HWHHBWB»HHlKW«iil <*¦>¦*-

THE CAMBRIDGE BIBLE
FOR SCHOOLS & COLLEGES

i»in»illH»Hwt<W>MM«#<ifm»iniiim i

S* JOHN

EDITED BY

A. PLUMMER, D.D.

WWiiiWfriifeiiw^iwiuwJjwyui''

4,,L S.PEROWNE,JDJD.
OB AW OF PETE RB O HO ij ( I i

•YAJLE-^THPfEiaSinnf-

DIVINITY SCHOOL
TROWBRIDGE LIBRARY

Wfyt Camfcritrfle MW for ddwfe

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO 4
S. JOHN.

EonDon: C. J. CLAY and SONS,
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE,
AVE MARIA LANE.

Eam&ri&ge: DEIGHTON, BELL, AND CO.
SUipjig: F. A. BROCKHAUS.

C{ie Cambrttrge Mbit for i^cfjools
anti Colleges.
General Editor:— J. J. S. PEROWNE, D.D.,
Dean of Peterborough.

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO

S. JOHN.

WITH MAPS, NOTES AND INTRODUCTION

THE REV. A. PLUMMER, M.A., D.D.
MASTER OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DURHAM,
FORMERLY FELLOW AND TUTOR OF TRINITY COLLEGE. OXFORD.

EDITED FOR THE SYNDICS OF THE UNIVERSITY PRESS

©Hmbri&ge :
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.
1889
I All Rights reserved.)

Cambrftige

PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY M.A. AND SONS
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS

PREFACE
BY THE GENERAL EDITOR.
THE General Editor of The Cambridge Bible for
Schools thinks it right to say that he does not hold
himself responsible either for the interpretation of
particular passages which the Editors of the several
Books have adopted, or for any opinion on points of
doctrine that they may have expressed. In the New
Testament more especially questions arise of the
deepest theological import, on which the ablest and
most conscientious interpreters have differed and
always will differ. His aim has been in all such
cases to leave each Contributor to the unfettered
exercise of his own judgment, only taking care that
mere controversy should as far as possible be avoided.
He has contented himself chiefly with a careful
revision of the notes, with pointing out omissions, with

PREFACE.

suggesting occasionally a reconsideration of some
question, or a fuller treatment of difficult passages,
and the like.
Beyond this he has not attempted to interfere,
feeling it better that each Commentary should have
its own individual character, and being convinced
that freshness and variety of treatment are more
than a compensation for any lack of uniformity in
the Series.

Deanery, Peterborough.

CONTENTS.

PAGES
I. Introduction. Chapter! The Life of S. John  9—18
Chapter II. The Authenticity of the Gospel  18 — 32
Chapter III. The Place and Date  32—34
Chapter IV. The Object and Plan  34—38
Chapter V. The Characteristics of the Gospel ... 38 — 46
Chapter VI. Its Relation to the Synoptic Gospels 46 — 50
Chapter VII. Its Relation to the First Epistle ... 50—51
Chapter VIII. The Text of the Gospel  51—52
Chapter IX. The Literature of the Gospel  5 3 — 54
Analysis ofthe Gospel in Detail  55 — 58
II. Text and Notes  59 — 378
III. Appendices  379 — 382
IV. Indices  ,  383 — 388
Map of Galilee  facingtitle
,, „ Sea of Galilee  at end of volume
„ „ Palestine in the time ok our
Saviour  do.
Plan of Jerusalem  ;.. do.

The Text adopted in this Edition is that of Dr Scrivener's
Cambridge Paragraph Bible. A few variations from the ordi
nary Text, chiefly in the spelling of certain words, and in the
use of italics, will be noticed. For the principles adopted by
Dr Scrivener as regards the printing of the Text see his In
troduction to the Paragraph Bible, published by the Cambridge
University Press.

INTRODUCTION. CHAPTER I.
THE LIFE OF S. JOHN.
THE life of S. John falls naturally • into two divisions, the
limits Of which correspond to the two main sources of infor
mation respecting him. (i) From his birth to the departure
from Jerusalem after the Ascension ; the sources for which are
contained in N. T. (2) From the departure from Jerusalem
to his death ; the sources for which are the traditions of the
primitive Church. In both cases the notices of S. John are
fragmentary, and cannot be woven together into anything like
a complete whole without a good deal of conjecture. But the
fragments are in the main very harmonious, and contain definite
traits and characteristics, enabling us to form a portrait, which
though imperfect is unique.
(i) Before the Departure from Jerusalem.
The date of S. John's birth cannot be determined. He was
probably younger than his Master and than the other Apostles.
He was the son of Zebedee and Salome, and brother of James,
who was probably the older of the two. Zebedee was a fisher
man of the lake of Galilee, who seems to have lived in or
near Bethsaida (i. 44), and was well enough off to have hired
servants (Mark i. 20). He appears only once in the Gospel-
narrative (Matt. iv. 21, 22 ; Mark i. 19, 20), but is mentioned
frequently as the father of S. James and S. John. Salome (see

INTRODUCTION.

on xix. 25) was probably the sister of the Virgin, and in that
case S. John was our Lord's first cousin. This relationship
harmonizes well with the special intimacy granted to the
beloved disciple by his Lord, with the fact of S. James also
being among the chosen three, and with the final committal of
the Virgin to St John's care. Salome was one of those women
who followed Christ and 'ministered to Him of their substance'
(Mark xv. 40 ; comp. Matt, xxvii. 55 ; Luke viii. 3). This was
probably after Zebedee's death. S. John's parents, therefore,
would seem to have been people of means ; and it is likely from
xix. 27 that the Apostle himself was fairly well off, a conclusion
to which his acquaintance with the high-priest (xviii. 15) also
points. S. John, therefore, like all the Apostles, excepting the traitor,
was a Galilean ; and this fact may be taken as in some degree
accounting for that fieriness of temper which earned for him
and his brother the name of 'sons of thunder' (Mark iii. 17).
The inhabitants of Galilee, while they had remained to a large
extent untouched by the culture of the rest of the nation, re
mained also untouched by the enervation both in belief and
habits which culture commonly brings. Ignorant ofthe glosses
of tradition, they kept the old simple faith in the letter of the
Law. Uninterested alike in politics and philosophy, they pre
ferred the sword to intrigue, and industry to speculation. Thus,
while the hierarchy jealously scrutinise all the circumstances of
Jesus' position, the Galileans on the strength of a single miracle
would 'take Him by force' (vi. 14, 15) and make Him king.
Population was dense and mixed, and between the Syrians and
Jews there were often fierce disputes. To this industrious,
hardy, and warlike race S. John belonged by birth and resi
dence, sharing its characteristic energy and its impatience of
indecision and intrigue. Hence, when the Baptist proclaimed
the kingdom of the Messiah, the young fisherman at once be
came a follower, and pressed steadily onwards until the goal
was reached.
Christian art has so familiarised us with a form of almost
feminine sweetness as representing the beloved disciple, that

INTRODUCTION.

the strong energy and even vehemence of his character is
almost lost sight of. In his writings as well as in what is
recorded of him both in N. T. and elsewhere we find both
sides of his character appearing. And indeed though ap
parently opposed they are not really so ; the one may beget
the other, and did so in him.
In yet another way his Galilean origin might influence S.
John. The population of the country, as has been said, was
mixed. From a boy he would have the opportunity of coming
in contact with Greek life and language. Hence that union of
Jewish and Greek characteristics which are found in him, and
which have led some to the conclusion that the author of the
Fourth Gospel was a Greek. We shall find as we go along
that the enormous preponderance of Jewish modes of thought
and expression, and of Jewish points of view, renders this con
clusion absolutely untenable.
The young son of Zebedee was perhaps never at one of the
rabbinical schools, which after the fall of Jerusalem made
Tiberias a great centre of education, and probably existed in
some shape before that. Hence he can be contemptuously
spoken of by the hierarchy as an 'illiterate and common'
person (Acts iv. 13). No doubt he paid the usual visits to
Jerusalem at the proper seasons, and became acquainted with
the grand liturgy of the Temple ; a worship which while it
kindled his deep spiritual emotions and gave him material for
reverent meditation, would insensibly prepare the way for that
intense hatred of the hierarchy, who had made the worship
there worse than a mockery, which breathes through all the
pages of his Gospel.
While he was still a lad, and perhaps already learning to
admire and love the impetuosity of his older friend S. Peter,
the rising of 'Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing' (see on
Acts v. 37) took place. Judas, like our own Wat Tyler, raised
a revolt against a tax which he held to be tyrannical, and pro
claimed that the people had 'no lord or master but God.'
Whether the boy and his future friend sympathized with the
movement we have no means of knowing. But the honest

INTRODUCTION.

though ill-advised cry of the leaders of this revolt may easily
have been remembered by S. John when he heard the false and
renegade priests declare to Pilate, 'We have no king but
Caesar' (xix. 15).
There was another movement of a very different kind, with
which we know that he did sympathize heartily. After cen
turies of dreary silence, in which it seemed as if Jehovah had
deserted His chosen people, * thrill went through the land that
God had again visited them, and that a Prophet had once more
appeared. His was a call, not to resist foreign taxation or to
throw off the yoke of Rome, but to withstand their own temp
tations and to break the heavy bondage of their own crying
sins: 'Repent ye, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!'
S. John heard and followed, and from the Baptist learnt to
know and at once to follow 'the Lamb of God' that was to do
(what the lambs provided by man in the Temple could never
do) — 'take away the sin of the world.' Assuming that the un
named disciple (i. 40) is S. John, we infer (i. 41) that he pro
ceeded to bring his brother S. James to Jesus as S. Andrew had
brought S. Peter. But from 'that day' (i. 39), that never to be
forgotten day, the whole tenour of the young man's life was
changed. The disciple of the Baptist had become the disciple
of Christ. After remaining with Jesus for a time he seems to have
gone back to his old employment ; from which he was again
called, and possibly more than once (Matt. iv. 18 ; Luke v.
1— u), to become an Apostle and fisher of men. Then the
group of the chosen three is formed. At the raising of Jairus'
daughter, at the Transfiguration, and in the Garden of Geth
semane, 'Peter, James, and John' are admitted to nearer
relationship with their Lord than the rest ; and on one other
solemn occasion, when He foretold the destruction of Jerusalem
(Mark xiii. 3), S. Andrew also is with them. In this group,
although S. Peter takes the lead, it is S. John who is nearest
and dearest to the Lord, 'the disciple whom Jesus loved.'
On three different occasions the burning temper ofthe 'sons
of thunder' displayed itself. (1) 'And John answered Him

INTRODUCTION.

13

saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in Thy name, and
he followeth not us : and we forbad him, because he followeth
not us' (Mark ix. 38; Luke ix. 49); a touch of zealous intoler
ance which reminds us of Joshua's zeal against Eldad and
Medad (Numb. xi. 28), as Christ's reply recalls the reply of
Moses. Probably his brother S. James is included in the 'we
forbad him.' (2) When the Samaritan villagers refused to
receive Him, ' because His face was as though He would go to
Jerusalem,' His disciples James and John said, 'Lord, wilt
Thou that we command fire to come down from heaven and
consume them ? ' (Luke ix. 54). Once again their zeal for their
Master makes them forget the spirit of their Master. (3) On
the last journey to Jerusalem Salome, as the mouthpiece of her
two sons (Matt. xx. 20 ; Mark x. 35), begs that they may sit,
the one on the Messiah's right hand, and the other on His left,
in His kingdom. This is their bold ambition, shewing that in
spite of their close intimacy with Him, they are still grossly
ignorant of the nature of His kingdom. And in their reply to
His challenge the same bold temper and burning zeal is mani
fest. They are willing to go through the furnace in order to be
near the Son of God. When S. John and his mother stood
beside the Cross, and when S. James won the crown of mar
tyrdom, Christ's challenge was taken up and their aspiration
fulfilled. It will not be necessary to recount at length the history of
the last Passover, in which S. John is a prominent figure. As
he gives us so much more than the Synoptists about the family
at Bethany, we may infer that he was a more intimate friend of
Lazarus and his sisters. He and S. Peter prepare the Last
Supper (Luke xxii. 8), at which S. Peter gets him to ask who is
the traitor ; and after the betrayal S. John gets his friend intro
duced into the high-priest's palace. He followed his Master
to judgment and death, and received His Mother as a farewell
charge (xviii. 15, xix. 26, 27). His friend's fall does not break
their friendship, and they visit the sepulchre together on Easter
morning. (On the characteristics of the two as shewn in this
incident see notes on xx. 4 — 6.) We find them still together

t4 INTRODUCTION. _^________
in Galilee, seeking refreshment in their suspense by resuming
their old calling (xxi. 2) ; and here again their different charac
ters shew themselves (see notes on xxi. 7). And the Gospel
closes with Christ's gentle rebuke to S. Peter's natural curiosity
about his friend.
In the Acts S. John appears but seldom, always in con
nexion with, and always playing a second part to his friend
(Acts iii., iv., viii. 14—25). We lose sight of him at Jerusalem
(viii. 25) after the return from Samaria ; but he was not there
at the time of S. Paul's first visit (Gal. i. 18, 19). Some twelve
or fifteen years later (c. A.D. 50) he seems to have been at Jeru
salem again (Acts xv. 6), but for how long we cannot tell. Nor
do we know why he left. Excepting his own notice of himself, as'
being 'in the island called Patmos for the word and testimony
of Jesus' (Rev. i. 9), the N. T. tells us nothing further respect
ing him. (ii) From the Departure from Jerusalem to his death.
For this period, with the exception of the notice in the
Apocalypse just quoted, we are entirely dependent upon tradi
tions of very different value. The conjecture that S. John lived
at Jerusalem until the death of the Virgin, and that this set
him free, is unsupported by evidence. Some think that she
accompanied him to Ephesus. It would be during this pro
longed residence at Jerusalem that he acquired that minute
knowledge of the topography of the city which marks the
Fourth Gospel.
It is quite uncertain whether the Apostle went direct from
Jerusalem to Ephesus ; but of two things we may be confident :
(1) that wherever he was he was not idle, (2) that he was not at
Ephesus when S. Paul bade farewell to that Church (Acts xx.),
nor when he wrote the Epistle to the Ephesians, nor when he
wrote the Pastoral Epistles. That S. John did work at
Ephesus during the latter part of his life may be accepted as
certain, unless the whole history of the subapostolic age is to
be pronounced doubtful ; but neither the date of his arrival nor
of his death can be fixed. He is described (Polycrates in Eus.

INTRODUCTION. 15

H. E. III. xxxi. 3, v. xxiv. 3) as a priest wearing the sacerdotal
plate or mitre (petalon) which was a special badge of the high-
priest (Exod. xxxix. 30) ; and we learn from the Apocalypse that
from Ephesus as a centre he directed the churches of Asia
Minor. What persecution drove him to Patmos or caused him
to be banished thither is uncertain, as also is the date of his
death, which may be placed somewhere near A.D. 100.
Of the traditions which cluster round this latter part of his
life three deserve more than a passing mention. (1) John, the
disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving
Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing,
crying out, ' Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall on us,
because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within' (Iren.
III. iii. 4). Epiphanius (Haer. xxx. 24) substitutes Ebion for
Cerinthus. Both Cerinthus and the Ebionites denied the reality
of the Incarnation. This tradition, like the incidents recorded,
Luke ix. 49, 54, shews that in later life also the spirit of the
' son of thunder ' was still alive within him.
(2) After his return from Patmos he made a tour to appoint
bishops or presbyters in the cities. In one place a lad of noble
bearing attracted his attention, and he specially commended
him to the bishop, who instructed and at last baptized him.
Then he took less care of him, and the young man went from
bad to worse, and at last became chief of a set of bandits. The
Apostle revisiting the place remembered him and said, ' Come,
bishop, restore to me my deposit,' which confounded the bishop,
who knew that he had received no money from S. John. ' I de
mand the young man, the soul of a brother ; ' and then the sad
story had to be told. The Apostle called for a horse, and rode
at once to the place infested by the bandits and was soon
taken by them. When the chief recognised him he turned to
fly. But the aged Apostle went after him and entreated him to
stay, and by his loving tears and exhortations induced him to
¦return with him to the church, to which in due time he restored
him (Eus. H. E. HI. xxiii. from Clement of Alexandria).
(3) Towards the very end of his life, when he was so infirm
that he had to be carried to church and was too weak to preach,

16 INTRODUCTION.

he used often to say no more than this, ' Little children, love
one another.' His hearers at last wearied of this, and said,
' Master, why dost thou always say this ? ' 'Itis the Lord's
command,' he replied, ' and if this alone is done, it is enough '
(Jerome, Comm. in Ep. ad Gal. vi. io).
Other traditions may be dismissed more briefly ; that in his
old age he amused himself with a partridge, and pleaded that
a bow could not always be bent, but needed relaxation ; that he
was thrown into a cauldron of boiling oil at Rome and was
none the worse ; that he drank hemlock without being harmed
by it ; that after he was buried the earth above him heaved
with his breathing, shewing that he was only asleep, tarrying
till Christ came. This last strange story S. Augustine is dis
posed to believe : those who know the place must know whether
the soil does move or not ; and he has heard it from no untrust
worthy people.
These fragments form a picture, which (as was said at the
outset) although very incomplete is harmonious, and so far as
it goes distinct. The two sides of his character, tender love
and stern intolerance, are the one the complement of the other ;
and both form part of the intensity of his nature. Intensity of
action, intensity of thought and word, intensity of love and
hate — these are the characteristics of the beloved disciple. In
the best sense of the phrase S. John was ' a good hater,' for his
hatred was part of his love. It was because he so loved the
truth, that he so hated all lukewarmness, unreality, insincerity,
and falsehood, and was so stern towards 'whosoever loveth and
maketh a lie.' It is because he so loved his Lord, that he shews
such uncompromising abhorrence of the national blindness that
rejected Him and the sacerdotal bigotry that hounded Him to
death. Intolerance of evil and of opposition to the truth was
sometimes expressed in a way that called for rebuke ; but this
would become less and less so, as his own knowledge of the
Lord and of the spirit of the Gospel deepened. With his eagle
gaze more and more fixed on the Sun of Righteousness he
became more and more keenly alive to the awful case of those
who 'loved the darkness rather than the light, because their

INTRODUCTION. 17

works were evil ' (iii. 19). Eternity for him was a thing not of
the future but of the present (iii. 36, v. 24, vi. 47, 54); and
whereas the world tries to make time the measure of eternity,"
he knows that eternity is the measure of time. Only from the
point of view of eternal life, only from its divine side, can this
life, both in its nothingness and in its infinite consequences,
be rightly estimated : for ' the world passeth away and the lust
thereof, but he that doeth the .will of God abideth for ever'
(1 John ii. 17).
** We thus see how at the end of a long life he was specially
fitted to write what has been well called 'the Gospel of Eternity'
and ' the Gospel of Love.' It is at the end of life, and when
the other side of the grave is in sight, that men can best form
an estimate both of this world and of the world to come. If
that is true of all men of ordinary seriousness, much more true
must it have been of him, who from his youth upwards had
been an Apostle, whose head had rested on the Lord's breast,
who had stood beside the Cross, had witnessed the Ascension,
had cherished till her death the Mother of the Lord, had seen
the Jewish dispensation closed and the Holy City overthrown,
and to whom the beatific visions of the Apocalypse had been
granted. No wonder therefore if his Gospel seems to be raised
above this world and to belong to eternity rather than to time.
And hence its other aspect of being also ' the Gospel of Love : '
for Love is eternal. Faith and Hope are for this world, but
can have no place when 'we shall see Him as He is' and
' know even as we are known.' Love is both for time and for
eternity. "They sin who tell us Love can die,
With life all other passions fly,
All others are but vanity.
In heaven ambition cannot dwell,
Nor avarice in the vaults of hell ;
Earthly, these passions of the earth
They perish where they had their birth,
But Love is indestructible,
s. JOHN 2

18 INTRODUCTION.

Its holy flame for ever burnetii,
From heaven it came, to heaven returneth.
Too oft on earth a troubled guest,
At times deceived, at .times oppressed,
It here is tried, and purified,
Then hath in heaven its perfect rest:
It soweth here with toil and care,
But the harvest-time of Love is there." Southey.

CHAPTER II.
THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE GOSPEL.
The Fourth Gospel is the battle field of the New Testament,
as the Book of Daniel is of the Old : the genuineness of both
will probably always remain a matter of controversy. With
regard to the Gospel, suspicion respecting it was aroused in
some quarters at the outset, but very quickly died out ; to rise
again, however, with immensely increased force in the eighteenth
century, since which time to the present day the question has
scarcely ever been allowed to rest. The scope of the present
work admits of no more than an outline of the argument being
presented. i. The External Evidence.
In this section of the argument two objections are made to
the Fourth Gospel : (i) the silence of the Apostolic Fathers ;
(2) its rejection by Marcion, the Alogi, and perhaps another
sect. (1) The silence of the Apostolic Fathers, if it were a fact,
would not be an insuperable difficulty. It is admitted on all
sides that the Fourth Gospel was published long after the
others, and when they were in possession of the field. There
was nothing to lead men to suppose that yet another Gospel
would be forthcoming ; this alone would make people jealous

INTRODUCTION. 19

of its claims. And when, as we shall see, it was found that
certain portions of it might be made to assume a Gnostic ap
pearance, jealousy in some quarters became suspicion. The
silence, therefore, of the first circle of Christian writers is no
more than we might reasonably expect ; and when taken in
connexion with the universal recognition of the Gospel by the
next circle of writers (A.D. 170 onwards), who had far more
evidence than has reached us, may be considered as telling for,
rather than against the authenticity.
But the silence of the Apostolic Fathers is by no means
certain. The Epistle of Barnabas (c. a.d. 120—130) pro
bably refers to it : Keim is convinced of the fact, although he
denies that S. John wrote the Gospel. The shorter Greek form
ofthe Ignatian Epistles (c. a.d. 150) contains allusions to it,
and adaptations of it, which cannot seriously be considered
doubtful. Bishop Lightfoot1 says of the expression 'living
water' (Rom. vii.) "Doubtless a reference to John iv. 10, 11, as
indeed the whole passage is inspired by the Fourth Gospel,"
and of the words 'knows whence it cometh and whither it
goeth' (Philad. vii.), " The coincidence (with John iii. 8) is quite
too strong to be accidental ;" and " the Gospel is prior to the
passage in Ignatius ;" for " the application in the Gospel is
natural : the application in Ignatius is strained and secondary."
Again, on the words 'being Himself the Door of the Father'
(Philad. ix.) he says, "Doubtless an allusion to John x. 9."
The Epistle of Polycarp (c. a.d. 150) contains almost
certain references to the First Epistle of S. John : and as it is
admitted that the First Epistle and the Fourth Gospel are by
the same hand, evidence in favour of the one may be used as
evidence in favour of the other.
Besides these, Papias (martyred about the same time as
Polycarp) certainly knew the First Epistle (Eus. H. E. ill.
xxxix.). Basilides (c. a.d. 125) seems to have made use of
the Fourth Gospel. Justin Martyr (c. a.d. 150) knew the
1 I am enabled to make these quotations from the great work of his
life through the great kindness of the Bishop of Durham.

INTRODUCTION.

Fourth Gospel. This may now be considered as beyond
reasonable doubt. Not only does he exhibit types of language
and doctrine closely akin to S. John's, but in the Dialogue with
Trypho, lxxxviii. (c. a.d. 146) he quotes the Baptist's reply,
' I am not the Christ, but the voice of one crying ' (comp. John
i. 20, 23) and in the First Apology, LXI., he paraphrases Christ's
words on the new birth (John iii. 3 — 5). Moreover Justin
teaches the great doctrine of S. John's Prologue, that Jesus
Christ is the Word. Keim regards it as certain that Justin
knew the Fourth Gospel.
When we pass beyond a.d. 170 the evidence becomes full
and clear: Tatian, the Epistle to the Churches of
Vienne and Lyons, Celsus, the Muratorian Fragment,
the Clementine Homilies, Theophilus of Antioch
(the earliest writer who mentions S. John by name as the
author of the Gospel — c. a.d. 175), Athenagoras, Irenaeus,
Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian. Of these
none perhaps is more important than Irenaeus, the pupil
of Polycarp, who was the friend of S. John. It never
occurs to him to maintain that the Fourth Gospel is the
work of S. John ; he treats it as a universally acknowledged
fact. He not only knows of no time when there were not four
Gospels, but with the help of certain quaint arguments he
persuades himself that there must be four Gospels, neither
more nor less (Haer. Hi. i. 1, XI. 8: comp. v. xxxvi. 2). So
firmly established had the Fourth Gospel become considerably
before the end of the second century.
(2) The rejection of the Fourth Gospel by Marcion and
some obscure sects is of no serious importance. There is no
evidence to shew that the Gospel was rejected on critical
grounds ; rather because the doctrines which it contained were
disliked. This is almost certain in the case of Marcion and
probable enough in the other cases.
Whether the obscure sect mentioned by Irenaeus (Haer. m.
xi. 9) as rejecting the Fourth Gospel and the promises of the
Paraclete which it contains are the same as those whom Epi
phanius with a contemptuous double entendre calls Alogi

INTRODUCTION.

('devoid of [the doctrine of] the Logos' or 'devoid of reason'),
is uncertain. But we can easily understand how a party might
arise, who in perfectly good faith and with the best motives
might reject the Fourth Gospel both for the doctrine of the
Logos and for other peculiarities which seemed to favour the
Gnosticism of Cerinthus. None of the Synoptists, none of the
Apostles, had thus far used the term 'Logos'; and the fact that
Cerinthus made use of it must have made its prominence in the
Prologue to the Fourth Gospel doubly suspicious. Cerinthus
maintained that Jesus was a mere man on whom the Logos or
Christ descended in the form of a dove at his baptism : and the
Fourth Gospel says nothing about the miraculous conception of
Christ, or about the wonders that attended and attested His
birth, but begins with the Baptism and the descent of the Spirit.
The Evangelist pointedly remarks that the miracle at Cana was
the first miracle : perhaps this was to insinuate that previous to
the Baptism Jesus (being a mere man) could do no miracle.
This Gospel omits the Transfiguration, an incident from which
a participation of His human Body in the glory of the Godhead
might be inferred. The 'prince' or 'ruler of this world,' an
expression not used previously by any Evangelist or Apostle,
might possibly be understood to mean the Demiurgus of the
Cerinthian system, the Creator of the world, and the God of the
Jews, but inferior to and ignorant of the Supreme God. Again,
the Fourth Gospel is silent about the wonders which attended
Christ's death; and this also harmonizes with the. system of
Cerinthus, who taught that the Logos or Christ departed when
Jesus was arrested, and that a mere man suffered on the Cross ;
for what meaning would there be in the sympathy of nature with
the death of a mere man 1 ? All this tends to shew that if the
Fourth Gospel was rejected in certain quarters for a time, this
tells little or nothing against its genuineness. Indeed it may
fairly be said to tell the other way; for it shews that the uni
versal recognition of the Gospel, which we find existing from
A.D. 170 onwards, was no mere blind enthusiasm, but a victory
1 See Dollinger's Hippolytus and Callistus, Chap. v.

INTRODUCTION.

of truth over baseless though not unnatural suspicion. More
over, the fact that these over-wary Christians assigned the
Gospel to Cerinthus is evidence that the Gospel was in their
opinion written by a contemporary of S. John. To concede
this is to concede the whole question.

ii. The Internal Evidence.
We have seen already that there are some features of this
Gospel wliich would seem to harmonize with a Gnostic system,
and that it need not surprise us if some persons in the second
century hastily concluded that it savoured of Cerinthus. It is
more surprising that modern critics, after a minute study of the
Gospel, should think it possible to assign it to a Greek Gnostic of
the second century. To say nothing of the general tone of the
Gospel, there are two texts which may almost be said to sum up
the theology of the Evangelist and which no Gnostic would even
have tolerated, much less have written : ' The Word became
flesh' (i. 14); 'Salvation is of the Jews' (iv. 22). That the
Infinite should limit itself and become finite, that the ineffable
purity of the Godhead should be united with impure matter,
was to a Gnostic a monstrous supposition ; and this was what
was implied in the Word becoming flesh. Again, that the
longed-for salvation of mankind should come from the Jews was
a fiat contradiction of one of the main principles of Gnosticism,
viz. that man's perfection is to be looked for in the attainment of
a higher knowledge of God and the universe, to which the Jew
as such had no special claim; on the contrary (as some Gnostics
held), the Jews had all along mistaken an inferior being for the
Supreme God. Other passages in the Gospel which are strongly
adverse to the theory of a Gnostic authorship will be pointed
out in the notes. And here the Gnostics themselves are our
witnesses, and that in the second century. Although the Fourth
Gospel was frequently used against them, they never denied its
genuineness. They tried to explain away what told against
them, but they never attempted to question the Apostolic
authority of the Gospel.

INTRODUCTION. 23
But the Gospel not only contains both direct and indirect
evidence which contradicts this particular hypothesis; it also
supplies both direct and indirect evidence of the true hypothesis.
(1) There is direct evidence that the author was an eye
witness of what he relates. In two places (according to far the
most reasonable, if not the only reasonable interpretation of
the words) the Evangelist claims for himself the authority of
an eyewitness : in a third he either claims it for himself or
others claim it for him. ' We beheld His glory ' (i. 14), especially
when taken in conjunction with ' which we beheld and our hands
handled' (1 John i. 1), cannot well mean anything else. Scarcely
less doubtful is 'He that hath seen hath borne witness, and his
witness is true, &c.' (xix. 35). 'This is the disciple who wit
nesseth concerning these things, and who wrote these things;
and we know that his witness is true' (xxi. 24), even if it be the
addition of another hand, is direct testimony to the fact that the
Evangelist gives us not second-hand information, but what he *
himself has heard and seen. (See notes in all three places.)
Of course it would be easy for a forger to make such a
claim ; and accomplices or dupes might support him. But it
would also be easy in so wide a field of narrative to test the
validity of the claim, and this we will proceed to do by ex
amining the indirect evidence. But first it will be well to state
the enormous difficulties which would confront a writer who
proposed in the second century to forge a Gospel.
The condition of Palestine during the life of Jesus Christ was
unique. The three great civilisations of the world were inter
mingled there ; Rome, the representative of law and conquest ;
Greece, the representative of philosophical speculation and com
merce ; Judaism, the representative of religion. The relations of
these three elements to one another were both intricate and varied.
In some particulars there was a combination between two or
more of them ; as in the mode of conducting the census (Luke
ii. 3) and of celebrating the Passover (see on xiii. 23) ; in others
there was the sharpest opposition, as in very many ceremonial
observances. Moreover, of these three factors it was exceedingly
difficult for the two that were Gentile to comprehend the third.

24 INTRODUCTION.

The Jew always remained an enigma to his neighbours, especially
to those from the West. This was owing partly to proud reserve
on his part and contempt on theirs, partly to the inability of
each side to express itself in terms that would be intelligible to
the other, so utterly different were and still are Eastern and
Western modes of thought. Again, if a Greek or Roman of the
first century had taken the pains to study Jewish literature with
a view to becoming thoroughly acquainted with this strange
people, his knowledge of them would still have remained both
defective and misleading, so much had been added or changed
by tradition and custom. To a Gentile of the second century
this difficulty would be very greatly increased ; for Jerusalem
had been destroyed and the Jewish nation had been once more
scattered abroad on the face of the earth. With the destruc
tion of the Temple the keeping of the Mosaic Law had become
a physical impossibility ; and the Jews who had lost their
language in the Captivity had now to a large extent lost the
ceremonial law. Even a Jew of the second century might
easily be mistaken as to the usages of his nation in the early
part of the first. How much more, then, would a Gentile be
likely to go astray ! We may say, therefore, that the intricate
combination of Jewish and Gentile elements in Palestine be
tween A.D. i and a.d. 50 was such that no one but a Jew living
in the country at the time would be able to master them ; and
that the almost total destruction of the Jewish element in the
latter part of the century would render a proper appreciation of
the circumstances a matter of the utmost difficulty even to
a careful antiquarian. Finally, we must remember that anti
quarian research in those days was almost unknown ; and that
to undertake it in order to give an accurate setting to a histo
rical fiction was an idea that was not born until long after the
second century. We may safely say that no Greek of that age
would ever have dreamed of going through the course of archaeo
logical study necessary for attempting the Fourth Gospel ; and
even if he had, the attempt would still have been a manifest
failure. He would have fallen into far more numerous and far
more serious errors than those which critics (with what success

INTRODUCTION. 25
we shall see hereafter) have tried to bring home to the Fourth
Evangelist (see on xi. 49).
(2) There is abundant indirect evidence to shew that the
writer of the Fourth Gospel was a Jew, and a Jew of Palestine,
who was an eyewitness of most of the events which he relates.
If this can be made out with something like certainty, the circle
of possible authors will be very much reduced. But in this
circle of possible authors we are not left to conjecture. There
is further evidence to shew that he was an Apostle, and the
Apostle S. John. (See Sanday, Authorship of the Fourth
Gospel, Chap, xix.) The Evangelist was a Jew.
He is perfectly at home in Jewish opinions and points of
view. Conspicuous among these are the ideas respecting the
Messiah current at the time (i. 19 — 28, 45 — 49, 51 ; iv. 25 ; vi.
14, 15; vii. 26, 27, 31, 40—42, 52; xii. 13, 34; xix. 15, 21).
Besides these we have the hostility between Jews and Samari
tans (iv. 9, 20, 22 ; viii. 48) ; estimate of women (iv. 27), of the
national schools (vii. 15), of the 'Dispersion' (vii. 35), oi Abra
ham and the Prophets (viii. 52, 53), &c. &c.
He is quite familiar also with Jewish usages and observ
ances. Among these we may notice baptism (i. 25, iii. 22, 23,
iv. 2), purification (ii. 6, iii. 25, xi. 55, xviii. 28, xix. 31), the
Jewish Feasts (ii. 13, 23, v. 1, vi. 4, vii. 2, 37, x. 22, xiii. 1, xviii.
28, xix. 31, 42), circumcision and the Sabbath (vii. 22, 23), law
of evidence (viii. 17, 18). (
The form of the Gospel, especially the style of the narra
tive, is essentially Jewish. The language is Greek, but the
arrangement of the thoughts, the structure of the sentences, and
a great deal of the vocabulary are Hebrew. And the source of
this Hebrew form is the O. T. This is shewn not only by fre
quent quotations but by the imagery employed ; — the lamb, the
living water, the manna, the shepherd, the vine, &c. And not
only so, but the Christian theology of the Evangelist is based
upon the theology ofthe O. T. 'Salvation is of the Jews' (iv.
22) ; Moses wrote of Christ (v. 46 ; i. 45) ; Abraham saw His

26 INTRODUCTION.

day (viii. 56) ; He was typified in the brazen serpent (iii. 14), the
manna (vi. 32), the paschal lamb (xix. 36) ; perhaps also in the
water from the rock (vii. 37) and the pillar of fire (viii. 12).
Much that He did was done 'that the Scripture might' be
fulfilled' (xiii. 18, xvii. 12, xix. 24, 28, 36, 37; comp. ii. 22, xx.
9): and these fulfilments of Scripture are noticed not as in
teresting coincidences, but 'that ye may believe' (xix. 35).
Judaism is the foundation of the Christian faith. No one but
a Jew could have handled the O. T. Scriptures in this way.
The Evangelist was a Jew of Palestine.
This is shewn chiefly by his great topographical knowledge,
which he uses both with ease and precision. In mentioning
a fresh place he commonly throws in some fact respecting
it, adding clearness or interest to the narrative. A forger
would avoid such gratuitous statements, as being unnecessary
and likely by being wrong to lead to detection. Thus, one
Bethany is 'nigh unto Jerusalem, about fifteen furlongs off'
(xi. 18), the other is 'beyond Jordan' (i. 28); Bethsaida is 'the
city of Andrew and Peter' (i. 44); ' Can any good thing come
out of Nazareth' (i. 46); Cana is 'of Galilee' (ii. 1, xxi. 2) ;
Aenon is 'near to Salim,' and there are ' many waters ' there
(iii. 23) ; Sychar is ' a city of Samaria, near to the parcel of
ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph. Now Jacob's well
was there' (iv. 5); Ephraim is a city 'near to the wilderness'
(xi. 54). Comp. the minute local knowledge implied in vi. 22—
24, iv. 11, ii. 12.
This familiarity with topography is the more remarkable
in the case of Jerusalem, which (as all are agreed) was
destroyed before the Fourth Gospel was written. Bethesda is
'a pool by the sheep-gate, having five porches' (v. 2); Siloam
is 'a pool, which is by interpretation Sent' (ix. 7); Solomon's
porch is 'in the Temple ' (x. 23). Comp. the minute knowledge
of the city and suburbs implied in xviii. 1, 28, xix. 13, 17  20
41,42. The way In which the author quotes the 0. T. points to
the same conclusion. He is not dependent on the LXX.

INTRODUCTION. 27

for his knowledge of the Scriptures, as a Greek-speaking Jew
born out of Palestine would very likely have been : he appears
to know the original Hebrew, which had become a dead lan
guage, and was not much studied outside Palestine. Out of
fourteen quotations three agree with the Hebrew against the
LXX. (vi. 45, xiii. 18, xix. 37); not one agrees with the LXX.
against the Hebrew. The majority are neutral, either agreeing
with both, or differing from both, or being free adaptations
rather than citations. (See also on xii. 13, 15.)
The Evangelist's doctrine of the Logos or Word confirms
us in the belief that he is a Jew of Palestine. The form which
this doctrine assumes in the Prologue is Palestinian rather than
Alexandrian. (See note on 'the Word,' i. 1.)
The Evangelist was an Eyewitness of most of the
events which he relates.
The narrative is crowded with figures, which are no mere non
entities to fill up space, but which live and move. Where they
appear on the scene more than once their action throughout is
harmonious, and their characteristics are indicated with a sim
plicity and distinctness which would be the most consummate
art if it were not taken from real life. And where in the lite
rature of the second century can we find such skilful delineation
of fictitious characters as is shewn in the portraits given to us
of the Baptist, the beloved disciple, Peter, Andrew, Philip,
Thomas, Judas Iscariot, Pilate, Nicodemus, Martha and Mary,
the Samaritan woman, the man born blind? Even the less
prominent persons are thoroughly lifelike and real ; Nathanael,
Judas not Iscariot, Caiaphas, Annas, Mary Magdalene, Joseph.
Exact notes of time are frequent; not only seasons, as the
Jewish Feasts noticed above, but days (i. 29, 35, 43, ii. 1, iv. 40,
43, vi. 22, vii. 14, 37, xi. 6, 17, 39, xii. I, 12, xix. 31, xx. 1, 26)
and hours (i. 39, iv. 6, 52, xix. 14; comp. iii. 2, vi. 16, xiii. 30,
xviii. 28, xx. 1, 19, xxi. 4).
The Evangelist sometimes knows the exact or approximate
number of persons (i. 35, iv. 18, vi. 10, xix. 23) and objects (ii. 6,
vi. 9, 19, xix. 39, xxi. 8, 11) mentioned in his narrative.

28 INTRODUCTION.
Throughout the Gospel we have examples of graphic and
vivid description, which would be astounding if they were not
the result of personal observation. Strong instances of this
would be the accounts of the cleansing of the Temple (ii.
14 — 16), the feeding of the 5000 (vi. 5 — 14), the healing of the
man born blind (ix. 6, 7), the feet-washing (xiii. 4, 5, 12), the
betrayal (xviii. 1 — 13), almost all the details of the Passion
(xviii., xix.), the visit to the sepulchre (xx. 3 — 8).
To this it must be added that the state of the text of the
Gospel, as we find it quoted by early writers, shews that before
the end of the second century there were already a great many
variations of readings in existence. Such things take time to
arise and multiply. This consideration compels us to believe
that the original document must have been made at a time
when eyewitnesses of the Gospel history were still living. See
notes on i. 13, 18 and ix. 35.
The Evangelist was an Apostle.
He knows the thoughts of the disciples on certain occasions,
thoughts which sometimes surprise us, and which no writer of
fiction would have attributed to them (ii. 11, 17, 22, iv. 27,
vi. 19, 60, xii. 16, xiii. 22, 28, xx. 9, xxi. 12). He knows also
words that were spoken by the disciples in private to Christ or
among themselves (iv. 31, 33, ix. 2, xi. 8, 12, 16, xvi. 17, 29).
He is familiar with the haunts of the disciples (xi. 54, xviii. 2,
xx. 19). Above all, he is one who was very intimate with the
Lord ; for he knows His motives (ii. 24, 25, iv. 1 — 3, v. 6, vi. 6,
15, vii. 1, xiii. I, 3, 11, xvi. 19, xviii. 4, xix. 28) and can bear
witness to His feelings (xi. 33, 38, xiii. 21).
The Evangelist was the Apostle S. John.
The contents of the two previous sections are almost suffi
cient to prove this last point. We know from the Synoptists
that three disciples were specially intimate with Jesus, Peter,
James, and his brother John. S. Peter cannot be our Evan
gelist : he was put to death long before the very earliest date
to which the Fourth Gospel can be assigned. Moreover the

INTRODUCTION. 29
style of the Gospel is quite unlike the undoubted First Epistle
of S. Peter. Still less can S. James be the author, for he was
martyred long before S. Peter. Only S. John remains, and he
not only entirely fits in with the details already' noticed, but
also having long outlived the rest of the Apostles he is the one
person who could have written a Gospel considerably later in
date than the other three.
But we have not yet exhausted the evidence. The concluding
note (xxi. 24) declares that the Gospel was written by 'the
disciple whom Jesus loved' (igapa, xxi. 20). This disciple is
mentioned in three other places under the same title (xiii. 23,
xix. 26, xxi. 7; — xx. 2 is different). He is some one who is
intimate with S. Peter (xiii. 24, xxi. 7; comp. xviii. 15, xx. 2),
and this we already know from the Synoptists that S. John was,
and we learn from the Acts that he remained so (iii. 1, 3, 11,
iv. 13, 19, viii. 14). He is one of those enumerated in xxi. 1,
and unless he is one of the two unnamed disciples he must be
S. John. One more point, a small one, but of very great significance,
remains. The Fourth Evangelist carefully distinguishes places
and persons. He distinguishes Cana 'of Galilee' (ii. 1, xxi. 2)
from Cana of Asher; Bethany 'beyond Jordan' (i. 28) from
Bethany 'nigh unto Jerusalem' (xi. 18) ; Bethsaida, 'the city of
Andrew and Peter' (i. 44), from Bethsaida Julias. He distin
guishes also Simon Peter after his call from others named
Simon by invariably adding the new name Peter, whereas the
Synoptists often call him simply Simon. The traitor Judas is
distinguished as the 'son of Simon' (vi. 71, xii. 4, xiii. 2, 26)
from the other Judas, who is expressly said to be 'not Iscariot'
(xiv. 22), while the Synoptists take no notice of the traitor's
parentage. S. Thomas is thrice for the sake of additional
clearness pointed out as the same who was called Didymus
(xi. 16, xx. 24, xxi. 2), a name not given by the Synoptists.
Comp. the careful identification of Nicodemus (xix. 39) and of
Caiaphas (xi. 49, xviii. 13). And yet the Fourth Evangelist
altogether neglects to make a distinction which the Synoptists
do make. They distinguish John the son of Zebedee from his

30 INTRODUCTION.

namesake by frequently calling the latter 'the Baptist' (more
than a dozen times in all). The Fourth Evangelist never does
so ; to him the Baptist is simply 'John.' He himself being the
other John, there is for him no chance of confusion, and it does
not occur to him to mark the distinction.
iii. Answers to objections.
We are now on too firm ground to be shaken by isolated
difficulties. It would take a great many difficulties of detail to
counterbalance the difficulty of believing that the Fourth Gospel
was written by some one who was neither an Apostle nor even
a contemporary. But there are certain difficulties supposed to
be involved in the theory that the Evangelist is S. John the
Apostle, some of which are important and deserve a separate
answer. They are mainly these ; —
(i) The marked dissimilarity between the Fourth Gospel
and the three others.
(2) The marked dissimilarity between the Fourth Gospel
and the Revelation.
(3) The difficulty of believing that S. John (a) would have
"studiously elevated himself in every way above the Apostle
Peter;" (b) would have magnified himself above all as 'the
disciple whom Jesus loved.'
(4) The use made by S. Polycarp of S. John's authority in
the Paschal controversy.
(1) The answer to the first of these objections will be found
below in Chapter vi. of the Introduction, and in the introductory
note to Chapter iii. of the Gospel.
(2) The answer to the second belongs rather to the Intro
duction to the Apocalypse. The answer to it is to a large
extent a further answer to the first objection; for "the Apo
calypse is doctrinally the uniting link between the Synoptists
and the Fourth Gospel" (Westcott). Great as are the differ
ences between the Revelation and the Gospel, the leading ideas
of both are the same. The one gives us in a magnificent vision,
the other in a great historic drama, the supreme conflict be
tween good and evil and its issue. In both Jesus Christ is the

INTRODUCTION. 31
central figure, whose victory through defeat is the issue of the
conflict. In both the Jewish dispensation is the preparation
for the Gospel, and the warfare and triumph of the Christ is
described in language saturated with the O. T. Some re
markable similarities of detail will be pointed out in the notes
(see on i. 14; xi. 44; xix. 2, 5, 13, 17, 20, 37). The difference of
date will go a long way towards explaining the difference of
style. (3 a) The question, 'How could S. John have studiously
elevated himself in every way above the Apostle Peter?' reminds
us of the famous question of Charles II. to the Royal Society.
The answer to it is that S. John does nothing of the kind.
S. Peter takes the lead in the Fourth Gospel as in the other
three. His introduction to Christ and significant naming stand
at the very opening of the Gospel (i. 41, 42) ; he answers in the
name of the Twelve (vi. 68) ; he is prominent if not first at the
feet-washing (xiii. 6) ; he directs S. John to find out who is the
traitor (xiii. 24) ; he takes the lead in defending his Master at
the betrayal (xviii. 10); the news of the Resurrection is brought
to him first (xx. 2); his companion does not venture to enter the
sepulchre until he has done so (xx. 6 — 8) ; he is mentioned first
in the list of disciples given xxi. 2, and there takes the lead
(xxi. 3) ; he continues to take the lead when Jesus appears to
them (xxi. 7, 11); he receives the last great charge, with which
the Gospel concludes (xxi. 15 — 22).
(b) To suppose that the phrase 'the disciple whom Jesus
loved' implies self-glorification at the expense of others is alto
gether to misunderstand it. It is not impossible that the
designation was given to him by others before he used it of
himself. At any rate the affection of the Lord for him was
so well known that such a title would be well suited for an
oblique indication of the author's personality. Besides thus
gently letting us behind the scenes the phrase serves two
purposes : (1) it is a permanent expression of gratitude on the
part of the Evangelist for the transcendent benefit bestowed
upon him ; (2) it is a modest explanation of the prominent part
which he was called upon to play on certain occasions. Why

32 INTRODUCTION.

was he singled out to be told who was the traitor (xiii. 23)?
Why was the care of the Lord's mother entrusted to him (xix. 26)?
Why was he allowed to recognise the Lord at the sea of Ti
berias (xxi. 7) before any of the rest did so ? The recipient of
these honours has only one explanation to give : Jesus loved
him. (4) In the controversy as to the right time of keeping
Easter S. Polycarp defended the Asiatic custom of keeping the
Christian Passover at the same time as the Jewish Passover,
viz. the evening of the 14th Nisan, "because he had always (so)
observed it with John the disciple of our Lord, and the rest of
the Apostles, with whom he associated" (Eus. H. E. v. xxiv. 16).
On this ground he refused to yield to Anicetus, Bishop of Rome,
though he did not require Anicetus to give way to him. But,
as we shall see (Appendix A), the Fourth Gospel clearly re
presents the Crucifixion as taking place on the 14th Nisan, and
the Last Supper as taking place the evening before. Therefore,
either Polycarp falsely appeals to S. John's authority (which is
most improbable), or the Fourth Gospel is not by S. John. But
this objection confuses two things, the Christian Passover or
Easter, and the Last Supper or institution of the Eucharist. The
latter point was not in dispute at all. The question debated
was whether the Christian Churches in fixing the time of Easter
were to follow the Jewish Calendar exactly or a Christian
modification of it. S. Polycarp claimed S. John as sanctioning
the former plan, and nothing in the Fourth Gospel is incon
sistent with such a view. Schiirer, who denies the authenticity
of the Gospel, has shewn that no argument against the au
thenticity can be drawn from the Paschal controversy.

CHAPTER III.
THE PLACE AND DATE.
Tradition is unanimous in giving Ephesus as the place where
S. John resided during the latter part of his life, and where the

INTRODUCTION. 33'
Fourth Gospel was written. There is no sufficient reason for
doubting this strong testimony, which may be accepted as
practically certain.
There is also strong evidence to shew that the Gospel was
written at the request of the elders and disciples of the Chris
tian Churches of Asia. We have this on the early and inde
pendent authority of the Muratorian Fragment (c. A.D. 170)
and of Clement of Alexandria (c. A.D. 190) ; and this is con
firmed by Jerome. No doubt S. John had often delivered the
contents of his Gospel orally ; and the elders wished before he
died to preserve it in a permanent form. Moreover, difficulties
had arisen in the Church which called for a recasting of Apos
tolic doctrine. The destruction of Jerusalem had given alto
gether a new turn to Christianity : it had severed the lingering
and hampering connexion with Judaism; it had involved a
readjustment of the interpretations of Christ's promises about
His return. Again, the rise of a Christian philosophy, shading
off by the strangest compromises and colouring into mere pagan
speculation, called for a fresh statement, in terms adequate to
the emergency, and by a voice sufficient in authority, of Chris
tian truth. There is both external and internal evidence to
shew that a crisis of this kind was the occasion of the Fourth
Gospel. The precise date cannot be determined with certainty. There
are indications in the Gospel itself that it was written late in the
author's life time. In his narrative he seems to be looking back
after a long lapse of time (vii. 39, xxi. 19). And as we study it,
we feel that it is the result of a larger experience of God's Pro
vidence and of a wider comprehension of the meaning of His
Kingdom than was possible at the time when the other Evan
gelists, especially the first two of them, wrote their Gospels.
All this induces us to place the date of the Fourth Gospel as
late as possible; and tradition (as we have seen in Chap. 1)
represents S. John as living to extreme old age. S. John would
not begin to teach at Ephesus until some time after S. Paul
left it, i.e. not much before A.D. 70. If Irenaeus is right in
saying that S. Luke's Gospel was not writte^..tilLaftgiKfeg:d^th
S. JOHN

34 INTRODUCTION.

of S. Peter and S. Paul (Haer. in. i. i), this would again place
the writing ofthe Fourth Gospel considerably later than A.D. 70.
It is not improbable that the first twenty chapters were written
a considerable time before the Gospel was published, that the
last chapter was added some years later, and then the whole
given to the church (see introductory note to chap. xxi.). S.John
may have lived almost if not quite to the end of the century;
therefore from a.d. 80 to 95 would seem to be the period within
which it is probable that the Gospel was published.
Those who deny that S. John is the author have tried almost
every date from A.D. no to 165. Dividing this period into two,
we have this dilemma : — If the Gospel was published between
no and 140, why did not the hundreds of Christians, who had
known S. John during his later years, denounce it as a forgery?
If it was not published till between 140 and 165, how did it
become universally accepted by 170?

CHAPTER IV.
THE OBJECT AND PLAN.
i. The Object.
These two subjects, the object and the plan, naturally go
together, for the one to a large extent determines the other :
the purpose with which the Evangelist wrote his Gospel greatly
influences the form which it assumes. What that purpose was
he tells us plainly himself : 'These have been written that ye
may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that
believing ye may have life in His name' (xx. 31). His object is
not to write the life of Christ ; if it were, we might wonder that
out of his immense stores of personal knowledge he has not
given us a great deal more than he has done. Rather, out of
these abundant stores he has made a careful and self-denying
selection with a view to producing a particular effect upon his
readers, and by means of that effect to open to them an inesti-

INTRODUCTION. 35
mable benefit. In this way his object manifestly influences his
plan. He might have given himself the delight of pouring
forth streams of information, which he, alone possessed, to
a community ardently thirsting for it. But such prodigality
would have obscured rather than strengthened his argument :
he therefore rigidly limits himself in order to produce the de
sired effect.
The effect is twofold : (1) to create a belief that Jesus is the
Christ ; (2) to create a belief that Jesus is the Son of God. The
first truth is primarily for the Jew ; the second is primarily for
the Gentile ; then both are for all united. The first truth leads
the Jew to become a Christian ; the second raises the Gentile
above the barriers of Jewish exclusiveness ; the two together
bring eternal life to both.
To the Jews the Evangelist would prove that Jesus, the Man
who had been known to them personally or historically by that
name, is the Christ, the Messiah for whom they had been look
ing, in whom all types and prophecies have been fulfilled, to
whom therefore the fullest allegiance is due. To the Gentiles
the Evangelist would prove that this same Jesus, of whom they
also have heard, is the Son of God, the Only God, theirs as
well as His, the Universal Father, their Father as well as His ;
whose Son's mission, therefore, must be coextensive with His
Father's family and kingdom. Long before the promise was
made to Abraham ' all things came into being through Him '
(i. 3): if therefore the Jews had a claim on the Christ, the Gen
tiles had a still older claim on the Son of God.
These two great truths, that Jesus is the Christ, and that
Jesus is the Son of God, being recognised and believed, the
blessed result follows that believers have life in His name, i.e.
in Him as revealed to them in the character which His name
implies. There is neither Gentile nor Jew, circumcision nor
uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free ; but Christ is
all and in all ; all are one in Christ Jesus (Col. iii. 1 1 ; Gal. iii. 28).
There is no need to look for any additional object over and
above that which the Evangelist himself states ; although this
is frequently done. Thus from the time of Irenaeus (Haer.
3—2

36 INTRODUCTION.
in. xi.) it has been common to say that S. John wrote his
Gospel against Cerinthus and other heretics. By clearly teach
ing the main truths of the Gospel S. John necessarily refutes
errors ; and it is possible that here and there some particular
form of error was in his mind when he wrote : but the refuta
tion of error is not his object in writing. If his Gospel is not
a Life of Christ, still less is it a polemical treatise.
Again, from the time of Eusebius (H. E. III. xxiv. n) and
earlier it has been maintained that S. John wrote to supplement
the Synoptists, recording what had not been recorded by them.
No doubt he does supplement them to a large extent, especially
as regards the ministry in Judaea : but it does not follow from
this that he wrote in order to supplement them. Where some
thing not recorded by them would suit his purpose equally
well he would naturally prefer it ; but he has no hesitation in
retelling what has already been told by one, two, or even all
three of them, if he requires it for the object which he has in
view (see introductory note to chap. vi.).
ii. The Plan.
In no Gospel is the plan so manifest as in the Fourth. Per
haps we may say of the others that they scarcely have a plan.
We may divide and subdivide them for our own convenience ;
but there is no clear evidence that the three Evangelists had
any definite scheme before them in putting together the frag
ments of Gospel history which they have preserved for us. It
is quite otherwise with the Fourth Evangelist. The different
scenes from the life of Jesus Christ which he puts before us,
are not only carefully selected but carefully arranged, leading
up step by step to the conclusion expressed in the confession of
S. Thomas, ' My Lord and my God.' But if there is a develop
ment of faith and love on the one side in those who accept and
follow Jesus, so also there is a development of unbelief and
hatred on the other in those who reject and persecute Him.
'The Word became flesh;' but, in as much as He was not
generally recognised and welcomed, His presence in the world
necessarily involved a separation and a conflict ; a separation

INTRODUCTION. 37

of light from darkness, truth from falsehood, good from evil,
life from death, and a conflict between the two. It is the
critical episodes in that conflict round the person of the Incar
nate Word that the Evangelist places before us one by one.
These various episodes taken one by one go far to shew, —
taken all together and combined with the issue of the conflict
irrefragably prove, — ' that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.'
The main outlines of the plan are these : —
I. The Prologue or Introduction (i. 1 — 18).
1. The Word in His own Nature (i. 1 — 5).
2. His revelation to men and rejection by them
(i. 6-13).
3. His revelation ofthe Father (i. 14 — 18).
II. First main Division. Christ's Ministry, or His Revela
tion of Himself to the World (i. 19 — xii. 50).
a. The Testimony (i. 19 — 51)
1. of John the Baptist (i. 19 — 37),
¦t. ofthe disciples (i. 38 — 51),
3. of the first sign (ii. r — n).
b. The Work (ii. 13 — xi. 57)
1. among Jews (ii. 13 — iii. 36),
2. among Samaritans (iv. r — 4-2),
3. among Galileans (iv. 43 — 54),
(The work has become a Conflict). 4. among mixed multitudes (v.— xi.).
c. The Judgment (xii.)
1. of men (1 — 36),
¦1. ofthe Evangelist (37— 43),
3. of Christ (44 — 50).
Close of Christ's public ministry.
III. Second main Division. The Issues of Christ's Ministry,
or His Revelation of Himself to His Disciples
(xiii. — xx.).
d. The inner Glorification of Christ in His last Dis
courses (xiii. — xvii.).
1. His love in humiliation (xiii. 1 — 30).
2. His love in keeping His own (xiii. 31 -xv. 27).

38 INTRODUCTION.
3. The promise of the Comforter and of His re
turn (xvi.).
4. The prayer ofthe High- Priest (xvii.).
c. The outer Glorification of Christ in His Passion
(xviii., xix.).
1. The betrayal (xviii. 1 — n).
2. The ecclesiastical and civil trials (xviii. 12 —
xix. 16).
3. The crucifixion and burial (xix. 17 — 42).
/. The Resurrection (xx.).
1. The manifestation to Mary Magdalene (1 — 18).
2. The manifestation to the ten (19 — 23).
3. The manifestation to S. Thomas with the ten
(24—29).
4. The conclusion (30, 31).
IV. The Epilogue or Appendix (xxi.).

CHAPTER V.
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL.
Here again, only a few leading points can be noticed : the
subject is capable of almost indefinite expansion.
1. From the time of Clement of Alexandria (c. A.D. 190)
this Gospel has been distinguished as a 'spiritual Gospel'
(Eus. H. E. VI. xiv. 7). The Synoptists give us mainly the
external acts of Jesus Christ: S. John lays before us glimpses
of the inner life and spirit of the Son of God. Their narrative
is chiefly composed of His manifold and ceaseless dealings with
men: in S. John we have rather His tranquil and unbroken
union with His Father. The heavenly element which forms
the background of the first three Gospels is the atmosphere of
the Fourth.
It is quite in harmony with this characteristic of the Gospel
that it should contain such a much larger proportion of Christ's

INTRODUCTION. 39

words than we find in the others : discourses here form the
principal part, especially in the latter half of the Gospel. Not
even in the Sermon on the Mount do we learn so much of ' the
spirit of Christ ' as in the discourses recorded by S. John. And
what is true of the central figure is true also of the numerous
characters which give such life and definiteness to S. John's
narrative : they also make themselves known to us by what
they say rather than by what they do. And this suggests to us
a second characteristic.
2. No Gospel is so rich in TYPICAL but thoroughly REAL
AND LIFELIKE GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS as the Fourth. They
are sketched, or rather by their words are made to sketch them
selves, with a vividness and precision which, as already observed,
is almost proof that the Evangelist was an eyewitness of what
he records.
Among the groups we have the disciples strangely misunder
standing Christ (iv. 33, xi. 12) yet firmly believing on Him
(xvi. 30); His brethren, dictating a policy to Him and not
believing on Him (vii. 3 — 5); John's disciples, with their
jealousy for the honour of their master (iii. 26) ; the Samari
tans, proud to believe from their own experience rather than
on the testimony of a woman (iv. 42) ; the multitude, sometimes
thinking Jesus possessed, sometimes thinking Him the Christ
(vii. 20, 26, 41) ; the Jews, claiming to be Abraham's seed and
seeking to kill the Messiah (viii. 33, 37, 40) ; the Pharisees,
haughtily asking, 'Hath any one of the rulers or ofthe Phari
sees believed on Him?' (vii. 48) and 'are we also blind?' (ix. 40);
the chief priests, professing to fear that Christ's success will be
fatal to the national existence (xi. 48), and declaring to Pilate
that they have no king but Caesar (xix. 15). In the sketching
of these groups nothing is more conclusive evidence of the
Evangelist being contemporary with his narrative than the way
in which the conflict and fluctuations between belief and un
belief among the multitude and 'the Jews' is indicated.
The types of individual character are still more varied, and
as in the case of the groups they exemplify both sides in the
great conflict, as well as those who wavered between the two.

40 INTRODUCTION.
On the one hand we have the Mother of the Lord (ii. 3—5,
xix. 25—27), the beloved disciple and his master the Baptist
(i. 6—37, iii. 23—36), S. Andrew and Mary of Bethany, all unfail
ing in their allegiance ; S. Peter falling and rising again to deeper
love (xviii. 27, xxi. 17) ; S. Philip rising from eager to firm faith
(xiv. 8), S. Thomas from desponding and despairing love (xi. 16,
xx. 25) to faith, hope, and love (xx. 28). There is the sober but
uninformed faith of Martha (xi. 21, 24, 27), the passionate affec
tion of Mary Magdalene (xx. 1 — 18). Among conversions we
have the instantaneous but deliberate conviction of Nathanael
(i. 49), the gradual but courageous progress in belief of the
schismatical Samaritan woman (see on iv. 19) and of the unin-
structed man bftrn blind (see on xi. 21), and in contrast with
both the timid, hesitating confessions of Nicodemus, the learned
Rabbi (iii. I, vii. 50, xix. 39). On the other side we have the
cowardly wavering of Pilate (xviii. 38, 39, xix. 1 — 4, 8, 12, 16),
the unscrupulous resoluteness of Caiaphas (xi. 49, 50), and the
blank treachery of Judas (xiii. 27, xviii. 2 — 5). Among the
minor characters there is the 'ruler of the feast' (ii. 9, 10), the
'nobleman' (iv. 49), the man healed at Bethesda (v. 7, 11,
H, 15)-
If these groups and individuals are creations of the imagi
nation, it is no exaggeration to say that the author of the Fourth
Gospel is a genius superior to Shakspere.
3. From typical characters we pass on to typical or sym
bolical events. Symbolism is a third characteristic of this
Gospel. Not merely does it contain the three great allegories
ofthe Sheep-fold, the Good Shepherd, and the Vine, from which
Christian art has drawn its symbolism from the very earliest
times ; but the whole Gospel from end to end is penetrated
with the spirit of symbolical representation. In nothing is this
more apparent than in the eight miracles which the Evangelist
has selected for the illustration of his Divine Epic. His own
word for them leads us to expect this : to him they are not so
much miracles as 'signs.' The first two are introductory, and
seem to be pointed out as such by S. John (ii. n, iv. 54). The
turning of the water into wine exhibits the Messiah's sovereign

INTRODUCTION. 41

power over inanimate matter, the healing of the official's son
His power over the noblest of living bodies. Moreover they
teach two great lessons which lie at the very root of Christianity ;
(1) that Christ's Presence hallows the commonest events and
turns the meanest elements into the richest ; (2) that the way to
win blessings is to trust the Bestower of them. The third sign,
healing the paralytic, shews the Messiah as the great Restorer,
repairing the physical as well as the spiritual ravages of sin
(v. 14). In the feeding of the 5000 the Christ appears as the
Support of life, in the walking on the sea as the Guardian and
Guide of His followers. The giving of sight to the man born
blind and the raising of Lazarus shew that He is the Source of
Light and of Life to men. The last sign, wrought by the Risen
Christ, sums up and concludes the whole series (xxi. 1 — 12).
Fallen man, restored, fed, guided, enlightened, delivered from
the terrors of death, passes to the everlasting shore of peace,
where the Lord is waiting to receive him.
In Nicodemus coming by night, in Judas going out into the
night, in the dividing of Christ's garments and the blood and
water from His side, &c. &c. we seem to have instances of the
same love of symbolism. These historical details are singled
out for notice because of the lesson which lies behind them.
And if we ask for the source of this mode of teaching, there
cannot be a doubt about the answer : it is the form in which
almost all the lessons of the Old Testament are conveyed.
This leads us to another characteristic.
4. Though written in Greek, S. John's Gospel is in thought
and tone, and sometimes in the form of expression also,
thoroughly HEBREW, AND BASED ON THE HEBREW SCRIP
TURES. Much has been already said on this point in Chap
ter II. ii. (2), in shewing § that the Evangelist must have been a
Jew. The Gospel sets forth two facts in tragic contrast : (1) that
the Jewish Scriptures in endless ways, by commands, types, and
prophecies, pointed and led up to the Christ ; (2) that precisely
the people who possessed these Scriptures, and studied them
most diligently, failed to recognise the Christ or refused to
believe in Him. In this aspect the Gospel is a long comment

INTRODUCTION.

on the mournful text, 'Ye search the Scriptures ; because in
them ye think ye have eternal life : and they are they which
testify of Me. And ye will not come to Me, that ye may have
life ' (v. 39, 40). To shew, therefore, the way out of this tragical
contradiction between a superstitious reverence for the letter of
the law and a scornful rejection of its true meaning, S. John
writes his Gospel. He points out to his fellow-countrymen that
they are right in taking the Scriptures for their guide, ruinously
wrong in the use they make of them : Abraham, Moses and the
Prophets, rightly understood, will lead them to adore Him whom
they have crucified. This he does, not merely in general state
ments (i. 45, iv. 22, v. 39, 46), but in detail, both by allusions;
e.g. to Jacob (i. 47, 51) and to the rock in the wilderness (vii. 37),
and by direct references; e. g. to Abraham (vii. 56), to the brazen
serpent (iii. 14), to the Bridegroom (iii. 29), to the manna (vi. 49),
to the paschal lamb (xix. 36), to the Psalms (ii. 17, x. 34, xiii. 18,
xix. 24, 37), to the Prophets generally (vi. 45, [vii. 38]), to Isaiah
(xii. 38, 40), to Zechariah (xii. 15), to Micah (vii. 42).
All these passages (and more might easily be added) tend to
shew that the Fourth Gospel is saturated with the thoughts,
imagery, and language of the O.T. "Without the basis of the
Old Testament, without the fullest acceptance of the unchanging
divinity of the Old Testament, the Gospel of S. John is an
insoluble riddle " (Westcott, Introduction, p. lxix.).
5. Yet another characteristic of this Gospel has been men
tioned by anticipation in discussing the plan of it (chap. iv. ii) ;
—its systematic ARRANGEMENT. It is the only Gospel which
clearly has a plan. What has been given above as an outline
of the plan (IV. ii.), and also the arrangement of the miracles
in section 3 of this chapter, illustrate this feature of the
Gospel. Further examples in detail wjll be pointed out in the
subdivisions of the Gospel given in the notes.
6. The last characteristic which our space will allow us to
notice is its style. The style of the Gospel and of the First
Epistle of S. John is unique. But it is a thing to be felt rather
than to be defined. The most illiterate reader is conscious of
it; the ablest critic cannot analyse it satisfactorily. A few

INTRODUCTION. 43
main features, however, may be pointed out ; the rest being left
to the student's own powers of observation.
Ever since Dionysius of Alexandria (c. A.D. 250) wrote his
masterly criticism of the differences between the Fourth Gospel
and the Apocalypse (Eus. H. E. VII. xxv.), it has been not un
common to say that the Gospel is written in very pure Greek,
free from all barbarous, irregular, or uncouth expressions. This
is true in a sense ; but it is somewhat misleading. The Greek
of the Fourth Gospel is pure, as that of a Greek Primer is
pure, because of its extreme simplicity. And it is faultless for
the same reason ; blemishes being avoided because idioms and
intricate constructions are avoided. Elegant, idiomatic, clas
sical Greek it is not.
(a) This, therefore, is one element in the style, — extreme
simplicity. The clauses and sentences are connected together
by simple conjunctions co-ordinately; they are not made to de
pend one upon another ; ' In Him was life, and the life was
the light of men ; ' not ' which was the light, &c.' Even where
there is strong contrast indicated a simple ' and ' is preferred to
'nevertheless' or 'notwithstanding;' 'He came unto His own
home, and His own people received Him not.' In passages of
great solemnity the sentences are placed side by side without
even a conjunction ; 'Jesus answered... Pilate answered... Jesus
answered' (xviii. 34 — 36). The words of others are given in
direct not in oblique oration. The first chapter (19 — 51), and
indeed the first half of the Gospel, abounds in illustrations.
(b) This simple co-ordination of sentences and avoidance of
relatives and dependent clauses involves a good deal of repeti
tion ; and even when repetition is not necessary we find it
employed for the sake of close connexion and emphasis. This
constant repetition is very impressive. A good example of it is
where the predicate (or part of the predicate) of one sentence
becomes the subject (or part of the subject) of the next ; or
where the subject is repeated ; ' I am the good Shepherd; the
good Shepherd giveth His life for the sheep ; ' ' The light shineth
in the darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not ;' ' In.
the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and

44 INTRODUCTION.

the Word was God. Sometimes instead of repeating the sub
ject S. John introduces an apparently superfluous demonstrative
pronoun ; ' He that seeketh the glory of Him that sent Him,
this one is true' (vii. 18); 'He that made me whole, that man
said unto me' (v. il). The personal pronouns are frequently
inserted for emphasis and repeated for the same reason. This
is specially true of ' I ' in the discourses of Christ.
(c) Although S. John connects his sentences so simply, and
sometimes merely places them side by side without conjunc
tions, yet he very frequently points out a sequence in fact or in
thought. His two most characteristic particles are 'therefore'
(ovv) and ' in order that ' (iva). ' Therefore ' occurs almost ex
clusively in narrative, and points out that one fact is a conse
quence of another, sometimes in cases where this would not
have been obvious ; ' He came therefore again into Cana of
Galilee ' (iv. 46), because of the welcome He had received there
before ; ' They sought therefore to take Him ' (vii. 30), because
of His claim to be sent from God. — While the frequent use of
' therefore ' points to the conviction that nothing happens with
out a cause, the frequent use of 'in order that' points to the
belief that nothing happens without a purpose. S. John uses
' in order that ' not only where some other construction would
have been suitable, but also where another construction would
seem to be much more suitable ; ' I am not worthy in order
that I may unloose ' (i. 27), ' My meat is in order that I may do
the will' (iv. 34) ; 'This is the work of God, in order that ye may
believe' (vi. 29); 'Who sinned, this man or his parents, in order
that he should be born blind ? ' (ix. 2) ; 'It is expedient for you,
in order that I go away' (xvi. 7). S. John is specially fond of
this construction to point out the working of the Divine pur
pose, as in some of the instances just given (comp. v. 23, vi. 40,
50, x. 10, xi. 42, xiv. 16, &c. &c.) and in particular of the fulfil
ment of prophecy (xviii. 9, xix. 24, 28, 36). In this connexion
an elliptical expression 'but in order that' (=but this was
done in order that) is not uncommon ; ' Neither this man
sinned, nor his parents, but in order that, &c.' (ix. 3 ; comp. xi.
52, xiv. 31, xv. 25, xviii. 28).

INTRODUCTION. 45

(d) S. John, full of the spirit of Hebrew poetry, frequently
employs that parallelism which to a large extent is the very
form of Hebrew poetry: 'A servant is not greater than his
lord ; neither one that is sent greater than he that sent him '
(xiii. 16); ' Peace I leave with you, My peace I give unto you...
Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be fearful ' (xiv.
27). Sometimes the parallelism is antithetic, and the second
clause denies the opposite of the first ; 'He confessed, and
denied not ' (i. 20) ; 'I give unto them eternal life, and they
shall never perish ' (x. 28).
(e) Another peculiarity, also of Hebrew origin, is minuteness
of detail. Instead of one word summing up the whole action,
S. John uses two or three stating the details of the action ;
'They asked him and said to him' (i. 25); 'John bare witness,
saying' (i. 32); 'Jesus cried aloud 'in the Temple teaching and
saying' (vii. 28). The frequent phrase 'answered and said,'
illustrates both this particularity and also the preference for
co-ordinate sentences (a). ' Answered and said ' occurs thirty-
four times in S. John, and only two or three times in the
Synoptists, who commonly write 'having answered said,' or
' answered saying.'
(/) In conclusion we may notice a few of S. John's favour
ite words and phrases ; ' Abide ' especially in the phrases
expressing abiding in one another ; ' believe on' a person ;
' true ' as opposed to lying, and ' true ' as opposed to spurious,
'truly,' and 'truth;' 'witness' and 'bear witness;' 'the dark
ness,' of moral darkness; 'the light,' of spiritual light; 'life;'
'love;' eternal life;' 'in frankness' or 'openly;' 'keep My
word;' 'manifest;' 'the Jews,' ofthe opponents of Christ; 'the
world,' of those alienated from Christ. The following words
and phrases are used by S. John only ; 'the Paraclete' or 'the
Advocate,' of the Holy Spirit; 'the Word,' of the Son; 'only-
begotten,' of the Son; 'come out from God,' of the Son; 'lay
down My life,' of Jesus Christ; 'Verily, verily;' 'the ruler of
this world,' of Satan; 'the last day.'
These characteristics combined form a book which stands
alone in Christian literature, as its author stands alone among

46 INTRODUCTION.

Christian teachers ; the work of one who for threescore years
and ten laboured as an Apostle. Called to follow the Baptist
when only a lad, and by him soon transferred to the Christ, he
may be said to have been the first who from his youth up was a
Christian. Who, therefore, could so fitly grasp and state in
their true proportions and with fitting impressiveness the great
verities of the Christian faith? He had had no deep-seated
prejudices to uproot, like his friend S. Peter and others who
were called late in life. He had had no sudden wrench to
make from the past, like S. Paul. He had not had the trying
excitement of wandering abroad over the face of the earth, like
most ofthe Twelve. He had remained at his post at Ephe'sus,
directing, teaching, meditating ; until at last when the fruit was
ripe it was given to the Church in the fulness of beauty which it
is still our privilege to possess and learn to love.

CHAPTER VI.
ITS RELATION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS.
The Fourth Gospel presupposes the other three ; the Evan
gelist assumes that the contents of his predecessors' Gospels are
known to his readers. The details of Christ's birth are summed
up in 'the Word became flesh.' His subjection to His parents
is implied by contrast in His reply to His mother at Cana. The
Baptism is involved in the Baptist's declaration, 'I have seen
(the Spirit descending and abiding on Him) and have borne
witness' (i. 34). The Ascension is promised through Mary
Magdalene to the Apostles (xx. 17), but left unrecorded. Chris
tian Baptism is assumed in the discourse with Nicodemus, and
the Eucharist in that on the Bread of Life ; but the reference
in each case is left to speak for itself to Christians familiar
with both those rites. S. John passes over their institution in
silence. The differences between the Fourth Gospel and the three
first are real and very marked: but it is easy to exaggerate

INTRODUCTION. 47

them. They are conveniently grouped under two heads; (1) dif
ferences as to the scene and extent of Christ's ministry ; (2) dif
ferences as to the view given of His Person.
(1) With regard to the first, it is urged that the Synoptists
represent our Lord's ministry as lasting for one year only,
including only one Passover and one visit to Jerusalem, with
which the ministry closes. S. John, however, describes the
ministry as extending over three or possibly more years, in
cluding at least three Passovers and several visits to Jerusalem.
In considering this difficulty, if it be one, we must remember
two things : (a) that all four Gospels are very incomplete and
contain only a series of fragments ; (b) that the date and dura
tion of Christ's ministry remain and are likely to remain un
certain, (a) In the gaps in the Synoptic narrative there is
plenty of room for all that is peculiar to S. John. In the spaces
deliberately left by S. John between his carefully arranged scenes
there is plenty of room for all that is peculiar to the Synoptists.
When all have been pieced together there still remain large
interstices which it would require at least four more Gospels to
fill (xxi. 25). Therefore it can be no serious difficulty that so
much of the Fourth Gospel has nothing parallel to it in the
other three, (b) The additional fact of the uncertainty as to
the date and duration of the Lord's public ministry is a further
explanation of the apparent difference in the amount of time
covered by the Synoptic narrative and that covered by the
narrative of S. John. There is no contradiction between the
two. The Synoptists nowhere say that the ministry lasted for
only one year, although some commentators from very early
times have proposed to understand 'the acceptable year of the
Lord' (Luke iv. 19) literally. The three Passovers of S. John
(ii. 13, vi. 4, xi. 55 ; v. 1 being omitted as very doubtful), compel
us to give at least a little over two years to Christ's ministry. But
S. John also nowhere implies that he has mentioned all the
Passovers within the period; and the startling statement of
Irenaeus (Haer. II. xxii. 5) must be borne in mind, that our
Lord fulfilled the office of a Teacher until He was over forty
years old, "even as the Gospel and all the elders bear witness,

48 INTRODUCTION.

who consorted with John the disciple of the Lord in Asia,
(stating) that John had handed this down to them." Irenaeus
makes the ministry begin when Christ was nearly thirty years
of age (Luke iii. 23) ; so that he gives it a duration of more than
ten years on what seems to be very high authority. All that
can be affirmed with certainty is that the ministry cannot have
begun earlier than A.D. 28 (the earlier alternative for the
fifteenth year of Tiberius; Luke iii. 1), and cannot have ended
later than A.D. 37, when Pilate was recalled by Tiberius shortly
before his death. Indeed as Tiberius died in March, and Pilate
found him already dead when he reached Rome, the recall
probably took place in A.D. 36; and the Passover of AD. 36
is the latest date possible for the Crucifixion. Chronology is
not what the Evangelists aimed at giving us ; and the fact that
S. John spreads his narrative over a longer period than the
Synoptists will cause a difficulty to those only who have mis
taken the purpose of the Gospels.
(2) As to the second great difference between S. John and
the Synoptists, it is said that, while they represent Jesus as
a great Teacher and Reformer, with the powers and authority
of a Prophet, who exasperates His countrymen by denouncing
their immoral traditions, S. John gives us instead a mysterious
Personage, invested with Divine attributes, who infuriates the
hierarchy by claiming to be one with the Supreme God. tt is
urged, moreover, that there is a corresponding difference in the
teaching attributed to Jesus in each case. The discourses in
the Synoptic Gospels are simple, direct, and easily intelligible,
inculcating for the most part high moral principles, which are
enforced and illustrated by numerous parables and proverbs.
Whereas the discourses in the Fourth Gospel are many and
intricate, inculcating for the most part deep mystical truths,
which are enforced by a ceaseless reiteration tending to obscure
the exact line of the argument, and illustrated by not a single
parable properly so called.
These important differences may be to a very great extent
explained by two considerations: (a) the peculiarities of S.
John's own temperament; (b) the circumstances under which

INTRODUCTION. 49

he wrote, (a) The main features of S. John's character, so far
as we can gather them from history and tradition, have been
stated above (chapter I. ii.), and we cannot doubt that they
have affected not only his choice of the incidents and discourses
selected for narration, but also his mode of narrating them. No
doubt in both he was under the guidance of the Holy Spirit
(xiv. 26): but we have every reason for supposing that such
guidance would work with, rather than against, the mental en
dowments of the person guided. To what extent the substance
and form of his Gospel has been influenced by the intensity of
his own nature we cannot tell : but the intensity is there, both
in thought and language, both in its devotion and in its stern
ness ; and the difference from the Synoptists shews that some
influence has been at work, (b) The circumstances under
which S. John wrote will carry us still further. They are very
different from those under which the first Gospels were written.
Christianity had grown from infancy to manhood and believed
itself to be near the great consummation of the Lord's return.
It was ' the last time.' Antichrist, who, as Jesus had foretold,
was to precede His return, was already present in manifold
shapes in the world (1 John ii. 18). In the bold speculations
which had mingled themselves with Christianity, the Divine
Government of the Father and the Incarnation of the Son were
being explained away or denied (1 John ii. 22, iv. 3). The
opposition, shewn from the first by ' the Jews ' to the disciples
of the Teacher whom they had crucified, had settled down into
a relentless hostility. And while the gulf between Christianity
and Judaism had thus widened, that between the Church and
the world had also become more evident. The more the
Christian realised the meaning of being 'born of God,' the
more manifest became the truth, that ' the whole world lieth in
wickedness' (1 John v. 18, 19). A Gospel that was to meet the
needs of a society so changed both in its internal and external
relations must obviously be very different from those which had
suited its infancy. And a reverent mind will here trace, the
Providence of God, in that an Apostle, and he the Apostle
S. John, was preserved for this crisis. It is scarcely too much
s. JOHN 4

50 INTRODUCTION.

to say that, had a Gospel, claiming to have been written by him
near the close of the first century, greatly resembled the other
three in matter and form, we should have had reasonable
grounds for doubting its authenticity. (The special difficulty
with regard to the discourses as reported by the Synoptists and
by S. John is discussed in the introductory note to chap, iii.)
It must be remarked on the other side that, along with these
important differences as regards the things narrated and the
mode of narrating them, there are coincidences less conspicuous,
but not less real or important.
Among the most remarkable of these are the characters of
the Lord, of S. Peter, of Mary and Martha, and of Judas. The
similarity in most cases is too subtle for the picture in the
Fourth Gospel to have been drawn from that in the Synoptic
account. It is very much easier to believe that the two pictures
agree because both are taken from life.
The invariable use by the Synoptists of the expression ' Sou
of Man ' is rigidly observed by S. John. It is always used by
Christ of Himself ; never by, or of, any one else. See notes on
i. 51; and also on ii. 19 and xviii. 11 for two other striking
coincidences. The student will find tabulated lists of minor coincidences in
Dr Westcott's Introduction, pp. Ixxxii., lxxxiii. He sums up
thus : " The general conclusion stands firm. The Synoptists
offer not only historical but also spiritual points of connexion
between the teaching which they record and the teaching in the
Fourth Gospel ; and S. John himself in the Apocalypse com
pletes the passage from the one to the other."

CHAPTER VII.
ITS RELATION TO THE FIRST EPISTLE.
The chronological relation of the Gospel to the First Epistle
of S. John cannot be determined with certainty. The Epistle

INTRODUCTION. 51

presupposes the Gospel in some shape or other: but as the
Gospel was given orally for many years before it was written,
it is possible that the Epistle may have been written first.
Probably they were written within a few years of one another,
whichever was written first of the two.
In comparing the Fourth Gospel with the Synoptists we
found great and obvious differences, accompanied by real but
less obvious correspondences. Here the opposite is rather the
case. The coincidences both in thought and expression be
tween the Gospel and the First Epistle of S. John are many
and conspicuous ; but closer inspection shews some important
differences. The object of the Gospel, as we have seen, is to create a con
viction ' that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.' The object
of the Epistle is rather to insist that the Son of God is Jesus.
The Gospel starts from the historical human Teacher and
proves that He is Divine ; the Epistle starts rather from the
Son of God and contends that He has come in the flesh. Again,
the Gospel is not polemical : the truth is stated rather than
error attacked. In the Epistle definite errors are attacked.
The lesson of both is one and the same ; faith in Jesus Christ
leading to fellowship with Him, and through fellowship with
Him to fellowship with the Father and with one another : or, to
sum up all in one word, Love.

CHAPTER VIII.
THE TEXT OF THE GOSPEL.
The authorities are abundant and various. It will suffice to
mention twelve of the most important ; six Greek MSS. and
six Ancient Versions. Greek Manuscripts.
CODEX SlNAITICUS («)¦ 4th century. Discovered by Tisch
endorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount
Sinai, and now at St Petersburg. The whole Gospel.
4—2

52 INTRODUCTION.
Codex Alexandrinus (A). 5th century. Brought by Cyril
Lucar, Patriarch of Constantinople, from Alexandria, and after
wards presented by him to Charles I. in 1628. In the British
Museum. The whole Gospel, excepting vi. 50 — viii. 52.
Codex Vaticanus (B). 4th century, but perhaps later than
the Sinaiticus. In the Vatican Library. The whole Gospel.
Codex Ephraemi (C). 5th century. A palimpsest : the
original writing has been partially rubbed out and the works of
Ephraem the Syrian have been written over it. In the National
Library at Paris. Eight fragments ; i. 1 — 41 ; iii. 33 — v. 16 ;
vi. 38 — vii. 3 ; viii. 34 — ix. 11; xi. 8 — 46 ; xiii. 8 — xiv. 7 ; xvi.
21 — xviii. 36 ; xx. 26 — xxi. 25.
Codex Bezae (D). 6th or 7th century. Given by Beza to
the University Library at Cambridge in 1581. Remarkable for
its interpolations and various readings. The whole Gospel,
excepting i. 16— iii. 26 : but xviii. 13 — xx. 13 is by a later hand,
possibly from the original MS.
Codex Regius Parisiensis (L). 8th or 9th century. Nearly
related to the Vaticanus. At Tours. The whole Gospel, ex
cepting xxi. 15— xxi. 25. Ancient Versions.
Old Syriac (Curetonian). 2nd century. Four fragments ;
i. — 42; iii. 5 — vii. 35 ; vii. 37 — viii. 53, omitting vii. 53 — viii. 11;
xiv. 11 — 29.
Vulgate Syriac (Peschito). 3rd century. The whole Gos
pel. Harclean Syriac (a revision of the Philoxenian Syriac ;
5th or 6th century). 7th century. The whole Gospel.
Old Latin (Vetus Latina). 2nd century. The whole Gospel
in several distinct forms.
Vulgate Latin (mainly a revision of the Old Latin, by Je
rome, A.D. 383 — 5). 4th century. The whole Gospel.
Memphitic (Coptic, in the dialect of Lower Egypt). 3rd
century. The whole Gospel.

INTRODUCTION. ^3

CHAPTER IX.
the literature of the gospel.
It would be impossible to give even a sketch of this within
a small compass, so numerous are the works on S. John and
his writings. All that will be attempted here will be to give
more advanced students some information as to where they
may look for greater help than can be given in a handbook for
the use of schools.
Of the earliest known commentary, that of Heracleon (c. A.D.
150), only quotations preserved by Origen remain. Of Origen's
own commentary (c. a.d. 225 — 235) only portions remain. Of
the Greek commentators of the fourth century, Theodorus of
Heraclea and Didymus of Alexandria, very little has come
down to us. But we have S. Chrysostom's 88 Homilies on the
Gospel, which have been translated in the Oxford ' Library of
the Fathers.' S. Augustine's 124 Lectures (Tractatus) on S.
John may be read in the ' Library of the Fathers,' or in the new
translation by Gibb, published by T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh.
But no translation can fairly represent the epigrammatic fulness
ofthe original. The Commentary of Cyril of Alexandria has been
translated by P. E. Pusey, Oxford, 1875. With Cyril the line
of great patristic interpreters of S. John ends.
The Catena Aurea of Thomas Aquinas (c. A.D. 1250) was
published in an English form at Oxford, 1841 — 45. It consists
of a 'chain' of comments selected from Greek and Latin
authors. Unfortunately Thomas Aquinas was the victim of pre
vious forgers, and a considerable number of the quotations from
early authorities are taken from spurious works.
Of modern commentaries those of Cornelius a Lapide (Van
der Steen) and Maldonatus in the sixteenth century and of
Lampe in the eighteenth must be mentioned. The last has
been a treasury of information for many more recent writers.
The following foreign commentaries have all been published
in an English form by T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh ; Bengel,

54 INTRODUCTION.

Godet, Luthardt, Meyer, Olshausen, Tholuck. Of these the
works of Godet and Meyer may be specially commended. The
high authority of Dr Westcott pronounces the commentary of
Godet, " except on questions of textual criticism," to be " un
surpassed " — we may add, except by Dr Westcott's own.
Among original English commentaries those of Alford, Dun-
well, McClellan, Watkins, and Wordsworth are or are becom
ing well known to all students. But immensely superior to all
preceding works is the one noticed above, that by Dr Westcott
in Vol. ii. of the Speaker's Commentary on N. T. Murray,
1880. Other works which give very valuable assistance are Ellicott' s
Historical Lectures on the Life of our Lord, Liddon's Bampton
Lectures, 1866, Sanday's Authorship and Historical Character
of the Fourth Gospel, and The Gospels in the Second Century,
and Westcott's Introduction to the Study of the Gospels.
The present writer is bound to express his obligations, in
some cases very great, to the works mentioned above of Alford,
Dunwell, Ellicott, Liddon, McClellan, Sanday, Meyer, Watkins,
and Westcott, as well as to many others. The debt to Canon
Westcott would probably have been still greater if the notes to
the first fifteen chapters had not been written before the writer
of them had seen Vol. 11. of the Speaker's Commentary : but
they have been revised with its help. It was originally intended
that Mr Sanday should undertake the present commentary, but
press of other work induced him to ask leave to withdraw after
having written notes on the greater part of the first chapter.
His successor has had the advantage of these notes and has
made large use of them, and throughout has aimed at in some
measure remedying the loss caused by Mr Sanday's retirement
by frequently quoting from his work on the Fourth Gospel.
These quotations are marked simply ' S.' with a reference to the
page.

INTRODUCTION.

ANALYSIS OF THE GOSPEL IN DETAIL.
I. i— 18. THE PROLOGUE.
i. The Word in His own nature (i — 5).
2. His revelation to men and rejection by them (6 — 13).
3. His revelation ofthe Father (14 — 18).
I. 19— XII. 50. THE MINISTRY.
a. I. 19 — II. 11. The Testimony.
1. The Testimony ofthe Baptist (i. 19—37)
to the deputation from Jerusalem (19 — 28),.
to the people (29 — 34),
\ to Andrew and John (35 — 37).
2. The Testimony of Disciples (i. 38 — 51).
3. The Testimony ofthe First Sign (ii. 1 — n).
b. II. 13— XI. 57. The Work.
1. The Work among Jews (ii. 13 — iii. 36).
First cleansing of the Temple (13 — 22).
Belief without devotion (23 — 25).
The discourse with Nicodemus (iii. 1 — 21).
The baptism and final testimony of John (22 — 36).
2. The Work among Samaritans (iv. 1 — 42).
3. The Work among Galileans (iv. 43 — 54).
4. The Work and conflict among mixed multitudes (v. — xi.).
(a) Christ the Source of Life (v.).
The sign at the pool of Bethsaida (r— 9).
The sequel of the sign (10 — 16).
The discourse on the Son as the Source of Life (17-
47).

56 INTRODUCTION.
(/3) Christ the Support of Life (vi.).
The sign on the land ; feeding the 5000 (1 — 15).
The sign on the lake; walking on the water (16 — 21).
The sequel ofthe two signs (22 — 25).
The discourse on the Son as the Support of Life (26 —
59)-
Opposite results of the discourse (60 — 71).
(7) Christ the Source of Truth and Light (vii. viii.).
The controversy with His brethren (vii. 1 — 9).
The discourse at the F. of Tabernacles (10 — 39).
Opposite results ofthe discourse (40 — 52).
[The woman taken in adultery (vii. 53— viii. 11)].
Christs true witness to Himself and against the Jews
(viii. 12—59).
Christ the Source of Truth and Life illustra
ted by a Sign (ix.).
The prelude to the sign (1 — 5).
The sign (6 — 12).
Opposite results ofthe sign (13 — 41).
(S) Christ is. Love (x.).
Allegory ofthe Door ofthe Fold (1—9).
Allegoryof the Good Shepherd (11— 18).
Opposite results ofthe teaching (19 — 21).
The discourse at the F. ofthe Dedication (22 — 38).
Opposite results ofthe discourse (39 — 42).
Christ is Love illustrated by a Sign (xi.)
The prelude to the sign (1 — 33).
The sign (33—44).
Opposite results ofthe sign (45 — 57),
c. XII. The Judgment.
1. The Judgment of men (1 — 36).
The devotion of Mary (1 — 8).
The hostility of the priests (9 — 11).
The enthusiasm ofthe people (12 — 18).
The discomfiture ofthe Pharisees (19).
The desire ofthe Gentiles (20 — 33).
The perplexity ofthe multitude (34—36).

INTRODUCTION. 57

2. The Judgment ofthe Evangelist (37 — 43).
3. The Judgment of Christ (44 — 50).
XIII.— XX. THE ISSUES OF THE MINISTRY.
d. XIII.— XVII. The inner Glorification of Christ in His last
Discourses.
1. His love in Humiliation (xiii. 1—30).
¦1. His Love in keeping His own (xiii. 31 — xv. 27).
Their union with Him illustrated by the allegory of
the Vine (xv. 1 — 11).
Their union with one another (12 — 17).
The hatred of the world to both Him andthem (18 — 25).
3. The Promise of the Paraclete and of Christ's Return (xvi. ).
The World and the Paraclete (xvi. 1 — n).
The disciples and the Paraclete (12 — 15).
The sorrow turned into joy (16 — 24).
Summary and conclusion (25—33).
4. The Prayer ofthe Great High Priest (xvii.).
The prayer for Himself (xvii. 1 — 5) ,
for the Disciples (6 — 19),
for the whole Church (20 — 26).
e. XVIII. XIX. The outer Glorification of Christ in His Passion.
1. The Betrayal (xviii. 1 — n).
2. The Jewish or Ecclesiastical Trial (12 — 27).
3. The Roman or Civil Trial (xviii. 28 — xix. 16).
4. The Death and Burial (xix. 17—42).
The crucifixion and the title on the cross (17 — 22).
The four enemies and the four friends (23 — 27).
The two words, ' I thirst,' ' It is finished' (28—30).
The hostile and the friendly petitions (31—42). ¦
/. XX. The Resurrection and threefold Manifestation of Christ.
.. The first Evidence of the Resurrection (1— 10).
2. The Manifestation to Mary Magdalene (11— 18).
3. The Manifestation to the Ten and others (19—23).
4. The Manifestation to S. Thomas and others (24—29).
5. The Conclusion and Purpose of the Gospel (30, 31).

58 INTRODUCTION.

XXI. THE EPILOGUE OR APPENDIX.
i . The Manifestation to the Seven and the Miraculous Draught
of Fishes (i — 14).
¦i. The Commission to S. Peter and Prediction as to his Death
('5—19)-
3. The misunderstood Saying as to the Evangelist (20 — 23).
4. Concluding Notes (24, 25).

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO
S. JOHN.
Chap. I. i — 18. The Prologue or Introduction.
The Gospel according to St John] This title exists in very
different forms, both ancient and modern, and is not original. As we
might expect, the oldest authorities are the simplest, and the heading
gradually increases in fulness; thus, i. According^ John, or Of John;
2. Gospel according to John ; 3. The Gospel according to John; 4. The
holy Gospel, &c. So also with the English Versions, from Wiclif's
siraplejoon, or The Gospel ofjoon, to The Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ
according to John of the Geneva Bible.
Chap. I. 1 — 18. The Prologue or Introduction.
That the first eighteen verses are introductory is universally admitted :
commentators are not so unanimous as to the main divisions of this in
troduction. A division into three nearly equal parts has much to com
mend it :
1. The Word in His own Nature (1 — 5).
2. His Revelation to men and rejection by them (6 — 13).
3. His Revelation of the Father (14 — 18).
Some throw the second and third part into one, thus :
2. The historical manifestation ofthe Word (6— iS).
Others again divide into two parts thus :
1. The Word in His absolute eternal Being (v. 1).
¦1. The Word in relation to Creation (2 — 18).
And there are other schemes besides these. In any scheme the
student can scarcely fail to feel that the first verse is unique. Through
out the prologue the three great characteristics of this Gospel, sim
plicity, subtlety, and sublimity, are specially conspicuous ; and the
majesty of the first verse surpasses all. The Gospel of the Son of
Thunder opens with a peal.

60 S. JOHN, I. [vv. I, 2.
i — 5. The Word in His own Nature.
1 tn the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with
2 1 God, and the Word was God. The same was in the
1— 5. The Word in His own Nature.
1. In the beginning) The meaning must depend on the context.
In Gen. i. 1 it is an act done 'in the beginning;' here it is a Being
existing 'in the beginning,' and therefore prior to all beginning. That
was the first moment of time; this is eternity, transcending time. Thus
we have an intimation that the later dispensation is the confirmation
and infinite extension of the first. ' In the beginning ' here equals
'before the world was,' xvii. 5. Compare xvii. 24; Eph. i. 4; and
contrast 'the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ,' Mark i. 1, which
is the historical beginning of the public ministry of the Messiah (John
vi. 64): 'the beginning' here is prior to all history. To interpret
'Beginning' of God as the Origin of all things is not correct, as the con
text shews.
was] Not 'came into existence,' but was already in existence before
the creation of the world. The generation ofthe Word or Son of God is
thus thrown back into eternity. Thus S. Paul calls Him (Col. i.
15) ' the firstborn of every creature, ' or (more accurately translated)
'begotten before all creation,' like 'begotten before all worlds' in
the Nicene creed. Comp. Heb. i. 8, vii. 3 ; Rev. i. 8. On these
passages is based the doctrine of the Eternal Generation of the Son:
see Articles of Religion, 1. and 11. The Arians maintained that there
was a period when the Son was not: S. John says distinctly that
the Son or Word was existing before time began, i.e. from all eternity.
the Word] As early as the second century Sermo and Verbum were
rival translations of the Greek term Logos=~Word. Tertullian (fl. a.d.
195 — 210) gives us both, but seems himself to prefer Ratio. Sermo first
became unusual, and finally was disallowed in the Latin Church. The
Latin versions all adopted Verbum, and from it comes our translation,
' the Word.'
None of these translations are at all adequate: but neither Latin nor
any modern language supplies anything really satisfactory. Verbum
and ' the Word ' do not give the whole of even one of the two sides of
Logos: the other side, which Tertullian tried to express by Ratio, is not
touched at all ; for 6 Xo7os means not only ' the spoken word,' but ' the
thought ' expressed by the spoken word ; it is the spoken word as expres
sive of thought. It is not found in the N.T. in the sense of ' reason.'
The expression Logos is a remarkable one; all the more so, because
S. John assumes that his readers will at once understand it. This
shews that his Gospel was written in the first instance for his own
disciples, who would be familiar with his teaching and phraseology.
Whence did S. John derive the expression, Logos ? It has its origin
in the Targums, or paraphrases of the Hebrew Scriptures, in use in
Palestine, rather than in the mixture of Jewish and Greek philosophy
prevalent at Alexandria and Ephesus, as is very commonly asserted.

v. I.] S. JOHN, I. 61
(1) In the Old Testament we find the Word or Wisdom of God per
sonified, generally as an instrument for executing the Divine Will. We
have a faint trace of it in the 'God said' of Gen. i. 3, 6, 9, n, 14, &c.
The personification of the Word of God begins to appear in the
Psalms, xxxiii. 6, cvii. 20, cxix. 89, cxlvii. 15. In Prov. viii. and ix.
the Wisdom of God is personified in very striking terms. This
Wisdom is manifested in the power and mighty works of God ; that
God is love is a revelation yet to come. (2) In the Apocrypha the
personification is more complete than in O. T. In Ecclesiasticus
(c. B.C. 150 — 100) i. 1 — 20, xxiv. 1 — 22, and in the Book of Wisdom
(c. B.C. 100) vi. 22 to ix. 18 we have Wisdom strongly personified. In
Wisd. xviii. 15 the 'Almighty Word' of God appears as an agent of
vengeance. (3) In the Targums, or Aramaic paraphrases of O.T., the
development is carried still further. These, though not yet written
down, were in common use among the Jews in our Lord's time ; and
they were strongly influenced by the growing tendency to separate the
Godhead from immediate contact with the material world. Where
Scripture speaks of a direct communication from God to man, the
Targums substituted the Memra, or ' Word of God.' Thus in Gen. iii.
8, 9, instead of 'they heard the voice of the Lord God,' the Targums
have ' they heard the voice of the Word of the Lord God ; ' and instead
of 'God called unto Adam,' they put 'the Word of the Lord called
unto Adam,' and so on. ' The Word of the Lord' is said to occur 150
times in a 'single Targum of the Pentateuch. In the theosophy of the
Alexandrine Jews, which was a compound of theology with philo
sophy and mysticism, we seem to come nearer to a strictly personal
view of the Divine Word or Wisdom, but really move further away
from it. Philo, the leading representative of this religious specu
lation (fl. A.D. 40 — 50), admitted into his philosophy very various,
and not always harmonious elements. Consequently his conception
of the Logos is not fixed or clear. On the whole his Logos means
some intermediate agency, by means of which God created material
things and communicated with them. But whether this Logos is one
Being or more, whether it is personal or not, we cannot be sure ; and
perhaps Philo himself was undecided. Certainly his Logos is very
different from that of S. John ; for it is scarcely a Person, and it is not the
Messiah. And when we note that of the two meanings of A6yos, Philo
dwells most on the side which is less prominent, while the Targums
insist on that which is more prominent in the teaching of S.John, we
cannot doubt the source of his language. The Logos of Philo is pre
eminently the Divine Reason. The Memra of the Targums is rather
the Divine Word; i.e. the Will of God manifested in personal action;
and this rather than a philosophical abstraction of the Divine Intelli
gence is the starting point of S. John's expression.
To sum up:— the personification of the Divine Word in O.T. is
poetical, in Philo metaphysical, in S. John historical. The Apocrypha
and Targums help to fill the chasm between O.T. and Philo; history
itself fills the far greater chasm which separates all from S. John.
Between Jewish poetry and Alexandrine speculation on the one hand,

62 S. JOHN, I. [vv. 3, 4.
3 beginning with God. All things were made by him ; and
4 without him was not any thing made that was made. In
and the Fourth Gospel on the other, lies the historical fact of the In
carnation of the Logos, the life of Jesus Christ.
The Logos of S. John, therefore, is not a mere attribute of God, but
the Son of God, existing from all eternity, and manifested in space and
time in the Person of Jesus Christ. In the Logos had been hidden
from eternity all that God had to say to man ; for the Logos was the
living expression of the nature, purposes, and Will of God. (Comp. the
impersonal designation of Christ in 1 John i. I.) Human thought had
been searching in vain for some means of connecting the finite with the
Infinite, of making God intelligible to man and leading man up to God.
S. John knew that he possessed the key to this enigma. He therefore
took the phrase which human reason had lighted on in its gropings,
stripped it of its misleading associations, fixed it by identifying it with
the Christ, and filled it with that fulness of meaning which he himself
had derived from Christ's own teaching.
with God] i.e. with the Father. 'With' = apud, or the French chez: it
expresses the distinct Personality of the Logos. We might render 'face to
face with God,' or 'at home with God.' So, 'His sisters, are they not
all with us?' Matt. xiii. 56; comp. Mark vi. 3, ix. 19, xiv. 49; 1 Cor.
xvi. 7; Gal. i. 18; 1 Thess. iii. 4; Philem. 13; 1 John i. 2.
the Word was God] i.e. the Word partook of the Divine Nature, not
was identical with the Divine Person. The verse may be thus para
phrased, ' the Logos existed from all eternity, distinct from the Father,
and equal to the Father.' Comp. 'neither confounding the Persons nor
dividing the Substance.'
2. The same) More literally, He or This (Word), with emphasis
(comp. vii. 18). This verse takes up the first two clauses and com
bines them. Such recapitulations are characteristic of S. John.
3. by him] Rather, through Him. The universe was created by
the Father through the agency of the Son. Comp. 1 Cor. viii. 6; Col.
i. 16 (where see Lightfoot's note); Rom. xi. 36; Heb. xi. 10. That no
inferiority is necessarily implied by 'through,' as if the Son were a mere
instrument, is shewn by 1 Cor. i. 9, where the same construction is used
ofthe Father, 'through Whom ye were called, &c.' Note the climax
in what follows ; the sphere contracts as the blessing enlarges : existence
for everything; life for the vegetable and animal world; light for men.
without him, &c] Better, apart from Him, &c. Comp. xv. 5.
Antithetic parallelism ; emphatic repetition by contradicting the opposite :
frequent in Hebrew 1 one of the many instances of the Hebrew cast of
S. John's style. Comp. v. 20, x. 28; 1 John i. 5, ii. 4, 27, 28; Ps.
lxxxix. 30, 31, 48, &c, &c.
not anything] No, not one ; not even one : stronger than ' nothing. '
Every single thing, however great, however small, throughout all the
realms of space, came into being through Him. No event takes place
without Him, — apart from His presence and power. Matt. x. 29; Luke
xii. 6.

v-5-]  S. JOHN, I.  63
him was life ; and the life was the light of men. And the 5
light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended
it not.
that was made] Better, that hath been made. The aorist refers to
the fact of creation; the perfect to the permanent result of that fact.
Contrast ' was made ' and ' hath been made ' here with ' was ' in w. 1
and 2. ' Was made ' denotes the springing into life of what was once
non-existent ; ' was ' denotes the perpetual pre-existence of the Word.
Some both ancient and modern writers would give the last part of v.
3 to v. 4, thus : That which hath been made in Him was life ; i.e. those
who were born again by union with Him felt His influence as life with
in them. It is very difficult to decide between the two punctuations.
Tatian (Orat. ad Graecos, xix.) has 'All things [were] by Him and with
out Him hath been made not even one thing. ' See on v. 5.
4. In him was life] He was the well-spring from which every
form of life — physical, intellectual, moral, spiritual, eternal — flows. See
on v. 26.
Observe how frequently S. John's thoughts overlap and run into one
another. Creation leads on to life, and life leads on to light. Without
life creation would be unintelligible; without light all but the lowest
forms of life would be impossible.
the light] Not 'light, but 'the Light,' the one true Light; absolute
Truth both intellectual and moral, free from all ignorance and all stain.
The Source of life is the Source of light.
the light of men] Man shares life with all organic creatures; light, or
Revelation, is for him alone. The communication of Divine truth before
the Fall is specially meant.
5. shineth] Note the present tense ; the only one in the section. It
brings us down to the Apostle's own day : now, as of old, the Light
shines — in reason, in creation, in conscience, — and shines in vain.
Note also the progress : in w. 1 and 2 we have the period before Crea
tion; in v. 3, the Creation; v, 4, man before the Fall; v. 5, man after
the Fall.
in darkness] Better, in the darkness. The Fall is presupposed.
and the darkness] Mark the strong connexion between the two
halves of v. 5 as also between v. 4 and v. 5, resulting in both cases
from a portion of the predicate of one clause becoming the subject of
the next clause. Such strong connexions are frequent in St John.
Sometimes the whole of the predicate is taken; sometimes the subject
or a portion of the subject is repeated. — By 'the darkness' is meant all
that the Divine Revelation does not reach, whether by God's decree or
their own stubbornness, ignorant Gentile or unbelieving Jew; 'Dark
ness' in a metaphorical sense for spiritual and moral darkness is peculiar
to S. John, viii. 12, xii. 35, 46; 1 John i. 5, ii. 8, 9, it.
comprehended it not] Or, apprehended it not: very appropriate of
that which requires mental and moral effort. Comp. Eph. iii. 18. The
darkness remained apart, unyielding, and unpenetrated. The words
'the darkness apprehendeth not the light' are given by Tatian as a

64 S. JOHN, I.  [vv. 6—9.
6—13. The Word revealed to Men and refected by them.
6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light,
8 that all men through him might believe. He was not that
g Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That
quotation (Orat. ad Graecos, XIII.). He flourished A.D. 150—170: so
this is early testimony to the existence of the Gospel. This and the
reference to v. 3 (see note) are quite beyond reasonable dispute.
We have here an instance of what has been called the "tragic
tone" in S. John. He frequently states a gracious fact, and in imme
diate connexion with it the very opposite of what might have been
expected to result from it. The Light shines in Darkness, and (instead
of yielding and dispersing) the darkness shut it out. Comp. w. 10 and
11, (ii. 24,) iii. 11, 19, 32, v. 39, 40, vi. 36, 43, viii. 45, &c. The word
rendered 'comprehended' may also mean 'overcame;' and this makes
good sense. Comp. xii. 35.
6 — 13. The Word revealed to Men and rejected by them.
6. There was a man] Rather, There arose a man, in contrast to
the 'was' in v. 1. The word was from all eternity ; John arose, came
into existence, in time. Comp. x. 19. Note once more the noble sim
plicity of language.
sent from God] i.e. a Prophet. Comp. 'I will send my messenger,'
Mai. iii. 1 ; 'I will send yon Elijah the Prophet,' iv. 5. From the Greek
for 'send' (apostello) comes our word 'Apostle;'
whose name was John] In the Fourth Gospel John is mentioned 20
times, and is never once distinguished as ' the Baptist.' The other three
Evangelists carefully distinguish the Baptist from the son of Zebedee :
to the writer of the Fourth Gospel there is only one John. This in itself
is strong incidental evidence that he himself is the other John. See on
xi. 16.
7. for a witness] Better, for witness, i.e. to bear witness, not to
be a witness: what follows shews the meaning. The word 'witness'
and 'to bear witness' are very frequent in S. John's writings, and this
frequency should be marked by retaining the same translation through
out : testimony to the truth is one of his favourite thoughts.
through him] i.e. through the Baptist, the Herald of the Truth.
Comp. v. 33; Acts x. 37, xiii. 24.
8. not that Light] Better, not the Light. The Baptist was not
the Light, but 'the lamp that is lighted and shineth' (see on v. 35). He
was lumen illuminatum, not lumen illuminans. At the close of the
first century it was still necessary for S. John to insist on this. At
Ephesus, where this Gospel was written, S. Paul in his third missionary
journey had found disciples still resting in 'John's baptism,' Acts xix.
1 — 6. 'By lamp-light we may advance to the day' (Augustine).
but was sent to] 'was sent' is not in the Greek. 'But (in order) that'

vv. 10, ii.] S. JOHN, I. 65
was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh
into the world. He was in the world, and the world was 1°
made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto "
is an elliptical phrase occurring several times in this Gospel. It calls
attention to the Divine purpose. Comp. ix. 3, xiii. 18, xiv. 31, xv. 25.
9. That was, &c] This verse is ambiguous in the Greek. Most
of the Ancient Versions, Fathers, and Reformers agree with our trans
lators. Many modern commentators translate — the true Light, which
lighteth every man, was coming into the world : but 'was' and 'com
ing' are almost too far apart in the Greek for this. There is yet a
third way ;— there was the true Light, which lighteth every man by
coming into the world. 'Was' is emphatic : 'there was the true Light,'
even while the Baptist was preparing the way for Him. The Baptist
came once for all; the Light was ever coming.
The word for 'true' (alHhinos) is remarkable: it means true as op
posed to 'spurious,' not true as opposed to 'lying.' It is in fact the
old English 'very,' e.g. 'very God of very God.' Christ then is the
true, the genuine, the perfect Light, just as He is 'the perfect Bread'
(vi. 32) and 'the perfect Vine' (xv. 1): not that He is the only Light,
and 'Bread, and Vine, but that He is in reality what all others are in
figure and imperfectly. All words about truth are very characteristic
of S. John.
every man] not 'all men:' the Light illumines each one singly, not all
collectively. God deals with men separately as individuals, not in
masses. But though every man is illumined, not every man is the
better for it : that depends upon himself.
that cometh into the world] A Jewish phrase for being born, fre
quent in S. John (ix. 39, xi. 27, xvi. 28); see on xviii. 37. 'The world'
is another of the expressions characteristic of S. John : it occurs nearly
80 times in the Gospel and 22 in the First Epistle. This verse, Hippo
lytus 'tells us (Refut. vn. x.), was used by Basilides in defending his
doctrine, and as he began to teach about a.d. 125, this is very early
evidence of the use of the Gospel.
10. and the world] Note three points; (1) the close connexion
obtained by repetition, as in vv. 4 and 5 ; (2) the tragic tone, as in v. 5 ;
(3) the climax. 'He was in the world' (therefore the world should have
known Him); 'and the world was His own creature' (therefore still
more it should have known Him); 'and (yet) the world knew Him
not.' 'And ' = 'and yet' is very frequent in S. John ; but it is best not
to put in the 'yet;' the simple 'and' is more forcible. Comp. vv. 5
and 11.
Note that 'the world ' has not the same meaning in vv. 9 and 10.
Throughout N.T. it is most important to distinguish the various mean
ings of 'the world.' It means (1) 'the universe;' Rdm. i. 20: (2) 'the
earth-' v. 9; Matt. iv. 8: (3) ' the inhabitants of the earth ;' v. 29, iv.
42 : (4') 'those outside the Church,' alienated from God; xii. 31, xiv. 17,
and frequently. In thisverse the meaning slips from (2) to (4).
s. JOHN 5

66 S. JOHN, I, [vv. 12, 13.
12 his own, and his own received him not. But as many as
received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of
i3 God, even to them that believe on his name : which were
knew him not] Did not acquire knowledge of its Creator; did not
recognise and acknowledge Him. Comp. Acts xix. 15.
11. unto his own] In the Greek the first 'own 'is neuter, the second is
masculine, and this difference should be preserved : He came unto His
own inheritance; and His own people received Him not (see on vi. 37).
In the parable of the Wicked Husbandmen (Matt. xxi. 33 — 41) the
vineyard is 'His own inheritance,' the husbandmen are 'His own
people,' the Jews. Or, for 'His own inheritance' we might say 'His
own home' as in xix. 27, where the Greek is the same. The tragic
tone is very strong here as in vv. 5 and 10.
received] A stronger word than 'knew.' The exact meaning of the
Greek word is 'to accept what is offered.' Mankind in general did not
recognise the Messiah ; the Jews, to whom He was specially sent, did
not welcome Him. See on xix. 16.
Once more there is a climax; — 'He was' (v. 9); 'He was in the
world' (v. 10); 'He came unto His own inheritance (v. n).
12. received] Not the same Greek word as before : this denotes the
spontaneous acceptance of the Messiah by individuals, whether Jews or
Gentiles. He was not specially offered to any individuals as He was to
the Jewish nation.
power] i.e. right, liberty, authority. We are bom with a capa
city for becoming sons of God ; that we have as men. He gives us a
right to become such ; that we receive as Christians. Comp. v. 27, x.
18. to become] Christ is from all eternity the Son of God; men are em
powered to become sons of God. Comp. Matt. v. 45.
the sons of God) Omit 'the:' children of God. Both S. John and
S. Paul insist on the fundamental fact that the relation of believers to
God is a filial one. S. John gives us this fact on the human side ; man
'must be born again' (iii. 3). S. Paul gives us the Divine side; God by
'adoption' makes us sons (Rom. viii. 16, 17, 21, 23; Gal. iv. 5).
even to them that believe] Explains who are the sons of God. The
test of a child of God is no longer descent from Abraham, but belief
in God's Son.
on his name] The construction ' to believe on' is characteristic of S.
John : it occurs about 35 times in the Gospel and 3 times in the First
Epistle; elsewhere in N.T. about 10 times. It expresses the very
strongest belief; motion to and repose on the object of belief. 'His
Name' is a frequent phrase in Jewish literature, both O. and N.T. It
is not a mere periphrasis. Names were so often significant, given some
times by God Himself, that a man's name told not merely who he was,
but what he was: it was an index of character. So 'the Name ofthe
Lord' is not a mere periphrasis for 'the Lord;' it suggests His attributes
and His relations to us as Lord. Perhaps the name of Logos is specially
meant here; and the meaning would then be to give one's entire ad-

v. I4-] S. JOHN, I. 67
born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the
will of man, but of God.
14 — 18. The Incarnate Word's revelation ofthe Father.
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, 14
hesion to Him as the Incarnate Son, the expression of the Will and
Nature of God. Comp. iii. 18, xx. 31.
13. S. John denies thrice most emphatically that human generation
has anything to do with Divine regeneration. Man cannot become a
child of God in right of human parentage : descent from Abraham con
fers no such 'power.' A bitter word to Jewish exclusiveness.
were born] Literally, were begotten. Comp. 1 John v. 1, 4, 18.
not of blood] The blood was regarded as the seat of physical life.
Gen. ix. 4; Lev. xvii. n, 14, &c.
nor of the will of the flesh] Better, nor yet from will of flesh, i.e.
from any fleshly impulse. A second denial of any physical process.
nor of the will of man] Better, nor yet from will of man, i.e. from
the volition of any earthly father : it is the Heavenly Father who wills
it. A third denial of any physical process.
There is an interesting false reading here. Tertullian (c. A.D. 200)
had 'was born' for 'were born,' making it refer to Christ; and he ac
cused the Valentinians of corrupting the text in reading 'were born,'
which is undoubtedly right. This shews that as early as A.D. 200 there
were corruptions in the text, the origin of which was already lost. Such
tilings take some time to grow : by comparing them and tracing their
roots and branches we arrive at a sure conclusion that this Gospel can
not have been written later than a.d. 85 — 100. See on v. 18 and ix.
35-
14 — 18. The Incarnate Word's revelation of the Father.
14. And the Word was made fiesh] Or, became flesh. This is the
gulf which separates S. John from Philo. Philo would have assented to
what precedes; from this he would have shrunk. From v. 9 to 13 we
have the subjective side ; the inward result of the Word's coming to those
who receive Him. Here we have the objective; the coming of the Word
as a historical fact. The Logos, existing from all eternity with the
Father (mi. 1 and 2), not only manifested His power in Creation (v. 3)
and in influence on the minds of men (vv. 9, 12, 13), but manifested
Himself in the form of a man of flesh. The important point is that the
Word became terrestrial and material : and thus the inferior part of man
is mentioned, the flesh, to mark His humiliation. He took the whole
of man's nature, including its frailty. "The majestic fulness of this
brief sentence," the Word became flesh, which affirms once for all the
union of the Infinite and the finite, "is absolutely unique." The Word
became flesh ; did not merely assume a body : and the Incarnate Word
is one, not two personalities. Thus various heresies, Gnostic and Eu-
tychian, are refuted by anticipation.
5—2

68 S. JOHN, I. [v. 15.
(and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten
15 ofthe Father,) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of
him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He
dwelt among us] Literally, tabernacled among us, dwelt as in a tent.
The Tabernacle had been the seat of the Divine Presence in the wilder
ness : when God became incarnate in order to dwell among the Chosen
People, 'to tabernacle' was a natural word to use. The word forms a
link between this Gospel and the Apocalypse : it occurs here, four times
in the Apocalypse, and nowhere else. Our translators render it simply
'dwell,' which is inadequate. Rev. vii. 15, xii. 12, xiii. 6, xxi. 3.
among us] In the midst of those of us who witnessed His life.
we beheld] Or, contemplated. Comp. 1 John i. 1. No need to
make a parenthesis.
his glory] The Shechinah. Comp. ii. 11, xi. 40, xii. 41, xvii. 5, 24;
2 Cor. iii. 7 — 18; Rev. xxi. 11. There is probably a special reference
to the Transfiguration (Luke ix. 32; 2 Pet. i. 17); and possibly to the
vision at the beginning of the Apocalypse. In any case it is the
Evangelist's own experience that is indicated. Omit 'the' before the
second 'glory.'
as of] i.e. exactly like. The glory is altogether such as that of an
only-begotten son. Comp. Matt. vii. 29. He taught exactly as one
having full authority. No article before 'only-begotten;' He was an
only-begotten Son, whereas Moses and the Prophets were but servants.
only begotten] Unigenitus. The Greek word is used of the widow's
son (Luke vii. 12), Jairus' daughter (viii. 42), the demoniac boy (ix. 38),
Isaac (Heb. xi. 17). As applied to Christ it occurs only in S. John's
writings; here, v. 18, iii. 16, 18; 1 Johniv.g. It marks off His unique
Sonship from that ofthe 'sons of God' (v. 12).
ofthe Father] Literally, from the presence of a father; an only son
sent on a mission from a father: comp. v. 6.
full] Looks forward to 'fulness' in v. 16.
grace] The original meaning of the Greek word is ' that which causes
pleasure.' Hence (1) comeliness, winsomeness: 'the words of grace' in
Luke iv. 22 are 'winning words.' (2) Kindliness, goodwill: Luke ii. 52;
Acts ii. 47. (3) The favour of God towards sinners. This distinctly
theological sense has for its central point the freeness of God's gifts : they
are not earned, He gives them spontaneously through Christ. 'Grace'
covers all these three meanings. The third at its fullest and deepest is
the one here. It is as the Life that the Word is 'full of grace,' for
it is 'by grace' that we come to eternal life. Eph. ii. 5.
truth] It is as the Light that the Word is 'full of truth.'
15. bare witness] Better, bears witness. At the end of a long life
this testimony of the Baptist abides still fresh in the heart of the aged
Apostle. Three times in 20 verses (15, 27, 30) he records the cry which
was such an epoch in his own life. The testimony remains as a memory
for him, a truth for all.
and cried] Better, and cries. The word indicates strong emotion,
characteristic of a prophet. Comp. vii. 28, 37, xii. 44; Is. xl. 3.

w. 16, 17.] S. JOHN, I. 69
that cometh after me is preferred before me : for he was
before me. And of his fulness have all we received, and 16
grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses, but grace 't

of whom I spake] As if his first utterance under the influence of the
Spirit had been scarcely intelligible to himself.
He that cometh after, &c] The exact meaning seems to be — 'He who
is coming after me (in His ministry as in His birth) has become superior
to me, for He was in existence from all eternity before me.' Christ's
pre-existence in eternity a great deal more than cancelled John's pre-
existence in the world ; and as soon as He appeared as a teacher He at
once eclipsed His forerunner. But this is not quite certain. The words
translated 'is preferred before me,' or 'is become superior to me,'
literally mean 'has come to be before me;' and this may refer to time
and not to dignity. But the perfect tense 'has come to be, has become'
points to dignity rather than time. Moreover if 'has become before me'
refers to time, this is almost tautology with 'for He was before me,'
which must refer to time.
he was before me] The Greek is peculiar, being the superlative instead
of the comparative ; not simply 'prior to me, ' but 'first of me. ' Perhaps
it means ' before me and first of all.'
16. The testimony of the Baptist to the incarnate Word is con
firmed by the experience of all believers. The Evangelist is the
speaker. And] The true reading gives Because.
fulness) The Greek word, pleroma, is ' a recognised technical term
in theology, denoting the totality of the Divine powers and attributes.'
This fulness of the Divine attributes belonged to Christ (v. 14), and by
Him was imparted to the Church, which is His Body (Eph. i. 23) ; and
through the Church each individual believer in his degree receives a
portion of it. See Lightfoot on Colossians, i. 19 and ii. 9. 'Of His
fulness' means literally 'out of His fulness,' as from an inexhaustible
store. all we] shews that the Evangelist and not the Baptist is speaking.
grace for grace] Literally, grace in the place of grace, one grace suc
ceeding another, and as it were taking its place. There is no reference
to the Christian dispensation displacing the Jewish. The Jewish dis
pensation would have been called 'the Law,' not 'grace;' see next
verse, and comp. xvii. 22.
17. The mention of 'grace' reminds the Evangelist that this was the
characteristic of the Gospel and marked its superiority to the Law; for
the Law could only condemn transgressors, grace forgives them.
For] Better, Because.
by Moses] The preposition translated 'by' in w. 3, 10, 17, and
'through' in v. 7, is one and the same in the Greek. The meaning in all
five cases is 'by means of.' Moses did not give the Law any more than
he gave the manna (vi. 32) : he was only the mediate agent by whose
hand it was given (Gal. iii. 19).

70 S. JOHN, I. [v. 18.
18 and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God
at any time ; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom
of the Father, he hath declared him.

truth] Like grace, truth is opposed to the Law, not as truth to false
hood, but as perfection to imperfection.
came] Note the change from 'was given.' The grace and truth which
came through Christ were His own ; the Law given through Moses was
not his own.
Jesus Christ] S. John no longer speaks of the Logos : the Logos has
become incarnate (v. 14) and is spoken of henceforth by the names
which He has borne in history.
18. The Evangelist solemnly sums up the purpose of the Incarnation
of the Logos — -to be a visible revelation of the invisible God. It was in
this way that ' the truth came through Jesus Christ, ' for the truth cannot
be fully known, while God is not fully revealed.
No man] Not even Moses. Until we see 'face to face' (1 Cor. xiii.
12) our knowledge is only partial. Symbolical visions, such as Ex.
xxiv. 10, xxxiii. 23; 1 Kings xix. 13; Is. vi. 1, do not transcend the
limits of partial knowledge.
hath seen] With his bodily eyes.
at any time] Better, ever yet; 'no one hath ever yet seen God;' but
some shall see Him hereafter.
the only begotten Son] The question of reading here is very interest
ing. Most MSS. and versions have 'the only-begotten Son' or 'only-
begotten Son.' But the tliree oldest and best MSS. and two others of
great value have 'only-begotten God.' The test of the value of a MS.,
or group of MSS., on any disputed point, is the extent to which it
admits false readings on other points not disputed. Judged by this test
the group of MSS. which read 'only-begotten God' is very strong;
while the far larger group of MSS. which have 'Son' for 'God' is com
paratively weak, for the same group of MSS. might be quoted in de
fence of a multitude of readings which no one would think of adopting.
Again, the revised Syriac, which is among the minority of versions that
support 'God,' is here of special weight, because it agrees with MSS.
from which it usually differs. We conclude, therefore, that the very un
usual expression 'only-begotten God' is the true reading, which has been
changed to the usual 'only-begotten Son,' a change which in an old
Greek MS. would involve the alteration of only a single letter. Both
readings can be traced up to the second century, which again is evidence
that the Gospel was written in the first century. Such differences take
time to spread themselves widely. See on v. 13 and ix. 35.
in the bosom] Literally, into the bosom, which may mean that the
return to glory after the Ascension is meant. Comp. Mark ii. 1, xiii.
16; Luke ix. 61. On the other hand the Greek for 'which is' points
to a timeless relation.
hath declared] Better, declared, acted as His interpreter. The Greek
word is used both in the LXX. and in classical authors of interpreting

v. I9-] S. JOHN, I. 71
19 — 37. The Testimony of the Baptist.
19 — 28. His Testimony to the Deputation from Jerusalem.
And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent 19
the Divine Will. On the emphatic use of 'He' here comp. v. 33 and
see on x. 1. In the First Epistle this pronoun (ekeinos) is used specially
for Christ; ii. 6, iii. 3, 5, 7, 16, iv. 17.
In this prologue we notice what may be called a spiral movement.
An idea comes to the front, like the strand of a rope, retires again, and
reappears later on for development and further definition. Meanwhile
another idea, like another strand, comes before us, and retires to re
appear in like manner. Thus the Word is presented to us in v. 1, is
withdrawn, and again presented to us in v. 14. The Creation comes
next in v. 3, disappears, and returns again in v. 10. Then 'the Light'
is introduced in v. 5, withdrawn, and reproduced in vv. 10, n. Next
the rejection of the Word is put before us in -u. 5, removed, and again
put before us in w. 10, n. Lastly , the testimony of John is mentioned
in vv. 6, 7, repeated in v. 15, taken up again in v. 19, and developed
through the next two sections of the chapter.
We now enter upon the first main division of the Gospel, which ex
tends to the end of chap, xii., the subject being Christ's Ministry,
or, His Revelation of Himself to the World, and that in three
parts; the Testimony (i. 19 — ii. 11), the Work (ii. 13 — xi. 57), and
the Judgment (xii.). These parts will be subdivided as we reach
them. 19 — 37 The Testimony of the Baptist (1) to the deputation
from Jerusalem, (2) to the people, (3) to S. Andrew and S. John:
38 — 51 The Testimony of the Disciples: ii. 1 — 11 The Testimony of the
First Sign. 19 — 37. The Testimony of the Baptist.
19 — 28. His Testimony to the Deputation from Jerusalem.
This section describes a crisis in the Baptist's ministry. He had
already attracted the attention of the Sanhedrin. It was a time of
excitement and expectation respecting the Messiah. John evidently
spoke with an authority greater than other teachers, and his success was
greater than theirs. The miracle attending his birth, connected with
the public ministry of Zacharias in the Temple, was probably Well
known. He had proclaimed that a new dispensation was at hand
(Matt. iii. 2), and this was believed to refer to the Messiah. But what
was John's own position? Was he the Messiah ? This uncertainty led
the authorities at Jerusalem to send and question John himself as to his
mission. No formal deputation from the Sanhedrin seems to have been
sent. The Sadducee members, acquiescing in the Roman dominion, would
not feel much interest. But to the Pharisee members, who represented
the religious and national hopes of their countrymen, the question was
vital; and they seem to have sent an informal though influential depu-

72 S. JOHN, I. [w. 20, 21.
priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art
2° thou ? And he confessed, and denied not ; but confessed, I
« am not the Christ. And they asked him, What then? Art

tation of ministers of religion (v. 19) from their own party (v. 24). S.
John was probably among the Baptist's disciples at this time, and heard
his master proclaim himself not the Messiah, but His Herald. It was
a crisis for him as well as for his master, and as such he records it.
19. the record] Better, the witness; see on v. 7 and comp. iii. 11,
v. 31.
the Jews] This term in S. John's Gospel commonly means the
opponents of Christ, a meaning not found in the Synoptists, who seldom
use the term. Matt, xxviii. 15; Mark vii. 3; Luke vi. 3, xxiii. 51, are
the only instances excepting the title 'King ofthe Jews.' In them it is the
sects and parties (Pharisees, Scribes, Herodians, &c.) that are the typical
representatives of hostility to Christ. But S. John, writing later, with
a fuller realisation of the national apostasy, and a fuller experience of
Jewish malignity in opposing the Gospel, lets the shadow of this know
ledge fall back upon his narrative, and ' the Jews ' are to him not his
fellow countrymen, but the persecutors and murderers of the Messiah.
' The name of a race has become the name of a sect.' He uses the
term about 70 times, almost always with this shade of meaning.
priests] The Baptist himself was of priestly family (Luke i. 5) ;
hence priests were suitable emissaries. The combination ' priests and
Levites ' occurs nowhere else in N. T. Together they represent the
hierarchy. Levites] Levites were commissioned to teach (2 Chron. xxxv. 3; Neh.
viii. 7 — 9) as well as serve in the Temple ; and it is as teachers, similar
to the Scribes, that they are sent to the Baptist. The mention of Levites
as part of the deputation is the mark of an eyewitness. Excepting
in the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke x. 32), Levites are
not mentioned by the Synoptists, nor elsewhere in N.T., excepting
Acts iv. 36. Had the Evangelist been constructing a story out of
borrowed materials, we should probably have had Scribes or Elders
instead of Levites. These indications of eyewitness . are among the
strong proofs of the authenticity of this Gospel.
Who art thou ?] with a strong emphasis on the 'thou.'
20. confessed, and denied not] Antithetic parallelism, as in v. 3.
but confessed] Rather, and he confessed, to introduce what he con
fessed. I am not the Christ] 'I' is emphatic, implying that some one else not
far distant is the Christ. Throughout the section (20 — 34) John
contrasts himself with the Christ by an emphasis on 'I.'
the Christ] It is to be regretted that our translators have so often
omitted the definite article before 'Christ,' although it is inserted in the
Greek. In the Gospel narratives the article should always be preserved
in English as here. Comp. Matt. xvi. 16, xxvi. 63; Mark viii. 29; and
contrast Matt. xxiv. 5; Luke xxiii. 35, 39, &c. To us 'Christ' is a

W. 22—24.] S. JOHN, I. 73
thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that
prophet ? And he answered, No. Then said they unto 22
him, Who art thou ? that we may give an answer to them
that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? He said, I am 23
the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make
straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet
Esaias. And they which were sent were of the Pharisees. 24
proper name, but to the Evangelists it is a title, 'the Christ,' the
Messiah so long expected. See Lightfoot, On Revision, p. 100.
21. What then ?] ' What then are we to think?' or, ' What then art
thou?' Art thou Elias f] The Scribes taught that Elijah would come again
before the coming of the Messiah (Matt. xvii. 10), and this belief is re
peatedly alluded to in the Talmud. Comp. Mai. iv. 5.
I am not] A forger would scarcely have ventured on this in the face
of Matt. xi. 14, where Christ says that John is Elijah. But Christ is
there speaking figuratively (comp. Luke i. 17); John is here speaking
literally. He says he is not Elijah returned to the earth again.
that prophet] Rather, the Prophet, the well-known Prophet of Deut.
xviii. 15, who some thought would be a second Moses, others a second
Elijah, others the Messiah. From vii. 40, 41 we see that some distin
guished 'the Prophet' from the Messiah; and from Matt. xvi. 14 it
appears that Jeremiah or other prophets were expected to return.
Comp. 2 Esdras ii. 18; : Mace. xiv. 41. This verse alone is almost
enough to prove that the writer is a Jew. Who but a Jew would
know of these expectations? Or if a Gentile chanced to know them,
would he not explain them to his readers? In v. 25, vi. 14, 48, 69 our
translators have repeated the error of translating the definite article by
'that' instead of 'the.'
No] The Baptist knows that 'the Prophet' is the Messiah. His
replies grow more and more abrupt; ' I am not the Christ,' 'I am not,'
'No.' 22. Who art thou?] They continue asking as to his person; he
replies as to his office. In the presence of the Messiah the personality
of His Forerunner is lost.
23. I am the voice, &c] Or, I am a. voice. The Synoptists use these
words of the Baptist as fulfilling prophecy. From this verse it would
seem as if they were first so used by himself. The quotation is almost
exact from the LXX. John was a Voice making known the Word,
meaningless without the Word. There is an almost certain reference to
this passage (19—23) in Justin Martyr, Trypho, lxxxviii., which is
evidence that this Gospel was known before a.d. 150.
21. And they which, &c] Perhaps the better reading is, and there
had been sent some of the Pharisees. S. John mentions neither Sad
ducees nor Herodians; only the Pharisees, the sect most opposed to
Christ, is remembered by the Evangelist who had gone furthest from
Judaism.

74 S. JOHN, I. [vv. 25—29.
25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest
thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither
26 that prophet ? John answered them, saying, I baptize with
water : but there standeth one among you, whom ye know
27 not ; he it is, who coming after me is preferred before me,
28 whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose. These
things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John
was baptizing. 29 — 34. The Testimony ofthe Baptist to the people.
29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and
25. Why baptizest thou then T] ' What right have you to treat Jews
as if they were proselytes and make them submit to a rite which im
plies that they are impure?' Had they forgotten Zech. xiii. 1; Ezek.
xxxvi. 25?
be not that Christ, &c] Better, art not the Christ, nor yet Elijah,
nor yet the Prophet. See on v. 21.
26. ' You ask for my credentials; and all the while He Who is far
more than credentials to me is among you. I am not a prophet to fore
tell His coming, but a herald to proclaim that He has come.'
27. He it is] These words and ' is preferred before me ' are want
ing in authority : the sentence should run, He that cometh after me,
whose shoe's latchet, &c, is standing in the midst of you, and
ye know Him not. ' Ye ' is emphatic ; ' Whom ye who question me
know not, but Whom I, the questioned, know.'
28. Bethabara] The true reading is Bethany, which was changed to
Bethabara owing to the powerful influence of Origen, who could find no
Bethany beyond Jordan known in his day. But in 200 years the very
name of an obscure place might easily perish. Origen found ' Bethany'
in almost all the MSS. The site of Bethabara or Bethany is lost now,
but it must have been near Galilee : comp. v. 29 with v. 43, and see on
the 'four days,' xi. 17.- It is possible to reconcile the two readings.
Bethabara has been identified with 'Abarah, one of the main Jordan
fords about 14 miles south ofthe sea of Galilee: and 'Bethania beyond
Jordan ' has been identified with Bashan ; Bethania or Batanea being
the Aramaic form of the Hebrew Bashan, meaning ' soft level ground.'
Thus Bethabara is the village or ford ; Bethania, the district on the
east side of the ford. See Conder, Handbook of the Bible, pp. 315,
320. But see Appendix D.
29 — 34. The Testimony of the Baptist to the people.
29. The next day] These words prevent us from inserting the
Temptation between vv. 28 and 29. The fact of the Baptist knowing
who Jesus is shews that the Baptism, and therefore the Temptation,
must have preceded the deputation from Jerusalem. The Evangelist

vv. 30—32.] S. JOHN, I. 75
saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the
sin 'of the world. This is he of whom I said, After me 30
cometh a man which is preferred before me : for he was
before me. And I knew him not : but that he should be 31
made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing
with water. And John bare record, saying, I saw the 32
Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode
assumes that his readers are well acquainted with the history of the
Baptism and Temptation.
the Lamb of God] Evidently some Lamb well known to John's
hearers is meant, viz. the Lamb of Is. liii. (comp. Acts viii. 32); but
there may be an indirect allusion to the Paschal Lamb. With ' Behold'
comp. xix. 5, 14: with 'of God' comp. Gen. xxii. 8.
which taketh away, &c] These words seem to make the reference to
Is. liii., esp. vv. 4, 5, 10, clear. The marginal reading, beareth, is not
right here (1 John iii. 5).
the sin) Regarding it as one great burden or plague.
of the world] Isaiah (liii. 8) seems to see no further than the redemp
tion of the Jews : 'for the transgression of my people was he stricken.'
The Baptist knows that the Messiah comes to save the whole human
race, even those hostile to Him.
30. of whom] The best text gives, in behalf of whom.
31. And I knew him not) Or, / also knew Him not ; I, like you,
did not at first know Him to be the Messiah. There is no contradiction
between this and Matt. iii. 14. (1) 'I kriew Him not ' need not mean
' I had no knowledge of Him whatever.' (2) John's professing that he
needed to be baptized by Jesus does not prove that he had already
recognised Jesus as the Messiah, but only as superior to himself.
that he should be made manifest] This was the Baptist's second duty.
He had (1) to prepare for the Messiah by preaching repentance; (2) to
point out the Messiah. The word for 'manifest' is one of S. John's
favourite words (phaneroun); ii. n, iii. 21, vii. 4, ix. 3, xvii. 6, xxi. i,
14; 1 John i. 2, ii. 19, 28, iii. 2, 5, 8, 9; Rev. iii. 18, xv. 4.
therefore am I come] Better, for this cause (xii. 18, 27) came I (comp.
y. 16, 18, vii. 22, viii. 47).
baptizing with water] In humble contrast to Him Who baptizeth
with the Holy Ghost ' (v. 33). ' With water ' is literally ' in water '
here and v. 26.
32. bare record] Better, bare witness ; comp. w. 7, 8, 15, 19, 34.
I saw] Better, /have beheld, or contemplated (1 Johniv. 12, 14), the
perfect ofthe verb used in w. 14 and 38.
like a dove] This was perhaps visible to Christ and the Baptist alone.
A real appearance is the natural meaning here and is insisted on by S.
Luke (iii. 22). And if we admit the 'bodily shape' at all, there can be
no sound reason for rejecting the dove. The marvel is that the Holy
Spirit should be visible in any way (comp. ' the tongues of fire,' Acts
ii. 3), not that He should assume the form of a dove in particular. Of

76 S. JOHN, I. [vv. 33, 34,
33 upon him. And I knew him not : but he that sent me to
baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom
thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him,
34 the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And
I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

course this visible descent of the Spirit made no change in the nature of
Christ. It served two purposes, (1) to make the Messiah known to the
Baptist, and through him to the world ; (2) to mark the official com
mencement of the ministry of the Messiah, like the anointing of a king.
The whole incident is very parallel to the Transfiguration. In both
Christ is miraculously glorified previous to setting out to suffer; in
both a voice from heaven bears witness to Him ; at both ' the goodly
fellowship of the Prophets ' is nobly represented.
33. And I knew him not] Or, as before, /also knew Him not. The
Baptist again protests, that but for a special revelation he was as ignorant
as others that Jesus was the Messiah.
he that sent me] The special mission of a Prophet. Comp. v. 6.
the same said unto me] Better, he said unto me : see on x. 1. When
this revelation was made we are not told.
and remaining on him] Better, and abiding on Him. It is the same
word as is used in v. 32, and one of which S. John is very fond; but
our translators have obscured this fact by capriciously varying the trans
lation, sometimes in the same verse (v. 39, iv. 40; 1 John ii. 24, iii.
24). Thus, though most often rendered 'abide,' it is also rendered
'remain' (ix. 41, xv. 11, 16), 'dwell' (i. 39, vi. 56, xiv. 10, 17), 'con
tinue ' (ii. 12, viii. 31), 'tarry' (iv. 40, xxi. 22, 23), ' endure ' (vi. 27),
' be present ' (xiv. 25). In 1 John ii. 24 it is translated in three different
ways. See on xv. 9.
which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost] See on xiv. 16. This phrase,
introduced without explanation or comment, assumes that the readers
of this Gospel are. well aware of this office of the Messiah, i. e. are
well-instructed Christians. The word baptizeth is appropriate, (1) to
mark the analogy and contrast between the office of the Baptist and
that of the Messiah; (2) because the gift of the Spirit is constantly
represented as an out-pouring. ' With,' as in vv. 26 and 31, is liter
ally 'in.'
34. And I saw, and bare record) Better, And I have seen and have
borne witness. ' I have seen ' is in joyous contrast to ' I knew Him
not,' w. 31, 33. 'Have borne witness' is the same verb as in w.
7, 8 and 32 : hence ' witness ' is preferable to ' record ' both here and in
v. 32.
the Son of God] The Messiah. This declaration of the Baptist
agrees with and confirms the account ofthe voice from heaven (Matt. iii.
i7)- These verses, 32 — 34, prove that S. John does not, as Philo does,
identify the Logos with the Spirit.

vv. 3S-38-] S. JOHN, I. 77
35 — 37. The Testimony of the Baptist to Andrew and John.
Again the next day after John stood, and two of his 35
disciples ; and looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, 36
Behold the Lamb of God. And the two disciples heard 37
him speak, and they followed Jesus.
38 — 51. The Testimony of Disciples.
Then Jesus turned, and saw them following, and saith 3s
35 — 37. The Testimony of the Baptist to Andrew and John.
35. Again] Referring to v. 29 : it should come second ; The next
day again John was standing.
The difference between this narrative and that of the Synoptists
(Matt. iv. 18; Mark i. 16; Luke v. 2) is satisfactorily explained by sup
posing this to refer to an earlier and less formal call of these first four
disciples, John and Andrew, Peter apd James. Their call to be Apostles
was a very gradual one. Two of them, aftd perhaps all four, began by
being disciples of the Baptist, who directs them to the Lamb of God
(v. 36), Who invites them to His abode (v. 39) : they then witness His
miracles (ri. 2, &c); are next called to be 'fishers of men' (Matt. iv. 19);
and are finally enrolled with the rest of the Twelve as Apostles (Mark
iii. 13). See note on Mark i. 20.
Two of his disciples] One of these we are told was S. Andrew (v. 40) ;
the other was no doubt S. John himself. The account is that of an
eyewitness ; and his habitual reserve with regard to himself fully ac
counts for his silence, if the other disciple was himself. If it was some
one else, it is difficult to see why S. John pointedly omits to mention
his name.
There was strong antecedent probability that the first followers of
Christ would be disciples of the Baptist. The fact of their being so is
one reason of the high honour in which the Baptist has been held from
the earliest times by the Church.
36. looking upon] having looked on with a fixed penetrating gaze.
Comp. v. 42; Mark x. 21, 27; Luke xx. 17, xxii. 61.
Behold the Lamb of God] This seems to shew that these disciples
were present the previous day (v. 29) : hence there was no need to say
more than this. This appears to have been the last meeting between
the Baptist and Christ.
37. heard him speak] Although the declaration had not been ad
dressed to them in particular.
they followed Jesus] The first beginning of the Christian Church.
But we are not to understand that they have already determined to be
come His disciples. 38  BI. The Testimony of Disciples.
38. saw them] Same verb as in vv. 14 and 32. The context shews
that He saw into their hearts as well. For 'Then' read But.

78 S. JOHN, I. [w. 39—41.
unto them, What seek ye? They said unto him, Rabbi,
(which is to say, being interpreted, Master,) where dwellest
39 thou? He saith unto them, Come and see. They came
and saw where he dwelt, and abode with him that day:
40 for it was about the tenth hour. One of the two which
heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon
41 Peter's brother. He first findeth his own brother Simon,

What seek ye?) i.e. in Me. He does not ask ' Whom seek ye?' It
was evident that they sought Him.
Rabbi) A comparatively modern word when S. John wrote, and there- ¦
fore all the more requiring explanation to Gentile readers. S. John
often interprets between Hebrew and Greek; thrice in this section.
(Comp. w. 41, 42.)
where dwellest thou?] Better, where abidest Thou? (See on v. 33.)
They have more to ask than can be answered on the spot. Perhaps
they think Him a travelling Rabbi staying with friends close by ; and
they intend to visit Him at some future time. He bids them come at
once : now is the day of salvation. .
39. Come and see] The more probable reading gives, Come and ye
shall see.
they came] Insert, therefore.
that day] That memorable day.
it was about the tenth hour] S. John remembers the very hour of this
crisis in his life : all the details of the narrative are very lifelike.
It is sometimes contended that S. John reckons the hours ofthe day
according to the modem method, from midnight to midnight, and not
according to the Jewish method, from sunset to sunset, as everywhere
else in N.T. and in Josephus. It is antecedently improbable that
Si John should in this point vary from the rest of N.T. writers; and we
ought to require strong evidence before accepting this theory, which
has been adopted mainly in order to escape from the difficulty of xix.
14, where see notes. Setting aside xix. 14 as the cause of the question,
we have four passages in which S. John mentions the hour of the day,
this, iv. 6, 52 and xi. 9. None of them are decisive: but in no single
case is the balance of probability strongly in favour of the modern
method. See notes in each place. Here either 10 a.m. or 4 P.M.
would suit the context: and while the antecedent probability that
S. John reckons time like the rest of the Evangelists will incline us
to 4 P.M., the fact that a good deal still remains to be done on this day
makes 10 A.M. rather more suitable. Origen knows nothing of S. John's
using the modern method of reckoning.
40. Andrew, Simon Peter's brother] Before the end of the first cen
tury, therefore, it was natural to describe Andrew by his relationship to
his far better known brother. In Church History S. Peter is everything
and S. Andrew nothing : but would there have been an Apostle Peter
but for Andrew. In the lists of the Apostles S. Andrew is always in

v. 42.] S. JOHN, I. 79
and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is,
being interpreted, the Christ. And he brought him to Jesus. 4*
And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the
son of Jona : thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by in
terpretation, A stone.
the first group of four, but he is outside the chosen three, in spite of
this early call.
41. He first findeth, &c] The meaning of 'first' becomes almost
certain when we remember S. John's characteristic reserve about him
self. Both disciples hurry to tell their own brothers the good tidings,
that the Messiah has been found : S. Andrew finds his brother first, and
afterwards S. John finds his; but we are left to infer the latter point.
S. Andrew thrice brings others to Christ; Peter, the lad with the
loaves (vi. 8), and certain Greeks (xii. 22); and excepting Mark xiii. 3
we know scarcely anything else about him. Thus it would seem as if in
these three incidents S. John had given us the key to his character.
And here we have another characteristic of this Gospel — the lifelike
way in which the less prominent figures are sketched. Besides
Andrew, we have Philip, i. 44, vi. 5, xii. 21, xiv. 8; Thomas, xi. 16, xiv.
5 ; xx. 24 — 29 ; Nathanael, i. 45 — 52 ; Nicodemus, iii. 1 — 1 2, vii. 50 — 52,
xix. 39; Martha and Mary, xi., xii. 1 — 3.
We have found] This does not prove that S. John is still with him,
only that they were together when their common desire and expecta
tion were fulfilled.
Messias] The Hebrew form of this name is used by S. John only,
here and iv. 25. Elsewhere the LXX. translation, 'the Christ,' is used.
Here 'the' before ' Christ' should be omitted.
42. beheld) Same word as in v. 36, implying a fixed earnest look;
what follows shews that Christ's gaze penetrated to his heart and read
his character.
Simon the son of Jona] The true reading here and xxi. 15, 16, 17
is Simon the son of John. There is a tradition that his mother's name was
Johanna. The Greek form Ibnd may represent two distinct Hebrew
names, Jonah and Johanan=John. There is no need to make Christ's
knowledge of his name and parentage miraculous; Andrew in bringing
Simon would naturally mention them.
A stone] The margin and text should change places, Peter, being in
the text and 'a stone' in the margin, like 'the Anointed' in v. 41. This
new name is given with reference to the new relation into which the
person named enters; comp. the cases of Abraham, Sarah, Israel. It
points to the future office of Simon rather than to his present character.
The form Cephas occurs nowhere else in the Gospels or Acts: but
comp. 1 Cor. i. 12, iii. 22, ix. 5; xv. 5, Gal. i. 18, ii. 9, 11, 14.
There is no discrepancy between this and Matt. xvi. 18. Here Christ
gives the name Peter; there he reminds S. Peter of it. It is quite clear
from this that S. Peter was not first called among the Apostles, a point
on which the Synoptists leave us in doubt.

80 S. JOHN, I. [w. 43— 46.
43 The day following Jesus would go forth into Galilee, and
44 findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow me. Now Philip
4s was of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. Philip
findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him,
of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write,
46 Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. And Nathanael
43. The day following] Better, as in vv. 29, 35, The next day: the
Greek is the same in all three verses. We thus have four days accu
rately marked, (1) v. 19; (2) v. 29; (3) v. 35; (4) v. 44. A writer of
fiction would not have cared for such minute details; they might
entangle him in discrepancies. They are thoroughly natural as coming
from an eyewitness. See on ii. 1.
Follow me] In the Gospels these words seem always to be the call
to become a disciple. Matt. viii. 22, ix. 9, xix. 21 ; Mark ii. 14, x. 21;
Luke v. 27, ix. 59; John xxi. 19. With two exceptions they are always
addressed to those who afterwards became Apostles.
44. Philip was of Bethsaida] In the Synoptists Philip is a mere
name in the lists of the Apostles : our knowledge of him comes from S.
John. See above on v. 42 and on xiv. 8. The local knowledge dis
played in this verse is very real. S. John would possess it; a writer in
the second century would not, and would not care to invent. This is
Bethsaida of Galilee on the western shore, not Bethsaida Julias. See
note on Matt. iv. 13.
45. Nathanael]=' Gift of God.' The name occurs Num. i. 8; 1
Chron. ii. 14; 1 Esdras i. 9, ix. 22. Nathanael is commonly identified
with Bartholomew; (1) Bartholomew is only a patronymic and the
bearer would be likely to have another name (comp. Barjona of Simon,
Barnabas of Joses); (2) S. John never mentions Bartholomew, the Sy
noptists never mention Nathanael; (3) the Synoptists in their lists place
Bartholomew next to Philip, as James next his probable caller John,
and Peter (in Matt, and Luke) next his caller Andrew; (4) all the other
disciples mentioned in this chapter become Apostles, and none are so
highly commended as Nathanael; (5) All Nathanael's companions
named in xxi. 2 were Apostles (see note there). But all these rea
sons do not make the identification more than probable. The framers
of our Liturgy do not countenance the identification : this passage ap
pears neither as the Gospel nor as a Lesson for S. Bartholomew's Day.
We have found him, of whom, &c] "A most correct representation
of the current phraseology, both in regard to the divisions of the O.T.,
and the application ofthe Messianic idea." S. p. 35.
Moses] viz. in Deut. xviii. 15 and in all the Messianic types, promises
to Adam, Abraham, &c.
Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph] The words are Philip's, and
express the common belief about Jesus. It was natural to say He was
' of or ' from Nazareth, ' as His home had been there ; still more natural
to call him 'the son of Joseph.' The conclusion that the Evangelist is
ignorant of the birth at Bethlehem, or of the miraculous nature of that

w. 47— 49.] S. JOHN, I.

said unto him, Can there any good thing come out of
Nazareth ? Philip saith unto him, Come and see. Jesus 47
saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an
Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile. Nathanael saith 48
unto him, Whence knowest thou me ? Jesus answered and
said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou
wast under the fig tree, I saw thee. Nathanael answered 49

birth, cannot be drawn from this passage. Rather, we may conclude
that he is a scrupulously honest historian, who records exactly what was
said, without making additions of his own.
46. Can there any good thing, &c] All Galileans were despised for
their want of culture, ' their rude dialect, and contact with Gentiles.
They were to the Jews what Boeotians were to the Athenians. But here
it is a Galilean who reproaches Nazareth in particular. Apart from the
Gospels we know nothing to the discredit of Nazareth; neither in O.T.
nor in Josephus is it mentioned ; but what we are told of the people by
the Evangelists is mostly bad. Christ left them and preferred to dwell
at Capernaum (Matt. iv. 13); He could do very little among them,
'because of their unbelief (xiii. 58), which was such as to make Him
marvel (Mark vi. 6); and once they tried to kill Him (Luke iv. 29).
S. Augustine would omit the question. Nathanael 'who knew the
Scriptures excellently well, when he heard the name Nazareth, was
filled with hope, and said, From Nazareth something good can come. '
But this is not probable. Possibly he meant no more than ' Can any
good thing come out of despised Galilee? ' Nazareth being in Galilee.
Come and see] The best cure for ill-founded prejudice. Philip shews
the depth of his own conviction in suggesting this test, which seems to
have been in harmony with the practical bent of his own mind. See on
xii. 21 and xiv. 8.
47. saw Nathanael coming] This contradicts the theory that Christ
overheard Nathanael's question. S. John represents Christ's knowledge
of Nathanael as miraculous ; as in v. 42 He appears as the searcher of
hearts. an Israelite indeed] In character as well as by birth: what follows
shews what is meant. The 'guile' may refer to the 'subtilty' of Jacob
(Gen. xxvii. 35) before he became Israel : 'Behold a son of Israel, who
is in no way a son of Jacob.' The 'supplanter' is gone; the 'prince'
remains. His guilelessness appears in his making no mock repudiation
ofthe character attributed to him (v. 48). He is free from 'the pride
that apes humility.'
48. under the fig tree) This probably means 'at home,' in the re
tirement of his own garden (1 Kings iv. 25; Mic. iv. 4; Zee. iii. 10);
the Greek implies motion to under. Nathanael had perhaps been pray
ing or meditating there ; he seems to see that Christ knew what his
thoughts had been there. It was under a fig tree that S. Augustine
heard the famous ' Tolle, lege.'
S. JOHN 6

82 S. JOHN, I. [vv. 50, 51.
and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God ; thou
so art the King of Israel. Jesus answered and said unto him,
Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree,
believest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these.
51 And he saith unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto you,
Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God
ascending and descending upon the Son of man.

49. thou art the Son of God] We know from other passages that
this was one of the recognised titles of the Messiah ; xi. 27; Matt. xxvi.
63 ; Mark iii. 1 1 , v. 7 ; Luke iv. 4 1 . ' Son of David ' was more common.
the King of Israel] Omit 'the.' This phrase "is especially important,
because it breathes those politico-theocratic hopes, which since the
taking of Jerusalem, Christians at least, if not Jews, must have entirely
laid aside." S. How could a Christian of the second century have
thrown himself back to this?
50. believest thou?) Or possibly, thou believest. Comp. xvi. 31,
xx. 29. The interrogative form is here best : He who marvelled at the
unbelief of the people of Nazareth here expresses joyous surprise at the
ready belief of the guileless Israelite of Cana.
51. Verily, verily] The double 'verily' occurs 25 times in this
Gospel, and nowhere else, always in the mouth of Christ. It introduces
a truth of special solemnity and importance. The single 'verily' occurs
about 30 times in Matt., 14 in Mark, and 7 in Luke. The word repre
sents the Hebrew 'Amen,' which in the LXX. never means 'verily.' In
the Gospels it has no other meaning. The 'Amen' at the end of
sentences (Matt. vi. 13, xxviii. 20; Mark xvi. 20; Luke xxiv. 53; John
xxi. 25) is in every case of doubtful authority.
unto you] Plural; all present are addressed, Andrew, John, Peter
(James), and Philip, as well as Nathanael.
Hereafter] Better, from henceforth; from this point onwards
Christ's Messianic work of linking earth to heaven, and re-establishing
free intercourse between man and God, goes on. But the word is
wanting in the best MSS.
heaven open] Better, the heaven opened ; made open and remaining
so. the angels of God] Like v. 47, an apparent reference to the life of
Jacob, perhaps suggested by the scene, which may have been near to
Bethel. This does not refer to the angels which appeared after the
Temptation, at the Agony, and at the Ascension : rather to the perpetual
intercourse between God and the Messiah during His ministry.
the Son of man] This phrase in all four Gospels is invariably used
by Christ Himself of Himself as the Messiah, upwards of 80 times in
all. None of the Evangelists direct our attention to this strict limitation
in the use of the expression: their agreement on this .striking point is
evidently undesigned, and therefore a strong mark of their veracity.
See notes on Matt. viii. 20; Mark ii. 10. In O.T. the phrase 'Son of

vv. 1—4.] S. JOHN, II. 83
Chap. II. 1 — n. The Testimony of the First Sign.
And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Gali- 2
lee ; and the mother of Jesus was there : and both Jesus 2
was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. And when 3
they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They
have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have 1 4
Man' has three distinct uses; (1) in the Psalms, for the ideal man; viii.
4 — 8, lxxx. 17, cxliv. 3, cxlvi. 3 : (2) in Ezekiel, as the name by which the
Prophet is addressed by God; ii. 1, 3, 6, 8, iii. 1, 3, 4, &c, &c, more
than 80 times in all ; probably to remind Ezekiei, that in spite of the
favour shewn to him, and the wrath denounced against the children of
Israel, he, no less than they, had a mortal's frailty: (3) in the 'night
visions' of Dan. vii. 13, 14, where 'One like a son of man came with
the clouds ofheaven, and came to the Ancient of Days. ..and there was
given Him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people,
nations, and languages should serve Him, &c.' That 'Son of man
henceforth became one of the titles of the looked-for Messiah' may be
doubted. Rather, the title was a new one assumed by Christ, and as
yet only dimly understood (comp. Matt. xvi. 13).
This first chapter alone is enough to shew that the Gospel is the work
of a Jew of Palestine, well acquainted with the Messianic hopes, and
traditions, and phraseology current in Palestine at the time of Christ's
ministry, and able to give a lifelike picture of the Baptist and of Christ's
first disciples.
Chap. II. 1— 11. The Testimony of the First Sign.
1. the third day] From the calling of Philip (i. 43), the last date
given, making a week in all ; the first week, perhaps in contrast to the
last week (xii. 1).
Cana of Galilee] To distinguish it from Cana of Asher (Josh. xix.
28). This Cana is not mentioned in O.T. ; it was the home of
Nathanael (xxi. 2), and is now generally identified with Kanet el-Jelil,
about six miles N. of Nazareth.
was there) Staying as a friend or relation of the family ; she speaks
to the servants as if she were quite at home in the house (v. 5). Joseph
has disappeared : the inference (not quite certain) is that in the interval
between Luke ii. 51 and this marriage — about 17 years— he had died.
2. and his disciples] Now five or six in number, Andrew, John,
Peter, Philip, Nathanael, and probably James. For 'both Jesus' read
'Jesus also.'
3. when they wanted wine] Better, when the wine failed. Perhaps
the arrival of these six or seven guests caused the want; certainly it
would make it more apparent. To Eastern hospitality such a mishap
on such an occasion would seem a most disgraceful calamity.
They have no wine] Much comment has here obscured a simple text.
The family in which she was a guest was in a serious difficulty. Per-
6—2

84 S. JOHN, II. [vv. 5, 6.~
s to do with thee ? mine hour is not yet come. His mother
saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.
6 And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the
manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three
haps she felt herself partly responsible for the arrangements : certainly
she would wish to help. What more natural than that she should turn
JcJjexjsoji_and tell Him the difficulty? Probably sne aid not expecT-a
miracle, still leis^isTnTff?TTo^feaRup~ the party, or begin a discourse
to distract attention from the want. The meaning simply is — 'They
have no wine; what is to be done?'
4. Woman, what have I to do with thee?) S. Tohn alone of all the
^Evangelists never gives the Virgin'sjame. Here, as so often, he
assumes that his readerFknbw the main points in the Gospel narrative:
or it may be part of the reserve which he exhibits with regard to all
that nearly concerns himself. Christ's Mother had become his mother
(xix. 26, 27). He nowhere mentions his brother James.
Treatises have been written to shew that these words do not contain
a rebuke ; for if Christ here rebukes His Mother, it cannot be main
tained that she is immaculate. tWftmanl of course implies no rebuke ;
the Greek might more fairly be rendered ' La3y^'(cdmp. xix. 26). At the"
same time it marks^a_djfierence between the Divine Son and the earthly
_parent : He does not say, 'Mother.' But ' what EaveTTToTIomfE theer"
itoes-imply- rebuke, as is evident from the other passages where the
phrase occurs, Judg. xi. 12; 1 Kings xvii. 18; 2 Kings iii. 13; Matt.
viii. 29 ; Mark i. 24 ; Luke viii. 28. Only in one passage does the mean
ing seem to vary: in 2 Chron. xxxv. 21 the question seems to mean
'why need we quarrel?' rather than 'what have we in common?' But
such a meaning, if possible there, would be quite inappropriate here.*
The further question has been asked, — what was she rebuked for?
Chrysostom thinks for vanity; she wished to glorify herself through her
Son. _More probably for interference: He will help, but in His- own
way, and in His'own time! CompTXuke IT. r 5 iV
mine hour] The meaning of 'My hour' and 'His hour' in this
Gospel depends in each case on the context. There cannot here be any
reference to His death; rather, jtjneans His hour for ' manifesting forth _
His glory*" (v. ~ n} as the MessialTTjy- working imracIe!r~TTieexact~
moment was still in the future. Comp. vii. 8, where He for the moment
reiu^eTwrratTT^lioo^raTteT3^ ; Jind xii. 23, xvii. 1, which confirm the
rneaning here given to 'hour.'
5. Between the lines of His refusal her faith reads a better answer to
her appeal.
6. six waterpots of stone] As. -aa,ey_e wjtness-S~-fohn ^remembers
their number, jnateaah__aflcLsize, The surroundings of the first miracle
would 'not easily be forgotten. It is idle to seek for any special mean
ing in the number six. Vessels of stone were preferred as being less
liable to impurity.
purifying] Comp. Matt. xv. 2; Mark vii. 3 (see note); Luke xi. 39.

w. 7— io.] S. JOHN, II. 85
firkins apiece. Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots 7
with water. And they filled them up to the brim. And he 8
saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor
of the feast. And they bare it. When the ruler of the 9
feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew
not whence it was : (but the servants which drew the water
knew ;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, and 10
saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth
good wine ; and when men have well drunk, then that which
two or three firkins] 'Firkin' is an almost exact equivalent of the
Greek metrites, which was about nine gallons. The six pitchers,
therefore, holding from 1 8 to 27 gallons each, would together hold 106
to 162 gallons.
7. Fill the waterpots] It is difficult to see the meaning of this command,
if (as some contend) only the water which was drawn out was turned
into wine. The pitchers had been partially emptied by the ceremonial
ablutions of the company, i. e. pouring water over their hands. Note
that in His miracles Christ does not create ; He increases the quantity.,
nr^hang^the^pality nf things already existing.
to the brim] His Mother's words (v. 5J nave done their work. Our
attention seems here to be called to the great quantity of water changed
into wine.
9. ruler of the feast] Perhaps manager ofthe feast would be better.
It is doubtful whether the head-waiter, who managed the feast and
tasted the meat and drink, is meant, or the rex convivii, arbiter bibendi,
the guest elected by the other guests to preside. The bad taste of his
remark inclines one to the former alternative : Ecclus. xxxii. i, 2 is in
favour of the second. In any case the translation should be uniform in
thesetwo verses, not sometimes 'governor,' sometimes 'ruler.' It is
the same Greek word in all three cases, a_word occurring nowhere
else in N.T. The words also for 'water-pot' or 'pitcher' and for
'draw out' are peculiar to this Gospel; but they occur again iv. 7,
15,28. the water that was made wine] Or, the water now become wine. The
Greek seems to imply that all the water had become wine; there is
nothing to mark a distinction between what was now wine and what still
remained water. It is idle to ask at what precise moment the water
became wine : nor is much gained by representing the miracle as a series
of natural processes (rain passing through the vine into the grapes,
being pressed out and fermented, &c.) compressed into an instant.
Such compression is neither more nor less intelligible than simple
transition from water to wine. Moreover there was no vine.
which drew] Better, who had drawn.
called] Rather, calleth.
10. when men have well drunk] Our translators have timidly
shrunk from giving the full coarseness of the man's joke : it should be

86 S. JOHN, II. [v. u.
is worse : but thou hast kept the good wine until now.
it This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and
manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on
him.

when they have become drunken, when they are drunk. In Matt. xxiv.
49; Acts ii. 15; 1 Cor. xi. 21; 1 Thess. v. 7; Rev. xvii. 2, 6, we have
the same word rightly translated. Tyndall and Cranmer were more
courageous here; they have 'be dronke;' and the Vulgate has inebriati
fuerint. The error comes from the Geneva Bible. Of course he does
not mean that the guests around him are intoxicated : it is a jocular
statement of his own experience at feasts. Omit ' then.'
thou hast kept the good wine until now] This was true in a sense of
which he never dreamed. The True Bridegroom was there, and had
indeed kept the best dispensation until the last.
11. This beginning, &c.] Better, this, as a beginning of His
signs, did Jesus in Cana ; i. e. it is the first miracle of all, not merely
the first at Cana. Thus S. John agrees with the Synoptists in repre
senting the Messianic career as beginning in Galilee. This verse is
conclusive against the miracles of Christ's childhood recorded in the
Aprocryphal Gospels. See on iv. 48. Our translators often in this
Gospel, though very rarely in the other three, turn ' signs ' into
' miracles.' manifested) The same Greek word occurs in connexion with His last
miracle, xxi. 1, 14, and the same English word should be used in all the
passages. Comp. vii. 4 and see on i. 31.
his glory] This is rhi>^ftTrat-t-mi.sf- nf Chrjc|t'<; ',!m^'H;; own an(J
His Father's glory(xiT 4), and these two are one.
and his disciples believed on him] What a strange remark for a writer
in the. second century to make! His disciples believed on Him? Of
course they did. Assume tha^a dkrjp1e_n,irnself is the wn'tfj andjll
js_expkined : he well remembers how his own imperfect faith was_cqn-
"fiSieiQiylhejnfiacIe. A forger would rather have given us the'effecTon
the guests. Three times in this chapter does S. John give us the disciples'
point of view, here, v. 17 and v. 22; very natural in a disciple, not
natural in a later writer. See on xi. 15 and xxi. 12.
TwQ_flbjections have been made to this miracle (1) on-rationalistic.
(2)_oji_4Tmrr^ance_'_grounds. (l) It is said that it is a wasteful
.jniracle^ a parade of power, unworthy of a Divine Agent :^~tenth7~of
"the quantity of- wine would have been ample. But the surplus" was not
wasted any more than the twelve baskets of fragments (vi. 13); it
would be_ajuhrablepresent to a bridal pair, (2) It is urged that Christ
would nothave suppIiettThe means for gross excess; and to avoid this
supposed difficulty it is suggested that the wine made was not in
toxicating, i.e. was not wine at all. But in all His dealings with men
GoiLallpws the possibility of a temptation to excess. AH His giftsmay
bi-thjjsaBuse(L" The 5050 iiiiglilThave been gluttonous over the loaves"
and filh~es7"~"

v. 12.] S. JOHN, II. 87
After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his i*
mother, and his brethren, and his disciples : and they con
tinued there not many days.

Christ's honouring a marriage-feast with His first miracle gives His
sanction (1) tornar^ge, (2) to times of festivity.
Four huncrrecTyears had elapserl since the Jews had seen a miracle.
The era of Daniel was the last age of Jewish miracles. Since the
three children walked in the burning fiery furnace, and Daniel had
remained unhurt in the lions' den, and had read the hand-writing on
the wall, no miracle is recorded in the history of the Jews until Jesus
made this beginning of His 'signs' at Cana of Galilee. No wonder
therefore, that the almost simultaneous appearance of a Prophet like
John and a worker of miracles like Jesus attracted the attention of all
classes. 12. "Now follows a section of which we can only say with M.
Renan, that it constitutes a decisive triumph for our Gospel  If it
is at all an artificial composition, with a dogmatic object, why should
the author carry his readers thus to Capernaum — for nothing?" S. p. 52.
If S. John wrote it, all is simple and natural. He records this visit to
Capernaum because it actually took place, and because he well remem
bers those ' not many days.'
went down] Capernaum (the modern Tell-Hum) being on the shore
of the lake. It was situated in one of the most busy and populous dis
tricts of Palestine, and was therefore a good centre.
his mother, and his brethren] Natural ties still hold Him; in the
next verse they disappear. On the vexed question of the 'brethren of
the Lord ' see the Introduction to the Epistle of S. James. It is im
possible to determine with certainty whether they are (1) the children of
Joseph and Mary, born after the birth of Jesus; (2) the children of
Joseph by a former marriage, whether levirate or not; or (3) adopted
children. There is nothing in Scripture to warn us against (1), the most
natural view antecedently ; but it has against it the general consensus of
the Fathers, and the prevailing tradition of the perpetual virginity of
S. Mary. Jerome's theory, that they were Our Lord s cousins, sons of
Alphaeus, is the one most commonly adopted, but vii. 5 (see note there)
is fatal to it, and it labours under other difficulties as well. (2) is on the
whole the most probable.
continued there] Better, abode there. See on i. 33.
not many days] Because the Passover was at hand, and He must be
about His Father's business.

II. 13— XI. 57. The Work.
We here enter on the second portion of the first main division of the
Gospel, thus subdivided: — The Work (i) among Jews, (2) among
Samaritans, (3) among Galileans, (4) among mixed multitudes.

S. JOHN, II. [vv. 13—16.

II. 13— XL 57. The Work.
II. 13 — III. 36. The Work among Jews.
13 And the Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up
to Jerusalem, 14—22. The First Cleansing of the Temple.
i4 And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep
is and doves, and the changers of money sitting : and when he
had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of
the temple, and the sheep and the oxen; and poured out
16 the changers' money, and overthrew the tables ; and said
II. 13— III. 36. The Work among Jews.
13. And the Jews' passover] Or, the passover of the Jews. An
•indication that this Gospel was written outside Palestine : one writing
in the country would hardly have added ' of the Jews. ' It is perhaps
also an indication that this Gospel was written after a Passover of the
Christians had come into recognition. Passovers were active times in
Christ's ministry ; and this is the first of them. It was possibly the
nearness of the Passover which caused this traffic in the Temple Court.
It existed for the convenience of strangers. Certainly the nearness of
the Feast would add significance to Christ's action. While the Jews
were purifying themselves for the Passover He purified the Temple.
S. John groups his narrative round the Jewish festivals : we have
(1) Passover; (2) Purim (?), v. 1; (3) Passover, vi. 4; (4) Tabernacles,
vii. 2; (5) Dedication, x. 22; (6) Passover, xi. 55.
14 — 22. The First Cleansing of the Temple.
14. in the temple] i.e. within the sacred enclosure, in the Court of
the Gentiles. The traffic would be very great at the approach of the
Passover. The account is very graphic, as of an eyewitness. Note
especially 'the changers of money sitting:' the sellers of cattle, &c,
would stand.
changers of money] Not the same Greek word as in v. 15. There
the word points to the commission paid on exchanges ; here the word
indicates a change from large to small coins.
15. when he had made a scourge] Peculiar to this account; not in
the similar narrative of the Synoptists.
and the sheep, &c] Rather, both the sheep and the oxen. 'All ' does not
refer to the sellers and exchangers, but anticipates the sheep and the
oxen. The men probably fled at once. The order is natural ; first the
driving out of the cattle, then the pouring out of the money and over
turning the tables. The word for 'money' literally means 'something
cut up small,' hence ' change.' The common exchange would be foreign
money for Jewish, payments to the Temple being necessarily made in
Jewish coin.

vv. 17, 18.] S. JOHN, II. 89
unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence ; make
not my Father's house a house of merchandise. And his 17
disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of
thine house hath eaten me up.
Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign 18
shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things 2
16. said unto them that sold doves] The doves could not be driven
out. He calls to the owners to take the cages away. Comp. Luke
ii. 24.
my Father's house] A distinct claim to Messiahship: it reminds
us of ' about My Father's business ' (which may also mean ' in My
Father's house') spoken in the same place some 17 years before, Luke
ii. 49. Possibly some who heard the Child's claim heard the Man's
claim also.
an house of merchandise) Two years later things seem to have grown
worse instead of better; the Temple has then become 'a den of
robbers' or 'a bandits' cave.' See notes on Matt. xxi. 13 and Mark
xi. 17.
17. remembered] Then and there. Who could know this but a
disciple ? Who would think of inventing it? See above on v. 11.
was written] Better, is written ; in the Greek it is the perf. part.
pass, with the auxiliary, which S.John almost always uses in quotations,
while the Synoptists commonly use the perf. pass. Comp. vi. 31,45, a.
34, xii. 14 (xix. 19).
hath eaten me up] Rather, will devour, or consume me, i.e. wear
me out. Ps. lxix. 9, a psalm referred to again xv. 25 and xix. 28.
It is difficult to believe that this cleansing of the Temple is identical
with the one placed by the Synoptists at the last Passover in Christ's
ministry; difficult also to see what is gained by the identification. If
they are the same event, either S. John or the Synoptists have made a
gross blunder in chronology. Could S. John, who was with our Lord
at both Passovers, make such a mistake? Could S. Matthew, who was
with Him at the last Passover, transfer to it an event which took place
at the first Passover, a year before his conversion? When we consider the
immense differences which distinguish the last Passover from the first in
Christ's ministry, it seems incredible that anyone who had contemporary
evidence could through any lapse of memory transfer a very remarkable
incident indeed from one to the other. On the other hand the diffi
culty of believing that the Temple was twice cleansed is very slight.
Was Christ's preaching so universally successful that one cleansing would
be certain to suffice? And if two years later He found that the evil had
returned, would He not be certain to drive it out once more? Differ
ences in the details ofthe narratives corroborate this view.
18. the Jews] See on i. 19.
What sign shewest thou] We have a similar question Matt. xxi. 23,
but the widely different answer shews that the occasion is not the same.
Such demands would be made often.

90 S. JOHN, II. [vv. 19—21.
19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple,
20 and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews,
Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt
21 thou rear it up in three days ? But he spake of the temple
19. Destroy this temple] It is S. Matthew (xxvi. 61) and S. Mark
(xiv. 58, see notes) who tell us that this saying was twisted into a
charge against Christ, but they do not record the saying. S. John, who
does record the saying, does not mention the charge. Such coincidence
can scarcely be designed, and is therefore evidence of the truth of both
statements. See on xviii. 11. The word used in these three verses for
'temple' means the central sacred building (naos), whereas that used in
v. 14 means the whole sacred enclosure (hieron). The latter is never
used figuratively.
raise it up] In the charge His accusers turn this into build, a word
not appropriate to raising a dead body. There is no contradiction
• between Christ's declaration and the ordinary N.T. theology, that the
Son was raised by the Father. The expression is figurative throughout ;
and 'I and My Father are one.' Comp. x. 18. This throwing out
seeds of thought for the future, which could not bear fruit at the time,
is one of the characteristics of Christ's teaching.
20. Forty and six years, &c] This was the third Temple. Solomon's
Temple was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. Zerubbabel's was rebuilt
by Herod the Great. The Greek implies that the building began 46
years ago, but not that it is now completed. "The building of the
Temple, we are told by Josephus (Ant. XV. ii. 1), was begun in
the 18th year of Herod the Great, 734 — 735 A.u.c. Reckoning 46
years from this point, we are brought to 781 or 782 A.U.C. = 28 or 29
A.D. Comparing this with the data given in Luke iii. 1, the question
arises, whether we are to reckon the 1 5th year of Tiberius from his
joint reign with Augustus, which began A.D. 12; or from his sole reign
after the death of Augustus, A.D. 14. This would give us a.d. 27 or 29
for the first public appearance of the Baptist, and at the earliest A. D. 28
or 30 for the Passover mentioned in this chapter." S. p. 65. So that
there seems to be exact agreement between this date and that of S.
Luke, if we count S. Luke's 15 years from the joint reign of Tiberius.
It is incredible that this coincidence can have been planned ; it involves
an intricate calculation, and even with the aid of Josephus absolute cer
tainty cannot be obtained. " By what conceivable process could a
Greek in the second century have come to hit upon this roundabout ex
pedient for giving a fictitious date to his invention?" S. p. 67.
rear it up) Better, raise Hup; the same verb as in v. 19. For other
instances of gross misunderstanding of Christ's words comp. iii. 4, 9,
iv. 11, 15, 33, vi. 34, 52, vii. 35, viii. 22, 33, 52, xi. 12, xiv. 5.
21. spake) Or, was speaking. Setting aside inspiration, S. John's
explanation must be admitted as the true one. What better in
terpreter of the mind of Jesus can be found than ' the disciple whom
Jesus loved?' And he gives the explanation not as his only, but

w. 22—25.] S. JOHN, II. 91
of his body. When therefore he was risen from the dead, «
his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them ;
and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus
had said. 23 — 25. Belief without Devotion.
Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the 23
feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the
miracles which he did. But Jesus did not commit himself 24
unto them, because he knew all men, and needed not that 25
any should testify of man : for he knew what was in man.
as that of the disciples generally. Moreover it explains the 'three
days,' which interpretations about destroying the old Temple religion
and raising up a new spiritual theocracy do not.
22. was risen] Better, was raised. Comp. xxi. 14; Acts iii. 15,
iv. 10, v. 30.
his disciples remembered] They recollected it when the event that
explained it took place ; meanwhile what had not been understood had
been forgotten. Would anyone but a disciple give us these details
about the disciples' thoughts ? See on v. n.
the scripture] O.T. prophecy, viz., Ps. xvi. 10 ; see on x. 35.
had said] Better, spalie, on the present occasion.
23 — 25. Belief without Devotion.
23. in Jerusalem at, &c] More accurately, in Jerusalem, at the
Passover, during the Feast. Note the exactness of detail.
when they saw the miracles] None of these have been recorded.
Comp. iv. 45, xx. 30. Faith growing out of such soil would be likely
to cease when the miracles ceased. ' When they saw ' should perhaps
be 'whilst they saw,' as if implying 'and no longer.' For 'miracles'
read signs, as in v. 11.
24. did not commit] The same verb as 'many believed' in v. 23.
'Many trusted in His name; but Jesus did not trust Himself unto
them.' The antithesis is probably intentional.
25. And needed not] Better, and because He had no need.
for he knew] Better, for He of Himself knew. We have instances
of this supernatural knowledge in the cases of Peter, i. 42 ; Nathanael,
i. 47, 48 ; Nicodemus, iii. 3 ; the woman at the well, iv. 29 ; the
disciples, vi. 61, 64 ; Lazarus, xi. 4, 15 ; Judas, xiii. 11 ; Peter, xxi. 17.
Chap. III. 1 — 21. The discourse with Nicodemus.
This is the first of the eleven discourses of our Lord which form
the main portion, and are among the great characteristics, of this:
Gospel. They have been used as a powerful argument against its i
authenticity ; (1) because they are unlike the discourses in the Sy- 1
noptic Gospels, (2) because they are suspiciously like the First Epistle ,

92 S. JOHN, III. [v. I.
Chap. III. i — 21. The discourse with Nicodemus.
1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a
;of S. John, which all admit was written by the author of the Fourth
(Gospel, (3) because this likeness to the First Epistle pervades not
j only the discourses of our Lord, but those of the Baptist also, as well
as the writer's own reflections throughout the Gospel. The inference
is that they are, as much as the speeches in Thucydides, if not as
much as those in Livy, the ideal compositions of the .writer himself.
On the question as a whole we may say at once with Matthew
Arnold (Literature and Dogma, p. 170), "the doctrine and discourses
of Jesus cannot in the main be the writer's, because in the main they
are clearly out of his reach." ' Never man spake like this man ' (vii.
46) ; not even S. John, and still less any one else, could invent such
words. But the objections urged above are serious and ought to be answered.
(1) The discourses in S. John are unlike those in the Synoptists, but
we must beware of exaggerating the unlikeness. They are longer,
more reflective, less popular. But they are for the most part addressed
J to the educated and learned, to Elders, Pharisees, and Rabbis: even
' the discourse on the Bread of Life, which is spoken before a mixed
multitude at Capernaum, is largely addressed to the educated portion
of it (vi. 41, 52), the hierarchial party opposed to Him. The discourses
in the first three Gospels are mostly spoken among the rude and
simple-minded peasants of Galilee. Contrast the University Sermons
with the Parish Sermons of an eminent modem preacher, and we
should notice, similar differences. This fact will account for a good
deal. But (2) the discourses both in S. John and in the Synoptists
) are translations from an Aramaic dialect. Two, translations may differ
1 very widely, and yet both be faithful ; they may each bear the impress
of the translator's own style, and yet accurately represent the original.
This will to a large extent answer objections (2) and (3). And we
must remember that it is possible, and perhaps probable, that the
peculiar tone of S. John, so unmistakeable, yet so difficult to analyse
satisfactorily, may be a reproduction, more or less conscious, of 'that
of his Divine Master.
But on the other hand we must remember that an eventful life
of half a century separates the time when S. John heard these dis
courses from the time when he committed them to writing. Christ
had promised (xiv. 26) that the Holy Spirit should ' bring all things
to the remembrance ' of the Apostles ; but we have no right to assume
that in so doing He would override the ordinary laws of psychology.
Material stored up so long in the breast of the Apostle could not
fail to be moulded by the working of his own mind. And therefore
we may admit that in his report of the sayings of Christ and of the
Baptist there is an element, impossible to separate now, which comes
from himself. His report is sometimes a literal translation of the
very words used, sometimes the substance of what was said put into

v. 2.] S. JOHN, III. 93
ruler of the Jews : the same came to Jesus by -night, and ,
said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come
from God : for no man can do these miracles that thou

his own words : but he gives us no means of distinguishing where the
one shades off into the other.
Cardinal Newman has kindly allowed the following to be quoted
from a private letter written by him, July 15th, 1878. " Every one
writes in his own style. S. John gives our Lord's meaning in his
own way. At that time the third person was not so commonly used
in history as now. When a reporter gives one of Gladstone's speeches
in the newspaper, if he uses the first person, I understand not only the
matter, but the style, the words, to be Gladstone's : when the third, I
consider the style, &c. to be the reporter's own. But in ancient times
this distinction was not made. Thucydides uses the dramatic method,
yet Spartan and Athenian speak in, Thucydidean Greek. And so every
clause of our Lord's speeches in S. John may be in S. John's Greek,
yet every clause may contain the matter which our Lord spoke in
Aramaic. Again, S. John might and did select or condense (as being
inspired for that purpose) the matter of our Lord's discourses, as that
with Nicodemus, and thereby the wording might be S. John's, though
the matter might still be our Lord's."
1. There was a man] Better, Now there was a man. The con
junction shows the connexion with what precedes : Nicodemus was
one of the 'many' who 'believed in His name,' when they beheld
His signs (ii. 23).
Nicodemus] He is mentioned only by S. John. It is impossible
to say whether he is identical with the Nicodemus of the Talmud,
also called Bunai, who survived the destruction of Jerusalem. The
name was common both among Greeks and Jews. Love of truth and
fear of man, candour and hesitation, seem to be combined in his cha
racter. Comp. vii. 50, xix. 39. In xix. 39 his timidity is again noted
and illustrated.
a ruler of the Jews] A member of the Sanhedrin, vii. 50. Comp.
xii. 42 ; Luke xxiii. 13, xxiv. 20. His coming by night is to avoid
the hostility of his colleagues : the Sanhedrin was opposed to Jesus.
Whether or no S. John was present at the interview we cannot be
certain : probably he was. Nicodemus would not fear the presence of
the disciples.
2. we know] Others are disposed to believe as well as Nicodemus.
a teacher come from God] In the Greek the order is, that Thou
art come from God as teacher. We are not sure that ' come from God '
points to the Messiah, ' He that should come.' But if so, we see the
timidity of Nicodemus ; he begins with an admission of Christ's Messiah-
ship, and ends with the weak word ' teacher ;' the Messiah was never
thought of as a mere teacher. But ' come from God ' may only mean
divinely sent, as a Prophet (i. 6), or even less.
these miracles) Better, these signs, as in ii. 1 1.

94 S. JOHN, III. [vv. 3—5.
3 doest, except God be with him. Jesus answered and said
unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be
4 bom again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus
saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old?
can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and
5 be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee,
Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot
/ except God be with him] A similarly weak conclusion, shewing
jl timidity : one expects 'unless he be a Prophet,' or ' the Messiah.'
, 3. Jesus answered] He answers his thoughts before they are ex
pressed. See on ii. 25, and on i. 51.
born again] The word translated 'again' may mean either 'from
the beginning,' or 'from above.' By itself it cannot exactly mean
' again.' S. John uses the same word v. 31 ; xix. 11, 23. In all three
places, (see especially xix. n), it means 'from above,' which is perhaps
to be preferred here: ' from the beginning' would make no sense. To
be 'born from above' recalls being 'born of God' in i. 13, (comp.
1 John iii. 9, iv. 7, v. 1, 4, 18). Of course being 'bom from above'
is necessarily being ' born again ;' but ' again ' comes not so much
from the Greek word, as from the context. Comp. ' verily I say unto
you, except ye be converted and become as little children, ye shall not
enter into the kingdom of heaven.' Matt, xviii. 3.
There is a probable reference to this passage (3 — 5) in Justin Martyr,
Apol. 1. lxi. If so, we have evidence that this Gospel was known
before A.D. 150. See on i. 23 and ix. 1.
he cannot see] i.e. so as to partake of it. Comp. to 'see corruption,'
Ps. xvi. 10; to 'see evil,' xc. 15; to 'see death/ John viii. 51; Luke
ii. 26.
the kingdom of God] This phrase, so frequent in the Synoptists;
occurs only here and v. 5 in S. John. We may conclude that it was
the very phrase used.
4. when he is old] He purposely puts the most impossible case;
I the words do not imply that he was an old man himself. It is difficult
to believe that Nicodemus really supposed Christ to be speaking of
ordinary birth ; the metaphor of 'new birth' for spiritual regeneration
cannot have been unfamiliar to him. Either he purposely misunder-
j stands, in order to reduce Christ's words to an absurdity; or, more
j probably, not knowing what to say, he asks what he knew to be a
' foolish question.
the second time] This expression has contributed to the word which
probably means 'from above,' being translated 'again.' But 'to enter
a second time into his mother's womb' is simply a periphrasis for 'to be
bom' in the case of an adult. The word which means 'from above' is
not included in the periphrasis. It is precisely that which perplexes
Nicodemus ; so he leaves it out.
5. cf water and of the Spirit] Christ leaves the foolish question of
Nicodemus to answer itself: He goes on to explain what is the real

w. 6—8.] S. JOHN, III. 95
enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the 6
flesh is fiesh ; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. 7
The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the 8

point, and what Nicodemus has not asked, the meaning of ' from above :' ,
'of water and (of the) Spirit.' The outward sign and inward grace of j
Christian baptism are here clearly given, and an unbiassed mind can
scarcely avoid seeing this plain fact. This becomes still more clear
when we compare i. 26 and 33, where the Baptist declares 'I baptize
with water;' the Messiah 'baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.' The Fathers,
both Greek and Latin, thus interpret the passage with singular una
nimity. Thus once more S. John assumes without stating the primary
elements of Christianity. Baptism is assumed here as well known to his
reader, as the Eucharist is assumed in chap. vi. To a well-instructed
Christian there was no need to explain what was meant by being born
of water and the Spirit. The words therefore had a threefold meaning, I
past, present, and future. In the past they looked back to the time j
when the Spirit moved upon the water causing the birth from above of '
Order and Beauty out of Chaos. In the present they pointed to the ;
divinely ordained (i. 33) baptism of John : and through it in the future
to that higher rite, to which John himself bore testimony.
6. The meaning of 'birth from above ' is still further explained by an
analogy. What a man inherits from his parents is a body with animal
life and passions ; what he receives from above is a spiritual nature with
heavenly aspirations and capabilities. What is born of sinful, human
nature is sinful and human ; what is born of the Holy Spirit is spiritual
and divine.
7. Ye must] The declaration is brought more closely home. In
¦w. 3 and 5 Christ had made a very general statement, ' except a man.'
He now shews that none are exempt from it. 'Ye, the chosen people,
ye, the Pharisees, ye, the rulers, must all be born from above.'
8. The wind bloweth, &c] This verse is sometimes taken very
differently : the Spirit breatheth where He willeth, and thou hearest His
voice, but canst not tell whence He cometh and whither He goeth; so is
every one (bom) who is born of the Spirit. The advantages of this
rendering are (1) that it gives to Pneuma the meaning which it almost I
invariably has in more than 350 passages in N.T. in which it occurs, of 1
which more than 20 are in this Gospel. Although pneuma may mean
'the breath of the wind,' yet its almost invariable use in N. T. is 'spirit'
or ' the Spirit, ' while anemos is used for 'wind : ' (2) that it gives a better I
meaning to 'willeth,' a word more appropriate to a person than to any- t
thing inanimate: (3) that it gives to pMni the meaning which it has in |
14 other passages in this Gospel, viz., 'articulate voice,' and not 'inar
ticulate sound.' On the other hand this rendering (1) gives topnei the I
meaning 'breathes,' a meaning quite unknown in N.T. : (2) uses the /
expression 'the voice of the Spirit,' also unknown to Scripture: (3) re- :
quires the insertion of 'bom' in the last clause, in order to make sense.

96 S. JOHN, III. [vv. 9— n.
sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and
whither it goeth : so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these
^things be? Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou
H a master of Israel, and knowest not these things ? Verily,
verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and
testify that we have seen ; and ye receive not our witness.

]For the usual rendering may be pleaded (i) that it gives to pnei the
meaning which it has everywhere else in N.T., viz. in vi. 18 and five
other passages. Although pnei may mean 'breathes,' yet its invariable
use in N. T. is of the 'blowing' of the wind, while another word (xx.
22) is used for 'breathe:' (2) that it gives the most literal meaning to
'hearest:' (3) that the last clause makes excellent sense without any
repetition of 'born.' The Aramaic word probably used by our Lord
has both meanings, ' wind ' and ' spirit, ' so that it is not impossible that
bbth meanings are meant to run concurrently through the passage.
"It was late at night when our Lord had this interview with the Jewish
teacher. At the pauses in the conversation, we may conjecture, they
heard the wind without, as it moaned along the narrow streets of
Jerusalem; and our Lord, as was His wont, took His. creature into His
service — the service of spiritual truth. The wind was a figure of the
Spirit. Our Lord would have used the same word for both." (Liddon.)
There is a clear reference to this passage in the Ignatian Epistles,
Philad. VII. Thus .we have evidence of the Gospel being known
certainly as early as A.D. 150, and probably A.D. 115.
so is every one] i. e. such is the case of every one : he feels the spiritual
influence, but finds it incomprehensible in its origin, which is from
above, and in its end, which is eternal life.
born of the Spirit] The Sinaitic MS. and two ancient versions read,
born of water and of the Spirit. The inserted words are a gloss.
9. How can these things be?] He is bewildered ; there is no appear
ing not to understand, as in v. 4. 'Be,' come to pass (see on i. 6).
10. Art thou a master of Israel] Better, art thou the teacher of
Israel, the well-known Rabbi, a representative of the supreme authority
in the Church?
11. We speak that we do know] The plural is no proof that any of
the disciples were present, though S. John at least may have been; nor
does it necessarily include more than Christ Himself. The plurals may
be rhetorical, giving the saying the tone of a proverb; but the next verse
(seems to shew that they do include others. Christ and his disciples tell
I of earthly things, Christ alone of heavenly.
testify] Or, bear witness of (see on i. 7).
we have seen] Of which we have immediate knowledge. Comp.
i. 18; xiv. 7, 9.
and ye receive not] The tragic tone once more; see on i. 5. 'Ye
teachers of Israel,' the very men who should receive it.

vv. 12— 16.] S. JOHN, III. 97
If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how 12
shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things 1 And no 13
man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down
from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. And 14
as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so
must the Son of man be lifted up : that whosoever believeth is
in him should not perish, but have eternal Ufe. For God 16
12. earthly things] Things which take place on earth, even though
originating in heaven, e.g. the 'new birth,' which though 'from
above,' must take place in this world. See notes on 1 Cor. xv. 40 and
James iii 15.
heavenly things] The mysteries which are not of this world, the
Divine counsels respecting man's salvation.
13. no man hath ascended up to heaven] No man has been in
heaven, so as to see and know these heavenly things, excepting Christ. 1
came down from heaven) Literally, out of heaven; at the Incarna- \
tion. On 'the Son of Man' see on i. 51.
which is in heaven] These words are omitted in the best MSS. If
they are retained, the meaning is 'Whose proper home is heaven.'
Or the Greek participle may be the imperfect tense (comp. vi. 62, ix.
25, xvii. 5), which was in heaven before the Incarnation. It is doubtful
whether in this verse we have any direct allusion to the Ascension,
though this is sometimes assumed.
14. the serpent] We here have some evidence of the date of the /
Gospel. The Ophitic is the earliest Gnostic system of which we have
full information. The serpent is the centre of the system, at once its
good and evil principle. Had this form of Gnosticism been prevalent '
before this Gospel was written, this verse would scarcely have stood j
thus. An orthodox writer would have guarded his readers from (
error: an Ophitic writer would have made more ofthe serpent.
even so] Christ here testifies to the prophetic and typical character of
the O.T.
must] It is so ordered in the counsels of God. Heb. ii. 9, ro.
be lifted up] On the cross : the lifting up does not refer to the exalta
tion of Christ to glory. The glory to which the cross led (crux scala (
coeli) is not included. Comp. viii. 28 and xii. 32; and for other
symbolic language about His death comp. Matt. xii. 40.
15. That] The eternal life of believers is the purpose of the 'must'
in v. 14. For 'should' read may both here and in v. 16.
not perish, but] These words are not genuine here, but have been
taken from the next verse. When they are struck out it is better to take
'in Him' with 'have' than with 'believeth:' that every one who be
lieveth may have in Him eternal life.
16 — 21. It is much disputed whether what follows is a continuation
of Christ's discourse, or the comment of the Evangelist upon it. The
fact that terms characteristic of S. John's theology are put into the
mouth of Christ, e.g. 'only-begotten' and 'the Light,' cannot settle the
s. JOHN 7

98 S. JOHN, III. [w. 17, 18.
so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that
Whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have
17 everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world
to condemn the world; but that the world through him
18 might be saved. He that believeth on him is not con
demned : but he that believeth not is condemned already,
because he hath not believed in the name of the only

question : the substance may still be our Lord's, though the wording is
S. John's. It seems unlikely that S. John would give us no indication
of the change from Christ's words to his own, if the discourse with
Nicodemus really came to a full stop in v. 15. See on vv. 31 — 36.
16. For] Explaining how God wills eternal life to every one that
believeth. loved the world] The whole human race: see on i. 10. This would
be a revelation to the exclusive Pharisee, brought up to believe that God
loved only the chosen people. The word for 'love,' agapdn, is very
frequent both in this Gospel and in the First Epistle, and may be con
sidered characteristic of S. John.
I that he gave his only begotten] This would be likely to remind
/Nicodemus ofthe offering of Isaac. Comp. 1 John iv. 9; Heb. xi. 17;
Rom. viii. 32. See note on i. 14.
everlasting life] The Greek is the same as in the previous verse, and
the translation should be the same, eternal life. 'Eternal life' is one
of the phrases of which S. John is fond. It occurs 17 times in the
Gospel (only eight in the Synoptics) and six times in the First Epistle.
In neither Gospel nor Epistle is 'eternal' (aibnios) applied to anything
but 'life.' On ai&nios, which of itself does not necessarily mean 'ever
lasting' or 'unending,' see note on Matt. xxv. 46.
17. the world] Note the emphatic repetition : the whole human
race is meant, as in v. 16, not the Gentiles in particular.
not... to condemn] This does not contradict ix. 39, 'For judgment
am I come into this world.' Comp. Luke ix. 56. Since there are
\ sinners in the world Christ's coming involves a separation of them from
1 the good, 3 judgment, a sentence : but this is not the purpose of His
coming; the purpose is salvation. 'Condemn' is too strong here for
the Greek word, which is simply to judge between good and bad ; but
the word frequently acquires the notion of ' condemn ' from the context
.(see on v. 29). Note the change of construction; not, 'to save the
(world,' but ' that the world might be saved through Him.' The world
! can reject Him if it pleases.
18. is not condemned. ..is condemned already] Better, is not judged
...hath been judged already. The change of tense from present to
.perfect must be preserved. Unbelievers have no need to be sentenced
jby the Messiah; their unbelief is of itself their sentence. The next
verse explains how this is. 'Judge ' and 'judgment ' are among S.John's
characteristic words.

w. 19—21.] S. JOHN, III. 99
begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that 19
light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather
than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one so
that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light,
lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth 2I
truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made
manifest, that they are wrought in God.
19. And this is the condemnation] Rather, But the judgment is
this ; this is what it consists in : comp. xv. 12, xvii. 3.
and men loved darkness, &c] The tragic tone again (see on i. 5).
Both words should have the article, loved the darkness rather than the
light. An understatement ; they hated the Light. There is probably
no allusion to Nicodemus coming to Jesus by night. He chose the
darkness, not because his deeds were evil, but because they were good.
He wished to conceal, not an evil deed from good men, but a good deed
from evil men.
deeds] Better, works here and vv. 20, 21.
20. doeth evil] The Greek word for 'doeth' is not the same as that
in the next verse; but it is not quite certain that any distinction of
meaning is intended, although v. 29 inclines one to think so. There
the words are paired in precisely the same way as here. On the other
hand in Rom. vii. 15—20 these same two words are interchanged
indifferently, each being used both of doing good and of doing evil.
In order to make a distinction practiseth evil has been suggested. But
' evil ' also requires re-translation, for in the Greek it differs from ' evil ' in
v. 19. The meaning in this verse is rather, ' frivolous, good-for-nothing,
worthless.' He that practiseth worthless things (the aimless trifler),
hateth the light, which would show him the true value of the inanities
which fill up his existence.
lest his deeds should] Better, In order that his works may not.
reproved) The margin gives ' discovered.' In viii. 9 the same word
is translated 'convict,' in viii. 46 'convince,' and in xvi. 8 'reprove'
with 'convince' in the margin. Of all these 'convict' is perhaps the
best ; in order that his works may not be convicted of being worth
less, proved to be what they really are. See note on Matt, xviii. 15.
21. doeth truth] Or, as in 1 John i. 6, doeth the truth, the opposite of
'doing' or 'making a lie,' Rev. xxi. 27, xxii. 15. It is moral rather
than intellectual truth that is meant. To ' do the truth ' is to do that
which is true to the moral law (comp. viii. 32), that which has true
moral worth, as opposed to 'practising worthless things.' In 1 Cor.
xiii. 6 we have a similar antithesis : ' rejoicing with the truth ' is opposed
to 'rejoicing in iniquity.'
that his deeds may be made manifest] ' His ' is emphatic, 'his deeds *
as opposed to those of him that doeth evil. 'Be made manifest'
balances 'be reproved.' The one fears to be convicted; the other
courts the light, not for self-glorification, but as loving that to which he
feels his works are akin. See on i. 31.
7-2

S. JOHN, III. [vv. 22, 23.

22 — 36. The Baptism and Final Testimony of John.
22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the
land of Judea ; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim,
wrought in God] -Better, have been wrought in God. This is his
reason for wishing them to be made manifest ; it is a manifestation of some
thing divine. The Greek for ' that they are ' may mean ' because they
are.' These three verses (19 — 21) shew that before the Incarnation there
/ were two classes of men in the world ; a majority of evil-doers, whose
antecedents led them to shun the Messiah; and a small minority of
righteous, whose antecedents led them to welcome the Messiah. They
had been given to Him by the Father (vi. 37, xvii. 6) ; they recognised
His teaching as of God, because they desired to do God's will (vii. 17).
Such would be Simeon, Anna (Luke ii. 25, 36), Nathanael, the dis
ciples, &c.
We have no means of knowing how Nicodemus was affected by this
interview, beyond the incidental notices of him vii. 50, 51, xix. 39,
which being so incidental shew that he is no fiction.
22—36. The Baptism and Final Testimony of John.
22, 23. We have here a mark of authenticity similar to ii. 12. These
passages "it is impossible to regard as embodiments of dogma. It is
equally impossible to regard them as fragments detached from the mass
of tradition. The only conclusion remains, that they axe facts lodged in
the memory of a living witness of the events described." S. p. 86.
S. John records them, not for any theological purpose, but because he
was there, and remembers what took place.
and baptized) Or, was baptizing during his stay there, through his
disciples (iv. 2). Christ's baptism was not yet in the Name of the
Trinity (vii. 39) as ordered to the Apostles (Matt, xxviii. 19). It was a
continuation of John's baptism, accompanied by the operation of the
Spirit (v. 5). We have abundant evidence that John baptized before
Christ's public ministry commenced, and that the disciples baptized
after His ministry closed. That the one baptism should be the off
spring of the other is probable enough antecedently; "yet this is the
one passage in which it is positively stated that our Lord authorised
baptism during His lifetime." S. p. 85.
23. John also was baptizing] Not as a rival to the Messiah, but still
in preparation for Him. Although John knew that the Messiah had
come, yet He had not yet taken the public position which John had ex
pected Him to take, and hence John was by no means led to suppose
that his own office in preaching repentance was at an end. There is no
improbability in Jesus and John baptizing side by side. But with this
difference ; Jesus seldom, if ever, administered His own baptism ; John
apparently always did administer his.
Aenon] The name means 'springs.' The identifications of both

vv. 24—27.] S. JOHN, III. 101
because there was much water there : and they came, and
were baptized. For John was not yet cast into prison. 24
Then there arose a question between some of John's disciples 25
and the Jews about purifying. And they came unto John, 26
and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond
Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same
baptizeth, and all men come to him. John answered and 27
said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him
Aenon and Salim remain uncertain. The most probable conjecture is
the Wady Far'ah, running from Mount Ebal to Jordan, an open vale,
full of springs. There is a Salim three miles south of the valley,, and
the name of Aenon survives in 'Ainun, a village four miles north of the
waters. much water] For immersion ; the Greek means literally many
waters. The remark shews that these places were not on the Jordan.
It would be gratuitous to say of the Jordan that ' there was much water
there.' 24. This corrects the impression, naturally derived from the Synop
tists, that Christ's public ministry did not commence till after the im
prisonment of the Baptist. The whole of these first three chapters and
part of the fourth must be placed before Matt. iv. 12, where there are
great gaps in the history.
25. Then there arose] Better, there arose therefore; i.e. in conse
quence of John's baptizing at Aenon.
a question] Or, questioning.
between some of John's disciples and the Jews] Better, on the part
of John's disciples with a Jew. 'A Jew ' for ' Jews ' is the reading of
the best authorities. We do not know what the question was ; probably
the efficacy of John's baptism as compared with Christ's, or as com
pared with the ordinary ceremonial washings, for purifying from sin.
There is no clue as to who this Jew was. His question makes the dis
ciples of John go at once to their master for his opinion about Jesus and
His success.
26. to whom thou barest witness) Rather, to whom thou hast
borne witness. This was the monstrous thing in their eyes ; that One
who seemed to owe His position to the testimony of John should be con-
peting with him and surpassing him.
behold, the same) Or perhaps, behold, this fellow, expressing astonish
ment and chagrin, and perhaps contempt.
all men) An exaggeration very natural in their excitement. The
picture is very true to life. Comp. the excited statement of the
Samaritan woman, iv. 29 ; and of the Pharisees, xii. 19 ; contrast
v. 32 and see on vi. 15.
27. A man can receive nothing, &c] Comp. xix. 11. The meaning
of John's declaration is given in two ways: (1) 'Jesus could not have
this great success, unless it were granted Him from Heaven. This

S. JOHN, III. [w. 28—30.

28 from heaven. Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I
29 am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. He that
hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the
bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth
greatly because of the bridegroom's voice : this my joy
30 therefore is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease.
ought to satisfy you that He is sent by God ;' (2) ' I cannot accept the
position of supremacy, which you would thrust upon me; because I
have not received it from Heaven.' The former is better, as being a
more direct answer to 'all men come to Him.' But it is quite possible
that both meanings are intended.
be given) More literally, have been given.
28. Ye yourselves] Though you are so indignant on my account.
bear me witness, that I said] They had appealed to his testimony
(v. 26) ; he turns it against them.
before him) 'Before Him, of whom you complain, whom I proclaim
to be the Christ. ' In i. 26, 30, John spoke less clearly.
29. John explains by a figure his subordination to the Messiah.
He that hath the bride] Here only in this Gospel , does this well-
known symbol occur. It is frequent both in O. T. and N. T. Is. liv.
5; Hos. ii. 19, 20; Eph. v. 32; Rev. xix. 7; xxi. 2, 9. Comp.
Song of Solomon, passim ; Matt. ix. 15, xxv. 1. In O.T. it sym
bolizes the relationship between Jehovah and His chosen people, in
N. T. that between Christ and His Church.
the friend of the bridegroom] The special friend, appointed to
arrange the preliminaries of the wedding, to manage and preside at
the marriage feast. Somewhat analogous to our ' best man, ' but his
duties were very much more considerable. A much closer analogy
may be found among the lower orders in the Tyrol at the present
day. Here the Messiah is the Bridegroom and the Church His Bride ;
John is His friend who has prepared the heart of the Bride and
arranged the espousal. He rejoices to see the consummation of his
labours. heareth him] i.e. listens attentively to do his bidding.
because of the bridegroom's voice] Heard in the midst of the
marriage-festivities. is fulfilled] i.e. has been fulfilled 'and still remains complete. Comp.
xv. n, xvi. 24, xvii. 13; 1 John i. 4.
30. must] It is so ordained in the counsels of God. Comp. vv. 7,
14, ix. 4, x. 16, xx. 9. This joy ofthe friend ofthe Bridegroom, in full
view of the inevitable wane of his own influence and dignity, is in
marked contrast to the jealousy and vexation of his disciples.
31 — 36. A question is raised with regard to this section similar
to that raised about vv. 16—21. Some regard what follows not as
a continuation of the Baptist's speech, but as the Evangelist's comment
upon it. But, as in the former case, seeing that the Evangelist gives
us no intimation that he is taking the place of the speaker, and that

vv. 31. 32-] S. JOHN, III. 103
He that cometh from above is above all : he that is of the 31
earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth : he that cometh
from heaven is above all. And what he hath seen and 32
heard, that he testified! j and no man receiveth his testimony.
there is nothing in what follows to compel us to suppose that there
is such a transition, it is best to regard the Baptist as still speaking.
It is, however, quite possible that this latter part of the discourse is
more strongly coloured with the Evangelist's own style and phrase
ology, while the substance still remains the Baptist's. Indeed a change
of style may be noticed. The sentences become less abrupt and more
connected; the stream of thought is continuous.
"The Baptist, with the growing inspiration ofthe prophet, unveils
before his narrowing circle of disciples the full majesty of Jesus ;
and then, as with a swan-like song, completes his testimony before
vanishing from history." Meyer, in loco.
There is no contradiction between this passage and Matt. xi. 2 — 6,
whatever construction we put on the latter (see notes there). John
was 'of the earth,' and therefore there is nothing improbable in his
here impressing on his disciples the peril of not believing on the
Messiah, and yet in prison feeling impatience, or despondency, or even
doubt about the position and career of Jesus.
31. that comethfrom above] i.e. Christ. Comp. v. 13, viii. 23, He
'is above all,' John included. No one, however exalted a Prophet,
can rival Him.
is earthly] There is loss instead of gain in obliterating the em
phatic repetition of the words 'of the earth' as they appear in the
Greek. He that is of the earth, of the earth he is, and of the earth
he speaketh. This was John's case : he spoke of ' earthly things ' (see
on v. 12), Divine Truth as manifested in the world, and as revealed
to him. He could not, like Christ, speak from immediate knowledge
of ' heavenly things. ' Note that ' speaking of the earth ' is a very
different thing from 'speaking of the world' (1 John iv. 5). The one
is to speak of God's work on earth ; the other of what opposes, or at
least is other than, God's work.
he that cometh from heaven] A repetition with further development,
very characteristic of S. John's style.
32. what he hath seen and heard] In His pre-existence with
God ; v. n, i. 18. He has immediate knowledge of heavenly things.
that he testifieth] Better, that he witnesseth (see on i. 7). Precisely
this is the substance of His witness.
and no man) The tragic tone again; see on i. 5, and comp. v. n.
' No man ' is an exaggeration resulting from deep feeling : com
paratively speaking none, so few were those who accepted the Messiah.
Comp. the similar exaggeration on the other side, v. 26, 'all men
come to Him.' These extreme contradictory statements, placed in
such close proximity, confirm our trust in the Evangelist as faithfully
reporting what was actually said. He does not soften it down to make
it look plausible.

104 S. JOHN, III. [vv. 33—36.
33 He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that
34 God is true. For he whom God hath sent speaketh the
words of God : for God giveth not the Spirit by measure
35 unto him. The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all
36 things into his hand. He that believeth on the Son hath
everlasting life : and he that believeth not the Son shall
not see life ; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
receiveth his testimony] Better, receiveth His witness. The Baptist
takes up Christ's words in v. n.
33. The Baptist shews at once that 'no man' is hyperbolical; there
are some who received the testimony.
hath received. ..hath set to his seal] Better, received... set his seal.
his testimony] his witness. 'His' is emphatic, balancing 'God.'
' He that received Christ's witness, set his seal that God is true.' To
believe the Messiah is to believe God, for the Messiah is God's inter
preter, i. 18. The metaphor is from sealing a document to express
one's trust in it and adherence to it. Comp. vi. 27 ; 1 Cor. ix. 2. On
' true ' see note on i. 9 ; ' true ' here is opposed to ' lying ' not to
' spurious.' 34. whom God hath sent] Better, whom God sent, viz. Christ ' who
cometh from above,' ». 31.
God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him] ' God ' is of doubtful
authority ; ' unto Him ' is not in the Greek. We must translate He
giveth not the Spirit by measure ; or, the Spirit giveth not by measure.
The former is better, and ' He ' probably means God ; so that the only
question is whether ' unto Him ' is rightly supplied or not. In trans
lation it is best to omit the words, although there is a direct reference
to Jesus. 'Not by measure giveth He the Spirit,' least of all to
Jesus, 'for it pleased (the Father) thct in Him the whole plenitude (of
• Divinity) should have its permanent abode,' Col. i. 19. Some take
' He ' as meaning Christ, who gives the Spirit fully to His disciples.
35. loveth the Son] Comp. v. 20. This is the reason for His
giving all things into His hand. Christ is thus made 'Head over
all things ' (Eph. i. 22), and ' Lord of all ' (Acts x. 36).
36. hath everlasting life] Or, eternal life (see on v. 16). Note
the tense; 'hath' not 'shall have.' Believers are already in possession
of eternal life. Christians often think of eternal life as something yet
to be won. It has been already given to them ; the question is whether
they will lose it again or not. The struggle is not to gain but to retain.
Comp. xvii. 3.
he that believeth not] This may also mean he that obeyeth not, and
this is better, for it is not the same word as ' he that believeth ' with
the negative added. The same correction seems to be needed, Acts
xiv. 2, xix. 9; Rom. xi. 30 (see margin). Comp. Heb. iv. 6, n;
1 Pet. iv. 17.
shall not see] Not only has not beheld, but has no prospect of
beholding.

vv. 1—5.] S. JOHN, IV. 105
Chap. IV. 1 — 42. The Work among Samaritans.
When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had 4
heard that Jesus made and baptized moe disciples than
John, (though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,) 2
he left Judea, and departed again into Galilee. And he \
must needs go through Samaria. Then cometh he to a
the wrath of God] This phrase occurs nowhere else in the Gospels.
It is the necessary complement of the love of God. If there is love
for those who believe, there must be wrath for those who refuse to
believe. Comp. Matt. iii. 7; Luke iii. 7; Rom. i. 18, ix. 22, xii. 19.
abideth] Not ' shall come to him :' this is his portion already. He
is under a ban until he believes, and he refuses to believe : therefore
the ban remains. He, like the believer, not only will have but has
his portion ; it rests with him also, whether the portion continues his.
He has to struggle, not to avert a sentence, but to be freed from it.
Chap. IV. 1 — 42. The Work among Samaritans.
1. When therefore the Lord knew] The ' therefore ' refers us back
to iii. 26. Of the many who came to Christ some told the Pharisees of
His doings, just as others told John.
the Pharisees] See on i. 24.
made and baptized] Literally, is making and baptizing, the very
words of the report are given. This is important as shewing the
meaning of the next verse, which is a correction not of the Evangelist's
own statement but of the report. In the Authorised Version S. John
seems to be correcting himself : he is really correcting the report carried
to the Pharisees.
than John] They did not object so much to John's making dis
ciples. He disclaimed being the Messiah, and he took his stand on
the Law. Moreover, he ' did no miracle.' They could understand
his position much better than that of Jesus, and feared it less. See on
vi. 15.
2. Jesus himself baptized not] Because baptizing is the work of
a minister, not of the Lord. Christ baptizes with the Holy Spirit
(i- 33)-
3. He left Judced) The stronghold of the Pharisees and of the party
opposed to Christ. We are to infer, therefore, that this report made
them commence operations against Him.
departed again into Galilee] ' Again ' is somewhat wanting in au
thority. It points to the period from i. 43 to ii. 12. Christ had come
up from Capernaum to Jerusalem for the Passover (ii. 13) : He now
returns to Galilee. It is sometimes assumed that this visit to Galilee
marks the beginning of the Galilean ministry recorded by the Sy
noptists (comp. Matt. iv. 12). This may be correct, but it is not quite
certain. See note on Mark i. 14, 15.
4. he must needs go through Samaria] There was no other way,

106 S. JOHN, IV. [v. 5.
city of Samaria, which is called Sychar, near to the parcel
unless he crossed the Jordan and went round by Perea, as Jews some
times did to avoid annoyance from the Samaritans (on the Samari
tans, see note on Matt. x. 5). As Christ was on his way from Jerusalem,
and escaping from the ruling party there, He had less reason to fear
molestation. Comp. Luke ix. 53.
6—42. Doubt has been thrown on this narrative in three different
ways. (1) On a priori grounds. How could the Samaritans, who re
jected the prophetical books, and were such bitter enemies of the Jews,
be expecting a Messiah? The narrative is based on a fundamental
mistake. But it is notorious that the Samaritans did look for a Mes
siah, and are looking for one to the present day. Though they rejected
the Prophets, they accepted the Pentateuch, with all its Messianic
prophecies. (2) On account of Acts viii. 5. How could Philip go and
convert the Samaritans, if Christ had already done so? But is it to be
supposed that in two days Christ perfected Christianity in Samaria (even
allowing, what is not certain, that Christ and Philip went to the same
town), so as to leave nothing for a preacher to do afterwards? Many
acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah who afterwards, on finding Him to be
very different from the Messiah they expected, fell away. This would
be likely enough at Samaria. The seed had fallen on rocky ground.
(3) On the supposition that the narrative is an allegory, of which the
whole point lies in the words 'thou hast had five husbands, and he whom
thou now hast is not thy husband.' The five husbands are the five
religions from Babylon, Cuthah, Ava, Hamath, and Sepharvaim,
brought to Samaria by the colonists from Assyria (2 Kings xvii. 24) ;
and the sixth is the adulterated worship of Jehovah. If our interpreting
Scripture depends upon our guessing such riddles as this, we may well
despair of the task. But the allegory is a pure fiction. 1 . When S.
John gives us an allegory, he leaves no doubt that it is an allegory.
There is not the faintest hint here. 2. It would be extraordinary that
in a narrative of 38 verses the whole allegory should be contained in less
than one verse, the rest being mere setting. This is like a frame a yard
wide round a miniature. 3. There is' a singular impropriety in making
the five heathen religions 'husbands,' while the worship of Jehovah is
represented by a paramour.
The narrative is true to what we know of 'Jews and Samaritans at
this time. The topography is well preserved. 'The gradual develop
ment of the woman's belief is psychologically true.' These and other'
points to be noticed as they occur may convince us that this narrative
cannot be a fiction. Far the easiest supposition is that it is a faithful
record of actual facts.
5. Then cometh he] Better, He cometh therefore ; because that was
His route.
a city of Samaria] City is used loosely, and must not be supposed
to imply anything large. Capernaum, which Josephus calls a village,
the Evangelists call a city. 'Town' would be better as a transla
tion. Samaria is the insignificant province of Samaria into which

vv. 6—8.] S. JOHN, IV. 107
of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph. Now Jacob's 6
well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied with his
journey, sat thus on the well : and it was about the sixth
hour. There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water : 7
Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink. (For his disciples 8
the old kingdom of Jeroboam had dwindled. Omit 'which is' before
'called.' called Sychar] ' Called ' may be another indication that this Gospel
was written outside Palestine or it may mean that Sychar was a nick
name ('liar' or 'drunkard'). In the one case Sychar is a different place
from Sychem or Shechem, though close to it, viz. the modern Askar :
in the other it is another name for Sychem, the Neapolis of S. John's
day, and the modern Naplus. The former view is preferable, though
. certainty is impossible. Would S. John have written 'Neapolis' if
Sychem were meant? He writes. Tiberias (vi. 1, 23, xxi. 1): but
Tiberias was probably a new town as well as a new name, whereas
Neapolis was a new name for an old town ; so the analogy is not perfect.
Eusebius and Jerome distinguish Sychar from Sychem. Naplus has
many wells close at hand.
that Jacob gave to his son Joseph] Gen. xxxiii. 19, xlviii. 22; Josh.
xxiv. 32. Abraham bought the ground, Jacob gave it to Joseph, and
Joseph was buried there.
6. Jacob's well] Or, spring (v. n). It still exists, but without
spring-water ; one of the few sites about which there is no dispute, in
the entrance to the valley between Ebal and Gerizim.
sat thus on the well] Or, was sitting thus (just as He was) by the
spring. All these details mark the report as of one who had fuU
information. about the sixth hour] See on i. 39. This case again is not decisive
as to S. John's mode of reckoning the hours. On the one hand, noon
was an unusual hour for drawing water. On the other, a woman whose
life, was under a cloud (v. 18) might select an unusual hour; and at
6 P. M. numbers would probably have been coming to draw, and the
conversation would have been disturbed. Again, after 6 P.M. there
would be rather short time for all that follows. These two instances
(i. 39 and this) lend no strong support to the antecedently improbable
theory that S. John's method of counting the hours is different from the
Synoptists. 7. a woman of Samaria] i. e. of the province ; not of the city of
Samaria, at that time called Sebaste, in honour of Augustus, who had
given it to Herod the Great. Herod's name for it survives in the modern
Sebustieh. A woman of the city of Samaria would not have come all
that distance to fetch water. In legends this woman is called Photina.
Give me to drink] Quite literal, as the next verse shews. He asked
her for refreshment because His disciples had gone away. ' Give me the
spiritual refreshment of thy conversion ' is a meaning read into the words
and not found in them. 1

108 S. JOHN, IV. [vv. 9— n.
9 were gone away unto the city to buy meat.) Then saith
the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being
a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria ?
i° For the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans. Jesus
answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of
God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink;
thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given
ii thee living water. The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou
hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep : from
8. to buy meat] i. e. food, not necessarily flesh. The meat-offering
was fine flour and oil without any flesh. Lev. ii. I. The Greek word
here means 'nourishment.'
9. woman of Samaria] In both places in this verse we should
rather have Samaritan woman : the Greek is not the same as in v. 7.
The adjective lays stress on the national and religious characteristics.
For 'then' read therefore, as in v. 5.
How is it] Feminine pertness. She is half-amused and half-
triumphant. being a Jew] She knew Him to be such by His dress and by His

for the Jews, &c] Omit the articles; for Jews have no dealings with
Samaritans. This is a remark, not of the woman, but of S. John, to
explain the woman's question. As He was on his way from Jerusalem
she probably thought He was a Judaean. The Galileans seem to have
been less strict ; and hence His disciples went to buy food of Samaritans.
Some important authorities omit the remark.
10. the gift of God] What He is ready to give thee, what is now
held out to thee, thy salvation. For 'knewest' read hadst known.
Comp. xi. 21, 32, xiv. 28, where we have the same construction; and
contrast v. 46 and viii. 19, where the A.V. makes the converse mistake
of translating imperfects as if they were aorists.
thou wouldest have asked of him] instead of His asking of thee:
'thou' is emphatic. 'Spiritually our positions are reversed. It is
thou who art weary, and foot-sore, and parched, close to the well, yet
unable to drink ; it is I who can give thee the water from the well, and
quench thy thirst for ever. ' There is a scarcely doubtful reference to
this passage in the Ignatian Epistles, Romans, vn. See on vi. 33, to
which there is a clear reference in this same chapter. The passage with
these references to the Fourth Gospel is found in the Syriac as well as
in the shorter Greek versions of Ignatius; so that we have almost certain
evidence of this Gospel being known as early as A.D. 115. See on
iii. 3-
11. Sir] A decided change from the pert 'How is it?' in v. 9. His
words and manner already begin to impress her.
the well is deep] Not the same word for 'well' as in v. 6. There the
spring in the well is the chief feature : here it is rather the deep hole

w. 12—14.] S. JOHN, IV. 109
whence then hast thou that living water? Art thou greater 12
than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank
thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle? Jesus 13
answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this
water shall thirst again ; but whosoever drinketh of the i4
in which the spring was. Earlier travellers have called it over a 100
feet deep : at the present time it is about 75 feet deep.
that living water] Better, the living water, of which Thou speakest.
She thinks He means spring-water as distinct from cistern-water.
Comp. Jer. ii. 13, where the two are strongly contrasted. In Gen. xxvi.
19, as the margin shews, 'springing water' is literally 'living water,'
viva aqua. What did Christ mean by the 'living water?' Among the
various answers we may at once set aside any reference to baptism.
Faith, God's grace and truth, Christ Himself, are other answers. The
difference between them is at bottom not so great as appears on the
surface. Christ here uses the figure of water, as elsewhere of bread
(vi.) and light (viii. 12), the three most necessary things for life. But
He does not here identify Himself with the living water, as He does
with the Bread, and the Light : therefore it seems better to understand
the living water as the 'grace and truth' of which He is full (i. 14).
Comp. Ecclus. xv. 3; Baruch iii. 12.
12. Art thou greater] ' Thou ' is very emphatic ; Surely Thou art
not greater. Comp. viii. 53. The loquacity of the woman as con
trasted with the sententiousness of Nicodemus is very natural, while on
the other hand she shews a similar perverseness in misunderstanding
spiritual metaphors.
our fattier Jacob) The Samaritans claimed to be descended from
Joseph; with how much justice is a question very much debated.
Some maintain that they were of purely heathen origin, although they
were driven by calamity to unite the worship of Jehovah with their own
idolatries: and this view seems to be in strict accordance with 2 Kings
xvii. 23 — 41. Renegade Jews took refuge among them from time to
time; but such immigrants would not affect the texture of the nation
more than the French refugees among ourselves. , Others hold that the
Samaritans were from the first a mongrel nation, a mixture of heathen
colonists with Jewish inhabitants, left behind by Shalmaneser. But
there is nothing to shew that he did leave any behind (2 Kings
xviii. 11); Josephus says (Ant. IX. xiv. 1) that 'he transplanted all the
people.' When the Samaritans asked Alexander the Great to excuse
them from tribute in the Sabbatical year, because as true sons of
Joseph they did not till their land in the seventh year, he pronounced
their claim an imposture, and destroyed Samaria. Our Lord calls a
Samaritan a 'stranger' (Luke xvii. 18), literally 'one of a different
race.' which gave us the well] This has no foundation in Scripture, but no
doubt was a Samaritan tradition. She means, the well was good enough
for him, and is good enough for us; hast Thou a better?

no S. JOHN, IV. [w. is— 20.
water that I shall give him shall never thirst ; but the water
that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water spring-
,s ing up into everlasting life. The woman saith unto him,
Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come
16 hither to draw. Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband,
i7 and come hither. The woman answered and said, I have
no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I
18 have no husband : for thou hast had five husbands ; and he
whom thou now hast is not thy husband : in that saidst
i9 thou truly. The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that
20 thou art a prophet. Our fathers worshipped in this moun-

13, 14. Christ leaves her question unanswered, like that of Nicodemus
(iii. 4, 5), and passes on to develop the metaphor rather than explain
it, contrasting the literal with the figurative sense. Comp. iii. 6.
14. shall never thirst] Literally, will certainly not thirst for ever,
for the craving is satisfied as soon as ever it recurs. See on viii. 51.
springing up into everlasting life] Not that eternal life is some
future result to be realised hereafter; it is the immediate result. The
soul in which the living water flows has eternal life. See on v. 36 and
iii. 16.
15. She still does not understand, but does not wilfully misunder
stand. This wonderful water will at any rate be worth having, and she
asks quite sincerely (not ironically) for it. Had she been a Jew, she
could scarcely have thus misunderstood, this metaphor of ' water ' and
' living water ' is so frequent in the Prophets. Comp. Isa. xii. 3, xliv. 3;
Jer. ii. 13; Zech. xiii. 1, xiv. 8. But the Samaritans rejected all but
the Pentateuch.
to draw] Same word as in ii. 8, 9 ; peculiar to this Gospel.
16. Go, call thy husband] Not that the man was wanted, either as
a concession to Jewish propriety, which forbad a Rabbi to talk with a
woman alone, or for any other reason. By a seemingly casual request
Christ lays hold of her inner life, convinces her of sin, and leads
her to repentance, without which her request, 'Give me this water,'
could not be granted. The husband who was no husband was the
plague-spot where her healing must begin.
17. hast well said) i.e. saidst rightly. Comp. viii. 48; Matt. xv.
7; Luke xx. 39. There is perhaps a touch of irony in the 'well.'
18. five husbands] To be understood quite literally. They were
either dead or divorced, and she was now living with a man without
being married to him.
in that saidst thou truly) Better, this (one thing) thou hast said truly.
Christ exposes the falsehood which lurks in the literal truth of her
statement. 19. a prophet] One divinely inspired with supernatural knowledge,
1 Sam. ix. 9. Note the gradual change in her attitude of mind towards

2i.] S. JOHN, IV.

tain ; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men
ought to worship. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe i
me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this moun-
Him. First, off-hand pertness (v. 9); then, respect to His gravity of
manner and serious words (v. 11); next, a misunderstanding belief in
what He says (v. 15); and now, reverence for Him as a ' man of God.'
Comp. the parallel development of faith in the man born blind (see on
ix. 11) and in Martha (see on xi. 21).
20. Convinced that He can read her life she shrinks from inspection
and hastily turns the conversation from herself. In seeking a new
subject she naturally catches at one of absorbing interest to every
Samaritan. Mount Gerizim shorn of its temple suggests the great
national religious question ever in dispute between them and the Jews.
Here was One who could give an authoritative answer about it ; she
will ask Him. To urge that such a woman would care nothing about
the matter is unsound reasoning. Are irreligious people never keen
about religious questions now-a-days? Does an immoral life destroy all
interest in Romanism, Ritualism, and the like?
in this mountain] Gerizim ; her not naming it is very lifelike. The
Samaritans contended that here Abraham offered up Isaac, and after
wards met Melchisedek. The former is more credible than the latter.
A certain Manasseh, a man of priestly family, married the daughter of
Sanballat the Horonite (Neh. xiii. 28), and was thereupon expelled
from Jerusalem. He fled to Samaria and helped Sanballat to set up a
rival worship on Gerizim. It is uncertain whether the temple on
Gerizim was built then (about B.C. 410) or a century later; but it was
destroyed by John Hyrcanus B.C. 130, after it had stood 200 years or
more. Yet the Samaritans in no way receded from their claims, but
continue their worship on Gerizim to the present day.
ye say] Unconsciously she admits that One, whom she has just con
fessed to be a Prophet, is against her in the controversy. Comp.
Deut. xii. 13.
21 — 24. "We shall surely be justified in attributing the wonderful
words of verses 21, 23, 24, to One greater even than S. John. They
seem to breathe the spirit of other worlds than ours — ' of worlds whose
course is equable and pure ;' where media and vehicles of grace are un-
needed, and the soul knows even as it is known. There is nothing so
like them in their sublime infinitude of comprehension, and intense
penetration to the deepest roots of things, as some of the sayings in the
Sermon on the Mount (Matt. v. 45, vi. 6). It is words like these that
strike home to the hearts of men, as in the most literal sense Divine."
S. p. 95.
21. believe me] This formula occurs here only; the usual one is 'I
say unto you.'
the hour cometh] No article in the Greek; there cometh an hour.
Christ decides neither for nor against either place. The utter ruin on
Gerizim and the glorious building at Jerusalem will soon be on an
equality. Those who would worship the Father must rise above such

S. JOHN, IV. [vv. 22, 23.

22 tain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. Ye worship
ye know not what : we know what we worship : for salvation
23 is of the Jews. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the
true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in
distinctions of place. A time is coming when all limitations of worship
will disappear.
22. ye know not what] Or, that which ye know not. The Samaritan
religion, even after being purified from the original mixture with idolatry
(2 Kings xvii. 33, 41), remained a mutilated religion; the obscurity of
the Pentateuch (and of that a garbled text) unenlightened by the clearer
revelations in the Prophets and other books of O.T. Such a religion
when contrasted with that of the Jews might well be called ignorance.
we know what we worship) Or, we worship that which we know.
The first person plural here is not similar to that in iii. 1 1 (see note there),
though some would take it so. Christ here speaks as a Jew, and in
such a passage there is nothing surprising in His so doing. As a rule
Christ gives no countenance to the view that He belongs to the Jewish
nation in any special way, though the Jewish nation specially belongs to
Him (i. n): He is the Saviour of the world, not of the Jews only.
But here, where it is a question whether Jew or Samaritan has the
larger share of religious truth, He ranks' Himself both by birth and
by religion among the Jews. 'We,' therefore, means 'we Jews.'
salvation is of tlie Jews] Literally, the salvation, the expected salva
tion, is of the Jews ; i.e. proceeds from them (not belongs to them), in
virtue of the promises to Abraham (Gen. xii. 3, xviii. 18, xxii. 18) and
Isaac (xxvi. 4). This verse is absolutely fatal to the theory that this
Gospel is the work of a Gnpstic Greek in the second century (see on
xix. 35). That salvation proceeded from the Jews contradicts the fun
damental principle of Gnosticism, that salvation was to be sought in the
higher knowledge of which Gnostics had the key. Hence those who
uphold such a theory of authorship assume, in defiance of all evidence,
that this verse is a later interpolation. The verse is found in all MSS.
and versions.
23. the hour cometh] As before, there cometh an hour. What
follows, and it is now here, could not be added in v. 21. The local
worship on Gerizim and Zion must still continue for a while ; but there
are already a few who are rising above these externals to the spirit of
true worship, in which the opposition between Jew and Samaritan
disappears. the true worshippers] The same word for 'true' as in i. 9 (see note
there); 'true' as opposed to what is 'spurious' and 'unreal.' Worship
to be genuine, real, and perfect must be offered in spirit and truth.
in spirit] This is opposed to all that is carnal, material, and of the
earth earthy; — 'this mountain,' the Temple, limitations of time and
place. Not that such limitations are wrong ; but they are not of the
essence of religion, and become wrong when they are mistaken for the
essence of religion.

vv. 24— 26.] S. JOHN, IV. 113
truth : for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is 24
a Spirit : and they that worship him must worship him in
spirit and in truth. The woman saith unto him, I know 25
that Messias cometh, which is called Christ : when he is
come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that 26
speak unto thee am he.
in truth] (Omit ' in') i.e. in harmony with the Nature and Will of
God. In the sphere of intellect, this means recognition of His Pre
sence and Omniscience ; in the sphere of action, conformity with His
absolute Holiness. 'Worship in spirit and truth,' therefore, implies
prostration of the inmost soul before the Divine Perfection, submission
of every thought and feeling to the Divine Will.
for the Father seeketh, &c] Better, for such the Father also seeketh
for His worshippers. ' Such' is very emphatic; 'this is the character
which He also desires in His worshippers.' The 'also' must not be
lost. That worship should be ' in spirit and truth ' is required by the
fitness of things : moreover God Himself desires to have it so, and
works for this end. Note how three times in succession Christ speaks
of God as the Father (vv. 21, 23) : perhaps it was quite a new aspect
of Him to the woman.
24. God is spirit, and must be approached in that part of us which
is spirit, in the true temple of God, ' which temple ye are.' Even to
the chosen three Christ imparts no truths more profound than these.
He admits this poor schismatic to the very fountain-head of religion.
25. Messias] See note on i. 41. There is nothing at all improbable
in her' knowing the Jewish name and using it to a Jew. The word
being so rare in N.T. we are perhaps to understand that it was the
very word used; but it may be S. John's equivalent for what she said.
Comp. v. 29. ¦ Throughout this discourse it is impossible to say how
much of it is a translation of the very words used, how much merely
the substance of what was said. S. John would obtain his information
from Christ, and possibly from the woman also during their two days'
stay. The idea that S. John was left behind by the disciples, and
heard the conversation, is against the whole tenour of the narrative and
is contradicted by w. 8 and 27.
which is called Christ] Probably a parenthetic explanation of the
Evangelist's (but contrast i. 41), not the woman's. The Samaritan
name for the expected Saviour was 'the Returning One,' or (according
to a less probable derivation) 'the Converter.' 'The Returner' points
to the belief that Moses was to appear again.
when he is come] Or, when He comes. 'He' is in emphatic con
trast to other teachers.
all things] In a vague colloquial sense.
26. am he] This is correct, although ' He' is not expressed in the
Greek. It is the ordinary Greek affirmative (comp. Luke xxii. 70) ;
there is no reference to the Divine name 'I AM,' Ex. iii. 14; Deut.
xxxii. 39. This open declaration of His Messiahship is startling when
s. JOHN 8

ii4 S. JOHN, IV. [w.27— 31.
27 And upon this came his disciples, and marvelled that he
talked with the woman : yet no man said, What seekest
28 thou? or, Why talkest thou with her? The woman then
left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith
29 to the men, Come, see a man, which told me all things that
30 ever I did : is not this the Christ ? Then they went out of
the city, and came unto him.
31 In the mean while his, disciples prayed him, saying,

we remember Matt. xvi. 20, xvii. 9; Mark viii. 30. But one great
reason for reserve on this subject, lest the people should 'take him by
force to make him a king' (vi. 15), is entirely wanting here. There
was no fear of the Samaritans making political capital out of Him.
Moreover it was one thing for Christ to avow Himself when He saw
that hearts were ready for the announcement ; quite another for disci
ples and others to make Him known promiscuously.
27. talked with the woman] Rather, was talking with a woman,
contrary to the precepts of the Rabbis. ' Let no one talk with a wo
man in the street, no not with his own wife.' The woman's being a
Samaritan would increase their astonishment.
What seekest thou ?] Probably both questions are addressed (hypo-
thetically) to Christ; not one to the woman, and the other to Him.
28. The woman then] Better, The woman therefore; because of
the interruption.
left her "waterpot] Same word for 'waterpot'. as in the miracle at
Cana, and used nowhere else. Her leaving it shews that her errand is
forgotten, or neglected as of no moment compared with what now lies
before her. This graphic touch comes from one who was there, and
saw, and remembered.
29. all things that ever I did] How natural is this exaggeration !
In her excitement she states not what He had really told her, but what
she is convinced He could have told her. Comp. 'all men' in iii. 26,
and 'no man' in iii. 32. This strong language is in all three cases
thoroughly in keeping with the circumstances.
_ is not this the Christ?) Rather, Is this, can this be, the Christ? A
similar error occurs xviii. 17, 25. Although she believes it she thinks it
almost too good to be true. Moreover she does not wish to seem too
positive and dogmatic to those who do not yet know the evidence.
The form of question is similar to that in v. 33 : both are put in a form
that anticipates a negative answer ; num not nonne.
30. went out  and came] Literally, went out  and were com
ing. The change of tense from aorist to imperfect gives vividness.
We are to see them coming along across the fields as we listen to the
conversation that follows, 31 — 38.
31. In the mean while] Between the departure of the women and
the arrival of her fellow-townsmen.

w. 32—36.] S. JOHN, IV. 115
Master, eat. But he said unto them, I have meat to eat 32
that ye know not of. Therefore said the disciples one to 33
another, Hath any man brought him ought to eat ? Jesus 34
saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that
sent me, and to finish his work. Say not ye, There are 35
yet four months, and then cometh harvest? behold, I say
unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for
they are white already to harvest. And he that reapeth 3s
Master, eat] Better, Rabbi, eat. Here and in ix. 2 and xi. 8 our
translators have rather regrettably turned 'Rabbi' into 'Master,' (comp.
Matt. xxvi. 25, 49; Mark ix. 5, xi. 21, xiv. 45); while 'Rabbi' is
retained i. 38, 49, iii. 2, 26, vi. 25 (comp. Matt, xxiii. 7, 8). Appa
rently their principle was that wherever a disciple addresses Christ,
'Rabbi' is to be translated 'Master;' in other cases 'Rabbi' is to be
retained ; thus obscuring the view which the disciples took of their own
relation to Jesus. He was their Rabbi.
32. I have meat, &c] The pronouns 'I' and 'ye' are emphatically
opposed. His joy at the woman's conversion prompts Him to refuse
food: not of course that His human frame could do without it, but
that in His delight He feels for the moment no want of food.
33. Hath any man brought him] The emphasis is on 'brought.'
' Surely no one hath brought Him any thing to eat.' Another instance
of dulness as to spiritual meaning. In ii. 20 it was the Jews ; in iii. 4
Nicodemus; in ». 11 the Samaritan woman; and now the disciples.
Comp. xi. 12, xiv. 5. These candid reports of what tells against the
disciples add to the trust which we place in the narratives of the Evan
gelists. 34. My meat is to do the will, &c] Literally, My food is that I
may do the will of Him that sent Me and thus finish His work. It is
Christ's aim and purpose that is His food. Comp. v. 36, viii. 56. These
words recall the reply to the tempter 'man doth not live by bread
alone, ' and the reply to His parents ' Wist ye not that I must be about
my Father's business.' Luke iv. 4, ii. 49.
35. Say not ye] The pronoun is again emphatic.
There are yet four months, &c] This cannot be a proverb. No
such proverb is known ; and a proverb on the subject would have to be
differently shaped ; e.g. ' From seedtime to harvest is four months,' or
something of the kind. So that we may regard this saying as a maik
of time. Harvest began in the middle of Nisan or April. Four
months from that would place this event in the middle of December :
or, if (as some suppose) this was a year in which an extra month was
inserted, in the middle of January.
are white already to harvest) In the green blades just shewing
through the soil the faith of the sower sees the white ears that will
soon be there. So also in the flocking of these ignorant Samaritans to
Him for instruction Christ sees the abundant harvest of souls that is
8—2

n6 S. JOHN, IV. [w. 37—39-
receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal : that
both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice to-
37 gether. And herein is that saying true, One soweth, and
38 another reapeth. I sent you to reap that whereon ye
bestowed no labour: other men laboured, and ye are entered
39 into their labours. And many of the Samaritans of that
to follow. 'Already' is the last word in the Greek sentence; and from
very ancient times there has been a doubt whether it belongs to this
sentence or the next. Some of the best MSS. give 'already' to the
next sentence ; ' already he that reapeth receiveth wages.' But MS.
authority in punctuation is not of much weight. The received punc
tuation is perhaps better; 'already' at the end of v. 35 being in
emphatic contrast to ' yet' at the beginning of it.
36. unto life eternal] Another small change without reason (comp.
xii. 25, xvii. 3). Our translators vary between 'eternal life,' 'fife
eternal,' ' everlasting life, ' and ' life everlasting ' (xii. 50). The Greek
is in all cases the same, and should in all cases be translated ' eternal
life.' See on iii. 16. Here 'into eternal life' would perhaps be better:
'eternal life' is represented as the granary into which the fruit is
gathered, not the future result ofthe gathering. See on v. 14. Comp.
for similar imagery, ' The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers
are few, &c.' Matt. ix. 37, 38.
that both] i. e. In order that both : shewing that this was God's pur
pose and intention.
he that soweth] Christ, not the Prophets. The Gospel is not the
fruit of which the O. T. is the seed ; rather the Gospel is the seed for
which the O. T. prepared the ground.
he that reapeth) Christ's ministers.
37. And herein is that saying true] Rather, For herein is the say
ing (proved) true, i.e. is shewn to be the genuine proverb capable of
realisation, not a mere empty phrase. 'True' is opposed to 'unreal'
not to 'lying.' See on v. 23, i. 9 and vii. 28. ' Herein ' refers to what
precedes : comp. xv. 8 and ' by this ' which represents the same Greek
in xvi. 30.
38. I sent you, &c] The pronouns are again emphatically opposed,
as in v. 32.
other men] Christ, the Sower; but put in the plural to balance 'ye'
in the next clause. In v. 37 both are put in the singular for the sake
of harmony; 'One soweth' (Christ), 'another reapeth' (the disciples).
All the verbs in this verse are perfects excepting 'sent;' have not
laboured, have laboured, have entered.
39. many of the Samaritans] Strong proof of the truth of v. 35.
These Samaritans outstrip the Jews, and even the Apostles, in their
readiness to believe. The Jews rejected the testimony of their own
Scriptures, of the Baptist, of Christ's miracles and teaching. The
Samaritans accept the testimony of the woman, who had suddenly be
come an Apostle to her countrymen.

vv. 40— 44.] s. JOHN, IV. 117
city believed on him for the saying of the woman, which
testified, He told me all that ever I did. So when the 4°
Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that
he would tarry with them : and he abode there two days.
And many moe believed because of his own word; and£
said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy
saying : for we have heard him ourselves, and know that
this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.
43 — 54- The Work among Galileans.
Now after two days he departed thence, and went into 43
Galilee. For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no 44
40. besought him] Or, kept beseeching Him. How different from
His own people at Nazareth; Matt. xiii. 58; Luke iv. 29. Comp. the
thankful Samaritan leper, Luke xvii. 16, 17.
tarry with them] Better, abide with them. See on i. 33. They per
haps mean, take up His abode permanently with them, or at any rate
for some time.
42. thy saying] Not the same word as in v. 39, the Greek for
which is the same as that translated ' word ' in v. 41. Vv. 39 and 41
should be alike, viz. 'word,' meaning 'statement ' in v. 39 and ' teach
ing' in v. 41. Here we should have 'speech' or 'talk.' In classical
Greek lalia has a slightly uncomplimentary turn, 'gossip, chatter.' But
this shade of meaning is lost in later Greek, though there is perhaps a
slight trace of it here; 'not because of thy talk;' but this being doubt
ful, ' speech ' will be the safer translation. The whole should run, no
longer is it because of thy speech that we believe. In viii. 43 lalia
is used by Christ of His own words ; see note there.
we have heard him ourselves] Better, we have heard for ourselves.
There is no ' Him ' in the Greek. ' The Christ ' is also to be omitted.
It is wanting in the best MSS.
the Saviour of the world] It is not improbable that such ready hearers
would arrive at this great truth before the end of those two days. It
is therefore unnecessary to suppose that S. John is here unconsciously
giving one of his own expressions (1 John iv. 14) for theirs.
43—54. The Work among Galileans.
43. after two days] Literally, after the two days mentioned in
v. 40.
and went] These words are wanting in the best MSS.
44. For Jesus himself testified] This is a well-known difficulty. As
in xx. 17, we have a reason assigned which seems to be the very
opposite of what we should expect. This witness of Jesus would
account for His not going into Galilee: how does it account for His
going thither? It seems best to fall back on the old explanation of

118 S. JOHN, IV. [vv. 45— 49.
45 honour in his own country. Then when he was come into
Galilee, the Galileans received him, having seen all the
things that he did at Jerusalem at the feast : for they also
46 went unto the feast. So Jesus came again into Cana of
Galilee, where he made the water wine. And there was
a certain nobleman, whose son was sick at Capernaum.
47 When he heard that Jesus was come out of Judea into
Galilee, he went unto him, and besought him that he would
come down, and heal his son : for he was at the point of
48 death. Then said Jesus unto him, Except ye see signs and
49 Wonders, ye will not believe. The nobleman saith unto

Origen, that by 'his own country' is meant Judaea, ' the home of the
Prophets.' Moreover, Judaea fits in with the circumstances. He had
not only met with little honour in Judaea; He had been forced to
retreat from it. No Apostle had been found there. The appeal to
Judaea had in the main been a failure.
45. all the things that he did) Of these we have a passing notice ii.
23. 'The Feast' means the Passover, but there is no need to name it,
because it has already been named, ii. 23.
46. where he made the water wine] and therefore would be likely to
find a favourable hearing. For ' So Jesus came ' read He came there
fore. See on vi. 14.
nobleman] Literally, king's man, i.e. officer in the service of the
king, Herod Antipas ; but whether in a civil or military office, there is
nothing to shew. ' Nobleman ' is, therefore, not at all accurate : the
word has nothing to do with birth. It has been conjectured that this
official was Chuza (Luke viii. 3), or Manaen (Acts xiii. 1).
47. that he would come down] Literally, in order that he might
come down ; comp. u. 34, v. 7, 36, vi. 29, 50.
at Capernaum] 20 miles or more from Cana.
48. signs and wonders] Christ's miracles are never mere 'wonders'
to excite astonishment ; they are ' signs ' of heavenly truths as well, and
this is their primary characteristic. Where these two words are joined
together ' signs ' always precedes, excepting four passages in the Acts,
where we have ' wonders and signs.' This is the only passage in
which S. John uses 'wonders' at all. In ii. n the word translated
' miracles ' is the same as the one here translated ' signs.' See below,
v. 54.
ye will not believe] In marked contrast to the ready belief of the
Samaritans. The form of negation in the Greek is of the strong
kind ; ye will in no wise believe. See note on 1 Cor. i. 22. Faith based
on miracles is of a low type comparatively, but Christ does not reject it.
Comp. x. 38, xiv. 1 1 , xx. 29. This man's faith is strengthened by being
put to test. The words are evidently addressed to him and those about
him, and they imply that those addressed are Jews.

w. so— 54.] S. JOHN, IV. 119
him, Sir, come down ere my child die. Jesus saith unto 50
him, Go thy way ; thy son liveth. And the man believed
the word that Jesus had spoken unto him, and he went his
way. And as he was now going down, his servants met si
him, and told him, saying, Thy son liveth. Then inquired 52
he of them the hour when he began to amend. And they
said unto him, Yesterday at the seventh hour the fever left
him. So the father knew that it was at the same hour, in 53
the which Jesus said unto him, Thy son liveth : and himself
beheved, and his whole house. This is again the second S4
49. ere my child die] This shews both the man's faith and its
weakness. He believes that Christ's presence can save the child ;
he does not believe that He can save him without being present.
50. the man believed] The father's faith is healed at the same time
as the son's body.
had spoken] Better, spake; aorist, not pluperfect.
52. began to amend] Or, was somewhat better; a colloquial
expression. The father fancies that the cure will be gradual. The
fever will depart at Christ's word, but will depart in the ordinary way.
He has not yet fully realised Christ's power. The reply of the servants
shews that the cure was instantaneous.
Yesterday at the seventh hour] Once more we have to discuss S. John's
method of counting the hours of the day. (See on i. 39 and iv. 6.)
Obviously the father set out as soon after Jesus said 'thy son liveth' as
possible; he had 20 or 25 miles to go to reach home, and he would not
be likely to loiter on the way. 7 A.M. is incredible; he would have
been home long before nightfall, and the servants met him some dis
tance from home. 7 P. M. is improbable ; the servants would meet him
before midnight. Thus the modern method of reckoning from midnight
to midnight does not suit. Adopting the Jewish method from sunset to
sunset, the seventh hour is 1 P.M. He would scarcely start at once in the
mid-day heat; nor would the servants. Supposing they met him after
sunset, they might speak of 1 P.M. as 'yesterday.' (But see on xx. 19,
where S . John speaks of the late hours of the evening as belonging to
the day before sunset. ) Still, 7 P. M. is not impossible, and this third in
stance must be regarded as not decisive. But the balance here seems to
incline to what is antecedently more probable, that S. John reckons
the hours, like the rest of the Evangelists, according to the Jewish
method. 53. himself believed] This is the last stage in the growth of the
man's faith, a growth which S. John sketches for us here as in the case
of the Samaritan woman. In both cases the spiritual development is
thoroughly natural, as also is the incidental way in which S. John places
it before us.
and his whole house] The first converted family.
54. This is again the second, &c] Rather, This again as a second

120 S. JOHN, IV. [v. 54.
miracle that Jesus did, when he was come out of Judea into
Galilee.miracle (or sign) did Jesus, after He had come out of Judaea into Galilee.
Both first and second had similar results : the first confirmed the faith of
the disciples, the second that of this official.
The question whether this foregoing narrative is a discordant account
ofthe healing of the centurion's servant (Matt. viii. 5; Luke vii. 2) has
been discussed from very early times, for Origen and Chrysostom con
tend against it. Irenaeus seems to be in favour of the identification,
but we cannot be sure that he is. He says, 'He healed the son of the
centurion though absent with a word, saying, Go, thy son liveth.'
Irenaeus may have.supposed that this official was a centurion, or 'cen
turion' may be a slip. Eight very marked points of difference be
tween the two narratives have been noted. Together they amount to
" something like proof that the two narratives cannot refer to one and the
same fact, unless we are to attribute an astonishing amount of care
lessness or misinformation either to the Synoptists or to S. John.
(1) Here a 'king's man' pleads for his son; there a centurion for his
servant. (2) Here he pleads in person ; there the Jewish elders plead for
him. (3) Here the father is probably a Jew; there the centurion is cer
tainly a Gentile.
(4) Here the healing words are spoken at Cana; there at Caper
naum. (5) Here the malady is fever ; there paralysis.
(6) Here the father wishes Jesus to come; there the centurion begs
him not to come.
(7) Here Christ does not go ; there apparently he does.
(8) Here the father has weak faith and is blamed (v. 48) ; there the
centurion has strong faith and is commended.
And what difficulty is there in supposing two somewhat similar
miracles? Christ's miracles were 'signs;' they were vehicles for con
veying the spiritual truths which Christ came to teach. If, as is
almost certain, He often repeated the same instructive sayings, may He
not sometimes have repeated the same instructive acts? Here, there
fore, as in the case of the cleansing of the Temple (ii. 13 — 17), it
seems wisest to believe that S. John and the Synoptists record different
events. Chaps. V. — XI. The Work among mixed multitudes,
chiefly Jews.
The Work now becomes a conflict between Christ and "the Jews;"
for as Christ reveals Himself more fully, the opposition between Him
and the ruling party becomes more intense; and the fuller revelation
which excites the hatred of His opponents serves also to sift the
disciples; some turnback, others are strengthened in their faith by what
they see and hear. The Evangelist from time to time points out the

I.] S. JOHN, V.

Chaps. V. — XI. The Work among mixed multitudes,
chiefly Jews.
Chap. V. Christ the Source of Life.
i — 9. The Sign at the Pool of Bethesda.
After this there was a feast of the Jews ; and Jesus went 5
opposite results of Christ's work: comp. vi. 60 — 71, vii. 40 — 52, ix.
13—41. x. 19, 21, 39—42, xi. 45—57.
Thus far we have had the announcement of the Gospel to the world,
and the reception it. is destined to meet with, set forth in four typical
instances; Nathanael, the guileless Israelite, traly religious according
to the light allowed him; Nicodemus, the learned ecclesiastic, skilled in the
Scriptures, but ignorant of the first elements of religion ; the Samaritan
woman, immoral in life and schismatical in religion, but simple in heart
and readily convinced; and the royal official, weak in faith, but pro
gressing gradually to a full conviction. But as yet there is little evi
dence of hostility to Christ, although the Evangelist prepares us for it
(i. 11, ii. 18 — 20, iii. 18, 19, 26, iv. 44). Henceforth, however, hos
tility to Him is manifested in every chapter of this division. Two
elements are placed in the sharpest contrast throughout ; the Messiah's
clearer manifestation of His Person and Work, and the growing
animosity of ' the Jews ' in consequence of it. Two miracles form the
introduction to two great, discourses: two miracles illustrate two dis
courses. The healing at Bethesda and the feeding of the 5000 lead to dis
courses in which Christ is set forth as the Source and the Support of Life
(v., vi.). Then He is set forth as the Source of Truth and Light ; and
this is illustrated by His giving physical and spiritual sight to the blind
(vii. — ix. ) . Finally Heissetforthas Love under the figure of the Good
Shepherd giving His life for the sheep ; and this is illustrated by the
raising of Lazarus, a work of love which costs Him His life (x., xi.).
Thus, of four typical miracles, two form the introduction and two form
the sequel to great discourses. The prevailing idea throughout is truth
and love provoking contradiction and enmity.
Chap. V. Christ the Source of Life.
In chaps, v. and vi. the word 'life' occurs 18 times; in the rest
of the Gospel 18 times.
This chapter falls into two main divisions ; (1) The Sign at the Pool of
Bethesda and its Sequel (1 — 16) ; (2) The Discourse on the Son as the
Source of Life (17—47)-
1 — 9. The Sign at the Pool of Bethesda.
1. After this] Better, After these things, a more indefinite se
quence. a feast ofthe Jews] This is the reading of highest authority, although
some important MSS. read 'the feast of the Jews,' probably because
from very early times this feast was believed to be the Passover.

S. JOHN, V. [vv. 2, 3.

2 up to Jerusalem. Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep
market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Be-
3 thesda, having five porches. In these lay a great multitude

If ' a feast ' is the true reading, this alone is almost conclusive against
its being the Passover; S. John would not call the Passover 'a feast of
the Jews.' Moreover in all other cases where he mentions Passovers
he lets us know that they are Passovers and not simply feasts, ii. 13,
vi. 4, xi. 55, &c. He gives us three Passovers ; to make this a fourth
would be to put an extra year into our Lord's ministry for which
scarcely any events can be found, and of which there is no trace else
where. Almost every other feast, and even the Day of Atonement,
have been suggested; but the only one which fits in satisfactorily is
Purim. We saw from iv. 35 that the two days in Samaria were either
in December or January. The next certain date is vi. 4, the eve of
the Passover, i. e. April. Purim, which was celebrated in March
(14th and 15th Adar), falls just in the right place in the interval.
This feast commemorated the deliverance of the Jews from Haman,
and took its name from the lots'vihich he caused to be cast (Esther iii.
7, ix. 24, 26, 28). It was a boisterous feast, and some have thought it
unlikely that Christ would have anything to do with it. But we are not
told that He went to Jerusalem in order to keep the feast ; Purim might
be kept anywhere. More probably He went because the multitudes at
the feast would afford great opportunities for teaching. Moreover, it
does not follow that because some made this feast a scene of unseemly
jollity, therefore Christ would discountenance the feast itself.
2. there is at Jerusalem] This is no evidence whatever that the
Gospel was written before the destruction of Jerusalem. The pool
would stiU exist, even if the building was destroyed ; and such a build
ing, as being of the nature of a hospital, would be likely to be spared.
Even if all were destroyed the present tense would be natural here.
See on xi. 18.
by the sheep market] There is no ' market ' in the Greek, and no
reason for supposing that it ought to be supplied. The margin is pro
bably right: sheep-%ate. We know from Neh. iii. 1, 32, xii. 39 that
there was a sheep-gatefso called probably from sheep for sacrifice being
sold there. It was near the Temple. The adjective for 'sheep-' occurs
nowhere else in N.T. but here, and nowhere in O.T. but in the
passages in Nehemiah. But so little is known of this gate, and the
ellipsis of ' gate ' is so unparalleled that we cannot regard this explana
tion as certain. Another translation is possible, with a change of case
in the word for poolf Now there is in Jerusalem, by the sheep-pool, a
place called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda.
in the Hebrew tongue] 'Hebrew' means Aramaic, the language
spoken at the time, not the old Hebrew of the Scriptures. See on
xx. 16.
Bethesda] ' House of mercy,' or possibly ' House ofthe Portico,' or
again ' of the Olive.' The name Bethesda does not occur elsewhere.

w- 4—7-]  S. JOHN, V. 123
of impotent folk, of blind, halt, 'withered, waiting for the
moving of the water. For an angel went down at a certain 4
season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever
then first after the troubling of the water stepped in, was
made whole of whatsoever disease he had. And a certain s
man was there, which had an infirmity thirty and eight
years. When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had 6
been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt
thou be made whole ? The impotent man answered him, 7
The traditional identification with Birket Israil is not commonly advo
cated now. The ' Fountain of the Virgin ' is an attractive identifica
tion, as the water is intermittent to this day. This fountain is connected
with the pool of Siloam, and some think that Siloam is Bethesda.
That S. John speaks of Bethesda here and Siloam in ix. 7, is not con
clusive against this : for Bethesda might be the name of the building
and Siloam of the pool; and the Greek for 'called' here is strictly
' called in addition ' or ' surnamed, ' as if the place had some other
name. five porches] Or, colonnades. These would be to shelter the sick. The
place seems to have been a kind of charitable institution.
3. lay a great multitude] Better, were lying a multitude.
blind, halt, withered] These'are the special kinds of 'impotent folk.'
waiting for the moving of the water] These words and the whole of
v. 4 are almost certainly an interpolation, though a very ancient one.
They are omitted by the best MSS. Other important MSS. omit v. 4
or mark it as suspicious. Moreover, those MSS. which contain the
passage vary very much. The passage is one more likely to be inserted
.without authority than to be omitted if genuine ; and very probably it
represents the popular belief with regard to the intermittent bubbling
of the healing water, first added as a gloss, and then inserted into the
text. The water was probably mineral in its elements, and the people
may or may not have been right in supposing that it was most efficacious
when the spring was most violent.
5. which had an infirmity, &c] Literally, who had passed thirty-
eight years in his infirmity. Not that he was 38 years old; evidently
he was more ; but he had had this malady 38 years.
6. knew] Or, perceived, perhaps supernaturally (see on xvi. 19),
but He might learn it from the bystanders: the fact was very likely
notorious. Wilt thou?] Or, more strongly, Dost thou will? Note that the
man does not ask first. Here and in the case of the man born blind
(ix.), as also of Malchus' ear (Luke xxii. 51), Christ heals without being
asked to do so. Excepting the healing of the royal official's^son all
Christ's miracles in the Fourth Gospel are spontaneous. On no other
occasion does Christ ask a question without being addressed first: why
does He now ask a question of which the answer was so obvious?

124 S. JOHN, V. [w. 8— n.
Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me
into the popl : but while I am coming, another steppeth
8 down before me. Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up
9 thy bed, and walk. And immediately the man was made
whole, and took up his bed, and walked : and on the same
day was the sabbath. io — 16. The Sequel of the Sign.
io The Jews therefore said unto him that was cured, It is
the sabbath day : it is not lawful for thee to carry thy
ii bed. He answered them, He that made me whole, the
Probably in order to rouse the sick man out of his lethargy and de
spondency. It was the first step towards the man's having sufficient
faith: he must be inspired with some expectation of being cured.
The question has nothing to do with religious scruples; 'Art thou
willing to be made whole, although it is the Sabbath ? '
7. I have no man] He is not only sick but friendless.
is troubled] No doubt this took place at irregular intervals, else
there would be no need to wait and watch for it.
to put me into the pool] Literally, in order to (iv. 47) throw me into
the pool; perhaps implying that the gush of water did not last long and
there was no time to be lost in quiet carrying. But in this late Greek
ballein ( = throw) has become weakened in meaning. Comp. xiii. 2,
xx. 25.
while I am coming] Unaided, and therefore slowly.
another steppeth down] This seems to shew that the place where the
bubbling appeared was not large. He does not say ' others step down
before me :' one is hindrance enough.
8. Rise, take up thy bed] As in the case of the paralytic (Mark
ii. 9), Christ makes no enquiry as to the man's faith. Christ knew
that he had faith ; and the man's attempting to rise and carry his bed
after 38 years of impotency was an open confession of faith. His bed
would probably be only a mat or rug, still common in the East.
It is scarcely necessary to discuss whether this miracle can be iden
tical with the healing of the paralytic let down through the roof (Matt.
ix.; Mark ii.; Luke v.). Time, place, details and context are all dif
ferent, especially the important point that this miracle was wrought on
the Sabbath. 10 — 16. The Sequel of the Sign.
10. The Jews] The hostile party, as usual : probably members of
the Sanhedrin (see on i. 19). They ignore the cure and notice only
what can be attacked. They had the letter of the law very strongly on
their side. Comp. Exod. xxiii. 12, xxxi. 14, xxxv. 2, 3; Num. xv. 32;
Neh. xiii. 15; and especially Jer. xvii. 21.
11. He that made me whole] The man's defiance of them in the

w. 12—14.] S. JOHN, V. 125
same said unto me, Take up thy bed, and walk. Then 12
asked they him, What man is that which said unto thee,
Take up thy bed, and walk ? And he that was healed 13
wist not who it was : for Jesus had conveyed himself away,
a multitude being in that place. Afterward Jesus findeth 14
him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold,- thou art
made whole : sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto
first flush of his recovered health is very natural. He means, ' if He
could cure me of a sickness of 38 years He had authority to tell me to
take up my bed.' They will not mention the cure ; he flings it in their
face. There is a higher law than that of the Sabbath, and higher
authority than theirs. Comp. the conduct of the blind man, chap. ix.
the same said unto me] Better, 'He said to me,' 'He' being em
phatic: see on x. 1.
12. What man is that which] Better, Who is the man that, 'man'
being contemptuous, almost = 'fellow.' Once more they ignore the
miracle, and attack the command. They ask not, ' Who cured thee,
and therefore must have Divine authority?' but, ' Who told thee to
break the Sabbath, and therefore could not have it?' Christ's com
mand was perhaps aimed at these erroneous views about the Sabbath.
13. had conveyed himself away] Better, withdrew. Originally the
word signified 'to stoop out of the way of,' 'to bend down as if to
avoid a blow.' Here only in N.T. The word might also mean, 'swam
out of,' which would be a graphic expression for making one's way
through a crowd.
a multitude being in that place] This is ambiguous. It may explain
either why Jesus withdrew, viz. to avoid the crowd, or how he with
drew, viz. by disappearing among the crowd. Both make good sense.
14. Afterward] Literally, after these things, as in v. 1. Proba
bly the same day ; we may suppose that one of his first acts after his
cure would be to offer his thanks in the Temple. On vv. 13 and 14
Augustine writes, 'It is difficult in a crowd to see Christ; a certain
solitude is necessary for our mind ; it is by a certain solitude of con
templation that God is seen  He did not see Jesus in the crowd, he
saw Him in the Temple. The Lord Jesus indeed saw him both in the
crowd and in the Temple. The impotent man, however, does not
know Jesus in the crowd; but he knows Him in the Temple.'
sin no more] Or perhaps, continue no longer in sin. Comp. [viii.
11,] xx. 17. The man's conscience would tell him what sin. Comp.
[viii. 7]. What follows shews plainly not merely that physical suffering
in the aggregate is the result of sin in the aggregate, but that this
man's 38 years of sickness were the result of his own sin. This was
known to Christ's heart-searching eye (ii. 24, 25), but it is a conclusion
which we may not draw without the clearest evidence in any given-
case. Suffering serves other ends than being a punishment for sin :
'whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth;' and comp. ix. 3.
a worse thing] Not necessarily hell: even in this life there might be

126 S. JOHN, V. [vv. 15—17.
15 thee. The man departed, and told the Jews that it was
Jesus, which had made him whole.
16 And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to
slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day.
17 — 47. The Discourse on the Son as the Source of Life.
17 But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto,
a worse thing than the sickness which had consumed more than half
man's threescore and ten. So terrible are God's judgments; so awful
is our responsibity. Comp. Matt. xii. 45 ; 2 Pet. ii. 20.
15. told the Jews] Not in malice against Jesus, nor in any hope of
converting His opponents. Neither of these is probable, nor is there
the least evidence of either. Rather, he continues his defiance of them
(v. n). He had given as his authority for breaking the Sabbath 'He
that made me whole.' Having found out that it was the famous
teacher from Galilee, he returns to give them this additional proof of
authority. 16. And therefore] Better, And on this account, or, and for this
cause (xii. 18, 27). It is not St John's favourite particle 'therefore,' but
a preposition and pronoun. Comp. v. 18.
and sought to slay him] These words are not genuine here, but
have been inserted from v. 18. The other two verbs are both in the
imperfect tense expressing continued action ; ' used to persecute, con
tinued to persecute;' 'used to do, habitually did.' From which we
may infer that some of the unrecorded miracles (ii. 23, iv. 45) were
wrought on the Sabbath : unless the Evangelist is speaking from their
point of view; 'because (as they said) He habitually did these things
on the Sabbath.'
17 — 47. The Discourse on the Son as the Source of Life.
17. answered them] This was how He met their constant persecu
tion. The discourse which follows (see introductory note to chap, iii.)
may be thus analysed. (S. p. 106.) It has two main divisions — I.
The prerogatives of the Son of God (17 — 30). II. The unbelief of the
Jews (31 — 47). These two are subdivided as follows : I. 1. Defence of
healing on the Sabbath based on the relation of the Son to the Father
(17, 18). 2. Intimacy ofthe Son with the Father further enforced (19,
20). 3. This intimacy proved by the twofold power committed to the
Son (a) of communicating spiritual life (21 — 27),. (b) of raising the
dead (28, 29). 4. The Son's qualification for these high powers is the
perfect harmony of His Will with that of the Father (30). II. 1. The
Son's claims rest not on His testimony alone, nor on that of John, but
on that of the Father (31 — 35). 2. The Father's testimony is evident
(a) in the works assigned to the Son (36), (b) in the revelation which
the Jews reject (37—40). 3. Not that the Son needs honour from
men, who are too worldly to receive Him (41 — 44). 4. Their appeal
to Moses is vain ; his writings condemn them.

w. 18, 19.] S. JOHN, V. 127
x7 — 3°- The Prerogatives and Powers ofthe Son of God.
and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to 18
kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath,
but said also that God was his Father, making him
self equal with God. Then answered Jesus and said unto 19
them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do
nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do : for
17 — 30. The Prerogatives and Powers of the Son of God.
17, 18. Defence of healing on the Sabbath based on the relation of
the Son to tlie Father.
My Father worketh hitherto, &c] Or, My Father Is working
even until now; I am working also. From the Creation up to this
moment God has been ceaselessly working for man's salvation. From
such activity there is no rest, no Sabbath: for mere cessation from
activity is not of the essence of the Sabbath; and to cease to do good
is not to keep the Sabbath but to sin. Sabbaths have never hindered
the Father's work ; they must not hinder the Son's. Elsewhere (Mark
ii. 27) Christ says that the Sabbath is a blessing not a burden ; it was
made for man, not man for it. Here He takes far higher ground for
Himself. He is equal to the Father, and does what the Father does.
Mark ii. 28 helps to connect the two positions. If the Sabbath is
subject to man, much more to" the Son of Man, who is equal to the
Father. 18. Therefore] Better, For this cause. See on v. 16, vi. 65,
vii. ai, 22, viii. 47, ix. 23, x. 17, xii. 39, xiii. n, xv. 19, xvi. 15.
the more] Shewing that the persecution spoken of in v. 16 included
attempts to eompass His death. Comp. Mark iii. 6. This ' seeking to
kill ' is the blood-red thread which runs through the whole of this
section of the Gospel: comp. vii. 1, 19, 25, viii. 37, 40, 59, x. 31,
xi. 53, xii. 10.
had broken] Literally, was loosing or relaxing; i.e. making less
binding. As in v. 1 5, the A.V. puts pluperfect for imperfect.
making himself equal] They fully understand the force of the parallel
statements, 'My Father is working; I am working also.' 'Behold,'
says Augustine, ' the Jews understand what the Arians fail to under
stand.' If Arian or Unitarian views were right, would not Christ at
once have explained that what they imputed to Him as blasphemy was
not in His mind at all? But instead of explaining that He by no
means claims equality with the Father, He goes on to reaffirm this
equality from other points of view: see especially v. 23.
19, 20. Intimacy of the Son with the Father further enforced.
19. can do nothing of himself] It is impossible for Him to act with
individual self-assertion independent of God, because He is the Son:
Their Will and working are one. The Jews accuse Him of blasphemy ;
and blasphemy implies opposition to God: but He and the Father are
most intimately united.

128 S. JOHN, V [vv. 20—22.
what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son
20 likewise. For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth
him all things that himself doeth : and he will shew him
21 greater works than these, that ye may marvel. For as the
Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them ; even so
22 the Son quickeneth whom he will. For the Father judgeth
but what he seeth, &c] Better, unless He seeth the Father doing it.
20. For the Father loveth the Son) Moral necessity for the Son's
doing what the Father does. The Father's love for the Son compels
Him to make known all His works to Him ; the Son's relation to the
Father compels Him to do what the Father does. The Son continues
on earth what He had seen in heaven before the Incarnation.
he will shew him, &c] Or, Greater works than these will He shew
Him. 'The Father will give the Son an example of greater works
than these healings, the Son will do the like, and ye unbelievers will be
shamed into admiration.' He does not say that they will believe.
' Works ' is a favourite term with S. John to express the details of
Christ's work of redemption. Comp. v. 36, ix. 4, x. 25, 32, 37,
xiv. n, 12, xv. 24.
21 — 29. The intimacy of the Son with the Father proved by the two
fold power committed to the Son (a) of communicating spiritual life,
(b) of causing the bodily resurrection ofthe dead.
21 — 27. The Father imparts to the Son the power of raising the
spiritually dead. It is very important to notice that ' raising the dead '
in this section is figurative ; raising from moral and spiritual death:
whereas the resurrection (vv. 28, 29) is literal; the rising of dead bodies
from the graves. It is impossible to take both sections in one and the
same sense, either figurative or literal. The wording of v. 28 and still
more of v. 29 is quite conclusive against spiritual resurrection being
meant there : what in that case could ' the resurrection of damnation '
mean? Verses 24 and 25 are equally conclusive against a bodily resur
rection being meant here: what in that case can 'an hour is coming,
and now is ' mean?
21. raiseth up the dead] This is one of the ' greater works ' which the
Father sheweth the Son, and which the Son imitates, the raising up
those who are spiritually dead. Not all of them : the Son imparts life
only to ' whom He will :' and He wills not to impart it to those who
will not believe. The 'whom He will ' would be almost unintelligible
if actual resurrection from the grave were intended.
22. For the Father judgeth no man] Rather, For not even doth the
Father (to Whom judgment belongs) judge any man. The Son there
fore has both powers, to make alive whom He will, and to judge : but
the second is only the corollary of first. Those whom He does not will
to make alive are by that very fact judged, separated off from the living,
and left in the death which they have chosen. He does not make them
dead, does not slay them. They are spiritually dead already, and will

w. 23—25.] S. JOHN, V. 129
no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son :
that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour 23
the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not
the Father which hath sent him. Verily, verily, I say unto 24
you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that
sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into
condemnation ; but is passed from death unto life. Verily, 25
verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is,
when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God : and
not be made alive. Here, as in iii. 17, 18, the judgment is one of con
demnation ; but this comes from the context, not from the word.
hath committed] Or, given ; there is no reason for varying the com
mon rendering.
23. honoureth not the Father] Because he refuses to honour the
Father's representative.
which hath sent] Better, which sent. See on xx. 21.
24. He' that heareth] We see from this that 'whom He will' (v. 21)
implies no arbitrary selection. It is each individual who decides for
himself whether he will hear and believe.
believeth on him that sent me] Omit ' on ;' there is no preposition in
the Greek.
hath everlasting life] Or, hath eternal life : see on iii. 16. Note the
tense ; he hath it already, it is not a reward to be bestowed hereafter :
see on iii. 36.
shall not come into condemnation] Better, cometh not Into judg
ment. is passed from death into life] Or, is passed over out of death into life
(comp. xiii. 1 ; 1 John iii. 14). This is evidently equivalent to escaping
judgment and attaining eternal life, clearly shewing that death is spiritual
death, and the resurrection from it spiritual also. This cannot refer to
the resurrection of the body.
25. Repetition of v. 24 in a more definite form, with a cheering
addition : v. 24 says that whoever hears and believes God has eternal
life; v. 25 states that already some are in this happy case.
The hour is coming] Better, There cometh an hour: comp. iv.
21, 23.
and now is] These words also exclude the meaning of a bodily resur
rection; the hour for which had not yet arrived. The few cases in
which Christ raised the dead cannot be meant; (1) the statement
evidently has a much wider range ; (2) the widow's son, Jairus' daughter,
and Lazarus were not yet dead, so that even of them ' and now is ' would
not be true; (3) they died again after their return from death, and 'they
that hear. shall live' clearly refers to eternal life, as a comparison with
v. 24 shews. If a spiritual resurrection be understood, ' and now is' is
perfectly intelligible : Christ's ministry was already winning souls from
spiritual death.
s. JOHN 9

130 S. JOHN, V. [vv. 26—28.
26 they that hear shall live. For as the Father hath life in
himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
=7 and hath given him authority to execute judgment also,
28 because he is the Son of man. Marvel not at this : for the
26. so hath he given to the Son] Better, so gave He also to the Son.
Comp. ' the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father ' (vi.
57). The Father is the absolutely living One, the Fount of all Life.
The Messiah, however, imparts life to all who believe; which He could
not do unless He had in Himself a fountain of life; and this the
Father gave Him when He sent Him into the world. The Eternal
Generation of the Son from the Father is not here in question ; it is
the Father's communication of Divine attributes to the Incarnate Word
that is meant.
27. Hath given him authority to execute judgment also] Better, gave
Him authority to execute judgment, when He sent Him into the world.
'Also' is not genuine. See on i. 12, and comp. x. 18.
because he is the Son of man) Rather, because He is a son of man ;
i.e. not because He is the Messiah, but because He is a human being.
In the Greek neither ' son ' nor ' man ' has the article. Where ' the
Son of Man,' i.e. the Messiah, is meant, both words have the article:
comp. i. 51, iii. 13, 14, vi. 27, 53, 62, viii. 28, &c. Because the Son
emptied Himself of all His glory and became a man, therefore the
Father endowed Him with these two powers; to have life in Himself,.
and to execute judgment.
Before passing on to the last section of this half of the discourse we
may remark that " the relation of the Son to the Father is seldom
alluded to in the Synoptic Gospels. But a single verse in which it is,
seems to contain the essence of the Johannean theology, Matt. xi. 27 :
'All things are delivered unto Me of My Father; and no man knoweth
the Son but the Father ; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the
Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him.' This passage is
one of the best authenticated in the Synoptic Gospels. It is found in
exact parallelism both in S. Matthew and S. Luke  And yet once
grant the authenticity of this passage, and there is nothing in the
Johannean Christology that it does not cover." S. p. 109. The theory,
therefore, that this discourse is the composition of the Evangelist, who
puts forward his own theology as the teaching of Christ, has no basis.
If the passage in S. Matthew and S. Luke represents the teaching of
Christ, what reason have we for doubting that this discourse does so ?
To invent the substance of it was beyond the reach even of S. John;
how far the precise wording is his we cannot tell. This section of it
(21 — 27) bears very strong impress of his style.
28, 29. The intimacy between the Father and the Son further proved
by the power committed to the Son of causing the bodily resurrection of
the dead.
.28. Marvel not] Comp. iii. 7. Marvel not that the Son can grant
spiritual life to them that believe, and separate from them those who will

w. 29—31.] S. JOHN, V. 131
hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall
hear his voice, and shall come forth ; they that have done 29
good, unto the resurrection of life ; and they that have done
evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. I can of mine 30
own self do nothing : as I hear, I judge : and my judgment
is just ; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of
the Father which hath sent me.
31 — 47. The unbelief of the Jews.
If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. 31
not believe. There cometh an hour when He shall cause a general resur
rection of men's bodies, and a final separation of good from bad, a final
judgment. He does not add 'and now is,' which is in favour of the
resurrection being literal.
all that are in the graves] Not ' whom He will ;' there are none
whom He does not will to come forth from their sepulchres (see on
xi. 7). All, whether believers or not, must rise. This shews that
spiritual resurrection cannot be meant.
29. done evil] Or, practised worthless things. See on iii. 20.
unto the resurrection of damnation] Better, unto the resurrection
of judgment. It is the same Greek word as is used in w. 22, 27.
These words are the strongest proof that spiritual resurrection cannot
be meant. Spiritual resurrection must always be a resurrection of life,
a passing from spiritual death to spiritual life. A passing from spiritual
death to judgment is not spiritual resurrection. This passage, and Acts
xxiv. 15, are the only direct assertions in N.T. of a bodily resurrection
of the wicked. It is implied, Matt. x. 28; Rev. xx. 12, 13. A
satisfactory translation for the Greek words meaning 'judge and
' judgment ' cannot be found : they combine the notions - of ' sepa
rating' and 'judging,' and from the context often acquire the further
notion of ' condemning.' See on iii. 17, 18.
30. The Son's qualification for these high powers is the perfect
harmony between His Will and that ofthe Father.
I can of mine own self] Change to the first person. He identifies
Himself with the Son. It is because He is the Son that He cannot
act independently : it is impossible for Him to will to do anything but
what the Father wills.
as I hear) From the Father : Christ's judgment is the declaration
of that which the Father communicates to Him. And hence Christ's
judgment must be just, for it is in accordance with the Divine Will;
and this is the strongest possible guarantee of its justice. Comp. Matt.
xxvi. 39.
31 — 47. The unbelief of the Jews.
31 — 35. These claims rest not on My testimony alone, nor on that of
John, but on that ofthe Father.
31. my witness is not true] Nothing is to be understood; the words
9—2

132 S. JOHN, V. [vv. 32—36.
32 There is another that beareth witness of me ; and I
know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is
33 true. Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the
34 truth. But I receive not testimony from man : but these
35 things I say, that ye might be saved. He was a burn
ing and a shining light : and ye were willing for a season
36 to rejoice in his hght. But I have greater witness than
are to be taken quite literally : ' If I bear any witness other than that
which My Father bears, that witness of Mine is not true.' In viii.
14 we have an apparent contradiction to this, but it is only the other
side of the same truth : ' My witness is true because it is really My
Father's.' 32. There is another] Not the Baptist, as seems clear from v. 34 ;
but the Father, comp. vii. 28, viii. 26. It has been already remarked
how much there is in this Gospel about 'witness,' 'bearing witness,'
and the like : see on i. 7.
33. Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness] Better, Ye have sent
unto John, and he hath borne witness. ' What ye have heard from
him is true; but I do not accept it, for I need not the testimony of
man. I mention it for your sakes, not My own. If ye believe John
ye will believe Me and be saved.' ' Ye ' and ' I ' in these two verses
(33, 34) are in emphatic opposition.
35. He was a burning and a shining light] A grievous mistranslation,
ignoring the Greek article twice over, and also the meaning of the
words ; and thus obscuring the marked difference between the Baptist and
the Messiah : better, he was the lamp which is kindled and (so) shineth.
Christ is the Light; John is only the lamp kindled at the Light, and
shining only after being so kindled, having no light but what is derived.
The word here, and Matt. vi. 22, translated 'light,' is translated
'candle' Matt. v. 15; Mark iv. 21; Luke viii. 16, xi. 33, 36, xv. 8;
Rev. xviii. 23, xxii. 5. 'Lamp' would be best in all places. No
O.T. prophecy speaks of the Baptist under this figure. David is so
called 2 Sam. xxi. 17 (see margin), and Elijah (Ecclus. xlviii. 1).
The imperfects in this verse seem to imply that John's career is closed;
he is in prison, if not dead.
were willing for a season] Like children, they were glad to disport
themselves in the blaze, instead of seriously considering its meaning.
And even that only for a season: their pilgrimages to the banks of
the Jordan had soon ended ; when John began to preach repentance
they left him, sated with the novelty and offended at his doctrine. —
For another charge of frivolity and fickleness against them in reference
to John comp. Matt xi. 16—19.
36 — 40. The Father's testimony is evident, (a) in the works assigned
to Me, (b) in the revelation which ye do not receive.
36. / have greater witness than that of John] Better, / have the

vv. 37,38-] S. JOHN, V. 133
that of John : for the works which the Father hath given
me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness
of me, that the Father hath sent me. And the Father 37
himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me.
Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his
shape. And ye have not his word abiding in you : for 38
witness which is greater than John ; or, the witness which I have
is greater than John, viz. the works which as the Messiah I have
been commissioned to do. Among these works would be raising the
spiritually dead to life, judging unbelievers, as well as miracles:
certainly not miracles only ; iv. 48, x. 38.
to finish] Literally, in order that I may accomplish; comp. xvii.
4. This was God's purpose. See on iv. 34, 47, ix. 3. S. John is very
fond of the construction 'in order that,' especially ofthe Divine purpose.
37 — 40. The connexion of thought in the next few verses is very
difficult to catch, and cannot be affirmed with certainty. This is often
the case in S. John's writings. A number of simple sentences follow
one another with an even flow ; but it is by no means easy to see how
each leads on to the next. Here there is a transition from the indirect
testimony to the Messiahship of Jesus given by the works which He
is commissioned to do (v. 36), to the direct testimony to the same given
by the words of Scripture (37 — 40). The Jews were rejecting both.
which hath sent me, hath borne witness] There is a difference of
tense in the Greek which should be retained : the Father which sent
Me (once for all at the Incarnation) He hath borne witness (for a long
time past, and is still doing so) of Me.
Ye have neither, &c] These words are a reproach; therefore there
can be no allusion (as suggested in the margin) to the Baptism or the
Transfiguration. The Transfiguration had not yet taken place, and
very few if any of Christ's hearers could have heard the voice from
heaven at the Baptism. Moreover, if that particular utterance were
meant, ' voice ' in the Greek would have had the article. Nor can
there be any reference to the theophanies, or symbolical visions of
God, in O.T. It could be no matter of reproach to these Jews that
they had never beheld a theophany. A paraphrase will shew the
meaning ; 'neither with the ear of the heart have ye ever heard Him,
nor with the eye of the heart have ye ever seen Him, in the revelation
of Himself given in the Scriptures ; and so ye have not the testimony
of His word present as an abiding power within you.' There should
be no full stop at 'shape,' only a comma or semi-colon. Had they
studied Scripture rightly they would have had a less narrow view of
the Sabbath (v. 16), and would have recognised the Messiah.
38. And ye have not his word] ' And hence it is that ye have no
inner appropriation of the word ' — seeing that ye have never received
it either by hearing or vision. 'His word' is not a fresh testimony
different from the 'voice' and 'shape:' all refer to the same thing, —
the testimony of Scripture to. the Messiah.

134 S. JOHN, V. [vv. 39—41.
39 whom he hath sent, him ye believe not. Search the Scrip
tures ; for in them ye think ye have eternal life : and they
40 are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me,
41 that ye might have life. I receive not honour from men.
for whom he hath sent] Better, because whom He sent. This is
the proof of the previous negation: one who had the word abiding
in his heart could not reject Him to whom that word bears witness.
Comp. 1 John ii. 14, 24.
39. Search the Scriptures] It will never be settled beyond dispute
whether the verb here is imperative or indicative. As far as the Greek
shews it may be either, 'search,' or ' ye search,' and both make sense.
The question is, which makes the best sense, and this the context
must decide. The context seems to be strongly in favour of the
indicative, ye search the Scriptures. All the verbs on either side are
in the indicative ; and more especially the one with which it is so closely
connected, ' and ye will not come.' Ye search the Scriptures, and
(instead of their leading you to Me) ye are not willing to come to Me.
The tragic tone once more : see on i. 5. The reproach lies not in their
searching, but in their searching to so little purpose. Jewish study of
the Scriptures was too often learned trifling and worse ; obscuring the
text by frivolous interpretations, ' making it of none effect ' by unholy
traditions. for in them- ye think] 'Ye' is emphatic; because ye are the people
who think; it is your own opinion. Not that they were wrong in
thinking that eternal life was to be found in the Scriptures ; their error
was in thinking that they, who rejected the Messiah, had found it.
Had they searched aright they would have found both the Messiah and
eternal life.
they are they] See on x. 1.
40. ye will not come to me] Not the future of 'to come,' but the
present of 'to will : ' ye are not willing to come to Me. This is at the
root of their failure to read Scripture aright, their hearts are estranged.
They have no will to find the truth, and without that no intellectual
searching will avail. Note that here again man's will is shewn to be
free; the truth is not forced upon him; he can reject it if he likes.
Comp. iii. 19.
that ye might have life] 'Ye fancy ye find life in your searching of
the Scriptures, and ye refuse to come to Me in order to have it in
reality.' 41 — 44. Not that I seek glory from men ; had I done so, you would
have received Me. Your worldliness prevents you from receiving One
whose motives are not worldly.
41. / receive not honour) It is nothing to Me; I have no need of it,
and refuse it : comp. v. 34. Glory would perhaps be better than
'honour' both here and in v. 44, and than 'praise' in ix. 24 and xii. 43;
see notes there. Christ is anticipating an objection, and at the same

w. 42— 45.] S. JOHN, V. 135
But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you. 42
I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not : 43
if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, 44
and seek not the honour that cometh from God only ? Do 45
not think that I will accuse you to the Father : there is one
time shewing what is the real cause of their unbelief. 'Glory from men
is not what I seek ; think not the want of that is the cause of My com
plaint. The desire of glory from men is what blinds your eyes to the
truth.' 42. But I know you] Once more Christ appears as the searcher of
hearts; comp. i. 47, 50, ii. 24, 25, iv. 17, 18, 48, v. 14.
in you] Or, in yourselves, in your hearts. 'Thou shalt love the
Lord thy God with all thy heart' (Deut. vii. 5) was written on their
broad phylacteries (see note on Matt, xxiii. 5), but it had no place in
their hearts and no influence on their lives. It is the want of love, the
want of will (v. 40) that makes them reject and persecute the Messiah.
43. and ye receive me not] The tragic tone as in w. 39, 40, 'I come
with the highest credentials, as My Father's representative (comp. viii.
42), and ye reject Me.'
come in his own name] As a false Messiah or as Antichrist. Sixty-
four pretended Messiahs have been counted. Comp. Matt. xxiv. 24.
44. How can ye believe] The emphasis is on 'ye.' How is it possible,
for you, who care only for the glory that man bestows, to believe on
One who rejects such glory. This is the climax of Christ's accusation.
They have reduced themselves to such a condition that they cannot
believe. They must change their whole view and manner of life before
they can do so, comp. v. 47.
from God only] Rather, from the only God, from Him who alone
is God ; whereas by receiving glory from one another they were making
gods of one another; so that it is they who really 'make themselves
equal with God' (v. 18). The Greek is not similar to Matt. xvii. 8 or
Luke v. 21, but to xvii. 3 ; 1 Tim. vi. 16. Comp. Rom. xvi. 27; 1 Tim.
i. 17; Jude 25. Note the absence ofthe article before the first 'honour'
and its presence before the second : they receive glory, such as it is,
from one another, and are indifferent to the glory, which alone deserves
the name.
The whole verse should run thus, How can ye believe, seeing that ye
receive glory one of another ; and the glory which cometh from the only
God ye seek not.
45 — 47. Do not appeal to Moses; his writings condemn you.
Thus the whole basis of their confidence is cut away. Moses on
whom they trust as a defender is their accuser.
45. Do not think] As you might be disposed to do after hearing
these reproaches.

136 S. JOHN, V. [vv. 46, 47.
46 that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had
ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me : for he
47 wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall
ye believe my words ?
that I will accuse you] ¦ If this refers to the day of judgment (and the
future tense seems to point to that), there are two reasons why Christ
will not a'ct as accuser ( 1) because it would be needless ; there is another
accuser ready; (2) because He will be acting as Judge.
there is one] Your accuser exists already ; he is there with his charge.
Note the change from future to present : Christ will not be, because
Moses is, their accuser.
in whom ye trust) Literally, on whom ye have set your hope.
46. had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me] Better, If ye
believed Moses, ye would believe Me: the verbs are imperfects, not
aorists. See on viii. 19 (where we have a similar mistranslation), 42,
ix. 41, xv. 19, xviii. 36. Contrast the construction in iv. 10, xi. 21, 32,
xiv. 28. This proves that Moses is their accuser.
for he wrote of me] Christ here stamps with His authority the au
thority of the Pentateuch. He accepts, as referring to Himself, the
Messianic types and prophecies which it contains. Comp. Luke xxiv.
27, 44-
47. if ye believe not] The emphatic words are 'his and 'My. Most
readers erroneously emphasize 'writings' and 'words.' The comparison
is between Moses and Christ. It was a simple matter of fact that Moses
had written and Christ had not: the contrast between writings and
words is no part of the argument. Comp. Luke xvi. 31; 'If they hear
not Moses and the prophets; neither will they be persuaded though one
rose from the dead. '
my words) Or, My sayings. It is not the plural of 'word' (\670s)
in v. 38, but another substantive (bfi/xara) used by S. John only in the
plural. Comp. vi. 63, 68, viii. 47, xii. 47, xv. 7; where the separate say
ings are meant; whereas in vi. 60, viii. 43, 51, xii. 48, xv. 3 it is rather
the teaching as a whole that is meant.
Chap. VI.
We see more and more as we go on, that this Gospel makes no at
tempt to be a complete' or connected whole. There are large gaps in
.the chronology. The Evangelist gives us not a biography, but a series
of typical scenes, very carefully selected, and painted with great accu
racy and minuteness, but not closely connected. As to what guided
him in his selection, we know no more than the general purpose stated
xx. 31, and it is sufficient for us. Those words and works of Jesus,
which seemed most calculated to convince men that He 'is the Christ,
the Son of God,,' were recorded By the beloved Apostle. And the fact
that they had already been recorded by one or more of the first Evan
gelists did not deter him from insisting on them again; although he
naturally more often chose what they had omitted. In this chapter we

vv. i, 2.] S. JOHN, VI. 137
Chap. VI. Christ the Support of Life.
1 — 15. The Sign on the Land; Feeding the Five Thousand.
After these things Jesus went over the sea of Galilee, 1
which is the sea of Tiberias. And a great multitude .
have a notable instance of readiness to go over old ground in order
to work out his own purpose. The miracle of feeding the Five
Thousand is recorded by all four Evangelists, the only miracle that
is so. Moreover, it is outside the Judaean ministry; so that for this
reason also we might have expected S. John to omit it. But he
needs it as a text for the great discourse on the Bread of Life ; and
this though spoken in Galilee was in a great measure addressed to
Jews from Jerusalem ; so that both text and discourse fall naturally
within the range of S. John's plan.
As in Chap. V. Christ is set forth as the Source of Life, so in
this chapter He is set forth as the Support of Life.
Chap. VI. Christ the Support of Life.
This chapter, like the last, contains a. discourse arising out of a
miracle. It contains moreover an element wanting in the previous
chapter, — the results ofthe discourse. Thus we obtain three divisions;
1. The Sign on the Land, the Sign on the Lake, and the Sequel of the
Signs (1 — 25). 2. The Discourse on the Son as the Support of Life
(26 — 59). 3. The opposite Results (60 — 71).
1 — 15. The Sign on the Land; Feeding the Five Thousand.
1. After these things] See on v. 1. How long after we cannot tell;
but if the feast in v. 1 is rightly conjectured to be Purim, this would
be about a month later in the same year, which is probably A.D. 29.
But S. John is not careful to mark the precise interval between the
various scenes which he gives us. Comp. the indefinite transitions from
the First Passover to Nicodemus, ii. 23, iii. 1 ; from Nicodemus to the
Baptist's discourse, iii. 22, 25 ; from that to the scene at Sychar iv. 1 —
4 ; &c, &c. The chronology is doubtless correct, but it is not clear :
chronology is not what S. John cares to give us. The historical con
nexion with what precedes is not the same in the four accounts. Here
it is in connexion with the miracles at Bethesda and probably after the
death of the Baptist (see on v. 25) : in S. Matthew it is in connexion
with the death of the Baptist: in S. Mark and S. Luke it is after the
death of the Baptist, but in connexion with the return of the Twelve.
The notes on Matt. xiv. 13 — 21 ; Mark vi. 40 — 44, and Luke ix. 10 — 17
should be compared throughout.
went over the sea of Galilee] To the eastern or north-eastern shore.
The scene shifts • suddenly from Judaea (v. 18) to Galilee; but we are
told nothing about the transit.
which is the sea of Tiberias] (Here, v. 23 and xxi. 1 only). Added to
describe the sea more exactly, especially for the sake of foreign readers.

138 S. JOHN, VI. [vv. 3—5.
followed him, because they saw his miracles which he did
3 on them that were diseased. And Jesus went up into a
4 mountain, and there he sat with his disciples. And the
s passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh. When Jesus then

Another slight indication that this Gospel was written outside Palestine :
inside Palestine such minute description would be less natural. Perhaps
we areto understand that thesouthern half of the lake is specially intended;
for here on the western shore Tiberias was situated. The name Tiberias
is not found in the first three Gospels. The town was built during our
Lord's life time by Herod Antipas, who called it Tiberias out of com
pliment to the reigning Emperor ; one of many instances of the Herods
paying court to Rome. Comp. Bethsaida Julias, where this miracle
took place, called Julias by Herod Philip after the infamous daughter of
Augustus. The new town would naturally be much better known and
more likely to be mentioned when S. John wrote than when the earlier
Evangelists wrote.
2. a great multitude] All the greater seeing that the Baptist was
no longer a counter-attraction, and that the Twelve had returned from
their mission, in which they had no doubt excited attention. This
multitude went round by land while Christ crossed the water. All the
verbs which follow are imperfects and express continued and habitual
action; were following Him, because they were beholding the signs
which he was doing, &c, i.e. after He landed He kept on working
miracles of healing, and these continually attracted fresh crowds.
3. into a mountain] Rather, into the mountain, or, perhaps the
mountainous part of the district. The definite article indicates fami
liarity with the locality. Comp. v. 15. We have no means of deter
mining the precise eminence.
4. And the passover] Better, Now the Passover.
a feast of the Jews) Rather, the feast of the Jews. Possibly this
near approach of the Passover is given merely as a date to mark the
time. As already noticed (see on ii. 13), S. John groups his narrative
round the Jewish festivals. But the statement may also be made as a
further explanation of the multitude. Just before the Passover large
bands of pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem would ba passing along
the east shore of the lake. But we find that the multitude in this case
are quite ready (v. 24) to cross over to Capernaum, as if they had no
intention of going to Jerusalem ; so that this interpretation of the verse
is uncertain. Still more doubtful is the theory that this verse gives a
key _ of interpretation to the discourse which follows, the eating of
Christy flesh and blood being the antitype of the Passover. Of this
there is no indication whatever. It is safest to regard the verse as a
mere note to time. In any case the addition of 'the feast of the Jews'
again indicates that the author is writing away from Palestine. From
vii. 1 4t would seem that Jesus did not go up to Jerusalem for this
Passover.

vv. 6—8.] S. JOHN, VI. 139
lift up his eyes, and saw a great company come unto him,
he saith unto Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these
may eat ? And this he said to prove him : for he himself 6
knew what he would do. Philip answered him, Two 7
hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them,
that every one of them may take a little. One of his 8
5. When Jesus then, &c] Better, Jesus therefore having lifted
up His eyes and seen that a great multitude cometh.
he saith unto Philip] Why Philip? Because he was nearest to
Him ; or because his forward spirit (xiv. 8) needed to be convinced of
its own helplessness ; or because, as living on the lake (i. 44) he would
know the neighbourhood. Any or all of these suggestions may be
correct. As Judas kept the bag it is not likely that Philip commonly
provided, food for the party. A more important question remains:
" we notice that the impulse to the performance of the miracle comes
in the Synoptists from the disciples; in S. John, solely from our Lord
Himself." This is difference, but not contradiction : S. John's narra
tive does not preclude the possibility of the disciples having sponta
neously applied to Christ for help either before or after this conversa
tion with Philip. "For the rest the superiority in distinctness and
precision is all on the side of S. John. He knows to whom the ques
tion was put ; he knows exactly what Philip answered ; and again the
remark of Andrew, Simon Peter's brother  Some memories are
essentially pictorial ; and the Apostle's appears to have been one of '
these. It is wonderful with what precision every stroke is thrown in.
Most minds would have become confused in reproducing events which
had occurred so long ago ; but there is no confusion here. The whole
scene could be transferred to canvas without any difficulty." S. pp.
121 — 123.
Whence shall we buy] Or, whence must we buy; the deliberative
subjunctive. 6. to prove him) This need not mean more than to try whether he
could suggest any way out of the difficulty ; but the more probable
meaning is to test his faith, to try what impression Christ's words and
works have made^upon him.
he himself] without suggestions from others.
would do) Or, was about to do.
7. Two hundred pennyworth] Two hundred shillingsworth would
more accurately represent the original. The denarius was the ordi
nary wage for a day's work (Matt. xx. 2 ; comp. Luke x. 35) ; in weight
of silver it was less than a shilling ; in purchasing power it was more.
Two hundred denarii from the one point of view would be about £j,
from the other, nearly double that. S. Philip does not solve the diffi
culty; he merely states it in a practical way; a much larger amount
than they can command would still be insufficient. See notes on Mark
viii. 4.
8. One of his disciples] Of course this does not imply that Philip

140 S. JOHN, VI. [w. 9— n.
disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, saith unto him,
9 There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two
io small fishes : but what are they among so many ? And
Jesus said, Make the men sit down. Now there was much
grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about
n five thousand. And Jesus took the loaves ; and when he
had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and the
disciples to them that were set down ; and likewise of the

was not a disciple; the meaning rather is, that a disciple had been
appealed to without results, and now a disciple makes a communication
out of which good results flow. There seems to have been some con
nexion between S. Andrew and S. Philip (i. 44, xii. 22). In the lists of
the Apostles in Mark iii. and Acts i. S. Philip's name immediately follows
Andrew's. On S. Andrew see notes on i. 40, 41. The particulars
about Philip and Andrew here are not found in the Synoptists' account.
9. a lad] And therefore able to carry very little. The word is a
diminutive in the Greek, a little lad; it might also mean 'servant,' but
this is less likely.
barley loaves) The ordinary coarse food of the lower orders ; Judg.
vii. 13. S. John alone mentions their being of barley, and that they
belonged to the lad, who was probably selling them. With homely
food from so scanty a store Christ will feed them all. These minute
details are the touches of an eyewitness.
two small fishes] Better, two fishes, although the Greek (opsaria)
is a. diminutive. The word occurs in this Gospel only (v. 11, xxi. 9,
10, 13), and literally means a little relish, i.e. anything eaten with
bread or other food : and as salt fish was most commonly used for this
purpose, the word came gradually to mean 'fish' in particular. Philip
had enlarged on the greatness of the difficulty ; Andrew insists rather
on the smallness of the resources for meeting it.
10. much grass) As we might expect early in April (v. 4). S.
Mark (vi. 39, 40) mentions how they reclined in parterres, by hun
dreds and by fifties, on the green grass. This arrangement would
make it easy to count them.
the men sat down) The women and children were probably apart
by themselves. S. Matthew (xiv. 21) tells us that the 5000 included
the men only. Among those going up to the Passover there would
not be many women or children.
11. when he had given thanks] The usual grace before meat said
by the head of the house or the host. ' He that enjoys aught without
thanksgiving, is as though he robbed God.' Talmud. But it seems
clear that this giving of thanks or blessing of the food (Luke ix. 16)
was the means of the miracle, because (1) all four narratives notice it;
(2) itis pointedly mentioned again v. 23; (3) it is also mentioned in
both accounts ofthe feeding ofthe 4000 (Matt. xv. 36; Mark viii. 6).
to the disciples, and the disciples]. These words are wanting in

vv. 12—14.] S. JOHN, VI. 141
fishes as much as they would. When they were filled, he 12
said unto his disciples, Gather up the fragments that remain,
that nothing be lost. Therefore they gathered them to- 13
gether, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the
five barley loaves, which remained over and above unto
them that had eaten. Then those men, when they had seen 14
the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that
prophet that should come into the world.
authority ; the best texts run, He distributed to them that were lying
down. It is futile to ask whether the multiplication took place in
Christ's hands only: the manner of the miracle eludes us, as in the
turning of the water into wine. That was a change of quality, this of
quantity. This is a literal fulfilment of Matt. vi. 33.
12. Gather up the fragments] S. John alone tells of this command,
though the others tell us that the fragments were gathered up. It has
been noticed as a strong mark of truth, most unlikely to have been
invented by the writer of a fiction. We do not find the owner of For-
tunatus' purse careful against extravagance. How improbable, from a
human point of view, that one who could multiply food at will should
give directions about saving fragments !
13. baskets] All four accounts have the same word for basket,
cophinus, i.e. the wallet which every Jew carried when on a journey, to
keep himself independent of Gentile food, which would be unclean.
Comp. Juvenal III. 14. Each of the Twelve gathered into his own
wallet, and filled it full. Moreover in referring to the miracle the
word cophinus is used (Matt. xvi. 9). In the feeding of the 4000
(Matt. xv. 37 ; Mark viii. 8), and in referring to it (Matt. xvi. 10), a
different word for basket, spuris, is used. Such accuracy is evidence
of truth. See note on Mark viii. 8. S. Mark tells us that fragments
of fish were gathered also. The remnants far exceed in quantity the
original store.
The expedients to evade the obvious meaning of the narrative are
worth mentioning, as shewing how some readers are willing to 'violate
all the canons of historical evidence, ' rather than admit the possibility
of a miracle : (1) that food had been brought over and concealed in
the boat; (2) that some among the multitude were abundantly sup
plied with food and were induced by 'Christ's example to share their
supply with others ; (3) that the whole is an allegorical illustration of
Matt. vi. 33. How could either (i)'or (2) excite even a, suspicion that
He was the Messiah, much less kindle such an enthusiasm as is
recorded in v. 15? And if the whole is an illustration of Matt. vi. 33,
what meaning in the allegory can be given to this popular enthusiasm ?
There are "rationalising expedients that are considerably more incre
dible than miracles." S. p. 126.
14. Then those men] Rather, The men therefore.
the miracle that Jesus did] Better, the sign that He did. The
name Jesus has been inserted here, as elsewhere, because this once

142

S. JOHN, VI. [v. 15.

15 When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come
and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed
again into a mountain himself alone.
was the beginning of a lesson read in church. The same thing has
been done in our own Prayer Book in the Gospels for Quinquagesima
and the 3rd Sunday in Lent: in the Gospel for S. John's Day the
names of both Jesus and Peter have been inserted ; and in those for
the 5th S. in Lent and 2nd S. after Easter the words 'Jesus said' have
been inserted. In all cases a desire for clearness has caused the inser
tion. Comp. viii. 21.
that prophet that should come] Literally, the Prophet that cometh:
the Prophet of Deut. xviii. 15 (see on i. 21). But perhaps the Greek
participle here only represents the Hebrew participle, which is properly
present, but is often used where a future participle would be used
in Latin or Greek. S. John alone tells us the effect of the miracle
on those who witnessed it: comp. ii. 11, 23. These two verses
(14, 15) supply "a decisive proof that the narrative in the fourth
Gospel is not constructed out of that of the Synoptists, and we might
almost add a decisive proof of the historical character of the Gospel
itself... The Synoptists have nothing of this... Yet how exactly it
corresponds with the current Messianic expectations! Our Lord had
performed a miracle ; and at once He is hailed as the Messiah. But
it is as the Jewish, not the Christian Messiah. The multitude would
take Him by force and make Him king. At last they have found
the leader who will lead them victoriously against the Romans and
' restore the kingdom to Israel. ' And just because He refused to do
this we are told a few verses lower down that many of His disciples
' went back, and walked no more with Him, ' and for the same cause, a
year later, they crucified Him. It is this contrast between the popular
Messianic belief and the sublimated form of it, as maintained and
represented by Christ, that is the clue to all the fluctuations and oscil
lations to which the belief in Him was subject. This is why He was
confessed one day and denied the next  Itis almost superfluous to
point out how impossible it would have been for a writer wholly ab
extra to throw himself into the midst of these hopes and feelings, and
to reproduce them, not as if they were something new that he had
learned, but as part of an atmosphere that he had himself once
breathed. There is no stronger proof both of the genuineness and of
the authenticity of the fourth Gospel than the way in which it reflects
the current Messianic idea." S. pp. 123, 124.
15. take him by force] Carry Him up to Jerusalem and proclaim
Him king at the Passover. This again is peculiar to S. John. In his
Epic he points out how the enmity of Christ's foes increases; and
nothing increased it so much as popular enthusiasm for Him : comp.
iii. 26, iv. 1—3, vii. 40, 41, 46, viii. 30, ix. 30—38, x. 21, 42, xi. 45,
46, xii. 9 — 11.
again] He had come down to feed them.

W. 16— 21.] S. JOHN, VI. 143
16 — 21. The Sign on the Lake ; Walking on the Water.
And when even was now come, his disciples went down 16
unto the sea, arid entered into a ship, and went over the sea 17
towards Capernaum. And it was now dark, and Jesus was
not come to them. And the sea arose by reason of a great 18
wind that blew. So when they had rowed about five and 19
twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus walking on the sea,
and drawing nigh unto the ship : and they were afraid. But 20
he saith unto them, It is I ; be not afraid. Then they 21
into a mountain] Better, as in v. 3, into the mountain, or the hill
country. himself alone] S. Matthew and S. Mark tell us that the solitude He
sought was for prayer. S. Luke (ix. 18) mentions both the solitary
prayer and also a question which seems to refer to this burst of enthu
siasm for Christ ; 'Whom say the people that I am?' Thus the various
accounts supplement one another.
16 — 21. The Sign on the Lake; Walking on the Water.
16. when even was now come] S. Matthew (xiv. 15, 23) makes two
evenings; this was in accordance with Jewish custom. It is the
second evening that is here meant, from 6 p.m.-to dark.
went down] From Matt. xiv. 22 and Mark vi. 45 we learn that
Christ 'constrained' His disciples to embark: this points either to
their general unwillingness to leave Him, or to their having shared the
wish to make Him a king by force. S. Luke omits the whole
incident. 17. toward Capernaum] S. Mark says 'unto Bethsaida' which was
close to Capernaum. See notes and map at Matt. iv. 13 and Luke v. 1.
For ' went over the sea' we should read were coming over the sea, i.e.
were on their way home.
was not come) More accurately, was not yet come.
18. the sea arose] Literally, was becoming thoroughly agitated, so
that their Master's following them in another boat seemed impossible.
For the vivid description comp. Jonah i. 13.
19. five and twenty or thirty furlongs] This pretty closely corre
sponds with 'in the midst of the sea' (Matt. xiv. 24). The lake is
nearly seven miles across in the widest part.
walking on the sea] There is no doubt that this means on the sur
face of the water, although an attempt has been made to shew that the
Greek may mean ' on the sea-shore.' Even if it can, which is perhaps
somewhat doubtful, the context shews plainly what is meant. How
could they have been afraid at seeing Jesus walking on the shore?
S. Mark tells us that it was about the fourth watch, i.e. between 3.0
and 6.0 a.m. S. Matthew alone gives S. Peter's walking on the sea.
20. It is I] Literally, lam (comp. xviii. 5,),

144 S. JOHN, VI. [v. 22.
willingly received him into the ship : and immediately the
ship was at the land whither they went.
22 — 25. The Sequel of the two Signs.
•¦2 The day following, when the people which stood on the
21. they willingly received him] Rather, they were willing to
receive Him. The mistranslation seems to have arisen from a wish to
make this account agree with that of S. Matthew and S. Mark, who
say that he entered the boat. It is probably due to Beza, who for the
Vulgate's voluerunt recipere substitutes volente animo receperunt. S.
John leaves us in doubt whether He entered the boat or not; he is not
correcting the other two accounts : this would require ' but before He
could enter it the boat was at the land.'
immediately] We are probably to understand that this was miracu
lous; not a mere favourable breeze which brought them to land before
they had recovered from their surprise : but the point is uncertain and
unimportant. whither they went] Better, whither they were going, or intending
to go. The imperfect tense helps to bring out the contrast between
the difficulty of the first half of the voyage, when they were alone, and
the ease of the last half, when He was with them. The word for
' going' implies departure, and looks back to the place left.
The Walking on the Sea cannot 'be used as evidence that the writer
held Docetic views about Christ, i.e. believed that His Body was a
mere phantom. A Docetist would have made more of the incident,
and would hardly have omitted the cry of the disciples 'It is a spirit'
(Matt. xiv. 36; comp. Mark vi. 49). Docetism is absolutely excluded
from this Gospel by i. 14, and by the general tone of it throughout.
Comp. xix. 34, 35, xx. 20, 27.
22—25. The Sequel of the two Signs.
22 — 24. We have here a complicated sentence very unusual in
S. John (but comp. xiii. 1 — 4); it betrays "a certain literary awk
wardness, but great historical accuracy  The structure of the sen
tence is no argument against the truth of the statements which it con
tains. On the contrary, if these had been fictitious, we may be sure
that they would have been much simpler. Indeed a forger would
never have thought of relating how the crowd got across the sea at all.'
We see the natural partiality with which the Evangelist dwells upon
scenes with which he is familiar. He had been a fisherman on the sea
of Galilee himself. He knew the boats of Tiberias from those of
Capernaum and the other cities, and had probably friends or relations
in that very crowd." S. pp. 126, 127.
22. the people] An instance of the caprice of our translators in
creating differences. The same Greek word is translated 'multitude'
in v. 2, 'company' in v. 5, and 'people' here, v. 24, &c; multitude
would be best throughout.

w. 23—26.] S. JOHN, VI. 145
other side of the sea saw that there was none other boat
there, save that one whereinto his disciples were entered,
and that Jesus went not with his disciples into the boat,
but that his disciples were gone away alone ; (howbeit there 23
came other boats from Tiberias nigh unto the place where
they did eat bread, after that the Lord had given thanks :)
when the people therefore saw that Jesus was not there, 24
neither his disciples, they also took shipping, and came to
Capernaum, seeking for Jesus. And when they had found 25
him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi)
when camest thou hither?
26 — 59. The Discourse on the Son as the Support of Life.
Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say 26
on the other side of the sea] On the eastern side where the miracle
took place.
save that one whereinto his disciples were entered] The only words of
this sentence that are of certain authority are save one ; the rest is pro
bably an explanatory note.
were gone away] Better, went away.
23. Howbeit there came] This awkward parenthesis explains how
there came to be boats to transport the people to the western shore
after they had given over seeking for Christ on the eastern.
after that the Lord had given thanks] Unless the giving thanks was
the turning-point of the miracle it is difficult to see why it is men
tioned again here:' see om>. 11.
24. they also took shipping] More literally, they themselves entered
into the boats, i.e. the boats that had come from Tiberias, driven
in very possibly by the gale which had delayed the Apostles: 'also'
is not genuine. Of course there is no reason to suppose that all who
had been miraculously fed crossed over ; but a sufficient number of them
to be called a ' multitude. '
25. on the other side of the sea] This now means the western shore ;
in v. 22 it meant the eastern. From v. 59 we have the locality fixed
very distinctly as the synagogue at Capernaum.
when camest thou] Including how? they suspect something mi
raculous. Christ does not gratify their curiosity : if the feeding of the
5000, which they had witnessed, taught them nothing, what good
would it do them to hear of the crossing of the sea? ' Camest Thou
hither ' is literally ' hast Thou come to be here :' comp. i. 15.
26 — 59. The Discourse on the Son as the Support of Life.
God's revealed word and created world are unhappily alike in this ;
that the most beautiful places in each are often the scene and subject
of strife. This marvellous discourse is a well-known field of contro-
S.JOHN io

146 S. JOHN, VI. [v. 26.
versy, as to whether it does or does not refer to the Eucharist. That
it has no reference whatever to the Eucharist seems incredible, when
we remember (1) the startling words here used about eating the Flesh
of the Son of Man and drinking His Blood; (2) that just a year from
this time Christ instituted the Eucharist ; (3) that the primitive Church
is something like unanimous in interpreting this discourse as referring
to the Eucharist. A few words are necessary on each of these points.
(1) Probably nowhere in any literature, not even among the luxuriant
imagery of the East, can we find an instance of a teacher speaking of
the reception of his doctrine under so astounding a metaphor as eating
his flesh and drinking his blood. Something more than this must at
any rate be meant here. The metaphor ' eating a man's flesh ' else
where means to injure or destroy him. Ps. xxvii. 2 (xiv. 4) ; James
v. 3. (2) The founding of new religions, especially of those which
have had any great hold on the minds of men, has ever been the
result of much thought and deliberation. Let us leave out of the
account the Divinity of Jesus Christ, and place Him for the moment
on a level with other great teachers. Are we to suppose that just
a year before the Eucharist was instituted, the Founder of this, the
most distinctive element of Christian worship, had no thought of it
in His mind ? Surely for long beforehand that institution was in His
thoughts ; and if so, ' Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and
drink His Blood, ye have no life in you' cannot but have some reference
to 'Take eat, this is My Body,' 'Drink ye all of it, for this is My
Blood.' The coincidence is too exact to be fortuitous, even if it were
probable that a year before it was instituted the Eucharist was still
unknown to the Founder of it. That the audience at Capernaum
could not thus understand Christ's words is nothing to the point:
He was speaking less to them than to Christians throughout all ages.
How often did He utter words which even Apostles could not under
stand at the time. (3) The interpretations of the primitive Church
are not infallible, even when they are almost unanimous: but they
carry great weight. And in a case of this kind, where spiritual in
sight and Apostolic tradition are needed, rather than scholarship and
critical power, patristic authority may be allowed the very greatest
weight. But while it is incredible that there is no reference to the Eucharist
in this discourse, it is equally incredible that the reference is solely or
primarily to the Eucharist. The wording of the larger portion of the
discourse is against any such exclusive interpretation; not until v. 51
does the reference to the Eucharist become clear and direct. Rather
the discourse refers to all the various channels of grace by means of
which_ Christ imparts Himself to the believing soul : and who will dare
to limit these in number or efficacy?
To quote the words of Dr Westcott, the discourse "cannot refer
primarily to the Holy Communion ; nor again can it be simply pro
phetic of that Sacrament. The teaching has a full and consistent
meaning m connexion with the actual circumstances, and it treats
essentially of spiritual realities with which no external act as 6uch
can be extensive. The well-known words of Augustine, crede et man-

v. 27.] S. JOHN, VI. 147
unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles,
but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.
Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that 27
meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son
of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the

ducasti, ' believe and thou hast eaten,' give the sum of the thoughts in
a luminous and pregnant sentence.
" But, on the other hand, there can be no doubt that the truth which
is presented in its absolute form in these discourses is presented in a
specific act and in a concrete form in the Holy Communion ; and yet
further that the Holy Communion is the divinely appointed means
whereby men may realise the truth. Nor can there be any difficulty
to any one who acknowledges a divine fitness in the ordinances of the
Church, an eternal correspondence in the parts of the one counsel of
God, in believing that the Lord, while speaking intelligibly to those
who heard Him at the time, gave by anticipation a commentary, so
to speak, on the Sacrament which He afterwards instituted." Speaker's
Commentary, II. p. 113.
The discourse may be thus divided ; I. 26 — 34, PJistinction between
the material bread and the Spiritual Bread; 11. 35 — 50 (with two
digressions, 37 — 40; 43 — 46), Identification of the Spiritual Bread
with Christ; in. 5r — 58, Further definition of the identification as
consisting in the giving of His Body and outpouring of His Blood.
S. p. 128. On the language and style see introductory note to
chap. in. <.
26 — 34. Distinction between the material bread and the Spiritual Bread.
26. not because ye saw the miracles] Better, not because ye saw
signs. There is no article in the Greek; and the strict meaning of
' signs ' should be retained. They had seen the miracle, but it had
not been a sign to them ; it had excited in them nothing better than
wonder and greediness. The plural does not necessarily refer to more
than the one sign of the Feeding; the generic plural.
27. Labour not for, &c] Better, Work not for, &c. The trans
lation in the margin is preferable, to keep up the connexion with
verses 28, 29, 30. The people keep harping on the word 'work.'
the meat which perisheth] Better (to avoid all ambiguity), the food
that perisheth: 'meat' in the sense of 'flesh-meat' is not intended.
Comp. (iv. 13) 'whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again.'
The discourse with the Samaritan woman should be compared through
out : ' the food which abides ' here 'corresponds with ' the living water '
there ; ' the food that perisheth ' with the water of the well. ' Perisheth '
not merely in its sustaining power, but in itself: it is digested and
dispersed (Matt. xv. 17; 1 Cor. vi. 13).
endureth unto everlasting life] Better, abideth unto eternal life:
see on i. 33 and iii. 16.

148 S. JOHN, AO  [w. 28—32.
28 Father sealed. Then said they unto him, What shall we
29 do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered
and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye
30 believe on him whom he hath sent. They said therefore
unto him, What sign- shewest thou then, that we may see,
31 and believe thee? what dost thou work ? Our fathers did
eat manna in the desert ; as it is written, He gave them
32 bread from heaven to eat. Then Jesus said unto them,
Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that

for him hath God the Father sealed] Better (preserving the em
phasis of the Greek order), for Him the Father sealed, even God.
' Sealed,' i.e. authenticated (iii. 33), as the true giver of this food
( 1 ) by direct testimony in the Scriptures, (2) by the same in the voice
from Heaven at His Baptism, (3) by indirect testimony in His miracles
and Messianic work.
28. Then said they] They said therefore.
What shall we do, that we might work] Better, what must we do
that we may work. They see that His words have a moral meaning ;
they are to do works pleasing to God. But how to set about this ?
29. the work of God] They probably were thinking of works of
the law, tithes, sacrifices, &c. Christ tells them of one work, one moral
act, from which all the rest derive their value, — belief in Him whom
God has sent.
that ye believe] Literally, that ye may believe'. S. John's favourite
form of expression, indicating the Divine purpose. Comp. v. 50 and
v. 36.
30. What sign shewest thou then] ' Thou ' is emphatic : ' what
dost Thou on Thy part?' They quite understand that in the words
'Him whom He hath sent' Jesus is claiming to be the Messiah; but
they want a proof. Their enthusiasm had cooled, their curiosity had
increased, during the night. After all, the feeding of the 5000 was
less marvellous than the manna, and Moses was not the Messiah. Note
that whereas He uses the strong form, ' believe on Him,' they use the
weak one, ' believe Thee. ' See last note on i. 12.
what dost thou work] They purposely choose the very word that He
had used in v. 29. The emphasis is on ' what.'
31. manna] More exactly, the manna.
He gave them bread from heaven to eat] A rough quotation of ' had
rained down manna upon them to eat' (Ps. lxxviii. 24). They artfully
suppress the nominative (which in the Psalm is 'God'), and leave
'Moses' to be understood. Possibly Neh. ix. 15 is in their thoughts;
if so, there is the same artfulness. On 'it is written' see on ii. 17.
'From heaven' is literally 'out ofheaven.'
32. Moses gave you not] Christ shews them that He quite under
stands their insinuation: they are comparing Him unfavourably with

vv. 33—35-] S. JOHN, VI.

149

bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true
bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he which 33
cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this 34
bread. And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of Ufe : 35
Moses. He denies both their points; (1) that Moses gave the manna;
(2) that the manna was in the truest sense bread from heaven.
giveth you the true bread, &c] Literally, giveth you the bread
out of heaven (which is) the true bread; 'true' in the sense of 'real'
and 'perfect' (see on i. 9); the manna was but the type, and therefore
imperfect. Note the change of tense from 'gave' to 'giveth:' God
is continually giving the true bread; it is not a thing granted at one
time and then no more, like the manna.
33. the bread of God is he which] Better, the bread of God is
that which. Christ has not yet identified Himself with the Bread;
it is still impersonal, and hence the present participle in the Greek.
Contrast v. 41. There is a clear reference to this passage in the
Ignatian Epistles, Romans vii. The whole chapter is impregnated
with the Fourth Gospel. See on iv. 10.
giveth life unto the world] Without this Bread mankind is spiritu
ally dead; and this is the point of the argument (the introductory 'for'
shews that the verse is argumentative): we have proof that it is the
Father who gives the really heavenly Bread, for it is His Bread that
quickens the whole human race.
34. Then said they] They said therefore.
Lord, evermore give us this bread] 'Lord' is too strong, and makes
the request too much like the prayer of a humble believer. Our trans
lators wisely vary the rendering of Kyrie, using sometimes ' Lord,' and
sometimes ' Sir.' Here, as in the conversation with the Samaritan
woman, 'Sir' would be better. Not that the request is ironical; it is
not the mocking prayer of the sceptic. Rather it is the selfish petition
of one whose beliefs and aspirations are low. As the Samaritan
woman thought that the living water would at any rate be very useful
(iv. 15), so these Jews think that the true bread is at least worth
having. He fed them yesterday, and they are hungry again ; He talks
to them of food that endureth ; it will be well to be evermore supplied
with this food, which is perhaps another manna with greater sustaining
powers. They do not disbelieve in His power, but in His mission.
35 — 50. Identification of the Spiritual Bread wilh Christ.
35. / am the bread of life. The pronoun is very emphatic : comp.
iv. 26. As in v. 30, He passes from the third to the first person.
'Bread of life' means 'bread that giveth life.' Comp. 'the tree of
life' (Gen. ii. 9, iii. 22, 24), 'the water of life' (Rev. xxi. 6, xxii. 1).
In the remainder of the verse 'He that cometh to Me' = 'he that be
lieveth on Me,' and 'shall never hunger '= ' shall never thirst;' i.e. the
believer shall experience the continual satisfaction of his highest spiri-

ISO S. JOHN, VI. [vv. 36—39.
he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that
36 believeth on me shall never thirst. But I said unto you,
37 That ye also have seen me, and believe not. All that the
Father giveth me shall come to me ; and him that cometh
38 to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from
heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that
39 sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me,
tual needs. The superiority of Christ to the manna consists in this,
that while it satisfied only bodily needs for a time, He satisfies spiri
tual needs for ever.
36. / said unto you] When? no such saying is recorded. Ewald
thus finds some slight evidence for his theory that a whole sheet of
this Gospel has been lost between chapters v. and vi. But the refer
ence may easily be to one of the countless unrecorded sayings of Christ,
or possibly to the general sense of v. 37 — 44. In the latter case 'you'
must mean the Jewish nation, for those verses were addressed to Jews
at Jerusalem. See on x. 26, where there is a somewhat similar case.
That 'I said' means 'I would have you to know,' and has no refer
ence to any previous utterance, does not seem very probable.
ye also have seen me] ' Also' belongs to ' have seen,' not to ' ye,' as
most English readers would suppose : ye have even seen me (not merely
heard of me), and (yet) do not believe. The tragic tone again. See on
i. 5, 10, 11. t
37—40. Digression on the blessedness of those who come to Christ
as believers.
37. All that the Father giveth.. .him that cometh] There is a signi
ficant change of gender in the Greek which is obscured in the English
version: 'all that' is neuter, all that which; what is given is treated
as impersonal, mankind en masse; what comes, with free will, is mas
culine. Men are given to Christ without their wills being consulted;
but each individual can, if he likes, refuse to come. There is no coer
cion. Comp. similar changes of gender in i. 11, xvii. 2.
shall come to me, and him that cometh... For I came down] The
verb 'come' here represents three different Greek verbs, but there is
no such great difference between them as to make it worth while to
change so familiar a text ; yet it would be more literal to translate all
that the Father giveth Me, to Me shall come, and him that approacheth
Me I will in no wise cast out; for I have descended, &c. The second
' Me' is emphatic, the first and third are not.
38. / came down] Better, I am come down or have descended.
Four times in this discourse Christ declares that He is come down
from heaven; verses 38, 50, 51, 58. The drift of these three verses
(38—40) is ;— How could I cast them out, seeing that I am come to do
my Father's will, and He wills that they should be received ?
39. this is the Father's will, &c] The true reading is; this is the
will of Him that sent Me.

vv. 40—42-] S. JOHN, VI. 151
that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing,
but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is 40
the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth
the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life :
and I will raise him up at the last day.
The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am 41
the bread which came down from heaven. And they said, 42
Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and
that of all] Literally, in order that of all: see on v. 29.
all which he hath given me] 'All' is neuter as in v. 37, and is placed
first for emphasis. In the Greek it is a nominativus pendens.
raise it up again at the last day] This gracious utterance is repeated
as a kind of refrain, verses 40, 44, 54. 'Again' may be omitted.
This is 'the resurrection of life' (v. 29), 'the first resurrection,' the
resurrection of the just.
the last day] This phrase is peculiar to S. John, and occurs seven
times in this Gospel. Elsewhere it is called 'the Day of the Lord,'
'the Great Day,' &c.
40. And this is the will of him that sent me] The true reading is ;
For this is the will of My Father. The opening words of verses 39 and
40, being very similar, have become confused in inferior MSS. The
best MSS. have 'Father' in this verse, where 'the Son' is mentioned,
not in v. 39, where He is not. Moreover this verse is explanatory of
v. 40, and opens with ' for ;' it shews who are meant by ' all which He ¦
hath given me,' viz. every one that contemplateth the Son and believeth
on Him. ' Seeth' is not strong enough for the Greek word here used !
the Jews had seen Jesus; they had not contemplated Him so as to
believe. ' Contemplate' is frequent in S. John and the Acts, elsewhere
not. Comp. xii. 45, xiv. 19, xvi. io, 16, 19. 'That' again = in order
that. I will raise him up] The Greek construction is ambiguous ; pos
sibly 'raise' depends upon 'that' as in v. 39: and that I should raise
him up. ' I ' is here very emphatic ; ' by My power as Messiah.'
41. The Jews then murmured at him] Better, The Jews therefore
muttered respecting Him, talked in an under tone among themselves
about Him : it does not necessarily mean that they found fault, though
the context shews that they did (comp. v. 61, vii. 12). From the men
tion of the Jews we are to understand that there were some of the hos
tile party among the multitude, perhaps some members of the Sanhe
drin ; but not that the whole multitude were hostile, though carnally-
minded and refusing to believe without a further sign. Comp. i. 19,
ii. 18, v. 10, vii. 11, &c.
I am the bread which came down from heaven) They put together
the statements in verses 33, 35, 38.
42. Is not this] Or, Is not this fellow; the expression is con
temptuous.

152

S. JOHN, VI. [w. 43—46.
mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came
43 down from heaven ? Jesus therefore answered and said unto
44 them, Murmur not among yourselves. No man can come
to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him :
4S and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the
prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every
man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the
46 Father, cometh unto me. Not that any man hath seen the

whose father and mother we knozv] 'We know all about His parent
age; there is nothing supernatural or mysterious about His origin.'
Nothing can be inferred from this as to Joseph's being alive at this
time : the probability is that he was not, as he nowhere appears in the
Gospel narrative ; but this cannot be proved.
how is it then, &c] Better, How doth He now say, I am come
down. 43 — 46. Digression on the difficulty of coming to Christ as a believer.
43. Murmur not] Christ does not answer their objection or explain.
Even among the first Christians the fact of his miraculous conception
seems to have been made known only gradually, so foul were the
calumnies which the Jews had spread respecting His Mother. This
certainly was not the place to proclaim it. He directs them to some
thing of more vital importance than the way by which He came into
the world, viz. the way by which they may come to Him.
44. draw him) It is the same word as is used xii. 32 ; 'will draw all
men unto Me.' The word does not necessarily imply force, still less
irresistible force, but merely attraction of some kind, some inducement
to come. Comp. 'with loving-kindness have I drawn thee' (Jer.
xxxi. 3), and Virgil's trahit sua quemque voluptas.
45. in the prophets] The direct reference is to Isa. liv. 13, but
there are similar passages Jer. xxxi. 33, 34; Joel iii. 16, 17. The
quotation explains what is meant by the Father's drawing men, viz.,
enlightening them. The 'therefore' in the second half of the verse is
not genuine: 'therefore' is very common in the narrative portion of
this Gospel, very rare in the discourses. On ' it is written' see on
ii. 17. Here, as in xiii. 18 and xix. 37, the quotation agrees with the
Hebrew against the LXX. This is evidence that the writer knew
Hebrew and therefore was probably a Jew of Palestine.
Every man therefore that hath heard, &c] And no others : only
those who have been enlightened by the Father can come to the
Son. 46. Not that any man hath seen] To be enlightened and taught by
the Father it is not necessary to see Him. "That is a privilege
reserved for a later stage in the spiritual life, and is only to be attained
mediately through the Son (comp. i. 18)." S. p. 129.

vv. 47— 5i-J S. JOHN, VI. 153
Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath 47
everlasting life. I am that bread of life. Your fathers did f9
eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. This is the 50
bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat
thereof, and not die. I am the living bread which came si
down from heaven : if any man eat of this bread, he shall
live for ever : and the bread that I will give is my flesh,
he which is of God] Or, He which is from God, with whom He was
previous to the Incarnation; i. 1, 14, viii. 42, xvi. 27.
47 — 50. Christ returns from answering the Jews to the main subject.
47. hath everlasting life] Hath eternal life (iii. 16). Note the tense.
Christ solemnly assures them (the double 'Verily') that the believer is
already in possession of eternal life. See on iii. 36 and v. 24.
48. that bread of life] Better, the Bread of life. Comp. v. 32,
i. 21, 25, vi. 14, where the same exaggerated translation of the Greek
article occurs.
49. Christ answers them out of their own mouths. They had spoken
of the manna as superior to the multiplied loaves and fishes ; but the
manna did not preserve men from death. The same word is used both
in v. 49 and v. 50 ; therefore for ' are dead ' it will be better to substi
tute died. Moreover, the point is, not that they are dead now, but that
they perished then ; the manna did not save them. They ate the manna
and died.
50. that a man may eat] S. John's favourite form of expression
again, indicating the Divine intention : comp. v. 29, vi. 34, viii. 56,
&c. ' Of this purpose is the Bread wliich cometh down from heaven ;
in order that a man may eat thereof and so not die.' Comp. 1 John v. 3.
51—58. Further definition ofthe identification ofthe Spiritual Bread
with Christ as consisting in the giving of His Body and the out
pouring of His Blood.
In w. 35 — 50 Christ in His Person is the Bread of Life: here He is
the spiritual food of believers in the Redemptive work of His Death.
51. the living bread] Not merely the Bread of life (v. 48), the life-
giving Bread, but the living Bread, having life in itself, which life is
imparted to those who partake of the Bread.
which came down] At the Incarnation. Now that the Bread is iden
tified with Christ, we have the past tense of what took place once for
all. Previously (verses 33, 50) the present tense is used of what is con
tinually going on. In one sense Christ is perpetually coming down
from heaven, in the other He came but once: He is ever imparting
Himself to man ; He only once became man.
he shall live for ever] Just as ' living Bread ' is a stronger expression
than ' Bread of life,' so ' live for ever ' is stronger than ' not die.'
and the bread that I will give] The precise wording of this sentence

154 S. JOHN, VI. [vv. 52—54.
52 which I will give for the life of the world. The Jews there
fore strove amongst themselves, saying, How can this man
53 give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said unto them,
Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of
the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal
is somewhat uncertain, but the best reading seems to be : and the Bread
that I will give is My Flesh for the life ofthe world. That in Christ's
mind these words looked onwards to the Eucharist, and that in thus
speaking to believers throughout all time He included a reference to the
Eucharist has already been stated to be highly probable. (See above,
Introduction to 26 — 58). But that the reference is not exclusively, nor
even directly, to the Eucharist is shewn from the use of ' Flesh ' (sarx)
and not ' Body ' (sbma). In all places where the Eucharist is mentioned
in N. T. we have ' Body,' not ' Flesh;' Matt. xxvi. 26 ; Mark xiv. 22;
Luke xxii. 19; 1 Cor. xi. 246°. Moreover the words must have had
some meaning for those who heard them at Capernaum. Evidently they
have a wider range than any one Sacrament. Christ promises to give
His Flesh (by His bloody death soon to come) for the benefit of the
whole wbrld. But this benefit can only be appropriated by the faith of
each individual ; and so that which when offered by Christ is His Flesh
appears under the figure of bread when partaken of by the believer.
The primary reference, therefore, is to Christ's propitiatory death ; the
secondary reference is to all those means by which the death of Christ
is appropriated, especially the Eucharist. Not that Christ is here
promising that ordinance, but uttering deep truths, which apply, and
which He intended to apply, to that ordinance, now that it is in
stituted. 52. strove among themselves] Their excitement increases ; they have
got beyond muttering among themselves (v. 41).
give us his flesh to eat] ' To eat ' is their own addition ; they wish
to bring out in full the strangeness of His declaration.
53. Then said Jesus] Better, Therefore said Jesus : see on v. 45.
and drink his blood] Christ not only accepts what they have added
to His words, but still further startles them by telling them that they
must drink His Blood ; an amazing statement to a Jew, who was for
bidden to taste even the blood of animals (Gen. ix. 4 ; Lev. xvii. 10—16).
These words point still more distinctly to His propitiatory death; for
'the blood is the life' which He offered up for the sins of the world.
The eating and drinking are not faith, but the appropriation of His
death ; faith leads us to eat and drink and is the means of appropriation.
Taken separately, the Flesh represents sacrifice and sustenance, the
Blood represents atonement and life.
no life in you] Literally, no life in yourselves : for the source of
life is absent. The next four verses explain more fully how this is.
54. The gracious positive of the previous minatory negative. From
the warning as to the disastrous consequences of not partaking He

w. 55—58-] S. JOHN, VI. 155
life ; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh 5S
is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that 56
eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me,
and I in him. As the Uving Father hath sent me, and 1 57
live by the Father : so he that eateth me, even he shall live
by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven : 58
not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead : he that
eateth of this bread shall live for ever.
passes to a declaration of the blessed consequences of partaking,
viz. eternal life, and that at once, with resurrection among the just
hereafter. 55. my flesh is meat indeed, &c] According to the best reading;
My Flesh is true food and My Blood is true drink; i.e. this is no mis
leading metaphor, but an actual fact.
56. dwelleth in me, and I in him] Or, abideth in Me and I in
him. This is one of S. John's very characteristic phrases to express the
most intimate mutual fellowship and union. The word 'abide' is also
characteristic, as we have seen. Comp. xiv. 10, 20, xv. 4, 5, xvii. 21;
1 John iii. 24, iv. 16. Christ is at once the centre and circumference
of the life of the Christian ; the source from which it springs, and the
ocean into which it flows ; its starting-point and its goal.
57. Not a mere repetition of the previous statement but an enlarge
ment of it. The result of this close union is perfect life, proceeding as
from the Father to the Son, so in like manner from the Son to all
believers. the living Father] The absolutely Living One, the Fount of all life,
in whom is no element of death. The expression occurs nowhere else.
Comp. Matt. xvi. 16; 2 Cor. vi. 16; Hebr. vii. 25. For 'hath sent'
read sent.
By the Father] Better because of the Father, i.e. because the Father
is the Living One. Similarly, 'by Me' should be because of Me,
i.e. because he thus derives life from Me.
he that eateth me] Instead of the Flesh and Blood we have Christ
Himself ; the two modes of partaking are merged in one, the more
appropriate of the two being retained.
even he] Or, he also.
58. This is that bread] Better, this is the Bread: see on v. 48.
The verse is a general summing up of the whole, returning from the
imagery of Flesh and Blood to the main expression of the discourse—
the Bread that came down from heaven and its superiority to all earthly
food. not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead] Better, not as the
fathers did eat and died (see on v. 49) : ' your ' and ' manna ' are
wanting in the best MSS. It is not in that way that the Bread comes
down from heaven, nor is it such food.
eateth of] Omit 'of,' as in vv. 54, 56: "of is rightly inserted in
vv. 26, 50, 51.

156 S. JOHN, VI. [vv. 59—62.
59 These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in
Capernaum. 60 — 71. Opposite Results ofthe Discourse.
60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard
61 this, said, This is a hard saying ; who can hear it ? When
Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he
62 said unto them, Doth this offend you ? What and if ye
59. hi the synagogue] Or, in synagogue, as we say ' in church :'
there is no article in the Greek. Comp. xviii. 20. The verse is a mere
historical note, stating definitely what was stated vaguely in v. 22 as
'the other side ofthe sea.' ' These things ' naturally refers to the whole
discourse from v. 26 ; we have no sufficient evidence of a break between
v. 40 and v. 41. On the other hand there is strong evidence that from
v. 26 to v. 58 forms one connected discourse spoken at one time in the
synagogue at Capernaum. The site of Capernaum is not undisputed
(see on Matt. iv. 13) ; but assuming Tell Hum to be correct, the ruins
of the synagogue there are probably those of the very building in
which these words were uttered. On one of the stones a pot of
manna is sculptured.60 — 71. Opposite Results of the Discourse.
60. Many therefore of his disciples] Including many more than the
Apostles. This is a hard saying] Or, Hard is this speech. Not hard to under
stand, but hard to accept. The word for 'hard ' means originally 'dry,'
and so 'rough;' and then in a moral sense, ' rough, harsh, offensive.1
Nabal the churl has this epithet, 1 Sam. xxv. 3 ; and the slothful ser
vant in the parable of the Talents calls his master a ' hard -mxa.,' Matt.
xxv. 24. Here the meaning is : ' This is a repulsive speech ; who can
listen to it ?' It was the notion of eating flesh and drinking blood that
specially scandalized them. See on v. 47.
61. knew in himself] Again He appears as the reader of the heart.
Comp. i. 42, 47, ii. 24, 25, iv. 18, v. 14, 42, vi. 26, &c. More
literally the verse runs : Now Jesus knowing in Himself that His dis
ciples are muttering about it: see on v. 41, vii. 12. They talked in
a low tone so that He could not hear : but He knew without hearing.
62. What and if, &c] Literally, If therefore ye should behold the
Son of man ascending where He was before ? The sentence breaks off
(aposiopesis) leaving something to be understood : but what is to be
understood ? The answer to this depends on the meaning assigned to
'behold the Son of man ascending.' The most literal and obvious
interpretation is of an actual beholding of the Ascension : and in that
case we supply; 'Would ye still take offence then?' Against this
interpretation it is urged (1) That S. John does not record the Ascen
sion. But it is assumed, if not here and iii. 13, yet certainly xx. 17 as a

vv. 63—65.] S. JOHN, VI. 157
shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before ?
It is the spirit that quickeneth ; the flesh profiteth nothing : 63
the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they
are life. But there are some of you that believe not. For 64
Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed
not, and who should betray him. And he said, Therefore 65
fact ; and in all three cases it is in the words of our Lord that" the
reference occurs. S. John throughout assumes that the main events of
Christ's life and the fundamental elements of Christianity are well known
to his readers. (2) That none but the Twelve witnessed the Ascension,
while this is addressed to a multitude of doubting disciples. But some
of the Twelve were present : and Christ speaks hypothetically ; ' if ye
should behold, 'not 'when ye shall behold.' (3) That in this case we
should expect 'but' instead of 'therefore.' Possibly, but not neces
sarily. The alternative interpretation is to make the ' ascending ' refer
to the whole drama which led to Christ's return to glory, especially the
Passion (comp. vii. 33, xiii. 3, xiv. 12, 28, xvi. 5, 28, xvii. 11, 13):
and in that case we supply ; ' Will not the sight of a suffering Messiah
offend you still more ?'
63. that quickeneth] Literally, that maketh alive or giveth life.
The latter would perhaps be better to bring out the connexion with
'they are life' at the end ofthe verse.
the flesh] Not, 'My Flesh,' which would contradict v. 51. The
statement is a general one, but has reference to Himself. ' My Flesh '
in v. 51 means 'My death' to be spiritually appropriated by every
Christian, and best appropriated in the Eucharist. 'The flesh' here
means the flesh without the Spirit, that which can only be appropriated
physically, like the manna. Even Christ's flesh in this sense ' profiteth
nothing.' (Comp. iii. 6.) Probably there is a general reference to
their carnal ideas about the Messiah: it is "in our Lord's refusal to
assume the outward insignia of the Messianic dignity, and in His per
sistent spiritualisation of the Messianic idea" that we must seek "the
ultimate cause" of the defection of so many disciples. S. pp. 141,
142. the words] Or, the sayings: see on v. 47.
that I speak] The true reading is; that T have spoken, in the dis
course just concluded.
64. some of you that believe not) There were some of those who followed
Him and called themselves His disciples, who still did not believe on
Him. The better order is, there are of you some.
knew from the beginning) it is impossible to fix the exact limits of
this; the meaning of ' the beginning' must depend on the context (see
on i. 1). Here the most natural limit is 'knew from the beginning of
their discipleship,' when they first became His followers. Comp. ii.
»4> 25-
who skould betray him] Or, who it was that should betray Him.
To ask, 'Why then did Jesus choose Judas as an Apostle?' is to ask in

158 S. JOHN, VI. [vv. 66-69.
said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it
were given unto him of my Father.
66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and
67 walked no more with him. Then said Jesus unto the
68 twelve, Will ye also go away? Then Simon Peter answered
him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of
69 eternal life. And we believe and are sure that thou art
a special instance for an answer to the insoluble enigma 'Why does
Omniscience allow wicked persons to be born? Why does Omnipo
tence allow evil to exist?' The tares once sown among the wheat, both
must 'grow together till the harvest,' and share sunshine and rain
alike. 65. Therefore] Better, For this cause (xii. 18, 27) : see on v. 16,
18, vii. 22, viii. 47.
said I unto you] v. 44; comp. v. 37, and see notes on both.
were given unto him of my Father) Have been given unto him of
the Father.
66. From that time] This may be the meaning, but more probably
it means in consequence of that. Hereupon has somewhat of the ambi
guity of the Greek, combining the notions of time and result. The
Greek phrase occurs here and xix. 12 only in N.T.
67. the twelve] The first mention of them; S. John speaks of
them familiarly as a well-known body, assuming that his readers are
well acquainted with the expression (see on v. 62). This is a mark of
truth: all the more so because the expression does not occur in the
earlier chapters; for it is probable that down to the end of chap. iv. at
any rate 'the Twelve' did not yet exist.
Pilate and Mary Magdalene are introduced in the same abrupt way
(xviii. 29, xix. 25).
Will ye also go away ?] Better, Surely ye also do not wish to go
away? 'Will' is too weak; it is not the future tense, but a separate
verb, 'to will.' There is a similar error vii. 17 and viii. 44. Christ
knows not only the unbelief of the many, but the belief and loyalty of
the few.
68. Then Simon Peter] Omit ' Then.' S. Peter, as leader, primus
inter pares, answers here as elsewhere in the name of the Twelve
(see note on Mark iii. 17), and answers with characteristic impetuosity.
The firmness of His conviction shews the appropriateness of the name
given to him i. 42. His answer contains three reasons in logical order
why they cannot desert their Master : (1) there is no one else to whom
they can go ; the Baptist is dead. Even if there were (2) Jesus has all
that they need; He has 'sayings of eternal life.' And if there be
other teachers who have them also, yet (3) there is but one Messiah,
and Jesus is He. See on v. 47.
69. we believe] Rather, we have believed : the perfect tense im
plies that the faith and knowledge which they possess have been theirs
for some time past. 'Are sure' means literally 'have come to know.'

vv. 70, 71.] S. JOHN, VI. 159
that Christ, the Son of the living God. Jesus answered 70
them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a
devil ? He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon : for 71
he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.
thou art that Christ, &c] These words seem to have been imported
hither from S. Peter's Confession, Matt. xvi. 16. The true reading
here is; Thou art the Holy One of God. This is altogether a different
occasion from Matt. xvi. 16, and probably previous to it. The Con
fessions are worth comparing. 1. 'Thou art the Son of God ' (Matt.
xiv. 33); in this the other Apostles joined. 2. 'Thou art the Holy
One of God' (John vi. 69). 3. 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the
living God' (Matt. xvi. 16). They increase in fulness, as we might
expect. 70. Have I not chosen you twelve] Or, Did not I choose you the Twelve
(comp. xiii. 18)? Here probably the question ends : and one of you is a
devil is best punctuated without an interrogation ; it is a single state
ment in tragic contrast to the preceding question. It would be closer
to the Greek to omit the article before ' devil ' and make it a kind of
adjective; and one of you is devil, i.e. devilish in nature: but this is
hardly English. The words contain a half-rebuke to S. Peter for his
impetuous avowal of loyalty in the name of them all. The passage
stands alone in the N.T. (comp. Matt. xvi. 23), but its very singular
ity is evidence of its truth. S. John is not likely to have forgotten
what was said, or in translating to have made any serious change.
71. Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon) The better reading is ; Judas,
the son of Simon Iscariot. If, as seems probable, the name Iscariot
means 'man of Kerioth,' a place in Judah, it would be natural enough
for both father and son to have the name. Assuming tliis to be cor
rect, Judas was the only Apostle who was not a Galilean.
that should betray] That was to betray; not the same phrase as in
v. 64.
being one of the twelve] 'Being' is of doubtful genuineness. The
tragic contrast is stronger without the participle : for he was to betray
Him, one of the Twelve.
With regard to the difficulty of understanding Christ's words in this
sixth chapter, Meyer's concluding remark is to be borne, in mind.
"The difficulty is partly exaggerated; and partly the fact is over-,
looked that' in all references to His death and the purpose of it Jesus
could rely upon the light which the future would throw on these utter
ances : and sowing, as He generally did, for the future in the bosom of
the present, He was compelled to utter much that was mysterious, but
which would supply material and support for the further development
and purification of faith and knowledge. The wisdom thus displayed
in His teaching has been justified by History. "
Chap. VII.
" Chapter vii., like chapter vi., is very important for the estimate of
the fourth Gospel. In it the scene of the Messianic crisis shifts from

i6o S. JOHN, VII. [vv. 1-3.
Chap. VII. Christ the Source of Truth and Light.
1 — 9. The controversy with His brethren.
7 After these things Jesus walked in Galilee : for he would
not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him.
* Now the Jews' feast of tabernacles was at hand. His
Galilee to Jerusalem; and, as we should naturally expect, the crisis
itself becomes hotter. The divisions, the doubts, the hopes, the jea
lousies, and the casuistry of the Jews are vividly portrayed. We see
the mass of the populace, especially those who had come up from
Galilee, swaying to and fro, hardly knowing which way to turn, in
clined to believe, but held back by the more sophisticated citizens of
the metropolis. These meanwhile apply the fragments of Rabbinical
learning at their command in order to test the claims of the new pro
phet. In the background looms the dark shadow of the hierarchy
itself, entrenched behind its prejudices and refusing to hear the cause
that it has already prejudged. A single timid voice is raised against
this injustice, but is at once fiercely silenced." S. p. 144.
As in chapters v. and vi. Christ is set forth as the Source and Support
of Life, so in chapters vii.. viii., and ix. He is set forth as the Source
of Truth and Light.
Chap. VII. Christ the Souuce of Truth and Light.
Chapter vii. has three main divisions: 1. The controversy with His
brethren (1 — 9); 2. His teaching at the Feast of Tabernacles (10 — 39);
3. The effect of His teaching ; division both in the multitude and in the
Sanhedrin (40 — 52).
1—9. The controversy with His brethren.
1 , After these things) The interval is again vague (see introductory
note to chap. vi. ) ; but comparing vi. 4 with vii. 2 we see that it covers
about five months, the interval between the Passover and the Feast
of Tabernacles.
walked in Galilee] To this ministry in Galilee, of which S. John
tells us nothing, most of the incidents narrated Matt. xiv. 34 — xviii. 35
belong. The tenses here are all imperfects, implying continued action.
he would not walk in Jewry] From this we understand that He
did not go up to Jerusalem for the Passover mentioned vi. 4. 'Jewry'
is found here in all the English versions excepting Wiclif s ; it was
common in the earlier translations. But in the A.V. it has been
retained (probably by an oversight) only here, Luke xxiii. 5, and Dan.
v. 13: elsewhere Judsea has been substituted. In Dan. v. 13 the
same word is translated both 'Jewry' and 'Judah!' Comp. the
Prayer Book version of Ps. lxxvi. 1 .
2. the Jews' feast of tabernacles] Again an indication that the
Gospel was written outside Palestine: see on vi. 1, 4. An author
writing in Palestine would be less likely to specify it as 'the feast

w. 4, 5.] S. JOHN, VII. 161
brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go
into Judea, that thy disciples also may see the works that
thou doest. For there is no man- that doeth any thing in 4
secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If
thou do these things, shew thyself to the world. For s

ofthe Jews' Tabernacles was the most joyous of the Jewish festivals.
It had two aspects; (1) a commemoration of their dwelling in tents
in the wilderness, (2) a harvest-home. It was therefore a thanks
giving (1) for a permanent abode, (2) for the crops of the year. It
began on the 15th of the 7th month, Tisri (about our September),
and lasted seven days, during which all who were not exempted
through illness or weakness were obliged to live in booths, which
involved much both of the discomfort and also of the merriment of
" picnic. The distinctions between rich and poor were to a large
extent obliterated in the general encampment, and the Feast thus
became a great levelling institution. On the eighth day the booths
were broken up and the people returned home: but it had special
sacrifices of its own and was often counted as part of the Feast itself.
The Feast is mentioned here, partly as a date, partly to shew what
after all induced Christ to go up to Jerusalem.
3. His brethren] See on ii. 12.
Depart hence] The bluntness of this suggestion, given almost as
a command, shews that they presumed upon their near relationship.
It would be more natural in the mouths of men older than Christ, and
therefore is in favour of their being sons of Joseph by a former marriage
rather than sons of Joseph and Mary (comp. Mark iii. 21, 31). They
shared the ordinary beliefs of the Jews about the Messiah, and there
fore did not believe in their Brother. But His miracles perplexed
them, and they wished the point brought to a decisive issue. There
is no treachery in their suggestion; its object is not to put Him in the
power of His enemies.
thy disciples also] His brethren seem to imply that they themselves
are not His disciples even nominally.
4. there is no man that doeth) More simply, no man doeth.
and he himself seeketh] i. e. no one does anything in secret and is
thereby personally seeking to act with openness. To conceal His
miracles is to deny His Messiahship; the Messiah must accept His
position. to be known openly] Literally, to be in openness or frankness. The
word for ' frankness ' occurs nine times in this Gospel and four times
in the First Epistle ; not in Matt, or Luke ; only once in Mark.
If thou do these things] Feeding the 5000, and other miracles. If
Thou doest such miracles at all, do them at Jerusalem at the Feast
and convince the whole nation. It is assuming a. false position to
do such things and hide them in obscure parts of Galilee : it is
claiming to be the Messiah and being afraid to shew one's credentials.
S. JOHN 1 1

162 S. JOHN, VII. [vv. 6—8.
6 neither did his brethren believe in him. Then Jesus said
unto them, My time is not yet come : but your time is
7 alway ready. The world cannot hate you ; but me it
hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are
8 evil. Go ye up unto this feast : I go not up yet unto this
They knew probably that He had not gone up to Jerusalem for the
Passover. shew thyself] Better, manifest Thyself. See on i. 31, xxi. 1, and
comp. ix. 3, xvii. 6.
5. For neither did his brethren believe in him] Or. For not even
did His brethren (as one would expect) believe on Him. It is mar
vellous that in the face of this verse any one should have maintained
that three of His brethren (James, Simon, and Judas) were Apostles.
This verse is also fatal to the common theory, that these 'brethren'
are really our Lord's cousins, the sons of Alphseus. Certainly one
of the sons of Alphaeus (James) was an Apostle; probably a second
was (Matthew, if Levi and Matthew are the same person, as is almost
universally admitted) ; possibly a third was (Judas, if ' Judas of James '
means 'Judas, brother of James,' as is commonly supposed). By this
time the company of the Twelve was complete (vi. 67, 70, 71); so
that we cannot suppose that some of the Twelve have still to be con
verted. If then one, two, or three sons of Alphseus were Apostles,
how could it be true that the sons of Alphseus 'did not believe on
Him?' 'His brethren' cannot be the sons of Alphseus. They seem
to have been converted by the Resurrection. Immediately after the
Ascension we find them with the Apostles and the holy women (Acts
i. 14; comp. 1 Cor. ix. 5, Gal. i. 19).
6. Then Jesus said] Better, Jesus therefore saith.
My time is not yet come] i.e. My time for manifesting Myself to the
world; with special reference to the Passion. It is inadequate to
interpret it of the time for going up to the Feast. Moreover, what
sense would there be in ' Your time for going up to the Feast is always
ready?' Whereas 'You can always manifest yourselves ' makes ex
cellent sense. See last note on ii. 4.
7. The world] Unbelievers; the common meaning in S. John.
In v. 4 'the world' means all mankind. See on i. 10.
cannot hate you] Because you and it are of one mind ; because you
are part of it: it cannot hate itself; see on xv. 19. Hence it is that
they can always manifest themselves : they can always count upon
favourable surroundings and a sympathetic audience.
me it hateth] Comp. iii. 20, vii. 34, 36, viii. 21, xii. 39.
8. Go ye up unto this feast] ' Ye ' is emphatic ; ' this ' is wanting
in authority; we should read, go ye up unto the feast.
I go not- up yet] 'Yet,' though very ancient, is possibly no part
of the original text : it may have been inserted to avoid the charge of
the heathen critic Porphyry, that Jesus here shews fickleness or deceit,
and therefore cannot be Divine. But the sense is the same, whether

w. 9— n.] S. JOHN, VII. 163
feast ; for my time is not yet full come. When he had said 9
these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee.
10 — 39. The Discourse at the Feast of Tabernacles.
But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also 10
up unto the' feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.
Then the Jews sought him at the feast, and said, Where is n
' yet ' is inserted or not. He means ' I am not going now ; not going
publicly in the general caravan of pilgrims ; not going with you, who
do not believe on Me.' He does not say ' I shall not go.' The next
two verses shew exactly what is meant by the negative.
9. he abode still in Galilee] This in conjunction with v. 1 shews
that S. John is quite aware that Galilee is the main scene of Christ's
ministry, as the Synoptists, represent. The gaps in his narrative leave
ample room for the Galilean ministry.
This opening scene (1 — 9) "is described by M. Renan as a 'gem
of history' (un petit tr&or historique). He argues justly that an
-apologist, writing merely ad probandum, would not have given so
much prominence to the unbelief which Jesus met with in His own
family. He insists, too, on the individualising traits which the whole
section bears. The brethren of Jesus are not ' types ' but living men ;
their ill-natured and jealous irony is only too human." S. pp. 144,
I4S- 10 — 39. The Discourse at the Feast of Tabernacles.
Of this section vv. 10 — 15 form a sort of introduction.
"An equal degree of authenticity belongs to the verses which follow,
10 — 15. The whispered enquiries and debatings among the people,
the secret journey, the sudden appearance in the temple in the midst
of the Feast, and in particular the question that alludes to the Rab
binical schools and the custom of professed teachers to frequent them,
compose a varied, clear, and graphic picture that has every circum
stance of probability in its favour." S. pp. 145, 146.
10. unto the feast] These words have become transposed ; they be
long to the first clause, not to the second ; Now when His brethren were
gone up to the feast, then He also went up. This being so, it becomes
possible, if not probable, that Christ's declaration ' I go not up to this
Feast' is true, even when made to mean ' I shall not go up at all.' All
that is certain is that Christ appeared when the Feast was half over (v.
H).
not openly] Not in the general caravan, but either by a different
route (e.g. through Samaria, as in iv. 4, instead of down the eastern
bank of Jordan), or several days later. One suspects that traces of
Docetism are difficult to find in this Gospel when it is maintained that
this verse contains such.
11. the Jews] The hostile party, as usual: comp. v. 1. Both here
and in v. 6 'then' should rather be therefore: comp. vi. 53, 67, 68.
II — 2

164 S. JOHN, VII. [vv. 12—16.
» he? And there was much murmuring among the people
concerning him : for some said, He is a good man : others
13 said, Nay ; but he deceiveth the people. Howbeit no man
spake openly of him for fear of the Jews.
14 Now about the midst of the feast Jesus went up into the
IS temple, and taught. And the Jews marvelled, saying, How
16 knoweth this man letters, having never learned? Jesus
The force of the ' therefore ' here is ' because they did not find Him in
the caravan of pilgrims from Galilee.'
sought. ..and said] Both verbs are imperfects of continued action.
They do not mention His name, — perhaps in contempt; 'Where is that
man?' Comp. ix. 28.
12. murmuring] Talking in an under tone, not necessarily com
plaining: see on vi. 41, 61. Here some are for, and some against Him.
'Among the people * should rather be among the multitudes ; the word
is plural, and this is the only place in the Gospel where the plural is
used : the singular (He leadeth the multitude astray) is common.
13. no man] Quite literally; no man dared speak openly either for
or against Him, they were so afraid of the hierarchy. Experience had
taught them that it was dangerous to take any line which the rulers had
not formally sanctioned; and though the rulers were known to be
against Christ, yet they had not committed themselves beyond recall,
and might turn against either side. 'A true indication of an utterly
Jesuitical domination ofthe people.' Meyer.
for fear of the Jews] Literally, for the fear of the Jews, i.e. on
account of the prevalent fear of the hierarchy and official representatives
of the nation.
14. about the midst of the feast] Literally, But now, when the feast
was at the middle, or was half way past; i.e. about the fourth day. But
the expression is a vague one, so that we cannot be certain which
day. went up into the temple] Whether He had been in Jerusalem or not
since the beginning ofthe Feast, is uncertain : see on v. 10. This is per
haps the first occasion of His publicly teaching in the Temple ; when
He cleansed it (ii. 13 — 17) He delivered no discourse.
15. And the Jews marvelled] According to the best MSS., The Jew s
therefore marvelled. 'Therefore' should also be inserted in v. 16;
Jesus therefore answered them. S. John's extreme fondness for this
particle in narrative is worth keeping in view.
How knoweth this man letters] Or, this fellow, as in vi. 42. Their
question is so eminently characteristic, that it is very unlikely that a
Greek writer of the second century would have been able to invent it
for them ; he would probably have made them too cautious to commit
themselves to any expression of astonishment about Him. The sub
stance of His doctrine excites no emotion in them, but they are
astounded that He should possess learning without having got it accord
ing to ordinary routine. He had never attended the schools of the

vv. 17— 19.] S. JOHN, VII. 165
answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his
that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know 17
of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak
of myself. He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own 18
glory : but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same
is true, and no unrighteousness is in him. Did not Moses 19
Rabbis, and yet His interpretations of Scripture shewed a large amount
of biblical and other knowledge. That does excite them. In Acts xxvi.
24, ' much learning doth make thee mad,' the word there translated
' learning ' is the same as the one here translated ' letters.'
16 — 36. The remark made on the Jews' question in v. 15 applies
also to their questions and comments throughout this dialogue. They
are too exactly in keeping with what we know of the Jews in our Lord's
day to be the invention of a Greek more than a century later. They
"are all exactly what we should expect from the popular mode of inter
preting and applying the Messianic prophecies." S. p. 146.
16. My doctrine is not mine] ' The teaching which I give does not
originate with Me ; that is the reason why I have no need to learn in
the schools. He Who sent Me communicates it to Me.'
17. If any man will do his will] As in vi. 67 and viii. 44, ' will ' is
too weak ; it is not the simple future, but the verb ' to will :' If any man
willeth to do His will. The mere mechanical performance of God's
will is not enough; there must be an inclination towards Him, a wish
to make our conduct agree with His will ; and without this agreement
Divine doctrine cannot be recognised as such. There must be a moral
harmony between the teaching and the taught, and this harmony is in
the first instance God's giftjvi. 44, 45), which each can accept or refuse
at will. Comp. xiv. 21.
he shall know] Literally, He shall come to know, recognise. See on
v. 26 and viii. 55.
whether it be of God, &c] Literally, whether it proceeds from God (as
its Fount), or I speak from Myself. Comp. v. 30, xv. 4.
18. Proof almost in the form of a syllogism that He does not speak
of Himself. It applies to Christ alone. Human teachers who seek
God's glory are not thereby secured from erroneous teaching. These
verses (16 — 18) remind us, and might remind some of His hearers of an
earlier discourse delivered in Jerusalem some seven months before:
comp. v. 19, 30, 37, 44.
the same is true] and therefore does not speak of himself, for who
ever speaks what comes from himself is not true.
no unrighteousness is in him] Or, unrighteousness is not in him.
S. John does not say ' falsehood ' as we might expect, but uses a wider
word which points out the moral root of the falsehood. Comp. viii. 46.
Throughout S. John's writings the connexion between truth and
righteousness, falsehood and unrighteousness is often brought before
us. Hence his peculiar phrases ' to do the truth ' (1 John i. 6), ' to do a
lie' (Rev. xxi. 27, xxii. 15).

166 S. JOHN, VII. [vv. 20—22.
give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law?
20 Why go ye about to kill me ? The people answered and
said, Thou hast a devil: who goeth about to kill thee?
21 Jesus answered and said unto them, I have done one work,
22 and ye all marvel. Moses therefore gave unto you cir
cumcision, not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers ;
There is no need to suppose that anything is omitted between 18
and 19, though the transition is abrupt. Christ has answered them
and now takes the offensive. He exposes the real meaning of their
cavillings ; they seek His life.
19. Did not Moses give you the law?) Here the question should
probably end : and none of you doeth the law should be a simple state
ment in contrast to the question preceding. The argument is similar to
v. 45; Moses in whom they trust condemns them. Moreover it is an
argumentum ad hominem : ' ye axe all breakers of the law, and yet
would put Me to death as a breaker of it.'
20. Thou hast a devil] The multitude who have come up from the
provinces know nothing of the designs of the hierarchy, although
dwellers in Jerusalem (v. 25) are better informed. These provincials
think He must be possessed to have such an idea. Comp. x. 20, and
also Matt. xi. 18, where the same is quoted as said of the Baptist. In
both cases extraordinary conduct is supposed to be evidence of in
sanity, and the insanity is attributed to demoniacal possession. In viii.
48 the same remark is made, but in a much more hostile spirit (see note
there); and there Christ answers the charge. Here, where it is the mere
ignorant rejoinder of a perplexed multitude, He takes no notice of the
interruption. 21. I have done] Better, I did. Comp. v. 23.
one work] The healing of the impotent man at Bethesda : it excited
the astonishment of all as being wrought on the Sabbath. Christ re
minds them that on that occasion all, and not the rulers only, were
offended. Most modern editors add to this verse the words translated 'there
fore ' in v. 22 [it is not S. John's favourite particle (see on v. 15), but a
preposition with a pronoun =for this cause, on account of this] ; ' and
ye all marvel on account of this.' But this is cumbrous, and unlike
S. John, who begins sentences with this phrase (v. 16, 18, viii. 47, x. 17,
xii. 39; mistranslated 'therefore' in all cases) rather than ends them
with it. The old arrangement is best.
22. Moses therefore gave] Better, For this cause (xii. 18, 27) Moses
hath given. Comp. viii. 47.
of Moses... of the fathers] 'Originating with Moses. ..originating
with the fathers.' Circumcision originated with the Patriarchs, and
was a more ancient institution than the Sabbath. When, therefore,
the two ordinances clashed, the younger had to give place; it was
more fit that the Sabbath should be broken, than that circumcision
should be administered on the wrong day. If then the Sabbath

vy. 23—27.] S. JOHN, VII. 167
and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man. If a man 23
on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of
Moses should not be broken ; are ye angry at me, because
I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day ?
Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous 24
judgment. Then said some of them of Jerusalem, Is not 25
this he, whom they seek to kill? But lo, he speaketh 16
boldly, and they say nothing unto him. Do the rulers
know indeed that this is the very Christ ? Howbeit we 27
know this man whence he is : but when Christ cometh, no
could give way to a mere ceremonial observance, how much more
might it give way to a work of mercy? The law of charity is older
and higher than any ceremonial law.
on ihe sabbath] Rather, on a Sabbath; so also in v. 23.
23. that the law of Moses should not be broken] i.e. the law about
circumcision on the eighth day (Lev. xii. 3), which was a re-enactment
of the patriarchal law (Gen. xvii. 12). Some adopt the inferior ren
dering in the margin ; ' without breaking the law of Moses, ' or ' with
out the law of Moses being broken ;' in which case ' the law of Moses '
means the law about the Sabbath.
are ye angry] The word occurs nowhere else in N.T. It signifies
bitter and violent resentment.
because I have made] Better, because I made. Comp. u. 21.
24. according to the appearance] ' According to the appearance '
Christ's act was a breach of the Sabbath. This is almost certainly the
meaning, although the word translated ' appearance ' may mean ' face, '
and is rightly translated 'face' in xi. 44 (see note there). There is no
reference here to Christ's having ' no form nor comeliness,' as if He
meant 'Judge not by My mean appearance.'
25. Then said some] Or, Some therefore said (see on vi. 53, vii.
11, 15), i.e. in consequence of Christ's vindication of Himself. These
inhabitants of the capital know better than the provincials, who speak
in v. 20, what the intentions of the hierarchy really are.
26. boldly] Or, with frankness, or openness; the same word as in
v. 4, where (as in xvi. 29) it has a preposition; here and v. 13 it is the
simple dative.
Do the rulers know] The word here translated 'know' is not the one
translated 'know' in vv. 28, 29. The latter is the most general word
for ' know :' this means rather to ' acquire knowledge. ' Have the
rulers come to know (or recognised)/ See on i. 10. In the next verse
we have both words. Comp. viii. 55.
that this is the very Christ] 'Very' is wanting in authority: that
this man is- the Christ is the right reading. This suggestion, however,
is only a momentary thought. They at once raise a difficulty which
for them demolishes the suggestion.
27. when Christ cometh] Better, when the Christ cometh: see onj. to.

168 S. JOHN, VII. [w. 28, 29.
28 man knoweth whence he is. Then cried Jesus in the
temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye
know whence I am : and I am not come of myself, but he
29 that sent me is true, whom ye know not. But I know him :
no man knoweth whence he is] Literally, no man comes to know (see
on v. 26 and viii. 55) whence He is. ' Whence' does not refer to the
Messiah's birthplace, which was known (vv. 41, 42); nor to His remote
descent, for He was to be the Son of David (ibid.); but to His parent
age (vi. 42), immediate and actual. This text is the strongest, if not
the only evidence that we have of the belief that the immediate parents
of the Messiah would be unknown : but the precision and vivacity of
this passage carries conviction with it, and shews how familiar the
ideas current among the Jews at that time were to S. John. It never
occurs to him to explain. The belief might easily grow out of Isa.
liii. 8, 'Who shall declare His generation?' Justin Martyr tells us
of a kindred belief, that the Messiahship of the Messiah would be
unknown, even to Himself, until He was anointed by Elijah. (Trypho,
pp. 226, 336.)
28. Then cried Jesus] Better, Jesus therefore cried aloud. The
word translated ' cried ' signifies a loud expression Of strong emotion.
He is moved by their gross misconception of Him, a fact which the
weakening of 'therefore' into 'then' obscures. Comp. v. 37, i. 15,
xii. 44.
in the temple] S. John well remembers that moving cry in the
Temple ; the scene is still before him and he puts it before us, although
neither ' in the Temple ' nor ' as He taught ' is needed for the narrative
(see v. 14).
Ye both know me, &c] Various constructions have been put upon
this: (1) that it is a question; (2) that it is ironical; (3) a mixture of
the two; (4) a. reproach, i.e. that they knew His Divine nature and
maliciously concealed it. None of these are satisfactory. The words
are best understood quite simply and literally. Christ admits the
truth of what they say : they have an outward knowledge of Him and
His origin (vi. 42) ; but He has an inner and higher origin, of which
they know nothing. So that even their self-made test, for the sake of
which they are willing to resist the evidence both of Scripture and of
His works, is complied with; for they know not His real immediate
origin. and I am not come of myself] ' Of Myself is emphatic ; and (yet) of
Myself I am not come. Comp. viii. 42. The 'and'- introduces a con
trast, as so often in S. John: 'ye know My person, and ye know My
parentage; and yet of the chief thing of all, My Divine mission, ye
know nothing. See on v. 30.
but he that sent me is true] The word for 'true' here is the same as
occurs i. 9 in ' the true Light ' (see note there) : the meaning, there
fore, is not 'truthful' but 'real, perfect;' He that sendeth Me is a real
sender, One who in the highest and most perfect sense can give a mis-

w. 30—32.] S. JOHN, VII. 169
for I am from him, and he hath sent me. Then they 30
sought to take him : but no man laid hands on him,
because his hour was not yet come. And many of the 31
people believed on him, and said, When Christ cometh, will
he do moe miracles than these which this man hath done ?
The Pharisees heard that the people murmured such things 32
concerning him; and the Pharisees and the chief priests

sion. But perhaps here and in Rev. iii. 7 and xix. 1 1 the distinction
between the two words for 'true' is not very marked. Such refine
ments (the words being alike except in termination) have a tendency to
become obscured.
29. / know him] ' I ' in emphatic contrast to the preceding • ye,'
which is also emphatic. ' I know Him, for I came forth from Him,
and it is He, and no other, that sent Me.' ' Sent' is aorist, not perfect.
Comp. the very remarkable passage Matt. xi. 27.
30. Then they sought] Better, Therefore they kept seeking (im
perfect of continued action) in consequence of His publicly claiming
Divine origin and mission. 'They' means the rulers, the Sanhedrin;
not the people, who are mentioned in the next verse.
but no man laid hands] Rather, and no man laid hands, 'and'
introducing a contrast as in u. 28. See on xxi. 3. That ' and' in
S. John often = 'and yet,' as here, is most true; that 'and' ever='but'
is true neither of S. John nor of any other Greek writer.
because his hour] The hour appointed by God for His Passion (xiii.
1), this meaning being clearly marked by the context (see on v. 6 and
ii. 4). The immediate cause of their not seizing Him was that they
were as yet afraid to do so ; but S. John passes through proximate
causes to the prime cause of all, the Will of God. When the hour
was come God no longer allowed their fear, which still existed (Matt.
xxvi. 5), to deter them.
31. And many of the people] Our version is somewhat perverse;
in v. 30 'and' is arbitrarily turned into 'but;' here 'but 'is turned
into 'and.' But (on the other hand, i.e. in contrast to the rulers) of
the multitude many believed on Him (as the Messiah) and kept saying
(in answer to objectors), When the Christ (see on v. 27 and i. 20)
cometh, will He do more signs than this man did? They express not
their own doubts but those of objectors in saying ' when the Christ
cometh:' they believe that He has come. Some of them perhaps had
witnessed the numerous Galilean miracles ; they have at any rate
heard of them.
32. heard that the people murmured such things] Better, heard the
multitude muttering these things (see on v. 12): it was not reported
to them, they heard it themselves, and they went and reported it in the
Sanhedrin, which gives an order for His apprehension. Note that in
this the reckless hierarchy, who were mainly Sadducees, combine with
the Pharisees (comp, v. 45, xi. 47, 57, xviii. 3).

170 S. JOHN, VII. [vv. 33— 35.
33 sent officers to take him. Then said Jesus unto them, Yet
a little while am I with you, and then I go unto him that
34 sent me. Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and
3s where I am, thither ye cannot come. Then said the Jews
among themselves, Whither will he go, that we shall not
find him? will he go unto the dispersed among the Gentiles,
33. Then said Jesus] Better, as in v. 30 and often, Therefore said
Jesus, i.e. in consequence of their sending to arrest Him : probably He
recognised the officers waiting for an opportunity to take Him. Ac
cording to the best MSS., 'Unto them' should be omitted: Christ's
words are addressed to the officers and those who sent them.
It is very di fficult to decide on the precise meaning of Christ's words.
Perhaps the simplest interpretation is the best. 'I must remain on
earth a little while longer, and during this time ye cannot kill Me:
then ye will succeed, and I shall go to My Father. Thither ye will
wish to come, but ye cannot ; for ye know Him not (v. 28), and such
as ye cannot enter there.' This is the first formal attempt upon His
life. It reminds Him that His death is not far off, and that it will
place a tremendous barrier between Him and those who compass it.
It is the beginning of the end ; an end that will bring a short-lived
loss and eternal triumph to Him, a short-lived triumph and eternal
loss to them.
unto him that sent me] One suspects that here S. John is translat
ing Christ's words into plainer language than He actually used. Had
He said thus clearly 'unto Him that sent Me,' a phrase which they
elsewhere understand at once of God (see on v. 30), they could scarcely
have asked the questions which follow in v. 35. Unless we are to
suppose that they here pretend not to understand ; which is unlikely,
as they speak not to Him but 'among themselves.'
34. Ye shall seek me] From xiii. 33 it seems almost certain that
these words are not to be understood of seeking His life: rather of
seeking for help at His hands. Comp. viii. 21. It is best, however,
not to limit their application to any particular occasion, such as the
destruction of Jerusalem, the great hour of Jewish need.
where I am, thither ye cannot come] ' Thither' is not in the Greek
and is perhaps better omitted, so as to bring out the emphatic oppo
sition between ' I ' and ' ye. '
35. Then said the Jews] The Jews therefore said, i.e. in con
sequence of what Christ had said, shewing that it is to the official
representatives of the nation that His words are addressed.
Whither will he go, &c. ] Better, Where does this fellow intend to
go, seeing that we shall not find. Him? Does He intend to go unto
the dispersion among the Gentiles, &c.
the dispersed] Or, the dispersion, meaning those Jews who were
dispersed among the heathen outside Palestine; the abstract for the
concrete, like ' the circumcision ' for the Jews generally. The word
for 'dispersion' (diaspora), occurs James i. 1 and 1 Pet. i. 1 (see

w. 36,37-] S. JOHN, VII. 171
and teach the Gentiles ? What manner of saying is this 36
that he said, Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me : and
where I am, thither ye cannot come ?
In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood 37
and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me,
notes there), and nowhere else in N.T. There were three chief
colonies of these ' dispersed ' or ' scattered ' Jews, in Babylonia, Egypt,
and Syria, whence they spread over the whole world. ' Moses of old
time hath in every city them that preach him,' Acts xv. 21. These
opponents of Christ, therefore, suggest that He means to go to the
Jews scattered among the Gentiles in order to reach the Gentiles and
teach them — the very mode of proceeding afterwards adopted by the
Apostles. But here it is spoken in sarcasm. Christ's utter disregard
of Jewish exclusiveness and apparent non-observance of the ceremonial
law gave a handle to the sneer ; which would be pointless if the word
translated 'Gentiles' (margin 'Greeks') were rendered 'Hellenists,'
i. e. Grecised Jews. Hellenes, ox ' Greeks,' in N. T. always means
Gentiles or heathen. See on xii. 20.
36. What manner of saying is this] Or, What Is this saying?
' this ' being contemptuous, like ' this precious saying.' They know
that their scornful suggestion is not true.
37. In the last day, that great day] Now on the last day, the
great day. This was probably not the seventh day, but the eighth
day, which according to Lev. xxiii. 36, 39; Num. xxix. 35; Neh.
viii. 18, was' reckoned along with the seven days of the feast proper.
To speak of the seventh day as 'the great day ofthe feast' would not
be very appropriate; whereas the eighth day on which the people
returned home was, like the first day, kept as a Sabbath (Lev. xxiii.
39), and had special sacrifices (Num. xxix. 36 — 38). In keeping with
the solemnity of the day Christ solemnly takes up His position and
cries aloud with deep emotion (see on v. 28).
stood] Or, was standing.
If any man thirst] The conjectural reference to the custom of
pouring water at the Feast of Tabernacles is probably correct. On
all seven days water was brought from the pool of Siloam and poured
into a silver basin on the western side of the altar of burnt offering,
a ceremony not mentioned in O.T. Apparently this was not done
on the eighth day. Accordingly Christ comes forward and fills the
gap, directing them to a better water than that of Siloam. The fact
that the water was poured and not drunk, does not seem to be a
reason for denying the reference, especially when we remember how
frequently Christ took an external fact as a text (comp. iv. 10, v. 17,
19, vi. 26, 27, (viii. 12?) ix. 39, xiii. 8, 10, 12 — 17; Mark x. 15, 16, 23,
24, Src). The pouring of the water would be suggestive enough. In
such cases there is no need for the analogy to be complete, and in the
present case it would add point to the reference that it was not com
plete. Mere pouring of water could not quench even bodily thirst ;

172 S. JOHN, VII. [w. 38—40.
38 and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath
39 said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But
this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him
should receive : for the Holy Ghost was not yet given ;
because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
40 — 52. Opposite Results of the Discourse.
40 Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying,
Christ could satisfy spiritual thirst. ' Therefore with joy shall ye draw
water out of the wells of salvation.' Isa. xii. 3.
38. as the scripture hath said] This phrase undoubtedly refers to
the words that follow: but inasmuch as no such text is found in
Scripture, some have tried to force the phrase into connexion with
what precedes, as if the meaning were 'He that believeth on me in
the way that Scripture prescribes.' Although the exact words are not
found in Scripture there are various texts of similar import : Isa. xliv.
3, lviii. n; Zech. xiii. t, xiv. 8, &c. But none of them contain the
very remarkable expression 'out of his belly.'
rivers of living water] In the Greek ' rivers ' stands first with strong
emphasis; rivers out of his belly shall flow, (rivers) of living water,
in marked contrast to the ewer of water poured each day during the
Feast. ' He that believeth on me ' is of course a stage far in advance
of ' if any one thirst.' A man may thirst for spiritual satisfaction, and
yet not end in believing on Christ. But the believer cannot end in
satisfying his own thirst; he at once becomes a fount whence others
may derive refreshment. Whether he wills to be a teacher or no, the
true Christian cannot fail to impart the spirit of Christianity to others.
39. this spake he of the Spirit] S. John's interpretation is to be
accepted, whatever may be our theory of inspiration, (1) because no
better interpreter of Christ's words ever lived, even among the Apostles ;
(2) because it is the result of his own inmost experience. The principle
of Christian activity has ever been the Spirit. He moves the waters,
and they overflowed at Pentecost. Till then ' the Spirit was not yet ;'
the dispensation of the Spirit had not come.
the Holy Ghost was not yet given] Both ' the Holy ' and ' given '
are of doubtful authority : ' given ' is omitted by nearly all MSS. except
the Vatican; it gives the right sense. Like 'Holy Spirit' in i. 33,
' Spirit ' has no article and means a power of the Spirit.
because that Jesus was not yet glorified] Comp. xvi. 7 ; Ps. Ixviii. 18.
The Spirit, "though given in His fulness to Christ Himself (iii. 34),
and operating through Him in His people (vi. 63), was not, until
after Christ's return to glory, to be given to the faithful as the Para
clete and representative of Christ for the carrying on of His work."
Meyer. 40—52. Opposite Results of the Discourse.
40. Many of the people, &c] According to the best authorities ;

w. 41— 45.] S. JOHN, VII. 173
said, Of a truth this is the Prophet. Others said, This is the 41
Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee ?
Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed 42
of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David
was ? So there was a division among the people because 43
of him. And some of them would have taken him ; but no 4*
man laid hands on him.
Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; 45
Of the multitude, therefore, some, when they heard these words,
were saying, or, began to say.
Of a truth this is the Prophet] The Prophet of Deut. xviii. 15,
whom some identified with the Messiah, others supposed would be the
fore-runner of the Messiah. Here he is plainly distinguished from the
Messiah. See on i. 21 and vi. 14.
41. Others said. ..some said] Both verbs, as in v. 40, are imperfects
of repeated action ; kept saying, used to say.
Shall Christ come out of Galilee] We have here an instance how
little attention our translators paid to the Greek article: in the same
verse they translate the article in one place and ignore it in another.
In the next verse they ignore it again. In all three places it should
be 'the Christ' (see on i. 20). Why, doth the Christ come out of
Galilee? It is quite inadmissible to infer, because S. John does not
correct this mistake of supposing that Jesus came from Galilee, that he
is either ignorant of the truth or indifferent to it. He knew that his
readers would be well aware of the facts. On the other hand, could
a Greek of the second century invent these discussions of the Jewish
multitude ?
42. of the seed of David] Ps. cxxxii. 11; Jer. xxiii. 5; Isa. xi. 1, 10.
out of the town of Bethlehem] Literally, from Bethlehem, the
village where David was. Mic. v. 2 ; 1 Sam xvi.
43. a division] Schisma, whence our word ' schism.' It means a
serious and possibly violent division: ix. 16, x. 19; 1 Cor. i. 10,
xii. 25 ; comp. Acts xiv. 4, xxiii. 7. In N. T. it is never used in the
modern sense of a separation from the Church, but of parties in the
Church. In the Synoptists it is used only in its original sense of
physical severing; 'a worse rent is made;' Matt. ix. 16; Mark ii. 21.
among the people] In the multitude.
44. some of them] Some of the multitude, provoked by the con
troversy, would on their own responsibility have carried Him before the
Sanhedrin. These 'some' are not the officers mentioned in the next
verse. 45. Then came the officers] Better, Therefore came the officers,
i.e. because neither they nor any of the multitude had ventured to
arrest Him. Under the control of God's providence (v. 30), they had
been unable to find any good opportunity for taking Him, and had
been over-awed by the majesty of His words (v. 46).

174 S. JOHN, VII. [vv. 46— 51.
and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him ?
46 The officers answered, Never man spake Hke this man.
47 Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived ?
48 Have any ofthe rulers or ofthe Pharisees believed on him?
49 But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed.
so Nicodemus saith unto them, (he that came to Jesus by
51 night, being one of them,) Doth our law judge any man,

to the chief priests and Pharisees] See on v. 32. It would seem as
if the Sanhedrin had continued sitting, waiting for the return of its
officers; an extraordinary proceeding on so great a day (see on v. 37),
shewing the intensity of their hostility. Their question is quite in
harmony with this.
they said) The pronoun used (ekeinoi) indicates that they are
regarded as alien or hostile to the narrator.
Why have ye not brought] Why did ye not bring ?
46. Never man spake like this man) The reading is doubtful ; some
of the best MSS. have Never man so spake. Possibly Christ said a
good deal more than is recorded by S. John.
47. the Pharisees] That portion of the Sanhedrin which was most
jealous of orthodoxy, regarded both by themselves and others as models
of correct belief : see next verse. For ' then ' read therefore.
Are ye also deceived] Strong emphasis on ' ye ;' Surely ye also have
nol been led astray, ye, the officers ofthe Sanhedrin ! Comp. v. 12.
48. What right have you to judge for yourselves, contrary to the
declared opinion of the Sanhedrin and of the orthodox party? What
right have you to wear our livery and dispute our resolutions?
49. this people] Very contemptuous; this multitude of yours
(comp. 35, 36), whose ignorant fancies you prefer to our deliberate
decisions. who knoweth not the law] The form of negative used implies cen
sure ; knoweth not when it ought to know. They ought to know that
a sabbath-breaker cannot be the Messiah.
are cursed] A mere outburst of theological fury. A formal excom
munication of the whole multitude by the Sanhedrin (comp. ix. 22)
would be impossible. How could such a sentence be executed on the
right individuals? It was reserved for a Christian hierarchy to invent
the interdict. Excommunication en masse was unknown to the Jews.
50. he that came to Jesus by night] The better reading seems to be,
he that came to Him before. See on iii. 1, 2. His 'being one of
them' contradicts what is implied in v. 48, that no member of the
Sanhedrin believed on Him.
51. Doth our law) 'Law' is emphatic. 'You condemn the mul
titude for not knowing the law; but are we not forgetting the law in
condemning a man unheard?' These learned theologians and lawyers
were forgetting such plain and simple texts as Deut. i. 16, 17, xvii. 8,
xix. 15; involving the most elementary principles of justice.

v. 52.] S. JOHN, VII. 175
before it hear him, and know what he doeth ? They 52
answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Galilee?
Search, and look : for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.
any man, before it hear kim] Literally, the man (prosecuted) ex
cept it first hear from himself.
62. Art thou also of Galilee ?] ' Surely thou dost not sympathize
with Him as being a fellow-countryman?' They share the popular
belief that Jesus was by birth a Galilean (v. 41).
out of Galilee ariseth no prophet] Either their temper makes them
forgetful, or in the heat of controversy they prefer a sweeping state
ment to a qualified one. Jonah of Gath-hepher (2 Kings xiv. 25) was
certainly of Galilee ; Nahum of Elkosh may have been, but the situa
tion of Elkosh is uncertain ; Hosea was of the northern kingdom, but
whether of Galilee or not is unknown ; Abelmeholah, whence Elisha
came, was in the north part of the Jordan valley, possibly in Galilee.
Anyhow, their statement is only a slight and very natural exaggera
tion (comp. iv. o. 29). Judging from the past, Galilee was not very
likely to produce a Prophet, much less the Messiah.

Of the various questions which arise respecting the paragraph that
follows (vii. 53 — viii. 11) one at least may be answered with something
like certainty, — that it is no part ofthe Gospel of S. John. (1) In both
tone and style it is very unlike his writings. His favourite words and
expressions are wanting ; others that he rarely or never uses are found.
(2) It breaks the course of the narrative, which runs smoothly enough
if this paragraph be omitted; and hence a few of the MSS. which
contain it place it at the end of the Gospel. (3) All the very serious
amount of external evidence which tells against the passage being part
of the Gospel narrative at all of course tells against its being by S. John,
and in this respect is not counterbalanced by other considerations.
So that the internal and external evidence when put together is over
whelmingly against the paragraph being part of the Fourth Gospel.
With regard to the question whether the section is a genuine portion
of the Gospel history, the internal evidence is wholly in favour of its
being so, while the balance of external testimony is decidedly on the
same side. (1) The style is similar to the Synoptic Gospels, espe
cially to S. Luke; and four inferior MSS. insert the passage at the end
of Luke xxi., the place in the history into which it fits best. (2) It
bears the impress of truth and is fully in harmony with Christ's conduct
on other occasions ; yet it is quite original and cannot be a divergent
account of any other incident in the Gospels. (3) It is easy to see
how prudential reasons may in some cases have caused its omission
(the fear of giving, as S. Augustine says, peccandi impunitatem mulier-
ibus); difficult to see what, excepting its truth, can have caused its
insertion. (4) Though it is found in no Greek MS. earlier than the
sixth century, nor in the earliest versions, nor is quoted as by S. John
until late in the fourth century, yet Jerome says that in his time it was

176 S. JOHN, VII. VIII. [vv. 53; 1,2.
g And every man went unto his own house. Jesus went
2 unto the mount of Olives. And early in the morning he
came again into the temple, and all the people came unto
contained 'in many Greek and Latin MSS.' (Adv. Pelag. 11. 17), and
these must have been as good as, or better than, the best MSS. which
we now possess.
The question as to who is the author, cannot be answered. There is
not sufficient material for a satisfactory conjecture, and mere guesswork
is worthless. The extraordinary number of various readings (80 in
183 words) points to more than one source.
One more question remains. How is it that nearly all the MSS.
that do contain it (several uncials, including the Cambridge MS., and
more than 300 cursives) agree in inserting it here? This cannot be
answered with certainty. Similarity of matter may have caused it to
have been placed in the margin in one copy, and thence it may have
passed, as other things have done, into the text of the Cambridge
and other MSS. In chap. vii. we have an unsuccessful attempt to
ruin Jesus : this paragraph contains the history of another attempt,
equally unsuccessful. Or, the incident may have been inserted in the
margin in illustration of viii. 15, and hence have got into the text.

53. That this verse, as well as viii. t, 2, is omitted in most MSS.
shews that prudential reasons cannot explain the omission of the para
graph in more than a limited number of cases. Some MSS. omit only
viii. 3 — 11.
every man went unto his own house] To what meeting this refers
we cannot tell : of course not to the meeting of the Sanhedrin just
recorded by S. John. It is unfortunate that the verse should have been
left as the end of this chapter instead of beginning the next.
Chap. VIII.
1. the mount of Olives) S. John nowhere mentions the Mount of
Olives (comp. xviii. 1), and when he mentions a new place he com
monly adds an explanation: i. 44, iv. 5, v. 2, vi. 1, xix. 13, 17. The
phrase for 'went unto' is not found in S. John. Both occur in all
three Synoptists.
2. And early in the morning, &c] Comp. Luke xxi. 37, 38; 'and
in the day time He was teaching in the temple, and at night He went
out and abode in the mount that is called the mount of Olives. And
all the people came early in the morning to Him in the temple for to
hear Him.' The phrase for 'all the people' used by S. Luke is the
phrase which occurs here : S. John never uses it. S. John uses the
word for 'people' only twice; it occurs more than thirty times in
S. Luke, and more than twenty times in the Acts. The word for
'came early' is a verb derived from the word for 'early' which occurs
here: S. John uses neither.

vv. 3—6.] S. JOHN, VIII. 177
him ; and he sat down, and taught them. And the scribes 3
and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery;
and when they had set her in the midst, they say unto him, 4
Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be 5
stoned : but what sayest thou ? This they said, tempting 6
him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus
sat down] To teach with authority. Comp. Matt. v. 1, xxiii. 2;
Mark ix. 35.
3. the scribes and Pharisees] This phrase is used thrice by S. Luke,
once each by S. Matthew and S. Mark. S. John nowhere mentions
the scribes: he speaks ofthe hierarchy as 'the chief priests' or 'rulers'
with or without 'the Pharisees,' or else simply as 'the Jews.' Here
we are probably not to understand an official deputation from the
Sanhedrin : there is nothing to shew that the woman had been taken
before the Sanhedrin before being brought to Christ.
brought unto him] Literally, bring unto Him. The bringing her
was a wanton outrage both on her and on all generous and modest
spectators. She might have been detained while the case was referred
to Christ. The statement 'in the very act' is another piece of brutal
indelicacy; and the Greek verb, hath been taken, adds to this.
5. Moses in the law] Of the two texts given in the margin of our
Bible, Lev. xx. 10 and Deut. xxii. 22, probably neither is correct. It
is often assumed that 'put to death' in Jewish Law means stoning:
such however is not Jewish tradition. The Rabbis taught that it meant
strangulation ; i. e. the criminal was smothered in mud and then a cord
was twisted round his neck. But for the case of a betrothed woman
sinning in the city, stoning is specified as the punishment (Deut. xxii.
23, 24), and this is probably what is indicated here. Such cases would
be rare, and therefore all the better suited for a casuistical question.
but what sayest thou?] Better, What therefore sayest Thou? This is
the only place in the whole paragraph where S.John's favourite particle
'therefore' occurs; and that not in the narrative, where S. John makes
such frequent use of it, but in the dialogue, where he very rarely
employs it. Scarcely anywhere in this Gospel can a dozen verses of
narrative be found without a 'therefore;' but see ii. 1 — 17, and contrast
iv. 1 — 26, xx. 1 — 9.
6. tempting him] The Greek word for 'tempting' is frequent in the
Synoptists of trying to place Christ in a, difficulty; never so used in
S. John, who, however, uses it once of Christ ' proving ' Philip
(vi. 6).
that they might have to accuse him] This clause must be borne in
mind in determining what the difficulty was in which they wished to
place Him. It seems to exclude the supposition that they hoped to
undermine His popularity, in case He should decide for the extreme
rigour of the law ; the people having become accustomed to a lax
morality (Matt. xii. 39; Mark viii. 38). Probably the case is somewhat
s. JOHN 1 2

178 S. JOHN, VIII. [v. 7.
stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as
7 though he heard them not. So when they continued asking
him, he lift up himself, and said unto them, He that is
without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
parallel to the question about tribute, and they hoped to bring Him into
collision either with the Law and Sanhedrin or with the Roman Govern
ment. If He said she was not to be stoned, He contradicted Jewish
Law; if He said she was to be stoned, He ran counter to Roman Law,
for the Romans had deprived the Jews of the right to inflict capital
punishment (xviii. 31). The Sanhedrin might of course pronounce
sentence of death (Matt. xxvi. 66; Mark xiv. 64; comp. John xix. 7),
but it rested with the Roman governor whether he would allow the
sentence to be carried out or not (xix. 16) : see on xviii. 31 and
xix. 6.
stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground] It is said that
this gesture was a recognised sign of unwillingness to attend to what was
being said ; a call for a change of subject. McClellan quotes Plut. 11.
532: 'Without uttering a syllable, by merely raising the eyebrows, or
stooping down, or fixing the eyes upon the ground, you may baffle un
reasonable importunities.' 'Wrote' should perhaps be ' kept writing'
(comp. vii.1 40, 41), or ' began to write, made as though He would write'
(comp. Luke i. 59). Either rendering would agree with this interpreta
tion, which our translators have insisted on as certain by inserting the
gloss (not found in any earlier English Version), 'as though He heard
them not. ' But it is just possible that by writing on the stone pave
ment of the Temple He wished to remind them of the ' tables of stone,
written with the finger of God' (Ex. xxxi. 18; Deut. ix. 10). They
were hoping that He would explain away the seventh commandment,
in order that they themselves might break the sixth.
7. they continued asking] They will not take the hint, whatever
His gesture meant.
without sin] The-Greek word occurs nowhere else in N.T., but it is
quite classical: it may mean either 'free from the possibility of sin,
impeccable;' or 'free from actual sin, sinless:' if the latter, it may mean
either 'free from sin in general, guiltless;' or 'freefrom a particular sin,
not guilty.' The context shews that the last is the meaning here, 'free
from the sin of impurity:' comp. 'sin no more,' v. 11, and 'sinner,'
Luke vii. 37, 39. The practical maxim involved in Christ's words is
that of Matt. vii. 1 — 5 ; Rom. xiv. 4. As to its application to them
comp. Matt. xii. 39; Mark viii. 38. He is contending not against
punishment being inflicted by human law, but against men taking the
law into their own hands.
a stone] Rather, the stone, according to the Received Text and some
MSS.; i.e. the stone required for executing the sentence. Others take
it of the first stone, which the witnesses were to throw (Deut. xvii. 7).
But Christ does not say 'let him cast the first stone,' but 'let him hefirst
of you to cast the stone.'

w. 8— ii.] S. JOHN, VIII. 179
And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 8
And they which heard it, being convicted by their own 9
conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest,
even unto the last : and Jesus was left alone, and the woman
standing in the midst. When Jesus had lift up himself, 10
and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman,
where are those thine accusers ? hath no man condemned
thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, n
Neither do I condemn thee : go, and sin no more.
8. again he stooped down] He again declines to have the office of
judge thrust upon Him. The Reader of men's hearts knew how His
challenge must work : no one would respond to it.
and wrote on the ground] A Venetian MS. ascribed to the tenth
century has the remarkable reading 'wrote on the ground the sins of
each one of them.' The same strange idea appears in Jerome, shewing
how soon men began to speculate as to what He wrote. Others sup
pose that He wrote His answer in v. 7. As has been shewn (v. 6), it
is not certain that He wrote anything.
9. being convicted by their own conscience] These words are probably
a gloss added by some copyist, like 'as though He heard them not,'
added by our translators (v. 6).
beginning at the eldest] Literally, beginning at the elders: but it
means the elders in years, not the Elders ; so that our translators have
done well to avoid a literal rendering which would have been mislead
ing. Meyer suggests that the oldest would be shrewd enough to slip
away at once without compromising themselves further ; certainly they
would have the largest experience of life and its temptations.
was left alone] Not that there were no witnesses, but that they had
withdrawn to a distance. The graphic precision of this verse indicates
the account of an eyewitness.
standing in the midst] Literally, being in the midst, where the
brutality of her accusers had placed her (v. 3).
10. none but the woman] The word for 'but' or 'except' occurs
nowhere in S. John's writings excepting Rev. ii. 25; frequently in
S. Luke, five times in S. Matthew, five times in S. Paul's Epistles,
once in S. Mark, and nowhere else.
hath no man condemned thee?] Literally, Did no man condemn thee?
But here the English perfect may idiomatically represent the Greek
aorist : see on v. 29. The word for 'condemn' is a compound not found
anywhere in S. John's writings, but occurring nine times in the Synop
tists. S. John uses the simple verb, which means 'judge,' but often
acquires the notion of judging unfavourably from the context (see on
iii. 17 and v. 29).
11. No man, Lord] We must bear in mind that 'Lord' may be too
strong a translation of the Greek word, which need not mean more than
'Sir' (see on vi. 34). But as we have no such ambiguous word in
English, 'Lord' is best.

180 S. JOHN, VIII. [v. 12.
VIII. 12 — IX. 41. Christ the Source of Truth and Light
(continued).
, Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the
light of the world : he that followeth me shall not walk in
Neither do I condemn thee] He maintains in tenderness towards her
the attitude which He had assumed in sternness towards her accusers:
He declines the office of judge. He came not to condemn, but to seek
and to save. And yet He did condemn, as S. Augustine remarks, not
the woman, but the sin. With regard to the woman, though He does
not condemn, yet He does not pardon : He does not say 'thy sins have
been forgiven thee' (Matt. ix. 2; Luke vii. 48), or even 'go in peace'
(Luke vii. 50, viii. 48). "We must not apply in all cases a sentence,
which requires His Divine knowledge to make it a just one" (Alford).
He knew whether she was penitent or not.
go, and sin no more] Or, go and continue no longer in sin. The
contrast between the mere negative declaration and the very positive
exhortation is striking. See on v. 14.
VIII. 12 — IX. 41. Christ the Source of Truth and Light

In viii. 1 2 — 46 the word ' true ' occurs six times, the word ' truth '
seven times.
12. Then spake Jesus again unto them] The paragraph vii. 53
— viii. 11 being omitted, these words must be connected with vii. 52.
The officers have made their report to the Sanhedrin, leaving Jesus
unmolested. After an interval He continues His discourse : again,
therefore, Jesus spake unto them, i.e. because the attempt to interfere
with Him had failed. How long the interval was we do not know,
but probably the evening of the same day.
I am the light ofthe world) Once more we have a possible reference
to the ceremonies of the Feast of Tabernacles, somewhat less probable
than the other (see on vii. 37), but not improbable. Large candelabra
were lighted in the .Court of the Women on the evening of the first
day of the Feast, and these flung their light over the whole city.
Authorities differ as to whether this illumination was repeated, but
all are agreed that it did not take place on the last evening. Here,
therefore, there was once more a gap, which Christ Himself may
have designed to fill; and while the multitude were missing the
festal light of the great lamps, He declares, 'I am the Light of the
world.' In the case of the water we know that it was poured on each
of the seven days, and that Christ spoke the probable reference to
it on the last day of the Feast. But in this case the illumination
took place possibly on the first night only, and Christ certainly did
not utter this possible reference to it until the last day of the Feast,
or perhaps not until the Feast was all over. But the fact that the
words were spoken in the Court of the Women (see on v. 20) makes
the reference not improbable.

vv. 13—15.] S. JOHN, VIII. 181
darkness, but shall have the light of life. The Pharisees 13
therefore said unto him, Thou bearest record of thyself;
thy record is not true. Jesus answered and said unto them, 14
Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true : for
I know whence I came, and whither I go ; but ye cannot
tell whence I come, and whither I go. Ye judge after the 15
he that followeth me] This expression also is in favour of the refer
ence. The illumination in the Court of the Women commemorated the
pillar of fire which led the Israelites through the wilderness, as the
pouring of the water of Siloam commemorated the water flowing
from the Rock. ' The Lord went before them by day in a pillar of
a cloud to lead them the way ; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give
them light' (Exod. xiii. 21). So Christ here declares that those who
follow Him shall in no wise walk in darkness. The negative is very
strong. This use of 'darkness' for moral evil is peculiar to S. John:
see on i. 5, where (as here) we have light and life (v. 4) closely con
nected, while darkness is opposed to both.
shall have the light of life) Not merely with him but in him, so
that he also becomes a source of light. See on vii. 38, and comp.
'Ye are the light ofthe world,' Matt. v. 14.
13. Thou bearest record)' Our translators have again been some
what capricious. The words which in verses 13 and 14 they render
'record' and 'bear record,' they render in verses 17 and 18 'witness'
and ' bear witness. ' The latter rendering is to be preferred. The
Pharisees attempt to cancel the effect of Christ's impressive declaration
by urging against Him a formal objection, the validity of which He
had been heard to admit (v. 31): Thou bearest witness of Thyself;
Thy witness is not true.
14. Though I bear record] Better, even if / bear witness. God
can testify respecting Himself, and there are truths to which He alone
can testify. Yet He condescends to conform to the standard of human
testimony, and adds to His witness the words and works of His
incarnate Son ; who in like manner can bear witness of Himself, being
supported by the witness ofthe Father (v. 16).
and whither I go] i.e. by Death and Ascension.
but ye cannot tell] Better, But ye know not. They knew neither
of these points respecting themselves ; how should they know it re
specting Him? Man knows not either the origin or the issue of his
life. ' Ye ' is emphatic.
whence I came, and whither I go) For 'and 'read or with the best
MSS. Note the change from 'came,' which refers to the Incarnation,
His having once come from the Father, to 'come,' which refers to
His perpetual presence with mankind. Note also the balanced pa
rallelism of the verse and comp. w. 35, 38, vii. 6.
15. Ye judge after the flesh] According to His outward form, the
form of a servant : comp. vii. 24. From the context 'judge ' here
acquires an adverse sense, and virtually means ' condemn :' comp.

182 S. JOHN, VIII. [vv. 16—19.
16 flesh ; I judge no man. And yet if I judge, my judgment
is true : for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent
17 me. It is also written in your law, that the testimony of
18 two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself,
19 and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. Then
said they unto him, Where is thy Father ? Jesus answered,
Ye neither know me, nor my Father : if ye had known me,
iii. 17, 18, vii. 51. Judging Him to be a mere man they had con
demned His testimony respecting Himself as invalid. ' Ye ' and ' I '
are in emphatic opposition.
I judge no man] Neither 'after the flesh,' nor 'as ye do,' nor
anything else is to be supplied. No such addition can be made in
v. 16, and therefore cannot be made here. The words are best taken
quite simply and literally. 'My mission is not to condemn, but to
save and to bless.' Comp. xii. 47.
16. And yet if I judge] Or, But even if I judge, like ' even if I
bear witness' (v. 14). 'I judge no man; not because I have no
authority, but because judging is not what I came to do. Even if
I do in exceptional cases judge, My judgment is a genuine and autho
ritative one (see on i. 9), not the mock sentence of an impostor. It
is the sentence not of a mere man, nor even of one with a Divine
commission yet acting independently ; but of One sent by God acting
in union with His Sender.' Comp. v. 30.
17. It is also written in your law) Literally, But in the law also,
your law, it is written. ' Your ' is very emphatic ; ' the Law about
which you profess to be so jealous.' Comp. 'Thou art called a Jew,
and restest on the Law' (Rom. ii. 17).
the testimony of two men is true) Better, the witness of two, &c.
Not so much a quotation as a reference to Deut. xix. 15, xvii. 6.
Note that the Law speaks of ' two or three witnesses :' here we have
' two men.' The change is not accidental, but introduces an argument
a fortiori : if the testimony of two men is true, how much more the
testimony of two Divine Witnesses. Comp. ' If we receive the witness
of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is the witness of God
which He hath testified of His Son' (1 John v. 9).
18. / am one that bear witness of myself) Or, It is I who bear
witness of Myself (in My words and works), and there beareth witness
of Me the Father, who sent Me (in Scripture and the voice from
Heaven). 19. Then said they) They said therefore:
Where is thy Father ?] They do not ask ' who ' but ' where ;' they
know well enough by this time the meaning of Christ's frequent
reference to ' Him that sent me :' v. 23, 24, 30, 37, 38, vi. 38, 39, 40,
44, vii. 16, 18, 28, 33. They ask, therefore, in mockery, what Philip
(xiv. 8) asks with earnest longing, 'Shew us the Father: we see one
of Thy two witnesses; shew us the other.'
if ye had known me, &c] Better, If ye knew Me, ye would know,

vv. 20—22.] S. JOHN, VIII. 183
ye should have known my Father also. These words spake 20
Jesus in the treasury, as he taught in the temple : and no
man laid hands on him ; for his hour was not yet come.
Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye 21
shall seek me, and shall die in your sins : whither I go, ye
cannot come. Then said the Jews, Will he kill himself? 22
&c. (There is a similar error v. 46). It is in the Son that the
Father reveals Himself. Comp. xiv. 9, xvi. 3 ; and for the construction
comp. v. 42.
20. in the treasury] At the treasury is an admissible and in one
respect safer translation. It is not certain that there was a separate
building called the treasury; and if there was, it is not probable that
Christ would be able to address the multitude there. But the thirteen
brazen chests, into which people put their offerings for the temple
and other charitable objects, stood in the Court of the Women (see
on Mark xii. 41), and these chests seem to have been called 'the
treasury.' The point seems to be that in so public and frequented
a place as this did He say all this, and yet no man laid hands on Him
(see on vii. 30). Moreover the Hall Gazith, where the Sanhedrin
met, was close to the Court of the Women ; so that He was teaching
close to His enemies' head quarters.
21. Then said Jesus again unto them] The name 'Jesus' should
be omitted both here and in the preceding verse (see on vi. 14), and
'then' should be therefore (see on vi. 45, 53, 68, vii. 15, 30, 33,
3S> 45)- He said, therefore, again to them. The 'therefore' does not
compel us to place what follows on the same day with what precedes ;
'therefore' merely signifies that, as' no one laid hands on Him, He
was able to address them again. ' Again ' shews that there is some
interval, but whether of minutes, hours, or days, we have no means of
determining. There is no distinct mark of time between vii. 37 (the
close of the Feast of Tabernacles) and x. 22 (the Feast of the Dedi
cation), an interval of two months. See introductory note to chap. vi.
I go my way] There is no 'my way' in the Greek; the word is the
same as for 'I go' in v. 14 and vii. 33 ; but to avoid abruptness we may
render, I go away. Possibly in all three passages there is a side refer
ence to the Jews who were now leaving Jerusalem in great numbers, the
Feast of Tabernacles being over.
shall seek me] See on vii. 33, 34. Here Christ is more explicit; He
does not say 'shall not find Me,' but 'shall die in your sin.' So far
from finding Him and being delivered by Him, they will perish most
miserably. In your sin shall ye die. ' Sin' is emphatic, and is singular,
not plural, meaning 'state of sin.'
22. Will he kill himself?] They see that He speaks of a voluntary
departure, and perhaps they suspect that He alludes to His death. So
with sarcasm still more bitter than the sneer in vii. 35 they exclaim
' Surely He does not mean to commit suicide? We certainly shall not
be able to follow Him if He takes refuge in that !'

184 S. JOHN; VIII. [w. 23—25.
23 because he saith, Whither I go, ye .cannot come. And he
said unto them, Ye are from beneath ; I am from above :
24 ye are of this world ; I am not of this world. I said there
fore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins : for if ye
25 believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. Then
said they unto him, Who art thou ? And Jesus saith unto
them, Even the same that I said unto you from the begin-
23. Ye are from beneath] At first sight it might seem as if this
meant "ye are from hell.' Christ uses strong language later on (v. 44),
and this interpretation would make good sense with what precedes.
'Ye suggest that I am going to hell by self-destruction: it is ye who
come from thence.' But what follows forbids this. The two halves of
the verse are manifestly equivalent, and 'ye are from beneath' = 'ye are
of this world.' The pronouns throughout are emphatically opposed.
The whole verse is a good instance of 'the spirit of parallelism, the in
forming power of Hebrew poetry,' which runs more or less through the
whole Gospel. Comp. xiv. 27.
24. ye shall die in your sins] Here 'die' is emphatic, not 'sin ' as
in v. 21. Moreover the plural is here correct ; it is no longer the state
of sin generally, but the separate sins of each that are spoken of.
Before it was 'in your sin shall ye die;' here it is 'ye shall die in your
sins. '
for if ye believe not] This is the only way in which they can be de
livered — faith in Him. Comp. i. 12, iii. 15 — 18; vi. 40.
that I am he] Better, that I am. It not merely means 'that I am
the Messiah, ' but is the great name, which every Jew at once under
stood, I AM. Comp. vv. 28, 58, xiii. 19, xviii. 5; Ex. iii. 14; Deut.
xxxii. 39; Isa. xliii. 10.
25. Then said they] They said therefore.
Who art thou ?] It is incredible that the Jews can have failed to
understand. Christ had just declared that He was from above, and not
of this world. Even if the words 'lam' were ambiguous in themselves,
in this context they are plain enough. As in v. 19, they pretend not to
understand, and contemptuously ask, Thou, who art Thou? The pro
noun is scornfully emphatic. Comp. Acts xix. 15. Possibly both in
v. ig and here they wish to draw from Him something more definite,
more capable of being stated in a formal charge against Him.
Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning] This is a
passage of well-known difficulty, and the meaning will probably always
remain uncertain. (1) It is doubtful whether it is a question or not.
(2) Ofthe six or seven Greek words all excepting the word meaning 'unto
you ' can have more than one meaning. (3) There is a doubt whether
we have six or seven Greek words. To discuss all the possible render
ings would go beyond the scope of this volume. What I from the
beginning am also speaking to you of is perhaps as likely as any transla
tion to be right. And it matters little whether it be made interrogative
or not. Either, ' Do you ask that of which I have been speaking to you

vv. 26—29.] s. john, vm. 185
ning. I have many things to say and to judge of you : 26
but he that sent me is true ; and I speak to the world those
things which I have heard of him. They understood not 27
that he spake to them of the Father. Then said Jesus unto 28
them, When ye have lift up the Son of man, then shall ye
know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but
as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. And 29
from the first?', in which case it is not unlike Christ's reply to Philip
(xiv. 9); or, 'I am that of which I have been speaking to you all
along. '
26. Here again we have a series of simple sentences, the precise
meaning of which and their connexion with one another cannot be de
termined with certainty. See on vii. 33. The following seems to be
the drift ofthe verse: 'I have very much to speak concerning you, very
much to blame. But I keep to My immediate task of speaking to the
world those truths which before the world was I heard from God that
cannot lie, Who sent Me:' i.e. Christ will- not desist from teaching
Divine truth in order to blame the Jews. It is as the Truth and the
Light that He appears in these discourses.
which I have heard of him] Better, what I heard from Him, these
things I speak unto the world, i.e. precisely these and nothing else.
Comp. v. 39.
27. They understood not that he spake] Better, they perceived not
that He was speaking. This statement of the Evangelist has seemed
to some so unaccountable after v. 18, that they have attempted to make
his words mean something else. But the meaning of the words is quite
unambiguous, and is not incredible. We have seen that there is an
interval, possibly of days, between v. 20 and v. 21. The audience may
have changed very considerably ; but if not, experience shews that the
ignorance and stupidity of unbelief are sometimes almost unbounded.
Still we may admit that the dulness exhibited here is extraordinary;
and it is precisely because it is so extraordinary that St John records
it. 28. Then said Jesus unto them] Better, as so often (see on v. 21),
Therefore said Jesus, i. e. in consequence of their gross want of percep
tion. ' Unto them ' is of doubtful authority.
When ye have lifted up] On the Cross: comp. iii. 14 and xii. 32.
The Crucifixion was the act of the Jews, as Peter tells them in Solomon's
Porch (Acts iii. 13 — 15).
then shall ye know] Better, then shall ye perceive. It is the same
verb as is used in v. 27, and evidently refers back to that (comp. v. 43).
Had they known the Messiah they would have known His Father also
(xiv. 9). But when by crucifying Him they have brought about His
glory, then and not till then will their eyes be opened. Then will facts
force upon them what no words could teach them. Comp. xii. 32.
that I am he] See on v. 24.
but as my Father hath taught me] Better, but that as My Father

186 S. JOHN, VIII. [vv. 30, 31.

he that sent me is with me : the Father hath not left me
30 alone ; for I do always those things that please him. As
he spake these words, many believed on him.
31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him,
taught Me, i.e. before the Incarnation; aorist, not perfect, like 'heard'
in v. 26. The construction depending on 'then shall ye understand'
continues to the end of this verse, and possibly down to 'is with Me.'
29. the Father hath not left me alone] Here again we have an
aorist, not a perfect; 'He left Me not alone' ('the Father' being omitted
in the best MSS.). It will depend on the interpretation whether the
aorist or perfect is to be used in English. If it refers to God sending the
Messiah into the world, then we must keep the aorist ; He left. But if
it refers to Christ's experience in each particular case, the perfect may
be substituted ; He hath left. In some cases it is the idiom in English
to use the perfect where the aorist is used in Greek, and then to translate
the Greek aorist by the English aorist would be misleading. See on
xvi. 32.
for I do always] Or, because the things which are pleasing to Him
I always do. 'I' and 'always' are emphatic; and 'always' literally
means 'on every occasion,' which is somewhat in favour of the second
interpretation in the preceding note. 'He hath never left me alone,
because in every case I do what pleaseth Him.' The emphasis on 'I'
is perhaps in mournful contrast to the Jews. In any case it is a distinct
claim to Divinity. What blasphemous effrontery would such a declara
tion be in the mouth of any but the Incarnate Deity. The theory that
Jesus was the noblest and holiest of teachers, but nothing more, shatters
against such words as these. What saint or prophet ever dared to say,
'The things which are pleasing to God I in every instance do?' Comp.
v. 46. And if it be said, that perhaps Jesus never uttered these words,
then it may also be said that perhaps He never uttered any of the words
attributed to Him. We have the same authority for what is accepted
as His as for what is rejected as not His. • History becomes impossible
if we are to admit evidence that we like, and refuse evidence that we
dislike. 30. many believed on him] Nothing exasperated His opponents so
much as His success ; and therefore in leading us on to the final cata
strophe, the Evangelist carefully notes the instances in which He won,
though often only for a time, adherents and believers. See on vi. 15.
Among these 'many' were some of the hierarchy (v. 51). Their faith,
poor as it proves, is better than that of the many in ii. 23; belief that
results from teaching is higher than that which results from miracles.
Jesus recognises both its worth and its weakness, and applies a test,
which might have raised it to something higher, but under which it
breaks down.
31. Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him] Better,
Jesus said, therefore, to the Jews who had believed Him. There is a
change in the expression respecting their belief. In v. 30 S. John

vv. 32—34.] S. JOHN, VIII. 187
If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed ;
and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you 32
free. They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and 33
were never in bondage to any man : how sayest thou, Ye
shall be made free ? Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, 34
I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of
uses the strong phrase 'believed on Him;' here he uses the much
weaker 'believed Him' (see on i. 12), as if to prepare us for the col
lapse of their faith.
If ye continue, &c] Or, If ye abide in My word (see on i. 33), ye
are truly My disciples. Both 'ye' and 'My' are emphatic: 'you on.
your part' — 'the word that is Mine.' "The new converts, who come
forward with a profession of faith, receive a word of encouragement as
well as of warning. They were not to mistake a momentary impulse
for a deliberate conviction." S. p. 155. ' If ye abide in My word, so
that it becomes the permanent condition of your life, then are ye My
disciples in truth, and not merely in appearance after being carried
away for the moment.'
32. the truth] Both Divine doctrine (xvii. 17) and Christ Himself
(xiv. 6) ' whose service is perfect freedom.' See on xviii. 37.
shall make you free] Free from the moral slavery of sin. Comp.
the Stoics' dictum — ' The wise man alone is free.'
33. They answered him] Or, unto Him, according to the best
MSS. 'They' must mean 'the Jews who had believed Him' (v. 31) :
it is quite arbitrary to suppose any one else. The severe words which
follow (v. 44) are addressed to them, for turning back, after their mo
mentary belief, as well as to those who had never believed at all.
Abraham's seed] Comp. 'kings of peoples shall be of her'' (Sarah),
and 'thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies' (Gen. xvii. 16,
xxii. 17). On texts like these they build the proud belief that Jews
have never yet been in bondage to any man. But passion once more
blinds them to historical facts (see on vii. 52). The bondage in Egypt,
the oppressions in the times- of the Judges, the captivity in Babylon,
and the Roman yoke, are all forgotten. Some, who think such forget -
fulness incredible, interpret ' we have never been lawfully in bondage.'
' The Truth ' would not free them from enforced slavery. It might free
them from voluntary slavery, by teaching them that it was unlawful
for them to be slaves. ' But we know that already.' This, however,
is somewhat subtle, and the more literal interpretation is not incredible.
The power which the human mind possesses of keeping inconvenient
facts out of sight is very considerable. In either case we have another
instance of gross inability to perceive the spiritual meaning of Christ's
words. Comp. iii. 4, iv. 15, vi. 34.
34. Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin] Better, Every
one who continues to commit sin is the bond-servant of sin. ' Com
mitteth sin' is too weak for the Greek: Christ does not say that a
single act of sin enslaves. 'To commit (poiein) sin' is the opposite of

S. JOHN, VIII. [xv. 35—3°-

35 sin. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever :
36 but the son abideth ever. If the Son therefore shall make
37 you free, ye shall be free indeed. I know that ye are
Abraham's seed ; but ye seek to kill me, because my word
38 hath no place in you. I speak that which I have seen with
'to do the Truth' (iii. 21). Again, 'servant,' though often a good
translation where nothing degrading is implied, is not strong enough,
where, as here, the degradation is the main point. Moreover, the
connexion with v. 33 must be kept up. The words for 'bondage' and
'servant' are cognate; therefore either 'bondage' and 'bond-servant,'
or 'slavery' and 'slave,' must be our renderings.
Some have thought that we have here an echo of Rom. vi. 16, which
of course S. John may have seen. But why may not both passages be
original? The idea that vice is slavery is common in all literature:
frequent in the classics. 2 Pet. ii. 19 is probably an echo either of this
passage or of Rom. vi. 16. Comp. Matt. vi. 24.
35. And the servant, &c] The transition is somewhat abrupt, the
mention of 'bond-servant' suggesting a fresh thought. Now the bond
servant (not the bond-servant of sin, but any slave) abideth not in the
house for ever : the son (not the Son of God, but any son) abideth for
ever. " The thought is throughout profound and instructive ; and to a
Jew, always ready to picture to himself the theocracy or the kingdom
of heaven under the form of a household, it would be easily intelligible."
S. p. 157.
36. If the Son therefore, &c] As before, any son is meant. ' If the
son emancipates you, your freedom is secured ; for he is always on the
spot to see that his emancipation is carried out.' The statement is
general, but of course with special reference to the Son of God. If
they will abide in His word (v. 31), He will abide in them (vi. 56),
and will take care that the bondage from which His word has freed
them is not thrust upon them again.
shall be free indeed] Not the same word as is translated 'indeed' in
¦u. 31. 'Indeed' or 'in reality' may do here; 'in truth' or 'truly' in
v. 31. Both words are opposed to mere appearance.
37. Christ's words seem gradually to take a wider range. They
are no longer addressed merely to those who for a moment had believed
on Him, but to His opponents generally, whose ranks these short
lived believers had joined.
Abraham's seed) He admits their claim in their own narrow sense.
They are the natural descendants of Abraham : his children in any
higher sense they are not (v. 39). Comp. ' neither, because they are
the seed of Abraham, are they all children' (Rom. ix. 8).
hath no place in you] Rather, maketh no advance in you. His
word had found place in them for a very short time ; but it made no
progress in their hearts : it did not abide in them and they did not
abide in it (v. 31). They had stifled it and cast it out.
38. / speak, &c] The text here is a little uncertain, but the foi-

vv. 39—41.] S. JOHN, VIII. 189
my Father : and ye do that which ye have seen with your
father. They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our 39
father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's
children, ye would do the works of Abraham. But now 40
ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth,
which I have heard of God : this did not Abraham. Ye 41
do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We
lowing seems to have most authority; / speak the things which /
have seen with (My) Father: ye also, therefore, do the things which
ye heard from (your) father. ' I speak those truths of which I have
had direct knowledge from all eternity with the Father ; you, there
fore, following My relation to the Father, commit those sins which
your father suggested to you.' Christ does not say who their father is ;
but he means that morally they are the children of the* devil. The
'therefore' (rare in discourses) is severely ironical. The connexion of
v. 38 with v. 37 is not quite obvious. Perhaps it is this : — My words
make no progress in you, because they are so different in origin and
nature from your acts, especially your attempt to kill Me. It is pos
sible to take the latter half of the verse as an imperative ; and do ye
therefore the things which ye heard from the Father.
39. Abraham is our father] They see that He means some other
father than Abraham ; possibly they suspect His full meaning, soon to
be expressed (v. 44).
If ye were Abraham's children] The true reading seems to be, if ye
are Abraham 's children, which has been altered to 'if ye were,' so as
to run more smoothly with the second clause. But the reading of the
second verb is also doubtful, and perhaps we should read, do (imper.)
the works of Abraham.
40. ' On the contrary, ye seek to commit murder, and a murder of
the most heinous kind. Ye would kill One who hath spoken unto
you the truth, truth which He learnt from God.'
a man that hath told you] This pointed insertion of 'man' possibly
looks forward to v. 44, where they are called the children of the great
man-slayer, lusting like him for blood. The Lord nowhere else uses
this term of Himself.
this did not Abraham] A litotes ox understatement of the truth.
Abraham's life was utterly unlike the whole tenour of theirs. What
could there be in common between 'the Friend of God' (Jas. ii. 23) and
the enemies of God's Son?
41. Ye do the deeds of your father] Better, Ye are doing the works
of your father. The word here rendered 'deeds' is the same as that
rendered 'works' in v. 39. 'Ye' is emphatic, in contrast to Abraham.
This shews them plainly that spiritual parentage is what He means. In
v. 39 they still cling to Abraham, although He has evidently assigned
them some other father. Here they drop literal parentage and adopt
His figurative language. 'You are speaking of spiritual parentage,
Well, our spiritual Father is God.'

igo S. JOHN, VIII. [w. 42, 43.
be not born of fornication ; we have one Father, even God.
42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would
love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God;
43 neither came I of myself, but he sent me. Why do ye not
understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my
We be not born offornication] The meaning of this is very much dis
puted. The following are the chief explanations : ( 1 ) Thou hast denied
that we are the children of Abraham, then we must be the children of
some one sinning with Sarah: which is false.' But this would be
adultery, not fornication. (2) 'We are the children of Sarah, not of
Hagar.' But this was lawful concubinage, not fornication. (3) 'We
are not a mongrel race, like the Samaritans; we are pure Jews.' This
is far-fetched, and does not suit the context. (4) ' We were not born of
fornication, as Thou art.' But His miraculous birth was not yet com
monly known, and this foul Jewish lie, perpetuated from the second
century onwards (Origen, c. Celsum I. xxxii.), was not yet in exis
tence. (5) 'We were not born of spiritual fornication; our sonship has
not been polluted with idolatry. If thou art speaking of spiritual
parentage, 'we have one Father, even God.' This last seems the best.
Idolatry is so constantly spoken of as whoredom and fornication through
out the whole of the O. T., that in a discussion about spiritual father
hood this image would be perfectly natural in the mouth of a Jew.
Exod. xxxiv. 15, 16; Lev. xvii. 7; Judg. ii. 17; 2 Kgs. ix. 22; Ps.
lxxiii. 27; Isa. i. 21; Jer. iii. 1, 9; Ezek. xvi. 15; &c. &c. See esp.
Hos. ii. 4. There is a proud emphasis on 'we;' — 'we are not idolaters,
like Thy friends the Gentiles' (comp. vii. 35).
we have one Father] Or, one Father we have, with emphasis on the
'one,' in contrast to the many gods ofthe heathen.
42. Moral proof that God is not their father; if they were God's
children they would love His Son. Comp. xv. 23, and 'every one that
loveth Him that begat loveth Him also that is begotten of Him'
(1 John v. 1). For the construction comp. v. 19, v. 46, ix. 41, xv. 19,
xiii. 36 : in all these cases we have imperfects, not aorists. Contrast
iv. 10, xi. 21, 32, xiv. 28.
I proceeded forth and came from God] Rather, / came out (see on
xvi. 28) from God and am here from God among you. Surely then
God's true children would recognise and love Me.
neither came I of myself] Rather, For not even of Myself have I
come. The 'for' must on no account be omitted; it introduces a proof
that He is come from God. 'For (not only have I not come from any
other than God) I have not even come of My own self-determination.'
43. my speech... my word) 'Speech' is the outward expression, the
language used; 'thy speech bewrayeth thee' (Matt. xxvi. 73; comp.
Mark xiv. 70). Besides these two passages the word for 'speech' is
used only iv. 42, where it is rendered 'saying,' and here. 'Word'is the
meaning of the expression, the teaching conveyed in the language used.
They perpetually misunderstand His language, because they cannot

v. 44-] S. JOHN, VIII. 191
word. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of 44
your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the
beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no

appreciate His meaning. They are 'from beneath' (v. 23), and He is
speaking of 'things above' (Col. iii. 1); they are 'of this world,' and
He is telling of 'heavenly things' (iii. 12) ; they are 'natural,' and He is
teaching ' spiritual things' (1 Cor. ii. 14; see note there). They 'can
not hear ; ' it is a moral impossibility : they have their whole character
to change before they can understand spiritual truths.
44. Ye are of your father the devil] At last Christ says plainly, what
He has implied in w. 38 and 41. 'Ye' is emphatic; 'ye, who boast
that ye have Abraham and God as your Father, ye are morally the
Devil's children.' Comp. 1 John iii. 8, 10, which is perhaps an echo of
Christ's words.
This passage seems to be conclusive as to the real personal existence
of the devil. It can scarcely be an economy, a concession to ordinary •
modes of thought and language. Would Christ have resorted to a
popular delusion in a denunciation of such solemn and awful severity?
Comp. 'the children of the wicked one' (Matt. xiii. 38); 'ye make him
twofold more the child of hell than yourselves' (Matt, xxiii. 15). With
this denunciation generally compare those contained in Matt. xi. 20 — 24,
xxiii. 13 — 36. "It is likely that dialogues of this sort would be of not
infrequent occurrence, especially just at this time when the conflict is
reaching its climax. It is likely too that they would be of the nature of
dialogues broken by impatient interruptions on the part of the Jews,
and not always a continuous strain of denunciation as in Matt, xxiii. "
S. p. 159-
A monstrous but grammatically possible translation of these words is
adopted by some who attribute a Gnostic origin to this Gospel ; — 'ye are
descended from the father of the devil.' This Gnostic demonology,
according to which the father of the devil is the God of the Jews, is
utterly unscriptural, and does not suit the context here.
and the lusts of your father ye will do] Rather, ye will to do. See
on vi. 67, vii. 17 ; and comp. v. 40. 'Ye love to gratify the lusts which
characterize him, especially the lust for blood. Being his children, ye
are like him in nature.'
He was a murderer from the beginning] The word for 'murderer'
etymologically means 'man-slayer,' and seems to connect this passage
with v. 40 (see note there). The devil was a murderer by causing the
Fall, and thus bringing death into the world. Comp. 'God created
man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of His own eternity.
Nevertheless, through envy ofthe devil came death into the world, and
they that do hold of his side shall find it (Wisd. ii. 23, 24) : and 'Cain
was of that wicked one and slew his brother:' and 'whosoever hateth
his brother is a murderer' (1 John iii. 12, 15).
and abode not in the truth] Rather, and standeth not in the truth.
The verb is not S. John's favourite word 'abide' (see on i. 33), but

192 S. JOHN, VIII. [vv. 45-48.
truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his
45 own : for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I
46 tell you the truth, ye believe me not. Which of you con
vinced! me of sin ? And if I say the truth, why do ye not
47 believe me ? He that is of God heareth God's words : ye
48 therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God. Then
(according to the common reading) the same that is used in i. 35 , iii. 29,
vii. 37, &c. Though perfect in form it is present in meaning: therefore
not 'hath stood,' still less 'stood' or 'abode,' but standeth. The true
reading, however, is probably not hestlken, but estiken, the imperfect of
stikein (i. 26; Rom. xiv. 4), a stronger form of the verb; stood firm.
Truth is a region from which the devil has long since departed.
he speaketh of his own) Literally, he speaketh out of his own; out ol
his own resources, out of his own nature: the outcome is what might be
expected from him.
for he is a liar, and the father of it] Better, because he is a liar and
the father thereof, i. e. father of the liar, rather than father of the lie
(understood in liar). Here again a monstrous misinterpretation is gram
matically possible ; — 'for he is a liar, and his father also.' It is not strange
that Gnostics ofthe second and third centuries should have tried to' wring
a sanction for their fantastic systems out of the writings of S. John. It is
strange that any modern critics should have thought demonology so
extravagant compatible with the theology of the Fourth Gospel.
45. And because I tell you, &c] Better, But because I speak the
truth, ye do not believe me. 'Ye will listen to the devil (v. 38) ; ye will
believe a lie : but the Messiah speaking the truth ye will not believe.'
The tragic tone once more: comp. i. 5, 10, 11, ii. 24, iii. 10, 19, &c.
46. Which ofyouconvincethme of sin?) Or, convicteth Me ofsin(see
on iii. 20). Many rebuked Christ and laid sin to His charge: none brought
sin home to His const ience. There is the majesty of Divinity in the chal
lenge. What mortal man would dare to make it? See on v. 29, and
comp. xiv. 30, and xv. 10; 1 John iii. 5; 1 Pet. i. 19, ii. 22. Note
the implied connexion between sin generally and falsehood, as between
righteousness and truth, vii. 18.
And if I say the truth] Better, If I say truth. No MSS. have the
article, and the best MSS. omit the conjunction. ' If I am free from
sin (and none of you can convict Me of sin), I am free from falsehood
and speak the truth. Why then do ye on your part refuse to believe
Me?' 'Ye' is emphatic.
47. Christ answers His own question and at the same time gives a
final disproof of their claim to call God their father (v. 41).
heareth God's words] Christ here assumes, what He elsewhere
maintains explicitly, that He speaks the words of God (v. 26, iii. 34,
vii. 16, xvii. 8).
ye therefore hear them not] Better, for this cause (xii. 18, 27) ye hear
not. It is not S. John's favourite particle 'therefore,' but, as in
v. 16, 18, vi, 65, vii. 22 (see notes there), a preposition and pronoun

v. 49O S. JOHN, VIII. 193
answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well
that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil? Jesus an- 49
swered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and
with which he not unfrequently begins a sentence to prepare the
way for a ' because ' afterwards. These characteristics of his language
should be preserved in English, and kept distinct, so far as is possible.
In the First Epistle he uses the very same test as Christ here applies
to the Jews ; ' We are of God : he that knoweth God heareth us ; he
that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth
and the spirit of error' (iv. 6).
48. Then answered the Jews] The best MSS. omit the particle,
which if it were genuine should be rendered ' therefore,' not ' then : '
The Jews answered. This denial of their national prerogative of being
sons of God seems to them malicious frenzy. He must be an enemy of
the peculiar people and be possessed.
Say we not well] i.e. rightly: comp. iv. 17, xiii. 13, xviii. 23. 'We'
is emphatic; 'we at any rate are right.'
that thou art a Samaritan] ' ' Nowhere else do we find the designa
tion ' a Samaritan ;' yet it might naturally — we might say inevitably —
be given to one who seemed to attack the exclusive privileges of the
Jewish people." S. pp. 159, 160. It is therefore a striking touch of
reality, and another instance of the Evangelist's complete familiarity
with the ideas and expressions current in Palestine at this time.
Possibly this term of reproach contains a sneer at His visit to Samaria
in chap, iv., and at His having chosen the unusual route through
Samaria, as He probably did (see on vii. 10), in coming up to the Feast
of Tabernacles. The parable of the Good Samaritan was probably not
yet spoken.
and hast a devil] It is unfortunate that we have not two words in our
Bible to distinguish diabolos, ' the Devil ' (v. 44, xiii. 2 ; Matt. iv. 1 ;
Luke viii. 12 ; &c, &c), from daimonion or daimdn, ' a devil,' or ' un
clean spirit.' 'Fiend,' which Wiclif sometimes employs (Matt. xii.
24, 28; Mark i. 34, 39, &c), might have been used, had Tyndale
and Cranmer adopted it: demon would have been better still. But
here Tyndale, Cranmer, and the Geneva Version make the confusion
complete by rendering 'and hast the devil,' a mistake which they
make also in vii. 20 and a. 20. The charge here is more bitter than
either vii. 20 or x. 20, where it simply means that His conduct is
so extraordinary that He must be demented. We have instances more
similar to this in the Synoptists; Matt. ix. 34, xii. 24; Mark iii. 22;
Luke xi. 15.
49. / have not a devil] He does not notice the charge of being a
Samaritan. For Him it contained nothing offensive, for He knew that
Samaritans might equal or excel Jews (iv. 39 — 42; Luke x. 33, xvii. 16)
in faith, benevolence, and gratitude. There is an emphasis on ' I,' but
the meaning of the emphasis is not '/have not a demon, but ye have.'
Rather it means ' / have not a demon, but honour My Father ; while
you on the contrary dishonour My Father through Me.'
S.JOHN 13

194 S. JOHN, VIII. [w. 50—53.
50 ye do dishonour me. And I seek not mine own glory :
51 there is one that seeketh and judgeth. Verily, verily, I say
unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see
52 deatL Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that
thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets;
and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never
53 taste of death. Art thou greater than our father Abraham,
50. And I seek not mine own glory] Better, But I seek not My glory.
' It is not because I seek glory for Myself that I speak of your dis
honouring Me : My Father seeks that for Me and pronounces judgment
on you.' Comp. v. 54 and v. 41.
51. If a man keep my saying) Better, if a man keep My word.
This is important, to shew the connexion with verses 31 and 43 and also
with v. 24. In all these the same Greek word is used, logos. The
phrase ' keep My word ' is one of frequent occurrence in this Gospel :
verses 52, 55, xiv. 23, xv. 20, xvii. 6: as also the kindred phrase 'keep
My commandments:' xiv. 15, 21, xv. 10: comp. 1 John ii. 3, 4, 5, iii.
22, 24, v. 2, 3. ' Keeping ' means not merely keeping in heart, but
obeying and fulfilling. This is the way in which they may escape the
judgment just spoken of. So that there is no need to suppose that
while verses 49, 50 are addressed to His opponents, v. 51 is addressed
after a pause to a more friendly section, a change of which there is no
hint. shall never see death] Literally, shall certainly not behold death for
ever. But 'for ever' belongs, like the negative, to the verb, not to
' death.' It does not mean ' he shall see death, but the death shall not
be eternal:' rather 'he shall certainly never see death,' i.e. he already
has eternal life (v. 24) and shall never lose it. This is evident from
iv. 14, which cannot mean 'shall thirst, but the thirst shall not be
eternal,' and from xiii. 8, which cannot mean ' shalt wash my feet, but
the washing shall not be eternal.' In all three cases the meaning is the
same, ' shall certainly never. ' Comp. x. 28, xi. 26.
52. Now we know that thou hast a devil] ' It was somewhat of
a conjecture before, but now we recognise clear evidence of it.'
Abraham is dead] Abraham died. Again they shew a gross want
of perception and ' do not understand His speech ' (v. 43). They can
not discern a spiritual truth, but understand Him to be speaking
of physical death. ' My saying ' should be ' My word ' as in v. 51.
he shall never taste of death] In their excitement they exaggerate
His language. The metaphor ' taste of death ' is not taken from a
death-cup, but from the general idea of bitterness. It is frequent in the
classics. 53. Art thou greater] Exactly parallel to iv. 12. 'Thou' is emphatic:
' Surely Thou art not greater than our father Abraham, who died 1 —
And the prophets died.' An anacoluthon, like their exaggeration, very
natural. Strictly the sentence should run, ' and than the prophets, who
died?'

vv. 54— S7-] S. JOHN, VIII. 195
which is dead ? and the prophets are dead : whom makest
thou thyself? Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my 54
honour is nothing : it is my Father that honoureth me ; of
whom ye say, that he is your God : yet ye have not known 55
him ; but I know him : and if I should say, I know him
not, I shall be a liar like unto you : but I know him, and
keep his saying. Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my 56
day : and he saw it, and was glad. Then said the Jews 57
64 — 56. Christ first answers the insinuation' that He is vain-glorious,
implied in the question 'whom makest Thou Thyself?' Then He shews
that He really is greater than Abraham.
64. If I honour myself] Better, If I shall have glorified Myself,
My glory ir nothing. It is not the same word as is rendered ' honour '
in v. 49, therefore another English word is desirable. There is My
Father who glorifieth Me — in miracles and the Messianic work generally.
Comp. v. 50.
65. Yet ye have not known him ; but I know him] Once more we
have two different Greek words for ' know ' in close proximity, and the
difference is obliterated in our version (comp. vii. 15, 17, 26, 27, xiii. 7,
xiv. 7, and see on vii. 26). Here the meaning is, And ye have not
recognised Him; but I know Him, the latter clause referring to His
immediate essential knowledge of the Father.
a liar like unto you] Or, Like unto you, a liar. Referring back to
v. 44.
keep his saying] Or, keep His word, as in verses 51, 52. Christ's
whole life was a continual practice of obedience : Heb. v. 8 ; Rom. v.
19; Phil. ii. 8.
56. rejoiced to see my day] Literally, exulted that he might see My
day, the object of his joy being represented as the goal to. which his
heart is directed. This is a remarkable instance of S. John's prefer
ence for the construction expressing a purpose, where other construc
tions would seem more natural. Comp. iv. 34, 47, vi. 29, 50, ix. 2, 3,
22, xi. 50, xvi. 7. Abraham exulted in anticipation of the coming
of the Messiah through implicit belief in the Divine promises.
and he saw it, and was glad] A very important passage with regard
to the intermediate state, shewing that the soul does not, as some main
tain, remain unconscious between death and the Day of Judgment.
The Old Testament saints in Paradise were allowed to know that the
Messiah had come. How this was revealed to them we are not told ; but
here is a plain statement ofthe fact. The word for ' was glad ' expresses
a calmer, less emotional joy than the word for ' rejoiced,' and therefore
both are appropriate : ' exulted ' while still on earth ; ' was glad ' in
Hades. Thus the ' Communion of Saints ' is assured, not merely in
parables (Luke xvi. 27, 28), but in the plainer words of Scripture.
Comp. Heb. xii. 1.
57. Then said the Jews) Better, Therefore said the Jews.
13—2

196 S. JOHN, VIII. [vv. 58, 59.
unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou
58 seen Abraham ? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say
59 unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up
stones to cast at him : but Jesus hid himself, and went out
of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so
passed by.
Thou art not yet fifty years old] The reading, ' forty years,' which
Chrysostom and a few authorities give, is no doubt incorrect. It has
arisen from a wish to make the number less wide of the mark ; for our
Lord was probably not yet thirty-five, although Irenaeus preserves
a tradition that He taught at a much later age. He says (11. xxii. 5),
a quadrigesimo autem et quinquagesimo anno declinat jam in aetatem
seniorem, quam habens Dominus noster docebat, sicut evangelium el
omnes seniores testantur qui in Asia apud Joannem discipulum Domini
convenerunt. By ' evangelium ' he probably means this passage. But
' fifty years ' is a round number, the Jewish traditional age of full man
hood (Num. iv. 3, 39, viii. 24, 25). There is no reason to suppose that
Jesus was nearly fifty, or looked nearly fifty. In comparing His age
with the 2000 years since Abraham the Jews would not care to be pre
cise so long as they were within the mark.
58. Before Abraham was, I am] Here our translators have lament
ably gone back from earlier translations. Cranmer has, ' Ere Abraham
was bom, lam;' and the Rhemish, ' Before that Abraham was made, I
am,' following the Vulgate, Antequam Abraham fieret, Ego sum. See
notes on 'was'ini. 1, 6. 'I am' denotes absolute existence, and in
this passage clearly involves the pre-existence and Divinity of Christ, as
the Jews see. Comp. vv. 24, 28 ; Rev. i. 4, 8 ; and see on v. 24.
59. Then took they up stones) Or, Therefore took tliey up stones, i.e.
in consequence of His last words. They see clearly what He means.
He has taken to Himself the Divine Name and they prepare to stone
Him for blasphemy. Material lying there for completing and re
pairing the Temple would supply them with missiles. Comp. x. 31, 33.
but Jesus hid himself) Probably we are not to understand a
miraculous withdrawal as in Luke iv. 30, where the ' passing through
the midst of them ' seems to be miraculous. Here we need not sup
pose more than that He drew back into the crowd away from those
who had taken up stones. The Providence which ordered that as yet the
fears of the hierarchy should prevail over their hostility (vii. 30, viii. 20),
ruled that the less hostile in this multitude should screen Him from the
fury of the more fanatical. It is quite arbitrary to invert the clauses
and render, 'Jesus went out of the Temple and hid Himself.'
going through the midst of them, and so passed by) These words are
apparently an insertion, and probably an adaptation of Luke iv.
30. No English Version previous to the one of 161 1 contains the
passage. As a comment on the whole discourse see 1 Pet. ii. 22, 23, remem
bering that S. Peter was very possibly present on the occasion.

w. 1, 2.] S. JOHN, IX. 197
Chap. IX. Christ the Source of Truth and Light illustrated
by a Sign.
1 — 5. The Prelude to the Sign.
And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind 9
from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, 2
Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was
" The whole of the Jews' reasoning is strictly what we should expect
from them. These constant appeals to their descent from Abraham,
these repeated imputations of diabolic possession, this narrow intelli
gence bounded by the letter, this jealousy of anything that seemed in
the slightest degree to trench on their own rigid monotheism — all these,
down to the touch in ver. 57, in which the age they fix upon in round
numbers is that assigned to completed manhood, give local truth and
accuracy to the picture ; which in any case, we may say confidently,
must have been drawn by a Palestinian Jew, and was in all probability
drawn by a Jew who had been himself an early disciple of Christ." S.
p. 160. Chap. IX. Christ the Source of Truth and Light
ILLUSTRATED BY A SIGN.
Light is given to the eyes of the man born blind and the Truth is re
vealed to his soul. 1 — 5. The Prelude to the Sign.
1. And as Jesus passed by] Or, And as He was passing by. This
was possibly on His way from the Temple (viii. 59), or it may refer to
a later occasion near the Feast of the Dedication (x. 22). We know
that this man begged for his living (v. 8), and that beggars frequented
the gates of the Temple (Acts iii. 2), as they frequent the entrances of
foreign churches now.
blind from his birth] The man would be repeatedly stating this fact
to passers by. The Greek for ' from his birth occurs nowhere else in
N. T. Justin Martyr uses the phrase twice of those whom Christ
healed ; Trypho lxix. ; Apol. I. xxii. No source is so probable as
this verse, for nowhere else is there an account of Christ's healing
a congenital disease. See on i. 23 and iii. 3.
2. Master] Better, Rabbi: see on iv. 31.
who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?]
Literally, that he should be born blind (see note on viii. 56). This
question has given rise to much discussion. It implies a belief that some
one must have sinned, or there would have been no such suffering : who
then was it that sinned? Possibly the question means no more than
this; the persons most closely connected with the suffering being
specially mentioned, without much thought as to possibilities or pro
babilities. But this is not quite satisfactory. The disciples name

S. JOHN, IX. [w. 3, 4.

3 born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned,
nor his parents : but that the works of God should be made
4 manifest in him. I must work the works of him that sent

two very definite alternatives ; we must not assume that one of them
was meaningless. That the sins of the fathers are visited on the
children is the teaching of the Second Commandment and of every
one's experience. But how could a man be born blind for his own sin?
Four answers have been suggested. (1) The predestinarian notion
that the man was punished for sins which God knew he would commit
in the course of his life. This is utterly unscriptural and scarcely fits
the context.
(2) The doctrine of the transmigration of souls, which was held by
some Jews ; he might have sinned in another body. But it is doubtful
whether this philosophic tenet would be familiar to the disciples.
(3) The doctrine of the pre-existence of the soul, which appears
Wisdom viii. 20: the man's soul sinned before it was united to the
body. This again can hardly have been familiar to illiterate men.
(4) The current Jewish interpretation of Gen. xxv. 22, Ps. Ii. 5,
and similar passages ; that it was possible for a babe yet unborn to have
emotions (comp. Luke i. 41 — 44) and that these might be and often
were sinful. On the whole, this seems to be the simplest and most
natural interpretation, and v. 34 seems to confirm it.
3. Christ shews that there is a third alternative, which their ques
tion assumes that there is not. Moreover He by implication warns
them against assuming a connexion between suffering and sin in in
dividuals (see on v. 14). Neither did this man sin (not 'hath sinned'),
nor his parents. The answer, like the question, points to a definite act
of sin.
but that] i. e. he was born blind in order that. This elliptical use of
' but (in order) that ' is common in S. John, and illustrates his fondness
for the construction expressing a purpose : see on i. 8 and viii. 56.
the works of God] All those in which He manifests Himself, not
miracles only. Comp. xi. 4. There is an undoubted reference to this
passage (1 — 3) in the Clementine Homilies (XIX. 22), the date of which
is about A.D. 150. Comp. x. 9, 27.
4. I must work, &c] The reading here is somewhat doubtful, as to
whether ' I ' or ' we, ' ' Me ' or ' us ' is right in each case. The best
authorities give, We must work the works of Him that sent Me, and this,
the more difficult reading, is probably correct. Some copyists altered
'we' into 'I' to make it agree with 'Me,' others altered 'Me' into 'us'
to make it agree with 'we.'
' We must work :' Christ identifies Himself with His disciples in the
work of converting the world. 'Him that sent Me: Christ does not
identify His mission with that of the disciples. They were both sent,
but not in the same sense. So also He says 'My Father' and 'your
Father,' 'My God' and 'your God;' but not 'our Father,' or 'our
God ' (xx. r7).

w. 5—7.] S. JOHN, IX. 199
me, while it is day : the night cometh, when no man can
work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of 5
the world. 6 — 12. The Sign.
When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, 6
and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes
of the blind man with the clay, and said unto him, Go, 7
wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation,
while it is day] Or, so long as it is day, i. e. so long as we have
life. Day and night here mean, as so often in literature of all kinds,
life and death. Other explanations, e. g. opportune and inopportune
moments, the presence of Christ in the world and His withdrawal from
it, — are less simple and less suitable to the context. If all that is re
corded from vii. 37 takes place on one day, these words would probably
be spoken in the evening, when the failing light would add force to the
warning, night cometh (no article), when no one can work. 'No
one;' not even Christ Himself as man upon earth: comp. xi. 7—10;
Ps. civ. 23.
5. As long as I am in the world] Better, Whensoever / am in the
world ; it is not the same construction as ' so long as it is day. ' The
Light shines at various times and in various degrees, whether the world
chooses to be illuminated or not. Comp. i. 5, viii. 12. Here there is
special reference to His giving light both to the man's eyes and to his
soul. The Pharisees prove the truth of the saying that ' the darkness
comprehended it not.'
lam the light ofthe world] Or, I am light to the world: no article.
Contrast viii. 12. 6—12. The Sign.
6. anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay] ' Of the
blind man ' should probably be omitted, ' of it ' inserted, and the ren
dering in the margin adopted : spread the clay of it (clay made with
the spittle) upon his eyes. Regard for Christ's truthfulness compels us
to regard the clay as the means of healing ; not that He could not heal
without it, but that He willed this to be the channel of His power. Else
where He uses spittle; to heal a blind man (Mark viii. 23); to heal a
deaf and dumb man (Mark vii. 33). Spittle was believed to be a
remedy for diseased eyes (comp. Vespasian's reputed miracle, Tac.
Hist. IV. 81, and other instances); clay also, though less commonly.
So that Christ selects an ordinary remedy and gives it success in a case
confessedly beyond its supposed powers (v. 32). , This helps us to con
clude why He willed to use means, instead of healing without even a
word ; viz. to help the faith of the sufferer. It is easier to believe, when
means can be perceived ; it is still easier, when the means seem to be
appropriate. 7. wash in the pool] Literally, wash into the pool, i. e. ' wash off

200 S. JOHN, IX. [vv. 8— n.
Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came
seeing.
8 The neighbours therefore, and they which before had
seen him that he was blind, said, Is not this he that sat and
9 begged ? Some said, This is he : others said, He is like
10 him : but he said, I am he. Therefore said they unto him,
ii How were thine eyes opened ? He answered and said, A
man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine
the clay into the pool,' or, 'go to the pool and wash.' The washing
was probably part of the means of healing (comp. Naaman) and was a
strong test of the man's faith.
Siloam] Satisfactorily identified with Birket Silwdn in the lower
Tyropoean valley, S. E. of the hill of Zion. This is probably the Siloah
of Neh. iii. 15 and the Shiloah of Isa. viii. 6. 'The tower in Siloam'
(Luke xiii. 4) was very possibly a building connected with the water;
perhaps part of an aqueduct.
which is by interpretation] Literally, which is interpreted.
Sent] This is an admissible interpretation ; but the original meaning
is rather Sending, i. e. outlet of waters, ' the waters of Shiloah that go
softly' (Isa. viii. 6). S. John sees in the word ' nomen et omen ' of the
man's cure. Perhaps he sees also that this water from the rock is an
image of Him who was sent from the Father.
and came seeing] ' Came,' not back to Christ, who had probably
gone away meanwhile (v. 12), but to his own home, as would appear
from what follows. Has any poet ever attempted to describe this man's
emotions on first seeing the world in which he had lived so long ?
"The scene in which the man returns seeing and is questioned by his
neighbours, is vividly described. So too is the whole of that which
follows, when the Pharisees come upon the stage. We may accept it
with little short of absolute credence. If the opponents of miracles
could produce a single Jewish document, in which any event, known not
to have happened, was described with so much minuteness and
verisimilitude, then it would be easier to agree with them." S. pp.
162, 163.
8. had seen him that he was blind] The true reading is, saw him
that he was a beggar, or perhaps, because he was a beggar, i. e. he was
often seen in public places.
he that sat and begged] Or, he that sitteth and beggeth; present parti
ciples with the article to express his general habit.
9. Some said] Or, Others said, making three groups of speakers
in all.
He is like him] The better reading is, No, but he is like him. The
opening of his eyes would greatly change his look and manner : this
added to the extreme improbability of a cure made them doubt his
identity. 11. A man that is called Jesus] This looks as if he had heard

w. 12—14.] S. JOHN, IX.

eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and
wash : and I went and washed, and I received sight.
Then said they unto him, Where is he ? He said, I know 12
not. 1 3 — 4 1 . Opposite Results of the Sign.
They brought to the Pharisees him that aforetime was 13
blind. And it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the 14
little of the fame of Jesus. But the better reading gives, 'The man that
is called Jesus,' which points the other way.
made clay] He does not say how, for this he had not seen. The rest
he tells in order. Omit the words ' the pool of.'
I received sight] The Greek may mean either ' I looked up,' as in
Mark vi. 41, vii. 34, xvi. 4, &c. ; or ' I recovered sight,' as Matt. xi. 5 ;
Mark x. 51, 52, &c. ' I looked up ' does not suit vv. 15 and 18, where
the word occurs again : and though 'I recovered sight' is not strictly
accurate of a man born blind, yet it is admissible, as sight is natural to
man. Note the gradual development of faith in the man's soul, and compare
it with that of the Samaritan woman (see on iv. 19) and of Martha (see
on xi. 21). Here he merely knows Jesus' name and the miracle; in
v. 17 he thinks Him 'a Prophet;' in v. 33 He is ' of God;' in v. 39 He
is 'the Son of God.' What writer of fiction in the second century could
have executed such a study in psychology ?
12. Where is he Y] That strange (ekeinos) Rabbi who perplexes us
so much.
/ know not] This shews that he did not return to Jesus after he was
healed (v. 7). ' He said' should be, He saith.
13 — 41. Opposite Results of the -Sign.
13. They brought, &c] Better, they bring him to the Pharisees, him
that once was blind. These friends and neighbours are perhaps well-
meaning people, not intending to make mischief. But they are uncom
fortable because work has been done on the Sabbath, and they think it
best to refer the matter to the Pharisees, the great authorities in matters
of legal observance and orthodoxy (comp. vii. 47, 48). This is not
a meeting of the Sanhedrin. S. John's formula for the Sanhedrin is
'the chief priests and (the) Pharisees' (vii. 45, xi. 47, 57, xviii. 3), or
'the Pharisees and the chief priests ' (vii. 32).
14. it was the sabbath] We cannot be sure whether this is the last
day ofthe Feast of Tabernacles (vii. 37) or the next Sabbath. There
were seven miracles of mercy wrought on the Sabbath : 1. Withered
hand (Matt. xii. 9) ; 2. Demoniac at Capernaum (Mark i. 21); 3. Si
mon's wife's mother (Mark i. 29) ; 4. Woman bowed down eighteen
years (Luke xiii. 14); 5. Dropsical man (Luke xiv. 1) ; 6. Paralytic at
Bethesda (John v. 10) ; 7. Man born blind.

S. JOHN, IX. [vv. 15—19.

15 clay, and opened his eyes. Then again the Pharisees also
asked him how he had received his sight. He, said unto
them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do
¦6 see. Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is
not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day.
Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such mira-
17 cles ? And there was a division among them. They say
unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, that
he hath opened thine eyes? He said, He is a prophet.
18 But the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he had
been blind, and received his sight, until they called the
19 parents of him that had received his sight. And they asked
15. Then again] Better, Again, therefore. The man is becoming
impatient of this cross-questioning : he answers much more briefly than
at first (v. 1 1).
16. This man is not of God] Comp. ' He casteth out devils through
the prince of the devils' (Matt. ix. 34); like this, an argument of the
Pharisees. The fact of a miracle is not denied : but it cannot have been
done with God's help ; therefore it was done with the devil's help.
How can a man that is a sinner, &c] The less bigoted, men like
Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, shew that the argument cuts both
ways. They also start from the ' sign,' but arrive at an opposite con
clusion. Comp. Nicodemus' question, vii. 51. Perhaps Christ's teach
ing about the Sabbath (v. 17 — 23) has had some effect.
there was a division] See on vii. 43.
17. There being a division among them they appeal to the man him
self, each side wishing to gain him. 'They ' includes both sides, the
whole body of Pharisees present. Their question is not twofold, but
single ; not, ' What sayest thou of Him ? that He hath opened thine
eyes?' but What sayest thou of Him, because He opened thine eyes?
' Thou ' is emphatic ; 'thou shouldest know something of Him.' They
do not raise the question of fact ; the miracle as yet is not in dispute.
His answer shews that only one question is asked, and that it is not the
question of fact.
He is a prophet] i.e. one sent by God to declare His will ; a man
with a special and Divine mission ; not necessarily predicting the future.
Comp. iv. 19, iii. 2.
18. But the Jews did not believe] Better, the Jews, therefore, did
not believe. The man having pronounced for the moderates, the bigoted
and hostile party begin to question the fact of the miracle. Note that
here and in v. 22 S. John no longer speaks of the Pharisees, some of
whom were not unfriendly to Christ, but ' the Jews, ' His enemies, the
official representatives of the nation that rejected the Messiah (see on
i. 19).
19. Three questions in legal form. Is this your son? Was he bom
blind? How does he now see?

w. 20—24.] S. JOHN, IX. 203
them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born blind?
how then doth he now see ? His parents answered them 20
and said, We know that this is our son, and that he was
born blind : but by what means he now s^eth, we know 21
not ; or who hath opened his eyes, we know not : he is of
age ; ask him : he shall speak for himself. These words 22
spake his parents, because they feared the Jews : for the
Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that
he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.
Therefore said his parents, He is of age ; ask him. Then ^
who ye say] Emphasis on 'ye,' implying 'we do not believe it;'
literally, of whom^ say that he was born blind.
21. by what means] Better, how, as in vv. 10, 15, 19, 26. In their
timidity they keep clqse to the precise questions asked.
who hath opened] Better, who opened. This is the dangerous point,
and they become more eager and passionate. Hitherto there has been
nothing emphatic in their reply; but now there is a marked stress on all
the pronouns, the parents contrasting their ignorance with their son's
responsibility. 'Who opened his eyes, we know not: ask himself ; he
himself Ss, of full age; he himself will speak concerning himself.' See on
v. 23.
22. had agreed] It does not appear when ; but we are probably to
understand an informal agreement among themselves rather than a
decree of the Sanhedrin. A formal decree would be easily obtained
afterwards. The word for ' agreed ' is used of the agreement with Judas
(Luke xxii. 5, where it is translated 'covenanted'), and ofthe agreement
of the Jews to kill S. Paul (Acts xxiii. 20), and nowhere else. 'As
sented ' in Acts xxiv. 9 is a different compound of the same verb.
that if any man] Literally, in order that if any man: what they
agreed upon is represented as the purpose of their agreement. See on
w. 2, 3, and viii. 56.
put out of the synagogue] i. e. excommunicated. The Jews had three
kinds of anathema. (1) Excommunication for thirty days, during which
the excommunicated might not come within four cubits of any one.
(2) Absolute exclusion from all intercourse and worship for an indefinite
period. (3) Absolute exclusion for ever; an irrevocable sentence. This
third form was very rarely if ever used. It is doubtful whether the second
was in use at this time for Jews ; but it would be the ban tinder which
all Samaritans were placed. This passage and 'separate' in Luke vi.
22 probably refer to the first and mildest kind of anathema. The
principle of all anathema was found in the Divine sentence on Meroz
(Judg. v. 23) : Comp. Ezra x. 8. The word for 'out of the synagogue'
is peculiar to S. John, occurring xii. 42, xvi. 2, and nowhere else.
23. Therefore] Better, For this cause (xii. 18, 27): comp. i. 31,
v. 16, 18, vi. 65, viii. 47.
He is of age; ask him] Or, He is ofVaH age; ask him himself. This

204 S. JOHN, IX. [vv. 25—28.
again called they the man that was blind, and said unto
him, Give God the praise : we know that this man is a
25 sinner. He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner
or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was
26 blind, now I see. Then said they to him again, What did
27 he to thee? how opened he thine eyes? He answered them,
I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore
28 would you hear it again? will ye also be his disciples'? Then
is the right order of the clauses here, and they have been altered in the
Received Text of v. 21 to match this verse.
24. Then again called they] Literally, They called, therefore, a
second time. They had cross-questioned the parents apart from the
son, and now try to browbeat the son, before he finds out that his parents
have not discredited his story.
Give God the praise) Better, Give glory to God (comp. v. 41 and
viii. 54); it is the same word for 'glory' as in i. 14, ii. 11, vii. 18, viii.
50. Even thus the meaning remains obscure : but ' Give God the praise'
is absolutely misleading. The meaning is not ' Give God the praise for
the cure ; ' they were trying to deny that there had been any cure : but,
' Give glory to God by speaking the truth. ' The words are an adjuration
to confess. Comp. Josh. vii. 19; 1 Sam. vi. 5; Ezra x. 11; 1 Esdr.
ix. 8; 2 Cor. xi. 31. Wiclif, with the Genevan and Rhemish Versions,
is right here. Tyndale and Cranmer have misled our translators.
we know that, he.] ' We ' with emphasis ; ' we, the people in authority,
who have the right to pronounce decisively. So it is useless for you to
maintain that He is a Prophet. '
25. He answered] Better, Therefore he answered. He will not
commit himself, but keeps to the incontrovertible facts of the case.
whereas I was blind ] Literally, being a blind man, but the Greek
participle may be either present or imperfect ; either 'being by nature a
blind man' or 'being formerly blind.' In iii. 13 and xix. 38 we have
the same participle, and a similar doubt as to whether it is present or
imperfect : so also in v. 8.
26. Being baffled, they return to the details of the fact, either
to try once more to shake the evidence, or for want of something better
to say.
27. I have told you] Rather, /told you.
and ye did not hear] Or possibly, and did ye not hear? This avoids
taking 'hear' in two different senses; (1) 'pay attention,' (2) 'hear.'
The man loses all patience, and will not go through it again.
wherefore would ye hear) Or, wherefore do ye wish to hear.
will ye also, &c. ] Or, Surely ye also do not wish to become His dis
ciples. The form of the question is similar to that in vi. 67 and vii. 52
(comp. iv. 29, vii. 35). Moreover, itisnot the future tense, but the verb
'to will' or 'wish' (comp. v. 40, vi. 67, vii. 17, viii. 44). Lastly, the
difference between 'be' and 'become' is easily preserved here, and is
worth preserving (comp. viii. 58). The meaning of 'also' has been

vv. 29—31.] S. JOHN, IX. 205
they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we
are Moses' disciples. We know that God spake unto Moses : 29
as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is. The 30
man answered and said unto them, Why herein is a mar
vellous thing, that ye know not from whence he is, and yet
he hath opened mine eyes. Now we know that God heareth 31
not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and
misunderstood. It can scarcely mean 'as well as I :' the man has not
advanced so far in faith as to count himself a disciple of Jesus; and if
he had, he would not avow the fact to the Jews. 'Also 'means 'as well
as His well-known disciples. ' That Christ had a band of followers was
notorious. 28. Then they reviled him] Omit 'then.' The word for 'revile'
occurs nowhere else in the Gospels. Comp. 1 Pet. ii. 23. Argument
fails, so they resort to abuse.
Thou art his disciple] Better, Thou art that man's disciple. They
use a pronoun which expresses that they have nothing to do with Him.
Comp. v. 12 and vii. 11.
The pronouns are emphatic in both v. 28 and v. 29 : ' Thou art His
disciple ; but we are Moses' disciples. We know that God hath spoken
to Moses ; but as for this fellow, &c. '
29. that God spake] Literally, that GodhaXh spoken, i. e. that Moses
received ' a revelation which still remains. This is a frequent meaning
of the perfect tense — to express the permanent result of a past action.
Thus tie frequent formula 'it is written' is strictly 'it has been written,'
or 'it stands written:' i.e. it once was written, and the writing still
remains. But this is perhaps one of those cases where the Greek
perfect is best represented by the English aorist (see on viii. 29, 10
for the converse).
we know not from whence he is] We know not what commission He
has received, nor who has sent Him. Comp. viii. 14 and contrast vii.
27. Once more He is compared with Moses, as in the synagogue at
Capernaum (vi. 31, 32).
30. a marvellous thing] Some of the best MSS. read 'the marvel
lous thing.' ' You, the very people who ought to know such things
(iii. 10), know not whether He is from God or not, and yet He opened
my eyes.' 'You' is emphatic, and perhaps is a taunting rejoinder to
their 'we know that this man is a sinner' (v. 24) and 'we know that
God hath spoken to Moses' (v. 29). The man gains courage at their
evident discomfiture.
31. God heareth not sinners] i.e. wilful, impenitent sinners. Of
course it cannot mean 'God heareth no one who hath sinned,' which
would imply that God never answers the prayers of men. But the man's
dictum, reasonably understood, is the plain teaching of the O. T.,
whence he no doubt derived it. ' The Lord is far from the wicked ; but
He heareth the prayer of the righteous ' (Prov. xv. 29). Comp. Ps. Ixvi.
18, 19; Job. xxvii. 8, 9; Isa. i. 11 — 15-

206 S. JOHN, IX. [vv. 32—36.
3= doeth his will, him he heareth. Since the world began was
it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was
33 born blind. If this man were not of God, he could do
34 nothing. They answered and said unto him, Thou wast
altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us? And they
35 cast him out. Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and
when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou
36 believe on the Son of God? He answered and said, Who is
a worshipper of God] Or, God-fearing, religious. The word occurs
nowhere else in N.T. The man supposes that miracles must be answers
to prayer. Only good men can gain such answers to prayer. Only a
very good man could gain such an unprecedented answer as this.
32. Since the world began] There is no healing of the blind in
O. T.
33. of God] Or, from God: comp. i. 6.
he could do nothing] The context limits the meaning — nothing at all
like this, no miracle.
34. Thou wast altogether born in sins] ' In sins (first for emphasis)
every part of thy nature (comp. xiii. 10) has been steeped from thy
birth; thou wast born a reprobate.' They hold the same belief as the
disciples, that sin before birth is possible, and maliciously exclude not
only the alternative stated by Christ (v. 3) but even the one stated by
the disciples (v. 2), that his parents might have sinned. Their passion
blinds them to their inconsistency. They had been contending that no
miracle had been wrought; now they throw. his calamity in his face as
proof of his sin.
Dost thou teach us ?] * Dost thou, the born reprobate, teach us, the
authorized teachers ?'
they cast him out] Or, they put him forth : see on x. 4. This pro
bably does not mean excommunication. (1) The expression is too
vague. (2) There could not well have been time to get a sentence of
excommunication passed. (3) The man had not incurred the threat
ened penalty; he had not ' confessed that He was Christ' (v. 22). Pro
voked by his impracticability and sturdy adherence to his own view they
ignominiously dismiss him — turnhim out of doors, if (as the 'out' seems
to imply) they were meeting within walls.
35. Dost thou believe] There is a stress on 'thou.' 'Dost thou,
though others deny and blaspheme, believe ? '
On the Son of God) Again there is much doubt about the reading.
The balance of MSS. authority (including both the Sinaitic and the
Vatican MSS.) is in favour ofthe Son of man,' which moreover is the
expression that our Lord commonly uses respecting Himself in all four
Gospels (see on i. 51). But the reading 'The Son of God' is very
strongly supported, and is at least as old as the second century ; for Ter
tullian, who in his work Against Praxeas quotes largely from this
Gospel, in chap. xxii. quotes this question thus, Tu credis in Filium

w. 37,38.] S. JOHN, IX. , 207
he, Lord, that I might believe on him? And Jesus said 37
unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that
talketh with thee. And he said, Lord, I believe. And he 38
worshipped him.
Dei ? In x. 36 and xi. 4 there is no doubt about the reading, and there
Christ calls himself ' the Son of God.' Moreover, this appellation seems
to suit the context better, for the man had been contending that
Jesus came 'from God' (v. 33), and the term 'Son of man' would
scarcely have been intelligible to him. Lastly, a copyist, knowing that
the ' Son of man ' was Christ's usual mode of designating Himself,
would be very likely to alter ' the Son of God ' into ' the Son of man. '
Neither title, however, is very frequent in St John's Gospel. For all
these reasons, therefore, it is allowable to retain the common reading.
But in any case we once more have evidence of the antiquity of this
Gospel. If both these readings were established by the end of the
second century, the original text must have been in existence long before.
Corruptions take time to spring up and spread. See on i. 13, 18.
36. Who is he, Lord] We should perhaps insert ' and or ' then '
with some of the best MSS., and Who is He? or, Who is He then?
This ' and ' or ' then ' has the effect of intensifying the question. Comp.
' and who is my neighbour ? ' (Luke x. 29) ; ' Who then can be saved ? '
(xviii. 26) ; ' Who is he then that maketh me glad?' (2 Cor. ii. 2). ' Lord'
should perhaps be 'Sir' as in iv. n, 15, 19, 49; v. 7 (seeonvi. 34): not
until v. 38 does he reach the point at which he would call Jesus ' Lord.'
But it is the same Greek word in both cases, though the amount of
reverence with which he uses it increases, as in the parallel case of the
woman at the well.
that I might believe] Literally, in order that /may believe. S. John's
favourite construction again, as in w. 2, 3, 22.
37. Thou hast both seen him] Better, Thou hast even seen Him, and
He that speaketh with thee is He. The latter half of the sentence is
similar to the declaration in iv. 26. " This spontaneous revelation to
the outcast from the synagogueyf«<& its only parallel in the similar reve
lation to the outcast from the nation." Westcott. Not even Apostles
are told so speedily.
38. Lord, I believe] Or, I believe, Lord : the order is worth keep
ing. Comp. the centurion's confession (Matt, xxvii. 54). There is no
need to suppose that in either case the man making the confession knew
anything like the full meaning of belief in the Son of God : even Apo
stles were slow at learning that. The blind man had had his own unin
formed idea of the Messiah, and he believed that the realisation of that
idea stood before him. His faith was necessarily imperfect, a poor
' two mites ;' but it was ' all that he had,' and he gave it readily, while
the learned Rabbis of their abundance gave nothing. It is quite gratui
tous to suppose that a special revelation was granted to him. There is
no hint of this in the narrative, nor can one see why so great an excep
tion to God's usual dealings with man should have been made.
he worshipped him] This shews that his idea ofthe Son of God in-

208 S. JOHN, IX. [vv. 39—41.
39 And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world,
that they which see not might see; and that they which
40 see might be made bhnd. And some of the Pharisees
which were with him heard these words, and said unto, him,
41 Are we blind also? Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind,
eludes attributes of Divinity. The word for 'worship ' occurs elsewhere
in this Gospel only in iv. 20 — 24 and xii. 20, always of the worship of
God. 39 — 41. "The concluding verses contain a saying which is thoroughly
in the manner ofthe Synoptists (cf. Matt. xv. 14; xxiii. 16, 17, 24, 26).
It also supplies a warranty for ascribing a typical significance to miracles.
That the Synoptists do not relate this miracle does not affect its his
torical character, as the whole of these events in Judaea are equally
omitted by them  The vague and shifting outlines of the Synoptic
narrative allow ample room for all the insertions that are made in them
with so much precision by S. John." S. pp. 165, 166.
39. And Jesus said] There is no need to make a break in the narra
tive and refer these words to a subsequent occasion. This is not natural.
Rather it is the sight of the man prostrate at His feet, endowed now
with sight both in body and soul, that moves Christ to say what follows.
His words are addressed to the bystanders generally, among whom are
some of the Pharisees.
For judgment I am come] Better, For judgment I came. The pre
cise form of word for 'judgment' occurs nowhere else in this Gospel.
It signifies not the act of judging (v. 22, 24, 27, 30) but its result, a
'sentence ' or ' decision ' (Matt. vii. 2, Mark xii. 40, Rom. ii. 2, 3, &c),
Christ came not to judge, but to save (iii. 17, viii. r5); but judgment
was the inevitable result of His coming, for those who rejected Him
passed sentence on themselves (iii. 19). See on i. 9 and xviii. 37. The
pronoun is emphatic.
they which see not] They who are conscious of their own blindness,
who know their deficiencies; like 'they that are sick' and 'sinners'
in Matt. ix. 12, 13, and 'babes' in Matt. xi. 25. This man was aware
of his spiritual blindness when he asked, ' Who is He then, that I may
believe on Him !'
might see] Better, may see, may really see, may pass from the dark
ness of which they are conscious, to light and truth.
they which see] They who fancy they see, who pride themselves on
their superior insight and knowledge, and wish to dictate to others ; like
'they that be whole,' and ' righteous ' in Matt. ix. 12, 13, and ' the wise
and prudent ' in Matt. xi. 25. These Pharisees shewed this proud self-
confidence when they declared, ' we know that this man is a sinner,' and
asked ' Dost thou teach us ?'
might be made blind] Or, may become blind, really blind (Isa. vi.
10), may pass from their fancied light into real darkness.
40. And some of] Better, Those of.
Are we blind also ?] Or, Surely we also are not blind 7 See on

v. 4i.] S. JOHN, IX. 209
ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore
your sin remaineth.
v. 27. Of course they understand Him to be speaking figuratively.
It is strange that any should have understood their question as referring
to bodily sight. They mean that they, the most enlightened among the
most enlightened nation, must be among 'those who see.'
41. If ye were blind] Christ returns to His own meaning of ' blind '
or ' they which see not ' in v. 39. ' If ye were conscious of your own
spiritual darkness, if ye yearned and strove to reach the light, ye would
not have sin (see on xv. 22) ; for either ye would find the light, or, if ye
failed, the failure would not lie at your door.' For the construction
comp. v. 46; viii. 19, 42; xv. 19; xviii. 36.
therefore your sin remaineth) Better, your sin abideth (see on i. 33):
' therefore ' is an insertion, and must be omitted. ' Ye profess to see :
your sin in this false profession and in your consequent rejection of Me
abideth.' Itwas a hopeless case. They rejected Him because they did not
know the truth about Him ; and they would never learn the truth because
they were fully persuaded that they were in possession of it. Those
who confess their ignorance and contend against it, (1) cease to be re
sponsible for it, (2) have a good prospect of being freed from it. Those
who deny their ignorance and contend against instruction, (1) remain
responsible for their ignorance, (2) have no prospect of ever being freed
from it. Comp. iii. 36.
Chap. X. Christ is Love.
In chapters v. and vi. two miracles, the healing of the paralytic and
the feeding of the five thousand, formed the introduction to two discourses
in which Christ is set forth as the Source and the Support of Life. In
chapters vii. and viii. we have a discourse in which fie is set forth as
the Source of Truth and Light, and this is illustrated (ix.) by His
giving physical and spiritual sight to the man born blind. In chap. x.
we again have a discourse in which Christ is set forth as Love, under
the figure of the Good Shepherd giving His life for the sheep, and this
is illustrated (xi.) by the raising of Lazarus, a work of Love which costs
Him His life. As already stated, the prevailing idea throughout this
section (v. — xi.) is truth and love provoking contradiction and enmity.
The more clearly the Messiah manifests Himself, and the more often He
convinces some of His hearers of His Messiahship (vii. 40, 41, 46, 50,
viii. 30, ix. 30 — 38, x. 21, 42, xi. 45), the more intense becomes the
hostility of ' the Jews ' and the more determined their intention to kill
Him. 1 — 18. "The form ofthe discourse in the first half of chap. x. is
remarkable. It resembles the Synoptic parables, but not exactly. The
parable is a short narrative, which is kept wholly separate from the
ideal facts which it signifies. But this discourse is not a narrative ; and
the figure and its application run side by side, and are interwoven with
one another all through. It is an extended metaphor, rather than a
s.john 14

S. JOHN, X. [v. i.

Chap. X. Christ is Love.
i — io. The Allegory of the Door of the Fold.
10 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the
parable. If we are to give it an accurate name we should be obliged to
fall back upon the wider term ' allegory.'
This, and the parallel passage in chap, xv., are the only instances of
allegory in the Gospels. They take in the Fourth Gospel the place
which parables hold with the Synoptists. The Synoptists have no
allegories distinct from parables. The fourth Evangelist has no
parables as a special form of allegory. What are we to infer from this?
The parables certainly are original and genuine. Does it follow that
the allegories are not?
(i) We notice, first, that along with the change oi form there is a
certain change of subject. The parables generally turn round the
ground conception of the kingdom ofheaven. They  do not enlarge
on the relation which its King bears to the separate members 
Though the royal dignity of the Son is incidentally put forward, there
is nothing which expresses so closely and directly the personal relation of
the Messiah to the community of believers, collectively and individually,
as these two 'allegories' from S. John. Their form seems in an
especial manner suited to their subject matter, which is a fixed, per
manent and simple relation, not a history of successive states. The
form of the allegories is at least appropriate.
(2) We notice next that even with the Synoptists the use of the
parable is not rigid. All do not conform precisely to the same type.
There are some, like the Pharisee and Publican, the Good Samari
tan, &c. , which give direct patterns for action, and are not therefore
parables in the same sense in which the Barren Fig-tree, the Prodigal
Son, &c. are parables  If, then, the parable admits so much devia
tion on the one side, may it not also on the other ?
(3) Lastly, we have to notice the parallels to this particular figure
of the Good Shepherd that are found in the Synoptists. These are
indeed abundant. The parable of the Lost Sheep (Luke xv. 4 — 7 ;
Matt, xviii. 12, 13)  ' I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the
house of Israel' (Matt. xv. 24)  'But when He saw the multitudes,
He was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and
were scattered abroad, as sheep having no Shepherd ' (Matt. ix. 36),
which when taken with Matt. xi. 28, 29 (' Come unto Me all ye that
labour,' &c), gives almost an exact parallel to the Johannean allegory."
S. pp. 167 — 169.
1 — 10. The Allegory of the Door of the Fold.
1. Verily, verily] This double affirmation, peculiar to this Gospel
(see on i. 51), never occurs at the beginning of a discourse, but either
in continuation, to introduce some deep truth, or in reply. This
verse is no exception. There is no break between the chapters,

w. 2, 3.] S. JOHN, X.

door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the
same is a thief and a robber. But he that entereth in by -
the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the porter 3
which should perhaps have been divided at ix. 34 or 38 rather than
here. The scene continues uninterrupted from ix. 35 to x. 21, where we
have a reference to the healing of the blind man. Moreover x. 6 seems
to point back to ix. 41 ; their not understanding the allegory was
evidence of self-complacent blindness. This chapter, therefore, although
it contains a fresh subject, is connected with the incidents in chap, ix.,
and grows out of them. The connexion seems to be that the Pharisees
by their conduct to the man had proved themselves bad shepherds ; but
he has found the Good Shepherd : they had cast him out of doors ; but
he has found the Door : they had put him forth to drive him away ;
the Good Shepherd puts His sheep forth to lead them. We are not
told where these words are spoken ; so that it is impossible to say
whether it is probable that a sheepfold with the shepherds and
their flocks was in sight. There is nothing improbable in the supposi
tion. He that entereth not by the door] The Oriental sheepfolds are com
monly walled or palisaded, with one door or gate. Into one of these
enclosures several shepherds drive their flocks, leaving them in charge
of an under-shepherd or porter, who fastens the door securely inside,
and remains with the sheep all night In the morning the shepherds
come to the door, the porter opens to them, and each calls away his own
sheep. some other way] Literally, from another quarter : the word occurs
here only in N.T.
the same] Better, he ; literally, that one. It is a pronoun of which
S. John is very fond in order to recall with emphasis some person or
thing previously mentioned. Comp. i. 18, 33, v. ii. 39, ix. 37, xii. 48,
xiv. 21, 26, xv. 26. In i. 33 (' the same said unto me '), v. 1 1, and xii.
48 it is inaccurately translated, as here, ' the same.'
a thief and robber] Everywhere in this Gospel (8, 10, xii. 6, xviii.
40), as also 2 Cor. xi. 26, these words are given correctly as renderings
of the Greek equivalents ; but everywhere else in N.T. (Matt. xxi. 13,
xxvi. 55, xxvii. 38, &c, &c.) the word here translated ' robber' is less
well translated 'thief.' The 'robber ' is a brigand, a more formidable
criminal than the 'thief;' the one uses violence, the other cunning.
2. is the shepherd of the sheep) Better, is a shepherd of the sheep.
There is more than one flock in the fold, and therefore more than one
shepherd to visit the fold. The Good Shepherd has not yet appeared
in the allegory. The allegory indeed is two-fold; in the first part
(' — S)> which is repeated (7 — 9), Christ is the Door of the fold ; in the
second part (11 — 18) He is the Shepherd; v. 10 forming a link between
the two parts.
3. To him the porter openeth] The 'porter' is the door-keeper or
gate-keeper, who fastens and opens the one door into the fold. -In the
allegory the fold is the Church, the Door is Christ, the sheep are the
14 — 2

S. JOHN, X. [vv. 4— 6.

openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his
4 own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he
putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the
5 sheep follow him : for they know his voice. And a stranger
will they not follow, but will flee from him : for they know
6 not the voice of strangers. This parable spake Jesus unto
elect, the shepherds are God's ministers. What does the porter repre
sent? Possibly nothing definite. Much harm is sometimes done by
trying to make every detail of an allegory or parable significant. There
must be back ground in every picture. But if it be insisted that the
porter here is too prominent to be meaningless, it is perhaps best to
understand the Holy Spirit as signified under this figure; He who
grants opportunities of coming, or of bringing others, through Christ
into the Kingdom of God. Comp. i Cor. xvi. 9; 2 Cor. ii. 12; Col.
iv. 3; Acts xiv. 27; Rev. iii. 8: but in all these passages 'door' does
hot mean Christ, but opportunity. See on 1 Cor. xvi. 9.
the sheep hear his voice] All the sheep, whether belonging to His
flock or not, know from His coming that they are about to be led out;
His own sheep (first for emphasis) he calleth by name (Exod. xxxiii. 12,
1 7 ; Isa. xliii. 1), and leadeth them out to pasture. Even in this country
shepherds and shepherds' dogs know each individual sheep ; in the East
the intimacy between shepherd and sheep is still closer. The naming
of sheep is a very ancient practice: see Theocritus V. 102.
4. when he putteth forth his own sheep] Better, when he hath put
forth all his own. Most of the best MSS. have 'all' for 'sheep:' 'there
shall not an hoof be left behind' (Exod. x. 26). The word for 'put
forth' is remarkable; it is the same as is used in ix. 34, 35 of the
Pharisees 'casting out' the man born blind. This is perhaps not acci
dental: the false shepherds put forth sheep to rid themselves of trouble;
the true shepherds put forth sheep to feed them. But even the true
shepherds must sometimes use a certain amount of violence to their
sheep to 'compel them to come' (Luke xiv. 23) to the pastures. But
note that there are no 'goats' in the allegory : all the flock are faithful.
It is the ideal Church composed entirely of the elect. The object of the
allegory being to set forth the relations of Christ to His sheep, the
possibility of bad sheep is not taken into account. That side of the
picture is treated in the parables of the Lost Sheep, and of the Sheep
and the Goats.
5. And a stranger will they not follow] Better,But a stranger they will
assuredly not follow. The form of negative is very strong, as in iv. 14,
48, vi. 35, 37, viii- 12, 5i> S«: see on viii. 51. By 'a stranger' is
meant quite literally anyone whom they do not know, not necessarily a
thief or robber.
6. This parable] ' Better, This allegory. The word which the
Synoptists use for 'parable' (parabola) is never used by S. John; and
the word here used by S. John (paroimia) is never used by the Synop
tists. This should be brought out in translation; both are rendered

w. 7, 8.] S. JOHN, X. , 213
them : but they understood not what things they were which
he spake unto them.
' Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say 7
unto you, I am the door of the sheep. All that ever came 8
before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not
by our translators sometimes 'parable' and sometimes 'proverb.' Paroi-
mia occurs again xvi. 25,29 and 2 Pet. ii. 22, and nowhere else in N.T.
Everywhere but here it is translated 'proverb.' Paroimia means some
thing beside the way; hence, according to some, a trite 'way side
saying;' according to others, a figurative 'out-of-the-way saying.' On
paraboli see on Mark iv. 2.
understood not] Did not recognise the meaning.
7. Then said Jesus unto them again] Better, Therefore said Jesus
again. They did not understand ; therefore He went through the allegory
again more explicitly, interpreting the main features. 'Unto them' is
of doubtful authority.
Verily, verily] This is the important point, to recognise that the one
door of the fold, through which the sheep and the shepherds enter, is
Christ. / (with great emphasis) am the Door. Comp. 'I am the Way'
(xiv. 6).
the door of the sheep] Better, 'the Door to the sheep' (vv. 1, 2), and
also 'the Door for the sheep' (v. 9). Sheep and shepherds alike have
one and the same door. The elect enter the Church through Christ ; the
ministers who would visit the flocks must receive their commission
from Christ. Note that Christ does not say, 'the Door of the fold,' but
'the Door of the sheep.' The fold has no meaning apart from the
sheep. 8. All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers] These words
are difficult, and some copyists seem to have tried to avoid the difficulty
by omitting either 'all' or 'before Me.' But the balance of authority
leaves no doubt that both are genuine. Some commentators would
translate ' instead of Me' for 'before Me.' But this meaning of the Greek
preposition is not common, and perhaps occurs nowhere in N. T. More
over 'instead of Me' ought to include the idea of 'for My advantage;'
and that is impossible here. We must retain the natural and ordinary
meaning of 'before Me:' and as 'before Me in dignity' would be
obviously inappropriate, 'before Me in time' must be the meaning. But
who are 'all that came before Me?' The patriarchs, prophets, Moses,
the Baptist cannot be meant, either collectively or singly. ' Salvation is
of the Jews ' (iv. 22); 'they are they which testify of Me' (v. 39); 'if ye
believed Moses, ye would believe Me' (v. 46); 'John bare witness unto
the truth' (v. 33): texts like this are quite conclusive against any such
Gnostic interpretation. Nor can false Messiahs be meant : it is doubtful
whether any had arisen at this time. Rather it refers to the ' ravening
wolves in sheep's clothing' who had been, and still were, the ruin ofthe
nation, who 'devoured widow's houses,' who were 'full of ravening and'
wickedness,' who had 'taken away the key of knowledge,' and were in

214 S. JOHN, X. [vv. 9, io.
9 hear them. I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he
shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
io The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and
to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that
they might have it more abundantly.
very truth 'thieves and robbers' (Matt. vii. 15, xxiii. 14; Luke xi. 39,
52). Some of them were now present, thirsting to add bloodshed to
robbery, and this denunciation of them is no stronger than several
passages in the Synoptists: e.g. Matt, xxiii. 33; Luke xi. 50, 51. The
tense also is in favour of this interpretation; not were, but 'are thieves
and robbers.'
but the sheep did not hear them] For they spoke with no authority
(Matt. vii. 29) ; there was no living voice in their teaching. They had
their hearers, but these were not 'the sheep,' but blind adherents, led
by the blind.
9. by me] Placed first for emphasis; 'through Me and in no other
way.' The main point is iterated again and again, each time with great
simplicity, and yet most emphatically. "The simplicity, the directness,
the particularity, the emphasis of S. John's style give his writings a
marvellous power, which is not perhaps felt at first. Yet his words
seem to hang about the reader till he is forced to remember them. Each
great truth sounds like the burden of a strain, ever falling upon the ear
with a calm persistency which secures attention. " Westcott, Introduc
tion to the Study of the Gospels, p. 250.
he shall be saved] These words and ' shall find pasture' seem to shew
that this verse does not refer to the shepherds only, but to the sheep
also. Although 'find pasture' may refer to the shepherd's work for the
flock, yet one is inclined to think that if the words do not refer to both,
they refer to the sheep only.
With the verse as a whole should be compared 'the strait gate and
narrow way which leadeth unto life' (Matt. vii. 14). In the Clementine
Homilies (ill. Iii.) we have 'He, being a true prophet, said, I am the
gate of life ; he that entereth in through Me entereth into life. ' See on
ix. 3.
10. and to kill] To slaughter as if for sacrifice.
/ am come] Better, I came. ' I ' is emphatic, in marked contrast to
the thief. This is the point of transition from the first part of the
allegory to the second. The figure of the Door, as the one entrance to
salvation, is" dropped ; and that of the Good Shepherd, as opposed to
the thief, is taken up; but this intermediate clause will apply to either
figure, inclining towards the second one. In order to make the strong
est possible antithesis to the thief, Christ introduces, not a shepherd, but
Himself, the Chief Shepherd. The thief takes life; the shepherds pro
tect life ; the Good Shepherd gives it.
that they might have] Rather, in both clauses, that they may
have. have it more abundantly) Omit 'more ; ' it is not in the Greek, and

12.] S. JOHN, X.

n — 1 8. The Allegory of the Good Shepherd.
I am the good shepherd : the good shepherd giveth his life «
for the sheep. But he that is a hireling, and not the shepherd, «
whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and
leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and
somewhat spoils the sense. More abundantly than what ? Translate,
that they may have abundance.
11 — 18. The Allegory of the Good Shepherd.
11. lam the Good Shepherd] The word translated 'good' cannot
be adequately translated : it means ' beautiful, noble, good, ' as opposed
to 'foul, mean, wicked.' It sums up the chief attributes of ideal perfec
tion. Christ is the Perfect Shepherd, as opposed to His own imperfect
ministers; He is the true Shepherd, as opposed to the false shepherds,
who are hirelings or hypocrites ; He is the Good Shepherd, who gives
His life for the sheep, as opposed to the wicked thief who takes their
lives to preserve his own. Thus in Christ is realised the ideal Shepherd
of O.T. Ps. xxiii. ; Isa. xl. n; Jer. xxiii.; Ezek. xxxiv., xxxvii. 24;
Zech. xi. 7. Perhaps no image has penetrated more deeply into the
mind of Christendom : Christian prayers and hymns, Christian painting
and statuary, and Christian literature are full of it, and have been from
the earliest ages. And side by side with it is commonly found the other
beautiful image of this Gospel, the Vine : the Good Shepherd and the
True Vine are figures of which Christians have never wearied.
giveth his life] Better, layeth down His life. The phrase is a
remarkable one and peculiar to S. John, whereas 'to give His life'
occurs in the Synoptists (Matt. xx. 20; Mark x. 45). 'To lay down'
perhaps includes the notion of 'to pay down,' a common meaning of the
words in classical Greek; if so, it is exactly equivalent to the Synoptic
phrase 'to give as a ransom.' It occurs again, w. 15, 17, xiii. 37, 38,
xv. 13; 1 John iii. 16. In this country the statement 'the good shep
herd lays down his life for his sheep' seems extravagant when taken
apart from the application to Christ. It is otherwise in the East, where
dangers from wild beasts and armed bands of robbers are serious and
constant. Comp. Gen. xiii. 5, xiv. 12, xxxi. 39, 40, xxxii. 7, 8, xxxvii.
33; Jobi. 17; 1 Sam. xvii. 34, 35.
12. an hireling] The word occurs nowhere else in N. T. excepting
ofthe 'hired servants' of Zebedee (Mark i. 20). The Good Shepherd
was introduced in contrast to the thief. Now we have another contrast
to the Good Shepherd given, the hired shepherd, a mercenary, who
tends a flock not his own for his own interests. The application is
obvious ; viz., to those ministers who care chiefly for the emoluments
and advantages of their position, and retire when the position becomes
irksome or dangerous.
and not the shepherd] Better, and not a shepherd, as in v. 1
the wolf] Any power opposed to Christ. See on v. 28.

216 S. JOHN, X. [vv. 13—16.
13 scattereth the sheep. The hireling fleeth, because he is a
14 hireling, and careth not for the sheep. I am the good shep-
15 herd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the
Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father : and I lay down
16 my life for the sheep. And other sheep I have, which are
not of this fold : them also I must bring, and they shall hear
my voice ; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd,
and scattereth the sheep) The best authorities omit 'the sheep;' but
the words might easily be omitted as apparently awkward and super
fluous after the preceding 'them.' But in any case the meaning is
'snatcheth certain sheep and scattereth the flock.'
13. The hireling fleeth] These words are of still more doubtful
authority. Omitting both the doubtful portions the sentence will run
(The hireling) leaveth the sheep and fleeth; and the wolf snatcheth them
and scattereth (them); because he is an hireling and careth not, &c.
14 — 18. Further description of the True Shepherd. (1) His inti
mate knowledge of His sheep; (2) His readiness to die for them. This
latter point recurs repeatedly as a sort of refrain, like ' I will raise him
up at the last day,' in chap. vi.
14. and know my sheep, and am known of mine] Better, and I know
Mine, and mine know me.
15. As the Father knoweth me, even so, &c] This rendering entirely
obscures the true meaning. There should be no full stop at the end of
v. 14, and the sentence should run; I know Mine, and Mine know Me,
even as the Father knoweth Me and I know the Father. So intimate
is the relation between the Good Shepherd and His sheep that it may
be compared to the relation between the Father and the Son. The
same thought runs through the discourses in the latter half of the
Gospel: xiv. 20, xv. 10, xvii. 8, 10, 18, 21.
16. other sheep I have] Not the Jews in heathen lands, but Gentiles,
for even among them He had sheep. The Jews had asked in derision,
'Will He go and teach the Gentiles?' (vii. 35). He declares here that
among the despised heathen He has sheep. He was going to lay down
His life, 'not for that nation only' (xi. 52), but .that He might 'draw all
men unto Him' (xii. 32). Of that most heathen of heathen cities,
Corinth, He declared to S. Paul in a vision, 'I have much people in
this city' (Acts xviii. 10).
not of this fold) Emphasis on 'fold,' not on 'this;' the Gentiles
were in no fold at all, but 'scattered abroad' (xi. 52).
them also I must bring] Better, them also I must lead. No need
for them to be removed; Christ can lead them in their own lands.
'Neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem' (iv. 21) is the ap
pointed place. Note the 'must;' it is the Messiah's bounden duty,
decreed for Him by the Father: comp. iii. 14, ix. 4, xii. 34, xx. 9.
there shall be onefold, and one shepherd] Rather, they shall become
one flock, one shepherd. The distinction between 'be' and 'become' is
worth preserving (see on ix. 27, 39), and that between 'flock' and

w. 17, 18.] S. JOHN, X. 217
Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my 17
life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, 18
'fold' still more so. 'There shall become one fold' would imply that
at present there are more than one : but nothing is said of any other
fold. In both these instances our translators have rejected their better
predecessors: Tyndale and Coverdale have 'flock,' not 'fold;' the
Geneva Version has 'be made,' not 'be.' One point in the Greek can
not be preserved in English. The words for 'flock' and 'shepherd' are
cognate and very similar, poimni and poimen : 'one herd, one herdsman '
would be the nearest approach we could make, and to change 'flock'
for 'herd' would be more loss than gain. The change from 'flock' to
'fold' has been all loss, leading to calamitous misunderstanding.
"The universalism of v. 16, which is so often quoted against the
Gospel, seems rather to be exactly of the kind of which we have abun
dant evidence in the Synoptists: e.g. in Matt. viii. n, xiii. 24 — 30,
xxviii. 19; Luke xiii. 29. A certain precedence is assigned to Israel,
but the inclusion of the Gentiles is distinctly contemplated." And if
S. Matthew could appreciate this side of his Master s teaching, how
much more S. John, who had lived to see the success of missions to the
heathen and the destruction of Jerusalem. "On the other hand, the
nature of S. John's universalism must not be mistaken. It implies a
privileged position on the part of the Jews." S. pp. 172, 173. More
over, even O.T. prophets seem to have had a presentiment that other
nations would share in the blessings of the Messiah. Mic. iv. 2 ; Isa.
Iii. 15.
17. Therefore] Better, On this account, or, For this cause (xii. 18, 27).
See on vii. 22 and viii. 47, and comp. v. 16, 18, vi. 65. The Father's
love for the incarnate Son is intensified by the self-sacrifice of the Son.
that I might take it again] Literally, in order that I may take it
again. This clause is closely connected with the preceding one : 'that'
depends upon 'because.' Only because Christ was to take His human
life again was His death such as the Father could have approved. Had
the Son returned to heaven at the Crucifixion leaving His humanity on
the Cross, the salvation of mankind would not have been won, the
sentence of death would not have been reversed, we should be 'yet in
our sins' (1 Cor. xv. 17). Morever, in that case He would have ceased
to be the Good Shepherd : He would have become like the hireling,
casting aside his duty before it was completed. The office of the True
Shepherd is not finished until all mankind become His flock ; and this
work continues from the Resurrection to the Day of Judgment.
18. No man taketh it from me] Better, No one taketh it from Me;
not even God. See on v. 28. Two points are insisted on; (1) that the
Death is entirely voluntary; (2) that both Death and Resurrection are
in accordance with a commission received from the Father. Comp.
'Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit' (Luke xxiii. 46). The
precise words used by the two Apostles of Christ's death bring this out
very clearly; 'yielded up (literally 'let go') the ghost' (Matt, xxvii. 50) ;
'gave up the ghost' (John xix. 30; see note there). The word used by

218 S. JOHN, X. [vv. 19—21.
but I 'lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down,
and I have power to take it again. This commandment
have I received of my Father.
19 — 21. Opposite Results of the Teaching.
19 There was a division therefore" again among the Jews for
20 these sayings. And many of them said, He hath a devil,
21 and is mad ; why hear ye him? Others said, These are not
the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the
eyes of the blind ?
S. Mark and S. Luke ('breathed His last,' or 'expired') is less strong.
Here there is an emphasis on the pronoun; 'but /lay it down of My
self.' / have power] i.e. right, authority, liberty: same word as in i. 12,
v. 27, xvii. 2, xix. 10. This authority is the commandment of the
Father: and hence this passage in no way contradicts the usual N.T.
doctrine that Christ was raised to life again by the Father. Acts ii.
24. This commandment have I received] Better, This commandment
received I, viz., at the Incarnation : the commandment to die and rise
again. Comp. iv. 34, v. 30, vi. 38.
19 — 21. Opposite Results of the Teaching.
19. again] As about the man born blind (ix. 6) among the Phari
sees, and at the Feast of Tabernacles (vii. 43), among the multitude.
' Therefore ' should be omitted here as wanting authority; and 'there
arose' would be more accurate than 'there was' (see on i. 6); there
arose a division again. See on vii. 43.
among the Jews] Some even among the hostile party are impressed,
and doubt the correctness of their position: comp. xi. 45.
20. He hath a devil] See last note on viii. 48, and comp. vii. 20.
21. of him that hath a devil] Better, of one possessed with a
demon : the expression differs from that in v. 20.
Can a devil] Or, Surely a demon cannot. See on ix. 40. It was
too great and too beneficent a miracle for a demon. But here they stop
short : they state what He cannot be; they do not see, or will not ad
mit, what He must be.
22 — 38. The Discourse at the Feast of the Dedication.
Again we seem to have a gap in the narrative. Between vv. 2 1 — 22
(but see below) there is an interval of about two months ; for the Feast
of Tabernacles would be about the middle of October, and that of the
Dedication towards the end of December. In this interval some would
place Luke x. 1 — xiii. 21. If this be correct, we may connect the send
ing out of the Seventy both with the Feast of Tabernacles and also with
John x. 16. Seventy was the traditional number of the nations of the

w. 22, 23.] S. JOHN, X. 219
22 — 38. The Discourse at the Feast of the Dedication.
And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and 22
it was winter. And Jesus walked in the temple in Solo- 23
earth ; and for the nations 70 bullocks were offered at the Feast of
Tabernacles — 13 on the first day, 12 on the second, 11 on the third, and
so on. The Seventy were sent out to gather in the nations ; for they
were not forbidden, as the Twelve were, to go into the way of the Gen
tiles or to enter any city of the Samaritans (Matt. x. 5). The Twelve
were primarily for the twelve tribes ; the Seventy for the Gentiles. The
words 'other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must
lead,' must have been spoken just before the mission ofthe Seventy.
Dr Westcott, on the strength of a strongly attested reading in v. 22,
Then there took place the Feast of the Dedication, would connect chap.
ix. and x. 1 — 21 with this later feast rather than with the Feast of
Tabernacles. In this case the interval of two months must be placed
between chaps, viii. and ix.
22. And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication] More
literally, Now there took place at Jerusalem the Feast of the Dedication.
This feast might be celebrated anywhere, and the pointed insertion of
'at Jerusalem' seems to suggest that in the interval between v. 21 andw.
22 Christ had been away from the city. It was kept in honour of the
purification and restoration of the Temple (B.C. 164) after its desecra
tion by Antiochus Epiphanes ; 1 Mace. i. 20 — 60, iv. 36 — 59 (note esp.
w. 36 and 59); 2 Mace. x. 1 — 8. Another name for it was 'the
Lights,' or 'Feast of Lights,' from the illuminations with which it was
celebrated. Christian dedication festivals are its lineal descendants.
"The feast was of comparatively recent institution.. ..It is not a feast
the name of which would be likely to occur to any but a Jew ; still less
the accurate note of place in v. 23 ('in the temple in Solomon's porch').
Both these verses proclaim the eye-witness. So does the admirable
question in the verse following. Attracted by His teachings and His
miracles, but repelled by His persistent refusal to assume the Messianic
character as they understood it, the Jews ask Jesus directly, 'How long,
&c. ' It is such a question as at this period of the ministry was inevit
able, and the language in which it is expressed exactly represents the
real difficulties and hesitation that the Jews would feel." S. pp. 174,
and it was winter] Omit 'and,' which is wanting in authority, and
join 'it was winter' to the next verse. The words explain why Jesus
was walking under cover.
23. in Solomon's porch] This was a cloister or colonnade in the
Temple-Courts, apparently on the east side. Tradition said that it was
a part of the original building which had survived the various destruc
tions and rebuildings. No such cloister is mentioned in the account of
Solomon's Temple, and perhaps the name was derived from the wall
against which it was built. It is mentioned again Acts iii. 1 1 (where
see note) and v. 12. Foundations still remaining probably belong to it.

220 S. JOHN, X. [w. 24—26.
24 mon's porch. Then came the Jews round about him,
and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt?
25 If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. Jesus answered
them, I told you, and ye believe not : the works that I do
26 in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. But ye
believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said
24. Then came the Jews round about, &c] Better, The Jews there
fore compassed Him about (Luke xxi. 20; Hebr. xi. 30; Rev. xx. 9)
and kept saying to Him. They encircled Him in an urgent and ob
trusive manner, indicating that they were determined to have an
answer. How long dost thou make us to doubt?) The margin is better with hold
us in suspense. The literal meaning is How long dost Thou excite our
mind? If Thou art the Christ tell us with openness (see on vii. 4).
They put a point-blank question, as the Sanhedrin do at the Passion
(Luke xxii. 67). Their motives for urging this v/ere no doubt mixed,
and the same motive was not predominant in each case. Some. were
hovering between faith and hostility and (forgetting viii. 13) fancied
that an explicit declaration from Him might help them. Others asked
mainly out of curiosity: He had interested them greatly, and they
wanted His own account of Himself. The worst wished for a plain
statement which might form material for an accusation: they wanted
Him to commit Himself.
25. I told you, and ye believed not] The best authorities have, and
ye believe not : their unbelief still continues. To some few, the woman
at the well, the man born blind, and the Apostles, Jesus had explicitly
declared Himself to be the Messiah ; to all He had implicitly declared
Himself by His works and teaching.
the works] in the widest sense, not miracles alone ; His Messianic
work generally. See on v. 36. The pronouns are emphatically op
posed; 'the works which I do... they. ...But ye believe not.
26. as I said unto you] These words are omitted by some of the
best authorities, including the Vatican and Sinaitic MSS. But they
may possibly have been left out to avoid a difficulty. If they are
genuine they are best joined, as in our version, with what precedes.
Nowhere in the Gospels does Christ make such a quotation from a
previous discourse as we should have if we read, 'As I said unto you,
My sheep hear My voice, &c.' The arrangement 'Ye are not of My
sheep, as I said unto you,' is better, and the reference is to the general
sense of the allegory of the sheep-fold, especially w. 14, 15. He and
His sheep have most intimate knowledge of one another ; therefore
these Jews asking who He is prove that they are not His sheep. Comp.
vi. 36, where there seems to be a similar reference to the general mean
ing of a previous discourse. It is strange that an objection should have
been made to His referring to the allegory after a lapse of two months.
There is nothing improbable in His doing so, especially if He had been
absent from the city in the interval (see on v. 22). Might not a speakei

vv. 27— 31.] S. JOHN, X.

unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, 27
and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life; and 28
they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them
out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater 29
than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my
Father's hand. I and my Father are one. Then the Jews |° -
at the present time refer to a speech made two months before, especially
if he had not spoken in public since then?
27, 28. Note the simple but very impressive coupling of the clauses
by a simple ' and ' throughout and comp. w. 3 and 12 : note also the
climax. 28. I give unto them) Not 'will give.' Here as in iii. 15, v. 24 and
often, the gift of eternal life is regarded as already possessed by the
faithful. It is not a promise, the fulfilment of which depends upon
man's conduct, but a gift, the retention of which depends upon our
selves. they shall never perish] This is parallel to viii. 51 (see note there) ;
shall certainly not perish for ever, being the literal meaning, But the
negative belongs to the verb, not to 'for ever;' and the meaning is, not
'they may die, but shall not die for ever' but ' they shall never die for
all eternity.' Comp. xi. 26.
neither shall any man pluck them] Better, and no one shall snatch
them. ' No one ' rather than ' no man ' (as in v. 18), for the powers of
darkness are excluded as well as human seducers. 'Snatch' rather than
' pluck,' for in the Greek it is the same word as is used of the wolf in
v. 12, and this should be preserved in translation.
This passage in no way asserts the indefectibility of the elect, and
gives no countenance to ultra-predestinarian views. Christ's sheep cannot
be taken from Him against their will ; but their will is free, and they
may choose to leave the flock.
out of my hand] " His hand protects, bears, cherishes, leads them."
Meyer. 29. which gave them] Better, which hath given them. Comp. xvii.
6, 24. This enforces the previous assertion. ' To snatch them out of
' My hand, he must snatch them out of My Father's hand ; and My Father
is greater than all :' even than the Son (xiv. 28). But the reading is
not certain. The most probable text gives, that which the Father
hath given Me is greater than fill. The unity of the Church is strength
invincible. out of my Fathers hand] The better reading is, out of 'the Father's
hand. 'Out of His hand' would have sufficed ; but 'Father' is repeated
for emphasis.
30. / and my Father are one] ' One ' is neuter in the Greek ; not
one Person, but one Substance. There is no 'My' in the Greek; I and
the Father -are one. Christ has just implied that His hand and the
Father's hand are one, which implies that He and the Father are one ;
and this He now asserts. They are one in power, in will, and in

S. JOHN, X. [w. 32-35.

32 took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them,
Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for
33 which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered
him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for
blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest
34 thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in
35 your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods,
action : this at the very least the words must mean ; the Arian interpre
tation of mere moral agreement is inadequate. Whether or no Unity
of Essence is actually stated here, it is certainly implied, as the Jews see.
They would stone Him for making Himself God, which they would not
have done had He not asserted or implied that He and the Father were
one in Substance, not merely in will. And Christ does not correct
them, as assuredly He would have done, had their animosity arisen out
of a gross misapprehension of His words. Comp. Rev. xx. 6, xxii. 3.
31. Then the Jews] Better, Therefore the Jews : their picking up
stones was a direct consequence of His words. But ' therefore ' should
perhaps be omitted. They prepare to act on Lev. xxiv. 16 (Comp.
1 Kin. xxi. 10). 'Again' refers us back to viii. 59. The word for
' took up ' is not the same in each case; the word used here is stronger,
implying more effort ; ' lifted up, bore.' But ' again ' shews that it
refers to raising up from the ground rather than carrying from a distance.
32. Many good works] It is the same word as is used v. 14 ofthe
Good Shepherd : many beautiful, noble, excellent works. Comp. 'He
hath done all things well' (Mark vii. 37) and 'God saw that it was good'
(Gen. i. 8, 10, 12, &c). These excellent works proceed from the
Father and are manifested by the Son.
for which of those) Literally, for what kind of work among these;
i. e. ' what is the character of the work for which ye are in the act of
stoning me?' It was precisely the character of the works which shewed
that they were Divine, as some of them were disposed to think (v.'n,
vii. 26). Comp. Matt. xxii. 36, where the literal meaning is, 'what&W
of a commandment is great in the law?' and 1 Cor. xv. 35, 'with what
kind of body do they come?' See on xii. 33, xviii. 32, xxi. 19.
33. For a good work] The preposition is changed in the Greek ;
concerning a good work. ' That is not the subject-matter of our charge?'
and because] ' And' is explanatory, shewing wherein the blasphemy
consisted : it does not introduce a separate charge.
34 — 38. Christ answers the formal charge of blasphemy by a formal
argument on the other side.
34. in your law] ' Law ' is here used in its widest sense for the
whole of the Old Testament; so also in xii. 34 and xv. 25 ; in all three
places the passage referred to is in the Psalms. Comp. vii. 19, 1 Cor.
xiv. 21. The force of the pronoun is, 'for which you profess to have
such a regard :' comp. viii. 17. On the Greek for 'is it written ' see on
ii. 17.
/ said, Ye are gods] The argument is both a fortiori and adhominem.

w. 36, 37.] S. JOHN, X. 223
unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture
cannot be broken; say ye of him, whom the Father hath 36
sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest;
because I said, I am the Son of God ? If I do not the works 37
In the Scriptures (Ps. Ixxxii. 6) even unjust rulers are called ' gods ' on
the principle of the theocracy, that rulers are the delegates and repre
sentatives of God (comp. Ex. xxii. 28). If this is admissible without
blasphemy, how much more may He call Himself ' Son of God.'
35. if he called them gods] More probably, If it called them gods,
viz. the Law. ' Them' is left unexplained ; a Jewish audience would at
once know who were meant. But how incredible that any but a Jew
should think of such an argument, or put it in this brief way ! These
last eight verses alone are sufficient to discredit the theory that this
Gospel is the work of Greek Gnostic in the second century.
the word of God] Practically the same as ' the Scripture ;' i.e. the
word of God in these passages of Scripture. The Word in the theolo
gical sense for the Son is not meant : this term appears nowhere in the
narrative part of S. John's Gospel. But of course it was through the
Word, not yet incarnate, that God revealed His will to His people.
cannot be broken] Literally, ' cannot be undone ' or ' unloosed.' The
same word is rendered 'unloose' (i. 27), 'destroy ' (ii. 19), 'break' (v. 18
and vii. 23), ' loose ' (xi. 44). i. 27 and xi. 44 are literal, of actual un
binding ; the others are figurative, of dissolution or unbinding as a form
of destruction. Here either metaphor, dissolution or unbinding, would
be appropriate ; either, ' cannot be explained away, made to mean
nothing;' or, 'cannot be deprived of its binding authority.' The latter
seems better. The clause depends upon ' if,' and is not parenthetical ;
'if the Scripture cannot be broken.' As in ii. 22, xvii. 12, xx. 9, 'the
Scripture ' (singular) probably means a definite passage. Comp. vii. 38,
42, xiii. 18, xvii. 12, xix. 24, 28, 36, 37. Scripture as a whole is called
' the Scriptures ' (plural) ; v. 39.
36. Say ye] ' Ye ' with great emphasis, 'T>o ye, in opposition to
the Scripture, say ?'
of him, whom the Father hath sanctified] Omit 'hath;' both verbs
are aorists. This also is emphatic, in opposition to 'them unto whom
the word of God came.' Men on whom God's word has conferred a
fragment of delegated authority may be called 'gods' (Elohim) without
scruple ; He, Whom the Father Himself sanctified and sent, may not be
called Son of God (no article before 'Son') without blasphemy 1 By
'sanctified ' is meant something analogous to the consecration of Jere
miah before his birth for the work of a Prophet (Jer. i. 5). When the
Son was sent into the world He was consecrated for the work of the
Messiah, and endowed with the fulness of grace and truth (see on i. 14),
the fulness of power (iii. 35), the fulness of life (v. 26). In virtue of this
Divine sanctification He becomes 'the Holy One of God' (vi. 69 ; Luke
iv. 34). See on xvii. 17, 19, the only other passages in S. John's
writings where the word occurs.

224 S. JOHN, X. [w.38, 39.
38 of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye
believe not me, believe the works : that ye may know, and
believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
39 — 42. Opposite Results of the Discourse.
39 Therefore they sought again to take him : but he escaped
37, 38. Having met their technical charge in a technical manner He
now proceeds to justify the assertion of His unity with the Father by an
appeal to His works.
37. believe me not] A literal command. If His works are not those
which His Father works, they ought not (not merely have no need) to
believe what He says. Comp. v. 24, 46; vi. 30; viii. 31, 45. His
works are His Father's (ix. 3, xiv. 10).
38. believe the works] ' Blessed are they that have not seen and yet
have believed ' (xx. 29) ; but it is better to have the faith that comes
with sight than none at all.
that ye may know, and believe] The better reading probably is, that
ye may come to know and continually know; 'attain to knowledge
and advance in knowledge in contrast to your state of suspense ' (v. 24).
In the Greek it is the aorist and present of the same verb ' to come to
know, perceive, recognise :' the aorist denotes the single act, the pre
sent the permanent growth. The apparent awkwardness of having the
same verb twice in the same clause has probably caused a large number
of authorities to substitute another verb in the second case. But the
change of tense is full of meaning, especially in reference to the Jews.
Many of them attained to a momentary conviction that He was the
Messiah (ii. 23, vi. 14, 15, vii. 41, viii. 30, x. 42, xi. 45); very few of
them went beyond a transitory conviction (ii. 24, vi. 66, viii. 31).
the Father is in me, and I in him] For 'in Him' read with the
best authorities in the Father. An instance of the solemnity and
emphasis derived from repetition, so frequent in this Gospel.
39 — 42. Opposite Results of the Discourse.
39. Therefore they sought again] ' Therefore ' is of rather doubtful
authenticity; some important witnesses omit 'again' also. 'Again'
refers us back to vii. 30, 32, 44, and shews that 'to take Him' means,
not, take Him and stone Him (v. 31), but, arrest Him for the San
hedrin. he escaped] Literally, went forth. There being nothing in the
text to shew that His departure was miraculous, it is safest (as in viii.
59, where the same word is used for ' went forth ') to suppose that
there was no miracle. He withdrew through the less hostile among
those who encircled Him, while the others were making up their minds
how to apprehend Him- The majesty of innocence suffices to protect
Him, His hour not having come.

vv. 40-42.] S. JOHN, X. 225
out of their hand, and went away again beyond Jordan into .40
the place where John at first baptized; and there he abode.
And many resorted unto him, and said, John did no miracle : 4i
but all things that John spake of this man were true. And 42
many believed on him there.
40 — 42. "The chapter ends with a note of place which is evidently
and certainly historical. No forger would ever have thought of the
periphrasis 'where John at first baptized' ... 'John did no miracle:'
but all things that John spake of this man were true.' It would be
impossible to find a stronger incidental proof that the author of the
Gospel had been originally a disciple of the Baptist, or at least his
contemporary, and also that he is writing of things that he had heard
and seen. A Gnostic, writing in Asia Minor, even though he had
come into relation with disciples of John, would not have introduced
the Baptist in this way. In circles that, had been affected by the Bap
tist's teaching, and were hesitating whether they should attach them
selves to Jesus, this is precisely the sort of comment that would be
heard." S. p. 179.
40. again beyond Jordan] Referring back to i. 28. The hostility
of the hierarchy being invincible and becoming more and more dan
gerous Jesus retires into Peraea for quiet and safety before His Passion.
This interval was between three and four months, from the latter part
of December to the middle of April. But some portion of this time
was spent at Ephraim (xi. 54) after going to Bethany in Judaea to
raise Lazarus. Nothing is told us as to how much time was given to
Bethany or Bethabara in Peraea, how much to Ephraim.
at first] John afterwards baptized at Aenon near Salim (iii. 23).
baptized] was baptizing.
41. many resorted unto him] There is no reason why the usual
translation 'came' should be changed to 'resorted.' The testimony of
the Baptist, and perhaps the miraculous voice at Christ's Baptism,
were still remembered there. Since then there had been the mission
of the Seventy and Christ's own work in Galilee.
and said] Or, kept saying or used to say: it was a common remark.
John did no miracle] Or sign. This is indirect evidence of the
genuineness of the miracles recorded of Christ. It is urged that if
Jesus had wrought no miracles, they would very possibly have been
attributed to Him after His death. Let us grant this; and at the
same time it must be granted that the same holds good to a very great
extent of the Baptist. The enthusiasm which he awakened, as a Pro
phet appearing after a weary interval of four centuries, was immense.
Miracles would have been eagerly believed of him, the second Elijah,
and would be likely enough to be attributed to him. But more than
half a century after his death we have one of his own disciples quite
incidentally telling us that 'John did no miracle'; and there is no
rival tradition to the contrary. All traditions concur in attributing
miracles to Jesus.
42. many believed on him there] ' There ' is emphatic. ' There,'
s. JOHN 15

226 S. JOHN, XI.

Chap. XI. Christ is Love illustrated by a Sign.
in contrast to Jerusalem which had rejected Him, ' many believed on
Him'. Note the full expression ' believed on' (see on i. 12) as distinct
from merely believing His statements, (vv. 37, 38).
Chap. XI. Christ is Love illustrated by a Sign.
Christ's love for His friends brings about His own death. Expressions
of affection and tenderness abound in the chapter; comp. vv. 3, 5, n,
'5. 35. 36- , , ,
We have now reached 'the culminating point of the miraculous
activity of our Lord', and at the same time the 'crucial question' of
this Gospel — the Raising of Lazarus. Various objections have been
urged against it, and through it against the Fourth Gospel as a whole.
The principal objections require notice. They are based (1) on the
extraordinary character of the miracle itself; (2) on the silence of the
Synoptists; (3) on the fact that in spite of what is narrated vv. 47 — 53,
no mention is made of the miracle in the accusation and condemnation
of Jesus.
(1) The extraordinary character ofthe miracle "has been exagge
rated by looking at it in the light of modern ideas. To us the raising
of the dead stands apart from other miracles in a class by itself as
peculiarly unexampled and incredible. But it was not so regarded at
the time when the Gospel was written. ..In the Synoptists the answer
that Jesus gives to the disciples of John groups together every class of
miracle, the raising of the dead amongst them, without distinction.
Similar narratives in the Synoptists, in the Acts, and in the Old Tes
tament, are given without any special relief or emphasis." S. p. 186.
And surely this ancient view is both more reverent and more philo
sophical than the modern one. Only from a purely human standpoint
can one miracle be regarded as more wonderful, i.e. more difficult of
performance, than another. To Omnipotence all miracles, as indeed
all works, are equal : distinctions of difficult and easy as applied to the
Almighty are meaningless.
(2) It is certainly surprising that the Synoptists do not mention
this miracle, all the more so because S. John tells us that it was the
proximate cause of Christ's arrest and condemnation. But this sur
prising circumstance has been exaggerated. It seems too mueh to say
that " it must always remain a mystery why this miracle, transcending
as it does all other miracles which the Lord wrought,... should have
been passed over by the three earlier Evangelists". Two considera
tions go a long way towards explaining the mystery, (i) "We are
accustomed to regard the Synoptic Gospels as three ; but in the out
line and by far the greater part of their narrative they are virtually
one. The groundwork of them all is supplied by a single document,
that document itself a compilation, and (as there is ample evidence to
show) a very fragmentary one." S. p. 185. That a fragmentary
document or tradition should omit important facts is not surprising:
that three writers, making use of this defective evidence, should not

v. I.] S. JOHN, XI. 227
1 — 33. The Prelude to the Sign.
Now a certain man was sick, named Lazarus, of Bethany, 11
even in this very important instance supply the deficiency, is not more
than surprising. And the second consideration greatly diminishes our
surprise, (ii) The Synoptists, until they reach the last Passover,
omit almost all events in or about Jerusalem : the ministry in Galilee
is their province. Therefore "we cannot be surprised that they
should omit an event which is placed at Bethany." S. p. 186. The
omission of this raising by the Synoptists is very little more strange
than the omission of the other raisings by John. Each side keeps to
its own scheme of narration.
To explain that the Synoptists were silent in order not to draw
attention, and perhaps persecution (xii. 10, n), on Lazarus and his
sisters, whereas when S. John wrote they were dead (just as S. John
alone records that it was S. Peter who cut off the High Priest's servant's
ear), is not very satisfactory. There is no evidence that Lazarus and
his sisters were living when the first Gospel was written, still less
when S. Luke wrote. And if they were alive, were the chief priests
alive, and their animosity still alive also? The explanation is less
easy than the difficulty.
(3) This last objection really tells in favour of the narrative. The
hierarchy would have stood self-condemned if they had made His
raising the dead a formal charge against Christ. The disciples had
fled, and could not urge the miracle in His favour; and Christ Him
self would not break the majestic silence which He maintained before
His accusers to mention such a detail.
There are those who assume that miracles are impossible, and that
no amount of evidence can render a miracle credible. This miracle is
therefore dismissed, and we are to believe either ( 1 ) Lazarus was only
apparently dead, i. e. that Christ was an impostor and S. John a dupe or
an accomplice ; or that (2) the parable of Lazarus and Dives has been
transformed into a miracle; or that (3) the narrative is a myth, or (4) an
allegory. (1) and (2) only need to be stated : of (3) and (4) we may say
with Meyer, "No narrative of the N.T. bears so completely the stamp
of being the very opposite of a later invention. . . .And what an incredible
height of art in the allegorical construction of history must we ascribe to
the composer!" Instead of an historical miracle we have a literary
miracle of the second century. Contrast this chapter with the miracles
of the Apocryphal Gospels, and it will seem impossible that both can
have come from the same source. To tear out this or any other page
from S. John, and retain the rest, is quite inadmissible. "The Gospel
is like that sacred coat 'without seam woven from the top throughout:'
it is either all real and true or all fictitious and illusory ; and the latter
alternative is, I cannot but think, more difficult to accept than the
miracle." S. p. 188.
1 — 33. The Prelude to the Sign.
1. Now a certain man was sick] Note once more the touching

228 S. JOHN, XI. [vv. 2, 3.
2 the town of Mary and her sister Martha. (It was that Mary
which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet
3 with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick.) Therefore
his sisters sent unto him, saying, Lord, behold, he whom
simplicity of the narrative. * Now * should perhaps be 'but, ' though the
Greek particle may mean either. Here it introduces a contrast to what
precedes. Christ went into Peraea for retirement, but the sickness of
Lazarus interrupted it.
named Lazarus] The theory that this narrative is a parable trans
formed into a miracle possibly represents something like the reverse of
the fact. The parable of Dives and Lazarus was apparently spoken
about this time, i. c. between the Feast of Dedication and the last Pass
over, and it may possibly have been suggested by this miracle. In no
other parable does Christ introduce a proper name. Some would
identify Lazarus of Bethany with the rich young ruler (Matt. xix. 16;
Mark x. 17; Luke xviii. 18), and also with the young man clad in a
linen cloth who followed Jesus in the Garden after the disciples had fled
(Mark xiv. 51; see note there). The name Lazarus is an abbreviated
Greek form of Eleazar = ' God is my help.' It is commonly assumed
without much evidence that he was younger than his sisters : S. Luke's
silence about him (x. 38, 39) agrees well with this.
Bethany] A small village on the S. E. slope of the Mount of Olives,
about two miles from Jerusalem (see on Matt. xxi. 9).
the town of Mary] Better, of the village of Mary. The same word
is used of Bethlehem (vii. 42) and in conjunction with 'towns' or 'cities'
(Luke xiii. 22). It is an elastic word; but its general meaning is
'village' rather than anything larger. Mary is here mentioned first,
although apparently the younger sister (Luke x. 28), because the
incident mentioned in the next verse had made her better known. They
would seem to have been people of position from the village being
described as their abode (to distinguish it from the other Bethany in
Peraea, to which Christ had just gone). The guests at the funeral (vv.
31, 45), the feast, the family burying-place (v. 38), and Mary's costly
offering (xii. 2, 3), point in the same direction.
2. It was that Mary which anointed] This of course does not
necessarily imply that the anointing had already taken place, as those
who identify Mary with the 'sinner' of Luke vii. 37 would insist: it
merely implies that when S. John wrote, this fact was well known
about her, as Christ had promised should be the case (Matt. xxvi. 13).
S. John tells two facts omitted in the earlier Gospels; (1) that the vil
lage of Martha and Mary was Bethany, (2) that the anointing at
Bethany was Mary's act. The identification of Mary of Bethany with
the prostitute of Luke vii. is altogether at variance with what S. Luke
and S. John tell us of her character. Nor is there any sufficient reason
for identifying either of them with Mary Magdalene. Mary of Bethany,
Mary of Magdala, and the 'sinner' of Luke vii. are three distinct persons.
3. Therefore his sisters sent] This shews that v. 2 ought not to be

w.4— 6.] S. JOHN, XI. 229
thou lovest is sick. When Jesus heard that, he said, This 4
sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that
the Son of God might be glorified thereby. Now Jesus 5
loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus. When he had 6

made a parenthesis: 'therefore' refers to the previous statement. Be
cause of the intimacy, which every one who knew of the anointing would
understand, the sisters sent. Note that they are not further described ;
S. John has said enough to tell his readers who are meant : but would
not a forger have introduced them with more description?
he whom thou lovest is sick] Exquisite in its tender simplicity. The
message implies a belief that Christ could, and probably would, heal a
dangerous sickness. See on ». 5.
4. is not unto death] i.e. is- not to have death as its final result.
Christ foresaw both the death and the resurrection, and (as so often)
uttered words which His disciples did not understand at the time, but
recognised in their proper meaning after what He indicated had taken
place. Comp. ii. 22, xii. 16, xxi. 23.
might be glorified] In two ways; because the miracle (1) would lead
many to believe that He was the Messiah ; (2) would bring about His
death. 'Being glorified' is a frequent expression in this Gospel for
Christ's Death regarded as the mode of His return to glory (vii. 39, xii.
16, 23, xiii. 31, 32); and this glorification ofthe Son involves the glory
of the Father (v. 23, x. 30, 38). Comp. ix. 3; in the Divine counsels
the purpose of the man's blindness and of Lazarus' sickness is the glory
of God.
We ought perhaps to connect the special meaning of 'glorified' with
the first clause: 'This sickness is to have for its final issue, not the
temporal death of an individual, but the eternal life of all mankind.'
It is worth noting that both the first and the last of the seven miracles
of the ministry recorded by S. John are declared to be manifestations
of glory (ii. 11, xi. 4, 40) and confirmations of faith (ii. 11, xi. 15).
thereby] Both in the English and in the Greek this is ambiguous : it
may refer either to the sickness or the glory. The former is correct.
5. Now Jesus loved Martha) The English Version loses much here,
and still more in xxi. 15—17, by using the same word 'love' to translate
two different Greek words : nor can the loss be remedied satisfactorily.
The word used in v. 3, philein (Lat. amare), denotes a passionate, emo
tional warmth, which ioves and cares not to ask why ; the affection of
lovers, parents, and the like. The word used here agapdn, (Lat.
diligere), denotes a calm, discriminating attachment, which loves because
of the excellence of the loved object ; the affection of friends. Philein
is the stronger, but less reasoning; agapdn the more earnest, but less
intense. The sisters naturally use the more emotional word, describing
their own feehng towards their brother ; the Evangelist equally naturally
uses the loftier and less impulsive, word. The fact that the sisters are
here included is not the reason for the change of expression.
Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus] The names are probably in

230 S. JOHN, XL [w. 7— io.
heard therefore that he was sick, he abode two days still
7 in the same place where he was. Then after that saith he
8 to his disciples, Let us go into Judea again. His disciples
say unto him, Master, the Jews of late sought to stone thee;
9 and goest thou thither again? Jesus answered, Are there
not twelve hours in the day? If any man walk in the day, he
stumbleth not, because he seeth the light of this world.
io But if a man walk in the night, he stumbleth, because there
order of age. This and v. 19 confirm what is almost certain from Luke
x. 38, that Martha is the elder sister.
6. When he had heard therefore] Omit 'had.' The connexion is a
little difficult. 'Therefore' after the statement in v. 5 prepares us for
'He set out immediately,' but instead of that we have the reverse.
'Therefore,' however, really leads on to v. 7, and consequently there
should be only a semicolon at the end of v. 6. When, therefore, He
heard that he is sick, then indeed He abode two days in the place
where He was ; then after this He saith, &c. The question why
Christ remained the two days is futile : such was the Divine Will with
regard to the mode of working this miracle and to His Messianic work
generally. His life was a perfect fulfilment of the Preacher's rule ; 'To
everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven'
(Eccl. iii. 1 ; comp. v. 9, ii. 4). There was a Divine plan, in conformity
with which He worked.
7. Let us go into Judea again] The again refers us back to x. 40.
His using the general term, Judsea, instead of Bethany leads to the
disciples' reply. Judaea was associated with hostility, Bethany with
love and friendship.
8. Master, the Jews of late sought to stone thee] Better, Rabbi (see on
iv. 31) just now the Jews were seeking to stone Thee (x. 31) and art
Thou going thither again ? 'Again' is emphatic.
9. Are there not twelve hours in the day] As so often, Christ gives
no direct answer to the question asked, but a general principle, involv
ing the answer to the question. Comp. ii. 6, 19, iii. 5, 10, iv. 13, 21,
vi- 32, S3, viii. 7, 25, 54, x. 25. The meaning seems to be, 'Are there
not twelve working-hours in which a man may labour without fear of
stumbling? I have not yet reached the end of My working-day, and so
can safely continue the work I came to do. The night cometh, when I
can no longer work ; but it has not yet come.' Comp. ix. 4. Thus it
is practically equivalent to ' Mine hour is not yet come ;' it is still safe
for Him to work : but the figure here adopted is of wider application,
and contains a moral for the disciples and all Christians as well as an
application to Christ. The expression throws no light on S. John's
method of reckoning time. See on xix. 14.
the light of this world] The sun.
10. he stumbleth] Christ's night came when His hour came (xvii. 1).
Then the powers of darkness prevailed (Luke xxii. 53) and His enemies

vv. ii— 13.] S. JOHN, XI. 231
is no light in him. These things said he : and after that he «
saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that
I may awake him out of sleep. Then said his disciples, 12
Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. Howbeit Jesus spake of I3
became a stumblingblock in His path, bringing His work to a close
(xix. 30). The word for 'stumble' means literally to ' knock the foot
against something.
there is no light in him] Rather, the light is not in him. This shews
that the meaning has slid from the literal to the figurative. ' The light '
in v. 9 is the physical light in the heavens ; here it is the spiritual light
in the heart.
11. and after that] and after this. These words indicate a pause
in the narrative.
Our friend Lazarus sleepeth] Better, Lazarus our friend Is fallen
asleep, or, is gone to rest. Sleep as an image of death is common from
the dawn of literature ; but the Gospel has raised the expression from a
figure to a fact. Comp. Matt, xxvii. 52; Acts vii. 50, xiii. 36; 1 Cor.
vii. 39, xi. 30, xv. 6, 18; 1 Thess. iv. 13; 2 Pet. iii. 4. The thoroughly
Christian term 'cemetery' ( = sleeping-place) in the sense of a place of
repose for the dead comes from the same Greek root. The exact time
of Lazarus' death cannot be determined, for we do not know how long
Christ took in reaching Bethany. Christ calls him 'our friend,' as
claiming the sympathy of the disciples, who had shewn unwillingness
to return to Judasa.
that I may awake him] This shews that no messenger has come to
announce the death. Christ sees the death as He foresees the resurrec
tion : comp. v. 4.
12. Then said his disciples] Better, Therefore said the disciples to
Him. They catch at any chance of escape from the dreaded journey.
if he sleep, he shall do well] Better, if he be fallen asleep, he shall be
saved, will be cured. Probably they thought that Christ meant to go
and cure Lazarus (v. 37, comp. ix. 3) ; and here they infer from his
sleeping that he will recover without Christ's aid : consequently Christ
need not go. They are too full of anxiety to notice Christ's significant
words 'I go, that I may awake him,' whereas the rendering in our Bible
reads like an expostulation against waking him, as if it meant ' a sick
man should not be disturbed.' . For other instances in which the disci
ples grossly misunderstand Christ, see iv. 33, xiv. 5,8, 22 ; Matt. xvi. 7 ;
and comp. iii. 4, 9, iv. 11, 15, vi. 34, 52, vii. 35, viii. 22, 33, 52. This
candour in declaring their own failings adds to our confidence in the
veracity of the Evangelists. It is urged that the misunderstanding here
is too gross to be probable : but they had not unnaturally understood
Christ Himself to have declared that Lazarus would not die (v. 4) ; this
being so, they could not easily suppose that by sleep He meant death.
Moreover, when men's minds are on the stretch the strangest misappre
hensions become possible.
13. Howbeit Jesus spake] Or, Now Jesus had spoken.

232 S. JOHN, XI. [w. 14—16.
his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of
14 rest in sleep. Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus
is is dead. And I am glad for your sakes that I was not
there, to the intent ye may believe; nevertheless let us go
16 unto him. Then said Thomas, which is called Didymus,

had spoken) spake.
taking of rest in sleep) The word here translated ' taking of rest '
corresponds to ' sleepeth ' or ' is gone to rest ' in v. n, and ' to sleep ' in
v. 12. The word translated ' awake him out of sleep ' in v. 1 1 is a com
pound of the word here rendered, ' sleep. '
14. Then said Jesus] 'Then' here, as in Rom. vi. 21, is made to
cover two Greek words, ' then ' of time, and ' then ' of consequence :
translate, Then therefore said Jesus.
plainly] Without metaphor : see on vii. 4 and x. 24.
15. I am glad] Christ rejoices, not at his friend's death, but at His
own absence from the scene, for the disciples' sake. Had He been
there, Lazarus would not have died, and the disciples would have lost
this great sign of His Messiahship.
to the intent ye may believe] S. John's favourite construction, indicat
ing the Divine purpose : see on ix. 2, 3. Would anyforger have written
this ? Would it not seem utterly improbable that at the close of His
ministry Christ should still be working in order that Apostles might be
lieve? Yet S. John, who heard the words, records them, and he knew
from sad experience (Mark xiv. 50, xvi. 11 ; Luke xxiv. 11, 21) that this
work was not superfluous. Just before the trial of faith which His
Passion and Death would bring to them, His disciples had need of all the
help and strength that He could give. See on ii. n.
nevertheless let us go] He breaks off suddenly.
16. Then said] Therefore said.
Thomas, which is called Didymus] S. John thrice (xx. 24, xxi. 2)
reminds his readers that Thomas is the same as he whom Gentile
Christians called Didymus. Thomas is Hebrew, Didymus is Greek, for
a twin. In all probability he was a twin, possibly of S. Matthew, with
whom he is coupled in all three lists of the Apostles in the Gospels : in
the Acts he is coupled with S. Philip. That S. Thomas received his name
from Christ (as Simon was called Peter, and the sons of Zebedee Boa
nerges) in consequence of his character, is pure conjecture. But the
coincidence between the name and his twin-mindedness (James i. 8,
iv. 8) is remarkable. " In him the twins, unbelief and faith, were con
tending with one another for mastery, as Esau and Jacob in Rebecca's
womb " (Trench). It is from S. John that we know his character : in
the Synoptists and the Acts he is a mere name (see on i. 41). He seems
to have combined devotion to Christ with a tendency to see the dark
side of everything. S. John's care in distinguishing him by his Gentile
name adds point to the argument derived from his never distinguishing
John as the Baptist (see on i. 6).

w. 17, 18.] S. JOHN, XI. 233
unto his fellow-disciples, Let us also go, that we may die
with him.
Then when Jesus came, he found that he had lien in the 17
grave four days aheady. . Now Bethany was nigh unto 18
fellow-disciples] The word occurs here only. It has been remarked that
S. Thomas would scarcely have taken the lead in this way had S. Peter
been present, and that had S- Peter been there he would probably have
appeared in the previous dialogue. If he was absent, we have an
additional reason for the absence of this miracle from S. Mark's Gospel,
the Gospel of S. Peter, and undoubtedly the representative ofthe oldest
form of the Synoptic narrative.
die with him) Of course with Christ (v. 8). It is strange that any
should understand it of Lazarus. They could not die with him, for he
was dead already, and S. Thomas knew this (v. 14).
17. Then when Jesus came] Better, When therefore Jesus came,
not to the house, nor to Bethany, but to the vicinity (vv. 20, 30). In
v. 16 also 'then' should be therefore, S.John's favourite particle to
express a sequence in fact.
he found] i.e. on enquiry. It would seem as if Christ's miraculous
power of knowing without the ordinary means of information was not in
constant activity, but like His other miraculous powers was employed
only on fitting occasions. It was necessary to His work that He should
know of Lazarus' death; it was not necessary that He should know how
long he had been buried, nor where he had been buried (v. 34). Comp.
i. 48, iv. 18. Similarly, Peter's prison-gate opens 'of its own accord;'
Mary's house-door does not (Acts xii. 10 — 16).
in the grave] Or, in the sepulchre. Our translators use three dif
ferent English words for the same Greek word ; ' grave ' in this chapter,
v. 28; Matt, xxvii. 52, &c. ; 'tomb' Matt. viii. 28; Mark v. 2, vi. 29,
&c. ; ' sepulchre' of Christ's resting-place. 'Sepulchre ' would be best
in ail cases. Another Greek word for 'tomb ' used by S. Matthew only
is rendered 'tomb' xxiii. 29, and 'sepulchre' xxiii. 27, xxvii. 61, 64, 66,
xxviii. 1.
four days] No doubt he had been buried the day he died, as is
usual in hot climates where decomposition is rapid ; moreover, he had
died of a malignant disease, probably a fever. Jehu ordered Jezebel to
be buried a few hours after death (2 Kings ix. 34) ; Ananias and Sapphira
were buried at once (Acts v. 6, 10). If Christ started just after Lazarus
died, as seems probable, the journey had occupied four days. This fits
in well with the conclusion that Bethabara or Bethany was in the north
of Palestine, possibly a little south of the Sea of Galilee ; near Galilee it
must have been (comp. i. 28, 29, 43). But on the other hand Lazarus
may have died soon after Christ heard of his illness ; in which case the
journey occupied barely two days.
18. Now Bethany was nigh unto Jerusalem] The ' was ' need not
imply that when S. John wrote Bethany had been destroyed, but this is
the more probable meaning ; especially as no other Evangelist speaks of

234 S. JOHN, XI. [vv. 19, 20.
i9 Jerusalem, about fifteen furlongs off: and many of the Jews
came to Martha and Mary, to comfort them concerning
ao their brother. Then Martha, as soon as she heard that
Jesus was coming, went and met him: but Mary sat still
places in the past tense, and S. John does not always do so. The infer
ence is that he wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem ; and that what
was destroyed in the siege he speaks of in the past tense ; e.g. Bethany
(here), the garden of Gethsemane (xviii. 1), Joseph's garden (xix. 41):
what was not destroyed, in the present tense ; e.g. Bethesda (v. 2, where
see note).
about fifteen furlongs] Literally, about fifteen stades. A Greek stade
is 18 yards less than an English furlong ; but the translation is suffi
ciently accurate, like 'firkin' (ii. 6). This distance, therefore, was under
two miles, and is mentioned to account for the many Jews who came to
condole with the sisters.
19. many of the Jews came to Martha and Mary] Better, many
from among the Jews had come, &c. The received text with some
good authorities has 'had come to Martha and Mary and their friends,'
but this is not the best-attested reading. 'The Jews' here, as usual,
means Christ's opponents ; they would come mostly, if not entirely, from
Jerusalem. to comfort them] It was part of the Jewish ceremonial of mourning
that many (ten at least) should come and condole. Gen. xxvii. 35;
comp. 2 Sam. xii. 17; Job ii. 11. It is said that the usual period of
mourning was thirty days; three of weeping, seven of lamentation,
twenty of sorrow. But the instances in Scripture vary : Jacob, seventy
days with an additional seven (Gen. 1. 3, 10) ; Aaron and Moses, thirty
days (Numb. xx. 29; Deut. xxxiv. 8); Saul and Judith, seven days
(1 Sam. xxviii. 13 ; Jud. xvi. 24; comp. Ecclus. xxii. 12 ; 2 Esdr. v. 20).
Josephus tells us that Archelaus mourned for his father seven days, and
the Jews for himself, thirty days (B. J. II. i. 1 ; III. ix. 5). The Mishna
prescribes seven days for near relations.
20. Then Martha] Or, Martha, therefore. Information would be
brought to her as the elder sister and (apparently) mistress of the house
(Luke x. 38). She as usual takes the lead in entertaining, and Mary
shrinks from it. " One most remarkable feature in the history is the
coincidence between the characters of Mary and Martha as depicted here
and in S. Luke." S. p. 185. It is incredible that this coincidence
should be either fortuitous or designed. It is much easier to believe
that both Gospels give us facts about real persons. Christ is unwilling
to mingle at once in the crowd of mourners, and halts outside the
village. Jesus was coming] Rather, Jesus is coming, probably the very words
of the message. Perhaps they were still on the look-out for His
arrival, although they supposed that it was too late for His coming
to avail anything.
Mary sat still in the house] Or, was sitting in the house: the atti-

w. 21— 25.] S. JOHN, XI. 235
in the house. Then said Martha unto Jesus, Lord, if thou 21
hadst been here, my brother had not died. But I know, 22
that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will
give it thee. Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise 23
again. Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise 24
again in the resurrection at the last day. Jesus said unto 25
tude of sorrow and meditation (Job ii. 13). She does not know of
Christ's approach (vv. 28, 29) : Martha, in discharging the duties of
hospitality to fresh arrivals, would be more likely to hear of it.
21. if thou hadst been here] Not a reproach, however gentle (she
does not say 'hadst Thou come'), but an expression of deep regret. This
thought had naturally been often in the sisters' minds during the last four
days (comp. v. 32). They believe that Christ could and would have
healed Lazarus : their faith and hope are not yet equal to anticipating
His raising him from the dead. The gradual progress of Martha's faith
is very true to life, and reminds us of similar development in the woman
of Samaria (iv. 19) and the man bom blind (ix. ri), though she starts
at a more advanced stage than they do. If all these three narratives
are late fictions, we have three masterpieces of psychological study, as
miraculous in the literature of the second century as would be a Gothic
cathedral in the architecture of that age. For the construction comp.
iv. 10, xiv. 28.
22. But I know, that even now] 'But' must be omitted on critical
grounds; and the text should run, and now (that he is dead) / know
that, &c. She believes that had Christ been there, He could have
healed Lazarus by His own power (comp. iv. 47), and that now His
prayer may prevail with God to raise him from the dead. She has yet
to learn that Christ's bodily presence is not necessary, and that He can
raise the dead by His own power. He gradually leads her faith on
wards to higher truth.
whatsoever thou wilt ask] She uses a word more appropriate to human
prayer, 'to ask. for oneself (comp. xiv. 13, 14, xv. 7, 16, xvi. 23, 26),
not used by Christ of His own prayers or by the Evangelists of Christ's
prayers (contrast xiv. 16, xvi. 26, xvii. 9, 15, 20 ; Matt. xxvi. 36, 39,
42, 44; Luke xxii. 32). She thus incidentally shews her imperfect idea
of His relation to God.
23. shall rise again] He uses an ambiguous expression as an exer
cise of her faith. Some think that these words contain no allusion to
the immediate restoration of Lazarus, and that Martha (v. 24) under
stands them rightly. More probably Christ includes the immediate
restoration of Lazarus, but she does not venture to do so, and rejects the
allusion to the final Resurrection as poor consolation.
24. I know that he shall rise again] This conviction was probably
in advance of average Jewish belief on the subject. The O.T. declara
tions as to a resurrection are so scanty and obscure, that the Sadducees
could deny the doctrine, and the Pharisees had to resort to oral tradition
to maintain it (see on Mark xii. 18; Acts xxiii. 8).

236 S. JOHN, XI. [w. 26—30.
her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in
26 me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: and whosoever
liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou
27 this? She saith unto him, Yea, Lord : I believe that thou art
the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the
28 world. And when she had so said, she went her way, and
called Mary her sister secretly, saying, The Master is come,
29 and calleth for thee. As soon as she heard that, she arose
3o quickly, and came unto him. Now Jesus was not yet come
the last day] See on vi. 39.
25. / am the resurrection, and the life] He draws her from her self
ish grief to Himself. There is no need for Him to pray as man to God
(v. 22) ; He (and none else) is the Resurrection and the Life. There is
no need to look forward to the last day; He is (not 'will be') the
Resurrection and the Life. Comp. xiv. 6; Col. iii. 4. In what
follows, the first part shews how He is the Resurrection, the second
how He is the Life. ' He that believeth in Me, even if he shall have
died (physically), shall live (eternally). And every one that liveth
(physically) and believeth in Me, shall never die (eternally).'
26. shall never die] See on viii. 51; the form of expression is the
same; 'shall assuredly never die.'
Believest thou this?] A searching question, suddenly put. She
answers with confidence, and gives the ground of her confidence.
27. / believe] Literally, I have believed, i. e. / have convinced my
self and do believe.
that thou art the Christ] She cannot have known the full import of
her confession. With the Apostles she shared her countrymen's im
perfect views of the character and office of the Messiah. See on ix.
38. which should come] Literally, that cometh. Comp. vi. 14; Matt.
xi. 3; Luke vii. 19; Deut. xviii. 15. She believes that He has the
powers mentioned in w. 25, 26, because He is the Messiah. How these
powers will affect her own case she does not know, but with ¦-. vague
hope of comfort in store for them all she returns to the house. See on
i. 9 and xviii. 37.
28. secretly] Because she knew that some of Christ's enemies were
among the guests (w. 19, 31). 'Secretly' belongs to 'saying,' not to
'called.' The Master is come] Or, The Teacher is come. It is not the Hebrew
word 'Rabbi' that is here used, as in i. 50, iii. 2, 26, iv. 31, vi. 25, ix.
2 ; but the Greek word given in i. 39 as the translation of 'Rabbi,' and
in xx. 16 as the translation of 'Rabboni,' and used by Christ (iii. 10) of
Nicodemus. Comp. xiii. 13, 14 ; Mark xiv. 14. Martha avoids using
His name for fear of being overheard.
29. she arose quickly] As was natural in one so fond of sitting at
Jesus' feet.

vv. 31— 33-]  S. JOHN, XI.  237
into the town, but was in that place where Martha met him.
The Jews then which were with her in the house, and 31
comforted her, when they saw Mary, that she rose up hastily
and went out, followed her, saying, She goeth unto the
grave to weep there. Then when Mary was come where 32
Jesus was, and saw him, she fell down at his feet, saying
unto him, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not
died. 33—44- The Sign.
When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews 33
also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit,
30. into tlie town] Or, into the village; see on v. 1. By remaining
outside He would be able to say what He wished to say to the sisters
without fear of interruption.
was in that place] was stUl in that place.
31. followed her, saying] For 'saying' read with the best authori
ties, thinking. Their following interferes with the privacy at which
Martha had aimed.
to weep there] The word rendered 'weep' here and in v. 33, as dis
tinct from the one used in v. 35, indicates a loud expression of grief;
wailing and crying, not merely shedding of tears.
32. Then when Mary] Mary therefore when.
she fell down at his feet] Nothing of the kind is reported of Martha,
v. 11. Here again the difference of character between the two sisters
appears. Lord, if thou hadst been here] The same words as those of Martha,
v. 11. No doubt the sisters had expressed this thought to one another
often in the last few days. Mary's emotion is too strong for her; she
can say no more than this; contrast v. 22. The Jews coming up pre
vent further conversation. For the construction comp. iv. 10, xiv. 28.
33—44. The Sign.
33. weeping... weeping] The repetition is for emphasis, and to point
a contrast which is the key to the passage.
he groaned in the spirit] Better, He was angered in the spirit.
The word translated 'groaned' occurs five times in N.T.; here, v. 38;
Matt. ix. 30; Mark i. 43, xiv. 5 (see notes in each place). In all
cases, as in classical Greek and in the LXX. , it expresses not sorrow
but indignation or severity. It means (1) literally, of animals, 'to snort,
growl;' then metaphorically (2) 'to be very angry or indignant;' (3) 'to
command sternly, under threat of displeasure.' What was He angered
at? Some translate 'at His spirit,', and explain (a) that He was in
dignant at the human emotion which overcame Him : which is out of
harmony with all that we know about the human nature of Christ.
Others, retaining 'in His spirit,' explain (J3) that He was indignant 'at

238 S. JOHN, XI. Lw. 34— 37.
34 and was troubled, and said, Where have ye laid him? They
||say unto him, Lord, come and see. Jesus wept. Then
37 said the Jews, Behold, how he loved him. And some of
them said, Could not this man, which opened the eyes of
the unbelief of the Jews and perhaps of the sisters :' but of this there is
no hint in the context. Others again, (7) that it was ' at the sight of
the momentary triumph of evil, as death,... which was here shewn under
circumstances of the deepest pathos :' but we nowhere else find the Lord
shewing anger at the physical consequences of sin. It seems better to
fall back on the contrast pointed out in the last note. He was indig
nant at seeing the hypocritical and sentimental lamentations of His
enemies the Jews mingling with the heartfelt lamentations of His loving
friend Mary (comp. xii. 10):. hypocrisy ever roused His anger.
was troubled] The margin is better; He troubled Himself, i.e. agi
tated Himself, allowed His emotion to become evident by external
movement such as a shudder.
34. Where have ye laid him ?] This question is against the supposi
tion, based on v. 31, that the place where Jesus halted outside the vil
lage was close to the grave.
They say unto him) ' They' are the two sisters: on both sides "grief
speaks in the fewest possible words."
35. Jesus wept] Or, shed tears. The word occurs nowhere else
in N.T.; it expresses less loud lamentation than the word used in
vv- 3r> 33- -^e sheds tears on His way to their brother's grave, not
because He is ignorant or doubtful of what is coming, but because He
cannot but sympathize with the intensity of His friends' grief. " The
intense humanity attributed to Jesus, His affection, His visible suffer
ing, the effort with which He collects Himself, are all strong marks of
authenticity, and the more so because they might be thought to con
flict with the doctrine of the prologue. But this is but one more
proof how little that doctrine has disturbed the Evangelist's true his
toric recollection." S. pp. 186, 7.
36. Then said.  loved him) Here, as in vv. 12, 14, 16, 17, 20,
2Ii 3J> 32. 41. 45> 47. 53' 5^. 'then' should rather be therefore,
as rightly given in vv. 3, 33, 38, 54: it is S. John's favourite particle
in all these verses. Both the verbs here are imperfects; 'kept saying,'
' used to love.' What follows shews that this remark was not made by
all the Jews. The word for ' love ' is the more passionate word used
in v. 3 by the sisters, not the higher word used in v. 5 by the Evan
gelist. 37. And some of them] Better, But some of them, in contrast to
those who speak in v. 36, who are not unfriendly, while these sneer.
The drift of this remark is 'He weeps; but why did He not come in
time to save His friend ? Because He knew that He could not. And
if He could not, did he really open the eyes of the blind?' They
use the death of Lazarus as an argument to throw fresh doubt on the
miracle which had so baffled them at Jerusalem. Their reference to

VV.38— 4I-] S. JOHN, XI. 239
the blind, have caused that even this man should not have
died? Jesus therefore again groaning in himself cometh to 3s
the grave. It was a cave,, and a stone lay upon it. Jesus 39
said, Take ye away the stone. Martha, the sister of him
that was dead, saith unto him, Lord, by this time he stinketh :
for he hath been dead four days. Jesus saith unto her, Said 40
I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest
see the glory of God? Then they took away the stone from 41
the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lift up his
the man bom blind instead of to the widow's son, or Jairus' daughter,
has been used as an objection to the truth of this narrative. It is
really a strong confirmation of its truth. An inventor would almost
certainly have preferred more obvious parallels. But these Jews of
course did not believe in those raisings of the dead : they much more
naturally refer to a reputed miracle within their own experience.
Moreover they are not hinting at raising the dead, but urging that if
Jesus could work miracles He ought to have prevented Lazarus from
dying. should not have died] Rather, should not die.
38. groaning in himself] See on v. 33. This shews that ' in His
spirit' not 'at His spirit' is the right translation there. Their sneering
scepticism rouses His indignation afresh.
to the grave] See on v. 17. Insert now before 'it was a cave.'
The having a private buryihg-place indicates that the family was well
off. The large attendance of mourners and the very precious ointment
(xii. 3) point to the same fact.
upon it] The Greek may mean ' against it,' so that an excavation
in the side of a rock or mound is not excluded. What is now shewn
as the sepulchre of Lazarus is an excavation in the ground with steps
down to it. The stone would keep out beasts of prey.
39. the sister of him that was dead] Not inserted gratuitously. It
was because she was his sister that she could not bear to see him or
allow him to be seen disfigured by corruption. The remark comes
much more naturally from the practical Martha than from the reserved
and retiring Mary. There is nothing to indicate that she was mis
taken; though some would have it that the miracle had begun from
Lazarus' death, and that the corpse had been preserved from decom
position. he hath been dead four days] Literally, he is of the fourth day.
40. Said I not] Apparently a reference to vv. 25, 26, and to the
reply to the messenger, v. 4 : on both occasions more perhaps was said
than is recorded. See notes on v. 4.
41. from the place where the dead was laid] These words are
omitted by an overwhelming number of authorities. They are a need
less explanation added by a later hand.
And Jesus lift] The verb is identical with that translated 'took

240 S. JOHN, XI. [vv. 42— 44.
eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard
42 me. And I knew that thou hearest me always : but
because of the people which stand by I said it, that they
43 may believe that thou hast sent me. And when he thus had
spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth.
44 And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot
with grave cloth es : and his face was bound about with a
napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.
away' in the preceding clause. Both should be translated alike; more
over, 'and' should be 'but.' They lifted therefore the stone. But
Jesus lifted His eyes upwards.
Father, 1 thank thee] Jesus thanks the Father as a public acknow
ledgment that the Son can do ' nothing of Himself,' but that the power
which He is about to exhibit is from the Father (v. 19 — 26).
that thou hast heard] Better, that Thou didst hear. The prayer
to which this refers is not recorded.
42. And I knew] Better, But I knew, 'I' being very emphatic.
This verse is added to prevent misunderstanding: no one must suppose
from this act of thanksgiving that there are any prayers of the Son
which the Father does not hear.
I said it] i.e. I said the words ' I thank Thee, &c.'
that thou hast sent me] Or, didst send Me. 'Thou' is emphatic;
'Thou and no one else.'
43. cried] The Greek word (rare in N.T. except in this Gospel)
is nowhere else used of Christ. It is elsewhere used of the shout of a
multitude; xii. 13, xviii. 40, xix. 6, (12), 15. Comp. Matt. xii. 19;
Acts xxii. 23. This loud cry was perhaps the result of strong emotion,
or in order that the whole multitude might hear. It is natural to
regard it as the direct means of the miracle, awakening the dead:
though some would have it that ' I thank Thee ' implies that Lazarus is
already alive and needs only to be called forth.
44. came forth] It is safest not to regard this as an additional
miracle. The winding-sheet may have been loosely tied round him,
or each limb may have been swathed separately: in Egyptian mum
mies sometimes every finger is kept distinct.
graveclothes] The Greek word occurs here only in N.T. Comp.
Prov. vii. 16. It means the bandages which kept the sheet and the
spices round the body. Nothing is said about the usual spices (xix. 40)
here; and Martha's remark (v. 39) rather implies that there had been
no embalming. If Lazarus died of a malignant disease he would be
buried as quickly as possible.
face] The Greek word occurs in N.T. only here, vii. 24, and Rev.
i. 16 : one of the small indications of a common authorship (see on xv.
20 and xix. 37).
napkin] A Latin word is used meaning literally ' a sweat-cloth.' It
occurs xx. 7; Luke xix. 20; Acts xix. 12. Here the cloth bound

w. 45— 48-] S. JOHN, XI. 241
45 — 57. Opposite Results of the Sign.
Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had 45
seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him. But some 46
of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them what
things Jesus had done. Then gathered the chief priests and 47
the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man
doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone, all men will 48
under the chin to keep the lower jaw from falling is probably meant.
These details shew the eyewitness.
let him go] The expression is identical with 'let these go their way'
(xviii. 8); and perhaps 'let him go his way' would be better here.
Lazarus is to be allowed to retire out of the way of harmful excitement
and idle curiosity.
The reserve of the Gospel narrative here is evidence of its truth,
and is in marked contrast to the myths about others who are said to
have returned from the grave. Lazarus makes no revelations as to the
unseen world. The traditions about him have no historic value: but
one mentioned by Trench (Miracles, p. 425) is worth remembering.
It is said that the first question which he asked Christ after being
restored to life was whether he must die again ; and being told that he
must, he was never more seen to smile.
45—57. Opposite Results of the Sign.
45. Then many ofthe Jews] The English Version is here mislead
ing, owing to inaccuracy and bad punctuation. It should run thus : —
Many therefore ofthe Jews, even they that came to Mary and beheld
that which He did (see on vi. 14). The Jews who witnessed the miracle
all believed : ' of the Jews ' means of the Jews generally.
But some of them went] Some of the Jews generally, not of those
who saw and believed, went and told the Pharisees ; with what intention
is not clear, but probably not out of malignity. Perhaps to convince
the Pharisees, or to seek an authoritative solution of their own per
plexity, or as feeling that the recognised leaders of the people ought to
know the whole case. The bad result of their mission has made some
too hastily conclude that their intention was bad, and that therefore
they could not be included in those who believed.
47. a council] They summon a meeting of the Sanhedrin. Even
the adversaries of Jesus are being converted, and something decisive
must be done. The crisis unites religious opponents. The chief priests,
who were mostly Sadducees, act in concert with the Pharisees ; jealous
ecclesiastics with religious fanatics (comp. vii. 32, 45, xviii. 3).
What do we ?] Implying that something must be done.
this man] Contemptuous, as in ix. 16, 24; comp. vii. 49.
doeth many miracles] It is no longer possible to deny the fact of the
signs. Instead of asking themselves what these 'signs' must mean,
S. JOHN l6

242

S. JOHN, XI. [v. 49.

believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away
49 both our place and nation. And one of them, named
Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto
their only thought is how to prevent others from drawing the obvious
conclusion. 48. the Romans will come) They do not inquire whether He is or
is not the Messiah ; they look solely to the consequences of admitting
that He is. " The Sanhedrin, especially the Pharisaic section of it, was
a national and patriotic body. It was the inheritor and guardian of the
Rabbinical theories as to the Messiah. There can have been no class in
the nation in which these were so inveterately ingrained, and therefore
none that was so little accessible to the teaching of Jesus. It was from
first to last unintelligible to them. It seemed to abandon all the national
hopes and privileges, and to make it a sin to defend them. If it were
successful, it seemed as if it must leave the field open to the Romans....
It is rarely in ancient literature that we find a highly complicated situa
tion so well understood and described." S. pp. 188, 189. This last
remark is eminently true of the whole narrative portion of the Fourth
Gospel. our place and nation] 'Our' is very emphatic; both our place and
our nation. 'Place' is perhaps best understood of Jerusalem, the seat of
the Sanhedrin, and the abode ofthe bulk of the hierarchy. Other inter
pretations are (1) the Temple, comp. 2 Mac. v. 19; (2) the whole land;
so that the expression means ' our land and people, ' which is illogical :
the land may be taken from the people, or the people from the land, but
how can both be taken away ? (3) ' position, raison d'ecre.' In any
case the sentiment is parallel to that of Demetrius, and his fellow-
craftsmen (Acts xix. 27). They profess to be very zealous for religion,
but cannot conceal their interested motives.
49. Caiaphas] This was a surname ; ' who was called Caiaphas ' Matt.
xxvi. 3 (where see note on the Sanhedrin). His original name was
Joseph. Caiaphas is either the Syriac form of Cephas, a 'rock,' or, ac
cording to another derivation, means ' depression. ' The highpriest-
hood had long since ceased to descend from father to son. Pilate's pre
decessor, Valerius Gratus, had deposed Annas. and set up in succession
Ismael, Eleazar (son of Annas), Simon, and Joseph Caiaphas (son-in-law
of Annas); Caiaphas held the office from a.d. 18 to 36, when he was de
posed by Vitellius. Annas in spite of his deposition was still regarded
as in some sense high-priest (xviii. 13; Luke iii. 2; Acts iv. 6), possibly
as president of the Sanhedrin (Acts v. 21, 27, vii. 1, ix. 1, 2, xxii. 5,
xxiii. -t, 4, xxiv. 1). Caiaphas is not president here, or he would not be
spoken of merely as ' one of them. '
that same year] This has been urged as an objection, as if the
Evangelist ignorantly supposed that the highpriesthood was an annual
office, — a mistake which would go far to prove that the Evangelist was
not a Jew, and therefore not S. John. But there is no ' same ' in the
Greek (comp. i. 33.lv. 53, v. 9, 11), and 'that year' means 'that nota
ble and fatal year.' The same expression recurs v. 5 1 and xviii. 13.

W..5Q-S3-]  S. JOHN, XL  243
them, Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is 50
expedient for us, that one man should die for the people,
and that the whole nation perish not. And this spake he 51
not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied
that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for that 52
nation only, but that also he should gather together in one
the children of God that were scattered abroad. Then 53
from that day forth they took counsel together for to put

Even if there were not this obvious meaning for 'that year,' the frequent
changes in the office at this period would fully explain the insertion
witbbut the notion of an annual change being implied. There had been
some twenty or thirty high-priests in S. John's lifetime.
Ye know nothing at all] An inference from their asking ' What do
we?' It was quite obvious what they must do. The 'ye' is contemp
tuously emphatic. The resolute but unscrupulous.character of the man
is evident. 50. expedient for us] For us members of the Sanhedrin. But the
better reading gives, for you half-hearted Pharisees.
that one man] Literally, in order that one man ; S. John's favourite
particle pointing to the Divine purpose : comp. iv. 34, 36, vi. 29, 50,
rx- 2> 3. 39, xii- 23i and especially xvi. 7.
the people] The Jews as a theocratic community (laos).
the whole nation] The Jews as one of the nations of the earth (ethnos).
Comp. Luke vii. 5; Acts x. 22. The same word in the plural, 'the
nations,' means the Gentiles.
51. not of himself] Like Saul, Caiaphas is a prophet in spite of
himself. being high priest] None but a Jew would be likely to know of the old
Jewish belief that the high-priest by means of the Urim and Thummim
was the mouth-piece of the Divine oracle. The Urim and Thummim
had been lost, and the high-priest's office had been shorn of much of its
glory, but the remembrance of his prophetical gift did not become quite
extinct (Hos. iii. 4); and 'in that fatal year' S. John might well believe
that the gift would be restored.
62. not for that nation only) S. John purposely uses the word which
describes the Jews merely as one of the nations ofthe earth distinct from
the Gentiles. Of course we are not to understand that Caiaphas
had any thought of the gracious meaning contained in his infamous
advice. gather together in one] Comp. xvii. 21: for 'in one'read into one.
63. Then from that day] Therefore for ' then' is the more important
here to bring out the meaning that it was in consequence of Caiaphas'
suggestion that the Sanhedrin practically if not formally pronounced
sentence of death. The question remained how to get the sentence
executed. 16 — 2

244

S. JOHN, XI. [w. 54—57.

54 him to death. Jesus therefore walked no more openly
among the Jews; but went thence unto a country near to the
wilderness, into a city called Ephraim, and there continued
55 with his disciples. And the Jews' passover was nigh at hand :
and many went out of the country up to Jerusalem before
56 the passover, to purify themselves. Then sought they for
Jesus, and spake among themselves, as they stood in the
temple, What think ye, that he will not come to the feast?
57 Now both the chief priests and the Pharisees had given a
commandment, that, if any man knew where he were, he
should shew it, that they might take him.
54. therefore] The decree of the Sanhedrin for His apprehension
had been published (v. 57) ; the sentence of death was probably a secret
among themselves.
openly] Comp. vii. 10. He withdraws from all intercourse with His
adversaries. went thence unto a country] Departed thence into the country.
the wilderness] The desert of Judsea, which extended to the confines
of Jericho, would naturally be meant by 'the wilderness.'
Ephraim] This place cannot be identified with certainty. Eusebius
makes it eight miles, Jerome twenty miles, N.E. of Jerusalem: both
make it the same as Ephron. If the Ephraim of 2 Chron. xiii. 19 and
Josephus (B. J. iv. ix. 9) be meant, the wilderness would be that of
Bethaven. 55. And the Jews' passover] Now the passover of the Jews. See
notes on ii. 13 and vi. 4.
to purify themselves] (Acts xxi. 24. ) Again we have evidence that
the Evangelist is a Jew. No purifications are ordered by the Law as a
preparation for the Passover. But to be ceremonially unclean was to be
excluded (xviii. 28) ; hence it was customary for those who were so to
go up to Jerusalem in good time so as to be declared clean before the
Feast began.
56. sought... spake] Both verbs are in the imperfect of what went on
continually. There are two questions in their words ; ' What think ye?
that He certainly will not come to the Feast.'
57. Now both the chief priests, &c] Omit 'both.' The word is
wanting in authority, and even if it were genuine it would not mean
' both ' but ' moreover.' The verse explains why the people doubted
His coming to the feast. Note that once more the Sadducaean hierarchy
takes the lead. Comp. v. 47, xii. 10, xviii. 3, 35, xix. 6, 15, 21. In
the history of the Passion the Pharisees are mentioned only once (Matt,
xxvii. 62), and then, as here, after the chief priests.
a commandment] The better reading is, commands, which has been
made singular because only one command is mentioned. Comp. our
phrase 'to give orders.'
that] Literally, in order that (see on v. 50).

v. i.] S. JOHN, XII. 245
Chap. XII. The Judgment.
i — 36. The Judgment of Men.
Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, 12
" We are not told how long our Lord stayed at Ephraim. If we are
to put faith in the tradition in the Talmud, and in the inferences which
Dr Caspari draws from it, an actual verdict of death was passed at the
recent meeting of the Sanhedrin, and was only waiting for its execution
until an opportunity offered, and the legal period for the production of
witnesses in the defence had expired. This would make the interval be
tween the retreat to Ephraim and the Passover coincide more or less
nearly with the forty days allowed. The data, however, are not such as
we can build on confidently." S. p. 191. So that once more we have
an interval of uncertain amount. See the introductory note to chapter
vi. and the note on vi. 1.
Chap. XII. The Judgment.
We now enter upon the third section of the first main division of this
Gospel. It may be useful to state the divisions once more. The
Prologue, i. 1 — 18; The Ministry, i. 19 — xii. 50, thus divided —
(1) The Testimony, i. 19 — ii. 11; (2) The Work, ii. 13 — xi. 57; (3)
The Judgment, xii. This third section, which now lies before us, may
be subdivided thus — (a) the Judgment of men, 1 — 36 ; (/3) the Judgment
of the Evangelist, 37 — 43; (7) the Judgment of Christ, 44 — 50.
We must be content to leave the precise method of harmonizing this
later portion of S. John's narrative with that of the Synoptists in un
certainty. "It is best to hold fast to the general scheme given by S.
John, and to treat the Synoptic sections, especially those in S. Luke
(ix. 51 — xviii. 35), as fragments of a great picture which are more or less
fortuitously thrown together, and are no longer capable of an exact re
construction." S. p. 191.
1 — 36. The Judgment of Men.
Note the dramatic contrast between the different sections of this
division ; the devotion of Mary and the enmity of the hierarchy, Christ's
triumph and the Pharisees' discomfiture, &c.
_ 1. Then Jesus] The 'then' or therefore simply resumes the narra
tive from the point where it quitted Jesus, xi. 55. This is better than
to make it depend on xi. 57, as if He went to Bethany to avoid His
enemies. His hour is drawing near, and therefore He draws near to
the appointed scene of His sufferings.
six days before the passover] The Passover began at sunset on Nisan
14 : six days before this would bring us to Nisan 8. Assuming the year
to be A. D. 30, Nisan 8 would be Friday, March 31 . We may suppose,
therefore, that Jesus and His disciples arrived at Bethany pn the Friday
evening a little after the Sabbath had commenced, having performed not
more than 'a Sabbath-Day's journey' on the Sabbath, the bulk of the

246 S. JOHN, XII. [w.2,3.
where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised
from the dead. 2 — 8. The Devotion of Mary.
2 There they made him a supper; and Martha served:
but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with
3 him. Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard,
very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his
journey being over before the day of rest began. But it must be remem
bered that this chronology is tentative, not certain.
which had been dead) These words are omitted by a large number of
the best authorities, which give where Lazarus was, whom Jesus raised
from the dead. They made Him therefore, &c.
2 — 8. The Devotion of Mary.
2. they made him a supper] ' They ' is indefinite : if we had only this
account we should suppose that the supper was in the house of Martha,
Mary," and Lazarus ; but S. Mark (xiv. 3) and S. Matthew (xxvi. 6) tell us
that it was in the house of Simon the leper, who had possibly been healed
by Christ and probably was a friend or relation of Lazarus and his sisters.
Martha's serving (comp. Luke x. 40) in his house is evidence of the latter
point (see the notes on the accounts of S. Matthew and S. Mark).
Lazarus was one of them] This is probably introduced to prove the
reality and completeness of his restoration to life : but it also confirms
the Synoptic accounts by indicating that Lazarus was a guest rather than
a host. sat at the table] Literally, reclined, as was the custom.
3. took Mary a pound] S. John alone gives her name and the
amount of ointment. The pound of 12 ounces is meant. So large a
quantity of a substance so costly is evidence of her over-flowing love.
Comp. xix. 39.
ointment of spikenard] The Greek expression is a rare one, and
occurs elsewhere only Mark xiv. 3, which S. John very likely had seen :
his account has all the independence of that of an eye-witness, but may
have been influenced by the Synoptic narratives. The meaning of the
Greek is not certain : itmaymean(i) 'genuine nard,' and spikenard was
often adulterated; or (2) 'drinkable, liquid nard,' and unguents were
sometimes drunk; or (3) 'Pistic nard,' 'Pistic' being supposed to be a
local adjective. But no place from which such an adjective could come
appears to be known. Of the other two explanations the first is to be
preferred. very costly] Horace offers to give a cask of wine for a very small box
of it; 'Nardi parvus onyx eliciet cadum.' Odes iv. xii. 17.
anointed the feet] The two Synoptists mention only the usual (Ps.
xxiii. 5) anointing ofthe head; S. John records the less usual act, which
again is evidence of Mary's devotion. The rest of this verse is peculiar
to S. John, and shews that he was present.

w. 4— 8.] S. JOHN, XII. 247
feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour
of the ointment. Then saith one of his disciples, Judas 4
Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him, Why was 5
not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given
to the poor? This he said, not that he cared for the 6
poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and
bare what was put therein. Then said Jesus, Let her alone : 7
against the day of my burying hath she kept this. For 8
4. Then saith, &c] Rather, But Judas Iscariot, &c. The best
authorities omit ' Simon's son. '
one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot] S. Mark says quite indefinitely,
'some,' S. Matthew, 'his disciples.' Each probably states just what he
knew; S. Mark that the remark was made; S. Matthew that it came
from the group of disciples; S. John that Judas made it, and why he
made it. S. John was perhaps anxious that the unworthy grumbling
should be assigned to the right person.
¦which should betray] Comp. vi. 71.
5. three hundred pence] Here, as in vi. 7, the translation 'pence' is
very inadequate and misleading; 'three hundred shillings' would be
nearer the mark (see on vi. 7). S. Mark adds that some were very in
dignant at her.
to the poor] More accurately, to poor people; there is no article
(comp. Luke xviii. 22).
6. tlie bag] Better, the box, the cash-box in which the funds of the
small company were kept. The word means literally 'a case for mouth
pieces' of musical instruments, and hence any portable chest. It occurs
in the LXX. of 2 Chron. xxiv. 8, n, but nowhere in N.T. excepting
here and xiii. 29.
and bare] The Greek word may mean either 'used to carry' or 'used
to carry away,' i.e. steal: comp. xx. 15. S. Augustine, commenting on
'portabat,' which he found in the Italic Version, and which survives in
the Vulgate, says "portabat an exportabat? sed ministerio portabat,
furto exportabat." We have thesame playin 'lift,' e. g. 'shop-lifting;'
and in the old use of 'convey: ' 'To steal'..." Convey the wise it call."
Merry Wives of Windsor I. 3. "O good! Convey? — Conveyers are
you all." Richard II. IV. 1.
what was put therein] Literally, the things that were being cast into
it from time to time ; the gifts of friends and followers.
7. hath she kept] The large majority of authorities, including the
best, read that she may. keep, and the whole will run : Let her alone that
she may preserve it for the day of My burial. The simplest interpre
tation of this is ' Let her preserve what remains of it ; not, however, to
be sold for the poor, but to be used for My burial, which is near at
hand.' The text has probably been altered to bring it more into
harmony with the Synoptists, with whom the present anointing appears
as anointing for the burial by anticipation. The word for 'burial' oi
'entombment' occurs only here and Mark xiv. 8.

248 S. JOHN, XII. [vv. 9-11.
the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not
always. 9 — n. The Hostility of the Priests.
9 Much people of the Jews therefore knew that he was
there: and they came not for Jesus' sake only, but that
they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the
io dead. But the chief priests consulted that they might put
ii Lazarus also to death ; because that by reason of him many
of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus.
8. For the poor, &c] Comp. Deut. xv. n. Every word of this
verse occurs in the first two Gospels, though not quite in the same
order. Here the emphasis is on 'the poor,' there on 'always.' The
striking originality of the saying, and the large claim which it makes,
are evidence of its origin from Him who spake as never man spake.
Considering how Christ speaks of the poor elsewhere, these words may
be regarded as quite beyond the reach of a writer of fiction.
9 — 11. The Hostility of the Priests.
9. Much people] Large caravans would be coming up for the Pass
over, and the news would spread quickly through the shifting crowds,
who were already on the alert (xi. 55) about Jesus, and were now
anxious to see Lazarus. Note that it is a 'large multitude of the Jews'
who come; i.e. of Christ's usual opponents. This again (comp. xi.
45 — 47) excites the hierarchy to take decisive measures. See on v.
12. 10. But the chief priests] Nothing is here said about the Pharisees
(comp.' xi. 47, 57), who are, however, not necessarily excluded. Both
would wish to put Lazarus out of the way for the reason given in v. 11 :
but the chief priests, who were mostly Sadducees, would have an
additional reason, in that Lazarus was a living refutation of their doctrine
that 'there is no resurrection' (Acts xxiii. 8). See on xi. 57.
put Lazarus also to death] Whatever may be true about xi. 53, we
must not suppose that this verse implies a formal sentence of death : it
does not even imply a meeting of the Sanhedrin.
These repeated references to the raising of Lazarus (xi. 45, 47, xii.
1, 9, 10, 17) greatly strengthen the historical evidence for the miracle.
They are quite inconsistent with the theory either of a misunderstand
ing or of deliberate fraud.
11. went away, and believed] Better, were going away and be:
lieving. It is best to leave ' going away ' quite indefinite : the notion
of falling away from the hierarchy lies in the context but not in the
word. The imperfects denote a continual process.
S. Augustine comments on the folly of the priests — as if Christ could
not raise Lazarus a second time ! But this ignores the ' also ': the hier
archy meant to put both to death. Their folly consisted in failing to

vv. 12—15.] S. JOHN, XII. 249
12 — 18. The Enthusiasm ofthe People.
On the next day much people that were come to the 12
feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem,
took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, J3
and cried, Hosanna : Blessed is the King of Israel that
cometh in the name of the Lord. And Jesus, when he had H
found a young ass, sat thereon ; as it is written, Fear not, 15
see, not that He could raise Lazarus again, but that Pie could raise
Himself (ii. rg). Note that it is the unscrupulous hierarchy, who
attempt this crime. Comp. xviii. 35, xix. 6, 15, 21.
12 — 18. The Enthusiasm of the People.
12. On the next day] From the date given v. 1, consequently
Nisan 9, from Saturday evening to Sunday evening, if the chronology
given on v. 1 is correct. S. John seems distinctly to assert that the
Triumphal Entry followed the supper at Bethany: S. Matthew and
S. Mark both place the supper after the entry, S. Matthew without
any date and probably neglecting (as often) the chronological order,
S. Mark also without date, yet apparently implying (xiv. 1) that the
supper took place two days before the Passover. But the date in
Mark xiv. 1 covers only two verses and must not be carried further in
contradiction to S. John's precise and consistent arrangement. S. John
omits all details respecting the procuring of the young ass.
much people] Not 'Jews', as in v. 9, but pilgrims without any bias
against Christ. Here and in v. 9 the true reading perhaps is, the common
people. 13. branches of palm trees] More literally, the palm-branches of
the palm-trees; i.e. those which grew there, or which were commonly
used at festivals. Comp. Simon's triumphal entry into Jerusalem
(1 Mace. xiii. 51). The palm-tree was regarded by the ancients as
characteristic of Palestine. ' Phoenicia' (Acts xi. 19, xv. 3) is pro
bably derived from phcenix= 'palm.' The tree is now comparatively
rare, except in the Philistine plain: at 'Jericho, the city of palm-trees '
(Deut. xxxiv. 3 ; 2 Chron. xxxviii. 15) there is not one.
Hosanna] This is evidence that the writer of this Gospel knows
Hebrew. In the LXX. at Ps. cxvii. 25 we have a translation of the
Hebrew, 'save we pray,' not a transliteration as here. (Comp. 'Alle
luia' in Rev. xix. 1, 6.) This Psalm is said by some to have been
written for the Feast of Tabernacles after the return from captivity, by
others for the founding or dedicating of the second Temple. In what
follows the better reading is Blessed is He that cometh in the name of
the Lord even the Mng of Israel. The cry of the multitude was of
course not always the same, and the different Evangelists give us differ
ent forms of it.
14. It is written] See on ii. 17.
15. Fear not, &c. The quotation is freely made ; ' fear not ' is sub-

250 S. JOHN, XII. [w. 16-19.
daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting
16 on an ass's colt. These things understood not his disci
ples at the first: but when Jesus was glorified, then re
membered they that these things were written of him, and
17 that they had done these things unto him. The people
therefore that was with him when he called Lazarus out of
>8 his grave, and raised him from the dead, bare record. For
this cause the people also met him, for that they heard that
he had done this miracle.
19. The Discomfiture ofthe Pharisees.
19 The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive
ye how ye prevail nothing ? behold, the world is gone after
him. stituted for 'rejoice greatly,' and the whole is abbreviated, Zech. ix. 9.
In adding ' thy ' to ' king ' and in writing ' an ass's colt ' the Evangelist
seems to be translating direct from the Hebrew. The best editions of
the LXX. omit 'thy' and all have 'a young colt' for the words here
rendered 'an ass's colt.' Comp. i. 29, vi. 45, xix. 37. If the writer of
this Gospel knew the O.T. in the original Hebrew he almost certainly
was a Jew.
16. understood not] A mark of candour (see on xi. 12): comp. ii. 22
(where see note) and xx. 9. Would a Christian of the second century
have invented this dulness of apprehension in Apostles? After Pentecost,
however, much that had passed unnoticed or had been obscure before
was brought to their remembrance and made clear (xiv. 26). Note
'these things' thrice repeated; vv. 14, 15 shew that the placing Him
on the young ass is primarily meant.
was glorified] Comp. vii. 39 and xi. 4, where see notes.
17. when he called Lazarus] See on v. 10. There is another
reading, well supported, which gives 'that He called Lazarus,' and the
whole will then run ; — The multitude, therefore, which was with Him,
kept bearing witness (i. 7) that He called Lazarus out of the sepulchre
and raised him from the dead. But ' when ' is to be preferred ; so that
there are two multitudes, one coming with Jesus from Bethany and one
(vv. 13, 18) meeting Him from Jerusalem. See on v. 41.
18. this miracle] 'This' is emphatic: other miracles had made
comparatively little impression, but this sign had convinced even His
adversaries. 19. The Discomfiture of the Pharisees.
19. Perceive ye] Rather, Behold ye. The Greek may also mean
'Behold' (imperat.) or ye behold: the last is perhaps best; 'Ye see
what a mistake we have made ; we ought to have adopted the plan of
Caiaphas long ago.'
the world] The exaggerated expression of their chagrin, which in

W. 20— 22.] S. JOHN, XII. 251
20 — 33. The Desire of the Gentiles and the Voice from
Heaven.
And there were certain Greeks among them that came up so
to worship at the feast : the same came therefore to Philip, 21
which was of Bethsaida of Galilee, and desired him, saying,
Sir, we would see Jesus. Philip cometh and telleth An- 22
this Divine epic is brought into strong contrast with the triumph of
Jesus. Comp. a similar exaggeration from a similar cause iii. 26; 'all
men come to Him. '
is gone after him] Literally, is gone away after Him. The Greek
word is not the same but is similar in meaning to that used in v. n.
After this confession of helplessness the Pharisees appear no more
alone ; the reckless hierarchy help them on to the catastrophe.
20 — 33. The Desire of the Gentiles and the Voice
from Heaven.
20. Greeks] The same word is translated 'Gentiles' vii. 35, where
see note. Care must be taken to distinguish in the N.T. between Hel
lenes or ' Greeks,' i.e. bom Gentiles, who may or may not have become
either Jewish proselytes or Christian converts, and Hellenistae or ' Gre
cians,' as our Bible renders the word, i.e. Jews who spoke Greek and
not Aramaic. Neither word occurs in the Synoptists. Hellenes are
mentioned here, vii. 35, and frequently in the Acts and in S. Paul's
Epistles. _ Hellenistae are mentioned only in the Acts, vi. 1 and ix. 29 :
in Acts xi. 20 the right reading is probably Hellenes.
that came up to worship] Better, that ware wont to go up to wor
ship. This shews that they were 'proselytes of the gate,' like the
Ethiopian eunuch (Acts viii. 27): see on Matt, xxiii. 15. In this inci
dent we have an indication of the salvation rejected by the Jews pass
ing to the Gentiles : the scene of it was probably the Court of the Gen
tiles; it is peculiar to S. John.
21. to Philip] Their coming to S. Philip was the result either (1) of
accident; or (2) of previous acquaintance, to which the mention of his
home seems to point; or (3) of his Greek name, which might attract
them. See on i. 45, vi. 5, xiv. 8.
Sir] Indicating respect for the disciple of such a Master : comp. iv.
11, 15, 19.
we would see Jesus] This desire to 'come and see' for themselves
would at once win the sympathy of the practical Philip. See on i. 46
and xiv. 8.
22. telleth Andrew] Another Apostle with a Greek name. They
were both of Bethsaida (i. 44), and possibly these Greeks may have
come from the same district. S. Philip seems to shrink from the respon
sibility of introducing Gentiles to the Messiah, and applies in his diffi
culty to the Apostle who had already distinguished himself by bringing
others to Christ (i. 41, vi. 8, 9).

252 S. JOHN, XII. [vv. 23—26.
23 drew : and again Andrew and Philip tell Jesus. And Jesus
answered them, saying, The hour is come, that the Son of
24 man should be glorified. Verily, verily, I say unto you,
Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it
abideth alone : but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.
25 He that loveth his life shall lose it ; and he that hateth his
26 life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal. If any man

and again] The true reading is Andrew cometh, and Philip, and
they tell Jesus.
23. And Jesus answered] Better, But Jesus answereth. He an
ticipates the Apostles and addresses them before they introduce the
Greeks. We are left in doubt as to the result of the Greeks' request.
Nothing is said to them in particular, though they may have followed
and heard this address to the Apostles, which gradually shades off into
soliloquy. These men from the West at the close of Christ's life set forth the
same truth as the men from the East at the beginning of it — that the
Gentiles are to be gathered in. The wise men came to His cradle,
these to His cross, of which their coming reminds Him; for only by
His death could ' the nations ' be saved.
The hour is come) The verb first for emphasis in the Greek as in
iv. 21, 23: 'it hath come — the fated hour.' Comp. xiii. 1.
that the Son of man] Literally, in order that, of the Divine purpose,
as in xi. 50 and xiii. 1, where see notes. See also the last note on
i. Si-
glorified] By His Passion and Death through which He must pass
to return to glory. See on vii. 39 and xi. 4.
24. Verily, verily) Strange as it may seem to you that the Mes
siah should die, yet this is but the course of nature : a seed cannot be
glorified unless it dies. A higher form of existence is obtained only
through the extinction of the lower form that preceded it. See on
i- 5i-
25. loveth his life. ..hateth his life. ..life eternal] ' Life' is here used
in two senses, and in the Greek two different words are used. In the
first two cases 'life' means the life of the individual, in the last, life in
the abstract. By sacrificing life in the one sense, we may win life in
the other. See notes on Matt. x. 39, xvi. 25; Mark viii. 35; Luke ix.
24, xvii. 33. A comparison of the texts will shew that most of them
refer to different occasions, so that this solemn warning must have
been often on His lips. The present utterance is distinct from all the
rest. shall lose it] Better, loseth it; the Greek may mean destroyeth it.
hateth his life] i. e. is ready to act towards it as if he hated it, if need
so require. Neither here nor in Luke xiv. 26 must 'hate' be watered
down to mean 'be not too fond of;' it means that and a great deal
more. The word rendered 'life' in 'loveth his life' and 'hateth his

v. 27.] S. JOHN, XII. 253
serve me, let him follow me ; and where I am, there shall
«also my servant be : if any man serve me, him will my
Father honour. Now is my soul troubled ; and what shall 27
I say ? Father, save me from this hour : but for this cause
life' might also mean 'soul,' and some would translate it so : but would
Christ have spoken of hating one's soul as the way to eternal life?
26. let him follow me] in My Ufe of self-sacrifice: Christ Himself has
set the example of hating one's life in this world. These words are
perhaps addressed through the disciples to the Greeks listening close at
hand. If they ' wish to see Jesus ' and know Him they must count the
cost first. ' Me ' is emphatic in both clauses.
where I am] i. e. where I shall be then, in My kingdom. Comp.
xiv. 3, xvii. 24. Some would include in the 'where' the road to the
kingdom, viz. death. 'I' and 'My' are emphatic.
serve... honour] Here the verbs are emphatic (not 'Me'), and balance
one another. This verse is closely parallel to v. 35 : 'let him follow
Me ' corresponds to ' hateth his life in this world ; ' ' him will the Father
honour,' to 'shall keep it unto life eternal.'
27. This is a verse of well-known difficulty, and the meaning can
not be determined with certainty, several meanings being admissible.
The doubtful points are (1) the position ofthe interrogation, whether it
should come after 'I say' or 'from this hour;' (2) the meaning of 'for
this cause.'
Now is my soul troubled] The word rendered 'soul' is the same as
that rendered 'life' in 'loveth his life' and 'hateth his life.' To bring
out this and the sequence of thought, 'life' would perhaps be better
here. ' He that would serve Me must follow Me and be ready to hate
his life ; for My life has long since been tossed and torn with emotion
and sorrow.' 'Is troubled '=has been and still is troubled; a frequent
meaning of the Greek perfect.
what shall I say?) Or, what must I say? This appears to be the
best punctuation ; and the question expresses the difficulty of framing a
prayer under the conflicting influences of fear of death and willingness
to glorify His Father by dying. The result is first a prayer under the
influence of fear — 'save Me from this hour' (comp. 'Let this cup pass
from Me,' Matt. xxvi. 39), and then a prayer under the influence of
ready obedience— ' Glorify Thy Name ' through My sufferings. But the
Greek means 'save me out of (sdson ek), i.e. 'bring Me safe out of;'
rather than 'save Me from' (sdson apd), i.e. 'keep Me altogether away
from,' as in 'deliver us from the evil' (Matt. vi. 13). S. John omits the
Agony in the garden, which was in the Synoptists and was well known
to every Christian; but he gives us here an insight into a less known
truth, which is still often forgotten, that the agony was not confined to
Gethsemane, but was part of Christ's whole life. Others place the ques
tion at 'from this hour,' and the drift of the whole will then be, 'How
can I say, Father save Me from this hour? Nay, I came to suffer;
therefore My prayer shall be, Father, glorify Thy Name.'

254 S. JOHN, XII. [vv. 28—31.
28 came I unto this hour. Father, glorify thy name. Then
came there a voice from heaven, saying; I have both glori-
29 fied it, and will glorify it again. The people therefore, that
stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered : others said,
30 An angel spake to him. Jesus answered and said, This
31 voice came not because of me, but for your sakes. Now is
the judgment of this world : now shall the prince of this
for this cause] These words are taken in two opposite senses; (1)
that I might be saved out of this hour; (2) that Thy Name might be
glorified by My obedience. Both make good sense. If the latter be
adopted it would be better to transpose the stops, placing a full stop
after 'from this hour' and a" colon after 'unto this hour.'
28. Then came there] Better, There came therefore, i. e. in answer
to Christ's prayer. There can be no doubt what S. John wishes us to
understand ; — that a voice was heard speaking articulate words, that
some could distinguish the words, others could not, while some mistook
the sounds for thunder. To make the thunder the reality, and the voice
and the words mere imagination, is to substitute an arbitrary explanation
for the Evangelist's plain meaning. For similar voices comp. that heard
by Elijah (1 Kings xix. 12, 13); by Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. iv. 31); at
Christ's Baptism (Mark i. 11) and Transfiguration (Mark ix. 7) ; and at
S. Paul's Conversion (Acts ix. 4, 7, xxii. 9), where it would seem that
S. Paul alone could distinguish the words, while his companions merely
heard a sound (see on Acts ix. 4). One of the conditions on which
power to distinguish what is said depends is sympathy with the
speaker. have glorified it] in all God's works from the Creation onwards,
especially in the life of Christ.
will glorify it] in the death of Christ and its results.
29. The people... thundered... spake] Better, The multitude... had
thundered... Taz,th spoken.
30. Jesus answered] He answered their discussions about the sound,
and by calling it a voice He decides conclusively against those who sup
posed it to be thunder. But those who recognised that it was a voice
were scarcely less seriously mistaken ; their error consisted in not recog
nising that the voice had a meaning for them. Not for My sake hath
this voice come, but for your sakes, i.e. that ye might believe. Comp.
xi. 42.
31. Now... now] With prophetic certainty Christ speaks of the
victory as already won.
the judgment of this world] The sentence passed on this world (see
on iii. 17 and v. 2t)) for refusing to believe. The Cross is the condemna
tion of all who reject it.
the prince of this-world] Literally, the ruler of this world. This is
one of the apparently Gnostic phrases which may have contributed to
render this Gospel suspicious in the eyes of the Alogi (see Introduction,
Chap. II. i.) : it occurs again xiv. 30, xvi. n, and nowhere else. It

w. 32-34-] S. JOHN, XIL  255
world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, 32
will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what 33
death he should die.
34 — 36. The Perplexity ofthe Multitude.
The people answered him, We have heard out of the 34
law that Christ abideth for ever: and how sayest thou,
was a Gnostic view that the creator and ruler of the material universe
was an evil being. But in the Rabbinical writings 'prince of this world'
was a common designation of Satan, as ruler of the Gentiles, in op
position to God, the Head of the Jewish theocracy. But. just as the
Messiah is the Saviour of the believing world, whether Jew or Gentile,
so Satan is the ruler of the unbelieving world, whether Gentile or Jew.
shall. ..be cast out] By the gradual conversion of unbelievers. This
is a process which will continue until the last day.
32. And I] ' I ' is very emphatic in opposition to 'the ruler of this
world.' The glorified Christ will rule men's hearts in place of the
devil. ,
be lifted up] Raised up to heaven by means of the Cross: we need
not, as in iii. 14 and viii. 28, confine the meaning to the Crucifixion,
although the lifting up on the Cross may be specially indicated. The
words 'from the earth' (literally, out of the earth) seem to point to the
Ascension; yet the Cross itself, apparently so repulsive, has through
Christ's Death become an attraction; and this may be the meaning
here. For the hypothetical form 'if Ihe lifted up,' comp. 'if I go,'
xiv. 3. In both cases Christ is concerned not with the time of the act,
but with the consequences of it; hence He does not say 'when,' but 'if.'
will draw] There are two Greek words for 'draw' in the N.T., one
of which necessarily implies violence, the other does not : it is the latter
that is used here and in vi. 44; the former is used Acts xiv. 19 and xvii.
6. Man's will is free ; he can refuse to be drawn : and there is no vio
lence; the attraction is moral. We see from vi. 44 that before the
' lifting up ' it is the Father who draws men to the Son.
all men] Not only the Jews represented by the Twelve, but the
Gentiles represented by these Greeks.
unto me] Better, unto Myself, up from the earth.
33. what death] Literally, by what manner of death: comp. x. 32,
xviii. 32, xxi. 9.
should die] The word translated ' should ' is the same as that used of
the traitor, v. 4 and vi. 71. It is used (1) of what is about to happen,
(2) of what (seeing that it has happened) may be regarded as necessary
and fore-ordained. 34 — 36. The Perplexity of the Multitude.
34. The people answered] The multitude therefore answered.
out of the law] In its widest sense, including the Psalms and the
Prophets. Comp. Ps. lxxxix. 29, 36, ex. 4; Is. ix. 7; Ezek. xxxvii.

256 S. JOHN, XII. [w. 35, 36.
The Son of man must be lift up? who is this Son of
35 man ? Then Jesus said unto them, Yet a little while
is the light with you. Walk while ye have the light, lest
darkness come upon you : for he that walketh in darkness
36 knoweth not whither he goeth. While ye have light, believe
in the light, that ye may be the children of light. These
25, &c. The people rightly understand 'lifted up from the earth1 to
mean removal from the earth by death; and they argue — 'Scripture
says that the Christ (see on i. 20) will abide for ever. You claim to be
the Christ, and yet you say that you will be lifted up and therefore not
abide.' who is this Son of man?) ' This ' is contemptuous : 'a strange Mes
siah this, with no power to abide!' (on 'Son of Man' see i. 51).
"Here we have the secret, unexplained by the Synoptists, why even
when the scale is seeming to turn for a moment in favour of belief, it is
continually swayed down again by the discovery of some new particular
in which the current ideas respecting the Messiah are disappointed and
contradicted." S. p. 199. One moment the people are convinced by
a miracle that Jesus is the Messiah, the next that it is impossible to
reconcile His position with the received interpretations of Messianic
prophecy. It did not occur to them to doubt the interpretations.
35. Then Jesus said] Better, Jesus therefore said: instead of an
swering their contemptuous question He gives them a solemn warning.
while ye have] The better reading is, as ye have: ' walk in a manner
suitable to the fact of there being the Light among you: make use of
the Light and work.'
darkness] that darkness ' in which no man can work.'
come upon you] like a bird of prey. The same Greek verb is used
of the last day ; 1 Thess. v. 4 ; and in the LXX. of sin overtaking the
sinner; Num. xxxii. 23.
for he that walketh in darkness] And he that walketh in the dark
ness. whither he goeth) Or, goeth away ; knows not to what end he is
departing: comp. 1 John ii. n.
36. While ye have] Here again the better reading is as ye have;
and 'light' should be 'the Light.' Note the emphatic repetition so
common in S. John.
that ye may be] Rather, that ye may become. Faith is only the
beginning ; it does not at once make us children.
children of light] No article : but in all the four preceding cases
'light' has the article and means Christ, the Light, as in i. 5, 7, 8, 9.
The expression ' child of or ' son of is frequent in Hebrew poetry to
indicate very close connexion as between product and producer (see on
xvii. 12). Thus, ' son of peace,' Luke x. 6; 'children of this world,'
xvi. 8; 'sons of thunder,' Mark iii. 17. Such expressions are very
frequent in the most Hebraistic of the Gospels : comp. Matt. v. 9,
viii. 12, ix. 15, xiii. 38, xxiii. 15.

vv. 37— 39-] S. JOHN, XII. 257
things spake Jesus, and departed, and did hide himself from,
' them. 37 — 43- The Judgment ofthe Evangelist.
But though he had done so many miracles before them, 37
yet they believed not on him : that the saying of Esaias the 38
prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath
believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of
the Lord been revealed? Therefore they could not 39
and departed] Probably to Bethany, to spend the last few days
before His hour came in retirement. Comp. Matt. xxi. 17; Mark xi.
n j Luke xxi. 37.
did hide himself] Rather, was hidden.
37—43. The Judgment of the Evangelist.
S. John here sums up the results of the ministry which has just
come to a close. Their comparative poverty is such that he can ex
plain it in no other way than as an illustration of that judicial blind
ness which had been foretold and denounced by Isaiah. The tragic
tone returns again : see on i. 5.
37. so many miracles] The Jews admitted His miracles, vii. 31 ;
xi. 47. They are assumed by S. John as notorious, although he him
self records only seven of them. Comp. ii. 23, iv. 45, vii, 31, xi. 47.
before them] i.e. before their very eyes.
38. That] Or, in order that, indicating the Divine purpose.
Comp. xiii. 18, xv. 25, xvii. 12, xviii. 9, 32, xix. 24, 36. It is the two
specially Hebraistic Gospels that most frequently remind us that
Christ's life was a fulfilment of Hebrew prophecy. Comp. Matt. i. 22,
ii. 15, 17, iv. 14, viii. 17, xii. 17, xiii. 35, xxi. 4, xxvi. 54, 56, xxvii. 9.
See on Matt. i. 22.
Lord, who hath believed] The quotation closely follows the LXX.
our report] Literally, that which they hear from us; comp. Rom.
x. 16.
the arm of the Lord] His power. There seems to be no sufficient
authority for interpreting this expression of the Messiah, although it is
the power of God as manifested in the Messiah that is here specially
meant. Comp. Luke i. 51; Acts xiii. 17.
39. 'Therefore] Or, For this cause (w. 18, 27); see on vii. 21, 22.
It refers to what precedes, and the 'because' which follows gives the
reason more explicitly. This use is common in S. John: comp. v. 18,
viii. 47, x. 17.
they could not] It had become morally impossible. Grace may be
refused so persistently as to destroy the power of accepting it. 'I will
not' leads to 'I cannot.' Pharaoh first hardened his heart and then
God hardened it. Comp. Rom. ix. 6 to xi. 32.
s. JOHN 1 -s

258 S. JOHN, XII. [w. 40-43.
40 believe, because that Esaias said again, He hath blinded
their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they
should not see with their eyes, nor understand
with their heart, and be converted, and I should
41 heal them. These things said Esaias, when he saw his
42 glory, and spake of him. Nevertheless among the chief
rulers also many believed on him; but because of the
Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put
43 out of the synagogue : for they loved the praise of men more
than the praise of God.
40. He hath blinded] Not Christ, nor the devil, but God. The
quotation-is free, following neither the Hebrew nor the LXX. very
closely. / should heal] ' I ' = Christ. God has hardened their hearts so that
they could not be converted, and therefore Christ could not heal them.
Comp. Matt. xiii. 14, 15, where Christ quotes this text to explain why
He teaches in parables; and Acts xxviii. 26, where S. Paul quotes it to
explain the rejection of his preaching by the Jews in Rome.
41. when he saw] The better reading is, because he saw. We
had a similar double reading in v. 17, where ' when' is to be preferred.
In the Greek the difference is only a single letter, ire and tn. Christ's
glory was revealed to Isaiah in a vision, and therefore he spoke of it.
The glory of the Son before the Incarnation, when He was ' in the
form of God' (Phil. ii. 6), is to be understood.
42. Nevertheless] In spite of the judicial blindness with which God
had visited them many even of the Sanhedrin believed. We know of
Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus.
because of the Pharisees] The recognised champions of orthodoxy
both in and .outside the Sanhedrin. Comp. vii. 13, ix. 22.
did not confess] Imperfect tense ; they were perpetually omitting to
do so.
43. the praise of men &c] Better, the glory (that cometh) from
men rather than the glory (that cometh) from God (see on v. 41, 44).
The word rendered 'praise' is the same as that rendered 'glory' in
v. 41. Moreover 'more than' is not strong enough; it should be
rather than. Joseph and Nicodemus confessed their belief after the
crisis ofthe Crucifixion. Gamaliel did not even get so far as to believe
on Him. 44 — 60. The Judgment of Christ.
The Evangelist has just summed up the results of Christ's ministry
(37 — 43). He now corroborates that estimate by quoting Christ Him
self. But as v. 36 seems to give us the close of the ministry, we are
probably to understand that what follows was uttered on some occasion
or. occasions previous to v. 36. Perhaps it is given us as an epitome of
what Christ often taught. .

w.44— 49-] S. JOHN, XII. 259
44 — 5 o. The Judgment of Christ.
Jesus cried and said, He that beheveth on me, believeth 44
not on me, but on him that sent me. And he that seeth me 45
seeth him that sent me. I am come a light into the world, 46
that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in dark
ness. And if any man hear my words, and believe not, 1 47
judge him not : for I came not to judge the world, but to
save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not 48
my words, hath one that judgeth him : the word that I have
spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. For I 49
44. cried] Comp. vii. 28, 37- The expression implies public
teaching. believeth not on me] His belief does not end there ; it must include
more. This saying does not occur in the previous discourses ; but in
v. 36 and viii. 19 we have a similar thought. Jesus came as His Fa
ther's ambassador, and an ambassador has no meaning apart from the
sovereign who sends him. Not only is it impossible to accept the one
without the other, but to accept the representative is to accept not him
in his own personality but the prince whom he personates. These
words are, therefore, to be taken quite literally.
45. seeth] Or, beholdeth, contemplateth. The same verb is used
vi. 40, 62, vii. 3 and frequently in S. John.
46. I am come] Emphatic; ' I and none other.' Comp. w. 35, 36,
viii. 12, ix. 5.
abide in darkness] Till the Light comes, all are in darkness; the
question remains whether they will remain so after the Light has
come. 47. hear my words] 'Hear' is a neutral word, implying neither
belief nor unbelief. Matt. vii. 24,26; Mark iv. 15, 16. For 'words'
read sayings (see on v. 47) both here and in v. 48.
and believe not] The true reading is and keep them not, i. e. fulfil
them (comp. Luke xi. 28, xviii. 21). One important MS. omits the
'not,' perhaps to avoid a supposed inconsistency between v. 47 and
v. 48.
48. my words] Better, My sayings (see on v. 47) : ' word ' in the
next clause is right.
hath one that judgeth him] Hath his judge already, without My
sentencing him. Comp. iii. 18, v. 45. The hearer may refuse the
word, but he cannot refuse the responsibility of having heard it.
in the last day] Peculiar to this Gospel: comp. vi. 39, 40, 44, 54,
xi. 24. This verse is conclusive as to the doctrine of the last judgment
being contained in this Gospel.
49. For] Or, Because: it introduces the reason why one who
rejects Christ's word will be judged by His word ; — because that word
is manifestly Divine and proceeds from the Father. 17 — 2

260 S. JOHN, XII. [v. 50.
have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me,
he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what
50 I should speak. And I know that his commandment is
life everlasting : whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the
Father said unto me, so I speak.
xiii. — xvii. The inner Glorification of Christ in His
last Discourses.
of myself] Literally, out of Myself (ek) without commission from the
Father. Comp. from Myself (apo) v. 30, vii. 16, 28, viii. 28.
he gave me] Himself (and none other) hath given Me. See on
x. 18.
say.. .speak) 'Say' probably refers to the doctrine, 'speak' to the
form in which it is expressed. See on viii. 43.
50. And I know] The Son's testimony to the Father. ' The com
mission which He hath given Me is eternal life.' (See on iii. 16.)
His commission is to save the world.
as the Father said] The same distinction as in the previous verse :
the matter of the revelation comes from the Father, the external ex
pression of it from the Son.
With this the first main division of the Gospel ends. Christ's
revelation of Himself to the world in His ministry is con
cluded. The Evangelist has set before us the Testimony to the
Christ, the Work of the Christ, and the Judgment respecting the
work, which has ended in a conflict, and the conflict has reached a
climax. We have reached the beginning of the end.
Chap. XIII.
We now enter upon the second main division of the Gospel. The
Evangelist has given us thus far a narrative of Christ's Ministry pre
sented to us in a series of typical scenes (i. 18 — xii. 50). He goes on
to set forth the Issues of Christ's Ministry (xiii — xx). The last
chapter (xxi.) forms the Epilogue, balancing the first eighteen verses
(i. 1 — 18), which form the Prologue.
The second main division of the Gospel, like the first, falls into three
parts: 1. the inner Glorification of Christ in His last
Discourses (xiii. — xvii.); 2. the outer Glorification of Christ
in His Passion (xviii, xix.) ; 3. the Victory completed in the
Resurrection (xx.). These parts will be subdivided as we reach
them. xiii.— xvii. The inner Glorification of Christ in His
last Discourses.
1. His Love in Humiliation (xiii. 1 — 30); 2, His Love in keeping His
own (xiii. 30 — xv. 27); 3. the Promise of the Paraclete and of Christs
Return (xvi.): 4. Christ's Prayer for Himself, the Apostles, and all
Believers (xvii. ).

w. 1, 2.] S. JOHN, XIII. 261
Chap. XIII. 1 — 30. Love in Humiliation.
Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew 13
that his hour was come that he should depart out of this
world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in
the world, he loved them unto the end. And supper being 2
ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas
Chap. XIII. 1 — 30. Love in Humiliation.
This section has two parts in strong and dramatic contrast ; I. the
washing ofthe disciples' feet (i — 20); 2. the self-excommunication of
the traitor (21 — 30).
1. Now before the feast ofthe passover] These words give a date not
to any one word in the verse, whether ' knew ' or ' having loved ' or
' loved,' but to the narrative which follows. Their most natural mean
ing is that some evening before the Passover Jesus was at supper with
His disciples. This was probably Thursday evening, the beginning of
Nisan 14: but the difficult question of the Day of the Crucifixion is too
long for a note and is discussed in Appendix A.
when Jesus knew] Or, Jesus knowing (v. 3). The Greek may mean
either ' although He knew or 'because He knew.' The latter is better :
it was precisely because He knew that He would soon return to glory
that He gave this last token of self-humiliating love.
his hour was come] See on ii. 4, vii. 6, xi. 9. Till His hour had
come His enemies could do. nothing but plot (vii. 30, viii. 20).
that he should] Literally, in order that He should, of the Divine
purpose. See on xii. 23.
depart out of] Or, pass over out of: it is the same verb and prepo
sition as in v. 24; 'hath passed over out of death into life.'
his own] Those whom God had given Him, i. 11, 12, xvii. n;
Acts iv. 23, xxiv. 23.
unto the end] The end of His life is the common interpretation,
which may be right. Comp. Matt. x. 22 and xxiv. 13, where the same
Greek expression is translated as it is here; and 1 Thess. ii. 16, where
it is translated ' to the uttermost.' In Luke xviii. 5 ' continual coming '
is literally ' coming to the end.' In all these passages the meaning may
either be 'at the last, finally,' or, 'to the uttermost, utterly.' To the
uttermost is perhaps to be preferred here. Comp. the LXX. of Amos
ix. 8; Ps. xii. 1.
2. supper being ended) There are two readings here, but neither of
them means 'being ended,' moreover the supper is not ended (v. 26).
The common reading would mean ' supper having begun,' and the better
reading, ' when supper was at hand, ' or, ' when supper was beginning.'
"It was the custom for slaves to wash the feet ofthe guests before
sitting down to meat ; and we are tempted to suppose that the symboli
cal act, which our Evangelist relates here, took the place of this custom."
S. p. 214.

262 S. JOHN, XIII. [vv. 3—5.
3 Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him; Jesus knowing that the
Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was
4 come from God, and went to God ; he riseth from supper,
and laid aside his garments ; and took a towel, and girded
5 himself. After that, he poureth water into a bason, and
the devil  to betray him] The true reading gives us, The devil hav
ing now put it into the heart, that Judas, Simon's son, Iscariot, should
betray Him. Whose heart ? Only two answers are possible grammati
cally; (1) the heart of Judas, (2) the devil's own heart. The latter is
incredible, if only for the reason that S.John himself has shewn that the
devil had long been at work with Judas. The meaning is that of the
received reading, but more awkwardly expressed. ' To betray' is
literally S. John's favourite form ' in order that he should betray.' The
traitor's name is given in full for greater solemnity, and in the true text
comes last for emphasis. Note the position of Iscariot, confirming the
view (see on vi. 71) that the word is a local epithet rather than a proper
name. 3. Jesus knowing] The Greek is the same as of 'when Jesus knew'
in v. 1, and may have either of the two meanings given there. Here
also ' because He knew ' is better.
given all things) Comp. Eph. i. 22; Phil. ii. 9 — 11.
and went to God] Better, and is going to God.
4. He riseth from supper, &c] Or, from the supper: the article
perhaps marks the supper as no ordinary one. "This is the realism of
history indeed  The carefulness with which here, as in the account
of the cleansing of the temple, the successive stages in the action are
described, proclaim the eye-witness." S. p. 216. One is unwilling to
surrender the view that this symbolical act was intended among other
purposes to be a tacit rebuke to the disciples for the 'strife among them,
which of them should be accounted the greatest ' (Luke xxii. 24) ; and
certainly 'I am among you as he that serveth' (v. 27) seems to point di
rectly to this act. This view seems all the more probable when we,
remember that a similar dispute was rebuked in a similar way, viz. by
symbolical action (Luke ix. 46 — 48). The dispute may have arisen
about their places at the table. That S. Luke places the strife after the
supper is not fatal to this view ; he gives no note of time, and the strife
is singularly out of place there, immediately after their Master's self-
humiliation and in the midst of the last farewells. We may therefore
believe, in spite of S. Luke's arrangement, that the strife preceded the
supper. " One thing is clear, that S.John, if he had read S. Luke's
Gospel at this point, has not copied or followed it. He proceeds with
the same peculiar independence which we have noticed in him all
through." S. p. 215.
his garments] Or, His upper garments, which would impede His
movements. 5. into a bason) Better, into the bason, which stood there for such
purposes, the large copper bason commonly found in oriental houses.

w. 6— 8.] S. JOHN, XIII. 263
began to wash the disciples' feet, and to wipe them with the
towel wherewith he was girded. Then cometh he to Simon 6
-Peter: and Peter saith unto him, Lord, dost thou wash rny
feet ? Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou 7
knowest not now ; but thou shalt know hereafter. Peter 8
saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus
answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with
began to wash] Began is not a mere amplification as in the other
Gospels (Matt. xi. 7, xxvi. 22, 37, 74; Mark iv. 1, vi. 2, 7, 34, 55;
Luke vii. 15, 24, 38, 49 ; &c. &c), and in the Acts (i. 1, ii. 4, xviii, 26,
&c). The word occurs nowhere else in S. John, and here is no mere
periphrasis for 'washed.' He began to wash, but was interrupted .by
the incident with S. Peter. With whom He began is not mentioned :
from very early times some have conjectured Judas.
Contrast the mad insolence of Caligula — quosdam summis honoribus
functos...ad pedes stare succinctos linteo passus est. Suet. Calig. xxvi.
Linteum in a Greek form is the very word here used for towel.
6. Then cometh he] Better, He cometh therefore, i. e. in consequence
of having begun to wash the feet of each in turn. ' The natural impres
sion is that S. Peter's turn at any rate did not come first. But if it. did,
this is not much in favour of the primacy of S. Peter, which can> be
proved from other passages, still less of a supremacy, which cannot be
proved at all.
dost thou wash my feet?) There is a strong emphasis on 'Thou.'
Comp. 'Comest Thou to me?' (Matt. iii. 14.)
7. What I do thou knowest not] Here both pronouns are emphatic
and are opposed. Peter's question implied that he knew, while Christ
did not know, what He was doing : Christ tells him that the very re
verse of this is the fact. On ' now ' see note on xvi. 31.
hereafter] Literally, after, these things (iii. 22, v. 1, 14, vi. 1, vii. 1,
xix. 38). ' Hereafter ' conveys a wrong impression, as if it referred to
the remote future. Had this been intended the words used for ' now '
and ' afterwards ' in v. 36 would probably have been employed here.
The reference probably is to the explanation of this symbolical action
given in vv. 12 — 17. This seems clear from the opening words (v. 12),
'Know ye what I have done to you?' — all the more so, because it is the
same word for 'know ' as here for ' thou shalt know ' ( gindskein) ; where
as the Greek for 'thou knowest' in this verse is a different and more
general word (oidas) : ' what / am doing,' thou knowest not just .now,
but thou shalt recognise presently.' See notes on vii. 26 and viii. 55.
8. Thou shalt never wash my feet] The negative is the strongest
form possible ; ' thou shalt certainly not wash my feet for ever.' See on
viii. 51, and comp. Matt. xvi. 22.
no part with me) The Greek is the same as in Matt. xxiv. 51 and
Luke xii. 46. The expression is of Hebrew origin ; comp. Deut, x. 9,
xii. 12, xiv. 27. To reject Christ's self-humiliating love, because it ¦
humiliates Him (a well-meaning but false principle), is to cut oneself off

264 S. JOHN, XIII. [vv. 9— 12.
9 me. Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only,
io but also my hands and my head. Jesus saith to him, He
that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is
ii clean every whit : and ye are clean, but not all. For he
knew who should betray him ; therefore said he, Ye are not
all clean.
ij So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his
garments, and was set down again, he said unto them,
from Him. It requires much more humility to accept a benefit which
is a serious loss to the giver than one which costs him nothing. In
this also the surrender of self is necessary.
9. not my feet only] The impetuosity which is so marked a charac
teristic of S. Peter in the first three Gospels (comp. especially Luke v. 8
and Matt. xvi. 22), comes out very strongly in his three utterances here.
It is incredible that this should be deliberate invention ; and if not,
the independent authority of this narrative is manifest.
10. He that is washed] Rather, He that is bathed (comp. Heb. x. 22
and 2 Pet. ii. 22). In the Greek we have quite a different word from the
one rendered 'wash' elsewhere in these verses: the latter means to
wash part of the body, this to bathe the whole person. A man who
h'as bathed does not need to bathe again when he reaches home, but only
to wash the dust off his feet : then he is wholly clean. So also in the
spiritual life, a man whose moral nature has once been thoroughly
purified need not think that this has been all undone if in the walk
through life he contracts some stains: these must be washed away,
and then he is once more wholly clean. Peter, conscious of his own
imperfections, in Luke v. 8, and possibly here, rushes to the conclusion
that he is utterly unclean. But his meaning here perhaps rather is ; 'If
having part in Thee depends on being washed by Thee, wash all Thou
canst. S. Peter excellently illustrates Christ's saying. His love for his
Master proves that he had bathed ; his boastfulness (v. 37), his attack
on Malchus (xviii. 10), his denials (25, 27) his dissimulation at Antioch
(Gal. ii.), all shew how often he had need to wash his feet.
but not all] This is the second indication of the presence of a traitor
among them (comp. vi. 70). Apparently it did not attract much atten
tion: each, conscious of his own faults, thought the remark only too
true. The disclosure is made gradually but rapidly now (vv. 18, 21,
26). 11. who should betray him] Or, him that was betraying Him. The
Greek construction is exactly equivalent to that of 'He that should
come' (Matt. xi. 3 ; Luke vii. 19); in both cases it is the present parti
ciple with the definite article — 'the betraying one,' 'the coming one.'
therefore] Or, for this cause: see on xii. 39.
12. was set down] The Greek verb occurs frequently in the Gospels
(and nowhere else in N.T.) of reclining at meals. It always implies a
change of position (see on v.. 25, and comp. vi. 10, xxi. 20; Matt, xv,
35 ; Mark vi. 40 ; Luke xi. 37).

w. 13—18.] S. JOHN, XIII. 265
Know ye what I have done to you ? Ye call me Master 13
and Lord : and ye say well ; for so I am. If I then, your H
Lord and Master, have washed your feet ; ye also ought to
wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, 15
that ye should do as I have done to you. Verily, verily, 1 16
say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord;
neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him. If ye 17
know these things, happy are ye if ye do them. I speak 18
Know ye] 'Do ye recognise the meaning of it?' (see on v. 7). The
question directs their attention to the explanation to be given.
13. Master and Lord] Or, The Master (Teacher) and the Lord.
These are the ordinary titles of respect paid to a Rabbi: 'Lord' is the
correlative of 'servant,' so that 'Master' might be a synonym for that
also ; but the disciples would no doubt use the word with deeper mean
ing as their knowledge of their Master increased. In the next verse the
order of the titles is reversed, to give emphasis to the one with this
deeper meaning.
14. your Lord and Master, have washed] Rather, the Lord and the
Master, washed. For the construction comp. xv. 20 and xviii. 23.
ye also ought to wash one another's feet] The custom of 'the feet-
washing' on Maundy Thursday in literal fulfilment of this typical com
mandment is not older than the fourth century. The Lord High
Almoner washed the feet ofthe recipients ofthe royal 'maundy' as late
as 1731. James II. was the last English sovereign who went through
the ceremony. In 1 Tim. v. 10 'washing the saints' feet' is perhaps
given rather as a type of devoted charity than as a definite act to be
required. 15. as I have done to .you] Not, ' what I have done to you,' but
'even as I have done :' this is the spirit in which to act — self-sacrificing
humility — whether or no it be exhibited precisely in this way. Mutual
service, and especially mutual cleansing, is the obligation of Christ's
disciples. Comp. James v. 16.
16. The servant is not greater than his lord] This saying occurs
four times in the Gospels, each time in a different connexion: (1) to
shew that the disciples must expect no better treatment than their
Master (Matt. x. 24) ; (2) to impress the Apostles with their responsi
bilities as teachers, for their disciples will be as they are (Luke vi. 40) ;
(3) here ; (4) with the same purpose as in Matt. x. 24, but on another
occasion (xv. 20). We infer that it was one of Christ's frequent sayings :
it is introduced here with the double 'verily' as of special importance
(i- 5i).
he that is sent] An Apostle (apostolos).
17. happy are ye if ye do them] Better, blessed are ye, &c. It is
the same Greek word as is used in xx. 29 and in the Beatitudes both in
S. Matthew and in S. Luke. Comp. Luke xi. 28, xii. 43 ; Matt. vii.
2i; Rev. i. 3.

266 S. JOHN, XIII. [v. 19.
not of you all : I know whom I have chosen : but that the
scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with
19 me hath lift up his heel against me. Now I tell you
before it come, that, when it is come to pass, ye may
18. / speak not of you all] There is one who knows these things,
and does not do them, and is the very reverse of blessed.
/ know whom I have chosen) The first ' I ' is emphatic : ' / know the
character of the Twelve whom I chose ; the treachery of one has been
foretold; it is no surprise to Me.' Comp. vi. 70.
but that] This elliptical use of 'but that' ( = 'but this was done in
order that') is frequent in S. John: i. 8, ix. 3, xiv. 31, xv. 25; 1 John
ii. 19. Here another way of filling up the ellipsis is possible; 'But I
chose them in order that. '
may be fulfilled] See on xii. 38. The quotation is taken, but with
freedom, from the Hebrew of Ps. xii. 9 ; for 'lifted up his heel' both the
Hebrew and the LXX. have 'magnified his heel.' (See on vi. 45.) The
metaphor here is of one raising his foot before kicking, but the blow is
not yet given. This was the attitude of Judas at this moment. It has
been remarked that Christ omits the words ' Mine own familiar friend
whom I trusted:' He had not trusted Judas j and had not been de
ceived, as the Psalmist had been : 'He knew what was in man ' (ii.
25)- He that eateth bread with me] Or, He that eateth the bread with Me.
The more probable reading gives, My bread for 'the bread with Me.'
The variations from the LXX. are remarkable. (1) The word for 'eat'
is changed from the common verb (^<r0I«)used in Ps. xii. 10 to the much
less common verb (rpuya) used of eating Christ's Flesh and the Bread
from Heaven (vi. 54, 56, 57, 58, where see notes), and nowhere else in
the N. T., excepting Matt. xxiv. 38. (2) 'Bread or 'loaves' (aprovi)
has been altered to 'the bread' (rbv aprov). (3) 'My' has possibly been
strengthened to 'with Me:' to eat bread with a man is more than to eat
his bread, which a servant might do. These changes can scarcely be
accidental, and seem to point to the fact that the treachery of Judas in
violating the bond of hospitality, so universally held sacred in the East,
was aggravated by his having partaken of the Eucharist. That Judas
did partake of the Eucharist seems to follow from Luke xxii. 19 — 21,
but the point is one about which there is much controversy.
S. John omits the institution of the Eucharist for the same reason that
he omits so much, — because it was so well known to every instructed
Christian ; and for such he writes.
19. Now] Better, as the margin, From henceforth (comp. i. 51,
xiv. 7; Rev. xiv. 13). Hitherto Christ had been reserved about the
presence of a traitor ; to point him out would have been to make him
desperate and deprive him of a chance of recovery. But every good
influence has failed, even the Eucharist and the washing of his feet;
and. from this time onward Christ tells the other Apostles.
before it come] Add to pass, as in the next clause. Comp. xiv. 29.

w. 20—23.] S. JOHN, XIII. 267
believe that I am he. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He *>
that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he
that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.
21 — 30. The self-excommunication ofthe traitor.
When Jesus had thus said, he was troubled in spirit, and 21
testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one
of you shall betray me. Then the disciples looked one on 22
another, doubting of whom he spake. Now there was 23
leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus
The success of such treachery might have shaken their faith had it taken
them unawares : by foretelling it He turns it into an aid to faith.
may believe that I am he] See on viii. 24, 28, 58.
20. He that receiveth, &c] The connexion of this saying, solemnly
introduced with the double 'verily,' with what precedes is not easy to
determine. The saying is one with which Christ had sent forth the
Apostles in the first instance (Matt. a. 40). It is recalled at the moment
when one of them is being denounced for treachery. It was natural
that such an end to such a mission should send Christ's thoughts back
to the beginning of it. Moreover He would warn them all from sup
posing that such a catastrophe either cancelled the mission or proved it
to be worthless from the first. Of every one of them, even of Judas
himself, the saying still held good, 'he that receiveth whomsoever I
send, receiveth Me.' The unworthiness of the minister cannot annul the
commission. 21—30. The self-excommunication of the traitor.
21. he was troubled in spirit] Once more the reality of Christ's
human nature is brought before us (comp. xi. 33, 35, 38, xii. 27) ; but
quite incidentally and without special point. It is the artless story of
one who tells what he saw because he saw it and remembers it. The
life-like details which follow are almost irresistible evidences of truth
fulness. 22. looked one on another] 'Began to enquire among themselves'
(Luke xxii. 23). The other two Evangehsts say that all began to say to
Him 'Is it I?' They neither doubt the statement, nor ask 'Is it he?'
Each thinks it is as credible of himself as of any of the others. Judas
asks, either to dissemble, or to see whether he really was known (Matt.
xxvi. 25).
23. there was leaning on Jesus' bosom] Better, there was reclining
on Jesus' lap. It is important to mark the distinction between this and
the words rendered 'lying on Jesus' breast' in v. 25. The Jews had
adopted the Persian, Greek, and Roman custom of reclining at meals,
and had long since exchanged the original practice of standing at the
Passover first for sitting and then for reclining. They reclined on the
left arm and ate with the right. This is the posture of the beloved

268 S. JOHN, XIII. [vv. 24-26.
=4 loved. Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he
25 should ask who it should be of whom he spake. He then
lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?
26 Jesus answered, He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when
I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he
disciple indicated here, which continued throughout the meal : in v. 25
we have a momentary change of posture.
whom Jesus loved) This explains how S. John came to be nearest
(see Introduction II. iii. 3 b), and "out of the recollection of that sacred,
never-to-be-forgotten moment, there breaks from him for the first time
this nameless, yet so expressive designation of himself" (Meyer). Comp.
xix. 26, xxi. 7, 20; not xx. 2. S. John was on our Lord's right. Who
was next to Him on the left? Some think Judas, who must have
been very close for Christ to answer him without the others hearing.
24. that he should ask. ..spake] The better reading gives, and saith
to him, Say who it is of whom He speaketh. S. Peter thinks that the
beloved disciple is sure to know. The received reading, besides being
wanting in authority, contains an optative mood, which S. John never
uses. 25. lying on Jesus' breast] Our version does well in using different
words from those used in v. 23, but the distinction used is inadequate.
Moreover the same preposition, ' on,' is used in both cases ; in the Greek
the prepositions differ also. In v. 23 we have the permanent posture;
here a change, the same verb being used as in v. 12 (see note). The
meaning is leaning back on to Jesus' breast. Comp. xxi. 20, where
our translators give a similarly inadequate rendering. "This is among
the most striking of those vivid descriptive traits which distinguish the
narrative of the Fourth Gospel generally, and which are especially re
markable in these last scenes of Jesus' life, where the beloved disciple
was himself an eye-witness and an actor. It is therefore to be regretted
that these fine touches of the picture should be blurred in our English
Bibles." Lightfoot, On Revision, p. 73.
Some good MSS. insert 'thus' before 'on to Jesus' breast' (comp. iv.
6). 26. to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it] The text
here is uncertain, but there is no doubt as to the meaning. Perhaps the
better reading is, for whom I shall dip the morsel and give it to him.
Copyists have possibly tried to correct the awkwardness of 'for
whom' and 'to him.' In any case 'sop' or 'morsel' must have the
article. The Greek word is derived from 'rub' or 'break,' and means
'a piece broken off:' it is still the common word in Greece for 'bread.'
To give such a morsel at a meal was an ordinary mark of goodwill,
somewhat analogous to taking wine with a person in modern times.
Christ, therefore, as a forlorn hope, gives the traitor one more mark of
affection before dismissing him. It is the last such mark: 'Friend,
wherefore art thou come?' (Matt. xxvi. 50) should rather be 'Comrade,
(do that) for which thou art come,' and is a sorrowful rebuke rather than

w.27— 30.] S. JOHN, XIII. 269
gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon. And after the 27
sop Satan entered into him. Then said Jesus unto him,
That thou doest, do quickly. Now no man at the table 28
knew for what intent he spake this unto him. For some of 29
them thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus had
said unto him, Buy those things that we have need of against
the feast; or that he should give something to the poor.
He then having received the sop went immediately out : 30
and it was night
an affectionate greeting. Whether the morsel was a piece of the un
leavened bread dipped in the broth of bitter herbs depends upon whether
this supper is regarded as the Paschal meal or not.
And when, &c] The true reading is, Therefore, when He had dipped
the morsel He taketh and giveth it. The name of Judas is once more
given with solemn fulness as in vi. 71, Judas the son of Simon Iscariot.
Comp. v. 2.
27. Satan entered into him] Literally, at that moment Satan
entered into him. At first Satan made suggestions to him (v. 2) and
Judas listened to them; now Satan takes full possession of him.- Desire
had conceived and brought forth sin, and the sin full grown had en
gendered death (James i. 15). Satan is mentioned here only in S.
John. Then said] Once more we must substitute therefore for 'then.'
Jesus knew that Satan had claimed his own, and therefore bad him do
his work.
do quickly] Literally, do more quickly; carry it out at once, even
sooner than has been planned. Now that the winning back of Judas
has become hopeless, delay was worse than useless : it merely kept Him
from His hour of victory. Comp. Matt, xxiii. 32.
28. no man... knew) Even S. John, who now knew that Judas was the
traitor, did not know that he would act at once, and that it was to this
Jesus alluded.
29. For some of them] Shewing that they could not have under
stood. had the bag] See on xii. 6.
against the feast] This agrees with v. 1, that this meal precedes the
Passover. to the poor] Comp. xii. 5; Neh. viii. 10, 12; Gal. ii. 10.
30. He then having received the sop) Better, He therefore having
received the morsel. The pronoun here and in v. 27 (ekeinos) indicates
that Judas is an alien. Comp. vii. n, ix. 12, 28. The last two verses
are a parenthetical remark of the Evangelist; he now returns to the
narrative, repeating with solemnity the incident which formed the last
crisis in the career of Judas.
went immediately out] This is no evidence as to the meal not being
a Paschal one. The rule that 'none should go out at the door of his

270 S. JOHN, XIII. [vv. 31, 32.
XIII. 31 — XV. 27. Christ's Love in keeping His own.
31 Therefore, when he was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the
32 Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him. If God
house until the morning' (Exod. xii. 22) had, like standing at the Pass
over, long since been abrogated. " When Satan entered into him, he
went out from the presence of Christ, as Cain went out from the presence
of the Lord."
and it was night] The tragic brevity of this has often been remarked,
and will never cease to lay hold of the imagination. It can scarcely
be meant merely to tell us that at the time when Judas went out night
had begun. In the Gospel in which the Messiah so often appears as
the Light of the World (i. 4 — 9, iii. 19 — 21, viii. 12, ix. 5, xii. 35, 36,
46), and in which darkness almost invariably means moral darkness (i.
5, viii. 12, xii. 35, 46) a use peculiar to S. John (1 John i. 5, ii. 8, 9,
11), — we shall hardly be wrong in understanding also that Judas went
forth from the Light of the World into the night in which a man cannot
but stumble 'because there is no light in him' (xi. 10). Thus also
Christ Himself said some two hours later, ' This is your hour, and the
power of darkness' (Luke xxii. 53). For other remarks of telling brevity
and abruptness comp. 'Jesus wept' (xi. 35); 'He saith to them, I am
He' (xviii. 5); 'Now Barabbas was a robber' (xviii. 40).
These remarks shew the impropriety of joining this sentence to the
next verse; 'and it was night, therefore, when he had gone out;' a
combination which is clumsy in itself and quite spoils the effect.
XIII. 31 — XV. 27. Christ's Love in keeping His own.
31 — 35. Jesus, freed from the oppressive presence of the traitor,
bursts out into a declaration that the glorification of the Son of Man has
begun. Judas is already beginning that series of events which will
end in sending Him away from them to the Father ; therefore they
must continue on earth the kingdom which He has begun — the reign of
Love. This section forms the first portion of those parting words of heavenly
meaning which were spoken to the faithful eleven in the last moments
before His Passion. At first the discourse takes the form of dialogue,
which lasts almost to the end of chap. xiv. Then they rise from the
table, and the words of Christ become more sustained, while the
disciples remain silent with the exception of xvi. 17, 18, 29, 30. Then
follows Christ's prayer, after which they go forth to the garden of Geth
semane (xviii. 1).
31. Therefore, when he was gone out] Indicating that the presence
of Judas had acted as a constraint, but also that he had gone of his own
will : there was no casting out ofthe faithless disciple (ix. 34).
Now] With solemn exultation : the beginning of the end has come.
the Son of man] See on i. 51.
glorified) In finishing the work which the Father gave Him to do
(xvii. 4) ; and thus God is glorified in Him.

w. 33. 34-] S. JOHN, XIII. 271
be glorified in him, God shall also glorify him in himself,
and shall straightway glorify him. Little children, yet a 33
little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me : and as I
said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come ; so now
I say to you. A new commandment I give unto you, That 34
ye love one another ; as I have loved you, that ye also love
32. If God be glorified in him] These words are omitted in the best
MSS., and though they might easily be left out accidentally owing to
the repetition, yet they spoil the balance and rhythm ofthe clauses.
God shall also glorify him] Better, And God shall glorify Him.
This refers to the heavenly glory which He had with the Father before
the world was. Hence the future tense : the glory of completing the
work of redemption has already begun ; that of departing to the Father
as the Son of Man and returning to the Father as the Son of God will
straightway follow.
in himself) i.e. in God : as God is glorified in the Messianic work of
the Son, so the Son shall be glorified in the eternal blessedness ,of the
Father. Comp. xvii. 4, 5 ; Phil. ii. 9. — Between this verse and the next
some would insert the institution ofthe Eucharist.
33. Little children] Nowhere else in trie Gospels does Christ use
this expression of tender affection (teknia), which springs from the
thought of His orphaned disciples. S. John appears never to have for
gotten it. It occurs frequently in his First Epistle (ii. 1, 12, 28, iii. 7,
18, iv. 4, v. 21), and perhaps nowhere else in the N.T. In Gal. iv. 19
the reading is doubtful. 'Children' in xxi. 5 is a different word
(paidid). a little while] See on vii. 33, 34, viii. 21.
Ye shall seek me] Christ does not add, as He did to the Jews, 'and
shall not find Me,' still less, 'ye shall die in your sin.' Rather, 'ye
shall seek Me: and though ye cannot come whither I go, yet ye shall
find Me by continuing to be My disciples and loving one another.' The
expression 'the Jews' is rare in Christ's discourses; comp. iv. 22, xviii.
20, 36.
34. . A new commandment] The commandment to love was not new,
for 'thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyseljf' (Lev. xix. 18) was part
ofthe Mosaic Law. But the motive is new; to love our neighbour be
cause Christ has loved us. We have only to read the 'most excellent
way' of love set forth in 1 Cor. xiii., and compare it with the measured
benevolence of the Pentateuch, to see how new the commandment
had become by having this motive added. There are two words for
'new' in Greek; one looks forward, 'young,'as opposed to 'aged;' the
other looks back, 'fresh,' as opposed to 'worn out.' It is the latter
that is used here and in xix. 41. Both are used in Matt. ix. 17, but our
version ignores the difference — ' They put new wine into fresh wine
skins.' The phrase 'to give a commandment' is peculiar to S. John;
comp. xii. 49 ; 1 John iii. 23.
as I have loved you] These words are rightly placed in the second

272 S. JOHN, XIII. [w. 35—38.
35 one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my
disciples, if ye have love one to another.
36 Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou?
Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow
37 me now ; but thou shalt follow me afterwards. Peter said
unto him, Lord, why cannot I follow thee now ? I will lay
38 down my life for thy sake. Jesus answered him, Wilt thou
lay down thy life for my sake ? Verily, verily, I .say unto

half of the verse. They do not mean 'love one another in the same way
as I have loved you ; ' but they give the reason for the fresh command
ment — 'even as I have loved you.' S. John states the same principle
in the First Epistle (iv. 11) 'If God so loved us, we ought also to
love one another.' Comp. xv. 13.
35. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples] This is the
true ' Note of the Church ; ' not miracles, not formularies, not numbers,
but love. " The working of such love puts a brand upon us ; for see,
say the heathen, how they love another," Tertullian, Apol. XXXIX.
Comp. 1 John iii. 10, 14. 'My disciples' is literally, disciples to Me.
36. Lord, whither goest thou?] The affectionate Apostle is absorbed
by the declaration ' Whither I go, ye cannot come,' and he lets all the
rest pass. His Master is going away out of his reach ; he must know
the meaning of that.
thou shalt follow me afterwards] Alluding probably not merely to
the Apostle's death, but also to the manner of it: comp. xxi. 18, 19.
But his hour has not yet come; he has a great mission to fulfil first
(Matt. xvi. 18). The beautiful story of the Domine, quo vadis? should
be remembered in connexion with this verse. See Introduction to the
Epistles of S. Peter, p. 56.
37. / will lay down my life] St Peter seems to see that Christ's
going away means death. With his usual impulsiveness (see on v. 9) he
declares that he is ready to follow at once even thither. He mistakes
strong feeling for moral strength. On the phrase ' lay down my life '
see last note on x. n.
38. / say unto thee] In the parallel passage in S. Luke (xxii. 34)
Christ for the first and only time addresses the Apostle by the name
which He had given him, — 'I tell thee, Peter;' as if He would remind
him that the rock-like strength of character was not his own to boast of,
but must be found in humble reliance on the Giver.
S. Luke agrees with S. John in placing the prediction of the triple
denial in the supper-room : St Matt. (xxvi. 30 — 35) and S. Mark (xiv.
26 — 30) place it on the way from the room to Gethsemane. It is possi
ble but not probable that the prediction was repeated; though some
would even make three predictions recorded by (1) S. Luke, (2) S. John,
(3) S. Matt, and S. Mark. See introductory note to Chapter xii. and
Appendix B,

v. I.] S. JOHN, XIII. XIV. 273
thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me
thrice. Chap. XIV. Christ's love in keeping His own (continued).
Let not your heart be troubled : ye believe in God, 14
thrice] All four accounts agree in this. S. Mark adds two details:
(1) that the cock should crow twice, (2) that the prediction so far from
checking S. Peter made him speak only the more vehemently, a par
ticular which S. Peter's Gospel more naturally contains than the other
three. S. Matthew and S. Mark both add that all the disciples joined
in S. Peter's protestations.
It has been objected that fowls were not allowed in the Holy City.
The statement is wanting in authority, and of course the Romans would
pay no attention to any such rule, even if it existed among the Jews.
Chap. XIV.
" We come now to the last great discourse (xiv. — xvii.), which con
stitutes a striking and peculiar element in the Fourth Gospel  we
cannot but recognise a change from the compact lucid addresses and
exposition of the Synoptists  This appears not so much in single
verses as when we look at the discourse as a whole. In all the Synop
tic Gospels, imperfectly as they are put together, there is not a single
discourse that could be called involved in structure, and yet I do not see
how it is possible to refuse this epithet to the discourse before us as
given by S. John. The different subjects are not kept apart, but are
continually crossing and entangling one another. The later subjects are
anticipated in the course of the earlier ; the earlier return in the later."
Comp.. the spiral movement noticed in the Prologue, i. 1 8.
"For instance, the description of the functions ofthe Paraclete is
broken up  into five fragments (xiv. 16, 17; 25, 26; xv. 26 ; xvi. 8 —
JSj 23 — 2S)  The relation ofthe Church and the world is intersected
just in the same way (xiv. 22 — 24, xv. 18 — 25, xvi. 1 — 3), besides scat
tered references in single verses  We may consider the discourse
perhaps under these heads: (1) the departure and the return, (2) the
Paraclete, (3) the vine and its branches, (4) the disciples and the world."
S. pp. 221 — 232. On the discourses in this Gospel generally see the
introductory note to chapter iii.
Chap. XIV. Christ's love in keeping His own (continued).
1. Let not your heart be troubled] There had been much to cause •
anxiety and alarm ; the denouncing of the traitor, the declaration of
Christ's approaching departure, the prediction of S. Peter's denial. The
last as being nearest might seem to be specially indicated ; but what
follows shews that ' let not your heart be troubled ' refers primarily to
' whither I go, ye cannot come ' (xiii. 33).
ye believe in God, believe also] The Greek for 'ye believe ' and '.be
lieve ' is the same, and there is nothing to indicate that one is indicative
S.JOHN j. 8

274 S. JOHN, XIV. [vv. 2— 4.
> believe also in me. In my Father's house are many man
sions : if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to
3 prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place
for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself;
4 that where I am, there ye may be also. And whither I go

and the other imperative. Both may be indicative ; but probably both
are imperative : believe in God, and believe in Me ; or perhaps, trust iri
God, and trust in Me. It implies the belief which moves towards and
reposes on its object (see last note on i. 12). In any case a genuine
belief in God leads to a belief in His Son.
2. In my Father's house] Heaven. Comp. ' The Lord's throne is
in heaven,' Ps. xi. 4 ; 'Our Father, Which art in heaven ' (Matt. vi. 9),
&c. are many mansions] Nothing is said about mansions differing in
dignity and beauty. There may be degrees of happiness hereafter, but
such are neither expressed nor implied here. What is said is that there
are ' many mansions ;' there is room enough for all. The word for
' mansions,' common in classical Greek, occurs in the N. T. 9nly here
and v. 23. It is a substantive from the verb of which S. John is so fond,
'to abide, dwell, remain' (see note on i. 33), which occurs vv. 10, 16, 17,
25, and twelve times in the next chapter. This substantive, therefore,
means 'an abode, dwelling, place to remain in.' 'Mansion,' Scotch
' manse,' and French 'maison,' are all from the Latin form of the same
root. if it were not so, I would have told you] The Greek may have more
than one meaning, but our version is best. Christ appeals to His fair
ness : would He have invited them to a place in which there was not
room for all ? Others connect this with the next verse ; ' should I have
said to you, I go to prepare a place for you ? ' or, 'I would have said to
you, I go, &c. ' The latter cannot be right. Christ had already said,
and says again, that He is going to shew them the way and to prepare
for them (xiii. 36, xiv. 3).
I go to prepare] We must insert ' for ' on overwhelming authority;
' for Igo to prepare.' This proves that there will be room for all.
3. And if I go] The 'if does not here imply doubt any more than
' when ' would have done : but we have ' if ' and not ' when ' because it
is the result of the departure and not the date of it that is emphasized
(see on xii. 32).
/ will come again, and receive] Literally, /am coming again and
I will receive (see on i. n and xix. 16). There is no doubt about the
meaning of the going away ; but the coming again may have various
meanings, and apparently not always the same one throughout this dis
course ; either the Resurrection, or the gift of the Paraclete, or the
death of individuals, or the presence of Christ in his Church, or the
Second Advent at the last day. The last seems to be the meaning here
(comp. vi. 39, 40).

w. 5— 7-] S. JOHN, XIV. 275
ye know, and the way ye know. Thomas saith unto him, 5
Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we
know the way ? Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the 6
truth, and the life : no man cometh unto the Father, but by
me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my 7
4. whither I go ye know, and the way ye know] The true text seems
once more to have been altered to avoid awkwardness of expression (see
on xiii. 26). Here we should read, Whither I go, ye know the way.
This is half a rebuke, implying that they ought to know more than
they did know : they had heard but had not heeded (x. 7, 9, xi. 25).
Thus we say ' you know, you see, ' meaning 'you might know, you might
see, if you would but take the trouble.'
5. Thomas] Nothing is to be inferred from the omission of ' Didy
mus' here (comp. xi. 16, xx. 24, xxi. 2). For his character see on xi. 16.
His question here has a melancholy tone combined with some dulness
of apprehension. But there is honesty of purpose in it. He owns his
ignorance and asks for explanation. This great home with many abodes,
is it the royal city of the conquering Messiah, who is to restore the king
dom to Israel (see on Acts i. 6) ; and will not that be Jerusalem ? How
then can He go away ?
and how can we know] The true reading is, How know we.
6. / am the way] The pronoun is emphatic ; I and no other : Ego sum
Via, Veritas, Vita. S. Thomas had wished rather to know about the
goal ; Christ shews that for him, and therefore for us, it is more important
to know the way. Hence the order ; although Christ is the Truth and
the Life before He is the Way. The Word is the Truth and the Life
from all eternity with the Father : He becomes the Way for us by
taking our nature. He is the Way to the many abodes in His Father's
home, the Way to the Father Himself; and that by His doctrine and
example, by His Death and Resurrection. In harmony with this
passage ' the Way ' soon became a recognised name for Christianity ;
Acts ix. 2, xix. 9, 23, xxii. 4, xxiv. 22 (comp. xxiv. 14; 2 Pet. ii. 2).
But this is obscured in our version by the common inaccuracy 'this way'
or ' that way ' for 'theWay.' (See on i. 21, 25, vi. 48.)
the truth] Better, and the Truth, being from all eternity in the form
of God, Who cannot lie (Phil. ii. 6; Heb. vi. 18), and being the repre
sentative on earth of a Sender Who is true (viii. 26). To know the
Truth is also to know the Way to God, Who must be approached and
worshipped in truth (iv. 23). Comp. Heb. xi. 6 ; 1 John v. 20.
and the life] Comp. xi. 25. He is the Life, being one with the
living Father and being sent by Him (vi. 57, x. 30). See on i. 4,
vi. 50, 51, and comp. 1 John v. 12; Gal. ii. 20. Here again to know
the Life is to know the Way to God.
no man cometh unto the Father, but by me] Christ continues to insist
that the Way is of the first importance to know. ' Through Him we
have access unto the Father ' (Eph. ii. 18). Comp. Hebr. x. 19 — 22;
1 Pet. iii. 18.
7. If ye had known me] In the better MSS. we have here again
18—2

276 S. JOHN, XIV. [w. 8, 9.
Father also : and from henceforth ye know him, and have
8 seen him. Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father,
9 and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so
long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip?
two different words for 'know' (see on vii. 26, viii. 55, xiii. 7), and the
emphasis in the first clause is on 'known' in the second on 'Father.'
Beware ofthe common mistake of putting an emphasis on 'Me.' The
meaning is : 'If ye had recognised Me, ye would have known My
Father also.' The veil of Jewish prejudice was still on their hearts,
hiding from them the true meaning both of Messianic prophecy and of
the Messiah's acts.
from henceforth] The same expression as is mistranslated 'now'
in xiii. 19: it is to be understood literally, not proleptically.
ye know him] Or, recognise Him. From this time onwards, after
the plain declaration of Himself in v. 6, they begin to recognise the
Bather in Him. Philip's request leads to a fuller statement of v. 6.
8. Philip] For the fourth and last time S. Philip appears in this
Gospel (see notes on i. 44 — 49, vi. 5 — 7, xii. 22). Thrice he is mentioned
in close connexion with S. Andrew, who may have brought about his
being found by Christ ; twice he follows in the footsteps of S^ Andrew
in bringing others to Christ, and on both occasions it is specially to see
Him that they are brought; 'Come and see' (i. 45); 'We would see
Jesus' (xii. 21). Like S. Thomas he has a fondness for the practical test
of personal experience ; he would see for himself, and have others also
see for themselves. His way of stating the difficulty about the 5000
(vi. 7) is quite in harmony with this practical turn of mind. Like
S. Thomas also he seems to have been somewhat slow of apprehension,
and at the same time perfectly honest in expressing the cravings which
he felt. No fear of exposing himself keeps either Apostle back.
Lord, shew us the Father) He is struck by Christ's last words, 'Ye
have seen the Father,' and cannot find that they are true of himself.
It is what he has been longing for in vain ; it is the one thing wanting.
He has heard the voice of the Father from Heaven, and it has awak
ened a hunger in his heart. Christ has been speaking .of the Father's
home with its many abodes to which He is going; and Philip longs to
see for himself. And when Christ tells him that he has seen, he unre
servedly opens his mind : ' Only make that saying good, and it is
enough. ' He sees nothing impossible in this. There were the theo
phanies, which had accompanied the giving of the Law by Moses.
And a greater than Moses was here — "that Prophet whom Moses had
foretold. He looked, like all the Jews of his time, to see the wonders
of the old dispensation repeated. Hence his question." S. p. 225.
9. so long time] Philip had been called among the first (i. 43).
hast thou not known me) Or, hast not recognised Me, as in v. 7.
The Gospels are full of evidence of how little the Apostles understood
of the life which they were allowed to share: and the candour with
which this is confessed confirms our trust in the narratives. Not until

vv. 10-12.] S. JOHN, XIV. 277
he that hath seen me hath seen the Father ; and how sayest
thou then, Shew us the Father? Believest thou not that :
I am in the Father, and the Father in me ? the words that
I speak unto you, I speak not of myself: but the Father
that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that :
I am in the Father, and the Father in me : or else believe
me for the very works' sake. Verily, verily, I say unto you, ;
He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do
Pentecost were their minds fully enlightened. Comp. x. 6, xii. 16;
Matt. xv. 16, xvi. 8; Mark. ix. 32; Luke ix. 45, xviii. 34, xxiv. 25;
Acts i. 6; Hebr. v. 12. Christ's question is asked in sorrowful but
affectionate surprise ; hence the tender repetition of the name. Had
S. Philip recognised Christ, he would have seen the revelation of God
in Him, and would never have asked for a vision of God such as was
granted to Moses. See notes on xii. 44, 45. There is no reference to
the Transfiguration, of which S. Philip had not yet been told; Matt.
xvii. 9.
and how sayest thou then] The 'and' is of doubtful authority;
'then' is an insertion of our translators.
10. Believest thou not] S. Philip's question seemed to imply that he
did not believe this truth, although Christ had taught it publicly (x. 38).
What follows is stated in an argumentative form. 'That the Father is
in Me is proved by the fact that My words do not originate with My
self; and this is proved by the fact that My works do not originate with
Myself, but are really His.' No proof is given of this last statement :
Christ's works speak for themselves; they are manifestly Divine. It
matters little whether we regard the argument as a fortiori, the works
being stronger evidence than the words; or as inclusive, the works
covering and containing the words. The latter seems to agree best
with viii. 28. On the whole statement that Christ's words and works
are not His own but the Father's, comp. v. 19, 30, viii. 26 — 29,
xii. 44.
the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works] The better read
ing gives us, the Father abiding in Me doeth His works (in Me).
And thus the saying ' Ye have seen the Father' (v. 7) is justified: the
Father is seen in the Son.
11. Believe me] The English obliterates the fact that Christ now
turns from S. Philip and addresses all the eleven : 'believe' is plural not
singular. 'You have been with Me long enough to believe what I say;
but if not, at any rate believe what I do. My words need no creden
tials : but if credentials are demanded, there are My works.' He had
said the same, somewhat more severely, to the Jews (x. 37, 38); and
he repeats it much more severely in reference to the Jews (xv. 22, 24).
Note the progress from ' believe Me ' here to ' believe on Me ' in the
next verse ; the one grows out of the other.
12. Verily, verily] See notes on i. 5 1.
the works that I do shall he do also] j. e. like Me, he shall dp the

278 S. JOHN, XIV. [w. 13—16.
also ; and greater works than these shall he do ; because I
13 go unto my Father. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my
name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the
r4 Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.
i| If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will
works of the Father, the Father dwelling in Him through the Son
(v. 23).
and greater works than these] There is no reference to healing by
means of S. Peter's shadow (Acts v. 15) or of handkerchiefs that had
touched S. Paul (Acts xix. 12). Even from a human point of view no
miracle wrought by an Apostle is greater than the raising of Lazarus.
But from a spiritual point of view no such comparisons are admissible ;
'to Omnipotence all works are alike. These 'greater works' refer
rather to the results of Pentecost ; the victory over Judaism and
Paganism, two powers which for the moment were victorious over
Christ (Luke xxii. 53). Christ's work was confined to Palestine and
had but small success ; the Apostles went everywhere, and converted
thousands. because I go unto my Father] For ' My' read 'the' with all the best
MSS. The reason is twofold: (1) He will have left the earth and be
unable to continue these works ; therefore believers must continue them
for Him ; (2) He will be in heaven ready to help both directly and by
intercession ; therefore believers will be able to continue these works
and surpass them.
It is doubtful whether there should be a comma or a full stop at the
end of this verse. Perhaps our punctuation is better; but to make
the 'because' run on into the next verse makes little difference to the
sense. 13. whatsoever ye shall ask in my name] Comp. xv. 16, xvi. 23,
24, 26. Anything that can rightly be asked in His name will be
granted; there is no other limit. By 'in My name' is not of course
meant the mere using the formula 'through Jesus Christ.' Rather, it
means praying and working as Christ's representatives in the same
spirit in which Christ prayed and worked, — 'Not My will, but Thine
be done.' Prayers for other ends than this are excluded; not that it is
said that they will not be granted, but there is no promise that they
will. Comp. 2 Cor. xii. 8, 9.
that the Father may be glorified] See notes on xi. 4, xii. 28, xiii. 31.
14. / will do it] ' I ' is emphatic. In both verses the prayer is
regarded as addressed to the Father, but granted by the Son, who is
one with the Father. But the most ancient authorities here add 'Me;'
if ye shall ask Me anything. In xv. 16 and xvi. 23 with equal truth
the Father grants the prayer; but in xv. 16 the Greek may mean either
' He may give' or ' I may give.'
15. If ye love me] The connexion with what precedes is again not
quite clear. Some would see it in the condition 'in My name,' which
includes willing obedience to His commands- Perhaps it is rather to

v. 16.] S. JOHN, XIV. 279
pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter,
be referred to the opening and general drift of the chapter. ' Let not
your heart be troubled at My going away. You will still be Mine, I
shall still be yours, and we shall still be caring for one another. I go
to prepare a place for you, you remain to continue and surpass My
work on earth. And though you can no longer minister to Me in the
flesh, you can prove your love for Me even more perfectly by keeping
My commandments when I am gone.' 'My' is emphatic; not those of
the Law but of the Gospel.
keep] The better reading is ye will keep. Only in these last dis
courses does Christ speak of His commandments: comp. v. 21, xiii. 34,
xv. 10, 12. See on v. 27.
16. And I will pray the Father] 'I' is emphatic: 'you do your
part on earth, and I will do mine in Heaven.' Our translators have
once more rightly made a distinction but an inadequate one (see on
xiii. 23, 25). The word for ' pray' here is different from that for 'ask'
mi. 13, 14; but ofthe two the one rendered 'pray' (erStdn) is (so far
as there is a distinction) the less suppliant. It is the word always
used by S. John when Christ speaks of His prayers to the Father (xvi.
26, xvii. 9, 15, 20); never the word rendered 'ask' (ostein), which
however Martha, less careful than the Evangelist, uses of Christ's prayers
(xi. 22). But the distinction must not be pressed as if aitein were
always used of inferiors (against which Deut. x. 12; Acts xvi. 29;
1 Pet. iii. 15 are conclusive), or erdtdn always of equals (against which
Mark vii. 26; Luke iv. 38, vii. 3; John iv. 40, 47; Acts iii. 3 are
equally conclusive), although the tendency is in that direction. In
1 John v. 16 both words are used. In classical Greek erdtdn is never
'to make a request,' but always (as in i. 19, 21, 25, ix. 2, 15, 19, 21,
23, &c.) 'to ask a question.' (See on xvi. 23.)
another Comforter] Better, another Advocate. The Greek word,
Paraclete (HapdK\i]Tos) is employed five times in the N. T. — four times
in this Gospel by Christ of the Holy Spirit (xiv. 16, 26, xv. 26, xvi. 7),
once in the First-Epistle by S. John of Christ (ii. 1). Our translators
render it 'Comforter' in the Gospel, and 'Advocate' in the Epistle.
As to the meaning of the word, usage appears to be decisive. It com
monly signifies 'one who is summoned to the side "of another' to aid
him in a court of justice, especially the ' counsel for the defence.' It is
passive, not active; 'one who is summoned to plead a cause,' not
' one who exhorts, or encourages, or comforts.' A comparison of the
simple word (kXijtos = 'called;' Matt. xx. 16, xxii. 14 ; Rom. i. 1, 6, 7;
1 Cor. i. 1,2, &c. ) and the other compounds, of which only one occurs
in the N.T. (dcey)tXip-os=' unaccused;' 1 Cor. i. 8; Col. i. 22, &c), or
a reference to the general rule about adjectives similarly formed from
transitive verbs, will shew that ' Paraclete ' must have a passive sense.
The rendering ' Comforter ' has arisen from giving the word an active
sense, which it cannot have. Moreover, 'Advocate ' is the sense which
the context suggests, wherever the word is used in the Gospel: the
idea of pleading, arguing, convincing, instructing, is prominent in every

28o S. JOHN, XIV. [vv. 17, 18.
17 that he may abide with you for ever ; Even the Spirit of
truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth
him not, neither knoweth him : but ye know him ; for he
18 dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave
instance. Here the Paraclete is the ' Spirit oi truth,' whose reasonings
fall dead on the ear of the world, and are taken in only by the faithful.
In v. 26 He is to teach and remind them. In xv. 26 He is to bear
witness to Christ. In xvi. 7 — n He is to convince or convict the*
world. In short, He is represented as the Advocate, the Counsel, who
suggests true reasonings to our minds and true courses for our lives,
convicts our adversary the world of wrong, and pleads our cause before
God our Father. In the Te Deum the Holy Spirit is rightly called 'the
Comforter,' but that is not the function which is set forth here. To
substitute ' Advocate ' will not only bring out the right meaning in the
Gospel, but will bring the language of the Gospel into its true relation
to the language of the Epistle. ' He will give you another Advocate '
acquires fresh meaning when we remember that S. John calls Christ
our 'Advocate :' the Advocacy of Christ and the Advocacy of the Spirit
mutually illustrating one another. At the same time an important co
incidence between the Gospel and Epistle is preserved, one ofthe many
which help to prove that both are by one and the same author, and
therefore that evidence of the genuineness of the Epistle is also evidence
of the genuineness of the Gospel. See Lightfoot, On Revision, pp. 50 —
56, from which nearly the whole of this note is taken.
It is worth noting that although S. Paul does not use the word
Paraclete, yet he has the doctrine : in Rom. viii. 27, 34 the same
language, 'maketh intercession for,' is used both of the Spirit and of
Christ. that he may abide with you for ever] Their present Advocate has
come to them and will leave them again ; this 'other Advocate' will
come and never leave them. And in Him, who is the Spirit of Christ
(Rom. viii. 9), Christ will be with them also (Matt, xxviii. 20).
17. the Spirit of truth] This expression confirms the rendering 'Ad
vocate. ' Truth is much more closely connected with the idea of advo
cating a cause than with that of comforting. Comp. xv. 26, xvi. 13;
1 John v. 6. The Paraclete is the Spirit of Truth as being the Bearer
of the Divine revelation, bringing truth home to the hearts of men.
In 1 John iv. 6 it is opposed to the 'spirit of error.' Comp. 1 Cor.
ii. 12.
the world] See notes on i. 9, 10.
it seeth him not] Because the Spirit and ' the things of the Spirit '
must be ' spiritually discerned ' (1 Cor. ii. 14). The world may have
intelligence, scientific investigation, criticism, learning ; but not by these
means is the Spirit of Truth contemplated and recognised ; rather by
humility, self-investigation, faith, and love.
for he dwelleth) Because He abideth : it is the same Greek word as
in the previous clause. Comp. v. 28.
and shall be in you] A reading of higher authority gives us, 'and is

w. 19—21.] S. JOHN, XIV. 281
you comfortless : I will come to you. Yet a little while, 19
and the world seeth me no more ; but ye see me : because
I live, ye shall live also. At that day ye shall know that 1 20
am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you. He that 21
hafh my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that
loveth me : and he that loveth me shall be loved of my
Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to

in you.' All the verbs are in the present tense. The Spirit was in the
Aposdes already, though not in the fulness of Pentecost.
Note throughout these two verses (16, 17) the definite personality of
the Spirit, distinct both from the Father Who gives Him and from the
Son Who promises Him. Note also the three prepositions (in vv. 16,
17): the Advocate is with us for fellowship (meta); He abides by our
side to defend us (para) ; He is in us as a source of power to each indi
vidually (en).
18. comfortless] Rather (with Wiclif) fatherless, as the word is
translated James i. 27, the only other place in the N. T. where it occurs;
or (with the margin) orphans, the very word used in the Greek. The
inaccurate rendering ' comfortless ' gives unreal support to the inaccu
rate rendering ' Comforter.' In the Greek there is no connexion
between orphans and Paraclete. We must connect this rather with
the tender address in xiii. 33 ; He will not leave His ' little children '
fatherless. I will come to you] Or, 7 am coming to you, in the Holy Spirit,
whom I will send. The context seems to shew clearly that Christ's
spiritual reunion with them through the Paraclete, and not His bodily
reunion with them either through the Resurrection or through the final
Return is intended.
19. a little while] Comp. xiii. 33, xvi. 16.
but ye see me] In the Paraclete, ever present with you.
because I live, ye shall live also] i.e. that higher and eternal life over
which death has no power either in Christ or His followers. Christ has
this life in Himself (v. 26) ; His followers derive it from Him (v. 21).
20. At that day] Comp. xvi. 23, 26. Pentecost, and thenceforth
to the end of the world. They will come to know, for experience will
teach them, that the presence of the Spirit is the presence of Christ, and
through Him of the Father.
ye in me, and I in you] Comp. xv. 4, 5, xvii. 21, 23; 1 John iii. 24,
iv. 13, 15, 16.
21. hath my commandments, and keepeth them] Bears them in his
mind and observes them in his life.
he it is] With great emphasis ; he and no one else.
¦will manifest myself to him] Once more willing obedience is set forth
as the road to spiritual enlightenment (see on vii. 17). The word for
' manifest ' is not S. John's favourite word (phaneroun) but one which
he uses only in these two verses (emphanizein).

282 S. JOHN, XIV. [w. 22, 23.
22 him. Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it
that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the
23 world ? Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love
me, he will keep my words : and my Father will love him,
and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

22. Judas] Excluding the genealogies of Christ we have six persons
of this name in the N. T.
1. This Judas, who was the son of a certain James (Luke vi. 16;
Acts i. 13) : he is commonly identified with Lebbaeus or Thaddaeus
(see on Matt. x. 3). 2. Judas Iscariot. 3. The brother of Jesus Christ,
and of James, Joses, and Simon (Matt. xiii. 55; Mark vi. 3). 4. Judas,
surnamed Barsabas (Acts xv. 22, 27, 32). 5. Judas of Galilee (Acts
v- 37)- *>. Judas of Damascus (Acts ix. n). Of these six the third
is probably the author of the Epistle ; so that this remark is the only
thing recorded in the N. T. of Judas the Apostle as distinct from the
other Apostles. Nor is anything really known of him from other
sources. how is it] Literally, What hath come to pass ; ' what has happened
to determine Thee ? '
manifest thyself] The word 'manifest' rouses S. Judas just as the
word 'see' roused S. Philip (v. 7). Both go wrong from the same cause,
inability to see the spiritual meaning of Christ's words, but they go
wrong in different ways. Philip wishes for a vision of the Father, a
Theophany, a suitable inauguration of the Messiah's kingdom. Judas
supposes with the rest of his countrymen that the manifestation of the
Messiah means a bodily appearance in glory before the whole world,
to judge the Gentiles and restore the kingdom to the Jews. Once more
we have the Jewish point of view given with convincing precision.
Comp. vii. 4.
23. Jesus answered] The answer is given, as so often in our
Lord's replies, not directly, but by repeating and developing the state
ment which elicited the question. Comp. iii. 5 — 8, iv. 14, vi. 44 — 51,
53 — 58, &c. The condition of receiving the revelation is loving obe
dience; those who have it not cannot receive it. This shews that
the revelation cannot be universal, cannot be shared by those who
hate and disobey (xv. 18).
my words] Rather, My word ; the Gospel in its entirety.
we will come) For the use of the plural comp. x. 30.
abode] See on v. 2. The thought of God dwelling among His peo
ple was familiar to every Jew (Ex. xxv. 8, xxix. 45 ; Zech. ii. 10; &p.).
This is a thought far beyond that, — God dwelling in the heart of the
individual ; and later Jewish philosophy had attained to this also. But
the united indwelling of the Fa-ther and the Son by means of the Spirit
is purely Christian.
In these two verses (23, 24) the changes 'words'  'sayings' 
'word' give a wrong impression: they should run — 'word '....'words'

w. 24— 27.] S. JOHN, XIV. 283
He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings : and the 24
word which you hear is not mine, but the Father's which
sent me.
These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present 25
with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, 26
whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you
all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, what-
soever I have said unto you. Peace I leave with you, my 27
...'word.' In the Greek we have the same substantive, twice n the
singular and once in the plural.
24. is not mine] To be understood literally : see on xii. 44.
25. being yet present] Better, while abiding; it is S.John's favourite
verb (see on i. 33). With this verse the discourse takes a fresh start
returning to the subject of the Paraclete. Perhaps there is a pause
after v. 24.
26. But the Comforter] Better, But the Advocate (see on v. 16).
¦which is the Holy Ghost] Even the Holy Spirit. The epithet
'holy ' is given to the Spirit thrice in this Gospel ; i. 33, xx. 22, and
here (in vii. 39 the ' holy' is very doubtful). It is not frequent in any
Gospel but the third ; five times in S. Matthew, four in S. Mark,
twelve in S. Luke. S. Luke seems fond of the expression, which he
uses about forty times in the Acts ; and he rarely speaks of the Spirit
without prefixing the 'holy.' Here only does S. John give the full
phrase, both substantive and epithet having the article: in i. 33 and
xx. 22 there is no article.
in my name] As My representative, taking My place and continuing
My work (see on v. 13). ' He shall not speak of Himself  He shall
receive of Mine and shew it unto you ' (xvi. 13, 14). The mission of
the Paraclete in reference to the glorified Redeemer, is analogous to the
mission of the Messiah in reference to the Father.
shall teach you all things] i. e. ' guide you into all the truth' (xvi. 13).
¦ He shall teach them the Divine truth in its fulness; all those things
which they 'cannot bear now,' and also ' things to come.'
bring all things to your remembrance] Not merely the words of
Christ, a particular in which this Gospel is a striking fulfilment of this
promise, but also the meaning of them, which the Apostles often failed
to see at the time : comp. ii. 22, xii. 16 ; Luke ix. 45, xviii. 34, xxiv. 8.
" It is on the fulfilment of this promise to the Apostles, that their suffi
ciency as Witnesses of all that the Lord did and taught, and conse
quently the authenticity ofthe Gospel narrative, is grounded " (Alford).
27. Peace I leave with you] "Finally the discourse returns to the
point from which it started. Its object had been to reassure the sor
rowful disciples against their Lord's departure, and with words of reas
surance and consolation it concludes. These are thrown into the form of
a leave-taking or farewell." S. p. 226. 'Peace I leave with you' is
probably a solemn adaptation of the conventional form of taking leave

284 S. JOHN, XIV. [w. 28, 29.

peace I give unto you : not as the world giveth, give I unto
you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be
28 afraid. Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away,
and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would
rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father
29 is greater than I. And now I have told you before it come
in the East : comp. ' Go in peace,' Judg. xviii. 6; 1 Sam. i. 17, xx. 42,
xxix. 7 ; 2 Kings v. 19 ; Mark 1. 34, &c. See notes on James ii. 16
and 1 Pet. v. 14. The Apostle of the Gentiles perhaps purposely
substitutes in his Epistles ' Grace be with you all ' for the traditional
Jewish ' Peace.'
my peace I give unto you) 'My ' is emphatic; this is no mere conven
tional wish. Comp. xvi. 33, xx. 19, 21, 26. The form of expression,
peace that is mine, is common in this Gospel. Comp. the joy that is
mine (iii. 29, xv. n, xvii. 13); the judgment that is mine (v. 30, viii.
16) ; the commandments that are mine (xiv. 15) ; the love that is mine
(xv. 10).
not as the world giveth] It seems best to understand ' as ' literally of
the world's manner of giving, not of its gifts, as if ' as ' were equivalent
to 'what.' The world gives from interested motives, because it has
received or hopes to receive as much again (Luke vi. 33, 34) ; it gives to
friends and withholds from enemies (Matt. v. 43) ; it gives what costs it
nothing or what it cannot keep, as in the case of legacies ; it pretends
to give that which is not its own, especially when it says 'Peace, peace,'
when there is no peace (Jer. vi. 14). The manner of Christ's giving is
the very opposite of this. He gives what is His own, what He might
have kept, what has cost Him a life of suffering and a cruel death to
bestow, what is open to friend and foe alike, who have nothing of their
own to give in return.
Let not your heart be troubled] See on v. 1 . Was He not right in
giving them this charge ? If He sends them another Advocate, through
whom both the Father and He will ever abide with them, if He leaves
them His peace, what room is there left for trouble and fear ?
The word for 'be afraid ' is frequent in the LXX. but occurs nowhere
else in the N. T. ' Be fearful ' is the literal meaning.
28. Ye have heard, &c] Literally, Ye heard that / said to you,
/am going away and I am coming unto you: comp. w. 1, 2, 18.
because I said, I go, &c] Omit ' I said,' which is wanting in all
the best authorities : If ye had loved Me, ye would have rejoiced that
I am going unto the Father. The construction is the same as in iv. 10,
xi. 21, 32, xiv. 28. Their affection is not free from selfishness: they
ought to rejoice at His gain rather than mourn over their own loss.
for my Father is greater than I] Because the Father is greater
than I. Therefore Christ's going to Him is gain. This was a favourite
text with the Arians, as implying the inferiority of the Son. There is a
real sense in which even in the Godhead the Son is subordinate to the
Father: this is involved in the Eternal Generation and in the Son's

vv.3o.3i-] S. JOHN, XIV. 285
to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.
Hereafter I will not talk much with you : for the prince of 3°
this world cometh, and hath nothing in me. But that the v
world may know that I love the Father ; and as the Father
gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go
hence. being the Agent by whom the Father works in the creation and preser
vation of all things. Again, there is the sense in which the ascended
and glorified Christ is ' inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.'
Lastly, there is the sense in which Jesus .on earth was inferior to His
Father in Heaven. Of the three this last meaning seems to suit the
context best, as shewing most clearly how His going to the Father
would be a gain, and that not only to Himself but to the Apostles ; for
at the right hand of the Father, who is greater than Himself, He will
have more power to advance His kingdom. See notes on 1 Cor. xv.
27, 28 ; Mark xiii. 32, [xvi. 19].
29. ye might believe) Better, ye may believe. The brevity of the
expression makes it ambiguous. It may mean either, ' ye may believe
that I am He' (as in xiii. 19), in which case 'I have told you' probably
refers to the sending ofthe Paraclete ; or, 'ye may believe Me ' (as in
v. n), in which case ' I have told you ' probably refers to Christ's going
to the Father. The former seems better.
30. Hereafter I will not talk much] Literally, No longer shall I
speak many things : comp. xv. 15.
the prince of this world cometh] Better, the ruler of the world is
coming. The powers of darkness are at work in Judas and his employ
ers. See on xii. 31.
and hath nothing in me) Quite literal : there is nothing in Jesus over
which Satan has control. ' Let no one think that My yielding to his
attack implies that he has power over Me. The yielding is voluntary
in loving obedience to the Father.' This declaration, in me he hath
nothing, could only be true if Jesus were sinless. On the import of
this confident appeal to His own sinlessness see notes on viii. 29, 46
and xv. 10.
31. But that] Once more we have an instance of S. John's ellipti
cal use of these words (see on xiii. 18), ' But (this is done, i. e. Satan
cometh) in order that, &c.' Some, however, would omit the full stop
at 'I do' and make 'that' depend upon 'Arise:' ' But that the world
may know that I love the Father, and that as the Father commanded
Me so I do, arise, let us go hence.' There is a want of solemnity, if not
a savour of ' theatrical effect, ' in this arrangement. Moreover it is less
in harmony with S. John's style, especially in these discourses. The
more simple construction is the more probable.
let us go hence] ' Let us go and meet the power before which I am
willing in accordance with God's will to fall.'
We are probably to understand that they rise from table and prepare
to depart, but that the contents of the next three chapters are spoken

286 S. JOHN, XV. [w. i, 2.
Chap. XV. i — n. The Union of the Disciples with Christ.
The Allegory of the Vine.
15 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away :
before they leave the room (comp. xviii. i). Others suppose that the
room is left now and that the next two chapters are discourses on the
way towards Gethsemane, chap. xvii. being spoken at some halting
place, possibly the Temple. See introductory note to chap. xvii.
Chap. XV.
The general subject still continues from xiii. 31 — Christ's love in
keeping His OWN. This is still further set forth in this chapter in
three main aspects : 1. Their union with Him, illustrated by the allegory
of the Vine (1 — 1 1) ; 2. Their union- with one another in Him (12 — 1 7);
3. The hatred of the world to both Him and them (18 — 25).
1 — 11. The Union of the Disciples with Christ.
The Allegory of the Vine.
The allegory of the Vine is similar in kind to that of the Door and of
the Good Shepherd in chap. x. (see introductory note there) : this sets
forth union from within, the other union from without.
1. I am the true vine] We have here the same word for ' true ' as
in i. 9, vi. 32 ; Rev. iii. 14. Christ is the true, the genuine, the ideal,
the perfect Vine, as He is the perfect Light, the perfect Bread, and the
perfect Witness (see on i. 9). "The material creations of God are only
inferior examples of that finer spiritual life and organism in which the
creature is raised up to partake of the Divine nature " (Alford). Whether
the allegory was suggested by anything external, — vineyards, or the vine
of the Temple visible in the moonlight, a vine creeping in at the win
dow, the ' fruit of the vine ' (Matt. xxvi. 29) on the table which they
had just left,— it is impossible to say. Of these the last is far the most
probable, as referring to the Eucharist just instituted as a special means
of union with Him and with one another. But the allegory may easily
have been chosen for its own merits and its O. T. associations (Ps. lxxx.
8—19; Is. v. 1 — 7; Jer. ii. 21; &c.) without any suggestion from with
out. The vine was a national emblem under the Maccabees and appears
on their coins.
the husbandman] The Owner of the soil Who tends His Vine
Himself and establishes the relation between the Vine and the branches.
There is therefore a good deal of difference between the form of this
allegory and the parable of the Vineyard (Mark xii. 1) or that of the
Fruitless Fig-tree (Luke xiii. 6). The word ' husbandman ' occurs no
where else in the Gospels except of the wicked husbandmen in the
parable of the Vineyard.
2. Every branch] The word for 'branch ' in these six verses occurs
here only in N. T., and in classical Greek is specially used of the vine.

w. 3— S-] S. JOHN, XV. 287
and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it
may bring forth more fruit. Now ye are clean through the 3
word which I have spoken unto you. Abide in me, and 1 4
in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it
abide in the vine ; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
I am the vine, ye are the branches : He that abideth in 5
me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit : for
The word used in the 'other Gospels (Matt. xiii. 32, xxi. 8, xxiv. 32 ;
Mark iv. 32, xiii. 28; Luke xiii. 9), and in Rom. xi. 16 — 21, is of the
same origin (from 'to break') but of more general meaning, — the
smaller branch of any tree. So that the very word used, independently
of the context, fixes the meaning of the allegory. It is every vine-hxaxieh,
i.e. every one who is by origin a Christian. If they continue such by
origin only, and give forth no fruit, they are cut off. The allegory takes
no account of the branches of other trees : neither Jews nor heathen are
included. Christ would not have called them branches ' in Me.'
he taketh away] Literally, He taketh it away ; in both clauses we
have a nominativus pendens.
he purgeth it] Better, He cleanseth it, in order to bring out the con
nexion with ' ye are clean ' (v. 3). The Greek words rendered 'purg
eth ' and ' clean ' are from the same root. There is also a similarity of
sound between the Greek words for 'taketh away' and 'cleanseth,' like
'bear and forbear ' in English (airei and kathairei). This may be in
tentional, but it cannot be reproduced in translation. By cleansing is
meant freeing from excrescences and useless shoots which are a drain
on the branch for nothing. The eleven were now to be cleansed by
suffering. bring forth] Better, as before, bear.
3. Now ye are clean] Already are ye clean. ' Ye ' is emphatic ;
many more will be made clean hereafter.
through the word] Better, on account of the word. This is a fre
quent error in our version, 5id with the accusative being translated as if
it had the genitive. Comp. Matt. xv. 3, 6, where ' by your tradition '
should be 'for the sake of your tradition.' 'The word ' (xvi. 23) here
means the whole teaching of Christ, not any particular utterance ; but
there may be special reference to the present discourses, through which
Peter, Thomas, Philip, and Judas Lebbaeus have been cleansed from
self-confidence and ignorance.
4. Abide in me, and I in you] See on vi. 56. ' And I in you '
may be taken either as a promise (' and then I will abide in you') or as
the other side of the command ('take care that I abide in you'); the
latter seems to be better.
except ye abide] There is this mysterious property in the branches
of the spiritual Vine, that they can cut themselves off, as Judas had done.
Nature does something, and grace does more; but grace may be rejected.
5. ye are the branches] This has been implied, but not stated yet.

288 S. JOHN, XV. [w.6— 9.
6 without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me,
he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men
gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are
7 burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you,
ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.
8 Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit ; so
9 shall ye be my disciples. As the Father hath loved me, so

for without me] Better, because apart from Me, or (as the margin)
severed from Me. Comp. i. 3; Eph. ii. 12.
ye can do nothing] Christians cannot live as Christians apart from
Christ. Nothing is said here about those who are not Christians, al
though there is a sense in which the words are true of them also.
6. he is cast forth) The verb is in a past tense ; he is already cast
forth by the very fact of not abiding in Christ. This consequence follows
so inevitably that to state the one is to state the other. The same re
mark applies to ' is withered.' But the cast-out branch may be grafted
in again (Rom. xi. 23) and the dead branch may be raised to life again
(v. 21, 25). The rest of the picture looks forward to the day of judg
ment. ' Men gather ' should be quite indefinitely, they gather (see on
Luke xii. 20).
they are burned] Or, they burn.
1. my words] Better, My sayings : see on v. 3 and v. 47.
ye shall ask what ye will] The better reading gives, ask whatsoever
ye will, in the imperative. The promise is similar to that in xiv. 13, 14
both in its comprehensiveness and in its limitation. One who abides
in Christ and has His words abiding in him cannot ask amiss.
8. Herein is my Father glorified] As in v. 6, the verb is the aorist
passive; not 'is being glorified' but 'is glorified,' i.e. whenever the
occasion arises. The aorist is used of an act regarded in itself as ac
complished at any conceivable moment : comp. xvii. 26. ' When ye pray
and obtain your prayers through abiding in Me, My Father is glorified
already.' It is best to understand ' herein ' as referring to what precedes
(comp. iv. 37 and xvi. 30), in order to give the proper meaning to
'that.' that ye bear] Literally, in order that ye may bear: it is S. John's
favourite particle once" more, expressing the Divine purpose (comp.
viii. 56, ix. 2, 3, xi. 15,- 50, xii. 23, xiii. 1, 2, &c). 'Herein' cannot
refer to 'in order that' without awkwardness.
so shall ye be my disciples] Rather, and may become My disciples.
The construction introduced by ' in order that ' continues to the end of
the verse; moreover the difference between 'to be' and 'to become'
should be preserved (see on x. 19, i. 6). The sense of the whole will
therefore be ; 'In granting your prayers My Father is glorified, in order
that ye may be fruitful and become My disciples.'
9. As the Father, &c] The Greek construction is ambiguous. It
would be quite possible to translate, Even as the Father loved Me and

w. io, u.] S. JOHN, XV. 289
have I loved you : continue ye in my love. If ye keep my 10
commandments, ye shall abide in my love ; even as I have
kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
These things have I spoken unto you,, that my joy might u
remain in you, and that your joy might be full.
I loved you, abide in My love. But our version is better as keeping
in due prominence the main statement, that the love of Christ for H is
disciples is analogous to that of the Father for the Son. In any case
'abide' is better than 'continue;' the same Greek word is used through
out these verses (4 — 16), a fact which our translators obscure by giving
three English words, ' abide, " continue,' and 'remain,' and that in three
consecutive verses (9 — 11). Throughout the Gospel ' abide ' should be
maintained as the rendering of S. John's favourite verb {Uvea (see on
i. 33). The whole should run, Even as ihe Father loved Me, I also
loved you (comp. xvii. 18, xx. 21) ; abide in My love. The verbs are
aorists, not perfects, and Christ's work is regarded as a completed
whole, already perfect in itself. But perhaps this is just one of those
cases where the English perfect may be allowed to translate the Greek
aorist : see on viii. 29.
in my love] The Greek might mean ' the love of Me,' but ' My
love ' for you is more natural and suits the context better, which speaks
of His love towards them as similar to the Father's towards Him.
The other, however, need not be altogether excluded. See on xiv.
27. 10. If ye keep] See on xiv. 15, 21, 24. To keep His command
ments not only proves our love for Him but secures His love for
us. / have kept my Father's commandments] This being in a subordinate
sentence the tremendous import of it is liable to pass unnoticed. Look
ing back over a life of thirty years Jesus says, ' I have kept the Father's
commandments.' Would the best man that ever lived, if only a man,
dare to make such a statement ? See on xiv. 30.
11. These things have I spoken) The verse forms a conclusion to
the allegory ofthe Vine. Comp. v. 17, xvi. 25, 33.
might remain] Better, may abide : but the reading is doubtful, and
perhaps ought to be simply 'may be;' that My joy (see on xiv. 27)
may be in you. This does not mean ' that I may have pleasure in you ;'
but that the joy which Christ experienced through consciousness of Hie
fellowship with the Father, and which supported Him in His sufferings,
might be in His disciples and support them in theirs. Here first, on
the eve of His sufferings, does Christ speak of His joy.
might be full] Or, may be fulfilled. This expression of joy being
fulfilled is peculiar to S. John (comp. iii. 29, xvi. 24, xvii. 13; 1 John
i. 4; 2 John 12). The active occurs Phil. ii. 2; 'make my joy full;'
but nowhere else. Human happiness can reach no higher than to share
that joy. which Christ ever felt in being loved by His Father and doing
His will. S.JOHN Ig

290 S. JOHN, XV. [vv. 12—15.
12 — 17. The Union ofthe Disciples with one another in
Christ.
12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I
13 have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that
14 a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends,
15 if ye do whatsoever I command you. Henceforth I call you
12 — 17. The Union of the Disciples with one another in
Christ.
12. This is my commandment] Literally, This is the commandment
that is Mine (see on xiv. 27). In v. 10 He said that to keep His com
mandments was the way to abide in His love. He now reminds them
what His commandment is (see on xiii. 34). It includes all others.
A day or two before this Christ had been teaching that all the Law and
the Prophets hang on the two great commands, ' love God with all thy
heart' and 'love thy neighbour as thyself (Matt. xxii. 37 — 40).
S. John teaches us that the second really implies the first (1 John
iv. 20).
That ye love one another] Literally, in order that ye love one another :
this is the purpose of the commandment. See next verse and on
v. 8, vi. 29, and xvii. 3.
as I have loved] Even as I loved ; comp. v. 9. Christ looks back
from a point still further.
13. that a man lay down] Literally, in order that a man lay down :
the greatest love is that of which the purpose is dying for those loved.
On ' lay down his life ' see note on x. n.
for his friends] Needless difficulty has been made about this, as if
it were at variance with Romans v. 6 — 8. Christ here says that the
greatest love that any one can shew towards his friends is to die for
them. S. Paul says that such cases of self-sacrifice for good men occur ;
but they are very rare. Christ, however, surpassed them, for He died
not only for His friends but for His enemies, not only for the good
but for sinners. There is no contradiction. Nor is there any emphasis
on ' friends ;' as if to suffer for friends were higher than to suffer for
strangers or enemies. The order of the Greek words throws the em
phasis on ' life :' it is the unique character of the thing sacrificed that
proves the love. Christ says 'for His friends' because fie is addressing
His friends.
14. Ye are my friends] ' Ye ' is emphatic : * and when I say
"friends," I mean you.' This shews that 'friends' was used simply be
cause He was speaking to the Apostles.
whatsoever I command you] Better, the things which I am com
manding you.
15. Henceforth I call you not servants] Better, No longer do I call
you servants (comp. xiv. 30 and see on viii. 34). He had implied that
they were servants before (xii. 26, xiii. 13 — 16). Perhaps the gentler
word 'servant' is better here, although 'bond-servant' would bring

vv. 16, 17.] S. JOHN, XV. 291
not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord
doeth : but I have called you friends ; for all things that
I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you.
Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and or- 16
dained you, that you should go and bring forth fruit, and
that your fruit should remain : that whatsoever ye shall ask
of the Father in my name, he may give it you. These z?
things I command you, that ye love one another.
out the contrast more strongly. Where the Apostles and others use it
of themselves the gentler rendering is certainly to be preferred (Rom.
L 1; Gal. i. 10; Jas. i. 1; 2 Pet. i. 1; &c. &c).
what his lord doeth] To be taken literally. The slave or servant
may see what his master is doing, but does not know the meaning or
purpose of it. ' Doeth ' need not be made equal to a future.
/ have called you friends] Or, you have I called friends; " you ' is
emphatic. He who wills to do His will as a servant, shall know of the
doctrine as a friend (vii. 17).
I have made known unto you] As they were able to bear it (xvi. 12).
After Pentecost they would be able to bear much more. Both verbs are
aorists ; — I heard — I made known : comp. vv. a and 1 2.
16. Ye have not, &c] Better, Ye chose Me not, but I chose you :
' Ye ' and ' I ' are emphatic ; there is no emphasis on ' Me.' The refer
ence is to their election to be Apostles, as the very word used seems to
imply (comp. vi. 70, xiii. 18; Acts i. 2); therefore the aorist as re
ferring to a definite act in the past should be preserved in translation.
ordained you] Better, appointed;^ (as 2 Tim. i. 11 and Heb. i. 2),
in order to avoid an unreal connexion with ordination in the ecclesias
tical sense. The same word used in the same sense as here is rendered
' set ' in Acts xiii. 47 and 1 Cor. xii. 28, ' ordained ' 1 Tim. ii. 7, and
'made' Acts xx. 28.
go and bring forth fruit] 'Go ' must not be insisted on too strongly
as if it referred to the missionary journeys of the Apostles. On the
other hand it is more than a mere auxiliary or expletive : it implies the
active carrying out of the idea expressed by the verb with which it is
coupled (comp. Luke x. 37 ; Mat. xiii. 44, xviii. 15, xix. 21), and per
haps also separation from their Master (Matt. xx. 4, 7). The mission
ary work of gathering in souls is not specially indicated here: the
' fruit ' is rather the holiness of their own lives and good works of all
kinds. ' Bring forth ' should be bear as in v. 5.
should remain] Better, should abide (see on v. 9). Comp. iv. 36.
whatsoever ye shall ask] See on v. 7 and xiv. 13.
he may give it] The Greek may also mean '/may give it' (comp.
xiv. 13), the first and third persons being alike in this tense ; and several
ancient commentators take it as the first.
17. These things I command you, &c] More literally, These things I
am commanding you, in order that ye may love one another. 'These
things ' does not refer to ' that ye love one another,' but to what has
Tg — 2

292 S. JOHN, XV. [vv. 18—20.
18 — 25. The Hatred of the World to both Him and them.
18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it
19 hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love
his own : but because ye are not of the world, but I have
chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.
20 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not
greater than his lord If they have persecuted me, they will
already been said about being one with Him and with each other.
Comp. v. 11, xiv. 25, xvi. 25, 33.
18 — 25. The Hatred of the World to both Him and them.
In strong contrast to the love and union between Christ and His
disciples and among the disciples themselves is the hatred of the world
to Him and them. He gives them these thoughts to console them in
encountering this hatred of the world. (1) It hated Him first : in this
trial also He has shewn them the way. (2) The hatred of the world
proves that they are not of the world. (3) They are sharing their
Master's lot, whether the world rejects or accepts their preaching.
(4) They will suffer this hatred not only with Him, but for His sake.
All this tends to shew that the very hatred of the world intensifies their
union with Him.
18. ye know that it hated me) Better, know that it hath hated me
(comp. v. 20). As in xiv. 1 the principal verb may be either indicative
or imperative, and the imperative is preferable : the second verb is the
perfect indicative, of that which has been and still is the case.
before it hated you] ' It hated : is an insertion by our translators,
and ' before you ' is literally ' first of you, ' like ' before me ' in i. 1 5 (see
note there) and 30 ; excepting that here we have the adverb and there
the adjective.
19. the world would love his own] In vii. 7 He told His brethren,
who did not believe on Him, that the world could not hate them. This
shews why : in their unbelief it still found something of its own (comp.
1 John iv. 5). ' His own,' or its own, is neuter singular not masculine
plural. The selfishness of the world's love is thus indicated : it loves
not so much them, as that in them which is to its own advantage ; and
hence the lower word for ' love ' is used (philein), not the higher one
(agapdn) as in v. 17. It is mere natural liking. Note the solemn repe
tition of 'world' in this verse. For the construction comp. v. 46, viii.
19, 42, ix. 41, xviii. 36 and contrast iv. 10, xi. 21, xiv. 28.
/ have chosen] I chose : see on v. 16.
therefore the world hateth you] Or, for this cause (see on viii. 47 and
xii. 39) &c. Comp. 1 John iii. 13.
20. Remember] See note on xiii. 16 : of the passages noticed there
Matt. x. 24 is similar in meaning to this. Christ may here be alluding to
the occasion recorded in Matt. x. 24. On the blessedness of sharing the
lot of Christ comp. 1 Pet. iv. 12, 13.

vv. 21—24] S. JOHN, XV. 293
also persecute you ; if they have kept my saying, they will
keep yours also. But all these things will they do unto you 21
for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me.
If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not 22
had sin : but now they have no cloke for their sin. He 23
that hateth me hateth my Father also. If I had not done 24
among them the works which none other man did, they had
if they have kept my saying, they will keep] Better, If they kept
(comp. xiii. 14, xviii. 23) My word, they will keep. 'Keep ' must not
be exchanged for 'watch, lay wait for,' in a hostile sense; as if both
halves of the verse were alike instead of being opposed. The phrase
'keep the word (or words) ' of any one is frequent in this Gospel (viii.
51! 53> 55> ^v- 23> 24> x™- 6); always in the sense of the parallel
phrase 'keep my commandments' (xiv. 15, 21, xv. 10). Both phrases
form a link not only between the Gospel and the First Epistle (ii. 3,
4, 5, iii. 22, 24, v. 2, 3), but also between these two and the Apocalypse
(iii. 8, 10, xii. 17, xiv. 12, xxii. 7, 9). Comp. John ix. 16 ; Rev. i. 3,
ii. 26, iii. 3. (See on xi. 44, xix. 37, xx. 16). All these passages
shew that it is impossible to take ' keep ' in a hostile sense. The phrase
'to keep the word' of any one occurs in S. John's writings only. ' To
keep the commandments (or commandment)' occurs elsewhere only
Matt. xix. 17 (comp. xxviii. 20) and 1 Tim. vi. 14. The meaning
of the verse as a whole is that both in failure and in success they will
share His lot. For the construction comp. xiii. 14, xviii. 23.
21. for my name's sake] This thought is to turn their suffering into
joy. Comp. Acts v. 41, xxi. 13; 2 Cor. xii. 10; Gal. vi. 14; Phil. ii.
17, 18; 1 Pet. iv. 14.
they know not him that sent me] Comp. vii. 28, xvi. 3, xvii. 25. They
not merely did not know that God had sent Jesus ; they did not know
God Himself, for their idea of Him was radically wrong.
22. If I had not come and spoken unto them] He had spoken as
man had never spoken before (vii. 46), and His words sufficed to tell
unprejudiced minds Who He was. Their hatred was a sin against
light; if there had been no light, there would have been no sin.
'To have sin' is a phrase peculiar to S. John (v. 24, ix. 41, xix. n;
1 John i. 8).
no cloke] Better (with the margin), no excuse : not only have they
sin, but they have sin without excuse. The same word is rendered
'cloke,' 1 Thess. ii. 5. But the notion is not that of hiding, but of ex
cusing what cannot be hid : 'colour ' (Acts xxvii. 30) is a better render
ing than ' cloke.' Comp. Ps. cxL 4.
for their sin] Literally, concerning their sin : comp. xvi. 8.
23. hateth my Father also] Comp. v. 23, xiv. 9.
24. the works) If they did not see that His words were Divine
they might at least have seen that His works were such. Comp. x.
38, xiv. 11, v. 36. Here again their sin was against light; for they
admitted the works (xi. 47).

294 S. JOHN, XV. [vv. 25, 26.
not had sin : but now have they both seen and hated both
zs me and my Father. But this cometh to pass, that the word
might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated
26 me without a cause. But when the Comforter is come,
whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit
of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify
which none other man did] Comp. ix. 32.
seen... my Father] Comp. xiv. 9, 10.
25. in their law] ' Law ' is used in the wide sense for the O. Ti
generally. Comp. x. 34, xii. 34, xv. 25 ; Rom. iii. 19.
without a cause) The passage may be from either Ps. lxix. 4 or
xxxv. 19: there are similar passages cix. 3 and cxix. 161. ' Without a
cause, ' gratuitously ; so that here again they are without excuse.
26. the Comforter] Better, the Advocate (see on xiv. 16).
whom I will send] ' I ' is emphatic. Here it is the Son Who sends
the Paraclete from the Father. In xiv. 16 the Father sends in answer
to the Son's prayer. In xiv. 26 the Father sends in the Son's name.
These are three ways of expressing that the mission of the Paraclete
is the act both of the Father and of the Son, Who are one.
from the Father] See note on ' from God ' i. 6 : the preposition and
case are here the same ; irapa with the genitive.
the Spirit of truth] See on xiv. 17.
which proceedeth from the Father] It seems best to take this much
discussed clause as simply yet another way of expressing the fact of the
mission of the Paraclete. If the Paraclete is sent by the Son from the
Father, and by the Father in the Son's name and at the Son's request,
then the Paraclete ' proceedeth from the Father. ' If this be correct,
then this statement refers to the office and not to the Person of the Holy
Spirit, and has no bearing either way on the great question between the
Eastern and Western Churches, the Filioque added in the West to the
Nicene Creed. The word used here for ' proceed ' is the same as that
used in the Creed of Nicea, and the Easterns quote these words of
Christ Himself as being against not merely the insertion of the clause
' and the Son ' into the Creed (which all admit to have been made ir
regularly), but against the truth of the statement that the Spirit, not
only in His temporal mission, but in His Person, from all eternity pro
ceeds from both the Father and the Son. On the whole question see
Pearson On the Creed, Art. viii.; Reunion Conference at Bonn, 1875,
pp. 9 — 85, Rivingtons; Pusey On the Clause "and the Son," a Letter
to Dr Liddon, Parker, 1876. The word rendered ' proceedeth ' occurs
in this Gospel only here and v. 29, but is frequent in the other Gospels
and in Revelation (Matt. iii. 5, iv. 4, xv. 11, 18; Mark vii. 15, 18, 20,
21, 23; Luke iv. 22, 37; Rev. i. 16, iv. 5, &c), and there seems to be
nothing in the word itself to limit it to the Eternal Procession. On the
other hand the preposition used here (para = ' from the side of ') is
strongly in favour of the reference being to the mission. Comp. xvi. 27,
xvii. 8.

w. 27; i.] S. JOHN, XV. XVI. 295
of me: and ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been 27
with me from the beginning.
Chap. XVI.
The Promise of the Paraclete and of Christ's Return.
1 — 11. The World and the Paraclete.
These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not 16
he shall testify of me] Better, He shall bear witness. It is the same
word as is used in the next verse and is one of the words characteristic
of this Gospel (see on i. 7). ' He ' is emphatic, in opposition to the
world which hates and rejects Christ. Christ has the witness of the
Spirit of truth, which has the authority of the Father : it is impossible
to have higher testimony than this.
27. And ye also shall bear witness] Better, Nay, ye also bear wit
ness : the verb is present, not future. It is also possible to take the verb
as an imperative (comp. v. 18 and xiv. 1), but the conjunctions used
are against this. The testimony of the disciples is partly one and the
same with the testimony ofthe Spirit, partly not. It is partly the same,
so far as it depends on the illumination of the Spirit, who was to bring
all things to their remembrance and lead them into all truth. This
would not be true in its fulness until Pentecost. It is partly not the
same, so far as it depends upon the Apostles' own personal experience
of Christ and His work. This is the case at once ; the experience is
already there ; and hence the present tense. Comp. Acts v. 32, where
the Apostles clearly set forth the twofold nature of their testimony, and
Acts xv. 28, where there is a parallel distinction of the two factors.
have been with me] Literally, are with Me; i. c. have been and
still are.
from the beginning] As usual the context decides the meaning, of
' beginning' (see on i. 1). Here plainly the meaning is from the be
ginning of Christ's ministry. They could bear witness as to what they
themselves had seen and heard. Comp. Acts i. 22 ; Luke i. 2.
Chap. XVI.
We are still in the first part of the second main division of the
Gospel, the inner Glorification of Christ in His last dis
courses (xiii. — xvii.). We now enter upon the third division of this
first part (see introductory note to chap. xiii. ).
The Promise of the Paraclete and of Christ's Return.
As has been remarked already, the subjects are not kept distinct ;
they cross and interlace, like the strands in a rope. But the following
divisions may conduce to clearness; 1. The World and the Paraclete
(1 — 11); 2. The Disciples and the Paraclete (12 — 15); The Sorrow of
Christs Departure turned into Joy by His Return (16 — 24); 4. Sum
mary and Conclusion ofthe Discourses (25 — 33).

¦296 S. JOHN, XVI. [vv. 2—4.
2 be offended They shall put you out of the synagogues :
yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think
3 that he doeth God service. And these things will they do
unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me.
4 But these things have I told you, that when the time shall
come, ye may remember that I told you of them. And
these things I said not unto you at the beginning, because
1 — 11. The World and the Paraclete.
1. These things] These discourses generally, especially the last
section about the world's hatred of Him and them (xv. 18 — 27).
should not be offended] Literally, should not be made to stumble:
comp. vi. 61 ; 1 John ii. 10. The metaphor is frequent in S. Matt, and
S. Mark, occurs thrice in S. Luke (vii. 23, xvii. 1, 2), and twice in
S. John. The fanatical hatred of the Jews might make Jewish Apostles
stumble at the truth.
2. out ofthe synagogues] Or, out of the synagogue, i. e. excommu
nicate you. Comp. ix. 22 ; xii. 42.
yea, the time cometh] Better, nay, there cometh an hour. Comp.
v. 25. 'You might think excommunication an extreme measure; but
(aXXd) they will go far greater lengths than this.'
that whosoever] Literally, in order that every one who. The Divine
purpose is again clearly indicated (see on xii. 23). Every one, Jew and
Gentile alike, will put down the Christians as blasphemers and atheists
and the perpetrators of every crime. The history of religious persecu
tion is the fulfilment of this prophecy.
doeth God service] Better, offereth service to God. The verb ex
presses the offering oi sacrifice (comp. Heb. v. 1, viii. 3, ix. 7); the
substantive expresses a religious service (Rom. ix. 4; Heb. ix. 1. 6).
3. unto you] These words are of doubtful authority.
they have not known] Better, they did not recognise. The verb im
plies that they had the opportunity of knowing ; but they had failed to
see that God is Love, and that Jesus came not to shut out, but to bring
in, not to destroy, but to save. The very names ' Father ' (here used
with special point) and ' Jesus ' might have taught them better things.
4. But] Making a fresh start ; But, to return (to v. 1).
have I told] See on v. 6.
when the time] Rather, when their hour, according to the better
reading; i. e. the hour appointed for these things (v. 2).
ye may  of them) Better, yemay remember them, that I toldyou.
' I ' is emphatic, ' I Myself, the object of your faith.'
And these things  beginning] Better, But these things /told you
not from the beginning. Not exactly the same phrase as in xv. 27 (ait
apxhs), but &f apxijs (here and vi. 64 only) : the one expresses simple
departure, the other consequence and continuity. There is no inconsis
tency between this statement and passages like Matt. x. 16 — 39, xxiv. 9;
Luke vi. 22, &c. 'These things ' will cover a great deal more than the

w. 5—8.] S. JOHN, XVI. 297
I was with you. But now I go my way to him that sent 5
me; and none of you asketh me, Whither goest thou?
But because I have said these things unto you, sorrow hath 6
filled your heart. Nevertheless I tell you the truth ; It is 7
expedient for you that I go away : for if I go not away,
the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart,
I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he 8
prediction of persecutions, e. g. the explanation of the persecutions, the
promise of the Paraclete, &c.
because I was with you] See notes on Matt. ix. 15. ,
5. I go my way to) Or, I go away unto ; the notion is that of with
drawal (see on v. 7). Hitherto He has been with them to protect them
and to be the main object of attack : soon they will have to bear the
brunt without Him. This is all that they feel at present, — how His de
parture affects themselves, not how it affects Him. And yet this latter
point is all important even as regards themselves, for He is going in
order to send the Paraclete.
none of you asketh] As far as words go S. Peter had asked this
very question (xiiil 36) and S. Thomas had suggested it (xiv. 5) ; but
altogether in a different spirit from what is meant here. They were
looking only at their own loss instead of at His gain.
6. / have said] Better, / have spoken as in v. 1. A similar cor
rection is needed in v. 4 for ' have I told :' it is the same Greek word in
all three cases, and means 'to speak,' not ' to say ' or ' to tell.'
sorrow hath filled] So that there is no room for thoughts of My glory
and your future consolation.
7. I tell you the truth] ' I ' is again emphatic ; ' I who know, and
who have never misled you.' Comp. xiv. 2.
It is expedient] So Caiaphas had said (xi. 50) .with more truth than
he knew; so also the taunt at the crucifixion, 'Himself He cannot save.'
' That ' here = ' in order that ' (S. John's favourite particle, tva). Comp.
v. 2 and xii. 43.
/ go away] There are three different Greek verbs in vv. 5, 7, and
10, and our translators have not been happy in distinguishing them.
The verb in w. 5 and 10 should be I go away : here for ' I go away '
we should have I depart, and for ' I depart ' we should have I go My
way. In the first the primary idea is withdrawal; in the second, sepa
ration ; in the third, going on to a goal.
the Comforter] The Advocate (see on xiv. 16). The Spirit could not
come until God and man had been made once more at one. In virtue
of His glorified and ascended Manhood Christ sends the Paraclete.
' Humanity was to ascend to heaven before the Spirit could be sent to
humanity on earth. '
8. The threefold office of the Advocate towards those who do not
believe but may yet be won over. And He when He is come will con
vict the world concerning sin, and concerning righteousness, and con-
cerning judgment.

298 S. JOHN, XVI. [w. 9, 10.
will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and
10 of judgment : of sin, because they believe not on me ; of
righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me
he w,"' reprove] ' Convince ' (as the margin) or convict is to be
preferred (see on iii. 20). This rendering gives additional point to the
rendering 'Advocate' for Paraclete. To convince and convict is a large
part of the duty of an advocate. He must vindicate and prove the
truth ; and whoever, after such proof, rejects the truth, does so with
responsibility in proportion to the interests involved. The word occurs
once in S. Matthew (xviii. 15) and once in S. Luke (iii. 19); but is
somewhat frequent in the Epistles. Comp. i. Cor. xiv. 24 ; Titus i. 9,
13, ii. 15; James ii. 9; Jude 15, [22], &c.
The conviction wrought by the Advocate may bring either salvation
or condemnation,. but it must bring one of the two. It is given to men
' for their wealth ;' but it may ' be unto them an occasion of falling,' if
it is wantonly set aside.
9. Of sin] Or, Concerning sin. This naturally comes first : the
work of the Spirit begins with convincing man that he is a fallen, sinful
creature in rebellion against God.
because they believe not on me] This is the source of sin — unbelief ;
formerly, unbelief in God, now unbelief in His Ambassador. Not that
the sin is limited to unbelief, but this is the beginning of it : ' Because ' does
not explain 'sin,' but ' will convict. ' The Spirit, by bringing the fact of
unbelief home to the hearts of men, shews what the nature of sin is.
10. righteousness] . The word occurs here only in this Gospel ; but
comp. 1 John ii. 29, iii. 7, 10; Rev. xix. 11. Righteousness is
the keeping of the law, and is the natural result of faith ; so much so
that faith is reckoned as if it were righteousness (Rom. iv. 3 — 9), so cer
tain is this result regarded. Here ' righteousness ' is used not in the
lower sense of keeping prescribed ordinances (Matt. iii. 15), but in the
highest and widest sense of keeping the law of God ; internal as well as
external obedience. The lower sense was almost the only sense both to
Jew and Gentile (Matt. v. 20). The Spirit, having convinced man that
sin is much more than a breaking of certain ordinances, viz. a rejection
of God and His Christ, goes on to convince him that righteousness is
much more than a keeping of certain ordinances.
I go to my Father] Better, / go away (see on v. 7) to the Father;
' My' is wanting in the best texts. Once more ' because ' explains ' will
convict,' not ' righteousness. ' The life of Christ on earth as the pattern
for all mankind being completed, and the reconciliation of man to God
being completed also, the Spirit makes known to man the nature of that
life, and thus shews what the nature of righteousness is. Sin being
resistance to God's will, righteousness is perfect harmony with it.
yi see me no more] ' Contemplate ' or behold would be better than
'see' (comp. v. 16, vi. 40, 62, vii. 3, xiv. 19, &c). He shews His
disciples that He has sympathy for them ; in speaking of His return to
glory He does not forget the sorrow which they feel and expect (erro
neously, as Acts ii. 46 shews) always to feel.

vv. il— 13.] S. JOHN, XVI. 299
no more ; of judgment, because the prince of this world is n
judged. 12 — 15. The Disciples and the Paraclete.
I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot 12
bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is i3
come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not
speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he
11. Of judgment  judged] Better, Concerning judgment, because
the ruler of this world hath been judged (see on xii. 31 and xiv. 30).
As the world has had its own false views about sin and righteousness,
so also it has had its own false standards of judgment. The Advocate
convicts the world of its error in this point also. The world might
think that ' the power of darkness ' conquered at Gethsemane and Cal
vary, but the Resurrection and Ascension proved that what looked like
victory was most signal defeat : instead of conquering he was judged.
This result is so certain that from the point of view of the Spirit's com
ing it is spoken of as already accomplished.
12 — 15. The Disciples and the Paraclete.
The Paraclete not only convicts and convinces the world, He also
enlightens the Apostles respecting Christ and thereby glorifies Him,
for to make Christ known is to glorify Him. These verses are very
important as shewing the authority of the Apostles' teaching : it is not
their own, but the truth of Christ revealed by the Spirit.
12. many things to say] They are His friends (xv. 15), and there is
nothing which He wishes to keep back from them; He would give
them His entire confidence. But it would be useless to tell them what
they cannot understand ; cruel to impart knowledge which would only
crush them. ' Now ' is emphatic (see on v. 31) : at Pentecost they will
receive both understanding and strength. The word here used for
'bear ' appears again in xix. 17 of Christ bearing the Cross.
13. the Spirit of truth] See on xiv. 17.
he will guide you] ' He and no other will be your guide. ' Christ is
the Way and the Truth. The Spirit leads men into the Way and thus
to the Truth. But He does no more than guide : He does not compel,
He does not carry. They may refuse to follow, and if they follow they
must exert themselves. Contrast Matt. xv. 14; Luke vi. 39; Acts
viii. 31.
into all truth] Better, into all the truth, i. e. the truth in its entirety :
this is very clearly expressed in the Greek.
he shall not speak of himself) This does not mean ' shall not speak
aboul Himself but 'from Himself.' The Spirit, like the Son, cannot
speak what proceeds from Himself as distinct from what proceeds from
the Father : He is the Source of Divine energy and truth._ Comp. v. 19
and vii. 18. This expression 'from himself, from itself (dirb) is peculiar
to S. John : comp. xi. 51, xv. 4.

30O S. JOHN, XVI. [w. 14—16.
14 speak : and he will shew you things to come. He shall
glorify me : for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it
15 unto you. All things that the Father hath are mine: there
fore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it
unto you.
16 — 24. The sorrow of Christ's departure turned into joy
by His return.
16 A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a
little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.

he will shew you things to come) Better, He shall declare to you
the things that are coming. The Greek verb means 'to announce,
proclaim, declare ' rather than ' shew.' Note the thrice repeated ' He
shall declare to you.' The phrase 'the things that are coming' is iden
tical in form with 'He that cometh' (Luke vii. 19) : among these things
we may place the constitution of the Church and the revelation re
specting the Last Judgment and its results.
14. He shall glorify me) Both pronouns are emphatic ; ' Me shall
that Spirit of truth glorify.' Just as the Son glorifies the Father by
revealing Him (i. 18; xvii. 4) both in word and work, so does the Spirit
glorify the Son by revealing Him. In both cases to reveal is necessarily
to glorify : the more the Truth is known, the more it is loved and
adored. for he shall receive  unto you] Better, because He shall take of
Mine and shall declare it to you. The verb rendered ' receive ' is the
same as that rendered ' take ' in v. 15, and 'take ' is better, as implying
that the recipient is not wholly passive (lambanein, not dechesthai).
Comp. x. 17, xii. 48, xx. 22.
15. All things] Literally, All things whatsoever : comp. xvii. 10.
therefore said I) For this cause (xii. 18, 27) said I: see on v. 16, 18.
shall take] Better, taketh : the Spirit is already revealing the Truth
which is both of the Father and of the Son.
16 — 24. The sorrow of Christ's departure turned into joy
by His return.
16. ye shall not see me] Better, ye behold Me no more (comp. v. 10):
the verb for ' see ' in the second half of the verse is a more general
term. When His bodily presence was withdrawn their view of Him was
enlarged ; no longer known after the flesh, He is seen and known by
faith. ye shall see me] In the spiritual revelation of Christ by the Para
clete from Pentecost onwards : Matt, xxviii. 20.
because I go to the Father] These words have probably been in
serted to suit the next verse; the best MSS. omit them.

w. 17— 20.] S. JOHN, XVI. 301
Then said some of his disciples among themselves, What 17
is this that he saith unto us, A little while, and ye shall not
see me : and again, a little while, and ye shall see me : and,
Because I go to the Father? They said therefore, What is 18
this that he saith, A little while? we cannot tell what he
saith. Now Jesus knew that they were desirous to ask him, 19
and said unto them, Do ye inquire among yourselves of that
I said, A little while, and ye shall not see me : and again, a
little while, and ye shall see me? Verily, verily, I say unto 20
you, That ye shall weep and lament, but the world shall
rejoice: and ye shall be sorrowful, but your sorrow shall be
17. Then  disciples] Better, Some of His disciples therefore
said. among themselves] Better, as in iv. 33, one to another ; so also in
xix. 24. The Greek for ' among themselves ' (xii. 19) is different.
ye shall not see] Ye behold Me not. As in the previous verse we
have two different verbs for ' see. '
and, Because I go] They refer to what was said in v. 10. The
Apostles are perplexed both about the apparent contradiction of not
beholding and yet seeing and also the departure to the Father. 'Be
cause' (8ti) should probably be 'that,' to introduce the saying 'I go
to the Father.' As already indicated, the reason, 'because I go, &c.' in
v. 16 is not genuine.
18. we cannot tell what he saith] More literally, we know not what
He speaketh.
19. Now Jesus knew] More literally, Jesus recognised or perceived
(see on viii. 55). We have here an indication that His supernatural
power of reading the thoughts did not supersede His natural powers of
observation, and perhaps was not used when the latter were sufficient :
comp. v. 6, vi. 15. A different verb is used for His supernatural know
ledge (vi. 61, 64, xiii. 1, 3, 11, 18, xviii. 4, xix. 28). But this distinc
tion between gindskein and eidenai is not always observed : comp. ii.
24, 25, where gindskein is used of supernatural knowledge. Omit
'now ' at the beginning of the verse.
among yourselves] Or, with one another. This is a third expression,
differing from ' among yourselves ' (xii. 19) and from ' one to another
(iv. 33). See on v. 17. The whole should run, Concerning this do ye
enquire with one another, that I said.
ye shall not see me] As in vv. 16, 17, ye behold Me not.
20. ye shall weep and lament] In the Greek ' ye ' comes last in em
phatic contrast to the world. The verbs express the outward manifesta
tion of grief. Comp. xx. 11; Luke xxiii. 27. The world rejoiced
at being rid of One whose life was a reproach to it and whose teaching
condemned it.
and ye shall be sorrowful] Here we have the feeling as distinct from
the manifestation of grief. Omit 'and.'

302 S. JOHN, XVI. [w. 21—24.
21 turned into joy. A woman when she is in travail hath
sorrow, because her hour is come : but as soon as she is
delivered of the child, she remembereth no more the anguish,
22 for joy that a man is born into the world. And ye now
therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your
heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you.
23 And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily,
I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father • in
24 my name, he will give it you. Hitherto have ye asked
sorrow shall be turned into joy] Not merely sorrow shall be succeeded
by joy, but shall become joy. The withdrawal of the bodily presence
of Christ shall be first a sorrow and then a joy. We have the same
Greek construction of the rejected stone becoming the head of the corner
(Matt. xxi. 42; Acts iv. 11), of the mustard sprout becoming a tree
(Luke xiii. 19), of the first man Adam becoming a living soul (1 Cor.
xv. 45).
21. A woman] Or, The woman, like 'the servant' (xv. 15) : in each
case the article is generic, expressing the general law. The figure is
frequent in O. T.; Isai. Ixvi. 7; Hos. xiii. 13; Mic. iv. 9. See on
Mark xiii. 8.
for joy] Better, for the joy, the joy peculiar to the case.
a man] A human being, one of the noblest of God's creatures.
22. And ye now therefore] Or, Ye also therefore now. As in the
case of childbirth, the suffering of the disciples was the necessary condi
tion of the joy. This suffering was to repeat itself in a new form in the
work of converting souls (Gal. iv. 19).
/ will see you] In vv. 16, 17, 19 we had ' ye shall see Me :' here we
have the other side of the same truth ; and the same verb for ' see ' is
used in all four cases. In Gal. iv. 9 we have both sides of the truth
stated (see on 1 Cor. viii. 3).
no man taketh] Or, according to some good authorities, no one Shall
take. Their sorrow shall depart, their joy shall remain.
23. in that day] Not the forty days of His bodily presence between
the Resurrection and the Ascension, but the many days of His spiritual
presence from Pentecost onwards. Comp. v. 26 and xiv. 20.
ye shall ask me nothing] The Greek is as ambiguous as the English.
It is the same verb (erStdn) as is used in v. 19, and may mean either, as
there, 'ask no question,' or, ' make no petition ' (see on xiv. 16). The
former is better. When they are illuminated by the Spirit there will be
no room for such questions as ' What is this little while? How can we
know the way? Whither goest Thou? How is it that Thou wilt
manifest Thyself unto us and not unto the world?' His going to the
Father will gain for them (1) perfect knowledge.
Verily, verily] See on i. 5 1 .
Whatsoever  .give it you] The better reading gives, If ye shall ask
anything of the Father, He will give it you in My name. The word

w. 25, 26.] S. JOHN, XVI. 303
nothing in my name: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy
may be full.
25 — 33. Summary and conclusion of these discourses.
These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: 25
but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto
you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the
Father. At that day ye shall ask in my name : and I say not 26
for ' ask ' here and in the next verse is aitein not erbtdn. Note that the
answer as well as the prayer (xiv. 13, xv. 16) is in Christ's name, and all
such prayers will be answered. His return to the Father will gain for
them (2) perfect response to prayer.
24. nothing in my name] Because Jesus was not yet glorified, was
not yet fully known to the Apostles.
ask] The full meaning of the Greek is go on asking; it is the present
not aorist imperative. Comp. v. 14, [viii. 11,] xx. 17, and contrast
Matt. vii. 7 with Mark vi. 22.
may be full] Or, may be fulfilled, so as to be complete and remain so.
His return to the Father will gain for them (3) perfect joy. See on xv.
11 and comp. xvii. 13 ; 1 John i. 4; 2 John 12.
25 — 33. Summary and conclusion of these discourses.
25. These things] As in v. 1 there is some uncertainty as to how
much is included. Some refer 'these things' to v. 19 — 24; others to
xv. 1 — xvi. 24. Perhaps even the latter is too narrow a limit. The
words can apply to all Christ's teaching, of which there was much which
the multitudes were not allowed (Matt. xiii. 11) and the Apostles were
not able jji. 22) to understand at the time.
in proverbs] Better, in allegories (see on x. 6).
but the time cometh] Better, there cometh an hour (iv. 21, 23, v. 25,
xvi. 2, 32). Omit ' but ' with the best authorities.
shew] Or, declare, as in vv. 13, 14, 15. The best MSS. give a
different compound of the same verb as is used in vv. 13, 14, 15, but
the difference cannot well be marked in English.
plainly] Frankly, without reserve (see on vii. 4 and comp. vii. 13,
26, x. 24, xi. 14, 54, xviii. 20).
26. At that day] As in v. 23 and xiv. 20 from Pentecost onwards.
ye shall ask in my name] With the perfect knowledge just promised
they will discern what may be asked in His name (see on xiv. 13):
' cogniiio parit orationem.'
I say not unto you] This does not mean 'I need not say unto you;
for of course I shall do so ;' which does not harmonize with v. 27. The
meaning rather is, that so long as through the power of the Advocate
they have direct communion with the Father in Christ's name, there is
no need to speak of Christ's intercession. But this communion may be
interrupted by sin, and then Christ becomes their Advocate (1 John ii.
1 ; Rom. viii. 34).

304 S. JOHN. XVI. [w. 27—30.
27 unto you, that I will pray the Father for you : for the Father
himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have
28 believed that I came out from God. I came forth from the
Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the
world, and go to the Father.
29 His disciples said unto him, Lo, now speakest thou
30 plainly, and speakest no proverb. Now are we sure that
that I will pray] The pronoun is emphatic. On the word here ren
dered 'pray' (erdtdn) see on xiv. 16.
for you] More literally, concerning you.
27. himself] Without My intercession.
loveth you] On the difference between the two Greek verbs for 'love'
see on xi. 5. It is the more emotional word that is used here in both
cases. At first sight it appears the less appropriate to express God's
love for the disciples : but the point is that it is a Father's love, it flows
spontaneously from a natural relationship as distinct from discriminating
friendship. because ye have loved me] Both pronouns are emphatic and are next
one another in the Greek, pointing to the closeness of the relationship ;
because ye Me have loved. Note the 'because ;' it is their love for Christ
which wins the Father's love (xiv. 21, 23).
have loved.  have believed] Both perfects signify what has been
and still continues. No argument can be drawn from the order of the
verbs as to love preceding faith: 'have loved' naturally comes first on
account of 'loveth' immediately preceding. 'Love begets love' is true
both between man and man and between God and man. ' Faith begets
faith ' cannot have any meaning between God and man.
from God] The better reading is, from the Father (see or* i. 6, xv.
26). It was specially because they recognised Him as the Son sent
from the Father, and not merely as a Prophet sent from God (i. 6), that
they won the Father's love.
28. I came forth from] Our translators are again right in marking a
difference but not quite right in their way of doing so (see on v. 7).
The Greek rendered ' I came forth from ' here differs in the preposition
used (ek) from that rendered 'I came out from' in v. 27 (para).- It
would be better to transpose the translations. In v. 27 it is the temporal
mission of Christ from the Father that is meant (comp. xvii. 8) ; in v.
28 the Eternal Generation ofthe Son is also included (comp. viii. 42).
The verse would almost form a creed. The Son, of one Substance with
the Father, was born into the world, suffered, and returned to the
Father. 29. said] Rather, say.
plainly] Literally, in plainness ox openness. As in vii. 4, the word
here has a preposition (see on vii. 26).
30. are we sure] Better, we know; it is the same verb as 'thou
knowest,' and the capricious change of rendering is regrettable. There
is a similarly capricious change 2 Cor. xii. 2, 3. Christ had spoken in

w. 31, 32] S. JOHN, XVI. 305
thou knowest all things, and needest not that any man
should ask thee : by this we believe that thou camest forth
from God. Jesus answered them, Do ye now believe? 31
Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be 32
scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone :
and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me.
the future tense (v. 23); they emphatically speak in the present; 'now
we know.' They feel that His gracious promise is already being ful
filled. thou knowest all things] He had shewn them that He had read their
hearts (v. 19) ; like the Samaritan woman (iv. 29, 39) they conclude that
He knows all.
by this] Or, Herein (see on iv. 37); literally 'in this.' His all-em
bracing knowledge is that in which their faith has root.
we believe that] The Greek might mean, 'we believe, because, &c.'
But the A. V. is more in accordance with the context and with S. John's
usage. forth from God] They refer to Christ's mission only (v. 27), not to
the Eternal Generation of the Son (v. 28).
31. Do ye now believe?) The words are only half a question (comp.
xx. 29). The belief of which they are conscious is no illusion, but it
is not yet as perfect as they in their momentary enthusiasm suppose.
'Now' means 'at this stage of your course;' it is not the word used
by the Apostles (vv. 29, 30), but another of which S. John makes much
use. The one (nun) regards the present moment only, 'now' abso
lutely; the other (arti) regards the present in relation to the past and
future, 'at this crisis.' Comp. v. 12, xiii. 7, 19, 33, 37, &c.
32. the hour cometh] Better (as in v. 25), there cometh an hour.
yea, is now come] Omit 'now;' the expression is not the same as
iv. 23.
that ye shall be scattered] Rather, that ye may be scattered. 'That' =
'in order that' expressing the Divine purpose (comp. v. 2). This part
of the allegory of the sheep-fold is to be illustrated even in the shepherds
themselves (x. 12).
to his own] 'To his own home,' as the margin has it here and the
text of xix. 27; or more generally 'to his own property and pursuits,'
his belongings and surroundings. Comp. i. n. The Greek in all
three passages is the same, 'his own' being neuter plural.
shall leave) Rather, may leave, depending upon 'in order that.'
and yet] The ' yet ' is not expressed in the Greek, but implied, as
often in S. John, in the collocation of the sentences. Comp. i. 10, 11,
iii. 19, 32, vi. 70, vii. 4, 26, viii. 20, ix. 30. Our translators have
as a rule wisely omitted the 'yet,' leaving S. John's simple constructions
to tell their own meaning. Here the 'yet' is almost necessary.
ihe Father is with me] The Divine background (as it seems to us) of
Christ's Ufe was to Him a Presence of which He was always conscious
(viii. 29), with the awful exception in Matt, xxvii. 46.
s. JOHN 20

306 S. JOHN, XVI. [v. 33.
33 These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might
have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation : but be
of good cheer; I have overcome the world.
33. These things] These farewell discourses.
might have peace] Better, may have peace. Christ's ministry ends,
as His life began, with a message of peace (Luke ii. 14).
ye shall have] Rather, ye have ; the tribulation has already begun.
I have overcome] The pronoun is very emphatic. At the very moment
when He is face to face with treachery, and disgrace, and death, Christ
triumphantly claims the victory. Comp. 1 John ii. 1 3, 14, v. 4. In
His victory His followers conquer also.
Chap. XVII. The Prayer of the Great High Priest.
"The prayer which follows the last discourse as its fit crown and
conclusion has been designated by an old tradition the Prayer of the
High Priest, now about to take upon Him His office, and to offer
atonement for the sins ofthe people." S. p. 235. It is unique in the
Gospels. The other Evangelists, especially S. Luke, mention the
fact of Christ praying (Matt. xiv. 23; Mark i. 35; Luke iii. 21, v. 16,
vi. 12, ix. 18, &c), and give some words of His prayer at Gethsemane;
but here the substance of a long act of devotion is preserved. S. John
never mentions the fact of Christ praying, but in xii. 27 he perhaps
gives us a few words of prayer, and in xi. 41 a thanksgiving which im
plies previous prayer. There is an approach to the first portion of this
prayer in the thanksgiving in Matt. xi. 25, 26.
This Oratio Summi Sacerdotis falls naturally into three portions;
1. for Himself (1— 5); 2. for thedisciples (6 — 19); 3. for the whole Church
(20 — 26), the last two verses forming a summary, in which the relations
of Christ to the Father and to His own, and of His own to both Father
and Son are gathered up.
The prayer was spoken aloud (v. 1), and thus was not only a prayer,
but a source of comfort to those who heard it (».' 13), and by its preser
vation a means of faith and life to all (xx. 31). No doubt it was spoken
in Aramaic, and we- have here also, as in the discourses, no means of
determining how far the Greek version preserves the very words, how
far only the substance of what was spoken. We must take it reverently
as it has been given to us, and we shall find abundant reason for be
lieving that on the one hand it quite transcends even the beloved dis
ciple's powers of invention ; on the other that there is nothing in it to
make us doubt that this report of it is from his pen. " It is urged that
the triumphant elevation of this prayer is inconsistent with the Synoptic
account of the Agony. But the liability to fluctuations of feeling and
emotion is inherent in humanity, and was assumed with His manhood
by Him Who was perfect man." S. p. 238. "All human experience
bears witness in common life to the naturalness of abrupt transitions
from joy to sadness in the contemplation of a supreme trial. The
absolute insight and foresight of Christ makes such an alternation even

w. I, 2.] S. JOHN, XVII. 307
Chap. XVII. The Prayer ofthe Great High Priest.
1 — 5. The Prayer for Himself
These words spake Jesus, and lift up his eyes to heaven, 17
and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy,
Son also may glorify thee : as thou hast given him power over 2
more intelligible. He could see, as man cannot do, both the complete
ness of His triumph and the suffering through which it was to be
gained." W. p. 237. The three characteristics of the Gospel, sim
plicity, subtlety, and sublimity, reach a climax here. Bengel calls this
chapter the simplest in language, the profoundest in meaning, in the
whole Bible.
The place where these words were spoken is not stated. If the view
taken above (xiv. 31) is correct, they were spoken in the upper room,
after the company had risen from supper, in the pause before starting
for the Mount of Olives (xviii. 1). Westcott thinks that "the upper
chamber was certainly left after xiv. 31," and that as "it is inconceiv
able that chap. xvii. should have been spoken anywhere except under
circumstances suited to its unapproachable solemnity," these would best
be found in the Temple Courts. Here was the great Golden Vine, to
suggest the allegory of the Vine (xvi. 1 — n), and "nowhere could the
outlines of the future spiritual Church be more fitly drawn than in the
sanctuary of the old Church." It is perhaps slightly against this at
tractive suggestion, that surroundings so rich in meaning would prob
ably have been pointed out by a writer so full of feeling for dramatic
contrasts and harmonies as the writer of this Divine Epic (comp. iii. 2,
iv. 6, xiii. 30, xviii. 3, 5, 28, 40, xix. 23 — 27, 31—42).
1 — 6. The Prayer for Himself.
The Son was sent to give to men eternal life, which consists in the
knowledge of God. This work the Son has completed to the glory of
the Father, and therefore prays to be glorified by the Father.
1. Thesewords] More exactly, these things, as in xvi. t, 4, 6, 25, 33.
lifted up his eyes] in calm confidence and in the assurance of victory
(xvi. 33). The attitude is in marked contrast to His falling on His
face in the garden (Matt. xxvi. 39). ' To heaven ' does not prove that
He was in the open air: comp. Acts. vii. 55; Luke xviii. 13.
Father] This is His claim to be heard. Comp. 'Abba, Father' in
Mark xiv. 36, and see Lightfoot on Gal. iv. 6.
the hour] See on ii. 4 and xii. 27. S. John loves to mark each
great crisis in Christ's life ; this is the last.
glorify thy Son] By His return to glory (v. 5) through suffering and
death. Comp. Phil. ii. 9 — n.
that thy Son also may glorify] By making known the glory of God,
through the Son. To make God known is to glorify Him. 'Also'
must be omitted, and for ' Thy Son ' we ought perhaps to read ' the
Son.'

308 S. JOHN, XVII. [w. 3, 4.
all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou
3 hast given him. And this is life eternal, that they might
know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou
4 hast sent. I have glorified thee on the earth : I have finished
2. As thou hast given him power] Better, Even as Thou gavest
Him authority. The authority was given once for all, and is the
reason for the petition in v. 1. Comp. v. 27.
all flesh] A Hebraism not used elsewhere in this Gospel. Comp.
Matt. xxiv. 22; Luke iii. 6; Acts ii. 17; Rom. iii. 20, &c. Fallen man,
man in his frailty, is specially meant ; but the Second Adam has do
minion also over ' all sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field,
the fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea. ' Ps. viii. 7, 8. In the fol
lowing texts 'all flesh' includes the brute creation; Gen. vi. 19, vii. 15,
16, 21, viii. 17, ix. 11, 15, 16, 17; Ps. cxxxvi. 25; Jer. xxxii. 27, xiv. 5.
Once more, therefore, Jewish enclusiveness is condemned. The Mes
siah is King of ' all flesh, ' not of the Jews only.
that he should give, &c] Literally, in order that all that Thou hast
given Him, He should give to them eternal life. 'All that' is neuter
singular; 'to them' is masculine plural. Believers are given to Christ
as a united whole; they earn eternal life as individuals. Comp. i. 11,
vi. 37.
3. And this is life eternal] More exactly, But the life eternal is
this. ' The life eternal ' means that which has just been mentioned ;
and ' is this' means ' this is what it consists in : ' comp. iii. 19, xv. 12.
that they might know] Literally, in order that they may recognise ;
comp. vi. 29, xv. 12; 1 John iii. 11, 23, v. 3; 2 John 6. The eternal
life is spoken of as already present (see on iii. 36, v. 24, vi. 47, 54);
hence 'may,' not 'might.' Moreover it is the appropriation of the
knowledge that is specially emphasized ; hence 'recognise' rather than
simply 'know.' Comp. Wisdom xv. 3.
thee the only true God) i.e. 'Thee as the only true God.' For
'true' see note on i. 9 and comp. iv. 23, vi. 32, xv. 1 : ' the only true
God ' is directed against the many false, spurious gods of the heathen.
This portion of the truth was what the Gentiles so signally failed to
recognise. Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent] Better, Him whom Thou didst
send — Jesus Christ; or, Jesus as Christ. This portion of the truth
the Jews failed to recognise. But the words are not without difficulty,
even when we insert the 'as;' and the run of the Greek words is
rather against the insertion of ' as. ' If ' Christ ' were a predicate and
not part ofthe proper name we should expect 'Jesus, whom Thou didst
send, as Christ.' Probably in this verse we have the substance and not
the exact words of Christ's utterance. That He should use the name
' Jesus ' here is perhaps improbable ; that He should anticipate the use
of 'Jesus Christ' as a proper name is very improbable; and the expres
sion ' the true God ' is not used elsewhere by Christ and is used by S.
John (1 John v. 20). We conclude, therefore, that the wording here is
the Evangelist's, perhaps abbreviated from the actual words.

w. 5—7.] S. JOHN, XVII. 309
the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, 5
glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I
had with thee before the world was.
6 — 19. The Prayer for His Disciples.
I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou 6
gavest me out of the world : thine they were, and thou gavest
them me; and they have kept thy word. Now they have 7
4. / have glorified] Better, I glorified. In confident anticipation
Christ looks backs from the point when all shall be accomplished, and
speaks of the whole work of redemption as one act. Our translators
have been very capricious throughout this chapter, rendering aorists as
perfects and perfects as aorists. Comp. vv. 6, 8, 18, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26.
I have finished] According to the right reading, having finished or
perfected. This is the way in which God is glorified, the completion
of the work of revelation.
gavest me] Better, hast given Me. Christ did not choose for Him
self. to do] Literally, in order that I may do it: this was God's purpose in
giving it. It is S. John's favourite particle; comp. v. 36 and see on
"¦ 3-
5. And now] When the ministry is completed.
glorify thou me] The pronouns are placed side by side for emphasis,
as in v. 4, where the Greek runs, 'I Thee glorified.' The two verses
are parallels; 'I Thee glorified on earth; glorify Me Thou in heaven.'
with thine own self] In fellowship with Thee. The following great
truths are contained in these two verses; (1) that the Son is in Person
distinct from the Father ; (2) that the Son, existing in glory with the
Father from all eternity, working in obedience to the Father on earth,
existing in glory with the Father now, is in Person one and the
same. I had] Imperfect tense, implying continual possession.
6 — 19. The Prayer for His Disciples.
6 — 8. The basis of the intercession ; — they have received the revela
tion given to them. The intercession itself begins v. 9.
6. / have manifested] Better, I manifested : see on v. 4 and
i. 31.which thou gavest] Better, whom Thou hast given: in the next
clause 'gavest' is right. Sometimes the Father is said to 'give' or
'draw' men to Christ (v. 24, vi. 37, 44, 65, x. 29, xviii. 9); sometimes
Christ is said to 'choose' them (vi. 70, xv. 16) : but it is always in their
power to refuse; there is no compulsion (i. 11, 12, iii. 18, 19, xii. 47,
48). kept thy word] S. John's favourite phrase (see on viii. 51): the
notion is that of intent watching. Christ's revelation of Himself and of

310 S. JOHN, XVII. [vv. 8— n.
known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of
8 thee. For I have given unto them the words which thou
gavest me; and they have received them, and have known
surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed
9 that thou didst send me. I pray for them: I pray not for
the world, but for them which thou hast given me ; for they
io are thine. And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and
ti I am glorified in them. And now I am no more in the
the Father is the Father's word (vii. 16, xii. 49); His doctrine as a
whole. 7. they have known] Rather, they know: literally, 'they have
recognised, come to know.' Comp. v. 42, vi. 69, viii. 52, 55, xiv. 9.
whatsoever thou hast given] Both His doctrine and His mission, as
the next verse explains. The whole of Christ's work of redemption in
word and act was in its origin and still is (present tense) of God.
8. the words] Or, the sayings (see on v. 47). This is not the plural
of 'word' (logos) in v. 6; but the other noun (rhemata), the singular of
which is not used by S. John. It means the separate utterances as dis
tinct from the doctrine as a whole.
they have received... have known... have believed] Better, they received
...recognised. ..believed. See on v. 4.
came out from] Better, came forth from (see on xvi. 28). They
recognised that His mission was Divine : they believed that He was sent
as the Messiah. They had proof of the first point ; the second was a
matter of faith.
9 — 19. The intercession for the disciples based on their need.
9. I pray for them, &c] Literally, I am praying concerning them ;
concerning the world I am not praying, but concerning them whom, &c.
'I,' 'them,' and 'the world' are emphatic. 'For them who have be
lieved I in turn am praying; for the world I am not praying.' On the
word here used for 'pray' see on xiv. 16. Of course this verse does not
mean that Christ never prays for unbelievers; v. 23 and Luke xxiii. 34
prove the contrary; but it is for the chosen few, in return for their
allegiance, that He is praying now.
they are thine] Although they have been given to the Son.
10. all mine are thine] Better, all things that are Mine are Thine.
The statement does not refer to persons only, but continues and ampli
fies the reason with which v. 9 concludes; 'Because they are Thine, and
all My things are Thine.' There should be no full stop at the end of
v. 9.
thine are mine] Or, the things that are Thine are Mine. The
statement is made conversely to insist on the perfect union between the
Father and the Son.
I am glorified) Better, I have been glorified; have been and still
am. in them] As the vine is glorified in its branches and fruit. They are
the vehicles and monuments ofthe glory. Comp. 1 Thess. ii. 20.

v. 12.] S. JOHN, XVII.

world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy
Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast
given me, that they may be one, as we are. While I was 12
with them in the world, I kept them in thy name : those that
thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lostr but
the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
11 — 16. In w. 6 — 8 the disciples' acceptance of Christ is given as
the basis of intercession for them : here another reason is added, — their
need of help during Christ's absence. This plea is first stated in all
simplicity, and then repeated at intervals in the petition.
11. but these] Rather, and these. The coupling of the sentences is
solemnly simple; 'And now. ..and these. ..and I.'
Holy Father] The expression occurs nowhere else ; but comp. Rev.
vi. 10; r John ii. 20; and 'Righteous Father,' v. 25. The epithet
agrees with the prayer that God would preserve the disciples from the
unholiness of the world (v. 15) in the holiness which Christ had revealed
to them and prays the Father to give them (v. 17).
keep... given] The true reading gives us, keep them in Thy name
which Thou hast given Me. In any case the Greek here rendered
'through Thy name,' and in v. 12 'in Thy name,' is the same, and
should be translated in the same manner in both verses. Comp. Rev. ii.
17, xix. 12, xxii. 4. God has given His name to Christ to reveal to the
disciples ; and Christ prays that they may be kept true to that revela
tion. On the meaning of 'name' see on i. 12.
may be one] They had just received a new bond of union. For long
there had been oneness of belief. Now they had been made one by
union with Jesus ; they were one bread and one body, for they had all
partaken ofthe one Bread (1 Cor. x. 17).
as we are] Or, even as we are (comp. v. 2) : in perfect spiritual
union conforming to the essential union between the Father and the
Son. 12- in the world] These words are omitted by the best authorities.
/ kept] Literally, / was keeping: Christ's continual watching over
His disciples is expressed. 'I' is emphatic, implying 'now that I am
leaving them, do Thou keep them. '
/ have kept) Rather, I guarded : both verb and tense are changed.
This expresses the protection which is the result of the watching. More
over the reading must be changed as in v. n ; I kept them in Thy name
which Thou hast given Me ; and I guarded them.
none of them is lost] Better, not one of them perished.
the son of perdition] The phrase is used twice only in N. T. ; here of
Judas, in 2 Thess. ii. 3 ofthe 'man of sin.' Comp. 'children of light,'
'children of darkness.' Such expressions are common in Hebrew (see on
xii. 36). 'Children of perdition' occurs Is. Ivii. 4, 'people of perdition'
Ecclus. xvi. 9, and 'son of death' 2 Sam. xii. 5. We cannot here pre
serve the full force ofthe original, in which 'perish' and 'perdition' are
represented by cognate words; 'none perished but the son of perishing.'

312 S. JOHN, XVII. [vv. 13—18.
13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the
world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.
i4 1 have given them thy word ; and the world hath hated them,
because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the-
15 world. I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the
world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
'Z Sanctify them through thy truth : thy word is truth. As thou
that the scripture] Ps. xii. 9: see on x. 35 and xiii. 18 and comp. xii. 38.
13. And now come I] Better, But now I come. The conjunction
introduces a contrast. Hitherto Christ has been with them watching
over them; 'but now' it is so no longer.
that they might] Better, that they may. Christ is praying aloud in
order that His words may comfort them when they remember that He
Himself consigned them to His Father's keeping. Comp. xi. 42.
my joy] Literally, ihe joy that is Mine: see on xiv. 27 and xv. 11.
14. I have given) 'I in emphatic opposition to the world.
thy word] The revelation of God as a whole (see on v. 16 and
v. 47)-
hath hated] Rather, hated; the aorist expresses the single act of
hate in contrast to the perfect, 'I have given' a gift which they continue
tc possess. These are the two results of discipleship ; on the one side,
Christ's protection (v. 12) and the gift of God's word; on the other, the
hatred of the world.
15. I pray not] See on xiv. 16. The nature of the protection is
made clear to the listening disciples; not exemption from attack and
temptation, but freedom from the permanent influence of the enemy.
from the evil] Rather, from the evil one ; comp. 1 John ii. 1 3, iii. 1 2,
and especially v. 18. 'From'= 'out of:' just as Christ is that in which
His disciples live and move, so the evil one, 'the ruler of this world'
(xii. 31, xvi. n), is that out of which He prays that they may be kept.
Thus "the relation of man to good and evil is a personal relation:"
comp. 1 John iv. 4.
16. They are not... world] What was stated in v. 14 as the reason
for the world's hatred is repeated here as the introduction to a new and
more definite petition ; not merely protection, but sanctification. There
is a slight change from the order of the words in v. 14; 'Of the world
they are not, even as I am not of the world.' In both verses 'I' is
emphatic. 17. Sanctify] Or, consecrate. The word expresses God's destina
tion of them for their work and His endowment of them with the
powers necessary for their work. The word is used of God's consecra
tion of Jeremiah, Moses, and the chosen people (Jer. i. 5 ; Ecclus. xlix.
7, xiv. 4; 2 Mac. i. 25). This prayer has been called "the Prayer of
Consecration. "
through thy truth) Rather, in the truth. 'Thy' is a gloss, rightly
explaining the text, but wanting in all the best MSS. The Truth is the

w. 19— 21.I S. JOHN, XVII. 313
hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them
into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that 19
they also might be sanctified through the truth.
20 — 26. The Prayer for the whole Church.
Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which 20
shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be 21
whole Christian revelation, the new environment in which believers are
placed, and which helps to work their sanctification; just as a sickly
wild plant is strengthened and changed by transplanting it to a garden.
thy word) Literally, the word that is Thine, a mode of expression
which gives prominence to the adjective. Comp. 'My doctrine is not
Mine, but His that sent Me,' vii. 16. The Greek for 'word' is logos,
God's revelation as a whole, not any single utterance or collection of
utterances. See on v. 47.
18. As thou hast sent) Better, Even as Thou didst send. Comp. x.
36- even so have I also sent] Better, I also did send. Comp. xx. 21,
xv. 9. The Apostles had already received their commission (Matt. x.
5 — 15; Mark vi. 7; Luke ix. 2 — 5), which is about to be renewed.
19. sanctify) Or, consecrate, as in v. 17. Christ does for Himself that
which He prays the Father to do for His disciples. In x. 36 He speaks
of Himself as consecrated by the Father ; set apart for a sacred purpose.
But only thus far is the consecration of Christ and of His disciples the
same. In them it also implied redemption and cleansing from sin ; and
in this sense the word is frequently connected with ' purify ' (2 Cor. vii.
1 ; Eph. v. 26; 2 Tim. ii. 21 ; Heb. ix. 13). The radical meaning of the
word is not separation, as is sometimes stated, but holiness, which in
volves separation, viz. the being set apart for God.
might be sanctified through the truth] Rather, may be sanctified or
consecrated in truth. 'In truth '= in reality and not merely in name
or appearance ; the expression is quite distinct from ' in the truth ' in v.
17. As a Priest consecrated by the Father (x. 36) He consecrates
Himself as a Sacrifice (Eph. v. 2), and thereby obtains a real internal
consecration for them through the Paraclete (xvi. 7).
20 — 26. The Prayer for the whole Church.
20. Neither pray I for these alone] More accurately, But not con
cerning these only do I pray (see on xiv. 16). The limitation stated in
v. 9 is at an end : through the Church He prays for the world (v. 21).
which shall believe] The true reading gives, who believe. The future
body of believers is regarded by anticipation as already in existence :
the Apostles are a guarantee and earnest of the Church that is to be.
on me through their word] Perhaps through their word on Me would
be better. The order of the Greek insists on the fact that those who
believe believe through the Apostles' word.
21. That they all may be one] This is the purpose rather than the

314 S. JOHN, XVII. [vv. 22, 23.
one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also
may be one in us : that the world may believe that thou hast
22 sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given
23 them ; that they may be one, even as we are one : I in them,
and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and
that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast
purport of the prayer : Christ prays for blessings for His Church with
this end in view, — that all may be one.
as] Or, even as. The unity of believers is like the unity of the
Father with the Son (x. 30), not a merely moral unity of disposition
and purpose, but a vital unity, in which the members share the life of
one and the same organism (see on Rom. xii. 4, 5). A mere agreement
in opinion and aim would not convince the world. See on v. 11. Omit
' art, ' which is an insertion of our translators.
may be one in us] The balance of authority is against 'one,' which
may be an explanatory gloss. In vi. 56 and xv. 4, 5 Christ's followers
are said to abide in Him : this is to abide in His Father also.
hast sent] Better, didst send (comp. v. 18). The eternal unity of be
lievers with one another will produce such external results ('see how
these Christians love one another '), that the world will be induced to
believe. Christian unity and love (Matt, vii.' 12 ; Luke vi. 31 ; 1 Cor.
xiii.) is a moral miracle, a. conquest of the resisting will of man, and
therefore more convincing than a physical miracle, which is a conquest
of unresisting nature. Hence the divisions and animosities of Christians
are a perpetual stumbling-block to the world.
22. Having prayed for them with a view to their unity, He states
what He Himself has done for them with the same end in view.
gavest] Better, hast given (see on v. 4). The meaning of this gift
of 'glory' seems evident from v. 24; the glory of the ascended and
glorified Christ in which believers are 'joint-heirs' with Him (see on
Rom. viii. 17). Looking forward with confidence to the issue ofthe
conflict, Christ speaks of this glory as already given back to him (v. 5)
and shared with His followers. Comp. xvi. 33.
23. / in them, and thou in me] And therefore, ' Thou in them and
they in Thee.'
made perfect in one] Literally, perfected into one; i. e. completed and
made one. In the unity the completeness consists. The expression
'into one' occurs elsewhere only xi. 52 (comp. 1 John v. 8). For 'per
fected' comp. 1 John ii. 5; iv. 12, 17, 18.
may know] Or, come to know, recognise (v. 3) gradually and in
time. This is the second effect of the unity of Christians, more perfect
than the first. The first (v. 21) was that the world is induced to believe
that God sent Christ; trie second is that the world comes to know that
God sent Christ, and moreover that He loved the world even as He
loved Christ. 'Hast sent' and 'hast loved' in both places are literally
didst send and didst love; but in the case of the second of the two
verbs the English perfect is perhaps the best representative of the

w.24, 25.] S. JOHN, XVII. 315
loved them, as thou hast loved me. Father, I will that 24
they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where
I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast
given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of
the world. 25, 26. Summary.
0 righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but as
Greek aorist. The second 'Thou' in the verse and the last 'Me'
are emphatic.
24. Father] Comp. vv, 1, 5, 11, xi. 41, xii. 27. The relationship
is the ground of the appeal ; He knows that His ' will ' is one with His
Father's. I will] Comp. xxi. 22; Matt. viii. 3, xxiii. 37, xxvi. 39; Luke xii.
49. He has already granted this by anticipation (v. 22) ; He wills that
this anticipation may be realised.
they whom] Literally, that which; the faithful as a body. See on
v. 2.
where I am] Comp. xiv. 3.
behold) In the sense of sharing and enjoying it ; for the faithful 'shall
also reign with Him.' 2 Tim. ii. 12. This glory they behold with
unveiled face, on which it is reflected as on the face of Moses. See on
2 Cor. iii. 18 and comp. 1 John iii. 2.
my glory] Literally, the glory which is Mine, a stronger expression
than that in v. 22 : see on xiv. 27.
which thou hast given me] Not the glory of the Word, the Eternal
Son, which was His in His equality with the Father, but the glory of
Christ, the Incarnate Son, with which the risen and ascended Jesus
was endowed. In sure confidence Christ speaks of this as already given,
and wills that all believers may behold and share it. Thus two gifts of
the Father to the Son meet and complete one another : those whom He
has given behold the glory that He has given.
for] Better, because.
the foundation of the world] Our Lord thrice uses this expression,
here, Luke xi. 50, and Matt. xxv. 34. Two of those who heard it
reproduce it (1 Pet. i. 20; Rev. xiii. 8, xvii. 8): comp. Eph. i. 4; Heb.
iv. 3, ix. 26, xi. n. 25, 26. Summary.
26. righteous Father] The epithet (comp. v. n) harmonizes with the
appeal to the justice oi God which follows, which is based on a simple
statement of the facts. The world knew not God ; Christ knew Him ;
the disciples knew that Christ was sent by Him. ' Shall not the Judge
of all the earth do right ? '
hath not known] Better, knew not. So also ' have known ' should
in both cases be knew, and ' hast sent ' should be didst send. The
verbs are all aorists. The conjunction kai before ' the world ' may be

316 S. JOHN, XVII. [v. 26.
I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast
a6 sent me. And I have declared unto them thy name, and
will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved
me may be in them, and I in them.
rendered 'indeed,' meaning 'it is true the world knew Thee not, but
yet &c.' Translate; the world indeed knew Thee not, but I knew
Thee. 26. have declared... will declare] Better, made known.. .will make
known. The verb is cognate with that rendered ' know ' in v. 25, and
here as there the aorist is used, not the perfect. Christ knows the
Father and makes known His name, i.e. His attributes and will (see on
i. 12), to the disciples. This imparting of knowledge is already accom
plished in part, — ' I made known' (comp. xv. 15) ; but the knowledge
and the love which imparts it being alike inexhaustible, there is room
for perpetual instruction throughout all time, especially after the Para
clete has been given, — 'I will make known' (comp. xiv. 26, xvi. 13).
wherewith thou hast loved me] In the Greek we have a double accu
sative, as in Eph. ii. 4. ' Hast loved ' should be didst love (see on v. 4) :
but possibly this is a case where the English present might be admitted
as the best equivalent of the Greek aorist (see on xv. 8).
may be in them] May rule in their hearts as a guiding principle,
without which they cannot receive the knowledge here promised ; for
'he that loveth not, knoweth not God ' (1 John iv. 8).
/ in them] These last words of Christ's Mediatorial Prayer sum up
its purpose. They are the thread which runs through all these farewell
discourses. He is going away, and yet abides wilh them. His bodily
presence passes away, His spiritual presence remains for ever ; not seen
with the eye without, but felt as life and strength within. Having
known Christ after the flesh, now they know Him so no more : they are
in Christ, a new creation (2 Cor. v. 16, 17).
Chap. XVIII.
We enter now upon the second part of the second main division of the
Gospel. The Evangelist having given us the inner Glorification
of Christ in His last Discourses (xiii.— xvii.), now sets forth
His outer Glorification in His Passion and Death (xviii., xix.).
This part, like the former (see introduction to chap, xiii.), may be
divided into four. 1. The Betrayal (xviii. 1 — 11); 2. The Jewish
Trial (12 — 27) ; 3. The Roman Trial (xviii. 28 — xix. 16) ; 4. The
Death and Burial (17 — 42).
" We return once more from discourse to narrative, which preponde
rates in the whole of the remaining portion of the Gospel. Accordingly
as we have found hitherto that in the narrative portions the marks of an
eye-witness at once begin to multiply, so here especially they occur
in such large amount and in such rapid succession that it appears impos
sible to resist the conviction that from an eye-witness and no one else the
account proceeds." S. p. 239.

S. JOHN, XVIII. 317
Dr Westcott (Speaker's Commentary, N.T., Vol. 11. p. 249) observes;
" 1. It is a superficial and inadequate treatment of his narrative to
regard it as a historical supplement of the other narratives, or of the
current oral narrative on which they are based  The record is inde
pendent and complete in itself. It is a whole, and like the rest of the
Gospel an interpretation of the inner meaning of the history which it
contains. Thus in the history of the Passion three thoughts among others rise
into clear prominence :
(1) The voluntariness of Christ's sufferings ; xviii. 4, 8, n, 36;
xix. 28, 30.
(2) The fulfilment of a divine plan in Christ's sufferings; xviii.
4, 9, 11; xix. ii. 24, 28, 36, 37.
(3) The majesty which shines through Christ's sufferings; xviii. 6,
20 — 23 (comp. Luke xxii. 53), 37; xix. 11, 26, 27, 30.
The narrative in this sense becomes a commentary on earlier words
which point to the end; (1) x. 17, 18; (2) xiii. 1; (3) xiii. 31.
2. In several places the full meaning of S. John's narrative is first
obtained by the help of words or incidents preserved by the synoptists.
His narrative assumes facts found in them: e.g. xviii. 11, 33, 40,
xix. 41.
3. The main incidents recorded by more than one of the other
Evangelists which are omitted by S. John are : (by all three) the agony,
traitor's kiss, mockery as prophet, council at daybreak, impressment of
Simon, reproaches of the spectators, darkness, confession of the centu
rion ; (by S. Matthew and S. Mark) the desertion by all, examination
before the Sanhedrin at night, false witness, adjuration, great Con
fession, mockery after condemnation, cry from Ps. xxii, rending of the
veil. Other incidents omitted by S. John are recorded by single Evange
lists : (S. Matthew) power over the hosts of heaven, Pilate's wife's mes
sage, Pilate's hand-washing, self-condemnation of the Jews, earthquake;
(S. Mark) flight of the young man, Pilate's question as to the death of
Christ ; (S. Luke) examination before Herod, lamentation of the women,
three ' words ' from the Cross (xxiii. 34, 43, 46), repentance of one of
the robbers.
4. The main incidents peculiar to S. John are : the words of power
at the arrest, examination before Annas, first conference of the Jews
with Pilate and Pilate's private examination, first mockery and Ecce
Homo, Pilate's maintenance of his words, the iast charge (xix. 25 — 27),
the thirst, piercing of the side, ministry of Nicodemus.
5. In the narrative of incidents recorded elsewhere S. John con
stantly adds details, often minute and yet most significant : e. g. xviii. 1,
2, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 26, 28, xix. 14, 17, 41. See the notes.
6. In the midst of great differences of detail the Synoptists and
S. John offer many impressive resemblances as to the spirit and character
ofthe proceedings : e.g. (1) the activity ofthe 'High Priests' (i.e. the
Sadducaean hierarchy) as distinguished from the Pharisees; (2) the
course of the accusation — civil charge, religious charge, personal influ
ence ; (3) the silence of the Lord in His public accusations, with the

318 S. JOHN, XVIII. [vv. I, 2.
1 — 11. The B'etrayal.
18 When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with
his disciples over the brook Cedron, where was a garden,
2 into the which he entered, and his disciples. And Judas
also, which betrayed him, knew the place : for Jesus ofttimes
significant exception, Matt. xxvi. 64 ; (4) the tone of mockery ; (5) the
character of Pilate." 1 — 11. The Betrayal.
1. he went forth] From the upper room. The same word is used
of leaving the room, Matt. xxvi. 30; Markxiv.26; Lukexxii.39. Those
who suppose that the room is left at xiv. 31 (perhaps for the Temple),
interpret this of the departure from the city, which of course it may
mean in any case.
the brook Cedron) Literally, the ravine of the Kedron, or of the
cedars, according to the reading, the differences of which are here ex
ceedingly interesting. Of the cedars (tG>v TLiopwv) is the reading of the
great majority of the authorities ; but of the Kedron (tov KeSpov or tov
KtSpiiv) is well supported. Ofthe cedars is the reading of the LXX. in
1 K. xv. 13 and occurs as a various reading 2 S. xv. 23; 1 K. ii. 37;
2 K. xxiii. 6, 12. The inference is that both names were current, the
Hebrew having given birth to a Greek name of different meaning but
very similar sound. Kedron or Kidron = 'black,' and is commonly sup
posed to refer to the dark colour ofthe water or the gloom ofthe ravine.
But it might possibly refer to the black green of cedar trees, and thus the
two names would be united. This detail of their crossing the ' Wady '
of the Kidron is given by S. John alone ; but he gives no indication of
a "reference to the history of the flight of David from Absalom and
Ahitophel " (2 S. xv. 23). ' Brook ' is misleading ; the Greek word
means ' winter- torrent, ' but even in winter there is little water in the
Kidron. Neither this word nor the name Kedron occurs elsewhere in
N. T.
a garden] Or, orchard. S. Matthew and S. Mark give us the name
ofthe enclosure or 'parcel of ground' (John iv. 5) rather than 'place,'
of which this 'garden' formed the whole or part. Gethsemane = oil-
press, and no doubt olives abounded there. The very ancient olive-trees
still existing on the traditional site were probably put there by pilgrims
who replanted the spot after its devastation at the siege of Jerusalem.
S. John gives no hint of a comparison between the two gardens, Eden
and Gethsemane, which commentators from Cyril to Isaac Williams
have traced. See on Mark i. 13 for another comparison.
and his disciples] Literally, Himself and His disciples, Judas ex
cepted. 2. which betrayed) Better, who was betraying : he was at that
moment at work. Comp. v. 5.
knew the place] Therefore Christ did not go thither to hide or escape,

v. 3-] S. JOHN, XVIII. 319
resorted thither with his disciples. Judas then, having 3
received a band of men, and officers from the chief priests
and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and
as Celsus scoffingly asserted. Origen (Cels. 11. 10) appeals to w. 4 and
5 as proving that Jesus deliberately surrendered Himself.
ofttimes] Comp. viii. 1, and see on Luke xxi. 37, xxii. 39. The
owner must have known of these gatherings, and may himself have been
a disciple. resorted thither] Literally, assembled there; as if these gatherings
were for teaching of a more private kind than was given to the
multitude. 3. Judas then] Better, Judas therefore ; S. John's favourite parti
cle, as in vv. 4,6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 19, 24, 27, 28, 29, 31, 33, 37,
40. It was because Judas knew that Jesus often went thither that he
came thither to take Him. "Our English version gives little idea of the
exactness ofthe description which follows." S. p. 241.
a band of men] Rather, the band of soldiers. This is one part of
the company ; Roman soldiers sent to prevent ' an uproar ' among the
thousands of pilgrims assembled to keep the Passover (see on Matt.
xxvi. 5). The word for band, speira, seems elsewhere in N. T. to mean
'cohort,' the tenth of a legion (Matt, xxvii. 27 ; Mark xv. 16; Acts x. 1,
xxi. 31, xxvii. 1), and with this Polybius (xi. xxi. 1 ; [xxiii. 1]) agrees.
But Polybius sometimes (vi. xxiv. 5, xv. ix. 7, in. cxiii. 3) appears
to use speira for 'maniple,' the third part of a cohort and about 200
men. In any case only a portion of the cohort which formed the garri
son of the fortress of Antonia can here be meant : but that the arrest of
Jesus was expected to produce a crisis is shewn by the presence of the
chief officer ofthe cohort (v. 12). The Jewish hierarchy had no doubt
communicated with Pilate, and his being ready to try the case at so early
an hour as 5 A. M. may be accounted for in this way.
officers from the chief priests and Pharisees] i. e. from the Sanhedrin.
These may have been either officers of justice appointed by the Sanhe
drin, or a portion of the Levitical temple-police : that some of the latter
were present is clear from Luke xxii. 4, 52. This is a second part
ofthe company. S. Luke (xxii. 52) tells us that some ofthe chief priests
themselves were there also. Thus there were (1) Roman soldiers,
(2) Jewish officials, (3) chief priests.
with lanterns and torches] The ordinary equipment for night duty,
which the Paschal full-moon would not render useless. It was possible
that dark woods or buildings would have to be searched. The word for
' lantern, ' phanos, occurs here only in N. T. ; and here only is lampas
rendered 'torch;' elsewhere either 'hght' (Acts xx. 8) or 'lamp' (Matt.
xxv. 1 — 8 ; Rev. iv. 5, viii. 10). ' Torch ' would perhaps be best in all
cases, even in Matt. xxv. 1 — 8, leaving 'lamp ' free as the translation of
luchnos (v. 35; Matt. v. 15, vi. 22; Mark iv. 21; Luke viii. 16, xi. 33,
34, 36, &c.) for which 'light' and 'candle' are either inadequate or
misleading. Torches were fed with oil carried in a vessel (Matt. xxv. 4)
for the purpose.

320 S. JOHN, XVIII. [w. 4— 6.
4 weapons. Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should
come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom
s seek ye ? They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus
saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed
6 him, stood with them. As soon then as he had said unto
4. all things that should come] Better, all the things that were
coming. went forth] From what? (i) from the shade into the light;
(2) from the circle of disciples; (3) from the depth of the garden;
(4) from the garden itself. It is impossible to say which of these sug
gestions is right; the last is not contradicted by v. 26. The kiss of
Judas is by some placed here, by others after v. 8. While 'His hour
was not yet come ' (vii. 30, viii. 20), He had withdrawn from danger
(viii. 59, xi. 54, xii. 36) ; now he goes forth to meet it. He who had
avoided notoriety (v. 13) and royalty (vi. 15), goes forth to welcome
death. said] The better reading gives saith. His question perhaps had
two objects; to withdraw attention from the disciples (v. 8), and to
make His captors realise what they were doing.
5. Jesus of Nazareth] Or, Jesus the Nazarene (Matt. ii. 23), a
rather more contemptuous expression than 'Jesus of Nazareth' (i. 46;
Acts x. 38; comp. Matt. xxi. 11). 'The Nazarene 'in a contemptuous
sense occurs xix. 19; Matt. xxvi. 71; Mark xiv. 67. It is sometimes
used in a neutral sense (Mark x. 47; Luke xviii. 37, xxiv. 19). Later
on the contempt of Jews and heathen became the glory of Christians
(Acts ii. 22, iii. 6, iv. 10, vi. 14).
I am he] The 'he' is not expressed in the Greek: and 'I am' to
Jewish ears was the name of Jehqvah. We have had the same expres
sion several times in this Gospel (iv. 26), vi. 20, viii. 24, 28, 58, xiii. 13
(see notes in each place). Judas, if not the chief priests, must have
noticed the significant words. There is nothing in the narrative to
shew that either the whole company were miraculously blinded (Luke
xxiv. 16), or that Judas in particular was blinded or paralysed. Even
those who knew Him well might fail to recognise Him at once by
night and with the traces of the Agony fresh upon Him.
which betrayed him, stood) Literally, who was betraying Him (v. 2),
was standing. This tragic detail is impressed on S. John's memory.
In this as in the lanterns and torches, which he alone mentions, we
have the vividness ofthe eye-witness. S. Luke (xxii. 47) tells us that
' Judas, one of the twelve, went before them, and drew near unto Jesus
to kiss Him.' Apparently, after having done this, he fell back and
rejoined Christ's enemies, standing in the foreground.
6. As soon then as he had said] Better, when therefore (see on v. 3)
He said. The Evangelist intimates that what followed was the imme
diate consequence of Christ's words.
went backward, and fell] Whether this was the natural effect of
guilt meeting with absolute innocence, or a supernatural effect wrought

vv. 7— io.] S. JOHN, XVIII. 321
them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.
Then asked he them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, 7
Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus answered, I have told you that I 8
am he: if therefore ye seek me, let these go their way : that 9
the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which
thou gavest me have I lost none. Then Simon Peter 10
by Christ's will, is a question which we have not the means of deter
mining. Moreover, the distinction may be an unreal one. Is it not
His will that guilt should quail before innocence? The result in this
case proved both to the disciples and to His foes that His surrender
was entirely voluntary (x. 18). Once before, the majesty of His words
had overwhelmed those who had come to arrest Him (vii. 46) ; and it
would have been so now, had not He willed to be taken. Comp.
Matt. xxvi. 53, where the expression 'legions of angels' may have
reference to the fragment of a legion that had come to superintend His
capture. 7. Then asked he them again) Again therefore (v. 3) He asked
them. Their first onset had been baffled ; He Himself therefore gives
them another opening. They repeat the terms of their warrant; they
have been sent to arrest Jesus the Nazarene.
8. I have told) Rather, I told.
let these] At first Jesus had gone forward (v. 4) from His company,
as Judas from his. Judas had fallen back on his followers while the
disciples followed up and gathered round Christ. Thus the two bands
confronted one another.
9. thou gavest me have I lost] Better, Thou hast given me I lost
(see on xvii. 4). The reference is to xvii. 12, and is a strong confirma
tion of the historical truth of chap. xvii. If the prayer were the compo
sition of the Evangelist to set forth in an ideal form Christ's mental
condition at the time, this reference to a definite portion of it would be
most unnatural. The change from ' not one of them perished ' to ' I
lost of them not one' brings out more clearly the protective intervention
of Christ.
It does not follow, because S. John gives this interpretation of
Christ's words, that therefore they have no other. This was a first ful
filment, within an hour or two of their utterance, an earnest of a larger
fulfilment in the future. The meaning here must not be limited to
bodily preservation. Had they been captured, apostasy (at least for a
time) might have been the result, as was actually the case with S.
Peter. 10. Then Simon Peter] Simon Peter therefore (v. 3), because he
' saw what would follow ' (Luke xxii. 49). All four Evangelists men
tion this act of violence ; S. John alone gives the names. While S.
Peter was alive it was only prudent not to mention his name; and prob
ably S. John was the only one who knew (v. 15) the servant's name.
S. Peter's impetuous boldness now illustrates his impetuous words
xiii. 37 and Mark viii. 32.
s. JOHN 2 1

322 S. JOHN, XVIII. [w. n— 13.
having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant,
and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.
11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the
sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I
not drink it?
12 — 27. The Jewish or Ecclesiastical Trial.
12 Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews
13 took Jesus, and bound him, and led him away to Annas
having a sword] Probably one of the two produced in misunder
standing of Christ's words at the end of the supper (Luke xxii. 38).
To carry arms on a feast-day was forbidden ; so that we have here
some indication that the Last Supper was not the Passover.
the high priest's servant] No doubt he had been prominent in the
attack on Jesus, and S. Peter had aimed at his head. S. Luke also
mentions that it was the right ear that was cut, and he alone mentions
the healing, under cover of which S. Peter probably escaped.
11. Then said Jesus) Jesus therefore (v. 3) said.
the cup] S. John alone gives these words. On the other hand, the
Synoptists alone give Christ's prayer in the garden (Matt. xxvi. 39, &c.)
to which they obviously refer. Thus the two accounts confirm one
another. See on ii. 19. For the metaphor comp. Ps. lxxv. 8, lx. 3;
Job xxi. 20; Jer. xxv. 15; Rev. xiv. 10, xvi. 19, &c. S. Matthew gives
another, reason for putting up the sword into its place ; ' all they that
take the sword shall perish with the sword ' (xxvi. 52).
12—27. The Jewish or Ecclesiastical Trial.
12. Then the band, and the captain) Therefore (v. 3) the band &c,
because of this violent attempt at resistance. The captain or chiliarch
is the tribune or chief officer of the Roman cohort. The representa
tions of the hierarchy to the Romans are confirmed by S. Peter's act :
Jesus the Nazarene is a dangerous character who stirs up His followers
to rebellion ; He must be properly secured and bound. Perhaps also
their falling to the ground on meeting Him impressed them with the
necessity of using the utmost caution, as with a powerful magician.
The whole force is required to secure Him.
13. to Annas first] Whether Annas was ' chief of the priests
(2 K. xxv. 18), or president, or vice-president, of the Sanhedrin, we
have no information. Certainly he was one of the most influential
members of the hierarchy, as is shewn by his securing the high-priest
hood for no less than five of his sons, as well as for his son-in-law
Caiaphas, after he had been deposed himself. He held office A.D.
7 — 14, his son Eleazar a.d. 16, Joseph Caiaphas a.d. 18 — 36; after
him four sons of Annas held the office, the last of whom, another
Annas (a.d. 62), put to death S. James, the first bishop of Jerusalem.
The high-priests at this time were often mere nominees of the civil

w. 14—16.] S. JOHN, XVIII. 323
first; for he was father in law to Caiaphas, which was the
high priest that same year. Now Caiaphas was he, which 14
gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one
man should die for the people.
And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and , so did another is
disciple : that disciple was known unto the high priest, and
went in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest. But 16
power, and were changed with a rapidity which must have scandalised
serious Jews. There were probably five or six deposed high-priests in
the Sanhedrin which tried our Lord (see on Luke iii. 2). Other forms
of the name Annas are Ananias, Ananus, and Hanan.
for he was father-in-law] And therefore Caiaphas would be sure to
respect the results of a preliminary examination conducted by him.
Possibly the chief priests thought that Annas was a safer man than
Caiaphas, and the father-in-law having taken the lead which they
wanted the high-priest would be compelled to follow. This examina
tion before Annas is given us by S. John only, who tacitly corrects the
impression that the examination before Caiaphas was the only one.
thai same year] Omit 'same' and see on xi. 49. Comp. xx. 19 and
Mark iv. 35, where ' same ' is improperly inserted, as here.
14. Now Caiaphas was he] See on xi. 50 — 52. The remark is
made here to recall the prophecy now so near fulfilment, and perhaps
to intimate that with Caiaphas and his father-in-law to direct the trial
it could have but one issue.
15. followed] Or, was following; the descriptive imperfect.
another disciple] Some good authorities read ' the other disciple,' but
the balance is very decidedly in favour of ' a«other. ' There is no reason
for doubting the almost universal opinion that this 'other' was S. John
himself; an opinion which agrees with the Evangelist's habitual reserve
about himself (i. 40, xiii. 23 — 25, xix. 26, xx. 2 — 8, xxi. 20 — 24); and
also with the fact that S. John frequently accompanies S. Peter (Luke
xxii. 8; Acts iii. 1, iv. 13, viii. 14). But it must be allowed that the
opinion is short of certain ; although the fact that S. John elsewhere
designates himself as 'the disciple .whom Jesus loved' is in no degree
against the identification. Here the description, 'the disciple whom
Jesus loved,' would explain nothing and would therefore be out of
place (see Introduction, chap. 11. iii. (3) b). S. Augustine, Calvin and
others suppose some person otherwise unknown to be meant. Other
conjectures are, S. James, the Evangelist's brother, and (strangely
enough) Judas Iscariot.
was known] The nature of this 'acquaintance' (Luke ii. 44, xxiii.
49) is nowhere explained.
the high priest] Caiaphas is probably meant (vv. 13, 24); but as de
posed high priests still kept the title sometimes (Luke iii. 2 ; Acts iv. 6),
it is possible that Annas is intended.
the palace] Rather, the court or open space in the centre or in front
ofthe house (Luke xxii. 55). The same word is used for the 'sheep-
21  2

324 S. JOHN, XVIII. [vv. 17—19.
Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other
disciple, which was known unto the high priest, and spake
17 unto her that kept the door, and brought in Peter. Then
saith the damsel that kept the door unto Peter, Art not thou
18 also one of this man's disciples ? He saith, I am not. And
the servants and officers stood there, who had made a fire of
coals; for it was cold: and they warmed themselves: and
Peter stood with them, and warmed himself.
19 The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of

fold' (x. 1, 16). It is not improbable that Annas lived in a portion of
the, official residence of his son-in-law ; but even if this was not the case,
it is no violent supposition that Annas conducted a preliminary examina
tion in the house of Caiaphas (see on v. 13).
16. stood) Or, was standing; the descriptive imperfect again.
Comp. vv. 5,15. The details here also indicate the report of an eye
witness. 'At the door without' seems to indicate that the 'court' was
inside rather than in front of the building.
her that kept the door) Comp. Rhoda, Acts xii. 13.
17. Then saith the damsel] The damsel therefore (v. 3) saith.
Art not thou also] Rather, Art thou also (as well as thy companion)
or, surely thou art not: S. Peter's denial is thus, as it were, put into his
mouth. See on iv. 29 and comp. iv. 33, vi. 67, vii. 47, ix. 40. In all
these passages the form of the question anticipates a negative answer.
one of this man's disciples] Or, one ofthe disciples of this man. 'This
man' and the turn of the sentence are contemptuous. Comp. ix. 16, 24,
xi. 47. S. John had hurried on to the room where Christ was being
examined; as at the Cross (xix. 26) he kept close to his Master; and in
neither case was molested. S. Peter, who 'followed afar off' (Luke xxii.
54) and that rather out of curiosity 'to seethe end' (Matt. xxvi. 58) than
out of love, encountered temptation and fell.
18. And the servants, &c] Better, Now the servants and the officers,
having made... were standing and warming themselves. The tribune
(v. 12) having deposited his prisoner in safety, has withdrawn with his
men. Only the Jewish officials remain, joined now by the household
servants of the high priests.
a fire of coals] Charcoal in a brazier, 'to the light' of which (Luke
xxii. 56) S. Peter turned. Comp. xxi. 9; Ecclus. xi. 32.
for it was cold] Cold nights are exceptional but not uncommon in
Palestine in April. Jerusalem stands high.
and Peter, &c] Rather, And Peter also was with them, standing
and warming himself, pretending to be indifferent, but restlessly
changing his posture. S. Luke says he 'sat to the light.'
19. The high priest then] Rather, therefore (v. 3), connecting what
follows with vv. 13, 14. Again we are in doubt as to who is meant by
the high-priest (see on v. 15), but it will be safest to consider that
Caiaphas is meant throughout. Neither hypothesis is free from difficulty.

w. 20— 23.] S. JOHN, XVIII. 32S
his doctrine. Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the 20
world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple,
whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said
nothing. Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, 21
what I have said unto them : behold, they know what I said.
And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which 22
stood by stroke Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying,
Answerest thou the high priest so? Jesus answered him, 23
If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well,
If the high priest here is Caiaphas, the difficulty is to explain v. 24 (see
note there). But we may suppose that while Annas is conducting the
examination Caiaphas enters and takes part in it.
of his disciples, &c] It was hoped that some evidence might be
obtained which would be of service in the formal trial that was to
follow. 20. / spake] The true reading gives, I have spoken. There is a
strong emphasis on 'I.' Christ answers no questions about His disciples ;
He bears the brunt Himself alone. Moreover He seems to contrast the
openness of His proceedings with the secrecy of His enemies.
openly] See on vii. 4, 26.
to the world ] Not to a secret society. Comp. viii. 26.
in the synagogue] All the best MSS. omit the article; in synagogue,
as we say 'in church.' See on vi. 59.
whither the Jews always resort] The better reading gives, where all
the Jews come together. The word rendered 'resort' is not the same
as that rendered 'resort' in v. 2. 'I always taught in public places,
where all the Jews meet.' Nothing could be more open than His
teaching. Comp. Matt. x. 27.
have I said) Rather, I spake, the aorist of the verb in the first clause,
which is in the perfect. See next verse.
21. which heard) Better, who have heard; and 'I have said' should
again be I spake.
they know] Or, these know, as if implying that they were present and
ought to be examined. According to Jewish rule witnesses for the de
fence were heard first. 'These' cannot refer to S. Peter and S. John.
S. Peter is still outside by the fire.
22. struck Jesus with the palm of his hand] Literally, gave a blow,
and the word for 'blow' (elsewhere xix. 3, Mark xiv. 65 only) etymo-
logically means a 'blow with a rod,' but is also used for a 'blow with
the open hand.' The word used for 'smite' in v. 23 is slightly in
favour of the former : but Matt. v. 39 and Acts xxiii. 2 are in favour of
the latter.
23. If I have spoken] Rather (as at the end of vv. 20, 21), If I
spake (comp. xiii. 14, xv. 20). This seems to shew that Christ does not
refer, as our version would lead., us to suppose, to His answer to the
high-priest, but to the teaching about which He is being examined,

326 S. JOHN, XVIII. [w. 24—26.
24 why smitest thou me? Now Annas had sent him bound unto
Caiaphas the high priest.
25 And Simon Peter stood and warmed himself. They
said therefore unto him, Art not thou also one of his
26 disciples? He denied it, and said, I am not. One of the
servants of the high priest, being his kinsman whose ear
He here gives His own illustration of His own precept (Matt. v. 39) ;
to exclude personal retaliation does not exclude calm protest and re
buke. 24. Now Annas had sent him bound] The receiyed text, following
important authorities, has no conjunction. The Sinaitic MS. and some
minor authorities insert 'now' or 'but' (Si).. But an overwhelming
amount of evidence, including the Vatican MS., gives S. John's favourite
particle, therefore (oBc). Moreover the verb is aorist, not pluperfect.
Annas therefore sent Him. It is not necessary to enquire whether the
aorist may not virtually be pluperfect in meaning. Even if 'now' were
genuine and the remark were an after-thought which ought to have pre
ceded v. 19, the aorist might still be rendered literally, as in Matt. xxvi.
48 ('gave them,' not 'had given them a sign'). Comp. Matt. xiv.
3. 4-
But 'therefore' shews that the remark is not an after-thought. Be
cause the results of the preliminary investigation before Annas were
such (there was a primd facie case, but nothing conclusive), 'Annas
therefore sent Him' for formal trial to Caiaphas, who had apparently
been present (see on v. 19) during the previous interrogation and had
taken part in it.
bound] He had been bound by the Roman soldiers and Jewish
officials when He was arrested (v. 12). This was to prevent escape or
rescue. During the examination he would be set free as possibly in
nocent. After the examination He was bound again as presumably
guilty, or as before to prevent escape.
25. And Simon Peter stood and warmed himself] Better, Now Simon
Peter was standing and warming himself (v. 18).
They said therefore] The movement in taking Jesus from Annas to
Caiaphas once more attracted attention to the stranger by the fire.
Art not thou also] Rather, Art thou also (see on v. 17). A look of
sympathy and distress on S. Peter's face, as His Master appears bound
as a criminal, and perhaps with the mark of the blow (v. 22) on His
face, provokes the exclamation, Surely thou also art not one of His
disciples? 26. his kinsman) A kinsman of him. How natural that an
acquaintance ofthe high-priest (v. 15) and known to his portress (v. 16)
should know this fact also as well as Malchus' name (v. 10). This
confirms the ordinary view that the 'other disciple' (v. 15) is the
Evangelist himself. This third -accusation and denial was, as S. Luke
tells us, about an hour after the second; so that our Lord must have
'turned and looked upon Peter' either from a room looking into the

v. 27.] S. JOHN, XVIII. 327
Peter cut off, saith, Did not I see thee in the garden with
him? Peter then denied again: and immediately the cock 27
crew.
court, or as He was being led to receive the formal sentence of the
Sanhedrin after the trial before Caiaphas, not as He was being taken
from Annas to Caiaphas.
Did not I see thee] 'I' is emphatic; 'with my own eyes.'
27. Peter then denied again] Again therefore (v. 3) Petei denied;
because he had denied before. S. John, like S. Luke, omits the oaths
and curses (Mark xiv. 71; Matt. xxvi. 73). We may believe that
S. Peter himself through S. Mark was the first to include this aggrava
tion of his guilt in the current tradition.
the cock crew] Rather, a cock crew. In none of the gospels is there
the definite article which our translation inserts. This was the second
crowing (Mark xiv. 72). A difficulty has been made here because the
Talmud says that fowls, which scratch in dunghills, are unclean. But
(1) the Talmud is inconsistent on this point with itself; (2) not all Jews
would be so scrupulous as to keep no fowls in Jerusalem; (3) certainly
the Romans would care nothing about such scruples.
Just as the Evangelist implies (v. 11), without mentioning, the Agony
in the garden, so he implies (xxi. 15), without mentioning, the repent
ance of S. Peter. The question has been raised, why he narrates
S. Peter's fall, which had been thrice told already. There is no need to
seek far-fetched explanations, as that "there might be contained in it
some great principle or prophetic history, and perhaps both : some great
principle to be developed in the future history of the Church, or of
S. Peter's Church." Rather, it is part of S. John's own experience
which falls naturally into the scope and plan of his Gospel, setting forth
on the one side the Divinity of Christ, on the other the glorification of
His manhood through suffering. Christ's foreknowledge of the fall of
His chief apostle (xiii. 38) illustrated both : it was evidence of His
Divinity (comp. ii. 24, 25), and it intensified His suffering. S. John,
therefore, gives both the prophecy and the fulfilment. It has been
noticed that it is "S. Peter's friend S. John, who seems to mention
most what may lessen the fault of his brother apostle;" that servants
and officers were about him ; that in the second case he was pressed by
more than one; and that on the last occasion a kinsman of Malchus
was among his accusers, which may greatly have increased Peter's terror.
Moreover, this instance of human frailty in one so exalted (an instance
which the life of the great Exemplar Himself could not afford), is given
us with fourfold emphasis, that none may presume and none despair.
On the difficulties connected with the four accounts of S. Peter's
denials see Appendix B.
28— XIX. 16. The Roman or Civil Trial.
As already stated, S. John omits both the examination before Caiaphas
and the Sanhedrin at an irregular time and place, at midnight and at
'the Booths' (Matt. xxvi. 57 — 68: Mark xiv. 53 — 65), and also the

328 S. JOHN, XVIII. [v. 28.

28— XIX. 16. The Roman or Civil Trial.
: Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of
judgment : and it was early; and they themselves went not
formal meeting of the Sanhedrin after daybreak in the proper place
(Matt, xxvii. 1; Mark xv. 1; Luke xxii. 66 — 71), at which Jesus was
sentenced to death. He proceeds to narrate what the Synoptists omit,
the conference between Pilate and the Jews (vv. 28 — 32) and two
private examinations of Jesus by Pilate (w. 33 — 38 and xix. 8 — 11).
Here also we seem to have the evidence of an eyewitness. We know
that S. John followed his Lord into the high priest's palace (v. 15), and
stood by the Cross (xix. 26); it is therefore probable enough that he
followed Him into the Procurator's court.
28. Then led they] Better, They led therefore (v. 3). S. John
assumes that his readers know the result of Jesus being taken to
Caiaphas (v. 24) : He had been condemned to death ; and now His
enemies (there is no need to name them) take Him to the Roman
governor to get the sentence executed.
the hall of judgment] The margin is better, Pilate's house, i. c. the
palace. In the original it is praitorion, the Greek form of praetorium.
Our translators have varied their rendering of it capriciously: Matt.
xxvii. 27, 'common hall,' with 'governor's house' in the margin;
Mark xv. 16, 'Praetorium;' John xviii. 33 and xix. 9, 'judgment-hall.'
Yet the meaning must be the same in all these passages. Comp; Acts
xxiii. 35, 'judgment-hall;' Phil. i. 13, 'the palace.' The meaning of
praetorium varies according to the context. The word is of military
origin; (1) 'the general's tent' or 'head quarters.' Hence, in the
provinces, (2) 'the governor's residence,' the meaning in Acts xxiii. 35 :
in a sort of metaphorical sense, (3) a 'mansion' or 'palace' (Juvenal
I. 75): at Rome, (4) 'the praetorian guard,' the probable meaning in
Phil. i. 13. Of these leading significations the second is probably right
here and throughout the Gospels; the official residence ofthe Procurator.
Where Pilate resided in Jerusalem is not quite certain. We know that
'Herod's Praetorium,' a magnificent' building on the western hill of
Jerusalem, was used by Roman governors somewhat later (Philo, Leg.
ad Gaium, p. 1034). But it is perhaps more likely that Pilate occupied
part of the fortress Antonia, on the supposed site of which a chamber
with a column in it has recently been discovered, which it is thought ¦
may possibly be the scene of the scourging.
S. John's narrative alternates between the outside and inside of the
Praetorium. Outside; 28 — 32; 38 — 40; xix. 4 — 7; 12 — 16. Inside;
33—37! xix. 1—3; 8— 11.
28 — 32. Outside the Praetorium; the Jews claim the execution of
the Sanhedrin's sentence of death, and Pilate refuses it.
early] The same word, pro'i, is rendered 'morning' Matt. xvi. 3;
Mark i. 35, xi. 20, xiii. 35, xv. 1 ; the last passage being partly parallel
to this. In Mark xiii. 35 the word stands for the fourth watch (see on
Mark vi. 48), which lasted from 3.0 to 6.0 A. M. A Roman court might

v. 29.] S. JOHN, XVIII. 329
into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that
they might eat the passover. Pilate then went out unto 29
be held directly after sunrise; and as Pilate had probably been informed
that an important case was to be brought before him, delay in which
might cause serious disturbance, there is nothing improbable in his
being ready to open his court between 4.0 and 5.0 A.M. The hierarchy
were in a difficulty. Jesus could not safely be arrested by daylight, and
the Sanhedrin could not legally pronounce sentence of death by night :
hence they had had to wait till dawn to condemn Him. Now another
regulation hampers them : a day must intervene between sentence and
execution. This they shuffled out of by going at once to Pilate. Of
course if he undertook the execution, he must fix the time ; and their
representations would secure his ordering immediate execution. Thus
they shifted the breach of the law from themselves to him.
As in the life of our Lord as a whole, so also in this last week and
last day of it, the exact sequence and time of the events cannot be
ascertained with certainty. ^Chronology is not what the Evangelists
aim at giving us. For a tentative arrangement of the chief events of
the Passion see Appendix C.
they themselves) In contrast with their Victim, whom they sent in
under a Roman guard.
lest they should] Better, that they might not, omitting 'that they'
in the next clause.
be defiled] by entering a house not properly cleansed of leaven (Ex.
xii. 15).
eat the passover] It is quite evident that S. John does not regard the
Last Supper as a Paschal meal. Comp. xiii. 1, 29. It is equally
evident that the synoptic narratives convey the impression that the Last
Supper was the ordinary Jewish Passover (Matt. xxvi. 17, 18, 19; Mark
xiv. 14, 16; Luke xxii. 7, 8, 11, 13, 15). Whatever be the right
solution of the difficulty, the independence of the author of the Fourth
Gospel is manifest. Would anyone counterfeiting an Apostle venture
thus to contradict what seemed to have such strong Apostolic authority?
Would he not expect that a glaring discrepancy on so important a point
would prove fatal to his pretensions? Assume that S. John is simply
recording his own vivid recollections, whether or no we suppose him to
be correcting the impression produced by the Synoptists, and this
difficulty at any rate is avoided. S. John's narrative is too precise and
consistent to be explained away. On the difficulty as regards the
Synoptists see Appendix A; also Excursus V at the end of Dr Farrar's
S. Luke.
29. Pilate then] Pilate therefore (v. 3). Because they would not
enter, he went out to them. The Evangelist assumes that his readers
know who Pilate is, just as he assumes that they know the Twelve
(vi. 67) and Mary Magdalene (xix. 25) ; all are introduced without ex
planation. went out] The verb stands first in the Greek for emphasis. The
best MS. add 'outside' to make it still more emphatic; went out there-

330 S. JOHN, XVIII. [w. 30—32.
them, and said, What accusation bring you against this man?
30 They answered and said unto him, If he were not a
malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee.
31 Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him
according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him,
32 It is not lawful for us to put any man to death : that the
fore Pilate outside unto them; as if attention were specialy called to this
Roman concession to Jewish religiousness.
What accusation] Not that he does not know, but in accordance with
strict procedure he demands a formal indictment?
30. a malefactor] Literally, 'doing evil' or an evil-doer; not the
same expression as Luke xxiii. 32. The Jews are taken aback at
Pilate's evident intention of trying the case himself. They had expected
him merely to carry out their sentence, and had not come provided with
any definite accusation. Blasphemy, for which they had condemned
Him (Matt. xxvi. 65, 66), might be no crime with Pilate (comp. Acts
xviii. 16). Hence the vagueness of their first charge. Later on (xix. 7)
they throw in the charge of blasphemy; but they rely mainly on three
distinct charges, which being political, Pilate must hear; (i) seditious
agitation, (2) forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, (3) assuming the title,
'King ofthe Jews' (Luke xxiii. 3).
31. Then said Pilate] Pilate therefore (v. 3) said. If they will
not make a specific charge, he will not deal with the case. Pilate, im
pressed probably by his wife's dream (Matt, xxvii. 19) tries in various
ways to avoid sentencing Jesus to death. (1) He would have the Jews
deal with the case themselves; (2) he sends Jesus to Herod ; (3) he pro
poses to release Him in honour of the Feast ; (4) he will scourge Him
and let Him go. Roman governors were not commonly so scrupulous,
and Pilate was not above the average : a vague superstitious dread was
perhaps his strongest motive. Thrioe in the course of these attempts
does he pronounce Jesus innocent (v. 39, xix. 4, 6).
Take ye, &c.) Literally, Take him yourselves, and according to your
law judge Him. ' Yourselves ' and ' your ' are emphatic and slightly
contemptuous. The ' therefore ' which follows is wanting in most of
the best MSS.
It is not lawful, &c] These words are to be taken quite literally,
and without any addition, such as ' at the Passover' or 'by crucifixion,'
or 'for high treason.' The question whether the Sanhedrin had or had
not the right to inflict capital punishment at this time is a vexed one.
On the one hand we have ( 1) this verse ; (2) the statement of the Talmud
that 40 years before the destruction of Jerusalem the Jews lost this
power; (3) the evidence of Josephus (Ant. xx. ix. 1; comp. xviii. i. 1;
xvi. ii. 4, and vi.) that the high priest could not summon a judicial
court of the Sanhedrin without the Procurator's leave ; (4) the analogy
of Roman law. To this it is replied (Dollinger, First age ofthe Church,
Appendix II.) ; (i) that the Jews quibbled in order to cause Jesus to be
crucified at the Feast instead of stoned after all the people had dispersed;

v. 33-3 S. JOHN, XVIII. 331
saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signi
fying what death he should die. Then Pilate entered into 33
the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and sa,id unto

and Pilate would not have insulted the Jews from the tribunal by telling
them to put Jesus to death, if they had no power to do so; (2) that the
Talmud is in error, for the Roman dominion began 60 years before the
destruction of Jerusalem ; (3) that Josephus (xx. ix. 1) shews that the
Jews had this power : Ananus is accused to Albinus not for putting
people to death, but for holding a court without leave : had the former
been criminal it would have been mentioned; (4) that the analogy of
Roman law proves nothing, for cities and countries subject to Rome
often retained their autonomy : and there are the cases of Stephen, those
for whose death S. Paul voted (Acts xxvi. 10), and the Apostles, whom
the Sanhedrin wished to put to death (Acts v. 33) ; and Gamaliel in dis
suading the council never hints that to inflict death will bring trouble
upon themselves. To this it may be replied again; (1) that Pilate
would have exposed a quibble had there been one, and his dignity as
judge was evidently not above shewing ironical contempt for the plain
tiffs; (2) that the Talmud may be wrong about the date and right about
the fact; possibly it is right about both; (3) to mention the holding of a
court by Ananus was enough to secure the interference of Albinus, and
more may have been said than Josephus reports ; (4) autonomy in the
case of subject states was the exception ; therefore the burden of proof
rests with those who assert it of the Jews. Stephen's death (if judicial
at all) and the other cases (comp. John v. 18, vii. 1, 25, viii. 37, 59;
Acts xxi. 31) only prove that the Jews sometimes ventured on acts of
violence of which the Romans took little notice. Besides we do not
know that in all these cases the Sanhedrin proposed to do more than to
sentence to death, trusting to the Romans to execute the sentence, as
here. Pilate's whole action, and his express statement xix. 10, seem to
imply that he alone has the power to inflict death.
32. tlie saying] Or word, xii. 32 ; Matt. xx. 19.
what death] Rather, by what manner of death, as in xii. 33 and
xxi. 19. So in x. 32 the Greek means 'for what kind of a work,' not
merely 'for which work.' Comp. Matt. xxi. 23; xxii. 36; Luke vi. 32,
xxiv. 19. Had the Sanhedrin executed Him as a blasphemer or a false
prophet, He would have been stoned. The Jews had other forms of
capital punishment, but crucifixion was not among them.
33 — 37. Inside the Praetorium; Jesus is privately examined by Pilate
and makes 'a good confession' (1 Tim. vi. 13).
38. Then Pilate] Pilate therefore (v. 3). Because of the impor
tunity of the Jews Pilate is obliged to investigate further ; and being
only Procurator, although cum potestate, has no Quaestor, but conducts
the examination himself.
called Jesus] Probably the Roman guards had already, brought Him
inside the Praetorium : Pilate now calls Him before the judgment-seat.

332 S. JOHN, XVIII. [w. 34—37-
34 him, Art thou the King of the Jews ? Jesus answered him,
Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of
35 me? Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and
the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast
36 thou done ? Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this
world : if my kingdom were of this world, then would my
servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews:
37 but now is my kingdom not from hence. Pilate therefore

The conversation implies that Jesus had not heard the previous conver
sation with the Jews.
Art thou the King of the Jews T) In all four Gospels these are the
first words of Pilate to Jesus, and in all four there is an emphasis on
'Thou.' The pitiable appearance of Jesus was in such contrast to the
royal title that Pilate speaks with a tone of surprise (comp. iv. 12). The
question may mean either 'Dost Thou claim to be King?' or, 'Art
Thou the so-called King?' The royal title first appears in the mouth
of the wise men, Matt. ii. 1, next in the mouth of Pilate.
34. answered him] Omit 'him:' the introductions to vv. 34, 35,
36 are alike in form and are solemn in their brevity. The Synoptists
give merely a portion ofthe reply in v. 37.
tell it thee] ' It ' is not in the original and need not be supplied. Jesus
claims a right to know the author of the charge. Moreover the mean
ing of the title, and therefore the truth of it, would depend on the
person who used it. In Pilate's sense He was not King; in another
sense He was.
35. Am I a Jew?) 'Is it likely that I, a Roman governor, have any
interest in these Jewish questions? '
have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?) Better, delivered
Thee unto me : what didst Thou do to make Thine own people turn
against Thee?
36. My kingdom] There is a strong emphasis on 'My ' throughout
the verse; 'the kingdom that is Mine, the servants that are Mine;'
i. e. those that are truly such (see on xiv. 27). The word for 'servants'
here is the same as is rendered 'officers' in w. 3, 12, 18, 22, vii.
32, 45, 46 (comp. Matt. v. 25), and no doubt contains an allusion to
the officials of the Jewish hierarchy. In Luke i. 2, the only other place
in the Gospels where the word is used of Christians, it is rendered
'ministers,' as also in 1 Cor. iv. 1, the only place where the word occurs
in the Epistles. Comp. Acts xiii. 5.
is not of this world] Has not its origin or root there so as to draw its
power from thence. Comp. viii. 23, xv. 19, xvii. 14, 16.
if my kingdom] In the original the order is impressively reversed; if
of this world were My kingdom. For the construction comp. v. 46.
fight] Better, be striving (comp. Luke xiii. 24; 1 Cor. ix. 25). For
the construction comp. v. 46, viii. 19, 42, ix. 41, xv. 19.
but now] The meaning of 'now' is clear from the context and also

v. 37-] S. JOHN, XVIII. 333
said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou
sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for
this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness
unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my
from viii. 40, ix. 41, xv. 12, 24, 'as it is,' 'as the case really stands.'
It does not mean 'My kingdom is not of this world now, but shall be so
hereafter ; ' as if Christ were promising a millenium.
37. Art thou a king then] The Greek for 'then' (oukoun) occurs here
only in N. T. The 'Thou' is even more emphatic than in v. 33. The
two together give a tone of scorn to the question, which is half an ex
clamation. 'So then, Thou art a king ! ' Comp. i. 21.
Thou sayest that, &c] This may be rendered, Thou sayest (truly);
because, &c. But the A. V. is better : Christ leaves the title and ex
plains the nature of His kingdom — the realm of truth.
To this end... for this cause] The Greek for both is the same, and
should be rendered in the same way in Enghsh ; to this end. Both
refer to what precedes; not one to what precedes and one to what
follows. To be a king, He became incarnate; to be a king, He entered
the world.
was I born. ..came F] Better, have I been born. ..am I come. Both
verbs are perfects and express not merely a past event but one which
continues in its effects ; Christ has come and remains in the world. The
pronoun is very emphatic; in this respect Christ stands alone among
men. The verbs point to His previous existence with the Father, al
though Pilate would not see this. The expression 'come into the world'
is frequent in S. John (i. 9, ix. 39, xi. 27, xvi. 28) : as apphed to Christ
it includes the notion of His mission (iii. 17, x. 36, xii. 47, 49, xvii. 18).
that I should] This is the Divine purpose of His royal power.
bear witness unto the truth] Not merely 'witness the truth,' i. c. give
a testimony that is true, but bear witness to the objective reality of the
Truth: again, not merely 'bear. witness of,' i. e. respecting the Truth (i.
7, 15, ii. 25, v. 31 — 39, viii. 13 — 18, &c), but 'bear witness to,' i. e. in
support and defence ofthe Truth (v. 33). Both these expressions, 'wit
ness' and 'truth,' have been seen to be very frequent in S. John (see
especially chaps, i. iii. v. viii. passim). We have them combined here,
as in v. 33. This is the object of Christ's sovereignty,— to bear witness
to the Truth. It is characteristic of the Gospel that it claims to be
'the Truth.' "This title ofthe Gospel is not found in the Synoptists,
Acts, or Apocalypse; but it occurs in the Catholic Epistles (James i.
18 ; 1 Pet. i. 22; 2 Pet. ii. 2) and in S. Paul (2 Thess. ii. 12; 2 Cor.
xiii. 8; Eph. i. 13, &c). It is specially characteristic ofthe Gospel and
Epistles of S. John." Westcott, Introduction to S. John, p. xliv.
that is of the truth) That has his root in it, so as to draw the power
of his life from it. Comp. v. 36, iii. 31, viii. 47, and especially 1 John
ii. 21, iii. 19.
"It is of great interest to compare this confession before Pilate with
the corresponding confession before the high priest (Matt. xxvi. 64).

334 S. JOHN, XVIII. [vv. 38, 39.
38 voice. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when
he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and
39 saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all. But ye
have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the
The one addressed to the Jews is in the language of prophecy, the other
addressed to a Roman appeals to the universal testimony of conscience.
The one speaks of a future manifestation of glory, the other of a present
manifestation of truth  It is obvious how completely they answer
severally to the circumstances ofthe two occasions." Westcott, in loco.
38. What is truth?) Pilate does not ask about 'the Truth,' but
truth in any particular case. His question does not indicate any serious
wish to know what truth really is, nor yet the despairing scepticism of a
baffled thinker ; nor, on the other hand, is it uttered in a hght spirit of
'jesting' (as Bacon thought). Rather it is the half-pitying, half-
impatient, question of a practical man of the world, whose experience of
life has convinced him that truth is a dream of enthusiasts, and that
a kingdom in which truth is to be supreme is as visionary as that of the
Stoics. He has heard enough to convince him that the Accused is no
dangerous incendiary, and he abruptly brings the investigation to a close
with a question, which to his mind cuts at the root of the Prisoner's
aspirations. Here probably we must insert the sending to Herod Anti
pas, who had come from Tiberias, as Pilate from Caesarea, on account
of the Feast, the one to win popularity, the other to keep order (Luke
xxiii. 6 — 12).
38—40. Outside the Praetorium ; Pilate pronounces Him innocent
and offers to release Him in honour of the feast : the Jews prefer
Barabbas. 38. unto the Jews) Apparently this means the mob and not the
hierarchy. Pilate hoped that only a minority were moving against
Jesus ; by an appeal to the majority he might be able to acquit Him
without incurring odium. By pronouncing Him legally innocent he
would gain this majority ; by proposing to release Him on account of
the Feast rather than of His innocence he would avoid insulting the
Sanhedrin, who had already pronounced Him guilty. From S. Mark
(xv. 8, n) it would appear that some of the multitude hoped to deliver
Jesus on the plea of the Feast and took the initiative in reminding
Pilate of the custom, but were controlled by the priests and made to
clamour for Barabbas.
I find in him no fault at all] Rather, I find no ground of accusa
tion in him. As in xix. 6, the pronoun is emphatic; 'I, the Roman
judge, in contrast to you Jewish fanatics.' The word here and xix. 4, 6
rendered 'fault' (aitia) is rendered 'accusation' Matt, xxvii. 37 and
Mark xv. 26, and 'cause' Acts xiii. 28, xxviii. 18. In all these pas
sages it seems to mean 'legal ground for prosecution.'
39. _ ye have a custom] Nothing is known of this custom beyond
what is told us in the Gospels. Prisoners were sometimes released at
Rome at certain festivals, and it would -be quite in harmony with the

w. 40.] S. JOHN, XVIII. 335
passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King
of the Jews? Then cried they all again, saying, Not this 40
man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.

conciliatory policy of Rome to honour native festivals in this way in the
case of subject nations. In Luke xxiii. 17 the custom is said to be an
obligation; 'of necessity he must;' but the verse is of very doubtful
genuineness. that I should] Literally, in order thut I should. See on xv. 12.
the King of the Jews) Expressive of scornful contempt. Comp.
xix. 15.
40. Then cried they all again) Better, They cried out therefore
(v. 3) again all of them. S. John has not mentioned any previous shout
of the multitude ; he once more assumes that his readers know the chief
facts. See on xix. 6.
Barabbas] Or, Bar-Abbas, son of Abba (father). The innocent Son
of the Father is rejected for the blood-stained son of a father. In
Matt, xxvii. 16 and 17 some inferior authorities read 'Jesus Barabbas'
as his name, and Pilate asks ' Which do ye wish that I release to
you, Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus Who is called Christ?' The reading is
remarkable, but it is supported by no good MS.
Now Barabbas was a robber) There is a tragic impressiveness in this
brief remark. Comp. 'Jesus wept' (xi. 35), and 'And it was night'
(xiii. 30). It is to be regretted that 'robber' has not always been given
as the translation of the Greek word used here (Xijo-nis not KKiirrisi).
Thus we should have ' den of robbers' or ' robbers' cave ' (Matt. xxi. 1 3) ; ' as
against a robber' (Matt. xxvi. 55) ; ' two robbers' (Matt, xxvii. 38, 44). The
'robber ' is the bandit or brigand, who is more dangerous to persons than
to property, and sometimes combines something of chivalry with his vio
lence. In the case of Barabbas we know from S. Mark and S. Luke that
he had been guilty of insurrection and consequent bloodshed rather than
of stealing; and this was very likely the case also with the two robbers
crucified with Jesus. Thus by a strange irony of fate the hierarchy
obtain the release of a man guilty of the very political crime with which
they charged Christ, — sedition. The people no doubt had some sym
pathy with the insurrectionary movement of Barabbas, and on this the
priests worked. Barabbas had done, just what Jesus had refused to do,
take the lead against the Romans. "They laid information against
Jesus before the Roman government as a dangerous character; their
real complaint against Him was precisely this, that He was not danger
ous. Pilate executed Him on the ground that His kingdom was of this
world ; the Jews procured His execution precisely because it was not."
Ecce Homo, p. 27.

336 S. JOHN, XIX. [w. 1—3.
Chap. XIX.
19 Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him. And
2 the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head,
3 and they put on him a purple robe, and said, Hail, King of
Chap. XIX.
1 — 3. Inside the Praetorium; the scourging and mockery by the
soldiers. 1. Tlien Pilate therefore) Because the attempt to release Him in
honour of the Feast had failed, Pilate now tries whether the severe and
degrading punishment of scourging will not satisfy the Jews. In
Pilate's hands the boasted justice of Roman Law ends in the policy
"What evil did He do? I found no cause of death in Him: I will
therefore chastise Him and let Him go" (Luke xxiii. 22). Scourging
was part of Roman capital punishment, and had we only the first two
Gospels we might suppose that the scourging was inflicted immediately
before the crucifixion : but this is not stated, and S. John, combined
with S. Luke, makes it clear that scourging was inflicted as a separate
punishment in the hope that it would suffice. The supposition of a
second scourging as part of the execution is unnecessary and improb
able. Pilate, sick of the bloody work and angry at being forced to
commit a judicial murder, would not have allowed it ; and it may be
doubted whether any human frame could have survived a Roman
scourging twice in one day. One infliction was sometimes fatal ; ille
flagellis ad mortem caesus, Hor. S. I. ii. 41. Comp. ' horribile flagellum'
S. 1. iii. 119.
2. And the soldiers] Herod and his troops (Luke xxiii. n) had set
an example which the Roman soldiers were ready enough to follow.
Pilate countenances the brutality as aiding his own plan of satisfying
Jewish hatred with something less than death. The soldiers had in
flicted the scourging; for Pilate, being only Procurator, would have no
lictors. a crown of thorns] The context seems to shew that this was in
mockery of a royal crown rather than of a victor's wreath. The plant
is supposed to be the thorny ndbk, with flexible branches, and leaves
like ivy, abundant in the Jordan valley and round about Jerusalem.
a purple robe] S. Mark has 'purple,' S. Matthew 'scarlet,' S. Luke
is silent. ' Purple ' with the ancients was a vague term for bright rich
colour and would be used of crimson as well as of violet. The robe was
a mihtary chlamys, or paludamentum, perhaps one of Pilate's cast-off
cloaks. The garment in which Herod had mocked Jesus was probably
white. Comp. 1 Mace. viii. 14, x. 20, 62. The scourging and
mockery were very possibly visible to the Jews outside.
3. And said] The best authorities add a graphic touch not given
by the Synoptists ; and they kept coming unto Him and saying. We
see each soldier coming up in turn to offer his mock homage.
Hail, King of the Jews] Like the Procurator, they mock the Jews
as well as their Victim.

w. 4— 6.] S. JOHN, XIX. 337
the Jews : and they smote him with their hands. Pilate 4
therefore went forth again, and saith unto them, Behold, I
bring him forth to you, that ye may know that I find no
fault in him. Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of s
thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them,
Behold the man. When the chief priests therefore and 6
officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify
him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify
smote him with their hands] Literally, gave Him blows, but
whether with a rod, as the root of the word implies, or with the hand,
as is more probable, we are uncertain (see on xviii. 22). The old
Latin version adds infaciem.
4 — 7. Outside the Praetorium ; Pilate's appeal, ' Behold the man ;'
the Jews' rejoinder, 'He made Himself Son of God.'
4. Pilate therefore] The true text gives, and Pilate. What follows
is a continuance rather than a consequence of what has preceded.
I find no fault in him] There is a slight change from xix. 38, the
emphasis here being on 'crime' instead of on 'I'; ground of accusa
tion I find none in Him.
5. Then came Jesus) Better, Jesus therefore came. The Evange
list repeats the details of v. 2; they are details of a picture deeply
imprinted on his memory. Whether or no he went into the Praetorium,
he no doubt witnessed the Ecce Homo.
wearing] Not simply 'having' or 'bearing' (phorbn not pherbn).
The crown and robe are now His permanent dress.
Behold the man I] In pity rather than contempt. Pilate appeals to
their humanity : surely the most bitter among them will now be satisfied,
or at least the more compassionate will control the rest. No one can
think that this Man is dangerous, or needs further punishment. When
this appeal fails, Pilate's pity turns to bitterness (v. 14).
6. and officers] Better (as in xviii. 18), and the officers.^ The
leaders take the initiative, to prevent any expression of compassion on
the part of the crowd. The sight of ' the Man ' maddens rather than
softens them.
cried out] The verb (kraugazo) expresses a loud cry, and (excepting
Matt. xii. 19; Acts xxii. 23) occurs only in this Gospel in N.T. Comp.
xi. 43, xii. 13, xviii. 40, xix. 12, 15.
Crucify him] Omit the pronoun, which is not in the Greek. The
simple imperative better expresses the cry which was to give the cue to
the multitude. According to all four Evangelists the demand for cruci
fixion was not made, at first, but after the offer to release Jesus in
honour of the Feast.
Take ye him] Better, Take Him yourselves, as in xviii. 31. We
may admit that it ought to have been beneath the dignity of a Roman
judge to taunt the people with a suggestion which he knew that they
dare not follow; but there is nothing so improbable in it as to compel
s. JOHN 22

338 S. JOHN, XIX. [w. 7— n.
¦j him: for. I find no fault in him. The Jews answered him,
We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he
made himself the Son of God.
8 When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he was the
9 more afraid; and went again into the judgment hall, and
saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou ? But Jesus gave him no
10 answer. Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not
unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify
11 thee, and have power to release thee? Jesus answered, Thou
us to believe that the Jews had the power of inflicting capital punishment
(see on xviii. 31). Pilate is goaded into an exhibition of feeling un
worthy of his office.
_ for I find] As in xviii. 38, the 'I' is emphatic; 'for / do not find
in Him a ground of accusation.'
7. We have a law] The Jews answer Pilate's taunt by a plea
hitherto kept in the background. He may think lightly of the seditious
conduct of Jesus, but as a Procurator he is bound by Roman precedent to
pay respect to the law of subject nationalities. He has challenged them
to takethe law into their own hands; let him hear what their law is.
by our law] Rather, according to the law ; 'of us' is not genuine.
They refer to Lev. xxiv. 16.
the Son of God) Omit 'the.' Pilate had said, 'Behold the Man!'
The Jews retort, ' He made Himself Son of God.' Comp. v. 18, x. 33.
They answer his appeal to their compassion by an appeal to his fears.
8—11. Inside the Praetorium ; Christ's origin is asked and not told;
the origin of authority is told unasked.
8. that saying) Better, this word (logos), the charge of blasphemy.
he was the more afraid] The message from his wife and the awe
which Christ's presence was probably inspiring had already in some
degree affected him. This mysterious claim still further excites his
fears. Was it the offspring of a divinity that he had so infamously
handled? Comp. Matt, xxvii. 54.
9. judgment-hall] See on xviii. 28.
Whence art thou?) Pilate tries a vague question which might apply
to Christs dwelling-place, which he already knew (Luke xxiii. 6),
hoping for an answer as to His origin. Would the prisoner assert his
mysterious claim to him, or explain it ?
no answer] Pilate could not have understood the answer; and what
had it to do with the merits of the case? Comp. Matt, xxvii. 12—14
and Christ's own precept, Matt. vii. 6.
10. Then saith, &c] Better, Pilate therefore saith to Him, To me
Speakest thou not? Whatever He might do before His Jewish persecu
tors, it was folly to refuse an answer to the Roman governor
power] Or, authority. See on i. 12 and comp. v. 27, x. 18,
xvn. 2. In the best texts 'to release' is placed first, 'to crucify'
second. J

v. 12.] S. JOHN, XIX. 339
couldest have no power at all against me, except it were
given thee from above: therefore he. that delivered me unto
thee hath the greater sin. And from thenceforth Pilate ™
sought to release him : but the Jews cried out, saying, If
thou let this man go, thou art not Cesar's friend : whoso-
11. Thou couldest] Or, wouldest. This is Christ's last word to
Pilate ; a defence of the supremacy of God, and a protest against the
claim of any human potentate to be irresponsible.
from above] i. e. from God. This even Pilate could understand :
had Jesus said 'from My Father' he would have remained uninstructed.
The point is not, that Pilate is an instrument ordained for the carrying
out of God's purposes (Acts ii. 23) ; he was such, but that is not the
meaning here. Rather, that the possession and exercise of all authority
is the gift of God; iii. 27; Rom. xiii. 1 — 7 (see notes there). To in
terpret ' from above ' of the higher tribunal of the Sanhedrin is quite
inadequate. Comp. iii. 3, 7, 31; James i. 17, iii. 15, 17, where the
same adverb, dndthen, is used : see notes in each place.
therefore] Better, for this cause (xii. 18, 27) ; comp. i. 31, v. 16, 18,
vii. 22, viii. 47.
he that delivered me unto thee] Caiaphas, the representative of the
Sanhedrin and of the nation. The expression rendered 'he that de
livered' is used in xiii. n, xviii. 2, 5 of Judas. But the addition 'to
thee ' shews that Judas is not meant ; Judas had not betrayed Jesus to
Pilate but to the Sanhedrin. The same verb is used of the Sanhedrin
delivering Him to Pilate, xviii. 35.
hath the greater sin] Because he had the opportunity of knowing
Who Jesus was. Once more we have the expression, peculiar to S.
John, 'to have sin' (ix. 41, xv. 22, 24; 1 John i. 8).
12 — 16. Outside the Praetorium; the power from above controlled
from below pronounces public sentence against the Innocent.
12. And from thenceforth] Or (as in vi. 66), Hereupon. Result
rather than time seems to be meant ; but the Greek (here and vi. 66 only
in N. T.) may mean either. Omit ' and.'
sought] Imperfect tense, of continued efforts. Indirect means, such
as the release in honour of the Feast, the appeal to compassion, and
taunts having proved unsuccessful, Pilate now makes more direct efforts
to release Jesus. What these were the Evangelist does not tell us.
If thou let this man gd] Better, If thou release this man; it is the
same verb as in the first clause. The Jews once more shift their tactics
and from the ecclesiastical charge (v. 7) go back to the pohtical, which
they now back up by an appeal to Pilate's own political interests. They
know their man : it is not a love of justice, but personal feeling which
moves him to seek to release Jesus ; and they will overcome one personal
feeling by another still stronger. Pilate's unexplained interest in Jesus
and supercilious contempt for His accusers must give way before a fear
for his own position and possibly even his life.
Cesar's friend] Whether or no there was any such title of honour

340 S. JOHN, XIX. [vv. 13, 14.
13 ever maketh himself a king speaketh against Cesar. When
Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth,
and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called
14 the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha. And it was
as amicus Cesaris, like our 'Queen's Counsel,' there is no need to sup
pose that any formal official distinction is intended here. The words
probably mean no more than 'loyal to Cesar.'
whosoever] Literally, every one who.
maketh himself] Comp. v. 7, x. 33. The phrase perhaps implies
action as well as words.
speaketh against Caesar] ipso facto declares himself a rebel; and for a
Roman governor to countenance and even protect such a person would
be high treason (maiestas). The Jews perhaps scarcely knew how
powerful their weapon was. Pilate's patron Sejanus (executed A.D. 31)
was losing his hold over Tiberius, even if he had not already fallen.
Pilate had already thrice nearly driven the Jews to revolt, and his cha
racter therefore would not stand high with an Emperor who justly
prided himself on the good government of the provinces. Above all,
the terrible Lex Majestatis was by this time worked in such a way that
prosecution under it was almost certain death.
13. that saying] The better reading gives, these words. Pilate's
mind seems to be made up at once.
brought Jesus forth] Sentence must be pronounced in public. Thus
we find that Pilate, in giving judgment about the standards, which had
been brought into Jerusalem, has his tribunal in the great circus at
Caesarea, and Florus erects his in front of the palace (Josephus, B. J.
II. ix. 3, xiv. 8).
sat down] The Greek verb (kathizo) may be either transitive, as in
1 Cor. vi. 4; Eph. i. 20, or intransitive, as in Matt. xix. 28; xxv. 31.
If it is transitive here, the meaning will be, 'placed him on a seat,' as
an illustration of his mocking exclamation, ' Behold your King ! ' — i. e.
'There He sits enthroned! But [viii. 2;] xii. 14; Rev. iii. 21, xx. 4,
the only places where S. John uses the word, and Acts xii. 21, xxv. 6,
17, where we have the same phrase as here, are against the transitive
meaning in this place.
in the judgment seat] In the true text there is no article, which may
mean that it was not the usual Bema but a temporary one. Every
where else in N. T. 'judgment seat' has the definite article.
Pavement] Literally, stone-paved. Josephus (Ant. v. v. 2) says that
the Temple-mount, on part of which the fortress of Antonia stood, was
covered with a tesselated pavement.
in the Hebrew, Gabbatha) Omit 'the,' as in v. 20, and see on xx. 16.
It was, we may conclude "from its having a Hebrew name, a fixed
spot, and not the portable mosaic work which Roman generals some
times carried about with them." S. p. 250. The fact that there was
a fixed pavement supports this view; but Gabbatha ( = Gab Baitha)
means 'the ridge ofthe House' i.e. 'the Temple-mound,' and refers to
the shape ofthe ground (like a back), not to the pavement upon it.

v. I4-] S. JOHN, XIX. , 341
the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour :
14. the preparation] i. c. the day before the Passover, the 'eve.' See
Appendix A.
and about the sixth hour] The best MSS. have 'it was' for 'and;'
it was about the sixth hour. In two abrupt sentences S. John calls
special attention to the day and hour ; now it was the eve ofthe Passover:
it was about the sixth hour. It is difficult to believe that he can be
utterly mistaken about both. The question of the day is discussed
elsewhere (Appendix A) ; the question as to the hour remains.
We have seen already (i. 39, iv. 6, 52, xi. 9), that whatever view we
may take of the balance of probability in each case, there is nothing thus
far which is conclusively in favour of the antecedently improbable view,
that S. John reckons the hours of the day as we do, from midnight to
noon and noon to midnight.
The modern method is sometimes spoken of as the Roman method.
This is misleading, as it seems to imply that the Romans counted their
hours as we do. If this were so, it would not surprise us so much to
find that S. John, living away from Palestine and in the capital of a
Roman province, had adopted the Roman reckoning. But the Romans
and Greeks, as well as the Jews, counted their hours from sunrise. Mar
tial, who goes through the day hour by hour (iv. viii.), places the
Roman method beyond a doubt. The difference between the Romans
and the Jews was not as to the mode of counting the hours, but as to the
limits of each individual day. The Jews placed the boundary at sunset,
the Romans (as we do) at midnight. (Comp. Pliny Nat. Hist. 11.
lxxvii.) The 'this day' of Pilate's wife (Matt, xxvii. 19) proves no
thing; it would fit either the Roman or the Jewish method; and some
suppose her to have been a proselyte. In this particular S. John does
seem to have adopted the Roman method; for (xx. 19) he speaks of
the evening of Easter Day as 'the same day at evening' (comp. Luke
xxiv, 29, 33). This must be admitted as against the explanation that
'yesterday' in iv. 54 was spoken before midnight and refers to the time
before sunset : but the servants may have met their master after mid
night. But there is some evidence of a custom of reckoning the hours from
midnight in Asia Minor. Polycarp was martyred 'at the eighth hour'
(Mart. Pol. xxi.), Pionius at 'the tenth hour' (Acta Mart. p. 137);
both at Smyrna. Such exhibitions commonly took place in the morning
(Philo, II. 529); so that 8.0 and 10.0 A.M. are more probable than 2.0
and 4.0 p.m.
McClellan adds another argument. "The phraseology of our present
passage is unique in the Gospels. The hour is mentioned in conjunction
with the day. To cite the words of St Augustine, but with the correct
rendering of Paraskeui, ' S. John does not say, It was about the sixth
hour of the day, nor merely, It was about the sixth hour, but It was the
Friday ofthe Passover; it was about the Sixth hour.' Hence in the
straightforward sense of the words, the sixth hour that he means is the
sixth hour ofthe Friday; and so it is rendered in the Thebaic Version.

342 S. JOHN, XIX. [w. 15, 16.
15 and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King. But they
cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him.
Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The
16 chief priests answered, We have no king but Cesar. Then
delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified.
And they took Jesus, and led him away.

But Friday in S. John is the name ofthe whole Roman civil day, and
the Roman civil days are reckoned from midnight." New Test. I. p. 742.
This solution may therefore be adopted, not as certain, but as less
unsatisfactory than the conjecture of a false reading either here or in
Mark xv. 25, or the various forced interpretations which have been
given of S. John's words. If, however, the mode of reckoning in both
Gospels be the same, the preference in point of accuracy must be given
to the Evangelist who stood by the cross.
Behold your King.) Like the title on the cross and unlike the "Ecce
Homo," these words are spoken in bitter irony. This man in His mock
insignia is a fit sovereign for the miserable Jews. Perhaps Pilate would
also taunt them with their own glorification of Him on Palm Sunday.
15. But they] The true text gives, They therefore, with the pronoun
of opposition (ekeinoi) in harmony with their cry. They will have no
thing to do with such a king.
Shall 7] Or, must I. There is a strong emphasis on 'King,' which
stands first in the original. Pilate begins (xviii. 33) and ends with the
same idea, the one dangerous item in the indictment, the claim of Jesus
to be King of the Jews.
The chief priests) This depth of degradation was reserved for them.
"The official organs of the theocracy themselves proclaim that they have
abandoned the faith by which the nation had lived." Sooner than
acknowledge that Jesus is the Messiah they proclaim that a heathen
Emperor is their King. And their baseness is at once followed by
Pilate's : sooner than meet a dangerous charge he condemns the inno
cent to death.
16. Then delivered he, &c] Better, Then therefore delivered he, &c.
In none of the Gospels does it appear that Pilate pronounced sentence
on Jesus ; he perhaps purposely avoided doing so. But in delivering
Him over to the priests he does not allow them to act for themselves :
'he delivered Him to them that He might be crucified' by Roman
soldiers; not that they might crucify Him themselves.
And they took] The best authorities give, They therefore took. The
word for 'took' should rather be rendered received, as in the only other
places in which it occurs in this Gospel, i. n, xiv. 3. It means to
'accept what is offered, receive from the hands of another.' A com
parison of the three texts is instructive. The eternal Son is given by
the Father,1 comes to his own inheritance, and His own people received
Him not (i. n). The Incarnate Son is given up by Pilate to His own
people, and they received Him to crucify Him (xix. 16). The glorified

w. 17, 18.] S. JOHN, XIX. 343
17 — 42. The Death and Burial.
17 — 22. The Crucifixion and the Title on the Cross.
And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called 17
the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha :
where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either 18
Son comes again to His own people, to receive them unto Himself
(xiv. 3).
and led him away] These words are of very doubtful authority.
17 — 42. The Death and Burial.
For what is peculiar to S. John's narrative in this section see the
introductory note to chap, xviii. Besides this,, the title on the cross, the
Jews' criticism of it, and the conduct of the four soldiers, are given with
more exactness by S. John than by the Synoptists.
The section falls into four double parts of which the second and
fourth contain a marked dramatic contrast, such as S. John loves to
point out : —
(1) The Crucifixion and the title on the cross (17 — 22).
(2) The four enemies and the four friends (23 — 27).
(3) The two words, 'I thirst,' 'It is finished' (28 — 30).
(4) The hostile and the friendly petitions (31 — 42 ) .
17—22. The Crucifixion and the Title on the Cross.
17. bearing his cross] The better reading gives, bearing the cross
for Himself. S. John omits the help which Simon the Cyrenian was
soon compelled to render, as also (what seems to be implied by Mark
xv. 22) that at last they were obliged to carry Jesus Himself. Comp.
the Lesson for Good Friday morning, Gen. xxii. , especially v. 6.
went forth] "The place of public execution appears to have been
situated north of the city. It was outside the gate (Heb. xiii. 12) and
yet 'nigh unto the city' (v. 20). In the Mishna it is placed outside the
city by a reference to Lev. xxiv. 14. It is said to have been 'two men
high' (Sanh. vi. 1). The Jews still point out the site at the cliff, north
ofthe Damascus gate, where is a cave now called 'Jeremiah's Grotto.'
This site has therefore some claim to be considered as that of the Cruci
fixion. It was within 200 yards of the wall of Agrippa, but was certainly
outside the ancient city. It was also close to the gardens and the tombs
of the old city, which stretch northwards from the cliff; and it was close
to the main north road, in a conspicuous position, such as might
naturally be selected for a place of public execution." Conder, Hand
book to the Bible, pp. 356, 7.
of a skull] Probably on account of its shape. It would be contrary
to Jewish law to leave skulls unburied ; and if this were the meaning of
the name we should expect 'of skulls' rather than 'of a skull.'
18. two other] Robbers or bandits (not 'thieves'), as S. Matthew

344 S. JOHN, XIX. [vv. 19—21.
19 side one, and Jesus in the midst. And Pilate wrote
a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was,
JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.
=0 This title then read many of the Jews : for the place where
Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in
« Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin. Then said the chief priests
of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews ;

and S. Mark call them, probably guilty of the same crimes as Barabbas
(see on xviii. 40). Jesus is crucified with them as being condemned
under a similar charge of sedition and treason.
Jesus in the midst) Here also we seem to have a tragic contrast
— the Christ between two criminals. It is the place of honour mock
ingly given to Him as King.
19. a title] Better, a title also. It was common to put on the cross
the name and crime of the person executed, after making him carry it
round his neck to the place of execution. S. John alone tells us that
Pilate wrote the title himself. The meaning of the 'also' is not quite
clear; perhaps it looks back to v. 16. S. John uses the Latin term,
titulus, in a Greek form, titles. S. Matthew has 'His indictment'
(xxvii. 37); S. Mark, 'the inscription of His indictment' (xv. 26);
S. Luke, 'an inscription' (xxiii. 38).
the writing was] Literally, there was written (see on ii. 17). The
other three give the inscription thus; — S. Matthew, 'This is Jesus the
King ofthe Jews;' S. Mark, 'The King of the Jews;' S. Luke, 'This-
is the King of the Jews.'
20. nigh to the city) Pictures are often misleading in placing the city
a mile or two in the background of the Crucifixion. S. John's exact
topographical knowledge comes out again here.
in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin] The better texts give, In Hebrew
and in Latin and in Greek. The national and the official languages
would naturally be placed before Greek, — and for different reasons
either Hebrew or Latin might be placed first. In Luke xxiii. 38 the
order is Greek, Latin, Hebrew; but the clause is of very doubtful
authority. In any case the three representative languages of the world
at that time, the languages of religion, of empire, and of intellect, were
employed. Thus did they 'tell it out among the heathen that the Lord
is king,' or (according to a remarkable reading of the LXX. in Ps. xcvi.
10) 'that the Lord reigned from the tree.' (See on xx. 16.)
21. Then said) Better, said therefore. Now that they have wrung
what they wanted out of Pilate they see that in granting it he has in
sulted them publicly before the thousands present at the Passover, and
in a way not easy to resent.
the chief priests ofthe Jews] The addition 'of the Jews' is remarkable,
and it occurs nowhere else in N.T. It probably refers to the title:
these 'chief priests ofthe Jews' objected to His being called 'the King
of the Jews.

w. 22—24.] S. JOHN, XIX. 345
but that he said, I am King of the Jews. Pilate answered, 22
What I have written I have written.
23 — 27. The four Enemies and the four Friends.
Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his 23
garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part ; and
also his coat : now the coat was without seam, woven from
the top throughout. They said therefore among themselves, 24
Let us not rent it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be :
that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They
parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture
22. Pilate answered] His answer illustrates the mixture of obstinacy
and relentlessness, which Philo says was characteristic of him. His
own interests are not at stake, so he will have his way : where he had
anything to fear or to gain he could be supple enough. - A shrewd,
practical man of the world, with all a Roman official's contemptuous
impartiality and severity, and all the disbelief in truth and disinterested
ness which the age had taught him, he seems to have been one of the
many whose self-interest is stronger than their convictions, and who can
walk uprightly when to do so is easy, but fail in the presence of danger
and difficulty.
23 — 27. The four Enemies and the four Friends.
23. Then the soldiers] Better, The soldiers therefore. The 'there
fore' looks back to v. 18.
his garments] The loose, outer garment, or toga, with the girdle and
fastenings. This was large enough to be worth dividing, and in some
cases was the only garment worn.
four parts] A mark of accurate knowledge; a quaternion of soldiers
has charge of the prisoner, as in Acts xii. 4 ; but there the prisoner has
to be guarded and kept alive, so four quaternions mount guard in turn,
one for each watch. The clothes of executed criminals were the per
quisite of the soldiers on duty.
his coat] Better, the coat or shirt : it fitted somewhat close to the
body, reaching from the neck to the knees or ancles.
without seam] Josephus tells us that that of the high-priest was
seamless, whereas in other cases this garment was commonly made of
two pieces (Ant. in. vii. 4).
24. that the scripture] It was in order that the Divine purpose,
already declared by the Psalmist, might be accomplished, that this two
fold assignment of Christ's garments took place. S. John quotes the
LXX. verbatim, although there the difference, which both he and the
original Hebrew mark between the upper and under garment, is obli
terated. It is from this passage that the reference to Ps. xxii. 18 has been
inserted in Matt, xxvii. 35 ; none of the Synoptists refer to the Psalm.
my raiment] A capricious change of translation; the same word is
rendered garments in v. 23.

346 S. JOHN, XIX. [vv. 25—27.
they did cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers
did.
25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and
his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary
26 Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the
disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his
27 mother, Woman, behold thy son. Then saith he to the
25. Now there stood] Or, But there were standing. By two small
particles (men in v. 23 and de here), scarcely translatable in English,
S. John indicates the contrast between the two groups. On the one
hand, the four plundering soldiers with the centurion; on the other, the
four ministering women with the beloved disciple.
his mother's sister, Mary] The Greek, hke the English, leaves us in
doubt whether we here have two women or one, whether altogether there
are four women or three. The former is much the more probable alterna
tive. (1) It avoids the very improbable supposition of two sisters having
the same name. (2) S. John is fond of parallel expressions; 'His
mother and His mother's sister, Mary of Clopas and Mary Magdalene'
are two pairs set one against the other. (3) S. Mark (xv. 40) mentions
Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the Less, and Salome.
Mary Magdalene is common to both narratives, 'Mary the mother of
James the Less' is the same as 'Mary of Clopas :' the natural inference
is that Salome is the same as 'His mother's sister.' If this is correct,
(4) S. John's silence about the name of ' His mother's sister' is explained :
she was his own mother, and he is habitually reserved about all closely
connected with himself. We have seen already that he never mentions
either his own name, or his brother's, or the Virgin's. (5) The very
ancient Peshito or Syriac Version adopts this view by inserting 'and'
before 'Mary the (wife) of Clopas.'
_ the wife of Cleophas] Rather, the wife of Clopas. The Greek is
simply 'the of Clopas,' and 'the daughter of Clopas' may be right, or
'the mother,' or even 'the sister:' but 'wife' is more probably to be
supphed. There is no reason for identifying Clopas here with Cleopas
in Luke xxiv. 18 : Clopas is Aramaic, Cleopas is Greek. The spelling
Cleophas is a mistake derived from Latin MSS. All Greek authorities
have Cleopas. If 'wife' is rightly inserted, and she is the mother of
James the Less, Clopas is the same as Alphaeus (Matt. x. 3; comp.
xxvii. 56). It is said that Clopas and Alphaeus may be different forms
of the same Aramaic name.
Mary Magdalene] Introduced, like the Twelve (vi. 67) and Pilate
(xviii. 29) abruptly and without explanation, as being quite familiar to
the readers ofthe Gospel. See on Matt, xxvii. 56 and Luke viii. 2.
26. whom he loved] See on xiii. 23. The expression here is not a
mere periphrasis to avoid giving the name, still less a boastful insertion:
it explains why Jesus committed the two to one another. (See Intro
duction, 11. iii. 3 b.)
Woman] See on ii. 4.

¦ v. 28.] S. JOHN, XIX. 347
disciple, Behold thy mother. And from that hour that
disciple took her unto his own home.
28 — 30. The two words from the Cross, 'I Thirst,' 'It is
finished.'
After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accom- 28
plished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, 1 thirst.
behold thy son.] If, as has just been maintained (2nd note on v. 25),
S. John was the Virgin's nephew, and if, as is probable (see on ii. 12),
Christ's 'brethren' were the sons of Joseph by a former marriage, the
fact that Christ committed His mother to her nephew and His own
beloved disciple rather than to her step-sons requires no explanation.
Even if His 'brethren' were the sons of Joseph and Mary, their not
believing on Him (vii. 5) would sufficiently account for their being set
aside; and we have no evidence that they believed until after the
Resurrection (Acts i. 14).
27. from that hour] Quite literally, as soon as all was over (v. 30) ;
or he may have led her away at once and then have returned (v. 35).
unto his own home] Although the commendation was double, each
being given to the other, yet (as was natural) S. John assumes the care
of Mary rather than she of him. This shews the untenability of the
view that not only S. John, but in him all the Apostles, were committed
by Christ to the guardianship of Mary. We have had the Greek
expression for 'his own (home)' twice already in this Gospel: see on
i. n and xvi. 32. That S. John was known to the high-priest (xviii. 15)
and that his family had hired servants (Mark i. 20) would seem to imply
that he was a man of some position and substance.
28 — 30. The two words prom the Cross, 'I Thirst,' 'It is
finished.'
28. After this] See on v. 38.
knowing] Comp. xiii. 1.
were now accomplished] Rather, are already finished. The very
same word is used here as in v. 30, and this identity must be preserved
in translation.
that the scripture, &c] Many critics make this depend on 'are
already finished,' in order to avoid the apparent contradiction between
all things being already finished and something still remaining to be
accomplished. But this construction is somewhat awkward. It is
better to connect 'that  fulfilled' with 'saith,' especially when Ps.
lxix. 21 speaks so plainly of the thirst. The apparent contradiction
almost disappears when we remember that the thirst had been felt
sometime before it was expressed. All things were finished, including
the thirst ; but Christ alone knew this. In order that the prophecy might
be accomplished, it was necessary that He should make known His
thirst. 'Brought to its due end' or 'made perfect' is the natural
meaning ofthe very unusual expression translated 'fulfilled.'

348 S. JOHN, XIX. . [w. 29, 30.
29 Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar : and they filled a
spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to
30 his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar,
he said, It is finished : and he bowed his head, and gave up
the ghost.
29. Now... vinegar] Omit 'now.' S, John's precise knowledge appears
once more : the other three do not mention the vessel, but he had stood
close to it. The 'vinegar' was probably the sour wine or posca in a
large j ar ' set ' by the soldiers for their own use while on guard. Criminals
sometimes lived for many hours, even a day or two, on the cross.
and they filled, &c] The true text gives, having placed therefore a
sponge full of the vinegar upon hyssop they put it to his mouth. The
difference between the two verbs rendered 'put' is very graphic; the
one expresses the placing of the sponge round the stalk (comp. Matt.
xxi. 33, xxvii. 28, 48), the other the offering (xvi. 2) and applying
(Mark x. 13) it to his lips.
hyssop] The plant cannot be identified with certainty. The caper-
plant, which is as likely as any, has stalks which run to two or three
feet, and this would suffice. It is not probable that Christ's feet were
on a level with the spectators' heads, as pictures represent : this would
have involved needless trouble and expense. Moreover the mockery of
the soldiers recorded by S. Luke (see on xxiii. 36) is more intelligible if
we suppose that they could almost put a vessel to His lips. S. John
alone mentions the hyssop ; another mark of exact knowledge.
put it to his mouth) The actors and their motive are left doubtful.
Probably soldiers, but possibly Jews, and probably in compassion rather
than mockery; or perhaps in compassion under cover of mockery (comp.
Mark xv. 36).
30. received] He had refused the stupefying draught (Matt, xxvii.
34; Mark xv. 23), which would have clouded his faculties : He accepts
what will revive them for the effort of a willing surrender of His life.
It is finished] Just as the thirst was there before he expressed it, so
the consciousness that His work was finished was there (v. 28) before
He declared it. The Messiah's work of redemption was accomplished;
His Father's commandment had been obeyed; types and prophecies
had been fulfilled; His life had been lived, and His teaching completed;
His1 last earthly tie had been severed (vv. 26, 27) ; and the end had
come. The final 'wages of sin' alone remained to be paid.
he bowed his head] Another detail peculiar to the Evangelist who
witnessed it.
gave up the ghost] The two apostles mark with special clearness that
the Messiah's death was entirely voluntary. S. Matthew says, ' He let
go His spirit ' (xxvii. 50) ; S. John, ' He gave up His spirit. None of
the four says 'He died.' The other two have ' He breathed out ;' and
S. Luke shews clearly that the surrender of life was a willing one by
giving the words of surrender 'Father into Thy hands I commend my
spirit.' — 'No one taketh it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself

v. 3i-] S. JOHN, XIX. 349
3 1 — 4 2 • The petition of the Jews and the petition of Joseph.
The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that 31
the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath
day, (for that sabbath day was a high day,) besought Pilate
that their legs might be broken, and that they might be
It was the one thing which Christ claimed to do 'of Himself (x. 18).
Contrast v. 30, vii. 28, viii. 28, 42.
On 'the seven words from the cross' see on Luke xxiii. 34; Mark
xv. 34; Matt, xxvii. 46. Between the two words recorded in these
verses (28 — 30) there is again a contrast. 'I thirst' is an expression of
suffering; the only one during the Passion. 'It is finished' is a cry of
triumph; and the 'therefore' in v. 30 shews how the expression of
suffering led on to the cry of triumph. S. John omits the 'loud voice'
which all the Synoptists give as immediately preceding Christ's death.
It proved that His end was voluntary and not the necessary result of
exhaustion.31 — 42. The petition of the Jews and the petition of Joseph.
31. As in xviii. 28, the Jews shew themselves to be among those
'who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel.' In the midst of deliberate
judicial murdej: they are scrupulous about ceremonial observances.
The Jews therefore] The 'therefore,' as in v. 23, probably does not
refer to what immediately precedes: it looks back to w. 20,- 21. The
Jews still continue their relentless hostility. They do not know whether
any one of the three sufferers is dead or not ; their request shews that ;
so that 'therefore' cannot mean in consequence of Jesus' death. In
order to save the Sabbath, and perhaps also to inflict still further
suffering, they ask Pilate for this terrible addition to the punishment of
crucifixion. Certainly the lesson 'I will have mercy and not sacrifice,'
of which Christ had twice reminded them, and once in connexion with
the Sabbath (Matt. xii. 7, ix. 13), had taken no hold on them.
the preparation] The eve of the Sabbath ; and the Sabbath on this
occasion coincided with the 15 th Nisan, the first day of the Passover.
This first day ranked as a Sabbath (Exod. xii. 16; Lev. xxiii. 7); so
that the day was doubly holy.
that.. .high day] Literally, the day of that Sabbath was great (comp.
™- 37)-
legs might be broken] The crurifragium, like crucifixion, was a
punishment commonly reserved for slaves. The two were sometimes
combined, as here. Lactantius (IV. xxvi.) says, 'His executioners did
not think it necessary to break His bones, as was their prevailing
custom;' which seems to imply that to Jewish crucifixions this horror
was commonly added, perhaps to hasten death. For even without a
Sabbath to make matters more urgent, corpses ought to be removed
before night-fall (Deut. xxi. 23); whereas the Roman custom was to
leave them to putrefy on the cross, like our obsolete custom of hanging
in chains.

350 S. JOHN, XIX. [w. 32—35-
32 taken away. Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of
the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.
33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead
34 already, they brake not his legs : but one of the soldiers
with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out
35 blood and water. And he that saw it bare record, and his
32. Then came the soldiers) The soldiers therefore came, in conse
quence ofthe fresh order from Pilate which the Jews would bring. Two
probably went to each of the robbers.
34. pierced] To make quite sure that He was dead. The Greek
word is not the same as that used in v. 37 ; this means either to 'prick'
or to 'stab,' that to 'pierce deeply.'
blood and water] There has been very much discussion as to the
physical cause of Christ's death ; and those who investigate this try
to frame an hypothesis which will at the same time account for the
effusion of blood and water. Two or three such hypotheses have been
put forward. But it may be doubted whether they are not altogether
out of place. It has been seen (v. 30) how the Evangelists insist on the
fact that the Lord's death was a voluntary surrender of life, not a result
forced upon Him. Of course it may be that the voluntariness consisted
in welcoming causes which must prove fatal. But it is more simple to
believe that He delivered up His life before natural causes became fatal.
' No one,' neither Jew nor Roman, 'took it from Him ' by any means
whatever : 'He lays it down of Himself (x. 18). And if we decline to
investigate the physical cause of the Lord's death, we need not ask for a
physical explanation of what is recorded here. S. John assures us that
he saw it with his own eyes, and he records it that we 'may believe:'
i. e. he regards it as a ' sign ' that the corpse was no ordinary one, but a
Body that even in death was Divine.
We can scarcely be wrong in supposing that the blood and water are
symbolical. The order confirms this. Blood symbolizes the work of
redemption which had just been completed by His death ; and water
symbolizes the 'birth from above,' with its cleansing from sin, which
was the result of His death, and is the means by which we appropriate
it. Thus the two great Sacraments are represented.
35. And he  is true] Rather, He that hath seen hath borne wit
ness and his witness is true (comp. i. 19, 32, 34, viii. 13, 14, xii. 17).
Besides the change from ' record ' to witness, for the sake of marking
by uniform translation S. John's fondness for this verb and substantive,
the correction from ' saw ' to hath seen must be noted. The use of the
perfect rather than the aorist is evidence that the writer himself is the
person who saw. If he were appealing to the witness of another person
he would almost certainly have written, as the A. V., 'he that saw.'
The inference that the author is the person who saw becomes still more
clear if we omit the centre of the verse, which is somewhat parentheti
cal : 'He that hath seen hath borne witness, in order that ye all also may
believe.' The natural sense of this statement is that the narrator is

w. 36,37.] S. JOHN, XIX. 35 1
record is true : and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye
might believe. For these things were done, that the scrip- 36
ture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be
broken. And again another scripture saith, They shall 37
look on him whom they pierced.
appealing to his own experience. Thus the Apostolic authorship of the
Gospel is again confirmed. (See Westcott, Introduction, p. xxvii.)
is true] Not simply truthful, but genuine, perfect : it fulfils the con
ditions of sufficient evidence. (See on i. 9 and comp. viii. 16, vii. 28.)
saith true] Better, saith things that are true. There is no tauto
logy, as in the A. V. S. John first says that his evidence is adequate ;
he then adds that the contents of it are true. Testimony may be suffi
cient (e.g. of a competent eyewitness) but false: or it may be insufficient
(e. g. of half-witted child) but true. S. John declares that his testimony
is both sufficient and true ; both alithinos and aletMs.
that ye might] Better, that ye also may ; ye as well as the witness
who saw for himself.
Why does S. John attest thus earnestly the trustworthiness of his nar
rative at this particular point ? Four reasons may be assigned. This
incident proved (I) the reality of Christ's humanity against Docetic
views; and these verses therefore are conclusive evidence against the
theory that the Fourth Gospel is the work of a Docetic Gnostic (see on iv.
22) : (2) the reality of Christ's Divinity, against Ebionite views ; while
His human form was no mere phantom, but flesh and blood, yet He
was not therefore a mere man, but the Son of God : (3) the reality of
Christ's death, and therefore of His Resurrection, against Jewish insinu
ations of trickery (comp. Matt, xxviii. 13 — 15) : (4) the clear and un
expected fulfilment of two Messianic prophecies.
36. were done] Better, came to pass. * Note that S. John uses the
aorist (iyivnTo), where S. Matthew, writing nearer to the events, uses
the perfect (yiyovev). ' Hath come to pass ' implies that the event is not
very remote : Matt. i. 22, xxi. 4, xxvi. 56. The 'for ' depends upon
'believe.' Belief has the support of Scripture ; for the two surprising
events, Christ's escaping the crurifragium and yet having His side
pierced, were evidently preordained in the Divine counsels.
shall not be broken) Exod. xii. 46. Thus he who at the opening of
this Gospel was proclaimed as the Lamb of God (i. 29, 36), at the close
of it is declared to be the true Paschal Lamb. Once more we have
evidence that S. John's consistent and precise view is, that the death of
Christ coincided with the killing ofthe Paschal Lamb. And this seems
also to have been S. Paul's view (see on 1 Cor. v. 7).
37. They shall look] All present, especially the Jews. The whole
world was represented there.
pierced] See on ». 34. The word here used occurs nowhere else in
N. T. excepting Rev. i. 7, and forms a connexion worth noting between
the Gospel and the Apocalypse (see on xi. 44, xv. 20, and xx. 16); all
the more so because S. John here agrees with the present Masoretic

352 S. JOHN, XIX. [w. 38, 39.
38 And after this Joseph of Arimathea, being a disciple of
Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that
he might take away the body of Jesus : and Pilate gave him
leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus.
39 And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to
Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes,

Hebrew text and in every word differs from the Greek of the LXX.
The Greek softens down ' pierced through ' (which seemed a strange
expression to use of men's treatment of Jehovah) into 'insulted.' See
on vi. 45, xii. 13, 15, where there is further evidence ofthe Evangelist
having independent knowledge of Hebrew, and therefore being a Jew
of Palestine.
38. And after this] More literally, But after these things. The
' but ' marks a contrast between the hostile petition of the Jews and the
friendly petition of Joseph. ' These things as distinct from ' this ' will
shew that no one event is singled out with which what follows is con
nected : the sequence is indefinite. Comp. iii. 22, vi. 14. 'After this'
in v. 28 is right : there the sequence is direct and definite. Comp.
ii. 12, xi. 7, if.
Joseph of Arimathea] See notes on Matt, xxvii. 57; Mark xv. 43 ;
Luke xxiii. 50. The Synoptists tell us that he was rich, a member of
the Sanhedrin, a good and just man who had not consented to the San-
hedrin's counsel and crime, one who (like Simon and Anna) waited for
the kingdom of God, and had become a disciple of Christ.
secretly for fear ofthe Jews] This forms a coincidence with S. Mark,
who says of him (xv. 43) that 'having summoned courage he went in
unto Pilate,' implying that like Nicodemus he was naturally timid.
Joseph probably went to Pilate as soon as he knew that Jesus was dead :
the vague ' after these things ' need not mean that he did not act till
after the piercing of the side.
took the body] As the friends of the Baptist (Matt. xiv. 12) and of
S. Stephen (Acts viii. 2) did in each case.
39. Nicodemus] Another coincidence. Nicodemus also was a mem
ber of the Sanhedrin (iii. 1 ), and his acquaintance with Joseph is thus
explained. And it is S. Mark who tells us that Joseph was one of the
Sanhedrin, S. John who brings him in contact with Nicodemus. It
would seem as if Joseph's unusual courage had inspired Nicodemus also.
We are not told whether or no Nicodemus had 'consented to the counsel
and deed of them.'
at the first] Either the first time that he came to Jesus, in contrast
to other occasions ; or simply at the beginning of Christ's ministry.
Comp. x. 40).
myrrh and aloes] Myrrh-resin and pounded aloe- wood, both aromatic
substances: 'All thy garments are myrrh and aloes' (Ps. xiv. 8). Comp.
Matt. ii. n. Aloes are not mentioned elsewhere in N. T. For 'mix
ture ' (migma) the two best MSS. read roll (eligma), and the purpose of

vv. 40— 42.] S. JOHN, XIX. 353
about an hundred pound weight. Then took they the body 4»
of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as
the manner of the Jews is to bury. Now in the place 41
where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the
garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid.
There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews' prepa- 42
ration day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.
this large quantity was probably to cover the Body entirely. Comp.
2 Chron. xvi. 14.
about an hundred pound] 1200 ounces. There is nothing incredible
in the amount. It is a rich man's proof of devotion, and possibly of re
morse for a timidity in the past which now seemed irremediable : his
courage had come too late.
40. Then took they] They took therefore.
wound it, &c] Or, bound il in linen cloths. The ' cloths ' seem to
refer to the bandages which kept the whole together rather than the
large ' linen sheet ' mentioned by the other Evangelists, which Joseph
had bought on purpose (Mark xv. 46). The word here used for ' linen
cloths ' occurs also in Luke xxiv. 12 : see note there.
the manner of the Jews] As distinct from the manner of the Egyp
tians, whose three methods of embalming are elaborately described by
Herodotus (11. Ixxxvi. ff.). The Egyptians in all cases removed part
of the intestines and steeped the body in nitre.
to bury] The Greek verb is rare in Scripture ; in N. T. only Matt.
xxvi. 12. The cognate substantive occurs xii. 7; Mark xiv. 8. In
Gen. 1. 2 it is used by the LXX. for the embalming of Jacob.
41. there was a garden] Contrast xviii. 1. S. John alone tells, of
the garden, which probably belonged to Joseph, for S. Matthew tells us
that the sepulchre was his.
a new sepulchre] S. Matthew also states that it was new, and S.
Luke that no one had ever yet been laid in it. S. John states this fact
in both ways with great emphasis. Not even in its contact with the
grave did 'His flesh see corruption.'
S. John omits what all the others note, that the sepulchre was hewn
in the rock.
42. the Jews' preparation day] Perhaps another slight indication
that the Gospel was written outside Palestine. Or the addition 'of the
Jews' may point to the time when there was already a Christian 'prepa
ration-day.' See notes on 'the Passover ofthe Jews' (ii. 13; xi. 55).
It would seem as if the burial was hastily and temporarily performed.
They probably intended after the Sabbath to make a more solemn and
complete burial elsewhere.
was nigh at hand] Perhaps this fact suggested to Joseph the thought
of going to Pilate. He had a sepulchre of his own close to Golgotha.

S.JOHN 23

354 S. JOHN, XX.

CHAP. XX.
We enter now upon the third and last part of the second main division
of the Gospel. The Evangelist having set before us the inner Glori
fication of Christ in His last Discourses (xiii.— xvii.), and His
outer Glorification in His Passion and Death (xviii, xix.), now
gives us his record of the Resurrection and threefold Manifes
tation of Christ (xx.).
The chapter falls naturally into five sections, i. The first Evidence
of the Resurrection (i — io). 2. The Manifestation to Mary Magdalene
(u — 18). 3. The Manifestation to the Ten and others (19 — 23). 4.
The Manifestation to S. Thomas and others (24 — 29). 5. The Conclu
sion and Purpose ofthe Gospel (30, 31).
S. John's Go'spel preserves its character to the end. Like the rest of
his narrative, the account of the Resurrection is not intended as a com
plete record ; — it is avowedly the very reverse of complete (v. 30) ; — but
a series of typical scenes selected as embodiments of spiritual truth.
Here also, as in the rest of the narrative, we have individual characters
marked with singular distinctness. The traits which distinguish S.
Peter, S. John, S. Thomas, and the Magdalene in this chapter are both
clear in themselves and completely in harmony with what is told of the
four elsewhere.
Of the incidents omitted by S. John a good many are given in the
other Gospels or by S. Paul : (S. Matthew and S. Mark) the angel's
message to the two Marys and Salome ; (S. Matthew and [S. Mark])
the farewell charge and promise ; (S. Luke and [S. Mark]) the manifes
tation to two disciples not Apostles; (S. Matthew) the earthquake,
angel's descent to remove the stone, soldiers' terror and report to the
priests, device of the Sanhedrin, manifestation on the mountain in Gali
lee (comp. 1 Cor. xv. 6) ; ([S. Mark]) the reproach for unbelief; ( S.
Luke) the manifestation to S. Peter (comp. 1 Cor. xv. 5), conversation
on the road to Emmaus, proof that He is not a spirit (xxiv. 38, 39), mani
festation before the Ascension (50, 51; comp. Acts i. 6—9); (S. Paul)
manifestations to the Twelve, to S. James, and to S. Paul himself ( i
Cor. xv. 6, 7, 8).
To these incidents S. John adds, besides the contents of chap, xxi,
the gift of the power of absolution, and the manifestation on the second
Lord's Day, when S. Thomas was present.
It may be freely admitted that the difficulty of harmonizing the diffe
rent accounts of the Resurrection is very great. As so often in the
Gospel narrative, we have not the knowledge required for piecing to
gether the fragmentary accounts that have been granted to us. To this
extent it may be allowed that the evidence for the Resurrection is not
what we should antecedently have desired.
But it is no paradox to say that for this very reason, as well as for other
reasons, the evidence is sufficient. Impostors would have made the evi
dence more harmonious. The difficulty arises from independent wit
nesses telling their own tale, not caring in their consciousness of its
truth to make it clearly agree with what had been told elsewhere. The
¦ writer of the Fourth Gospel must have known of some, if not all,

w. I, 2.] S. JOHN, XX. 355
i — io. The first Evidence of the Resurrection.
The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, 20
when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the
stone taken away from the sepulchre. Then she runneth, „
and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom
Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the
of the Synoptic accounts; but he writes freely and firmly from his own
independent experience and information. All the Gospels agree in the
following very important particulars ;
I. The Resurrection itself is left undescribed.
2. The manifestations were granted to disciples only, but to disci
ples wholly unexpectant of a Resurrection.
3. They were received with doubt and hesitation at first.
4. Mere reports were rejected.
5. The manifestations were granted to all kinds of witnesses, both
male and female, both individuals and companies.
6. The result was a conviction, which nothing ever shook, that 'the
Lord had risen indeed' and been present with them.
All four accounts also agree in some of the details ;
r. The evidence begins with the visit of women to the sepulchre in
the early morning.
2. The first sign was the removal of the stone.
3. Angels were seen before the Lord was seen.
(See Westcott, Speaker's Commentary, II. pp. 287, 8.)
1 — 10. The first Evidence of the Resurrection.
1. The first day] Better, But on the first day; literally, 'day one.'
We have the same expression Luke xxiv. 1.
the stone taken away] All four Gospels note the displacement of the
stone; S. Mark alone notes the placing of it and S. Matthew the sealing.
The words 'taken away from' should rather be lifted out of: the Synop
tists all speak of 'rolling away' the stone.
2. Then she runneth] She runneth therefore, concluding that the
body must be gone.
Simon Peter] His fall was probably known and his deep repentance
also : he is still chief of the Apostles, and as such the one consulted first.
and to the other] The repetition of 'to' implies that the two Apostles
were not lodging together, although v. 3 implies that they were close to
one another.
whom Jesus loved] Perhaps the expression is meant to apply to
Simon Peter also; 'the other disciple whom Jesus loved.' This becomes
probable when we notice that the word for 'loved' is not that used of S.
John in xix. 26, xxi. 7, 20 (agapdn), but the more general word (phi
lein). See on xi. 5.
They have taken] She does not attempt to determine who, whether
friends or foes. 23 — 2

356 S. JOHN, XX. [vv. 3—9-
Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they
3 have laid him. Peter therefore went forth, and that other
4 disciple, and came to the sepulchre. So they ran both
together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came
5 first to the sepulchre. And he stooping down, and looking
6 in, saw the linen clothes lying ; yet went he not in. Then
cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the
7 sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie, and the napkin,
that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes,
8 but wrapped together in a place by itself. Then went in
also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre,
9 and he saw, and believed. For as yet they knew not the
we know not] This possibly implies that other women had been
with her, as stated by the Synoptists. If so, she may have outstripped
them in going to the garden.
3. and that... sepulchre] Better, and the other disciple, and they were
coming towards the sepulchre.
4. So they ran] More exactly, But they began to run.
did outrun] Literally, ran on more quickly than, as being much the
younger man. Would a writer of the second century have thought of
this in inventing a narrative ?
5. stooping down, and looking in] In the Greek this is expressed in
a single word, which occurs again v. n and Luke xxiv. 12, in a literal
sense, of 'bending down to look carefully at;' and in a figurative sense in
1 Pet. i. 12 and James i. 25 (see notes in both places). In Ecclus. xiv.
23 it is used of the earnest searcher after wisdom, in xxi. 23 of the rude
prying of a fool.
saw] Better, seeth, at a glance (blepei).
6. Then cometh, &c] Better, Simon Peter therefore also cometh;
because S. John has remained standing there in awe and meditation.
S. Peter with his natural impulsiveness goes in at once. Both Apostles
act characteristically.
seeth] Or, beholdeth (thebrei). He takes a complete survey, and
hence sees the 'napkin,' which S. John in his short look had not
observed. 7. the napkin] See on xi. 44 : the same word is used here.
about his head] Literally, upon His head: there is no need to men
tion His name. The writer is absorbed in his subject.
in a place by itself] Literally, apart into one place.
8. Then  that other] Better, Therefore went in also the other.
He is encouraged by his older companion. Note how all the details
tell of the eye-witness : he remembers even that the napkin was folded.
Contrast the want of detail in Luke xxiv. 12.
and believed] More difficulty has perhaps been made about this than is
necessary. 'Believed what?' is asked. That Jesus was risen. The

vv. 10—13.] S. JOHN, XX. 357
scripture, that he must rise again from the dead. Then the ^
disciples went away again unto their own home.
11 — 18. The Manifestation to Mary Magdalene.
But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping : and n
as she wept, she stooped down, - and looked into the
sepulchre, and seeth two angels in white sitting, the one 12
at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body
of Jesus had lain. And they say unto her, Woman, why 13
whole context implies it; and comp. v. 25. The careful arrangement
of the grave-cloths proved that the body had not been taken away in
haste as by a foe : and friends would scarcely have removed them at all.
It is thoroughly natural that S. John speaks only of himself, saying
nothing of S. Peter. He is full of the impression which the empty and
orderly tomb made upon his own mind. S. Luke (xxiv. 12) speaks only
of S. Peter's wonder, neither affirming nor denying his belief.
9. they knew not the scripture) S. John's belief in the Resurrection
was as yet based only on what he had seen in the sepulchre. He had
nothing derived from prophecy to help him. The candour of the Evan
gelists is again shewn very strongly in the simple avowal that the love
of Apostles failed to grasp and remember what the enmity of the priests
understood and treasured up. Even with Christ to expound Scripture
to them, the prophecies about His Passion and Resurrection had re
mained a sealed book to them (comp. Luke xxiv. 25 — 27).
he must] Comp. iii. 14, xii. 34; Matt. xvi. 21, xxvi. 54; Mark viii.
31; Luke ix. 22, xvii. 25, xxii. 37, xxiv. 7, 26, 44. The Divine deter
mination meets us throughout Christ's life on earth, and is pointed out
with increasing frequency towards the close of it. Comp. Eph. iii. n.
10. Then the disciples] The disciples therefore ; because nothing
more could be done at the sepulchre.
11 — 18. The Manifestation to Mary Magdalene.
11. But Mary] She had returned to the sepulchre after the hurry
ing Apostles. Mark xvi. 9 states definitely, what we gather from this
section, that the risen Lord's first appearance was to Mary Magdalene :
the details of the meeting are given by S. John alone.
stood] Or, continued standing, after the other two had gone.
stooped down, and looked ] See on v. 5.
12. seeth] Or, beholdeth, as in v. 6, a long contemplative gaze.
two angels] This is the only place where angels appear in S. John's
narrative. Comp. i. 51, xii. 29, [v. 4].
in white] In the Greek ' white ' is plural, ' garments ' being under
stood, as in Rev. iii. 4 : in Rev. iii. 5, 18, iv. 4 'garments' is expressed.
Omit 'the' before ' one ' and for ' the other ' read 'one;' one at the head
and one at the feet.
13. Woman] See on ii. 4, xix. 26.

358 S. JOHN, XX. [vv. 14—16.
weepest thou ? She saith unto them, Because they have
taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have
i4 laid him. And when she had thus said, she turned her
self back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it
is was Jesus. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest
thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the
gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence,
tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.
16 Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith

my Lord, and I know not] In v. 2 it was ' the Lord and we know
not.' In speaking to Apostles she includes other believers; in speaking
to strangers she represents the relationship and the loss as personal.
These words express the burden of her thoughts since she first saw that
the stone had been removed. We may reasonably suppose that the
Evangelist obtained his information from Mary Magdalene herself.
"The extreme simplicity of the narrative, it may be added, reflects
something of the solemn majesty of the scene. The sentences follow
without any connecting particles till v. 19. (Comp. c. xv.)" Westcott
in loco.
14. And when] Omit 'and.' Perhaps she becomes in some way
conscious of another Presence.
saw] Better, beholdeth, as in vv. 6, 12.
knew not] Christ's Risen Body is so changed as not to be recognised
at once even by those who had known Him well. It has new powers
and a new majesty. Comp. xxi. 4; Luke xxiv. 16, 37; Matt, xxviii. 17;
[Mark xvi. 12].
16. the gardener] Because he was there at that early hour.
if thou have borne him hence] The omission of the name is very life
like : she is so full of her loss that she assumes that others must know
all about it. 'Thou' is emphatic; 'Thou and not, as I fear, some
enemy.' / will take him away] In her loving devotion she does not measure
her strength. Note that throughout it is 'the Lord' (v. 2), 'my Lord '
(v. 13), 'Him' thrice (v. 15), never 'His body' or 'the corpse.' His
lifeless form is to her still Himself.
16. Mary] The term of general address, -Woman,' awoke no
echo in her heart ; the sign of personal knowledge and sympathy comes
home to her at once. Thus ' He calleth His own sheep by name' (x. 3).
saith unto him] We must add with the best authorities, in Hebrew.
The insertion is of importance as indicating the language spoken be
tween Christ and His disciples. S. John thinks it well to remind Greek
readers that Greek was not the language used. Comp. Acts xxii. 2,
xxvi. 14. The expression here used (Hebrdisti) occurs only in this Go
spel (v. 2, xix. 13, 17, 20) and in Revelation (ix. n, xvi. 16). See on
xix. 37.

vv. 17, 18.] S. JOHN, XX. 359
unto him, Rabboni ; which is to say, Master. Jesus saith 17
unto her, Touch me not ; for I am not yet ascended to my
Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend
unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your
God. Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that 18
Rabboni] More exactly, Rabbunl. This precise form occurs also in
Mark x. 51, but has been obliterated in the A. V. It is said to be
Galilean, and if so natural in a woman of Magdala. Would any but a
Jew of Palestine have preserved this detail ?
Master] Or, Teacher. Its literal meaning is 'my Master,' but the
pronominal portion ofthe word had lost almost all meaning. S. John's
translation shews that as yet her belief is very imperfect : she uses
a mere human title.
17. Touch me not, for, &c] This is a passage of well-known difficulty.
At first sight the reason given for refraining from touching would seem
to be more suitable to a permission to touch. It is perhaps needless to
enquire whether the ' for ' refers to the whole of what follows or only to
the first sentence, ' I am not yet ascended to the Father?' In either
case the meaning would be, that the Ascension has not yet taken place,
although it soon will do so, whereas Mary's action assumes that it has
taken place. If ' for ' refers to the first clause only, then the emphasis
is thrown on Mary's mistake ; if ' for ' refers to the whole of what
is said, then the emphasis is thrown on the promise that what Mary
craves shall be granted in a higher way to both her and others very soon.
The translation ' touch Me not ' is inadequate and gives a false im
pression. The verb (haptesthai) does not mean to ' touch ' and ' handle '
with a view to seeing whether His body was real ; this Christ not only
allowed but enjoined (v. 27 ; Luke xxiv. 39; comp. 1 John i. 1) : rather
it means to ' hold on to ' and ' cling to.' Moreover it is the present (not
aorist) imperative ; and the full meaning will therefore be, ' Do not
continue holding Me,' or simply, hold Me not. The old and often 'in
terrupted earthly intercourse is over ; the new and continuous intercourse
with the Ascended Lord has not yet begun : but that Presence win be
granted soon, and there will be no need of straining eyes and clinging
hands to realize it. (For a large collection of various interpretations see
Meyer.) to my Father] The better reading gives, to the Father; with this 'My
brethren ' immediately following agrees better. The general relation
ship applying both to Him and them, is stated first, and then pointedly
distinguished in its application to Him and to them.
I ascend] Or, I am ascending. The change has already begun.
my God] The risen and glorified Redeemer is still perfect man.
Comp. Rev. iii. 12. Thus also S. Paul and S. Peter speak of 'the God
and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.' Comp. Eph. i. 3 ; 2 Cor. xi. 31 ;
1 Peter i. 3; and see on Rom. xv. 6; 2 Cor. i. 3, where the expression
is blurred in the A. V.
18. came and told] Better, cometh and telleth; literally, cometh
telling instead ofthe more usual 'having come telleth.'

360 S. JOHN, XX. [v. 19.
she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things
unto her.
19 — 23. The Manifestation to the Ten and others.
*9 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the
week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were
Thus as Mary's love seems to have been the first to manifest itself
(v. 1), so the first Manifestation of the Risen Lord is granted to her. It
confirms our trust in the Gospel narratives to find this stated. A writer
of a fictitious account would almost certainly have represented the first
appearance as being to the Virgin, or to S. Peter, the chief of the
Apostles, or to S. John, the beloved disciple, or to the chosen three.
But these are all passed over, and this honour is given to her, who had
once been possessed by seven devils, to Mary of Magdala, 'for she loved
much.' A late and worthless tradition does assign the first appearance
to the Virgin ; but so completely has Christ's earthly relationship to her
been severed (xix. 26, 27), that henceforth she appears only among the
other believers (Acts i. 14).
19 — 23. The Manifestation to the Ten and others.
19. Then the same day, &c] Rather, When therefore it was even
ing on that day, the first day of the week. Note the great precision
of the expression. 'That day,' that memorable day, the 'day of days.'
Oh! day of days! shall hearts set free
No minstrel rapture find for thee?
Thou art the Sun of other days,
They shine by giving back thy rays.
Keble, Christian Year, Easter Day.
Comp. i. 39, v. 9, xi. 49, xviii. 13, where 'that' has a similar meaning.
Evidently the hour is late ; the disciples have returned from Emmaus
(Luke xxiv. 23), and it was evening when they left Emmaus. At least it
must be long after sunset, when the second day of the week, according
to the Jewish reckoning, would begin. And S. John speaks of it as still
part of the first day. This is a point in favour of S. John's using the
modern method in counting the hours : it has a special bearing on the
explanation of 'the seventh hour' in iv. 52. See notes there and on
xix. 14.
when the doors were shut] This is mentioned both here and v. 26 to
shew that the appearance was miraculous. After the Resurrection
Christ's human form, though still real and corporeal, is not subject to
• the ordinary conditions of material bodies. Before the Resurrection He
was visible, unless He willed it otherwise; after the Resurrection it
would seem that He was invisible, unless He willed it otherwise. Comp.
Luke xxiv. 3 i .
where the disciples were] The best authorities all omit 'assembled.'
S. Luke says more definitely, ' the eleven and they that were with them'

vv. 20, 21.] S. JOHN, XX. 361
assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the
midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when 20
he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side.
Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord.
Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you : as my 21
(xxiv. 33); 'the eleven' meaning the Apostolic company, although one
was absent. It was natural that the small community of believers should
be gathered together, not merely for mutual protection and comfort, but
to discuss the reported appearances to the women and to S. Peter.
for fear of the Jews] Literally, because ofVaa (prevailing) _/«w of the
Jews (comp. vii. 13). It was not certain that the Sanhedrin would rest
content with having put Jesus to death ; all the less so as rumours of His
being alive again were spreading.
came Jesus] It is futile to discuss how; that the doors were miracu
lously opened, as in S. Peter's release from prison, is neither stated nor
implied. Peace be unto you] The ordinary greeting intensified. His last word
to them in their sorrow before His Passion (xvi. 33), His first word to
them in their terror (Luke xxiv. 37) at. His return, is 'Peace.' Possibly
the place was the same, the large upper room where they had last been
all together.
20. his hands and his side] S. Luke (xxiv. 40), who does not men
tion the piercing of the side, says ' His hands and His feet, ' and adds
that He told them to 'handle' Him, the very word used in 1 John i. 1.
Then were the disciples] The disciples therefore were. Their sorrow
is turned into joy (xvi. 20), joy which at first made them doubt its reality
(Luke xxiv. 41).
when they saw the Lord] Till then they had seen a form, but like
Mary of Magdala and the two at Emmaus, knew not whose it was.
21. Then said Jesus] Jesus therefore said; because now they were
ready to receive it. Their alarm was dispelled and they knew that He
was the Lord. He repeats His message of 'Peace.'
as my Father, &c] Better, As the Father hath sent Me. Christ's
mission is sometimes spoken of in the aorist tense, as having taken place
at a definite point in history (iii. 17, 34, v. 38, vi. 29, 57, vii. 29, viii.
42, x. 36, xi. 42, xvii. 3, 8, 18, 21, 23, 25), in which case the fact ofthe
Incarnation is the prominent idea. Sometimes, though much less often,
it is spoken of, as here, in the perfect tense, as a fact which continues in
its results (v. 36; 1 John iv. 9, 14), in which case the present and
.permanent effects of the mission are the prominent idea. Christ's
mission is henceforth to be carried on by His disciples.
The Greek for 'send' is not the same in both clauses; in the first,
'hath sent,' it is apostellein; in the second, 'send,' it is pempein.
The latter is the most general word for 'send,' implying no special rela
tion between sender and sent; the former adds the notion of a delegated
authority constituting the person sent the envoy or representative of the
sender. Both verbs are used both of the mission of Christ and of the

362 S. JOHN, XX  [w. 22, 23.
22 Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he
had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them,
23 Receive ye the Holy Ghost : whose soever sins ye remit,
mission of the disciples. Apostellein is used of the mission of Christ in
all the passages quoted above : it is used of the mission of the disciples,
iv. 38, xvii. 18. (Comp. i. 6, 19, 24, iii. 28, v. 33, vii. 32, xi. 3.) Pempein
is used of Christ's mission only in the aorist participle (iv. 34, v. 23, 24,
3°, 37. «• 38> 39. 4°. 44, ¦">¦ l6> t8> *8, 33. viii- l6> l8> 2<5> 2?>. »• 4j.
and in all the passages in chaps, xii — xvi.); the aorist participle of
apostellein is not used by S. John, although the Synoptists use it in this
very sense (Matt. x. 40; Mark ix. 37; Luke ix. 48, x. 16). Pempein is
used of disciples here and in xiii. 20 (of the Spirit, xiv. 26, xvi. 7).
"The general result... seems to be, that in this charge the Lord pre
sents His own Mission as the one abiding Mission ofthe Father; this
He fulfils through His Church. His disciples receive no new commis
sion, but carry out His." Westcott in loco.
send I you] Or, am I sending you; their mission has already begun
(comp. v. 17, xvii. 9); and the first and main part of it was to be the
proclamation of the truth just brought home to themselves— the Resur
rection (Acts i. 22, ii. 24, iv. 2, 33, &c).
22. he breathed on them] The very same Greek verb (here only in
N.T.) is used by the LXX. in Gen. ii. 7 (Wisdom xv. 11) of breathing
life into Adam. This Gospel of the new Creation looks back at its close,
as at its beginning (i. 1), to the first Creation.
We are probably to regard the breath here not merely as the emblem
of the Spirit (iii. 8), but as the means by which the Spirit was imparted
to them. 'Receive ye,' combined with the action of breathing, implies
this. This is all the more clear in the Greek, because pneuma means
both 'breath' and 'spirit,' a point which cannot be preserved in Enghsh;
but at least 'Spirit' is better than 'Ghost.' We have here, therefore,
an anticipation and earnest of Pentecost ; just as Christ's bodily return
from the grave and temporary manifestation to them was an anticipa
tion of His spiritual return and abiding Presence with them 'even unto
the end of the world.'
Receive ye] Or, tulieye, implying that the recipient may welcome or
reject the gift : he is not a mere passive receptacle. It is the very word
used for 'Take' (Matt. xxvi. 26; Mark xiv. 22; Luke xxii. 17) in the
account of the institution of the Eucharist ; which somewhat confirms the
view that here, as there, there is an outward sign and vehicle of an in
ward spiritual grace. The expression still more plainly implies that
some gift was offered and bestowed then and there : it is an unnatural
wresting of plain language to make 'Take ye' a mere promise. There
was therefore a Paschal as distinct from a Pentecostal gift of the Holy
Spirit, the one preparatory to the other. It should be noticed that
'Holy Ghost' is without the definite article in the Greek, and this seems
to imply that the gift is not made in all its fulness. See on xiv. 26,
where both substantive and adjective have the article.
23. Whose soever sins, &c] This power accompanies the gift of the

w. 24,25.] S. JOHN, XX. 3^3
they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye
retain, they are retained.
24 — 29. The Manifestation to S. Thomas and others.
But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not 24
with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore 25
Spirit just conferred. It must be noticed (1) that it is given to the whole
company present ; not to the Apostles alone. Of the Apostles one was
absent, and there were others who were not Apostles present : no hint is
given that this power is confined to the Ten. The commission therefore
in the first instance is to the Christian community as a whole, not to the
Ministry alone.
It follows from this (2) that the power being conferred on the com
munity and never revoked, the power continues so long as the com
munity continues. While the Christian Church lasts it has the power
of remitting and retaining along with the power of spiritual discernment
which is part of the gift- of the Spirit. That is, it has the power to
declare the conditions on which forgiveness is granted and the fact that
it has or has not been granted.
It should be noted (3) that the expression throughout is plural on both
sides. As it is the community rather than individuals that is invested
with the power, so it is classes of men rather than individuals on
whom it is exercised. God deals with mankind not in the mass but with
personal love and knowledge soul by soul. His Church in fulfilling its
mission from Him, while keeping this ideal in view, is compelled for
the most part to minister to men in groups and classes. The plural
here seems to indicate not what must always or ought to be the case,
but what generally is.
are remitted... are retained] Both verbs are perfects, though there is
some doubt about the reading as regards the former. The force of the
perfect is — 'are ipso facto remitted' — 'are ipso facto retained.' When
the community under the guidance of the Spirit has spoken, the result is
complete. retain] i.e. 'hold fast,' so that they do not depart from the sinner.
The word occurs here only in this Gospel. In Revelation it is used of
'holding fast doctrine,' &c. (ii. 14, 15, 25, iii. 11; comp. 2 Thess. ii.
15)- 24 — 29. The Manifestation to S. Thomas and others.
Peculiar to S. John.
24. Thomas] See on xi. 16.
the twelve] See on vi. 67.
was not with them] His melancholy temperament might dispose him
to solitude and to put no trust in the rumours of Christ's Resurrection if
they reached him on Easter Day. And afterwards his despondency is
too great to be removed by the testimony even of eye-witnesses. The
test which he selects has various points of contact with the surroundings.

364 S. JOHN, XX. [w. 26—28.
said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto
them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails,
and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my
26 hand into his side, I will not believe. And after eight days
again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them : then
came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst,
27 and said, Peace be unto you. Then saith he to Thomas,
Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands ; and reach
hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side : and be not
28 faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said
The wounds had been the cause of his despair ; it is they that must
reassure him. The print of them would prove beyond all doubt that it
was indeed His Lord that had returned to him. Moreover, the Ten had
no doubt told him of their own terror and hesitation, and how Jesus had
invited them to 'handle Him and see' in order to convince themselves.
This would suggest a similar mode of proof to S. Thomas.
25. print... put... print... thrust] The A.V. preserves the emphatic
repetition of 'print' but obliterates the similar repetition of 'put.' The
verb (ballein) rendered 'thrust' here and in v. 27 is the same as that
rendered 'put.' Its literal meaning is 'throw' or 'cast;' but in late
Greek its meaning becomes more vague and general; 'place, lay, put.'
Comp. v. 7, xiii. 2, xviii. 11. Here put would be better in all three
places. / will not believe] Or, / will in no wise believe; the negative is in
the strongest form. Comp. iv. 48, vi. 37, &c.
26. after eight days] Including both extremes, according to the
Jewish method. This is therefore the Sunday following Easter Day.
We are not to understand that the disciples had not met together during
the interval, but that there is no appearance of Jesus to record. The
first step is here taken towards establishing 'the Lord's Day' as the
Christian weekly festival. The Passover is over, so that the meeting of
the disciples has nothing to do with that.
again... within] Implying that the place is the same. No hint is
given as to the time of day.
then came Jesus] Better, in the simplicity of the original, Jesus
cometh. 27. saith, &c] He at once shews to S. Thomas that He knows the
test that he had demanded.
behold] Better, see; it is the same word as S. Thomas used in
v. 25.
be not] Rather, become not. The demand for this proof did not
make S. Thomas faithless, but it placed him in peril of becoming so.
'Faithless' and 'believing' are verbal as well as actual contradictories in
the Greek. 'Faithless' and 'faithful,' 'unbelieving and 'believing'
would in this respect be better; but it is best to leave it as in the A.V.
28. And Thomas answered] Omit 'and.' This answer and Christ's

v. 29.] S. JOHN, XX. 365
unto him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him, 29
Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed :
blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
comment, 'because thou hast seen,' seem to shew that S. Thomas did
not use the test which he had demanded. In accordance with his
desponding temperament he had underrated the possibilities of being
convinced. My Lord and my God] Most unnatural is the Unitarian view, that
these words are an expression of astonishment addressed to God. Against
this are (1) the plain and conclusive 'said unto Him;' (2) the words
'my Lord,' which manifestly are addressed to Christ (comp. v. 13);
(3) the fact that this confession of faith forms a climax and conclusion to
the whole Gospel. The words are rightly considered as an impassioned
declaration on the part of a devoted but (in the better sense of the term)
sceptical Apostle of his conviction, not merely that his Risen Lord
stood before him, but that this Lord was also his God. And it must be
noted that Christ does not correct His Apostle for this avowal, any
more than He corrected the Jews for supposing that He claimed to be
'equal with God' (v. 18, 19); onthe contrary He accepts and approves
this confession of belief in His Divinity.
29. Thomas, because, &c] 'Thomas' must be omitted on overwhelm
ing evidence, although the addition of the name seems natural here as in
xiv. 9. 'Thou hast believed' is half exclamation, half question (comp.
xvi. 31).
blessed are they that have not seen] Rather, Blessed are they that saw
not. There must have been some disciples who believed in the Resur
rection merely on the evidence of others. Jesus had not appeared to
every one of His followers.
This last great declaration of blessedness is a Beatitude which is the
special property of the countless number of believers who have never
seen Christ in the flesh. Just as it is possible for every Christian to be
come equal in blessedness to Christ's Mother and brethren by obedience
(Matt. xii. 49, 50), so it is possible for them to transcend the blessed
ness of Apostles by faith. All the Apostles, like S. Thomas, had seen
before they believed : even S. John's faith did not shew itself until he
had had evidence (v. 8). S. Thomas had the opportunity of believing
without seeing, but rejected it. The same opportunity is granted to all
believers now.
Thus this wonderful Gospel begins and ends with the same article of
faith. 'The Word was God,' — 'the Word became flesh,' is the Evan
gelist's solemn confession of a belief which had been proved and
deepened by the experience of more than half a century. From this he
starts, and patiently traces out for us the main points in the evidence
out of which that belief had grown. This done, he shews us the power
of the evidence over one needlessly wary of being influenced by in
sufficient testimony. The result is the instantaneous confession, at once
the result of questioning and the victory over it, 'My Lord and my
God.'

366 S. JOHN, XX. [vv. 30, 31.
30, 31. The Conclusion and Purpose ofthe Gospel.
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of
31 his disciples, which are not written in this book : but
these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the
Christ, the Son of God ; and that believing ye might have
life through his name.
30, 31. The Conclusion and Purpose of the Gospel.
30. And many other signs truly] The Greek cannot be exactly
rendered without awkwardness : Therefore (as might be expected from
what has been written here) many and other signs. The context shews
that 'signs' must not be limited to proofs of the Resurrection : S. John
is glancing back over his whole work — 'this book;' and the ' signs ' here,
as elsewhere in this Gospel, are miracles generally. Comp. especially
xii. 37. The expression 'many and other' points the same way; many
in number and different in kind from those related. The signs of the
Resurrection from the nature of the case were all similar in kind.
31. but these are written] On the one hand there were many un
recorded; but on the other hand some have been recorded. Note
in the Greek the men and the de and comp. xix. 23, 25. It was not
S. John's purpose to write a complete 'Life of Christ;' it was not his
purpose to write a 'Life' at all. Rather he would narrate just those
facts respecting Jesus which would produce a saving faith in Him as
the Messiah and the Son of God. S. John's work is 'a Gospel and not
a biography.' that ye might believe] That ye may believe.
that Jesus is the Christ, &c] That those who read this record may
be convinced of two things, — identical in the Divine counsels, identical
in fact, but separate in the thoughts of men, — (1) that Jesus, the well-
known Teacher and true man, is the Christ, the long looked for Messiah
and Deliverer of Israel, the fulfiller of type and prophecy; (2) that He
is also the Son of God, the Divine Word and true God. Were He not
the latter He could not be the former, although men have failed to see
this. Some had been looking for a mere Prophet and Wonder-worker,
— a second Moses or a second Elijah ; others had been looking for an
earthly King and Conqueror, — a second David or a second Solomon.
These views were all far short of the truth, and too often obscured and
hindered the truth. Jesus, the Lord's Anointed, must be and is not
only very man but very God. Comp. 1 John iv. 14, 15.
ye might have life] Ye may have life. The truth is worth having for
its own sake : but in this case to possess the truth is to possess eternal
life. Comp. 1 John v. 13. Note once more that eternal life is not a
a prize to be won hereafter; in believing these great truths we have
eternal life already (see on v. 24).
through his name) Rather, in His name (see on i. 12). Thus the
conclusion of the Gospel is an echo of the beginning (i. 4, 12). Comp.
Acts iv. 10; 1 Cor. vi. n.

v- '¦]  S. JOHN, XXI. 367
Chap. XXI. The Epilogue or Appendix.
1 — 14- The Manifestation to the Seven and the Miraculous
Draught of Fishes.
After these things Jesus shewed himself again to the 21
It is quite manifest that this was in the first instance intended as the
end of the Gospel. The conflict between belief and unbelief recorded
in it reach a climax in the confession of S. Thomas and the Beatitude
which follows : the work appears to be complete ; and the Evangelist
abruptly but deliberately brings it to a close. What follows is an after
thought, added by S. John's own hand, as the style and language
sufficiently indicate, but not part of the original plan. There is nothing
to shew how long an interval elapsed before the addition was made, nor
whether the Gospel was ever published without it. The absence of
evidence as to this latter point favours the view that the Gospel was not
given to the world until after the appendix was written.
Sixteen distinct marks tending to shew that chap. xxi. is by S. John
are pointed out in the notes and counted up by figures in square brackets,
thus [1]. Besides these points it should be noticed that S. John's cha
racteristic 'therefore' occurs seven times (w. 5, 6, 7, 9, 15, 21, 23) in
twenty-three verses.
Chap. XXI. The Epilogue or Appendix.
This Epilogue to a certain extent balances the Prologue, the main
body of the Gospel in two great divisions lying in between them ; but
with this difference, that the Prologue is part of the original plan of the
Gospel, whereas the Epilogue is not. It is evident that when the
Evangelist wrote xx. 30, lie had no intention of narrating any more
'signs.' The reason for adding this appendix can be conjectured with
something hke certainty : the Evangelist wished to give a full and exact
account of Christ's words respecting himself, about which there had been
serious misunderstanding. In order to make the meaning of Christ's
saying as clear as possible, S. John narrates in detail the circumstances
which led to its being spoken.
The whole of the chapter is peculiar to S. John's Gospel. It falls
into four parts. 1. The Manifestation to the Seven and the Miraculous
Draught of Fishes (1 — 14). 2. The Commission to S. Peter and Pre-
dictionas to his Death (15 — 19). 3. The misunderstood Saying respecting
the Evangelist (20 — 23). 4. Concluding Notes (24, 25).
1 — 14. The Manifestation to the Seven and the
Miraculous Draught of Fishes.
1. After these things] This vague expression (see on v. 1, vi. 1,
xix. 38) suits an afterthought which has no direct connexion with what
immediately precedes.
shewed himself] Better, manifested Himself. The rendering of this
verb (phaneroun), which is one of S. John's favourite words [1], should

368 S. JOHN, XXI. [w. 2—4.
disciples at the sea of Tiberias ; and on this wise shewed he
2 himself. There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas
called Didymus, and Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, and the
3 sons of Zebedee, and two other of his disciples. Simon Peter
saith unto them, I go a fishing. They say unto him, We
also go with thee. They went forth, and entered into a ship
4 immediately ; and that night they caught nothing. But
be kept uniform, especially here, ii. n, vii. 4, xvii. 6, where the active
voice is used. Comp. i. 31, iii. 21, ix. 3, xxi. 14; 1 John i. 2, ii. 19,
28, iii. 2, 5, 8, iv. 9. In the other Gospels the word occurs only Mark
iv. 22; [xvi. 12, 14], in all cases in the passive form.
again] This (as v. 14 shews) points back to the manifestation to S.
Thomas and the rest (xx. 26).
sea of Tiberias] See on vi. 1. S. John alone uses this name [2]. The
return of the disciples from Jerusalem to Galilee is commanded Matt.
xxviii. 7 ; Mark xvi. 7. They returned to Jerusalem soon, and remained
there from the Ascension to Pentecost (Acts i. 4). S. Matthew notices
only the appearances in Galilee, S. Luke [and S. Mark] only those in
Jerusalem. S. John gives some of both groups.
on this wise shewed he] Better, He manifested on this wise. This
repetition is S. John's style [3].
2. There were together] Probably all seven belonged to the neigh
bourhood; we know this of four of them.
Thomas] See on xi. 16, xiv. 5, xx. 24. All particulars about him
are given by S. John [4].
Nathanael] See on i. 45 : the descriptive addition 'of Cana of
Galilee' occurs here only. S. John alone mentions Nathanael [5].
the sons of Zebedee) If one of the sons of Zebedee were not the writer,
they would have been placed first after S. Peter, instead of last of those
named [6]. The omission of their names also is in harmony with S.
John's reserve about all closely connected with himself [7].
two other] Some conjecture Andrew and Philip ; but if so, why are
the names not given? More probably these nameless disciples are not
Apostles. 3. Simon Peter] As so often, he takes the lead. In the interval of
waiting for definite instructions the disciples have returned to their usual
employment. Once more we have precise and vivid details, as of an
eye-witness. We also go] Rather, we also come.
went forth] From the town or village, probably Capernaum or
Bethsaida. into a ship] Better, into the ships. 'Immediately' must be omitted
on decisive evidence.
that night] Better, In that night. 'That' perhaps indicates that
failure was exceptional; or it may mean 'that memorable night' (comp.
xix. 31 ; xx. 19). Night was the best time for fishing (Luke v. 5).
they caught nothing] Failure at first is the common lot of Christ's

w. 5—7-] S. JOHN, XXI. 369
when the morning was now come, Jesus stood on the shore :
but the disciples knew not that it was Jesus. Then Jesus 5
saith unto them, Children, have ye any meat? They an
swered him, No. And he said unto them, Cast the net on 6
the right side of the ship, and ye shall find. They cast
therefore, and now they were not able to draw it for the
multitude of fishes. Therefore tiiat disciple whom Jesus 7
loved saith unto Peter, It is the Lord. Now when Simon
Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt his fisher's coat
fishers. His Presence again causing success after failure might bring
home to them the lesson that apart from Him they could do nothing
(xv. 5).
The word here used for 'catch' does not occur in the Synoptists, but
besides v. 10 is found six times in this Gospel (vii. 30, 32, 44, viii. 20,
x. 39, xi. 57), and once in Revelation (xix. 20) [8]. Elsewhere only
Acts iii. 7, xii. 4 ; 2 Cor. xi. 32.
4. morningwas now come] The better reading gives, dawn was now
breaking. stood on the shore] Literally, stood on to the beach, i. e. He came and
stood on the beach.
but] Nevertheless, or howbeit (mentoi, a particle rare in N.T. out
side this Gospel); implying that this was surprising. Comp. iv. 27,
vii. 13, xii. 42, xx. 5.
knew not] See on xx. 14.
5. Then Jesus] Jesus therefore ; because they did not recognise
Him. Children] Perhaps a mere term of friendly address (paidia) ; not the
affectionate term used xiii. 33 (teknia). Paidia occurs 1 John ii. 14, 18;
teknia occurs 1 John ii. 1, 12, 28, iii. 7, 18, iv. 4, v. 21.
meat) The Greek word (prosphagion) occurs here only. It appears
to mean something eaten with bread, especially fish. Perhaps we should
translate, Have ye any fish 7
6. They cast therefore] Perhaps they thought the stranger saw fish
on the right side. Fish are at times seen "in dense masses" in the
lake. 7. Therefore that disciple] The characteristics of the two Apostles
are again most delicately yet clearly given (comp. xx. 2 — 9). S. John is
the first to apprehend; S. Peter the first to act [9].
Now when Simon Peter heard] Simon Peter therefore having heard.
fisher's coat] The Greek word (ependutes) occurs here only. It was .
his upper garment, which he gathered round him "with instinctive
reverence for the presence of his Master" (Westcott). 'Naked' need
not mean more than ' stripped ' of the upper garment. "No one but an
eye-witness would have thought of the touch in v. 7, which exactly in
verts the natural action of one about to swim, and yet is quite accounted
for by the circumstances." S. p. 267.

370 S. JOHN, XXI. [w. 8— u.
unto him, (for he was naked,) and did cast himself into the
8 sea. And the other disciples came in a little ship ; (for
they were not far from land, but as it were two hundred
9 cubits,) dragging the net with fishes. As soon then as they
were come to land, they saw a fire of coals there, and fish
io laid thereon, and bread. Jesus saith unto them, Bring of
ii the fish which ye have now caught. Simon Peter went up,
cast himself) with his habitual impulsiveness.
8. in a little ship] Rather, in th-9 boat, whether 'the ship ' of v. 3
or a smaller boat attached to it, we cannot determine.
two hundred cubits] About 100 yards.
9. As soon as... they saw] Better, When therefore. ..they see.
afire of coals] See on xviii. 18 : the word occurs only there and here
in N. T. [10]. 'There' is literally laid.
fish laid thereon, and bread] Or possibly, a. fish laid thereon and a
loaf. But the singulars may be collectives as in the A. V. The word
for fish (opsarion) is similar in meaning, though not in derivation, to
the one used in v. 5. (Seeonvi. 9.) In v. 11 yet another word is used
(ichthus), which means 'fish' generally, whether for eating or not.
10. fish] The same word as in v. 9, but in the plural.
caught] See on v. 3.
11. went up] Better, with the best texts, went up therefore: the
meaning probably is 'went on board' the vessel, now in shallow water.
The details in this verse are strong evidence of the writer having been
an eye-witness : he had helped to count these 'great fishes ' and gives the
number, not because there is anything mystical in it, but because he re
members it.
The points of contrast between this Draught of Fishes and the similar
miracle at the beginning of Christ's ministry are so numerous and so
striking, that it is difficult to resist the conclusion that the spiritual
meaning, which from very early times has been deduced from them, is
divinely intended. Symbolical interpretations of Scripture are of three
kinds: (1) Fanciful and illegitimate. These are simply misleading:
they force into plain statements meanings wholly unreal if not false ; as
when the 153 fishes are made to symbolize Gentiles, Jews, and the
Trinity. (2) Fanciful but legitimate. These are harmless, and may be
edifying: they use a plain statement to inculcate a spiritual lesson,
although there is no evidence that such lesson is intended. (3) Legiti
mate and divinely intended. In these cases the spiritual meaning is
either pointed out for us in Scripture (Luke v. 10), or is so strikingly in
harmony with the narrative, that it seems reasonable to accept it as
purposely included in it. Of course it requires both spiritual and intel
lectual power to determine in any given case to which class a particular
interpretation belongs ; but in the present instance we may safely assign
the symbolism to the third class.
The main points are these. The two Miraculous Draughts represent
the Church Militant and the Church Triumphant. The one gathers

w. 12—15.] S. JOHN, XXI. 371
and drew the net to land full of great fishes, an hundred and
fifty and three : and for all there were so many, yet was not
the net broken. Jesus saith unto them, Come and dine. 12
And none of the disciples durst ask him, Who art thou ?
knowing that it was the Lord. Jesus then cometh, and 13
taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish likewise. This is 14
now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his disciples,
after that he was risen from the dead.
15 — 19. The Commission to S. Peter and Prediction as to
his death.
So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, 15
together an untold multitude of both good and bad in the troubled waters
of this world. Its net is rent with schisms and its Ark seems like to
sink. The other gathers a definite number of elect, and though they be
many contains them all, taking them not on the stormy ocean but on
the eternal shore of peace.
12. Come and dine) The meal indicated is not the principal meal
of the day (deipnon) which was taken in the afternoon, but the morning
meal (ariston) or breakfast. See on Luke xi. 37.
And none] Omit 'and.' There is a solemn simplicity in the narra
tive. The sentences from v. 10 to z\ 14 have no connecting particles:
comp. chap. xv. and xx. 13 — ig.
none durst ask... knowing] A mixture of perplexity, awe, and convic
tion. They are convinced that He is the Lord, yet feel that He is
changed, and reverence restrains them from curious questions. Comp.
Matt. ii. 8, x. 11. The writer knows the inmost feelings of Apostles
(comp. ii. n, 17, 22, iv. 27, 33, vi. 21, ix. 2, xx. 20) [11].
13. Jesus then cometh] Omit ' then.' They are afraid to approach,
so He comes to them. 'Bread' and 'fish' are in the singular, as in v. 9,
but with the definite article, which points back to v. 9 ; ' the bread ' and
'the fish' which had been mentioned before. Of course this is not the
fish that had just been caught, and nothing is told us as to how it was
provided. The food is a gift from the Lord to His disciples.
' 14. This is now the third time] We have a similar construction 2
Pet. iii. 1. The two previous manifestations are probably those related
xx. 19 — 23, 26 — 29 : but we have not sufficient knowledge to arrange
the different appearances in chronological order. See on Luke xxiv. 49.
shewed himself] Manifested Himself: see on v. 1.
15—19. The Commission to S. Peter and Prediction as to
his death.
15. dined] See on v. 12.
saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas] For 'Jonas' read John
here and in vv. 16, 17, as in i. 42. Note that the writer himself calls
24 — 2

372 S. JOHN, XXI. [v. 15.
Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these ? He
saith unto him, Yea, Lord ; thou knowest that I love thee.
him Simon Peter, but represents the Lord as calling him 'Simon son of
John. ' This is not only in harmony with the rest of this Gospel, but with
the Gospels as a whole. Although Jesus gave Simon the name of Peter,
yet, with one remarkable exception (see on Luke xxii. 34), He never
addresses him as Peter, but always as Simon. Matt. xvi. 1 7, xvii. 25 ;
Mark xiv. 37; Luke xxii. 31. The Synoptists generally call him Simon,
sometimes adding his surname. S. John always gives both names,
excepting in i. 41, where the surname just about to be given would be
obviously out of place. Contrast in this chapter vv. 2, 3, 7, n with
16, 17. Should we find this minute difference observed, if the writer
were any other than S. John? [12] This being the general usage of
our Lord, there is no reason to suppose that His calling him Simon
rather than Peter on this occasion is a reproach, as implying that by
denying his Master he had forfeited the name of Peter. That S. John
should add the surname with much greater frequency than the Synop
tists is natural. At the time when S. John wrote the surname had
become the more familiar of the two. S. Paul never calls him Simon,
but uses the Aramaic form of the surname, Cephas.
lovest thou me] The word for 'love' here and in the question in v. 16
is agapdn (see on xi. 5). S. Peter in all three answers uses philein,
and our Lord uses philein in the third question (v. 17). The change is
not accidental ; and once more we have evidence of the accuracy of the
writer: he preserves distinctions which were actually made. S. Peter's
preference for philein is doubly intelligible: (1) it is the less exalted
word ; he is sure of the natural affection which it expresses ; he will say
nothing about the higher love implied in agapdn; (2) it is the warmer
word; there is a calm discrimination implied in agapdn which to him
seems cold. In the third question Christ takes him at his own standard;
he adopts S. Peter's own word, and thus presses the question more
home. more than these] ' More than these, thy companions, love Me.' The
A. V. is ambiguous, and so also is the Greek, but there cannot be much
doubt as to the meaning: 'more than thou lovest these things' gives a
very inadequate signification to the question. At this stage in S. Peter's
career Christ would not be likely to ask him whether he preferred his
boat and nets to Himself. S. Peter had professed to be ready to die for
His Master (xiii. 37) and had declared that though all the rest might
deny Him, he would never do so (Matt. xxvi. 33). Jesus recalls this
boast by asking him whether he now professes to have more loyalty and
devotion than the rest.
Yea, Lord; thou knowest] "We have once more an exquisite touch
of psychology. It is Peter's modesty that speaks, and his sense of shame
at his own short-comings... He has nothing to appeal to, and yet he is
conscious that his affection is not unreal or insincere, and He trusts to
Him who searches the hearts." S. pp. 268, 9. Not only does he change
the word for 'love' from agapdn to philein, but he says nothing about

vv- 16, 1 7-]  S. JOHN, XXI.  373
He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. He saith to him again 16
the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me ? He
saith unto him, Yea, Lord ; thou knowest that I love thee.
He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. He saith unto him the i?
third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me ? Peter was
grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou
me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things;
'more than these:' he will not venture any more to compare himself
with others. Moreover he makes no professions as to the future ; ex
perience has taught him that the present is all that he can be sure of.
The 'Thou' in 'Thou knowest' is emphatic. This time he will trust
the Lord's knowledge of him rather than his own estimate of himself.
Can all these delicate touches be artistic fictions?
Feed my lambs] Not only is he not degraded on account of his fall,
he receives a fresh charge and commission. The work of the fisher
gives place to that of the shepherd : the souls that have been brought
together and won need to be fed and tended. And this S. Peter must
do. 16. lovest thou me?] Jesus drops the 'more than these,' which the
humbled Apostle had shrunk from answering, but retains His own word '
for 'love.' S. Peter answers exactly as before.
Feed my sheep] Better, Tend, or shepherd, My sheep. The word ren
dered 'feed' in w. 15 and 17 (boskein) means 'supply with food.' Comp.
Matt. viii. 30, 33; Mark v. n, 14; Luke viii. 32, 34; xv. 15 (the only
other passages where the word occurs in N. T.) of the feeding of the
herd of swine. The word used here (poimainein) means rather 'be
shepherd to.' It is used literally Luke xvii. 7; 1 Cor. ix. 7; and
figuratively Matt. ii. 6; Acts xx. 28; 1 Pet. v. 2. Comp. Jude 12;
Rev. ii. 27, vii. 17, xii. 5, xix. 15. Tending implies more of guidance
and government than feeding does. The lambs, which can go no dis
tance, scarcely require guidance, their chief need is food. The sheep
require both.
17. the third time] He had denied thrice, and must thrice affirm
his love. This time Jesus makes a further concession : He not only
ceases to urge the 'more than these,' but He adopts S. Peter's own
word, philein . The Apostle had rejected Christ's standard and taken
one of his own, about which he could be more sure ; and Christ now
questions the Apostle's own standard. This is why 'Peter was grieved'
so much; not merely at the threefold question recalling his threefold
denial, not merely at his devotion being questioned more than once,
but that the humble form of love which he had professed, and that with
out boastful comparison with others, and without rash promises about
the future, should seem to be doubted by his Lord.
thou knowest all things; thou knowest) Once more we have two words
for 'know' in the original and only one in the A. V. (Comp. vii. 27,
viii. 55, xiii. 7, xiv. 7.) The first 'knowest' (oidas) refers to Christ's
supernatural intuition, as in vv. 15, 16 : the second 'knowest' (ginSskeis)

374 S. JOHN, XXI. [v. 18.
thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed
18 my sheep. Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast
young, thou girdest thyself, and walkedst whither thou
wouldest : but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch
forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee
to His experience and discernment; Thou recognises!, perceivest, seest,
that I love Thee. See on ii. 24, 25.
Feed my sheep] It is doubtful whether we have or have not precisely
the same word for 'sheep' here as in v. 16. The Greek word here
according to the best authorities is undoubtedly a diminutive (probatia,
not probata) ; in v. 16 the evidence is pretty evenly balanced between
probatia and probata ('little sheep' and 'sheep'). One is tempted to
adopt S. Ambrose's order in vv. 15, 16, 17 — 'lambs,' 'little sheep,'
'sheep' (agnos, oviculas, oves), which seems also to have been the read
ing of the old Syriac : but the balance of evidence is against it. But
without counting the possible difference between 'little sheep' and
'sheep,' there are three important distinctions obliterated in the A. V.,
— the two words rendered 'love,' the two rendered 'feed,' and the two
rendered 'know.'
S. Peter seems to recall this charge in his First Epistle (v. 2, 3), a
passage which in the plainest terms condemns the policy of those who
on the strength of this charge have claimed to rule as his successors over
the whole of Christ's flock.
18, 19. This high charge will involve suffering and even death. In
spite of his boastfulness and consequent fall the honour which he once
too rashly claimed (xiii. 37) will after all be granted to him.
18. Verily, verily] This peculiarity of S. John's Gospel (see on i.
55) is preserved in the appendix to it [13].
wast young] Literally, wast younger than thou art now. He was
now between youth and age.
stretch forth thy hands] For help.
shall gird thee] As a criminal.
whither thou wouldest not] To death. This does not mean that at
the last S. Peter will be unwilling to die for his Lord, but that death,
and especially a criminal's death, is what men naturally shrink from.
The common interpretation that 'stretch forth thy hands' refers to the
attitude in crucifixion, and 'gird thee' to binding to the cross, is pre
carious, on account of the order of the clauses, the taking to execu
tion being mentioned after the execution. But it is not impossible; for
the order of this group of clauses may be determined by the previous
group, and the order in the previous group is the natural one. The
girding naturally precedes the walking in the first half; therefore 'gird'
precedes 'carry' in.the second half, and 'stretch forth thy hands' is con
nected with 'gird' rather than 'carry' and therefore is coupled with
'gird.' Or again 'carry thee &c.' may possibly refer to the setting up
of the cross after the sufferer was bound to it ; in this way all runs
smoothly. '

w. 19—21.] S. JOHN, XXI. 375
whither thou wouldest not. This spake he, signifying by 19
what death he should glorify God. And when he had
spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
20 — 23. The Misunderstood Saying respecting the Evangelist.
Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus 20
loved following ; which also leaned on his breast at supper,
and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee ? Peter 21
seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man
19. This spake he] Now this He spake.
signifying by what death) Signifying by what manner of death.
This comment is quite in S. John's style (comp. xii. 33, xviii. 32) [14].
It will depend on the interpretation of v. 18 whether we understand
this to mean crucifixion or simply martyrdom. That S. Peter was
crucified at Rome rests on sufficient evidence, beginning with Tertullian
(Scorp. XV. ), and that he requested to be crucified head downwards is
stated by Eusebius (H. E. III. i. 2) on the authority of Origen.
he should glorify] Literally, he shall glorify.
Follow me] Perhaps the literal meaning is not altogether to be ex
cluded ; and it appears from S. Peter's ' turning about ' (v. 20), that he
understood the words literally and began to follow. But no doubt this
command here, as elsewhere in the Gospels, is to be understood figura
tively, the precise shade of meaning being determined by the context.
Comp. i. 43; Matt. viii. 22, ix. 9, xix. 21. In the present case there is
probably a reference to xiii. 36, 37; and the 'following' includes follow
ing to a martyr's death, and possibly the precise death of crucifixion.
20—23. The Misunderstood Saying respecting the Evangelist.
20. Peter, turning about, seeth] Omit ' then. ' The graphic details
are those of an eyewitness.
leaned] Better, leaned back. The allusion is to the momentary
change of posture (xiii. 25) in order to ask who was the traitor, not to
the position which he occupied next our Lord throughout the meal (xiii.
*3)- 21. Peter seeing him] Peter therefore seeing him. Once more we
see the intimacy between these two Apostles. When S. Peter is told
to follow, S. John does so also unbidden ; and S. Peter having received
his own commission asks about that of his friend. Comp. xviii. 15,
xx. 1 [15].
and what shall this man do?) Literally, but this man, what? Not
so much 'what shall he do?' as 'what about him?' What is the lot in
store for him. The question indicates the natural wish to know the
future of a friend, all the more natural after having been told something
about his own future. Hence the 'therefore' at the beginning of the
verse. As usual, S. Peter acts on the first impulse.

376 S. JOHN, XXI. [w. 22, 23.
22 do ? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come,
23 what is that to thee ? follow thou me. Then went this
saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should
not die : yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die ;
but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee ?
22. If I will] Christ died and rose again that He might become the
Lord and Master both of the dead and the living (Rom. xiv. 9). He
speaks here in full consciousness of this sovereignty. For the use of ' I
will' by Christ comp. xvii. 24; Matt. viii. 3 and parallels, xxvi. 39.
While the 'I will' asserts the Divine authority, the 'if keeps the deci
sion secret.
that he tarry] Better, that he abide; it is S. John's favourite word
which we have had so often (i. 32, 33, 39, 40, ii. 12, iii. 36, iv. 40, &c,
and twelve times in chap, xv.) [16]. S. Peter's lot was to suffer, S.
John's to wait. For 'abide' in the sense of remain in life comp. xii. 34;
Phil. i. 25; 1 Cor. xv. 6.
till I come] Literally, while I am coming. The words express rather
the interval of waiting than the end oi it. Comp. ix. 4; Mark vi. 45.
This at once seems to shew that it is unnecessary to enquire whether
Pentecost, or the destruction of Jerusalem, or the apocalyptic visions
recorded in the Revelation, or a natural death, or the Second Advent,
is meant by Christ's 'coming' in this verse. He is not giving an answer
but refusing one. The reply is purposely hypothetical and perhaps pur
posely indefinite. But inasmuch as the longer the interval covered by
the words, the greater the indefiniteness, the Second Advent is to be
preferred as an interpretation, if a distinct meaning is given to the
'coming.' what is that to thee?) The words are evidently a rebuke. There is a
sense in which 'Am I my brother's keeper?' is a safeguard against curi
osity and presumption rather than a shirking of responsibility.
follow thou me] 'Thou' is emphatic, contrasting with the preceding
'he,' which is emphatic also.
23. Then went this saying] This saying therefore went.
abroad among] Literally, forth unto: comp. Matt. ix. 26; Mark i.
28; Rom. x. 18.
the brethren]^ This phrase, common in the Acts (ix. 30, xi. 1, 29, xv.
1, 3, 22, 23, &c), is not used elsewhere in the Gospels for believers
generally; but we see the way prepared for it in the Lord's words to the
disciples (Matt, xxiii. 8), to S. Peter (Luke xxii. 32), and to Mary
Magdalene (xx. 17).
should not die] Literally, doth not die; so also 'shall not die' in the
next clause. The mistake points to a time when Christians generally
expected that the Second Advent would take place in their own time ;
and the correction of the mistake points to a time when the Apostle
was still living. If this chapter was added by another hand after the
Apostle's death it would have been natural to mention his death, as the
simplest and most complete answer to the misunderstanding. The
cautious character of the answer given, merely pointing out the hypo-

v. 24.] S. JOHN, XXI. 377
24, 25. Concluding Notes.
This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and 24
wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.
thetical form of Christ's language, without pretending to explain it,
shews that the question had not yet been solved in fact. Thus we are
once more forced back within the limits of the first century for the date
of this Gospel. 24, 25. Concluding Notes.
Again the question of authorship confronts us. Are these last two
verses by the writer of the rest of the chapter? Are they both by the
same hand? The external evidence, as in the case of the preceding
verses, is in favour of their being both by the same hand, and that the
writer of the first twenty-three verses, and therefore S. John. No MS.
or version is extant without v. 24, and all except the Sinaitic, have v.
25 also ; nor is there any evidence that a copy was ever in existence
lacking either this last chapter or v. 24.
The internal evidence is the other way. The natural impression pro
duced by v. 24 is that it is not the writer of the Gospel who here bears
witness to his own work, but a plurality of persons who testify to the
trustworthiness of the Evangelist's narrative. So that we possibly have
in this verse a note added by the Ephesian elders before the publication
of the Gospel. The change to the singular in v. 25 would seem to imply
that this verse is an addition by a third hand of a remark which the
writer may have heard from S. John.
But the internal evidence is not conclusive, and the impression natu
rally produced by the wording of the verses need not be the right one.
The aged Apostle in bringing his work a second time (xx. 30, 31) to a
conclusion may have included that inmost circle of disciples (to whom
he had frequently told his narrative by word of mouth) among those who
were able to guarantee his accuracy. With a glance of affectionate con
fidence round the group of devoted hearers, he adds their testimony to
his own, and gives them a share in bearing witness to the truth of the
Gospel. 24. which testifieth] Better, which beareth witness. Whether
'these things' refers to the whole Gospel, or only to the contents of
chap. xxi. cannot be determined.
wrote] Note the change from present to aorist. The witness still
continues at the present time ; the writing took place once for all in the
past. we know] Because S. John uses the singular, 'he knoweth,' in xix.
35, it does not follow that he would not use the plural here. It would
have been out of place in the middle of his narrative to add the testi
mony of the Ephesian, elders to his own as to details which he saw with
his own eyes at the foot of the cross. But it is not unnatural that at the
close of his Gospel he should claim them as joint witnesses to the fide
lity with which he has committed to writing this last instalment of

378 S. JOHN, XXI. [v. 25.
25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the
which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that
even the world itself could not contain the books that
should be written. Amen.
evangelical and apostolic traditions. Comp. 1 John v. 18, 19, 20, 15,
iii. 14, i. 1; 3 John 12.
25. every one] Literally, one by one.
I suppose] The Greek word (oimai) occurs nowhere else in N. T.
excepting Phil. i. 17; James i. 7. The use of the first person singular
is very unlike S. John.
If this verse is an addition by an unknown hand it appears to be
almost contemporary. The wording seems to imply that it would still
be possible to write a great deal : additional materials still abound.
could not contain] The bold hyperbole (which may be S. John's,
though added by another hand) expresses the yearnings of Christendom
throughout all ages. The attempts which century after century con
tinue to be made to write the 'Life of Christ' seem to prove that even
the fragments that have come down to us of that 'Life' have been found
in their manysidedness and profundity to be practically inexhaustible.
After all that the piety and learning of eighteen hundred years have
accomplished, Christians remain still unsatisfied, still unconvinced that
the most has been made of the very fragmentary account of scarcely a
tenth portion of the Lord's life on earth. What would be needed to
make even this tenth complete? What, therefore, to complete the
whole? Amen] The addition of a copyist,

APPENDICES.
A. THE DAY OF THE CRUCIFIXION.
It can scarcely be doubted that if we had only the Fourth Gospel no
question would have arisen as to the date of the Last Supper and of the
Crucifixion. S. John's statements are as usual so clear and precise, and
at the same time so entirely consistent, that obscurity arises only when
attempts are made to force his plain language into harmony with the
statements of the Synoptists which appear to contradict his.
S. John's gives five distinct intimations ofthe date.
I. 'Now before the Feast ofthe Passover' (xiii. i); a phrase which
gives a date to the feet-washing and farewell discourses at the Last
Supper. 2. 'Buy those things that we have need oifor the Feast' (xiii. 29);
which again shews that the Last Supper was not the Passover.
3. 'They themselves went not into the palace, that they might not
be defiled, but might eat the Passover' (xviii. 28); which proves that
'early' on the day of the crucifixion the Jews who delivered our Lord
to Pilate had not yet eaten the Passover.
4. ' It was the preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth
hour. And he saith to the Jews, Behold your King' (xix. 14); which
shews that the Jews had not postponed eating the Passover because of
urgent business : the Passover had not yet begun.
5. 'The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the
bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day, (for that
Sabbath day was an high day) asked Pilate &c.' (xix. 31). Here 'the
preparation ' (paraskeul) may mean either the preparation for the Sab
bath, i.e. Friday, or the preparation for the Passover, i.e. Nisan 14. But
the statement that the Sabbath was a 'high day' most naturally means
that the Sabbath in that week coincided with the first day of the Feast :
so that the day was 'the preparation' for both the Sabbath and the
Feast. From these passages it is evident that 6". John places the Crucifixion
on the preparation or eve ofthe Passover, i.e. on Nisan 14, on the after
noon of which the Paschal Lamb was slain; and that he makes the Pass
over begin at sunset that same day. Consequently our Lord was in the
grave before the Passover began, and the Last Supper cannot have been
the Paschal meal.
Moreover these statements fall in very well with the almost universal
view that the Crucifixion took place on a Friday, on the evening of
which the Passover as well as the Sabbath began.
It is from the Synoptists that we inevitably derive the impression that
the Last Supper was the Paschal meal (Matt. xxvi. 2, 17, 18, 19; Mark
xiv. 14 — 16; Luke xxii. 7, n, 13, 15). Whatever method of explana
tion be adopted, it is the impression derived from the Synoptists that
must be modified, not that derived from S. John. Their statements
refer rather to the nature oi the Last Supper, his cover the whole field
from the Supper to the taking down from the cross, giving clear marks
of time all along. No doubt they are correct in stating that the Last
Supper had in some sense the character of a Paschal meal ; but it is quite

380 APPENDICES.

evident from S. John that the Last Supper was not the Passover in the
ordinary Jewish sense. When the Sabbath gave place to the Lord's
Day the day was deliberately changed in order to mark the change of
associations : a similar change for similar reasons may have been adopted
when the Eucharist supplanted the Passover. The fact that the whole
Church for eight centuries always used leavened bread at the Eucharist,
and that the Eastern Church continues to do so to this day, may point
to a tradition that the meal at which the Eucharist was instituted was
not the Paschal meal. Moreover Jews, to whom the Gospel was to be
preached first, might have found a serious stumbling-block in the fact
that He who was proclaimed as the Paschal Lamb partook of the
Paschal Feast and was slain afterwards. Whereas S. John makes it
clear to them, that on the very day and at the very hour when the
Paschal lambs had to be slain, the True Lamb was sacrificed on the
Cross. (See note on Matt. xxvi. 17 and Excursus V. in Dr Farrar's S.
Luke. ) B. S. PETER'S DENIALS.
The difficulties which attend all attempts at forming a Harmony of the
Gospels are commonly supposed to reach something like a climax here.
Very few events are narrated at such length by all four Evangelists ; and
in no case is the narrative so carefully divided by them into distinct
portions as in the case of S. Peter's threefold denial of his Master.
Here therefore we have an exceptionally good opportunity of comparing
the Evangelists with one another piece by piece ; and the result is sup
posed to be damaging to them. A careful comparison of the four ac
counts will establish one fact beyond the reach of reasonable dispute; —
that, whatever may be the relation between the narratives of S. Matthew
and S. Mark, those of S. Luke and S. John are independent both of the
first two Gospels and of one another. So that we have at least three
independent accounts.
It would be an instructive exercise for the student to do for himself
what Canon Westcott has done for him (Additional Note on John xviii :
comp. Alford on Matt. xxvi. 69), and tabulate the four accounts, com
paring not merely verse with verse but clause with clause.
His first impression of great discrepancy between the accounts will
convince him of the independence of at least three of them. And a
further consideration will probably lead him to see that this independ
ence and consequent difference are the result of fearless truthfulness.
Each Evangelist, conscious of his own fidelity, tells the story in his own
way without caring to correct his account by that of others. In the
midst of the differences of details there is quite enough substantial
agreement to lead us to the conclusion that each narrative would be
found to be accurate if we were acquainted with all the circumstances.
All four Evangelists tell us that three denials were predicted (Matt. xxvi. ,
34; Mark xiv. 30; Luke xxii. 34; John xiii. 38) and all ioux give three
denials (Matt. xxvi. 70, 72, 74; Mark xiv. 68, 70, 71 ; Luke xxii. 57,
58, 60; John xviii. 17, 25, 27).
The apparent discrepancy with regard to the prediction is that S. Luke
and S. John place it during the Supper, S. Mark and S. Matthew during

APPENDICES. 381

the walk to Gethsemane. But the words of the first two Evangelists do
not quite necessarily mean that the prediction was made precisely where
they mention it. Yet, if the more natural conclusion be adopted that
they do mean to place the prediction on the road to Gethsemane ; then,
either the prediction was repeated, or they have placed it out of the
actual chronological sequence. As already remarked elsewhere, chro
nology is not what the Evangelists care to give us.
The numerous differences of detail with regard to the three denials,
especially the second and third, will sink into very small proportions if
we consider that the attack of the maid which provoked the first denial,
about which the four accounts are very harmonious, led to a series of
attacks gathered into two groups, with intervals during which S. Peter
was left unmolested. Each Evangelist gives us salient points in these
groups of attacks and denials. As to the particular words put into the
mouth of S. Peter and his assailants, it is quite unnecessary to suppose
that they are intended to give us more than the substance of what was
said (see Introductory Note to chap. iii.). Let us remember S. Augus
tine's wise and moderate words respecting the differences of detail in
the narratives ofthe storm on the lake. "There is no need to enquire
which of these exclamations was really uttered. For whether they
uttered some one of these three, or other words which none of the
Evangelists have recorded, yet ' conveying the same sense, what does it
matter?" De Cons. Ev. II. xxiv. 55.
C. ORDER OF THE CHIEF EVENTS OF THE PASSION.
This part of the Gospel narrative is like the main portion of it in this,
that the exact sequence of events cannot in all cases be determined with
certainty, and that the precise date of events can in no case be deter
mined with certainty. But for the sake of clearness of view it is well
to have a tentative scheme ; bearing in mind that, like a plan drawn
from description instead of from sight, while it helps us to understand
and realise the description, it must be defective and may here and there
be misleading. in P M. The Last Supper and Last Discourses.
The Agony.
The Betrayal.
Conveyance to the high-priest's house.
Examination before Annas.
Examination before Caiaphas at an informal meeting
of the Sanhedrin.
Condemnation to death at a formal meeting of the
Sanhedrin.
First Examination before Pilate.
Examination before Herod.
Second Examination before Pilate.
The scourging and first mockeryby Pilate's soldiers.
Pilate gives sentence of Crucifixion.
Second mockery by Pilate's soldiers.
The Crucifixion.
First Word. ' Father, forgive them, &.C.'
Second — ' Woman, behold thy son.'
' Behold, thy mother.'
Third — ' To-day Hutu shalt be, &c.'

Thursday after 6.0 p.m.
(Nisan 14)

II P.M.

Midnight
Friday 1 a.m.
2 A.M.

3 A.M.

4.30 A.M.

5 a.m.
5 io a. M.
6 A.M.
6.30 A.M.
9 A M.
382 APPENDICES.

Friday Noon to 3 p.m.

The Darkness.

Fourth Word. ' My God, My God, &c*

Fifth — 'I thirst'

Sixth — * 1 1 is finished.1

3 p.m.

Seventh — ' Father, into Thy hands, &c*

The Centurion's Confession.
The Piercing of the side.
3 to 5 P.M.
Slaughter of the Paschal Iambs.
5 P-M.
The Burial.
6 P.M.
The Sabbath begins.
(Nisan 15)
The Passover.
Saturday
The Great Day ofthe Feast
Jesus in the Grave.
D. ON SOME POINTS OF GEOGRAPHY.
It seems to be quite certain that the attractive reconciliation of the
two readings, ~&t\6avta and B-pdapapif, derived from Lieutenant Conder's
conjectures, and suggested in the note on i. 28, must be abandoned.
And, what is of much more serious moment, it is becoming clear that
Lieutenant Conder's identifications, when they depend upon philologi
cal theories, must be received with the utmost caution. It is true that
the Arabs call Batanaea, the Baravala of Josephus, Bathania; changing
the Aramaic ' t ', corresponding to the Hebrew ' sh ' in Bashan, to"'th ',
by a well-known phonetic relation between these three dialects. But
a Jewish writer would not adopt a pure Arabic form, which is there
fore impossible in a Gospel written by a Jew. And even if this point
could be conceded there would remain the further improbability that
the Arabic 'a' in Bathaniya should be represented by i) in B-qBavla.
Bethania is a compound of B6th, and some place on the Jordan. It
might possibly mean 'boat-house'; and this would coincide pretty
closely with Bethabara, which means 'ford-house' or 'ferry-house'.
In any map of Jerusalem there must of necessity be either serious
omissions, or insertions which are more or less conjectural. In the
present map the traditional name of Zion has been retained for the
Western Hill, and also the name of Hippicus for the great Herodian
tower which still stands close to the Jaffa Gate. Recent measurements,
however, have shewn that of the three Herodian towers, Hippicus,
Phasael, and Mariamne, the existing tower, often called the Tower of
David, may be Phasael rather than Hippicus. The name, Tower of
David, is mediaeval, and is a perpetuation of the error of Josephus,
who supposed that the fortress of David belonged to the Upper City,
and that the Western Hill had always been part of Jerusalem.
Again, the position of the Acra is much disputed. In the map it
is not intended to affirm the special conjecture of Warren and Conder,
but merely to retain, until something better is fully established, their
present view. There is, however, good reason for doubting its cor
rectness. On this and other topographical questions see the very
interesting article on Jerusalem in the Encycl. Britan. (xiii. p. 641) by
Professor Robertson Smith, to whom the writer of this Appendix is
much indebted.
INDICES.

I. GENERAL.

Abraham's seed, supposed privileges of,
67, 187, 189
adultery, the woman taken in, 176 — 180;
the paragraph part ofthe Gospel narra
tive, but not ofthe Fourth Gospel, 175
Aenon, 100
Anitophel, 318
allegories in S. John, 210, 286
Alogi, rejection of the Fourth Gospel by
the, 20, 21
analysis of the Gospel, 55 — 58
Andrew, character of, 79, 140, 251
angels, 82
Annas, his office and influence, 322 ;
examination of Jesus by him peculiar
to S. John, 323
Apocalypse, relation of the Fourth Gospel
to, 30
Apocryphal Gospels, miracles of the
Child Jesus in, 86
Apostles' defects stated without reserve,
91, 114, "5. 250j 263, 276, 357
Apostolic Fathers, assumed silence of, as
to the Fourth Gospel, 18, 19
appearances after the resurrection, 354, 367
Ananism condemned, 127, 222
Arimathea, Joseph of, coincidence be
tween S. John and S. Mark as to his
character and connexion with Nico
demus,, 352
attempts to arrest Jesus, 169, 173, 241,
248, 319
ascension, implied but not narrated by
S. John, 156, 359, 97
Augustine quoted, 125, 146
authenticity, of the Gospel, by whom dis
puted, 18, 21 ; external evidence for,
20, 21 ; internal evidence for, 22 — 30,
50 ; internal evidence against, 30 — 32,
47 — 49 ; of the Appendix, 367, 377
baptism, Christian, referred to in tne dis
course with Nicodemus, 25 ; of Jesus,
100, 105 ; of John, 100
Baptist, his connexion with the Evan
gelist, T2, 77 ; argument from the
Evanglist's calling him simply 'John,'
29, 64 ; crisis in his ministry, 71 ; he is
a voice crying in the wilderness, 73

Barabbas, 335
Barnabas, epistle of, its evidence to the
Fourth Gospel, 19
Bartholomew, reasons for identifying
with Nathanael, 80
barley loaves, 140
Basilides, 19, 65
baskets, different kinds of at the feed
ing of 5000 and the feeding of 4000, 141
Bethabra, false reading for Bethany, 74
Bethany, two places of this name, 74,
228, 233
Bethesda, 122
Bethsaida, two places of this name, 80,138
betrayal, 318
blasphemy, the Lord accused of, 127, 196,
222
blind, man born, healed, 199; his pro
gressive faith, 201 ; his confession of
faith, 207
brethren of the Lord, various theories
respecting, 87 ; cannot be the sons of
Alphaeus, 162
bridegroom, figure of the Messiah, 102
Caesar, speak against, 340
Caesarea, Pilate's residence, 334
Caiaphas, his office, 242; his prophecy, 243
Calvary or Golgotha, 343
Cana, two places of this name, 83 ; nature
of the miracle at Cana of Galilee, 85
Capernaum, the modern Tell H Am, 87,
156; argument from the mention of a
visit to, 87
capital punishment, whether allowed to
the Jews by the Romans, 178, 330
centurion's servant dii/erent from the
nobleman's son, 120
Cerinthus, the Fourth Gospel attributed
to, 21
characteristics of the Fourth Gospel, 38
— 46, 63, 64, 65, 155; of S. John, 16, 46
chief priests, mostly Sadducees, 169, 241 ;
their baseness, 342
chronology of the Fourth Gospel inde
finite, 47, 137, 160, 218
Church, first beginning of the, 77 ; powers
granted to, 362

334

INDEX I.

circumcision prior to the Sabbath, 166
cleansing of the Temple in S. John dis
tinct from that in the Synoptists, 8g
Clement of Alexandria, 20, 33
Clementine homilies, 198, 214
cloths, 353, 356
Clopas or Alphaeus, 346
codices, the principal, containing the
Gospel, 51, 52
coincidences, between S. Paul and S.
John, 66, 280 ; between the Synoptists
and S. John, 50
commandment, Christ's new, 271, 290
cocks, not excluded from Jerusalem, 327
cross, size of the, 348 ; title on, 344
crown of thorns, 336
cup of suffering, coincidence respecting,
322
date of the Gospel, 33
darkness, in a metaphorical sense, pecu
liar to S. John, 63
David, Christ's descent from, 173
death, punishment of, whether allowed to
the Jews, 178, 330
Dedication, Feast of, 219
denials, S. Peter's, 326 ; why narrated
by S. John, 327 ; difficulties respecting,
380
destruction of Jerusalem, S. John wrote
after the, 234
devil, personal existence of the, 191 ; in
fluence on Judas, 262
devil, nr demon, Christ accused of being
possessed by a, 166, 193, 194, 218
disciples' imperfections, 86, gi, 114, 115,
I5°» 25o. 357
discourses in the Fourth Gospel con
trasted with those in the Synoptic
Gospels, 48, 91
discourses of Christ, with Nicodemus,
91; on the Source of life, 126; on the
Support of life, 146; at the Feast of
Tabernacles, 163 ; at the Feast of the
Dedication, 219 ; at the last Passover,
261 — 316
Divinity claimed by Jesus, 186, 192, 196,
222, 285, 289
Docetism excluded from the Fourth Gos-
pel, 144, 351
door of the fold, allegory of, 210, 213.
dove visible at the baptism, 75
Ecce homo quoted, 335
Elijah, argument from the Baptist's denial
that he is, 73
Ephesus, the abode of S. John, 14 ; the
place where he wrote his Gospel, 32 ;
the elders of, 32, 377
Ephraim, city called, 244
Epilogue, an afterthought, 367
Epistle, first of S. John ; relation to the
Gospel, 19, 50, 280

eternal life already possessed by be
lievers, 104, 129, 153, 155, 308
Eucharist, implied in the discourse on
the Bread of Life, 146 ; why omitted
by S. John, 266 ; symbolized at the
crucifixion, 350
Evangelists, concurrence of all four, 50,
137, 3^7» 355. 381 .
evenings, the two Jewish, 143
excommunication, Jewish, 174, 203, 206
faith, the text of a child of God, 66
false readings, 67, 74, ioi, 159, 196, 335, 346
feast, the unnamed in v. 1, probably not
a Passover, 122
feasts, Jewish, S. John groups his narra
tive round, 88
five thousand, feeding of the, 137
forger of a gospel confronted by insuper
able difficulties, 23
fragments, argument from the command
to gather up, 141
funeral customs among the Jews, 234, 353
Gabbatha, not a mosaic pavement but
the temple-mound, 340
Galileans, characteristics of, 10; ill repute
of, 81, 173, 175
Galilee, mixed population in, 11 ; prophets
from, 175; ministry in, 160
gaps in S.John's narrative, 47, 136, 160,218
garments, 262
Gentiles seek Christ, 251, 252
Gerizim, temple on, in
Gethsemane, anticipation of the agony
in, 253
Gnostic demonology, 191, 192
Gnostics, the witness of, to the Fourth
Gospel, 22
Gnosticism, excluded from the Fourth
Gospel, 22, 112, 223, 351
Golgotha, 343
Gospel, not a Life of Christ, 34
grace before meat, 140
grave, 233, 239
Greek names among the Apostles, 251
Greeks desiring to see Jesus, 251
guards at the Cross, 345
Hebrew, evidence that the author of the
Fourth Gospel knew, 152, 249, 266, 352
Herod Antipas, 118
high-priest, supposed to have prophetical
gifts^ 243 ; doubt as to who is meant by
the title, 323, 324
Holy Ghost, 283
hyssop, 348
Ignatian epistles, their evidence to the
Fourth Gospel, 19, 108
interpolations, 123, 175, 196
Irenaeus, evidence to the Fourth Gospel,
20 ; _ to the duration of the Lord's
ministry, 47, 196

INDEX I.

385

Jacob's well, 107, 109
James, brother of S. John, 9 ; not men
tioned by the Evangelist, 79, 346
Jerome, on the brethren of the Lord, 87 ;
on Sychar, 107 ; on the paragraph of
the woman taken in adultery, 175 ; on
the Lord's writing on the ground, 179
Jerusalem, destroyed before S. John
wrote, 234 ; his minute knowledge of, 26
Jesus :
(i) The Ministry.
Baptist's testimony to Him, 74 ; dis
ciples' testimony to Him, 77; turns
water into wine at Cana, S3 ; pays a
brief visit to Capernaum, 17 ; cleanses
the Temple, 88; discourses with
Nicodemus, 92 ; converts many
Samaritans, 105 ; heals the royal
official's son, 118; heals a paralytic
at Bethesda, 121 ; reasons with the
Jews about the Son as the Source of
life, 126 ; feeds five thousand, 137 ;
who would make Him a king, 142 ;
walks on the water, 143 ; reasons with
the Jews about the Son as the Sup
port of life, 145 ; with the Twelve
about desertion of Him, 158 ; with
His brethren about manifesting Him
self, 160 ; with the Jews at the Feast
of Tabernacles, 163; is marked for
arrest, 173 ; [rescues the woman
taken in adultery, 176;] charges the
Jews with seeking to kill Him, 188;
claims to be God, ig'5 ; heals the
man born blind, 197 ; delivers the
allegories of the Fold and of the
Good Shepherd, 210; reasons with
the Jews at the Feast of the Dedica
tion, 2x9 ; retires into Peraea, 225 ;
raises Lazarus from the dead, 227;
is marked for death by Caiaphas,
243; is anointed byMary of Bethany,
246; enters Jerusalem in triumph,
249 ; is sought for by Gentile prose
lytes, 251 ; retires from public teach
ing, 257
(ii) The Issues of the Ministry.
washes His disciples' feet, 261 ; points
out the traitor, 267; delivers His
farewell discourses to the eleven,
270 ; foretells Peter's denials, 272 ;
answers Thomas, 273 ; Philip, 276 ;
Judas not Iscariot, 282 ; delivers the
allegory ofthe Vine, 286; promises to
send the Paraclete and to return, 295 ;
prays for Himself, His disciples, and
His Church, 307 ; is arrested in the
garden, 318 ; examined before Annas,
322 ; denied by Peter, 326 ; examined
by Pilate, 328; mocked, sentenced,
and crucified, 336 ; dies and is buried,
347 ; manifests Himself after His
resurrection to Mary Magdalene,
S. JOHN

357; to the ten Apostles, 360; to
Thomas, 363 ; to seven disciples at
the sea of Tiberias, 367 ; gives Peter
his last commission and foretells his
death; rebukes his curiosity about
the Evangelist, 375
Jewish elements in the Fourth Gospel,
25—27
Jews, hostility of, to Christianity, 49 ;
S. John's view of them, 72
John, the son of Zebedee ; his parentage,
o ; nationality, 10 ; connexion with the
Baptist, 12, 77 ; fiery zeal, 13, 15 ; gives
a home to the Blessed Virgin, 14, 347 ;
life at Ephesus, 14; traditions about
him, 15, 16 ,* chief characteristicSj 16, 17;
probably the unnamed disciple in i. 35,
77 ; and in xviii. 15, 323 ; mode of reck
oning time, 78,107,119, 341
John, the Baptist ; the Evangelist's man
ner of naming him, 29, 64; not the
Light but the Lamp, 64, 132; his wit
ness to the Messiah, 68, 74, 75, 77, 101 ;
the friend of the Bridegroom, 102 ; his
baptism, iod, 105
John, the father of Peter, 79, 371
Jordan, ford of, at Bethany, 74 ; the coun
try beyond, 225
Joseph, husband of the Virgin, 83
Joseph of Arimathea ; his character and
connexion with Nicodemus, 352
Judas Iscariot; his name and character,
159; murmurs at Mary of Bethany, 247;
receives the sop and is entered by
Satan, 269 ; helps to arrest Jesus, 318
Judas, not Iscariot, 282
Judas of Galilee, rising of, n
Justin Martyr's evidence to the Fourth
Gospel, 19, 73, 94, 197
Keble quoted, 360
Kedron, the ravine of the, 318
kingdom, nature of Christ's, 332
Last Day, 151
Last Supper, not a Passover, 379
Lazarus, raising of, obj ections to the, 226 ;
identifications of, 228
Levites, argument from the mention of, 72
Liddon quoted, 96
Life, 63, 275
Light, 63, 64, 180
Lightfoot quoted, 19, 69, 268, 280
Lord, 149, 179, 207
Love, the Fourth Gospel the Gospel of,
1,7, 51, 209, 261, 270, 271, 290
Magdalene; see Mary
Majestas, Pilate's fear of being accused
of, 340
Malchus, 322
Manasseh, founder of the rival worship
on Gerizim, in
Marcion^srejection ofthe Four thGospel, 20
25

386

INDEX I.

marriage, Christ gives his sanction to, 87 ;
symbolical of Hisrelation toHis Church,
102
Martha, probably older than Mary and
Lazarus, 229, 234; coincidence between
S. John and S. Luke respecting her,
234; her progressive faith, 235
Mary Magdalene, introduced as a person
well known, 346; visits the sepulchre,
355 ; manifestation to her, 357 ; nature
ofthe rebuke to her, 359
Mary, the wife of Clopas, probably iden
tical with the mother of James the less,
346
Mary, sister of Lazarus, not identical
with the prostitute of Luke vii., nor
with Mary Magdalene, 228; coinci
dence between S. John and S. Luke
respecting her, 234; her devotion, 246 ;
argument from the praise bestowed on
her, 248
Mary, the Blessed Virgin, rebuked by
Christ at Cana, 84; her relationship to
His brethren, 87; to S. John, ro, 346,
347 ; no special manifestation to her
after the Resurrection, 360
Messiah, Jewish ideas respecting well-
known to the Evangelist, 73, 82, 83,
142; Samaritan, 106, 113
Meyer quoted, 103, 159, 268
ministry, duration of Christ's, 47, 48
miracles in the Fourth Gospel symboli
cal, 40; spontaneous, 123
mission of Jesus distinct from that of His
disciples, 198, 361; of the Holy Spirit,
279, 283, 294
money, 88, 139
Moses, contrasted with Christ, 149, 205 ;
testifies to Christ, 80, 136 ; and against
the Jews, 136, 166 ; the giver, neither
of the Law, 69 ; nor of the manna, 149
Mount Gerizim, temple upon, in
Mount of Olives not mentioned by S.
John, 176
multitude, fickleness of the, 91, 142, 158,
160, 186, 256
Nathanael, reasons for identifying with
Bartholomew, 80 ; his character, 81
Nazarene, 320
Nazareth, evil report of, 81
Neapolis, or Sychem, 107
New Commandment, 271, 290
Newman, Cardinal, quoted, 93
Nicodemus, mentioned by S. John only,
93; his character, 93; coincidence be
tween S. John and S. Mark in' con
nexion with him, 252
nobleman's son distinct from the centu
rion's servant, 120
Olives, Mount of, see Mount
orally, the Fourth Gospel delivered at
first, 33, 51

Papias, 19
parables not found in the Fourth Gospel,
210
Paraclete, threefold office of the, 297;
mission of^ see Mission
parallelism in the Fourth Gospel, 45, 62,
72, 184
paralytic at Bethesda, 123
Passion, prominent thoughts in S. John's
narrative of the, 317; probable order
of the events of the, 381
Passover, customs at the, 267, 268, 269,
322; the first, 88; the second, 138; the
last, 245 ; the Last Supper not the Pass
over, 379
Paul, coincidences between S. John and
S., 66, 280 _ _
Pentecost anticipated, 362
Peter, brought to Jesus by his brother
Andrew, 79 ; named by Jesus, 79 ; his
impetuosity, 264, 272, 321, 356, 370; his
denials, 324, 326, 380; his repentance
implied but not recorded by S. John,
327; his visit to the sepulchre, 356;
commission to him and prediction of
his death, 371
Pharisees, the only sect mentioned by
S. John, 73
Philip, called by Jesus, 80 ; consulted by
Jesus, 139; rebuked by Jesus, 276 ; his
character, 276
Philo, contrasted with S. John, 61, 67
Pilate, introduced in the narrative as well
known, 329; his residence, 328; tries
to avdid putting Jesus to death, 330;
his famous question, 334 ; his conflicting
fears, 338, 340; his character, 345 ^
Polycarp's evidence to the First Epistle,
ig; fallacious argument from his con
troversy with Anicetus, 32
Praetorium, 328
prayer of the Great High Priest, 336
priests, 72 ; mostly Sadducees, yet com
bine with the Pharisees, 169, 241,
3J9
procession of the Holy Spirit, 294
Procurator, Pilate as, conducts the ex
amination, 331
prophecies fulfilled in Christ, 89, 249, 345,
35i
punctuation, differences of, 65, 166, 230,
253, 270, 278
purification, ceremonial, 84, 244
Purim, Feast of, 122
purple robe, 336
purpose, constructions implying, frequent
in S. John, 115, 118, 148, 153, 195, 232,
243, 296, 297
purpose ofthe Gospel, 34, 366
readings, differences of, 67, 70, 104, 141,
151, 154, 162, 163, 189, 199, 206, 212,
220, 266, 311, 318, 326
remission of sins by the Church, 363

INDEX I.

387

reserve, a characteristic of S. John, 77.,
79. 84, 346 "*
resurrection, spiritual, 129; ofthe wicked,
130 ; of Christ, 355 ; Jewish belief as
to, 235
robber or ¦ bandit^n, 335; S. John and
the robber, 15
Sabbath, of later origin than Circum
cision, 166; Christ's attitude towards,
127 ; miracles wrought on, 201
Sadducees, not mentioned by S. John, 73 ;
combine with the Pharisees, 169, 241
Salome, mother of S. John, 9; probably
sister of the Virgin, 346
Samaria, 106
Samaritan, Jesus taunted with being a, 193
Samaritans, relations of, to the Jews, 108,
112; origin, 109; readiness to believe
in Jesus, 116, 117
Samaritan Messiah, 106, 113
Samaritan woman, historical character of
the narrative of, 106; her progressive
faith, in ; the revelation vouchsafed to
her, 114
Samaritan religion, in, 112
Sanhedrin, i6gj 174, 178, 327; in a diffi
culty respecting the execution of Jesus,
3=9
Satan, personal existence of, 191 ; in
fluence on Judas, 262
scourging, Pilate'sobject in inflicting, 336
Sebas'te, or Samaria, 107
sepulchre, 233, 339
serpent, argument from the mention of, g7
signs, 86
Siloam, pouring of water from, 171; iden
tified with Birekei Silivdn, 200
Simon, S. John's usage in employing this
name for S. Peter, 372
Solomon's porch, 219
Son of Man, use of the phrase in the
Gospels, 82; in O. T., 83; its applica
tion to the Messiah, 83
spiral movement in the Prologue, 71
style of S. John, 42 — 46, 63, 64,' 133
superscription, 344
Supper, tlie Last, 261
Sychar, 107
symbolical interpretations of Scripture, 370
symbolism in the Fourth Gospel, 40, 41
synagogue at Capernaum, 156
Synoptic Gospels, relation of to the Fourth,
46—50, 77, 91
Tabernacles, Feast of, 161 ; ceremonies
at, 171, 1S0
table, mode of reclining at, 267
Talmud quoteH, 140 ; declares fowls un
clean, 327 ; declares that the Jews had
lost the power to inflict capital punish
ment, 330
Targums, 61
Tatian, 63, 64

Temple^ traffic in the, 88; Christ's public
teaching in, 164, [177,] 183, 196; Solo
mon's porch in, 219
Tertullian, defender of a false reading,
67; witness to an early various read
ing, 206; gives the true 'Note of the
Church', 272
Thaddaeus, or Judas, 282
Theophilus of Antioch; his evidence to
the Fourth Gospel, 20
Thomas, name and character of, 232,
275> 363; compared with Philip, 276;
nature of his scepticism, 364, 365
thorns, crown of, 336
Tiberias, not mentioned by the Synop
tists, 138; a centre of education, n;
sea of, 137, 368 ; the boats of known to
S. John, 144
Tiberius, chronology of his reign in con
nexion with Christ's ministry, 48 ;
_ Pilate's fear of him, 340
title on the Cross, 344
tombs, 233, 339
tragic brevity in S. John, 270
tragic tone in S. John, 64, 99, 103
transfiguration, not recorded by S. John,
2t ; not alluded to in v. 37, 133
transmigration of souls, 198
treasury, 183
Trench quoted, 232
Truth, Jesus is the, 275 ; the Gospel is
.the, 333 »
trials, ecclesiastical and civil, of Jesus,
322—342
triumphal entry, 249
Twelve, the, spoken of as well-known, 158
typical characters in the Fourth Gospel,
typical miracles, 40, 370
Uncial manuscripts, table of, 51, 52
versions, table of principal, 52
vine, allegory of the, 286
vinegar, 348
voice of one crying, &c, 73
voice from heaven, 254
washing the disciples' feet, 263
water, the living, 109
water, Christ walking on the, 143
Way, Jesus is the, 275
Westcott quoted, 30, 42, 50, 146, 214,
307. 3*6* 3*7, 333» 362, 369
wilderness, 244
wine, water turned into, 85; objections
to the miracle, 86
woman of Samaria; see Samaritan woman,
woman taken in adultery; see adultery.
women minister to Christ, 10; at the
cross, 346 ; visit the sepulchre, 354
words from the cross, 382 '
Zebedee, 9

388

INDEX II.

II. WORDS AND PHRASES EXPLAINED.

abide, 76
Advocate, 279
Aenon, 100
after these things, 121, 352,
367
all flesh, 308
allegory, 212
ask, 235, 279, 302
arm of the Lord, 257
bag or box, 247
band, 319
Barabbas, 335
basket, 141
bear, 247
beginning, 60
believe on, 66
Bethesda, 122
born again, 94
branch, 286
breathe, 96, 362
brethren, 376
Caesar's friend, 339
Caiaphas, 242
captain, 322
changers of money, 88
children of God, 66
children of hght, 256
cloke, 293
Comforter, 279
comfortless, 281
convey oneself away, 125
convince, 99, 192, 298
crurifragiumy 349
darkness, 63
demon, 193
Didymus, 232
dispersion, 170
division or schism, 173
do the truth, 99
door, 211
early, 528
eternal life, 98
fault, 334
feast of the Jews, 138, 160
feed, 373
firkin, 85
fish, 140
fisher's coat, ,369
fornication, 190
friend of the Bridegroom,
102
fulness, 69

Gentiles, 171, 251
give His life, 215
give glory to God, 204
glory, 68
Golgotha, 343
Good Shepherd, 215
grace, 68
grave, 233
Greeks, 171, 231
groan, 237
hall of judgment, 328
hard, 156
Hebrew, 122
Hellenes, 251
Hosanna, 249
hour, 84, 252
Iscariot, 159
Jewry, 160
Jews, 72
judge, 98, 181
keep, 293, 309
Lamb of God, 75
lamp, 132
last day ofthe feast, 171
life, 63
light, 63, 64
living water, 109
Logos, 60
Lord, 149, 179, 207
love, 229, 372
manifest, 367
mansions, 274
master, 96, 236
Messias, 79
murderer, 191
name, 66
napkin, 240
Nathanael, 80
new, 271
nobleman, 118
now, 305
ointment of spikenard, 246
offended, 296
only-begotten, 68, 70, g8
only God, the, 135
ordain, 291
palace, 323
parable, 212
Paraclete, 279
Passover of the Jews, 88
pennyworth, 139, 247
power, 66, 218

pray, 279
preparation, 349, 353
prince of this world, 254 \
proceed, 294
prophet, a, 64, 93, no, 202
prophet, the, 73, 142, 173
proverb, 303
purge, 287
put, 364
Rabbi, 78, 96, 115
Rabboni, 359
reprove, 99, 298
righteousness, 298
robber, 211, 335
ruler of the feast, 85
ruler ofthe Jews, 93, 253
ruler of this world, 254
sanctify, 312, 313
sayings, 136
schism, 173
scripture, 223
seal, 148
send, 361
sepulchre, 233
signs, 86
Siloam, 200
sir, 149, 179, 207
sleep, 231
Son of Man, 82
son of man, 130
son of perdition, 311
sop, 268
speech, 117, 190
spirit, 95
Sychar, 107
tabernacled, 68
temple, ¦ go
tempt, 177
Thomas, 232
true, 65, 351
verily, verily, 8a
voice, 95
way, 275
wash, 264
wind, 95
without sin, 178
word, 190,. 194
Word, the, 60 '
word of God, 225
words, 136
works, 128
world, 65

CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS, AT THE UNIVERSITY 1'RESS.

Soman, Miles.

English Mies

THE CAMBRIDGE BIBLE FOR
SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES.
General Editor, The Very Rev. J. J. S. Perowne,
, Dean of Peterborough.
tiPpfnfons of tf)t press*
"It is difficult to commend too highly this excellent series." — Guardian.
'.' The modesty of the general title of this series has, we believe, led
many to misunderstand its character and underrate its value. The books
are well suited for study in the upper forms of our best schools, but not
the less are they adapted to the wants of all Bible students who are not
specialists. We doubt, indeed, whether any of .the numerous popular
commentaries recently issued in this country will be found more service
able for general use." — Academy.
" One of the most popular and useful literacy enterprises of the
nineteenth century." — Baptist Magazine.
" Of great value. The whole series of comments for schools is highly
esteemed by students capable of forming a judgment. The books are
scholarly without being pretentious : and information is so given as to be
easily understood." — Sword and Trowel.
" The value of the work as an aid to Biblical study, not merely in
schools but among people of all classes who are desirous to have intelligent
knowledge of the Scriptures, cannot easily be over-estimated" — The
Scotsman.

The Book of Judges. J. J. Lias, M.A. " His introduction is clear
and concise, full of the information which young students require, and
indicating the lines on which the various problems suggested by the
Book of Judges may be solved." — Baptist Magazine.
1 Samuel, by A. F. Kirkpatrick. "Remembering the interest
with which we read the Books of the Kingdom when they were appointed
as a subject for school work in our boyhood, we have looked with some
eagerness into Mr Kirkpatrick's volume, which contains the first instal
ment of them. We are struck with the great improvement in character,
and variety in the materials, with which schools are now supplied. A
clear map inserted in each volume, notes suiting the convenience of the
scholar and the difficulty of the passage, and not merely dictated by the
fancy of the commentator, were luxuries which a quarter" of a century
ago the Biblical student could not buy." — Church Quarterly Review.
"To the valuable series of Scriptural expositions and elementary
commentaries which is being issued at the Cambridge University Press,
under the title 'The Cambridge Bible for Schools,' has been added
The First Book of Samuel by the Rev. A. F. Kirkpatrick. Like
other volumes of the series, it contains a carefully written historical and
critical introduction, while the text is profusely illustrated and explained
by notes." — The Scotsman.
10,000
12/7/89

2 CAMBRIDGE BIBLE FOR SCHOOLS & COLLEGES.
II. Samuel. A. F. Kirkpatrick, M.A. " Small as this work.is
in mere dimensions, it is every way the best on its subject and for its
purpose that we know of. The opening sections at once prove the
thorough competence of the writer for dealing with' questions of criti
cism in an earnest, faithful and devout spirit ; and the appendices discuss
a few special difficulties with a full knowledge of the data, and a judicial
reserve, which contrast most favourably with the superficial dogmatism
which has too often made the exegesis of the Old Testament a field for
the play of unlimited paradox and the ostentation of personal infalli
bility. The notes are always clear and suggestive; never trifling or
irrelevant; and they everywhere demonstrate the great difference in
value between the work of a commentator who is also a Hebraist, and
that of one who has to depend for his Hebrew upon secondhand
sources." — Academy.
"The Rev. A. F. Kirkpatrick has now completed his commentary
on the two books of Samuel. This second volume, like the first, is
furnishedwith a scholarly and carefully prepared critical and historical
introduction, and the notes supply everything necessary to enable the
merely English scholar — so far as is possible for one ignorant of the
original language — to gather up the precise meaning of the text. Even
Hebrew scholars may consult this small volume with profit. " — Scotsman.
I. Kings and Ephesians. "With great heartiness we commend
these most valuable little commentaries. We had rather purchase
these than nine out of ten of the big blown up expositions. Quality is
far better than quantity, and we have it here." — Sword and Trowel.
I. Kings. "This is really admirably well done, and from first to
last there is nothing but commendation to give to such honest work." 
Bookseller. II. Kings. "The Introduction is scholarly and wholly admirable,
while the notes must be of incalculable value to students."— Glasgow
Herald. "It is equipped with a valuable introduction and commentary, and
makes an admirable text book for Bible-classes." — Scotsman.
"It would be difficult to find a commentary better suited for general
use." — Academy.
The Book of Job. "Able and scholarly as the Introduction is, it is
far surpassed by the detailed exegesis ofthe book. In this Dr Davidson's
strength is at its greatest. His linguistic knowledge, his artistic habit,
his scientific insight, and his literary power have full scope when he
comes to exegesis. .. .The book is worthy ofthe reputation of Dr Davidspn ;
it represents the results of many years of labour, and it will greatly help
to the right understanding of one of the greatest works in the literature
of the world." — The Spectator.
" In the course of a long introduction, Dr Davidson has presented
us with a very able and very interesting criticism of this wonderful
book. Its contents, the nature of its composition, its idea and purpose
its integrity, and its age are all exhaustively treated of.... We have not
space to examine fijlly the text and notes before us, but we can, and do
heartily, recommend the book, not only for the upper forms in schools
but to Bible students and teachers generally. As we wrote of a previous
volume in the same series, this one leaves nothing to be desired. The

OPINIONS OF THE PRESS.

notes are full and suggestive, without being too long, and, in itself, the
introduction forms a valuable addition to modern Bible literature." — 7%;
Educational Times.
"Already we have frequently called attention to this exceedingly
valuable work as its volumes have successively appeared. But we have
never done so with greater pleasure, very seldom with so great pleasure,
as we now refer to the last published volume, that on the Book of Joh,
by Dr Davidson, of Edinburgh. ...We cordially commend the volume to
all our readers. The least instructed will understand and enjoy it ;
and mature scholars will learn from it." — Methodist Recorder.
Joh — Hosea. " It is difficult to commend too highly this excellent
series, the volumes of which are now becoming numerous. The two
books before us, small as they are in size, comprise almost everything
that the young student can reasonably expect to find in the way of helps
towards such general knowledge of their subjects as may be gained
without an attempt to grapple with the Hebrew ; and even the learned
scholar can hardly read without interest and benefit the very able intro
ductory matter which both these commentators have prefixed to their
volumes. It is not too much to say that these works have brought
within the reach of the ordinary reader resources which were until
lately quite unknown for understanding some of the most difficult and
obscure portions of Old Testament literature." — Guardian.
Ecclesiastes ; or, the Preacher. — "Of the Notes, it is sufficient to
say that they are in every respect worthy of Dr Plumptre's high repu
tation as a scholar and a critic, being at once learned, sensible, and
practical. . . . An appendix, in which it is clearly proved that the-
author of Ecclesiastes anticipated Shakspeare and Tennyson in some
of their finest thoughts and reflections, will be read with interest by
students both of Hebrew and of English literature. Commentaries are
seldom attractive reading. This little volume is a notable exception." —
The Scotsman.
"In short, this little book is of far greater value than most of the
larger and more elaborate commentaries on this Scripture. Indispens
able to the scholar, it will render real and large help to all who have to
expound the dramatic utterances of The Preacher whether in the Church
or in the School." — The Expositor.
"The 'ideal biography' of the author is one of the most exquisite
and fascinating pieces of writing we have met with, and, granting its
starting-point, throws wonderful light on many problems connected with
the book. The notes illustrating the text are full of delicate criticism,
fine glowing insight, and apt historical allusion. An abler volume
than Professor Plumptre's we could not desire." — Baptist Magazine.
Jeremiah, by A. W. Streane. "The arrangement of the book is
well treated on pp. xxx., 396, and the question of Baruch's relations
with its composition on pp. xxvii., xxxiv., 317. The illustrations from
English literature, history, monuments, works on botany, topography,
etc., are good and plentiful, as indeed they are in other volumes of this
series."— Church Quarterly Review, April, 1881.
"Mr Streane's Jeremiah consists of a series of admirable and well-
nigh exhaustive notes on the text, with introduction and appendices,
drawing the life, times, and character of the prophet, the style, contents,

4 CAMBRIDGE BIBLE FOR SCHOOLS & COLLEGES.
and arrangement of his prophecies, the traditions relating to Jeremiah,
meant as a type of Christ (a most remarkable chapter), and other
prophecies relating to Jeremiah." — The English Ckurchman and Clerical
Journal. Obadiah and Jonah. "This number of the admirable series of
Scriptural expositions issued by the Syndics of the Cambridge Uni
versity Press is well up to the mark. The numerous notes are
excellent. No difficulty is shirked, and much light is thrown on the
contents both of Obadiah and Jonah. Scholars and students of to-day
are to be congratulated on having so large an amount of information on
Biblical subjects, so clearly and ably put together, placed within their
reach in such small bulk. To all Biblical students the series will be
acceptable, and for the use of Sabbath-school teachers will prove
invaluable." — North British Daily Mail.
" It is a very useful and sensible exposition of these two Minor
Prophets, and deals very thoroughly and honestly with the immense
difficulties of the later-named of the two, from the orthodox point of
view.' ' — Expositor.
" Haggai and Zechariah. This interesting little volume is of great
value. It is one of the best books in that well-known series of
scholarly and popular commentaries, ' the Cambridge Bible for Schools
and Colleges ' of which Dean Perowne is the General Editor. In the
expositions of Archdeacon Perowne we are always sure to notice
learning, ability, judgment and reverence .... The notes are terse
and pointed, but full and reliable." — Churchman.
" The Gospel according to St Matthew, by the Rev. A. Carr. The
introduction is able, scholarly, and eminently practical, as it bears
on the authorship and contents of the Gospel, and the original form
in which it is supposed to have been written. It is well illustrated by
two excellent maps of the Holy Land and of the Sea of Galilee." —
English Churchman.
"St Matthew, edited by A. Carr, M.A. The Book of Joshua,
edited by G. F. Maclear, D.D. The General Epistle of St James,
edited by E. H. Plumptre, D.D. The introductions and notes are
scholarly, and generally such as young readers need and can appre
ciate. The maps in both Joshua and Matthew are very good, and all
matters of editing are faultless. Professor Plumptre's notes on 'The
Epistle of St James' are models of terse, exact, and elegant renderings
of the original, which is too often obscured in the authorised version." —
Nonconformist. "St Mark, with Notes by the Rev. G. F. Maclear, D.D. Into
this small volume Dr Maclear, besides a clear and able Introduc
tion to the Gospel, and the text of St Mark, has compressed many
hundreds of valuable and helpful notes. In short, he has given us
a capital manual of the kind required — containing all that is needed to
illustrate the text, i. e. all that can be drawn from the history, geography,
customs, and manners of the time. But as a handbook, giving in a
clear and succinct form the information which a lad requires in order
to stand an examination in the Gospel, it is admirable  I can very
heartily commend it, not only to the senior boys and girls in our High
Schools, but also to Sunday-school teachers, who may get from it the
very kind of knowledge they often find it hardest to get. —Expositor.

OPINIONS OF THE PRESS.

"With the help of a book like this, an intelligent teacher may make
'Divinity' as interesting a lesson as any in the school course. The
notes are of a kind that will be, for the most part, intelligible to boys
of the lower forms of our public schools ; but they may be read with
greater profit by the fifth and sixth, in conjunction with the original
text." — The Academy.
"St Luke. Canon Farrar has supplied students of the Gospel
with an admirable manual in this volume. It has all that copious
variety of illustration, ingenuity of suggestion, and general soundness ot
interpretation which readers are accustomed to expect from the learned
and eloquent editor. Any one who has been accustomed to associate
the idea of 'dryness' with a commentary, should go to Canon Farrar's
St Luke for a more correct impression. He will find that a commen
tary may be made interesting in the highest degree, and that without
losing anything of its solid value. . . . But, so to speak, it is too good
for some of the readers for whom it is intended." — The Spectator.
"Canon Farrar's contribution to The Cambridge School Bible
is one of the most valuable yet made. His annotations on The Gospel
according to St Luke, while they display a scholarship at least as sound,
and an erudition at least as wide and varied as those of the editors ot
St Matthew and St Mark, are rendered telling and attractive by a
more lively imagination, a keener intellectual and spiritual insight, a
more incisive and picturesque style. ¦ His St Luke is worthy to be ranked
with Professor Plumptre's St James, than which no higher commend
ation can well be given." — The Expositor.
"St Luke. Edited by Canon Farrar, D.D. We have received with
pleasure this edition of the Gospel by St Luke, by Canon Farrar. It is
another instalment of the best school commentary of the Bible we pos
sess. Of the expository part of the work we cannot speak too highly.
It is admirable in every way, and contains just the sort of informa
tion needed for Students of the English text unable to make use of the
original Greek for themselves." — The Nonconformist and Independent.
"As a handbook to the third gospel, this small work is invaluable.
The author has compressed into little space a vast mass of scholarly in
formation. . . The notes are pithy, vigorous, and suggestive, abounding
in pertinent illustrations from general literature, and aiding the youngest
reader to an intelligent appreciation of the text. A finer contribution to
'The Cambridge Bible for Schools' has not yet been made." — Baptist
Magazine. "We were quite prepared to find in 'Canon Farrar's St Luke a
masterpiece of Biblical criticism and comment, and we are not dis
appointed by our examination of the volume before us. It reflects very
faithfully the learning and critical insight of the Canon's greatest works,
his 'Life of Christ' and his 'Life of St Paul', but differs widely from
both in the terseness and condensation of its style. What Canon Farrar
has evidently aimed at is to place before students as much information
as possible within the limits of the smallest possible space, and
in this aim he has hit the mark to perfection."— The Examiner.

6 CAMBRIDGE BIBLE FOR SCHOOLS & COLLEGES.
The Gospel according to St John. "Of the notes we can say with
confidence that they are useful, necessary, learned, and brief. To
Divinity students, to teachers, and for private use, this compact
Commentary will be found a valuable aid to the better understanding
of the Sacred Text. " — School Guardian.
"The new volume of the 'Cambridge Bible for Schools' — the
Gospel according to St John, by the Rev. A. Plummer — shows as
careful and thorough work as either of its predecessors. The intro
duction concisely yet fully describes the life of St John, the authenticity
of the Gospel, its characteristics, its relation to the Synoptic Gospels,
and to the Apostle's First Epistle, and the usual subjects referred to in
an 'introduction'." — The Christian Church.
"The notes are extremely scholarly and valuable, and in most cases
exhaustive, bringing to the elucidation of the text all that is best in
commentaries, ancient and modern." — The English Churchman and
Clerical Journal.
"(i) The Acts of the Apostles. By J. Rawson Lumby, D.D.
(2) The Second Epistle of the Corinthians, edited by Professor Lias.
The introduction is pithy, and contains a mass of carefully-selected
information on the authorship of the Acts, its designs, and its sources.
 The Second Epistle of the Corinthians is a manual beyond all praise,
for the excellence of its pithy and pointed annotations, its analysis ofthe
contents, and the fulness and value of its introduction." — Examiner.
" The concluding portion of the Acts of the Apostles, under the very
competent editorship of Dr Lumby, is a valuable addition to our
school-books on that subject. Detailed criticism is impossible within
the space at our command, but we may say that the ample notes touch
with much exactness the very points on which most readers of the text
desire information. Due reference is made, where necessary, to the
Revised Version ; the maps are excellent ; and we do not know of any
other volume where so much help is given to the complete understand
ing of one of the most important and, in many respects, difficult books
ofthe New Testament." — School Guardian.
"The Rev. H. C. G. Moule, M.A., has made a valuable addition
to The Cambridge Bible for Schools in his brief commentary on
the Epistle to the Romans. The "Notes" are very good, and lean,
as the notes of* a School Bible should, to the most commonly ac
cepted and orthodox view ofthe inspired author's meaning; while the
Introduction, and especially the Sketch of the Life of St Paul, is a model
of condensation. It is as lively and pleasant to read as if two or three
facts had not been crowded into well-nigh every sentence." — Expositor.
"The Epistle to the Romans. It is seldom we have met with a
work, so remarkable for the compression and condensation of all that
is valuable in the smallest possible space as in the volume before us.
Within its limited pages we have 'a sketch of the Life of St Paul,'
we have further a critical account of the date of the Epistle to the
Romans, of its language, and of its genuineness. The notes are
numerous, full of matter, to the point, and leave no real difficulty
or obscurity unexplained." — The Examiner.

OPINIONS OF THE PRESS.

' ' The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Edited by Professor Lias.
Every fresh instalment of this annotated edition of the Bible for Schools
confirms the favourable opinion we formed of its value from the exami
nation of its first number. The origin and plan of the Epistle are
discussed with its character and genuineness." — The Nonconformist.
"The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. By Professor Lias. The
General Epistles of St Peter and St Jude. By E. H. Plumptre, D.D.
We welcome these additions to the valuable series of the Cambridge
Bible. We have nothing to add to the commendation which we
have from the first publication given to this edition of the Bible. It is
enough to say that Professor Lias has completed his work on the two
Epistles to the Corinthians in the same admirable manner as at first.
Dr Plumptre has also completed the Catholic Epistles. " — Nonconformist.
The Epistie to the Ephesians. By Rev. H. C. G. Moule, M.A.
" It seems to us the model of a School and College Commentary —
comprehensive, but not cumbersome; scholarly, but not pedantic." —
Baptist Magazine.
Hebrews. " Like his (Canon Farrar's) commentary on Luke it
possesses all the best characteristics of his writing. It is a work not
only of an accomplished scholar, but of a skilled teacher." — Baptist
Magazine. " We heartily commend this volume of this excellent work." —
Sunday School Chronicle.
"The General Epistle of St James, by Professor Plumptre, D.D.
Nevertheless it is, so far as I know, by far the best exposition of the
Epistle of St James in the English language. Not Schoolboys or
Students going in for an examination alone, but Ministers and Preachers
of the Word, may get more real help from it than from the most costly
and elaborate commentaries." — Expositor.
The Epistles of St John. By the Rev. A. Plummer, M.A., D.D.
"This forms an admirable companion to the 'Commentary on the
Gospel according to St John,' which was reviewed in The Churchman
as soon as it appeared. Dr Plummer has some of the highest qualifica
tions for such a task ; and these two volumes, their size being considered,
will bear comparison with the best Commentaries of the time." — The
Churchman. " His small volume is, for all practical purposes, complete, both in
the Introduction and Notes. He is an accomplished scholar, a keen
dialectician, a sound critic, and a judicious expositor, in full sympathy,
also, with the utterances of the great Apostle of Love. Our space does
not admit us to enter into details, but the estimate we have expressed
is the result of a full and minute acquaintance with this delightful
little book." — The Baptist Magazine.
" Dr Plummer's edition of the Epistles of St John is worthy of its
companions in the 'Cambridge Bible for Schools' Series. The
subject, though not apparently extensive, is really one not easy to
treat, and requiring to be treated at length, owing to the constant-
reference to obscure heresies in the Johannine writings. Dr Plummer
has done his exegetical task well." — The Saturday Review.

GREEK TESTAMENT.

THE CAMBRIDGE GREEK TESTAMENT
FOR SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES
with a Revised Text, based on the most recent critical authorities, and
English Notes, prepared under the direction of the General Editor,
The Very Reverend J. J. S. PEROWNE, D.D.
St Matthew. " Copious illustrations, gathered from a great variety
of sources, make his notes a very valuable aid to the student. They
are indeed remarkably interesting, while all explanations on meanings,
applications, and the like are distinguished by their lucidity and good
sense." — Pall Mall Gazette.
St'Mark. "The Cambridge Greek Testament of which Dr Maclear's
edition of the Gospel according to St Mark is a volume, certainly
supplies a want. Without pretending to compete with the leading
commentaries, or to embody very much original research, it forms a
most satisfactory introduction to the study of the New Testament in
the original. ...Dr Maclear's introduction contains all that is known of
St Mark's life; an account of the circumstances in which the Gospel
was composed, with an estimate of the influence of St Peter's teaching
upon St Mark ; an excellent sketch of the special characteristics of this
Gospel ; an analysis, and a chapter on the text of the New Testament
generally. " — Saturday Review.
St Luke. "Of this second series we have a new volume by
Archdeacon Farrar on St Luke, completing the four Gospels.... It
gives us in clear and beautiful language the best results of modern
scholarship. We have a most attractive Introduction. ' Then follows
a sort of composite Greek text, representing fairly and in very beautiful
type the consensus of modern textual critics. At the beginning of the
exposition of each chapter of the Gospel are a few short critical notes
giving the manuscript evidence for such various readings as seem to
deserve mention. The expository notes are short, but clear and helpful.
For young students and those who are not disposed to buy or to study
the much more costly work of Godet, this seems to us to be the best
book on the Greek Text of the Third Gospel." — Methodist Recorder.
St John. "We take this opportunity of recommending to ministers
on probation, the very excellent volume of the same series on this part
of the New Testament. We hope that most or all of our young ministers
will prefer to study the volume in the Cambridge Greek Testament fm
Schools." — Methodist Recorder.
The Acts of the Apostles. "Professor Lumby has performed his
laborious task well, and supplied us with a commentary the fulness and
freshness of which Bible students will not be slow to appreciate. The
volume is enriched with the usual copious indexes and four coloured
maps." — Glasgow Herald.
I. Corinthians. "Mr Lias is no novice in New Testament exposi
tion, and the present series of essays and notes is an able and helpful
addition to the existing books." — Guardian.
The Epistles of St John. " In the very useful and well annotated
series of the Cambridge Greek Testament the volume on the Epistles
of St John must hold a high position... The notes are brief, well
informed and intelligent." — Scotsman.
CAMBRIDGE : PRINTED BY C. J CLAY, M.A. AND SONS, AT THE UNIVERSITY

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS.
THE PITT PRESS SERIES.

I. MATHEMATICS.

Euclid, The Elements of Geometry after. Books I and II.
By H. M. Taylor, M. A., Fellow and late Tutor of Trinity College, Cambridge.
[Nearly ready.

II. GREEK.
Aristophanes. Aves — Plutus— Ranae. By W. C. Green,
M.A., late Assistant Master at Rugby School. 3$. 6d. each.
Aristotle. Outlines of the Philosophy of. Compiled by
Edwin Wallace, M.A., LL.D. Third Edition, Enlarged. 4?. 6d.
Euripides. Heracleidae. With Introduction and Explanatory
Notes. By E. A. Beck, M.A., Fellow of Trinity Hall. 3s. 6d.
 Hercules Furens. With Introduction, Notes and
Analysis. By A. Gray, M.A., and J. T. Hutchinson, M.A. New Ed. 2s.
Hippolytus. With Introduction and Notes. By W. S.

Hadley, M.A., Fellow of Pembroke College. 2s.
 Iphigeneia in Aulis. By C. E. S. Headlam, B.A.
[In the Press.
Herodotus, Book VI. Edited with Notes and Introduction by
E. S._Shuckburgh, M.A. 4s.
 Book VIII., Chaps. 1—90. By the same Editor. 3.5-. 6d.
 Book IX., Chaps. 1 — 89. By the same Editor. 3s. 6d.
Homer. Odyssey, Books IX., X. With Introduction, Notes
and Appendices by G. M. Edwards, M.A. 2$. 6d. each.
Luciani Somnium Charon Piscator et De Luctu. By W. E.
Heitland, M.A., Fellow of St John's College, Cambridge. 3s. 6d.
Platonis Apologia Socratis. With Introduction, Notes and
Appendices. By J. Adam, M.A. 3s. 6d.
—  Crito. By the same Editor, ¦zs. bd.
 Euthyphro. By the same Editor. [In the Press.
Plutarch. Lives of the Gracchi. With Introduction, Notes
and Lexicon by Rev. H. A. Holden, M.A., LL.D. 6s.
 Life of Nicias. By the same Editor. 5j.
 Life of Sulla. By the same Editor. 6s.
 Life of Timoleon. By the same Editor. [Nearly ready.
Sophocles. Oedipus Tyrannus. School Edition, with Intro
duction and Commentary by R. C. Jebb, LittD., LL.D. 4s. 6d.
Thucydides, Book VII. With Notes and Introduction. By
H. R. Tottenham, M.A [Nearly ready.
Xenophon. Agesilaus. By H. Hailstone, M.A. is. 6d.
London: Cambridge Warehouse, Ave Maria Lane.
10/9/89

PUBLICATIONS OF

Xenophon. Anabasis. With Introduction, Map and English
Notes, by A. Pretor, M.A. Two vols. is. 6d.
 Books I. III. IV. and V. By the same. 2s. each.
— ¦ — Books n. VI. and VII. By the same. 2s. bd. each.
Xenophon. Cyropaedeia. .Books I. II. With Introduction
and Notes by Rev. H. A. Holden, M.A., LL.D. 2 vols. 6s.
 Books III. IV. and V. By the same Editor. 5s.

III. LATIN.
Beda's Ecclesiastical History, Books III., IV. Edited with
a life, Notes, Glossary, Onomasticon and Index, by J. E. B. Mayor, M.A., and
J. R. Lumby, D.D. Revised Edition, ys. 6d.
 Books I. II. By the same Editors. [In the Press.
Caesar. De Bello Gallico, Comment. I. With Maps and Notes
by A. G. Peskett, M.A., Fellow of Magdalene College, Cambridge, is. td.
Comment. II. III. 2s. Comment. I. II. III. 3s. Comment. IV. V., and
Comment. VII. 2s. each. Comment. VI. and Comment. VIII. is. 6d. each.
Cicero. De Amicitia — De Senectute. Edited by J. S. Reid,
Litt.D., Fellow of Gonville and Caius College. 3^. 6d. each.
 In Gaium Verrem Actio Prima. With Notes, by
H. Cowie, M.A. is. 6d.
 In Q. Caecilium Divinatio et in C. Verrem Actio.
With Notes by W. E. Heitland, M.A., and H. Cowie, M.A. 3s.
 Philippica Secunda. By A. G. Peskett, M.A. y. bd.
 Oratio pro Archia Poeta. By J. S. Reid, Litt.D. 2s.
 Pro L. Cornelio Balbo Oratio. By the same. "is. bd.
— — Oratio pro Tito Annio Milone, with English Notes,
&C by John Smyth Purton, B.D. 2s. 6d.
 Oratio pro L. Murena, with English Introduction
and Notes. By W. E. Heitland, M.A. 3s.
 ProCn.PlancioOratio,byH.A.HoLDEN,LL.D. t^s.bd.
Pro P. Cornelio Sulla Oratio. By J. S. Reid, Litt.D.

3s. 6d.
 Somnium Scipionis. With Introduction and Notes.
Edited by W. D. Pearman, M.A. 2s.
Horace. Epistles, Book I. With Notes and Introduction by
E. S. Shuckburgh, M.A., late Fellow of Emmanuel College. 2s. -6d.
Livy. Book IV. With Introduction and Notes. By H. M.
Stephenson, M.A. [Nearly readv
 Books XXI., XXII. With Notes, Introduction and
Maps. By M. S. Dimsdale, M.A., Fellow of King's College. 2s. dd. each.
Lucan. Pharsaliae Liber Primus, with English Introduction
and Notes by W. E. Heitland, M.A., and C. E. Haskins, M.A. is. 6d.
Lucretius, Book V. With Notes and Introduction bv T D
Duff, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College. 2s. J J ¦
Ovidii Nasonis Fastorum Liber VI. With Notes bv A
Sidgwick, M.A., Tutor of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, is. 6d.
London: Cambridge Warehouse, Ave Maria Lane.

THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 3
Quintus Curtius. A Portion ofthe History (Alexander in India).
By W. E. Heitland, M.A., and T. E. Raven, B.A. With Two Maps. 3*. 6d.
Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Libri I.— XII. Edited with Notes
by A. Sidgwick, M.A. is. 6d. each.
 Bucolica. By the same Editor, is. bd.
- Georgicon Libri I. II. By the same Editor. 2s.
Libri III. IV. By the same Editor. 2s.

 The Complete Works. By the same Editor. Two
vols. Vol. I. containing the Text. Vol. II. The Notes. [Nearly ready.

IV. FRENCH.
Corneille. La Suite du Menteur. A Comedy in Five Acts.
With Notes Philological and Historical, by the late G. Masson, B.A. 2s.
De Bonnechose. Lazare Hoche. With four Maps, Intro
duction and Commentary, by C. Colbeck, M.A. Revised Edition. 2s.
D'Harleville. Le Vieux Celibataire. A Comedy, Gram
matical and Historical Notes, by G. Masson, B.A. 2s.
De Lamartine. Jeanne D'Arc. Edited with a Map and
Notes Historical and Philological, and a Vocabulary, by Rev. 'A. C. Clapin,
M.A., St John's College, Cambridge. 2s.
De Vigny. La Canne de Jonc. Edited with Notes by
Rev. H. A Bull, M.A., late Master at Wellington College. 2.v.
Erckmann-Chatrian. La Guerre. With Map, Introduction
and Commentary by Rev. A. C. Clapin, M.A. 3s.
La Baronne de Stael-Holstein. Le Directoire. (Considera
tions sur la Revolution Francaise. Troisieme et quatrieme parties.) Revised
and enlarged. With Notes by G. Masson, B.A. and-G. W. Prothero, M.A. 2s.
 Dix Annies d'Exil. Livre II. Chapitres 1—81
By the same Editors. New Edition, enlarged. 2s.
Lemercier. Fredegonde et Brunehaut. A Tragedy in Five
Acts. By Gustave Masson, B.A 2s.
Moliere. Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme, Come'die-Ballet en
Cinq Actes. (1670.) By Rev. A. C. Clapin, M.A. Revised Edition, is. 6d.
 L'Ecole des Femmes. With Introduction and Notes by
G. Saintsbury, M.A. 2s. 6d.
Les Precieuses Ridicules. With Introduction and

Notes, by E. G. W. Braunholtz, M.A., Ph.D. [Nearly ready.
Piron. La M^tromanie. A Comedy, with Notes, by G.
Masson, B.A. 2s.
Eacine. Les Plaideurs. With Introduction and Notes, by
E. G. W. Braunholtz, M.A., Ph.D. [Nearly ready.
Sainte-Beuve. M. Daru (Causeries du Lundi, Vol. IX.).
By G. Masson, B.A. 2s.
Saintine. Picciola. With Introduction, Notes and Map. By
Rev. A. C. Clapin, M.A. 2s.
Scribe and Legouve\ Bataille de Dames. Edited by Rev.
H. A. Bull, M.A. 2s.

London: Cambridge Warehouse, Ave Maria Lane.

PUBLICATIONS OF

Scribe. Le Verre d'Eau. A Comedy; with Memoir, Gram
matical and Historical Notes. Edited by C. Colbeck, M.A. 2s.
S6daine. Le Philosophe sans le savoir. Edited with Notes
by Rev. H. A. Bull, M.A., late Master at Wellington College. 2s.
Thierry. Lettres sur l'histoire de France (XIII.— XXIV).
By G. Masson, B.A. and G. W. Prothero, M.A. 2s. 6d.
 R6cits des Temps Merovingiens I — III. Edited by
Gustave Masson, B.A. Univ. Gallic, and A. R. Ropes, M.A. With Map. 3s.
Villemain. Lascaris ou Les Grecs du XVe Siecle, Nouvelle
Historique. By G. Masson, B.A. 2s.
Voltaire. Histoire du Siecle de Louis XIV. Chaps. I. —
XIII. Edited by G. Masson, B.A. and G. W. Prothf.ro, M.A. 2s. 6d.
Part II. Chaps. XIV.— XXIV. By the same Editors. With Three Maps.
2s. 6d. Part III. Chaps. XXV. to end. By the same Editors. 2s. td.
Xavier de Maistre. La Jeune Siberienne. Le Lepreux de
la Cite' D'Aoste. By G. Masson, B.A. 2s.

V. GERMAN.
Ballads on German History. Arranged and annotated by
Wilhelm Wagner, Ph.D. 2s.
Benedix. Doctor Wespe. Lustspiel in fiinf Aufzugen. Edited
with Notes by Karl Hermann Breul, M.A. 3s.
Freytag. Der Staat Friedrichs des Grossen. With Notes.
By Wilhelm Wagner, Ph.D. 2s.
German Dactylic Poetry. Arranged and annotated by
Wilhelm Wagner, Ph.D. 3s.
Goethe's Knabenjahre. (1749— 17$9-) Arranged and anno
tated by Wilhelm Wagner, Ph. D. 2s.
 Hermann und Dorothea. By Wilhelm Wagner
Ph.D. Revised edition by J. W. Cartmell, M.A. 3s. 6d.
Gutzkow. Zopf und Schwert. Lustspiel in fiinf Aufziig-en
By H. J. Wolstenholme, B.A. (Lond.). 3s. 6d. '
Hauff. Das Bild des Kaisers. By Karl Hermann Breui
M.A., Ph.D., University Lecturer in German. 3s. '
 Das Wirthshaus im Spessart. By A. Schlottmann
Ph.D. 3s. 6d. '
—  Die Karavane. Edited with Notes by A. Schlott
mann, Ph.D. 3s. td.
Immermann. Der Oberhof. A Tale of Westphalian Life, by
Wilhelm Wagner, Ph.D. 3s. ' '
Kohlrausch. Das Jahr 1 8 1 3. With English Notes by Wilhelm
Lessing and Gellert. Selected Fables. Edited with Notes
by Karl Hermann Breul, M.A. 3s J^uica
M1±!m0a1u133, LetterS- Selections fr<™- Edited by James
Ka^GeNER,?heD.eLSte Kreuzzu* d°95-io99). By Wilhelm
London. Cambridge Warehouse, Ave Maria Lane.

THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 5
Riehl. Culturgeschichtliche Novellen. Edited by H. J.
Wolstenholme, B.A. (Lond.). 4*. td.
Schiller. Wilhelm Tell. Edited with Introduction and Notes,
by Karl Hermann Breul, M.A. [Nearly ready.
Uhland. Ernst, Herzog von Schwaben. With Introduction
and Notes. By H. J. Wolstenholme, B.A. 3s. td.

VI. ENGLISH.
Ancient Philosophy from Thales to Cicero, A Sketch of. By
Joseph B. Mayor, M.A. 3s. td.
Bacon's History of the Reign of King Henry VII. With
Notes by the Rev. Professor Lumby, D.D. 3J.
British India, a Short History of. By E. S. Carlos, M.A.,
late Head Master of Exeter Grammar School. [Nearly ready.
Cowley's Essays. With Introduction and Notes, by the Rev.
Professor Lumby, D.D. 4?.
Geography, Elementary Commercial. A Sketch ofthe Com
modities and the Countries ofthe World. By H. R. Mill,D.Sc, F.R.S.E. is.
Geography, an Atlas of Commercial. (A Companion to the
above.) By J. G. Bartholomew, F.R.G.S. With an Introduction by Hugh
Robert Mill, D.Sc. [Preparing.
More's History of King Richard III. Edited with Notes,
Glossary, Index of Names. By J. Rawson Lumby, D.D. 31. td.
More's Utopia. With Notes, by Rev. Prof. Lumby, D.D. 3s. bd.
The Two Noble Kinsmen, edited with Introduction and Notes,
by the Rev. Professor Skeat, Litt.D. 3s. td.

VII. EDUCATIONAL SCIENCE.
Comenius, John Amos, Bishop of the Moravians. His Life
and Educational Works, by S. S. Laurie, A.M., F.R.S.E. 3s. td.
Education, Three Lectures on the Practice of. I. On Mark
ing, by H. W. Eve, M. A. II. On Stimulus, by A. Sidgwick, M.A. III. On
the Teaching of Latin Verse Composition, by E. A. Abbott, D.D. 2s.
Stimulus. A Lecture delivered for the Teachers' Training
Syndicate, May, 188*, by A. Sidgwick, M.A. is.
Locke on Education. With Introduction and Notes by the
Rev. R. H. Quick, M.A. 3s. id.
Milton's Tractate on Education. A facsimile reprint from
the Edition -of 1673. Edited with Notes, by O. Browning, M.A. 2s.
Modern Languages, Lectures on the Teaching of. By C.
Colbeck, M.A. zs.
Teacher, General Aims of the, and Form Management. Two
Lectures delivered in the University of Cambridge in the Lent Term, 1883, by "
F. W. Farrar, D.D. and R. B. Poole, B.D. is. td.
Teaching, Theory and Practice of. By the Rev. E. Thring,
M.A., late Head Master of Uppingham School. New Edition. 4s. td.
Other Volumes are in preparation.
London: Cambridge Warehouse, Ave Maria Lane.

PUBLICATIONS OF

%\)t Camim&ae Bifrle for
iz>c{wte an& Collets*

General Editor : J. J. S. PEROWNE, D.D.,
Dean of Peterborough.
"It is difficult to commend too highly this excellent series." —
Guardian.
Now Ready. Cloth, Extra Fcap. 8vo. With Maps.
Book of Joshua. By Rev. G. F. Maclear, D.D. 2s. bd.
Book of Judges. By Rev. J. J. Lias, M.A.. 3s. bd.
First Book of Samuel. By Rev. Prof. Kirkpatrick, B. D. 3 j. bd.
Second Book of Samuel. By Rev. Prof. Kirkpatrick, B.D.
3s. td.
First Book of Kings. By Rev. Prof. Lumby, D.D. 3s. bd.
Second Book of Kings. By Rev. Prof. Lumby, D.D. 3s. bd.
Book of Job. By Rev. A. B. Davidson, D.D. $s.
Book of Ecclesiastes. By Very Rev. E. H. Plumptre, D.D. t,s.
Book of Jeremiah. By Rev. A. W. Streane, M.A. 4s. bd.
Book of Hosea. By Rev. T. K. Cheyne, M.A., D.D. 3s.
Books of Obadiah & Jonah. By Archdeacon Perowne. 2s. bd.
Book of Micah. By Rev. T. K. Cheyne, M. A., D.D. is. bd.
Books of Haggai & Zechariah. By Archdeacon Perowne. 3s.
Gospel according to St Matthew. By Rev. A. Carr, M.A. 2s. bd.
Gospel according to St Mark. By Rev. G. F. Maclear
D.D. 2s. td.
Gospel according to St Luke. By Arch. Farrar, D.D. 4s. bd.
Gospel according to St John. By Rev. A. Plummer, d. D. 4s. bd.
Acts of the Apostles. By Rev. Prof. Lumby, D.D. 4s. bd.
Epistle to the Romans. By Rev. H. C. G. Moule, M.A. 3s. bd.
First Corinthians. By Rev. J. J. Lias, M.A. With Map. 2s.
Second Corinthians. By Rev. J. J. Lias, M.A. With Map. 2s.
London: Cambridge Warehouse, Ave Maria Lane.

THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 7
Epistle to the Ephesians. By Rev. H. C. G. Moule, M.A. 2s.6d.
Epistle to the Philippians. By Rev. H. C. G. Moule, M.A.
2S. td.
Epistle to the Hebrews. By Arch. Farrar, D.D. 3s. bd.
General Epistle of St James. By Very Rev. E. H. Plumptre,
D.D. is. td.
Epistles of St Peter and St Jude. By Very Rev. E. H.
Plumptre, D.D. 2s. id.
Epistles of St John. By Rev. A. Plummer, M.A., D.D. 3s. bd.
Preparing.
Book of Genesis. By Very Rev. the Dean of Peterborough.
Books of Exodus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. By Rev.
C D. Ginsburg, LL.D.
Books of Ezra and Nehemiah. By Rev. Prof. Ryle, M.A.
Book of Psalms. By Rev. Prof. Kirkpatrick, B.D.
Book of Isaiah. By Prof. W. Robertson Smith, M.A.
Book of Ezekiel. By Rev. A. B. Davidson, D.D.
Book of Malachi. By Archdeacon Perowne.
Epistle to the Galatians. By Rev. E. H. Perowne, D.D.
Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon. By Rev. H. C. G.
Moule, M.A.
Epistles to Timothy & Titus. By Rev. A. E. Humphreys, M.A.

€bz Smaller Cambridge Mbk for ^rboote*
The Smaller Cambridge Bible for Schools will form an entirely
new series of commentaries on some selected books ofthe Bible. It is expected
that they will be prepared for the most part by the Editors of the larger
series (The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges). The volumes
will be issued at a low price, and will be suitable to the requirements of
preparatory and elementary schools. The first volumes of the series will
be ready for publication before the end of the present year.
In the Press.
First and Second Books of Samuel. By Rev. Prof. Kirk
patrick, B.D.
Gospel according to St Matthew. - By Rev. A. Carr, M.A.
Gospel according to St Mark. By Rev. G. F. Maclear, D.D.

London : Cambridge Warehouse, Ave Maria Lane.

8 PUBLICATIONS OF THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.
Cfit Cambridge <Bvttk Cestament for
^rftoote antr Colleger,
with a Revised Text, based on the most recent critical authorities, and
English Notes, prepared under the direction of the General Editor,
J. J. S. PEROWNE, D.D., Dean of Peterborough.
Gospel according to St Matthew. By Rev. A. Carr, M.A.
With 4 Maps. 4s. td.
Gospel according to St Mark. By Rev. G. F. Maclear, D.D.
With 3 Maps. 4s. td.
Gospel according to St Luke. By Archdeacon Farrar.
With 4 Maps. is.
Gospel according to St John. By Rev. A. Plummer, D.D.
With 4 Maps. ts.
Acts of the Apostles. By Rev. Professor Lumby, D.D
With 4 Maps. ts.
First Epistle to the Corinthians. By Rev. J. J. Lias, M.A. 3s.
Second Epistle to the Corinthians. By Rev. J. J. Lias, M.A.
[In the Press.
Epistle to the Hebrews. By Archdeacon Farrar, D.D. 3.?. bd.
Epistle of St James. By Very Rev. E. H. Plumptre, D.D.

Epistles of St John. By Rev. A. Plummer, M. A., D.D. 4s.

2onoon: c. J. CLAY and SONS,
CAMBRIDGE WAREHOUSE, AVE MARIA LANE.
ffitaasoto: 263, ARGYLE STREET.
Camirios*: DEIGHTON, BELL AND CO.
letpjttc: F. A. BROCKHAUS.

CAMBR.DGE: PRINTED BV C. J. CLAV. M.A. AND SONS, AT THK PNIVERSITV PRE^S.

I LIBRARY

3 9002 051

i n \ttmiiiii\~\7ini

¦¦"^¦^¦¦-¦g^-Y^-'^-"^llirTiiriiMfflMigrii,niTi.niw