,f0mmrg:,,.

^/1/[aA. ALat^aIaA

./S90

EXPOSITOET THOUGHTS
ON THE GOSPELS.

mOR I'-.A-lMIXiY A.-NT> FRIVATE TTSE3.

-WITH THB TEXT COMPLETE.
BY THE REV. J. C. RYLE, B.A.,
OHBIST CHUEOH, OXPOED,
"VIOAR OF STBADBBOKB, SUFFOLK.

ST. JOHN. VOL. I.

NEW YOEK:
ROBERT CARTER & BROTHERS,
530 BEOADWAT. 1871.

t^ 6 5 -re
V.I

PREFACE.

I SEND forth the volume now in the reader's hands, with
much diffidence, and a very deep sense of responsibility.
It is no light matter to publish an exposition of any
book in the Bible. It is a peculiarly serious undertak
ing to attempt a Commentary on the Gospel of St. John.
I do not forget that we are all apt to exaggerate the
difficulties of our own particular department of literary
labour. But I think every intelligent student of Scrip
ture will bear me out when I say, that St. John's Gospel
is pre-eminently full of things " hard to be understood."
(2 Pet. iii. 16.) It contains a large portion of our Lord
Jesus Christ's doctrinal teaching. It abounds in " deep
things of God," and " sayings of the King," which we
feel instinctively we have no line to fully fathom, no
mind to fully comprehend, no words to fully explain.
It must needs be that such a book of Scripture should
be difficult. I can truly say that I have commented on
many a verse in this Gospel with fear and trembling. I
have often said to myself, " Who is sufficient for these
things ?" — " The place whereon thou standest is holy
ground." (2 Cor. ii. 16 ; Exod. iii. 5.)
The nature of the work now published, requires a few
words of explanation. It is a continuation of the " Expo
sitory Thoughts on the Gospels," of which four volumes,
comprising the first three Go.spels, have been already
Bent forth. Like the volumes on St. Matthew, St. Mark,

IV PEEFACE.
and St. Luke, the basis of the work is a continuous series
of short expositions, intended for family or private read
ing, or for the use of tliose who visit the sick and the
poor. But, unlike the previous volumes, the work now
in the reader's hands contains full explanatory notes on
every verse of the portions expounded, forming, in fact,
a complete Commentary.
This "Commentary" is so extensive that it occupies
far more space than the " Expository Thoughts," and is,
I must honestly confess, the principal part of the 'vi^ork.
To some it may appear far too long and full. But the
circumstances of the times are my justification.* We
live in a day of abounding vagueness and indistinctness
on doctrinal subjects in religion. Now, if ever, it is the
duty of all advocates of clear, well-defined, sharply-cut
theology, to supply proof that their views are thoroughly
borne out by Scripture. I have endeavoured to do so in
this Commentary. I hold that the Gospel of St. John,
rightly interpreted, is the best and simplest answer to
those who profess to admire a vague and indistinct Chris
tianity. * The expectations of Bengel, the German commentator, appear likely
to be fulfilled with curious accuracy in the present day. He said, in the
year A. D. 1740, — "Though Socinianism and Popery at present appear
mutually aloof, they -wlU iu process of time form a mighty confluence,
that will tiurst all bounds, and bring everything to a crisis. We
may expect it in the foUowing way. The residue of heavenly influence
on the professing Church, as a body, -will have utterly evaporated, its
holy things having been already more and more prostituted to the spirit
of this world. The Holy Spirit being thus -withdra-jvu from the camp at
large, the world -will deem its own victory and triumph secured. Now,
therefore, a spirit of hberal Latitudinarianism will prevail everywhere, 
a notion that every one may be right iu his own way of thinking, and
consequently that all is well -with the Jew, the Turk, and the Pagan.
Ideas of this kind -will wonderfully prepare men for embraemg the false
prophet." (Ufe of Bengel, Walker's edition, page 322.) How painfully
correct these prognostications, made 125 years ago, have proved any
one who observes the state of religious feeling in England must know
only too well I

PREFACE. V
The theological stand-point which the writer of this
Commentary occupies will be obvious to any intelligent
reader. Such an one will see at a glance that I belong
to that school in the Church of England which, rightly
or wrongly, is called " Evangelical." He will see that
I have no sympathy whatever with either Eomish or
Neologian tendencies. He will see that I hold firmly
the distinctive theological views of the Reformers and
doctrinal Puritans, and that I totally disapprove the
loose and broad theology of some modern schools of
divines. — ^But while I say all this, I must be allowed to
add, that in interpreting Scripture, I " call no man mas
ter or father." I abhor the idea of wresting and warp
ing God's Word in order to made it support party views.
Throughout this Commentary I have endeavoured ho
nestly and conscientiously to find out the real meaning
of every sentence on which I have commented. I have
evaded no difficulty, and shrunk from no inference. I
have simply followed Scripture wherever its words seem
ed to point, and accepted whatever they seemed to mean.
I have never hesitated to express my disagreement from
the views of other commentators if occasion required ;
but when I have done so I have tried to do it with
courtesy and respect.
On one point of vast importance in the present day,
the reader will see that 1 hold very decided opinions.
That point is inspiration, I feel no hesitation in avow
ing, that I believe in the " plenary inspiration " of every
word of the original text of Holy Scripture. I hold not
only that the Bible contains the Word of God, but that
every jot of it was written, or brought together, by
Divine inspiration, and is the Word of God. I entirely
disagree with those who maintain that the writers of tho

VI PEEFACE.
Bible were partially inspired, or inspired to such a
limited extent that discrepancies, inaccuracies, and con
tradictions to the facts of science and history, must be
expected and do exist in their writings. I utterly repu
diate such a theory. I consider that it practically
destroys the whole value of God's Word, puts a sword
in the hand of infidels and sceptics, and raises far more
serious difficulties than it pretends to solve.
I grant freely that the theory of "plenary verbal
inspiration," involves some difficulties. I do not pretend
to answer all the objections brought against it, or to
defend all that has been written by its supporters.'* I
am content to remember that all inspiration is a miracu
lous operation of the Holy Ghost, and, like every opera
tion of the Holy Ghost, must needs be mysterious. It
is an operation of which not forty men in the world
have been made the subjects, and the manner of which
not one of the forty has described. It stands to reason
that the whole question of inspiration, like everything
else supernatural, must necessarily contain much that is
mysterious, and much that we cannot explain. — But the
difficulties of the " plenary vebal " theory appear to me
mere trifles, compared with those which surround the
counter theory of "partial inspiration." Once admit
the principle that the writers of the Bible could make
* When I speak of "plenary verbal inspiration," I do not for a
moment admit the absurd theory that all parts of the Bible are equally
important. I should never dream of saying that the catalogues in Cliro-
nicles are of as much value to the Church as the Gospel of St. John.
But I do maintain that all parts of the Bible are equally "given by
inspiration of God," and that all are to be regarded as " God's Word."
If we do not see the Divine character of any particular part, it is because
we have at present no eyes to see it. The humblest moss is as much
(he handiwork of God's creative power as the cedar of Lebanon. Tet
it would be foolish to say it was au equally important part of crea-tion.
The least verse in the Bible is just as truly " given by inspiration " as
th© greatest. But it does not follow that it is equally valuable.

PJiEFAOE. vil
mistakes, and were not in all things guided by the Spirit,
and I know not where I am. I see nothing certain,
nothing solid, nothing trustworthy in the foundations
of my faith. A fog has descended on the Book of God,
and enveloped every chapter in uncertainty ! Who
shall decide when the writers of Scripture made mis
takes, and when they did not ? How am I to know
where inspiration ends, and where it begins ? What I
think inspired, another may think uninspired! The
texts that I rest upon, may possibly have been put in
by a slip of the pen ! The words and phrases that I
love to feed upon, may possibly be weak earthly expres
sions, in writing which the author was left to his own
private uninspired mind! — The glory is departed from
my Bible at this rate. A cold feeling of suspicion and
doubt creeps over me as I read it, I am almost tempted
to lay it down in flat despair. A partially inspired
Bible is little better than no Bible at aU. Give me the
" plenary verbal " theory, with all its difficulties, rather
than this. I accept the difficulties of that theory, and
humbly wait for their solution. But while I wait, I
feel that I am standing on a rock.
I grant the existence of occasional difficulties, and
apparent discrepancies, in Scripture. They are trace
able, in some cases, I believe, to the errors of early
transcribers ; and in others to our ignorance of explana
tory circumstances and minute links and details. To tell
us that things cannot be explained, merely because vje are
not at present able to explain them, is childish and
absurd! "He that believeth shall not make haste."
(Isa. xx-viii. 16.) A true philosopher will never give up
a sound theory, on account of a few difficulties. He will
rather say, — " J can afford to wait. It will all be plain

Vlll PEEFACE.
one day." For my own part, I believe that the whole
Bible, as it came originally from the hands of the inspired
writers, was verbally perfect and without flaw. I believe
that the inspired writers were infallibly guided by the
Holy Ghost, both in their selection of matter and their
choice of words. I believe that even now, when -we
cannot explain alleged difficulties in Holy Scripture, the
wisest course is to blame the interpreter and not the text,
to suspect our own ignorance to be in fault, and not any
defect in God's Word. The theological system of modern
days, which delights in magnifying the so-called mistakes
of the Bible, in explaining away its miraculous narratives,
and in making as little as possible of its Divine character
and supernatural element, is a system that I cannot away
with. It seems to me to take a rock from beneath our
feet, and plant us on a quicksand. It robs us of bread,
and does not give us in its place so much as a stone.
Nothing, to my mind, is so unutterably painful as the
patronizing tone of compassion which the modern advo
cates of "partial inspiration" adopt in speaking of the
writers of the Bible. They write and talk as if St. Paul
and St. John, and their companions, were nothing better
than well-meaning pious men, who on some points were
greatly mistaken, and far below our enlightened age I
They speak with pity and contempt of that system of
divinity which satisfied the master-builders and giants of
the Church in by-gone days ! They tell us complacently
that a new theology is needed for our age, and that a
'' freer handling " of the Bible, with pens untrammelled
by the fetters which cumbered former interpreters, will
produce, and is producing, wonderful results I I tho
roughly distrust these new theologians, however learned
and plausible they may be, and I expect the Church will

PREFACE. IX
receive no light from them. I see nothing solid in their
arguments, and am utterly unmoved by them. I believe
that the want of our age is not more " free" handling of
the Bible, but more "reverent" handling, more humility,
more patient study, and more prayer. I repeat my own
firm conviction, that no theory of inspiration involves so
few difficulties as that of "plenary verbal inspiration."
To that theory I entirely adhere, and on that theory my
readers -will find this Commentary is written.
In preparing this Commentary I have made it a point
of duty to look through every work on St. John's Gos
pel which I could meet with. I append a list of books,
partly because it may be interesting and useful to some
readers, and partly because I wish to show that when I
differ from the authors, I have not written in ignorance
of their opinions.
The commentaries and expository works on St. John
which I have looked through are the following : —
I. Of Fathers. Origen, Cyril of Alexandria, Chry-
sostom, Augustine, Theophylact, Euthymius, and the
Catena Aurea.
n. Of Foreign Reformers and their successors, to the
close of the seventeenth century, Melancthon, Zwingle,
Calvin, Ecolampadius, Brentius, Bucer, Bullinger,
Gualter, Pellican, Flacius Illyricus, Musculus, Beza,
Aretius, Chemnitius,* Diodati, Calovius, De Dieu, Coc-
ceius, Gomarus, Nifanius, Heinsius, Glassius,t Critici
Sacri. * The work I here refer to is the Commentary ou the "Harmony of
the Gospels," begun by Chemnitius, and continued by Lyserus and
Gerhard. f The work of Glassius to -which I here refer, is his " Expositions of
the Gospels and Epistles appointed for Sundays." It is a collection of
Homilies.

X PEEFACE.
IIL Of Roman Catholic Writers. Rupertus, Ferus,
Arias Montanus, Toletus, Barradius, Maldonatus, Cor
nelius a Lapide, Jansenius, Quesnel.
ly. Of Scotch and English Writers. Rollock, Hut-
cheson, Poole's Synopsis and Annotations, Cartwright,
Trapp, Mayer, Leigh, Lightfoot, Baxter, Hammond,
Hall, Henry, Burkitt, Whitby, Pearce, Gill, Scott,
Bloomfield, Doddridge, A. Clarke, Barnes, Burgon,
Alford, Webster, Wordsworth, J. Brown, D. Brown,
Ford. To this list I may also add Arrowsmith, on
John i. ; Dyke, on John ii. iii. ; Hildersam, on John iv. ;
Trench, on Miracles ; and Schottgen's Horse Hebraicse.
T". Of German Writers, from the beginning of the
eighteenth century to the present day. Lampe, Bengel,
Tittman, Tholuck, Olshausen, Stier, Besser.
Of course no man can spend years, as I have now done,
in looking through this formidable mass of books, with
out forming some decided opinions about the comparative
merits of their respective authors. Some of these
opinions I have no hesitation in putting down, as they
may be of use to some of my younger brethren in the
ministry. (A.) The Fathers appear to me greatly overrated,
as commentators and expositors. Cyril and Chrysos^
tom are far the most valuable of them, in my judgment,
on St. John.
(B.) The Continental Reformers and their successors
appear to me greatly underrated and neglected. Bren
tius and Musculus, for instance, abound in excellent
thoughts and suggestions, but seem quite ignored by
most modern commentators.

PEEFACE. XI
(C.) The Roman Catholic writers often contain much
that is useful and little that is objectionable. Happy
would it be for the Church of England if all her Clergy
knew their Bibles as well as such men as Ferus and
Toletus !
(D.) The few German writers that I have consulted
appear to me to be far too highly esteemed, with tha
exception of Bengel and Lampe. Stier is always reve
rential, but tremendously difi"use. As to Olshausen,
Tholuck, and Tittman, I have generally laid down their
works with unmixed disappointment. What people
cai^.rnean by telling us that we have much to learn from
modern German writers on Scripture passes my com
prehension ! — I can only suppose, from my own
acquaintance with them, that many say it without hav
ing read them, or- without having read other exposi
tors. (E.) The Scotch and English commentators I shall
pass over in silence, as raost of them are well known.
I must confess that I think we have little to show in
this department of Theological literature. Of our old
writers, Eollock, the Scotch divine, is incomparably the
best. In fact, I do not know such a " buried treasure "
as his Latin commentary on St. John.* — Of modern
writers Burgon and Wordsworth strike me as two of
the most valuable, though I differ widely from them on
such points as the Church and the Sacraments. But I
admire their reverential spirit. — Alford is almost always
able and clear, but not always in my opinion a safe
theological guide. — A thoroughly satisfactory critical
* Bollock was bom A.B. 1555, and died A.D. 1598. He was principal
of the University of Edinburgh.

XU PEEFACE.
commentary on the Greek Testament, in the English
language, is a great desideratui-n.
I have only to add that on all points of philology,
grammar, etc., I have consulted Flacius, Ravanel, Park
hurst, Leigh, Schleusner, Raphelius, Suicer, Glassius,
and Winer.
The vexed question of " various readings," I have
deliberately left alone. It is not because I have no
opinion on the subject. But the real extent to which
all the various readings would affect the meaning of
Scripture, if they were admitted, is so much exa.ggerated,
that it does not seem to me worth while to mix up the
question with such a work as that which I have under
taken. The Greek text which I have been content to
use throughout is that of the third Edition of Stephens
(1550), edited by Scholefield. I do not say for a moment
that it is the best text. I only say I have used it.
The occasional short-comings of our authorized Eng
lish translation I have not hesitated to notice. I have
frequently pointed out expressions which in my judg
ment are not rendered so literally or accurately as they
might have been. There is nothing perfect on earth.
Our excellent translators undoubtedly fail occasionally
to give the full sense of Greek words, and are not always
sufficiently careful about tenses and the article. But it
is useless to expect perfection in any translation. Trans
lators are not inspired, and are all liable to err. 'The
" plenary verbal inspiration " which I firmly maintain,
;s that of the original text of Scripture, and not of any
translation. — I have no sympathy however with those
who wish to have a new authorized English version of
the Bible. I concede the short-comings of the old ver
sion, but judging by the specimens of "new and

PREFACE. xii:
improved " versions which I have seen, I doubt much
whether we should gain anything by attempting to mend
it. Taking it for all in all, the authorized English ver
sion is an admirable translation. I am quite content to
" let well alone."
I now conclude this preface with an earnest prayer,
that it may please God to pardon the many deficiencies
of this volume, and to use it for His own glory and the
good of souls. It has cost me a large amount of time
and thought and labour. But if the Holy Ghost shall
make it useful to the Church of Christ, I shall feel
abundantly repaid.
Ignorance of Scripture is the root of every error in
religion, and the source of eyerj heresy. To be allowed
to remove a few grains of ignorance, and to throw a few
rays of light on God's precious word, is, in my opinion,
the greatest honour that can be put on a Christian.
J. C. RYLE, B.A.,
CHRIST CHURCH, OXFORD.
Elradiroke Ytcarage, Suffiilk,
February, 1865.
P.S. I feel it due to many of my readers to offer some
explanation of the long delay which has taken place
since the publication of this work on St. John began.
An interval of almost five years has elapsed between
the publication of the first four chapters and of the fifth
and sixth. This delay, I am afraid, has caused incon
venience and annoyance in many quarters. For this I
am unfeignedly sorry.
But the delay has been unavoidable, and has arisen
from circumstances entirely beyond my own control.
Deaths, domestic anxieties, illness, and change from one
residence to another, have had much to do with it. Tha

XlV PEEFACE.
principal cause has been my removal to my present
parish. The work was begun in a little quiet parish of
300 people. It has been resumed in a widely-scattered
parish of 1400 people, requiring almost the whole of
my attention.
Even now, in sending forth the first volume of the
Expository Thoughts on St. John," I dare not promise
anything certain as to the time when the work will be
completed. I have the will to finish it, but I find it
almost impossible to secure the necessary leisure. What
absolute need there is of entire freedom from distraction
and interruption in writing a Commentary, none know
but those who have attempted it. What endless petty
interruptions a clergyman must submit to in a poor rural'
parish of 1400 people, where there is no resident land
lord, and no layman who has leisure, and where many
things must necessarily hinge on the clergyman, no one
can know unless he has filled the position.
If the great Head of the Church intends me to finish
this work, I believe that He will make my way plain,
and remove all obstacles. But my readers must kindly
make allowances for my altered position. There are
but twelve hours in the day. I cannot create time. It
is not one of the primary duties of a parochial clergy
man's office to write Commentaries. If therefore the
work does not go on so fast as they could wish, they
must have the goodness to consider my position, and to
believe that there is a cause.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

John. paob
1 — 5. Christ eternal, — a distinct Person, — ^very God,
— ^the Creator of aE things, — the source of
all light and life  1 — i
6 — 13. The minister's office, — Christ the light of the
world, — ^the -wickedness of man, — ^the privi
leges of believers .... 13 — 11
14. The reality of Christ's incarnation . . 24 — 28
15 — 18. The fulness of Christ, — the superiority of
Christ to Moses, — Christ the Eevealer of
the Father -  34—31
19 — 28. John the Baptist's humility, — ^the blindness
of the unconverted Jews . . . 43 — id
29 — 34. Christ the Lamb of God, — Christ the taker
away of sin, — Christ He that baptizeth
¦with the Holy Ghost .... 54—58

67— n

35 — 42. The good done by testifying of Christ, — ^the
good believers may do to others
43 — 51. Souls led by various ways, — Christ in the Old
Testament Scriptures, — Philip's advice to
Nathanael, — ^High character of Nathanael 15 — 80
II. 1 — 11. Matrimony an honourable estate, — the la-wfitl-
ness of mirth and rejoicing,— Christ's al
mighty power  81 — 02
12 — 25. Irreverent use of holy places rebuked, — words
of Christ long remembered, — Christ's per
fect knowledge of man's heart . . 102 — ] 08

XVI

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

JJHN.

PAOB

IIL

nr.

V.

9—21.

22—36.

1—6.

1—26.

21—30.

31—42.

43—54.

1—15.

118—123

The beginnings of some Christians very
feeble,— the necessity of the new birth,-
the Spirit's operation like the -wind .
Spiritual ignorance,— God's love the source of
salvation,— Christ's death the means of
providing salvation,— faith the instrument
which makes salvation ours . . 139 — 1^5
Jealousy and party-spirit, — true humility, —
Christ's dignity set forth, — salvation a pre
sent thing  169-113
Baptism, and its true position, — our Lord's

human nature

190—193

Christ's tact and condescension, — Christ's
readiness to give, — the excellence of
Christ's gifts, — the necessity of conviction
of sin, — ^the uselessness of formal religion,
— Christ's kindness to great sinners . 201 — 206
Christ's dealings marvellous, — grace an ab
sorbing principle, — true converts zealous
to do good  221—232
Christ's zeal to do good, — encouragement to
those who labour for Christ, — men led to
Christ in various ways . . . 231 — 241
The rich have afflictions, — the young may bo
sick and die, — afdiction a blessing, — Christ's
word as good as His presence . . 251 — 265
The misery caused by sin, — the compassion of
Christ, — ^the lessons that recovery should

teach

264—268

16 — 23. Some works lawful ou the Sabbath,  the di"-
nity and majesty of Christ . . . 216  219
24^29. Hearing Christ the way to salvation, — tho
privileges of true believers, — Christ's power
to givo life, — ^the final resurrection of all
the dead  289—293

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Xvii
John. PAOfi
V. 30 — 39. The honour Christ puts on His servants, —
the honour Christ puts on miracles, — the
honour Christ puts on the Scriptures 300 — 303
40 — 41. The reason why many are lost, — one principal
cause of unbeUef, — Christ's testimony to
Moses  313—310
TL 1 — 14. Christ's almighty power, — the office of minis
ters, — the sufficiency of the Gospel for all
mankind  323—326
15 — 21. Christ's humihty, — the trials of Christ's disci
ples, — Christ's -power over the waters 334 — 32"
22 — 21. Christ's knowledge of man's heart, — what
Christ forbids, — what Christ advises, — what
Christ promises  344 — 348
28 — 34. The ignorance of natural man, — ^the honour
Christ puts on faith, — the high privileges
of Christ's hearers over those of the Jews
in the wilderness .... 355 — 358
35—40. Christ the bread of Ufe, — none cast out, —
the Father's -will about all who come to
Christ  361-^310
41 — 51. Christ's lowly condition an offence to some, —
man's natural impotence, — salvation a pre
sent thing  318—382
62 — 59. The true meaning of eating Christ's body and
drinking Christ's blood . . . 393—396
60 — 65. Some of Christ's sayings hard, — danger of
putting carnal meanings on spiritual words,
— Christ's perfect knowledge of hearts . 406 — i09
66 — 11. Backsliding an old sin, — Peter's noble declara
tion, — the little benefit some get from reli-
pous privileges  -414 — 418

EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS

ON THE GOSPELS.

JOHN L 1—5.

1 In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was -with God, and
the Word was God.
2 The same was in the begin-
lung -with God.
3 AU things were made by him ;

and without him was not ffliy thing
made that was made.
4 In him was life ; and the life
was the light of men.
5 And the light shineth in dark
ness; and the darkness compre
hended it not.

The Gospel of St. John, which begins Avith these verses,
is in many respects very unlike the other three Gospels.
It contains many things which they omit. It omits many
things which they contain. Good reason might easily be
shown for this unlikeness. But it is enough to remember
that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote under the
direct insj)iration of God. In the general plan of their
respective Gospels, and in the particular details, — in every
thing that they record, and in everything that they do not
record, — they were all four equally and entirely guided by
the Holy Ghost.
About the matters which St. John was specially inspired
to relate in his Gospel, one general remark wiU suffice.
The things which are peculiar to his Gospel are among the
most precious possessions of the Church of Christ. No
1

2 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
one of the four Gospel-writers has given us such full
statements about the divinity of Christ, — about justifica
tion by faith,— about the offices of Christ, — about the work
of the Holy Ghost,— and about the privileges of believers,
as we read in the pages of St. John. On none of these
great subjects, undoubtedly, have Matthew, Mark, and
Luke been silent. But in St. John's Gospel, they stand out
jirominently on the surface, so that he who runs may read.
The five verses now before us contain a statement of
matchless sublimity concerning the divine nature of our
Lord Jesus Christ. He it is, beyond all question, whom
St. John means, when he speaks of " the Word." No
doubt there are heights and depths in that statement
which are far beyond man's understanding. And yet
there are plain lessons in it, which every Christian would
do well to treasure up iu his mind.
We learn, firstly, that our Lord Jesus Christ is eternal.
St. .Tohn tells us that " in the beginning was the Word."
Ho did not begin to exist when the heavens and the earth
were made. Much less did He begin to exist when the
Gospel was brought into the world. He had glory with
the Father '¦ before the world was." (John xvii. 5.) He
was existing when matter was first created, and before
time began. He was " before all things." (Col. i. IT.) He
was from all eternity.
We learn, secondly, that our Lord Jesus Christ is a Per
son distinct from God the Father, and yet one with Sim,
St. John tells us that " the Word was with God." The
Father and the Word, though two persons, are joined by
an ineffable union. Where God the Father was from all
eternity, there also was the Word, even God the Son 
their glory equal, their majesty co-eternal, and yet tlieir
Godhead one. This is a great mystery! Happy is he
who can receive it as a little child, without attempting
to exjplain it.

JOHN, CHAP. I. 3
We learn, thirdly, that the Lord Jesus Christ is very
God, St. John tells us that " the Word was God." He
is not merely a created angel, or a being inferior to God
the Father, and invested by Him with power to redeem
sinners. He is nothing less than perfect God, — equal to
the Father as touching His Godhead, — God of the sub
stance of the Father, begotten before the worlds.
We learn, fourthly, that the Lord Jesus Christ is the
Creator of all things. St. John tells us that "by Him
¦were all things made, and without Him was not any thing
made that was made." So far from being a creature of
God, as some heretics have falsely asserted, He is the Being
who made the worlds and all that they contain. " He
commanded and they were created." (Psalm xl. 8.)
We learn, lastly, that the Lord Jesus Christ is the source
of all spiritual life and light, St. John tells us, that " in
Him was life, and the life was the light of men." He is
the eternal fountain, from which alone the sons of men
have ever derived life. Whatever spiritual life and light
Adam and Eve possessed before the fall, was from Christ.
Whatever deliverance from sin and spiritual death any child
of Adam has ever enjoyed since the fall, whatever light of
conscience or understanding any one has obtained, all has
flowed from Christ. The vast majority of mankind in
every age have refused to know Him, have forgotten the
fall, and their own need of a Saviour. The light has been
constantly shining "in darkness." The most have "not
comprehended the light." But if any men and women out
of the countless millions of mankind have ever had spiritual
life and fight, they have owed all to Christ.
Such is a brief summary of the leading lessons which
these wonderful verses appear to contain. There is much
in them, without controversy, which is above our reason ;
but there is nothing contrary to it. There is much that
we cannot explain, and must be content humbly to beUeve.

4 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
Let us however never forget that there are plain practical
consequences flowing from the passage, which we can never
grasp too firmly, or know too well.
Would we know, for one thing, the exceeding sinfulness
of sin? Let us often read these first five verses of St.
John's Gospel. Let us mark what kind of Being the
Redeemer of mankind must needs be, in order to provide
eternal redemption for sinners. If no one less than the
Eternal God, the Creator and Preserver of all things,
could take away the sin of the world, sin must be a far
more abominable thing in the sight of God than most men
suppose. The right measure of sin's sinfulness is the dig
nity of Him who came into the world to save sinners. If
Christ is so great, then sin must indeed be sinful !
Would we know, for another thing, the strength of a
true Christian's foundation for hope ? Let us often read
these first five verses of St. John's Gospel. Let us mark
that the Saviour in whom the believer is bid to trust is
nothing less than the Eternal God, One able to. save to the
uttermost all that come to the Father by Him. He that
was " with God," and " was God," is also "Emmanuel, God
with us." Let us thank God that our help is laid on One
that is mighty. (Psalm Ixxxix. 1 9.) In ourselves we are
great sinners. But in Jesus Christ we have a great Saviour.
He is a strong foundation-stone, able to bear the weight of
a world's sin. He that believeth on Him shall not be con
founded. (I Peter ii. 6.)
Notes. John I. I — 5.
[The Gospel m:cording to St John.] The foUowing prefatory
remarks on St. John's Gospel, may prove useful to some^readerl
i;Vrs%.— There is no doubt that this Gospel was writtpn h^ T^v,n
the Apostle, the son of Zebedee, and brother oTws^once a
fisherman on the sea of Galilee, and afterwards called to be a
disciple of the Lord Jesus, an eye-witness of all Christ's minis!
try, and a piUar of the church. John, be it remembered ia

specially called " the disciple whom Jesus loved." He was one
of the chosen three who alone saw the daughter of Jairus raised
— ^were eye-'witnesses of the transfiguration — and were by-stand-
ers during our Lord's agony in the garden. He was the one
who leaned on Christ's breast at the last supper, and to whom
our Lord committed the care of the Virgin Mary, when He waa
dying on the cross. It is an interesting fact, that he was the
disciple who was specially inspired to write the deepest things
concerning Christ.
Secondly. — There is little doubt that this Gospel was written at a
much later date than the other three Gospels. How much
later, and at what precise time, we do not know. It is commonly
supposed that it was written after the rise of heresies about the
Person and natures of Christ, such as those attributed to Ebion
and Cerinthus. It is not likely that it was written at so late a
period as the destruction of Jerusalem. If this had been the
case, John would hardly have spoken of iLe " sheep-market " at
Jerusalem as still standing. (John v. 2.)
Thirdly. — The substance of this Gospel is, for the most part,
peculiar to itself. "With the exception of the crucifixion, and a
few other matters, the things which St. John was inspired to
record concerning our Lord, are only found in his gospel. He
says nothing about our Lord's birth and infancy, — His tempta
tion, — the Sermon on the Mount, — the transfiguration, — the
prophecy about Jerusalem, and the appointment of the Lord's
Supper. He gives us very few miracles, and even fewer para
bles. But the things which John does relate are among the
most precious treasures which Christians possess. The chapters
about Nicodemus, — the woman of Samaria, — the raising of Laza
rus, and our Lord's appearance to Peter after His resurrection
at the sea of Galilee, — the public discourses of the fifth, sixth,
seventh, eighth, and tenth chapters, — the private discourses of
the thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth chapters, — ¦
and, above all, the prayer of the seventeenth cliapter, are some
of the most valuable portions of the Bible. All these chapters,
be it remembered, we owe to St. John.
Fourthly. — The style of this Gospel is no less peculiar than ita
substance. There appears extraordinary simpHoity in many of
its statements, and yet there is a depth about them which no
man can entirely fathom. — It contains many expressions which
are used in a profound and spiritual sense, such as "light,"
"darkness," "world," "life," "truth," "to abide," "to know."—
It contains two names of the second and third Persons of the
Trinity, not found in the other Gospels. These are, " the "Word,"
as a name of our Lord, and " the Comforter," as a name of the
Holy Ghost. — It contains, fi:om time to time, explanatory com
ments and remarks on our Lord's words. — Moreover, it contains

6 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
frequent short explanations of Jewish customs and terms, whioli
serve to show that it was not written so much for Jewish read
ers as for the whole church throughout the world. " Matthew,"
(says Gregory Nazianzen, quoted by Ford,) " wrote for the He
brews ; Mark, for the Italians ; Luke, for the Greeks ; the great;
herald, John, for all."
Lastly. — The preface of this Gospel is one of the most striking
peculiarities about the whole book. Under t'he term preface, I
include the first eighteen verses of the first chapter. This pre
face forms the quintessence of the whole book, and is composed
of simple, short, condensed propositions. Nowhere in the Bible
shall we find such clear and distinct statements about our Lord
Jesus Christ's divine nature. Nowhere shall we find so many
expressions, which for want of mental power, no mortal man
can fully grasp or explain. In no portion of Scripture is it so
deeply important to notice each word, and even each tense em
ployed in each sentence. In no portion of Scripture do the per
fect grammatical accuracy and verbal precision of an inspired
composition shine out so brightly. It is not, perhaps, too much
to say, that not a single word could be altered in the first five
verses of St. John's Gospel, without opening the door to some
heresy. The first verse of St. John's Gospel, in particular, has always
been allowed to be one of the sublimest verses in the Bible.
The ancients used to say that it deserved to be written in golden
letters in every Christian Church. It has well been said to be an
opening worthy of him whom Jesus called " a son of thunder."
1 . — [In the beginning, (fee] This wonderful verse contains three
things. It tells us that our Lord Jesus Christ, here called the
Word, is eternal, — that He is a distinct Person from God the
Father, and yet most intimately united to him, — and that He
is God. The term " God," be it remembered, in the second
clause, is to be taken personally, for God the Father, and in the
third to be taken essentially, as signifying the Divine Being.
The expression, " in the beginning," means in the beginning
of aU creation. It is like the first verse of Genesis " In the
beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Gen. i. I.)
The expression " was " means " existed, was existing " The
whole sentence signifies that when the world was first called
into being, however long ago that may be,— when matter waa
first formed, however many millions of ages ago that may be 
at that period the Lord Jesua Christ was existing. He had no
beginning. He was before all things. There never was the
time when He was not. In short, the Lord Jesus Christ is an
eternal Be ng.

JOHN, CHAP. I. 7
Several of the fathers dwell strongly on the immense import
ance of the word "was" in this sentence, and on the fact that it
is four times repeated in the two first verses of this Gospel. It
is not said, " the "Word -was made," but " the "Word was." Basil
says, " Those two terms, ' beginning ' and ' was,' are like two
anchors," which the ship of a man's soul may safely ride at,
whatever storms of heresy may come.
The expression, "the "Word," is a very difficult one, and is
peculiar to St. John. I see no clear proof that it is used by any
other New Testament writer. The texts, Acts xx. 32, and Heb.
iv. 12, are, to say the least, doubtful proofs. That it here signi
fies a " person," and not a spoken word, and that it is applied to
our Lord Jesus Christ, is clear from the after sentence, " The
Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." That it was a term
familiar lo the Jews is undeniable. But why this particular
name is used by St. John, both here and in his other writings,
is a point on which commentators have difiFered greatly.
Some think, as TertuUian, Zwingle, Musculus, Bucer, and
Calvin, that Christ is called " the Word " because He is the wis
dom of God, and the " wisdom " of the Book of Proverbs. These
would have the expression translated, " reason, -wisdom, or
counsel." Some think, as some of the fathers, that Christ is called " the
Word," because He is the image and ofi^spring of the Father's
mind, " the express image of the Father's person," just as our
words, if honest and sincere, are the image and representation
of our minds.
Some think, as Cartwright and Tittman, that Christ is called
" the Word," because He is the Person who is spoken of in all
the Old Testament promises, and the subject of prophecy.
Some think, as Melancthon, RoHockjGomarus, and Scott, that
Christ is called " the "Word," bec:iuse He is the speaker, utterer,
and interpreter of God the Father's will It is written in this
very chapter, that " the only begotten Son hath declared the
Father." It is also written, that " God hath in these last days
spoken unto us by his Son." (Heb. i. 1.)
I think the last of these views the simplest and most satis
factory. All of them are at best only conjectures. There is
probalDly something about the expression which has not yet been
discovered. It is thought by many that the expression " the "Word," is
used in several places of the Old Testament, concerning the
Second Person in the Trinity. Such places are Psalm xxxiii. 6 ;
Psalm cvii. 20, and 2 Sam. vii. 21, compared with 1 Chron. xvii.

EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
19. The proof in all these cases is somewhat doubtful. Never
theless the idea is strengthened by the fact that in Rabbinical
writings the Messiah is often spoken of as " the Word." In the
third of Genesis, the Chaldee paraphrase says that Adam and
Eve " heard the Word of the Lord walking in the garden."
Arrowsmith, in his admirable work on this chapter, suggests
a probable reason why John did not say, "In the beginning was
the Son of God," but " the Word." — " John would not at first
alienate the hearts of Ms readers. He knew that neither Jews
nor Gentiles would endure the term, the Son of God. They
could not endure to hear of a sonship in the Deity and Godhead :
but with this term ' Word,' applied to the Godhead, they were
well acquainted." — Poole observes that no term was so abhorred
by the Jews as the term " Son of God." — Ferus remarks, that
by calling our Lord " the Word," St. John excludes all idea of a
material, carnal relationship between the Father and the Son.
This is also shown by Suicer to be the view of Chrysostom,
Theodoret, Basil, Gregory, Nyssen, and Theophylact.
"Whatever difficulty we may feel about this expression, " tho
Word," in our times, there does not seem to have been the same
difficulty felt about it, either by Jews or Gentiles, when St. John
wrote his Gospel. To say, as some have done, that he borrowed
the expression from the philosophers of his time, is dishonouring
to inspiration. But we may safely say that he used an expres
sion, of which the meaning was quite familiar to the first readers
of his Gospel, as a name of the Second Person of the Trinity.
With this we may be content. Those who wish more informa
tion, should consult Witsius' Dissertation on the Word Logos,
Suicer's Thesaurus, and Adam Clarke's Commentary.
[Tlie word was with God.'\ This sentence means, that from all
eternity there was a most intimate and ineftable union between
the first and second Persons in the blessed Trinity, — between
Christ the Word, and God the Father. And yet, though thus
ineffably united, the Word and the Father were from all eternity
two distinct Persons. " It was He," says Pearson, to whom tlie
Father said, "Let us make man in our image." (Gen. i. 26.)
The trutli contained in this sentence, is one of the deepest
and most mysterious in the whole range of Christian theology.
The nature of this union between the Father and the Son we'
have no mental capacity to explain. Augustine draws illustra
tions from the sun and its rays, and from" fire and the light of
fire, which, though two distinct things, are yet inseparably
united, so that where the one is the other is. But all illustra-
tioas on such subjects halt and fail. Here, at any rate it is
better to beUeve than to attempt to explain. Our Lord sav.s
distinctly, "I am in the Father and the Father in me " ' " j

JOHN, CHAP. I. 9
and the Father are one." " He that hath seen me hath seen
the Father." (John xiv. 9—11 ; John x. 30.) Let us be fuUy
persuaded that the Father and the Son are two distinct Per
sons in the Trinity, co-equal and co-eternal, — and yet that they
are one in substance and inseparably united and undivided. Let
us grasp firmly the words of the Athanasian Creed, " Neither
confounding the Persons nor dividing the substance." But here
let us stop.
Musculus remarks on this sentence, how carefully St. John
-writes that " the Word was with God," and not " God was with
God." He would have us remember that there are not two
Gods but one. And yet " the Word was with God, and was
God." [The Word was God.] This sentence means that the Lord
Jesus Christ, the eternal Word, was in nature, essence, and sub
stance very God, and that "as the Father is God, so also the Son
is God." It seems impossible to assert Christ's divinity more
distinctly than it is here asserted. The sentence cannot possibly
mean that the Father is God, since no one ever thought of dis
puting that. Nor yet can it possibly mean that the title of God
was conferred on some being inferior to God and uncreated, as
the princes of this world are caUed " gods." He who is here
caUed God, is the same who was uncreated and eternal. There
is no inferiority in the Word to God the Father. The Godhead
of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is aU one. To
maintain in the face of such a text, as some so-caUed Christians
do, that our Lord Jesus Christ was only a man, is a mournful
proof of the perversity of the human heart.
Tho whole verse, honestly and impartiaUy interpreted, is an
unanswerable argument against three classes of heretics. It
confutes the Arians, who regard Christ as a Being inferior to
God. — It confutes the SabelUans, who deny any distinction of
Persons in the Trinity, and say that God sometimes manifested
Himself as the Father, sometimes as the Son, and sometimes as
the Spirit, and that the Father and the Spirit suffered on the
cross! — Above aU it confutes the Socinians and Unitarians who
say that Jesus Christ was not God but man, a most holy and
perfect man, but only a man.
In leaving this verse, it is useless to deny that there are deep
mysteries in it which man has no mind to comprehend, and no
language to express. How there can be a plurality in unity,
and a unity in pluraUty, three Persons in the Trinity and One
God in essence, — how Christ can be at the same time in the
Father, as regards the unity of the essence, and wiiii the Father,
as regards the distinction of his Person,— these are matters far
beyond our feeble understanding. Happy are we, if we can
1*

10 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
agree with Bernard's devout remark about the subject, " It ia
rashness to search too far into it. It is piety to believe it. It is
life eternal lo know it. And we can never have a fuU compre
hension of it, till we come to enjoy it."
2.— [The same was in the beginning, i&c] This verse contains an
emphatic repetition of the second clause of the preceding verse.
St. John anticipates the possible objection of some perverse
mind, that perhaps there was a time when Christ, the Word,
was not a distinct Person in the Trinity. In reply to this objec
tion, he declares that the same Word who was eternal, and was
God, was also from aU eternity a Person in the Godhead distinct
from God the Father, and yet with Him by a most intimate and
inefi'able union. In short, there never was a time when Christ
was not " with God."
There are two passages in the Old Testament which throw
strong light on the doctrine of this verse. The one is in the
Book of Proverbs viii. 22 — 31. The other is in Zechariah xiu.
7. The passage in Proverbs seems intended to explain the
verse before us. The passage in Zechariah contains an expres
sion which is almost a parallel to the expression " with God."
" Awake, 0 sword, against my shepherd, and against the man
that is my fellow, saith the Lord." "The man that is my
fellow," according to the best commentators, means the Messiah,
Jesus Christ, and a reference to Poole's Synopsis will show that
the words signify " the man that is near me, or joined to me."
Arrowsmith says, " Ask the sun, if ever it were without its
beams. Ask the fountain, if ever it were without its streams.
So God was never without His Son."
We must not suppose that the repetition of this second verse
ia useless or unmeaning. Arrowsmith remarks that " Repeti
tions have divers uses in Scripture. In prayer they argue affec
tion. In prophecy they note celerity and certainty. In threat-
enings they note unavoidableness and suddenness. In precepts
they note a necessity of performing them. In truths, Uke that
before us, they serve to show the necessity of believing and
knowing them."
Z.-[All things. ..made by him.] This sentence means that creation
was the work of our Lord Jesus Christ, no le^s than of God the
Father. "By him were aU things created." (Coloss i 16)
" Thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the
earth." (Heb. i. 10.) Now He that made all things must needs
be God.
The expression, we must carefuUy remember, does not imply
any mferionty of God the Son to God the Father, as if God
the Son was only the agent and workman under ano'ther. Nor
yet doe^ it imply (hat cre:ition was in no sense the work of God

JOHN, CHAP. r. 11
the Father, and that He is not the maker of heaven and earth.
But it does imply that such is the dignity of the eternal Word,
that in creation as weU as in every thing else. He co-operated
with the Father. " What things soever the Father doeth,
these also doeth the Son likewise." (John v. 19.) " By whom
also He made the worlds." (Heb. i. 2.) When we read the
expression " by me kings reign," (Prov. viii. 15,) we do not for
a moment suppose, that kings are superior in dignity to Him by
whom they reign.
Jansenius remarks that this verse completely overthrows the
heretical notion entertained by the Manichees that the material
world was formed by an evil spirit, as weU as the notion of the
Platonic school that some part of creation was made by angels
and demons.
[Without him was not anything made, dec] This sentence
appears added, to show the utter impossibility of our Lord
Jesus Christ being no more than a created being. If not even
the slightest thing was created without Him, it is plain that He
cannot possibly be a creature Himself.
The fathers raised curious speculations about the origin of
evU from the expression now before us. " If nothing was made
without Christ," they argued, " from whence came sin ? " The
simplest answer to this question is, that sin was not among the
things which were originally created at the beginning. It came
in afterwards, at the fall, "By one man sin entered into the
world." (Rom. v. 12.) That it could not have entered without
divine permission, and that its entrance has been overruled to
the display of divine mercy in redemption, are undeniable truths.
But we have no right to say that sin was among the "all
things." which were "made by Christ."
1. —[In Him was life.] This sentence means that in the eternal
counsels of t'ne Trinity, Christ was appointed to be the source,
fountain, origin, and cause of life. Prom Him aU life was to
flow. As to the kind of "life" which is here meant, there is
much difference of opinion among commentators.
Some think as CyrU, Theophylact, Chemnitius, and Calvin,
that the expression refers speoiaUy to the continued preservation
of aU created things by Christ's providence. Having created aU
things, He keeps aU alive and in order.
Some think as Zwingle, Cartwright, Arrowsmith, Poo'e,
Alford, and most modern commentators, that the expression in
cludes all sorts of Ufe, both vegetable, animal, and spiritual
" Thou sendest forth thy spirit, and they are created." (Psalm
civ. 30.) " In Him we Uve, and move, and have our being."
(Acts xvii. 28.)

12 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
Some think, as Luther, Melancthon, Brentius, Flacius, Light-
foot, Lampe, and Pearce, that the expression appUes solely to
spiritual Ufe, and that it is meant to declare that Christ alone is
the source of aU life to the souls of men, whether in time or
eternity. He was the creator of aU things, and He also -was
the author of new creation. To this opinion I decidedly incline.
For one thing, natural life seems already included in the pre
ceding verse about cieation. For another thing, it is the view
which seems to agree best with the conclusion of the verse, and
to be in harmony with the words, " With thee is the fountain of
life : in thy Ught we shall see light." " God hath given to us
eternal life, and this life is in His Son." (Psalm xxxvi. 9 ; 1
John V. II.)
[The life ivas the light of men.] This .'-•cntence means that the
life which was in Christ, -nas intended before the fall to be the
guide of man's soul to heaven, and the supply of man's heart
and conscience, — and that since the fall of man it has been the
salvation and the comfort of all who have been saved. It is
those and those only who have foUowed Christ as their light,
who have lived before God and reached heaven. There has
never been any spiritual life or light enjoyed by men, excepting
from Christ.
5. — [The light shineth in darJcness.] This sentence means that the
spiritual Ught which Christ, the source of life, offers to man, has
always been neglected since the faU, and is still neglected by un-
regenerate men. It has been like a candle shining in a dark
place, a light in the middle of a world of darkness, — making the
darkness more visible. Unregenerate men are darkness itself
about spiritual things. " Te were darkness." (Ephes. v. 8.)
Arrowsmith remarks on this sentence, " Christ hath shined in
all ages in the ivorks of creation and providence. He left not
Himself without witnes?. Eveiy creature is a kind of professor
that readeth man a lecture concerning God, of His wisdom, and
power, and goodness."
[The darkness comprehended it not] This sentence means
that the natural heart of man has always been so dark since the
faU, that the great majority of mankind have neither understood,
nor received, nor laid hold upon the Ught offered to them by
Christ. The difference in the tenses of the two verbs used in this
verse is very remarkable. About the "light" the present
tense is used ; " It shineth now as it has always shone ' it is
StiU shining." — About the " darkness" the past tense is used •
"It has not comprehended the Ught; it never has compre
hended it from the first, and does not comprehend it at the pre
sent day." ^

JOHN, CHAP. 1.

13

The Greek word which we render " comprehended," is the
same that is used in Ephes. iu. 18. In Acts iv. 14, it is trans
lated " perceived," — in Rom. ix. 30, " attained," — in PhiUpp. iii.
13, " apprehend," — in John vui. 3, " taken," — and in 1 Thess. v.
4, " overtake."
At this point, the remark of Bengel upon the whole passage
deserves attention. "In the first and second verses of this
chapter, mention is made of a state before the creation of the
world ; in the third verse, the world's creation ; iu the fourth,
the time of man's uprightness; in the fifth, the time of man's
decUne and falL"
I cannot close these notes on the opening verses of St. John's
Gospel without expressing my deep sense of the utter inabiUty
of any human commentator to enter fully into the vast and
subUme truths which the passage contains. I have laboured to
throw a litde Ught on the passage, and have not hesitated to ex
ceed the average length of these notes on account of the immense
importance of this part of Scripture. But after saying all that I
have said, I feel as if I had only faintly touched the surface of
the passage. There is something here which nothing but the
light of eternity wiU ever fully reveal.

JOHN L 6—13.

6 There was a, man sent from
God, whose name was John.
T The same came for a witness,
to bear -witness of the Light, that
aU men through him might believe.
8 He was not that Light, but was
sent to bear witness of that Light.
9 That was the true Light,
which lighteth every man that
Cometh into the world.
10 He was in the world, and the

world was made by him, and the
world knew him not.
11 He came unto his own, and
his Q-wn received him not.
12 But as many as received him,
to them gave he power to become
the sons of God, even to them that
believe on Ms name :
13 "Which were bom, not of
blood, nor of the -wiU of the flesh,
nor of the wiU of man, but of God.

St. John, after beginning his gospel with a statement of
our Lord's nature as God, proceeds to speak of His fore
runner, John the Baptist. The contrast between the lan
guage used about the Saviour, and that used about His
forerunner, ought not to be overlooked. Of Christ we are
told that He was the etern.al God, — the Crentor of nil

14 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
things, — the source of life and light. Of John the Baptist
we are told simply, that " there was a man sent from God,
whose name was John."
We see, firstly, in these verses, the true nature of a
Christian minister's office. We have it in the description
of John the Baptist: " He came for a witness, to bear wit
ness of the light, that all men through him inight believe."
Christian ministers are not priests, nor mediators between
God and man. They are not agents into whose hands men
may commit their souls, and carry on their religion by
deputy. They are witnesses. They are intended to bear
testimony to God's truth, and specially to the great truth
that Christ is the only Saviour and light of the world. This
was St. Peter's ministry on the day of Pentecost. — " With
many other words did he testify." (Acts ii. 40.) This was
the whole tenor of St. Paul's ministry. — " He testified both
to the Jews and Greeks repentance towards God, and faith
towards our Lord Jesus Christ." (Acts xx. 21.) Unless
a Christian minister bears a full testimony to Christ, he is
not faithfid to his ofiice. So long as he does testify of
Christ, he has done his part, and will receive his reward,
although his hearers may not believe his testimony. Until
a minister's hearers believe on that Christ of whom they
are told, they receive no benefit from the ministry. They
may be pleased and interested ; but they are not profited
until they believe. The great end of a minister's testimony
is " that through him, men may believe."
We see, secondly, in these verses, one principal position
which our Lord Jesus Christ occupies towards manhind.
"We have it in the words, " He -was the true light which
lighteth every man that cometh into the world."
Christ is to the souls of men what the sun is to the world.
He is the centre and source of all spiritual light, warmth
life, health, growth, beauty, and fertility. Like the sun
He shines for tho common benefit of all mankind  for hio-b

JOHN, CHAP. I. 15
and for low, for rich and for poor, for Jew and for Greek.
Like the sun. He is free to all. All may look at Him, and
drink health out of His fight. If millions of mankind were
mad enough to dwell in caves under ground, or to bandage
their eyes, their darkness would be their own fault, and
not the fault of the sun. So, likewise, if millions of men
and women love spiritual " darkness rather than light," the
blame must be laid on their Wind hearts, and not on Christ.
" Their foolish hearts are darkened." (John iii. 19; Rom.
i. 21.) But whether men will see or not, Christ is the true
sun, and the light of the world. There is no light for
sinners except in the Lord Jesus.
We see, thirdly, in these verses, the desperate wicJcedness
ofman^s natural heart. We have it in the words, Christ
" was in the world, and the world was made by Plim, and
the world knew Him not. He carae unto His own, and
His own received Him not."
Christ was in the world invisibly, long before He was
born of the Virgin Mary. He was there from the very
beginning, ruling, ordering, and governing the whole crea
tion. By Him all things consisted. (Coloss. i. 17.) He
gave to all life and broath, rain from heaven, and fruitful
seasons. By Him kings reigned, and nations were increased
or diminished. Yet men knew Him not, and honoured
Him not. They " worshipped and served the creature more
than the Creator." (Rom. i. 25.) Well may the natural
heart be called " wicked !"
But Christ came visibly into the world, when He was
born at Bethlehem, and fared no better. He came to the very
people whom He had brought out fromEgyj)t, and purchased
for His own. He came to the Jews, -whom He had separated
from other nations, and to whom He had revealed Himself
by the prophets. He came to those very Jews who had
read of Hira in the Old Testament Scriptures, — seen Him
under types and figures in their temple services, — and pro

16 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
fessed to be waiting for His coming. And yet, when He
came, those very Jews received Him not. They even
rejected Him, despised Him, and slew Him. Well may
the natural heart be called " desperately wicked !"
We see, lastly, in these verses, the vast privileges of all
¦who receive Christ, and believe on Him. We are told that
"as many as received Him, to them gave He power to
become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His
name." Christ will never be without some servants. If tho vast
majority of the Jews did not receive Him as the Messiah,
there were, at any rate, a few who did. To them He gave
the privilege of being God's children. He adopted them
as members of His Father's family. He reckoned them
His own brethren and sisters, bone of His bone, and flesh of
His flesh. He conferred on them a dignity which was ample
recompense for th« cross which they had to carry for His
sake. He made them sons and daughters of the Lord
Almighty. Privileges like these, be it remembered, are the posses
sion of all, in every age, who receive Christ by faith, and
follow Him as their Saviour. They are " children of God
by faith in Christ Jesus." (Gal. iii. 26.) They are born
again by a new and heavenly birth, and adopted into the
family of the King of kings. Few in number, and despised
by the world as they are, they are cared for with infinite
love by a Father in heaven, who, for His Son's sake, is
well pleased with them. In time He provides them with
everything that is for their good. In eternity He will give
them a crown of glory that fadeth not away. These are
great things ! But faith in Christ gives men an ample
title to them. Good masters care for their servants, and
Christ cares for His.
Are we ourselves sons of God? Have we been born
again ? Have we the marks which always accompany the

JOHN, CHAP. I. 17
new birth, — sense of sin, faith in Jesus, love of others,
righteous living, separation from the world ? Let us
never be content till we can give a satisfactory answer to
these questions.
Do we desire to be sons of God ? Then let us " receive
Christ" as our Saviour, and beUeve on Him with the
heart. To every one that so receives Him, He will give
the privilege of becoming a son of God.
Notes. John I. 6 — 13.
6. — [Ihere was a man sent from God,....John.] This is a short and
striking description of John the Baptist. He was the messenger
whom God promised to send before Messiah's face. He waa
bom when his parents were aged, by God's miraculous inter
position. He was fiUed with the Holy Ghost from his mother's
womb. He received a special commission from God to preach
the baptism of repentance, and to proclaim the immediate com
ing of Christ. In short, he was specially raised up by God to
prepare the way for the Messiah. For aU these reasons he is
here caUed " a man sent from God." It is, in one sense, the
common mark of aU true ministers of 'the Gospel. Ignorant,
bUnd, and unconverted ministers may be ordained and sent by
man. But they are not " sent from God."
7. — [ Came for a witness.] Tliis does not mean, as it might at first
sight appear, " came to be a witness." The Greek word which
we translate " witness," does not mean " a person," but the testi
mony which a witness bears.
[To hear wiine.ss of the light] This means, to testify concern
ing Jesus Christ the Ught of the world, that He was the promised
Messiah, the Lamb of God, the Bridegroom, the Almighty
Saviour, to whom all dark souls ought to apply.
[AU men.] This cannot of course signify " aU mankind." It
means all who heard John's testimony, and all Jews who were
really looking for a Redeemer. One end of John the Baptist's
testimony was that all sucli should believe on Christ the true
Ught. [Throvgh him.] This does not mean "through Christ" and
Christ's grace, but through John the Baptist and John's testi
mony. It is one of those texts which show the immense im
portance of the ministerial office. It is a means and instrument
through which the Holy Spirit is pleased to produce faith m
man's heart. " Faith cometh by hearing." Through John tho

18 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
Baptist's testimony, Andrew was led to beUeve in Jesus and
become a disciple. Just so now, through the preaching of minis
ters sinners learn to beUeve on Christ and are saved.
8.— [He was not that Ivjht] This expression would be more lite
rally rendered, " He was not the light," the promised light of
sinners, the Ught of the world. The Greek article " the," is
used in a similar emphatic manner, to denote eminence and
distinction, in the following passages. " That bread." John vi.
32. "That prophet." John i. 21—25. "That day." I Thess.
V. 4. " That way." Acts ix. 2.
Let it be noted that our Lord himself calls John the Baptist
at a later period, " The burning and shining light." (John v. 35.)
But it is a curious fact that the Greek word there rendered
"light," is not the one used here. It is a word which is fre
quently translated " candle." John the Baptist was a " candle,"
but not the Ught itself. Believers are called " the Ught of the
world." (Matt. v. 14,) but only as members of Christ the light,
and borrowing Ught from him. Christ alone is the great sun
and fountain of aU light, the light itself.
9. — [That was the true light.] The force of the expression " true "
in this sentence, is weU brought out by Arrowsmith in his com
mentary on this verse. He says that Christ is " the true light"
in four respects. Firstly, He is undeceiving light, the true light
in opposition to all the false lights of the Gentiles. — Secondly,
He is real light, true in opposition to ceremonial types and
shadows. — Thirdly, He is underived Ught, tr.ue in opposition to
aU light that is borrowed, communicated, or participated from
another. — Fourthly, He is supereminent Ught, true in opposition
to aU that is ordinary and common.
[fVhich lighteth every man....comet?i....ioorld.] This sentence haa
caused much difference of opinio-:! among commentators, in
respect to two points.
(a.) In the first place, men differ as to the appUcation of the
words, " that cometh into the world." Some connect these
words with " the true light," and read the words, " this is the
true light that coming into the world lighteth every man." In
favour of this view, the words "light is come into Ihe woild,"
(John iii. 19,) and "I am come a light into the worid," (John
xii. 46,) deserve notice. — Others connect the words with "every
man," and regard them as a sweeping description of every one
naturally born of the seed of Adam. That " coming into Ihe
world" is a Hebrew phrase for being born, is shown by Nifa
nius. The conslruction of the whole vers-e in the orio-inal Greek
is such that eitUer rendering is grammatical and correct! '
Opinions are so nicely balanced on this point, and so much

JOHN, CUAP. I. 19
may be said on either side, that I venture my own judgment
with much hesitation. But I am inclined to think on tho whole,
with Chemnitius and Glassius, that our translators are right, and
that the clause " that cometh into the world," is better con
nected with " every man " than with " the true light." — If the
verse is rendered " this is the true Ught that coming into the
world Ughteth every man," it seems rather to narrow the bless
ing of the true Ught, and to confine his illumining benefits to the
times after His incarnation. This, be it remembered, is precisely
the view of the Socinian. And yet it is unquestionably true
that Christ's incarnation increased greatly the spiritual light in
the world. St. John says, " The darkness is past and the true
Ught now shineth." (I John U. 8.) If, on the other hand, the
verse is rendered as our version has it, the words " that cometh
into the world," seem very suitably joined to " every man," as
expressing the universaUty of the blessings which Christ confers
on man. He is not only the true light of the Jew, but of " every
man that is born into the world," of every name, and people,
and tongue. To suppose, as some have done, that this applica
tion of the words " come into the world," involves the preexist-
ence of souls, is, to say the least, a fooUsh thought.
The point is, happily, one on which men may agree to differ.
Sound doctrine may be got out of either view.
(5.) The second difference of opinion respecting this verse
arises from the words, " lighteth every man." This expression
has received widely different interpretations. AU, except here
tics, are agreed that the words cannot mean that aU are con
verted, and cannot signify the final, universal salvntion of all
mankind. 'What then do they mean?
Some think, as Cyril, that Christ " the true light," lighteth
every man and woman on earth with the light of reason, intelU
gence, and consciousness of right and wrong. This view is par
tially true, and yet it seems weak and defective.
Some think, as the Quakers are reported to do, that Christ
Ughteth every man and woman on earth with an inward light of
grace, sufficient to save him, if he wiU only use it. This view
is a dangerous one, and beside contradicting many texts of
Scripture, leads on to downright Pelagianism.
Some think, as Augustine, that Christ lighteth all that are
lighted by His grace, and that " every man " is practically the
same as every believer. They quote iu support of this view, the
verse, "The Lord upholdeth aU that fall," (Psalm cxlv. 141.)
where " aU " can only mean, " aU tho=e that are upheld are up
held by the Lord." A favourite illustration of this view is the
saying, that a schoolmaster " teaches aU the boys in a town,"

20 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
that is, " all who are taught are taught by him." This interpre
tation, however, is not thoroughly satisfactory, and has au
appearance of quibbUng and unfairness about it.
Some think, as Chrysostom, and Brentius in his HomiUes, and
Lightfoot,, that Christ is really given to be the Ught of aU man
kind. They think that when it is said, He " Ughteth every
man," it means that He shines sufficiently for the salvation of
all mankind, both Jews and Gentiles, (like the sun shining upon
aU creation,) though the majority of men are so blinded by sin
that they do not see Him. Yet Christ is for every man. " He
lighteth all," says Chrysostom, "as far as in Him lies." — "There
is power and good will in the light," says Chemnitius, " to illu
mine all; but some love darkness rather than light." Arrow-
smith says, " Christ doth dispense to every one light sufficient
to leave him without excuse. But Christ doth not dispense to
every one converting light sufficient to bring him to salvation."
I beUeve this last view to be the most probable one, though
I confess that it is not unattended by difficulties. But I rest
in the conclusion that Christ is offered as a Ught to all the
world, and that every one born into the world will prove at
last to have been in some -way indebted to Christ, even though
not saved.
Pearce says of the Greek word rendered "lighteth," that, "in
the Hebrew tongue that which is only intended to be done is
often expressed as a thing actuaUy done." He regards this
expression before us as a similar one. He gives, as parallel
instances, 1 Cor. x. 33, "please," for "intend to please," Gal.
V. 4, "justified," for " intend to be justified," and I John u. 26,
" seduce," for " intend to seduce."
The Greek word rendered " lighteth " is used eleven times in
the New Testament, and is translated " to give Ught, to Ught,
to bring to light, to enlighten, to iUuminate."
10. — [He was in the world, &c....'knew him not] This verse de
scribes the unbelief of the whole world before Christ's incarna
tion. He " was in the world " invisibly, before He was born of
the Virgin Mary, as in the days of Noah. (1 Pet. in. 19.) He
was to be seen in His works and iu His providential govern
ment of aU things, if men had only had eyes to see Him. And
yet the very world which He had made, the work of his hands,
did not acknowledge, believe, or obey Him. It knew Him not.
At Athens, Paul found an altar " to the unknown God."
That the expression applies to Christ before His incarnation
and not after, is said by Lampe to be the unanimous opinion of
Origen, Chrysostom, Augustine, Cyril, Theodoret, Beda, Theo
phylact, and Euthymius.

21
There is a striking similarity between the declaration of this
verse and the contents of the latter part of the 1st chapter of
the Epistle to the Romans. In fact the Une of argument by
which St. Paul shows the Gentiles to be guilty, in the first
chapter of that epistle, and the Jews to be equally guilty and
excuseless in the second chapter, is only a fuU exposition of
what St. John here states briefly in two verses.
11. — [He came unto his own,...received him not] This verse de
scribes the unbelief of the Jewish nation after the incarnation
of Christ, and during His ministry among them. He came to
a people who were pecuUarly His own, by their redemption
from Egypt, by their introduction into the land of Canaan, and
by their possession of the law of Moses, and the covenants, and
yet they did not believe on Him, or receive Him, but actuaUy
rejected and slew Him.
There is a peculiarity about the Greek words rendered " his
own," in this verse, which ought not to be overlooked. The
first " his own " is in the neuter gender, and means Uterally " his
own things." The second " his own " is in the masculine gen
der, and means "his own men, servants or subjects." It is
probably meant to show that our Lord came to a people whose
land, territory, cities, temple, were aU His own property, and
had been originally granted by Himself. The Jews, Palestine,
Jerusalem, the temple, were aU Christ's peculiar possession.
Israel was "His inheritance." (Psalm Ixxviii. 71.) — This made
the sin of those who "received Him not," even more sinfiil.
J 2. — [As many as received Him.] This expression signifies, "aa
many as beUeved on Christ, and acknowledged Him as the
Messiah." It is only another form of the expression at the end
of the verse, " believed on His name." To receive Christ is to
accept Him with a wlUing heart, and to take Him as our Saviour.
It is one of many forms of speech, by which that justifying
faith which unites the sinner's soul to Christ is expressed in the
Bible. To beUeve on Christ with the heart, is to receive Him,
and to receive Him is to beUeve on Him. — St. Paul says to the
Colossians, " As ye have received Christ, so walk ye in Him."
(Col. U. 6.)
The Greek word rendered, " As many as," is literaUy, "who
soever," " whatsoever persons." Glassius remarks, that the
expression denotes the universality of the benefits which Christ
conferred. " Whosoever " received Him, Pharisees, Sadducees,
learned or unlearned, male or female, Jews or Gentiles, to them
He gave the privilege of sonship to God.
[To them gave he poioer to become the sons of God!] This
expression means, "He gave them the privilege of adoption
ioto God's family." They became, the " chUdren of God by

22 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
faith in -Ohrist Jesus." (Gal. iii. 26.) " Whosoever beUeveth that
Jesus is the Christ is born of God." (I John v. I.) There ia
no sonship to God without living faith in Christ. Let this never
be forgotten. To talk of God being men's Father, and men
being God's children, while they do not believe on the Son of
God, is contrary to Scripture. Those are not children of God
who have not faith in Jesus.
The word "power" in this sentence requires careful guarding
against misrepresentation. It means, as the marginal reading
says, "right or privilege." It does not mean strength or abiUty.
It does not mean that Christ confers on those who receive Him
a spiritual and moral strength, by which they convert them
selves, change their own hearts, and make themselves God's
children. No doubt Christ gives to all His people aU needful
grace to supply aU the wants of their hearts, and the necessities
of their position. No doubt He gives them strength to carry
the cross, fight the good fight, and overcome the world. But
that is not the truth taught in the words before us, and must be
sought in other places. The words before us only mean that
Christ confers the privilege of adoption on all believers, and did
so especiaUy on His first disciples. While their unbelieving
feUow-countrymen were boasting of being cluldren of Abraham,
Christ gave His disciples the far higher privilege of being
children of God.
The Greek word rendered " power " is used 102 times in the
New Testament, and never on one occasion in the sense of
physical, moral, or spiritual strength to do a thing. It is gene
rally translated, " authority, right, power, liberty, jurisdiction."
[To them that believe on His name.] These -words are added to
make clearer, if possible, the character of those who have the
privilege of being sons of God. They are they who receive
Christ and believe on His name. Arrowsmith remarks, " The
word 'name,' iu the Scripture, is often put for person. The
receivers of Christ are said to beUeve ou His name, because the
direct object of their faith is the person of Christ. It is not the
beUeving that Christ died for aU, or for me, or for the elect, or
any such proposition, that saveth. It is believing on Christ.
The person, or name of Christ, is the object of faith."
The expression, "beUeve on His name," ought not to be over
looked. Arrowsmith remarks that there is a known distinction
amongst divines, between beUeving God, that there is such a
Being,— believing God, that what He says is true, — and beUev
ing on God in the way of faith and confidence as our God. And
he observes, most truly, that precisely the same distinction exists
between faith that there is sueh a Saviour as Christ —faith that
what Christ says is true, — and faith of reliance on Christ as our

JOHN, CHAP. I. 23
Saviour, ylelieving on Christ's name is exactly this faith of
reUance, and is the faith that saves and justifies.
13. — ['Which ivere born, &c., &c....of God^ The birth here spoken
of is the new birth, or regeneration, that complete change of
heart and nature which takes place in a man when he becomes
a real Christian. It is a change so great that no other figure
but that of birth can fuUy express it. It is as when a new
being, with new appetites, wants, and desires is brought into
the world. A person born of God is " a new creature, old things
are passed away, behold all things are become new." (2 Cor.
V. 17.)
The persons who beUeve on Christ's name are said to be born
" not of blood, nor of the wiU of the flesh, nor of the will of
man, but of God." The interpretation of this expression which
is usuaUy given by commentators appears to me neither correct
nor seemly. The true meaning of the word.t, I believe, is this.
Believers did not become what they are " by blood," that is by
descent from Abraham or blood connection with godly people.
Grace does not descend from parent to child. — Nor yet did
believers become what they are by the will of the flesh, — that
is by the efforts and exertions of their own natural hearts.
Nature can never change itself. " That which is born of the
flesh is flesh." — Nor yet did believers become what they are by
the win of man, — that is by the acts and deeds of others.
Neither ordained ministers, nor any one else, can confer grace
upon another. Man cannot regenerate hearts. — Believers
become what they are solely and entirely by the grace of God.
It is to God's free grace, preventing, caUing, converting, renew
ing and sanctifying, that they owe their new birth. They are
bom of God, or, as the third chapter says more distinctly,
"born of the Spirit."
The word which we render " blood," in the singular number,
is, in the Greek, plural, " bloods." — This pecuUarity has made
some conjecture that the expression refers to the blood shed in
circumcision and sacrifice, and te.ichcs the inability of these
things to regenerate man. But this idea seems far-fetched and
improbable. The use of the plural number appears to me
intended to exclude all fleshly confidence in any descent or rela
tionship. It was neither the blood of Abraham, or of David, or
of Aaron, or of Judah, or of Levi, which could give grace or
make any one a child of God.
This is the first time the new birth is spoken of by name in
Scripture. Let us not fail to notice how carefully the doctrine
is fenced against errors, and how emphatically we are told what
this new birth does not come from, as well as what it does come
from. It is a striking fact that when St. Peter mentions the

24 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
new birth, he fences it in like manner, (1 Pet. i. 23,) and
when he speaks of baptism " saving " us, he carefuUy adds that
it is " not the putting away the filth of the flesh." (1 Pet. iu.
21.) In the face of aU these cautions, it is curious to observe
the pertinacity with which many overthrow the whole doctrine
of the new birth by the assertion that aU baptized persons are
born again 1
We must be careful that we do not interpret the words
" which were born "as if the new birth was a change which
takes place in a man after he has beUeved in Christ, and is the
next step after faith. Saving faith and regeneration are insepa
rable. The moment that a man reaUy believes in Christ, how
ever feebly, he is born of God. The weakness of his faith may
make him unconscious of the change, just as a new-born infant
knows little or nothing about itself. But where there is faith
there is always new birth, and where there is no faith there is
no regeneration.

JOHN L 14.
14 And the Word was made flesh, ' gotten of the Father,) full of grace
and dwelt among us, (and we beheld and truth.
his glory, the glory as of the only be- 1
The passage of Scripture now before us is very short, if
we measure it by words. But it is very long, if we
measure it by the nature of its contents. The substance
of it is so immensely important that "n^e shall do well to
give it separate and distinct consideration. This single
verse contains more than enough matter for a whole
exposition. The raain truth which this verse teaches is the reality of
our Lord Jesits Christ's incarnation, or being made man,
St. John tells us that "the Word was made flesh, and
dwelt among us."
The plain meaning of these words is, that our divine
Saviour really took human nature upon Him, in order to
save sinners. He really became a man like ourselves in
all things, sin only excepted. Like ourselves, he was born

JOHN, CHAP. I. 25
of a woman, though born in a miraculous manner. Like
Ourselves, He grew from infancy to boyhood, aud from
boyhood to man's estate, both in wisdom and in stature.
(Luke ii. 52.) Like ourselves, he hungered, thirsted, ate,
drank, slept, was wearied, felt pain, wept, rejoiced, mar-
veiled, was moved to anger and compassion. Having be
come flesh, and taken a body. He prayed, read the Scrip
tures, suffered being tempted, and submitted His human
will to the will of God the Father. And finally, in the
same body. He really suffered and shed His blood, really
died, was really buried, really rose again, and really
ascended up into heaven. And yet all this time He was
God as well as man !
This union of two natures in Christ's one Person is
doubtless one of the greatest mysteries of the Christian
religion. It needs to be carefully stated. It is just one
of those great truths which are not meant to be curiously-
pried into, but to be reverently believed. Nowhere, per-
hajDS, shall we find a more wise and judicious statement
than in the second article of the Church of England.
" The Son, which is the Word of the Father, begotten
from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God,
and of one substance with the Father, took man's nature
in the womb of the blessed Virgin of her substance : so
that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say, the God
head and the manhood, were joined together in one Per
son, never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God
and very man." This is a most valuable declaration. This
is " sound speech, which cannot be condemned."
But while we do not pretend to explain the union'of two
natures in our LoM .Tesus Christ's Person, we must not
hesitate to fence the subject with well-defined cautions.
While we state most carefully what we do believe, we must
not shrink from declaring boldly what we do not beUeve.
We must never forget, that though our Lord was God and
2

26 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
man at the same time, the divine and human natures in
Him were never confounded. One nature did not swallow
ftp the other. The two natures remained perfect and dis
tinct. The divinity of Christ was never for a moment laid
aside, although veiled. The manhood of Christ, during
His life-time, was never for a moment unlike our own,
though by union with the Godhead, greatly dignified.
Though perfect God, Christ has always been perfect man
from the first moment of His incarnation. He that is gone
into heaven, and is sitting at the Father's right hand to
intercede for sinners, is man as well as God. Though per
fect man, Christ never ceased to be perfect God. He that
suffered for sin on the cross, and was made sin for us, was
" God manifest in the flesh." Tfie blood with which the
Church was purchased, is called the blood " of God."
(Acts XX. 28.) Though He became " flesh" in the fullest
sense, when He was born of the Virgin Mary, He never at
any period ceased to be the Eternal Word. To say that
He constantly nianifested His divine nature during His
earthly ministry, would, of course, be contrary to plain
facts. To attempt to explain why His Godhead was some
times veiled and at other times unveiled, while He was on
earth, -would be ventiiring on ground which we had better
leave alone. But to say that at any instant of His earthly
ministry He was not fully and entirely God, is nothing less
than heresy.
The cautions just given may seem at first sight needless,
wearisome, and hair-splitting. It is precisely the neglect
of such cautions which ruins many souls. This constant
undivided union of two perfect natures in Christ's Person
is exactly that which gives infinite value to His mediation,
and qualifies Him to be the very Mediator that sinners
need. Our Mediator is One who can sympathize with us
because He is very man. And yet, at the same time, He
is One Who can deal with the Father for us on equal terms

JOHN, CHAP. I. 11
because He is very God. — It is the same union which gives
infinite value to His righteousness, when imputed to be
lievers. It is the righteousness of One who was God as
well as man. — It is the same union which gives infinite
value to the atoning blood which He shed for sinners on
the cross. It is the blood of One who was God as well as
man. — It is the same union which gives infinite value to
His resurrection. When He rose again, as the Head of the
body of believers. He rose not as a mere man, but as God.
— ^Let these things sink deeply into our hearts. The second
Adam is far greater than the first Adam was. The first
Adam was only man, and so he fell. The second Adam
was God as well as man, and so He completely con
quered. Let us leave the subject with feelings of deep gratitude
and thankfulness. It is full of abounding consolation for
all who know Christ by faith, and believe on Him.
Did the Word become flesh ? Then He is One who can
be touched with the feeling of His people's infirmities,
because He has suffered Himself, being tempted. He is
almighty because He is God, and yet He can feel with us,
because He is man.
Did the Word become flesh ? Then He can supply us
with a perfect pattern and example for our daily life.
Had he walked among us as an angel or a spirit, we
could never have copied Him. But having dwelt among
us as a man, we know that the true standard of holiness is
to "walk even as He walked." (1 John u. 6.) He is a
perfect pattern, because He is <5od. But He is also a pat
tern exactly suited to our wants, because He is man.
Finally, did the Word become flesh ? Then let us see
in our mortal bodies a real, true dignity, and not defile
them by sin. Vile and weak as our body may seem, it is a
body which the Eternal Son of God was not ashamed to
take npon Himself, and to take up to heaven. That simple

28 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
fact is a pledge that He will raise our bodies at the last
day, and glorify them together with His own.
Notes. John I. 14.
[And the xoord teas wade flesh.] This sentence means that the
eternal Word of God, the second Person in the Trinity, became
a man, like one of ourselves in all things, sin only excepted.
This He accomplished, by being born of the "Virgin Mary, after
a miraculous manner, through the operation of the Holy Ghost.
And the end for which He became flesh, was that He might
live and die for sinners.
The expression "the Word," shows clearly that "the Word"
who " was with God and was God," must be a Person. It could
not reasonably be said of any one but a Person, that He became
" flesh and dwelt among us." Whether St. John could have
found any other name for the second Person of the Trinity
equally proper, we need not trouble ourselves to inquire. It
certainly would not have been accurately correct to say that
" Jesus was made flesh," because the name Jesus was not given
to our I ord till after His incarnation. Nor yet would it have
been correct to say, " In the beginning was Christ," because, the
name Christ belongs to the times after the fall of man.
This is the last time that John uses this expression, " The
Word," about Christ in his Gospel. From the time of His incar
nation he generally speaks of Him as " Jesus," or " the Lord."
[Was made.] This expression might perhaps have been better
translated " became." At any rate, we must carefully remember
that it does not signify " was created." The Athanasian Creed
says truly, " The Son is of the Father alone, neither made nor
created, but begotten."
[Flesh.] The use of this word, instead of " man," ought not
to be overlooked. It is purposely used in order to show us that
when our Lord became incarnate, He took upon Him nothing
less than our whole nature, consisting of a true body and a
reasonable soul. As Arrowsmith says, " That which was not
taken could not be healed. If Christ had not taken the whole
man, He could not have saved the soul." — It also impUes that
our Lord took upon Him a body Uable to those weaknesses,
fatigues, and pams, which are inseparable from the idea of flesh.
He did not become a man like Adam before the fall with a
nature free from afl infirmity. He became a man Uke 'any one
of Adam's children, with a nature liable to every thing thatfaUen
humanity is liable to, except sin. He was made " flesh " and " all
flesh is grass."— Finally, it teaches that our Lord did not assume

JOHN, CHAP. L 29
the human nature of any one family, or class, or people, but
that nature which is common to all Adam's children, whether
Jews or Gentiles. He came to be a Saviour for " all flesh," and
so was made " flesh."
The subject of this sentence is a deeply mysterious one, but
one about wliich it is most important to have clear views. Next
to the doctrine of the Trinity, there is no doctrine on which
fallen man has built so mony deadly heresies as the incarnation
of Christ. There is unquestionably much about this union of
two natures in one person which we cannot explain, and must
be content to believe. There is much that we cannot under
stand, be it remembered, in the union of body and soul in our
own persons. But there are some points in the subject of
Christ's incarnation which we must hold fast, and never let go.
(o.) In the first place, let us carefully remember, that when
" the Word became flesh," He became so by the union of two
perfect and distinct natures in one Person. The manner of this
union we cannot explain, but the fact we must firmly beUeve.
" Christ," says the Athanasian Creed, " is God and Man ; God of
the substance of the Father, begotten before the world, and man
of the substance of His mother, born in the world ; perfect God
and perfect man. Who, although He be God and man, yet He
is not two but one Christ; one not byconversion of the godhead
into flesh, but by taking of the manhood into God." These
words are very important. The Word was not made flesh by
changing one nature into another, or by laying aside one nature
and taking up another. In all our thoughts about Christ, let us
take care that we do not divide His Person, and that we maintain
steadily that He has two distinct and perfect natures. The old
Latin Une on the subject, quoted by Gomarus, is worth remem
bering. It represents " the Word raade flesh," as saying, " I am
what I was, that is God : — I was not what I am, that is man : —
I am now called both, that is both God and man."
(6.) Secondly, when " the Word became flesh," He did not cease
for a moment to be God. No doubt He was pleased to veil His
divinity and to hide His power, and more especially so at some
seasons. He emptied Himself of external marks of glory aud
was called " the carpenter." But He never laid His divinity
.iside. God cannot cease to be God. It was as God-man that
He lived, suffered, died, and rose again. It is written that God
" has purchased the Church with His own blood." It was the
blood of one who was not man only, but God.
(c.) Thirdly, when " the Word became flesh," He was made
a man in the truth of our nature lil-ce unto us in all things, and
from that hour has never ceased to be man. His humanity was
¦ not a humanity different fi:om-our own, and though now glorified

30 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
is our humanity still. It was perfect man no less than perfect
God, who resisted temptation, fulfilled the law perfectly, endured
the contradiction of sinners, spent nights in prayer, kept His will
in subjection to the Father's wiU, suffered, died, and at length
ascended up to heaven with flesh, bones, and all things apper
taining to man's nature. It is written, that in " aU things it be
hoved Him to be made like unto His brethren." Moreover, He
did not lay aside His humanity when He left the world. He
that ascended up on the mount Olives, and is sitting at the right
hand of God to intercede for believers, is one who is stUl man as
well as God. Our High Priest in heaven is not God only, but
man. Christ's humanity as well as divinity are both in heaven.
One in our nature, our elder Brother, has gone as our Fore
runner to prepare a place for us.
(d.) Lastly, When "the Word, became flesh," He did not
take on Him " peccable flesh." It is written that He was made
in " the likeness of sinful flesh." (Rom. viii. 3.) But we must
not go beyond this. Christ was " made sin f jr us." (2 Cor. 5,
21.) But He " knew no sin," and was holy, harmless, undefiled,
separate from sinners, and without taint of corruption. Satan
found nothing in Him. Christ's human nature was liable to
weakness, but not to sin. The words of the fifteenth Article
must never be forgotten, Christ was " void fi-om sin, both in His
flesh and in His Spirit."
For want of a clear understanding of this union of two natures
in Christ's Person, the heresies which arose in the early Church
were many and great. And yet Arrowsmith points out that no
less than four of these heresies are at once confuted by a right
interpretation of the sentence now before us.
" The Arians hold that Jesus Christ was not true God. This
text calleth Him the Word, and maketh Him a Person in the
Trinity. " The Apollinarians acknowledge Christ to be God, yea, and
man too; but they hold that He took only the body of a man,
not the soul of a man, while His divinity supplied the room of
a soul. We interpret the word 'flesh' for the whole human
nature, both soul and body.
" The Nestorians grant Christ to be both God and man : but
then they say the Godhead made one person, and the manhood
another person. We interpret the words ' was made ' as imply
ing an union, in which Christ assumed not the person of man,
but the nature of man.
"The Eiilychians held but one person in Christ; but then
they confounded the natures. They say the Godhead and man
hood made such a mixture aa to produce a third thing. Here

JOHN, CHAP. I. 31
they also are confuted by the right understanding of the union
between the Word and flesh."
He then goes on to show how the ancient Church met all
these heretics with four adverbs, which briefly and conveniently
defined the union of two natures iu Christ's person. They said
that the divine and human natures when " the Word was made
flesh," were united truly, to oppose the Arians, — perfectly, to
oppose the Apollinarians, — undividedly, to oppose the Nestorians,
— and unmixedly, to oppose the Eutychians.
Those who wish to examine this subject further, wiU do weU
to consult Pearson on the Creed, Dods on the Incarnation of the
Etern.il Word, and Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity, B. v., chap.
51, 52, 53, 54
[Dwelt among ms.] The Greek word rendered dwelt, means
literally " tabernacled," or " dwelt in a tent." The sentence does
not mean that Christ dwelt in His human body as in a tabernacle,
whicli He left when He ascended up to heaven. " Christ," says
Arrowsmith, " continueth now, and shall for ever, as true man
as when He was born of the Virgin Mary. — He so took human
nature as never to lay it down again." The sentence only means
that Christ dwelt among men on earth for thirty-three years.
He was on earth so long conversing among men, that there
could be no doubt of the reality of His incarnation. He did
•not appear for a few minutes, Uke a phantom or ghost. He did
not come down for a brief visit of a few days, but was living
among us in His human body for the duration of a whole gene
ration of men. For thirty-three years He pitched His tent in
Palestine, and was going to and fro among its inhabitants.
Arrowsmith remarks that three sorts of men are described in
the Bible as Uving in tents ; shepherds, sojourners, and soldiers.
He thinks that the phrase here used has reference to the calUng
of all these three, and that it points to Christ's life on earth
being that of a shepherd, a traveller, and a soldier. But it may
be doubted whether this is not a somewhat fanciful idea, how
ever pleasing and true. The Greek,word rendered " dwelt " is only
used in four other places in the New Testament, (Eev. vii. 15 ;
xii. 12 ; xiii. 6 ; xxi. 3,) and in each of them is applied to a
permanent, and not a temporary dweUing.
[ We beheld his glory.] St. John here declares, that although
"the Word was made flesh," he and others beheld from time
to time His glory, and saw manifest proof that He was not
man only, but the " only begotten Son of God."
There is a difference of opinion among commentators as to the
right application of these words. Some think that they apply
to Christ's ascension, which John witnessed, and to aU His mi-

82 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
raculous actions throughout His ministry, in all of which, as it
is said of the miracle of Cana, He " manifested forth his glory,"
and His disciples s:iw it.— Others think that they apply especiaUy
to our Lord's transfiguration, when He put on fur a Uttle season
His glory, in the presence of John, James, and Peter. I am on
the whole incUned to think that this is the true view, and the
more so, because of Peter's words in speaking of the transfigura
tion, (2 Pet. i. 16, 18,) and the words which immediately follow
in the verse we are now considering.
[The glory as of the only begotten of ihe Father.] This sen
tence means " such glory as became and was suitable to one who
is the only begotten Son of God the Father." These words will
hardly apply to Christ's miracles. They seem to confine the glory
which John says "we beheld," to the vision of glory which he
and his t-vvo companions saw when Christ was transfigured, and
they heard the Father saying, " This is my beloved Son."
Lightfoot's paraphrase of this expression is worth reading
though he does not apply the passage to the transfiguration
" We saw His glory as wliat was worthy, as became, the only be
gotten Son of God. He did not glisten in any worldly pomp or
grandeur, according to what the Jewish nation fondly dreamed
their Messiah would do. But He was dressed with the glory of
holiness, grace, truth, and the power of miracles."
We must carefully remember that the adverb "as" in this
place, does not imply compari-,on, or similitude, as if John only
n:teant that the Word's glory was like that of the only begotten
Son of God. Chrysostom says, "The expref-«ion 'as' in this
place does not belon.a- to simi arity or comparison, but to con
firmation and unquestionable definition, as thouph he saiil, we
beheld glory such as it was becoming and likely thiit He should
possess, who is the only begotten and true Son of God and King
of all." He also remarks that it is a common manner of speak
ing, when people nre describing the appearance of a king in
state, to say tliat " he was like a king," meaning only that, lie
wasa real king.
Glassius, in his Philologia, makes the sa-ne comment on the
expression, and quotes as paraUel cases of tho use of the adverb
"as," 2 Pet. i. 3; 1 Pet. i. 19; Philem. 9; Rom. ix. 32; Matt.
xiv. 5; 2 Cor. ui. 18. He thinks it a Hebraism, denoting not
the similitude, but the reality and truth of a thins', and quotes
Psalm oxxii. 3, and Hosea iv. 4, as Old Testament instances.
[Tfie only begotten of tiie Father:] This remarkable expression
describes our Lord's eternal generation, or Sonthip. He is that
Person who alone has been begotten of the Father from al]
etsrnity, and from all eternity has been His beloved Son.

-JOHN, CHAP. I. 33
The phrase is only used five times in the New Testament, and
only in St. John's writings. That God always had a Son appears
in the Old Testament. " What is his son's name," says Agur.
(Prov. XXX. 4.) So also the Father says to Messiah, " 'Thou art
my Son : this day have I begotten thee." (Psal. ii. 7.) But the
Sonship now before us, we must carefully remember, is not to
be datied from any " day." It is the everlasting Sonship of
which John speaks.
The subject is one of those which we must be content to
believe and reverence, but must not attempt to define too nar
rowly. We are taught distinctly in Scripture that in the unity
of the Godhead, there are three Persons of one substance, power,
and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. We
are taught, -with equal distinctness, that " Sonship " describeF
the everlasting relation which exists between the first and
second Persons in the Trinity, and that Christ is the only begot
ten and eternal Son of God. We are taught, -with equal dis-
tinotnes.=!, that the Father loveth the Son, and loved Him before
the foundation of the world. (John xvii. '24.) But here we mast
be content to pause. Our feeble faculties could not comprehend
more if more were told us.
Let us however remember carefully, when we think of Christ
as the only begotten Son of the Father, that we must not attach
the least idea of inferiority to the idea of His Sonship. As the
Athanasian creed says, " The Godhead of the Father, of the Son,
and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the glory equal, the majesty
co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son." And yet
the Father is not the Son, and the Son is not the Father. The
argument of the ancient Arians, that if Christ is the Son of
God, he must necessarily be inferior in dignity to God, and
subsequent in existence to God, is one that will not stand for a
moment. The reply is. simple. . We are not talking of the rela
tionship of mortal beings, but of the relationship between the
Persons of the -Trinity, who are eternal. All analogies and Ulus-
trations drawn from human parents and children are necessarily
defective. As Augustine said, so must we say, " Show me and
explain to me an eternal Father, and I wUl show you and explain
to you an eternal Son." We must beUeve and not try to
explain. Christ's generation, as God, is eternal, — who shall
declare it? He was begotten from everlasting of the Father.
He was always the beloved Son. And yet " He is equal to the
Father as touching his godhead, though inferior to Him as touch
ing his naahhood."
[Full of Grace and Truth.] These words do not belong to
the Father, though they follow His name so closely. They
belong to " the "\Vord." The meaning of them is differently
explained. 9*

84

EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.

Some think that they describe our Lord Jesus Christ's cha
racter, during the time that He was upon the earth, in general
terms. FuU of grace were His lips, and fuU of grace was His
Ufe. He was full of the grace of God, the Spirit dwelling in
Him without measure, full of kindness, love, and favour to man ;
—full of truth in His deeds and words, for in His lips was no
guile, fuU of truth in His preaching concerning God the Father's
love to sinners, and the way of salvation, for He was ever
unfolding in rich abundance all truths that man can need to
know for his soul's good.
Some think that the words describe especially the spiritual
riches that Christ brought into the world, when He became
incarnate, and set up His kingdom. Hejcame full of the gospel
of grace, in contradistinction to the burdensome requirements of
the ceremonial law. He came fuU of truth, of real, true, soUd
comfort, in contradistinction to the types, and figures, and
shadows of the law of Moses. In short the fuU grace of God,
and the full truth about the way of acceptance, were never
clearly seen until the Word became flesh, dwelt among us on
earth, opened the treasure-house, and revealed grace and truth
in His own person.
I decidedly prefer the second of these two views. The first
is truth, but not the truth of the passage. The second appears
to me to harmonize with the 17th verse, which foUows almost
immediately, where the law and the gospel are contrasted, and
we are told that " grace and truth came by Jesus Christ."

JOHN L 15—18.

15 John bare witness of him, and
cried, saying, This was he of whom
I spake, He that cometh after me
is preferred before me : for he was
before me.
16 And of bis fulness have all
we received, and grace for grace.

1'7 For the law was given by
Moses, but grace and truth came
by Jesus Christ.
18 No man hath seen God at
any time ; the only begotten Son,
which is in the bosom of the Father,
he hath declared him.

The passage before us contains three great declarations
about our Lord Jesus Christ. Each of the three is
among the foundation principles of Christianity.
We are taught, firstly, that it is Christ alone xoho sup
plies all the spiritual wants of all believera. ft is written

JOHN, CHAP. L 35
that " of his fulness have we all received, and grace for
grace." There is an infinite fulness iu Jesus Christ. As St. Paul
says, " It pleased the Father that in him should all fulness
dwell." — " In Him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and
knowledge." (Coloss. i. 19; ii. 3.) There is laid up in
Him, as in a treasury, a boimdless supply of all that any
sinner can need, either in time or eternity. The Spirit of
Life is His special gift to the Church, and conveys from
Him, as from a great root, sap and vigour to all the believ
ing branches. He is rich in mercy, grace, wisdom, right
eousness, sanctification, and redemption. Out of Christ's
fulness, all believers in every age of the world, have been
supplied. They did not clearly understand the fountain
from which their supplies flowed, in Old Testament times.
The Old Testament saints only saw Christ afar off, and not
face to face. But from Abel downwards, aU saved souls
have received all they have had from Jesus Christ alone.
Every saint in glory will at last acknowledge that he is
Christ's debtor for all he is. Jesus will prove to have been
all in all.
We are taught, secondly, the vast superiority of Christ
to Moses, and of the Gospel to the Law, It is written that
" the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came
by Jesus Christ."
Moses was employed by God "as a servant," to convey
to Israel the moral and ceremonial law. (Heb. iii. 5.) As
a servant, he was faithful to Him who appointed him, but
he was only a servant. The moral law, which he brought
down from Mount Sinai, was holy, and just, and good.
But it could not justify. It had no healing power. It
could wound, but it could not bind up. It " worked wrath."
(Rom. iv. 15.) It pronounced a curse against any imperfect
obedience. — The ceremonial law, which he was commanded
to impose on Israel, was full of deep meaning and typical

SQ EXPOSITOEY THOU-GHTS.
iustruction. Its ordinances and ceremonies made it an
excellent schoolmaster to guide men tov.'ard Christ. (Gal.
iii. 24.) But the ceremonial law was only a schoolmaster.
It could not make him that kept it perfect, as pertaining
to the conscience. (Heb. ix. 9.) It laid a grievous yoke
on men's hearts, which they were not able to bear. It was
a ministration of death and condemnation. (2 Cor. iii.
7 — 9.) The light which men got from Moses and the law
was at best only starlight compared to noon-day.
Christ, on the other hand, came into the world " as a
Son," with the keys of God's treasury of grace and truth
entirely in His hands. (Heb. iii. 6.) Grace carae by Him,
when He made fully known God's gracious plan of salva
tion, by faith in His own blood, and opened the fountain
of mercy to all the world. — Truth came by Him, when He
fulfilled in His own Person the types of the Old Testament,
and revealed Himself as the true Sacrifice, the true mercy-
seat, and the true Priest. No doubt there was much of
" grace and truth " under the law of Moses. But the
whole of God's grace, and the whole truth about redemp
tion, were never known until Jesus came into the world,
and died for sinners.
We are taught, thirdly, that it is Christ alone xoho has
revealed God tlie Father to man. It is written that "no
man hath seen God at any time : tho only begotten Son,
which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared
him." The eye of mortal man has never beheld God the
Father. No man could bear the sight. Even to Moses
it was said, " Thou canst not see my face : for there
shall no man see me, and live." (Exod. xxxiii. 20.)
Yet all that mortal man is capable of knowing about
God the Father is fully revealed to us by God the Son.
He, who was in the bosom of the Father from .all eternity
has been pleased to take our nature upon Him and to

JOHN, CHAP. I. 3?
exh.ibit to us in the form of man, all that our minds can
comprehend of the Father's perfections. In Christ's words,
and deeds, and life, and death, we learn as much concern
ing God the Father as our feeble minds can at present
bear. His perfect wisdom, — His almighty power, — His
unspeakable love to sinners, — His incomparable holiness, —
His hatred of sin, could never be -epresented to our eyes
more clearly than we see them m Christ's life and death.
In truth, " God was manifest in the flesh," when the Word
took on Him a body. " He was the brightness of the
Father's glory, and the express image of His person."
He says Himself, "I and my Father are one." "He that
hath seen me hath seen the Father." " In Him dwelleth
all tiie fulness of the Godhead bodily." (Coloss. ii. 9.)
These are deep and mysterious things. But they are true.
(1 Tim. iii. 16 ; Heb. i. 3 ; John x. 30 ; xiv. 9.)
And now, after reading this passage, can we ever give
too much honour to Christ? Can we ever think too
highly of Him ? Let us banish the unworthy thought
from our minds for ever. Let us learn to exalt Him
more in our hearts, and to rest more confidingly the whole
weight of our souls in His hands. Men may easily fall
into error about the three Persons in the holy Trinity
if they do not carefully «dhere to the teaching of Scrip
ture. But no man ever errs on the side of giving too
much honour to God the Son. Christ is the meeting-
point between the Trinity and the sinner's soul. "He
that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father
which sent Him." (John v. 23.)
Notes. John I. 15 — 18.
15. — [John bare witness....criedi] The time at which John the
Baptist bore this testimony is not specified. We have not yet
come to the historic part of John's Gospel, properly speaking.
V.'e are still in the i. troductory preface. It seems therelbre
probable, as Lightfoot says, that the sentence before i s describes

88 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS,.
the habitual character of John's testimony to Christ. He was,
throughout his ministry, continually proclaiming Christ's great
ness and superiority to himself, both in nature and dignity.
[Cried.] The Greek word so rendered, impUes a very loud
cry, like that of one making a proclamation. Parkhurst defines
it in this place as " speaking- out very openly."
[He that cometh after me. ..preferred before....was befire me.]
This sentence has caused much discussion and some difference
of opinion. The Greek words Uterally translated would be,
" He that cometh after me has become, or been made, in front
of me, — for he was first of me." I feel no doubt that our EngUsh
version gives the correct meaning of the sentence. — Hammond's
note on the text is very good.
The first " before," signifies before in place, position, or dig
nity. The Qteek adverb so rendered, is used forty-nine times
in the New Testament, but never once in the sense of " before
in point of time or age."
The second " before," signifies before in point of time or ex
istence. " He was existing before me, at the time when I was
not." The expression is certainly remarkable and uncommon,
but there is another exactly like it in this Gospel, " It hated me
before it hated you," where the Uteral rendering would be, " it
hated me first of you."
The sentence " he was before me," is a distinct statement of
Christ's pre-existence. He was born at least six months after
John the Baptist, and was therefore younger in age than John.
Yet John says, '' He was before me. He was existing when I
was born." If he had meant only, that our Lord was a more
honourable person than himself, he would surely have said, " He
is before me."
The greatness of John the Baptist's spiritual knowledge ap
pears in this expression. He understood the doctrine of Christ's
pre-existence. Christians are apt to think far too slightingly
of John the Baptist's attainments, and the depths of his teach
ing. -
IC. — [ Of His fulness liave all we received.] This sentence means,
" all we who believe on Jesus, have received an abundant sup
ply of aU that our souls need out of the full store that resides in
Him for His people. It is from Christ and Christ alone, that all
our spiritual wants have been suppUed."
Watcrland, in his book on the Trinity, caUs particular atten
tion to this expression. He thinks that it was speciaUy used
with a view to the strange doctrines of the Gnostics in general
and the Cerinthians in particular, whose heresies arose before'

JOHN, CHAP. L 89
St. Join's Gospel was written. They seem to have held that
there was a certain fulness or plenitude of the Deity, into which
only certain spiritual men, including themselves, were to be
received, and from which others who were less spiritual, though
they had grace, were to be excluded. " St. John," says Water-
land, " here asserts, that aU Christians, equaUy and indifferently,
all beUevers at large, have received of the plenitude or fulness
of the divine Word, and that not sparingly, but in the largest
measure, even grace upon grace."
Melancthon on this verse, calls particular attention to the
word " all." He observes that it embraces the whole Church of
God, from Adam downwards. AU who have been saved have
received out of Christ's fulness, and all other sources of fulness
are distinctly excluded.
[Grace for grace!] This expression is very peculiar, and has
caused much difference of opinion among commentators.
I. Some think it means " the new grace of the Gospel in
place of or instead of, the old grace of the law." This is the
view of OyrU, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius, Rupertus,
Lyranus, Bucer, Beza, Scaliger, De Dieu, Calovius, Jansenius,
Lampe, and Quesnel.
2. Some think that it means "grace, on account of God's
grace or favour, and specially His favour towards His Son."
This is the vie"w of Zwingle, Mel.incthon, Chemnitius, Flacius,
RoUock, Grotius, Camerarius, Tarnovius, Toletus, Barradius,
Cartwright, and Cornelius S. Lapide.
3. Some think that it means " grace on account of, or in return
for, the grace of faith that is in us." This is the view of Augus
tine, Gomarus, and Beda.
4. Some think that it means " grace answering to, or propor
tioned to, the grace that is in Christ." This is the view of Cal
vin, Leigh, and Bridge.
5. Some think that it means " grace for the propagation of
grace." This is the view of Lightfoot.
6. Some think that it means " accumulated grace, abundant
grace, grace upon grace." This is the view of Schleusner, Winer,
Bucer, PelUcan, Musculus, Gualter, Poole, Nifanius, Pearce,
Burkitt, Doddridge, Bengel, A. Clarke, Tittman, Olshausen,
Barnes, and Alford.
Brentius, BuUinger, Aretius, Jansenius, Hutcheson, Gill, Scott,
and Henry, give several views, but signify their adhesion to no
one in particular.
On tJ-o whole, I am incUned to think that the sixth and last

40 EXPO'SI-rORY THOUGHTS.
is the correct view. I admit fuUy that the Greek preposition,
here rendered "for," is only found in three senses in the Greek
Testament,— viz. : " In the room or place of." (Matt. li. 22.) " In
return for." (Rom. xii. 17.) and " On aoco-unt of" (Acts xii. 23 ;
Ephes. V. 31.) In composition it also signifies " opposition,"
but with that we have nothing to do here. In the present case
I think the meaning is " grace in the place of grace, constant,
fresh, abundant supplies of new grace, to take the place of old
grace, and therefore uufiiiling, abundant grace, continually fiU
ing up and supplying all our need."
IT. — [For tlie law was given, <6c.] This verse seerns intended to
show the inferiority of the law to the Gospel. It does so by
putting in strong contrast the leading characteristics of the Old
and New dispensations, — the religion which began with Moses,
and the religion which began with Christ.
By Moses was given the law, — the moral law, full of high and
holy demands, and of stern threatenings against disobedience ;
— the ceremonial law, full of burdensome sacrifices, ordinances,
and ceremonies, which never healed the worshipper's conscience,
and at best were only shadows of good things to come.
By Christ, on the other hand, came grace and truth, — grace
by the full manifestation of God's plan of salvation, and tho offer
of complete pardon to every soul that beUeves on Jesus, — and
truth, by the unveiled exhibition of Christ Himse'f, as the true
saciifice, the true Priest, and the true atonement for sin.
Augustine, on this verse, says, " The law threatened, not
helped; commanded, not hea'ed; showed, not took away, our
feebleness. But it made ready for the Physician, who was to
come with grace and trulh."
18. — [No man hath seen Ood, (fie.] This verse seems intended to
show the infinite personal superiority of Christ to Moses, or, to
any other suint that ever lived.
No man hath ever seen God the Father ; neither Abraham nor
Moses, nor Joshua, nor Diivid, nor Isaiah, nor Daniel. AU
these, however holy and good men, were still only men, and
quite incapable of beholding God face to face, from very -(veak-
ness. What they knew of God Ihe Father, they knew only by
report, Or by special revelation, vouchsafed to them fiomtimeto
time. They were but servants, and " The servant knoweth not
what his lord doeth." (John xv. 15.)
Christ on the other hand, is the only begotten Son, which is
in the bosom of the Father. He is one who is most intimately
united f om all eternity to God the Father, and is equal to Him
in all thinga He, during the time of His earthly ministry here
fully showed to man rdl thai: man can bear to know concernincJ

JOHN, CHAP. I. 41
His Father. He has revealed His Fathei-'s wisdom, and holines-,
and compassion, and power, and hatred of sin, and love of s'n-
ners, in the fullest possible way. He has brought into clear
light the great mystery how God the Faiher can be just, and
yet justify the ungodly. The knowledge of the Father which a
man derived from the teaching of Moses, is as different from that
derived from the teaching of Christ, as twilight is different from
noon-day. We must carefully remember that none of the appearances of
God to man, described in the Old Testament, were the appear
ances of God the Father. He whom Abraham, and Jacob, and
Moses, and Joshua, and Isaiah, and Daniel saw, was not the
First Person in the Trinity, but the Second.
The speculations of some commentators on the sentence now
before us, as to whether any created being, angel or spirit, has
ever seen God the Father, are, to say the least, unprofitable.
The sentence before us speaks of man, being written for man's
use. The expression, "Which is in the bosom of the Father," is
doubtless a figurative one, mercifully accommodated to man's
capacity. As one who lies in the bosom of another is fairly sup
posed to be most intimate with him, to know all his secrets, and
possess .nil his affections, so is it, we are to understand, in the
union of the Father and the Son. It is more close than man's
mind can conceive.
The Greek word rendered " declared," means Uterally, " hath
expounded." It is the root of the words, which are well known
among Uterary students of the Bible, " exegesis and exegetical."
The idea is that of giving a fuU and particular explanation.
(Acts XV. 14.) Whether the " Declaring of God the Father,"
here described, is to be confined to Christ's oral teaching about
the Father, or whether it means also that Christ has in His
Person given a visible representation of many of the Father's
attributes, is a doubtful point. Perhaps both ideas are included
in the expression.
In leaving this passage, I must say something about the dis
puted question, To -whom do tho three verses beginning, " And
of his fulness," belong? Are they the words of John the Bap-
t'st. and a part of his testmony ? Or are they the words of
John the Gospel-wiiter, and an explanatory comment of his,
such as we occasionally find in his Gospel? — There is something
to be said on both sides.
(a.) Some think that these three verses were spoken by John
the Baptist, because of the awkwardness and abruptness with

42 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
which his testimony ends upon the other theory, — ^because they
run on harmoniously with the fifteenth verse, — and because
there is nothing in tliem which we might not reasonably expect
John the Baptist to say.
This is the Opinion of Origen, Athanasius, BasU, Cyprian,
Augustine, Theophylact, Rupertus, Melancthon, Calvin, Zwingle,
Erasmus, Chemnitius, Gualter, Musculus, Bucer, Flacius, Bul
linger, Pellican, Toletus, Gomarus, Nifanius, Eollock, Poole,
Burkitt, Hutcheson, Bengel, and Cartwright.
(i.) Others think, that the three verses are the comment of
John the Gospel-writer, arising out of John's testimony about
Christ's pre-existence, and out of the expression, Grace and
truth, in the fourteenth verse. — They regard the verses as an
exposition of the expression, "FuU of grace and truth." — They
question whether the language is such as would have been used
by John the Baptist, — whether he would have said "aU we,"
after just saying " me," — whether he would have used the
word "fulness," — whether he would, at so early a period, have
contrasted the reUgion of Moses and of Christ, — and whether
he would have so openly declared Christ to be the only begotten
Son, which is in the bosom of the Father. — Finally, they think
that if these were John the Baptist's words, the Gospel would
not have begun again in the nineteenth verse, " This is the
record of John."
This is the opinion of Cyril, Chrysostom, Euthymius, Beda,
Lyranus, Brentius, Beza, Ferus, Grotius, Aretius, Barradius,
Maldonatus, Cornelius &, Lapide, Jansenius, Lightfoot, Arrow-
smith, Gill, Doddridge, Lampe, Pearce, Henry, Tittman, A.
Clarke, Barnes, Olshausen, Alford, and Wordsworth, — Baxter
and Scott decline any decided opinion on the point, and Whitby
says nothing about it.
The arguments on either side are so nicely balanced, and the
names on either side are so weighty, that I venture an opinion
with much diffidence. But on the whole, I am incUned to think
that the three verses are not the words of John the Baptist, but
of John the Evangelist.— The remarkable style of the first eight
een verses of this chapter makes the abruptness and brevity of
the testimony which John the Baptist bears, upon this theory,
appear to me not strange. — And the connection between the
three verses, and the words " fuU of grace and truth" in the
fourteenth verse,_appears to me much more marked and d'stinot,
than the conneolion between John's testimony and the words
" of his fulness all we have received."
Happily Ihe point is one which involves no serious question
and is therefore one on which Christians may be content to
differ, if they cannot convince one another.

JOHN, CHAP. I,

48

JOHN L 19—23.

24 And they which were sent
were of the Pharisees.
25 Aud they asked him, and said
unto him. Why baptizest thou then,
if thou be not that Christ, nor EUas,
neither that prophet ?
26 John answered them saying,
I baptize -with water: but there
standeth one among you, whom ye
know not ;
21 He it is, who coming after
me is preferred before me, whose
shoe's latchet I am not worthy to
unloose. 28 These things were done in
Bethabara beyond Jordan, where
John was baptizing.

19 And this is the record of
John, when the Jews sent Priests
and Levites from Jerusalem to ask
him, "Who art thou ?
20 And he confessed, and de
nied not ; but confessed, I am not
the Christ.
21 And they asked Mm, "What
then? Art thou EUas? And he
saith, I am not. Art thou that
prophet ? And he answered. No.
22 Theu said they unto him. Who
art thou? that we may give an
answer to them that sent us. 'What
sayest thou of thyself?
23 He said, I am the voice of
one crying in the -wilderness, Make
straight the way of the Lord, as
said the prophet Esaias.
The verses we have now read begin the properly histori
cal part of St. John's Gospel. Hitherto we have been
reading deep and weighty statements about Christ's divine
nature, incarnation, and dignity. Now we come to the
plain narrative of the days of Christ's earthly ministry, and
the plain story of Christ's doings and sayings among men.
And here, like the other Gospel-writers, St. John begins at
once with " the record " or testimony of John the Baptist.
(Matt. iii. I ; Mark i. 2 ; Luke iii. 2.)
We have, for one thing, in these verses, an instructive
example of true humility. That example is supplied by
John the Baptist himself.
John the Baptist was an eminent saint of God. There
are few names which stand higher than his in the Bible
calendar of great and good men. The Lord Jesus Himself
declared that " Among them that are born of woman there
hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist." (Matt.
xi. II.) The Lord Jesus Himself declared that he was " a
burning and a shining light." (John v. 35.) Yet here in

44 ESPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
this p.assage we see this eminent saint lowly, self abased,
aud full of humility. He puts away from himself the
honour which the Jews from Jerusalem were ready to pay
him. He declines all flattering titles. He speaks of him
self as nothing more than the " voice of one crying in the
wilderness," and as one who " baptized with water." He
proclaims loudly that there is One standing among the
Jews far greater than himself. One whose shoe-latchet he
is not worthy to unloose. He claims honour not for him
self but for Christ. To exalt Christ was his mission, and
to that mission he steadfastly adheres.
The greatest saints of God in every age of the Church
have always been men of John the Baptist's spirit. In
gifts, and knowledge, and general character they have
often difiered wndely. But in one respect they have
always been alike ; — they have been " clothed with hu
mility." (1 Pet. V. 5.) They have not sought their own
honour. They have thought little of themselves. They
have been ever -willing to decrease if Christ might only
increase, to be nothing if Christ might be all. And here
has been the secret of the honour God has put upon them.
" He that humbleth himself shall be exalted." (Luke xiv. 11.)
If we profess to have any real Christianity, let us strive
to be of John the Baptist's spirit. Let us study humility.
This is the grace with which .ill must begin, who would be
saved. We have no true religion about us, until we cast
away our high thoughts, and feel ourselves sinners. — This
is the grace which all saints may follow after, and which
none have any excuse for neglecting. All God's children
have not gifts, or money, or time to work, or a wide sphere
of usefulness ; but all may be humble. — This is the grace,
above all, which will appear most beautiful in our latter
end. Never shall we feel the need of humility so deeply,
as when we lie on our deathbeds, and stand before the
judgment-seat of Christ. Our. whole lives will then appear

JOHN, CHAP. I. 45
a long catalogue of imperfections, ourselves nothing, and
Chiist all.
We have, for another thing, in these verses, a mournful
example of the blindness of unconverted men. That ex
ample is supplied by the state of the Jews who came to
question John the Baptist.
These Jews professed to be waiting for the appearance
of Messiah. Like all the Pharisees they prided themselves
on being children of Abraham, and possessors of the cove
nants. They rested in the law, and made their boast of
God. They professed to know God's will, and to believe
God's promises. They were confident that they themselves
were guides of the blind, and lights of them that sat in
darkness. (Rom. ii. 17 — 19.) And yet at this very
moment their souls were utterly in the dark. " There was
standing among them," as John the Baptist told them,
" One whom they knew not." Christ Himself, the promis
ed Messiah, was in the midst of them, aud yet they neither
knew Him, nor saw Him, nor received Him, nor acknow
ledged Him, nor believed Him. And worse than this, the
vast majority of them never would know Him ! The
words of John the Baptist are a prophetic description of a
state of things which lasted during the whole of our Lord's
earthly ministry, Christ " stood among the Jews," and
yet the Jews knew Him not, and the greater part of them
died in their sins.
It is a solemn thought that John the Baptist's words in
this place apply strictly to thousands in the present day.
Christ is still standing among many who neither see, nor
know, nor believe. Christ is passing by in many a parish
and many a congregation, and the vast majority have
neither an eye to see Him, nor an ear to hear Him. The
spirit of slumber seems poured out upon them. Money,
and pleasure, and the world they know ; but tbij know
not Christ. The kina;dom of God is close to thera ; but

46 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
they sleep. Salvation is within their reach ; but they sleep
Mercy, grace, peace, heaven, eternal life, are so nigh that
they might touch them; and yet they sleep. "Christ
standeth among them ami they know him not." These are
sorrowful things to write down. But every faithful minis
ter of Christ can testify, like John the Baptist, that they
are true.
What are we doing ourselves ? This, after all, is the
great question that concerns us. Do we know the extent
of our religious privileges in this country, and in these
times ? Are we aware that Christ is going to and fro in
our land, inviting souls to join Him and to be His disciples ?
Do we know that the time is short and that the door of
mercy will soon be closed for evermore ? Do we know
that Christ rejected will soon be Christ withdrawn ? —
Happy are they who can give a good account of these
inquiries and who " know the day of their visitation !"
(Luke xix. 44.) It will be better at the last day never to
have been born, than to have had Christ " standing among
us" and not to have known Him.
Notes. John I. 19 — 28.
19. — [This is the record.] The Greek word translated "record," is
the same that is rendered " witness" in the 7th verse. The sen
tence means, "this is the testimony that John bore."
[When.] This word raises the question, "At what time was
this testimony of John borne ?" It appears to have been after
our Lord Jesus Christ's baptism, and at the end of Bis forty
days' temptation in the wUdemess. The 29th verse teUs us, that
" the next day John seeth Jgsus coming to him." It is worthy
of notice that nowhere in the Gospels do we find "days" so
carefully marked, as in that portion of the first chapter of St.
John, which we have now begun.
[The Jews.] This expression is remarkable, as peculiar to St.
John's Gospel. He generaUy speaks of our Lord's enemies and
questioners, as "the Jews." It seems to indicate that St John
did not write his Gospel in Palestine or at Jerusalem and that
it was written especiaUy for the Gentile Christians' scattered
over tho world, and much later than the other three Gospels

JOHN, CHAP. I. 47
[Sent Priests and Levites....Jerusalem.] These words show that
those who questioned John the Baptist on this occasion, were a
formal deputation, sent with authority from the Sanhedrim, or
ecclesiastical council of the Jews, to inquire about John's pro
ceedings, and to report what he taught, and whom he gave him
self out to be.
Words-worth remarks, that "More honour was pa'd by the
Jews to John than to Christ, both in the persons sent, and in
the place from which they were sent. They esteemed John for
his sacerdotal lineage." 'When Christ appeared, they caUed Him
the Carpenter's Son. Our Lord refers to this great respect at
first shown to John, when He says, "ye were wiUing for a
season to rejoice in his Ught." (John v. 33.)
[To asic him, Who art thou?] We can hardly suppose that
these Priests and Levites were ignorant that John was the son
of a priest, Zacharias, and therefore a Levite himself. Their
inquiry seems to refer to John's otfice. " What did he profess to
be ? Did he assume to be the Messiah ? Did he claim to be a
prophet? What reason could he assign for his having taken up
his remarkable position as a preacher and abaptizer at a distance
from Jerusalem ? What account could he give of himself and
his ministry ?"
Two things are plainly taught in this verse. One is, the great
sensation which John the Baptist's ministry caused throughout
Palestine. He attracted so much notice, and such crowds fol
lowed him, that the Sanhedrim felt it necessary to inquire about
him. — The other is, the state of expectation in which the minds
bf the Jews were at this particular season. Partly from the
seventy weeks of Daniel having expired, partly from the sceptre
having practically departed from Judah, there was evidently an
expectation that some remarkable person was about to appear.
— As to the sort of person the Jews expected, it is plain that
they only looked for a temporal King, who would make them
once more an independent nation. They had no idea of a spiri
tual Saviour from sin. But as to the fact that this vague expecta
tion existed throughout the East at this particular time, we have
the direct testimony of Latin historians. The extraordinary
ministry of John the Baptist, at once suggested the idea tp the
Jews at Jerusalem, that he might possibly be the expected
Redeemer. Therefore they sent to ask, "Who art thou? Art
thou the long expected King ? "
20. — [He confessed....denied not....confessed, &c.] This is a peculiar
form of speech, implying a very positive, unmistakeable, empha
tic asseveration. It gives the idea of a man shrinking with holy
indignation from the very thought of being regarded as the
Christ ; — " Pain me not by suggesting that such an one as I can
be the Christ of God. I am one far inferior to Him."

48 EXl'OSITOEY THOUGHTS.
Bengel says on this verse, " Whilst John denied himself, he
did not deny Christ." — Luther makes some exceUent remarks on
the strong temptation which was here put in John's way, to take
honour to himself, and the humility and faith which he showed
in overcoming it.
21. — [Art thou Elias?] This question was not an absurd and
unnatural one, as some commentators have thought fit to say.
It was based upon that prophecy of Malachi, which speaks of
God "sending Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible
day of the Lord." (Mai. iv. 5.) The manner, dress, and ministry
of John the Baptist, as well as his appearing in the wilderness,
constituted a great simUarity between him and Elijah, and sug
gested the idea that John might possibly be Elijah. " If this
man," thought the Priests and Levites, " is not the Christ, per
haps he is his forerunner, the prophet Elijah."
[And he saith, I am not.] This answer of John's deserves
particular notice, and involves a grave difiiculty. How could
John say, " I am not Elias," when Christ says distinctly in ano
ther place, "This is Elias." How shaU we reconcile tiese two
statements ? — To me it seems impossible to explain John's words,
except on the simple theory, that there are two comings of
Elijah the prophet. The first was only a coming in spirit and
in power, but not a literal coming. The second will be a literal
and real appearance on earth of him whom Elisha saw taken up
into heaven. The first coming took place at Christ's first advent,
and was fulfilled by John the Baptist going before Messiah's face
in the spirit and power of Elijah. The second coming of Elijah
wiU take place at the second advent of Jesus Christ, and wiU be
fulfiUed by Elijah himself once more coming as a prophet to the
tribes of Israel.
It is of this second, future, literal coming of Elias that John
speaks in this place. When he says, " I am not Elias," he means,
" I am not that Elijah you mean, who was taken up to heaven
900 years ago. The coming of that Elijah is yet a future thing.
I am the forerunner of the first advent in humiUation, not of ihe
second advent in glory. I am not the herald of Christ coming
to reign, as Elijah will be one day, but the herald of Christ com
ing to suffer on the cross. I am not come to prepare the way
for a conquering Kinsr, such as you fondly expect, but for a meek
and lowly Saviour, whose great work is to bear our tins and to
die. I am not the Elias you expect."
In confirmation of this view, our Lnr/"s remarkable words in
another Gospel, ought to be carefully studied. He says distinctly
"Elias truly shall first c. me, and rest ,re aU things," (Ma't. xvii.
II.) And yet He adds in the same breath, " I say unto you
that Elias.is cume already," that is, "He is come, in a certain

49
sense, by John the Baptist going before my face in the spirit and
power of EUas." Iu short, our Lord says at the same time,
"Elias sbaU come," and "Elias is comel" — To me His words
seem a plain proof of the theory I am here maintaining, that
there are two comings of EUas. In spirit EUas came, when John
the Baptist came, a man Uke to EUas in mind and habits. But
in the flesh EUas has not yet come, and is yet to appear. And
it was in the view of this future, literal coming, that John the
Baptist said, " I am not Elias." — He knew that the Jews were
thinking of the times of Messiah's glory, and of the literal com
ing of Elijah, which would usher in those times. Therefore he
says, " I am not the Eias you mean. I belong to a different
dispensation." The other view, which is undoubtedly ma'ntained by the vast
majority of commentators, appears to me surrounded with insu
perable difficulties. According to them, there never was to be
more than one fulfilment of Malachi's prophecy about EUas. It
was to be fulfiUed by John the Baptist ; and when he appeared,
it had received its full accompUshment. How John the Baptist's
answer in this place can be satisfactorUy explained, according to
this theory, I am quite unable to see. The Jews ask him plainly,
whether he is Elias, that is, whether he is the person who is to
fulfil Malaclii's prophecy. This, at any rate, was evidently the
idea in their minds. He answers distinctly that he is not. And
yet according to the theory against which I contend, he was
Elias, and he ought to have repUed, " I am." In short, he
appears to say that which is not true I — There never was to be
eny one after him, who was to fulfil Malachi's prophecy, and yet
he declares in effect that he does not fulfil it, by saying that ho
is not EUas !
About the future literal coming of Elijah the prophet, when
the Jews wiU at last see a living person, who will say, " I am
Elias," this is not the place to speak. 'Whether or not he wiU
minister to any but the Jews, — whether or not he wiU prove
one of the two witnesses spoken of in Revelation, (Rev. xi. 3,)
are interesting and disputed questions. I will only remark, that
the subject deserves far more attention than it ordinarily receives.
The foUowing quotations from the Fathers will show that the
opinion I have expressed is not a modem one :
Chrysostom, on Matt. xvii. 10, says, " As there are two com
ings of Christ, — first, to suffer, — secondly, to judge, so there are
two comings of Elias ; first of John before Christ's first coming,
who is called EUas, because he came in the manner and spirit
of Elias ; secondly, of the person of Elijah, the Tishbite, before
Christ's second coming." — Jerome and Theophylact say just tho
same. 3

50 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
Gregory, quoted by Mayer, says, " Whereas John denitth him-
self to be Elias, and Christ after affirmeth it, there is no contra
diction. There is a double coming of Elias. The one is in spirit,
before Christ's coming to redeem ; the other in person, before
Christ's coming to judgment. According to the first, Christ's
Buying is true, ' This is Elias.' According to the second, John's
speech is true, ' I am not.' This was the fittest answer to men
asking in a carnal sense."
Augustine says, " "What John was to the first advent. EUas
wiU be to the second advent. As there are two advents, sj there
are two heralds."
[Art thou that prophet ?] There are two views of this ques
tion. Some think, as Augustine and Gregory, that the words
should be as our marginal reading has them, " Art thou a pro
phet ?" Others think, as Cyril and Chrysostom, that the ques
tion referred to " the prophet," of whom Moses foretold that he
would come. (Dent, xviii. 15.) I decidedly prefer the latter
view. It seems very improbable that John the Baptist would
entirely deny that he was a prophet. — Besides this, it seems not
unreasonable that the Jews would ask whether he was " the
great prophet foretold by Moses." And to this question, John
answers most truly, that he was not. — It admits of doubt, whe
ther the Jews who questioned him, clearly saw that the " pro
phet like unto Moses," and the " Messiah," were to be one and
the same. It rather looks as if they thought " Christ " and " the
prophet " were two different persons.
Lightfoot thinks that t'le question refers to a common expec
tation among the Jews, that the prophets were to rise again at
the coming of Messiah, and that John's questioners meant, "Art
thou one of the prophets raised from the dead ?" This supersti
tious notion explains the words of the disciples in Xuke, " Others
say that one of the old prophets is risen again." (Luke ix. 19.)
But the Greek article in the words before us, seems to me too
strong to be rendered " a prophet."
22. — [An answer to them that sent ms.] This expression confirms the
opinion already given, about the character of those who ques
tioned John. They were not idle inquirers, but a formal depu
tation sent down from the Sanhedrim at Jerusalem, with a com
mission to find out who John was, and to make a report of what
they discovered.
2Z.—[He said, I am the voice, &c.] John the Baptist's account of
himself in this verse, consists of a reference to Scripture. He
reminds the Priests and Levites who wanted to know who he
was, of Isaiah's prophecy concerning the times of the Messiah.
(Isaiah xl. 3.) They would there find Isaiah saying, with the
abruptness of an inspired prophet, and speaking as if he saw

51
what he was describing, " The voice of Him that crieth in the
wilderness!" That means, "I hear in spirit, as I look forward
to Messiah's time, a man crying in a wilderness, prepare ye the
way of the Lord." — " That prophecy," says John the Baptist,
"is this day fulfiUed in me. I am the person whom Isaiah saw
and heard in vision. I am come to prepare the way for Mes
siah, Uke a man going before a King in a desert country, to pre
pare a road for his master. I am come to make ready the barren
hearts of the Jewish nation for Christ's fiist advent, and the
kingdom of God. I am only a voice. I do not come to work
miracles. I do not want disciples to follow me, but my master.
The object of my mission is to be a herald, a crier, a warning
voice to my fellow-countrymen, so that when my master begins
His ministry they may not be found unprepared."
[The wilderness.] The common view of this expression is,
that it refers to John the Baptist's ministry having begun in the
wilderness of Judaea. I rather doubt the correctness of this idea.
The whole quotation is undeniably figurative. The prophet com
pares Messiah's forerunner to one preparing a road for a King
through a desert or uninhabited country. The " way " or road,
is unquestionably figurative, and the straightness of the way too.
No one supposes that Isaiah meant that John the Baptist was
UteraUy to make a road. But if the " way " is figurative, the
country through which it is made must surely be figurative too.
I therefore think that the wilderness is a prophetical and figu
rative description of the spiritual barrenness of Israel, when the
Messiah's forerunner began his ministry. At the same time,
I fully admit that John's retired and ascetic habits and his
residence in the wUderness, form a remarkable coincidence with
the text.
The expression " voice," has often been remarked as a beauti
ful iUustration of the general character of John's ministry. He
was eminently a humble man. He was one who desired to be
' heard, and to awaken attention by the sound of his testimony,
but not to be seen or visibly honoured.
2i..—[And they....sent....Pharisees.] The object of this verso is
somewhat doubtful. Some think that it refers to the verse pre
ceding, -which contains a quotation from Isaiah. They which
were S'?nt, being Pharisees, and not Sadducees or Herodians,
should have seen and admitted the Scriptural character of John's
mission. — Some think, as Bengel, that it refers to the following
verse, in which a question was raised about baptism. They
which were sent, being Pharisees, were specially strict about
ceremonies, ordinances, and forms. Therefore they were not
satisfied with a reference to Scripture. They asked John's
authority for baptizing. Some think that it refers generally to
the notorious enmity and disUke with which the Pharisees

52 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
regarded John the Baptist aU through his ministry. Our Lord
says in another place, " They rejected the counsel of God, not
being baptized by him." (Luke vii. 30.) The text before ua
would then mean, that they which asked aU these questions,
asked them with a thoroughly unfriendly spirit, and with no
real desire to learn God's trath, because they were Pharisees.
25. — [ Why baptizest thou....if tliou bl not, dbci] This verse evidently
implies that John's questioners expt cted the Messiah, or his fore
runner, to baptize whenever he apptaretl. It is not unUkely, as
Lightfoot says, that the idea arose from the text in Ezekiel, de
scribing Messiah's time, "Then will I sprinkle clean water upon
you, and ye shaU be clean," &o. (Ezek. xxxvi. 24.)
Luther thinks, that this verse shows that the questioners who
came to John, now changed their tone. Hitherto they had
flattered. Now they began to threaten.
One thing is very clear from this verse. The Jews were not
unacquainted with baptism as a religious ordinance. It was
one of the ceremonies, according to Lightfoot, by which proselytes
were admitted into the Jewish Church. Moreover it is worthy
of notice, that when proselytes were so admitted, their chUdreu
were baptized together with them. It was not therefore the fact
of John baptizing, which the Pharisees here caUed in question,
but his authority for administering baptism.
2C. — [/ baptize witli water ; but dec] The answer of John the
Baptist here reported is very elliptical, and the full meaning of
what he said must be supplied fTom other places. He seems
to say, "I do not baptize by my o-wn authority, but by a com
mission fron One far higher than either you or I. I only
baptize with water ; and I do not do it to make disciples for my
self, but for my master. I form no party. I ask no man to foUow
me. I teU aU whom I baptize to believe on that Mighty One who is
coming after me. I am only the servant of One far greater than
myself, who is even now standing among you, if you had eyes to
see him. He is one so much above me in nature and dignity,
that I am not worthy to be his humblest servant. He can
baptize hearts, and wiU fulfil the promises about Messiah, to
which you are vaguely referring. In the mean time I only
baptize with water all those who profess repentance and wiUing-
ness to receive my master. — I baptize for another .and not for
myself." [There standeth one among you.] I doubt whether these wor Is
Uterally mean, " There is standing in the crowd of you m f
hearers." I prefer the sense, " there is already living and abiding
among you in this land of Judaea one greater than I." I think
this the sense because of the words in the 29th verse " John
eeeth Jesus coming to him," which seem to imply tliat he was

JOHN, CHAP. I. 53
not with him the previous day. — The thought seems parallel to
that contained in the words, " The kingdom of God cometh
not with observation." — " The messenger of God cometh sud
denly to his temple." (Mai. iii. 1 ; Luke xvii. 20.) AU serve to
point to the same truth, viz. — that when Messiah came the first
time, He came quietly, without noise, without display, without
the ration of the Jews knowing it, so that he "stood among
them," and yet they were not aware of His presence.
The Greek word rendered " standeth," is in the perfect tense,
and would be UteraUy rendered, " there hath stood," that is,
''hath stood for some little time, and is still standing." The
Messiah has come and is present. Bengel renders it, "hath
taken his stand."
The view I have maintained of the meaning of the word
" standeth," is held by Parkhurst, who defines it as " being or
Uving," and quotes John vi. 22, as a paraUel instance. Pearce
takes the same view, and quotes Acts xxvi. 22. Jansenius
renders it, "has conversed among you, as when he sat among
the doctors" in the temple. Aretius renders it, " He is present
in the flesh, and walking in Judaea."
[ Te know not] This seems to mean, not only that the Jews
knew not Jesus the Messiah by sight, but that they had no
spiritual knowledge of him, and of the true nature of his office,
as the Saviour of sinners. — " Ye look for a conquering, reigning
Messiah. Te know not the suffering Messiah, who came to be
cut off, and to be crucified for sinners."
Bengel remarks, that John is here specially " addressing
inhabitants of Jerusalem, who had not been present at the
baptism of Jesus. Aud he whets their desires, that they may be
anxious to become acquainted with him."
27. — [Coming after.. ..preferred before.] The remarks made on the
15th verse apply fully to this expression. John declares, that
though his master, in point of time, began his ministry after
him, in point of dignity he was far above him. To exalt Christ,
and abase himself, seem ideas never long out of John's mind.
[Shoe's latchd....worthy to unloose.] This is evidently a pro
verbial expression. " I am so inferior to Him that came after
me, that in comparison with him, I am Uke the humblest
servant compared to his master." To be not fit to carry a
person's shoes, in our times, is a well-known proverb, describing
inferiority.
28. — [These things....done  in Bethabara!] In hot countries Uke
Palestine, it was evidently important for John the Baptist to be
near a supply of water, suited to the baptism of the multitudes
who came to him. If Beth-barah, spoken of in Gideon's history

54

EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.

is the same place, it is worthy of notice that it is specially
mentioned as near " waters." (Judges vU. 24.)
The name of the place ought always to be dear to the hearts
of Christians. It is the place where the first disciples of Jesus
were made, and the foundation of the Christian church was laid.
It was here, " the next day," that Jesus was publicly proclaimed
as the "Lamb of God." It was here, "the day after," that
Andrew .and another disciple followed Jesus. Here then the
Church of Christ, properly so called, began.
In leaving this passage, let us remember that John the
Baptist's ministry left the Jews entirely without excuse, when
afterwards they refused to believe on Christ. They could never
plead that our Lord's ministry came on them unawares and
took them by surprise. The whole nation dwelling in Pales
tine, from the great ecclesiastical council down to the humblest
classes, were evidently aroused to a state of attention by John's
doings.

JOHN L 29—34.

29 Tho next day John seeth Jesus
coming unto him, and saith. Behold
the Lamb of God, which taketh away
the sin of the world.
3* This is he of whom I said. After
mo cometh a man which is preferred
before me : for he was before me.
31 And I knew him not: but that
he should be made manifest to Israel,
therefore am I come baptizing with
water. 32 And John bare record, saying.

I saw the Spirit descending from
heaven Uke a dove, and it abode upon
him. 33 And I knew him not : but he
that sent me to baptize -with water,
the same said unto me. Upon whom
thou shalt see the Spirit descending,
and remaining ou him, the same is
he which baptizeth -with the Holy
Ghost. 3i And I saw, and bare record
that this is the Son of God.

This passage cont.ains a verse which ought to be printed
in great letters in the memory of every reader of the
Bible. All the stars iu heaven are bright and beautiful,
and yet one star exceedeth another star in glory. So also
all texts of Scripture are inspired and profitable, and yet
some texts are richer than others. Of such texts the first
verse before us is prcemine'itly one. Never w^as there a
fuller testimony borne to Christ upon earth, than that
which is here borne by John the Baptist.

JOHN, CHAP. I. 55
Let us notice, firstly, in this passage, the peculiar name
which John the Baptist gives to Christ. He calls Him
"The Lamb of God."
This name did not merely mean, as some have supposed,
that Christ was meek and gentle as a lamb. This would
be truth no doubt, but only a very small portion of the
truth. There are greater things here than this I It
meant that Christ was the great sacrifice for sin, who
was come to make atonement for transgression by His
own death upon the cross. He was the true Lamb which
Abraham told Isaac at Moriah God would provide. (Gen.
xxii. 8.) He was the true Lamb to which every morning
and evening sacrifice in the temple had daily pointed. He
was the Lamb of which Isaiah had prophesied, that He
would be " brought to the slaughter." (Isaiah liii. 1.)
He was the true Lamb of which the passover lamb in
Egypt had been a vivid type. In short, He was the great
propitiation for sin which God had covenanted from all
eternity to send into the world. He was God's Lamb.
Let us take heed that in all our thoughts of Christ, we
first think of Him as John the Baptist here represents
Him. Let us serve him faithfully as our Master. Let
us obey Him loyally as our King. Let us study His
teaching as our Prophet. Let us walk diligently after
Him as our Example. Let us look anxiously for Him as
our coming Redeemer of body as well as soul. But above
all, let us prize Him as our sacrifice, and rest our whole
weight on His death as an atonement for sin. Let His
blood be more precious in our eyes every year we live.
Whatever else we glory in about Christ, let us glory
above all things in His cross. This is the corner-stone,
this is the citadel, this is the rule of true Christian
theology. We know nothing rightly about Christ, until
we see him with John the Baptist's eyes, nnd can rejoice
in Him as " the Lamb that was slain."

56 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Let US notice, secondly, in this passage, the peculiar work
whicli John the IBaptist describes Christ as doing. He
says that " he taketh away the sin of the world."
Christ is a Saviour. He did not come on earth to be a
conqueror, or a philosopher, or a mere teacher of morality.
He came to save sinners. He came to do that which man
could never do for himself, — to do that which money and
learning can never obtain, — to do that which is essential to
man's real happiness, — He came to " take away sin."
Christ is a complete Saviour. He " taketh away sin."
He did not merely make vague proclamations of pardon,
mercy, and forgiveness. He " took" our sins upon Him
self, and carried them away. He allowed them to be laid
upon Himself, and " bore them in His own body on the
tree." (I Pet. ii. 24.) The sins of every one that believes
on Jesus are made as though they had never been sinned
at all. The Lamb of God has taken them clean away.
Christ is an almighty Saviour, and a Saviour for all man
kind. He " taketh away the sin of the world." He did
not die for the Jews only, but for the Gentile as well as the
Jew. He did not suSer for a few persons only, but for aU
mankind. The payment that He made on the cross was
more than enough to make satisfaction for the debts of all.
The blood that He shed was precious enough to wash away
the sins of all. His atonement on the cross was sufiicient
for all mankind, though efficient only to them that believe.
The sin that He took up and bore on the cross was the sin
of the whole world.
Last, but not least, Christ is a perpetual and unwearied
Saviour. He "taketh away" sin. He is daily taking it
away from every one that believes on Him, — daily purging,
daily cleansing, daily washing the souls of His people, daily
granting and applying fresh supplies of mercy. He did
not cease to work for His saints, when He died for them on
the cross. He lives in heaven as a Priest, to present His

JOHN, CHAP. I. 57
sacrifice continually before God. In grace as well as in
providence, Christ worketh stiU. He is ever taking away
sin. These are golden truths indeed. Well would it be for
the Church of Christ, if they were used by all who know
them ! Our very familiarity with texts like these is one of
our greatest dangers. Blessed are they who not only keep
this text in their memories, but feed upon it in their hearts !
Let us notice, lastly, in this passage, the peculiar office
which John the Jiaptist oMributes to Christ. He speaks
of Him as Him " which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost."
The baptism here spoken of is not the baptism of water.
It does not consist either of dipping or sprinkling. It does
not belong exclusively either to infants or to grown up
people. It is not a baptism which any man can give, Epis
copalian or Presbyterian, Independent or Methodist, lay
man or minister. It is a baptism which the great Head of
the Church keeps exclusively in His own hands. It consists
of the implanting of grace into the inward man. It is the
same thing with the new birth. It is a baptism, not of the
body, but of the heart. It is a baptism which the penitent
thief received, though neither dipped nor sprinkled by the
hand of man. It is a baptism which Ananias and Sapphira
did not receive, though admitted into church-communion
by apostolic men.
Let it be a settled principle in our religion that the bap
tism of which John the Baptist speaks here, is the baptism
which is absolutely necessary to salvation. It is well to be
baptized into the visible Church ; but it is far better to be
baJptized into that Church which is made up of true believ
ers. The baptism of water is a most blessed and profitable
ordinance, and cannot be neglected without great sin. But
the baptism of the Holy Ghost is of far greater importance.
The man who dies with his heart not baptized by Christ
can never be saved. 3*

58 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Let us ask ourselves, as we leave this passage. Whether
we are baptized with the Holy Ghost, and whether we
have any real interest in the Lamb of God ? Thousands,
unhappily, are wasting their time in controversy about
water baptism, and neglecting the baptism of the heart.
Thousands more are content with a head-knowledge of the
Lamb of God, or have never sought Him by faith, that
their own sins may be actually taken away. Let us take
heed that we ourselves have new hearts, and believe to the
saving of our souls. Notes. John L 29—34.
29. — [The next day.] This means the day after the conversation
between John the Baptist and the deputation of priests and Le
vites. The careful marking of days by St. John at this stage of
his gospel deserves particular notice.
[Seeth Jesus coming unto him.] These words seem to prove
that Jesus was not present on the preceding day, during the
conversation with the priests and Levites, and that John's words,
" standeth among you," cannot be UteraUy taken.
It seems probable, as before observed, that our Lord came
back to John after His temptation in the wilderness. The Spirit
took Him into the wilderness " immediately " after His baptism,
(Mark i. 12,) and it was upon His return, at the end of forty days,
that John the Baptist saw him again.
[And saith, behold.] This appears to have been a public, open
proclamation made by John to his disciples and the multitude
who surrounded him. "Behold that person who is coming
towards us. He is the Lamb of God, the Messiah of whom I
have been preaching to you, and on whom I have told you to
beUeve." [The Lamb of God.] There can be no reasonable doubt that
John gave (his name to our Lord because He was the true sacri
fice for sin, the true antitype of the passover lamb, and the lamb
prophesied of by Isaiah. (Is. Uii. 7.) The idea that he only
refers to the quietness and meekness of our Lord's personal
character is utterly unsatisfactory. He is describing our Lord's
ofQ.cial character as the great propitiation for sin.
The expression, " Lamb of God," according to some, signifies
" that eminent, great, divine, and most excellent Lamb." It is a
weU-known Hebraism to describe anything very great as a thin"

JOHN, CHAP. I. 59
"of God." Thus we read of "thunderings of God," and
"trembUng of God," (Exod. ix. 28; 1 Sam. xiv. 15.) — According
to others it signifies the Lamb which God has provided from aU
eternity, and which God has long covenanted and promised to
send into the world to be slain for sinners. Both views make
good doctrine, but the second seems the preferable one.
Bengel thinks that John called our Lord "the Lamb of God,"
with a special reference to the Passover, which was then near.
(John ii. 13.) He also sees a paraUel between the expression
" Lamb of (Jod," and the phrase, " sacrifice of God," (Psaka U.
17,) which means " the sacrifice which God acknowledges as
pleasing to Him."
Chemnitius thinks, in addition to other reasons why John
caUs our Lord " the Lamb," that he desired to show that Christ's
kingdom was not political. He was neither the ram nor the
he-goat described in Daniel. (Dan. viii. 20.)
[Taketh away.] The Greek word so rendered, is given in the
marginal reading, " beareth." Both ideas are included. It means
" taketh away by his expiatory death." The Lamb of God " bear
eth " the sin of the world by taking it upon Himself. He
aUowed our guilt to be laid upon Him, and carried it away like
the scapegoat, so that there was none left. - It is one of the
many expressions which describe the great Scripture truth, that
Christ's death was a vicarious sacrifice for sin. He became our
substitute. He took upon Him our sin. He was made sin for
us. Our sins were imputed to Him. He was made a curse for
us. The word here rendered " taketh away " is found at least 100
times in the New Testament. In 82 places it is rendered, " take,"
— " take up,"— or " take away." In 5 places it is, " bear.'' In 4
it is, "Uft up." In 2 it is, " remove." In most of the other places
it is the imperative expression, " away with I" All point to the
same -view of the text before us, viz., " a complete atonement for
sin." The use of the present tense, " taketh away," is remarked by
aU the best commentators, ancient and modern. It is intended
to show the completeness of Christ's satisfaction for sin, and
the continual application of His once-made sacrifice. He is
always taking sin away. Eollock observes, " The influence of
Christ's sacrifice is perpetual, and His blood never dries up."
The idea maintained by some, that " taking away sin," in this
place, includes sanctification as well as justification, seems to me
quite untenable. That Christ " takes away " the power of a
believer's sins, when He applies His redemption to his soul, is no
doubt true. But it is not the truth of this text.

60 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
[The sin.] Let it be noted that the singular number is used
here. It is " the sin," not " the sins." The expression seems to
me purposely intended to show that what Christ took away, and
bore on the cross, was not the sin of certain people only, but the
whole accumulated mass of all the sins of all the children of
Adam. He bore the weight of all, and made an atonement
suf&cient to make satisfaction for all.
The idea propounded by some, that " the sin " which Christ is
said here to take away, is only man's original sin, — and that for
man's actual sins each man must make satisfaction himself, is
destitute of the slightest foundation in Scripture, contradicts
scores of plain texts, and utterly overthrows the whole Gospel.
[Of the world.] It is almost needless to say that there are
two views of this expression. Some say, that it only means,
that Christ takes away the sins of Gentiles as well as Jews, and
that it does not mean the sin of any but the elect. Others say,
that it really means that Christ "taketh away" the sin of all
mankind, that is, that He made an atonement sufficient for all,
and that aU are solvable, though not all saved, in consequence of
His death.
I decidedly prefer the latter of these two views. I hold as
strongly as any one, that Christ's death is profitable to none but
to the elect who believe on His name. But I dare not limit and
pare down such expressions as the one before us. I dare not
say that no atonement has been made, in any sense, except for
the elect. I believe it is possible to be more systematic than the
Bible in our statements. When I read that the wicked who are
lost, " deny the Lord that bought them," (2 Peter ii. 1,) and that
" God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himselfj" (2 Cor.
V. 19,) I dare not confine the intention of redemption to the
saints alone. Christ is for every man.
I am aware the objection is often made, that "if Christ taketh
0,way the sin of the world, and yet the vast majority of men die
in their sins and are lost, Christ's work for many was -n'rought
in vain." I see no force in this objection. I think we might as
weU argue, that because sin came into the world and marred
creation, creation was in vain. We are not talking of the works
of men, but of the eternal Word, and we must be content to see
much in His works that we do not entirely understand. Though
multitudes are lost, I have no doubt the last day wiU prove that
nothing that Christ did for them was in vain.
I rest in the view of the text, that in some ineffable and inscru
table way, the whole world's sin was borne and atoned for by
Christ. " He taketh away, or makes atonement for, the sin of
aU the men and women m the world." I have no doubt from
Scripture, that the vast majority of " the worid's " inhabitants will

JOHN, CHAP. I. 61
be found at last to have received no benefit from Christ, and to
have died in their sins. I repudiate the idea of universal salva
tion, as a dangerous heresy, and utterly contrary to Scripture. —
But the lost wiU not prove to be lost because Christ did nothing
for them. He bore their sins. He carried their transgressions.
He provided payment, but they would not put in their claim to
any interest in it. He set the prison door open to all; but the
majority would not come out and be fi:ee. In the work of the
Father in election, and of the spirit in conversion, I see limita
tion in the Bible most clearly. But in the work of Christ in
atonement I see no limitation. The atonement was made for all
the world, though it is applied to and enjoyed by none but be
lievers. — Christ's intercession is the peculiar privUege of His
people. But Christ's atonement is a benefit which is offered
freely and honestly to all mankind.
In saying all this I am fully aware that the word " world " is
sometimes used in a qualified sense, and must be interpreted
with some limitation. When it is said, " The world knew him
not," (John i. 10,) it cannot mean that not a single person in the
world knew Him. But in the text before us I see no necessity
for limitation. I see the whole mass of mankind's guilt brought
together in one singular word, " the sin of the world," and that
sin, I am told, Christ " taketh away." And I beUeve the true
meaning to be, that the Lamb of God has made atonement
Buf5cient for all mankind, though efficient unquestionably to none
but believers.
Augustine remarks, " How weighty must be the blood of the
Lamb, by whom the world was made, to tum the scale when
weighed against the world I"
Calvin, in his commentary on this verse, says, ' John uses the
word sin in the singular number for any kind of iniquity ; as if
he had said that every kmd of unrighteousness which alienates
men from God is taken away by Christ. And when he says ' The
sin of the world,' he extends this favour indiscriminately to tho
whole human race, that the Jews might not think that He had
been sent to them alone. Hence we infer that the whole worid
is involved in the same condemnation; and that as aU men,
without exception, are guilty of unrighteousness before God'
they need to be reconcUed to Him. John the Baptist, by speak
ing generaUy of the sin of the world, intended to impress upon
us the conviction of our own misery, and to exhort us to seek
the remedy. Now our duty is to embrace the benefit which is
offered to aU, that each of us may be convinced that there is
nothing to hinder him from obtaining reconciUatioa in Christ,
provided that he comes to Him by the guidance of f lith."
Brentius says, "Although all the men in the world Ai not

62 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
receive the benefit of Christ's passion, because all do not believe
on Christ, yet that benefit is so offered to the whole woild, that
whosoever, whether circumcised or uncircumcised, king or peas
ant, high or low, rich or poor, sick or well, old or young, receives
Christ by faith, is justified before God, and saved with an eternal
salvation." Musculus says, " John places before us no one particular person
whose sins the Lamb has come to take away; but under the
expression 'the world,' he comprehends the whole race of mortals
from the very beginning of the world to the end of it."
Melancthon says, " He taketh away the sin, that is the univer
sal condemnation, of the human race."
Chemnitius says, "John affirms that the benefits of Christ
belong not to the Jews only, but to the whole world, and that
no one who is in the world is excluded from them, if he is only
wilUng to receive them by faith."
The deep spiritual knowledge exhibited by John the Baptist
in this verse, ou,ght not to be overlooked. Such a sentence as
the one before us never fell from the lips of any other disciple of
•Christ before the day of Pentecost. Others could say that our
Lord was the Christ, the Son of God, the Messiah, the Son of
David, the King of Israel, the Son of the Blessed, who was to
come into the world. But none seem to have seen so clearly as
John that Christ was the sacrifice for sin, the Lamb that was to
be slain. Well would it be for the Church of Christ in the
nineteenth century, if all its ministers possessed as much know
ledge of Christ's atonement as is here shown by John the
Baptist! John saw the vicarious sacrifice of Christ, before He
died on the cross. Many so-called Christians cannot see Christ's
ficarious sacrifice even at this day I
30. — [This is he of whom I said!] These words appear to have been
spoken in our Lord's presence, and to have been specially
intended to point the multitude to Him. "This person before
you is He of whom I have repeatedly spoken in my ministry, aa
the coming One who is far greater than myself. You see Him
now before you."
[A man.. .he was before me.] The human and divine natures
of our Lord are here brought together by John in one sentence,
" He of whom I spake to you is a man, and yet at the same time
He is One who v?as before me, because He has existed from all
eternity."
dl.—[I kneiu him not] This means " I was not acquainted with
Him in time past. There has been no private collusion or
arrangement between Him and me. I did not even know Him

JOHN, CHAP. I. 68
by sight until the day when He came to be baptized." The
difficulty connected with these words of John will be considered
fvilly at the 33d verse.
[Thai he should be made manifeU to Israel, &c.] John here
declares that the great end of his ministry was, that this wonder
ful Person, whom he had just pointed out, should be manifested
and made known to the Jews. He did not come to form a party
of his own, or to baptize in his own nama. The whole object of
his preaching and baptizing was now before his hearers. It was
simply to make known to Israel the Mighty One, the Lamb of
God, whom they now saw.
32. — [And John bare record!] These words seem to denote a public
and solemn testimony borne by John to the fact, that our Lord
had been visibly acknowledged by God the Father as the Messiah.
If his hearers would have further proof that this Person, to
whom he was pointing them, was really the Christ, he would tell
them what he had seen with his own eyes. He would bear
witness that he had seen visible proofs that this Person was really
the Messiah.
[I saw!] This means, "At the time when our Lord was
baptized, I saw this heavenly vision.'' Whether any beside John
saw this vision, and heard the voice of the Father, which accom
panied it, may well be doubted. At any rate, if they did, they
did not understand either what they saw or heard.
[The Spirit descending, dec] This means that John saw
something coming down from heaven after the manner of a dove
flying downwards, and that what he saw was the Holy Spirit,
graciously revealing Himself in a visible manner.
[It abode upon him.] This means that the heavenly vision of
the Holy Spirit rested upon Christ at the time of His baptism.
It Ughted down upon Him as a dove would settle down, and did
not leave Him.
I cannot satisfy myself that the expression "like a dove " in
this verse, means that any dove was really seen by John, when
our Lord was baptized. All the four Gospel-writers describe an
appearance "Uke a dove." St. Luke distinctly speaks of " a
bodily shape." That something visible was seen by John is
plain, and that its appearance descending on our Lord, resembled
the downward flight of a dove, is also plain. But I am unable
to see that the Holy Ghost took upon Him the actual form of a
dove. Some think, as Augustine, that the likeness lo a dove was
especiaUy employed at this time, to answer the figure of Noah's
flood. He says, " As a dove did at that time bring tidings of the

64 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
abating of the water, so doth it now of the abating of the wrath
of God, upon the preaching of the Gospel."
We must beware of supposing for a moment, that this vision
of the Spirit descending was meant to imply, that our Lord
first received the grace of the Holy Ghost at that particular time,
or that He had not received it before in the same degree. We
must not doubt that the Holy Ghost dwelt in Jesus " without
measure " from the very time of His incarnation. The vision
was meant to show the Church, that when Christ's ministry
began, a fuUer revelation of aU Three Persons in the Trinity was
made at once to mankind. It was meant at the same time to be
a formal testimony to John the Baptist that the Messiah was
before him, — that this was the promised Saviour whom God had
anointed with the Holy Ghost and sent into the world, ^— that
the time of Christ's ministry had begun, — that He who had the
Spirit to bestow on men was before him, — and that His entrance
on His public work was attested by the presence both of the
Father and the Holy Ghost, in short, by a manifestation of aU
three Persons in the Trinity at one time.
As a Levite, John doubtless was familiar with all the ceremo
nies by which the Jewish high priests and kings were solemnly
inducted into their ofBce. For his satisfaction, therefore, our
Lord received visible attestation from heaven, and was publicly
recognized as the Messiah, the anointed Priest, and King, and
Prophet, before his forerunner's eyes.
Musculus on this verse remarks, "The Spirit; did not descend
on Christ's account, who was never separate, either from the
Holy Spirit or from the Father, — but on our account, that He
who came to redeem the world, might be made manifest, through
John's declaration of Him."
33. — [I knew him not] The Greek word so rendered, both here
and in the 31st verse, is literally, "I had not known him."
There is a difficulty connected with the expression which
demands explanation. St. Matthew tells us, that when our
Lord came to John to be baptized, John said to him, " I have
need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me ?" (Matt.
iii. 14,) showing plainly by these words that he knew He was
before him. And yet here we find John saying, " I knew him
not." How can this apparent inconsistency be reconciled '?
Some think, as Chrysostom, that " John is speaking of former
times, and not of the times near to his baptism."
Some think, as Augustine, that it means, " I had not known
till that day that Jesus would baptize with the Holy Ghost,
although I had long known him personaUy, and had recognized
him aa the Christ of God. But when He came to be baptized.

JOHN, CHAP. I. 65
it was also revealed to me, that He would confer on men the
great gift of the Holy Ghost."
Some think, as Brentius and Beza, that it means, " I had not
kno-wn Jesus by sight until the day when He came to be bap
tized. I knew that He had been born of the Virgin Mary, but
was not personally acquainted with Him, having been myself
brought up ' in the desert.' (Luke i. 80.) I had only been told
by Him who sen* me to baptize, that whenever the Messiah
came to be baptized, I should recognize Him by the descent of
the Holy Ghost. When He did come, I received a secret reve
lation &om God that Messiah stood before me, and under thy
power of that feeling I confessed my unworthiaess to baptize
Him. But when at last I did baptize Him, I received a fuU con
firmation of my faith by beholding the promised sign of the
descent of the Holy Ghost." Those who hold this view, think
the case of Samuel receiving a secret revelation about Saul, an
Ulustration of the matter. (I Sam. ix. 15.)
Some think, as Poole, that it means, " I knew him not per
fectly and distinctly, though I had an impression when I first
saw Him coming to be baptized, that He was One far greater
than myself, and under that impression demurred to baptizing
Him. After BGs baptism I saw clearly who He was."
The last explanation is perhaps the simplest, and most proba
ble. That John at one time did not know our Lord by sight at
aU, that he afterwards knew Him imperfectly, and that his per
fect knowledge of Him, His nature, office, and work, was not
attained tiU the time when the Spirit descended at His baptism,
are points that seem clear. The time when he said, " I have
need to be baptized of thee," would seem to be the time of im
perfect knowledge, when the fact that Jesus was the Messiah
began to dawn upon him, and made him cry out, " comest thou
to me ?"
Chrysostom observes, that the expression is a proof " that the
miracles -which they say belong to Christ's ohUdhood are false,
and the invention of those who bring them to notice. For if
He had begun from His early age to work miracles, neither
could John have been ignorant of Him, nor would the multitude
have needed a teacher to make Him known."
[Hs that sent me...same said.] This expression indicates that
John the Baptist had many special revelations of God concern
ing His work, of which we have no record given to us. He
seems to have been taught and instructed Uke one of the old
prophets. [He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost] The remarkable

66 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
description of our Lord, here given by John the Baptist, haa
received three very different interpretations.
Some think that it means, " This is He who shaU institute
Christian baptism, with which the gift of the Holy Ghost shall
be connected. Plis baptism shaU be like mine, a baptism of
water. But it shaU not be a baptism of water only, as mine is,
but a baptism accompanied by the regenerating grace of the
Spirit." Some think that it means, " This is He who shaU baptize with
the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost, and confer miraculous
gifts on the church."
Some think it means, "This is He who shall baptize the
hearts of men, which neither thou canst do nor any other human
minister. He has the prerogative of giving spiritual Ufe. He
is the giver of the Holy Spirit to aU who beUeve on Him.''
I am decidedly of opinion that this third view is the correct
one. It is the only one which seems at all answerable to the
majesty of the person spoken of, the dignity of the speaker, and
the solemnity of the occasion. — To say, " This is He who shall
institute Christian baptism " seems a very lame and impotent
account of the expression. — To say, "This is He who shaU
bestow miraculous gifts at the day of Pentecost," is a degree
better, but gives a picture of our Lord's office confined to a
single generation. — But to say, " This is He who, in every age
of the church, wiU baptize the hearts of his people by the Holy
Ghost, and by this baptism continually replenish the ranks of
His mystical body," is saying that which exactly suits the occa
sion, and describes our Lord's work in the world in a worthy
manner. Musculus, on this verse, remarks, " What is it to baptize with
the Holy Ghost ? It is to regenerate the hearts of the elect,
and consecrate them into the fellowship of the sons of God."
Again, he says, " It is Christ alone who baptizes with the Holy
Ghost, a power which, as divine, He keeps in His own hands
and never communicates to any minister."
The view I have maintained is ably set forth in Bucer's com
mentary on this place. He fays, "By the baptism of water we
are received into the outward Church of God ; by the baptism
of the Spirit into the inward C-hurch." The opinion of one who
w:is Segius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, in the reign of
Edward the Sixth, and the personal friend and adviser of Cran
mer and the other English reformers, deserves much considera
tion. It proves, at any rate, that the doctrine of inward baptism
of the Spirit, which Christ alone gives to every beUever, and the
identity of this baptism with conversion or new birth, are not

-JOHN, CHAP. I.

67

such modern and contemptible notions as some persons are
pleased to think.
The untenableness of the view, held by many, that John's
baptism was not the same as Christian bap'ism, to all intents
and purposes, is ably shown by Lightfoot, in his Harmony of the
Four Evangelists. If it was not Christian baptism, it would be
hard to prove that some of the disciples ever received Chris
tian baptism at aU. There is not the slightest evidence that
Andrew, Peter, and PhUip were baptized by Jesus.
The famUiarity which John displays with the Holy Ghost and
his work, deserves particular attention. To say, as many do,
that the Holy Ghost was not known until the day of Pentecost,
is saying what cannot be proved. The Holy Ghost has always
been in the hearts of believers in every age of the world. His
abundant outpouring is undoubtedly a leading mark of the days
since Christ came into the world. But the Holy Ghost was ever
in God's elect, and without Him there never was a soul saved.
34. — [/ saw and bare record, &c.] This means, " I saw perfectly,
and fi'om that time have distinctly and unhesitatingly testified
that the person whom you now see before you is the Christ, the
Son of the living God. From the day of His baptism I have
been fully con-vinced that this is the Messiah."
John here declares his own firm conviction of our Lord's
divinity and eternal generation. He was satisfied that our Lord
was not the son of Mary only, but the Son of God.

JOHN L 35—42.

35 Again the next day after
John stood, and two of his disci
ples; 36 And looking upon Jesus as
he walked, he saith, Behold the
Lamb of Godl
SI And the two disciples heard
hira speak, and they foUowed
Josus. 38 Then Jesus turned, and saw
them foUo-wing, and saith unto
them, "WTiat seek ye? They said
unto him. Rabbi, (which is to say,
being interpreted. Master,) where
dweUest thou?
39 Ho saith unto them, Come
ani see. They came and saw

where he dwelt, and abode -with
him that day, for it was about the
tenth hour.
40 One of the two which hearu
John speak, and followed him, waa
Andrew, Simon Peter's brother.
41 He first findeth his own
brother Simou, and saith unto him.
We have found the Messias, which
is, being interpreted, the Christ.
42 And he brought him to- Je
sus. And when Jesus beheld him,
he said. Thou art Simon the son
of Jona: thou shalt be called Ce
phas, which is by interpretation, A
stone.

68 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
These verses ought always to be interesting to every true
Christian. They describe the first beginnings of the
Christian Church. Vast as that church is now, there Avas
a time when it consisted of only two weak members. The
calling of those two members is described in the passage
which is now before our eyes.
We see, for one thing, in these verses, what good is done
by continually testifying of Christ.
The first time that John the Baptist cried, " Behold the
Lamb of God," no result appears to have followed. We
are not told of any who heard, inquired, and believed.
But when he repeated the same words the next day, we
read that two of His disciples "heard him speak and fol
lowed Jesus." They were received most graciously by Him
whom they followed. "They came and saw where he
dwelt, and abode with him that day." Truly it was a day
in their lives most eventful, and most blessed ! From that
day they became fast and firm disciples of the new-found
Messiah. They took up the cross. They continued with
Him in His temptations. They followed Him whitherso
ever He went. One of them at least, if not both, became
a chosen ajsostle, and a master builder in the Christian
temple. And all was owing to John the Baptist's testi
mony, " Behold the lamb of God." That testimony was a
little seed. But it bore mighty fruits.
This simple story is a pattern of the way in which good
has been done to souls in every age of the Christian
Church. By such testimony as that before us, and by none
else, men and women are converted and saved. It is by
exalting Christ, not the church, — Christ, not the sacra
ments, — Christ, not the ministry, — it is by this means that
hearts are moved, and sinners are turned to God. To the
world such testimony may seem weakness and foolishness.
Yet, like the ram's horns, before whose blast the walls of
Jericho fell down, this testimony is mighty to the pulling

JOHN, CHAP. I. 69
down of strongholds. The story of the crucified Lamb of
God has proved in every age, the power of God unto sal
vation. Those who have done most for Christ's cause in
every part of the world, have been men like John the
Baptist. They have not cried, Behold me, or Behold the
church, or Behold the ordinances, but " Behold the Lamb."
If souls are to be saved, men must be pointed directly t(
Christ. One thing, however, must never be forgotten. There
must be patient continuance in preaching and teaching the
truth, if we want good to be done. Christ must be set
forth again and again, as the "Lamb of God which taketh
away the sin of the world." The story of grace must be
told repeatedly, — line upon line, aud precept upon precept.
It is the constant dropping which wears away the stone.
The promise shall never be broken, that " God's word shall
not return unto him void." (Isai. Iv. II.) But it is nowhere
said that it shall do good the very first time that it is
preached. It was not the first proclamation of John the
Baptist, but the second, which made Andrew and his com
panion follow Jesus.
We see, for another thing, what good a believer may do
to others, by speaking to them about Christ.
No sooner does Andrew become a disciple, than he tells
his brother Simon what a discovery he has made. Like
one who has unexpectedly heard good tidings, he hastens
to impart it to the one nearest and dearest to him. He
says to his brother, " We have found the Messias," and
he " brings him to Jesus." Who can tell what might have
happened if Andrew had been of a silent, reserved, and
uncommunicative spirit, like many a Christian iu the
present day ? Who can tell but his brother might have
lived and died a fisherman on the Galilean lake? But
happily for Simon, Andrew was not a man of this sort.
He was one whose heart was so full that he must speak.

70 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
And to Andrew's out-spoken testimony, imder God, the
great apostle Peter owed the first begiuniag of light in
his soul.
The fact before us is most striking and instructive. Out
of the three first members of the Christian Church, one at
least was brought to Jesus, by the private, quiet word of
a relative. He seems to have heard no public preaching.
He saw no mighty miracle wrought. He was not con
vinced by any powerful reasoning. He only heard his
brother telling him that he had found a Saviour himself,
and at once the work began in his soul. The simple testi
mony of a warm-hearted brother was the first link in the
chain by which Peter was drawn out of the world, and
joined to Christ. The first blow in that mighty work by
which Peter was made a pillar of the Church, was struck
by Andrew's words, " We have found the Christ."
Well would it be for the Church of Christ, if all believ
ers were more like Andrew ! Well would it be for souls
if all men and women who have been converted themselves,
would speak to their friends and relatives on spiritual sub
jects, and tell them what they have found! How much
good might be done ! How many might be led to Jesus,
who now live and die in unbelief! The work of testifying
the Gospel of the grace of God ought not to be left to
ministers alone. All who have received mercy ought to
find a tongue, and to declare what God has done for their
souls. All who have been delivered from the power of the
devil, ought to " go home and tell their friends what great
things God has done for them." (Mark v. 19.) Thousands,
humanly speaking, would listen to a word from a friend,
who will not listen to a sermon. Every believer ought to
be a home-missionary, a missionary to his family, children,
servants, neighbours, and friends. Surely, if we can find
nothing to say to others about Jesus, we may well doubt
whether we are savingly acquainted with Him ourselves.

71
Let us take heed that we are among those who really
follow Christ, and abide with Him. It is not enough to
hear Him preached from the pulpit, and to read of Him aa
described in books. We must actuaUy follow Him, pour
out our hearts before Him, and hold personal communion
with Him. Then, and not till then, we shall feel con
strained to speak of Him to others. The man who only
knows Christ by the hearing of the ear, will never do much
for the spread of Christ's cause in the earth.
Notes. John I. 35—42.
35. — [The next day.] Let St. John's particularity in noting days at
this period of our Lord's history, be observed again in this verse.
If, as many suppose, St. John was one of the two who this day
followed Jesus and became His disciples, we can well under
stand that it was a memorable day to him.
[John stood.] This expression seems to imply that there -was
some particular spot near Bethabara, where John the Baptist
was in the habit of standing, to preach, and to receive those who
came to be baptized. While he " stood " here, the event which
foUows took place.
Z6.—[Looking....Jesus, as he ivalked.] This probably means that he
saw Jesus walking among the crowd of persons who were at
tracted to Bethabara, alone, without foUowers, and as yet not
recognized by any one as the Messiah.
Stier remarks, " John saw Jesus walking, in silent meditation,
waiting for His hour, and His Father's commands ; in fuU pre
paration for the world and its sin : equipped for the testimony
to the truth, with that armour, which has been tested and
approved in His first great spiritual conflict ; and for the utter
ance of the new words of God, which the Father has given
Him." [He saith, beliold, dec] This .seems to have been a second
pubUc proclamation of our Lord's office and character, a partial
repetition of what had been said the day before ; and yet, as the
event shows, a more effective proclamation. The same truth
may do good the second time that it is preached, wluch does
nothing the first time.
Z7.-[Heard....speak....followed.] The three steps described in this
verse, are very noteworthy. John the Baptist ''speaks. The
disciples "hear." After hearing they " follow Jesus This is
a succinct summary of God's way of savmg myriads of souls.

72 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
RoUock on this verse remarks, " We learn by this example,
how powerful is the preaching of Christ, — yea, one or two words
about Christ and the cross, how powerful are they in changing
the hearts of men ! Preach, if you like, about the great deeds
of kings and generals, and their courage and glory ; — these things
wUl please men for a Uttle time, but they will not convert them.
But preach concerning Him that was crucified, a subject appa
rently ignominious and fooUsh, — and then the story of the cross,
which is foolishness to them that perish, wiU be the power and
wisdom of God to them that beUeve."
38. — [ What seek ye ?] We cannot doubt that our Lord knew per
fectly weU the hearts and motives of these two disciples. In
asking this question, therefore, He spoke partly for their encou
ragement, and partly to stir them up to self-inquiry. " 'What
seek ye ? Is there anything that I can do for you, any truth
that I can teach you, any burden that I can take away ? If so,
speak, and be not afraid." — " What seek ye 7 Are you sure
that you are following me with right motives ? Are you sure
that you are not regarding me as a temporal ruler ? Are you
sure that you are not, like other Jews, seeking riches, honour,
greatness, in this world ? Prove your own selves, and be sure
that you are seeking the right object."
[ Which is to say, being interpreted.] This is one of a class of
expressions which shows that John wrote for Gentile readers
rather than Jews. A Jew would not have needed this parenthe
tical comment. This same remark applies to verse 41.
[ Where dwellest thou ?] This question seems to imply a desire
for conversation and private communion. " We would fain know
more of Thee. We are drawn to Thee by John the Baptist's
proclamation. We would like to go aside with Thee from the
crowd, and inquire of Thee more privately and quietly, at thy
dweUing, about the things which are upon our hearts."
To apply the text, as many do, to our Lord's spiritual dweU
ing in "contrite hearts," &c., (Isaiah Iviii. 15,) may produce
good doctrinal and practical theology. But it is not the point
of the text.
30. — [Come and see.] The great affabUitv, and condescension of
these first words of our Lord's after His pubUc appearance as
Messiah, ought not to be overlooked. The very first thing that
we hear Him saying, after He has been pubUcly proclaimed as
the " Lamb of God," is " Come and see." It is a pleasant type
of what He has been ever saying to the sons of men from that
day down to this. " Come and see who I am, and what I am.
Come and be acquainted with me."
Schottgen and Lightfoot both remark, that the expres.sicn

JOHN, CHAP. I. 73
" Come and see," is a very common one in Rabbinical writings,
and would be very familiar to the Jews.
[ Where he dwelt] We can only suppose that the place where
our Lord was dwelling at this time, was some temporary resi
dence in or near Bethabara. At the best, it was probably some
humble lodging. It is not impossible that it was nothing more
than a cave. He often " had not where to lay His head." If
the two disciples had the least reUc of Jewish expectation, that
Messiah would appear in royal dignity and glory, our Lord's
dwelling would go far to disabuse their minds of the idea.
[Abode with Him that day. ..tenth hour!] The Jewish day began
at six o'clock in the morning. The tenth hour therefore means,
four o'clock in the afternoon. At this late hour of the day. His
disciples found it impossible to conclude their conversatioH with
Jesus, and therefore remained in the same lodging with Him all
night. Many commentators, from Augustine downwards, make the
natural remark, that this evening must have been a blessed
evening for these two disciples ; and that it would have been
pleasant if the conversation had been given to us 1 Yet if it
had been good for us to know the conversation, it would doubt
less have been recorded. There are no deficiencies in Scrip
ture.
40. — [One of the two. ...was Andrew.] The priority of Andrew to
Peter ought not to be overlooked. Peter, to whom the Church
of Rome boastfuUy attributes a primacy among the apostles,
was neither converted nor made acquainted with Christ, so soon
as his brother.
'Who the other of these two disciples was, we are not told. It
is highly probable, as Chrysostom and Theophylact conjecture,
that it was St. John himself. On seven other occasions in this
Gospel he humbly withholds his name. (John xiii. 23 ; xix. 26,
35 ; XX. 2 ; xxL 7, 20, 24.) It is therefore very likely that he with
held it here. — The supposition of Musculus, and others, that the
other disciple was a person of less zeal and sincerity than Andrew,
and is therefore not named, appears to me improbable.
4.1. — [He first.] This expression must either mean th^t Andrew
was the first of the two disciples who brought a brother to
Jesus, — or that he was the first disciple, speaking generally, who
spoke to others of the Messiah, when he had found Him,— or
that he was the first to teU his brother Peter, and Peter was not
the first to teU him about Christ.
[We have found.] This expression impUes an unexpected and
joyful discovery. The evening's conversation which Andrew

74: EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
had held with Jesus, had convinced him that He was indeed
the Christ.
[2he Messias.. ..interpreted.... Clirist] It is almost needless to
remark, that these names mean the " anointed one." The first
is Hebrew, and the second is Greek. Kings, prophets, and
priests, in the Old Testament, were anointed, and our Lord as
the Prophet, Priest, aud Eng of the Church was oaUed the
Anointed One, not because He was really anointed with oil, but
because he was " anointed with the Holy Ghost." (Acts x. 38.)
The extent of Andrew's religious knowledge ought not to be
overlooked. Poor and humble in station as he was, he seems,
like aU the Jews, to have known what the Old Testament
prophets had foretold about Messiah, and to have been prepared
to hear of a person appearing in the character of Messiah. It
is one of many expressions in the Gospels which show that the
lower orders among the Jev/s were far better acquainted with the
letter of the Old Testament Scriptures, than the poor in our own
day generally are with the letter of the New Testament, or indeed
of any part of the Bible.
Calvin remarks on Andrew's conduct, " Woe to our indolence,
if we do not, after having been fuUy enlightened, endeavour
to make others partakers of the same grace."
42. — [When Jesus helield....said....thou art Simon.] Our Lord here
displayed His perfect knowledge of all persons, names, and
things. He needed not that any should tell Him who and what
a person was. This knowledge was supposed by the Jews to be
a peculiar attribute of Messiah, whenever He came. He was to
be one of " quick understanding." (Isaiah xi. 3.) Enough fur
us to know that it is a pecuUar attribute of God. He alone
knows the hearts of men. Our Lord's perfect knowledge of all
hearts was one among many proofs of His divinity. The same
knowledge appears again in His address to Nathanael, in this
chapter, ver. 47, and in His conversation with the Samaritan
woman. (John iv. 18, etc.) — The effect produced in both cases,
is very worthy of notice.
[Ceplias!] This is a Syriac word, and is equivalent to the
Greek word Petros, which we render Peter. Both mean a stone,
a portion of a rock. "Petra" means a rock, "Petros" a piece
of a rock Peter was the latter, but not the former.
[A stone!] The marginal reading here, as Lightfoot remarks,
would have been much better than that which the translators
have put in our version. If the words were " Cephas, which is
by interpretation Peter,'' it would have conveyed our Lord's
meaning far more clearly.
The custom of having two names appears to have been

JOHN, CHAP. I. 75
common in New Testament times. The apostle Petei seems to
have been only known as " Cephas" in the Corinthian Church.
Out of the five other places in the New Testament where tho
name Cephas is found, four are in the epistle to the Corinthians,
whUe the name Peter is not used in that epistle at all.
Nifanius gives the names of three Popes who have so grossly
mistaken the origin of the word Cephas as to suppose that it is
derived from the Greek word which signifies " a head," and that
it indicated Peter's headship in the Church! Such a palpable
blunder is one of a thousand proofs that Popes are no more infal-
Uble than other men. Calovius makes the same charge against
no less a person than Cardinal BeUarmine.
If it be asked why our Lord gave Simon this new name, the
best answer appears to be that it was given with a special refer
ence to the change which grace was to work in Simon's heart.
Naturally impulsive, unstable, and unsteady, he was finally to
become a firm, solid stone in the Church of Christ, and to testify
his unshaken adherence to Christ by suffering martyrdom.
Chrysostom thinks that our Lord altered Simon's name "to
show that it was He who gave the old covenant, that it was He
who caUed Abram Abraham, and Sarai Sarah, and Jacob Israel."
Lightfoot, on these verses, after noticing the error which
Roman Catholic writers attempt to found upon it, about Peter
being the rock upon which the Church is buUt, makes the following
curious observation, — " If they will so pertinaciously adhere to
it, let us apprehend our Lord speaking proplietically , and fore
telling the grand error that would spring up in the Church,
namely that Peter is a rock, than which the Christian Church has
known nothing more sad and destructive."
Let it be noted, in leaving this passage, that the selection of
such humble unlearned men as th !se here described, to be the
first apostles and preachers of the Gospel, is a strong evidence
of the truth of Christianity. A religion which was propagated
by such weak instruments, in the face of persecution and oppo
sition from the great and learned, must be a religion from God.
Such results from such instrumentaUty cannot possibly be ac
counted for on natural principles.

JOHN L 43—51.

43 The day following Jesus
would go forth into Galilee, and
findeth PhiUp, and saith unto him,
FoUow me.

44 Now PhUip was of Bethsaida,
the city of Andrew and Peter.
45 PhiUp findeth Nathanael, and
saith unto huri, "We have found

76

EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.

him, of whom Moses in the Law,
and the Prophets, did write, Jesus
of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.
46 And Nathanael said unto
him, Can there any good thing
come out of Nazareth? PhUip
saith unto him. Come and see.
47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming
to him, and saith of him, Behold
an Israelite indeed, ia whom is no
guile I
48 Nathanael saith unto Mm,
Whence knowest thou me ? Jesus
answered and said unto him, Be
fore that Philip called thee, when

thou wast under the fig tree, I saw
thee. 49 Nathanael answered and saith
unto him. Rabbi, thou art the Sou
of God ; thou art the iKing of Israel.
50 Jesus answered and said un
to him. Because I said unto thee,
I saw thee under the fig tree, be-
Uevest thou? thou shalt see greater
things than these.
51 And he saith unto him, Veri
ly, verily, I say unto you. Hereafter
ye shaU see heaven open, and the
angels of God ascending and de
scending upon the Son of man.

Let us observe, as we read these verses, how various are
the paths by which soxds are led into the narrow way of life.
We are told of a man, named Philip, being added to
the little company of Christ's disciples. He does not
appear to have been moved, like Andrew and his com
panions, by the testimony of John the Baptist. He was
not drawn, like Simon Peter, by the out-spoken declara
tion of a brother. He seems to have been caUed directly
by Christ Himself, and the agency of man seems not to
have been used in his calling. Tet in faith and life he
became one with those who were disciples before him.
Though led by difierent paths, they aU entered the same
road, embraced the same truths, served the same Master,
and at length reached the same home.
The fact before us is a deeply important one. It throws
light on the history of all God's people in every age, and
of every tongue. There are diversities of operations in
the saving of souls. All true Christians are led by one
Spirit, washed in one blood, serve one Lord, lean on one
Saviour, believe one truth, and walk by one general rule.
But all are not converted in one and the same manner.
All do not pass through the same experience. In conver
sion, the Holy Ghost acts as a sovereign. He calleth
every one severally as He will.

JOHN, CHAP. I. 77
A careful recollection of this point may s.ave us much
trouble. We must beware of making the experience of
other believers the measure of our own. We must beware
of denying another's grace, because he has not been led
by the same way as ourselves. Has a man got the real
grace of God ? This is the only question that concerns
us. — Is he a penitent man ? Is he a believer ? Does he
live a holy life ? — ^Provided these inquiries can be answered
satisfactorily, we may well be content. It matters nothing
by what path a man has been led, if he has only been led
at last into the right way.
Let us observe, secondly, in these verses, how much of
Christ there is in the Old Testament Scriptures. We read
that when Philip described Christ to Nathanael, he says,
" We have found Him of whom Moses in the law and the
prophets did write."
Christ is the sum and substance of the Old Testament.
To Him the earliest promises pointed in the days of Adam,
and Enoch, and Noah, and Abraham^ and Isaac, and Jacob.
To Him eveiy sacrifice pointed in the ceremonial worship
appointed at Mount Sinai. Of Him every high priest was
a type, and every part of the tabernacle was a shadow,
and every judge and deliverer of Israel was a figure. He
was the prophet like unto Moses, whom the Lord God
promised to send, and the King of the house of David, who
came to be David's Lord as well as son. He was the Son
of the virgin, and the Lamb, foretold by Isaiah, — the
righteous Branch mentioned by Jeremiah, — the true Shep
herd, foreseen by Ezekiel, — the Messenger of the Cove
nant, promised by Malachi, — and the Messiah, who, accord
ing to Daniel, was to be cut ofi", though not for Himself.
The further we read in the volume of the Old Testament,
the clearer do we find the testimony about Christ. The
light which the inspired writers enjoyed in ancient days
was, at best, but dim, compared to that of the Gospel.

78 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
But the coming Person they all saw afar ofiT, and on whom
they all fixed their eyes, was one and the same. The
Spirit, which was in them, testified of Christ. (I Pet.
i. 11.)
Do we stumble at this saying ? Do we fimd it hard to
see Christ in the Old Testament, because we do not see
His name ? Let us be sure that the fault is all our own.
It is our spiritual vision which is to blame, and not the
book. The eyes of our understanding need to be enlight
ened. The veil has yet to be taken away. Let us pray
for a more humble, childlike, aud teachable spirit, and
let us take up " Moses and the prophets " again. Christ
is there, though our eyes may not yet have seen Him.
May we never rest tiU we can subscribe to our Lord's
words about the Old Testament Scriptures, "They are
they which testify of me." (John v. 89.)
Let us observe, thirdly, in these verses, the good advice
which Philip gave to Nathanael. The mind of Nathanael
Avas full of doubts about the Saviour, of whom Philip told
Him. " Can there any good thing," he said, " come out
of Nazareth ?" And what did Philip reply ? He said,
" Come and see."
Wiser counsel than this it would be impossible to con
ceive! If Philip had reproved Nathanael's unbelief, he
might have driven him back for many a day, and given
offence. If he had reasoned with him, he might have
failed to con-vince him, or might have confirmed him in his
doubts. But by inviting him to prove the matter for him
self, he showed his entire confidence in the truth of his
own assertion, and his willingness to have it tested and
proved. And the result shows the wisdom of Philip's
words. Nathanael owed his early acquaintance -^'ith Christ
to that frank invitation, " Come and see."
If we call ourselves true Christians, let us never be
afraid to deal with people about their souls as Philip dealt

JOHN, CHAP. I. 79
With Nathanael. Let us invite them boldly to make proof
of our rehgion. Let us tell them confidently that they
cannot know its real value until they have tried it. Let
us assure them that vital Christianity courts every possible
inquiry. It has no secrets. It has nothing to conceal.
Its faith and practice are spoken against, just because they
are not known. Its enemies speak evil of things with
which they are not acquainted. They understand neither
what they say nor whereof they affirm. Philip's mode of
dealing, we may be sure, is one principal way to do good.
Few are ever moved by reasoning and argument. StUl
fewer are frightened into repentance. The man who does
most good to souls, is often the simple believer who says
to his friends, " I have found a Saviour ; come and see
Him." Let us observe, lastly, in these verses, the high character
which Jesus gives of Nathanael, He calls him " an Israelite
indeed, in whom is no guile."
Nathanael, there can be no doubt, was a true child of
God, and a child of God in difficult times. He was one
of a very little flock. Like Simeon and Anna, and other
pious Jews, he was living by faith and waiting prayer
fully for the promised Redeemer, when our Lord's
ministry began. He had that which grace alone can
give, an honest heart, a heart without guile. His know
ledge was probably small. His spiritual eyesight was
dim. But he was one who had lived carefully up to his
light. He had diligently used such knowledge as ho
possessed. His eye had been single, though his vision
had not been strong. His spiritual judgment had been
honest, though it had not been powerful. What he saw
in Scripture, he had held firmly, in spite of Pharisees
and Sadducees, and all the fashionable religion of the
day. He was an honest Old Testament beUever, who
had stood alone. And here was the secret of our Lord's

80 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
peculiar commendation! He declared Nathanael to be
a true son of Abraham, — a Jew inwardly, possessing
circumcision in the spirit as well as in the letter, — an
Israelite in heart, as well as a son of Jacob in the flesh.
Let us pray that we may be of the same spirit as
Nathanael. An honest, unprejudiced mind, — a child-like
willingness to follow the truth, wherever the truth may
lead us, — a simple, hearty desire to be guided, taught, and
led by the Spirit, — a thorough deteiinination to use every
spark of light which we have, — are a possession of price
less value. A man of this spirit may live in the midst
of much darkness, and be surrounded by every possible
disadvantage to his soul. But the Lord Jesus will take
care that such a man does not miss the way to heaven.
" The meek -will he guide in judgment : and the meek
-will he teach his way." (Psalm xxv. 9.)
Notes. John I. 43 — 51.
43. — [The day following.] This is the fourth successive day -which
is speciaUy named by St. John, and its events described. The
first contained John the Baptist's reply to the priests and Levites,
— the second, his public announcement of our Lord as the
Lamb of God, — the third, the calling of Andrew and his coin-
panion, and Peter, — the fourth describes the calling of PhiUp
and Nathanael.
[Would go forth!] The Greek word rendered " would," signifies
that our Lord " willed or had a wUl."
[Findeth Piiilip.] It does not appear where PhUip was when
Jesus called him. He must either have been at Bethabara,
among John's hearers, — or at some place on the road frora
Bethabara to GaUlee, — or at his own native place, Bethsaida.
The last is perhaps the most probable idea.
[Follow me.] This simple sentence describes the direct quick
ening voice of an almighty Saviour. It is evident that the power
of the Holy Ghost accompanied our Lord's words, and that as
soon as they were spoken, PhUip, Uke Matthew the publican,
arose, left all, and became a disciple. In conversion God acts
as a sovereign. One is caUed in one way, and another in another.
EoUock observes on this verse, " This teaches us that Christ is

JOHN, CHAP. I. 31
able to caU any one whom He pleases into the kingdom of
heaven, without the ministry either of angel or man."
ii.— [Philip  of Bethsaida  city  Andrew  Peter.] This verse
seems to make it probable that PhiUp's conversion and calUng
took place at Bethsaida. Andrew and Peter having been con-
verted and become companions of Jesus on His way to Galilee
would appear to have taken Him to then- own native place'
Bethsaida. '
45.— [ We have found him.] PhiUp, like his fellow-citizen, Andrew
seems to have expected the appearance of Messiah.
Chrysostom remarks, " Seest thou what a thoughtful mind he
had, how assiduously he meditates on the writings of Moses, and
expected the advent ? The expression, ' we have found,' belongs
always to those who are in some way seeking."
[Him....Mose$....prophets did write.] Here, as in the case of
Andrew, we should notice the famiUarity with the general con
tents of Scripture which a poor Jew like PhiUp possessed. He
thoroughly understood that " Moses and the prophets" held forth
the promise of a coming Eedeemer, and that a better Priest,
Prophet, and King were foretold in their writings. " The Old
Testament," as the Church of England Article wisely declares,
"is not contrary to the New; for both in the Old Testament and
New, everlasting life is offered to mankind by Christ." "We must
beware, in these latter days, of despising the Old Testament. It
is one by-path to infidelity.
[Jesus of Nazareth...son of Joseph!] PhiUp here describes our
Lord according to the common report about Him, and in all
probabUity accoiding to his own present knowledge. His heart
was at present better than his bead. The miraculous conception
of Christ was hidden from him. Tet it is not unworthy of
remark, that this ignorant account of our Lord was very likely the
cause of Nathanael's doubt and prejudice, exhibited in the next
versa. The mistakes of young converts are often mighty stum
bling-blocks in the way of other people's souls. "We must not,
however, despise PhUip because of his mistake. EoUock remarks,
"I had rather a man should stammer and babble about Christ,
providing he does it sincerely and from his heart, and has before
him as an object the glory of God and salvation of men, than
say many things eloquently about Christ, for ostentation and
vain glory."
xG — [Can any good thing...come...Nazardh?] This question shows
the low estimate in which Nazareth, where our Lord had
been brought up, was held. It was an obscure town in a corner
of Q-alilee, not far from the borders of the province, and its
reputation seems to have been very bad. Nathanael could not
4-*

82 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
remember any prophecy about Messiah coming out of Nazareth
and at once stumbled at the idea of Him whom "Moses and
the prophets" had described, bebnging to such a contemptible
place. The condescension of our Lord in living thirty years in such
a place as Nazareth, is strongly brought out by Nathanael's
question. Augustine, Cyril, Origen, and others thought that the sentence
before us ought not to be interpreted as a question, but as a
simple affirmation, " Some good thing may come out of Nazareth."
"Wyoliffe's version also takes this view. The sentence would
then be the expression of a calm and unprejudiced mind,
acknowledging the possibility of good coming from Nazareth. '
Musculus thinks it possible, in this view of the expression, that
Nathanael might have had in his mind the remarkable pro
phetical saying quoted in St. Matthew, "He shall be called a
Nazarene 1" The judgment of the great majority of interpreters
agrees with our own translation, that it is a question, and
not an assertion ; and it is by far the more probable view of the
text. [Qome and see.] How common this expression was among
the Jewish religious teachers has been already noticed. PhUip's
wisdom in not arguing and reasoning with Nathanael, should be
observed. Ford gives a good quotation from Adam, "Little good
comes by disputing. Pride is generally at the bottom of it, and
not charity or love of truth ; and it is seldom managed with
decency or candour enough to produce any good effect. Let fall
a word in season, and -vvait in patience till the rain drops on it
from heaven."
47. — [In whom is no guile] It is very likely that in using this
expression our Lord referred to the 32nd Psalm, where the
character of the godly man is described. He is not only one
whose iniquities are forgiven, but one '' in whose Ups there is no
guile." The expression implies a true heart, a really converted
man, a genuine son of Abraham by faith, as well as a son accord
ing to the flesh.
Hutcheson observes, "The true mark of a true Israelite in
spirit, is not sinlessness or perfection, but sincerity."
48. — [ Whence knowest thou me ?] This question impUes Nathanael's
surprise that Jesus should exhibit any knowledo-e of his cha
racter. [When...under...fig-tree I saw thee!] The common opinion
about this expres^on is, that Nathanael was praying or holding
coniminion with Go 1 under the fig-tree. It may be so. 'We are
told nothing about it, and ere entirely le''t to conjecture. If it

JOHN, CHAP. I. 83
nad been good for us to know, it would have been told us.
Sufficient for us to understand that when Nathanael thought
he was alone and no eye upon him, the Lord Jesus, by His
divine power of seeing and knowing all things, 'was perfectly
acquainted with aU that Nathanael said, thought, and did. His
" eyes are in every place." (Prov. xv. 3.)
Chrysostom and Theophylact think that the expression only
refers to the conversation between Philip and Nathanael about
Jesus, which had taken place under a fig-tree. Grotius takes
the same view.
Gill mentions a tradition in the Syriac dictionary, "that
Nathanael's mother had laid him under a fig-tree when the
infants were slain at Bethlehem by Herod," (Matt. ii. 16,) and
that our Lord shovred His perfect knowledge by referring to this
fact. Heinsius thinks there is a reference to the prophecy of Zecha
riah, " In that day ye shaU call every man his neighbour, under
the vine and under the fig-tree," (Zech. iii. 10,) and that hence
Nathanael drew the inference that Messiah's days were come,
and Messiah before him.
Augustine sees an allegory in the fig-tree, and gravely says,
" that as Adam and Eve, when they had sinned, made themselves
aprons of fig-leaves, fig-leaves must signify sins. Nathanael
therefore being under the fig-tree, signifies being under the sha
dow of death I "
19. — [Thou art..Son of God...King of Israel.] These words are the
outburst of a heart convinced at once that Jesus was the Mes
siah. They are a noble confession that our Lord was that divine
Person who was promised to come into the world to redeem sin
ners, and that King who was prophesied of as the future Gather
er and Euler of the tribes of Israel. "Whether Nathanael clearly
understood the nature of our Lord's kingdom at this time, may
be reasonably doubted. But that he saw, like Peter, that He
was the Christ, the Son of the Blessed, we cannot doubt. The
restoring of the kingdom to Israel was a subject which we know,
from other passages of Scripture, was one of the last which the
first disciples were able to understand aright. (Acts i. 6.)
The history of Nathanael's caUing at this point should be
compared with that of the woman of 8a,marla, in the fourth
chapter of this Gospel. It is striking to observe that a discovery
and conviction of our Lord's perfect knowledge of the most se
cret things, was in both oases the turning point.
It should not be forgotten, that the title " King of Israel," waa
one which our Lord never refused during His ministry, though
He never took to Himsnlf His great power and actually reigned.

84 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
The angel Gabriel foretold that the " Lord God would give unto
Him the throne of His father David, and that He would reiin
over the house of Jacob, and that of His kingdom there would
be no end." (Luke i. 32, 33.) When the wise men came from
the East, they inquired for him who was born " King of the
Jews." (Matt. U. 2.) When our Lord was crucified, the title
over His head was, " King of the Jews." All this shall yet be
literally true. Christ shall yet be King in Zion, and reign over
the gathered and restored tribes of Israel at His second coming.
And then the words of Nathanael shaU be seen completely ful
fiUed. He shall be acknowledged by all as the " Son of God,
and King of Israel."
50. — [Believest thou?] It admits of a question whether this ex
pression would not be better rendered, as it might be with per
fect grammatical correctness, " thou believest." It would then
be very like our Lord's words to Thomas, " Because thou hast
seen me, thou hast believed." (John xx. 29.) The sense would
be, " Because I said I saw thee under the fig-tree thou beUevest.
It is well. Great is thy faith. But I teU thee for thy comfort
and encouragement, that thou shalt one day see far greater
proofs of my divinity and Messiahship than these." WycUffe's,
Tyndale's, and Cranmer's versions, all render the expression as
an affirmation, and not as a. question. Aretius maintains the
same view.
51. — ['Ferily, verily I say.] This expression is peculiar to St. John's
Gospel, and very remarkable. It is the word which is familiar
to aU Christians, " Amen," twice repeated. It is found twenty-
five times in this Gospe', always at the beginning of a sentence,
and always used by Christ. In every place it implies a very
solemn, emphatic assertion of some great truth, or heart-search
ing fact. No other writer in the New Testament, except St.
John, ever gives the double " Amen."
[Hereafter...ye shall see...heaven...angels...Son of man.] This
prediction is very remarkable. It should be carefully observed,
that it is not addressed to Nathanael alone. The preceding verse
says, " thou shalt see." The present verse says, " ye shall see,"
— that is, " thou and aU my other disciples."
About the true meaning of the prediction, commentators diifer
exceedingly. Arguing, as nearly aU do, that the words plainly
refer to Jacob's vision of the ladder reaching from heaven to
earth, (Gen. xxvi'i. 12,) they disagree about the way in which
the prediction is fulfiUed.
Some think, as Stier, that the prediction must be interpreted
figuratively, and that it was fiilfilled when our Lord was upon
earth. They think it only means that Nathanael and the other
dijc-ip'cs wou'd see a still fuller revelation of Christ and the

JOHN, CHAP. 1. 85
Gospel by and bye. They would see a figurative fulfilment of
Jacob's vision, and a way opened from earth to heaven for all
true IsraeUtes or beUevers. They would see stiU greater proofs,
in the shape of miracles and signs, that Jesus was the Son of
God. Heaven, in a spiritual sense shut by the sin of the first
Adam, would be opened by the obedience of the second Adam.
"The heavenly ladder," says Bonaventura, quoted by Calovius,
" was broken in Adam and repaired in Christ." — According to
this view, " the angels of God " in the text mean nothing in
particular, which, to say the least, seems a very loose and un-
satit-factory explanation.
Others think, as Eollock, that the prediction must be inter
preted Uterally, and that it was fulfilled while our Lord was on
earth. They think it was accomphshed when our Lord was
transfigured, — when an angel appeared in the garden of Geth-
semane, — and when our Lord ascended on the Mount of Olives.
This view also seems very unsatisfactory. The transfiguration,
and the agony in the garden, were not seen by Nathanael at all.
There is nothing whatever said about angels appearing, either
at the transfiguration or the ascension. And as to " angels as
cending and descending," there is nothing at any period of the
Gospel history at all answering to the expression.
The only true and satisfactory view, I beUeve, is that which
makes the whole prediction apply to events which are still future.
Our Lord spoke of His second coming and kingdom. When He
comes the second time to take His gieat power and reign, the
-words of this text shaU be UteraUy fulfilled. His believing peo
ple shall see heaven open, and a constant communication kept up
between heaven and earth, — the tabernacle of God with men,
and the angels visibly ministering to the King of Israel, and
King of all the earth.
The context confirms me in this view of the text. Nathanael
believed Jesus to be the Messiah, when he was lowly and poor.
Jesus rewards his faith by assuring him that, lowly as He now
seems. He shaU one day come in the clouds of heaven and reign
as a King.
I am further confirmed by the striking Ukeness between our
Lord's words here, and those He addressed to the chief priests,
in the day that He was arraigned as a prisoner before them.
"Hereafter ye thall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand
of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." (Matt. xxvi. C4.)
This view of the p-ediction is maintained by Gomarus.
I am aware that son;e maintain, in opposition to the view 1
support; that the Greek word rendered " hereafter," must mean
"from henceforth, i. e immediately afler the p esent tim '. and

86 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
ever hereafter," and does not imply a distant event. In reply,
I would have it speciaUy noted, that the Greek word here trans
lated "hereafter," is the very same that is used by our Lord in
the solemn words, just quoted, which he addressed to the chief
priests when He was arraigned. (Matt. xxvi. 69.) In that case,
there cannot be any reasonable doubt that He spoke of a far
distant event and time. I beUeve, that in like manner, He
speaks of a far distant event and time in this place.
As to the nature of Christ's future kingdom, and the inter
course which shall then be kept up by angels between earth and
heaven, this is not the place to speak. I only remark, that the
words before us wiU probably receive a far more real and Uteral
accomplishment than many of us are expecting.
It is worthy of reraark that Nathanael caUs our Lord " the
Son of God." Jesus in His prediction teUs him he shall see
angels ascending and descending on the " Son of man." He
whom Nathanael now saw as a man, would yet appear as man
glorified in the heavenly kingdom. He would even then be
God-man. The expression " Son of man," here first used by St.
John, seems derived, as Chemnitius says, from Daniel's words in
a prophecy about Messiah. (Dan. vii. 13, 14.) It is never apphed
to our Lord by any but Himself, except by Stephen. (Acts vii.
56.) Lightfoot thinks that " it is used so often by our Saviour
about Himself, as intimating that he is the second Adam, the
true seed of the woman."
In leaving this passage, the question naturally arises, Who
was Nathanael? How is it that we hear so little afterwards of
so good a man and so clear-sighted a believer ?
Some think, as Augustine and others, that Nathanael was
purposely not placed among our Lord's immediate companions
and apostles, because he was a man of learning and knowledge,
lest any should say that our Lord chose learned men to be His
first ministers. I can see nothing in this argument. There is
no evidence to my own mind that Nathanael was more learned
than other Jews of humble birth, in our Lord's time. More
over he was a friend of Philip, one of our Lord's apostles, and
most probably a man of simUar position and attainments. — In
fact we are told elsewhere that he Uved at " Cana of Galilee."
(lohn xxi. 1.)
Some think, because Nathanael Uved at Cana, that he was tho
same person as the apostle Simon the Canaan-te. (Matt, x 4 ;
Mark iii. 18.)
Some think, that he w.as Stephen the martyr, because Stephen
saw the heavens opened in vision. (Acts vii. 56.)

JOHN, CHAP. II.

87

The most probable opinion to my own mind is, that Nathanae'
-was the apostle who is called elsewhere Bartholomew, and who
Uke others of the apostles, had two names. In favour of this
opinion there are three remarkable facts. The first is, that in
three Usts of the twelve apostles out of four, the names of Philip
and Bartholomew are always found together. (Matt. x. 3 ; Mark
iii. 18 ; Luke vi. 14.) — The second is, that Nathanael is specially
mentioned after our Lord's ascension as a companion of Peter,
Thomas, James, John, and two other disciples. — The third is,
that St. John never once mentions the name of Bartholomew
in his Gospel. — The objection that Nathanael's name is never
mentioned by Matthew, Mark, or Luke, is of no weight. No one
of the three, it may be replied, tells us that Peter was called
Cephas. Only Matthew gives Jude, the brother of James, tho
name of Lebbteus.
The point happily is not one of any particular importance. I
only say that the conjectural probabiUty that Nathanael was an
apostle, and was the same as Bartholomew, seems to me very
strong and weU founded.
In leaving this chapter the observation of Aretius is worth
quoting. He remarks that the chapter is singularly rich in
names or epithets applied to the Lord Jesus Christ. He num
bers up the following twenty-one. 1. The Word. 2. God. 3.
Life. 4. Light. 5. The true Ught. 6. The only begotten of
the Father. 7. Pull of grace and truth. 8. Jesus Christ. 9.
The only begotten Son. 10. The Lord. 11. The Lamb of God.
12. Jesus. 13. A Man. 14. The Son of God. 15. Eabbi. 16.
Teacher. 17. Messiah. 18. Christ. 19. The Son of Joseph.
20. The King of Israel. 21. The Son of man.

JOHN IL 1.— 11.

1 And the third day there was a
marriage in Cana of GaUlee ; and
the mother of Jesus was there :
2 Andboth Jesus was caUed, and
his disciples, to the marriage.
3 And when they wanted wine,
the mother of Jesus saith unto him,
They have no -wine.
4 Jesus saith unto her, 'Woman,
what have I to do -with thee ? mine
hour is not yet come.
5 His mother saith unto the ser

vants, "Whatsoever he sait'u unto
you, do it.
6 And there were set there sis
waterpots of stone, after the man
ner of the purifying of the Jews,
containing two or three firkins
apiece. 1 Jesus saith unto them, Pill tho
waterpots -with water. And they
fined thera up to the brim.
8 And he saith unto them, Dra^s
out now, and bear unto the g07-

EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.

ernor of the feast. And they bare
it. 9 "When the ruler of the feast
had tasted the water that was made
-wine, and knew not whence it was :
(but the servants which drew the
water knew ;) the govemor of the
feast called the bridegroom,
10 And saith unto him. Every

man at the beginning doth set forth
good -wine; and when men hava
well drunk, then that which is
worse : hut thou hast kept the good
vrine untu now.
11 This beginning of miracles
did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and
manifested forth his glory ; aud his
disciples beUeved on him.

These verses describe a miracle which should always
possess a special interest in the eyes of a true Christian.
It is the first, in order of time, of the many mighty
works which Jesus did, when He was upon earth. "We
are distinctly told, " This beginning of miracles did .lesus
in Cana of Galilee." — Like every other miracle which St.
John was inspired to record, it is related with great
minuteness and particularity. And, like every other
miracle in St. John's Gospel, it is rich in spiritual les
sons. We learn, firstly, from these verses, how honourable in
the sight of Christ is the estate of matrimony. To be
present at a " marriage" was almost the first public act of
our Lord's earthly ministry.
Marriage is not a sacrament, as the Church of Eome
asserts. It is simply a state of life ordained by God for
man's benefit. But it is a state which ought never to be
spoken of with levity, or regarded with disrespect. The
Prayerbook service has well described it, as " an honoura
ble estate, instituted of God in the time of man's inno
cency, and signifying unto us the mystical union that is
betwixt Christ and his Church." Society is never in a
healthy conditiop, and true religion never flourishes in
that land where the marriage tie is lightly esteemed.
They who lightly esteem it have not the mind of Christ.
He who " beautified and adorned the estate of matrimony
by His presence and first miracle that Ho wrought in
Cana of Galilee," is One who is always of one mind.

JOHN, CHAP. n. 89
" Marriage," says the Holy Ghost by St. Paul, " is hon
curable in all." (Heb. xiii. 4.)
One thing, however, ought not to be forgotten,
Marriage is a step which so seriously affects the temporal
happiness and spiritual welfare of two immortal souls,
that it ought never to be taken in hand " imad-visedly,
lightly, wantonly, and without due consideration." To
be truly happy, it should be undertaken "reverently,
discreetly, soberly, and in the fear of God." Christ's
blessing and presence are essential to a happy wedding.
The marriage at which there is no place for Christ and
His disciples, is not one that can justly be expected to
prosper. We learn, secondly, from these verses, that there are times
when it is lawful to be merry and rejoice. Our Lord
Himself sanctioned a wedding-feast by His own presence.
He did not refuse to be a guest at " a marriage in Cana
of Galilee." " A feast," it is written, " is made for
laughter, and wine maketh merry." (Eccles. x. 19.)
Our Lord, in the passage before us, countenances both
the feast and the use of wine.
True religion was never meant to make men melancholy.
On the contrary, it was intended to increase real joy and
happiness among men. The servant of Christ unquestion
ably ought to have nothing to do with races, balls, theatres,
and such-like amusements, which tend to frivolity and dis
sipation, if not to sin. But he has no right to hand over
innocent recreations and family gatherings to the devil and
the world. The Christian who withdraws entirely from
the society of his fellow-men, and walks the earth with a
face as melancholy as if he was always attending a funeral,
does injury to the cause of the Gospel. A cheerful, kindly
spirit is a great recommendation to a believer. It is a
positive misfortune to Christianity when a Christian cannot
smEe. A merry heart, and a readiness to take part in all

90 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
innocent mirth, are gifts of inestimable value. They go
far to soften prejudices, to take up stumbling-blocks out of
the way, and to make way for Christ and the Gospel.
The subject no doubt is a diificult and delicate one. On
no point of Christian practice is it so hard to hit the mean
between that which is lawful and that which is unlawful,
between that which is right and that which is wrong. It
is very hard indeed to be both merry and wise. High
spirits soon degenerate into levity. Acceptance of many
invitations to feasts soon leads to waste of time, and begets
leanness of soul. Frequent eating and drinking at other
men's tables, soon lowers a Christian's tone of religion.
Going often into company is a heavy strain on spirituality
of heart. Here, if anywhere, God's children have need to
be on their guard. Each must know his own strength and
natural temperament, and act accordingly. One believer
can go without risk where another cannot. Happy is he
who can use his Christian liberty without abusing it ! It
is possible to be sorely wounded in soul at marriage feasts
and the tables of friends.
One golden rule on the subject may be laid down, the
use of which will save us much trouble. Let us take care
that we always go to feasts in the spirit of our divine
Master, and that we never go where He would not have
gone. Like Him, let us endeavour to be always " about
our Father's business." (Luke ii. 49.) Like Him, let us
wiUingly promote joy and gladness, but let us strive that
it may be sinless joy, if not joy in the Lord. Let us en
deavour to bring the salt of grace into every company, and
to drop the word in season in every ear we address. Much
good may be done in society by giving a healthy tone to
conversation. Let us never be ashamed to show our
colours, and to make men see whose we are and whom we
serve. We may well say, " Who is sufficient for these
things ?" But if Christ -went to a marriage feast in Cana

JOHN, CHAP. II. 91
there is surely something that Christians can do on similar
occasions. Let them only remember that if they gci where
their Master went, they must go in their Master's spirit.
We learn lastly, from these verses, th£, Almighty power
of our Lord Jesus Christ, We are told of a miracle which
He wrought at the marriage feast, when the wine failed.
By a mere act of wiU He changed water into wine, and so
supplied the need of all the guests.
The manner in which the miracle was worked deserves
especial notice. We are not told of any outward visible
action which preceded or accompanied it. It is not said
that He touched the waterpots containing the water that
was made wine. It is not said that He commanded the
water to change its qualities, or that He prayed to His
Father in Heaven. He simply willed the change, and it
took place. We read of no prophet or apostle in the Bible
who ever worked a miracle after this fashion. He who
could do such a mighty work, in such a manner, was no
thing less than very God.
It is a comfortable thought that the same almighty
power of will which our Lord here displ.ayed is still exer
cised on behalf of His believing people. They have no
need of His bodily presence to maintain their cause.
They have no reason to be cast down because they can
not see Him with their eyes interceding for them, or touch
Him with their hands, that they may cling to Him for
safety. If He " wills " their salvation and the daily sup
ply of all their spiritual need, they are as safe and well
provided for as if they saw Him standing by them.
Christ's will is as mighty and effectual as Christ's deed.
The will of Him who could say to the Father, " I will
that they whom thou hast given me be with me where I
am," is a will that has all power in heaven and earth, and
must prevail. (John xvii. 24.)
Happy ave those who, like the disciples, beheve on Him

92 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
by whom this miracle was wrought. A greater marriage
feast than that of Cana will one day be held, when Christ
Himself will be the bridegroom and believers will be the
bride. A greater glory will one day be manifested, when
Jesus shall take to Himself His great power and reign.
Blessed wiU they be in that day who are called to the
narriage supper of the Lamb ! (Rev. xix. 9.)
Notes. John II. 1 — II.
1. — [The third day.] The question naturaUy arises, " What day
was this? Prom what day was it the third ?" The most pro
bable answer is, that it was the third day after the last event
described in the preceding chapter, the third day after Nathanael
was brought to Jesus and became a disciple. The meaning
therefore is, " The third day after the conversation between
Jesus and Nathanael."
[A marriage in Cana.] Let it be remembered, that we are
told elsewhere that Nathanael was an inhabitant of Cana. (John
xxi. 2.) This makes it far from improbable, that Nathanael,
after he became a disciple, invited our Lord to visit the place
where he Uved. Cana is a place not mentioned in the Old
Testament. Eobinson, in his Biblical Eesearches, says it was a
viUage about three hours' journey from Nazareth.
[The mother of Jesus ivas there.] We must suppose that the
Virgin Mary was in some way connected with the bride or
bridegroom, and was therefore present at the marriage and as
sisting in the arrangements of the feast. Without some such
supposition it is difiicult to understand her speaking to the ser
vants, as she afterwards does.
The absence of Joseph's name, both here and in other places
where the mother of our Lord is mentioned in the Gospels and
Acts, has induced most commentators to think that Joseph was
dead when our Lord began His pubUc ministry. The point is
one of which we know nothing except by conjecture. It de
serves notice, however, that the Jews of Capernaum speak of
Jesus as " the son of J oseph, whose father and mother we know."
(John vi. 42 ) If it had been profitable to us to know more
about Joseph, we should have been told more. The Eoman
CathoUc Church has aheady given him a superstitious reverence,
upon the authority of tradition, and without the slightest war
rant of Scripture. What would have not been said about Joseph
by the Eomish Church, if he had been more prominently men
tioned in God's Word ?

JOHN, CHAP. II. 93
_ Lightfoot points out that a comparison of Mark iii. 18 Mark
VI. 3, and John xix. 25, makes it exceedingly probable that the
Virgin Mary's sister, caUed elsewhere Mary, the wife of Cleophas
or Alpheus, and aU her family, Uved at Cana. He observes, that
in the list of our Lord's " brethren " or cousms we find the foUow
ing names, — James, Joses, Juda, and Simon. Of these he thinks
that James, Juda, and Simon were apostles. James the apostle
is expressly called " the brother of our Lord," and the son of
Alpheus, and Jude is expressly caUed brother of this James
(Gal. i. 19 ; Jude 1 .) The remaining brother, Simon, he think
was the apostle who is called Simon the Canaanite. This, Light
foot argues, is a proof that his father and mother lived at Cana ;
and hence he concludes that this marriage feast was in the house
of Alpheus. That Alpheus and Cleophas were the same person
is a general and well-founded opinion.
2. — [Jeszcs was called... .disciples.] Our Lord was doubtless invited
as the 'Virgin Mary's son. His disciples were invited as His
friends and companions. We cannot, of course, suppose, at so
early a period of our Lord's ministry, that He was recognized as
a reUgious teacher, or those with Him as disciples of a new
faith. The disciples here spoken of must be the five mentioned
in the last chapter, viz., Andrew and his companion, (probably
John,) Simon Peter, Philip, and Nathanael.
[To the marriage.] We know nothing about the names of the
bride and bridegroom. There is a legend among Eomish writers
that the bridegroom was John the apostle, and that though
married, John left wife and home at once, in order to become
Christ's disciple ! The whole story is utterly destitute of Scrip
tural foundation, and a tissue of improbabiUties. Baronius
conjectures that the bridegroom was Simon the Canaanite, but
-without any proof worth mentioning.
Let it be noted, that the presence of Jesus, and His disciples,
and the Virgin Mary at a marriage, is a significant fact, which
stands out in strong contrast to the Patristic and Eoman Catholic
doctrine, of the imperfection of the state of marriage compared
to that of celibacy. "Forbidding to marry" is a doctrine of
Antichrist, not of Christ. (1 Tim. iv. 3.)
The Eoman Catholic argument, that Christ, by His presence,
made marriage a sacrament, is utterly worthless. .Dyke remarks
that we might as weU caU feasts and burials sacraments, because
Christ was present at them. He says, " There is required a word
of institution to make a sacrament. Let the Papists show any
such word here used. And if Christ did make marriage a sacra
ment, why do they call it a work of the flesh ? Are saciaments
works of the flesh ? "

94 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
The suggestion of some modern writers, that our Lord's pre
sence at a marriage feast condemns those Christians who decline
to go to such amusements as balls, and routs, and dancing-parties,
has no weight in it at all. The objects for which people meet
together at a marriage feast and at a ball are widely diff"erent.
The one is a mere irreligious assembly for pleasure and recrea
tion of a very questionable tendency, entailing late hours, and
ministering to worldUness, levity, and the love of display. The
other is a gathering of friends to witness the most important step
in life that two persons can take, and a gathering closely con
nected with a religious ceremony.
3. — [ When they wanted wine!] The Greek words so rendered mean
UteraUy, " "Wine having I'ailed." This circumstance probably
shows the poor and humble condition of those to whose marriage
Jesus was invited. His acquaintances and those of His mother
were not wealthy persons.
It throws light on this expression, and indeed on the whole
story, to remember that a marriage feast among the Jews was often
an affair of several days' duration, and an occasion when many
were invited. Consequently it entailed not only much expense,
but a considerable consumption of food and wine. Thus Sam
son's marriage feast lasted seven days. (Judges xv. 10 — IS.)
Thus the marriage feast described in the parable of the Bang's
Son, was a feast which large numbers were invited to attend.
(Matt. XXU. 2, &c.) This being the case, we may well understand
that in the feasts of those who were not wealthy the wine might
soon run short, without there having been .iny excess of drinking.
So it seems to have happened in the case before us.
[The mother of Jesus... .saith.. ..no wine!] This little sentence
has given rise to various and strange interpretations.
Some have thought, as Bengel, that Mary suggested to our
Lord that it was time for Him and His disciples to depart and
leave the feast, in order to spare the feelings of the bride and
bridegroom, and to avoid exposing their poverty.
Some have thought, as Calvin, that she wished our Lord to
occupy the minds of the guests by profitable discourse, and so
to take off their attention from the deficiency of wine.
By far the most reasonable and probable idea is, that Mary
conjectured that our Lord might in some way supply the de-
ficienc;y of wine. How it would be done she could not teU.
There is not the slightest gi-ound for supposing that our Lord
had ever worked a miracle up to this time. But it would be
foolish to suppose that Mary did not remember well all the mi
raculous circumstances of our Lord's birth, and aU the words

JOHN, CHAP. II. 95
spoken before by the angel Gabriel concerning Him,— We cannot
doubt, that although our Lord had Uved a quiet life at Nazareth for
thirty years, and done no miracles, His mother must have observed
in Him a perfection of word and deed utterly unlike the behaviour
of common men. — AVe cannot doubt that she was aware of aU
the events of the last few weeks, — our Lord's baptism by John,
John's public proclamation of Him as the Messiah, and the
gathering around Jesas of a smaU knot of disciples. — Eemem-
bering all these things, we surely need not wonder that Mary's
expectations were greatly raised. She looked for her Son speedily
doing some great miracle. She was in daily expectation that
He would prove Himself the Messiah by some mighty act. And
it was under these feelings that she turned to Him, saying,
" They have no wine." It is as though she said, — " Surely the
time is come for declaring thyself. Manifest thy power, as I
have long expected thee to do, by providing a supply of wine."
The argument which the Eoman Catholics draw from this
expression in favour of the Virgin Mary's intercession in heaven
for sinners, and the consequent lawfulness of praying to her, is
utterly worthless, and most unhappy. For one thing, it does not
foUow, because the petitions of Uving saints are heard upon earth,
that the petitions of dead saints in heaven are effectual. Por
another thing, it is an unfortunate fact, that this petition, the
only one that we ever find addressed to our Lord by the Virgin
Mary, brought from Him an immediate rebuke ! Men must be
in great straits for an argument when they can reason in this
way in defence of the invocation of saints 1
Melancthon, Chemnitius, and others, think that this want of
wine at the marriage feast is purposely mentioned in order to
remind married persons, or those who intend marriage, that
matrimony brings with it cares as weU as comforts, and specially
cares from poverty. They that marry do weU, and with Christ's
blessing wiU have happiness. But they must not expect to
escape " trouble in the flesh " fi-om the very day of marriage.
(1 Cor. vu. 28.)
4. — [Jesus saith, Woman, what, &c., &c.] This remarkable verse
has naturally attracted great attention. In interpreting it, it is
very important to avoid the extremes into which some Protest
ants and nearly aU Eoman Catholic writers have faUen, in theh
interpretations. On the one side we must not lay too much stress on the ex
pression " "Woman." It is surely a mistake to suppose, as Calvin
and others suggest, that it conveys any reproof, or is anywise
inconsistent with reverence and respect. The very same ex
pression was used by our Lord when He addressed His mother
for the last time on the cross, and affectionately commended her

96 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
to John's care. He said, "Woman, behold thy son.'' (John
xix. 26.) The Virgin Mary was an erring woman, like aU other
beUeving women, but we must not lay more blame on her than
Scripture warrants.
On the other side, it is useless to deny that our Lord's words
were intended, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Euthymius say,
to be a rebuke to Mary. She erred here, perhaps from affection
ate desire to bring honour to her Son, as she erred on other
occasions. The words before us were meant to remind her, that
she must henceforth leave our Lord to choose His own times and
modes of acting. The season of subjection to her and Joseph
was over. The season of his pubhc ministry had at length
begun. In carrying on that ministry, she must not presume to
suggest to Him. The utter contrariety of this verse to the
teaching of the Eoman CathoUc Church about the Virgin Mary
is too palpable to be explained away. She was not without
error and sin, as Eomish writers have dared to assert, and was
not meant to be prayed to and adored. If our Lord would not
allow His mother even to suggest to Him the working of a mha-
cle, we may well suppose that aU Eoman Catholic prayers to the
Virgin Mary, and especiaUy prayers entreating her to " command
her Son," are most offensive and blasphemous in His eyes.
The Greek expression, rendered "what have I to do with
thee," would be translated literaUy, "what to me and thee?"
It is an eUiptical expression, of which the fuU meaning probably
is, "What is there in common to me and thee ? " " My thoughts,"
as Bengel says, " are one thing, and thine another." — It is the
same phrase that is used in an interrogative form in Matt. viii.
29 ; Mark i. 24, v. 7 ; Luke vui 28 ; and in an imperative form in
Matt, xxvii. 19.
[Mine hour is not yet come.] The simplest and most reason
able view of these words is to refer them to Christ's " hour " oi
time for working a miracle. It is like the expression, " my time
is not yet fuU come." (John vn. 8.) Our Lord did not teU Mary
that He would not work a miracle. But He would have her
know that she must not expect Him to do mighty works to
please His relatives after the flesh. He would only work a
miracle, upon this or any other occasion, when the fitting season
for it, the time appointed in God's counsel, had arrived.
There is a curious idea maintained by Augustine, Wordsworth,
and others, that our Lord here referred to -the hour of His cruci
fixion, and that He meant, " My hour is not yet come for recog
nizing thee and honouring thee publicly as my mother, but I
shaU do it one day on ti-ie cross." This however seems a very
far-fetched and improbable application of the words.

JOHN, CHAP. II. 97
it. — [His mother saith...do it.] Two things are very noteworthy in
this verse. One is the meekness with which the Virgin Mary
submitted to the gentle rebuke which came from our Lord's
mouth, in the last verse. The other is the firm faith which she
still exhibited in our Lord's power to work a miracle in order to
supply the lack of wine, and in the probabiUty of His working
it. Dyke observes, " The direction which Mary gives to the ser
vants belongs to us aU. We must perform simple obedience to
Christ in all things ; His sayings must be our doings. No rea
soning of the matter must there be, no inquiry, as into men's
commandments and speeches ; but this must suffice, ' Christ hath
said it.' This is the bUnd obedience which Jesuits yield to their
superiors, but it is the obedience that belongs to Christ. Many
will do something that Christ says, but not whatsoever He says."
It is not, perhaps going too far to say, that after observing
her Son's perfect Ufe and perfect wisdom during thirty years at
Nazareth, Mary spoke the words before us with special confidence,
and with a greater depth of meaning than appears on the sur
face of the sentence. — " Whatsoever He says deserves attention.
Whatsoever He says, do it." — At any rate the verse contains a
deep practical lesson for the whole Church of Christ. Whatso
ever Christ says, let us obey and do.
C. —[Six water-pots... .after the manner. ...Jews.] St. John mentions
these details in describing the miracle, with a special reference
to GentUe readers. He meant them to understand that there
was nothing remarkable in the circumstance that there were six
large water-pots of stone in the place where the feast was held.
The peculiar customs of the Jews about ceremonial washings
and purifyings, made it necessary to have a large supply of
water at hand. The words of St. Mark throw Ught on the verse
before us: — " The Pharisees, and aU the Jews, except they wash
their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders," &c.
(Mark viL 3, &c.) The presence of the six water-pots, therefore,
could not arise from coUusion or pre-arrangement. It was a
natural consequence of Jewish habits in our Lord's times.
[Tivo or three firkins apiece.] Many fooUsh and unprofitable
rsiiarks have been buUt on this expression, as to the very large
quantity of wine which our Lord must have created when the
miracle we are considering was wrought. It might suffice to
reply that there is much uncertainty about the precise quantity
of Uquid which the ancient measure, which we here render
" firkins " contained. But the best and safest answer is, that we
must not measure the demands of a Jewish marriage feast, which
perhaps lasted several days, and included a large number ot
guests, by the feasts of our own times.
5

98 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
7. — [Jesus saith....fill the water-pots, ic] The remark is frequently
made Dy commentators on this verse, with much propriety, that
these simple words describe the duty of all who work for Christ,
and especially of ministers and teachers. They are to hear
Christ's voice, and do as He teUs them, and then leave the result
to Him. Duties are ours. Events are God's. It is ours to fiU
the water-pots. It is Christ's to make the water wine.
[Up to the brim.] Tliis circumstance is no doubt mentioned
in order to show that there was no room left for trick, jugglery,
or imposture. What was put into the water-pots was water, and
only water, and they were so filled that nothing could be infused,
or mingled with their contents.
8. — [And he saith.. .draw out now.] It was at this moment, no
doubt, that the miracle took place. By an act of will our Lord
changed the contents of the water-pots. That which was poured
in was water. That which was drawn out was wine. To Him
who created the vine and made it bear grapes at the first, the
change was perfectly easy. He who could create matter out of
nothing, could much more easily change one kind of matter into
another. [The governor of the feast] This person appears to have been
one who presided at large entertainments like that before us,
and superintended all the proceedings. The Greek word so
rendered, is precisely the same as that translated " ruler of the
feast," in the foUowing verse. The presence of such a person
at feasts was a weU-known custom among the Greeks and
Eomans.
9. — [Tasted...ivine...knew not whence ii was.] The testimony of the
ruler of the feast is specially adduced, in order to show the
reality of the miracle. He knew nothing of what had been
done to the water-pots. He had not seen the water poured in
by our Lord's command. There was no coUusion or conspiracy
between him and the servants, much less between him and our
Lord. Hence the value of his testimony. He not only testifies
that the Uquid which a few minutes before was water was now
wine, but that it was also wine of more than common goodness
and strength, — not wine mixed with water, but pure, good
wine. Let the word " tasted " be carefully noticed in this place. It
BuppUes a strong incidental argument against the Eomish doctrine
of transubstantiation. The occasion before us is the only known
occasion on which our Lord changed one liquid into another.
When He did so change it, the reaUty of the change was
at once proved by the "taste." Why is it then that in the
pretended change of the sacramental wine in the Lord's Supper

JOHN, CHAP. II. 99
into Christ's blood the change cannot be detected by the senses ?
Why does the wine after consecration taste like wine, just as it
did before? — These are questions which the Eoman Catholics
cannot satisfactorily answer. The pretended change of the bread
and wine in the Lord's Supper is a complete delusion. It is
contradicted by the senses of every communicant. The bread
after consecration is still bread, and the wine is still wine. That
which contradicts our senses we are nowhere required in God's
Word to beUeve.
10.—[Eh)ery man at the beginning, <£c.] The words in this sentence
must not be pressed too closely, in order to bring out of them a
spiritual meaning. The ruler of the feast makes a general remark
about the way in which banquets were usually managed. The
ordinary custom was to bring the best wine first, and the inferior
wine last. But the wine before him, drawn from the water-pots,
was so singularly good, that the custom of this day seemed
reversed. The verse is a strong incidental testimony to the
reality and greatness of our Lord's miracle. Not only did He
change water into wine, but into wine so singularly good as to
excite remark and attention.
[When men have weU drunk.] FooUsh remarks have sometimes
been made on this expression, as if our Lord had countenanced
excessive drinking on this occasion. For one thing, it may be
remarked that the Greek word rendered " have well drunk," does
not necessarily imply intoxication. It may be justly interpreted,
as Schleu.^ner and Parkhurst observe, "have drunk sufficiently,
or drunk freely." — Men who have had enough, are indifferent as
to the quality of the wine set before them. Por another thing,
we must remember that the ruler of the feast was only making
a general remark about men's ordinary customs in supplying
wine to their guests. There is nothing whatever to show that
he was alluding to the guests actually before him.
[Thou hast kept ihe good wine until now.] A good practical
remark has often been raised from these words of the ruler of
the feast. The world gives its best things, Uke the best wine,
, first, and its worst things last. The longer we serve the world,
the more disappointing, unsatisfactory, and unsavoury wiU its
gifts prove. Christ, on the other hand, gives His servants their
best things last. They have first the cross, the race, and the
battle, and then the rest, the glory, and the crown. Specially
will it be found true at his second advent. Then wiU beUevers
say emphatically, " Thou hast kept the good wine until now."
These are pious and useful thoughts. But it may be doubted
whether they are more than accommodations.
This is perhaps the proper place to remark, that it seems
utterly impossible, on any fair and honest interpretation, to re-

100 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
concile the passage before us with the leading principles of what
is commonly called " Teetotalism." If our Lord Jesus Christ
actually worked a miracle in order to supply wine at a marriage
feast, if seems to me impossible, by any ingenuity, to prove that
drinking wine is sinful. Temperance in all things is one of the
fruits of the Spirit. An intemperate man is an unconverted
man. Total abstinence from fermented liquors is in many cases
most useful and desirable. But to say, as many do say, that to
drink any fermented liquor at all is " a sin," is taking up ground
that cannot be maintained in the face of the passage before us,
without wresting the plain meaning of Scripture, and charging
Christ with abetting sin.
11.— [This beginning of miracles, c&c.] The plain meaning of this
sentence seems to be that this was the first miracle which our
Lord Jesus Christ ever worked. The miracles which some have
reported that He worked in His infancy and childhood, are
destitute of the slightest foundation in Scripture, and utterly
unworthy of credit. Those who wish to see their absurdity wiU
find specimens of them in the preliminary Essay to Trench's
Notes on Miracles.
Lightfoot suggests the five foUowing reasons why the miracle
now before us was purposely the first that Christ worked. 1. As
marriage was the first institution ordained by God, so at a
marriage was Christ's first miracle. 2. As Christ had showed
Himself miraculous a little wMle ago by a fast, so He doth now
by an extraordinary provision at a feast. When He would not
make stones bread, it was not because He could not. 3. He
would not make stones into bread to satisfy Satan, but He was
willing to turn water into wine to show forth His own glory.
4. The first miracle wrought in the world by man was transfor
mation, (Exod. vii. 9,) and the first miracle wrought by the Son
of Man was of the same nature. 5. The first time you hear of
John the Baptist, you hear of his strict diet, and so the first time
you hear of Christ in His public ministry, you hear of Him at a
marriage feast.
[Manifested forth liis glory.] I am unable to see that these
words refer to the expression used in the first chapter, " We be
held his glory." (John i. 14.) I beUeve the meaning to be that
" by this miracle Jesus now for the first time opened or revealed
His glorious and divine power, and His commission to be the
Messiah." After thirty years' seclusion at Nazareth, He now
for the first time lifted up the veil which He had thrown over
His divinity in becoming flesh, and revealed something of His
almighty power and Godhead.
[His disciples believed on him!] These words cannot of course
mean that Arndew, and John, and Peter, and Philip, and Na-

JOHN, CHAP. II. 101
thanael now beUeved on Jesus for the first time. The probable
meaning is, that from this time forth they believed more confi-
denfly, more implicitiy, and more unhesitatingly. From this time
they feft thorougly convinced, in spite of much remaining igno
rance, that He whom they were following was the Messiah.
I cannot close the note on this wonderful miracle without
saying something about the aUegorical and typical meanings
assigned to it by the fathers and many other commentators.
Many see in the miracle an allegorical history of the introduction
of the Gospel into the worid. Like the marriage feast, the
Gospel was an occasion of joy. As at the marriage feasr, the
personal presence of Jesus was the great feature of the Gospel.
The times of the Jewish dispensation were times of deficiency
and dim Ught. The coming of Christ supplied aU that was
lacking. Eevealed reUgion before Christ was like water. Christ
coming into the world turned the water of the old dispensation
into wine. The good wine was reserved until the time of Christ.
The first miracle wrought by Moses was turning water into
blood. The first wrought by Christ was turning water into wine.
These are undoubtedly pious thoughts, and fuU of truth. I
should be sorry to speak harshly of them, or to pronounce de
cidedly that they may not be legitimately deduced from the
miracle. I orUy venture the remark, that it is far wiser to
abstain from allegorical interpretations as a general rule, and
to be content with the plain meaning which appears on the sur
face of Scripture. Once begin aUegorizing Scripture, and you
never know where you are to stop. You may prove anything,
and find anything in the Bible upon the aUegorical system, and
at last throw open the floodgate to a torrent of wild fanaticism.
The aUegorical lessons drawn from this miracle by Augustine,
Bernard, and Alcuin, are striking examples of the extremes into
which aUegory may run. When such a man as Augustine, for
instance, teUs us that the two or three firkins mean the two
races of men, Jews and Greeks, or the three sons of Noah, — or
when he says that the six water-pots in the miracle before us
denote six successive prophetical periods in the days between
Adam and Christ, one cannot but feel that there is something
wrong. These are his words, " The six water-pots, containing
two or three firkins apiece, are six ages, containing the prophecy
belonging to all nations, whether as referred to two kinds of
men, Jews and GentUes, as the apostle often says, or to three,
on account of the three sons of Noah." The system of inter
preting Scripture which can lead a good man into such assertions
as this, must surely be a dangerous two-edged weapon, aud
likely to do more harm than good.
That all our Lord's miracles were deeply significant, I do not

102

EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.

deny. That aU were mtended to convey deep sphitual lessons,
beside supplying proofs of His divinity, I make no questibn.
AU I maintain is that they require reverent and deUcate handling,
and that to rush hastily into allegorical interpretation's of them,
and invest every minute portion of them with a figurative mean
ing, is an unwise mode of handling Scripture, and eminently
calculated to bring the Bible into contempt.
Hardly any commentator has drawn more useful practical
lessons from this miracle than Melancthon. Those who think
lightly of Protestant divinity would do well to compare his com
mentary on the whole passage with that of Augustine.

JOKSr n. 12—25,

12 After this he went down to
Capernaum, he, and his mother, and
his brethren, and his disciples: and
they continued there not many days.
13 And the Jews' Passover was
at hand, and Jesus went up to Je
rusalem. 14 And found in the temple those
that sold oxen and sheep and doves,
and the changers of money sitting :
15 And when he had made a
scourge of smaU cords, he drove
them aU out of the temple, and the
sheep, and the oxen: and poured
out the changers' money, and over
threw the tables ;
1 6 And said unto them that sold
doves, Take these things hence;
make not my Father's house an
house of merchandise.
IT And his disciples remembered
that it was written, The zeal of
thine house hath eaten me up.
18 Then answered the Jews and
said unto him, "What sign shewest
thou unto us, seeing that thou do-
est these things ?

19 Jesus answered and said unto
them, Desti'oy this temple, and in
three days I -wiU raise it up.
20 Then said the Jews, Porty
and six years was this temple in
buflding, and vrilt thou rear it up
in three days ?
21 But he spake of the temple
of his body.
22 "When therefore he was risen
from the dead, his disciples remem
bered that he had said this unto
them ; and they believed the Scrip
ture, and the word which Jesus had
said. 23 Now when ho was in Jerusa
lem, at the Passover, in the feast
day, many believed in his name,
when they saw the miracles which
he did.
24 But Jesus did not commit
himself unto them, because he
knew aU men,
25 And needed not that any
should testify of man : for he knew
what was in man.

The second miracle wliich our Lord is recorded to have
wrought demands our attention in these verses. Like the
first miracle at Cana, it is eminently typical and significant

JOHN, CHAP. II. 103
of things yet to come. To attend a marriage feast, and
cleanse the temple from profanation were among the first
acts of om- Lord's ministry at His first coming. To purify
the whole visible Church, and hold a marriage supper, will
be amongst His first acts, when He comes again.
We see, for one thing, in this passage, how much Christ
disapproves aU irreverent behaviour in the house of God.
We are told that He drove out of the temple those
whom He found selling oxen and sheep and doves within
its walls, — that He poured out the changers' money and
overthrew their tables, — and that He said to them that
sold doves, " take these things hence, make not my
Father's house an house of merchandise." On no occasion
in our Lord's earthly ministry do we find Him acting so
energetically, and exhibiting such righteous indignation,
as on the occasion now before us. Nothing seems to have
called from Him such a marked display of holy wrath as
the gross irreverence which the priests permitted in the
temple, notwithstanding aU their boasted zeal for God's
law. Twice, it will be remembered. He discovered the
same profanation of His Father's house going on, within
three years, once at the beginning of His ministry and
once at the end. T-wice we see Him expressing his dis
pleasure in the strongest terms, " The thing is doubled "
in order to impress a lesson more strongly on our minds.
The passage is one that ought to raise deep searchings
of heart in many quarters. Are there none who profess
and call themselves Christians, behaving every Sunday
just as badly as these Jews ? Are there none who secretly
bring into the house of God their money, their lands, their
houses, their cattle, and a whole train of worldly affairs?
Arc there none who bring their bodies only into the place
of worship, and allow their hearts to wander into the
ends of the earth ? Are there none who are " almost in
all evil, in the midst of -the congregation?" (Prov. v. 14.)

104 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
These are serious questions ! Multitudes, it may be feared,
could not give them a satisfactory answer. Christian
churches and chapels, no doubt, are very unlike the Jew
ish temple. They are not built after a divine pattern.
They have no altars or holy places. Their furniture has
no typical meaning. But they are places where God's
word is read, and where Christ is specially present. The
man who professes to worship in them should surely
behave with revei-ence and respect. The man who brings
his worldly matters with him when he professes to wor
ship, is doing that which is evidently most ofiensive to
Christ. The words which Solomon -wrote by the Holy
Ghost are applicable to all times, " Keep thy foot when
thou goest to the house of God." (Eccles. v. 1.)
We see, for another thing, in this passage, how men may
remember words of religious truth long after they are spok
en, and may one day see a meaning in them which at first
they did not see.
We are told that our Lord said to the Jews, " Destroy
this temple and in three days I will raise it up." St. John
informs us distinctly that " He spake of the temple of His
body," that he referred to His own resurrection. Yet
the meaning of the sentence was not understood by our
Lord's disciples at the time that it was spoken. It was
not till " He was risen from the dead," three years after
the events here described, that the full significance of the
sentence fiashed on their hearts. For three years it was a
dark and useless saying to them. For three years it lay
sleeping in their minds, like a seed in a tomb, and bore no
fruit. But at the end of that time the darkness passed
away. They saw the application of their Master's words,
and as they saw it were confirmed in their faith. " They
remembered that He had said this," and as they remem
bered " they believed."
It is a comfortable and cheering thought, that the same

JOHN, CHAP. II. H).0
kind of thing that happened to the disciples is often going
on at the present day. The sermons that are preached to
apparently heedless ears in churches, are not all lost and
thrown away. The instruction that is given in schools
and pastoral -visits, is not all wasted and forgotten. The
texts that are taught by parents to children are not all
taught in vain. There is often a resurrection of sermons,
and texts, and instruction, after an interval of many years.
The good seed sometimes springs up after he that sowed
it has been long dead and gone. Let preachers go on
preaching, and teachers go on teaching, and parents go on
training up children in the way they should go. Let them
sow the good seed of Bible truth in faith and patience.
Their labour is not in vain in the Lord. Their words are
remembered far more than they think, and will yet spring
up "after many days." (1 Cor. xv. 58 ; Eccles. xi. 1.)
We see, lastly, in this passage, hoio perfect is oxir Lord
Jesus Christ's knowledge of the human heart.
We are told that when our Lord was at Jerusalem, the
first time. He "did not commit Himself" to those who
professed belief in Him. He knew that they were not to
be depended on. They were astonished at the miracles
which they saw Him work. They were even intellectually
convinced that He was the Messiah, whom they had long
expected. But they were not "disciples indeed." (John
viii. 31.) They were not converted, and true believers.
Their hearts were not right in the sight of God, though
their feelings were excited. Their inward man was not
renewed, whatever they might profess with their lips. Our
Lord knew that nearly all of them were stony-ground hear
ers. (Luke viii. 13.) As soon as tribulation or persecu
tion arose because of the word, their so-called faith would
probably wither away and come to an end. All this our
Lord saw clearly, if others around Him did not. Andrew,
and Peter, and John, and Philip, and Nathan.nel, perhnpi

106 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
wondered that their Master did not receive these seeming
believers wdth open arms. But they could only judge
thhigs by the outward appearance. Their Master could
read hearts. " He knew what was in man."
The truth now before us, is one which ought to make
hypocrites and false professors tremble. They may de
ceive men, but they cannot deceive Christ. They may
wear a cloak of religion, and appear, like whited sepul
chres, beautiful iu the eyes of men. But the eyes of
Christ see their inward rottenness, and the judgment of
Christ will surely overtake them, except they repent.
Christ is already reading their hearts, and as He reads He
is displeased. They are known in heaven, if they are not
known on earth, and they will be known at length to their
shame, before assembled w^orlds, if they die unchanged.
It is written, " I know thy works, that thou hast a name
that thou livest, and art dead." (Rev. iii. I.)
But the truth before us has two sides, like the pillar of
cloud and fire at the Red sea. (Exod.. xiv. 20.) If it looks
darkly on hypocrites, it looks brightly on true believers.
If it threatens wrath to false professors, it speaks peace to
all who love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. A real
Christian may be weak, but he is true. One thing, at any
rate, the servant of Christ can say, when cast down by a
sense of his own infirmity, or pained by the slander of a
lying world. He can say, " Lord, I am a poor sinner, but
I am in earnest, I am true. Thou knowest all things : thou
knowest that I love thee. Thou knowest all hearts, and
thou knowest that, weak as my heart is, it is a heart that
cleaves to thee." The false Christian shrinks from the eye
of an all-seeing Saviour. The true Christian desires his
Lord's eye to be on him morning, noon, and night. He
has notliing to hide.

JOHN, CHAP. II. 107

Notes. John IL 12—25.
12. — [He went down to Capernaum.] The strict accuracy of John's
writing is note-worthy here. Cana was a village in the hUl
country. Capernaum was a town on the shore of the lake of
Galilee, at a very much lower level than Cana. It is therefore
said that Jesus " went down!'
Capernaum appears to have been our Lord's principal residence
in Galilee during his earthly ministry. " Leaving Nazareth, he
dwelt in Capernaum." (Matt. iv. 18.) At no place does He seem
to have worked so many miracles ; and on no place does He de
nounce so severe a judgment for its impenitence and neglect of
privileges : " Thou Capernaum whicli art exalted to heaven shalt
be cast down to heU." (Matt. xi. 23.) It is a, striking fact that
though Capernaum was a wealthy and important place in our
Lord's time, it has so entirely passed away and been " cast down," '
that even its situation has never been clearly ascertained.
[His motlier.] Here again we see no mention of Joseph.
Whether the "Virgin Mary was a constant companion of our Lord
throughout His earthly ministry, may be doubted. We see her
here. We see her again at the crucifixion. But we see her in
another place " standing without and desiring to speak with
him " when He was talking to the people, and giving occasion to
the solemn saying, "Who is my mother?" (Matt. xii. 46.) In
deed there is no proof that Mary ever saw more clearly than the
rest of our Lord's disciples the whole purpose of Christ's advent,
or was at ali more prepared than the rest for His crucifixion and
sufferings. [His brethren.] There is no good ground for supposing that
these were our Lord's brethren according to the flesh, and that
Mary ever had any other son after our Lord's miraculous birth. —
For one thing, it is well known to every careful reader, that the
word "brethren " is applied in the Bible to many relatives be
sides those whom we caU " brethren." Abraham says to Lot,
" We be brethren," (Gen. xiii. 8,) though Lot was his nephew.
Mishael and Blzaphan were caUed the " hrdhren " of Nadab and
Abihu, though they were only cousins. (Lev. x. 4.) — Jacob said
" to his brethren " gather stones (Gen. xxxi. 46) ; yet they were
his sons and servants.— For another thing, it is quite possible
: that Joseph might have had chfldren by a former marriage, be
fore he was espoused to the Virgin Mary ; and these children, -we
can well understand, would be caUed our Lord's " brethren.' —In
the last place, we know that the Apostle James was caUed oui
"Lord's brother," (Gal. i. 19,) and yet we are distinctly told that
he was the son of Alpheus or Cleophas, the husband of the Vir
gin Mary's sister. It is therefore most probable that brethren

108 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
in the verse before us means " cousins," some of whom believed
on our Lord, though others did not. (John vii. 5.)
It is an interesting fact, that two at least of our Lord's apostles
were His kinsmen according to the flesh, viz., James and Jude,
the sons of Alpheus. To them we may probably add Simon, on
the strength of Mark vi. 3, and perhaps Matthew also, on the
strength of Mark ii. 14 and Matthew ix. 9.
[And his disciples.] This expression, being used after the
words " His brethren," may raise a doubt whether any of our
Lord's relatives as yet believed on Him, except the Virgin Mary.
It is possible that they only followed Him now out of curiosity,
in consequence of the miracle he had just wrought.
13. — [The Jews' passover...at hand.] This expression is another
proof that St. John wrote his Gospel for Gentile believers rather
than for Jews.
Our Lord's regular attendance on the feasts and ordinances of
the law of Moses, deserves notice. So long as the dispensation
of the Old Testament lasted, He gave it all due honour, how
ever unworthy the hands which administered it. The unwor-
thiness of ministers wiU not justify us in neglecting God's ordi
nances. The exact number of Passovers which our Lord kept, and con
sequently the exact length of His ministry from His baptism to
His crucifixion, are points on which there is much difference of
opinion. For myself I can see no better" view than the old one,
that our Lord's ministry lasted three years. It evidently began
shortly before a Passover, and ended with a Passover. But
whether it included only three Passovers, and in that case lasted
between two and three years, — or four Passovers, and in that
case lasted between three and four years, — I think we have no
materials for deciding positively. If I must venture an opinion,
I think it most Ukely that our Lord only kept three Passovers. —
But it is an open question, and one happily not of deep moment.
— Three Passovers are distinctly named by John, viz., the one
before us, the one in the sixth chapter, (John vi. 3,) and the one
at which our Lord was crucified. If the "feast" mentioned in
the fifth chapter (John v. 1,) was the Passover, our Lord kept
four Passovers. But this last point cannot be settled.
Sir Isaac Newton thought that our Lord kept no less than five
Passovers. Some few writers have maintained that He kept
only two. Those who wish to see the subject discussed wiU find
it in Doddridge's notes on this place.
[Jesus went up to Jerusalem!] Let it be noted, that th's jour
ney, and aU the circumstances which attended this visit to Jeru-

JOHN, CHAP. II. 109
salem, are only related by St. John. For some wise reason the
other three Gospel writers were inspired to leave out this part
of our Lord's history.
14. — [Found in tlie temple those that sold, <&c.] The presence of
oxen, sheep, doves, and money-changers, within \he temple
courts, is easily accounted for. The animals were intended to
supply the wants of Jews who came to the Passover and othfer
feasts, from distant places, and required sacrifices. For them
the dealers in oxen, sheep, and doves, were ready, within a few
yards of the altar. The changers of money came naturally
enough where buying and seUing went on, to meet the conve-
nie-nce of Jews who had nothing but foreign money, which they
wished to exchange for the current coin of Jerusalem. The
tendency of the whole custom was evidently most profane. It
was no doubt connived at by the priests from covetous motives.
They were either connected with those who sold animals and
changed money, and shared in their profits ; or else they re
ceived a rent for the privilege of carrying on business within the
sacred waUs. No doubt they would have pleaded that all was
done with a good intention ! Their end was to provide facihties
for worshipping God I But good intentions cannot sanctify un-
scriptural actions. As Dyke says on the passage, " No pretence
of good ends can justify that which is forbidden by God."
When we are told that our Lord found all this going on " in
the temple," we must of course understand that it means " in
the courtyards surrounding the temple, — within the precincts of
the temple." But these courtyards, we must remember, were
regarded as part of the temple, and therefore holy ground.
I am inclined to see in this visit of our Lord to the temple at
His first appearance in Jerusalem after beginning His ministry, a
partial though very imperfect fulfilment of Malachi's prophecy :
" The Lord whom ye S3ek shaU suddenly come to his temple."
(Mai. in. 1.) WhUe tha Jewish nation was expecting the ap
pearance of a conquering Messiah with power and great glory,
the true Messiah suddenly appeared in the temple, and declared
His presence, not by exhibiting temporal power, but by insisting
on greater purity in the temple worship, as the first thing which
the nation needed.
That a fuller and more complete accomplishment of Malachi's
words remains yet to come, I feel no doubt. But like many Old
Testament prophecies about Messiah, the words were purposely
intended to have a double fulfilment, — a partial one at Messiah's
first coming to suffer, a complete one at Messiah's second coming
to reign.
The great majority of the best commeniators hold (hat our
Lord oast out the buyers and sellers from the temple twice, onco

110 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
at the beginning of His ministry and once at the end. — ^It is
fair to say that Bishop Pearce and a few other writers think that
it only happened once, — at the end of His ministry, just before
His crucifixion. But the arguments in favor of this view do
not appear to me at aU weighty or satisfactory.
15. — [Made a scourge of small cords.] The Greek word translated
-" smaU cords," means literally a " cord made of rushes." Some
have thoug'Lt that these rushes were used as litter for the sheep
and oxen. Others have thought that such small cords as these
might very Ukely have been lying about, after having been
used for tying up the oxen. "Whether the scourge was applied
to those persons who brought the animals into the temple, as a
sort of chastisement, as some old painters have represented the
scene, we do not know. The more probable view seems to be,
that the scourge was simply meant to assist our Lord in speedily
ejecting the sheep and oxen.
The whole transaction is a remarkable one, as exhibiting our
Lord using more physical exertion, and energetic bodily action,
than we see Him using at any other period of His ministry. A
word, a touch, or the reaching forth of a hand, are the ordinary
limits of His actions. Here we see Him doing no less than
four things : — (1) Making the scourge ; — (2) Driving out the
animals ; — (3) Pouring out on the ground the changers' money ;
— (4) Overthrowing the tables. On no occasion do we find Him
showing such strong outward marks of indignation, as at the
sight of the profanation of the temple. Remembering that the
whole transaction is a striking type of what Christ wiU do to
His visible church at His second coming, we may get some idea
of the deep meaning of that remarkable expression, " The wrath
of the Lamb." (Eev. vi. 16.)
A remark of Dyke on our Lord's conduct in this place, is
worth noticing. " This act of Christ is not to be drawn into
imitation, because He did it as Lord of the temple by virtue of
His Sonship. Therefore the Papists grossly abuse this place
that hence gather the power of the Pope to punish offenders
even with corporal punishments, or to deprive princes of their
kingdoms. As for ministers, the only whip they may use is their
tongue, in powerful preaching against abuses. — As for private
persons, God hath not tied their tongues, though He hath their
hands. As occasion is offered, they may show their detestation
and dislike of corruption."
10. — [Said....sold doves... .take these things hence.] The distinction
between our Lord's mode of dealing with each of the objects of
His displeasure deserves notice. The oxen and sheep He drove
out There was no danger of their being lost by such treatment
— The money He threw on the ground. It might be soon picked

in
up and carried away. — The doves He simply ordered to be taken
away. Had He done more, they might have flown away, and
been completely lost to their owners. — It would have been well
for the church, if aU church reformers had blended like wisdom
with a Uke zeal in their proceeding!. In the present instance aU
were rebuked and all instructed. But no one was really injured,
and nothing was lost.
[My Father's house!] This expression is note-worthy. Whether
the Jews observed it, in the hurry and confusion of the whole
transaction, may be questioned. It was evidently an assertion by
our Lord of His divine Sonship, and consequently of his right to
vindicate the purity of His Father's place of worship. On another
occasion when our Lord caUed God His Father, the Jews at
once said that He " made himself equal with God." (John v. 18.)
Some have thought that the expression is parallel to that used
in the description of Christ among the doctors, (Luke ii. 49,) and
that the words used there, ' I must be about my Father's business,"
would have been better rendered, " I must be in my Father's
house." The fact that the profane custom which our Lord here re
proved was resumed by the Jews, and that two or three years
afterward our Lord found the same thing going on again in
the temple, and again cast out the buyers and sellers, ought not
to be overlooked. It is a striking proof of the desperate wicked
ness and fallen condition of the priests and rulers of the temple.
They were deaf to all counsel aud reproof, and given over to
a reprobate mind. — The difference between our Lord's language
at the second visit and that used at the first, ought also to be
noticed. At the first visit He only says, " Make not my Father's
house a house of merchandise," a place of buying and seUing.
At the second visit He says, " 'Ye have made it a den of thieves."
(Matt. xxi. 13.) The more wicked and hardened men are, the
louder must be our protest, and the sharper our rebuke.
[A house of merchandise!] Musculus remarks on this ex
pression, that if the sale of animals for sacrifices caUed forth
Christ's displeasure, much more must He be displeased at what
goes on continually in Eoman Catholic Churches. The sale of
masses, indulgences, &c., must be far more offensive to Christ
than the sale of oxen and sheep.
The complete success of our Lord on this occasion, and the ab
sence of the slightest opposition on the part of the Jews, deserve
notice. It is a fact that induced some of the Fathers to caU this
the greatest miracle Christ ever worked. There are however
three things to be remembered in considering this matter. For
one thing, the conscience of the Jews was on our Lord's side.
They knew that He was right and they were wrong. For

112 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
another thing, as a nation familiar with the history - of the Old
Testament Prophets, they would not be surprised at an indi
vidual apparently under a divine impulse suddenly doing what
our Lord did. — Above aU there can be Uttle doubt that a divine
influence was brought to bear on all present, as it was when our
Lord rode into Jerusalem on an ass, and when He caused His
enemies in the garden to " go backward and fall to the ground."
(Matt. xxi. 9, 10 ; John xviii. 6.) Here, as on other occasions, our
Lord showed His disciples that He had complete power over all
wills and minds, when He thought fit to exercise it ; and that
when He was rejected and disobeyed by the Jews, it was not
because He had no power to compel obedience. They had no
power against Him except when He permitted.
The allegorical meanings assigned to the sheep, oxen, and
doves, by Augustine, Origen, and Bede, are too absurd to be
quoted. They may be seen in the Catena of Aquinas. Origen
sees in the casting out of the animals, a type of the dissolution
of the Jewish dispensation with its offerings and sacrifices.
Beza sees a peculiar fitness in our Lord's action of purifying
the temple. It became Him who was to be our Prophet, Priest,
and King, to exhibit the same zeal for the purity of God's house
that was formerly exhibited by such men as the Prophet Isaiah,
the pi'iest Jehoiada, and the kings Hezekiah and Josiah. (2
Chron. xxiv. 16.)
17. — [His disciples remembered, dec!] These words certainly appear
to mean that our Lord's disciples " remembered " the text which
is here quoted, at the very time when our Lord was casting out
the buyers and sellers. It occurred to their minds as a striking
illustration of the spirit which their divine Master was exhibit
ing. He was completely absorbed for the moment in zeal for
the purity of God's house. It is one araong many proofs of the
familiarity of the poor and unlearned Jews with the Old Testa
ment Scriptures. Whether, however, the disciples regarded the
Psalm, of which they remembered this verse, as applicable to
the Messiah, may be reasonably doubted.
[The zeal of thine house.. ..eatsn me.] The 69th Psalm, from
which this text is taken, is quoted no less than seven times in
the New Testament, as the utterance of Messiah. In the first
twenty-one verses of the Psalm the Messiah's sufferings are related
by Himself. The fifth verse is undoubtedly very remarkable as
coming from Messiah's lips, when He speaks of " my foolishness"
and " my sins." Ainsworth says it means, " false imputation of
sins.'' " Thou knowest if there be any such as my foes charge
me with." Bonar says much the same.
The text before us shows that it is sometimes justifiable to be
entirely absorbed and eaten up, so to speak, by zeal for some

JOHN, CHAP. II. 113
object in which God's glory is concerned. Moses, Phineas, and
Paul at Athens, ave examples of such zeal. (Exodus xxxii. 19 ¦
Numbers xxv. II ; Acts xvii. 16.)
Augustine remarks on this text, " Let the zeal of the house of
God ever eat thee. — For example : Seest thou a brother running
to the theatre ? stop him, warn him, be grieved for him, if the
zeal of God's house hath now eaten thee. — Seest thou others
running and wanting to drink themselves drunk ? Stop whom
thou canst, hold whom thou canst, frighten whom thou canst;
whom thou canst, win in gentieness ; do not in any wise sit stUl
and do nothing."
18. — [Then answered the Jews and said!] Doddridge remarks here
that these Jews were probably the rulers, because the Great
Assembly, or Sanhedrim, sat in the temple, and our Lord's
actions would undoubtedly come to their knowledge without
delay. This makes the question and answer which follow the
more important.
[What sign showest ihou....doest these things.] This question
of the Jews shows us that they admitted the lawfulness of a
man doing such things as our Lord had done, if he could prove
that he had a divine commission. He had suddenly taken upon
Himself a great and independent authority. Though ne..ther a
priest nor a Levite, He had virtuaUy interfered with the man
agement of the temple courts. Let Hira now show that He was
a prophet, Uke Elijah or Amos, and they would concede He had
a warrant for His conduct.
19. — [Jesus answered....destroy ihis temple.] The meaning of this
remarkable expression is either hypothetical or prophetical. It
must either be rendered, " Supposing you destroy this temple,"
or "Ye wUl destroy this temple," — "If ye kiU my body," or
'¦'When ye shaU kiU my body." — It is of course absurd to sup
pose that our Lord UteraUy commanded the Jews to destroy
Him. The use of the imperative instead of the future, must
surely be famfliar to every Bible reader. See especially the
109th Psalm. In the present case it is truly astonishing that
any one can see difficulty in our Lord's expression. He only
used a mode of speaking which is in common use among our
selves. If a lawyer said to his client in a consultation, " Take
such a step, and you wiU be ruined," we all know that he would
not be commanding his cUent to take the step. He would only
mean, " If you do take such a step."— A simUar form of lan
guage may be seen in our Lord's words, " FiU ye up the mea
sure of your fathers," addressed to the Pharisees. (Matt, xxiii.
32.) No one would say that our Lord commanded the Phari
sees to do this. It is a prophecy.— So also, " Make the tree
good," (Matt. xn. 33,) is not so much a command as an hypo
thesis. See also IsaL viii. 9, 10.

114 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
[In three days I wiU raise it up.] This is a prophecy of our
Lord's resurrection. But it is a very remarkable one, from
the fact that our Lord distinctly asserts His own power to raise
Himself up. It is Uke the expression, "I have power to lay
down my life, and I have power to take it again." (John x. 18 )
Both the expressions deserve particular notice, because many
now-a-days assert that our Lord's resurrection was owing to
the operation of God the Father and of God the Holy Ghost, and
that He did not rise by His own power. This is a dangerous
heresy. That the Father and the Holy Ghost co-operated in the
resurrection of our Lord's body there can be no doubt. It is
clearly taught in many places. But to say that our Lord did
not raise his own body, is to contradict the text before us, and
the other which has been already quoted.
Hurrion, quoted by Ford, observes, " The efficient cause of
Christ's resurrection was the infinite power of God, which being
common to all the Persons m the blessed Trinity, the resurrec
tion is sometimes ascribed to the Father, sometimes to the Son,
and sometimes to the Holy Ghost. Christ's being raised by the
Father and the Spirit is not inconsistent with His raising Him
self; for ' what things soever the Father doeth, these also doeth
the Son,' (John v. 19,) for being one in nature, they are also one
in operation."
The questions naturally arise in many minds, Why did Jesus
not work some miracle at once, as a sign, to convince the Jews ?
Why did He not at once proclaim Himself the Messiah? Why
did he give the Jews so dark and mysterious a reply as the one
before us ? — The answer to these questions is this. For one thing
we must remark, it was a leading principle in our Lord's dealings
with men, not to force conviction on them, but to speak to them
according to what He saw was the state of their hearts. He
answered fools according to their folly. (Prov. xxvi. 5.) If He
had given the Jews a more direct reply, He knew that it would
have brought His ministry to an abrupt end, and would have led
to His being cut off before the time. — For another thing, we must
remember, that however dark our Lord's saying seemed when it
was spoken, it did in effect tell the Jews of the greatest and most
important sign which could be given them as a proof of His
Messiahship. It told them of His future resurrection. It wns
equivalent to saying, "You ask me for a sign, and I will givo
you one. I will rise again from the dead the third day ahvr my
crucifixion. If I do not so rise from the dead, you need not
believe that I am the Messiah. But if I do so rise, you will bo
without excuse if you do not beUeve on me." In efl'ect our Lord
staked the truth of His mission on His resurrection. He did
the same -ivhen He said that He would give the Jewish nation
no sign but that of the prophet Jonas. (Matt, xii. 39.) When

JOHN, CHAP. II. 115
the apostJes began to preach, they continually referred the Jews
to Christ's resurrection as the proof of His Messiahship. And
why did they do so ? One main reason was, because their Mas
ter had told the Jews, the first time He appeared in the temple,
that the great sign they must look to was His own rising again
from the dead.
20. — [Then said.,..Jews, forty and six years, &c.] This expression
has given rise to some difference of opinion. The temple to
which the Jews refer, cannot of course be the temple built by
Solomon. That temple was completely destroyed by Nebuchad
nezzar. — Nor yet does it seem likely to have been the temple
built by Zerubbabel and his companions, after the return from
Babylon. There is no sufficiently clear proof that this temple
was forty and six years buUding. — By far the most probable
view is, that the temple spoken of is the one repaired, or rather
re-buUt by Herod, and that the forty-six years here mentioned
mean the time during which these repairs were going on, and
that the entire completion of them had not been effected up to
our Lord's time. These repairs, according to Josephus, had been
going on exactly forty-six years when our Lord visited the tem
ple. They were so extensive and costly, that eighteen thousand
workmen were employed about them, and they amounted to a
re-building. Moreover, the minds of the Jews would probably
be full of them at this particular time, because they were of re
cent date, if not going on at that very time. The Greek words
might fairly be rendered, "Forty and six .years has this temple
been buUding." — They denote a time, as Whitby remarks, not
perfectly past.
If any one desires to see an instance of the extravagant lengths
into which a good man may be led, in following the allegorical
system of interpreting Scripture, he wiU do well to read Augus
tine's allegorical explanation of the forty and six years. It is far
too absurd to be worth inserting here.
[Wilt tliou rear it up in three days?] This question impUes
three tilings, — a sneer, astonishment, and incredulity. There is
probably an emphasis meant to be laid on the word " thou."
Such an one as thou ! WUt thou do it ?
That this saying of our Lord, nevertheless, was not thrown
away and forgotten, but stuck in the minds of the Jews, though
they did not understand it. is strikingly proved by two facts. —
One is, that the false witnesses brought it forward, though in a
garbled form, when our Lord was arraigned before the high
priests.— The other is, that the Jews taunted Him with it when
He hung on the cross. (Matt. xxvi. 61 ; xxvu. 40.)
7 \,—[Bat he spa7ce....temple....hody.] This verse is an instance of
Sfc. John's habit of making explanatory comments in his Gos-

116 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
pel as he goes on, in order to make things clear lo his Gentile
readers. Let it be noted, that as our Lord caUs His own body a " tem
ple," so also the bodies of His beUeving people are called " the
temple of the Holy Ghost." (1 Cor. vi. 19.) If it was wrong
to defile and profane the temple made of stone and wood, how
much more is it wrong to defile by sin the temple of our bodies!
St. Paul and St. Peter both call our bodies our "tabernacle."
(2 Cor. V. I ; 2 Pet. i. 13.)
22. — [ When....risen....dead....d,isciples remembered!] This sentence
is an interesting proof of two things. For one thing, it shows
how much light was brought to the minds of the disciples by
our Lord's resurrection, and how many hard sayings of His were
at once unraveUed and made plain. — For another thing, it shows
how long truth may lie dormant in men's minds without being
understood, or doing them any service. It is one of the special
offices of the Holy Ghost to bring things to remembrance. (John
xiv. 20.) We must not suppose religious teaching does no good
because it is not understood immediately. It may do good long
after the teacher is dead.
[Tliey believed the Scripture!] What Scripture does this mean ?
It cannot, of course, be our Lord's saying. What our Lord said
is specially added, as something beside the Scripture, which the
disciples " beUeved." — -Nor yet does it seem likely that it means
any particular text in the Old Testament about the resurrection.
I incline to the opinion, that it means generally the whole testi
mony of Scripture to our Lord's claim to be received as the
Messiah. When Jesus rose from the dead, the disciples were
fully convinced that the Scripture about the Messiah was fulfiUed
in their Master.
The expression "believed" cannot mean that the disciples
then believed for the first time. As in other places, it signifies
that they beUeved fully, and without any more doubt and hesi
tation. The same may be said of John xiv. 1.
23. — [Many believed.] These persons do not appear to have really
believed with the heart, but to have been only convinced in their
understandings. The distinction between intellectual beUef and
saving belief, and between one degree of saving beUef and ano
ther, ought to be carefully noticed in Scripture. There is a fiiith
which devils have, and a faith which is the gift of God. The
persons mentioned in this verse had the former, but not the
latter. So also we are told that Simon Magus "beheved."
(Acts viii. 18.) Again, there is a real heart-belief which a man
may have that admits of great increase. This is the belief
spoken of in the preceding verse.

JOHN, CHAP. II. 117
[ When they saw the miracles.] This expression shows us that
there were many miracles worked by our Lord which are no
where recorded in Scripture. St, John himself tells us so twice
over. (John xx. 30; xxi. 25.) Nicodemus refers to these miracles
in the beginning of the foUowing chapter. (John in. 2.) If it
had been good for us to know anything about these miracles
they would no doubt have been recorded. But it is weU to re
member that there were such miracles, in order that we may
rightly understand the unbelief and hardness of the Jews a
Jerusalem. The miracles which are related as having been
worked in or near Jerusalem, we must remember, are by no
means aU that our Lord worked there.
24. — [Lid not commit himself] The Greek word so rendered means
Uterally "Did not trust hunself" It is the same verb that is
generally rendered " beUeve."
[He knew all men.] This is a direct assertion of our Lord's
divine omniscience. As God He knew all mankind, and these
seeming believers among others. As God, He knew that their
hearts were like the stony ground in the parable, and their faith
only temporary.
Melancthon makes some very wise remarks on this verse, as
to the example which our Lord sets us here of caution in deal
ing with strangers. It is a, melancholy fact, which the expe
rience of years always confirms, that we must not trust implicitly
to appearances of kindness, or be ready to open our hearts to
every one as a friend, upon short acquaintance. The man who
does not hastily contract intimacies, may be thought cold and
distant by some ; but in the long run of life he wiU escape many
sorrows. It is a wise saying, that a man ought to be friendly
with all, but intimate with few.
25. — [Needed not...tesiify of man.] These words mean that our
Lord had no need of any one's testimony " about man." He
required no information from others about the real character of
those who professed faith in Him.
[He knew wliat teas in man.] This means that our Lord, as
God, possessed a perfect knowledge of man's inner nature, and
was a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. We
should remember Solomon's words in his prayer, " Thou only
knowest the hearts of aU the chUdren of men." (1 Kings vui. 39.)
The immense difference between our Lord and all ministers
of His Gospel appears strikingly in this verse. Ministers are
constantly deceived in their estimate of people. Christ never
was, and never could be. When He aUowed Judas Iscariot to
be a disciple, He was perfectly acquainted with his character.
Wordsworth observes that the two last verses of this chapter

118

EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.

" afford an instance of the peculiar manner in which the Holy
Spirit, in St. John's Gospel, pronounces judgment on things and
persons. Compare vi. 64, 71; vU. 39; vui. 27; xii. 33, 37;
xiu. 11 ; xxi. 17."
In leaving the whole passage, I cannot help remarking what
a faithful picture of human nature it exhibits, and how many are
the ways in which human corruption and infirmity show them
selves. Within the space of a few verses we find some openly
profaning God's temple for the sake of gain,^sorae angrily de
manding a sign of Him who shows zeal for purity, — some pro
fessing a false faith, — and some few only believing, but even
these believing with a weak, unintelligent faith. It is the state
of things which exists everywhere and always.

JOHN" HL 1—8.

1 There was a man of the Phari
sees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of
the Jews :
2 The same came to Jesus by
night, and said unto hun. Rabbi,
we know that thou art a teacher
come from God: for no man can
do these miracles that thou doest,
except God be -with him.
3 Jesus answered and said un
to him, VerUy, verUy, I say unto
thee, Except a man be born again,
ho cannot see the kingdom of
God. 4 Nicodemus saith unto him,
How can a man be born when he
is old? can he enter the second

time into his mother's womb, and
be born ?
5 Jesus answered. Verily, verUy,
I say unto thee, Except a man be
born of water and of the Spirit, he
cannot enter into the kingdom of
God. 6 That which is born of the
flesh is flesh; and that which is
born of the Spirit is spirit.
7 Marvel not that I said unto
thee. Ye must be born again.
8 The -wuid bloweth where it
listeth, and thou hearest the sound
thereof, but canst not tell whence it
cometh, and whither it goeth : so is
every one that is bom of the Spirit.

The conversation between Christ and Nicodemus, which
begins with these verses, is one of the most important
passages in the whole Bible. Nowhere else do we find
stronger statements about those two mighty subjects, the
new birth, and salvation by faith in the Son of God. The
servant of Christ will do well to make himself thoroughly
acquainted with this chapter. A man may be ignorant of
many things in religion, and yet be saved. But to be

JOHN, CHAP. HI. 119
ignorant of the matters handled in this chapter, is to be in
the broad way which leadeth to destruction.
"We should notice, firstly, in these verses, lohat a weak
y,nd feeble beginning a man may make in religion, and yet
finally prove a strong Christia7i. We are told of a certain
Pharisee, named Nicodemus, who feeling concerned about
ills soul, " came to Jesus by night."
There can be little doubt that Nicodemus acted as he
did on this occasion from the fear of man. He was afraid
of what man would think, or say, or do, if his visit to Jesus
was known. He came "by night," because he had not
faith and courage enough to come by day. And yet there
was a time afterwards when this very Nicodemus took our
Lord's part in open day in the council of the Jews. " Doth
our law judge any man," he said, " before it hear him and
know what he doeth." (John vii. 51.) — Nor was this all.
There came a time when this very Nicodemus was one of
the only two men who did honour to our Lord's dead
body. He helped Joseph of Arimathea to bury Jesus,
when even the apostles had forsaken their Master and fled.
His last things were more than his first. Though he began
UI, he ended well.
The history of Nicodemus is meant to teach us that we
should never " despise the day of small things " in rehgion.
(Zee. iv. 10.) We must not set down a man as having no
grace, because his first steps towards God are timid and
wavering, and the first movements of his soul are uncertain,
hesitating, and stamped with much imperfection. We
must remember our Lord's reception of Nicodemus. He
did not "break the bruised reed, or quench the smoking
flax," which He saw before Him. (Matt. xii. 20.) Like Him,
let us take inquirers by the hand, and deal with them
gently and lovingly. In everything there must be a begin
ning. It is not those who make the most flaming profes
sion of religion at first, who endure the longest and prove

120 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
the most steadfast. Judas Iscariot was an apostle when
Nicodemus was just groping his way slowly into full light.
Yet afterwards, when Nicodemus was boldly helping to
bury his crucified Saviour, Judas Iscariot had betrayed
Him, and hanged himself! This is a fact which ought not
to be forgotten.
We should notice, secondly, in these verses, what a
tnighty change our Lord declares to be needful to salvation,
and what a remarkable expression Me uses in describing it.
He speaks of a new birth. He says to Nicodemus, " Ex
cept a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of
God." He announces the same truth in other words, in
order to make it more plain to his hearer's mind : " Except
a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter
into the kingdom of God." By this expression He meant
Nicodemus to understand that " no one could become His
disciple, unless his inward man was as thoroughly cleansed
and renewed by the Spirit, as the outward man is cleansed
by water." To possess the privileges of Judaism a man
only needed to be born of the seed of Abraham after the
flesh. To possess the privileges of Christ's kingdom, a man
must be born again of the Holy Ghost.
The change which our Lord here declares needful to
salvation is evidently no slight or superficial one. It is
not merely reformation, or amendment, or moral change,
or outward alteration of life. It is a thorough change of
heart, will, and character. It is a resurrection. It is a new
creation. It is a passing from death to life. It is the im
planting in our dead hearts of a new principle from above.
It is the calling into existence of a new creature, with a
new nature, new habits of life, new tastes, new desires,
new appetites, new judgments, new opuiions, new hopes,
and new fears. All this, and nothing less than this is im
plied, when our Lord declares that we all need a "new
birth."

JOHN, CHAP. III. 121
This change of heart is rendered absolutely necessary to
salvation by the corrupt condition in which we are all,
without exception, born. " That which is bom of the flesh
is flesh." Our nature is thoroughly fallen. The carnal
mind is enmity against God. (Rom. viii. 7.) We come
inio the world without faith, or love, or fear toward God.
We have no natural inclination to serve Him or obey Him,
and no natural pleasure in doing His will. Left to himself,
no child of Adam would ever turn to God. The truest
description of the change which we all need in order to
make us real Christians, is the expression, " new birth."
This mighty change, it must never be forgotten, we can
not give to ourselves. The very name which our Lord
gives to it is a convincing proof of this. He calls it "a
birth." No man is the author of his own existence, and no
man can quicken his own soul. We might as well expect a
dead man to give himself life, as expect a natural man to
make himself spiritual. A power from above must be put
in exercise, even that same power which created the world.
(2 Cor. iv. 6.) Man can do many things ; but he cannot
give life either to himself or to others. To give life is the
peculiar prerogative of God. Well may our Lord declare
that we need to be " born again I"
This mighty change, we must, above all, remember, is
a thing without which we cannot go to heaven, and could
not enjoy heaven if we went there. Our Lord's words on
this point are distinct and express. " Except a man be
born again, he can neither see nor enter the kingdom of
God." Heaven may be reached without money, or rank,
or learning. But it is clear as daylight, if words have any
meaning, that nobody can enter heaven without a "new
birth." We should notice, lastly, in these verses, the instructive
comparison which our Lord uses in explaining the new birth.
He saw Nicodemus perplexed and astonished by the things
fi

122 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
lie had just heard. He graciously helped his wondering
mind by an illusti-ation drawn from " the wind." A more
beautiful and fitting illustration of the work of the Spirit it
is impossible to conceive.
There is much about the wind that is mysterious and
inexplicable. " Thou canst not tell," says our Lord,
" whence it cometh and whither it goeth." We cannot
handle it with our hands, or see it with our eyes. When
the wind blows, we cannot point out the exact spot where
its breath first began to be felt, and the exact distance to
¦which its influence shall extend. But we do not on that
account deny its presence. — It is just the same with the
operations of the Spirit, in the new birth of man. They
may be mysterious, sovereign, and incomprehensible to us
in many ways. But it is foolish to stumble at them because
there is much about them that we cannot explain.
But whatever mystery there may be about the wind, its
presence may always be known by its sound and effects.
"Thou hearest the sound thereof," says our Lord. When
our ears hear it whistling in the windows, and our eyes see
the clouds dri-ving before it, we do not hesitate to say,
" There is wind." — It is just the same with the operations
of the Holy Spirit in the new birth of man. Marvellous
and incomprehensible as His work may be, it is work that
can always be seen and known. The new birth is a thing
that " cannot be hid." There w^Ul always be visible " fruits
of the Spirit" in every one that is born of the Spirit.
Would we know what the marks of the new birth are ?
— We shall find them already written for our learning in
the First Epistle of St. John. The man born of God
" bebevcs that Jesus is the Christ," — " doth not commit
sin," — "doeth righteousness," — "loves the brethren," —
" overcomes the world," — " keepeth himself from the
wicked one." — This is the man born of the Spirit ! "Where
these fruits are to be seen, there is the new birth of which

JOHN, CHAP. III. 123
our Lord is speaking. He that lacks these marks, is yet
dead in trespasses and sins. (John v. 1 ; iii. 9 ; ii. 29 ; iii.
14; V. 4; V. 18.)
And now let us solemnly ask ourselves. Whether we
know anything of the mighty change of which we have
been reading ? Have we been born again ? Can any
marks of the new birth be seen in us ? Can the sound of
the Spirit be heard in our daily conversation ? Is the image
and superscription of the Spirit to be discerned in our
lives ? — Happy is the man who can give satisfactory
answers to these questions ! A day will come when those
who are not born again will wish that they had never been
born at all. NoiES. John III. I — 8.
'l. — [There was a man, <&c.] The close connection of the conversa
tion between Christ and Nicodemus with the end of the preceding
chapter ought to be carefully noted. In fact the original Greek
contains a connecting particle, which our translators have omitted
to express in our version. The chapter should begin, " And there
was a man," or " Now there was a man." — The conversation took
place when our Lord " was in Jerusalem," at the time of the
Passover. Nicodemus was one of those who " saw the miracles
which Jesus did," and was so much struck by what he saw, that
he sought out our Lord in order to converse with Him.
[Of ihe Pharisees.] The striking variety of character in those
who were brought to believe on Christ while He was on earth,
ought not to be overlooked. His disciples were not drawn exclu
sively from any one class. As a general rule, none were more
bitterly opposed to Him and His doctrines than the Pharisees.
Yet here we see that nothing is impossible with grace. Even a
Pharisee became an inquirer, and ultimately a disciple ! Nicode
mus and St. Paul are standing proofs that no heart is too hard to
be converted. The third chapter shows us Jesus teaching a proud,
moral Pharisee. The fourth wUl show him teaching an ignorant,
immoral Samaritan woman. None are too bad to be taught by
Christ. [A ruler of the Jews.] The civil government of the Jews at
this time, we must remember, was in the hands of the Eomans.
When Nicodemus is called " a ruler," it means that he was a
chief person among the Jews, probably in high ecclesiastical

124 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
position, and certainly a famous religious teacher. See the lOth
verse.
2. — [The same camc.by night!] The fact here recorded appears to
me to show that Nicodemus was influenced by the fear of inan,
and was afraid or ashamed to visit Jesus by day. — The view
maintained by some, that we ought not to blame him for coming
by night, because it was the quietest time for conversation, and
the time when an interview was least liable to be interrupted, or
because the Jewish teachers were in the habit of receiving inquir
ers by night, appears to me undeserving of attention. I am
confirmed in this opinion by the fact, that on the only other
occasions where Nicodemus is mentioned, he is speciaUy described
as the man who "came to Jesus by night." This repeated
expression appears to me to imply blame. (John vii. 50 :
xix. 39.)
How any one can waste time, as some famous commentators
doj in speculating how the conversation between Christ and
Nicodemus was reported, is to my mind perfectly astonishing.
To hint, as one has done, that Jesus must have told St. John
about the conversation afterwards, or that St. John must have
been present, appears to me to strike a blow at the very root of
inspiration. Both here and elsewhere, frequently, St. John
describes things which he only knew by the direct inspiration of
the Holy Ghost.
[Rabbi!] This expression was a name of dignity araong the
Hebrews, signifying Doctor or Master. Cruden says that the
name came originally from the Chaldees, and that it was not used
before the time of captivity, except in describing the ofiicers of
the kings of Assyria and Babylon. Thus we find the names of
Bab-saris and Rab-shakeh. (2 Kings xviii. 17.) The use of the
word here by Nicodemus, was intended to mark his respect for
our Lord.
[We know!] Different reasons have been assigned for Nicode
mus' use of the plural number in this place. Whom did he mean
when he said "we?" Some say that he meant himself and
many of his brethren among the Pharisees. — Some say that he
meant himself and the secret believers of all classes mentioned
at the end of the last chapter. — Some say, as Lightfoot, that he
meant no one in particular, but user! the plural for the singular,
according to an idiom common in all languages. He only meant,
" It is commonly known." — I venture the suggestion, that Nico
demus probably used the plural number intentionally, on account
of its vagueness, and avoided the singular number from motives
of caution, that he might not commit himself too much. Even
at the present day people wiU talk of "we" in religion, long
before they wUl talk of "I." — Weak faith strives to be hid in a
crowd.

JOHN, CHAP. III. 125
[Thou art a teacher come from God.] This cautious sentence
is an instructive indication of the state of Nicodemus' mind. He
was naturaUy a timid, hesitating, slow-moving man. That Jesus
was somebody remarkable, he was convinced by His miracles.
That He might possibly be the Messiah, had probably crossed his
mind, and the more so because he doubtless knew of the ministry
of John the Baptist, and had heard that John spake of ono
greater than himself who was yet to come. But until he can
make out more about Jesus, by private conversation, he declines
to commit himself to any stronger statement than that before us.
The Greek words would be more Uterally rendered, " Prom God
thou hast come a teacher."
Lightfoot thinks that Nicodemus here refers to the long cessa
tion of prophecy, which had now lasted for four hundred years.
During this long period no one had appeared from God to teach
the once-favoured Jewish nation, as the prophets did of old. But
now, he seems to say, " Thou hast appeared as the prophets did
in former times, to teach us."
[No man can do these miracles....ioith Mm!] This sentence bsk.
been justly called an illustration of one great purpose of our
Lord's miracles. They arrested men's attention. They were
evidences of a divine mission. They showed that He who
wrought them was no ordinary Person, and ought to be lis
tened to.
I am aware that some have thought that Nicodemus attached
too much weight to our Lord's miracles, and have boldly asserted
that miracles are no necessary proof of a divine mission, seein.g
that Anti-christ wiU appear with signs and lying wonders. (2
Thess. ii. 9; Eev. xiii. 14.) In reply it might be sufiicient to
remark that our Lord Himself declared that " His works bore
witness that the Father had sent Him." (John v. 36 ; x. 25 ; xv.
24.) But I also think that sufllcient stress is not laid on the
expression, "These miracles that thou doest." The character
and quality of our Lord's miracles were such as to prove flis
divine commission. Palse teachers and Anti-christs may bo
permitted to work some miracles, like the magicians who with
stood Moses. But there is a point beyond which Anti-christ
and his servants cannot go. Such miracles as our Lord worked
could only be wrought by the finger of God. I therefore think
that Nicodemus' argument was just and correct. — It is moreover
vi'orthy of note, that the expression he uses is precisely the same
as that used by St. Peter when describing our Lord's ministry
and miracles. He says, " God was with him." (Acts x. 38.)
The expression, " God being with a man," is a common
phrase in the Scriptures, denoting the possession of certain special

126 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
gifts or graces from God, beyond those ordinarily given to men.
Thus I Sam. xvi. 18; iii. 19; and xviii. 12 — 14.
3. — [.lesus answered.] The question has often been asked, " To
what did our Lord answer?" No question was put to him.
What is the connecting link between the words of Nicodemus,
and the solemn statement contained in the first words which our
Lord addressed to hiin ?
I beUeve the true reply to these questions is, that our Lord, as
on many other occasions, made answer according to what He
saw going on in Nicodemus' heart. He knew that the inquirer
before Him, like all the Jews, was expecting the appearance of
Messiah, and was even suspecting that he had found Him. He
therefore begins, by telling him at once what was absolutely need
ful if he would belong to Messiah's kingdom. It was not a tem
poral kingdom, as he vainly supposed, but a spiritual one. It
was not a kingdom, in which all persons born of the seed of
Abraham, would, as a matter of course, have a place because of
their birth. It was a kingdom in which grace, not blood, was
the indispensable condition of admission. The first thing need
ful in order to belong to Messiah's kingdom, was to be " born
again." Men must renounce aU idea of privileges by reason of
their natural birth. All men, whether Jews or Gentiles, must
be born again, born anew, born from above by a spiritual birth. —
"Nicodemus," our Lord seems to say, "if you want to know
how a man is to become a member of Messiah's kingdom, under
stand this day, that the first step is to be born again. Think not
because Abraham is your father, that ilessiah wiU acknowledge
you as one of his subjects. I tell you at once, that the first thing
you and all other men need is a new birth."
I am quite aware that several other explanations have been
given of the link between Nicodemus' remark and our Lord's
opening assertion. I will only say, that the one I have given,
appears to me by far the simplest and most satisfactory.
['Verily, verily, I say unto thee.] This expression, which is
pecuUar to St. John's Gospel, has "been already commented on.
(John i. 51.) But it is useliil to remark, in considering the verse
before us, that the phrase is never used except in connection
with some statement of great importance and solemnit3^
[Except a man.] The Greek word which our version has ren
dered " a man," would be more literally translated, " any one,"
or "any person." The change called the "new birth,'' our Lord
would have us know, is of universal necessity. Nobody can be
saved without it.
[.Born again.] The Greek word here rendered " again," might
be translated with equal correctness, "from above," i. e. from

JOHN, CHAP. IIL 127
heaven, or from God. It is so translated in this chapter, (verse
31,) and in four other places in the New Testament. (John xix.
11 ; James i. 17 ; iii. 15, 17.) In one other place, (Galat. iv. 9,)
it is " again." Many commentators in every age, as Origen,
CyrU, Theophylact, Bullinger, Lightfoot, Erasmus, Bengel, have
maintained strongly, that " born from above," and not " born
again," is the true and better translation of the phrase. Cran
mer's version renders it " born from above," and our own trans
lators have allowed it in. a marginal reading. My own impres
sion agrees with that of most commentators, that " born again "
is the right translation. — For one thing, it seems most probable
that Nicodemus understood our Lo;-d to mean " born again," or
else he would hardly have asked the question, " Can a man enter
the second time into his mother's womb and be born."- — For ano
ther thing, the Greek words used in four other places where
i-egeneration is spoken of in the New Testament, admit of no
other meaning than being " born again," and could not possibly
be rendered " born from above." See 1 Pet. i. 3, 23 ; Matt. xix.
28 ; Titus Ui. 5.
The point is happily not one of importance, and men may
agree to differ about it, if they cannot convince one another.
Every true Christian is undoubtedly " born from above " by the
quickening power of God in heaven, — as weU as " born again " by
a second spiritual birth.
The meaning of our Lord when He said, "except a man be
born again," is unhappily a subject on which there is a wide
difference of opinion in the Church of Christ. — The expression
at any rate cannot be said to stand alone. It is used six times
iu the Gospel of St. John, once in the first Epistle of St. Peter,
and six times in the first Epistle of St. John. (John i. 13 ; iii.
3, 5, 6, 7, 8 ; 1 Peter i. 23 ; 1 John ii. 29 ; iii. 9 ; iv. 7 ; v. 1, 4,
18.) Common sense and fair interpretation of language, point
out that " born again, born of the Spirit, and born of God," are
exjjressions so intimately connected with one another, that they
mean one and the same thing. The only question is, " What do
they mean ?'
Some think that to be " born again," means nothing more
than " an outward reformation, or such outward conformity as
a proselyte might yield to a new set of rules of life." — This is
an almost obsolete and utterly unsatisfactory interpretation. It
makes our Lord tell Nicodemus nothing more than he might
have learned from heathen philosophers, — such as Socrates, Plato,
or Aristotle ; or than he might have heard from any Eabbi about
the duties of a proselyte from heathenism to Judaism.
Some think that to be "born again," means to be admitted
into the Church of Christ by baptism, and to receive a spiritual

128 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
change of heart inseparably connected with baptism. — This again
is an unsatisfactory interpretation. For one thing, it seems
improbable, that the first truth which our Lord would propound
to an inquiring Pharisee, would be the necessity of baptism. He
certainly never did so on any other occasion. — For another thing,
if our Lord only meant baptism, it is difficult to account for the
astonishment and perplexity which Nicodemus_ expressed on
hearing our Lord's words. Baptism was not a thing with which
a Pharisee was unacquainted. In the Jewish Church proselytes
were baptized. — Last, but not least, it is clear ft-om St. John's
first Epistie, that to be " born again, born of the Spirit, or born
of God," means something much greater than baptism. The
picture which the apostle there .gives of the man who is " born
of God," could certainly not be given of the raan who is
baptized. The true view of the expression I believe to be this. Being
"born again," means that complete change of heart and character
which is produced in a man by the Holy Ghost, when he repents,
believes on Christ, and becomes a true Christian. It is a change
whicli is frequently spoken of in the Bible. In 'Ezekiel it ia
called "taking away the stony heart and giving a heart of flesh,"
— " giving a new heart, and putting within a new spirit." (Ezek.
xi. 19; xxxvi. 26.) In Acts it is caUed "repentance and conver
sion." (Acts Ui. 19.) In Eomans it is caUed "being aUve
from the dead." (Rom. vi. 13.) In Corinthians it is called "being
a new creature." (2 Cor. v. 17.) In Ephesians it is called
" being quickened." (Ephes. ii. 1.) In Colossians it is called
"putting off tho old man and putting on the new." (Coloss. iii.
9. 10.) In Titus it is called the "washing of regeneration."
(Titus Ui. 5.) In Peter it is called " being called out of darkness
into light," and being " made partaker of the divine nature."
(1 Peter ii. 9; 2 Peter i. 4.) In John it is called "passing from
death to life." (1 John iii. 14.) I believe that all these expres
sions come to the same thing in the end. They are all the same
truth, only viewed from different sides. They all mean that
mighty inward change of heart, which our Lord here calls a
" new birth," and which John the Baptist foretold would spe
cially characterize Messiah's kingdom. He was to baptize not
with water, but with the Holy Ghost. Our Lord begins Hi?
address to Nicodemus by taking up His forerunner's prediction:
¦ — He tells him that he must be "born again" or baptized with
the Spirit. — Human nature is so entirely corrupt, diseased, and
ruined by the fall, that all who would be saved must be born
again. No lesser change vrill suffice. They need nothing lesa
than a new birth.
[He cannot see.] This expression has received two interpre
tations. Some think that it means, "he cannot understand ar

JOHN, CHAP. III. 129
comprehend." Others think that it means, "he cannot enter,
enjoy, partake of, or possess." The last I beUeve to be the true
meaning of the expression. The first is truth, but not the truth
of the text. The second is confirmed by the language used in
the fifth verse, and is a common form of speech of which there
are many instances in the Bible. Thus we find, to " see life,"
(John ni. 36,) — to "see corruption," (Psalm xvi. 10,) — to "see
death," (John viii. 51,) — to see evil," (Psalm xc. 15,) — to " see
sorrow." (Eev. xviii. 7.)
[The kingdom of God!] This expression means that spiritUid
kingdom which Messiah came into the world to set up, and of
which aU believers are the subjects, — the kingdom which is now
small, and weak, and despised, but which shall be great and
glorious at the second advent. Our Lord declares that no man
ean belong lo that kingdom and be one of its subjects, without
a new birth. To belong to the covenant of Israel with all its
temporal privileges, a man need only be born of Jewish parents.
To belong to Messiah's kingdom, a man must be " born again "
of the Spirit, and have a new heart.
Luther's remark on this verse, quoted by Stier, is worth
reading. He supposes our Lord to say, " My doctrine is not of
doing, and of leaving undone, but of being and becoming ; so
that it is not a new work to be done, but the being new
created; — not the Uving otherwise but the being new born."
The unvarying suitableness of our Lord's teaching to the special
state of mind of those whora He taught, deserves observation.
To the young ruler fi^nd of his money. He says, " Sell all and
give to the poor." — To the multitude craving food, He says,
" Labour not for the meat that perisheth." — To the Samaritan
woman coming to draw water, He commends "living water."
— To the Pharisee proud of his birth, as a son of Abraham, Ho
says, " Te must be born again." (Luke xvni. 22 ; John vi. 27 ;
iv. 10.)
4. — [Nicodemus saith... .how.] Tlie question of Nicodemus is pre
cisely one of those which the natural ignorance of man in
spiritual things prompts a person to ask. Just as the Samaritan
woman, in the 4th chapter, put a carnal meaning on our Lord's
words about " living water," and the Jews, in the 6th chapter,
put a carnal meaning on the "bread of God," so Nicodemus
puts a carnal meaning on the expression " born again." — There
is nothing which the heart of man in every part and every age
of the world is so slow to understand as the work of the Holy
Ghost. Our minds are so gross and sensuous, that we cannot
take in the idea of an inward and spiritual operation. Unless
we can see things and touch things in religion we are slow to
believe them 6*

.30 EXP0.'5IT0EY THOUGHTS.
[ When he is old.] This expression seems to indicate thai
Nicodemus himself was an old man when this conversation
took place. If this be so, it is only fair, in judging his case, to make
some allowance for the slowness with which old age receives new
opinions, and speciaUy in the things of reUgion. At the same
time it supplies an encouraging proof that no man is too old to be
converted. One of our Lord's first converts was an old man 1
5. — [Excepi....horn of water and of the Spirit] This famous text
has unhappily given rise to widely difl'ereut interpretations. On
one thing only respecting it, nearly all commentators are agreed.
It is the same truth that is laid down in the third verse, only
laid down witli greater fiilness in compassion to Nicodemus'
-\veakness of understanding. But what does it mean ? The ex
pression " born of water " is peculiar to this place, and occurs
nowhere else in the Bible. It cannot be literally interpreted.
No one can be literally " born of water." "What then does the
phrase signify ? When can it be said of any one, that he is
" born of water and of the Spirit ? "
The first and commonest interpretation is to refer the text
entirely to baptism, and to draw frora it the inseparable connec
tion of baptism and spiritual regeneration. — According to this
view of the text, our Lord teUs Nicodemus that baptisra is abso
lutely necessary to salvation, and is the appointed means of
giving new birth to the heart; of m.«.n. " If you wish to belong
to ray kingdom, j^ou must be born again, as I have already
said ; and if you wish to be born again, the only way to obtain
this mighty blessing is to be baptized. Except a man be re
generated or born again by baptism, he cannot enter my king
dom." This is the view of the text which is maintained by
the fathers, by the Eoman Catholic writers, by the Lutheran
commentators, and by many English divines down to the present
day. It is a view which is supported by much learning, and by
many strange and far-fetched arguments, such as Gen. i. 2. It
is, however, ti view which to my own mind is utterly unsatis
factory. The second, and less common interpretation, is to refer the
text partly to baptisra and partly to that real regeneration of
heart, which a man may receive, like the penitent thief, without
having been baptized. — According to this view, our Lord tells
Nicodemus that a new birth is absolutely necessary to salvation,
and that to be baptized, or " born of water," is one of the appointed
ways by which regeneration is effected. Those who hold this
view deny as stoutly as any that there is any inseparable con
nection between baptism and regeneration. They hold that multi
tudes are " born of water " who are never born of the Spirit. But
they maintain ihat the word " water " must be intended to point
us to bapi.Tn, and that by the use of the expression, "born of

JOHN, CHAP. III. 181
water," our Lord meant to defend both John's baptism and Hia
own, and to show their value. This is the view of the text
which is maintained by some few of the best Eoman Catholic
writers, such as Eupertus and Ferus, — by almost all the
EngUsh Eeformers, and by many exceUent commentators down
to the present day. It is a view, which to my own min I
seems not much more satisfactory than the former one. aheady
described, on account of the strange consequences v.'hieh it
involves. The third, and much the least common interpretation, is to
refer the text entirely to the regeneration of man's heart, and to
exclude baptism altogether from any pliice in it. — According to
this vie^v, our Lord explains to Nicodemus, by the use of a figure,
what He had meant when he spoke of be'ng " born again." He
would have Nicodemus know that a man must have his heart as
thoroughly- cleansed and renewed by the Spirit as the body is
cleansed and purified by water. He must be born of the Spirit
working on his inward nature, as water works on the material
body. In short, he must have a " clean heart " created in him if
he would belong to Messiah's kingdom. Most of those who take
this view, consider that baptism was certainly meant to point to
the change of heart described in the text, but that this text waa
meant to point out something distinct from baptism, and even
more important than baptism. This is the view which I believe
to be the true one, and to which I unhesitatingly adhere.
Those who hold that baptism is not referred to in this text, are
undoubtedly a small minority among theologians, but their
names are weighty. Among them will be found Calvin, Zwingle,
BuUinger, Gualter, Archbishop Whitgifr, Bishop Prideaux,
Whitaker, Pulke, Poole, Hutcheson, Charnock, Gill, Cartwright,
Grotius, Cocceias, Gomarus, Piscafor, Eivetus, Chamier, Witsius,
Mastrieht, Turretin, Lampe, Burkitt, A. Clarke, and, according
to Lampe, Wycliffe, Daille and I'arfflus. — I do not assert this on
second-hand information. I have verified the assertion by examin
ing with my own eyes the works of all the authors above named,
excepting the three referred to by Lampe. On the precise mean
ing of the word " water " they are not agreed. But they all hold
that our Lord did not mean baptisra when He spoke of being
" born of water and the Spirit." — Dean Alford, I observe, says
that the expression " refers to the token, or outward sign of
baptism, on any honest interpretation." How far it is justifiable
to use such language al^out an opinion supported by so many
great names, I leave to the reader to decide I Those who wish
to see the view of the text which I advocate more fuUy defended,
wUl find what they want in Lampe's Dissert.-.tions and Chamier'a
Panstratia. In adhering to a view of this text which is adopted by so few

132 EXPOSlTOPvY THOUGHTS.
commentators, I feel a natural desire to give the reasons of my
opinion at full length, and I think that the importance of the
subject in the present day justifies me in doing so. In giving
these reasons I must decline entering into questions which are
not directly before me. The value of the sacrament of baptism,
— the right of infants to baptism, — the true meaning of the Church
of England Baptismal Service, are matters which I shall not
touch. The meaning of our Lord's words, " Except a man be
born of water and of the Spirit," is the only point to which I
shall confine myself I beUeve that in using these words our
Lord did not refer to baptism, and I think so for the following
reasons. (a.) Firstly, there is nothing in the words of the text which
necessarily requires to be referred to baptism. " Water," — " wash
ing," — and " cleansing" are figurative expressions, frequently used
in Scripture, in order to denote a spiritual operation on man's heart.
(See Psa. li. 7-10 ; Isai. xliv. 3 ; Jer. iv. 14 ; Ezek. xxxvi. 25 ;
John iv. 10 ; vii. 38, 39.) The expression, " Born of water and
of the Spirit," is doubtless very peculiar. But it is not more
peculiar -than the parallel expression, " He shall baptize you with
the Holy Ghost and with fire." (Matt. iii. 10.) To explain this
last text by the tongues of fire on the day of Pentecost, is an
utterly unsatisfactory interpretation, and confines the fulfilment
of a mighty general promise to one single act and one single d-iy.
I beUeve that in each case an element is mentioned in connection
with the Spirit, in order to show the nature of the Spirit's opera
tion. Men must be "baptized with the Holy Ghost," purifying
their hearts from corruption, as fire purifies metal, and must bo
"bom of the Spirit," cleansing their hearts as ii>ater cleanses the
body. The use of fire and water as the great instruments of
purification, was well known to the Jews. See Num. xxxi. 23,
where both are mentioned together. Chi-ysostom well remarks
that " Scripture sometimes connects tlie grace of the Spirit with
fire, and sometimes with water."
(i.) Secondly, the assertion that " water " must mean baptism,
because baptism is tlie ordinary means of regeneration, is an
assertion utterly destitute of Scriptural proof It is no doubt
written of professing saints and believers, that " they have been
buried with Christ in baptism," and that " as many as have been
baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (Eom. vi. 4 ; Gal. iii.
27.) But there is not a single text which declares that baptism i?
the only way by which people are born again. On the contraiy,
we find two plain texts in which regeneration is distinctly a crib-
ed, not lo baptism, but to the word, (1 Pet. i. 33 ; James i. IS.)
Moreover the case of Simon Magus clearly proves, that in apos
tolic times aU persons did not repeive grace when they were
baptized. St. Peter tells him a very few days after his baptism

JOHN, CHAP. III. 133
" Thou art in the gall of bitterness and the bond of iniquity, —
thy heart is not right in the sight of God, — thou hast neither
part nor lot in this matter." (Acts viii. 21—23.) The assertion,
therefore, that " water " m.ii.st mean baptism, is a mere gratuitous
assumption, and must fall to the ground.
(c.) Thirdly, if "water" in the text before us means baptism
it fallows as a logical consequence that baptism is absolutely
necessary to salvation, and that all who have died unbaptized
since these words were spoken, have been lost I The penitent
thief was lost on this theory, for he was never baptized I AU
infants who have died unbaptized have been lost ! The whole
body of the Quakers, who die in their own communion, are lost!
There is no evading this conclusion, unless we adopt the absurd
and untenable hypothesis that the kingdom of God in this solemn
passage means nothing more than the visible church. Where
our Lord, in declaring a great general truth, makes no exceptions,
we have no right to make them. If words mean anything, to
refer " water " to baptism excludes unbaptized persons from
heaven ! And yet there is not another instance in Scripture of
an outward ordinance being made absolutely necessary to salva
tion, and specially an ordinance which a man cannot confer on
himself A new, regenerate heart is undoubtedly necessary to the
salvation of every one, without exception, and it is of this only, I
believe, that the text before us speaks.
{d.) Fourthly, if we accept the theory that baptism is the
ordinary means of conveying the grace of regeneration, that all
baptized persons are necessarily regenerated, and that all who
are " born of water " are at the same time born of the Spirit, we
are irresistibly involved in the most dangerous and pernicious
consequences.— We pour contempt on the whole work of the
Spirit, and ou the blessed doctrine of regeneration. We bring
into the Church a new and unscriptural kind of new birth, a new
birth that cannot be seen by its fruits. We make out that people
are "born of God" when the.y have not one of the marks of
regeneration laid down by St. John.— We encourage the rankest
antinomianism. We lead people to suppose that they have grace
in their hearts while they are servants of sin, and that they have
the Holy Spirit within them while they are obeying the lusts of
the flesh. — Last, but not least, we pour contempt on the holy
sacrament of baptism. We turn it into a mere form, in which
faith and prayer have no place at all. Wc lead people to suppose
that it matters nothing in what spirit they bring their childrer
to baptism, and that if water is sprinkled, and certain words are
used, an infant is, as a matter of couise, born again. Worst ot
aU, wo induce people secretly to despise baptism, because wo
teach them that it always conveys a mighty spiritual blessing,
while t'-eir own eyes tell them, that, in a multitiide of c--i.=^s. it

L34 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
does no good at all. — I see no possibility of avoiding thc'sfi con
sequences, however littie some persons who hold the inseparability
of baptism and regeneration may intend them. Happily I have
the comfort of thinking that there is an utter want of logic in
some hearts which have much grace.
(e.) Fifthly, if "born of water an d of the Spirit" was meant
to teach Nicodemus that baptism is the ordinary means of con
veying spiritual regeneration, it is very difiicult to understand
why our Lord rebuked him for not knowing it. " Knowest thou
not these tilings ?" How could he know them ? That there
was such a thing as baptism, he knew as a Pharisee. But that
baptism was the appointed means of conveying "new birth," he
could not know. It was a doctrine nowhere taught in the Old
Testament. It is a doctrine, on the showing of its own advocates,
peculiar to Christianity. Ajid yet Nicodemus is rebuked for not
knowing it I To my mind this is inexplicable. The necessity
of a thorough change of heart, on the contrary, Nicodemus might
have known from the Old Testament Scriptures. And it was for
ignorance of this, not for ignorance of baptismal regeneration,
that he was rebuked.
{f.) Sixthly and lastly, if it be true that "to be born of
water" means baptism, and that baptism is the ordinary means
of conveying the grace of regeneration, it is most extraordinary
that there is so little about baptism in the Epistles of the New
Testament. In Romans it is only twice mentioned, — and in
1st Corinthians, seven times. — In Galatians, Ephesians, Colos
sians, Hebrews, and the Ist Peter we find it named once in each
Epistle. In thirteen of the remaining Epistles it is neither
named nor referred to. Ip the two Pastoral Epistles to Timothy,
where we might expect something about baptism, if anywhere,
there is not a word about it I In the Epistle to 'Titus the only
text that can possibly be applied to baptism is by no means
clearly applicable. (Titus iii. 5.) Nor is this all. In the one
Epistle which mentions baptism seven times, we find the writer
saying that "Christ sent hira not to baptize, but to preach the
Gospel," and actually " thanking God," that he had " baptized
none of the Corinthians, save Crispus and Gains." (1 Cor. i.
14, 17.) He would surely never have said this, if all whom he
baptized were at once born again. Imagine St. Paul saying,
" I thank God I regenerated none of you !" Moreover, it is a star
tling fact, that this very same Apostle, in the very same Epistle,
says to these same Corinthians, " I have begotten you through
the Gospel." (1 Cor. iv. 14.) My deliberate conviction is, that
Sfc. Paul would never have written these sentences, if he had
beUeved that the only way to be born of the Spirit was to be
baptized. I give these reasons with a sorrowful feeUng that to many

135
they are given in vain. But I have felt it due to ttyself, in
maintaining an opinion about a most important text which
is not commonly held, to state fully my reasons, and to show
that my opinion is not lightly maintained.
Before leaving this subject, I think it right, in self-defence, to
say something about the fact, that the view I maintain is not
held by the great majority of commentators. This fact undoubt
edly calls for some explanation.
With regard to the Fathers, no one can read their wiitings
without seeing that they were faUible men. On no point dcjs
their weakness appear so strongly, as in their language about
the sacraments. The man who intends to abide by all tho
opinions of the Fathers about the sacraments, will have to
swallow a great deal. After all, the very earliest Father, whose
commentary on St. John's Gospel is extant, is Origen, who died
in 253, A.D. The true view ol^the text before us, mi.ght easily
be lost in the period of at least 150 years between Origen's day
and the days of St. John. Tertullian incidentally applies tho
text before us to baptism, in one of his writings. But even he
was not born tiU 160, a.d., at least two generations after St.
John's time.
With regard to the Lutheran writers, tlieir avowed opinions
upon the sacraments make their interpretations of the text before
us of little weight. They have a peculiar sacramental theory to
maintain when they expound Scripture, and to that theory they
steadfasfly adhere. Yet even Brentius on this text confesses, that
the baptism here signified by '" water," means something much
more than the sacrament of baptism, and includes the whole
doctrine of the Gospel. — The Eoman Catholic commentators are,
of course, even more fettered in their views of the sacraments
than the Lutherans, and hardly call for any remark. Their con
stant endeavour in expounding Scripture, is to maintain the
sacramental system of their own church, and a text like that
before us is unhesitatingly applied to baptisra.
With regard to our own English reformers and their immediate
successors, their opinions about a text like this are perhaps less
valuable than upon any subject. They always display an exces
sive anxiety to agree with the Fathers. They were anxiou-"'
in every way to conciliate opponents, and to support their own
Protestantism by appeals to primitive antiquity. When, there
fore, they saw that the Fathers referred the text before us to
baptism, and that at best the point was doubtful, we cannot
wonder that they held, that to be "born of water" was to be
baptized. Yet even they seem not unanimous on the point ; and
Latimer's well-known assertion, that "to be christened with
water is not regeneration," must not be forgotten. — The famous

136 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
remarks of Hooker, which are so frequently thrown in the teeth
of those who take the view of " water and the Spirit," which I
do, are a curious instance of the coolness with which a great man
can soihetimes draw an illogical conclusion in his own favour,
from some broad general premise. He lays down the general
principle " that when a literal construction of a text will stand,
that furthest from the letter is commonly the worst." He then
proceeds to take it for granted, that to interpret " born of water "
of baptism, is the literal construction of the text now before us.
Unfortunately this is precisely the point that I for one do not
concede ; and his conclusion is consequently, to my mind, worth
less. Moreover when we talk of a "literal" sense, there must
evidently be some limit to it. If not, we cannot answer the
Roman Catholic, when he proves transubstantiation from the
words, "this is my body."
I believe that for a true and sound exposition of the text before
us, we must look to the Puritans and Dutch divines of the seven
teenth century. It was necessary for men to be a generation
further off frora Eomanism, before they were able to give a
dispassionate opinion about such a text as this. The early
Protestants did not see the consequences of the language they
sometimes used about baptism with sufficient clearness. Other
wise, I believe they would not have written about it as they
did. To any one who asks for a specimen of the I7th century
divinity, I would say, that one of the simplest and best state
ments of the true meaning of the text before us, will be found in
Poole's Annotations.
In leaving the whole subject, there is one fact which I think
deserves very serious consideration. Those Churches of Chris
tendom at -the present day, which distinctly maintain that all
baptized persons are born of the Spirit, are as a general rule, the
most corrupt churches in the world. Those bodies of Christians
on the other hand, which deny the inseparable connection of
baptism and the new birth, are precisely those bodies which
are most pure in faith and practice, and do most for the
extension of the Gospel in the world. This is a great fact which
ought not to be forgotten.
6. — [That wliich is born.. .flesh. ..spirit.] In this verse, our Lord
gives Nicodemus the reason why the change of heart called
"new birth," is a thing of such absolute necessity, and why
no slight moral change will suffice. Nicodemus had spoken of
" entering a second time into his mother's womb." Our Lord
tells him, that even if sucli a thing was possible, it would not
make him fit for the kingdom of God. The child of human
parents would always be Uke the parents from which it sprung,
if it was born a hundred times over. "That which is born of
the flesh is flesh." All men and women are by nature corrupt,

137
sinful, fleshly, and alienated from God. " They that are in the
flesh cannot please God." (Eom. viii. 8.) Their chUdren wiU
always be born with a nature like that of their parents. To
bring a clean thing out of aa unclean, is proverbially impossible.
A bramble will never bear grapes, however much it may be
cultivated, and a natural man will never be a godly man without
the Spirit. In order to be really spiritual arid fit for the king
dom of God, a new power from without must enter into a man's
nature. " That which is born of the spirit is spirit."
The sentence is undoubtedly very elliptical, and expressed in
abstract terms. It is Uke St. Paul's words, " The carnal mind
is enmity against God." (Eom. -viii. 7.) But the general mean
ing is unmistakeable. Human nature is so utterly fallen,
corrupt, and carnal, that nothing can come from it by natural
generation, but a fallen, corrupt, and carnal offspring. There
is no self-curative power in man. He will always go on repro
ducing himself To become spiritual and fit for communion
with God, nothing less is required than the entrance of the
Spirit of God into our hearts. In one word, ws must have that
new birth of the Spirit which our Lord twice described to
Nicodemus. The word "flesh," I am inclined to think, with Poole and
Dyke, is taken in two senses in this verse. In the first case, it
means the natural body of man, as in John i, 14. In the second
case, it means the corrupt carnal nature of man, as in Gal. v.
17. — The same remark applies to the word Spirit. In the first
instance, it means the Holy Spirit, and in the second, the spiritual
nature which the Spirit produces. The offspring of all children
of Adam is fleshly. The offspring of the Spirit is spiritual. Nei
ther the grace, nor rank, nor money, nor learning of parents will
prevent a child having a corrupt heart, if it is naturally born of
the flesh. Nothing will make any one spiritual but being born
again of the spirit.
It must be carefully remembered, in considering this verse,
that it cannot be applied to the human nature of our Lord Jesus
Christ. Though He had a true body Uke our own, He was not
" bom of the flesh" as we are, by natural generation, but con
ceived by the miraculous operation of the Holy Ghost.
7. — [Marvel not...must be born again!] In reading this verse, the
stress ought to be laid on the two last words, "born again." It
is evident that the thing which stumbled Nicodemus was the
idea of any " new birth" at all being necessary. He felt unable
to understand what this "new birth" was. Our Lord forbids
him to marvel, and proceeds to explain the new birth by a
familiar illustration.
It is a noteworthy and striking fact, that no doctrine has ex-

i38 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
cited luoh surprise in every age of the Church, and has caUed
forth s ) much opposition from the great and learned, as this very
doctrine of the new birth. The men of the present day who
sneer at conversions and revivals, as fanaticism and enthusiasm,
are nowise better than Nicodemus. Like him, they expose their
own ignorance of the work of the Holy Ghost.
8. — [The loind bloweth, &c.] The object of this verse appears to be
to explain the work of the Holy Ghost in the regeneration of
man, by a familiar Ulustration drawn from the wind. Mysterious
as the Spirit's work was, Nicodemus must allow that there was
much of mystery about the wind. " The wind bloweth where it
listeth." "We cannot account for the direction in which it blows,
or for the beginning or extent of its influence. But when we
hear the sound of the wind, we do not for a moment question
that it is blowing. Our Lord tells Nicodemus that it is just the
same with the operations of the Spirit. There is doubtless much
about them that is mysterious and incomprehensible. But when
we see fruit brought forth, in a manifest change of heart and
life, we have no right to question the reality of the Spirit's
operations. The last clause of the verse is undeniably somewhat dilEouH,
— " So is every one that is born of the Spirit." We should rather
have expected, " So does the Spirit operate on every one that is
born again." And this was, no doubt, our Lord's meaning. Tet
the form of speech which our Lord uses is not altogether without
parallel in the New Testament. For instance, we read, " The
kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good
seed." (Matt. xiii. 24.) The likeness in this case is clearly not
between the man and the kingdom. The meaning is that the
whole story is an illustration of Ihe kingdom of heaven. So also
we read that " the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant
man seeking goodly pearls," and might make n similar remark.
(Matt. xiii. 45.)
The Greek word translated "wind," at the beginning of this
verse, might ba rendered with equal correctness, " the Spirit."
Many think, as Origen, Augustine, Eupertus, Bengel, Schottgen,
Ambrose, Jansenius, Wycliffe's "Version, Bucer, and Bede, that
it ought to be so rendered. They deny that our Lord brought
in the idea of " the wind" at all. They object to it being said of
the wind that " it listeth," and Eay that the expression cannot bo
applied to any but a person.
This notion seems to me. as it does to the great mrgo-.i-y of
commentators, entirely untenable. Por one tiling, it croatcs
great aw'xwardness to make a comparison between the Spirit and
the work of the Spirit, which we must do if this theory i,;i
correct. "The Spirit bloweth, — and so is every one born of the

JOHN, CHAP. III.

139

Spirit!" — For another thing, it seems to me very strange to
speak of the Holy Ghost as '' blowing," and to speak of the
"sound" of the Holy Ghost, or of that "sound" being heard by
Nicodemus. I can see no difficulty whatever in the expression, " The wind
bloweth where it Usteth." It is common in the Bible to personify
unintelligent things, and to speak of them as having mind and
wUl. Thus our Lord speaks of the " stones crying out." (Luke
.six. 40.) And the Psalmist says, " The sun knoweth his going
down." (Psalm civ. 19.) See also Job xxxvii. 8, 35. — ^In addition
to this, I see a peculiar beauty in the selection of the wind as an
illustration of the work of the Spirit. Not only is the iUustration
most apt and striking, but it is one which is used in other places
in Scripture. See for instance, in the vision of the dry bones,
how Ezekiel cries to the " wind" to breathe on the slain. (Ezek.
xxxvii. 9.) See also Cant. iv. 16, and Acts ii. 2. — Last, but not
least, it seems to me, that Nicodemus' state of perplexity makes
it highly probable that our Lord would graciously help his igno
rance by the use of a famiUar iUustration, Uke that of the wind.
If no Ulustration at all was used in this verse, it is not quite easy
to see how its language would help Nicodemus to understand the
doctrine of the new birth. — But if the verse contains a famiUar
iUustration, the whole purpose of our Lord in saying what He
did becomes clear and plain.

JOHN in. 9—21.

9 Nicodemus answered and said
unto him. How can these things be ?
10 Jesus answered and said un
to him. Art thou a master of Israel,
and knowest not these things ?
11 VerUy, verUy, I say unto thee.
We speak that we do know, and
testify that wo have' seen; and ye
receive not our -sritness.
12 If I have told you earthly
things, and yo believe not, how
shaU ye believe, if I teU you of
heavenly things ?
13 And no man hath ascended
up to heaven, but he that came
down from heaven, even the Son of
man which is in heaven.
14 And as Moses lifted up the

serpent iu the wilderness, even so
must the Son of man be lifted up :
15 That whosoever beUeveth in
him should not perish, but have
eternal Ufe.
16 Eor God so loved the world,
that he gave his only begotten Son,
that whosoever believeth in hira
should not perish, bat have ever
lasting Ufe.
1*; For God sent not his Son in
to the world to condemn the world ;
b-dt that the world through him
might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is
not condemned: but he that be
lieveth not is condemned already,
because he hath not believed in the

140 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.

hateth the light, neither cometh to
the Ught, lest his deeds should be
reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth
cometh to the Ught, that his deeds
may be made manifest, that they
are wrought in God.

name of the only begotten Son of
God. 19 And this u the condemnation,
that Ught is come into the world,
and men loved darkness rather
than light, because their deeds
wore evU.
20 For every one that doeth evU
We have in these verses the second part of the conversa
tion between our Lord Jesus Christ and Mcodemus. A
lesson about regeneration is closely followed by a lesson
about justification I The whole passage ought always to
be read with afifectionate reverence. It contains words
which have brought eternal life to myriads of souls.
These verses show us, firstly, what gross spiritual igno
rance there may be in the mind of a great and learned man.
We see a " master of Israel " unacquainted with the first
elements of saving religion. Nicodemus is told about the
new birth, and at once exclaims, " How can these things
be ?" When such was tho darkness of a Jewish teacher,
what must have been the state of the Jewish people ? It
was indeed due time for Christ to appear ! The pastors
of Israel had ceased to feed the peo25le -with knowledge.
The blind were leading the blind, and both were falling
into the ditch. (Matt. xv. 14.)
Ignor.ance like that of ISTicodemus is unhappily far too
common in the Church of Christ. We must never be
surprised if we find it in quarters -\vhere we might reason
ably expect knowledge. Learning, and rank, and high
ecclesiastical oiEce are no proof that a minister is taught
by the Spirit. The successors of Nicodemus, in every age,
are far more numerous than the successors of St. Peter.
On no point is religious ignorance so common as on tho
Avork of the Holy Ghost. That old stumbling-block, at
which Nicodemus stumbled, is as much an ofience to
thousands in the present day as it was in the days of
Christ. 'The natural man receiveth not the things of

JOHN, CHAP. III. 1-41
the Spirit of God." (1 Cor. ii. 14.) Happy is he who has
been taught to prove all things by Scripture, and to call no
man master upon earth. (1 Thess. v. 21 ; JMatt. xxiii. 9.)
These verses show us, secondly, the original source froin
which marCs salvation springs. That source is the love of
God the Father. Our Lord says to Nicodemus, " God so
loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that
whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have
everlasting life."
This wonderful verse has been justly called by Luther,
"The Bible in miniature." No part of it, perhaps,
is so deeply important as the first five words, " God so
loved the world." The love here spoken of is not that
special love with which the Father regards His own
elect, but that mighty pity and compassion with which
He regards the whole race of mankind. Its object is not
merely the little flock which He has given to Christ from
aU eternity, but the whole " world " of sinners, without
any exception. There is a deep sense in which God loves
that world. All whom He has created He regards with
pity and compassion. Their sins He cannot love ; — but
He loves their souls. " His tender mercies are over all
His works." (Psal. cxlv. 9.) Christ is God's gracious
gift to the whole world.
Let us take heed that our views of the love of God are
Scriptural and well-defined. The subject is one on which
error abounds on either side. — On the one hand we must
beware of vague and exaggerated opinions. We must
maintain firmly that God hates wickedness, and that the
end of all who persist in wickedness will be destruction.
It is not true that God's love is "lower than hell." It is
not true that God so loved the world that all mankind will
be finally saved, but that He so loved the world that He
gave His Son to be the Saviour of all who believe. His
love is offered to all men freely, fully, honestly, and unre-

142 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
servedly, but it is only through the one channel cf Christ's
redemption. He that rejects Christ cuts himself off from
God's love, and will perish everlastingly. — On the other
hand, we must beware of narrow and contracted opinions.
We must not hesitate to tell any sinner that God loves him.
It is not true that God cares for none but His own elect, or
that Christ is not offered to any but those who are ordained
to eternal life. There is a " kindness and love" in God
towards all mankind. It was in consequence of that love
that Christ came into the world, and died upon the cross.
Let us not be wise above that which is written, or more
systematic in our statements than Scripture itself. God
has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. God is not
willing that any should perish. God Avould have all men
to be saved. God loves the world. (John vi. 32; Titus
iii. 4 ; 1 John iv. 10 ; 2 Pet. iii. 9 ; I Tim. ii. 4 ; Ezek. xxxiii.
11.) These verses show us, thirdly, the peculiar plan by
which the love of God has provided salvation for sinners.
That plan is the atoning death of Christ on the cross. Our
Lord says to Nicodemus, "As Moses lifted up the serpent
in the wUderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted
np, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish,
but have eternal life."
By being " lifted up," our Lord meant nothing less than
His own death upon the cross. That death. He would
have us know, was appointed by God to be "the life
of the worid." (John vi. 51.) It was ordained from all
eternity to be the great propitiation and satisfaction for
man's sin. It was the payment, by an Almighty Substitute
and Representative, of man's enormous debt to God.
When Christ died upon the cross, our many sins were laid
upon Him. He was made " sin" for us. He was made " a
curse" for us. (2 Cor. v. 21 ; Gal. iii. 13.) By His death
He purchased pardon and complete redemption for sinners.

JOHN, CHAP. III. 143
The brazen serpent, lifted up in the camp of Israel, brought
health and cure within the reach of all who were bitten by
serpents. Christ crucified, in like manner, brought eternal
life within reach of lost mankind. Christ has been lifted
up on the cross, and man looking to Him by faith may be
saved. The truth before us is the very foundation-stone of the
Christian rehgion. Christ's death is the Christian's life.
Christ's cross is the Christian's title to heaven. Christ
" lifted up" and put to shame on Calvary is the ladder by
which Christians " enter into the holiest," and are at
length landed in glory. It is tme that we are sinners ; —
but Christ has suffered for us. It is true that we deserve
death ; — but Christ has died for us. It is true that we are
guilty debtors ; — but Christ has paid our debts with His
own blood. This is the real Gospel ! This is the good
news ! On this let us lean while we live. To this let us
cling when we die. Christ has been " lifted up" on the
cross, and has thro-wu open the gates of heaven to all
believers. These verses show us, fourthly, the way in which the
benefits of Christ's death are made our own. That way
is simply to put faith and trust in Christ. Faith is the
same thing as believing. Three times our Lord repeats
this glorious truth to Nicodemus. Twice He proclaims
that "whosoever believeth shall not perish." Once He
says, " He that believeth on the Son of God is not con
demned." Faith in the Lord Jesus is the very key of salvation. He
that has it has life, and he that has it not has not life.
Nothing whatever beside this faith is necessary to oar
complete justification ; but nothing whatever, except this
faith, win give us an interest in Christ. We may fast and
mourn for sin, and do many things that are right, and -jse
religious ordinances, and give all our goods to feed the

144 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
poor, and yet remain unpardoned, and lose our souls. — ^But
if we will only come to Christ as guilty sinners, and believe
on Him, our sins shall at once be forgiven, and our iniqui
ties shall be entirely put away. Without faith there is no
salvation ; but through faith in Jesus, the vilest sinner may
be saved.
If we would have a peaceful conscience in our religion,
let us see that our views of saving faith are distinct and
clear. Let us beware of supposing that justifying faith is
any thing more than a sinner's simjDle trust in a Saviour,
the grasp of a drowning man on the hand held out for his
relief. — Let us beware of mingling anything else with faith
in the matter of justification. Here we must always
remember faith stands entirely alone. A justified man, no
doubt, will always be a holy man. True believing wUl
always be accompanied by godly living. But that which
gives a man an interest in Christ, is not his living, but his
faith. If we would know whether our faith is genuine, we
do well to ask ourselves how we are living. But if we
would know whether we are justified by Christ, there is
but one question to be asked. That question is, " Do we
believe ?"
These verses show us, lastly, the true cause of the loss of
mail's soul. Our Lord says to Nicodemus, " This is the
condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men
loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were
evil" The words before us foi-m a suitable conclusion to the
glorious tidings which we have just been considering. They
completely clear God of injustice in the condemnation of
sinners. They show in simple and unmistakeable terms
that although man's salvation is entirely of God, his ruin
if he is lost, will be entirely from himself. He AA'ill reap
the fruit of his own sowing.
The doctrine here laid down ought to be carefully re-

JOHN, CHAP. III. 145
membered. It supplies an answer to a common cavil of
the enemies of God's truth. There is no decreed reproba
tion, excluding any one from heaven. " God sent not His
Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the
world through Him might be saved." There is no unwill
ingness on God's part to receive any sinner, however great
his sins. God has sent " light " into the world, and if man
Vf'iVi not come to the light, the fault is entirely on man's
side. His blood will be on his own head, if he makes ship
wreck of his soul. The blame will be at his own door, if
he misses heaven. His eternal misery will be the result of
his own choice. His destruction will be the work of his
own hand. God loved him, and was willing to save him ;
but he " loved darkness," and therefore darkness must be
his everlasting portion. He would not come to Christ, and
therefore he could not have life. (John v. 40.)
The truths we have been considering are peculiarly
weighty and solemn. Do we live as if we believed, them ?
— Salvation by Christ's death is close to us to-day. Have
we embraced it by faith, and made it our own ? — Let us
never rest till we know Christ as our oWn Saviour. Let us
look to Him without delay for pardon and peace, if we
have never looked before. Let us go on beheving on Him,
if we have already believed. " Whosoever," is His own
gracious word, — '¦^whosoever believeth on Him, shall not
perish, but have eternal life."
Notes. Johx IIL 9—21.
9. — [Nicodemws answered...how...these things be?] This is the third
and last time that Nicodemus speaks during his visit to Christ,
so far as it is reported to us. His question here is a striking and
instructive in-tance of the deep spiritual ignorance which may
be- found in the mind of a learned man. In four different ways
our Lord had brought before him one and the same lesson. First,
He had laid down the great principle that every man must be
" born again." — Secondly, He had repeated the same thing in
fuUer words, and brought in the idea of "water," to Ulustrate
17

146 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
the work of the Spirit.— Thirdly, he had shown the necessity
of the new birth, from the natural corruption of man. — Fourthly,
He had Ulustratea the work of the Spirit a second time by the
instance of the " wind." And yet now, after aU that our Lord
has said, this learned Pharisee seems utterly in the dark, and
asks the pitiable question, "How can these things be?" "W"e
have no right to be surprised at the vast ignorance of saving
religion which we see on all sides, when we consider the history
of Nicodemus. "We should make up our minds to expect to find
spiritual darkness the rule, and spiritual light the exception.
Few things in the long run give so much trouble to ministers,
missionaries, teachers, and district-visitors, as beginning work
wit'n extravagant and unscriptural expectations.
]0. — [Jesus answered and said.] It wiU be observed, that our
Lord does not answer the question of Nicodemus directly, but
rebukes him sharply for his ignorance. Tet it ought to be care
fully noted, as JMelancthon remarks, that before He concludes
what He now begins to say, He supplies a complete answer to
His inquirer. He shows him the true root and spring of regene
ration, namely, faith in Himself. He answers his groping in-
C[uiry, "How can these things be?" by showing him the first
step in saving religion, viz., to believe in the Son of God. Let
Nicodemus begin like a little child, by simply believing on Him
who was to be lifted up on the cross, and he would soon under
stand "how " a man could be born again, even in his old age.
[Art thou a master of Israel] The English version of this
question hardly gives the fuU force of the original. It should
be UteraUy rendered, " Art thou ihe master of Israel ? " i. e., " Art
thou the famous teacher and instructor of the Jews ? " " Dost
thou profess to be a light of them that sit in darkness, and an
instructor of others ? " — The expression certainly seems to indi
cate that Nicodemus was a man of estabUshed reputation as a
teacher among the Pharisees. "W"hen the teachers were so
ignorant, what must have been the state of the taught?
[Knowest not these things.] These words unquestionably imply
rebuke. The things which our Lord had just mentioned, Nico
demus ought to have known and understood. He professed to
be a reUgiaus teacher. He professed to know the Old Testament
Scriptures. The doctrine, therefore, of the necessity of a nsw
birth ought not to have appeared strange to him. " A clean
heart, — circumcision of the heart, — a new heart, — a heart of
stone instead of a heart of flesh," were expressions and ideas
which he must have read in the prophets, and which aU pointed
towards the new birth. (Psalm IL 10 ; Jer. iv. 4 ; Ezek. xviii. 31 •
xxxvi. 26.) His ignorance consequently was deserving of
blame.

JOHN, CHAP. III. 147
The verse before us appears to me to supply a strong argument
against the idea that the expression, " born of water and the
Spirit" means baptism. I do not see how Nicodemus could
possibly have known this doctrine, as it is nowhere revealed in
the Old Testament, and even its own advocates confine it to New
Testament times. To blame a man for not knowing " things "
which he could not possibly know, would be obviously most
unjust, and entirely at variance with the general tenor of our
Lord's deaUngs.
II.. — [ We speak that we do know, &c.] "Whom does our Lord mean
here when He says "we?" The answers to this question are
various. (a.) Some think, as Luinei-, Brentius, Bucer, Gualter, Aretius,
Hutcheson, Musculus, Gomarus, Piscator, and Cartwright, that
" we " means, " I and John the Baptist."
(b.) Some think, as Calvin, Beza, and Scott, that it means, " I
and the Old Testament prophets."
(c.) Some think, as Alcuin, (according to Maldonatus,) and
"Wesley, that it means, "I and aU who are born of the Spirit."
(d.) Some think, as Chrysostom, Cyril, Rupertus, Calovius,
Glassius, Chemnitius, Lampe, Leigh, Nifanius, Cornelius d, Lapide,
Cocceius, Stier and Bengel, that it means either, " I and the
Father,"— or "I and the Holy Ghost,"— or "I and both the
Father and the Spirit."
(e.) Some think, as Theophylact, Zwingle, Poole, and Dod
dridge, that our Lord only means Himself when He says " we,"
and that He uses the plural number in order to give weight and
dignity to what He say.s, as kings do. So also He says, " Where-
unto shall we liken the kingdom of God ? or with what compari
son shaU we compare it ? " (Mark iv. 30.) " We," in that text,
evidently stands for " I." — In St. John's First Epistle, the first
person plural is used instead of the singular repeatedly in the
first five verses of the first chapter.
The last of these five opinions appears to me by far the most
probable and satisfactory. — The three first seem to me to be en
tirely overthro-wn by John the Baptist's words in this chapter,
(v. 32,) where he mentions it as a peculiar mark of our Lord's
superiority to aU other teachers, that "He testifieth what He
hath seen and heard." — The fourth opinion appears to me unten
able. The fear of Socinianism must not make us wrest texts
in order to apply them to the Trinity. There is a fitness in our
Lord's saying, during His earthly ministry, after His incarnation,
"I speak and testily what 1 have known and seen from all
eternity with my Father." But there is no apparent fitness in

148 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
saying that He and the two other Persons in the Trinity
" speak vriiat they have seen."
The meaning of the sentence appears to be this, " I declare
with aurhority, and b^ar witness to truths, which from al]
eternity 1 have known and seen, as God in union W:tli the
Father aid the Holy Ghost. I do not speak (as aU merely
human ministers muH) what I have been taught by others. I
do not testify things which I have received a< God's servant,, as
ordinary prophets have, and which I should not have known
wi'hout God's inspiration. I testify what I have seen with .my
Father, and knew before the world began." It is like the ex-
piession, "I speak that which I have seen with my Father."
(John viii. 38.)
Melancthon thinks that our Lord, in this verse, contrasts the
uncertain traditions and human inventions which the Pharisees
taught, with the sure, certain, and irrefragable truths of God,
-\vhich he came to preach.
Bucer remarks that the verse contains a practical lesson for all
religious teachers. No man has a right to teach, upIcsr he ia
thoroughly persuaded of the truth of what he teaches.
[Ye receive not our witness!] This sentence corresponds so
exactly with John tlie Baptist's words, at verse 32, that it con
firms me in the opinion that our Lord, in this verse, only speaks
of Himself The words before us, as well as those of John the
Baptist, must be taken with some qualification : " The greater
part of you receive not our testimony." — The object of the verse
is to rebuke the unbi'lief of Nicodemus and all who were Uke-
minded with him among the Jews. The use of the plural num
ber " ye," makes it probable that our Lord in this verse refers
not merely to what He had just been saying to Nicodemus, but
to all His pubUo teaching at Jerusalem, from the time of His
casting out the buyers and sellers in the temple. If we do not
adopt this theory, we must suppose Him to mean, " "What I
have spoken and testified to you about regeneration, is what I
continually say to aU who come, Uke you, to inquire of me ; and
yet neither you nor they believe what I say. You aU aUke
stumble at this stumbling-stone, the new birth."
Calvin remarks on this expression, that we oun-ht never to be
surprised at unbelief. If men would not receive Christ's testi
mony, it is no wonder if they will not receive ours.
12. — [If I have iold...earthly... heavenly things?] To see the full force
of this verse, we should paraphrase it thus. "If ye do not be-
hevs what I say when I teU you, as I have done, things that are
eartiily, how wiU you believe if I go on, as I shaU do to teU
you of things that are heavenly ?_ If you ^yill not belie-^'o when

JOHN, CHAP. III. 149
ye hear my first lesson, what WUl ye do when ye h'.'ar my
second? If ye are stumbled at the very alphabet of my Gospel,
what wiU ye do when I proceed to show you higher and deeper
truths?" The difficulty of the verse lies in the two expressions, " earth
ly things " and " heavenly things." Our Lord does not explain
the n, and we are therefore left to conjecture their true meaning.
— I offer the foUowing explanation with some diffidence, as , tho
most satisfactory one.
By " earthly things " I believe our Lord means the doctrine of
the " new birth," which He had just been expounding to Nico
demus. By " heavenly things " I beUeve He means the great
and solemn truths which he was about immediately to declare,
and which he does declare in rapid succe«sion frora this verse
down to the end of the conversation. — These truths were His
own divinity, — the plan of redemption by His own death on the
cross, — the love of God to the whole world, and His consequent
provision of salvation, — faith in the Son of God as the only way
to escape hell, — and man's wilful rejection of light, the onl^'
cause of man's condemnation.
But why does our Lord call the new birth an " earthly thing?"
I reply that He does so, because it is an " earthly " thing com
pared with His own divinity and atonement. Eegenei-ation is a
thing that takes place in man, here upon earth. The atonement
is a transaction that was done for man, and of which the special
effect is on man's position before God in heaven. In' regenera
tion God comes down to man, and dwells in hira upon earth.
In the atonement Christ takes up man's nature as man's repre
sentative, and as man's forerunner goes up into heaven. — Re
generation is a change of which even the men of this world
have some faint inkling, and which can be illustrated by such
earthly figures as water and wind. Almost every one allows,
as Bucer remarks, that he is not So good as ho should be, and
that he needs some change to fit him for heaven. Christ's di
vinity, and the incarnation, and the atonement, and justification
by faith, are such high and heavenly things that man has no
natural conception of them. — Regeneration is so far an " earth
ly " idea that even irreligious men borrow the word, and talk of
regenerating nations, and society. Salvation by faith in Christ's
blood is so entirely a "heavenly thing," that it is constantly mis
understood, hated, and sneered at by unconverted men. — -"When
therefore our Lord cffls the new birth an " earthly thing," we
must understand that he does so comparatively. In itself the
new birth is a high, holy, and " heavenly thing." But compared
with the doctrine of the incarnation and the atonement, it is an
" earthly thing."

1.50 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
13.— [And no man hath ascended, cfec] This verse, according to my
view, contains the first "heavenly thing" whichour Lord dis
plays to Nicodemus. But the sentence is undeniably a difficult
one, and commentators differ widely as to its meaning.
Some think, as Calvin. Musculus, BuUinger, Hutcheson, Poole,
Quesnel, Schottgen, Dyke, Lightfoot, Leigh, Doddridge, A.
Clarke, and Stier, that our Lord here shows to Nicodemus, ic
highly figurative language, the necessity of divine teaching, iii
order to understand spiritual truth. — " No child of Adam has
ever reached the lofty mysteries of heaven, and made himself
acquainted with its high and holy truths, by his own natural
understanding. Such knowledge is only possessed by the in
carnate Saviour, the Son of man, who has come down from
heaven. If you would know spiritual truth, you must sit at Hia
feet, and learn of Him." This view of the text is supported by
Prov. XXX. 34. According to this view, the verse must be taken
in close connection with the preceding one, v/liere the ignorance
of Nicodemus is exposed.
Some think, as Zwingle, Melancthon, Brentius, Aretius, Fla
cius, and F>-rus, that our Lord here shows to Nicodemus, (and
again in highly figurative language,) the impossibility of human
merit, and the utter inability of man justifying himself, and ob
taining an entrance into heaven by his own righteousness. —
" No one can possibly ascend into God's presence in heaven, and
stand perfect and complete before Him, except the incarnate Sa
viour, who has come down from heaven to fulfil all righteous
ness. I am the way to heaven. If you would enter heaven,
you must beUeve on the Son of man, and become a member of
"His body by faith."' — -This view of the text appeals for support
to Rom. x. 6 — 9. According to this view, the verse must be
taken in close connection with the foUowing verse, in wliich the
way of justification is explained.
The true view of the text, I venture to think, is as foUows.
The words of the text are to be taken literally. Our Lord be
gins His Ust of "heavenly things" by declaring to Nicodemus
His own divine nature and dignity. He reminds him that no
one has ever ascended literally into that heaven where God
dweUs. Enoch, and Elijah, and David, for instance were doubt
less in a place of bliss, when they left this world,' but they had
not "ascended into heaven." (Acts u. 34.) But that which no
man, not even the holiest saint, had attained, was the right and
pierogative of Him in whose corapany Nicodemus was. The
Son of man had dwelt from all eternity in heaven had come
down from heaven, would one day ascend again into heaven
and in His divine nature was actually in heaven, one with God
the Father, at that very moment. — " Know who it is to whom

JOHN, CHAP. HI. 1,51
you are speaking. I am not merely a teacher come from God,
as you say. I am the Messiah, the Son of man, foretold bj
Daniel I have come down from heaven, according to promise,
to save sinners. I shall one day ascend ag.iin mto heaven, as
the victorious forerunner of a saved people. Above all, I am as
God in heaven at this moment. I am He who fiUs heaven and
earth." — I prefer this view of the verse to any other, for two
reasons. For one thing, it gives a literal meaning to every word
in the text. For another, it seems a fitting answer to the first
idea which Nicodemus had put forward in the conversation, viz.,
that our Lord was only " a teacher come from God." It is the
v'lew which is in the main held by RoUock, Calovius, and Goma
rus, and expounded by them with much abUity.
The Greek word which we render " but," I am inclined to
think, ought to be taken in an adversative rather than in an ex
ceptive sense. Instances of this usage wiU be found in Matt. xii.
4 ; Mark xiii. 32 ; Luke iv. 26, 27 ; John xvii. 12 ; Rev. ix. 4 ;
xxi. 27. The thought appears to be, " Man has not, and cannot
ascend into heaven. But that which man cannot do, I the Son
of man can do."
" Heaven," throughout this verse, must be taken in ine sense
of that immediate and peculiar presence of God, which we can
conceive of and express in no other form than by the word
" heaven." The expression "which is in heaven," deserves particular
notice. It is one of those many expressions in the New Testa
ment which can be explained in no other way than by the doc
trine of Christ's divinity. It would be utterly absurd and un
true to say of any mere man, that at the very lime he was
speaking to another on earth he was in heaven I But it can be
said of Christ with perfect truth and propriety. He never ceased
to be very God, when He became incarnate. He was <' with
God and was God." As God He was in heaven while He was
speaking to Nicodemus.
The expression is one which no Socinian can explain away.
If Christ was only a very holy man and nothing more, He could
not have used these words. The Socinian explanation of the for
mer part of the verse, viz., that Christ was caught up into heaven
after His baptism, and there instructed about the Gospel He was
to teach, would be of itself utterly absurd, and a mere theory
invented to get over a difficulty. But the conclusion of the
verse is a blow at the very root of the Socinian system. It is
written not only that Christ " came down from heaven," but
that "he is in heaven."
It admits of a question whether the Greek words which we

152 EXrOSlTOP.Y THOUGHTS.
translate " which is," do not, both here and in chap. i. 18, poin'j
to that peculiar name of Jehovah, which was doubtless familiar
to Nicodemus, " The ever existing One ; the living One " It is
the same phrase which forms part of Christ's name in Revela
tion, 'Him which is." (Rev. i. 4.)
Much cf the difficulty of the verse is removed by remember
ing that the past tense, "hath ascended," admits of being ren
dered with equal grammatical correctness, " does ascend, can
ascend, or wiU ascend." Pearce takes this view, and quotes in
support of it John i. 26 ; iii. 18 ; v. 24 ; vi. 69 ; xi. 27 ; xx. 39.
Whitby thinks that throughout Ihis verse our Lord hag in
view a Rabbinical tradition, that Moses had been into heaven
to receive the law, — and that He declares the falsehood of this
tradition by saying, " no man, not even Moses, has ascended
into heaven."
] 4. — [As Moses lifted. ..serpent..so must, dec, &c.!] In this verse our
Lord proceeds to show Nicodemus another " heavenly thing,"
viz., the necessity of His own crucifixion. Nicodemus probably
thought, like most Jews, that when Messiah appeared, He would
come with power and glory, to be exalted and honoured by men.
Jesus tells him that so far from this being the cise, Me.-^siah
must be " cut olf" at His first advent, and put to an open ^hame
by being hanged on a tree. He illustrates this by a well-known
event; in the history of Israel's wanderings, the story of the
brazen serpent. (Numb. xxi. 9.) "Are you expecting me to ta'^e
to myself power and to restore the kingdom of I.-rael ? Ca=t
away such a vain expectation. I have come to do very different
work. I have come to suffer, and to offer up myself as a sacri
fice for sin."
The mention of Moses, of whom the Pharisees thought so
much, was eminently calculated to arrest the attention of Nico
demus. " Even Moses, in whom ye trust, has supplied a most
vivid type of my great work on earth — the crucifixion."
[The Son of itan must be lifted itp.] The expression " Son of
Man " was doubtless intended to remind Nicodemus of Daniel's
prophecy of the Me siah. — The Greek word rendered " must,"
signifies "it behovelh that," "it is necessary that." It is neces
sary in order that God's promises of a Redeemer may be ful
fiUed, — the types of the Old Testament sacrifices be accompliish-
ed, — the law of God be satisfied, — and a way for God's men-y
be provided. In order to aU this Messiah must suffer in our
Pt;ad. The phrase "lifted up," appears to me most deciiledly to
mean " lifted up on the cross." For one thing we find it to ex
plained in this Gospel. (John xii. 32, 33.) For another the il-
luslration of the brazen serpent makes it absolutely ncces-rery

JOHN, CHAP. III. 153
to explain it so. To apply the phrase, as Calvin and others do,
to the " necessity of lifting up and exalting Christ's atonement
in Christian teaching," seems to me a mistake. It is needlessly
dragging in an idea which the words were not intended to con
vey. It is truth no doubt, and truth abundantly taught in Sorip-
t-jro, but not the truth of this text.
The main points of resemblance in the comparison, — " As
Moses hfted up the serpent in the wilderness," — form a subject
which requires careful handling. The lifting up of the serpent
of brass for the reUef of Israel when bitten by serpents, is evi
dently selected by our Lord as an apt Ulustration of His own
crucifixion for sinners. But how far may we press this iUus
tration ? "Where are we to stop ? What are the exact points at
which the type and antitype meet ? These questions require
consideration. Some see a meaning in the " brass" of which the serpent was
made, as a shining metal, a strong metal, &c., &c. I cannot see
it. Our Lord does not even mention the brass.
Some see in the "serpent" hanging on the pole, a type of the
devil, the old serpent, bruised by Christ's death on the cross, and
openly triumphed over on it. (Coloss. ii. 15.) I cannot see tliis
at aU. It appears to me to confound and mingle up two Scrip
tural truths, which ought to be kept distinct. Moreover, there
is something revolting in the idea, that in order to be healed,
the Israelite had to look at a figure of the devil.
Some see in " Moses" lifting up the serpent, a type of the law
of God requiring payment of its demands, and becoming the
cause of Christ dying on the cross. On this I wiU content myself
with saying that I am not satisfied that this idea was in Christ's
mind. The points of resemblance appear to me to be these.—
(a.) As the Israelites were in sore distress, and dying from
the bites of poisonous serpents, so is man in great spiritual
danger, and dying from the poisonous effects of sin.
(b.) As the serpent of brass was lifted up on a pole in the
sight of the camp of Israel, so Christ was to be Ufted -ap on the
cross publicly, and in the sight of -the whole nation, at tiie
Passovfer. . (c.) As the serpent, lifted up on the pole, was an irnacre of
the very thing which had poisoned the Israelites, even so Christ
hal iu Himself no sin, and yet was made and crucified " in the
likeness of sinful fiesh," and counted sin. (Rom. viii. 3.) The
brazen serpent was a serpent wi bout poi^oti, and Christ was a
man without sin. The thing which we should specially see in

154 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Chri^t crucified, is our sin laid upon Him, and Him counted as a
sinner, and treated as a sinner, and punished as a sinner, for
our redemption. In fact we see on the cross our sins punished,
crucified, borne, and carried by our Redeemer.
(d.) FinaUy, as the one way by which IsraeUtes obtained
relief from the brazen serpent, was by looking at it, so the one
way to get benefit from Christ, is to look at him by faith. The
feeblest look brought cure to an Israelite, and the weakest faith,
if true and sincere, brings salvation to sinners.
It should be carefully noted, that it seems impossible to recon
cile this verse with that modern divinity which can see nothing
in Christ's death but a great act of self-sacrifice, and which
denies Christ's substitution for us on the cross, and the imputa
tion of our sins to Him. Such divinity withers up such a verse
as this entirely, and cuts out the life, heart, and marrow of its
meaning. Unless words are most violently wrested from their
ordinary signification, the iUustration before us points directly
towards two great truths of the Gospel. One of them is that
Christ's death upon the cross was meant to have a medicinal,
health-conferring effect upon our souls, and that there was some
thing in it far above a mere martyr's example. The other truth
is, that when Christ died upon the cross, He was dealt with as
our Substitute and Representative, and punished, through the
imputation of our sing, in our place. The thing that Israel saw
on the pole, and from which they got health, was an image of the
very serpent that bit them. The object that Christians should
see on the cross, is a Divine Person, made sin and a curse for
them, and allowing that very sin that has poisoned the worid to
be imputed to Him, and laid upon His head. — It is easy work
to sneer at the words " vicarious sacrifice," and " imputed merit,"
as nowhere to be found in Scripture. But it is not so easy to
disprove the fact that the "ideas" are constantly to be met with
in the Bible.
The use of the brazen serpent in tiiis verse, as an iUustration
of Christ's death and its purpose, must not be abused, and made
an excuse for turning every incident of the history of Israel in
the wilderness mto an aUegory. It is very important not lo
attach an aUegorical meaning to Bible facts without authority.
Such things as the manna, the smitten rock, and the brazen
serpent, are aUegorized for us by the Holy Ghost. But where
the Holy Gho;t has not pointed out any aUegory we ouo-ht to
be very cautious in our assertions that aUegory exists. Elucer's
remarks on this subject deserve reading.
15. — [7 hat whosoever believeth.. .not peri.sh...lfe.] In this verse our
Lord declares to Nicodemus the great end and purpose for which
Uie Son of man was to Le " li ted up" on tiic cross, and the way

JOHN, CHAP. III. 155
in which the benefits of His crucifixion become our own. In
interpreting the verse, we should carefully remember that the
comparison of the serpent lifted up in the wUderness must be
carried through to the end of the sentence. The Son of man
must be Ufted up on the cross, that whosoever believeth on Hira,
or looks to Him by faith, as the Israelites looked to the brazen
serpent, should not perish in lieU.
The expression " whosoever,'' deserves special notice. It
might have been equally weU translated " every one." It is
intended to show us the width and breadth of Christ's offers of
salvation. They are for "every one," without exception, that
"beUeveth." The expression " believeth in Him," is deeply important. It
describes that one act of man's soul which is needful to give him
an interest in Jesus Christ. It is not a mere belief of the head
that there is such a Person as Jesus Christ, and that He is a
Saviour. It is a belief of the heart and will. 'When a person,
feeling his desperate need by reason of sin, flees to Jesus Christ,
and trusts in Him, leans on Him, and commits his soul entirely to
Him as his Saviour and Redeemer, he is said, in the language of
the text, to " beUeve on Him." — The simpler our views of faith
are, the better. The more steadily we keep in view the Israelites
looking at the brazen serpent, the more we shaU understand the
words before us. "Beheving" is neither more nor less than
heart-looking. 'Whosoever looked at the brazen serpent was
made weU, however ill he was, and however feeble his look.
Just so, whosoever looks to Jesus by faith, is pardoned, however
great his sins may have been, and however feeble his faith. — Did
the Israelite look? That was the only question in the matter of
being healed from the serpent's bite. — Does the sinner believe ?
That is the only question in the matter of being justified and
pardoned. — Looking to Moses, or looking to the tabernacle, or
looking even to the pole on which the serpent hung, or looking
to anything- except the brazen serpent, the bitten Israelite would
not have been cured. Just so, looking to anything but Christ
crucified, however holy the object looked at may be, the sinner
cannot be saved.
The expression, "should not perish, but have eternal life," is
pecuUarly strong. As the Israelite who looked to the brazen
serpent not only did not die of his wounds, but recovered com
plete health, so the sinner who looks to Je.gus not only escapes
hell and condemnation, but has a seed of eternal life at once put
in his heart, receives a complete title to an etei:)al life of glory
and blessedness in heaven, and enters into that Ufe after death. — ¦
The salvation of the Gospel is exceedingly full. It is not merely
being pardoned. It is being counted completely righteous, and
made a citizen of heaven. It is not merely an escape from hell,

15:1 EXPOSITORY THOUBHTS.
but the reception of a tide to heaven. It has been weU remark
ed, that the Old Testament generally promised ^only " length of
days," but the Gospel promises " everlasting Ufe."
lG.—[For God so loved the world, Sc] Our Lord, in this verse,
shows Nicodemus another " heavenly thing." — Nicodemus pro
bably thought, like many Jews, that God's purposes of mercy
-we! e entirely confined to His chosen people Israel, and that when
Jlessiah appeared. He would appear only for the special benefit
of the Jewish nation. Our Lord here declares to him that God
loves all the world without any exception, that the Messiah,
the only begotten Son of God, is the Father's gift to the whole
faraily of Adam, and that every one, whether Jew or Gentile,
who believes on Him for salvation, may have eternal life. — A
more startling declaration to the ears of a rigid Pharisee it is
impossible to conceive I A more wonderful verse is not to be
found in the Bible I That God should love such a wicked world
as this and not hate it, — that He should love it so as to provide
salvation — that in order to provide salvation He should give, not
an angel, or any created being, but such a priceless gift as His
only begotten Son, — that this great salvation should be freely
offered to every one that believeth, — all, all this is wonderful in
deed I This was indeed a " heavenly thing."
The words, "God loved fhe woild," have received two very
different interpretations. The importance of the subject in the
present day makes it desirable to state both views fully.
Some think, as Hutcheson, Lampe, and GiU, that the " worid"
here means God's elect out of every nation, whether Jews or
Gentiles, and that the " love" with which God is said to love
them is that eternal love with which the elect were loved before
creation began, and by which their calUng, justification, pre
servation and final salvation are completely secured. — This view,
though supported by many and great divines, does not appear
to me to be our Lord's meaning. For one thing, it seems to me
a violent straining of language to confine the word "world" to
the elect. " The world" is undoubtedly a name sometimes given
to the " wicked " exclusively. But I cannot see tliat.it is a name
ever given to the saints. — For another things to interpret the
word "world" of the elect only is to ignore the di.-tinction
which, to my eyes, is plainly drawn in the text between the
whole of mankind and those out of mankind who " believe."
If the "world" means only the beUeving portion of mankind,
it would have been quite enough to say, " God so loved the
world, Ihat he gave his only begotten Son, that the world should
not perish." But our Lord does not say so. He says " that
whosoever believeth, i. e , that whosoever out of the wo'rld be
lieveth." — Las!ly. to confine God's love to the elect is taking 3

JOHN, CHAP. III. 157
harsh and narrow view of God's character, and fairly lays
Christianity open to the modern charges brought against it as
cruel and unjust to the ungodly. If God takes no thought for
any but his elect, and cares for none beside, how shall God judge
the world ? — I believe in the electing love of God the Father as
stro-'gly as any one. I regard the special love with which God
loves the sheep whom He has given to Christ from all eternity,
as a most blessed and comfortable truth, and one most cheering
and profitable to beUevers. I only say, that it is not the truth of
this text.
The true view of the words, " God loved the world," I believe
to be this. The ''world" means the whole race of mankind,
both saints and sinners, without any exception. The word, in
my opinion, is so used in John i. 10, 29 ; vi. 33, 51 ; viii. 12. — •
Eom. in. 19.— 2 Cor. v. 19.-1 John ii. 2; iv. 14. The "love"
Spoken of is that love of pity and compassion with which God
regards all His creatures, and specially regards mankind. It is
the same feeUng of "love" which appears in Psalm cxlv. 9. —
Ezek. xxxiii. 11 — John vi. 32. — Titus iii. 4. — 1 John iv. 10. —
2 Pet. iii. 9. — 1 Tim. ii. 4. It is a love unquestionably distinct
and separate from the special love with which God regards His
saints. It is a love of pity and not of approbation or complais
ance. But it is not the less a real love. It is a love which
clears God of injustice in judging the world.
I am quite familiar with the objections commonly brought
against the theory I have just propounded. I find no weight
in them, and am not careful to answer them. Those who con
fine God's love exclusively to the elect appear to me to take a
narrow and contracted view of God's character and attributes.
They refuse to God that attribute of compassion with which even
an earthly father can regard a profligate son, and can offer to him
pardon, even though his compassion is despised and his ofters
refused. I have long come to the conclusion that men may be
more systematic in their statements than the Bible, and may be
led into grave error by idolatrous veneration of a system. The
foUowing quotation from one whom for convenience sake I must
call a thorough Calvinist, I mean Bishop Davenant,. .will show
that the view I advocate is not new.
" The general love of God toward mankind is so clearly tes
tified in Holy Scripture, and so demonstrated by the manifold
effects of God's goodness and mercy extended to every par
ticular man in this world, that to dou'ot thereof were infidelity,
and to deny it plain blasphemy." — Davenant's Answer to Hoard,
p. I.
"God hateth nothing whieh Himself :;reated. And yet it ia
most tme that He hateth sin in any creature, and hateth the

153 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
creature infected with sin, in such manner as hatred may be
attributed to God. But for all this He so generally loved man
kind, fallen in Adam, that He hath given His only begotten
Son, that what sinner soever believeth in Him should not perish
but have everlasting life. And this everlasting life is so provided
for man by God, that no decrees of His can bring any man thither
without faith and repentance ; and no decrees of His can keep
any man out who repenteth and believeth. As for the measure
of God's love exhibited in the external effect unto man, it must
not be denied that God poureth out His grace more abundantly
on some men than on others, and worketh more powerfully and
effectually in the hearts of some men than of others, and that out
of His alone will and pleasure. But- yet, when this more special
love is not extended. His less special love is not restrained to
outward and temporal mercies, but reacheth to internal and
spiritual blessings, even such as wiU bring men to an eternal
blessedness, if their voluntary wickedness hinders not." — Dave
nant's Answer to Hoard, p. 469.
" No divine of the Reformed Church, of sound judgment, wiU
deny a general intention or appointment concerning the salvation
of all men individually by the death of Christ, on the condition
if they should believe. Por the intention or appointment of
God is general, and is plainly revealed in holy Scripture, although
the absolute and not to be frustrated intention of God concerning
the gift of faith and eternal life to some persons, is special, and
Umited to the elect alone. So I have maintained and do main
tain." — Davenant's Opinion on the Gallican Controversy.
Calvin observes on this text, " Christ brought life, because the
heavenly Father loves the human race, and wishes that they
should not perish." Again he says, "Christ employed the uni
versal terra whosoever, both to invite indiscriminately aU to par
take of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers. Such
also is the import of the term luorld. Though there is nothing
in the world that is worthy of God's favour, yet He shows Him
self to be reconciled to the whole world, when He invites aU
men without exception to the faith of Christ."
The same view of God's " love" and the " worid," in this text,
is taken by Brentius, Bucer, Calovius, Glassius, Chemnitius,
Musculus, BuUmger, Bengel, Nifanius, Dyke, Scott, Henry, and
Manton. The Uttie word "so," in this verse, has caUed forth many re
marks, on account of its depth of meaning. It doubtless signifies
" so greatly, so much, so dearly." Bishop Sanderson, quoted by
Ford, observes, " How much that ' so' containeth, no ton"-ue or
wit of man can reach : nothing expresseth it better to the hfe
than the work Itself doth." '

JOHN, CHAP. III. 159
[That he gave his only begotten Son!] The gift of Christ, be it
here noted, is the result of God's love to the world, and not the
cause. To say that God loves us because Christ died for us, is
wretched theology indeed. But to say that Christ came into the
world in consequence of the love of God, is scriptural truth.
The expression " he gave," is a remarkable one. Christ is God
the Father's gift to a lost and sinful world. He was given gene
rally to be the Saviour, the Redeemer, the Friend of sinners, — to
make an atonement sufficient for aU, — and to provide a re
demption large enough for aU. To effect this, the Father freely
gave Him up to be despised, rejected, mocked, crucified, and
counted guilty and accursed for our sakes. It is written that He
was " delivered for our offences," and that " God spared Him not,
but delivered him up for us all." (Rom. iv. 25 ; viii. 32.) Christ
is the " gift of God," spoken of to the Samaritan woman, (John
iv. 10,) and the " unspeakable gift" spoken of by St. Paul. (2
Cor. ix. 15.) He Himself says to the wicked Jews, "My Father
giveth you the true bread from heaven." (John vi. 32.) This last
text, be it noted, was one with which Erskine silenced the
General Assembly in Scotland, when he was accused of offering
Christ too freely to sinners.
It should be observed that our Lord calls Himself " the only
begotten Son of God" in this verse. In the verse but one before
thLs, He called Himself "the Son of man." Both the names were
used in order to impress upon the mind of Nicodemus the two
natures of Messiah. He was not only the Son of man but the
Son of God. But it is striking to remark that precisely the same
words are used in both places about faith in Christ. If we would
be saved, we must believe in Him both as the Son of man and
the Son of God.
[That whosoever believeth, dtc.,...life.] These words are exactly
the same as those in the preceding verse. "Why our translators •
should have rendered the same Greek word by "everlasting"
in one place, and " eternal " in the other, it is hard to say. In
Matt. xxv. 46, they did just the same.
The repetition of this glorious saying, " whosoever believeth,"
is very instructive. For one thing it serves to show that mighty
and broad as is the love of God, it will prove useless to every one
who does not believe in Christ. God loves all the world, but
God wUl save none in the world who refuse to believe in His
only begotten Son. — For another thing it shows us the great
point to which every Christian should direct his attention. He
must see to it that he believes on Christ. It is mere waste of
time to be constantly asking ourselves whether God loves us,
and whether Christ died for us ; and it argues gross ignorance of
Scripture to trouble ourselves with such questions. The Bib'e

160 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
never teUa men to look at these questions, but commands thera
to believe. Salvation, it always teaches, does not turn on the
point, " did Christ die for me ?'"' but on the point, " do I believe
on Christ ?" If men do not "' have eternal Ufe," it is never because
God did not love them, or because Christ was not given for them,
but because they do not believe on Christ.
In leaving this verse, I may remark, that the idea maintained
by Erasmus, Olshausen, Wetstein, Rosenmuller, and others, that
it does not contain our Lord's words, and that from this verse
down to the 21st we have St. John's comments or observations,
appears to me utterly destitute of foundation, and unsupported
by a single argument worth noticing. That our Lord would not
have used the third person in spetiking of Himself is no argu
ment. We find Him frequently speaking of Himself in the third
person. See, for instance, John v. 19, 29. There is literally no
thing to be gained by adopting the theory, while it contradicts
the common belief of nearly all believers in every age of the
world. Flacius observes that this verse and the two preceding ones
comprise all the causes of justification : 1. The remote and
efficient cause, God's love. 2. The approximate efficient cause,
the gift of God's Son. 3. The material cause, Christ's exaltation
on the cross. 4. The instrumental cause, faith. 5. The final
cause, eternal life.
17. — [ God sent not....condemn....icorld.] In this verse our Lord shows
Nicodemus another " heavenly thing." He shows him the main
object of Messiah coming into the world. It was not to judge
men, but to die for them ; not to condemn, but to save.
I have a strong impression that when our Lord spoke these
words, He had in view the prophecy of David about Messiah
bruising the nations with a rod of iron, and Daniel's prophecy
about the judgment, where he speaks of the thrones being cast
down, and the Ancient of days judging tho world. (Psalm ii. 6 —
9; Dan. vii. 9—22.) I think that Nicodemus, like most Jews,
was filled with the expect-. tion that when Messiah came He
would come with power and great glory, and jurlge aU men. Our
Lord corrects tiiis notion in this verse. He declares that Messiah's
first advent was not to jud.TC but to save people from their sins.
He says in another place, " I came not to judge the world, but
to save the world.|' (John xii. 47.) The Greek word forjudging
and condemning, it must be remembered, is one ami the same!
Judgment and the condemnation of the ungodly our Lord would
have us know, are not the work of the first advent, but of4he
second. The.speci.il work of. the first advent was to seek and
save that which was lost.
[TIiat...jj>orld....throiigh Him... .saved.] Tins sentence must

JOHN, CHAP. III. 161
clearly he interpreted with some qualification. It would contra
dict other plain texts of Scripture, if we took it to mean^ " God
sent His Son into the world, fliat all the world might fisially be
saved through Him, and none be lost." In fact, our Lord Him
self declares in the very next verse, " that he that believeth not
is condemned already."
The meaning of the sentence evidentiyis, that "all the world
might have a door of salvation opened through Christ, — that
salvation might be provided for all the world, — and that so any
one in the world beUeving on Christ, might be saved." In this
view it is like the expression of St. John, " The Father sent the
Son to be the Saviour of the world." (I John iv. 14.)
The expression, " God hath sent," in this verse, ought not to
be overlooked. It is very frequently applied, in St. John's Gas-
pel, to our Lord. At least thirty-eight times we find Him speaking
of Himself as Him "whom God hath sent." It is probably frorr
this expression that St. Paul derives the peculiar name whioli
he gives to our Lord, "The apostle of our profession." (Heb. Ui.
I.) The apostie means simply, " The sent one."
The readiness of natural raan everywhere to regard Christ as
a Judge rauch more than as a Saviour, is a curious fact. The
whole system of the Roman Catholic Church is fuU of the idea.
People are taught to be afraid of Christ, and to flee to the Virgin
Mary ! Ignorant Protestants are not much Better. They often
regard Christ as a kind of Judge, whose demands they will have
to satisfy at the last day, much more than as a present personal
Saviour and Friend. Our Lord teems to foresee this error, and
to correct it in the words of this text.
Calvin observes on this verse, " Whene-ver our sins press us, —
whenever Satan would drive us to despair, — we ought to hold
out this shield, that God is unwilling that we should be over-
whelraed with everlasting destruction, because He has appointed
His Son to be the salvation of the world."
18. — [He thai believeth on Him....is not condemned.] In this verse
our Lord shows Nicodemus another " heavenly thing." He de
clares fhe privileges of believing, and the peril of not believing
in the Son of God. Nicodemus had addressed Him as a " teacher
come from Gol." He would have Nicodemus know that He
w'as that hi.gh and holy One, to believe on whora was life eter
nal, and not to believe on whom was everlasting destruction.
Life or death was be''ore men. If they believed and received
Him as the Messiah, thev would be saved. If they beUeved not,-"
they would die in their sins.
The expression, " He that believeth," deserves special aotice.
It is the third time that our Lord speaks of "believing" on

162 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Himself, and the consequence of believing, within four verses.
It shows the immense importance of faith in the sinner's justi
fication. It is that one thing, without which eternal life cannot
be had. — It shows the amazing graciousness of the Gospel, and
its admirable suitableness to tlie wants of human nature. — A
man may have been the worst of sinners, but if he wiU only
" believe," he is at once pardoned. Last, but not least, it shows
the need of clear, distinct views of the nature of saving faith,
and the importance of keeping it entirely distinct from works of
any kind, in the matter of justification. Faith, and faith only,
gives an interest in Christ. The old sentence of Luther's days
is perfectly true, — paradoxical and startling as it may sound,
" The faith which justifies is not the faith which includes charity,
but the faith which la3's hold on Christ."
The expression, "is not condemned," is equivalent to saying,
" he is pardoned, acquitted, justified, cleared from aU guilt,
delivered from the curse of a broken law, no longer counted a
sinner, but reckoned perfectly righteous in the sight of God."
The presentness of the phrase, if one may coin a word, should be
speciaUy noticed. It is not said, that the believer "shall not
be condemned at the last day," but that " he is not condemned."
The very moment a sinner believes on Christ, his iniquities are
taken away, and he is counted righteous. " All that beUeve are
justified frora all things." (Acts xiii. 39.)
[He... .believeth not... condemned already.] This sentence means
that the man who refuses to believe on Christ is in a state of
condemnation before God, even while he lives. The curse of a
broken law, which we all deserve, is upon him. His sins are
upon his head. He is reckoned guilty and dead before God, and
there is but a step between him and hell. Faith takes aU a
man's sins away. Unbelief keeps them all on him. Through
faith a man is made an heir of heaven, th.ough kept outside till
he dies. Through unbelief a man is already a subject of the
devil, though not yet entirely in his power, and within hell. The
moment a man believes, all charges are completely wiped aw.ay
from his name. So lon.g as a man does not believe, his sins
cover hm over, and make him abominable before God, and the
just wrath of God abides upon him.
Melancthon remarks that the sentence of God's condemnation,
¦\^-liich was passed at the beginning, " Thou shalt surely di'.',"
remains in fuU force and unrepealed, against every one who do;'S
not believe on Christ. No new condemnation is needful. Eve:y
man or woman who does not believe, is under the curse and
condemned already.
[Because... .not believed.. ..7iamc.... Son of God.] Ths sentence
is justly thought to prove that no sin is so great, and so damnin'T

JOHN, CHAP. III. 163
and ruinous to the soul as unbelief In one sense it is the only
unpardonable sin. All other sins may be forgiven, however many
and great, and a man may stand complete before God. But if a
man will not believe on Christ, there is no hope for him ; and if
he persists in his unbelief he cannot be saved. Nothing is so
provoking and offensive to God as to refuse the glorious salvation
He has provided at so mighty a cost, by the death of His only
begotten Son. Nothing is so suicidal on the part of man as to
turn away from the only remedy which can heal his souL Other
sins may be scarlet, filthy, and abominable. But not to believe
on Christ is to bar the door in our own way, and to cut off our
selves entirely from heaven. It has been truly remarked that it
was a greater sin in Judas Iscariot not to believe on Christ for
pardon, after he had betrayed Him, than to betray Him into the
hands of his enemies. To betray Him no doubt was an act of
enormous covetousness, wickedness, and ingratitude. But not
to seek Him afterwards by faith for pardon, was to disbelieve
His mercy, love, and power to save.
The expression " the name,'' as the object of faith, is explained
in chap. i. 12. Here, as frequently, it stands for the attributes,
character, and office of the Son of God.
Luther, quoted by Brown, remarks, " Henceforward, he who
is condemned must not complain of Adam, and his inborn sin.
The seed of the woman, promised by God to bruise the head of
the serpent, is now come and has atoned for sin, and taken away
condemnation. But he must cry out against himself for not hav
ing accepted and believed in the Christ, the devU's head-bruiser
and sin-strangler. If I do not believe the same, sin and condem
nation must continue."
19. — [This is the condemnation, dec] In this verse our Lord shows
Nicodemus one more " heavenly thing." He unfolds to him the
true cause of the ruin of those who are lost. Primarily, I think,
our Lord had in view the unbelieving Jews of His own day,
and the real reason of their rejection of Himself It was not
that there was any want of evidence of His Messiahship. They
had evidence enough and to spare. The real reason was that they
had no . mind to give up their sins. — Secondarily, I think, our
Lord had in view the future history of all Christians, and the
true cause of the ruin of all who are not saved in every age. It
is not because there is any want of light to guide men to heaven.
It is not because God is wanting in love and unwiUing to save.
The real reason is that men in every age love their own sins, and
will not come to Christ that they may be delivered from them.
The expression " this is the condemnation," is evidentiy very
eUiptical, and the full meaning must be supplied. It is probably
equivalent to saying " this is the cause of the condemnation, this

164 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
is the true account of it." The following elliptical expressions
are somewhat similar, and aU found in St. Jolin's 1st Epistle.
" This is the promise," " this is the love of God," " this is the
victory," " this is the confidence." (1 John ii. 25.— v. 4, 14)
[That light is come inio the world.] It is a question in this
sentence whether "light" means Christ Himself, or the light of
Christ's Gospel. I arn inclined to ihink that our Lord meant to
include both ideas. He has come as a light into the world, and
the Gospel that He has brought w-ith Him, is, like its Author, a
strong contrast to the ignorance and wickedness of the earth.
[Men loved darkness rather than light] The darkness in this
sentence means moral, darkness and mental darkness, sin, igno
rance, superstition, and irreligion. Men cannot come to Christ
and receive His Gospel without parting With all this, and they
love it too well to part with it.
[Because iheir deeds were evil!] This sentence means that their
habits of life were wicked, and any doctrine whieh necessitated
a change of these habits they naturally hated.
Throughout this verse I am inclined to think that the past
tense "loved," ought to be taken in a present sense, (prolepfi-
cally, to use a graniraarian's phrase,) as is frequently the case in
the New Testament. See John xv. 8, aud Rom. viii. 30. The
meaning will then be, " men have loved, do love, and always
will love darkness, in consequence of the corruption of human
nature, as long as the world stands." The sentence then becomes
a solemn description of a state of things which was not only to
be seen among the Jews, while our Lord was on eartli, but
would be seen everywhere to the end of time.
The verse is one which deserves special nstice, because of the
deep mystery it unfolds. It tells us the true reason -\vhy men
miss heaven and are lost in hell. The origin of evil we are not
told. The reason why evil men are lost, we are told plainly.
There is not a word about any decree of God predestinating men
to destruction. There is not a syUable about anything deficient or
wanting either in God's love, or in Christ's atonement. On the
contrary our Lord tells us that "light has come into the work!,"
that God has revealed enough of the wav of salvation to make
men inexcusable if they are not saved. But the real account of
the matter is that men have naturally no wiU or IncUnation to
use the Ught. They love their own dark and corrupt ways more
than the ways whieh God proposes to ihem. They therefore
reap the fuit of their own ways, and wiU have at last what they
loved. They loverl darkness and they will be cast nio outer
darkness. 'They did not like the light and so they ^¦^^l be shut
out from light eternally. In short, lost souls will be what they
-wUled to be, and wUl have what ihey loved.

JOHN, CHAP. HI. 165
The words, "because their deeds were evil," are very instruc
tive. They teacli us that where men have no love to Christ and
His Gospel, and wUl not receive them, their lives and their works
will prove at last to have been evil Their hahiis of life may
not be gross and immoral. They may be even compa-atively
decent and pure. But the last day will prove them to have been
in reality " evil." Pride of intellect, or selfishnes.=, or love of
man's applause, or dislike to submission of wiU, or self-right eons-
ness, or some other false principle will be found to have run
through aU their conduct. In one way or another, when men
refuse to come to Christ, their deeds will always prove to be
" evil." Rejection of the Gospel wUl always be found to be con
nected with some moral obliquity. 'When Christ is refused we
may be quite sure that there is something or other in life, or
heart, which is not right. If a man does not love light his
"deeds are evU." Human eyes may not detect the flaw; but
the eyes of an all-seeing God do.
The whole verse is a deeply humbling one. It shows the foUy
of all excuse? for not receiving the Gospel, drawn from intel
lectual difficulties, fj-om God's predestination, from our own in
ability to change ourselves, or to see things with the eyes of
others. All such excuses are scattered to the winds by this
Solemn verse. People do not come to Christ, and do continue
unconverted, just because they do not wish and want to come to
Christ. They lore something else. better than the light. The
elect of God prove themselves to be elect by "chousing" the
things which are according to God's mind. The wicked prove
themselves to be only fit for destruction, by " choosing, loving,
and foUo-v^ing" the things which must lead to destruction.
Quesnel says on this verse, " The greatest misfortune of men
does not consist in their being subject to sin, corruption, and
blindness; but in their rejecting the Deliverer, the Physician,
and the Light itself."
20.—[!Every one that doeth evil, Sc, Sc] This verse and the
following one form a practical appUcation of aU that our Lord
has been saying to Nicodemus, and are also a logical consequence
of the preceding verse. Like the preceding verse, these two
verses apply primarily to the Jews in our Lord's day, and
secondarily to every nation to which the light of the Gospel
comes. They are a most remarkable appeal to an inquirer's
conscience, and supply a most searching test of the sincerity of
a m,a,n in Nicodemus' state of mind.
The words " everjr one that doeth evil," meah every uncon
verted person, every one whose heart is not right and honest in
God's si.sht, and whose actions are consequently evil and un
godly^ _^very s-ach person" hateth thejight, neither cometh to

166 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
the light." He cannot really love Christ and the Gospel, and
will not honestiy, and with his whole heart, seek Christ by faith
and embrace His Go?pcl, until he is renewed. The reason of
this is, that every unconverted person shrinks from having his
ungodliness exposed. He does not wish his wicked ways to be
discovered, and bis utter want of true righteousness and true
preparedness for leath, judgment, and eternity to be put to
shame. He does not "like his deeds to be reproved," and
therefore he shrinks from the light, and keeps away from
Christ. The application of this verse must doubtless be made with
caution. In the case of many unconverted persons, its truth is
plain as noon-day. They love sin and hate true religion, and
get away from the Gospel, the Bible, and religious people as
much as they possibly can. In the case of others, its truth
is not so apparent at first sight. There are many unconverted
persons who profess to like the Gospel, and seem to have no
prejudice against it, and to hear it with pleasure, and yet remain
unconverted. Yet even in the case of those persons the text
would be found perfectly true if their heaits were really
known. "With all their seeming love to the light they do not
really love it with all their heart. There is something or other
which they love better, and which keeps them back from Christ.
There is something or other which they do not want to give up,
and do not Uke to be discovered and reproved. Man's eyes may
not detect it ; but the eyes of God can. The general principle
of the text wiU be found true at last of every hearer of the Gos
pel who dies unconverted. He did not thoroughly love the light.
He did not really want to be changed. He did not truly and
honestly seek salvation. All this was true of the Jews in the
time of Nicodemus, and it is no less true of all mankind to
whom the Gospel comes in the present day. Right hearts wUl
always come to Christ. If a man keeps away from the light, his
heart is wrong. He is one who " doeth evil.''
There is a curious difference between the Greek word trans
lated " doeth" in this verse and the one translated " doeth" in the
next verse. Stier and Alford think the difference instructive and
meaniui^. They say that the Greek word used for " doeth evU,"
means the habit of action without fruit or result. On the con
trary, the Greek word for "doing truth," signifies the true doing
of good, good fruit, good that remains.
21. — [He thai doeth truth, Sc] This verse, it is needless to say,
is closely connected with the preceding one. The preceding
verse describes the unconverted man. The verse before us de
scribes the converted man.
The expression, "He that doeth truth,'' signifiei!, the person

167
whose heart is honest, the man who is truly converted, however
weak and ignorant, and whose heart and actions are consequently
true and right in the sight of God. The phrase is frequently
found in St. John's writings. (See John xviii. 37; 1 John i. 6 — 8;
ii. 4 ; iii. 19 ; 2 John i. ; 3 John iii. 4.) Every such person will
always come to Christ and embrace His Gospel when it is
brought near him. He will have an honest desire that " his
deeds may be made manifest," and that his real character may
be discovered to himself and others. He will have an honest
wish to know whether his habits of life are really godly, or
" wrought in God."
The principle here laid down is of great importance, and expe
rience shows that the assertion of the text is always confirmed
by facts. I believe there was not a truly gpod man among the
Jews in our Lord's day, who did not at once receive Christ, and
welcome Christ's Gospel, as soon as it was brought before him.
Nathanael was an example. He was a man " who did truth "
under the obscure Ught of the law of Moses, as ministered by
Scribes and Pharisees. But the moment the Messiah was brought
before him, he received Him and believed. — So also, I believe,
when the Gospel comes into a church, a parish, or a congregation,
it is always gladly received and embraced by any whose hearts
are true. To be a truly godly man, au'l yet to refuse to come
to Christ, is an impossibility. He that hears of Christ and does
not come to Him, and believe on Him as God's appointed way
of salvation, has something fatally wrong about him. He is not
really " doing truth." He is not a converted man. Gospel light
is a mighty magnet. If there is any one that has true religion
within its sphere, it will attract to itself that person. To be
truly religio-as and not to gravitate towards Him who is the
great centre of all light and truth, is impossible. If a man re
fuses Christ, he cannot be a godly man.
The application of the two last verses to the case of Nicodemus
and those Jews who were in the sarae ^tate of mind as Nicode
mus, is plain and obvious. Our Lord leaves on the Pharisee's
mir.d a solemn and heart-searching conclusion. " Think not
that you can stay away from me after hearing this discourse and
be saved. If you are a really earnest inquirer after truth, and
your heart is honest and sincere, yo-a must go on, you must
come to the light and embrace the light, and you wiU do so,
however great your present ignorance. If on the other hand
you are not really desirous to serve God, you will prove it by
keeping away from my Gospel, ami by not confessing me as the
Messiah." It is a pleasant reflection, that after events proved
that Nicodemus was one who " did truth." He used the light
our Lord graciously imparted to him. He came forward and
ppoke for Christ in the council. And at last, when he boldly

168 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
helped to bury Christ, he made it manifest to all Israel that "his
deeds were wro'ij-ht in God."
Let it be noted, that the two verses which conclude our
Lord's addre's to Nicodemus are a most instructive test of the
sincerty and reality of persons who appear anxious inquiiers
in religion. If they are honest and true they will go on, and
come to the fuU light of Christ. If they are not honest and
sincere, but only influenced by temporary excitement, ihey will
probably go back from the Ught, and will certainly not close
with Christ and become his disciples. This should be pres-ed
by ministers on all inquirers. " If you are true you will come
to the light. If you are not true, you will go back, or sJand
still ; you will not draw near and close with Christ." The test
will never be found to fail. Those who wish to see how ex
ceedingly weak the beginnings of grace may be in a heart, and
yet be true, as it proved in the case of Nicodemus, will find the
matter most skilfully treated in a small work of Perkins, little
known, caUed " A Grain of Mustard Seed." A man may have
the beginning of regeneration in his heart, and yet be so ignorant
as not to know what regeneration is.
In concluding these long notes, for the length of which the
immense importance of the passage must be ray apology, I think
we should remark that we never hear a word about Nicodemus
being baptized 1 This fact is a strong incidental evidence to my
mind, that the bapt'sm of water was not the subject which our
Lord had in view when he told Nicodemus that he must be torn
of water and the Spirit.
One other thing ought to be remarked, in leaving this subject
of <iur Lord's conversation with Nieoderaus. That thing is the
singular fulness of matter by whieh the whole of our Lord's
addres-i is characterized. "Within the space of twenty verses we
read of the work of all Three Persons in the Trinity, — the
Father's love, the Son's death on the cross, and the Spirit's
operation in the new birth of man, — the corruption of man's
nature, the nature of regeneration, and the efficacy of faith
in Christ, — the way to escape perishing in heU, the true cause
of man's condemnation if he is lost, and the true marks of
sincerity in an inquirer. A fuUer sermon was never delvered
than th'it which was here preached to Nicodemus in one even
ing I There is hardly a single important point in divinity whieh
is l.ft untouched 1

JOHN, CHAP. III.

169

JOHN HL 22—36.

22 After these things camo Je
sus and his disciples into the land
of Judaaa; and there he tarried
with them, and baptized.
23 And John also was baptizing
in iEnon near to SaUm, because
there was much water there: and
they came, and were baptized.
24 For John was not yet east
into prison.
25 Then there arose a question
between some of John's disciples
and the Jews about purifying.
26 And they came unto John,
and said unto him. Rabbi, he that
was with thee beyond Jordan, to
whom thou barest witness, behold,
the same baptizeth, and aU men
come to him.
21 John answered and said, A
man can receive notnmg, except it
be given him from heaven.
28 Ye yourselves bear me -wit-
Dess, that I said, I am not the
Christ, but that I am sent before
him. 29 He that hath the bride is the
bridegroom : but the friend of the
bridegroom, which standeth and
On one account, this passage deserves the special atten
tion of all devout readers of the Bible. It contains the
last testimony of John the Baptist concerning our Lord
Jesus Chi-ist. That faithful man of God was the same
at the end of his ministry that he was at the beginning,
— the same in his views of self, — the same in his views
of Christ. Happy is that church whose ministers are as
steady, bold, and constant to one thing, as John the
Baptist !
We have, firstly, in these verses, a humbling example of
the petty Jealousies and party-spirit which may exist among
professors of religion. We are told, that the disciples of
John the Baptist were offended, because the ministry ^f
" ¦'" " '¦¦¦"'' 8 ''¦' ^

heareth him, rejoiceth greatly be
cause of the bridegroom's voice:
this my joy therefore is fulfilled.
30 Ho must increase, but I mtisi
decrease. 31 He that cometh from above is
above aU : he that is of the earth is
earthly, and speaketh of the earth :
he that cometh from heaven is
above all.
32 And what he hath seen and
heard, that he testifieth; and no
man receiveth his testimony.
33 He that hath received his tes
timony hath set to his seal that
God is true.
34 For he whom God hath sent
speaketh the words of God: for God
giveth not the Spirit by measure
unto Mm.
35 The Father loveth the Son,
and hath given aU things into his
hand. 36 He that beUeveth on the Son
hath everlasting life : aud he that
beUeveth not the Son shall not see
life ; but the wrath of God abideth
ou him.

170 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Jesus began to attract more attention than that of their
master. " They came unto John, and said unto him. Rabbi,
he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou
barest witness, behold the s.ame baptizeth, and all men
come to him."
The spirit exhibited in this complaint, is unhappily too
coinnion in the Churches of Christ. The succession of these
compl liners has never failed. There are never wanting
religious professors who care far more for the increase of
their own party, than for the increase of true Christianity;
and who cannot rejoice in the spread of religion, if it
spreads anywhere except within their own pale. There is
a generation which can see no good doing except in the
ranks of its own congregations ; and which seems ready
to shut men out of heaven, if they will not enter therein
under its banner.
The true Christian must watch and pray against the
spirit here manifested by John's disciples. It is very
insidious, very contagious, and very injurious to the cause
of religion. Nothing so defiles Christianity and gives the
enemies of truth such occasion to blaspheme, as jealousy
and party-spirit among Christians. Wherever there is real
grace, we should be ready and wiUing to acknowledge it,
even though it may be outside our own pale. We should
strive to say with the apostle, " If Christ be preached, I
rejoice, yea! and will rejoice." (Phil. i. 18.) If good is
done, we ought to be thankful, though it even may not be
done in what we think the best way. If souls are saved,
we ought to be glad, whatever be the means that God may
think fit to employ.
We have, secondly, in these verses, a splendid pattern
of true and godly humility. We see in John the Baptist
a very different spirit from that displayed by his disciples.
He begins by laying down the great principle, that accep
tance with man is a special gift of God ; and that we must

JOHN, CHAP. III. 171
therefore not presume to find fault, when others have more
acceptance than ourselves. " A man can receive nothing
except it be given him from heaven." He goes on to
remind his followers of his repeated declaration, that one
greater than himself was coming ; — " I said, I am not the
Christ." He tells them that his office compared to that of
Christ, is that of the bridegroom's friend, compared to
the bridegroom. And finally, he solemnly affirms, that
Christ must and will become greater and greater, and
that he himself must become less and less important, until,
like a star eclipsed by the rising sun, he has completely
disappeared. A frame of mind like this, is the highest degree of grace
to which mortal man can attain. The greatest saint in the
sight of God, is the man who is most thoroughly " clothed
with humility." (1 Peter v. 5.) Would we know the
prime secret of being men of the stamp of Abraham, and
Moses, and Job, and David, and Daniel, and St. Paul, and
John the Baptist ? They were all eminently humble men.
Living at different ages, and enjoying very different degrees
of light, in this matter at least they were all agreed. In
themselves they saw nothing but sin and weakness. To
God they gave all the praise of what they were. Let us
walk in their steps. Let us covet earnestly the best gifts ;
but above aU, let us covet humility. The way to true
honour is to be humble. No man ever was so praised by
Christ, as the very man who says here, " I must decrease,"
the humble John the Baptist.
We have, thirdly, in these verses, an instructive declara
tion of Christ's honour and dignity. John the Baptist
teaches his disciples once more, the true greatness of the
Person whose gro-wing popularity offended them. Once
more, and perhaps for the last time, he proclaims Him as
one-worthy of air honour and praisfe. He' uses one striking
expression after another, to convey a correct idea of the

172 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
majesty of Chi-ist. He speaks of Him as " the bride
groom" of the Church,— as " him that eometh from above,"
—as " him wliom God hath sent,"— as " him to whora the
Spirit is given without measure," — as Him " whom the
Father loves," and into "whose hands all things are
given," — to believe in whom is life everlasting, and to
reject whom is eternal ruin. Each of these phrases is full
of deep meaning, and would supply matter for a long ser
mon. All show the depth and height of John's spiritual
attainments. More honourable things are nowhere written
concerning Jesus, than these verses recorded as spoken by
John the Baptist.
Let us endeavour in life and death, to hold the same
views O'f the Lord Jesus, to which John here gives expres
sion. We can never make too much of Christ. Our
thoughts about the Church, the ministry, and the sacra
ments, may easily become too high and extravagant. We
can never have too high thoughts about Christ, can never
love Him too much, trust Him too implicitly, lay too much
weight upon Him, and speak too highly in His praise. He
is Avorthy of all the honour that we can give Him. He will
be all in heaven. Let us see to it, that He is all in our
hearts on earth.
We have, lastly, in these verses, a broad assertion of the
nearness and presentness of the salvation of true Chris
tians. John the Baptist declares, " He that believeth on
the Son hath everlasting life." He is not intended to look
forward with a sick heart to a far distant privilege. He
" hath" everlasting life as soon as he believes. Pardon,
peace, and a complete title to Heaven, are an immediate
possession. They become a believer's own, from the very
moment he puts faith in Christ. They will not be more
completely his own, if he lives to the age of Methuselah.
The truth before us, is one of the most glorious privUeges
of the Gospel. There are no works to be done, no condi-

JOHN, CHAP. III. 173.
tions to be fulfilled, no price to be paid, no wearing years
of probation to be passed, before a sinner can be accepted
with God. Let him only believe On Christ, and he is at
once forgiven. Salvation is close to the chief of sinners.
Let him only repent and believe, and this day it is his
own. By Christ all that believe are at once justified from
all things.
Let us leave the whole passage with one grave and
heart-searching thought. If faith in Christ brings with it
present and immediate privUeges, to remain unbelieving is
to be in a state of tremendous perU. If heaven is very
near to the believer, hell must be very near to the unbeliever.
The greater the mercy that the Lord Jesus offers, the
greater wUl be the guilt of those who neglect and reject it.
" He that believeth not the Son shall not see life ; but tbi'
wrath of God abideth on him."
Notes. John IIL 22—36.
22. — [Came Jesus...into...land ofJudcea!]. Some haye thought, from
this expression, that the conversation, bet-ween Christ and Nico
demus did not take place in JerusaliBin or Judaea, but in G-alilee.
Others have thought that a long interval must be supposed to
have elapsed between the conversation and the. events wliich are
here narrated. — I can agree with neither view. — I believe the
true explanation is, that "the land" here spoken of means the
rural part or territory of Judaea, in contradistinction to the
capital town of the territory, Jerusalem. The meaning wiU then
be, that Jesus left the city and went into the country districts.
The expression, " Thou Bethlehem, in the land of Judasa," is
simUar. (Matt. n. 6.)
[He tarried.] The Greek word so rendered signifies a lengthened
stay. It is translated in other places "continued" or "abode."
It is note-worthy that many of the events of our Lord's ministry
in Jerusalem and the surrounding district, are evidently not
recorded in any of the G-ospels.
[And baptized!] That our Lord did not baptize with His own
hands, but left the ordinance to be administered by His disciples,
as work inferior to that of preaching, we may learn fi:om the
next chapter. (John iv. 2.)
Lightfoot observes that " The administration of Christ's ordi.

17-1: EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
nances by his ministers, according to His institution, is as His
own work. The disciples' baptizing is called His baptizing."
The questions have often been raised, " In what name -was
t'njs baptism administered ?" " "Was it a baptism that needed to
be repeated after the day of Pentecost ?" — The most probable
answer to the first question is, that it was a baptism in the name
of Jesus, upon profession of belief that he was the Messiah.
The most probable answer to the second question is, that it was
certainly not a baptism that required repetition. To suppose
that a baptism, administered by our Lord's disciples, under our
Lord's own eye, and by our Lord's own command, was not aa
effectual and profitable an ordinance as any baptisra that was
ever afterwards administered, is a most improbable supposition.
It may be remarked here, that there is no ground for the
common idea, that it is absolutely necessary that baptism should
be administered in the name of the Trinity, in order to be a vaUd
and Christian baptisra. In three cases recorded in the Acts we
are expressly told that baptism was administered in the name of
Jesus Christ, and no mention is made of aU three Persons in the
Trinity. (See Acts u. 38; viii. 37; x. 48.) In all these cases,
however, it will be remembered, baptism in the name of Christ
was practically baptism in the name of the Trinity. It was con
fession of faith in Him whom the Father sent, and who was the
giver of the Holy Ghost.
As a general rule in the Church of Christ, no doubt, baptism
ought to be in the name of the Trinity. (Matt, xxviii. 19.) But
that our Lord's disciples, in the place now before us, did not
baptize in the name of the Trinity is pretty certain, and that
baptism in the name of Jesus is valid Christian baptism seems
clear from the places referred to in Acts.
Hutcheson remarks, that " Christ's own bodily presence, fiUed
with the Spirit without measure, did not take away the use of
external ordinances," such as baptism. The Quaker's opinion,
that we need no external ordinances under the Gospel, is hard
to reconcUe with such a text as this.
23.— [John also was baptizing.] We can hardly doubt that John
baptized all who came to him, at this period of his ministry, in
the name of Jesus, upon confession of faith that Jesus was the
Messiah. It seems most improbable that after publicly jiointing
out Jesus Christ as the Lamb of God, and the promised Savioui°
he would be content to baptize with the baptism of repentance'
which he had administered before Christ appeared. In short'
John's b-iptism at this period, and the baptisra administered by
Christ's disciples, must have been precisely the same.
I may remark here, that the opinion maintained by Roman

JOHN, CHAP. III. 175
Catholics, and those who agree with them, that there was an
essential difference between John's baptism and Christian bap
tism, seems to rae entirely destitute of foundation. I agree with
Brentius, Lightfoot, and most of the Protestant commentators,
that John's baptism and Christian baptism differed only in cir
cumstantials, but were the same in substance, and that a person
baptized by John the Baptist had no need to be re-baptized after
the day of Pentecost. — Unless we take this view, I cannot see
any evidence that Peter, and Andrew, and James, and John
ever received Christian baptism at aU. There is not a single
word in the Gospel to show that they were ever baptized again
after leaving John the Baptist's company, and becoming Christ's
disciples. Moreover, we are expressly told that " Jesus himself
baptized not." (John iv. 2.) The only baptism that the first
apostles received appears to have been John the Baptist's bap
tism. This fact seems to me to prove irresistibly, that John's
baptism was essentially of equal value witU Christian baptism,
and that a person baptized by John had no need to be baptized
again. The well-known passage in Acts, (Acts xix. I — 6,) which is
always quoted in opposition to the view I maintain, does not
appear to me at aU conclusive and decisive upon the question
now before us. — For one thing, the persons described in that
passage as having only been baptized with John's baptism, seem
to have been ignorant of the first principles of Christianity.
They said, "we have not so much as heard whether there be
any Holy Ghost." That expression shows pretty clearly that
they had not been hearers of John the Baptist, who frequently
spoke of the Holy Ghost, (Mat^ iii. 11,) and had not been
baptized by John himself. — It is most probable that they were
inhabitants of Ephesus, who had only heard ApoUos preaching,
and knew even less than their teacher. Whether St. Paul might
not think it needful to administer baptism to such ignorant
disciples as these, who could give no intelligent account of Chris
tianity, is a question I would not undertake to decide. — But
beside this, it is by no means certain that these disciples were
reall.v baptized again with water at aU. Brentius holds that tho
words, "they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus,"
mean the baptism of the Spirit. Streso maintains that the words
are the concluding sentence of St. Paul's address to these ignorant
men. I cannot say that either of these last views is altogether
satisfactory. All I say is, that I would infinitely rather adopt
either of them, than hold such a monstrous opinion as tho Romish
one, that John's baptism was not Christian baptism at all, and
needed to be repaated. The difficulties in the way of this last
view appear to me far greater than tho difficulties in the way of
the one which I support. To say that the first five aposfles never
received any Christian baptism at all is really preposterous. To

176 EXPOSITORY 'FTOUGHTL
assert that Christ Himself baptized them is to adiert what tha
Bible never even hints at. There is not a shadow of proof that
Jesus ever baptized a single person. I see no escape from the
conclusion that Andrew, John, Peter, Philip, and Nathanael
either received John's baptisra or no baptism at aU.
"Whatever men may think about John's baptism before the
time when our Lord appeared, they -n'ill never prove that the
baptism he administered in the text before us was not Christian
baptism. To suppose that John would go on administering an
ordinance which he knew was imperfect, while Christian baptism
was being administered by Christ's disciples a few miles off, is
simply absurd.
, [JEnon near to Salim!] It is not certainly known where this
place was. The probability is that it was somewhere in Judasa.
In the list of the cities given to the tribe of Juda, we find
together " Shilhim and Ain." (Josh. xv. 32.) It is very possible
that these two may be the "jSlnon and Salim" now before us.
The changes which proper names undergo in passing from one
language to another, every one knows, are very great.
[Because there ivas much water!] It is frequently assumed frora
this expression, that John's baptism was immersion and not
sprinkling, and that on this account a great supply of water was
absolutely needful. It may perhaps have been so. The point is
one of no importance. That immersion, however, is necessary to
the validity of baptism, and that sprinkling alone is not sufficient,
are points that can never be demonstrated frora Scripture. So
long as water is used, it seems to be left a matter of indifference
whether the person baptized is dipped or sprinkled. 1 should
find it very hard to believe that the three thousand baptized on
the day of Pentecost, or the jaUor and his family, baptized at
midnight in the Philippian prison, were all immeiseil. The
Church of England wisely allows either mode of applying waer
to be used. 'To suppose that dipping is forbidden to English
Churchmen is mere ignorance.
[They came...baptized.] This is an eUiptical sentence. "We are
not told who are meant by "thpy." It is like "men," in Matt.
V. 15, and means generally "people.''
2A.— [John.. .not yd.. .prison.] John's diUgence in his Master's
work is here pointed out. He doubtless knew that his ministry
was fulfilled when Christ appeared, and that the time of his own
departure, and violent dea'.h under Herod's hands, was at hand.
Yet he worked on to the very last. "Blessed is' that servant,
whom his Lord when he cometh shall find so doino- " fMa't
xxiv. 46.) °" ^
Theophylact thinks that John's early death was permitted in

JOHN, CHAP. III. 177
God's providence, in order to prevent any distraction in people's
minds between him and Christ.
25. — [There arose...question...disciples...Jews...purifying.] The nature
and particulars of this dispute must be left co conjecture. "We
can only form an idea of it from the context. It seems proba
ble that it was a dispute between the unbeheving Jews and the
disciples of John the Baptist, about the comparative value of
the two baptisms which were being administered in Judea, viz.,
John's baptism and Christ's. — "Which was the most purifying?
"Which was the most efficacious? "Which was the most valuable
of the two? — The Jews probably taunted John's disciples witii
the decUne of their master's popularity. John's disciples, in
ignorant zeal and heat for their master, probably contended that
no new teacher's baptism could possibly be more purifying and
valuable than their o-wn master's.
"Wordsworth remarks upon the word "purifying," that St. John
never uses the word " baptistn," and never oaUs John the Baptist
by his common surname " the Baptist." He says " John was no
longer the Baptist, when St. John wrote. His baptism had
passed away."
Musculus, on this verse, observes the excessive readiness of
men in every age to raise questions, controversies, and persecu
tions about ceremonies of merely human institution, whUe about
faith, and hope, and love, and humility, and patience, and mor
tification of the flesh, and renewal of the Spirit, they exhibit no
zeal at all.
Controversies about baptism certainly appear to be among the
oldest and most mischievous by Which the Church has been
plagued.
26. — [They came unto John, Sc] The language of the whole verse
seems intended to show that John's disciples were jealous for
their master's ministry, and that its declining popularity, in con
sequence of our Lord's appearance in Judaea as a public teacher,
was a cause of annoyance to them. The vt-r.'^e is an instructive
instance of that httleness and party spirit -vs-hich are so painfully
common among Christians when one mini.ster's popularity ia
interfered with by the appearance of another.
[He....with ihee....thou barest witness.] This expression shows
the pubhcity and notoriety of John's testimony to our Lord as
the Messiah and the Lamb of God. It was testimony not borne
privately in a corner, but in the hearing and fuU knowledge of
all John's disciples. It would seem to have had very little effect
on their minds. The words fell on their ears, but went no
further. [Behold the same baptizeth!] This expression impUes partly

178 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
sui'p]is3 and partiy complahit. In any case it shows how Uttle
the bulk of Jo'm's disciples understood that Jesus was really the
Messiah promisod in tho prophecies. If they had undorstood it,
they would surely neither have been surprised nor annoyed at
Him for baptizing and becoming popular. They would raiher
have exp.3Cted it and rejoiced at it. It is one among many
proo.fs that ministers may be loved by their heare-s, and may
teU them the truth faithfully, and yet be utterly unable to make
their hearers undei stand or beUeve. Few are like Andrew, and
" follow Jesus," when their minister says, "Behold the Lamb."
The most are as though they did not hear at all.
[All men come to him.] These words must doubtless be taken
with qualification. The expression, "all men," only means,
" many persons." We know as a fact that not all men came to
Christ. Moreover, we must remember, that out of those who
did come to Christ, very few beUeved. John says in his reply
lo his disciples, "No man receiveth his testimony." — AUowance
must be raade for the irritation under which John's disciples
spoke. When raen are vexed in spirit, by seeing their own
party diminishing, they are often tempted to use exaggerated
and incorrect expressions.
Hutcheson reraarks on this verse, that " Carnal emulation is
an o'd and great sin in the Church, and even among professors;
it being the foul fruit of a carnal temper to look on the success
of one man's gifts as the debasing of another's who is faithful,
and to count the thriving of God's work in one minister's hand
the d!Sgra3ing of another -who is not so much flocked to."
Cyril remarks on this verse, how admirably God can bring
good out of apparent evil. Here, as in many cases, a carnal and
unkind saying of John's disciples gives occasion to John's ad
mirable testimony about Christ.
27. — [John answered....a man can rec^ivs nothing, Sc] This sentence
is the statement of a general truth in religion. Success, promo
tion, and growth of influence are gifts which God keeps entirely
in His own hands. If one faithful minister's popularity wanes,
while another's popularity and influence over men's hearts in
crease, the thing is of Goil, and we must s.ibmit to His appoint
ment. (Psalm Ixxv. 6.)
The application of the sentencj is not to Christ, as Chrysostom
thought, but to John the Baptist himself, as Augustine thought.
They are meant to imply, "I cannot command continued success
inray ministry. I can only receive what God gives me. If He
thinks fit to give any one more acceptance with men than myself
I cannot prevent it, and have no right to compliin. All success
is of God. All that I have bad, at any period of my ministry
has been received, and none d.;served."— To apply the sentence

JOHN, CHAP. III. 179
lo our Lord, seems to me an unsatisfactory interpretation, and
derogatory to the dignity of Christ's m'nisrj'. Those who take
this view, would probably prefer tho marginal reading of the
word "receive," and would render it, "No man can fake fo
Lims/5lf anything." The sentence would then be Uke St. Paul's
words to the Hebrews, " No man taketh this honour unio him
self, but he that is caUed of God, as was Aaron." (Heb. v. 4 )
But the translation, "receive," and the appUcation to John the
Baptist, appear to me more agreeable to the context, an 1 the
general spirit of John's reply. And although the word, a " man,"
ought not to have much stress laid upon it, I cannot help think
ing that John uses it intentionaUy, in order to point to himself.
"A mere man like me can receive nothing but what is given him
frora heaven."
Lightfoot thinks that the Greek word rendered "receive''
means " perceive," or " apprehend," and that John meant, " I see
by this instance of yourselves, that no man can learn or under
stand anything, unless it be given him from heaven." He
regards the sentence as John's rebuke to his disciples for incre
dulity and stupidity. I doubt myself whether the Greek word
wiU bear the sense Lightfoot would put on it.
The expression " frora heaven," is equivalent to saying " from
God." See Dan. iv. 26; Luke xv. 21.
The whole verse is a most useful antidote to that jealousy
which sometimes springs up in a minister's mind, when he sees
a brother's ministry prospering more than his own.
28. — [Ye yourselves bear me witness,.. ..I said, Sc] John here re
minds his disciples that he had repeatedly told them that he
was not the Christ, and that he was only a forerunner sent
before Him. They ought to have remembered this. If they had
done so, they would not have been surprised at the rise and pro
gress of Christ's ministry, but would rather have expected Him
to outshine and surpass their master, as a matter of course.
The verse is an instructive iUustration of the forgetfulness of
hearers. John's testimony to the dignity of Christ and liis
superiority to himself had been constantly repeated. But it had
been aU thrown away on his disciples, and when Christ began to
receive greater honours than their master, and their own party
began to grow smaUer than that of Christ's disciples, they were
offended. People soon forget what they do not like.
29. — [He that haih....bride...,bridegroom, Sc] In this verse John the
Baptist explains the relative positions occupied by himself and
Christ by a famfliar illustration. In tracing it out, it is of great
importance not to press the points of resemblance too far. The

180 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Ulustration is one which speciaUy requires to be handled with
reverence, decency, and discretion.
The "bride," in the ver--e, signifies the whole company of
believers, the Lamb's wife. (Ri;v. xxi. 9.) The " bridegroom " is
the Lord Jesus Christ Himself The " fiiend of the bridegroom''
means John the Baptist, and aU other falthfiil ministers of Christ.
According to the marriage-customs of the Jews, there were cer
tain persons called the bridegroom's /ri'ereiis, who were the means
of communication between him and the bride before tho mnr-
riage. Their duty was simply to set forward and promote the
bridegroom's interests, and to remove all obstacles, as far as pos
sible, to a speedy union of the parties. To accomplish this end
and promote a thoroughly good understanding between the
bride an! brid groom was their sole office. If they saw the
bridegroom's suit prospering, and at last saw him received
favourably and gladly by the brile, their end was accomplished
and their work was done. To all this John the Baptist makes
allusion in the verse now before us. He teUs his disciples that
his sxle work was to set forward and promote a good under
standing between Christ and men. If he saw that work pros
pering he was thankful and would rejoice, even though the result
was that his own personal importance was diminished. He
would have his disciples know that the growing popularity of
Christ which offended them, was the very thing which he longed
to see. He had no greater joy than to hear of the voice of Christ,
the bridegroom, being listened to by believers, the bride. It was
the very thing for which he had been preaching and ministering,
His "joy was fulfilled."
The word "hath" means "possesses as his own." Possession
of the bride, as "bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh," is the
peculiar prerogative of the bridegroom. (Gen. ii. 23.) With this
his friends have nothing to do.
The expression " standeth," raust probably not be pressed too
far. Some think that it is taken from the position occupied by
the bridegroom's friends on the day when the bridegroom was
first formally introduced to the bride. They stood at a respect
ful distance and looked on. The expression certainly implies
inferiority. St. Paul says that the Jewish priests "stand" daily
mini-teriu.ff, but Christ "sat down" on the rif>-ht hand of God.
(Heb. X. 12.)
The expression " heareth the bridegroom's voice," like the last,
is one that must not be pressed too far. It is 'a part of the
drapery of the illustration. ¦\Vhen report was brought to John
the Bajitist, that Jesus Christ's ministry was accepted by some,
and that He found favour with many disciples, then was fulfilled
what i; here meant, John "heard the bridegroom's voice " and

JOHN, CHAP. III. 181
saw the successful progress of his m.ission, and seeing and hear
ing t'nis " rejoiced."
The whole verse is a most instructive picture of a true rainis-
ter's work and character. He is a friend of Christ, and is ordained
in order to promote a union between Christ and souls. (2 Cor. ii.
2.) He must rigidly adhere to that ofiice, and must never take
to himself that which does not belong to hira. The minister who
allows honour to be given to himself which only belongs to Jesus,
and exalts his own office into that of a mediator and priest, is
treacherously usurping a position which is not his but his Mas
ter's. The professing Christian who treats ministers as if they
were priests and mediators, is dishonouring Jesus Christ, and
basely giving that honour to the Bridegroom's friends which
belongs exclusively to the Bridegroom Himself.
The expression " this my joy is fulfilled," is a very instructive
one for ministers. It shows that the truest happiness of a minis
ter should consist in Christ's voice being heard by souls. " Now
we Uve," says St. Paul, "if ye stand fast in the Lord." (1 Thess.
iii. 8,) &c.
It deserves notice that when our Lord at another period of His
ministry expressly speaks of Himself as " the bridegroom," in
His reply to the disciples of John the Baptist (Matt. ix.. 15), He
seems purposely to remind them of their master's words.
Musculus, on this verse, observes, " The day of the Lord will
declare what kind of zeal that is in our Popish bishops, who
profess to be influenced by zeal for the love of ihe church, which
is Christ's bride, against Christ's enemies. The day will declare
whether a zeal which makes them shed innocent blood and per
secute the members of Christ, is the zeal of true friends of the
Bridegroom, or of treacherous suitors of the bride."
30. — [He must increase... I. .decrease.] In this sentence John the
Baptist tells his complaining disciples that it is right and proper
and necessary that Christ should grow in dignity, and that he
himself should be less thought of. He was only the servant ;
Christ was the Master. He was only the forerunner and am
bassador , Christ was the King. He was only the morning star ;
Christ was the Sun. The idea implied appears to be that of the
stars graduaUy fading away, as the sun rises, after the break of
day. The stars do not really perish or really become less, but
they pale and become invisible before the superior brightness of
the great centre of light. The sun does not really become
larger, or reaUy increase in brightness, but it becomes more fully
visible, and occupies a position in which it more completely fills
our vision. So was it with John tiie Baptist and Christ.^Every
faithful minister ought to be like-minded with John. He must
be content to be less thought of by his believing hearers, in pro-

182 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
portion as they grow in knowledge and faith, and see Christ Him
self more clearly. As churches decay and fall away, they think
less of Christ and more of their ministers. As churches revive
and receive spiritual life, they think less of ministers and more of
Christ. To a decaying church the sun is going dov/n, and tiie
stars are beginning to appear. To a reviving church the stars
are waning, and the sun appearing.
31. — [He...coineth...above... above all] In this sentence John the
Baptist asserts the infinite superiority of Christ over himself oi
any other chUd of Adam, whatever office he may fill. Christ is
" from above." He is not merely man, but God. He came from
heaven when He took our nature on Him, and was born. As God,
He is as far above all His ministers and servants as the Creator
is above the creature. He is " far above all principality, and
power, and every name that can be named." He is " Head over
all things to the church," and richly deserves aU the honour, and
dignity, and respect, and reverence that man can give. (Ephes.
i. 21, 22.)
[He that is of the earth... earthly. ..speakeih...earth.] In this sen
tence John the Baptist expresses in strong language the compara
tive inferiority to Christ of himself or of any other minister.
" All who like me," he seems to say, " are only men, mere dust
and clay, descended from a father who was made out of the dust
of the ground) are comparatively earthly. The weakness and
feebleness of our origin pervade all our doings. By nature
earthly, our works are earthly, and our speaking and preaching
earthly." — In short, there will be a savour of humanity about the
ministry of every one who is naturaUy engendered of the seed
of Adam.
The difficulty that some see in John the Baptist calling his own
ministry " earthly," is quite needlessly raised. It is evident that
he caUs it so " comparatively." Compared to the teaching of
Scribes and Pharisees it was not earthly but heavenly. Com
pared to the teaching of Him -who came from heaven it wa-:
earthly. A candle compared to darkness is light. But the same
candle compared to the sun is a poor dim spark.
[He thai comdh...lieaven...ahove all.] This sentence is only a
repetition of the beginning of the verse. It is a second assertion
of Christ's greatness and superiority over any mere man, in order
to impress the matter more deeply on those who heard it.
"Mark what I tell you," John the Baptist seems to say to his
disciples, " I repeat emphatically that Christ having come from
heaven, and being by nature God as well as man, is far above rao
and aU other ministers, who are only men and nothing more."
Some think, as Erasmus, Bengel, Wetstein, Olshausen, and
Tholuck, that John the Baptist's words end with the verse pro-

JOHN, CHAP. III. 183
ceding the one now before us, and that the words "He that
cometh from above" begin the comment of John the Evangelist.
I cannot for a moment admit this idea to be correct. I see no
necessity for it. The whole passage runs on naturaUy, as the
language of John the Baptist, to the end of the chapter. J see
nothing unsuitable to John the Baptist in the concluding verses.
They contain no truth which he was not likely to know. I see
notiiing gained by this idea. It throws no new light on the
passage, and is an awkward break which would never occur t.''
a simple reader of the Bible.
32. — [Whai...seen...heard...tesiifidh.] In this sentence John the
Baptist shows the divinity of Christ, and His consequent superi
ority over himself in another point of view. He says that Christ
bears witness to truths which he has "seen and heard." He is
not like mere human ministers who only declare what they have
been taught by the Holy Spirit, and inspired to communicate to
others. As God, He declares with authority truths which He
had seen, and heard, and known from all eternity with the Father.
(John- V. 19, 30; viii. 38.)
Some draw a distinction between what our Lord has seen ana
what He has heard. They think that what Christ has " seen,'
means what He has seen as one with God the Father in essence,
and what Christ has " heard," means what He has heard as a
distinct person in the Trinity. — Or else they think that what
Christ has " seen," means what He has seen with the Father as
God, and what He has " heard," what He has heard from the
Father as man. — I doubt the correctness of either view. I think
it more probable that the expression " seen and heard," is only a
proverbial way of signifying perfect knowledge, such as a person
has intuitively or at first hand.
Euthymius thinks, that the expression " seen and heard," was
purposely used, because of bhe weakness of John's hearers ; aud
that such expressions were necessary, in order to give such hear
ers any adequate idea of Christ's divine nature.
The word " testifieth" deserves notice, as an expression pecu
liarly characteristic of Christ's ministry. He told Pilate, " I
came into the world that I should bear witness unto the truth."
(John xvUi. 27.)
[And no man receiveth his testimony.] The expression "no
man " in this sentence, must evidently, from the foUowing verses,
be taken with qualification. It must mean " very few." Andrew,
Peter, PhiUp, and others, had received Christ's testimony. The
sentence seems intended to rebuke the complaint uttered by
John's disoipleSj " All men come unto him." John seems to say,
" However many persons come to hear Jesus, you will yet see

184 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
that very few believe ou him. Great as he is, and deserving of
far more reverence than myself, you have yet to learn, that e^ea
he is really beUeVed on by fevv. The crowds who follow him are.
unhappily, not true believers. The temporary popularity whicli
attends his ministry, is as worthless as that which attended my
own." Pearce thinks, that the Greek word rendered " and," would
have been better translated, " and yet," as in John vii. 19, and
ix. 30.
The notion of Augustine's, that "no man," in this sentence
means, " none of the wicked," seems very untenable and unsa
tisfactory.
33. — [He hath received, Sc] In this verse John shows the great
importance of receiving Christ's testimony. So far from being
offended by the crowd which attended Christ's ministry, John's
disciples should be thankful that so many heard Him, and that
some few received His teaching into their hearts.
[Hath set to his seal] This expression is peculiar, and found
nowhere else in the New Testament, in the same sense. Of
course it does not mean any literal sealing. It only means,
"hath formally declared his belief, — hath publicly professed his
conviction," — just as a man puts his seal to a document, as a testi
mony that he consents to its contents. In ancient days, when
few comparatively could write, to affix a seal to a paper, was a
more common mode of expressing assent to it, than to sign a
nara.e. — The sentence is equivalent to saying, " He that receives
Christ's testimony, has set down his name as one who believes
that God is true."
[That God is true.] These words may be taken two ways.
According to some they mean, "He that receives Christ, declares
his belief, that it is the true God who has sent Christ ; and that
Christ is no impostor, but the Messiah, whom the true God of
fhe Old Testament prophets promised to send." — According to
others they mean, " He that receives Christ, declares his belief,
that God is true to his word, and has kept the promise that he
made to Adam, Abraham, and David." That the Greek word
rendered " true," will bear this last raeaning, seems proved by
the expression, " Let God be true, but every man a liar." (Rom.
iii. 4.) Either view makes good sense and good divinity; but
on the whole, I prefer the second one. It seems to me strongly
confirmed by the expression in St. John's 1st Epistie: "He that
believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth
not the record that God gave of his Son.'' (1 John v. 10.)
Some have thought that the sentence may mean "He that
receives Christ, declares his belief, that Christ is the 'true God,"

JOHN, CHAP. III. 185
ai.d that it is parallel to 1 John v. 20, " This is the true God."' —
But I do not think the Greek words wiU admit of the interpre
tation. If they would, the Greek fathers would never have
overlooked this text in writing against the Arians. Maldonatus
seems to favour this opinion, and says that Cyril holds it. But
it certainly does not clearly appear in Cyril's commentary on the
place.
34. — [He whom God hath sent!] In this verse John the Baptist
shows the dignity of Christ, and His superiority over all other
teachers, by another striking declaration about Him. He begins
by giving Him fhe weU-known epithet which was peculiarly
applied to Messiah, " He whom God hath sent, the sent One, —
the One whom God has sent into the world according to
promiNe." [Speakdh the words of God.] This sentence means that Christ's
words were not the words of a mere man, like John himself or
one of the prophets. Tliey were nothing less than the words
of God. Ho who heard them heard nothing less than God
speaking. The unity of the Father and the Son is so close that
he who hears the teaching of the Son hears the teaching of the
Father also. (Compare John vii. 16 ; v. 19 ; xiv. 10, 11 ; viu. 28 ; xu.
49.) When John the Baptist spoke, he spoke merely human
words, however true, and good, and scriptural. But when
Christ spoke, He spoke divine words, even the words of God
Himself As Quesnel says, "He spoke by the Holy Ghost, who
is His own Spirit, who inseparably dwelleth in Him, and by
the possession of whose fulness He receives His unction and
consecration." Theophylact remarks on this sentence and others like it in St.
-"uhn's Gospck, that we must not suppose that Christ needed to
Dc taught by God the Father what to speak, because whatever
(bo Father knows the Son also knows, as consubstantial with
Him. So also when we read of the Son being " sent," we must
think of Him as a ray sent from the sun, which is not in reality
separate from the sun, but a part of the sun itself.
Some think that the expression, " speaketh the words of God,"
in this place, has special reference to the promise given to Moses
about Messiah, " I will put my words in His mouth." (Deut.
xviii. 18.)
[For God giveth noi...Spirit by measure. .Him.] The expression
"by measure," in this sentence, means "partially, — scantUy, —
stintedly, — in smaU degree." It is fhe opposite to "fuUy, — com
pletely, — in unmeasured abundance." Thus we read iu Ezekiel's
description of a time of scarcity at Jerusalem, " They shall drink
water by measure." (Ezek. iv. 16.)

186 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
The whole sentence is peculiar, and requires careful interpreta-
tioHi The object of John the Baptist is to show once more the
infinite superiority of the Lord Jesus over himself or any other
man. To aU others, even to the raost eminent prophets and
apostles, God gives the Holy Spiiit " by measure." Their gifts
and graces are both imperfect. As St. Paul sa3's, they "know in
part and prophesy in part." (1 Cor. xin. 9.) But with Hiin
whom God hath sent, it is very different. To Him the Holy
Ghost is given without measure, in infinite fulness and complete
ness. In His human nature the gifts and graces of the Spirit are
present without the shghtest shadow of imperfection. As man,
Jesus of Nazareth was anointed with the Holy Ghost, and fitted
for His office as our Priest, and Prophet, and King, in a way and
degree never granted to any other man. (Acts x. 38.)
All this is undoubtedly true, but it is not, in my opinion, fhe
whole truth of the sentence. I believe that John the Baptist
points not only to our Lord's human nature but to His divinity.
I believe his raeaning to be, " He whora God hath sent, is One
far above prophets and ministers, to whom the Spirit is only
given by measure. He is One who is Himself very God. In
Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. He is One
who, as a Person in the Trinity, is eternally and ineffably united
with God the Holy Spirit. From Hi.ra fhe Holy Spirit proceeds
as well as from the Father, and is fhe Spirit of Christ and the
Spirit of the Son. As God, it is impossible that He can be
separated from the Holy Spirit. To Him therefore the Spirit is
not given by measure, as if He were only a man. He is God as
well as man, and as such He needeth not that the Spirit should
be given to Him. He has the Spirit without measure, because in
the divine essence, lie, and the Spirit, and the Father, are One,
and undivided."
I am inclined to hold the view just stated, because of fhe
verse which foUows. The object of John the Baptist, in this last
testimony to Christ, appears to be to lead his disciples step by
step to fhe highest view of Messiah's dignity. He would have
them recognize in Him One who was very God as well as very
man. The view of the sentence before us which is commonly
adopted, appears to me of an unsafe tendency'. That the Spirit
was given to our Lord as man, and given without measure, ia
doubtiess true. But we must be very careful tiiat we never f -.rget
a truth of no less importance. That truth is, that our Lord Jesus
Christ never ceased to be God as well as man, and that as God
He was never separate from the Spirit. As Henry says, "The
Spirit dwelt in Him, not as in a vess^-1, but as in a fountain as in
a bottomless ocean." '
It deserves remark, that the concluding words of the verse
" unto Him," are not four d in the original Greek. This has led

JOHN, CHAP. III. 187
some to maintain that the second clause of the verse is only a
general statement, " God is not a God who gives the Spirit by
measure." But all fhe best commentators, from Augustine down
wards, hold the view of our translators, that it is Christ who
is signified, and that " unto Him" ought to be supplied in any
translation. Chemnitius thinks that this verse specially refers to Isaiah xi.
2, where it is predicted that the seven-fold gifts of the Spirit
shall rest on Messiah.
35. — [The Father loveth... Son...given all. .hand.] There is something,
at first sight, abrupt and elliptical in this verse. The full mean
ing of it, I beUeve to be as follows. " He whom God hath sent
is One far above me or any other prophet. He is the eternal Son
of God, whom the Father loved from all eternity, and into whose
hands aU things concerning man's salvation have been given and
committed by an everlasting covenant. He is no mere man, as
you, my disciples, ignorantly suppose. He is the Son, of whom
it is written, ' Kiss the Son lest He be angry, and so ye perish
from the way.' He is the Son to whom the Father has said, ' I
wUl give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the utter
most parts of the earth for thy possession.' (Psalm ii. 7 — 9.)
Instead of being jealous of his present popularity, you should
serve Him with fear, and rejoice before Him with trembling."
The " love of the Father toward the Son," here spoken of, is
a subject far too deep for man to fathom. It is an expression
graciously accommodated to man's feeble understanding, and
intended to signify that most intimate and ineffable union which
exists between the First and Second Persons in the blessed
Trinity, and the entire approbation and complacency with which
the Father regards the work of redemption undertaken by the
Son. It is that love to which our Lord refers in the words,
" Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world," (John
xvii. 24,) and which the Father expressly asserted at the begin
ning of the Son's earthly ministry, " This is my beloved Son, in
whom I am weU pleased." (Matt. ui. 17.)
When it says that " the Father hath given all things into the
Son's hand," we must understand that mediatorial kingdom
which in fhe eternal counsels of the Trinity has been appointed
to Christ. By the terms of the everlasting covenant, the Father
has given to the Son power over all flesh, to quicken whom He
wiU — to justify, to sanctify, to keep, and to glorify His people, — ¦
to judge, and finally punish the wicked and unbelieving, — and at
last fo take to Himself a kingdom over all the world, and put
down every enemy under His leet. These are the " all things,'
of which John speaks. Christ, he would have us know, has the

188 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
keys of death and heU in His hand, and to Him a' one men must
go, if they want anything for their souls.
Calvin observes on this verso, " The love here spoken of is
that pecuUar love of God, which beginning with the Son flows
from Him to all the creatures. For that love, with which,
embracing His Son, He embraces us also in Him, leads Him to
communicate all His benefits to us by His hand."
Quesnel remarks, " God loved fhe prophets as His servants,
out He loves Christ as His only Son, and communicates Himself
to Him in proportion to His love." — " The prophets had only
particular commissions, limited fo a certain time and certain pur
poses ; but Christ has full power given Him as the general
disposer of all His Fath-r's works, the executor of His
desig-ns, the head of His Church, the universal High Priest
of good things to come, the steward and disposer of all His
graces." Chemnitius, on this verse, remarks the infinite wisdom and
lo'ife of God in giving the manageraent of our soul's affairs inte
Christ's hand. "We are all naturaUy so weak and feeble, that ii
anything was left in our hands we should never be saved. We
should lose al', even sooner than Adam did in Paradise. But
Christ will take care of all committed to His charge, and our
wisdom is to commit all things to Him, as St. Paul did. (2 Tiui.
L12.)
iJ6. — [He that believeth... Son...hath... life!] In this verse John the
Baptist concludes his testimony to Christ, by a solemn decia- ation
of the unspeakable importance of believing on Him. Whether
his disciples would receive it or not, he tells them that life or
death, heaven or heU, all turned on believing in this Jesus who
had " been with him beyond Jordan."
The excellence of faith should be noted here. Like his divine
Master, John teaches that " beUeving on the Son," is the princi
pal thing in saving religion. Believing is the way f o heaven, and
not beUeving the way to heU.
The " presentness" of the salvation whieh is in Christ should
be here noted. Again, like his divine Master, John teaches tiiat
a believer " hath" everiasting life. Pardon, peace, and a title to
heaven are at once and immediately a man's possession, the very
moment that he lays his sins on Jesus, and puts his tiust in
Him. [He thai believeth not..noi see life!] Tho Greek -word here ren
dered " believeth not," is quite difl'erent from the one translated
" believeth" at the beginning of the verse. It means somethirg
much stronger than " not trusting." It would be more literally

189
rendered " He that does not obey, or is disobedient to." It ia
the same word so rendered in Rom. ii. 8 ; x. 21 ; 1 Pet. ii. 8 ; iii.
L20. The expression, " shaU not see life,'' raust of course mean,
" shall not see life, if he continues impenitent and unbelieving,
and dies in that state." The phrase " to see Ufe," most probably
means "to taste, enter, enjoy, possess life," and must not be
literaUy interpreted as seeing either with bodily or mental eyes
[The wrath of God abideth on him.] This concluding sentence
of John the Baptist's testimony, is again very Uke his Master's
teaching, " He that believeth not is condemned already." The
meaning of the sentence is, that so long as a man is not a be
liever in Christ, the just wrath of God hangs over him, and he
is under the curse of God's broken law. "We are all by nature
born in sin, and children of wrath ; and our sins are all upon us,
unpardoned, unforgiven, and untaken away, until that day when
we believe on the Son of God and are made children of grace.
The sentence is a very instructive one, and especially so in the
present day. I see in it an unanswerable reply to some grievous
errors which are very prevalent in some quarters.
(a.) It condemns the notion, upheld by some, that under the
Gospel there is no more anger in God, and that he is only love,
mercy, and compassion, and nothing else. Here we are plainly
told of " the wrath of God." It is clear that God hates sin.
There is a helL God can be angry. Sinners ought to be afraid.
(h.) It condemns the notion, maintained by some, that the
elect are justified from aU eternity, or justified before they be
lieve. Here we are plainly told that if a man believe not on the
Son, God's wrath abideth on him. We know nothing of any
one's justification until he beUeves. Those whom God predes
tinates, God caUs and justifies in due season. But there is no
justification until there is faith.
(c) It condemns the modern idea, that Christ by His death,
justified aU mankind, and removed God's wrath from the whole
seed of Adam ; and that all men and women are justified in
reality, though they do not know it, and wOl all finaUy be saved.
This idea sounds very amiable, but is flatly contrary to the text
before us. Here we are plainly told, that until a man " believeth
on the Son of God, the wrath of God abideth on him."
(d.) Finally, it condemns the weak and false charity of those
who say, that preachers of the Gospel should never speak of
God's wrath, and should never mention heU. Here we find that
the last words of one Of Christ's best servants consist of a
solemn dedaration of the danger of unbeliefj ¦ " The wrath of

190 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
God " is John's last thought. To warn men of God's wrath,
and of their danger of hell, is not harshness, but true charity.
Many will go to "hell, because their ministers never told them
about hell.
In leaving fha passage, the variety of expressions used by John
the Baptist concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, is very worthy of
notice. He calls Him the Christ, — the bridegroom, — Him that
cometh from above, — Him that testifieth what He hath seen and
heard, — Him whom God hath sent, — Him who has the Spirit
without measure, — Him whom the Father loves, — Him into
whose hands aU tilings are given, — Him in whom fo beheve ia
everlasting Ufe. To talk of John the Baptist's knowledge of di
vine things as meagre and scanty, in the face of such a passage
as this, is, to say the least, not wise, and argues a very slight
acquaintance with Scripture. To suppose, as some do, that the
man who had such clear views oi our Lord's nature and office,
could afterwards doubt whether Jesus was the Christ, is to sup
pose what is grossly improbable. The message that John sent to
Jesus when he was in prison, was for the sake of his disciples,
and not for his own satisfaction. (Matt. xi. 3, &c.)

JOHN IV. 1— G.

I "When therefore the Lord knew
how the Pharisees had heard that
Jesus made and baptized more dis
ciples than John,
2 (Though Jesus himself bap
tized not, but his disciples.)
3 He left Judtea, and departed
again into GaUlee.
4 And he must needs go f lirough
Samaria.

5 Theu cometh he to a city of
Samaria, which is caUed Sychar,
near to the parcel of ground that
Jacob gave to his son Joseph.
6 Now Jacob's weU was there.
Jesus therefore, being wearied with
his journey, sat thus on the
weU : and it was about the sixth
hour.

Theke are two sayings in these verses which deserve par
ticular notice. They throw light on two subjects in reli
gion, on which clear and well defined opinions are of great
importance. "W^e should observe, for one thing, what is said about
baptism. We read that " Jesus himself baptized not, but
his disciples."
The expression here -used is a very rematkabfe one. " In
reading it we seem irresistibly led to one instructive con-

JOHN, CHAP. lY. 191
elusion. That conclusion is, that baptism is not the prin
cipal part of Christianity, and that to baptize is not the
principal work for which Christian ministers are ordained.
Frequently we read of our Lord preaching and praying.
Once we read of His administering the Lord's supper.
But we have not a single instance recorded of His ever
baptizing any one. And here we are distinctly told, that
it "was a subordinate work, which He left to others. Jesus
" himself baptized not, but liis disciples."
The lesson is one of peculiar importance in the present
day. Baptism, as a sacrament ordained by Christ Himself,
is an honourable ordinance, and ought never to be lightly
esteemed in the churches. It cannot be neglected or de
spised without great sin. When rightly used, with faith
and prayer, it is calculated to convey the highest blessings.
But baptism was never meant to be exalted to the position
wbich many now-a-days assign to it in religion. It does
not act as a charm. It does not necessarily convey the
grace of the Holy Ghost. The benefit of it depends
greatly on the manner in which it is used. The doctrine
taught, and the language employed about it, in some quar
ters, are utterly inconsistent with the fact announced in
the text. If baptism was all that some say it is, we should
never have been told, that " Jesus himself baptized not."
Let it be a settled principle in our minds that the first
and chief business of the Church of Christ is to preach
the Gospel. The words of St. Paul ought to be constantly
remembered, — " Christ sent me not to baptize, but to
preach the Gospel." (1 Cor. i. 17.) When the Gospel of
Christ is faithfully and fully preached we need not fear
that the sacraments will be undervalued. Baptism and
the Lord's supper will always be most truly reverenced in
those churches where the truth as it is in Jesus is most
fully taught and known.
We should observe, for another thing, in this passage.

192 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
what is said about our Lord's human nature. We read
that Jesus was " wearied with his journey."
We learn from this, as well as many other expressions
in the Gospels, that our Lord had a body exactly like our
own. When " the Word became flesh," He took on Him
a nature like our own in all things, sin only excepted.
Like ourselves. He grew from infancy to youth, and from
youth to man's estate. Like ourselves, He hungered,
thirsted, felt pain, and needed sleep. He was liable to
every sinless infirmity to which we are liable. In all things
His body was framed like our own.
The truth before us is full of comtort for all who are
true Christians. He to whom sinners are bid to come for
pardon and peace, is one who is man as well as God. He
had a real human nature when He was upon earth. He
took a real human nature with Him, when He ascended up
into heaven. We have at the right hand of God a High
Priest who can be touched with the feeling of our infirmi
ties, because He has suffered Himself being tempted.
When we cry to Hitn in the hour of bodily pain and weak
ness. He knows well what we mean. When our prayers
and praises are feeble through bodily weariness. He can
understand our condition. He knows our frame. He has
learned by experience what it is to be a man. To say that
the Virgin Mary, or any one else, can feel more sympathy
for us than Chi'ist, is ignorance no less than blasphemy.
The man Christ Jesus can enter fully into everything that
belongs to man's condition. The poor, the sick, and the
suffering, have in heaven One who is not only an almighty
Saviour, but a most feeling Friend.
The servant of Christ should grasp firmly this great
truth, that there are two perfect and complete natures in
the one Person whom he serves. The Lord Jesus, in whora
the Gospel bids us beheve, is, without doubt, almighty
God,7-equal to the Father in all thiijgs, and able to save

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 193
to the uttermost all those that come unto God by Him.
But that same Jesus is no less certainly perfect man, — able
to sympathize with man in all his bodily sufferings, and
acquainted by experience with all that man's body has to
endure. Power and sympathy are marvellously combined
in Him- who died for us on the cross. Because He is God,
we may repose the weight of our souls upon Him with uii-
hesitating confidence. He is mighty to save. — Because He
is man, we may speak to Him with freedom, about the
many trials to which flesh is heir. He knows the heart of
a man. — ^Here is rest for the weary ! Here is good news !
Our Redeemer is man as well as God, and God as well as
man. He that believeth on Him, has everything that a
child of Adam can possibly require, either for safety or for
peace. Notes. John IV. I — 6.
1. — [When tlierefore the Lord knew, Sc] The connection between
this chapter and the last will be found at the 25th verse of the
last chapter. The controversy between John's disciples and the
Jews was the means of calling pubUc attention to our Lord's
ministry. It became a subject of common conversation, and
attracted the notice of the principal religious teachers of the
Jews, viz., the Pharisees. They had already been disturbed
by the . ministry of John fhe Baptist, and the crowds which
attended it. (John i. 19 — 28.) The deputation which they sent
to John had been distinctly told by him that One greater than
himself WIS about to appear. When therefore " the Pharisees
heard" mat Jesus was actuaUy baptizing more disciples, and
attracting more attention than John, we can well imagine that
their minds would he even more disturbed than before. A vague
uncomfortable feeling would arise in their hearts, that this mys
terious person, who had cast out of the temple the buyers and
sellers in so mira,culous a manner, and was now baptizing so
many disciples, might possibly be the Christ. And then would
come the attendant feeling, that if this was the Christ, He was
. not the Christ they either expected or wanted. The result of
both feelings would probably be a bitter enmity against our
Lord, and a secret determination, if possible, to settle all doubts
by putting Him tp death.
In what manner our Lord " knew " what the Pharisees had

194 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
heard, we need not be careful to inquire. Possibly He knew il
frora inforniation ubtained by His disciples. We can hardly
doubt that sorae of them kept up intercourse with their old
master, John the Baptist, and so learned what was going on
at iEnon. — It is more probable that He knew it from His om
niscience as God. We are frequently told that " He knew the
thoughts " of His enemies, and acted and spoke accordingly. It
is good for us all to remember that nothing is spoken, talked of,
or reported among men, however secretly, which Christ does not
know.
2. — [Though Jesus himself baptized not, Sc] The fact that our
Lord did not actually administer baptism with His own hands,
is only mentioned here in the Gospels, and is noteworthy. It
shows, at any rate, that what is done by Christ's ministers, at
Christ's command, in the administration of ordinances, is regarded
as done by Christ Himself. The preceding verse says that "Jesus
baptized," while fhe present one says, that He " baptized not."
Lightfoot remarks, " It is ordinary, both in Scripture phrase and
in other language, to speak of a thing as done by a man himself,
which is done by another at his appointment. So Pharaoh's
daughter is said to 'nurse Moses,' and Solomon is said to 'buUd
the temple and his own house.' So D.avid ' took Saul's spear and
cruse,' meaning A'oishai by David's appointment." (1 Sam.
xxvi. 12.)
The reasons assigned for our Lord's not administering baptism
with His own hands, are various. Lightfoot mentions four.
1. " Because he was not sent so much to baptize as to preach.
2. Because it might have been taken as a thing somewhat im
proper for Christ to baptize in His own name. 3. Because the
baptizing that was most proper for Christ to use, was not with
water, but with fhe Holy Ghost. 4. Because he would prevent
all quarrels and disputes among men about their baptisra, which
might have risen if some had been baptized by Christ, and others
only by His disciples."
To these reasons we may add another of considerable import
ance. Our Lord would show us that the effect and benefit of
baptism do not depend on the person who administers it. We
cannot doubt that Judas Iscariot baptized some. The intention
of the minister does not afi'ect the validity of the sacrament.
One thing seems abundantly clear, and that is, that baptism
is not an ordinance of primary, but of subordinate importance
in Christianity. The high-flown and extravagant language used
by some divines about the sacrament of baptism and its effects,
is quite irreconcilable with the text before us, as well as with the
general teaching of Scripture. (See Acts x. 48; 1 Cor. i. 17.)
3. — [He left Judwa, &c!] _ The context of fhe preceding verses seems

JOHN, CHAP, IV. 196
to show that this movement was intended to avoid the designs of
the Pharisees against our Lord. If he had remaincl in Judfea,
He would have been cut off, and put to death before the ap
pointed time. He therefore withdrew into the province of Gali
lee, where He was further oft' from Jerusalem, and where His
ministry would attract less public notice.
Our Lord's conduct on this occasion shows us that it is not
obligatory on a Christian to await danger to life and person,
when he sees it coining, and that it is not cowardice to use aP
reasonable means to avoid it. We are not to court martyrdom,
or needlessly to throw our lives away. There is a time for all
things, — a time to live and work, as well as a time to suffer and to
die. Whether some of the primitive martyrs would have acted
as our Lord did here may be questioned. Their zeal for maityr-
dom seems sometimes to have partaken of the character of
fanaticism.
i. — [He must needs go through Samario.] Many pious and pro
fitable remarks have been made on this expression. It has been
thought to teach that our Lord went purposely, and out of the
regular road, in order to save the soul of the Samaritan woman.
It admits of grave question whether this opinion is well-founded.
— There was no other way by which a person could conveniently
go from Judoea to Galilee, excepting through Samaria. — The
expression, therefore, is probably nothing more than a natural
introduction to fhe story of the Samaritan woman. The first in
the train of circumstances which led to her conversion, was the
circumstance that Jesus was obliged to pass through Samaria,
on His journey towards GaUlee. This accounted for His meeting
with a Samaritan woman.
5. — [Then cometh....city....cal'.ed Sychar.] The common opinion is,
that the city here spoken of is fhe same as Sichem or Shechera.
(Gen. xxxiii. 18, 19.) Few places in Palestine, afcer Jerusalem,
have had so much of Bible history connected with them. Here
God first appeared to Abraham. (Gen. xii. 6.) Here Jacob dwelt
when he first returned from Padan-aram, and here the disgraceful
history of Dinah, and the consequent rnurder of the Shecheniites
took place. (Gen. xxxiv. 2, &c.) Here Joseph's brethren fed
their flocks when Jacob sent him to fhem, little thinking he
would never see him again foi' many years. (Gen. xxxvii. 12.)
Here, when Israel took possess"on of the land of Canaan, was
one of the cities of refuge. (Josh. xx. 7, 8.) Here Joshua gathered
all the tribes when he addressed thera for the last time. (Josh.
xxiv 1.) Here the bones of Joseph were buried, and all the
patriarchs were interred. (Josh. xxiv. 32 ; Acts, vii. 16.) Here
the principal events in the history of Abiraelech took place.
(Judges ix. 1 , &c.) Here Rehoboam ihet the tribes of Israel aftei

196 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Solomon's death, and gave the jmswer which rent his kingdoir,
in two. (1 Kings, xii. 1.) Here Jeroboam first dwelt, when he
was made king of Israel. (I Kings xii. 25.) And flnally,_ close
bv Shechem was the city of Samaria itself, and the two hills of
Ebal and Gi-rizim, where tho solemn blessings and cur-ings were
recited, after Israel entered Canaan. (Josh. viii. 33.) A more
interesting neighbourhood it is difficult to imagine. Whichever
way the eye of a wearied traveUer looked, he would see some
thing to remind him of Israel's history.
It is only fair to say that one of the latest travellers in Pales
tine (Dr. Thomson, author of " The Land and the Book,") doubts
whether Sychar and Shechera really were fhe same place. He
grounds his doubt on the fact that the well now called Jacob's
well is two miles from the ruins of Shechem, and that close to
these ruins are beautiful fountains of water. He thinks it highly
improbable that a woman of Shechem would go two miles to
draw water, if she could find it close by. He therefore thinks it
more likely that a place now called Aschar, which is close to
Jacob's well, must be the anc-ient Sychar, and that Sychar and
Shechem were two different places.
The subject is one on which it is impossible to attain a conclu
sive decision. "Whether the ruins now called the ruins of Shechem
are really on the site of ancient Shechem, — whether the well
now called Jacob's well is really the weU spoken of in this
chapter, — whether ancient Shechem may not have been nearer
the well than it now appears, — are all points on which, after
eighteen hundred years have passed away, it is impossible fo
.'peak positively. It ought, however, fo be remembered, that
the opinion of raost competent judges is almost entirely against
Dr. Thomson's theory. Moreover, it is worth noticing that the
Samaritan woman's word.', " Neither come hither to draw," seem
to imply that she had to come some distance to Jacob's weU
when she drew water.
[Near....parcel...ground....Jacoh....Joseph.] The ground here
spoken of seems to consist of two parts. One part was bought
by Jacob of Hamor, Shechem's father, for a hundred pieces of
silver. (Gen. xxxiii. 29.) The other seerns to have been his by
conquest, when his sons slew the Shechemites for dishonouring
Dinah. (Gen. xxxiv. 28, and xlviii. 22.)
Let it be carefuUy noted that St. John here speaks of Jacob
and Joseph and the evunts of their lives, as if the history con
tained in Genesis was aU simple matter of fact. It is always
so in the New Testament. The modern theory, that the histories
of tlie Old Testament are only fables, destitute of any foundation
m fact, is a mere baseless invention, without a single respectabla
argument to be adduced 'n its favour.

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 197
6. — [Jacob's weU.] It is not known how or when this -\vell received
its name. In Genesis we find mention of Abraham and Isaac
digging wells, but not of Jacob doing so. All we know about it
is what we read in the chapter before us.
A well caUed Jacob's well is still shown fo all travellers in
Palestine, near the ruins of Shechem, and is commonly supposed
to be one of the oldest and most genuine remains of ancient
times in the Holy Land. In fact there seems no reason for dis
puting the common belief, that it is the very identical well at
which our Lord sat and held the conversation recorded in this
chapter. It is in good preservation, and about thirty yards deep.
[ Wearied ivith his journey!] This expression deserves notice.
It shows the reality of our Lord's human nature. He had a
body hke our own, subject to all the conditions of flesh and
blood. — ^It shows our Lord's infinite compassion, humility, and
condescension, when He became flesh, and came on earth to Uve
and die for our sins. Though He was rich He became poor. He
who had made the world, and whose were "the cattle on a thou
sand hUls," was content to be a weary traveller on foot, in order
to provide eternal redemption for us. We never read of Jesus
travelUng in a carriage, and only once of His riding on a beast.
— It supplies the poor with the strongest argument for content
ment. If Christ was willing fo be poor, we may surely be willing
to submit to poverty. Men need not be ashamed of poverty,
if they have not brought it on themselves by misconduct. It is
disgraceful to be profligate and immoral. But it is no sin to be
poor. — Finally, it shows believers what a sympathizing Saviour
Christ is. He knows what it is to have a weak and weary
body. He can be touched with the feeling of our infirmities.
When our work wearies us, though we are not weary of our
work, we may confidently tell Jesus, and ask Him for help. He
knows the heart of a weary man.
[Sat thus on the well!] The general meaning of these words
is, that our Lord sat down on the stones, which, according to
Eastern custom, formed a wall or battlement round the mouth
of the weU. The particular meaning of the word "thus" in the
sentence, is a point that has perplexed commentators in every
age, and wiU perhaps never be settled.
Some think, as De Dieu, A. Clarke, and Schleusner, that
" thus " is a pleonasm, or elegant expletive and redundancy in
the Greek original, and that although a Greek would see a
meaning in it, as giving a finish to the sentence, it has no spe
cial meaning that can be attached to it in the English transla
tion. Some think, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius, Muscu
lus, Bengel, Glassius, and Wordsworth, that "thus" means "jusf

198 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
as He was," without any regular seat, without looking for any
convenient position, without any pride or formality, not upon a
throne, not upon a cushion, but simply upon the ground.
Some think, as Doddridge, that " thus " means immediately,
and find a paraUel for it in Acts xx. II.
Some think, as Calvin, Lightfoot, Dyke, Bullinger, Beza,
Parkhurst, Stier, Alford, and Burgon, that " thus " refers to fhe
weariness just mentioned. Jesus, being wearied, sat down on
fhe well accordingly, after the manner and according to the
fashion that any weary person would sit. He was weary, and
so He sat on the weU.
The question is one that I feel unable to settle. The last
meaning seems to me, on the whole, the most probable one,
though it fails to carry complete conviction with it. The use of
the word " so," in Acts vii. 8, is somewhat like it. The Greek
word for "so " in that case is the same as the one here rendered
" thus." Bnrgon remarks on this sentence, " that Jacob and Moses each
;i,found his future wife beside a well of wafer ; and here it is seen
that One greater than they, their divine Antitype, the Bride
groom takes to Himself His alien spouse, the Samaritan Church,
at a well likewise."
Quesnel remarks, "The rest of Jesus Christ is as mysterious
and full of kindness and beneficence as His weariness. — It is a
great matter for a man to learn how to rest Himself without
being idle, and to make his necessary repose subservient to the
Glory of God."
[It v.-as about ihe sixth hour.] What time of the day was this,
according to our calculation of tirae ? — By far the most common
opinion is, that the sixth hour here means twelve o'clock, the
hottest and sultriest time of the day. It is notorious that the
Jewish day began at six o'clock in the e-^-ening. Our seven
o'clock was their one o'clock, aud their sixth hour would be our
twelve o'clock.
It is however only just and right to say, that some commenta
tors, as Wordsworth and Burgon, maintain strongly that in St.
John's Gospel fhe Jewish mode of reckoning the hours of the
day is not observed. They say that, writing later than the other
Evangelists, and in Asia Minor, St. John uses the Roman or
Asiatic mode of reckoning time, and that the Roman mode wis
like our own. They say, therefore, ihat when fhe disciples fjl-
lowed Jesus, (John i. 39,) at the tenth hour, it was ten o'clock in
the morning, and when the fever left tiie ruLr's son at the
seventh hour, it was seven o'clock in fhe evening. (John iv. 52.)
They say tiiat when Pilate brought f rth Jesus^to the Jews on

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 199
the day of the crucifixion, at the sixth hour, (John xix. 14,) it
was six o'clock in the morning. And finaUy, they saw that when
Jesus, in the passage before us, sat wearied on the well at the
sixth hour, it means six o'clock iu the evening. Moreover, they
plead in support of their view, that it is infinitely more likely
that a woman would come to a well to draw water at six o'clock
in the evening than at twelve o'clock in the day. In Genesis it
is distinctly said that the "evening" is the "time that women
go out to draw water." (Gen. xxiv. 11.)
These arguments are undoubtedly weighty and ingenious, aud
the matter is one that admits of doubt. Nevertheless, for several
reasons, I ara disposed to think that the common view of the
ciuestion is the correct one, and that the sixth hour in this place
means twelve o'clock in the day. I purposely omit the con
sideration of the other places where St. John mentions hours in
his Gospel. None of them seem to me to present any difficulty,
except the " sixth hour," in St. John's account of the crucifixion.
That difficulty I shall be prepared to examine in its proper place.
I think then that the " sixth hour " in fhe text before us, means
twelve o'clock, for the following reasons :
(a.) It seems exceedingly improbable that St. John would
reckon time in a manner different to the other three Gospel-
writers. (5.) It is by no means clear that the Romans did reckon time
in our way, and not in the Jewish way. When Ihe Roman poet
Horace describes himself as lying late in bed in a morning, he
says, " I lie till fhe fourth hour." He must surely mean ten
o'clock, and not four in the afternoon. — When the Roman poet
Martial describes the Roman day, he says, " The first and second
hours are employed by clients in attending levees, and the third
hour exercises the advocates in the law-courts." — He surely can
not mean that Roman law-courts did not open till two o'clock
in the afternoon. About the custom of the Asiatics I offer no
opinion. It is a doubtful point.
(c.) It is entirely a gratuitous assumption to say that no
woman ever came to draw water except in fhe evening. There
must surely be exceptions fo every rule. The fact of the woman
coming alone, seems of itself to indicate that she came at an
unusual hour, and not in the evening.
(d.) Last, but not least, it seems far more probable that our
Lord would hold a conversation alone with such a person as the
Samaritan woman at twelve o'clock in the day, than at six
o'clock in the evening. The conversation -f.vas not a very short
one. There is little or no twilight in Eastern countries. The
ni^ht soon comes on. And yet, on the theory I oppose, our
Lord begins a conversation about six o'clock, and carries it on

200 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
till the woman is converted. Then the woman goes away to the
city and teUs the men what has happened, and th^-y ail come out
to the weU to see Jesus. Yet by this time, in aU reasonable pro
bability, it would be quite dark, and the night would have begun.
And yet, after all this, our Lord says to the disciples, "Lift up
your eyes, and look on the fields." (iv. 35.)
This last reason weighs very heavily in my mind, :n forming
a conclusion on the subject. Our Lord appears to me t > have
reached a resting-place for the middle of the day, according to
the Eastern custom in travelUng, and to have intended staying
by the well for a short tirae, till the heat of the day was past.
The arrival of the Samaritan woman at this hour of the day gave
ample time for the conversation, for her rapid return to the city,
and for the coming of the inhabitants to the well.
I must say that I see a peculiar beauty and fitness in fhe men
tion of the sixth hour, if it means twelve o'clock, which I should
not see so strongly if it meant six in the evening. To my eyes
there is a special seemliness and propriety in fhe fact that our
Lord held His conversation with such a person as this S-imaritan
woman at noon daj'. When He talked to Nicodemus, in the
preceding chapter, we are told that it was at night. But when
He talked to a woman of impure Ufe, we are carefully told that
it was twelve o'clock in the day. I see in this fact a beautiful
carefulness to avoid even the appearance of evil, which I should
entirely miss if the sixth hour meant six o'chick in the evening.
I see even more than this. I see a lesson to all ministei s and
teachers of the Gospel about the right mode of carrjing on the
work of trying to do good to souls i.ke that of the S.nnaiitan
woman. Like their Master, they must be carefiil about times
and hours, and speciaUy if they work alone. If a man will try
to do good to a person like the Samaritan v,-oman, alone and
without witnesses, let him take heed that he widks in his i\las-
ter's footsteps, botli as to the time, of his proceedings as weU as
to the message he delivers. — I believe there was a deep mean
ing in the Uttle sentence, " it was about the sixth hour."
Augustine thinks that "the six:li hour" hero was meant to
represent, allegorically, the sixth age of the world. He saya
that the first hour was frora Adam to Noah, Ihe second from
Noah to Abraham, the third from Abraham to David, the fLurth
fiom David to fhe Babylonian captivity, the fifth frou. the cap
tivity to the baptism of John, and the sixth the time of tiie Lord
Jesus. I can see no foundation for these things in the te-ct. If
such interpretations of Scripture are correct, it is easy to make
the Bible mean anything

JOHN, CHAP. IV.

201

JOHN rV. 7—26.

1 There ccmeth a woman of Sa
maria to draw water: Jesus saith
unto her, Give me to drink.
8 (For his disciples were gone
away unto the city to buy meat.)
9 Then saith the woman of Sa
maria unto him, How is it that
thou, being a Jew, askest drink of
me, which am a woman of Samaria?
for the Jews have no dealings with
the Samaritans.
10 Jesus answered and said un
to her, K thou knewest the gift of
God, and who it is that saith to
thee. Give me to drink ; thou
wouldest liave asked of him, and
he would have given thee living
water. 11 The woman saith unto him,
Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with,
and the well is deep : from whence
then hast thou that Uviug water ?
12 Art thou greater than our fa
ther Jacob, which gave us the well,
and draiik thereof himself, aud his
chUdren, and his cattle ?
13 Jesus answered and said unto
her. Whosoever drinketh of this
water shaU thirst again :
14 But whosoever drinketh of
the water that I shaU give him
shaU never tliirst ; but the water
that I shaU give him shaU be in
him a weU of water springing up
into everlasting Ufe.
15 The woman saith unto him,
Sir, give me this water, that I thirst
not, neither come hither to draw.

16 Jesus saith unto her, Go, call
thy husband, and come hither.
17 The woman answered and
said, I have no husband. Jesus
said unto her, Thou hast well said,
I have no husband :
18 Por thou hast had five hus
bands ; and he whom thou now
hast is not thy husband: iu that
saidst thou truly.
19 The woman saith unto him, Sir,
I perceive that thou art a prophet.
20 Our fathers worshipped ia
this mouutain ; and ye say, that iu
Jerusalem is 1;he place where men
ought to worship.
21 Jesus saith unto her, 'Womari,
believe me, the hour cometh, when
ye shaU neither in this mountain,
nor yet at Jerusalem, worship tho
Father. 22 Ye worship ye know not what .
we know what we worship ; for
salvation is of the Jews.
23 But the hour cometh, and now
is, when the true worshippers shall
worship the Father lu spirit and in
truth : for the Father seeketh such
to worship him.
24 God is a Spirit: and they that
worship him must worship him in
spirit and iu truth.
25 The woman saith unto him, I
know that Messias cometh, which
is caUed Christ : when he is come.
he wiU teU us all things.
26 Jesus saith uuto her, I that
speak unto thee am he.

The history of the Samaritan woman, contained in these
verses, is one of the most interesting and instructive pas
sages in St. John's Gospel. St, John has shown us, in the
case of Nicodemus, how our Lord dealt -with a self-right
eous formalist. He now shows us how our Lord dealt
with an ignorant, canial-miiided woooan, whose moral
character was more than ordinarily, bad. There are les-
9*

202 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
sons in the passage for ministers and teachers, which they
would do well to ponder.
"VVe should mark, firstly, the mingled tact and condescen
sion of Christ in dealing toith a careless sinner.
Our Lord was sitting by Jacob's well when a -n'omati
of Samaria came thither to draw water. At once He
says to her, " Give me to drink." He does not wait for
her to speak to Him. He does not begin by reproving
her sins, though He doubtless knew them. He opens
communication by asking a favour. He approaches the
woman's mind by the subject of " water," which was
naturally uppermost in her thoughts. Simple as this re
quest may seem, it opened a door to spiritual conversation.
It threw a bridge across the gulf which lay between her
and Him. It led to the conversion of her soul.
Our Lord's conduct in this place should be carefully-
remembered by all who want to do good to the thought
less aud spiritually ignorant. It is vain to expect that
such persons will voluntarily come to us, and begin to
seek knowledge. We must begin wdth them, and go
down to them in tho spirit of courteous and friendly
aggression. It is vain to expect that such persons will
be prepared for our instruction, and will at once see and
acknowledge the -svisdom of all we are doing. We must
go to work wisely. We must study the best avenues to
their hearts, and the most likely way of arresting their
attention. There is a handle to every mind, and our
chief aim must be to get hold of it. Above all, we must
be kind in manner, and beware of showing that we feel
conscious of our own superiority. If we let ignorant
people fiincy that we think we are doing them a great
i'a\our in talking to them about religion, there is Httle
hope of doing good to their souls.
We should mark, secondly, Christ's readiness to give
mercies to careless siimers. He tells the Samaritan woman

IV. 203
that if she had asked, " He would have given her living
water." He knew the character of the person before
Him perfectly well. Yet He says, "If she had asked.
He would have given," — He would have given the living
water of grace, mercy, and peace.
The infinite willingness of Christ to receive sinners is
a golden truth, which ought to be treasured up in our
hearts, and diligently impressed on others. The Lord
Jesus is far more ready to hear than we are to pray, and
far more ready to give favours than we are to ask thcni.
All day long He stretches out His hands to the disobedient
and gainsaying. He has thoughts of pity and compassion
towards the vilest of sinners, even when they have no
thoughts of Hirn. He stands waiting to bestow mercy
and grace on the worst and most unworthy, if they will
only cry to Him. He will never draw back from that
well-known promise, "Ask and ye shall receive: seek and
ye shall find." The lost will discover at the last day,
that they had not because they asked not.
We should mark, thirdly, the priceless excellence of
Christ's gifts when compared with the things of this world.
Our Lord tells the Samaritan woman, " He that drinketh
of this water shall thirst again, but he that drinketh of
the water that I shall give him shall never thirst."
The truth of the principle here laid down may be seen
on every side by all who are not blinded by prejudice or
love of the world. Thousands of men have every temporal
good thing that heart could wish, and are yet weary and
dissatisfied. It is now as it was iu David's time, — " There
be many that say who will show us any good." (Psalm
iv. 6.) Riches, and rank, and place, and power, and
learning, and amusements, are utterly unable to fill the
soul, He that only drinks of these waters is sure to
thirst again. Every Ahab finds a Naboth's vineyard hard
by his palace, and every Hainan sees a Mordecai at the

20-1: EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
gate. There is no heart satisfaction in this world, until
we believe on Christ. Jesus alone can fill up the empty
places of our inward man. Jesus alone can give solid,
lasting, enduring happiness. The peace that He imparts
is a fountain, which, once set flowing within the soul,
flows on to all eternity. Its waters may have their ebbing
seasons ; but they are living waters, and they shall nevei
be completely dried.
We should mark, fourthly, the absolute necessity of con
viction of sin before a soul can be converted to God. The
Samaritan woman seems to have been comparatively un
moved until our Lord exposed her breach of the seventh
commandment. Those heart-searching words, " Go, call
thy husband," appear to have pierced her conscience like
an arrow. From that moment, however ignorant, she
speaks like an earnest, sincere inquirer after truth. And
the reason is evident. She felt that her spiritual disease
was discovered. For the first time in her life she saw her
self. To bring thoughtless people to this state of mind should
be the principal aim of all teachers and ministers of the
Gospel. They should carefully copy their Master's ex-
amjile in this place. Till men and women are brought
to feel their sinfulness and need, no real good is ever done
to their souls. Till a sinner sees himself as God sees him,
he will continue careless, trifling, and unmoved. By all
means we must labour to convince the unconverted man
of sin, to prick his conscience, to open his eyes, to show
him himself. To this end we must expound the length
and breadth of God's holy law. To this end we must
denounce every practice contrary to that law, however
fashionable and customary. This is the only way to do
good. Never does a soul value the Gospel medicine until
it feels its disease. Never does a man see any beauty in
Christ as a Savioui-, until he discovers that he is himself

JOHN, CH-i-P. IV. 205
a lost and ruiued sinner. Ignorance of sin is invariably
attended by neglect of Christ.
We should mark, fifthly, the uselessness of any religion
which only consists of formality. The Samaritan woman,
when awakened to spiritual concern, started questions
about the comparative merits of the Samaritan and
Jewish modes of worshipping God. Our Lord tells her
that true and acceptable worship depends not on the
place in which it is ofiered, but on the state of the wor
shipper's heart. He declares, "The hour cometh when
ye shall neither in this place nor at Jerusalem worship the
Father." He adds that " the true worshippers shall wor
ship in spirit and in truth."
The principle contained in these sentences can never be
too strongly impressed on professing Christians. We are
all naturally inclined to make religion a mere matter of out
ward forms and ceremonies, and to attach an excessive
importance to our own particular manner of worshipping
God. We must beware of this spirit, and especially when
we first begin to think seriously about our souls. The heart
is the principal thing in all our approaches to God. " The
Lord looketh on the heart." (I Sam. xvi. 7) The most
gorgeous cathedral-service is offensive in God's sight, if all
is gone through coldly, heartlessly, and without grace. The
feeblest gathering of three or four poor believers in a cot
tage to read the Bible and pray, is a more acceptable sight
to Him who searches the heart than the fullest congregation
which is ever gathered in St. Peter's at Eome.
We should mark, lastly, Christ's gracious willingness to
reveal Himself to the chief of sinners. He concludes His
conversation with the Samaritan woman by telling her
openly and unreservedly that He is tho Saviour of the
world. "I that speak to thee," He says, "am the Mes
siah." Nowhere in all the Gospels do we find our Lord
nuiking such a full avowal of His nature and oflice as lie

206 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
does ill this place. And this avowal, be it remembered,
was made not to learned Scribes, or moral Pharisees, but
to one who up to that day had been an ignorant, thought
less, and immoral person !
Dealings with sinners, such as these, form one of the
grand peculiarities of the Gospel. Whatever a man's past
life may have been, there is hope and a remedy for him in
Christ. If he is only willing to hear Christ's voice and
follow Him, Christ is willing to receive him at once as a
friend, and to bestow on him the fullest measure of mercy
.and grace. The Samaritan woman, the penitent thief, the
Philippian jailor, the i^ublican Zacchseus, are all patterns
of Christ's readiness to show mercy, and to confer full and
immediate pardons. It is His glory that, like a great phy
sician, He will undertake to cure those who are apparently
incurable, and that none are too bad for Him to love and
heal. Let these things sink down into our hearts. What
ever else we doubt, let us never doubt that Christ's love
to sinners passeth knowledge, and that Christ is as willing
to receive as He is almighty to save.
What are we ourselves ? This is the question, after all,
whieh demands our attention. We may have been up to
this day careless, thoughtless, sinful as the woman whose
story we have been reading. But yet there is hope. He
who talked with the Samaritan woman at the well is yet
living at God's right hand, and never changes. Let us
only ask, and He will " give us living -water."
Notes. Johit IV. 7 — 26.
7. — [Then cometh...woman...draw water!] Tho scarcity of water in
the hot cUmates of the East makes drawing water from the near
est weU an important part of the daily business of an Eastern
household. We learn from other parts of Scripture that it was
a work ordinarfly done by women. (Gen. xxiv. II. I Sam. ix.
II.) A weU became naturaUy a common meeting-place for tha
inhabitants of a neighbourhood, and especiaUy for the young

JOHN, CH.-i.P. IV. 207
people. (Judges v. II.) The insinuation, however, of soma
w-riters, as Schottgen, that the Samaritan woman's motives in
coming to the well were possibly imraoral, seems destitute of any
foundation. Bad as her moral character evidently was, we have
no right to heap upon her more blame than is warranted by
facts. Augustine regards this woman as a type of the GentUe Church,
" not now justified, but even now at the point to be justified."
I doubt whether ^^¦e were meant by the Holy Ghost to fake this
view. There is great danger in adopting such allegorical inter
pretations. They insensibly draw avi'ay the mind from the plain
lessons of Scripture.
Musculus remarks what a wonderful instance it is of sovereign
grace, that our Lord should turn away from learned Scribes,
Pharisees, and Priests, to converse with and convert such a per
son as this woman, to all appearance so utterly unworthy of
notice. He also observes how singularly our least movements
are overruled by God's providence. Like Rebecca and Rachel,
the woman came to the well knowing nothing of the importance
of that day's visit to her soul.
[Jesus saith...give me to drink!] In this simple request of our
Lord there are four things deserving notice, (a!) It was a gra
cious act of spiritual aggression on a sinner. He did not wait
for the woman to speak to Him, but was the first to begin con
versation. (6.) It was an act of marveUous condescension. He
by whom aU things were made, the Creator of fountains, brooks,
and rivers, is not ashamed to ask a draught of water from the
hand of one of his sinfirl creatures, (c.) It was an act full of
wisdom and prudence. He does not at once force reUgion on
the attention of the woman, and rebuke her for her sins. He
begins with a subject, apparently indifferent, and yet one of
which fhe woman's mind was doubtless full. He asks her for
water, (fl.) It was an act fuU of the nicest tact, and exhibiting
perfect knowledge of fhe human mind. He asks a favour, and
puts Himself under an obhgation. No line of proceeding, it is
weU known to aUwise people, would be more Ukely to conciliate
the woman's feelings towards Him, and to make her wilUng to
hear His teaching. Simple as the request was, it contains prin
ciples which deserve the closest attention of aU who desire to do
good to ignorant and thoughtless sinners.
The idea of Euthymius, that our liorA pretended thirst in order
to introduce conversation, is unworthy of notice. — Cyril thinks
that our Lord intended to make a practical protest against the
exclusiveness of the Jews, by asking drink of a Samaritan wo
man, and to show her that He disapproved the custom of His
nation.

208 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
8. — [His disciples.. .gone...luy meat] This verse is an instance of
our Lord's general rule not to work a miracle in order to supply
his own wants. He who could feed five thousand with a few
loaves and fishes when He wUled, was content to buy food, like
any other man. — It is an instance of His lowly-mindedness. The
Creator of aU things, though rich, for our sakes became poor. —
It ought to teach Christians that they are not meant to be so
spiritual as to neglect the management of money, and a reason
able use of it for the supply of their wants. God could feed His
children, as He fed Elijah, by a daily miracle. But He knows
it is better for our souls, and more likely to call grace into exer
cise, not to feed thera so, but to make them think, and use means.
There is no real spirituality in being careless about money.
Jesus Himself allowed His disciples to " buy."
The word rendered "meat" means nothing more than "food
or nourishment," and must not be confined fo " flesh." Out of
the sixteen places where it is used in the New Testament, there
is not one where it necessarily signifies " flesh." The meat offer
ing of the Old Testament consisted of nothing but flour, oU, and
incense. (Lev, ii. I, 2.) The meaning of the word " meat," in
the English language, has evidently changed since the last revi
sion of the English Bible.
The whole verse is an instance of one of those short, paren
thetical, explanatory comments, which are common in St, John's
Go«pel, Its object is to explain the circumstance of our Lord
being alone at the weU, and the fact that He did not ask a dis
ciple to give Him water.
9. — [Then saith. ..woman...how is it...a Jew... Samaria.] This ques
tion implies that the woman was surpi ised at our Lord speaking
to her. It wa? an unexpected act of condescension on His part,
and as such arrested her attention. Thus one point, at any rate,
was gained. It is a great inatter if we can only get a careless
sinner to give us u, quiet hearing. We shaU soon see how our
Lord improved the opportunity.
How the woman knew our Lord to be a Jew, is matter of
conjecture. Some think that she knew it by the dialect that He
spoke. Some think that she knew it by the fringe upon His
dress, which he probably wore, in conformity to the Mosaic law,
(Num, XV. 38, 39,) and which fhe Samaritans very Ukely ne
glected. One thing is very clear. There was nothing in our
Lord's personal appearance, when He was a man upon earth, to
distinguish Him from any other Jewish traveUer who might
have been found sitiing at a well. There was nothing eccentric
cr peculiar about his diess. He looked Uke other men.
I venture the opinion that in tho woman's question stress

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 209
should be laid on the word " woman." Slie was not only sur
prised that -a Jewish man asked drink of a Samaritan, but also
that he asked it of a woman.
[The Jews have no dealings.. .Samaritans.] This sentence is
generaUy thought, with much reason, to be the explanatory
comment of St. John, and not the words of the Samaritan
woman. It certainly seems more natural fo take it so. The
sentence should then be read as a parenthesis. Calvin thinks it
is the woman's words, but his reasons are not; convincing.
The enmity between the Jews and Samaritans, here referred
to, no doubt originated in the separation of the ten tribes under
Jeroboam, and the establishment of the kingdom of Israel, It
was exceedingly increased after the ten tribes were carried info
captivity by the Assyrians, hy the fact that fhe Samaritans
became mingled with foreigners, whom the king of Assyria sent
to Samaria from Babylon and other places, and so lost their right
to be caUed pure Jews. (2 Kings xvii. I, &c.) It was further
aggravated by the opposition which the inhabitants of Samaria
made to the re-building of Jerusalem, after the return from fhe
captivity of Babylon, in the days of Ezra. (Ezra iv. 10, &o.) In
the days of our Lord the Jews seem to have gone into tiie
extreme of regarding the Samaritans as entirely foreigners, and
ahens from the commonwealth of Israel. When they told our
.Lord that He was " a Samaritan and had a devil," they meant
the expression to convey the bitterest scorn and reproach. (John
vui. 48.) It is clear, however, from the conversation in th's
chapter, that the Samaritans, however mistaken on many points
were not ignorant heathens. They regarded themselves as
descended from Jacob. They had a kind of Old Testament reli
gion. They expected the coming of Messias.
The birter and exclusive spirit of the Jews towards aU other
nations, referred to in this verse, is curiously confirmed by the
language used about the Jews by heathen writers at Eome.
Exclusiveness was noted as one among their peculiarities.  The
immense difficulty with which even the aposties got over this
exclusive feeling, and went forth to preach to tiie Gentiles, is
noticeable both in the Acts and Epistles. (Acts x 28 • .xi 2 '
Gal. iL 12 ; I Thess. ii. 16.) ' - >
The utter absence of real charity and love araong men in the
days when our Lord was upon earth, ought not to be overlooked.
WeU would it be if men had never quaireUcd about religion
after He left, the world ! Quarrels among the crew of a sinking
ship are not more hideous, unseemly, and irrational than fhe
majority of quarrels among professors of religion. An historian
iiight truly apply St. John's words to many a period in Church
history, and say, "The Romanists have no dealings with the

210 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Protestants," — or "the Lutherans have no dealings witii the
Calvinists,"— or " fhe Calvinists have no dealings v/ith the
Arminians," — or " the Episcopalians have no dealings with the
Presbyterians,"— or " the Baptists have no dealings with those
who baptize infants," — or " the Plymouth Brethren have no
dealings with anybody who does not join their company." " These
things ought not so to be. They are the scandal of Christianity,
the jo;j- of the devil, and fhe greatest stumbling-block to fhe
spread of the Gospel.
The Greek words translated " have no dealings," mean lilei-al!y
"use not anything together with" the Samaritans, Pearce says,
" The Jews would not eat or drink with the Samatitans, would
not drink out of the same cup, or eat of the sarae dish with
thera." This fact throws rauch light on tho woman's surprise at
our Lord's request, " Give me to drink."
10. — [Jesus answered, Sc] In this verse our Lord proceeds to use
the opportunity which the woman's question affords Him. He
passes over for fhe present her expression of surprise at a Jew
speaking to a Samaritan. He begins by exciting her curiosity
and raising her expectations, by speaking of something within
her reach which He calls " living water," The first step to fake
with a careless sinner after his attentii n has been arrested, is to
produce on his mind the impression that we can teU hira of
something to his advantage within his reach. There is a certain
vagueness in our Lord's words which exhibit His consummate
wisdom, A systeraatic statement of doctrinal truth would have
been thrown away at this stage of the -woman's feeUng. Tho
general and figurative language which our Lord employed, was
exactly calculated to arouse her imagination, and to kad her on
to further inquiry.
[The gift of God.] This expression is variously explained.
Some think, as Augustine, Rupertus, Jansenius, Whitby, and
Alford, that it means " the Holy Spirit," that peculiar gift which
it was the Messiah's special office to impait to men in greater
abundance than it had before been imparted. (Acts ii. 38; x. 45.)
Some think, as Brentius, Bucer, Musculus, Calovius, Grotius,
and Barradius, that it means " the gracious opportunity which
God is graciously giving to thee." If thou didst but know what
a door of Ufe is close to thee, thou wouldst joyfally use it.
Some think, .is Euthymius, Toletus, BuUin.gcr, Gualter, IJao]:-
er, Beza, EoUoclc, Lightfoot, Glassius, Dyke, Hdrlersam. and Gill,
that it means "Christ Himself," God'.s gracious gilt to a sinful
world. If thou didst but know that God has actually .eiven Ilia
only -begotten Son, according to promise, and that He has come
into the world, and th.at it is He who is speaking to thee, thou
wouldst at once ask of Him living water.

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 211
Some think that it means " God's gift, and especially His gift
of grace," which is now being proclaimed and made manifest
to the world by the appearing on earth of His Son. (See Rom.
V. 15.) This seems to be the view of CyrU, Lampe, Theophylact,
Zwingle, and Calvin.
Of these four views the last seems to me, on the whole, the
most probable and satisfactory. The first sounds strange and
unlike the usual teaching of Scripture. " If thou knewest the
Holy Spirit, thou wouldst have asked," is an expression we can
hardly expect at this period of our Lord's ministry, when the
mission of the Comforter had not yet been explained. — The
second view seems hardly more natural than the first, — Th-s
third view is undoubtedly recommended by fhe fact that Christ
i^ frequently spoken of as God's great gift to the world. If
the woman had really known anything aright about Messiah,
and had known that He was before her, she would have asked of
Him li-ving water. Nevertheless, it is a strong objection fo
this view, that it makes our Lord apparently say the same thing
twice over. " If thou knewest Christ, and that it is Christ who
speaks." The last view makes the first clause general, " If thou knewest
the grace of God," and the second particular, " If thou also
knewest that the Saviour Himself was with thee." Thus both
clauses receive a meaning.
[Living water!] The meaning of this expression, like "the
gift of God," is variously explained. Some, as Calovius and
Chemnitius, seem to think it means the doctrine of God's mercy,
pardon, cleansing, and justification. Others, as Chrysostom,
Augustine, Cyril, Theophylact, Calvin, Beza, Gualter, Musculus,
and Ferus, think it means the Holy Spirit, renewing, and
sanctification. I doubt whether either view is quite correct. I am inclined,
with Bullinger and RoUock, to regard fhe expression as a general
figurative description of everything which it is Christ's office to
bestow on the soul of man,— pardon, peace, mercy, grace, justi
fication, and sanctification. As water is cleansing, purifying,
cooUng, refreshing, thir,-t-safisfying to man's body, so are Christ's
gifts to the soul. I think everythin.g that a sinful soul needs is
purposely included under the general words, " living water." -It
comprises not only the justifying " blood which cleanses from all
sin," but the sanctifying .arace of the Spirit, by which we
"cleanse ourselves fron-i all filthiness,"— not only the inward
peace which is the result of pardon, but the sense of inward
comfort, which is the companion of renewal of hearts.
Tha idea of " wafer," we should remember, is specially brought
forward in sorae of the Old Testamert promises of good thing?

212 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
to come. (See Isai. xii. 3 ; xliv. 3 ; Ezek. xlvii. 1, &o. ; Zech. xiii
1 ; xiv. 8.) A sprinkling of clean water was particularly men
tioned as one of the things Messiah was to give. (Isai.- lii. 15 ;
Ezek. xxxvi. 25.) To an intelligent reader of the Old Testament
the mention of " living water," would at once raise up the idea
of Messiah's tiraes.
The word " livin,?," applied here to water, must not be pressed
too far. It does not necessarUy mean anything more than fresh,
running waters. Thus it is said that Isaac's servant "found a
well of living waters," (Gen. xxvi. 19. See also Num. xix. 17;
Cant iv, 15,) There was undoubtedly a deep meaning in our
Lord's words, and a tacit reference to the verse iii Jeremiah,
where God speaks of Himself as " the fountain of Uving waters,"
(Jer, ii, 13,) Nevertheless, the first idea that fhe words would
convey to the woman's mind, would probably be no more than
this, that he who sat before her had better, fi-esher, and more
valuable water than that, of the well. The fact is, that our Lord
purposely used a figurative, general expression, in order fo lead
the woman's mind gently on. If He had said, " He would have
given thee grace and raercy," she would have been unprepared
for such purely doctrinal language, and it would have called forth
prejudice and dislike.
There is a vast quantify of deep truth contained in this verse.
It is rich in first principles, linked together in a most instructive
chain. (1.) Christ has living water to give to men. (2.) If men
would only ask, Christ would at once give. (3.) Men do not
ask because they are ignorant. — The verse condemns aU who
die unpardoned. They have not because they ask not. They
ask not because they are blind to their condition. To remove;
this blindness and ignorance must be the first object we should
aim at in dealing with a thoughtless, unconverted man.
The notion of Ambrose, Cyprian, and Rupertus, that " living
water" here raeans baptism, is too monstrous to require refuta
tion. It is only a sample of the preposterous views of some of
the Fathers and their followers about the sacraments.
Bengel remarks on this verse our Lord's readiness to draw
lessons of spiritual instruction from every object near Him. To
the Jews desiring bread, He spoke of the bread of life. (John vi.
33.) To the people at Jerusalem at break of day, He speaks of
the light of the world, referring probably to the rising sun,
(John viii. 2, 12.) To the woman coming to draw water. He
speaks of living water.
l.—[Tlie woman saith, Sc] The words of the woman in this and
the ibllowing verse, imply surprise, curiosity, and perhaps a
slight sneer. At any rate tiiey show that her attention wa*

213
arrested. A strange Jew at a well suddenl.y speaks to her about
" living water." 'What could He mean ? Was He in earnest or
not? With a woman's curiosity she desires to know.
[Sir.] The Greek word so rendered is generally translated
"Lord." This leads some, as Chrysostom, to think, that the wo
man's heart was so far impressed now, that she purposely used
a term of respect and reverence. We must not, however, lay
too much stress on the word. It is certainly translated "Sir,"
in other places, where inferiors speak to superiors Matt, xiii
27 ; xxi. 30 ; xxvii. 63. John iv. 49 ; v. 7 ; xii. 21 ; xx. 15.
Rev. vii. 14. Yet it is difGcult to see what other word the
woman could have used in addressing a strange man, without
rudeness and discourtesy.
[Nothing to draw with.] — The Greek expression here is simply
a substantive, meaning " an instrument for drawing water."
'What it was we are left to conjecture. Schleusner suggests from
Nonnus that it raust raean a cup fastened to a i-ope.
[The icell is deep.] These words, according to the universal
testimony of travellers at this day, are still literally true. The
well is at least thirty yards deep, and to a person not provided
with a rope, as the woman doubtless saw was our Lord's case,
the water would be inaccessible.
['Wlience then....that living water.] The Greek word here
rendered " that " is siraply the article coramonly translated " the."
It is like " that prophet." (John i. 21.)
The ignorance of the woman in thinking of nothing but material
water, naturally strikes us. Yet it is nothing more than we see
in many other instances in the Gospels. Nicodemus could not see
any but a carnal meaning in the new birth. The disciples could
not understand our Lord's having " meat to eat," unless it was
literal meat. The Jews thought the " bread from heaven " was
literal bread. (John Ui. 4 ; iv. 33 ; vi, 34.) The natural heart of
man always tries to put a carnal and material sense on spiritual
expressions. Hence have arisen the greatest errors about the
sacraments.
1 2,— [Art thou greater!] This question exhibits the woman's curiosity
to know who the stranger before her could be. Who art thou
that speakest of living water? — It also savours of a sneer and
incredulity. Dost thou mean to say that thou canst give me
better and more abundant suppUes of water, than a weU wbich
the patriarch Jacob found sufficient for himself and all h's nurae
rous company? Dost thou pretend to know of a better well?
Art thou, a poor weary traveller in appearance, so great a person
that thou dost possess a better weU than Jacob possessed ?
[Oar father Jacob....gave us ihe weU.] Let it be noted that

214 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
the woman carefully claimed relationship with Jacob, and called
hira our father, though after all the intermixture of the Samaritans
with heathen nations, the relationship was not very easy of proof.
But it is common to find people shutting their eyes to difficulties,
when they want to prove a connection or relationship. The
advocates of an extreme view of apostolical succession seldom
condescend to notice difficulties when they assert that episcopally
ordained ministers can trace their order up to the aposties.
When it says that "Jacob gave" the well, there is probably a
reference to the grant which Jacob made fo his son Joseph of
the district near the well. From Joseph came the tribe of
Ephraira, to which, no doubt, the Samaritan woman claimed lo
belong. (Gen xlviii. 22.)
[Drink....himself....children....caitle.] These words were doubt
less said to show the goodness and abundance of the water. Did
the stranger at the well really mean to say that he could give
any better water ?
Bucer on this verse, remarks how fhe Samaritans prided
themselves on their relationship to Jacob, and the possession of
his well, while they made no effijrt to imitate his goodnesr, and
points out the tendency of superstition to the same thing, in
every age. " True piety," he says, " does not consist in having
Jacob's weU and Jacob's land, but Jacob's spirit, — not in keeping
the bones of the saints, but in imitating their lives."
]3. — [Jesus answered, Sc] In this and the foUowing verse our Lord
proceeds to raise the desires of the woman by exalting the value
of the living wafer of which He had spoken. He still refrains
from distinct statements of doctrinal truth. He stiU adheres fo the
figurative expression, " water." And yet He makes an advance,
and leads ou the woman gentiy and almost imperceptibly to
glorious spiritual fhin.gs. Now, for the first time. He begins fo
speak of " everlasting life."
[Whosoever drinketh... .this water.. ..thirst again.] It will be
noted, that our Lord does not answer the woman's questions
directiy. He keeps steadily to tho one point He desires to fasten
on her mind, viz.: the infinite exceUence of a certain "living
water " which He had to give. And first He reminds her of what
she knew well by laborious experience. The water of Jacob's
weU might be good and plentiful. But still he who drank of it
was only satisfied for a few hours. He soon thirsted again.
We cannot doubt that there was a deep latent thought in our
Lord's words, in this sentence. He would have us know that
the waters of Jacob's well are typical of all temporal and material
good things. They can not. satisfy, the ,'^^oul. They have no power

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 215
to fill the heart of an iraraortal creature like man. He (ylio only
drinks of them is sure to thirst again.
Some have thought that there is a tacit reference in these words
fo the woman's insatiable love of sin.
The fimilarity ought to be noticed between our Lord's line of
argument in this verse, and the line He adopts in recommending
to the Jews the bread of life in the sixth chapter. He showed
the Jews the superiority of the bread of life over the manna by
the words " your fathers did eat manna, and are dead," (John vi.
49.) Just so in this place. He shows the inferiority of fhe water
of Jacob's well to the living water, by saying " He that drinks
of this water shall thirst again." The two passages deserve a
careful comparison.
14. — [Whosoever drinketh. ...never thirst] These words contain a
precious promise, and declare a glorious truth of the Goipel. The
benefits of Christ's gifts are promised to every one who is willing
to receive them, whosoever and whatsoever he may be. He may
have been as bad as the Samaritan woman. But the promise ii
for him as weU as for her, "whosoever drinketh, shall never
thirst." — The declaration "shall never thirst" does not mean,
" shall never feel any spiritual want at all." It siraply asserts the
abiding and enduring nature of the benefits which Christ gives.
He that drinks of the living water which Christ gives, shall never
entirely and completely lose the cleansing, p'arifying, and soul-
refreshing effects which it produces.
Our English translation of this sentence hardly gives fhe full
sense of the Greek. LiteraUy rendered, it would be, " shall never
thirst unto eternity." The same expression is used frequently
in St. John's Gospel. See John vi. 51 — 58 ; vui. 51 ; x. 28 ; xi.
26; xiv. 16.
[The water....!. ..give.. ..well. ..everlasting life.] To see the full
meaning of this figurative sentence, it must be paraphrased. The
meaning seems to be something of this kind. " The gift of grace,
mercy, and peace which I am ready to give, shall be in the heart
of him who receives it an everflowing source of comfort, satis
faction, and spiritual refreshment, continuing and flowing on, not
only through this life, but unto life eternal He that receives
my gift of living water has a fountain opened in his soul of spiritual
satisfaction, which shall neither be dried up in this life or the life
to come, but shall flow on to all eternity."
Let it be noted that the whole verse is n strong argument in
favour of the doctrine of the perpetuity of grace, and the consequent
perseverance in the faith of believers. It is difficult to understand
how the Arminian doctrine of the possibUity of believers com-

216 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
pletely falling awny, and being lost, can be reconciled with any
natural interpretation of this verse.
Zwingle thinks, with much probability, that the words " a
fountain in him," point to fhe benefits which grace once received
makes a man impart to others, as weU as enjoy himself. See
John vn. 38.
RoUock remarks on this verse, " Let me say in a word what I
feel You will find nothing either in heaven or in earth, with
which you will be satisfied and feel supplied, except Jesus Christ
alone, with all that fulness of the Godhead which dwells iu Him
bodily." Poole says, " He who receiveth the Holy Spirit and the grace
thereof, though he will be daily saying give, give, and continually
desiring further supplies of grace, yet he shall never whoUy want,
never want any good thing that shaU be needfiil for him. The
seed of God shall abide in him, and His water shall be in him a
spring supplying him until he comes to heaven."
15, — [The woman saith, Sc] In this verse, I think, we see the first
sparks of good in the woman's soul. Our Lord's words aroused
a desire in her heart for this living water of which He had spoken.
She does what our Lord said she ought to have done at first. She
"asks" Him to give her the water.
[Give me this water... .that....tliirst not....draiv.] The motives of
the woman in making this request are variously explained.
Some think, as Musculus, Calvin, Bucer, Brentius, Gualter,
Lightfoot, Poole, and Dyke, that the request was made in a
sarcastic and sneering spirit, as though she would say " Truly
this water would be a fine thing, if we could get it ! Give it me,
if you have it to give,"
Some think, as Augustine, Cyril, Bullinger, Eollock, Hilder
sam, Jansenius, and Nifanius, that the request was only the lazy,
indolent wish of one who was weary of this world's labour, and
yet could see nothing but the things of this world in our Lord's
sayings, like the request of the Jews, "Evermore give us this
bread." (John vi. 34,) It is as though she would say, " Anything to
save me the trouble of coming to draw water would be a boon.
If you can do that for mo, do it," As Bengel says, "She wished
to have this living fountain at her own house."
Some tliink, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Euthymius, that
the request was really the prayer of an anxious soul, aroused to
Borac faint spiritual desires by the mention of eternal life. "Hast
thou eternal life to bestow ? Give it to nie."
I venture to tiiink th£|,t none of these three views is quite

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 217
correct. The true motive of the request was probably a vague
feeling of de.sire that the woman herself could hardly have defined.
It is useless to analyze and scrutinize too closely the first languid
and imperfect desires that arise in souls when the Spirit begins
His work of conversion. It is folly to say that the first movings
of a heart towards God must be free from all imperfect motives
and all mixture of infirmity. The woman's motives in saying
" Give me this water," were probably mixed and indefinite.
Material water was not out of her thoughts, and yet she had
probably some desires after everlasting life. Enough for us to
know, that she asked and received, she sought and found. Our
great aim mu^t be to persuade sinners to apply to Jesus, and to
say to Him, " Give me to drink." If we forbid them to ask
anything until they can prove that they ask in a perfect spirit, wo
should do no good at all. It would be as foolish to scrutinize the
grammatical construction of an infant's cries, as to analyze the
precise motives of a soul's first breathings after God. If it breathes
at aU and says, " Give," we ought to be thankful
16. — [Jesus saith....go....caU....liusband...hither.] This verse begins
an entirely new stage in the history of the woman's conversion.
P;om this point we hear no more of " living water." Figurative
language is dropped entirely. Our Lord's words become direct,
personal, and plain. The woman had asked at last for " Uving
water." At onee our Lord proceeds to give it to her.
Our Lord's reasons for bidding the woman to call her husband,
have been variously interpreted. Some think that he only meant
her to understand that He had spoken long enough to her, a
solitary woman; and that before He proceeded further, she must
call her husband to be a witness of fhe conversation, and to partake
of the benefits He was going to confer. This seems fhe view of
Chrysostom and Theophylact, — Others think, with far more
probabiUty, in ray judgment, that our Lord's main object in naming
the woman's husband, was to produce in iier mind conviction of
sin, and to show her His own divine knowledge of all things. He
knew thatshehadno husband, and He purposely named hira in order
to touch her conscience. He always knew the thoughts of those
to whom He spoke ; and He knew in the pres.ut case, what the
effect of H's words would be. It would brin.g to light the woman's
besetting sin. — It is as though He said, " Thou dost ask me for
living water. Thou dost at last express a desire for that great
spiritual gift which I am able to bestow. Well, then, I begin by
bidding thee know thyself and thy sinfulness. I will show thee
that I know thy spiritual disease, and can lay ray finger on the
uiost dangerous ailment of thy soul. Go, call thy husband, aud
r:orae hither."
Let it be noted that the first draught of Uving water which
10

218 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
our Lord gave to the Samaritan woman was conviction of sin.
That fact is a lesson for all who desire to benefit ignorant and
careless sinners. The first thing to be taught to such persons,
when once we have got their attention, is their own sinfulness,
and their consequent need of a Saviour. No one values the
physician until he feels his disease.
Augustine thinks that when our Lord said, " CaU thy hus
band," He meant, " Cause thine understanding to be forthcom
ing. Thy understanding is not with thee. I am speaking after
the spirit, and thou hearest after the flesh 1 " I can see no wis
dom in this fanciful idea.
17. — [The woman answered...no husband.] These words were an
honest and truthful confession, so far as they went. Whether
the woman wished it to be supposed that she was a widow, it
would perhaps be hardly fair to inquire. Theophylact and
Euthymius suggest that she did wish fo deceive our Lord. The
way in which our Lord receives her declaration, makes it proba
ble that she did not profess to be a widow, and very likely her
dress showed that she was not. In this point of view the ho
nesty of her confession is noteworthy. There is always more
hope of one who honestly and bluntly confesses sin, than of a
smooth-tongued hypocrite.
[Jesus said...thou hast ivell said.. .husband.] Our Lord's com
mendation of fhe woman's honest confession deserves notice.
It teaches us that we should make the best of an ignorant sin
ner's words. An unskilful physician of souls woiUd probably
have rebuked the woman sharply for her wickedness, if her
words led him to suspect it. Our Lord on the contrary says,
" Thou hast well said."
18. — [Thou hast had five husbands.] Many foolish and unseemly
things have been written about this sentence, which it is not
worth while to bring forward. Of course it is utterly improba
ble that the woman had lost five husbands by death, and had
been five times a widow. The more likely explanation is that
she had been divorced and put away by several husbands in suc
cession. Divorces were notoriously common among the Jews,
and in all probability among the Samaritans, for very trivial
causes. In the case, however, of the woman before us, the
second clause of the verse before us makes it likely that she had
been justly divorced for adultery.
Augustine regards these five husbands as significant of " the
five senses of the body," which are as five husbands by which
tho soul of the natural man is ruled 1 I cannot think tha.t our
Lord meant anything of the kind, — Euthymius mentioiio another
allegorical view, making the woman to typify human na^ire, and

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 219
the five husbands five different dispensations, and him with
whom she now lived the Mosaic Law I This seems to me simply
absurd. Origen says much the sarae. It is well to know what
patristic interpretation is !
[Be wliom...liast...not thy husband.] These words show plainly
that the Samaritan woman was living in adultery up to the very
day when our Lord spoke to her.
Our Lord's perfect knowledge of the woman's past and present
hfe is very noteworthy. It ought t ) remind us how perfectly
He is acquainted with every transaction of our own lives. From
Him no secrets are hid.
[Tn that saidst thou truly.] There is a kindness very worthy
of notice in these words. Wicked and abandoned as this Sama
ritan woman was, our Lord deals gently and kindly with her,
and twice in one breath coraraends her confession : " Thou hast
well said. — In that thou saidst truly." Kindness of manner like
this wiU always be found a most important point in dealing with
the ungodly. Scolding and sharp rebuke, however weU-deserved,
have a tendency to harden and shut up hearts, and to make
people bolt their doors. Kindness, on the contrary, wins, softens,
conciliates, and disarms prejudice. An unskilful soul-physician
would probably have ended his sentence by saying, " Thou art
a wicked woman ; and if thou dost not repent, thou wilt be
lost." All this would have been true no doubt. But how dif
ferent our Lord's grave and gentle remark, " Thou saidst truly 1"
Id.— [The wnman saith...I perceive...prophet.] I think we see in
this verse a great change in the Samaritan woman's mind. She
evidently confesses the entire truth of what our Lord had just
said, and turns to Him as an anxious inquirer about her soul. It;
is as though she said, "I perceive at last that thou art indeed no
common person. Thou hast told me what thou couldst not have
known, if thou wert not a prophet sent from God. Thou hast
exposed sins which I cannot deny, and aroused spiritual concern
which I would now fain have relieved. Now give me instruc
tion." Let it be noted that the thing which first struck the Samaritan
woman, and made her call Jesus " a prophet," was the same that
struck Nathanael, viz., our Lord's perfect knowledge. — To call
our Lord " a prophet " at first sight may seem not much. But
it must be remembered that even after His resurrection, the two
disciples going to Emmaus, only described Jesus as a "prophet
mighty in deed and word." (Luke xxiv. 19.) A clear know
ledge of the divine nature of Messiah seems to have been one
of the points on which almost the whole Jewish nation was
ignorant. Even the learned Scribes could not explain how Mes-

220 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
siah was to be David's Lord and also David's Son. (Mark
xii. 37.)
29. — [ Our fathers ivorshipped, Sc] To see the full drift of tills
ver -e, we must carefu'.-'y remeraber the stat-j of the Samaritan
wnraan's mind at th's moment. I ihink that she spoke under
spiritual anxiety. She was alarmed by having her sins s-iddenly
exjiosed. She found herself for the first time in fhe presence of
a prophet. She felt for fhe first time the necessity of religion.
But, at once the old question between the Jews and Samaritans
arose before her mind. How was she to know what was truth ?
What was .=he to believe ? Her own people said that fhe Sa
maritan mode of worshipping God was correct. The Jews said
that Jerusalem was the only place where raen ought to worship.
Between these two conflicting opinions what was she to do?
The natural ignorance of almost all unconverted people, when
first aroused to thought about religion, appears strikingly in the
woman's words. Man's first idea is to attach great importance
to the outward mode of worshipping God. The first refuge of
an awakened conscience is strict adherence to some outward
form, and zeal for the external part of religion.
The woman's readiness to quote " the fathers " and their cus
toms, is an instructive instance of man's readiness to make cus
tom and tradition his only rule of faith. " Our fathers did so," is
one of the natural man's favourite arguments. Calvin's com
ments on the expression " fathers " in this verse are very useful.
He remarks, among other things, " None should be reckoned
Fathers but those who are manifestly the sons of God."
When the woman spoke of " this mountain,'' she doubtless
meant the hill on which the rival temple of Samaria was built,
to the bitter annoyance of the Jerusalem Jews. It is said that
this temple was first built in the daj'S of Nehemiah by San-
ballat, and that his son-in-law, the son of Joiada, whom Nehe
miah " chased from him," was its first high-priest. (Neh. xiii.
29.) Some have gone so far as to maintain that the hiU Gerizim
at Samaria -was the hill on which Abraham offered up Isaac,
and that the words of the woman refer to this. The more com
mon opinion is that Mount Moriah at Jerusalem was the place.
When the woman says, "Ye say," she doubtless includes the
whole Jewish nation, of whom she regards our Lord as a repre
sentative. Musculus, Baxter, Scott, and Barnes, think that the woman,
in this verse, desired to turn away the conversation from her
own sins to a subject of public controversy, and in th's way to
change the subject. I am not however sati--fied thai this view
is correct. I prefer the view of Brentius, which I have already

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 221
set forth, that she was truly impressed by our Lord's exposure
of her wickedness, and made a serious inquiry about the things
needful to salvation. She was aroused to seriousness, and asked
what was true religion. Her own nation said one thing. The
Jews said another. What was truth ? In short, her words
were only another form of fhe jailor's question, " What shall I
do to be taved ?"
21. — [Jesus saith, Woman, believe me.] The calmness, .gravity, nnd
solemnity of these opening words are very noteworthy. "I tell
you a great truth, which I ask you to credit and believe."
Jansenius thinks that our Lord uses fhe expression " believe
me," because the truth he was about to impart was so new and
strange, that the woman would be apt to think it incredible.
Stier remarks that this is fhe only time our Lord ever uses
this expression " believe me " in the Gospels.
[The hour cometh.] The hour, or time here spoken ofj means
the time of the Gospel, the hour of the Christian dispensation.
[Ye shall neither...this mount ain... Jerusalem.. .worship, &c!] Our
Lord here declares that under the Gospel there was to be no
more distinction of places like Jerusalem. The old dispensation
under which men were bound to go up to Jerusalem three times
a year, to attend the feasts and worship in fhe temple, was about
to pass away. All questions about the superior sanctity of Sa-
daria or Jerusalem would soon be at an end. A church was
about to be founded, whose members would find access to the
Father everywhere, and would need no temple-service, and no
priests or sacrifices or altars in order to approa'jh God. It was
therefore mere waste of time to be disputing about the compara
tive claims of either Samaria or Jerusalem. Under the Gospel
aU places would soon be alike.
It seems far fi'om improbable that our Lord referred in this
verse to fhe prophecy of Malachi, "In every place incense shall
be oflFered to my name." (Mai. i. II.)
The utter passing away of the whole Jewish system seems
clearly pointed at in this verse. To bring into the Christian
Church holy places, sanctuaries, altars, priests, sacrifices, gorgeous
vestments, and the like, is to dig up that which has been long
buried, and to turn to candles for light under the noon-day sun.
The favourite theory of the Irvingites that we ought as fai' as
possible ir. our public worship, to copy the Jewish temple ser
vices and ceremonial, seems incapable of reconciUation with this
verse. Calvin says, " By calUng God the Father in this verse, Christ
seems indirectly to contrast Him with the ' fathers' whom the

222 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
woman had mentioned, and to convey this instruction, that God
wiU be a common Father to aU, so that He wiU be generaUy
worshipped without distinction of place or nation."
22.— [ Ye worship...know not what] In this verse our Lord unhesi
tatingly condemns the religious system of the Samaritans, aa
compared with that of the Jews. The Samaritans could show
no Scriptural authority, no revelation of God, commanding and
sanctioning their worship. Whatever it was, it was purely an
invention of man, which God had never formaUy authorized or
accredited. They had no warrant for beUeving that it was
accepted. They had no right to feel sure that their prayers,
praises, and offerings were received. In short, aU was uncer
tainty. They were practically worshipping an "unknown
God." Mede remarks that the Samaritan woman overlooked the
object of worship in her question about the place. " You inquire
concerning the place of worshipping. But a far more important
question is at issue between us, viz., the Being to be worshipped,
respecting whom you are ignorant."
[ We know what we worship.] In contrast to the Samaritan
religious system, our Lord declares that the Jews at any rate
could show divine warrant and Scriptural authority for all they
did in their religion. They could render a reason of their hope.
They knew whom they approached in their religious services,
[Salivation is of the Jews.] Our Lord here deckres that God's
promises of a Saviour and Eedeemer specially belong to the
Jerusalem Jews. They were the descendants of the tribe of
Judah, and to them belonged the house and lineage of David.
On this point at any rate the Samaritans had no right whatever
to claim equality with the Jews. Granting that the Samaritans
had any ri,»-ht to be called Israelites, they were of the tribe of
Ephraira, from which it was nowhere said that Messiah should
spring. And in truth the Samaritans were of such mixed origin,
that they had no right to be called IsraeUtes at aU.
I believe with Olshausen, that "salvation," in this verse, waa
reaUy intended to mean " the Saviour" Himself The use of
the article in the Greek is striking. It is literally " tUe salva
tion." Does not the saying to Zacchaeus point the same way?
" This day is salvation co.me to this house," (Luke xix. 9.)
The expression " we'' in this verse is very interesting. It is
0, wouderf il instance of our Lord's condescension, and one that
stands almost alone. He was pleased to speak of Himself, just
in tiie Ught that He a-^ipeared to the woman, as one of the Jew
ish nation. " I and all other Jews know what we worship."
The folly of supposing that ignorance is to be praised and

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 223
commei ded in reUgion, as the mother of devotion, is strongly
condemned in this verse. Christ would have Christians " know
what they worship."
The testimony borne to the general truth of the religious sys
tem of the Jews in this place is very striking. Corrupt and
wicked as Scribes and Pharisees were, Jesus declares that the
Jewish religion was true and Scriptural. It is a mournful proof
that a church may retain a sound creed, and yet be on the higri
road to destruction.
Hildersam has a long note which is well worth reading on the
words " salvation is of fhe Jews." Considering the times in
which he lived, it shows singulariy clear views of God's con
tinual purposes concerning the Jewish nation. He sees in the
words the great truth that all God's revelations to man in every
age have been made through the Jews.
23. — [The hour cometh and now is.] These words mean that the
times of the Gospel approach, and indeed have already begun.
" They have begun by the preaching of the kingdom of God.
They will be fuUy brought in by my death and ascension, and
the estabUshment of the New Testament church."
[True worshippers ..worship...spirit and...fruth.] Our Lord here
declares who alone would be considered true worshippers in the
coming dispensation of the Gospel. They would not be merely
thosa who worshipped in this place or in that place. They
would not be exclusively Jews, or exclusively Gentiles, or exclu
sively Samaritans. The external part of the worship would be
of no value compared to the internal state of the worshippers.
They only would be counted true worshippers who worshipped
in spirit and in truth.
The words " in spirit and in truth" are variously interpreted,
and much has been written about them. I believe the simplest
explanation to be this. The word " spirit" must not be taken
to raean the Holy Spirit, but the inteUectual or mental part of
man in contradistinction to the material or carnal part of man.
This distinction is clearly marked in I Cor. vii. 34, " Holy in
body and in spirit." — " 'Worship in spirit" is heart-worship in
contradistinction to all formal, material, carnal worship, consist
ing only of ceremonies, offerings, sacrifices, and the hlie. When
a Jew offered a formal meat-offering, with his heart far away,
it was worship after the flesh. When David offered in prayer
a broken and a contrite heart, it was worship in spirit. — " Wor
ship in truth," means worship through the one true way of
access to God, without the medium of the sacrifices or priest
hood, which were ordained tiU Christ died on the cross. When
the veU was rent, and the way into the holiest made manifest by

224 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Christ's death, then, and not till then, men "worshipped in
truth." Before Christ, they worshipped through types, and
shadows, and figures, and emblems. After Christ they wor
shipped in truth. — Spirit is opposed to " flesh ;" truth to " sha
dow." " Sp'rit," in short, is heart-service, contrasted with lip
worship and formal devotion. " Truth" is fhe fuU light of the
Christian dispensation contrasted with the twilight of the law cf
Moses. The view I have endeavoured to give is substantiaUy that of
Chrysostom and Euthymius.
Caryl, quoted by Ford, says, "In spirit regards the inward
power, in truth the outward form. The first strikes at hypocrisy,
the second at idolatry."
[Tlie Faiher seeketh such...worsbip him.] This is a remarkable
sentence. I believe it fo mean that " the hour is eome, in which
the Father has ordained from eternity that He will gaiher out
of the world a corapany of true and spiritual worshippers. He
is even now seeking out and gathering- in such worshippers." —
The expression " seeketh" is peculiar. There is something Uke
it in the sentence, " The Son of man is come to seek and to
save that which is lost." (Luke xix 10.) It seems to show
the exceeding compassion of fhe Father, and His infinite wiU-
ingness to save sou's. He does not merely wait for men to
come to Him. He "seeks" for them. — It also shows fhe wide
opening of God the Father's mercv under the Gospel. He no
longer confines His grace fo the Jews. He now seeks and de
sires to gather in everywhere true wor.diippers out of every
nation. The clause appears to me specially intended to encourage the
Samaritan woman. Let her not trouble her.-elf with diflii-ulties
abo'ut the comparative claims of the Samaritan and Jewish sys
tems. Was she willing fo be a spiritual worshipper ? That wa?
the one question which deserved her attention.
Trapp observes, " How should this fire up our hearts to spiri
tual worship I That God seelis for such worshippers 1"
24. — [God is a Spirit.] Our Lord here dec-lares to the Samaritan
woman the true nature of God. Let her cea^e to think that God
was such an one as man, and that He coul 1 not be found, or
apprcached, or addressed, like a mere earthly monarch, except ar.
one particular place. Let her lea n to have higher, nobler, and
more exalted views of the Being with whom smners lia\e to do.
Lot her know tliis day that God was a Spirit.
The declaration before us is one of the most lofty and definite
sayings about God's nature which is to be found in the whole

225
Bible. That such a declaration should have been made to such
a person as the Samaritan woman is a wonderful instance of
Christ's condescension ! To define precisely the full meaning of
the expression is past man's understanding. The leading idea
most probably is, that " God is an immaterial being, that He
dweUeth not iu temples made with hands, and that He is not, Uke
ourselves, therefore, absent from one place when He is present
at another." These things are all true, but how Uttle we can
reaUze them I
Cornelius S, Lapide gives an excellent summary of the opinion.s
of heathen philosophers on the nature of God, in his commentary
on this verse.
[They....worship...,musf..,.worship... .spirit....truih.] Our Lord
draws this broad conclusion from the statement of God's nature
which He has just made. If " God is a Spirit" it behoves those
who would worship Him acceptably, to worship in spirit and in
truth. It is unreasonable to suppose that He can like any wor
ship which does not come from the heart, or can be so well
pleased with worship which is offered through types and cere
monies, as with worship offered through the true way which He
has provided, and is now revealing.
The importance of the great principle laid down in this and
the preceding verse, can never be overrated. Any religious
teaching which tends to depreciate heart-worship, and fo turn
Christianity into a mere formal service, or which tends to bring
back Jewish shadows, ceremonies, and services, and to introduce
them into Christian worship, is on the face of these remarkable
verses most unscriptural and deserving of reprobation.
Of course we must not admit fhe idea, that in this and the
preceding verse, Jesus meant to pour contempt on the ceremonial
law, which God Himself had given. But He plainly teaches that
it was an imperfect dispensation, given because of man's igno
rance and infirmity, as we give pictures to children in teaching
them. It wa', in fact, a schoolmaster to Christ. (Gal. iii. 24,)
To want men to return to it is as absurd as to bid grown up peo
ple begin learning the alphabet by pictures in an infant school. — ¦
On the other hand, as Beza remarks, we must not run mto the
extreme of despising all ordinances, sacrament^, and outward
ceremonies in religion. These things have their use and value,
however much they may be abused.
25, — [The woman saith, Iknow...Messias... Christ, Sc] This verse is
an interesting one. It shows the woman at last brought to the
very state of mind in which she would be prepared fo welcome
a revelation of Christ. She had been told of " living v.'ater," aud
had expressed a desire for it. She had been told her own sin,
and had been unable to deny it. She had been told the uselas,*-
10*

226 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
ness of resting on any forraal raembership of the Samaritan
Church, and the necessity of spiritual and heart-worship of God.
And now what can she say ? It is all true, she feels, — she cannot
gainsay it. But what can she do? To whora is she fo go?
Whose teaching can she follow ? All she can do is to say that
" she knows Messias is one day coming, and that He wUl make
all things clear and plain." It is evident that she wishes for
Him. She is uncomfortable and sees no relief for her newly-
raised perplexities, unless Messias should appear.
The mention of Messias in this verse, makes it clear that the
Samaritans were not altogether ignorant of the Old Testament,
and that there was an expectation of a Redeemer of some kind
among them, as well as among the Jews, The existence of a
general expectation of this sort throughout fhe East, at the time
when our Lord appeared on earth, is a fact to which even
heathen writers have testified.
When the woman says, " He will tell us all things," we must
probably not inquire too closely info what she meant. It is very
likely that she had only a vague feeling that Messias would
remove all doubts and show all things needful to salvation.
Chrysostom remarks on this verse, " The woman was made
dizzy by Christ's discourse, and fainted at the sublimity of what
He said, and in her trouble saith, I know that Messias cometh."
Wordsworth observes, that the Samaritan woman had a clearer
knowledge of Messiah's office than the Jews generally showed.
She looked for Him as a Teacher. They looked for Him as
a conquering King.
Beza and A. Clark think, that the words, "which is called
Christ," in this verse, are St. John's parenthetical explanation of
the word Messias. It is certainly rather unlikely that fhe woman
would have used thera in addre.^sing a Jew. Yet most commen
tators think that they were her words,
26. — [Jesus saitli...I...spcak...am He.] These words are the fullest
declaration which our Lord ever made of His own Messiahship,
-which the Gospel writers have recorded. That such a full
declaration should be made to such a person as the Samaritan
woman is one of fhe most wonderful instances of our Lord's
grace and condescension related in the New Testament! At
list the woman obtained an answer to one of her first questions,
"Art thou greater tiian our father Jacob?" When the answer
came it completely converted her soul.
Rollock remarlis on this verse, how ready and wiUing Christ is
to reve.d Himself to a sinner's soul. The very moment that this
woraun expressed any desiie for Messiah, He at once revealed
Himself fo her—" I am fie."

JOHN, CHAP. IV.

227

Quesnel observes, " It is a great mistake to suppose that the
knowledge of the mysteries of religion ought not to be imparted
to women by the reading of Scripture, considering this instance
of fhe great confidence Christ reposed in this woman by His
manifestation of Himself The abuse of the Scriptures and the
sin of heresies, did not proceed from the simpUcity of women,
but from the conceited learning of raen."
In leaving the whole passage, there are several striking points
which ought never to be forgotten, (a.) Our Lord's mercy is
remarkable. That such an one as He should deal so graoiou^ly
with such a sinner is a striking fact, (b.) Our Lord's wisdom is
remarkable. How wise was every step of His way in dealing
with this sinful soul I (c.) Our Lord's patience is remarkable.
How He bore with the woman's ignorance, and what trouble He
took to lead her to knowledge I (d) Our Lord's power is re
markable. What a complete victory He won at lastl How
almighty must that grace be which could soften and convert such
a carnal and wicked heart I
We must never despise any soul, after reading this passage.
Noue can be worse than this woman. But Christ did not despise
her. We must never despair of any soul, after reading this passage.
If this woman was converted, any one may be converted.
Finally, we must never contemn the use of all wise and
reasonable means in deaUng with souls. There is a " wisdom
which is profitable to direct" in approaching ignorant and un
godly people, which must be diligently sought.

JOHN rV. 27—30.

27 And upon this came liis dis
ciples, and marveUed that he talked
-with the woman ; yet no mau said,
"Wh.at seekest thou ? or Why talk-
est thou with her?
28 The woman then left her
waterpot, aud went her way

into the city, and saith to the
men, 29 Come, see a man. which told
me all things that ever I did: is
not tliis the Christ ?
30 Then they went out of the
city, and came unto him.

These verses continue the well-known story of the Sama
ritan woman's conversion. Short as the passage may
appear, it contains points of deep interest and importance.
The mere worldling, who cares nothing about experimental

228 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
religion, may see nothing particular in these verses. To
all who desire to know something of the experience of a
converted person, they will be found full of food for
thought. We see, iirstly, in this passage, how marvellous in the
eyes of man are Christ's dealings with soids. We are told
tliat the disciples "marvelled that he talked with the
woman." That their Master should take the trouble to
talk to a woman at all, and to a Samaritan woman, and to
a strange woman at a well, when He was wearied with
His journey, — all this was wonderful to the eleven disci
ples. It was a sort of thing which they did not expect.
It was contrary to their idea of what a religious teacher
should do. It startled them and filled them with surprise.
The feeling displayed by tho disciples on this occasion,
does not stand alone in the Bible. When our Lord
allowed publicans and sinners to draw n^ar to Him and be
in His company, the Pharisees marvelled. They exclaimed,
" This man receiveth sinners and eateth with them." (Luke
XV. 2.) — ^When Saul came back from Damascus, a converted
man and a new creature, the Christians at Jerusalem were
astonished. " They believed not that he was a disciple."
(Acts ix. 26.) — When Peter was delivered from Herod's
prison by an aJigel, and brought to the door of the house
where disciples were praying for his deliverance, they were
so taken by surprise that they could not believe it was
Peter. " When they saw him they were astonished."
(Acts xii. 16.)
But why should we stop short in Bible instances ? The
true Christian has only to look around him in this world hi
order to see abundant illustrations of the truth before us.
How much astonishment every fresh conversion occasions!
Whnt surprise is expressed at the change in the heart, life,
tastes, and habits of the converted person ! What wonder
is felt at the power, the mercy, the patience, the compas-

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 229
sion of Christ ! It is now as it was eighteen hundred years
ago. The dealings of Christ are still a marvel both to the
Church and to the world.
If there was more real faith on the earth, there would
be less surprise felt at the conversion of souls. If Chris
tians believed more, they would expect more, and if they
understood Christ better, they would be less startled and
astonished when He calls and saves the chief of sinners.
We should consider nothing impossible, and regard no
sinner as beyond the reach of the grace of God. The
astonishment expressed at conversions is a proof of the
weak faith and ignorance of these latter days. The thing
that ought to fill us with surprise is the obstinate unbelief
of the ungodly, and their determined perseverance in the
w^ay to ruin. This was the mind of Christ. It is written
that He thanked the Father for conversions. But He mar
velled at unbelief. (Matt. xi. 25 ; Mark vi. 6.)
We see, secondly, in this passage, hoio absorbing is the
influence of grace, when it first comes into a believer's
heart. We are told that after our Lord had told the
woman He was the Messiah, " She left her water-pot and
went her way into the city, and saith to the men. Come,
see a man which told me all things that ever I did." She
had left her home for the express purpose of drawing
water. She had carried a large vessel to the well, intend
ing to bring it back filled. But she found at the well a
new heart, and new objects of interest. She became a
new creature. Old things passed away. All things be
came new. At once everything else was forgotten for the
time. She could think of nothing but the truths she had
heard, and the Saviour she had found. In the fulness of
her heart she "left her water-pot," and hastened away to
express her feelings to others.
We see here tho expulsive power of the graca of the
Holy Ghost. Grace once introduced into the heart drives

230 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
out old tastes and interests. A converted person no longer
cares for what he once cared for. A new tenant is in the
house. A new pilot is at the helm. The whole world
looks different. All things have become new. It was so
with Matthew the publican. The moment that grace came
into his heart he left the receipt of custom. (Matt. ix. 9.)
— ^It was so with Peter, James, and John, and Andrew.
As soon as they were converted they forsook their nets
and fishing-boats. (Mark i. 19.) — It was so with Saul the
Pharisee. As soon as he became a Christian he gave up
all his brilliant prospects as a Jew, in order to preach the
faith he had once despised. (Acts ix. 20.) — The conduct
of the Samaritan woman was precisely of the same kind.
For the time present the salvation she had found com
pletely filled her mind. That she never returned for
her water-pot would be more than we have a right
to s.ay. But under the first impressions of new spiri
tual life, she went away and " left her water-pot"
behind. Conduct like that here described is doubtless uncom
mon in the present day. Rarely do we see a person so
entirely taken up with spiritual matters, that attention to
this world's affairs is made a secondary matter, or post
poned. And why is it so ? Simply because true conver
sions to God are uncommon. Few really feel their sins,
aud flee to Christ by faith. Few really pass from death
to life, and become new creatures. Yet these few are
the real Christians of the -n'orld. These are the people
whose religion, like the Samaritan woman's, tells on
others. Happy are they who know something by expe
rience of this woman's feelings, and can say with Paul,
"I count all things but loss for the excellency of the
knowledge of Christ !" Happy are they who have given
up everything for Christ's sake, or at any rate have
altered the relative importance of all things in their

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 231
minds! "If thine eye be single thy whole body shall
be full of light." (Phihpp. iii. 8 ; Matt. v. 22.)
We see, lastly, in this passage, how zealous a truly
converted person is to do good to others. We are told that
the Samaritan woman " went into the city, and said to
the men. Come, see a man which told me all things
that ever I did : is not this the Christ ?" In the day
of her conversion she became a missionary. She felt so
deeply the amazing benefit she had received from Christ,
that she could not hold her peace about Him. Just as
Andrew told his brother Peter about Jesus, and Philip
told Nathanael that he had found Messiah, and Saul,
when converted, straightway preached Christ, so, in the
same way, the Samaritan woman said, "Come and see
Christ." She used no abstruse arguments. She attempted
no deep reasoning about our Lord's claim to be the Messiah.
She only said, " Come and see." Out of the abundance
of her heart her mouth spoke.
That which the Samaritan woman here did, all true
Christians ought to do likewise. The Church needs it.
The state of the world demands it. Common sense
points out that it is right. Every one who has received
the grace of God, and tasted that Christ is gracious,
ought to find words to testify of Christ to others. Where
is our faith, if we believe that souls around us are perish
ing, and that Christ alone can save them, and yet bold
our peace? Where is our charity if we can see others
going down to heU, and yet say nothing to them about
Christ and salvation ? — We may well doubt our own love
to Christ, if our hearts are never moved to speak of Him.
We may weU doubt the safety of our own souls, if we
feel no concern about the souls of others.
What are we ourselves ? This is the question, after all,
which demands our notice. Do we feel the supreme
importance of spiritual things, and the comparative

282 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
nothingness of the things of the world ? Do we ever talk
to others about God, and Christ, and eternity, and the
soul, and heaven, and hell ? If not, what is the value of
our faith ? Where is the reality of our Christianity ? Let
us take heed lest we awake too late, and find that we are
lost for ever, a wonder to angels and devils, and, above all,
a wonder to ourselves, because of our own obstinate blind
ness and folly. Notes. Johm IV. 27—30.
27. — [ Upon this!] The true idea contained in this expression seems
to be, "At this point, at this critical juncture in the conversation
between our Lord and the woman." — What the woman would
have said next after our Lord's raarvellous discovery of Himself,
we are left to conjecture. But just as our Lord said, " I am the
Me-siah," the disciples returned from buying food, and their
appearance stopped the conversation. The woman's heart was
probably too full, and her mind too much excited to say more in
the presence of witnesses, and especially of strangers. Therefore
no more was said, and she withdrew. The soul, in the beginning
of a work of grace, shrinks from discovering its workings before
strangers. [Marvelled,. .talked with the woman.] I am inclined to think
that these words would have been more correctly rendered,
" Talked with a woman." There is no article in "the original
Greek. Ths wonder of the disciples was excited, not so much
by our Lord talking to this woman, as by His talking to a woman
at aT. It is clear from Eabbinical writings, that there was a
common opinion among the Jews that both in understanding
and religion women were an inferior order of beings to men.
This ignorant prejudice had most likely leavened the minds of
the disoipl s, and is probably referred to in this place. Of the
woraan's moral character it is not clear that the disciples could
know anything at all.
Eupertus thinks that our Lord, by conversing openly with a
Samaritan woman, wished to show His disciples by an example,
that the wall between Jews and other people wa-3 to be broken
down by fhe Gospel, just as He taught Peter the same lesson
after His ascensi-m, by the vision of the sheet full of clean and
unclean beasts. (Acts x. Il — 15.) He thinks that the wonder
of the disciple? arose from the same Jewish prejudice against
intercourse with uncircumcised Gentiles which appeared so
strongly in after times.

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 233
Lightfoot, Schottgen, and Tholuck quote proverbial sayings
from Rabbinical writers, showing the Jewish feeling about
women. The foUowing are instances — "He who instructs his
daughter in the law plays the fool." '¦ Do not raulfip'y discourses
with a woman." "Let no one talk with a woraan in the street,
no not with his own wife.'' — Whitby also says, from Buxtorf,
that the Rabbins say that " talking with a woman is one of fhe
six things which make a disciple impure."
[No man said, What seekest. .why ialkest, Sc] We are left to
conjecture whether both these questions apply to our Lord, or
whether fhe first appUed to the woman, " What seekest thou of
Him?" aud the second to our Lord, "Why talkest thou with
ber?" The point is of no particular importance. To me, how
ever, it appears that both questions apply to Chiist.. — " No raan
said, 'What art thou sacking frora her? Why art thou taking
with her?'"
Grotius suggests that fhe disciples supposed our Lord might
have been seeking meat or drink from the Samaritan woman,
and meant, " Why seekest thou any meat or drink from her ?"
I venture to doubt whether both questions had not better have
been translated aUke, " What art thou seeking from her ? What
art thou talking about with her ? '' The Greek word is ths same
whi ;h our translators have rendered " what " in the first question,
and " why " in the second.
The expression, "No raan said," seeras to imply that no man
ventured to ask any question what was our Lord's reason for
talking with the woman. It is not very clear why the sentence
is introduced. The object probably is, as CyrU and Chrysostom
remark, to show us the deep reverence and respect with which
the dis-jiples regarded our Lord aud aU His actions, even at this
early peiiod of His ministry, — It also shows us that fhey some
times thought things about Him to which they dared not give
expression, and saw deeds of His which they could not under
stand, but were content s'lently to wonder at them. There is a
lesson for us in their conduct. When we cannot understand the
reason of our Lord's dealings with souls, let us hold our peace, and
try to believe that there are reasons which we shall know ono
day. A pood servant in a great house mast do his own duly,
and ask no questions. A young student of medicine must take
many things on trust.
28. — [The woman...left... water-pot] The Greek word here rendered
" water-pot " is the s ime that is used in the account of the miracle
at Can:i in Galilee. (John ii. 6.) It dees not mean a sma'l drink-
in.[>-vesfel, hut a large jar, such as a woman in Easiern countries
would carry on her head. V/"e can therefore well understand
that if the woman wished ts return in haste to the city she

234 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
would leave her water-pot. So large a vessel could not be carried
quickly, whether empty or full.
The mind of the woman in leaving her water-pot seems to me
clear and unmistakeable. She was entirely absorbed in the things
which she had heard from our Lord's mouth. She was anxious
to tell thera without delay to her friends and neighbours. She
therefore postponed her business of drawing water, for which she
had left her house, as a matter of secondary importance, and
hurried off to teU others what she had been told. The sentence
is deeply instructive.
Lightfoot thinks, beside this, that the won-.an left her water-pot
out of kindne-s to our Lord, " that Jesus and His disciples might
have wherewithal to drink."
[Went her way. ..city.] The Greek word rendered "went her
way," means simply, " departed " or " went." The city must of
course mean " Sychar."
[Saith to the men.] We must not suppose that the woman
spoke to ths men only, and not to her own sex. But it is pro
bable that the " men " of the place would be the first persons she
would see, and that the women would not be in fhe streets, but
at home. Moreover it is not unlikely that the expression is
meant to show us the woman's zeal and anxiety to spread the
good tidings. She did not hesitate to speak to men, though she
well knew that anything a woman might say about religion was
not likely to command attention.
Cyril, on this verse, remarks the power of Christ's grace. He
began by bidding the woman to go and " call her husband." The
end of the conversation which ensued was her going and oaUing
aU the men of fhe city to come and see Christ.
29. — [Come, see a man.] The missionary spirit of the woman, in
this verse, deserves special notice. Having found Christ herself,
she invites others to come and be acquainted with Him. Origen
calls her " the apostle of the Samaritans."
Let it be noted that her words are simple in the extreme. She
enters into no argument. She only asks the men to " come and
see." This, after all, is often the best way of dealing with souls.
A bold invitation to come and make trial of the Gospel often
produces more efiect than the most elaborate arguments in sup
port of its doctrines. Most men do not want their reason con
vinced so much as their will bent, and their conscience aroused,
A simple-minded, hearty, unlearned young disciple will often
touch hearts that would hear an abstruse argument without being
moved, — This fact is most encouraging to all beUevers who try
to do good. All cannot argue. But all believers may say,

JOHN, CHAP. IV. ' 235
" Come and see Christ. If you would only look at Him and see
Him, you would soon beUeve,"
Barradius remarks what a practical iUustration the woman
aiiords of one of the concluding sentences of Revelation, " Let
him that heareth say. Come." (Rev. xxii. 17.) The Samaritan
woman having heard, said " Corae," and the result was that many
souls came and took the water of Ufe freely.
CyrU remarks the difference between the woman's conduct
and that of the servant who buried his talent in fhe ground.
She received the talent of the good tidings of the Gospel, aud at
once put it out at interest.
Chrysostom remarks the wisdom of the woman. " She did
not say. Come, believe, but Come, see, a gentler expression than
the other, and one which more attracted them."
[Told me all things...ever I did!] These words must be taken
with some qualifications. Of course fhey cannot mean that our
Lord had literaUy told fhe woman " all things that ever she did
in her life." This would have been physically impossible in the
space of a single afternoon. — The probable meaning is, " He has
told me aU the principal sins that I have committed. He has
shown a perfect knowledge of the chief events of ray Ufe. He
has shown such thorough acquaintance with my history, that I
doubt not He could have told me anything I ever did."
Some aUowance must probably be made for the warm and
excited feelings of the woman when she spoke these words. She
used hyperboUeal and extravagant language, under the influence
of these feeUngs, which she would probably not have used in a
calm state of mind, and v/hioh we must therefore not judge too
strictly. Moreover, as Poole remarks, it admits of doubt
whether our Lord may not have spoken of other things
in the conversation, wliich St. John has not been inspired to
record. Let it be noted, that the Samaritan woman, in saying that
"our Lord had told her aU things she had ever done," very
probably referred to the common opinion about Messiah's om
niscience. The Rabbinical writers, according to Lightfoot,
specially applied to Messiah the words of Isaiah, " He shall
make him of quick understanding in the fear of the Lord. He
shall not judge by the sight of his eyes." (Isai. xi. 3,) Her
words, therefore, were a well-known argument, that our Lord
must be the Christ, and her object in using them would be
thoroughly understood.
[Is not this the Christ ?] The Greek words so rendered would
be translated with equal correctness, "Is this the Christ? Can

236 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
this bo tiie Christ?" A siraUar form of interrogative sentence is
found in thirteen other places in the New Testament. In twelve
of them tiie interrogative is used without " not," viz., Matt. vii.
16 ; xxvi. 22, 25 ; Mark iv, 21 ; xiv. 9 ; Luke vi. 39 ; John vii.
31 ; viii. 22; xviii. 35; Acts x. 47 ; 2 Cor. i. 17; James Ui, IL
— In only one place is the interrogative used with "not," Matt.
xii. 23. I am inclined, on the whole, to think that " not" would
have been better omitted in the sentence before us. Euthymius
takes this view.
The value of questions, if we want to do good to souls, is
well iUustra'ed in this verse. A question often sets working a
mind which would be utterly unmoved by an affirmation. It
drives the mind to e.xertion, and by a gentle compulsion arouses
it to think. Men are far less able to go fo sleep under religious
teaching, when they are invited fo answer a question. The
number of questions in the New Testament is a striking and
instructive tact. Had the woman said, " This is the Christ !"
she might have excited prejudice and dislike. By asking, " Is
this the Christ ?" she got the men to inquire and judge for them
selves.
30. — [Tlien they went out of the city!] This sentence is full of
encouragement to all who try to do good to souls. The words
of one single woman were fhe means of arousing a whole city
to go forth and inquire about Christ. We must never despise
the smallest and meanest efforts. We never know to what the
least beginnings may grow. The grain of mustard seed at Sychar
was the word of a feeble woman, " Come and see."
Specially we ought to observe the encouragement the verse
affords to the efforts of women. A woraan may be the means,
undi-r God, of founding a Church. The first person baptized by
Paul in Europe was not a man but a woman, Lydia, the seller of
puiple. — Let, women never suppose that men only can do. good.
Women also, in their way, can evangelize as really and truly as
men. Every believing woman who has a tongue can speali to
others about Christ, — The Samaritan woman was far less learned
than Nicodemus. But she was far bolder, and so did far more
good. [And came unto him.] Perhaps the sentence would be more
UteraUy rendered, " were coming," or " began fo come to Him,"
It was while tiiey were comin.o- that tiie conveisation which
iraraediately follows, between Christ and His disciples, took place,
and perlKips it was the sight of the crowd coming which made
our Lord s.iy some of fhe things that He did.
Cabin remarks on this part of the woman's history, that some
may think her blaraeable, in that "while she is stUl ignorant and
imperfectly taught, she goes beyond the Umits of her faith. I

JOHN, CHAP. IV.

287

reply that she would have acted inconsiderately if she had
assumed the office of a teacher; but when she desires nothing
more fhan to excite her fellow-citizens fo hear Christ speaking,
we will not say that she forgot herself^ or proceeded lurther
than she had a right to do. She merely does the office of a
trumpet or a bell, to invite others fo come to Christ."
The concluding verse shows us most forcibly that ministers
and teachers of religion ought never to be above taking pains
and trouble with a single soul. A conversation with one person
was the means of leading a whole city to come and hear Christ,
and resulted in the salvation of many souls.
Cornelius d Lapide, at this point of his commentary, gravely
informs us that the name ot the Samaritan woman was Photiua,
— that after her conversion she preached the Gospel at Carthage,
and that she suffered martyrdom there on the 20th of March, on
which day fhe Romish Martyrology makes special mention of
her name ! He also tells us that her head is kept as a relic at
Rome, in the BasUicaof St. Paul and that it was actually shown
to him there ! — It is well to know what ridiculous and lying
legends the Church of Eome palms upon Roman CathoUcs aa
truths, whUe she withholds from them the Bible !

JOHN IV. 31—42.

31 In tho mean while his dis
ciples prayed him, saying, Master,
eat. 32 But he said unto them, T have
meat to eat that ye kuow not of.
33 Therefore said the disciples
one to another. Hath any man
brought him ought to eat ?
34 Jesus saith unto them. My
meat is to do the -ndU of him that
sent rae, and to finish his work.
35 Say not ye. There are yet
four months, aud tlien cometh har
vest ? behold, I say unto you. Lift
up your eyes, and look on the
fields; for they are white already
to harvest.
3G And he that reapeth receiveth
wages, and gathereth fruit unto life
eternal: that both he tliat soweth
and he that reapeth may rejoice
together.

ZI And herein is that saying true.
One soweth, aud another reapeth.
38 1 sent you to reap that where
on ye bestowed no labour: other
men laboured, and ye are entered
into their labours.
39 And many of the Samaritans
of that city beUeved on him for tho
saying of the woman, which testi
fied, i&e told me all that ever I did.
40 So when the Samaritans were
come unto him, they besought him
that he would tarry with them:
aud he abode there two days.
41 And many more believed be
cause of his own word;
42 And said unto the woraan.
Now we believe, not because of thy
saying : for we have heard him our
selves, and know that this is in
deed the Christ, ths Saviour of the
world.

238 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
We have, for one thing, in these verses, an instructive pat
tern of zeal for the good of others. We read, that our
Lord Jesus Christ declares, " My meat is to do the will
of him which sent me, and to finish his work." To do
good was not merely duty and pleasure to Him. He
counted it as His food, meat and drink. Job, one of the
holiest Old Testament saints, could say, that he esteemed
God's word " more than his necessary food." (Job xxiii.
15.) The Great Head of the New Testament Church went
even further. He could say the same of God's work.
Do we do any work for God ? Do we try, however
feebly, to set forward His cause on earth, — to check that
which is evil, to promote that which is good ? If we do,
let us never be ashamed of doing it -with all our heart,
and soul, and mind, and strength. Whatsoever our hand
finds to do for the souls of others, let us do it with our
might. (Eccles. ix. 10.) The world may mock and sneer,
and call us enthusiasts. The world can admire zeal in any
service but that of God, and can praise enthusiasm on any
subject but that of religion. Let us work on unmoved.
Whatever men may say and think, -wC are walking in the
steps of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Let us, beside this, take comfort in the thought that
Jesus Christ never changes. He that sat by the well of
Samaria, and found it " meat and drink" to do good to an
ignorant soul, is always in one mind. High in heaven at
God's right hand. He still dehghts to save sinners, and
still approves zeal and labour in the cause of God. The
work of the missionary and the evangelist may be despised
and ridiculed in many quarters. But while man is mock
ing, Christ is well pleased. Thanks be to God, Jesus is
the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever.
We have, for another thing, in these verses, strong en
couragement held out to those leho labour to do good to
souls. We read, that our Lord described the world as a

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 239
" field white for the harvest ;" and then said to His dis
ciples, " He that reapeth, receiveth wages, and gathereth
fruit unto life eternal."
Work for the souls of men, is undoubtedly attended by
great discouragements. The heart of natural man is very
hard and unbelieving. The blindness of most men to theu*
own lost condition and peril of ruin, is something past
description. " The carnal mind is enmity against God."
(Rom. viii. 7.) No one can have any just idea of the
desperate hardness of men and women, until he has tried
to do good. No one can have any conception of the small
number of those wdio repent and believe, until he has per
sonally endeavoured to " save some." (I Cor. ix. 22.) To
suppose that everybody will become a true Christian, who
is told about Christ, and entreated to believe, is mere
childish ignorance. " Few there be that find the narrow
way 1" The labourer for Christ will find the vast majority
of those among whom he labours, unbelieving and impeni
tent, in spite of all that he can do. "The many " will not
turn to Christ. These are discouraging facts. But they
are facts, and facts that ought to be known.
The true antidote against despondency in God's work,
is an abiding recollection of such promises as that before
us. There are "wages" laid up for faithful reapers.
They shall receive a reward at the last day, far exceeding
anything they have done for Christ, — a reward propor
tioned not to their success, but to the quantity of their
work. — They are gathering "fruit," which shall endure
when this world has passed away, — fruit, in some souls
saved, if many will not believe, and fruit in evidences
of their own faithfulness, to be brought out before assem
bled worlds. Do our hands ever hang down, and our
knees wax faint ? Do we feel disposed to say, " my labour
is in vain and my words without profit." Let us lean back
at such seasons on this glorious promise. There are

2-iO EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
" wages " yet to be paid. There is " fruit " yet to be
exhibited. " We are a sweet savour of Christ, both in
thom that are saved and iu them that perish." (2 Cor. ii.
15.) Let us work on. "He that goeth forth and weep-
eth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with
rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him." (Psa. cxxvi. 6.)
One single soul saved, shall outlive and outweigh all the
kingdoms of the world.
We have, lastly, in these verses, a most teaching distance
of the variety of ways by which men are led to believe
Christ, We read that " many of the Samaritans believed
on Christ for the saying of the woman." But this is not
all. We read again, "Many more believed because of
Christ's own word." In short, some were converted
through the means of the woman's testimony, and some
were converted by hearing Christ Himself.
The words of St. Paul should never be forgotten, "There
are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which
worketh all in all." (I Cor. xii. 6.) The way in which the
Spirit leads all God's people is always one and the same.
But the paths by which they are severally brought into
that road are often widely dififerent. There are some in
whom the work of conversion is sudden and instantaneous.
There are others in whom it goes on slowly, quietly, and
by imperceptible degrees. Some have their hearts geutly
opeiied, like Lydia. Others are aroused by violent alarm,
like the jailor at Philippi. All are finally brought to repen
tance toward God, faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ,
and holiness of conversation. But all do not begin with
the same experience. The -\veapon which carries convic
tion to one believer's soul, is not the one which first pierces
another. The arrows of the Holy Ghost are all drawn
from the same quiver. But He uses sometimes one and
sometimes another, according to His own sovereign will.
Are we converted ourselves ? This is the one point to

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 241
which our attention ought to be directed. Our experience
m;iy not tally with that of other believers. But that is
not the question. Do wo feel sin, hate it, and flee from
it ? Do we love Christ, and rest solely on Him for sah
vation ? Are we bringing forth fruits of the Spirit in
righteousness and true holiness ? If these things arc so,
we may thank God, and take courage.
Notes. John IV. 31—42.
31. — [In the mean while.] This expression means " during the time
when the Samaritans were coming out of the citv to the well,"
between the time when the woman went her way, and the time
when her feUow-counfrj'men, aroused by her testimony, appear
ed at the well. It is highly probable that they were aheady in
sight. [Prayed.] The Greek word so rendered is remarkable. It is
frequently used to convey the idea of "asking, or making in-
quiiy." It is a curious fact that it is not used in describing any
person's address to God in prayer, except in the case of our Lord
Jesus Chrisf. (John xiv. 16 ; xvi. 26 ; xvii. 9, 15, 20.) There is
one remarkable instance where it seems to be used in descrbing
a believer's prayer. (I John v. 16.) But this instance stand* so
entirely alone that it is probable the meaning is not "pray," but
" make curious inquiry."
[Master, eat] The difi'erence between our Lord and His dis
ciples appears here in a striking manner. Their weak minds
were preoccupied with the idea of food and bodily sustenance.
His heart was fiUed with the great object of His ministry, " do
ing good to souls." It is a striking illustration of a difference
that may frequently be seen between a believer of great grace
and a believer of Uttle grace. The latter, with fhe best possible
intentions, wUl often attach an importance to bodily and tem
poral things, with which the strong beUever will feel no sym
pathy.
2. — [I have meat, Sc] The meaning of our Lord's words in this
verse must evidently be figurative. He had soul-nourishment
and soul-sustenance of which His disciples were ignorant. He
fi.und such refreshment in doing good to ignorant souls that for
the time present He did not feel bodUy hunger.
There is no neces-ity for supposing that our Lord referred to
any miraculous supply of His bodily wants in this pi- ce. His
words appear to me only to indicate that He found such dehght
and comfort in doing good to souls, that it was as good as meat
11

242 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
and drink to Him. Many of His holiest servants in every age,
I believe, could testify much the same. The joy and happiness
of spiritual success has for the time lifted them above all bodily
wants, and supplied the place of material meat and drink. I see
no reason why this may not have been fhe case with our Lord.
He had a body in all respects constituted like our own.
The idea of some writers that these words show that our
Lord's " thirst " was only simulated and pretended, seems to ma
utterly unworthy of notice.
The appUcation of the words which every beUever ought to
endeavour to make to himself, is familiar to every weU-instructed
Christian. He has supplies of spiritual nourishment and sup
port, which are hidden and unknown to the world. These sup
plies he ought to use at all times, and specially in times of sorrow
and trial.
33. — [Therefore said.. .one to another, Sc] These words seem to
have been spoken privately, or whispered one to another, by the
disciples. "Their inability to put any but a carnal sense on their
Master's words, has been already remarked. In slowness to see
a spiritual sense in His language they do not appear at all unlike
Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman. " What wonder is it,"
says Augustine, "if fhe woman could not understand our Lord,
speaking about living water, when the disciples could not under
stand Him speaking about meat ?"
The original Greek of the expression " hath any man brought
him ought to eat," is remarkable. There is a negative left out in
our translation. It seeras to show that the question of the wo
raan, at verse 29, would have been better rendered, " Is this the
Christ ? Can this be the Christ ?"
34. — [Jesus saith, Sc] The leading idea of this verse is; " that do
ing God's will, and finishing God's work, was so soul-refreshing
and pleasant to our Lord that He found it equivalent to meat
and drink."
The Greek expression rendered " to do," and " to finish,"
would have been more literally rendered, " that I should do,"
and, " that I should finish." But there can be littie doubt, as
Winer remarks, that the language is intended to have an infini
tive sense. Precisely the same construction is employed in ano
ther remarkable place, John xvii. 3. It seems matter of regret
that our translators did not render that verse as they have ren
dered the verse before us. It should have been, '" this is life
eternal to know thee, &c."
, The " wiU of God," which it was Christ's meat to " do," must
mean God's wiU, that salvation by faitih in a Saviour should he

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 24.B
proclaimed, and a door of mercy set wide open to the chief of
sinners. "It is my meat," says our Lord, "to do that wUl, and
to proclaim to every one with whom I speak that whosoever be
lieveth on the Son shall not perish." The view that it simply
means, " my meat is to obey God's commandments and do what
He has told me to do," appears to me to fall short of the full
meaning of the expression. The leading idea seems to me to be
specially God's will about proclaiming salvation by Christ. Com
pare John vi. 39, 40.
The "work of God," which it was Christ's meat to " finish,"
must mean that work of complete fulfilment of a Saviour's office
which Christ came on earth to perform, and that obedience to
God's law which He came to render. " It is my meat," says our
Lord, " to be daily doing that great work which I came into the
world to do for man's soul, to be daily preaching peace, and daily
fulfilling all righteousness." Compare John xvii. 4.
The utter unlikeness between Christ and all ministers of the
Gospel who perform their duties in a mere prefunctory way, and
care more for the world, and its pleasures or gains, than for sav
ing souls, is strikingly brought out in this and the preceding
verse. How many professing teachers of reUaion know nothing
whatever of the spirit and habits of mind which our Lord here
displays ! It can never be said of hunting, shooting, ball-going,
card-playing, farming clergymen, that it is their meat and drink
to do God's will and finish His work I With what face will they
meet Christ in the day of judgment ?
CyrU says, on this verse, " We learn from hence how great is
the love of God towards men. He calls the conversion of lost
people His meat."
35. — [Say not ye, Sc] This saying is interpreted in two different
ways. Some think, as Origen, Rupertus, Brentius, Beza, Jansenius,
Cyril, Lightfoot, Lampe, Suicer, and many others, that our Lord
really meant that there were four literal months to harvest, at
the time when He spoke; and that as the harvest began about
May, He spoke in February. The sense would then be, " Ye say
at this time of the year that it will be harvest in four months.
But I teU you there is a spiritual harvest already before you, if
you wiU only lift up your eyes and see it."
Others think, as De Dieu, Maldonatus, Calovius, Whitby,
Schottgen, Pearce, Tittman, Stier, Alford, Barnes, and Tholuck,
that our Lord only meant that it was a proverbial saying among
fhe Jews, — " four months between seed time and harvest," and
that He did not mean the words to be literaUy taken. The sense
would their be; "Ye have" a common paying that it is four

244 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
months from seed time to harvest. But I teU you ihat in s'liri
tual works the harvest lipeni far more quickly. Behold those
Samaii ans coming out already to hear the word, the very day
that sjed has been sown among them. The fields are alreadj
white for harvest."
E ther of tiie above views make good sense and good divinity.
Yet on the whole I prefer thu second view, viz.: ihat our Lord
quoted a proverb. To suppose that He really meant th it ihere
were literally four months to pass away before harvest, appears
to me to involve serious chronological difBcu'ties. It necessitates
the assumption that at least three quarters of -i year had passed
away since the passover, when our Lord purified the tt-inple.
(John ii, 23.) No doubt this possibly may have been the case.
IJut it does not appear fo me probable. — In addition we must
remeni!;er that our Loid, on another occasion, referred to a pro
verbial saying about the weather, beginning iiiui-h as He doss
here, " Ye say." Matt. xvi. 3. Moreover, in this very passage
He quotes a proverb about " one sowing and another reaping,"
within two verses. The expression therelbre, "say not ye,"
seems to me to point to a proverbial saying much more than to
a fact. The antithesis to it is the " I say," which immediately
foUows. Calvin says, "By this expression, do not ye say? Clirist in
tended indirectly to point out how much more attentive the
miuds of men are to earthly than to heavenly things, for they
burn with so intense a desire of harvest that they carefully
reckon up months and days, while it is astonishing how drowsy
and indolent they are in gathering the heavenly wheat."
Cornelius &, Lapide conjectures that the disciples had been talk
ing to one another about ihe prospects of harvest, as they came
to the well, and that our Lord knowing the conversation, referred-
to it by the words, " do not ye say ?"
[Lift up...eiies. .look...ficlds... white.. .harvest] There can be little
doubt that this saying must be interpreted figuratively. The
sense is, " There is a harvest of souls before you ready fo be
gathered in." The same figure is used elsewhere. (Matt. ix. 37.
Luke X. 32.)
Some think, as Chrysostom, that when our Lord said, " Be
hold.. „lift up your eyes.. .look," He spoke with especial reference
to the crowd of Samaritans whom He saw comin.g from the
city to the weU, If this be so, it is hard to suppose that He
first began conversation with the woraan at six o'clock in the
evening. Others think, that our Lord spoke these words with reference
to the whole world, and specially the Jewish nation, at the time

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 245
of His ministry. They were so ready and prepared for the
preaching of fhe Go.^pel, that they were like a field white for
harvest. The expression, " lift up your eyes," is used elsewhere
in Scripture, when mental attention is being called to something
remarkable. See Isai. xlix. 18; Lx. 4; Gen. xiii. li, 15.
I am disposed to think that both views are correct. Our Lord
wished His disciples to notice that both at Samaria and else
where the minds of men were everywhere ready to receive the
mes-age of the Gospel in an unusual degree. Let them mark
how willing the multitude was everywhere to listen f o the truth.
Let them know that everywhere, as in the apparently hopeless
field of Samaria, they would find a harvest of souls ready to be
reaped, if only they would be reapers.
Chrysostom, on this verse, remark.", " Christ leads His disciples,
as His custom is, from low things to high. Fields and harvests
here express the great number of souls which are ready to receive
the word. The eyes are both spiritual and bodily ones, for they
saw a great multitude of Samaritans now approaching. Thip,
expectant crowd He caUs, very suitably, white fields. Por aa
the corn, when it grows white, is ready for harvest, so were
those ready for salvation. But why does He not say all this in
direct language? Because by making use of the objects around
thera He gave great vividness and pov/er to His words, and also
caused His discourse to be more pleasant and sink deeper into
their memories."
36. — [He ihat reapeth, Sc] This verse seeras to me to show that
our Lord is speaking generaUy of the field of this world, and of
the whole work which His apostles would have to do iu it, not
only in Samaria, but to tho ends of the earth. The verse is a
general promise for the encouragement of all labourers of Christ.
'The fuU meaning of it can hardly be brought out without a para
phrase. "The reaper of the spiritual harvest has a far more
hononrable and satisfactory ofiice than the reaper of fhe natural
harvest. He receives wages and gathers fruit not for this life
only, but for the life to come. The wages that he receives are
eternal wages, a crown of glory that fadeth not away. (I Pet.
V. 4.) The fruit that he gathers is eternal fruit, souls plucked
from destruction and saved for evermore." See Daniel xii. 3 ;
John XV. 16; and 1 Cor. ix. 17.
Burkitt, and several other writers, caU attention to the fact that
the harvestman's wages are much more than the v/.ages of any
other labourer, and lience draw the conclu.sion that no Christian
will receive so glorious a reward as the man who labours to win
souls to Christ.
[That both he....soweth...reapeth...rejoice together.] These words

246 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
appear to me to refer to the common joy that there will be in
heaven among all who have laboured for Christ, when the whole
harvest of saved souls is finally gathered in. The Old Testament
prophets and John the Baptist, who sowed, will all rejoice toge
ther with the apostles, who reaped. — The results of the spiritual
harvest are not like those of the natural harvest, temporal, but
eternal, so that a day wiU come when all who have laboured for
it in any way, either by sowing or reaping, will sit down and
rejoice together to all eternity. Here in this -world the sower
sometimes doe'-j not live to see the fruit of his labour, and the
reaper who gathers in the harvest rejoices alone. But work done
in the spiritual harvest is eternal work, and consequently both
sowers and reapers are sure at last to " rejoice together," and to
see the fruit of their toil.
Let it be noted, that in heaven there wiU at last be no jealousy
and envy among Christ's labourers. Some will have been sowers
and sorae -will have been reapers. But all will have done that
part of fhe work aUotted to them, and all will finally "rejoice
together." Envious feelings will be absorbed in common joy.
Let it be noted, that in doing work for Christ, and labouring
for souls, there are sowers as well as reapers. The work of the
reaper makes far more show than the work o£ the sower. Yet
it is perfectly clear that if there was no sowing there would be
no reaping. It is of great importance to remember this. The
Church is often disposed to give an excessive honour to Christ's
reapers, and to overlook the labours of Christ's sowers.
37. — [Herein...that saying true, Sc. Sc] Our Lord here quotes a
proverbial saying, whieh appears to me to confirm the view I
liave already maintained, that the expression of the 35fh verse,
"Say not ye there are yet four months," &c., refers to a proverb.
The phrase " herein'' means literaUy, " in this,'' and seems to me
to refer to the verse which iramedi.*tely follows. " That common
saying, one soweth and another reapeth, is made good in ihia
way, — is fulfilled by this circumstance, — is verified in the foUow
ing manner, viz., I sent you to reap," &c.
The meaning of the proverb is plain. " It is a common saying
among men that it often falls to one to sow fhe field and to
another lo reap it. The sower and the reaper are not always
the same person."
The fiequent use of proverbial sayings in the New Testament
deserves notice. It shows the value of proverbs, and the import
ance cf teaching them to children and young people. A pointed
proverb is often remembered when a long moral lesson is for
gotten.

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 247
38. — [Taent you to reap, Sc] Our Lord here states fhe manner in
which the proverbial saying of the preceding verse is true. He
tells fhe apostles that they were sent to reap a spiritual harvest
on which they had bestowed no labour. Other men had laboured,
-viz., the prophets of the Old Testament and John the Baptist.
They had broken up the ground. They had sown the seed. The
result of their labour was that the minds of men iu the apostles'
times were prepared to expect the Messiah, and the aposfles had
oriy to go forth and proclaim the glad tidings that Messiah was
come. Pearce maintains the strange notion that our Lord, in this
verse, only means, "I sent you away into the city to buy meat.
While you were absent I sowed spiritual seed in the heart of a
Samaritan woman. She is now gone to caU others. These and
many more will be the harvest which you will reap, without
having bestowed any labour on it." This interpretation seems
to me quite untenable.
The past tense in this verse, " I have sent," is used, as a gram
marian would say, proleptically. It means, "I do send you."
Such a use of the past tense is common in Scripture, and espe
cially when God speaks of a thing about to be done. With God
there is no uncertainty. When He undertakes a thing, it may
be regarded as done and finished, because in His counsels it ia
certain to be finished. Our Lord's meaning is, "I send you
throughout Samaria, GaUlee, and Judaea, to reap the fruit of the
labours of the prophets and John the Baptist. They have sowed,
and you have now only to reap."
Some think, as Stier and Alford, that when our Lord said,
"other men have laboured," He referred rather to Himself than
to the prophets. I am unable to see this. It appears to me a
forced and unnatural interpretation. I hold decidedly with Chry
sostom, CyrU, Theophylact, Calvin, Zwingle, Melancthon, Bren
tius, Lampe, and Poole, that it appUes principaUy to the law and
prophets. — "If the prophets were not the sowers," saith Augus
tine, "whence had that saying come to the -vnoman, I know that
Messias cometh?" — Origen says, "Did not Moses and Elias, the
sowers, rejoice with the reapers, Peter, James, and John, when
they saw the glory of the Son of God at the transfiguration ?"
Theophylact sees in this verse a strong argument against the
heretical view of the Marcioniles, Manichees, and others, that
the New Testament is contrary to the Old. Here the prophets
and apostles are spoken of together as labourers under one com
mon Master, in one common field.
The idea propounded by Bucer, that our Lord alludes here to
the heathen philosophers as well as the prophets, seems to me
unwarrantable and unsafe.

248 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
39. — [Many. ..Samaritans. ..believed.] About the exact nature of the
belief mentioned here and in the 41st verse, we have no mate
rials for formin.sr an opinion. Whether it was only sm intellec
tual belief ti-at Christ was the Messiah, or whether it was tiiat
true faith of the heart which justifies a sinner before God, we arc
left to conjecture. The raore probable opinion appears to be that
it was true faith, though very weak and unintelligent, like (hat
of tho aposiles thera=elves. It is a sfron.g confirraafion of this
view, that when Philip, after the day of Pentecost, went down
to Samaria and preached Christ, his preaching was receivetl with
joy, and many were baptized, both men and women. (Acts viii.
5 — 12.) The Gospel was received without pnjudice, and em
braced at once as an acknowledged truth.
[For....saying... .woman... testfied, Sc] These words show the
importance of mi;rely human festiraony to Christ's Gospel. The
word of one weak woraan v/as made the instrumental means of
belief to many souls. There was nothing remarkable in the
woman's word. It contained no elaborate reasoning, and no
striking eloquence. It was only a hearty, earnest festiraony of
a beUeving heart. Yet God was pleased to use it to Ihe conver
sion of souK We must never despise the use of mean-. If
the woman had not spoken, the Samaritans would not have been
converted, — Above all, we must never despise means because
of their apparent weakness, feeblenes=, ,ind inaptness to do good,
God can make the weakest instruments powerful to piiR down
the strongholds of sin and Satan, just as He raade David's sling
and stone prevail over Goliah.
Theophylact points ont that the Samaritan woman's past wicked
life was well known to her fellow-citizc-iis, and that their atten
tion must have been aroused by her publicly proclaiming tliat she
had found One who knew her former lifi', although a stranger.
They rightly concluded that He must be no common p,;rson.
Melanoth(m remarks that the belief which resulted from tho
testunony of a woman in this case, is a clear proof that it is not
absolutely necessary to have regular ministerial orders, in order
to do gi)od to souls, and that episcopal orders are not absolutely
needful in order to give effect to the word v;hen spoken.
40. — [Sj Jrlii-n... Samaritans... come.. .besought.Jarry, Sc] Tlie desire
;if the Samaritans for instruotion is shown i;i tiiis verse, and Ihe
-willingness of Christ to assist inquirers is strikingly exhibited.
He waits fo b,: entreated. If we have lliai not abiding ui'ii us,
it is because we do nut a^c Him. The t-,vo disciples journeyin.L!
to Emmaus would have mi-<sed a .great privilege if they had" not
said, '-Abide with us." (Luke xxiv. 29.)
Ferus on this verse reraarks the wide difference between the
Samaritans and the Gergesenes. The Gergesenes prayed our

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 249
Lord to " depart " from -them, the Samaritans to " tarry " v/ith
them. (Matt. viii. 34.)
[He abodc.two days.] We can only suppose that these two
days were spent in teaching and preaching the Gospel. One
would like to know all that was thought and said in those two
days. But it is an instance of the occasional " silences " of
Scripfjre, whieh every attentive Bible-reader must have noticed.
The first thirty years of our Lord's life at Nazareth, — the way in
which St. Paul spent his time in Arabia, — and his employment
during his two years' imprisonment in Csesarea, are similar
silences. (Gal. i. 17 ; Acts xxiv. 27.)
It is an interesting fact which has been observed by some
writers, that at this very day, Nablous and its neighbourhood,
occupying the site of Samaria and Sychar, are in amore flourish
ing and prosperous condition than almost any place in Palestine.
While Capernaum, and Chorazin, and Bethsaida, which rejected
Christ, have almost entirely passed away, Samaria, which beheved
and received Him, flourishes still.
41. — [Many more believed....own word!] This verse shows tho
sovereignty of God in saving souls. One is called in one way
and another in another. Some Samaritans believed when they
heard the woman testify. Others did not beUeve tiU they heard
Christ HimsgU; — We must be careful that we do not bind down
the Holy Ghost to one mode of operation. The experience of
saved souls often differs widely. If people are brought to re
pentance and faith in Christ, we must not be stumbled because
they are not aU brought in the sarae way.
Olshausen remarks on this verse, " Here is a rare instance in
which tlie ministry of the Lord produced an awakening on a
large scale. Ordinarily we find that a few individuals only were
aroused by Him, and that these, Uke grains of seed, scattered
here and thei e, became the germs of a new and higher order of
things among the people at large."
.42. — [Now we helieve....not....thy saying.] The Greek words so
rendered would be translated more literaUy, "Not any longer
because of thy saying do we believe."
Calvin thinks that the Greek word here rendered " saying,"
means Uterally, "talk or talkativeness," and that "the Samari
tans appear to boast that they have now a stronger foundation
than a woman's tongue." In the only other three places where
it is used, it is translated " speech." (Matt. xxvi. 73 ; Mark xiv.
70 ; John viii. 43.)
[This is indeed.... Christ... Saviour. ..world.] The Greek words
so rendered would be translated more literally, " This is the
Saviour of the world, the Chi ist." 11*

50 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
The singular fulness of the confession made by these Samaii-
tans deserves special notice. A more full declaration of our
Lord's oflice as " Saviour of fhe world " is nowhere to be found in
the Gospels. Whether the Samaritans clearly understood what
they meant when they spoke of our Lord as " the Saviour," may
be reasonably doubted. But that they saw with pecuUar clear
ness a truth which the Jews were speciaUy backward in seeing,
that He had corae to be a Redeemer for all mankind, and not
for the " Jews " only, seems evident from the expression " the
world." That such a testimony should have been borne to
Christ, by a mixed race, of semi-heathen origin, like the Sama
ritans, and not by the Jews, is a remarkable instance of the
grace of God.
The inference drawn by Calvin fi'om this verse, that '' within
two days the sense of the Gospel was more plainly taught by
Christ at Samaria than he had hitherto taught it at Jerusalem,"
seems both unwarrantable and needless. Ought we not rather
to fix our eyes on the diflference between the Jews and Samari
tans? Christ's teaching was the same, but the hearts of His
hearers were widely different. The Jews were hardened. The
Samaritans believed.
Chemnitius, on this verse, thinks that an emphasis is meant to
be laid on the Greek word rendered " indeed." Literally it is
" truly." He thinks it was used of our Lord in contradistinction
to the false Christs and Messiahs who had appeared before Hira,
as well as to the typical Messiahs and Saviours, sueh as the
Judges. In leaving the passage we may well wonder that so many
" Samaritans " should at once have believed on our Lord, when
so few " Jews " ever beUeved. Our wonder may well be in
creased, when we consider that our Lord worked no miracle on
this occasion, and that the word was the only instrument used
to open the Samaritans' hearts. — We see, for one thing, fhe entire
sovereignty of the grace of God. The last are often first and
the first last. The raost ignorant and unenlightened beUeve
and are saved, while Ihe most learned and enlightened continue
unbelieving and are lost. — We see, for another thing, tiiat it is
not miracles and privileges, but grace, which converts souls.
The Jews saw scores of mighty miracles worked by our Lord,
and heard Him preach for weeks and months, and yet with a
few rare exceptions remained impenitent and hardened. The
Samaritans s-.iw no miracles worked at all, and only had our
Lord araong fhem for two days, and yet many of them believed.
If ever there was clear proof that the grace of the Holy Spirit
is (he chief thing needed in order to procure the conversion of
soul.=, Wtf h;;v;.' it in ihe verses we are now leaving.

JOHN, CHAP. IV.

251

The allegorical and typical meanings which some writers
assign to the Samaritan woman and her history, as related in
this chapter, are hardly worth recounting. Some regard fhe
woman as a type of the Jewish synagogue, slavishly bound to
fhe five books of the law, and drawn finally by Christ to drink
the Uving water of the Gospel. — Some regard the woman as a
type of the Gen'tile nations, for five thousand years committing
fornication with heathen idols, and at length purged by Christ,
and casting away their empty water-pots in obedience fo Chris
tianity. — Some go even fiirther, and regard the woman as a
prophetical type of things yet to come. They consider her as a
type of the Greek Church, which is yet fo be brought into the
true faith of Christi These views appear to me at best only
fanciful speculations, and more likely to do harm than good,
by drawing men away from the plain practical lessons which the
passage contains.

JOHN rV. 43—54.

43 Now after two days he de-
jarted thence, and went into Gali
lee. 44 For Jesus himself testified,
that a prophet hath no honour in
his own country.
45 Then when he was come into
GalUee, the Galilseans received him,
having seen aU the things that he
did at Jerusalem at the feast : for
they also went unto the feast.
46 So Jesus came again into Caca
of GaUlee, where he made the water
-wine. Aud there was a certain
nobleman, whose sou was slok at
Capernaum. 47 'When he heard that Jesus
waa corae out of Judsea into GaUlee,
he went unto him, and besought
him that he would come do-sra, and
heal hia son; for he was at the
point of death.
48 Then said Jesus unto him,
K.tCBpt ye see sigua and wonders,
ys wiU not beUeve.

49 The nobleman saith unto
him. Sir, come down, ere my child
die. 50 Jesus saith unto him. Go thy
way ; thy son liveth. And the man
believed the word that Jesus had
spoken unto him, aud he went his
way. 51 And as he waa now going
down, his servants met him, and
told Mm, saying, Thy son liveth.
52 Theu enquired he of them the
hour when he began to amend.
And they said unto him, Yester
day at the seventh hour the fever
left him.
53 So the father ilfnew that it
was at the same hour, in the whieh
Jesus said unto him, thy sou liv
eth: and himself believed, and his
whole houae,
54 This is again the second
miracle that Jesua did, when he
waa oomo out of Judaa into Ga»
lUee,

Fotru great lessons stand out boldly on the face of this

252 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
passage. Ltit us fix them in our memories, and use tliem
continually as we journey through life.
We learn, firstly, that the rich have affiictions as well as
the poor. We read of a nobleman in deep anxiety because
his son was .sick. We need not doubt that every menus
of restoration was used that money could procure. But
money is not almighty. The sickness increased, and the
nobleman's son lay at the point of death.
The lesson is one which needs to be constantly im-
pressed on the minds of men. There is no more common,
or more mischievous error, than to suppose that the rich
have no cares. The rich are as liable to sickness as the
poor ; and have a hundred anxieties beside, of which the
poor know nothing at all. Silks and satins often cover
very heavy hearts. The dwellers in palaces often sleep
more uneasily than the dwellers in cottages. Gold and
silver can lift no man beyond the reach of trouble. They
may shut out debt and rags, but they cannot shut out
care, disease, and death. The higher the tree, the more
it is shaken by storms. The broader its branches, the
greater is the mark which it exposes to the tempest.
David was a happier man when he kept his father's sheep
at Bethlehem, than when he dwelt as a king at Jerusalem,
and governed the twelve tribes of Israel.
Let the servant of Christ ' beware of desiring riches.
They are certain cares, and uncertain comforts. Let him
pray for the rich, and not envy them. How hardly shall
a rich man enter the kingdom of God ! Above all, let
him learn to be content with such things as he has. He
only is truly rich, who has treasure iu heaven.
We learn, secondly, in this passage, tliat sickness and
death come to the young as well as to the old. We read of
a son sick unto death, and a father in trouble about him.
We see the natural order of things inverted. The elder
Is obliged to minister to the younger, and not the younger

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 253
to the elder. The child draws nigh to the grave before
the parent, and not the p.irent before the child.
The lesson is one which we are all slow to learn. We
are apt to shut our eyes to plain facts, and to speak and
act, as if young people, as a matter of course, never died
when young. And yet the grave-stones iu every church
yard would tell us, that few people out of a hundred ever
live to be fifty years old, while many never grow up to
man's estate at all. The first grave that ever was dug
on this earth, was that of a young man. The first person
who ever died, was not a father but a son. Aaron lost
two sons at a stroke. David, the man after God's own
heart, lived long enough to see three children buried.
Job was deprived of all his children in one day. These
things wei'e carefully recorded for our learning.
He that is wise, will never reckon confidently on long
life. We never know what a day may bring forth. The
strongest and fairest are often cut down and hurried away
in a few hour.s, while the old and feeble linger on for many
years. The only ti'ue wisdom is to be always prepared to
meet God, to put nothing oif which concerns eternity, and
to live like men ready to depart at any moment. So living,
it matters little whether we die young or old. Joined to
the Lord Jesus, we are safe in any event.
We learn, thirdly, from this passage, what benefits afflic
tion can confer on the soul. We read, that anxiety about
a son led the nobleman to Christ, in order to obtain help
in time of need. Once brought into Christ's company, he
learned a lesson of priceless value. In the end, "he
believed, and his whole house." All this, be it remembered,
hinged upon the son's sickness. If the nobleman's son
had never been ill, his father might have lived and died in
his sins.
Afiliction is one of God's medicines. By it He often
leaches lessons which would be learned in no other way.

254 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
By it He often draws souls away from sin and the world,
which would otherwise have perished everlastingly. Health
is a great blessing, but sanctified disease is a greater.
Prosperity and worldly comfort, are what all naturally
desire ; but losses and crosses are far better for us, if they
lead us to Christ. Thousands at the last day, will testify
with David, and the nobleman before us, " It is good for
me that I have been afficted." (Psa. cxix. 71.)
Let us beware of murmuring in the time of trouble.
Let us settle it firmly in our minds, that there is a meaning,
a needs-be, and a message from God, in every sorrow that
falls upon us. There are no lessons so useful as those
learned in the school of affliction. There is no commentary
that opens up the Bible so much as sickness and sorrow.
" 'No chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, hut
grievous : nevertheless afterward it yieldeth peaceable
fruit." (Heb. xii. II.) The resurrection morning will
prove, that many of the losses of God's people were in
reality eternal gains.
We learn, lastly, from this passage, that Christ's word
is as good as Christ's presence. We read, that Jesus did
not come down to Capernaum to see the sick young raan,
but only spoke the word, " Thy son liveth." Almighty
power went w-ith that little sentence. That very hour the
patient began to amend. Christ only spoke, and the cure
was done. Christ only commanded, and the deadly disease
stood fast.
The fact before us is singularly full of comfort. It gives
enormous value to every promise of mercy, grace, and
peace, which ever fell from Christ's lips. He that by faith
has laid hold on some word of Christ, has got his feet upon
a rock. What Christ has said, He is able to do ; and what
He has undertaken, He will never fail to make good. The
sinner who has really reposed his soul on the word of the
Lord Jesus, is safe to all eternity. He could not be safer,

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 255
if he saw the book of life, and his own name written in it.
If Christ has said, "Him that cometh to me, I will in
nowise cast out," and our hearts can testify, " I have
come," we need not doubt that we are saved. In the
things of this world, we say that seeing is believing. But
in the things of the Gospel, believing is as good as seeing.
Christ's word is as good as man's deed. He of -whom
Jesus says in the Gospel, " He liveth," is alive for ever
more, and shall never die.
And now let us remember that afflictions, like that of the
nobleman, are very common. They will probably come to
our door one day. Have we known anything of bearing
affliction ? Would we know where to turn for help and
comfort when our time comes ? Let us fill our minds and
memories betimes with Christ's words. They are not the
words of man only, hut of God. The words that he speaks
are spirit and life. (John vi. 63.)
Notes. John IV. 43 — 54.
43. — [After two days!] The Greek words here would be more
literally rendered, " After the two days," i. e., after the two days
mentioned in the preceding verse.
[Departed thence.] Quesnel remarks, " It is an instance of self-
denial which is very uncommon, to leave those who respect and
applaud us, that we may go to preach among others from whom
we have reason to expect a quite different treatment."
iL — [For Jesus himself tedified...his own country.] This verse has
much perplexed commentators. What is meant by the expres
sion, "His own country?" If it means Galilee, as most sup
pose, how are we to reconcUe it with the words which follow,
"the Galileans received him?" — And again, what is the connec
tion between fhe verse before us and the one which precedes it ?
Why should our Lord go into GaUlee, when it was a place where
He had no honour ? And finally, how are we to reconcile the
statement that our Lord had no "honour" in Galilee with the
undeniable fact that nearly all His disciples and adherents were
Galileans ? All these points have given rise to much speculation
Jind conjecture.
(a!) Some, as Origen and Maldonatus, get over the difficulty

256 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
in the foUowing manner. They say that the words, " His own
country," must mean Judasa, and Bethlehem, where Christ was
born. The sense wiU then be, ''after two days Jesus departed
from Samaria, and went into Galilee, and not into Juda;a, ba
cause in JudiEa He received no honour, and was not believed.'
This solution seeras to me unnatural and unsatisfactory. Our
Lord's going to Galilee was a premeditated journey, and not a
sudden plan decided on during His stay at Samaria. Beside this,
tlieie is no proof whatever th:it our Lord was not received and
believed in Judiea. On the contrary. He "made and baptized"
so many disciples in Judsea, that it attracted the notice of
the Pharisees, and made it necessary for Him to " depart into
G^dilee." (6.) Augustine holds that " His own country" means Galilee,
and seems to attach the following sense to the verse, " And yet
Jtsus testified that a prophet hath no honour in his own country,
for when he came into Galilee no one believed on Him, except
the nobleman and his house." This appears to me a far-fetched
and unnatural interpretation. Tittman and Blomfield tako
much the same view, and render it, " Although Jesus had testi
fied, ' &c.
(c) Chrysostom and Euthymius think that "His own coun
try" means Capernaum. This interpretation also seems to me
impro'.jable. We find Capernaum elsewhere called our Lord's
" own city," but nowhere else " His own country." (See Matt.
ix. 1.)
(d.) Theophylact suggests that the verse before us is inserted
in order to explain " v/Ly our Lord did not always abide and
continue in GaUlee, but only came there at intervals. The reason
was that He received no honour there." This also seems to me
an unsatisfactory interpretation.
(c.) Alford says, " The only true and simple view is, that this
verse refers to tho next following, and indeed to fhe whole nar
rative which it introduces. It stands as a preliminary explana^
tion of 'Except ye see signs and wonders ye wiU not believe,'
and indicates the contrast between the Samaritans, who believed
on Hira for His own word, and His own countrymen, who
only received Him because they had seen the miracles which
He did at Jerusalem." This view cf the text seems to me as
fai-fetche-.l and unsatisfactory as any of those I have mentioned
Moreover 1 doubt much whether the Greek word rendered
"for," is ever used in ths sense Alford puis on it, in the New
Testament. (/.) The following explanation appears to me by far tho most
probable one. The words, "His own country," mean neither
Galilee nor Judrea, but "Naz.areth." The sense is " Jes'as de-

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 257
parted f.-om Samaria into Galilee, but not to His own country,
Nazareth, becaute He testified, both now aud on other occasions,
that a prophet has no honour in his own country." — In coulir-
mation of the view I have maintained, it deserves notice, that
in the six only places in which the Greek word here rendered
"country" is found in the Gospels, beside the one befo.-e us, it
.'Iways means the town of Nazareth, and not the district in which
Nazareth is situated. (Malt xiii. 54, 57; Mark vi. I. 4; Luke iv.
23, 24.) The view I have supported is that of CyrU, Ca'vin,
C.ilovius, Lampe, Poole, De Dieu, Pearce, Doddridge, Dyke, and
Olshausen. Our Lord's use of a proverb in this verse is again worthy of
notice. It is another proof of fhe value of proverbial sayings.
The lesson of the proverb is a very instructive one. It is one
of the most melancholy proofs of man's fallen and corrupt state,
that he never values what he is familiar with, and that familiarity
breeds contempt. Ministers of the Gospel discover this by pain
ful experience, when they have resided many years in the same
parish, and ministered long in fhe same congregation. Those
who have the most abundant supply of Gospel privileges are
often the people who value them least. " The nearer ihe church
the further from God," is often found to be literally true. Those
who live furthest off, and are obliged to deny themselves most
in order to hear the Gospel, are often the very persons who tako
most pains to hear it.
One grain of comfort, however, may be extracted from this
painful ve' se. A minister must not despair, and accuse himself
of unfaithfulness, because the Gospel he preaches is not honoured
in his own congregation, and many remain hardened and unbe
lieving, after he has preached to them many years. Let him
remember that he is sharing his Master's lot. He is drinking fhe
very cup of which Christ drank. Christ had no honour in Naz:i-
retli, and faithful ministers have often less honour among their
own people than they have elsewhere.
Pe'lioan thinks that our Lord " testified " the truth contained
in this ver.«e in reply to some one who asked Him why He did
not go to Nazareth. I prefer the opinion that it s'mply means
our Lord " always did testify, and made a practice of testifying."
i5. — [Gdilceans received him.] The word "received" probably
in'.'ans no more than that Ihey "received Him with respect and
rexerence," as Ons who was no common p°ison. Thtre is no
warant for sjppo^in.;- Iliat ihey al iccrived Him with liui' faith,
and exper.mentally believed on Him as the Saviour of their
souls. [Having seen.,..things.... Jerusalem. ...feast.] This expression con-

258 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
firms tiie view already maintained (John ii. 23), that our Lord
did many other miracles at Jerusalem at the first passover, when
He was there, beside casting the buyers and sellers out of fhe
temple. It is probable that fhe miracles recorded in the four
Gospels are only a selection out of the number that Chiist
worked. Here, as elsewhere, we see the special use of miracles. They
served to arrest men's attention, and gave the impression that
He who wrought them deserved a hearing. The Galileans were
ready to receive Christ respectfully, because they had seen His
miracles. [They also went... feast!] This sentence is a useful proof of the
universality of the Jewish custom of attending the great feasts at
Jerusalem, and especiaUy the feast of the Passover. Even those
who lived furthest off from Jerusalem, in Galilee, made a point
of going to the Passover. It serves to show the publicity of our
Lord's ministry, both in life and death. When He was crucified
at fhe Passover, the event happened in the presence of myriads
of witnesses from every part of the world. The overruling pro
vidence of God ordered things so that the facts of Christ's life
and death could never be denied. " This thing was not done in
a corner." (Acts xxvX26.)
46. — [Jesus came again.... Cana.] The circumstance of our Lord
going twice to Cana may be accounted for by remembering the
fact that one of His disciples, " Nathanael," belonged to Cana,
and that His mother, Mary, in aU probabUity had relatives there.
(See note on John ii. I.)
[A certain nobleman!] The Greek word rendered " nobleman "
is only found here in this sense, as a substantive, in the New
Testament. The marginal reading, " courtier or ruler," hardly
makes it more clear. Some have conjectured that the nobleman
must have been some one attached to Herod's court, and is
therefore called "a royal person," which is the literal meaning of
the word. Some, as Luther, Chemnitius, Lightfoot, and Pearce,
have also conjectured that " Chuza, Herod's steward," whose
wife Joanna became one of our Lord's disciples, and " minist-pred
unto Him," (Luke vui. 3,) must have been this nobleman. This
is no doubt possible, and would be an interesting fact if it could
be proved. But there is no authority for it, except conjecture.
Lightfoot adds a conjecture, that if not Chuza it might have been
Manaen. (Acts xiU. 1.)
The rarity of a nobleman and a person connected with a, royal
court seeking Christ under any circumstances, is observed by
Glassius and others. It shows us that Christ wUl h-;ve frophiej
of the power of His grace out of every rank, class, and condition.

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 259
In the first chapter of St. John's Gospel we see fishermen con
verted ; in the third, a self-righteous Pharisee ; in the beginning
of the fourth, a fallen Samaritan woman ; and in the end, a noble
man out of a king's court.
Pearce thinks that the nobleman was one of the class called
Herodians. (Matt. xxii. 16.)
[Son was sick at Capernaum.] We should always notice the
number and greatness of miracles which our Lord worked at
Capernaum, and the dignity of the persons at whose instance
they were worked. Here He healed the Centurion's servant.
(Matt. viii. 5.) Here, in all probability, He restored to life the
daughter of Jairus, the ruler of the synagogue. (Mark v. 21.)
And here, in the present instance, He healed the nobleman's
son. Three distinct and leading classes had, each of them, a
mighty miracle wrought among them. The Centurion wa-i a
Gentile soldier. The ruler of the synagogue was a Jew of hisfh
ecclesiastical position. The noblemarf was connected with the
highest civil authorities. The consequence no doubt was that
the name and power of Christ became known to every leading
famUy in Capernaum. No wonder that our Lord says, " Thou
Capernaum that art exalted unto heaven." (Matt. xi. 23.) No
place was so pnvUeged as this city.
The idea entertained by sorae that this " nobleman " was the
same as the Centurion in Matt. viii. 5, and that the miracle here
recorded is only the sarae miracle differently reported, seems to
me entirely destitute of foundation. The details of the two mir
acles are entirely different. Th'j miracle before us is nowhere
else reported in the Gospels.
47. — [Heard that Jesus was come, Sc] This verse shows how
widely spread was the fame of the miracle wrought at Cana
upon the occasion of our Lord's former visit, and how great was
the report of our Lord's miracles at Jerusalem, brought back by
the G.dileans who went to the feast. In no other way can we
a-'count for the nobleman going to our Lord and beseeching Him
to come and heal his son. Our Lord must have got the reputa
tion of being One who was both able and wilUng to work such
cures. Musculus remarks on this verse, how much more love descends
than ascends. In all the Gospels we never read of any sons or
daughters coming to Christ on behalf of their parents.
Dyke observes, " Some crosses drive men to Christ, especially
in our children. This was the cross that subdued Egypt: and to
great men, such as this ruler, who have much to leave their chil
dren, this cross is the greatest."
48. — [Tlien said Jesus, Except ye see, Sc] Our Lord in this verse

260 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
appears to refer to the common desire expressed by the .Tews to
see miracles and signs, as a proof of His Messiahship. " Cannot
you believe unless you actually see with your own eyes a miracle
worked? Is your faith so sraall, that except you see somi'thing
you cannot believe ?"— -No doubt our Lord knew the heart of the
man before Him. He wished to test his faith, and to draw out
from him more earnest desires after the mercy that he wanted.
The resemblance between our Lord's first answer to fhe noble
man and His first answer to the woman of Canaan, who came
to Him about her daughter, deserve comparison. (Matt. xv. 24.)
Chrysostom remarks, " Christ's meaning is. Ye have not yet
the right faith, but slill feel towards me as only a prophet, lie
rebuketh the state of mind wiih which the nobleman had come
to Him, because that before a miracle he believed not strong!)'.
Thus too He drew hin on fhe more to belief. — That the noble
man came and entreated was nothing wonderful, for parents in
their great affection are wont to resort to, and talk with physi
cians. But that he came without any strong purpose appears from
this, that he only came to Christ when Christ came into Galilee,
wherea-j, if he had firmly believed, he would not have hesitated,
when his child was at the point of death, fo go into Judasa."
Glassius thinks that our Lord, in these words, intends to con
trast fhe faith of the Samaritans with the unbelief of the Gali
leans. The Samaritans believed without having seen any signs
or wonders at aV.
Chemnitius thinks that our Lord, in this verse, spoke with spe
cial reference to the state of mind in which He ibund the inhabi
tants of Cana upon His second visit. He thinks that He ibund
them aroused to a state of expectation and curiosity, by H'S
mira-.;le of changing water into wine, but StiU destitute of any
real saving- faith.
Poole compares the nobleman to Naaman, who had faith
enough to come to Elisha's door to be healed of his leprosy, but
was stumbled because Elisha did not put his hand on the diseased
place, but on'y sent him a message. (2 Kings v. 11.)
iO.—[The nobleman saith, Sc] Th's verse shows the earnestness
of the iiobleraan's drsir for relief, quickened .and sharpened by
fhe appa-ent rehuff cont.iin-jd in our Lords replv t) his first
applio:it;on. Yet it was a saying exhibiting much ignorance. It
is clear that he did not discover wha^, our L-jrd liinled at, ihat
pofs lily he might be helped without liis coning .lo-.vn tu see his
sick son. He nether denies the u-utli of our Lord's words nor
enters inti) argument. He only knew that he felt in grievous
distress, and begged our Lord to "corae down ere his child died."
That our Lord could heal him he did not doub'. But that He

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 261
could heal him at a distance, without even seeing him, w.'xs some
thing that he could not yet understand.
Chrysostom says, " Observe how thes3 very words show the
weakness of Oie man. When he ought, afcer Christ had r^-buked
his state of mind, to have imagined something great concerning
Him, even if he did not before, listen how he drags along the
ground! He speaks as though Christ could nut raise his son
afier death, and as though He knew not in what state the child
was." Brentius remarks that the nobleman did not bring to Christ
faith, but merely a spark of faith.
50.— [Jesus saith unto him, Sc] Three things are very deserving of
notice in this verse, (a.) We should observe our Lord's mar
vellous kindness and compassion. He takes no notic-e of the
nobleman's weak faith and slowness of understanding. He
freelv grants his recpest, aud gives his son life and health with
out delay. (6.) We should observe our Lord's almighty power.
He simply speaks the words, "Thy son hveth," and at once a
sick person, at several miles' distance, is cured and raade well.
He spake and it was done, (c.) We should observe, not least,
the unhcbitating confidence which the nobleman reposed in our
Lord's power. He asked no more questions after he heard the
words, " Thy son liveth." At once he believed that all would be
weU, and went his way.
Cyril observes on this verse, that our Lord here healed two
persons at one time by the same words. " He brought fhe
nobleman's mind fo faith, and delivered the body of the young
man from disease."
Chrysostom remarks, '¦ What can be the reason why in the
case of the Centurion Christ undertook voluntaril.y lo come aud
heal, while here, though invited, he carae not? Because in the
case of the Centurion faith had been perfected, and therefore He
undertook to go, that we might learn the right-mindedness of
the man ; but here fhe nobleman was iraperfecc. When there
fore he continuaUy urged Him, saying. Come down, and knew
not clearly that even when absent He could heal, He showeth
that even this was possible unto Him, in order that this raan
might gain, from His not going, that knowledge which the Cen
turion had of hiraself."
Bishop Ha'l observes, " The ruler's request wa=. Come and
heal. Christis ansvver was, ' Go thy way : thy son liveth.' Our
merciful Saviour meets those in the end whora He crosses in fhe
way. How sweetiy doth He correct our prayers ; and while He
doth not give us what We asked, gives us better than we asked."
51. — [As he was now going down,] The relative positions of Cana

262 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
and Capernaum are not precisely known at the present day.
The exact site of Capernaum is matter of dispute among travel
lers and geographers. All we can glean fiom the expression
before us is, that Cana was probably in the hill country, and
Capernaum on the lake of Galilee. Hence a person leaving Cana
for Capernaum would " go down."
[Thy son liveth.] The meaning of this expression must evi
dentiy be, "Thy son is so rauch better, that he is coraparatively
alive from the dead. He was as one dead. He is now alive."
52. — [Tlien inquired he the hour.] This man's raind seems at once
to have laid hold on the nature of the miracle, and to have
acknowledged the power of Christ's word.
[He began to amend ] The Greek expression so rendered is a
very peculiar one, and only found in this place. It is literally,
"Had himself better, in more elegant order." — Let it be noted,
that here, as elsewhere, we find an expression which is only used
once in the New Testament. This shows that it is no valid
argument against the inspiration of any text or passage, that it
contains Greek expressions nowhere else used.
[Yesterday at the seventh hour.] This expression has been
differently interpreted — according to the view which commenta
tors take of St. John's mode of reckoning time. Those who
think that he numbered hours in ths same way that we do, main
tain that it means, " at seven o'clock in the evening." Those,
on the contrary, who maintain that St. John observed fhe Jew
ish mode of computation, say that it means " at one o'clock in
the afternoon."
I have already given it as my decided opinion, that John
observes the Jewish mode of reckoning time ; and I therefore
iiold with those who think, that "the seventh hour" ifieans one
o'clock. The arguments of those who say that, if it had been
one o'clock, the nobleman would never have taken till the next
day to reach home, appear to my mind quite inconclusive. For
one thing, we know nothing accurately of the distance from
Cana to Capernaum. — For another thing, we forget the slow rate
at which people travel in Eastern countries, on bad roads, in a
hilly country.— For another thing, it is entirely an assumption
to suppose that the nobleman had nothing else to do at Cana,
when he came to Jesus about his son. For anything we know,
he had, as a nobleman, business of various kinds, which made it
impossible for him to reach home in the afternoon after Jesus
had said, "Thy son liveth." — Last, but not least, it seems hardly
probable that the nobleman would have asked our Lord to come
down to Capernaum at so late an hour as seven o'clock in the
evening; or would have set off on his own return at that hour
and methis Servants in fhe night. 1

JOHN, CHAP. IV. 263
[The fever left him.] Trench remarks, that the words seem to
indicate, that there was not raerely an abatement of the lever,
but that it suddenly Jbrsook him. Compare Luke iv. 9.
53. — [Himself believed.] Beda remarks, on the matter of tiie noble"
man's beUeving, that "there are three degrees of faith, — the
beginning, the increase, and the perfection. There was a begin
ning in this man, when he first came to Christ ; an increase, v^ hen
our Lord told him that his son Uved ; and a perfection, whet, he
found him to have recovered at that very time."
[His whole house.] This expression probably means, "his
whole family," — including children and servants. We have no
right whatever to exclude children fiom the sense of the words.
Remembering this, we shall better understand what is meant,
when it is written, St. Paul baptized " tho household of Stepha
nas : " or when it is related, that the house of Lydia was baptized.
(I Cor. i. 16 ; Acts xvi. 15.)
There seems no reason for doubting that the nobleman, from
this time forth, became a thorough, true-hearted, believer in
Christ If, as some suppose, he is the same as Chuza, Herod's
steward, we may perhaps date the conversion of Joanna his wiie,
to the period of the verse now before us.
Bishop Hall remarks on this verse, " Great men cannot want
cUents. Their example sways some : their authoiity more.
They cannot go to either of fhe other worlds alone. In vain do
they pretend power over others, who labour not to draw their
famUies to God."
54. — [The second miracle ihat Jesus did.] The plain meaning of these
words is, that our Lord had worked no other miracle in Galilee
before this one, excepting that of turning the water into wine at
Cana. It appears likely that many of our Lord's earliest miracles
were wrought in Judsea and Jerusalem ; although we have no re
cord of fhem, except in the second chapter of St. John's GospeL
(John iL 23.) This fact is note-worthy, because it throws light
on the wickedness of the Jews at Jerusalem, where at last Christ
was condemned and crucified.
Chrysostom remarks, " The word ' second' is not added with
out cause, but to exalt yet more the praises of the Samaritans,
by showing that even when a second miracle had been wrought,
they who beheld it had not yet reached so high as those who
had not seen one."
Origen says, " Mystically the two journeys of Christ into
Galilee signify His two advents. At the first He makes us His
guest? at supper, and gives u.s wine to drink. At the second He
raises up the nobleman's son at the point of death, ^—ie., the

261 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Jewish people, who after the fiilness of Ihe GentUes attain salva
tion. Tlic sick Sun is the Jewish people fallen frora the ti-ue
religion.— This is patristic interpretation I AUegorical expositions
like ihis destroy tlie whole value of God's word. At this rate
the Bible may be made to mean anything.
Chemnitius thinks, that with this chapter ends the first year
of our Lord's public ministry, and gives a useful summary of fhe
principal events comprehended within it. These are the Lord's
baptism, — the calling of the first disciples, — the miracle at Cana,
— the miracle of casting out of the temple the buyers and sell
ers, — the conversation with Nicodemus, — the tarrying in Judsea
and baptizing, — the testimony of John the Baptist, — the journey
through Samaria, — the arrival in Galileo, — and the healing of the
nobleman's son. Epiphanius, he observes, calls it the " acceptable
year" of our Lord's ministry, because it was the most quiet and
peaceful. Bengel, in closing tiiis chapter, observes, that St. John seems
to arrange our Lord's miracles in threes. He relates three in
Galilee, — the first at the marriage in Cana, the second on the
nobleman's son, the third in feeding five thousand men (John
vi.) ; — Ihree in Judasa, — the first at Bethesda at pentecost (ch. v.),
the second after the i'east of tabernacles, on the bhnd raan (ch.
ix.), the third on Lazarus before the passover (ch. xi.). — So also
alter the ascension, he describes three appearances of our Lord
to His disciples. (John xxi. 14.)
Dyke observes how God keeps account of all fhe gracious
means He affords men for their good. " The second miracle is
specified to aggravate the infidelity of the Jews ; that though
Cliritt had now done another and a second miracle, yet only the
ruler and his household believed. Two miracles wrought, and
one household converted! God takes account not only how
many raen are won by a sermon, (Acts ii. 41,) but of how many
sermons are lest by men."

JOHN V. 1—15.

1 After this there was a feast of
the Jews; and Jesus went up to
Jerusalem. 2 Now there is at Jerusalem by
tho sheep market a pool, wliich
is called in the Hebrew tongue
Bethoada, ha-ving five porches.

3 In these lay a great multitudo
of impotent folk, of bUnd, halt,
withered, waiting for the moving of
the water.
4 For an angel went down at a
certain season into the pool, and
troubled tho water : whosoever

JOHN, CHAP. V.

265

then first after tho troubUng of the
water stepped in was raade whole
of whatsoever disease he had.
5 And a certain man was there,
which had au infirmity thirty and
eight years.
6 '\Vhen Jesus saw him lie, and
knew that he had been now a long
time in that case, he saith unto
him, Wilt thou be made whole?
1 The impotent man answered
him, Sir, I have no mau, when the
water is troubled, to put me into
the poo!: but while I am coming,
another steppeth down before me.
8 Jesus saith imto him. Rise,
take up thy bed, and walk.
9 And immediately the man was
made whole, and took up his bed,
and walked: and on the same day
was the sabbath.
10 The Jews therefore said unto

him that was cured, It ia tho sab-
bath day; it is not lawful for thee
to carry thy bed.
11 He answered them. Ho that
made mo whole, the same said unto
me. Take up thy bed, and walk.
12 Theu asked they him. What
man is that which said unto thee.
Take up thy bed, and walk 1
13 And he that was healed wist
not who it was : for Jesus had con
veyed himself away, a multitudo
being iu that place.
14 Afterward Jesus findeth him
in the temple, and said unto 14m,
Behold, thou art made whole : siu
no more, lest a worse thing como
unto thee.
15 The man departed, aud told
the Jews that it was Jesus, which
had made him whole.

We have in this passage one of the few miracles of Christ,
which St. John records. Like every other miracle in this
Gospel, it is described with great minuteness and particu
larity. And like more than one other miracle it leads on
to a discourse full of singularly deep instruction.
We are taught, for one thing, in this passage, what
misery sin has brought into the world. We read of a man
who had been ill for no less than thirty-eight years ! For
eight-and-thii'ty weary summers and winters he had endured
pain and infirmity. He had seen others healed at the waters
of Bethesda, and going to their homes I'ejoicing. But for
him there had been no healing. Friendless, helpless, and
hopeless, he lay near the wonder-working waters, but
derived no benefit from them. Year after year passed
away, and left him still uncured. No relief or change for
the better seemed likely to come, except from the grave.
When we read of cases of sickness like this, we should
remember how deeply we ought to hate sin ! Sin was the
originiil root, and cause, and fountain of every disease hi
12

266 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
the world God did not create man to be full of aches, and
pains, and infirmities. These things are the fruits of the
Fall. There would have been no sickness, if there had
been no sin.
ISFo greater proof can be shown of man's inbred un
belief, than his carelessness about sin. "Pools," says the
wise man, " make a mock at sin." (Pro. xiv. 9.) Thou
sands delight in things which are positively evil, and run
greedily after that which is downright poison. They love
that which God abhors, and dislike that which God loves.
They are like the madman, who loves his enemies and
hates his friends. Their eyes are blinded. Surely if men
would only look at hospitals and infirmaries, and think
what havoc sin has made on this earth, they would never
take pleasure in sin as they do.
WeU may we be told to pray for the coming of God's
kingdom ! Well may we be told to long for the second
advent of Jesus Christ! Then, and not till then, shall
there be no more curse on the earth, no more suffering,
no more sorrow, and no more sin. Tears shall be -wiped
from the faces of all who love Christ's appearing, when
their Master returns. Weakness and infirmity shall all
pass away. Hope deferred shall no longer make hearts
sick. There will be no chronic invalids and incurable
cases, when Christ has renewed this earth.
We are taught, for another thing, in this passage, how
great is the mercy and compassion of Christ, He " saw"
the poor sufferer lying in the crowd. JSTeglected, over
looked, and forgotten in the great multitude, he was
observed by the all-seeing eye of Christ. " He knew " fidl
well, by His Divine knowledge, how long he had been
" in that case," and pitied him. He spoke to him unex
pectedly, with words of gracious sympathy. He healed
him by miraculous power, at once and without tedious
delay, and sent him home rejoicLng.

JOHN, CHAP. V. 267
This is just one among many examples of our Lord
Jesus Christ's kindness and compas.sion. He is full of
undeserved, unexpected, abounding love towards m.an.
"He delighteth in mercy." (Micah vii. IS.) He is far
more ready to save than raan is to be saved, far more
willing to do good than man is to receive it.
No one ever need be afraid of beginning the life of a
true Christian, if he feels disposed to begin. Let him
not hang back and delay, under the vain idea that Christ
is not willing to receive him. Let him come boldly, and
trust confidently. He that healed the cripple at Bethesda
is still the same.
We are taught, lastly, the lesson that recovery from
sickness ought to impress upon us. That lesson is contained
in the solemn words -which our Saviour addressed to the
man He had cured : " Sin no more, lest a worse thing come
unto thee."
Every sickness and sorrow is the voice of God speaking
to us. Each has its peculiar message. Happy are they
who have au eye to see God's hand, and an ear to hear
His voice, in all that happens to them. Nothing in this
world happens by chance.
And as it is with sickness, so it is with recovery.
Renewed health should send us back to our post in the
world with a deeper hatred of sin, a more thorough
watchfulness over our own ways, and a more constant
purpose of mind to live to God. Far too often the excite
ment and novelty of returning health tempt us to forget
the vows and intentions of the sick-room. There are
spiritual dangers attending a recovery ! Well would it be
for us all after illness to grave these words on our hearts,
"Let me sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto me."
Let us leave the passage with grateful hearts, and bless
God that we have such a Gospel and such a Saviour as
the Bible reveals.— Are we ever sick and HI? Let us

268 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
remember that Christ sees, and knows, and can heal il
He thinks fit. — Are we ever in trouble? Let us hear
iu our trouble the voice of God, and learn to hate sin
more. Notes. John V. 1 — 15.
1. — [After this.] Literally translated, this would be, ''aftei these
things." Some think that when St. John is feUing some event
which fo'lows immediately after the last thing narrated, he uses
the expression, " after this thing " (as John U. 12), but, that
when there has been an interval of time he uses the expi-ession,
"after these things." — If this be correct, we must S'lppose that
sorae space of time elapsed between the healing of the noble
man's son and the visit to Jerusalem, recorded in this chapter.
[A feast of ihe Jews.] There is nothing to show what feast
tliij was. Mo,it com.mentators think it was the passover. Many
however think it was the feast of pentecost. Some few say it
wa.s Ihe feast of tabernae'es, Siime fhe feast of purira, and some
the feast of fhe dedication. Each view has its advocates, and
tiie question will probably never be settled. An argument in
favour of the passover is the f ict that none of the five Jewish
l'eas;s were so regularly attended by devout Jews as the pass-
over. An argument against it is the fact th-at on three other
occasions, when the feast of the passover is mentioned in St.
John, he carefully specifies it by name; and one would naturaUy
e.xpect that it would be named here.
The matter is really of no peculiar importance. In one point
of view only it is interesting. — If the "I'east" was the passover,
it proves that there were four passovers during the period of our
Lord's ministry on earth. St. John mentions three by name, —
beside this "feast" (John U. 23; vi. 4; xii. 1.) Th's would
m^iko it certain that our Lord's ministry lasted three full years,
or at any rate raust have begun with a passover, and ended witli
a passover. — If the " feast " was not the passover, we have no
proof that His ministry lasted longer than between two and
three years. (See notes on John ii. 13.)
The expression, "a fea-t of the Jews," is one of many inci
dental evidences that St. John wrote specially for the use of
Gentile converts, and that he thought it needful for their benefit
to explain Jewish ordinances.
[Jesus went up.] The fiequency of our Lord's attendance at
Jewish feasts, and the respect He showed for Mosaic ordinances
should always be noticed. They were appointed by God. and
60 long as they lasted, He gave them honour. It is an imporUnt

JOHN, CHAP. V. 269
proof to UP, that fhe unworthiness of ministers is no reason for
neglecting Go I's ordinances, such as bapti m and ths Lord's
Supper. The benefit we receive from ordinances and saorameiila
does not depend on the character of those who administer them,
but on the state of our own souls. The pries' s and officers of
the Temple, in our Lord's time, were probably very unworthy
per-ons. But that did not pi event our Lord hunou.ing the
Temple ordinances and feasts. — It does not however follow from
this that we shjuld be justified in habitually going to hear false
doctrine preached. Our Lord never did this.
Let it be noted, that none of the four Gospel-writers speak
so ranch of our Lord's doings ia Judxa and Jerusalem as St.
John does.
1. — [There is at Jerusalem ] Thee words, it is thought, show
that Jerusalem was yet standing, and not taken aid destroyed
by the Romans, when John wrote his GospeL Otherwise, it is
argued, he would have said, '' There was at Jerusalem."
[By ihe sheep-market a pool] Nothing certain is known about
this pool, or its precise situation. Molern travellers have p'o-
fessed to point out where it was. But there is lirfle ground for
determining the matter, except conjecture and tradition. After
all the changes of eighteen centuries, points like these are almost
incapable of a satis''actory solution. There is no place in ths
world, perhaps, where it is so dif&cult to settle anything decid
edly about ancient buildings and sites as Jerusalem. Sorae
propose to render the expression "sheep-market'' the "sheep-
gate," because of Nehemiah iii. 1. But we really have no cer
tain ground for either expression.
[Called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda.] The word " Bethesda,''
according to Cruden, means "house of effusion," or "house of
pity or mercy." It is not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible.
The mention of the "Hebrew tongue," shows again that John
did not write for Jews so much as GentUes.
[Having five porches] These porches were probably covered
arcades, piazz.is, colonnades, or verandas, open at one side to
the air, but protected ag.iiust the sun or rain over-bead. In a
hot country like Palestine, such buildings are very necessary.
I. — [la these lay a great multitude!] The context seems to show
that fhe mukitu.le were assembled at this p.u-ticular feast in this
place, expecting a certain miracle to be wrought, which only
look place at tnis particular time of the year.
[Impotent folk] This expression evidently does not raean
paralytic people, but merely people who were sick and iU. Tha
mention of " blind, halt, withered," shows this.

270 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
[Moving of ihe water.] This " moving " must have been some"
thing that could be seen and observed by persons standing by
or looking on. There was no virtue or healing element in the
water, until the movement took place.
4:.— [For an angel went down, Sc] The thing we are here told is
very curious. There is nothing like it in the Bible. Josephu^,
the Jewish writer, does not mention it. The simplest view is
that it was a standing miracle wrought onco every year, as Cyril
says, or at any rate at some special season only, by God's ap
pointment, to keep the Jews in raind of the wonderful works
that had been done for th.em in time past, and to remind them
that the God of miracles was unchanged. — But when this singu
lar miracle first began, — on what occasion it began, — why we
never hear anything else about it,— in what way the angel
came down, — are questions which cannot be answered. — That
angels did interpose in a miraculous manner in the days of the
New Testament, is perfectly clear from many instances in the
Gospels and Acts. That the Jews themselves had strong faith
in fhe interposition of angels on certain occasions, is clear fi-om
the account of fhe vi.-ion of Zacharias, when we are simply told
that the people "perceived that he had seen a vision in the
temple." (Luke i. 22.) That from the days of Malachi, when
inspiration ceased, God may have seen it good to keep up in the
Jeivish mind a faith in unseen things, by the grant of a standing
miraole, is a very probable opinion. The wisest course is to
take the passage as we find it, and to believe though we cannot
explain. AU other attempts to get over the difficulties of the passage
are thoroughly unsatisfactory. To condemn the passage as not
genuine, is a lazy way of cutting the knot, and not at all clearly
warranted by the authority of manuscripts. — To say that St.
John only used the popular language of the Jews in describing
the miracle, and did not really believe it hiraself, is, to say the
least, irreverent and profane. — To suppose, as Hamraond and
oihers have done, that the "angel" only means a common
human "messenger" sent by the priests, and that the healing
efiSoacy of the water arose from the blood of the many sacrifices
which drained into the pool of Bethesda at the passover feast; —
or to suppose, as others, that Bethesda was a p ^ol where sacri
fices were wa4ied before they were offered, are aU eutirely gra
tuitous a.ssumptions, and do not get over the main ditliculty.
There is no p -oof that the blood i;f the sacrifices did drain into
the pooh There is no proof that the blood wouM cive the water
any hea ing virtue. There is no proof, as Litiit 'oot slio'.vs, that
sacrhiees were washed at aU. (See Ligh!foot's E.xiei'oiiatioiis on
John, on this passage.) Moreover, this hypothes's would not
account for only one person being healed every time the waters

JOHN, CHAP. V. 271
were " troubled," or for St. John's mention of the " angel trou
bling" the waters. Here, as in many other instances, the sim
plest view, and the one which involves the fewest diflficulties, ia
fo take the passage as we find it, aud to interpret it as narrating
an actual fact, — viz. : a standing miracle whieh actuaUy was
literally wrought at a certain season, and perhaps every year.
After aU there is no raore real difficulty in the account before
us, than in the history of our Lord's temptation in the wUder
ness, the various cases of Satanic possession, or the release of
Peter from prison by an angel. Once admit the existence of
angels, their ministry on earth, and the possibiUty of their inter
position to carry out God's designs, and there is nothing that
ought to stumble us in the passage. The true secret of some of
the objections to it, is the modern tendency to regard aU miracles
as useless lumber, which must be thrown overboard, if possible,
and cast out of the Sacred Narrative on every occasion. Against
this tendency we raust watch and be on our guard.
RoUock remarks, " The Jewish people at this time was in a
state of great confusion, and the presence of God was in great
measure withdrawn from it. The prophets whom God had been
accustomed to raise up for extraordinary purposes, were no
longer given to the Jews. Therefore God, that He might not
appear altogether to cast ofi" His people, was wiUing to heal
some miraculously, and in an extraordinary way, in order that
He might testify fo the world that the nation was not yet en
tirely rejected." Brentius and Calvin say much the same.
Poole thinks that this miracle only began a Uttle before the
birth of Christ, " as a figure of him being about to come, who
was to be a fountain opened to the house of David." Lightfoot
takes the same view.
[Troubled the water.] This means, no doubt, " disturbed, agi
tated, stirred up," the water of the pooL There is no reason foi
supposing that the angel visibly appeared in doing this. It is
enough to suppose that at a certain hour there was a sudden stit
and agitation of the waters, immediately after winch tiiey pos
sessed the miraculous virtue of heaUng, — just as the waters at
Marah became sweet immediately after Moses cast the tree into
them. (Exod. xv. 25.)
[ '^Tiosoever thenfirst] This shows that the whole affair was mi
raculous. On no other supposition can we account for only one
person being healed after the troubUng of the water. That only
"one" was healed, is plain, I think, from the wording of the passage
[ Of whatsoever disease he had.] These vTOrds would be more
UteraUy translaied, " with whatsoever disease he was held."
Bengel thinks that ihe use of the past tense throughout this

272 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
verse shows that the miracle had ceased when John wrote. Ha
"used to go down,"— "used to trouble the water.s," &c. Ter
tullian declares expressly that the miracle ceased fiom tiie time
that the Jews rejected Christ.
5. — [Infirmity thirty and eight years!] This means the length of
time duting which the sick man had been ill. How old he was
we do not know.
Baxter remarks, "How great a mercy is it to live eight and
thirty years under God's wholesome di.scipline! O my God, I
thank Tlieefor the like discipUne of eight and fify years. How safe
a life is this compared to one spent in full prosperity and pleasure I"
Those who see typical and abstruse meanings in s}\ tiie least
details of the narratives of Scriptures, observe that tliTty-eight
years was the exact time of Isr.iel's wanderings in the wildernets.
They see in the sick raan, — helpless and hopeless tUl Clirist
came, — a type of the Jewish Church. The pool of Bethesda is
Old 'festaraent relgion. The smaU benefit it conferred, — viz.:
only healing one at a tirae, represents the narrow aud limi'ed
benefit which Judaism conferred on mankind. The merciful
interference of Christ on the sick man's behalf, represents the
bringing in of the Gospel for all the world. These are pious
thoughts, but it may well be doubted whether there is any
warrant ftir fhem.
The notions that the pool of Bethesda was a type of baptism,
and the five porches typical of the five books of the law, or the
five wounds of Christ, appear to me mere ingenious inventions
of man, without any soUd foundation. Yet Chrysostom, Augus
tine, Theophylact, Euthymius, Burgon, "Woids-.vorth, a d many
others, mail tain tiiera. Those who wisli to see a full reply to the
thecry, that the miracle at the pool of Bethesda is a t.ypicil proof
of the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, will find it in Gomarus,
the Dutch divine. He takes up Bellarmine's argument on ths
subject, and anweis him completely.
C. — [When Jesus saw. ..knew., long time] 'We need not do'ubt that
our Lord Icnew this man's history by that divine knowledge
which, as God, lie possesses of aU things in heaven and eart'i.
To s-ippose that He a--oei-tained by inquiry the state of his case
before speaking to him, is a weak, meagre, and frigid i.iterpre-
tatio.i. As a praciical irutb, it is a most co;iif:r'able dociriiie ihit
Jesus knows every sickness and disease, and aU its wearv history.
Nothing is hiJ fi-om Him.
[He said unto him!] This is an example of our Lord being the
first to speak and begin conversation, as He did with the woman
of Samaria. (John iv. 7.) Unasked, unsolicited, unexpectedly,
He meroifuUy addressed the sick man. No doubt He always

JOHN CHAP. V. 273
begins in man's heart before man begins with Him. But He
does all things, as a Sovereign, according to His own will; and
it is not always that we see liim taking the liist step so enti-ely
of Himself, as we do here.
[Wilt thou be made whole?] The English language here fails
fo give the fuU force of the Greek. It raeans, " If ast thou a
will? Dost thou wish? Dost thou desire to be made whole ?"
The question was perhaps meant to awaken desire and expecta
tion in the man, and to prepare liim in some sense for the bless
ing about to be bestowed on him.
Is not this, to take a spiritual viev/, the very language that
Christ is continuaUy addressing to every man and woman v/ho
hears His Gospel ? He sees us in a wretched, miserable, sin-sick
condition. The one thing He asks us is, "Hast tho'i any
wish to be saved ? "
7. — [The impotent man answered, him, Sir.] The word rendered
"Sir" is the same that is mors commonly rendered "Lord." It
is ihe same that is rendered " Sir" all through the fourth chap
ter, in the history of the Samaritan woman.
[/ have no man....pui me into the pool] This is no doubt
mentioned as an intentional proof of ihe he.Trtlessness and un-
kindness of human nature. Think of a poor invaUd waiting for
years by the water, and having not a single friend to help him 1
The longer we live on earth the more wc shall find that it is a
selfish world, and that the sick and afflicted have few real friends
in time of need. "The poor is hated even of his neighbour."
(Prov. xiv. 20.) Christ is the only unfailing friend of the friend
less aud helper of the helpless.
8. — [Rise, take up thy bed and walk.] Here, as in other simUar cases,
it is evident that miraculous healing power went forth with the
words of our Lord. Thus, " Stretch forth thy hand " (Mark iii.
5) ; " Go show yourselves to the priests " (Luke xvii. 14). Com
mands like these tested the faith and obedience of those to
whom they were given. How could they possibly do the things
commanded, if irapotent, like the man belore us ? 'Where the
use of doing them, if stiU covered with leprosy, like fhe ten
lepers? But it was precisely in the act of obedience that fhe
blessing carae. The whole power is Christ's. But He loves fo
make us exert ourselves, and show our obedience and faith.
Augustine finds in the command, " Take up thy bed," an
exho! tation to the love of our neighbours, because we are to bear
one another's burdens; and in the command, " walk," an exhor-
tatio:i to love God I Such aUegorizing appears to nie very un
warrantable, and calculated to bring the Bible into contempt,
as a book that can be made to mean anything.
12*

27-1 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
^.—[Immediately ...made whole,. ...loalked.] Here we see the reality
of the miracle wi-ought. Noihing but Divine power could enable
one who had been a cripple for so many years to move his limbs
and carry a burden all at once. But it was as easy to our Lord
to give immediate s'rength as it was to create muscles, nerves,
and sinews in the day ihat Adam was made.
"When we are told that the man " took up his bed," we must
remember that this probably was nothing raore than a light
mattress, carpet, or thick cloth, such as is commonly used in hot
countries for sleeping on.
10. — [The Jews.] Here, as in many places in St. John's Gospel,
the expression, " the Jews," v/hen used of the Jews at Jerusalem,
means the leaders of the people, — elders, rulers, and scribes.
It does not mean vaguely the " Jewi.sh crowd" around our Lord,
but the representatives of the whole nation,— the heads of Israel
at the time.
[It is not lawfal....carry  bed!] In support of this charge of
unlawfulness, the Jews would allege not merely the general law
of the fourth commandment, but the special passasjes in Nehemiah
and Jeremiah, about " b.^aring no burden " on the Sabbath day.
(Neh. xiii. 19 ; Jer. xvii. 21 ) But they could not have proved that
these passages applied to the case of the man before them. — For
a man lo carry merchandise and wares on the Sabbath was one
thing. Por a sick man, suddenly and miraculous'y healed, to walk
away to his home, carrying his mattress, was quite another. — To
forbid the one man to carry his burden was Scriptural and lawful.
To forbid the other was cruel, and contrary to the spirit of the law
of Moses. — The act of the one man was unnecessary. The act
of the other was an act of necessity and mercy. — It might per
haps be urged in defence of the Jews, that fhey only saw a man
carrying off a burden, and knew nothing of hs previous illness
or his cure. But when we remember the many ins'anoes re
corded in the Gospels of their extreme and harsh interpretation of
the fourth commandment, it is doubtful whether this plea wUI stand.
II. — [He that made me whole ihe same said, etc.] The answer of fhe
man seems simple. But it contains a deep principle. "He that
has done so great a thing to me was surely to be obeyed, when
PTe told me to take up my bed. If He had authority and power
to heal. He was not likely to l.iy upon me an unlawful command.
I only obeyed him who cured me." If Christ has really healed
our souh, should not this be our feeling toward Him? — -"Thou
hast healed me. What thou oonimandest I will do."
12. — [What man is he which said,... Take vp thy hed, etc] Ecolampa
dius, Grotius, and many others, remark what an example this
question is of the malevolent and malicious spirit of the Jeu-s.
In.stead of asking, " who healed tiiee ?" fhey asked " who told

JOHN, CHAP. V. 275
thee to carry tiiy bed ?" They cared not for knowing what fhey
might admire as a work of mercy, but what they might make
the ground of an accusation. How raany are like them I They
are always looking out fbr something to find fault with.
13. — [ Wist not who it was.] It is raost probable that fhe cripple
really knew not who it was that had healed hira, and had only
seen our Lord that day for the first time. He was ignorant of
His name, and only knew Hira as a kind person, who came up
and said suddenly," Wilt thou be made whole?" and, after
curing him miraculously, suddenly disappeared in tiie crowd.
[Conveyed himself away.] The Greek word so rendered is
pecuUar, and only found in this place. Parkhurst. thinks that it
simply means " departed, or went away." Schleusner says that
the root of the idea is, " swimming out, or escaping by swim
ming," and that the meaning here is, "witiidrew himself secretly
from the crowd that was iu the place." If so, it is not improba
ble that, as in Luke iv. 30, at Nazareth, and John x. 39, in the
Temple, our Lord put forth a miraculous power in passing or
gliding through the crowd without being observed or stopped.
ri. — [Afterward.... temple.] It is not clear how long a time elapsed
before our Lord found the man whom He had healed in the
Temple. If the theory be correct to which I adverted in the
note on the first verse, there raust have been an interval. The
word " afterwards " is literally " after these things."
Chrysostom thinks that the circumstance of the man being
Ibund " ill .the temple " is an indicution of his piety.
[Behold thou art made whole : sin no more, etc.] These words
appear to point at something more fhan meets the eye. They are
a solemn caution. One might fancy that our Lord knew that
some sin had been the beginning of the man's iUness, and that
be meant to remind hira of it. It certainly seeras very unlikely
that our Lord would say broadly and vaguely, " sin no more,"
unless he spoke with a significant reference to some sin which
had been the primary cause of this man's long illness. (See 1 Cor.
xi. 30.) There are sins which bring their own punishments on
men's bodies ; and I am strongly disposed to think that it may
have been the case with this man. The expression, "a worse
thing," would then corae out with more force. It would be "a
heavier visitation," — a worse judgment, — even than this thirty-
eight years' Ulness. A sick bed is a sorrowful place, but hell ia
much worse.
Besser remarks, — "It is a dreadful thing, when the correction
and mercy of Divine love wearies itself with a man in va n. You
that are sick, write over your beds, when you rise up from them
in renewed health, — 'Behold thou art made whole; sin no more,
lest a worse thing come unto thee.' " Brentius says much the same.

276

EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.

If sin was the cause of this man's disease, and he had been ill
from the effects of it thirty and eight years, it is plain that it must
have I ;een committed before our Lord was boi n ! It is an instance,
in that case, of our Lord's perfect and Divine knowledge of ail
fhin.^s, past as well as future.
15. — [Departed and told the Jews.] There is no proof that the man
did this with any evil design. Born a Jew, and taught to rever
ence his rulers and elders, he naturaUy wished to give fhem the
information they desire-.l, and had no reason to suppose, for any
thing we can see, that it would injure his Benefactor.

JOHN V. 16—23.

16 And therefore did the Jews
persecute Jesus, and sought to slay
him, because he had done those
things on the sabbath day.
17 But Jesus answered them, My
Father worketh hitherto, and I work.
18 Therefore the Jews sought
the more to kill him, because he not
only had broken the sabbath, but
said also that God was his Father,
making himself equal -with God.
19 Theu answered Jesns and said
unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto
you, the Son can do nothing of him
self, but what he seeth the Father
do : for what things soever he doeth,
these also doeth the Son Ukewise.

20 For tho Father loveth the
Sou, and sheweth him aU things that
himself doeth : and he will shew him
greater works than these, that ya
may marvel.
21 For as the Father raiseth up
the dead, and quiokenethttein; even
so the Son quickeneth whom ho
will. 22 Por the Father judgeth no
man, but hath committed all judg
ment unto the Son:
23 That aU men should honour
the Son, even as they honour the
Father. He that honoureth not the
Son honoureth not the Father which
hath sent him.

These verses begin one of the most deep and solemn pas-
s.ages in the four Gospels. They show us the Lord Jesus
asserting His own Divine nature. His unity with God the
Father, and the high dignity of His office. Nowhere does
our Lord dwell so fully on these subjects .as in the ch.apter
before us. And nowhere, we must confess, do we find out
so thoroughly the weakness of man's understanding ! There
is much, we must all feel, that is far beyond our compre
hension in our Lord's account of Himself Such knowledo-e,
in short, is too wonderful for us. "It is hi^-h : we cannot
attain unto it." (Psalm cxxxix. 6.) How often men say
that they want clear explanations of such doctrines as tha

JOHN, CHAP. V. 277
Trinity. Yet here we have our Lord handling the subject
of His own Person, and, behold ! we cannot follow Him.
We seem only to touch His meaning with the tip of our
fingers. We learn, for one thing, from the verses before us, that
tliere are some works which it is lawful to do on the Sabbath
day. The Jews, as on many other occasions, found fault be
cause Jesus healed a man who had been ill for thirty-eight
years, on the Sabbath. They charged our Lord with a
breach of the fourth commandment.
Our Lord's reply to the Jews is very remarkable. "My
Father," he says, " worketh hitherto, and I also work."
It is as though He said : — " Though my Father rested on
the seventh day from His work of creation. He has never
rested for a moment from His providential government of
the world, and from His morciiul work of supplying the
daUy wants of all His creatures. Were He to rest from
such work, the whole frame of nature woidd stand still.
And I also ivork -works of mercy on tho Sabbath day. I
do not break the fourth commandment when I heal the
sick, any moi'c than my Father breaks it when He causes
the sun to rise and the grass to grow on the Sabb.ath."
We must distinctly understand, that neither here nor
elsewhere does the Lord Jesus overthrow the obligation of
the fourth commandment. Neither here nor elsewhere is
there a word to justify the vague assertions of sorae
modern teachers, that " Christians ought not to keep a
Sabbath," and that it is "a Jewish institution which has
passed away." The utmost that our Lord doss, is to jilace
the claims of the Sabbath on the right found.ation. He
clears the day of rest from the false and superstitious
teacliing of the Jews, about the right way of observing it.
He shows us clearly that works of necessity and works of
mercy are no breach of the fourth commandment.

278 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
After all, the errors of 'Christians on this subject, in
these latter days, are of a very dilFerent kind from those
of the Jews. There is httle danger of men keeping the
Sabb.ath too strictly. The thing to be feared is the dispo
sition to keep it loosely and partially, or not to keep it at
all. The tendency of the age is not to exaggerate the
fourth commandment, but to cut it out of the Decalogue,
and throw it aside altogether. Against this tendency it
becomes us all to be on our guard. The experience of
eighteen centuries supplies abundant proofs that vital
religion never flourishes when the Sabbath is not well kept.
We learn, for another thing, from these verses, the
dignity and greatness of our Lord Jesus Christ,
The Jews, we are told, sought to kill Jesus because He
said " that God was his Father, making himself equal with
God." Our Lord, in reply, on this special occasion, enters
very fully into the question of His own Divine nature. In
reading His words, we must all feel that we are reading
mysterious things, and treading on very holy ground. But
we must feel a deep conviction, however little we may
understand, that the things He says could never have been
said by one who was only man. The Speaker is nothing
less than " God manifest in the flesh. (1 Tim. iii. 16.)
He asserts His own unity with God the Father. Ko
other reasonable meaning can be put on the exiu-essions,
— "The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth
the Father do : for what things soever he doeth, these also
doeth the Son likewise. — The Father loveth the Son, and
showeth him all things that himself doeth." Such lan
guage, however deep and high, appears to mean that in
operation, and knowledge, and heart, and will, the Father
and the Son are One, — two Persons, but one God. Truths
such as these are of course beyond man's power to explain
particularly. Enough for us to believe and rest upon them.
He asserts, in the next place. His o-wn Divine power to

279
give life. He tells us, "The Son quickeneth whom he will."
Life is the highest and greatest gift that can be bestowed.
It is precisely that thing that man, with all his cleverness,
can neither give to the work of his hands, nor restore when
taken away. But life, we are told, is in the hands of the
Lord Jesus, to bestow and give at His discretion. Dead
bodies and dead souls are both alike under Ilis dominion.
He has the keys of death and hell. In Him is life. He is
the life. (John 1. 4. Rev. i. 18.)
He asserts, in the last place, His own authority to judge
the world. " The Father," we are told, " has committed
all judgment unto the Son." All power and authority
over the world is committed to Christ's hands. He is the
King and the Judge of mankind. Before Him every knee
sh.iU bow, and every tongue shall confess that he is Lord.
He that was once despised and rejected of m.an, condemned
and crucified as a malefactor, shall one day hold a great
assize, and judge all the world. " God shall judge the
secrets of man by Jesus Christ.'' (Rom. ii. 16.)
And now let us think whether it is possible to make too
much of Christ in our religion. If we have ever thought
so, let us cast aside the thought for ever. Both in His Own
nature as God, and in His office as commissioned Mediator,
He is worthy of all honour. He that is one with the
Father, — the Giver of life,— the King of kings, — the
coming Judge, can never be too much exalted. " He that
honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father that
sent him."
If we desire salvation, let us lean our Avhole weight ou
this mighty Saviour. So leaning, we never need be afraid.
Christ is the rock of ages, and he that builds on Him shall
never be confounded, — ^neither in sickness, nor in death,
nor in the judgment-day. The hand that was nailed to tha
cross is almighty. The Saviour of sinners is " mighty to
save." (Isaiah Ixiii. 1,^

280 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.

Notes. John V. 16—23.
lQ.--[Thereforc..Jews persecute, etc.] The verbs in this verse are
aU in the imperfect teuKe. It may be doubted whether the mean
ing is not, strictly speaking, stmietiiing of this kind : — " The Jews
from this time began to persecute Jesus, and were ahvays seek
ing to s'ay Him, because He made a habit of doing these things
on the Sj,bb.;tli day." It is some confirmation of this view that
our Lord at a much later period lefjrs to this very miracle at
Bethesda, as a thing which had spec'ally angered the Jews of
Jerusalem, and for which they hated Him and sought still to kill
IJim. It was long after the time of this miraole when He said, —
" Are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit
whole on the Sabbath day ? " (John vii. 23.)
17. — [But Jesus answered.] This seems to have been the first reply
which our Lord made when charged with breaking the fourth
commandment. It was a short, simple justification of the law
fulness of doing works of mercy on the Sabbath. There seems
to have been an interval between this reply and the long argu
mentative defence which begins in the 19th verse.
[My Father woiketh hithertn, and I also work.] The words
rendered "hitherto," are, literally, "until now," — that is, from
the beginning of creation up to the present time.
I can only see one meaning in this pithy sentence: — "My
Father in heaven is continually working works of mercy and
kindne-s in His providential government of the world, in supply
ing the wan's of all His creatures, in maintaining the whole
fabric of the earth in perfection, in giving rain from heaven and
fruitful seasons, in preserving and sustaining life. All this He
does on Sabbaths, as well as week days. Were He to cease fi-om
such works, the whjle world would be full of confusion. "When
He rested from His works of creation He did not rest from His
-\yorks of providence. I also, who am His beloved Son, claim the
right to work works of mercy on fhe Sabbath. In working
such works I do not break the Sabbath any raore than My Fa
ther does. My Father appointed the fourth commandment to be
honoured, and yet never ceased to cause the sun to rise and the
grass to grow on the Sabbath. I also, who claim to be One with
the Father, honour the Sabbath, but I do not abstain from works
of mercy upon it."
Two things should be observed in this sentence. One is the
plain practical lesson that thj Sabbath -was not meant to be a
day of total idleness, and of entire cessation frora aU kinds and
sorts of work. " The Sabbath was made for man "  for his
benefit, comfort, and advantage. "Works of mercv and of real

JOHN, CHAP. V. 281
necessity to man's life and animal existence on the Sabbath day
were never intended to be forbidden. — Tlie other thing to bo
observed is our Lord's assertion of His own Divinity and equality
with God the Father. "When He said, " My Father worketh,
and I also work," He evidently meant much more than bringing
forward His Father's example, though that of course is con
tained in His argument, and justifies all Christians in doing
v.'orks of mercy on Sundays. "What He meant was, " I am the
beloved Son of God: I and My Father are one in essence,
dignity, honour, and authority ; whatever He does I a'so do,
and have right to do. He v/orks and I also work. He gave you
the Sabbath, and it is His day. I too, as one with Him, am
Lord of the Sabbath." That the Jews saw this to be the
meaning of His words seems clear from the next verse.
Chrysostom remarks on this verse : — "If any one say, ' How
doth the Father work, who ceased on the seventh day from all
His works?' let him learn the manner in which He worketh.
^Vliat is it? He careth for, He holdeth together all that hath
been made. When thou beholdest the sun rising, and the moon
running in her path, the lakes, the fountains, the rivers, tho
rains, the course of nature in seeds, and in our own bodies and
those of irrational beings, and all the rest, by means of which
this universe is made up, then learn the ceaseless working of
the Father." (Matt. v. 45 ; vi. 30.)
Schottgen quotes a remarkable saying of Philo JudiBus, —
" God never ceases to work. Just as it is the property of fire to
burn and of snow to be cold, so is it the property of God to
work." Ferns remarks on the great variety of arguments used by our
Lord on various occasions, in reply to the superstitious views of
the Jews about the Sabbath. One time He ad luces the exaraple
of David eating the shew-bread, another time the examnle of
the priests working in the Temple on the S.ibbath, another time
the readiness of the Jews to help an ox out of a pit on the Sab
bath. All these arguments were used in defence of works of
neces-ity and raercy. Here He takes higher ground stiU, — the
example of His Fa her.
1 8 — [ Therefore ihe Jews FOWjlit the more to kill him.] This short de
fence which our Lord made seems to have rankled in tho minds
of the Jews, and to have raade them even raore bitter against
Him. "What length of time is coves ed by this ver.se is not vory
plain. I am incUned to tiiink that it implies some little pause
bjtwo™ the 17th and 19th verses. Here agahi, as in the 16th
verse, we have the imperfect tense all the way through. It must
surely point at something of habit, both in the dtsigns of the
Jews against our Lord, and in our Lord's conduct, and in His
language about His Father.

282 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
[Said God...his Father... e^ual with Ood.] Tt is clear that out
Lord's words about His Sonship struck the Jews in a far more for
cible way than fhey seem to strike us. In a certain sense aU
believers are " sons of God." (Eom. viii. 14.) But it is evident
that they are not so in the sense that our Lord meant when He
talked of God as His Faiher, and Hiraself as God's Son. The
Greek undoubtedly might be translated more clearly, "said tiiat
God was His own particular Father." (Compare Eom. viii 32).
The Jews at any rate accepted the words as meaning our Lnrd
to assert His own peculiar Sonship, and His consequent entire
equality with God fhe Father. Their charge and ground of anger
against Him amounted f o this : — " Thou caUest God Thine own
particular Father, and claimest auihority to do whatsoever He
does By so doing Thou makest Thyself equal with God." And
our Lord seems to have accepted this charge as a correct state
ment of the case, and to have proceeded to argue that He had
a right to say what He had said, and that He really was equal
with God. As St. Paul says, — " He thought it not robbery to
be equal with God" (PhiL ii. 6.)
Augustine remarks, — " Behold the Jev.s underslood what the
Arians would not understand."
'Whitby remarks that the Jews never accused our Lord of
blasphemy for saying that he was the Messiah, but for saying
that He was the Son of God, because they did not beUeve that
Messiah when He appeared was to be a Divine Person.
Ferus remarks that the Jews probably took notice of our Lord
caUing God " My Father," and not " our Father." — Cartwright
also thinks that there is much weight in the expression "my,"
and that the Jews gathered frora it that Christ claimed to be the
only -begotten Son of God, and not merely a Son by adoption
and grace.
19 — [Then answered Jesus and said unio ihem!] This verse begins
a long discourse, in which our Lord formaUy defends himsi'lf
from the charge of the Jews of laying claim to what He had no
right to claim. (1.) He assorts His own Divine authority, com
mission, dignity, and equaUty with God His Father. (2.) He
brin.gs forward tiie evidence of His Divine commissio ', which
the Jews ought to consider and receive. (3.) Fina'ly, He tells
the Jews plainly the reason of their unbelief, and charges home
on their consciences their love of man's praise more than
God's, and their inconsistency in pretending to honour Moses
whi'e tiiey did not honour Christ. It is a discourse almost un-
rivaUcd in depth and majesty.
There are few chapters in the Bible, perhaps, where we feel
our own shallowness of undersiandiiig so thoroughly, and dis-

JOHN', CHAP. Y. 283
cover so completely the insufficiency of all human language to
express " the deep tilings of God." Men are often saying they
wont explanations of the mysteries of the Christian faith, the
Trinity, the Incarnation, the person of Christ, and the like.
Let them just observe, when we do find a passage fuU of expla
natory slalements on a deep subject, how much there is that
we have no line to fathom and no mind to take in. " I want
more light," says proud man. God gives him his desire in this
chapter, and lilts up the veil a lii tie. But behold! we are daz
zled by the very light we wanted, and find we have not eyes to
take it in.
It. has always been thought by many commentators that this
solemn discourse of our Lord's was delivered before fhe Sanhe
drim, or general Ecclesiastical Assembly of the Jews. They
regard it as a formal defence of His Divinity and Messiahship,
and a statement of evidence why He should be received, before
a regularly constituted ecc!esia.stieal court. — It may be so. Pro-
babiUties seem in favour of the idea. But it must be remem
bered that we have noth'ng but internal evidence in favour of
the theory. There is not a word said to show that our Lord
was formally brought before the Sanhedrim, and made a formal
defence. — Some writers lay much stress upon the opening words
of the I9th verse, — "Then answered Jesus and said," — aud con
sider that these words imply a formal charge in court, and a
formal repl.v from our Lord. It may be true. But we must
remember that it is only a conjecture.
One thing only is certain. Nowhere else in the Gospels do
we find our Lord making such a formal, systematic, orderly,
regular statement of His own unity with fhe Father, His Divine
commission and authority, and the proofs of His Messiahship,
as we find in this discourse. To me it seems one of the deepest
things in the Bible.
['Verily, verily, I say unto you.] Here, as elsewhere, the re
mark applie--, that this form of expression always precedes some
statement of more than ordinary depth and importance.
[The Son can do nothing of himself, Sc] This opening verse
declares the complete unity there is between God the Father
and God the Son. The Son, fiom His very nature and relation
to the Father, "can do nothing" independently or sep:irately
from the Father. It is not that He lacks or wants \he ^iwer
to do, but ihat He will not do. (Compare Gen. xix. 22.) "When
the angel said, " I cannot do anything liU thou be corae thither;"
it raeans of course ''1 wUl not do." — "Of himself" does not
mean without help, or unassis'erl, but "from hiraself," from Hia
own ind.p'jndent wil. He can only do such things as, from His
unity with the Father, and consequent ineffable knowledge, He

284 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
" seeth " the Father doing. For the Father and the Son are so
united,— one God though two Persons, — that whatsoever the
Father does the Son does also. The acts of tiie Son therefire
are not His own independent acts, but fhe acts of His Father also.
The Greek word which we render "likewise'' must not be
supposed to mean nothing more than "also, as well.'' Itis
literally " in like manner."
Bishop Hall paraphrases this saying of our Lord thus:—"!
and ihe Father are one indivisible essence, and our acts are no
less inseparable. The Son can do nothing without the w.U and
act of the Father; ami, even as He is man, can do nothing but
what He seeth agreeable to the will and puipose of His heavenly
Father." Barnes remarks, — " The words ' what things soever' are with
out limit ; all that fhe Father does, the Son likewise does. This
is as high an assertion as possible of His being equiil Avith God.
If one floe.s all that another does, or can do, then there is proof
of equ.ilit}'. if tfe S ui does all that the Faiher does, then, like
Him, He must be aim glity, omniscient, all-p e.-ent, and infinite
in every peifcotion; or, in other words. He must be God."
Augustine remarks, — " Our Lord does not say, whatsoever the
Father doeth the Son does other things like them, but the very
same things... .It the Son doeth the stime things, and in Uke man
ner, then let Ihe .Few be sUenced, the Chritian believe, the
heretic be convinced; the Son is equal with the Father."
Hilary, quoted in the "Catena Aurea" remavks, — "Christis
the Son because He does nothing of Himself He is God because
whatsoever things the Father doeth, .He doeth fhe same. They
are One because They are equal in honour. He is not the Father
because He is sent."
Diodati remarks, — "The phrase, 'what He seeth the Father
do,' is a figurative terra, showing the inseparable communion of
wiU, wisdom, and power, between the Son and the Father in
the internal order of the most holy Trinity."
Toletus remarks,—" 'When it is said ' the Son can do nothing
of Hiniseir,' this does not mjan want of power, b-it the highest
p.Mvrr. Just as it is a mark o' omnipotence not to be able to die,
or lo be wo-n out, or to bo annihikned, because theie is nothing
that c;u injuro omnipoleuce, so, likewi-e, 'to be unable to do
au\ thing ol' Himself is no mark of impotence, but of the
b'glio.st p-)wer. Ir, means not'iing less than having one and the
saint' power with the Father, so that noihing can be done by the
Oue which is not equally done by the Other."
20,— ''The Father loveth ihe Son, Sc] This verse carries on the

JOHN, CHAP. V. 283
thought begun in the preceding verse, — fne unity of the Father
and the S m. "When we read tho words, "The father loveth,"
and the "Faiher showeth," we must not for a moment suppose
theui fo imply any superiority in the Father, or any inferiority
in fhe Son, as to their Divine nature .and essence. — Thf "love"
is not the love of an earthly parent to a beloved chilil. The
"showing" is not the showing of a teacher to an ignorant
scholar. The "love " is raeant to show us that un.^peakable unity
of heart and affection (if such words raay be reverently used)
which eternally existed and exists between fhe Father and the
Son. The "showing" means that entire confidence and co
operation which there was between fhe Father and the Son as to
all the works which fhe Son should do when He came into the
world, fo fill the ofiice of Mediator, and to save sinners. — The
" greater works," which remained to be shown, were evidentiy
the works specified in the two following verses, — the works of
quickening and of jud.ging. That fhe Jews did " marvel," and
were confounded at the works of "quickening," we kuow from
the Acts of the Apostles. That fhey will "marvel" even more
at our Lord's work of judgment we shall see when Christ comes
again to judge the heathen, to restore Jerusalem, fo gather Israel,
to convince the Jews of their unbelief, and to renew the face of
the earth.
Both in this, and fhe preceding verse, we must carefully re
member the utter inability of any human language, or huraan
ideas, to express perfectly such matters as our Lord is speaking
of. Language is intended specially to express Ihe things of man.
It fails gieatly when used to express things about God. In the
expressions " seeth the Father do," — " lovetii the Son," — " show
eth him all thin.gs," — " will show him greater works," — we must
carefully bear this in raind. "VVe must remember that they are
expressions accommodated fo our weaker capacities. They are
intended to explain fhe relation between two divine Beings,
who are one in essence, though two Persons, — cue in mind and
wUI, thou.gh two in manifestation, — equal in all tilings as touch
ing the Godhead, though the Son is inferior to the Father as
touching His manhood. There must needs be immense difiiculty
in finding words to convey any idea of the relation between
these two P( rsons. Hence tiie language used by our Lord must
be cautiously handled, with a constant recollecti'm that we are
not reading of an earthly father and son, but of God the Father
and God the Son, who though one in essence as God, arc at
the same time two distinct Persons.
Augustine wisely remarks, "There are times when speech is
deficient, even when the understanding is proficient. How much
more doth speech suffer defect, when the understanding hath
nothing perfect ! "

286 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Augustine and Bernard both remark, that it is far "greatei
work " to repair ruined human nature, than to make it at first,
and to re-create it, than to create it.
21, 22.- — [As the Father raiseth up the dead, Sc] Our Lord hero
proceeds to tell the Jews one of His mighty works which He
had corae to do, in proof of His divine nature, authority, and
comraission. Did they find fault with Hira for making Himself
equal with God ? Let them know that He had the same power
as God the Father to give "Ufe" and quicken the dead. Let
them know furthermore, that all "judgment" was committed to
Him. Surely He who had in His hand the mighty prerogatives
of giving life and judging the world, had a right to speak of
himself as equal with God I
"When we read "the Father raiseth up the dead, and quick
eneth them," we must either understand the words to refer
generaUy to God's power fo raise tho dead at the last da.y,—
which the Jew would allow as an article of faith, and a special
attribute of divinity, — or else we inn:.t understand it to apply
to the power of spiritually quickening men's souls, which God
had from the beginning exercised in caUing men from death to
hfe, — or else we must simply take it to mean that to give life,
whether bodily or spiritual, is notoriously the peculiar attribute
of God. The last view appears to me the most probable one,
and most in harmony with what follows in after verses.
When we read " the Son quickeneth whom he wills," we have
a distinct assertion of the Son's authority to give life at His will,
either bodily or spiritual, with the same ii'resisfible power as fhe
Father. The highest of all gifts He has but to " will " and to
bestow. The Greek word translated " quickeneth," is very
strong. It is, literally, " makes alive," and seems to imply the
power of making life of all kind, both bodily and spiritual.
Burkitt remarks, that it is never said of any prophet or apostle,
that he did mighty works "at his wiU."
"When we read " the Father judgeth no man, but hath com
mitted all judgment to the Son," we must understand that in fhe
economy of redemption, the Father has honoured the Son by
devolving on Hira the whole office of judging the world. It
cannot of course raean that judgment is work with which the
Father from His nature hath nothing fo do, but that it is work
which He has completely and entirely committed to fhe Son's
hands. He that died for sinners, is He that will judge them.
Thus it is written, — " He will judge the world in righteousness
by that man whom he hath ordained." (Acts xvii. 31 )
Burgon remarks, " There is an original, supreme, judicial power;
and there is a'so a judicial power derived, given by commission.

JOHN, CHAP. V. 287
Christ, .".s God, hath the first together with the Father : Christ, as
man, hath the second from the Father."
I think it highly probable that the " all judgraent committed
to the Son," includes not merely the final judgment of the last
da}', but the whole work of orderin.g, governing, and deciding
the affairs of God's kingdom. " To judge " is an expression
constantly used in the Old Testament in the sense of " to rule."
The meaning then would be, that the Father has given to fhe
Son the office of King and Judge. The whole administration of
the Divine government of the world is put into the hands of the
Son, Christ Jesus. Everything connected with fhe rule of fhe
church and world, as well as the last judgment, is placed in the
Son's hands.
'We should carefuUy mark the distinction between " quicken
ing" and "judging" in the language of these two verses.
(a.) It is not said that " the Father quickeneth no man," but hath
committed the power of giving life to the Son. Had this been
said, it would have contradicted the texts "no man can corae
unto Me except the Father draw hira," and "the Spirit giveth
life." (John vi. 44 ; 2 Cor. iii. 6.) Quickening is the work of all
three Persons in the Trinity, of one as much as another.
(i). It is said that judgraent is the special work of the second
Person of the Trinity. It is not the peculiar office either of the
Father, or the Spirit, but of the Son. There seems a fitness in
this. He who was condemned by an unjust judgment, and died
for sinners, is He whose office it will be to judge the world.
(c.) It is said that " the Son quickeneth whora he wiU " The
power of giving life is as rauch fhe prerogative of the Son as of
the Father, or of the Spirit. Surely this teaches us that to place
the election of God the Father, or the work of the Spirit, before
men, as the first and principal thing fhey should look at, is not
good theology. Christ, after aU, is the meeting-point between
the Trinity and the world. It is His office to quicken as well as
pardon. No doubt He quickeneth by the Spirit whom He sends
into man's heart. But it is His prerogative to give life as well
as peace. This ought to be remembered. There are some in this
day who in a mistaken zeal put the work of the Father and the
Spirit before the work of Christ.
23. — [That all men should honour the Son, So!] By these words
our Lord teaches us that the Father would have fhe Son fo
receive equal honour with Hiraself "We are to understand dis
tinctly that there is no inferiority in the Son to the Father. He
is equal to Him in di.gnity and autiiorlfy. He is to be worshipped
with equal worship. If any man fancies that to honour the Son
equally with the Father, detracts from ths Father's honour, our

288 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Lord declares that such a man is entirely mistaken. On the con-
tary, "He Ihat honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Fatiitr
t'lat se it him." It was the mind and inleniion of the F.ifhpr
that the Sim, as the Mediator between God and man, should
reo^ive honour from all men. The glorv of His beloved Son is
part of the Father's eternal counsels. "Whenever therefore luiy
one through ignorance or pride, or unbelief, neglects Christ, hiit
jrofesses at the same time to honour God, he is commit ting a
mighty error, and so far from pleasing God, is greatly displeas^n."
Him. The more a raan honours Christ, and makes much of Hiiii,
the more the Father is pleased.
Evangelical Christians should mark the doctrine of this verse,
and remember it. They are sometimes taunted with holding new
views in religion, because they bring forward Christ so much
more prominently than their fathers or grandfathers did. Let
thera see here that the more they e.xalt the Son of God and His
office, the more honour they are doing to the Father who sent
Him. To the Deist and Socinian, the words of this verse are a strong
condemnation. Not honouring Christ, they are angering God
the Father. The Fatherhood of God, out of Christ, is a mere
idol of man's invention, and incapable of comforting or saving.
Alford remarks, ""Whosoever does not honour the Son with
equal honour to that which he pays fo the Father, however he
may imagine that he honours or approaches God, does not
honour Him at all ; because he can only be known by us aa
'the Father who sent his Son.'" — Barnes remarks, "If our
Sa\-iour here did not intend to teach that He ought to be wor
shipped and esteemed equal with God, it would be difficult to
teach it by any language."
Eollock remarks, " The Jews and Turks in the present day
profi'ss to worship God earnestly, not only without the Son, but
even with contempt of the Son Jesus Christ. But the whole of
such worship is idolatrous, and that which they worship is an
idoL There is no knowledge of the true God except in the face
of the Son."
¦Wordsworth remarks, " They who profess zeal for the one
God do not honour Him aright, unless they honour the Son as
fhey honour the Father. This is a warning to those who claim
the title of Unitarians, and deny the divinily of Christ. No one
can be snid to believe in the Divine Unity who rejects the doctrine
of the Trinity."
The entire unity of the three Persons in the Trinity, is a
subject that needs far more attention than many give to it.
It may be feared that many woU-meaning Christians are tritiieisti

JOHN, CHAP. V.

289

or worshippers of three distinct Gods, without knowing if. They
talk as if God the Father's mind towards sinners was one thing,
and God the Son's another, — as if the Father baled man, and
the Son loved him and protected him. Such persons would do
well to study this part of Scripture, and to mark the unity of the
Father aud the Son.
After aU, that deep truth, " fhe eternal generation " of God the
Son, whatever proud man may say of it, is the foundation
truth which we raust never forget in frying to understand a
passage like that befiro us. Iu tho Trinity "none is afore or
after otiier. The Father is eternal : the Son eternal : the Holy
Ghost eternal. The Father is God: the Son is God: the Holy
Ghost is God. And yet there are not three eternals, but one
eternal: not three Gods, but one God." — As Burgon reraarks,
" There never was a tirae when any one of the three Persons
was not ;" and it might be added, there never was a time when
the three Persons were not equal. And yet the Son was begot
ten of the Father frora all eternity, and the Holy Ghost proceed
ed from all eternity from the Father and the Son.

JOHN V. 2-^-29.

27 And hath given him author
ity to execute judgment also, be
cause he is the Son of raan.
23 IMarvel not at this: for the
hour is coming, in the which all
that are ia the graves shall hear his
voice, 29 And shall come forth ; they
that have done good, unto the re
surrection of life; and they that
have done evil, unto the resurreo-
tiou of damnation.

24 Verily, verily, I say unto
you. He that heareth my word, and
beUeveth on him that sent me, hath
everlasting life, and shaU not come
into condemnation; but is passed
from death unto life.
25 Verily, verily, I say unto you.
The hour is coming, and now is,
when the dead shaU hear tlie voice
of the Son of God : and they that
hear shall live.
25 For as tho Father hath life in
himself; so hath he given to the
Sou to liavj life in himself;
The passage before us is singularly rich in weighty truths.
To the minds of Jews, who were familiar with the writ
ings of Moses and Daniel, it would come home with
peculiar power. In the words of our Lord they woidd
not fail to see fresh assertions of His claim to be received
as the promised Messi.ah. 13

290 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
We see in these vei'scs that the saloation of our souls de
pends on hearing Christ. It is the man, we are told,
who "hears Christ's word," and believes that God the
Father sent Him to save sinners, who " has everlasting
life." Such " hearing " of course is something more
than mere listening. It is hearing as a humble scholar,
--hearing as an obedient disciple, — hearing with faith
and love, — hearing with a heart ready to do Christ's
will, — this is the hearing that saves. It is the very
hearing of which God spoke in the famous prediction of
a " prophet like unto Moses :" — " Unto him shall ye
hearken." — " Whosoever will not hearken unto my words
which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of
him." (Deut. xviii. 15—19.)
To "hear " Christ in this way, we must never forget, is
just as needful now as it was eighteen hundred years ago.
It is not enough to hear sermons, and run after preach
ers, though some people seem to think this makes up the
whole of religion. We must go much further than this :
we must " hear Christ." To submit our hearts to Christ's
teaching, — to sit humbly at His feet by faith, and learn of
Him, — to enter His school as penitents, and become His
believing scholars, — to hear His voice and follow Him,—
this is the way to heaven. Till we know something ex
perimentally of these things, there is no life in us.
We see, secondly, in these verses, how rich and full are
the privileges of the true hearer and believer. Such a man
enjoys a present salvation. Even now, at this present
time, he " hath everlasting life." — Such a man is com
pletely justified and forgiven. There remains no more
condemnation for him. His sins are put away. "He
shall not come into condemnation." — Such a man is in an
entirely new position before God. He is like one who has
moved from one side of a gulf to another : " He is pass
ed from death unto iife." ... •.' . '¦¦-?

JOHN, CHAP. V. 291
The privileges of a true Christian are gi'eatly underrated
by many. Chiefly from deplorable ignorance of Scripture,
they have little idea of the spiritual treasures of every
believer in Jesus. These treasures are brought together
here in beautiful order, if we will only look at them. One
of a true Christian's treasures is the "piresentness" of his
salvation. It is not a far distant thing which he is to have
at last, if he does his duty and is good. It is his own in
title the moment he believes. He is already pardoned,
forgiven, and saved, though not in heaven. — Another of a
true Christian's treasures is the " completeness " of his
justification. His sins are entirely removed, taken away,
and blotted out of God's book, by Christ's blood. He may
look forward to judgment without fear, and say, "who is
he that condemneth ? " (Rom. viii. 34.) He shall stand
without fiiult before the throne of God. — The Inst, but not
the least, of a true Christian's treasures, is the entire change
in his relation and position toward God. He is no longer
as one dead before Him, — dead, legally, like a man sen
tenced to die, and dead in heart. He is " alive unto God."
(Rom. vi. 11.) "He is a new creature. Old things are
passed away, and all things are become new." (2 Cor. v.
17.) Well would it be for Christians if these things were
better known ! It is want of knowledge, in many cases,
that is the secret of want of peace.
We see, thirdly, in these verses, a striking declaration
of Christ's power to give life to dead souls. Our Lord
tells us that " tha hour is coming and now is, when the
dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God ; and they that
hear shall live." It seems most unlikely that these words
wore meant to be confined to the rising of men's bodies,
and wei'e fulfilled by such miracles as that of raising
Lazarus from the grave. It appears fur more probable that
what our Lord had in view was the quickening of sofds,—
the resurrecUou .of com:ersion^ (Ephes. ii- l; Colos. ii. 13.)

292 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
The words wore fulfilled in not a few cases, during our
Lord's own ministry. They were fulfilled far more com
pletely after the day of Pentecost, through the ministry of
the Apostles. Tho myriads of converts at Jerusalem, at
Antioch, at Ephesus, at Corinth, and elsewhere, were iiU
examples of their fulfilment. In all these cases, "the
¦voice of the Son of God" aw.akened dead hearts to
spiritual life, and made them feel their need of salvation,
repent, and believe. — They are fulfilled at this very day, in
every instance of true conversion. Whenever any men or
women among ourselves awaken to a sense of their soul's
value, .and become alive to God, the words are made good
before our eyes. It is Christ who has spoken to their
hearts by His Spirit. It is "the dead hearing Christ's voice,
and living."
We see, lastly, in these verses, a most solemn prophecy
of the final resurrection of all the dead. Our Lord tells
us that " the hour is coming when all that are in the grave
shall hear his voice, and shall come forth ; they that have
done good to the resurrection of life, and they that have
done evil to the resurrection of damnation."
The pass.ige is one of those that ought to sink dowTi
very deeply into our hearts, and never be forgotten. All
is not over when men die. Whether they like it or not,
they will have to come forth from their graves at the last
day, and to stand at Christ's bar. None can escape His
summons. When His voice calls them before Him, all
must obey. — When men rise again, they -will not all rise in
the same condition. There will be two classes— two
parties — two bodies. Not all will go to heaven. Not all
will be saved. Some will I'ise again to inherit eternal life,
but some will rise again only to be condemned. These are
terrible things ! But the words of Christ are plain and
unmistakeable. Thus it is written, and th ,is it must be.
I/et us make sure that we hear Christ's quickening voice

JOHN, CHAP. V. 293
non', and are numbered among His true disciples. Let us
know the privileges of true believers, while vre have life
and health. Then, wdien His voice shakes heaven aud
earth, and is calling the dead from their graves, we shall
feci confidence, aud not be " ashamed before Him at his
coming." (1 John ii. 28.)
Notes. John V. 24—29.
2i. — [Verily, verily, I say.] Here, as in other places, these words
are fhe preface to a saying of more than ordinary solemnity and
importance. [He ihat heareth my loord.] The "hearing" here is much more
than mere listenin.g, or hearing with the ears. It means hearing
with the heart, hearing with faith, hearing accompanied by
obedient discipbship. He that so hears the doctrine, teaching,
or ''word" of Ohri<t, hath life. It is such hearing as that of the
ti-ue sheep : " My sheep hear my voice," (John x. 27,) or as
that spoken of by St. Paul: "Ye have not so learned Christ, if
so be that j'e have heard him, and have been taught by him."
(Eph. iv. 21.)
[Believeth on Him that sent Me.] This must not be supposed to
mean that a vague faith in God, such as the Deist professes to
have, is the way to everlasting life. The belief spoken of is a
believing on God in Christ, — a believing on God as the God who
sent Christ to save sinners, — a believing on God as the God .and
Father of our Lord Jesu.s Christ, who has planned and provided
redemption by the blood of His Son. He who so believes on
God the Father, is the same man that believes in God the Son.
In this sense the Fatiier is just as rauch the- object of saving faith
as the Son. Thus we read, " It shall be imputed if we believe
on him who raised up Jesus our Lord frora fhe dead." (Bora.
iv. 24.) And again, " 'Who by him do believe in God, that raised
him up from the dead, and gave him glory, that your faith and
hope might be in God." (1 Pet. i. 21.) He that rightly believes
on Christ as his Saviour, with the sarae faith behaves in God as
his reconciled Father. The Gospel that invites the sinner to
believe in Jesus as his Redeemer and Advocate, invites him at
the same time to believe in the Father, who is "weU pleased"
with all who trust in His Son.
Henrv reraarks, "Christ's design is to bring us to God. fl
Pet. iii.' 18.) As God is the first^riginal of aU grace, so is He
the ultimate object of all faith. Christ is our way, and God is
our rest. "We must beUeve on God as having sent Jesus Christ,

294 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
and recommended Himself to our faith and love, by manifesting
His glory in the face of Jesus Christ."
Lightfoot remarks, " He doth most properly centre the ultimate
fixing and resting of belief in God the Father. For as from Him,
as from a fountain, do How all those things that are the object of
faith, — ^namely free grace^ the gift of Christ, the way of redemp
tion, the gracious promises, — so unto Him as to that fountaiii
doth faith betake itself in its Unal resting and repose, — namely to
God in Christ."
Chemnitius remarks, that the expression " believe on Him who
sent me," shows "that true faith embraces the word of the Gos
pel, not as something thought out by Christ alone, but as some
thing decreed in the secret counsel of the whole Trinity."
[Hath everlasting life.] This means thit he possesses a com
plete title to an everlasting life of glory hereafter, and is reckoned
pardoned, forgiven, justified, and an heir of heaven, even now
upon earth. His soul is delivered from tho second death. — The
"presentness" of the expression should be carefully noticed.
Everlasting Ufe is the present possession of every true beUever,
from the moment he believes. It is not a thing he shall have at
last. H'c^ has it at once, even in this world. "All that believe
are justified." — ''Being justified by faith we have place with
God!" (Acts xiii. 39 ; Eom. v. 1.)
[Shall not come inio condemnation!] The Greek word for
" come " is in the present tense, and it would be raore literally
rendered " does not come." The meaning is, there is no con
demnation for him. His guilt is removed even now. He has
nothing to fear in looking forward to the judgment of the last
day. " There is therefore now no condemnation to them which
are in Ciirist Jesus." — "He that b.-lieveth on Him is not con
demned." (Eom. viii. 1; John iU. 18.)
I cannot see in these words any warrant for the notion held
by some, that the saints of God shall not be judged at the last
day in any way at aU. The notion itse'f is so utterly oontra-
diotory to some plain texts of Scripture (2 Cor. v. 10; Eom. xiv.
10; Matt. xxv. 31), that I cannct understand anyone holding
it. But even in the text before u-, it scet.is to me a violent
stra'ning of the words to apply fh-em to thi judgmpnt-f!a}^ The
thing our Lord is spi'ak ng of is the present privilege of a
believer. The tense He uses, as Chemnitius bids us specially
observe, is the present and not the future. And even s.ipposing
that ihe word-; d> apply to the judgnient-;lay, ihs utmost that
can be f driy made o: them is, that a believer has no condem-
Lation fo fiar at the last day. Judged according to his works
he shall be. Condemned he may certainly teel assured he shall

JOHN, CHAP. V. 295
not be. From the day he believes, all his condemnation is taken
away. Ecolampadius remarks how irreconcileable this verse is with
the Eomish doctrine of purgatory.
[But is passed from death to life.] This means that a believer
has passed from a state of spiritual death to a state of spiritual
Ufe. Before he believed, he was dead legally,— dead as a guilty
criminal condemned to die. In the day that he beUeved h'.
received a free and full pardon. His sentence was reversed and
put away. Instead of being legaUy dead, be became legally
alive. — But this is not all. His heart, which was dead in sins,
is now renewed, and alive unto God. There is a change in his
character as well as in his position toward God. Like the
prodigal son, he " was dead and is alive." (Luke xv. 24.)
"We should mark carefully the strong language of Scrip
ture in describing the immense difference between the posi
tion of a man who believes, and the man who does not believe.
It is nothing else than the difference between Ufe and death, —
between being dead and being alive. "Whatever some may think
fit to say about the privUeges of baptisra, we must never shrink
from maintaining, that so long as men do not hear Christ's voice
and believe, — so long they are dead, whether baptized or not,
and have no life in fhem. Faith, not baptisra, is the turning-
point. He that has not yet beUeved is dead, and must be born
again. "When he believes, and not fill then, he wiU pass from
death to life.
Ferus reraarks, " Althougli it seems very easy to believe, and
many think they do believe when they have only heard the
name of believing, — supposing that to beUeve is the same as to
understand, to remember, to know, to think, — yet this beUeving
is in truth a hard and difficult thing. It is easy to fast, to say
prayers, to go on pilgrimage, to give alms and the like ; but to
believe is a thing impossible to our strength. Let superstitious
people learn that God requires of us a far higher and more
difficult kind of worship than they imagine. Let pious people
learn to seek faith more than anything, saying, — Lord, increase
our faith."
i5.~[Verily, verVy, I say unto you] This emphatic preface here
begins a prophecy of the wonderful things that should yet be
done by the Son of God. Did the Jews of Jerusalem desire to
know what profs of Divine power and authority the Son of God
would give ? Let them hear what he would do.
[The hour is coming and noiv ix ] This meant that a time was
coming, and in fact had already begun.
^The dead shall hear His voice and live!] It is thought by some

296 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
that these words apply to the literal raising again of dead persons,
such as Laznru? at Betiiany. I cannot think it I believe that
the "dead" here spoken of are fhe spiritually dead. I believe
that the " hearing the voice of the Son of God," me.ins the
hearing of laith. I believe that the "living'' spoken of m-'ans
the rising out of the death of sin to spiritual newness of life.
And I believe that the whole verse is a prouiction of the many
conversions of dead sinners that were to take pLce soon, ami ha'd
begun in some measure fo take place already. The prediction
wa? fullilled when dead souls were converted during our L ird's
own ministry, and was much more fulfiUed after the day of Pen
tecost, when He was preached by His aposties to the Gectdes,
and "believed on in the world." (1 Tim. iii. 16.)
To confine the words to the few cases of miraculous raising
of dead bodies which took place in the time of our Lord and Ilia
apostles, appe irs to supply a very inadequate interpretation, and
to be rendered unnecessary by the succeeding verse.
Let it be noted that it is only those who " hear," or " have
heard" with faith the voice of Christ, that Uve. Spititual Ufa
turns on beli.'ving. "Ye al;0 trusted, after that ye heard the
word of trutii." (Eph. i. 13.)
Ferus and Cosceius think that fhe caUing and conversion of
fhe Gentiles was the principal thought in our Lord's mind when
He spoke these words.
20. — [For as the Father, etc] The first part of th's verse needs no
explanalinn. It is an admi'ted principle thut God is the Au hor
and Source of all life. He "hath Ufe in himself" "Wnen it
siys further th.-it "he hath givm to the Son to luve lif; in him
self,'' wa must not suppose it means that He has bestowed it on
His Son, in the s ime way that He gives gifis to mere men, such
as projihels and apos'.les. It rather means that in His everlasting
counsels concerning man's rtderaption, IL- has appointed that
the Second Person of the Trinity, — His beloved Son, —
should be the Dispenser .ind Giver of life to all mankind.
" God has given fo us eternal Ufe, and this Ufe is in his Son." (1
John V. 11.)
Both here and in the following verse we must remeraber that
"giving ' does not iraply any i.il'eriority in the Son lo the Falh-r,
FO fir as concern? Ilii Divine essence. The Ih'ng? "given'' to
the Son were tiiin.gs solemnly appointed, deputed, and ia'd upon
Jlun when He assumed the office of ML-diaior, in vir-LUe of Ilis
office. Burgon remarks, — " Both the Father and the Son have tiie
sarae life; both have it in themselves; both in the same
degree; as the one so the other; but only with this difi'erence,

JOHN, CHAP. V. 297
— the Faiher from all eternity giveth'it, the Son from all eternity
receiveth il."
27. — [And hath given him authority, etc.] This means that in virtue
of His Mediatorial office the Second Person of the Triniiy ia
specially appointed to be fhe Judge of all mankind. In the
coun.-^e's of God concerning man, "jurlgment" is assi.uned to fhe
Son, and not to the Father, or to the Holy Spirit. It is undoubt
edly true that God is " the Judge of all." (Hub. xU. 23.) But;
it is also true that it is God the Son who will execute judgment,
and sit on the throne at the last day.
[Because he is the Son of man.] These words seem to imply
that there is a connect'on between our Lord's incarnation and
His fiUing the office of the Judge. It is because He humbled
Himself to take our nature on Him, and be born of the Virgin
Mary, that he will at length be exalted fo execute judgment at
the last day. It appears to be the same thought Ihat St. Paul
expresses when he tells the Philippians that because of Christ's
humiliation, " God also hath highly exalted him, and given hira
a name which is above every name," etc. (Phil. ii. 9.)
B-jrgon remarks, — •" Because of His aUiance wilh man's nature,
because of His sansc of man's infirm'ties, because of all He did
and suffered for man's s;rke as the Son of man, the Son is that
Person of the Triniiy who is most fit, as well as most worthy, to
be man's judge."
The expression, " The Son of man,'' would be rendered more
UteraUy, " a Son of man," or, " Son of man." Campbell remarks
that the absence of the article " the" bt-fore the words " Son of
man," occurs nowhere in the Gosp-els except in this passage.
Both in th's and the preceding verse we should observe an
example of the great truth, that " order is heaven's first law."
Even tho Second Person in the Trinity, one with the Father,
very and eternal Go I, does not take on Himself the office of
giving hfe and executing judgment, but receives it throu:.ih the
solemn appeintment of God the Fatiier. Just as it is written, —
" Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest, but he
that said unto him, Thou art my -Son" (Heb. v. 5), so we find it
written here, that in taking on Him the office of Mediator, it
was "given" to Him to have life in Hiraself, and " authority
given to him" to judge. Those who take on th.e<>iselves offices
without either divine or human commission are very unlike oar
Lord. Toletus quotes a reraarkable passage from Atiianasius, in
which he points o it that such expressions as, "given to tiie Son
by the Father," 'received by the Son from the Father," a.e
purposely used in order to prevent the SabeUian heresy of sup-
13*

298 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
po.smg that the Father and the Son are one and the same Person.
— Such expressions are an unanswerable proof ihat the Fath!-!
and the Son are two distinct Person^, though one God. We
must never forget the words of the Athanasian creed, —
" Neither co-ofounding the Persons nor dividing the substance."
28, 29. — [Marvel not ai this.] These words imply that the hearers
of our Lord were astonish'.^d at the things He had spoken con-
ceruin.a' His Divine comraission to give lile and to judge. He
proceeds to tell them that they have not yet heard all. If they
wondered at what fhey had already heard, what would they
think when He told them one thing more ?
[The hour is coming.] This raeans the List day. To use the
present tense of a time so distant as this is characteristic of one
who is very God, to whom time past, time present, and time to
come, are a'l alike, and a thousand years are as one day.
[All thai are in the graves shall hear his voicc.come forth., dam
nation, etc.] These words are singularly Uke those in Daniel xii.
2. They contain one of the most distinct statements in Scrip-
tui-e of that great truth, — the resurrection of the dead. — It shaU
be universal, and not confined tn a few only. "AU"in the
graves shall come forth, whether old or young, rich or poor. — It
shall take- place at Christ's comraand and bidding. His "voice"
shall be the call that shall summon the dead from their graves.^
There shall be a distinction of those who rise again, into two
classes. Some shall rise to glory and happiness, — to what is
called a " resurrection of Ufe." Some shall rise to be lost and
ruined for ever, — to what is caUed a "resurrection of damnation."
— The doings of men shall be the test by which their final state
shall be decided. " Lifis" shall be the portion of those that have
" done good," " damnation" of those that " have done evil," in
the resurrection-day.
(a.) This passage condemns those who fancy that this world is
all, and that this life ends everything, a'ld that the grave is the
conclusion. They are awfully mistaken. There is a resurrection
and a life to come.
(b.) This passage condemns those who try to persuade us in
the present day that there is no future pun shment, no hell, no
condemnation for the" -wicked in fhe world to come,— that the
love of God is lower than hell, — that God is too merciful and
corapassionate fo punish any one. There is a "resurrection,''
vre are told, " of damnation."
(c) This passage condemns those who try to make out that
rosurrec;ion is the peculiar privilege of believers and saints, and
that the wicked will be puui.-hed by complete annihilation. Both
here nnd in Aits xxiv. 15 we are distinotiy t-jld that both bad

JOHN, CHAP. V. 299
and good shall rise again. In St. Paul's famous chapter about
the resurrection (1 Cor. xv.), the resurrection of beUevers only
is treated of.
(d.) This passage condemns those who try to make out that
men's lives and conduct are of Uttie importance so long as the.y
profess to have faith and to believe in Christ. Christ himseli'
teUs us expressly that the "doings" of men, whether good or
evil, wiU be the evidence that shall decide whether they rise
again to glory or condemnation.
Musculus remarks that the goodness which God requires of us
is not such as only begins in the next world, after the resurrec
tion. We must have it now, and it must precede fhe time of
judgment. It is not said, " some shall rise again that they may
be made good and partakers of life," but, " they that have done
good shal come forth to a resurrection of life." We should take
care to be such in this Ufe as we desire to be found in the day
of judgraent. — He also remarks that our Lord does not say,
'' those who have known or talked what is good," but, " those
who have actually done good " shall com-j forth to a resurrection
of life. Those only will be found to have " done good" who are
God's elect, born again, and true believers. Nothing but true
faith wUl bear fhe fruit of good works.
Calvin remarks that our Lord is not here speaking of the
cause of salvation, but of the marks of the saved, and that one
great mark which distinguishes the elect from the reprobate, is
good doing.
There are two different Greek words used to express the Eng
Ush words " they that have done," and if is difficult to say
why. Precisely the same difference exists in John iii. 20, 21.
The attempts raade to explain the distinction between the two
words do not appear to rae very successful. For instance, —
'Wordsworth remarks : " Good made and done has permanence
for ever. EvU is practised, but produces no fruit for eternity."
Yet I doubt whether this remark will apply to Eom. i. 32, and
ii. 3, where both the two Greek words for " doing " are used
together, and applied to the same class of persons, viz., the
wicked. It is thought by some that this passage supports the doctrine
of the first resurrection as the peculiar privUege of the saints.
(Eev. XX. 5.) But it must in fiirness be remembered that there
is nothing said here about distinction of time in the resurrection
of the good and bad.
As to the manner in which Christ's " voi;e " will be heard by
the dead " in the graves " we are told nothing. It is rema,ik-
able that there are two other places beside this m which a

300

EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.

"voice" or sound is mentioned as accompanying the resurrec
tion. In Corntiiians we read of the " last irumpet." (1 Cor. xv.
52.) In Thess.ilonians we are told of "a shout," of the ''voice
of the archangel," and the "trump of God." (l Tlie-.s. iv. 16.)
Notijiug, however, but conject'ire can be brought forward about
the subject. No doulit the latent tliou;jhb is ihat the dead bodies
of raen are shci ing, and need fo be awakened, as sleepers are
roused by a voice.
As lo the na'ure of risen bodies we are told nothing. Enough
for us to know that this passage clea ly shows it will be a resur-
rrction of " bodies" as well as souls. It is those who are "ia
the graves " that shall come forth.

JOHN V. 30—39.

30 I can of mine Oivn self do
nothing : as I hear, I jud,ge : and
my judgment is just ; because I seek
not mine own will, but the will of
the Father which hath sent me.
31 If I bear witness of myself,
my witness is not true.
32 There is another that beareth
witness of me ; aud I know that
the witness which he wituesseth of
me is true.
33 Ye sent unto John, aud he
bare witness uuto the truth.
34 But I receive not testimony
from man ; but these things I say,
that ye might be saved.
35 He was a burning and a shin
ing light : and ye were willing for
a season to rejoice in his light.
In these verses we see the proof of our Lord Jesus Christ
being the jiroraised Messiah, set forth before the Jews in
one vie-w. Four diflx'rent witnesses ni'o brought forward.
Four kinds of evidence are offered. His Father in heaven,
—His forerunner, John the Baptist,— the miraculous works
He had done, — the Scriptures, which the Jews professed
to honour,- each and all are named by our Lord, as testify
ing tliat He -was the Christ, the Son of God. Hard must

36 But I have greater witness
than that of John: for the works
which the Father hath given me to
finish, the same works that I do,
bear witness of me, that the Father
hath sent me.
3"? And the Father himself,
which hath sent me, hath borne
witness of me. Ye have ueither
heard his voice at any time, nor
seen his shape.
3S And ye Iiave not his word
abiding in you : for whom he hath
sent, him ye believe not.
39 Search the Scriptures ; for in
them ye think ye have eternal Ufe :
and they are they which testify of
me.

JOHN, CHAP. V. 301
those hearts have been which could hear such testimony,
and yet remain unmoved ! But it only proves the truth
of tho old saying, — that unbelief does not arise so much
from want of evidence, as from want of will to believe.
Let us observe for one thing in this pas.s.ige, the honom
Christ puts on His faithful servants. See how Ho speaks
of John the Baptist. — "He bare witness of tlie truth;" —
" He was a burning and a shining light." — .John had pro
bably passed away from his earthly labours when these
words were spoken. He had been persecuted, imprisoned,
and put to death by Herod, — none interfering, none trying
to prevent his murder. But this murdered disciple was
not forgotten by his Divino Master. If no one else I'emeni-
bered him, Jesus did. He had honoured Christ, and Christ
honoured him.
These things ought not to be overlooked. They are
written to teach us that Christ cares for all His believing
people, and never forgets them. Forgotten and despised
by the world, perhaps, they are never forgotten by their
Saviour. He knows where they dwell, and what their
trials are. A book of remembr.ince is written for them.
"Their tears are all in His bottle." (Psalm Ivi. 8.) Their
names are graven on the palms of His hands. He notices
all they do for Him in this evil world, though they think it
not worth notice, and He will confess it one day publicly,
before His Father and the holy angels. He that bore
witness to John the Baptist never changes. Let believers
remember this. In their worst estate they may boldly say
with David, — " I am poor and needy ; yet the Lord
thinketh upon me." (Psalm xl. 17.)
Let us observe, for another thing, ihe honour Christ
inits upon miracles, as an evidence of JTis being the
Messiah. He says, — " The works which the Father hath
given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness
of me that the Father hath sent rae,"

S02 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
The miracles of the Lord receive far less attention, in
the present day, as proofs of His Divine mission, than they
ought to do. Too many regard them wilh a silent incre
dulity, as things which, not having seen, they cannot be
expected to care for. ISTot a few openly avow that they
do not believe in the possibility of such things as miracles,
and would fain strike them out of the Bible as weak stories,
^^¦llicll, like burdensome lumber, should be cast overboard,
to lighten the ship.
But, after all, there is no getting over the fact, that in
tho days when our Lord was upon earth, His miracles
produced an immense effect on the minds of men. They
aroused attention to Him that worked them. They ex
cited inquiry, if they did not convert. They were so
many, so public, and so incapable of being explained
away, that our Lord's enemies could only say that they
were done by satanic agency. That they were done they
could not deny. " This man," they said, " doeth many
mii-acles." (John xi. 47.) The facts which wise men
pretend to deny now, no one pretended to deny eighteen
hundred years ago.
Let the enemies of the Bible take our Lord's last and
greatest miracle — His own resurrection from the dead —
and disprove it if they can. When they have done that,
it will be time to consider what they say about miracles
in general. They have never answered the e^'idence of
it yet, and they never will. Let the friends of the Bible
not be moved by objections against miracles, until that
one miracle has been fairly disposed of. If that is
proved unassailable, they need not care much for quib
bling arguments against other miracles. If Christ did
re.illy rise from the dead by His own power, there is none
of His mighty works which man need hesitate to believe.
Let us observe, lastly, in these verses, the honour that
Christ puis up07i the Scriptures. He refers to them in

JOHN, CHAP. V. 803
concluding His list of evidences, as the great witnesses to
Him. "Search the Scriptures," He says: " they are they
whicli testify of me."
The " Scriptures" of which our Lord speaks are of course
the Old Testament. And His words show the important
truth which too many are apt to overlook, — that every
part of our Bibles is meant to teach us about Chiist.
Christ is not merely in the Gospels and Epistles. Christ is
to he found directly and indirectly in the Law, the Ps.alms,
and the Prophets. In the promises to Adam, Abraham,
Moses, and David, — in the types and emblems of the cere
monial law, — in the jDredictions of Isaiah and the other
prophets, — .Tesus, the Messiah, is everywhere to be found
in the Old Testament.
How is it that men see these things so little ? The
answer is plain. They do not " search the Scriptures."
They do not dig into that wondrous mine of wisdom and
knowledge, and seek to become acquainted with its con
tents. Simple, regular reading of our Bibles is the grand
secret of establishment in the faith. Ignorance of the
Scriptures is the root of all error.
And now what will men believe, if they do not believe
the Divine mission of Christ? Great indeed is the
obstinacy of infidelity. A cloud of witnesses testify that
Jesus was the Son of God. To talk of wanting evidence
is childish folly. The plain truth is, that the chief seat of
unbehef is the heart. Many do not wish to believe, and
therefore remain unbelievers. Notes. Joes V. 30—39.
30.— [I can of mine own self, etc.] This verse is perhaps one of
the most difficult in Scripture. It is so because the subject of
it is that great mystery,— the unity of God the Father and God
the Son. Mau has no langua.ge to express adequately the idea
that has to be conveyed. The general thought of the verse seema
to be as follows : —

504 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
" In consequence of the close relation between Me and tho
Father, I c.innot do anything indep.'iidently and separately Iroia
Him. 'I j'ldge,' and decide, and speak ou aU points, iu entire
harmony with the Father, as though I heard Him continually at
My side; and so judging and speak ng Mv judgment on all
po.uts is ahvays right. It is right now, and wti 1 be .seen right
at the gri'at account of the last day. For in aU that I do 1 soek
not to do My Own will only, but the will of Him that sent Me
since there is an entire harmony between My will and His."
Let it be carefuUy noted that at this part of His address our
Lord ceases to speak in the third person of Himself as " ihe
Son of man," and begins to use fhe first person, — "I can," "I
hear," "I judge," etc.
" Of mine own self" does not mean "unhelped and unas
sisted," but "from myself," — ^from My own independent volition
and action.
Chrysostom remarks. — " Just as when we say, it is impossible
for God to >do wro.ig, we do not impute to Hirn any weaknes.^,
but confess in Him an unutlerable power; so also when Christ
saiih, ' I can of my ovvn self do noihing,' the meaning is that it
is impossible, — my na'ure admits not,- — tiiat I should do any
thing contrary to the Father."
" As I hear" is an expression adapted to man's comprehen
sion, to convey the idea of the unity between the Father and
fhe Son. It is hke verse I9th, where it is said, " The Son can do
noihing of himself, but what he se-th the Father do." It is also
like the words used of fhe Holy Ghost, — " He shall not speak of
himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak."
(John xvi. 13.)
Chrysostom remarks, — "Just as when Christ said, ' we speak
that we do know, and testify that we have seen,' and John the
Baptist said, 'that which he hath seen and heard he lestifielh,'
(John iii, 11, 32,) both e.xpressions are used concerning exact
knowled,!.i-e, and not concerning raere 'seein.g' and ' hearrng ;' — so
in this place, when Christ speaks of 'heaiing,' He declares no
thing elso than that it is impo.ssible for H.m to desire anything
save what the Father desireth."
"I judge'' appUes not only to all Christ's judgraents and de-
cisiiin-i as Mediator when He was upon earth, but to His final
j ulgmont at the last day.
"My jud.ament is just" would probably remind tho Jews of
the prophecies about Messiah. (Isa. xi. 3 and Dan. vu. 13)
" I sock not mine own will" must be interpreted with special
reference to our Lord's Divine nature, as Son of God. Having

JOHK, CHAP. V. 305
as God, oue will with the Father, it was not postible for Him to
seek His own will independently of tiie Father. ITeiu-e the jiid;;-
ment was not His on'y, but His Father's also. — As Son of man
He had a human wi.l (.iisiinct from His Divine will, as when
H" Slid, "Let this cup pass from me: neveriheless not as I
will, but as thou wilt." (Matt. xxvi. 39.) But the wUl hero
seems lo be His Divine will.
Chrysostom remarks, — " "What Christ impUeth is of this kind:
— not that the will of the Father is one and His own another,
but that as one wUl in one mind, so is Mine own will and My
Father's." Once more we must remeraber the extrerae difficulty of han
dling such a subject as the one before us. The distinction between
fhe Persons in the Trinity, and the Unity of their vssence iit
fhe same time, must .ilways be a deep thing to man, hard to con
ceive, and harder still to speak or write about.
31. — [If I bear witness of myself, etc!] This verse must be In
tel pi eted witii caution and reasonable qualification. It would
be folly and bla-phemy to say that our Lord's testimony about
Himself raust be false. 'What the verse does appear to mean
is this: — ''If I have no other testimony to bring forward in proof
of My Messiahship but iMy own word, my testimony would be
justly open to susoicion.'' — Our Lord knew that in any disputed
question a man's assertions in his own favour are worth little
or nothing. He tells the Jews that He did notwant them to be
Ueve Ilim raeie'y because He said He was ihe Son of God. He
would show them that He had other witnesses, and these wit
nesses He next proceeds fo bring foi ward. A comparison of
this verse with John vid. 14 shows at once that the meaning
of the woids, " My wi ness is not true," must be qualified and
res:rained, or else one place of Scripture would contradict the
other.
32. — [There is another that heareth witness.] There are two dis
tinct and diffjrent views of this expression.
(a.) Some, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthjmius, Light-
fiot, Brentius, Giotius, Ferus, Barradius, Que-nel, 'Whitby,
Doddridge, Gdl, think that the " other witness" is John the
Bapth-t. (h.) Some, a^ Cyril, Athanasius, Calvin, Bezi, Gualter, Bucer,
Eco'ampadius, Zwingl.., Rup^rtuK, Flacius, Caloviu", Cocceius,
M^ca-or, Musculrs, Aretius, Toletus, Nifaniu--., Ibdock, Poole,
Le'gh. Diod'ti, Hammond, Trapp, Hutcheson, Henry, Bui k.tt,
Baxter, B oomfield, Lampe, Bengel, Pearce, A. Clarke, Scott
Barnes, St'er, Alford, Webster, think that " the other witness,'
is God the Father.

306 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
I feel no doubt in my own mind that this last is the coi-
rect view. The use of the present tense, — " witnesseth," — is a
strong proof of it. John the Baptist's testimony was a thing
past and gone. — Our Lord declares that His Father had borne
distinct testimony to Him, and supplied abundant evidence, if
thoy, the Jews, would only receive it. And He adds, " his tes
timony is true." H'^ will never bear witness to a lie. — Then
having laid down this general propo-ition. He goes on to show
the threefold testimony which God had provided : — first, John
the Baptist;— secondly, the miracles which the Father had com
missioned Him to work ; — and, thirdly, the Scriptures.
The expression, "I know,'' probably impUes the deep con
sciousness which our Lord had, even in His humiliation, of H;S
Father's perfect righteousness and truthfulness. It means much
more than a mere man's " I know." "I know and have known
from aU eternity that my Father's testimony is perfect truth."
33 — [Ye r.ent unto John, etc.] In this sentence the word "ye " must
be taken emphatioaUy. It is "ye yourselves." The meaning of
fhe verse seems fo be, — "My first witness is John the Baptist.
Now ye yourselves sent unto him at an early period of his min
istry, and ye know that he told you One greater than himself was
coining, whose messenger he was, and that afterwards he said of
Me, ' Behold the Lamb of God.' You cannot deny that he was
a prophet indeed. Yet he bore faithful witness unto Me. He
fold you the truth."
There can be no doubt that our Lord refers to the formal mission
of " priests and Levites from Jerusalem " to John the Baptist,
described in John i. 19.
34. — [But Ireceive not testimony from man, etc!] This sentence seems
meant to remind the Jews that they must not suppose our Lord
depended either solely or chiefly on man's testimony. "Not
that I would have you think I rest My claim to be received as
the Messiah on the witness of John the Baptist, or of any other
man. But I say these things about John and his witness to Me
in order to remind you of what you heard him say, and that
remembering his testimony to Me you may believe and be saved."
Here, as elsewhere, Vic should note how our Lord presses home
on the Jews the inconsistency of admitting Jolm the Baptist to
be a prophet sent frora God, while they refu.sed to believe Him
self as the 5Ies.tiah. If they believed John they ought in consis
tency to have believed Him. (See Matt. xxi. 23 — 27.)
35. — [He was a burning... light.] This is very high le;timoRy to
John. Doubtiess he was not '- the li.';ht," as Christ was. "Bm
still he was not an ordinary lamp lighted from above, as all true
believers are. lie was pre-eminently " the lamp," a lamp of

JOHN, CHAP. V. 307
pecuUar power and brilliancy, a "burning '' and a " shining" light
like a flaming beacon or light-house seen from afar.
I think the expression " he was " shows that at the time when
our Lord spoke, John fhe Baptist was either in prison or dead.
At any rate his public ministry was ended. " He used fo be a
Ught. He is burning and shining no longer."
Chrysostom remarks, — " He called John a torch or lamp, sig
nifying that he had not light of himself, but by the grace of the
Spirit." [Je were wiUing for a season to rejoice.] This refers to the ex
traordinary popularity and acceptance of John the Baptist when
his ministry first began. "Then went out unto him Jerusalem
and .all Judaea, and all the country round about Jordan." (Matt.
iii. 5.) " Many of the Pharisees and Sadducees came to his
baptism." (Matt. iii. 7.) It was an ignorant excitement that
brought raany of John's hearers to him. They thought most pro
bably, that the Messiah, of whom he spoke, and whose way he
came to pre-pare, would be a temporal king and conqueror, and
would give to Israel its old pre-eminence on earth. But be the
motives what they might, the fact remains that John's ministry
attracted immense attention, and awakened the curiosity of the
whole Jewish nation. "They wUlingly rejoiced in the light
which John lifted up." They seemed to take pleasure in coining
to Mm, hearing him, following him, and submitting to his bap
tism. The expression, " for a season," seems purposely used fo remind
the Jews of the very temporary and transitory nature of the im
pressions which John's ministry produced on them.
Stier remarks, — "Man generaUy, even a prophet, can only give
Ught by burning, like a lighted candle, until he is burnt out, and
his mission on earth ceases. Thus did the Baptist burn, brightly
but rapidly."
Burkitt remarks, — " It has been an old practice among profes
sors not to like their pastors long, though they have been never
such burning and shining lights, John was not changed, but his
hearers were changed. He did burn and shine in the candlestick
with equal zeal and lustre to the last, but they had changed their
thoughts of him."
j6. — [But I have greater witness.. .John.] This means, " althou.gh
John the Baptist was a witness to My being the Messiah, and the
Son of God, his was not the only testimony I bid you receive.
There is fes:iraony even more important than his, namely, that
ily miracles." The Greek means Uterally, "the gi-eater wit
ness;" — " The -ivitness that I h.uve is greater."

308 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Flacius suggests that our Lord here and in the precodhig verse
reminds the Jews how willin.g tliey "ere at first lo receive
John's ministry, and almost seemed to think he was -tire Mos.siah.
Yet aU this time "John did no minvde." — But when the true
Messiah appeared, doin^- mighty -' woi-ks," the Jews did not show
him even as rauch attention as they had shown to John.
[The works.. .Father hath given, etc.] This is a distinct appeal to
miracles, as an impoi'tant proof of our Lord's Messiahship and
Divinity. Four times in this Gospel we find the sarae appeal.
(John i'i. 2; x. 25 ; xv. 24.) The evidence of miracles should
never be lightiy esteemed. We nre apt tn underrate their value
because ihey were wrought so long ago. But in the d.iys when
they were wrought they were great facts, whieh demanded Ihe
attention of all who saw them, and could not be evaded. Unless
the Jews could explain Ihem away, they were bound, as honest
and reasonab!'-' raen, to bel eve our Lord's Divine raission. That
they really were wrought the Jews never appear to have denied.
In fact they dared not attempt to deny fhem. "What they did
do Wi s to ascribe them to Satanic agency. AU who attempt to
deny llie reality of our Lord's miracles in the present d y, would
do well fo remember that those who had fhe best opportunity
of judging, namely, the men who saw these miracles, and lived
within hearing of them, never disputed the fact that they were
wrought. If the enemies of our Lord could have proved that His
miracles were only tricks, legerdemain, and impostures, it stands
to reason they would have been only too glad to show it to the
world, and to silence Him for ever.
Five things should always be noted about O'lr Lord's miracles.
(1.) Thciv number : ihey were not a few only, but very many
indeed. (2.) Their greatness : they were not little, but raiihty
interferences with the ordnary course of nature. (3.) Their
puKicity : they were generally not done in a corner, but in open
day, and before raany witnesses, and often before enemies. (4.)
Their character: ihey were almost always works of love, mercy,
and compassion, helpful and benefic-al to man, and not mere
barren exhibitions of power. (5.) Their dired appeal to men's
senses : they were visible, and would bear any examination. The
difference between them and fhe boasled iiiir.icles of flic Church
of Rome, on all these points, is striking and instructive.
The mannor in which our Lord speaks of His miracles is very
remarkable. He calls thera, — "The works t'lat the Father liaih
.oiven me that I should finish." He carefuUy avoids the apiiear-
anee- of want of iiniiy between the Father and H m.sell', oven in
the woikiiig of miraeles. They are not works which He did of
His own independent wiU, but " works whieh the Father hath
given me," works which it had been arranged in the eternal

JOHN, CHAP. V. 309
counsels the Son should work, when He became man and dwelt
upon earth. Pr, cisJy Ihe same expression is u-ed eLsewhere
about " fhe words " our Lord spake, as hero about " the works:"
"I have given unto fhem the words whieh thou gatest me."
(John xvii. 8.)
37. — [And ihe Fa'her himself. ..loitne.ss of me.] There is undeniable
difficu'ty about these words. It is not clear to what " witiiesj
of the Father " our Lord here refers.
(a.) Some, as Chrysostom, Brentius, Bullinger, Gualter, Ferus,
Toletus, Barradius, Cartwright, Chemnitius, Bollock, Jansenius,
Trapp, Baxter, Hammond, Burkitt, Lampe, Bengel, Henry, Scott,
GiU, think that our Lord refers to the audible testimony borne to
Hira by the Father at His baptisra, and at the transfiguration,
when fie said, — "This is my beloved Son, hear him." (Matt. iii.
17 ; xvii. 5.) But it surely is a capital objection to this tiieory,
that this voice of the Faiher was in a'l probability heard by no
body excepting John the Baptist at the baptism, and Peter,
James, and John at the transfiguration. At this rate it would
be entirely a private testimony, and of no avail to the general
body of the Jewish nation.
(i.) Some, as Theophylact, Euthymius, Rupertus, Calvin, Coc
ceius, Pearce, Tholuck, Bloomfield, Tittman, A. Clark, D. Brown,
Alford, Burgon, think that our Lord refers to the testimony the
Faiher has borne to Hira generally throughout the Old Testa
ment Scripture.-^, and that the sentence before us should be taken
in close connection with the ne.xt verse but one, beginning,
" Searc'n the Scriptures." In fact that expression would then
be the explanation of our Lord's meaning.
Of the two views I decidedly prefer the second one. It cer
tainly seeras the least difftcult, and open to the fewest objections.
There is a third view, supported by Olshausen and Bucer, viz.,
that Ihe " witness " here means the inward witness of the Spirit
in the hearts of believers. This, however, appears fo rae wholly
out of the question. It is a witness that would be useless to the
world at large.
Botii here and elsewhere we must take care that we do not
attach fhe idea of "inferiority'' to the expression "sent' by
'.he Father. Eollock remarks, — "It is quiie possible that an
equal may send an equal to discharge some office." Cyril
remarks, — " Mission and obedience, being sent and obeying,
do not take away equality of po-sver in the sender and the sent
one." [Ye have neither heard. ...seen his shape.] This appears lo be a
parenlhetical sentence, as well as the verse that follows. It
certainly seems to strengthen the view that when our Lord spoke

310 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
of His Father " bearing witness,'' He could not have meant the
audible witness of His voice at the baptism or transfiguration.
In fact the sentence seems purposely to preclude the notion. It
is as though our Lord said, " Do not suppo.?e that I mean any
audible testimony of voice, or apparition, or vision, when I speak
of My Father bearing witness fo me. I mean festimoiiy of a
very different kind, even the testimony of His Yv^ord."
The expression "not seen His shape," teaches the same great
truth we find elsewhere, — viz., that the Father is invisible, and
has never been seen by mortal man. He who appeared fo Abra
ham was fhe Second Person of the Triniiy, and not Ihe Father.
St. Paul says distinctly of fhe Father, — " whora no man hath
seen, nor can see." (1 Tim. vi. 17.) The idea of artists and
painters, when fhey represent the Father as an aged man, is a
mere irreverent invention of their own brains, without tho
slightest warrant of Scripture.
Eupertus and Ferus suggest that the latter part of this verso
was spoken to prevent the Jews thinking that our Lord spoke
of Joseph, His supposed father. This, however, seems a ralhor
improbable and fanciful idea.
38. — [And ye have not his word, Sc] This verse seems meant to
remind the Jews that with all their pretended reverence for God,
and affected zeal against blasphemies of Him, ihey were really
ignorant of God's mind. Their reverence for Him was only a
form. Their z-eal for Him was a blind fanaticism. They knew
no more of His mind than of His shape or voice. They were
not acquainted with His \\'oi d. It did not dwell in their hearts
and guide their religion. They proved their own ignorance by
not believing Him whom the Father had sent. Had fhey really
been farailiur with the writings of the Old Testament they would
have believed.
Our Lord evidently implies that real knowled.Q-e of God's Word
will always lead a man to faith in Christ. "Where there is no
faith we may rightly assume fhe Bible is either not read, or read
in a wrong spirit. Ignorance and unbelief will go together.
Locke holds the curious opinion, that the " word" in this verse
means the "Personal "Word," as at John i. I. "'Ye have not
Me, the Eternal Word, dwelling in your hearts.'' But Christ
nowhere calls Himself " the Word," and the idea does not har
monize with the context.
Ecolampadius th'nks that in this and the preceding verse there
is a reference to Deut. xviii. 15 — 19, where the Lord promised a
prophet to the Jews Uke unto Mose.s, because they had said 
" Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God, neither
let me se.e this .great, fire- any morc,.that I die not." He thinks

JOHN, CHAP. V. 311
our Lord reminds thom of this. God had fulfilled His jiromise,
and sent them a prophet Uke unto Moses, and now they would
not beUeve on Him I
39.— [Search the Scri^Jtures.] This famous sentence is interpreted
two different ways.
(a.) Sorae, as Cyril, Erasraus, Ecolampadius, Beza, Brentius,
Piscator, Camero, Poole, Toletus, Li.ghtfoot, Lampe, Bengel,
Doddridge, Bloomfield, Tholuck, A. Clark, Scholefield, Barnes,
Burgon, D. Brown, "Webster, think that our Lord spoke in fhe
indicative mood, simply making an assertion, — " Te do search."
(b.) Some, as Chrysostom, Augustine, Theophylact, Euthy
mius, Luther, Calvin, Cartwright, Gualter, Groiius, Eollock,
Ferus, Calovius, Jansenius, Cocceius, Barradius, Musculus, Nifa
nius, Maldonatus, Cornelius 6. Lapide, Leigh, "Whitby, Hammond,
Stier, Alford, Wordsworth, think that He spoke in the impe
rative mood, giving a command, — " Search," — as our version
gives it.
I decidedly prefer this latter view. It is more forcible, and
more in keeping- with our Lord's general style of address. Above
all it seems fo me to agree far better with the context. Our
Lord had told the Jews that His Fatiier had borne witness of
Him, though not by audible vo'ce, nor by visible apparition.
How then had He borne witness? They would find it in His
Word. " Go and search your o\vn Scriptures," our Lord seeras
to say. " Examine them, and become really acquainted with
their contents; you will find that fhey testify clearly and dis
tinctly of Me. If you wish fo know God the Father's testimony
to Me, search the Scriptures."
The word rendered " search'' means " search minutely and
diligently." It appears to me intentionally used, fo show thut
the Jews should not be content with mere reading. The Sep-
tuagint version of Prov. ii. 4, has an expression like it.
Chrysostom remarks, — " When Christ referred fhe Jews fo the
Scriptures, He sent them not to a mere reading, but to a careful
and considerate search. He said not, 'read,' but, 'search.'
Since the sayings about Him required great attention (for they
had been concealed fi-om the beginning for the advantage of men
of that lime), He bids them now dig down with care, that thoy
might discern what lay iu the depths below. These saying? were
not on the surface, nor were fhey cast f .rth to open view, but
lay Uke some treasure hidden very deep."
Some, who think the word "search" .sh' uld be taken as au
indicative, "ye search," maintain that our Lord spoke ironically,
, .and, meant, J' Te-.pretend ,tg mal':e a minute investigation, of
Scripture, and search into the letter of it, but uever.get .any

312 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
further." I can see little ground for this view. The word
" search'' is nevei- u^ed in a ba I sen-e in Scriptui e (1 Pet. i. 11.)
The ch'ef argument ill fivouroithe " indicative" side of the ques
tion is the notorious Eabbinical cusiom of minutely scruiiniziiig
and reverencing every syllable of Scriplure. To this custom of
honouring the letter of Scripture, while ne.ulecting its spiiit,
many advocates of the "indicative" here think that our Lord
referred. Brentius gives a full account of the length to whieh
the Jev/s went in their reverence for the letter of Scripture,
EU-h as counting the letters of each book, etc., and thinks that
this was in our Lord's mind. I cannot however agree with this
view. [In them ye ihink ye have eternal life.] In this sentence the
first " ye" must be taken emphatieally, as in the 33rd verso.
" Think" does not imply that it was a doubtful point, or mere
raatt; r of opinion. It is rather, " Ye yourselves Ihink, and tiiink
rightly, — it is one of the dograas of your faith, — that ye have in
the Scriptures the way to eternal life pointed out."
Chemnitius remarks, — "The words 'ye think' mean that
common persuasion and opinion of all men concerning- Scrip
ture, which, like an axiom in science, is established, firm, aiul
certain." Let it be noted that many Christians are just in the unsatis
factory state of the Jews here described. Like them, they
" think," and hold it as a dogma of their creed, that they "have
eternal life in the Scriptures." But, like ihein, they never read,
mark, learn, and inwardly digest what Scripture contains.
Ec'dampadius r. marks, — "Scripture alone does not make a
raan any the belter, nor even preaching, by itself, except by
the Holy Ghost aiding. It is the peculiar office of fhe external
AVord fo supply testiraony ; but it is fhe Spirit of God alone that
can make the heart of man assent."
[They are they which testify of me.] This sentence is a strong
and weighty declaration of the value of fhe Old Testament
Scriptures. It was lo thera exclusively, of course, that our Lord
referred. He says, " they testify of me." In direct prophecie-^,
in promises, in typio.al persons, in typical ceremonies, the Old
Testament Scripture aU through testifies of Christ. We read
them to very little purpose if we do not discern tiiis.
Ferus remarks that there are three ways in which the Scrip
tures testify of Christ. (I.) Generally: they are as it were tiie
voice of Ihe uncreated 'Word, ever speaking to raan in every
part of tiiem. (2.) In figures: tiie paschal lamb, the brazen
f erpent, and aU the sacrifices of the law were witnesses of Christ,
(3.) In direct prophecies.

JOHN, CHAP. V.

313

Let us note in this verse the high honour which our Lord puts
on tiie Old Testament Scrijituics. Ue distinctly endorses ihe
Jewish Canon of inspired writings. Those mo'lern wriers
who labour to depreciate them, and bring them Into di.Tepiuc,
show very li'ile of Christ's mind. Much infidelity begins with
an ignorant contempt of the Old Testament. Stier remarks, —
" Israel, po=s:ssing slill the Old Testament, wiU enter into the
kingdom, when the despisers of Scripture in the final unbelief
of Christendom will be judged and couderaned."
Let us note furtiier what a plain duty it is fo read the Scrip
tures. Men have no right to exp-ict spiritual light if they ne
glect the great treasury of all light. If even of fhe Old Testa
ment our Lord said, "Search," "it testifies of me," how much
more is it a duty to search the whole Bible ! An idle neglect of
the Bible is one secret of the ignorant formal Christianity which
is so widely prevalent in these latter I'ays. God's blessing on a
diUgent study of the Scripture is strikingly illustrated in the case
of the Bereans. (Acts xvii. II.)

JOHlSr V. 40—47.

iO And ye will not come to me,
tliiit ye might have Ufe.
•41 I receive not hoiio-ar from
men. 42 But I know you, that ye have
not thf love of God in you.
43 t am come iu my Father's
name, and ye receive me not: if an
other shall come in his o-wn name,
him je wiU receive.
44 How can ye believe, which
receive honour one of another, and

seek not the honour that cometh
from God only 1
45 Do not think that I -will ac
cuse you to the Father : there is one
that accuseth you, even Moses, in
whom ye trust.
46 iFor had ye believed Moses,
ye would have beUeved me ; for he
-wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writ
ings, how shaU yo beUeve my
words 1

This passage concludes our Lord Jesus Christ's wondrous
defence of His own divine mission. It is a conclusion
worthy of the defence, full of heart-searching appeals to
the consciences of His enemies, and rich in deep truths.
A mighty sermon is followed by a mighty application.
Let us mark, in this passage, the reason why many souls
are lost. The Lord Jesus says to tho unbelieving Jews,
— " Ye will not come to me that ye might have life."
14

31-1 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
These words are a golden sentence, which ought to
be engraven in our memories, and treasured up in our
minds. It is want of will to come to Christ for salvation
that will he found, at last, to have shut the many out of
heaven. — It is not men's sins. All manner of sin may be
forgiven. — It is not any decree of God. We are not told
in the Bible of any whom God has only created to he de
stroyed. — It is not any limit in Christ's work of redemp
tion. He has paid a price sufiicient for all mankind. — It is
something far more than this. It is man's own innate un
willingness to come to Christ, repent, and believe. Either
from pride, or laziness, or love of sin, or love of the world,
the many have no mind, or wish, or heart, or desire to
seek life in Christ. " God has given to us eternal life, and
this life is in his Son." (I John v. II,) But men stand
still, and will not stir hand or foot to get life. Aud this
is the whole reason why many of the lost are not saved.
This is a painful and solemn truth, but one that we can
never know too -well. It contains a first principle in Chris
tian theology. Thousands, in every age, are constantly
labouring to shift the blame of their condition from off
themselves. They talk of their inability to change. They
tell you complacently, that they cannot help being what
they are I They know, forsooth, that they are wrong, hut
they cannot be different ! — It will not do. Such talk will
not stand the test of the Word of Christ before us. The
unconverted are what they are because they have no will
to be better. " Light is come into the world, and men
love darkness rather than light." (John iii. 19.) The
words of the Lord Jesus will silence many : " I would
have gathered you, and ye would not be gathered."
(Matt, xxiii. 37.)
Let us mark, secondly, in this passage, one principal
cause of^unbelief, l^he Lord Jesus say.s to the Jews, — '
"How can ye believe which receive honour one of

JOHN, CHAP. V. 315
another, and seek not the honour that cometh of God
only?" He meant by that saying, that they were not
honest in their religion. With all their apparent desire
to hear aud learn, they cared more in reality for pleasing
raan than God. In this state of mind they were never
likely to believe.
A deep principle is contained in this saying of our Lord's,
and one th.at deserves special attention. True faith does
not depend merely on the state of man's head and under
standing, but on the state of his heart. His mind may be
convinced. His conscience may be pricked. But so long
as there is anything the man is secretly loving more than
God, there will be no true faith. The man himself may
be puzzled, and wonder why he does not believe. He
does not see that he is like a child sitting on the lid of
his box, and wishing to open it, but not considering that
his own weight keeps it shut. Let a man make sure that
he honestly and really desires first the praise of God. It is
the want of an honest heart which makes many stick fast
La their rehgion all their days, and die at length without
peace. Those who complain that tliey hear, and approve,
and assent, but make no progress, and cannot get any hold
on Christ, should ast themselves this simple question,
— "Am I honest? — Am I sincere? — Do I really desire
first the praise of God ?"
Let us mark, lastly, in this passage, the manner in
which Christ speaks of Moses, He says to the Jews, —
" Had ye believed Moses ye would have believed me : for
lie wrote of me."
These words demand our special attention in these
latter days. That there really was such a person aa
Moses, — that he really was the author of the writings
commonly ascribed to him, — on both these points our
Lord's testimony is distinct. " He wrote of me." Can
we suppose for a moment that our Lord was only accom-

316 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
modating Himself to the prejudices and traditions of His
hearers, and that He spoke of Moses as a writer, though
lie knew in His heart that Moses never wrote at all?
Such au idea is profane. It woitid make out our Lord
to have been dishonest. — Can we suppose for a moment
that our Lord was ignorant abont Moses, and did not
know the wonderful discoveries which learned men,
falsely so called, have made in the nineteenth cen
tury ? Such an idea is ridiculous blasphemy. To
imagine the Lord Jesus sj)eaking ignorantly in such a
chapter as the one before us, is to strike at the root of
all Christianity. — ^There is but one conclusion about the
matter. There was such a person as Moses. The writings
comiuonly ascribed to him were written by him. The
facts recorded in them are worthy of all credit. Our
Lord's testimony is an unanswerable argument. The
sceptical writers against Moses and the Pentateuch have
greatly erred.
Let us beware of handling the Old Testament irreve
rently, and allowing our minds to doubt the truth of any
part of it, because of alleged diflSculties. The simple fact
that the writers of the New Testament continually refer
to the Old Testament, and speak even of the most
miraculous events recorded in it as undoubtedly true,
should silence our doubts. Is it at all likely, probable,
or credible, that we of the nineteenth century are better
informed about Moses than Jesus and His Apostles ? God
forbid that we should think so ! Then let us stand fast,
and not doubt that every -word in the Old Testament, as
well as in the New, was given by inspiration of God.
Notes. John V. 40 — 47.
40. — [And ye will not come to mc.life.] The connection between
this verse and the preceding one is not very clear. It is one of
those abrupt elUptioal transitions which oocur frequently in St,

317
John's writings. I conjecture the link must be someth.Hig of this
kind: "The Scriptures testify plainly of Me. And yet in ihe face
of this festimoiiy ye have no will or inclination lo come to Me
by faith, that ye may have eternal life through Me."
This verse evidently begins the third part of our Lord's address
fo the Jews. He had declared the relation between Hiraself and
God ihe Kallier. He had brought forward fhe evidence of His
own Divine commission, and His claim lo be received as the
Messiah. And now He concludes by a most heart-piercing
appeal to the consciences of His enemies, in which He exposes
the true state of tiieir hearts, and fhe real reasons why they did
not believe in Him. If ever raen were plainly dealt wilh, and
received home-thrusts as to their own spiritual condition, it was
on this occasion. In reading the conclusion of this chapter, one
c.innot but feel that a miraculous restraint must have been put
on our Lord's enemies. Otherwise it is difficult to understand
how they could have allowed Him fo bi ing such cutting and truth
ful charges against them. If ministers desire a warrant for deal
ing plainly with their hearers, and addressing them directly and
personally about their sins, ihey have only to look at their Divine
Master's words in this passage.
The opening charge that our Lord makes, "Ye wiU not come
to me," misses much of its force in the English language. It is
not the future tense of " come " that is used in the Greek. Two
distinct verbs are employed. The right meaning is, "Te do not
will to eome," — " Ye have no heart, desire, or inelination to come
to Me."
Let it be noted here that (I.) we are all by nature dead in
sins; — that (2.) spiritual Uli; is laid up for sinners in Christ alone;
Be is the fountain of iife; — that (3.) in order to receive benefit
from Christ men must corae to him by faith, and believe : be
Ueving is coming;— and, finaUy, (4.) that the real reasons why
men do not come to Christ, and consequently die in their sins, is
their want of will to come.
Let it be carefully noted, that both here and elsewhere tho loss
of man's soul is always attributed in Scripture to man's own
want of will to be saved. It is not any decree of God. It is
not God's unwillingness to receive. It is not any limitation of
Christ's redeeming work and a'oncment. It is not any want of
wide, broad, fiee, full invitations lo repent and behove. It is
simply and entirely man's own fault. — his want of wUl. For
ever let us c'eave ti> Ihis doclrine. Man's salvation, if saved, is
entirely (f Go I. Man's ruin, if lost, is entirely of himself. Ho
"lovcj daikuess rather than Ught." He will have his own way.
AVe should observe in Ihis concluding part of our Lord's
address, that He charges the Jews with four distinct sins : (1.)

818 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
want of real wiU to come to Hira, (2.) want of real love to God
(3.) undue desire of man's praise, (4.) want of real faith in Moses
writings.
41. — [I receive not honour from men.] The connection between
these words and the preceding verse is again not very clear. I
conjecture that it must be as follows : — " I do not say these things,
as if I desired the praise and honour of man. I do not complain
of your not coming to Me, as if I only came into fhe world lo
seek man's praise. It is not on My own account that I mention
your unbelief, but on yours, because it shows fhe state of your
hearts. Do not suppose that I stand in need of foUowers, and
am covetous of man's favour."
42. — [But I know you.. .not the love of God, Sc] The sense and
connection here appear to be as foUows; — "But the plain truth
is, that I know and have long known the state of your hearts,
and I know that you have no real love of God in you. You
profess to worship fhe one true God, and fo give Him honour.
But you show bj' your conduct, that with all your profession you
do not really love God."
To a Jewi-h hearer this tremendous charge must have been
peculiarly galling. It was a charge that none but our Lord
could make with equal decision, because He read men's hearts,
and knew what was in them.
The word " I know " is UteraUy " I have known." _ Alford
paraphrases the sentence, — " By long trial and bearing with your
manners these many generations, and personally also, I have
known, and do know you."
In another place we find our Lord naming this sin ss one of
the special sins of the Pharisees. " Woe unto you, Pharisees!
for ye tithe mint and rue, and all raanner of herbs, and pass over
judgraent and the love of God." (Luke xi. 42.)
Ferus remarks that the increduhty of the Jews did not arise
from want of evidence, but want of love towards God.
43. — [/ am com^ in my Father's namc.reccive me not] This sen
tence contains a p: oof of the assertion made in the preceding
vere. ''You show Ihat you have no real love for Gol, by your
not receiving Me who have coine in my Father's name, and de
sire nothing so mur-li us His honour. If you really loved and
bono- red God rs yo-.i professed to do, you "would gladly receive
and honour Ilis Son."
[Tf another...in his own name, him ye will receive] In ti-iis sen
tence our Lord supposes a c:ise, to show the corrupt and carnal
state of the Jews' hearts. " If another public te.'.cher shaU app.-ar,
giving himself out to be some great one, not seeking God's

JOHM, CHAP. V. 319
honour, and doing all in God's name, but aiming to exalt him
self, and get honour to himself, you will receive and believe him.
You reject Me the true Son of God. You are ready to receive
any false pretender who comes among you, though be may give
no honour to the God whom you profess to worship. It is true
then that you have no real love of God in you."
I believe decidedly that our Lord spoke these words propheti
cally. He had in view the many false Christs and false Messiahs
who arose within the first hundred years after His death, and by
whom so many of the Jews were invariably deluded. Accord
ing to Stier no less than sixty-four false Messiahs appeared to
them, and were more or less believed.
The readiness with which they believed these impostors is a
remarkable historical fact, and a striking fulfilment of the words
before us. They proved as forward to believe these pretenders
to a Divine mission who came in their own names, as they had
been backward to believe our Lord.
I may add, however, that I am one of those who doubt
whether Ihe words of our Lord have even yet received their com
plete fulfilment. I think it highly probable that the world may
yet see a personal Antichrist arise, who will succeed in obtain
ing credence from a vast portion of the Jewish nation. Then,
and not till then, when Antichrist has appeared, this verse will
be completely accomplished. Chrysostom, Cyril, Theophylact,
Euthymius, Alcuin, Heinsius, take this view.
Stier reraarks, "He of whom the Lord here prophecies, is
finally Antichrist, with his open and avowed denial of God and
of Christ; with his most daring 'I,' before which aU the proud
wiU humbly bow down, because they wiU find themselves in
him, and wiU honour him as their true God. As the Father
reveals Himself in Christ, so wiU Satan manifest himself in Anti
christ, and give hira alt his work and witness, and his own
honour as the prince of this world ; and the wicked wiU yield
themselves to him, because through unbeUef they have already
faUen into his nature, and fitly belong to him."
'Wordsworth reraarks, " The Fathers were generally of opinion,
grounded on this passage, that Antichrist would be received by
the Jews."
i'l. — [How can ye believe, etc., etc.] This verse contains a very
imporiant principle. The substance of the meaning seems to
be as follows : — Our Lord tells the Jews that they were not
likely to believe, so long as they cared more for the praise of
man Ihan the praise of God. The true cause of their un
belief was a want of honesty and godly sincerity. With all
their professed zeal for God, fhey did not really care so much

320 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
for pleasing Hira as for pleasing man. In this state of mind
Ihey were never Ukely lo have failh, or to come to the know
ledge of fhe truth. " How can ye believe, receiving and seek
ing honour from one another as ye do now?" It is not
possible that you can beheve, until you cease from your pre
sent earthly-mindedness, and honestly desire God's praise raore
than man's.
The great principle contained in the verse is Ihe close connec
tion between fhe state of a man's heart and his posse.';sing fhe
gift of faith. Believing or not believing, fo have faith or not to
liave laith, is not a thing that depends only on a man's he.ad
being satisfied, and his intellect convinced. It depends fir
more on the state of a man's heart. If a man is not thfiroughly
honest in his professed desire to find out the truth in religion, —
if he secretly cherishes any idol which he is resolved not to give
up, — if he privately cares for anything more than God's praise,
— he v.-ill g-o on to the end of his days doubting, perplexed, dis
satisfied, and resiles^, and will never fiml fhe way fo peace.
His ins'neerity of heart is an insuperable barrier in the way of
his believing. Tliere is a raine of wisdom in the expression,
"An honest and good heart." (Luke viii. 15.) For want of it
many a one compLiins that he cannot get comfort in religion,
.nnd cannot see his way towards heaven, when the truth is that
his own dishonesty of heart is the cause. There is something he
loves more than God. The consequence is that he never feels
an honest will to believe.
The "can" in this verse should be compared with the "wiU"
in the fortieth verse. " Ye cannot because ye will not."
[From God only.] This expression would be more literally
rendered, " from the only God," — the one true God, whom the
Jews boasted that they alone knew and worshipped.
Doddridge remarks th.at the whole verse "has much more
fpirit in it, if we cmsider it as applied to the members of fhe
Sanhedrim, who had suth distingu'shed titles of honour, than if
we only fake it as spoken fo a mixed miiltitiide." If, as many
.suppose, our Lord w. is m.akiiig a formal defence of Hiraself iind
His divine mission before the great Eaclesiastioal Ass mbly of
Ihe .Jews, Ilis words in this verse would corae home to" His
hearers with stinging power.
45. — ['Oo not think that I will accuse, etc.] Wc must not supposo
that our Lord literally meant that there was any real likelihood
of Moses or Himself standing up lo make a formal accusation
against, to Jews. What He did mean was, that not to believe
Hmi was not to believe Moses. There Avas no need for Ilim to
accuse thera of unbelief Moses hiraself, for wdiom they professed
such respect, might be their accuser, and prove them guUty,

JOHX, CHAP. V. 321
"Even now," He saj^s, "Moses accuseth you. His writings
daily read in your synagogue, are a constant wiiness of your
unbelief." There may also, it is highly probible, be a reference
here to the Song of Moses, where he predicts the unbelief of the
people, and desires the book of the law to be " put in the side
of the ark, that it may be there for a witness against thee."
(Deut. xxxii. 26.)
Chemnitius remarks, "What the Lord says to the Jews, is
cxacilv as if I were to say to the Papists, It is not I, but the
very Fathers whose authority ye allege in favour of your super-
stiton, who wiU accuse you of impiety. Or as if we were to say
to the Pope, It is not we who accuse and condemn tliee, but
C :ri~t himself, whose vicar thou callest thyself; and Pettr whose
successor thou wilt have thyself: and Paul whose swi rd thou
pretendest to bear: they it is who wiU accuse thee." Biza
makes much the same remark, and observes, that none will be
more opposed to the Roman CathoUcs in the judgment-day than
the Virgin Mary and fhe saints in whom they profess to trust!
The notion of some Romanists that the expression "Moses in
whom ye trust," justifies the invocation of saints, and jiutting
confidence in them as mediators, is, as Chemnitius observes, too
weak and groundless to need refutation.
4G. — [For had ye believed Moses  me.] These words are simply
an amplification of the idea in the preceding verse. If the Jews
had really believed Moses, they could not have helped believing
Christ. The witness of Moses to Christ, was so di^tinct, express,
and unmistakeable, that true belief in his writings must inevi
tably have led them to belief in Cerist.
[He wrote of me.] These words are very remarkable. In
what sense our Lord used them, we cannot exactiy know. At
the very least we may conclude He raeant that throughout the
five books of Mo-es, by direct prophtcy, by typical pei.sons, by
typical ceremonies, in many ways, and in diveis manner--, Mosoi,,
had written of Him. There is probably a depth of meaning in
the Pentateuch that has never yet been fuUy fathomed. We
shall probably find at the last day that Christ was in many a
chapter and many a verse, and yet we knew it not. There is a
fulness in all Scripture far beyond our conception.
Let us note carefully that our Lord distinotiy speaks of Moses
as a real person who, as a matter cf history, lived and wrote
books, and of his writings as true genuine wiitings deserving of
all credit, and of undeniable authority. In the face of sueh an
expr.ession as this, it is a mournful .fact that imy man .caUed a
Christian can throw doubt on the existence of Moses, or ou the
authority of the books attributed to him.
To say, as some have' done, that our Lord was only accommov,,
14*

322 EXPOSlTOPvY THOUGHTS.
dating Himself to lh'3 oonvenlional language of the times, and
that He did not really me:.n to assert Ilis own belief either in the
existence of Moses, or the authority of his writing.s, is to char vje
Hiui with downright di-hones.y. It represents Him as O.ie
aiding and countenancing fhe dissemination of a lie 1
To say, a? some have done, that our Lord, born of a Jewish
woman, and brought up among Jews, u-as not above fhe iguu-
raiit prejudices of the Jew-, and did not really know that Muses
ever ex.s.eJ, and that his writings are full of mistake-, is to
t-ilk downright b'aspheray and nonsense. Fancy the eternal
Son of God at any tirae talking ignorantly ! Fancy above aU
that any trace of Jewish ignorance would be likely to be found
iu this chapter of St. John's gospel, in which, above all other
chapters perhaps, our Lord's divine knowledge is most strikingly
brought out 1
i7 .—[If ye believe not hU writings, etc!] This verse is an extension
of fhe thought contained in the preceding one, and a, solemn and
mournful c.mc-lusion of the whole address. Thei-e is evilenlly
an intentional contrast between "writings" and "words," as if
our Lord would reraind the Jews that " v/ritings" are generally
more relied upon than "sayings." — " If you do not re.dly believe
what your own honoured lawgiver Moses wrote,— and it is plain
that you do not, — it is not hkely that you will believe what I
SAY. If you have no real faith in the things written in your
Scriptures by that very Moses, for whon you prof;ss such rever
ence, your favourite teacher and lawgiver, it is not to be wonder
ed at that you have no faith in what I say, and that I speak to
you in vain."
The Gieek word used here for "writings" is very remarkable.
It is generally translated "letters," as Luke xxiii. 38. In 2
Tim. iii. 15, it is rendered " Scriptures." To my mind it is a
strong indirect evidence in favour of the verbal inspiration of
Scripture. There is a sense in which these words should ring painfuUy
in ihe ears of all the molern assailants of the Mosaic writings.
It is just as true now, I firmly beUeve, as it was eighteen hundred
years aao. They cannot divide Moses and Christ. If fhey do
not believe the one, they will Iind sooner or later that they do
not beheve the other. If fhey begin wilh ci:sting off Moses and
not believing his writings, they will find in the end that to he
coiiti-;tent they must cast off Christ. If fhey wiU not have the
Old Testament, thoy wid discover at last that they cannot have
the Kew. The two are so linked togetiier that they cannot be
separated. '' What God hath joined together let no man put
asunder." In eoncliidiiig tiis note.:; on this v/onderful chapter, one would

JOHN, CHAP. VI.

323

like to know how this marvellous address was received by those
who heard it. But here we meet with one of the peculiar
" silences " of Scripture. Kot one word is written to tell us what
the Jews of Jerusalem thought of our Lord's argument, or what
effect it hid upon them. Our own duty is clear. Let us take
heed that it has some effect on ourselves.
The amazing fulness of our Lord's teaching appears most
strikingly in the address contained in this chapter. Within the
short span of twenty-nine verses, we Iind no less than eleven
mighty subjects brought forward: (1.) The intimate relation of
the Father and the Son (2.) The divine commission and dignity
of the Son. (3.) The pr.vileges of the man who believes. (4.)
The quickening of the spiriiually dead. (5.) The judgment. (6.)
The resurrection of the hody. (7.) The value of miracles. (8.)
The Scriptures. (9.) The corruption of man's wUl the secret
of man's ruin. (10.) The love of man's praise the cause of
unbelief. (II.) The importance of tho writings of Moses.

JOHN VL 1—14.

1 After these things Jesus went
over the sea of GaUlee, whieh is
the sea of Tiberias.
2 And a great multitude fol
lowed him because they saw his
miraeles which he did ou them that
were diseased.
3 And Jesus went up into a
mountain, and there he sat with his
disciples. i And the passover, a, feast of
the Jews, was nigh.
5 When Jesus then Ufted up
his eyes anO saw a great company
come unto him, he saith unto PhiUp,
¦Whence shaU we buy bread, that
these may eat ?
6 And this ho said to prove him ;
for he himself knew what ha would
do. 1 Philip answered him, Two him
dred pennyworth of bread is not
sutEoient for them, that every one
of them may take a Uttle.
_ 8 One of his disciples, Andrew,
Simoa Peter's brother, saith unto
him, 0 There is a lad here, which hath

five barley loaves, and two smaU
fishes : but what are they among so
many ?
10 And Jesus said, Make the
men sit down. iNow there was
much grass iu the place. So the
men s.it down, in number about
five thousand.
11 Aud Jesus toofc the loaves ;
and when he had given thanks, he
distributed to the disciples, aud the
disciples to them that were set
down ; and likewise of the fishes
as much as they would.
12 "When they were filled, he
said unto his disciples, Gather up
the fragments that remain, tliat
nothing be lost.
13 Therefore they gathered them
together, and fiUed twelve baskets
with the fragments of the five
barley loaves which remained over
and above unto them that had
eaten. 14 Then those men when they
had seen the miraole that Jesus did,
s.ud, This is of a truth that prophet
that should come into the world.

324 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
These verses describe one of our Lord's most remarkable
miracles. Of all the gre.at works that He did, none was
done so publicly as this, and before so many Avitnesses.
Of all the miracles related in the Gospels, this is the
only one which all the four Gosiiel-writers alike record.
This fact .alone (like the four times repeated account of
tlie crucifixion and resurrection) is enough to show that
it is a miracle demanding special attention.
We have, for one thing, in this miracle, a lesson about
Christ's cdmighty poioer. "We see our Lord feeding five
thousand men with "five barley loaves and two small
fi-shes." We see clear proof that a miraculous event took
place in the " twelve baskets of fragments " that remain
ed after all had eaten. Creative power was manifestly
exercised. Food was called into existence that did not
exist before. In healing the sick, and raising the dead,
something was amended or restored that had already
existed. In feeding five thousand men with five loaves,
something must have been created which before had no
existence. Such a history as this ought to be specially instructive
and encouraging to all who endeavour to do good to
souls. It shows us the Lord Jesus " able to save to the
uttermost." He is Oue who has all power over dead he.irts.
Not only can He mend that which is broken, — build up
that which is ruined, — heal that which is sick, — sti'engthen
that which is weak. He can do even greater things than
these. He can call into being that which was not before,
and call it out of nothing. We must never despair of any
one being saved. So long as there is life there is hope.
Re.nson and sense may say that some i^oor sinner is too
hardened, or too old to be converted. Faith will reply, —
" Our Master can create as well as renew. With a Saviour
who, by His Spiiit, can create a new heart, nothing is j>a-
possible."

JOHN, CHAP. VI. S20
We have, for another thing, in this miracle, a lesson
about the office of ministers. We soe the apostles receiving
the bread from our Lord's hands, after He had blessed it,
aud distributing it to the multitude. It .was not their
hands that made it increase. and multiply, but their Mas
ter's. It was His almighty power that ju-ovided an unfailing
supply. It was their work to receive humbly, and dis
tribute faitlifidly.
Now here is a lively emblem of the work which a true
minister of the New Testament is meant to do. He is not
a mediator between God and man. He has no power to
put away sin, or impart grace. His whole business is to
receive the bread of life which his Master provides, and to
distribute it among the souls among whom he labours. He
cannot make men value the bread, or receive it. He can
not make it soul-saving, or life-giving, to any one. This is
not his work. For this he is not responsible. His whole
business is to be a faithful distributor of the food which
his Divine Master has provided ; and that done, his office
is discharged.
We have, lastly, in this miracle, a lesson ctbout the suffi
ciency of the Gospel for the wants of all mankind. We
see the Lord Jesus supplying the hunger of a huge multi
tude of five thousand men. The provision seemed, at first
sight, utterly inadequate for the occasion. To satisfy so
many craving mouths with such scanty fare, in such a
wilderness, seemed impossible. But the event showed that
there was enough and to spare. There was not one who
could complain that he was not tilled.
There can be no doubt that this was meant to teach the
adequacy of Christ's Gospel to supply the necessities of the
whole v.'orld. Weak, and feeble, and fooli.sh as it may seem
to man, the simple story of the Cross is enough for all the
children of Adam in every part of the globe. The tidings
of Christ's death for sinners, and the atonement made by

326 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
that death, is able to meet the hearts and satisfy the con
sciences of all nations, and peoples, and kindreds, and
tongues. Carried by faithful messengers, it feeds and sup
plies all ranks and classes. "The preaching of the cross is
to thom that perish foolishness, but to us who are saved it
is the power of God." (I Cor. i. 18.) Five barley loaves
aud two small fishes seemed scanty provision for a hungry
crowd. But blessed by Christ, and distributed by His
disciples, they were more than sufficient.
Let us never doubt for a moment, that the preaching of
Christ crucified, — the old story of His blood, and right
eousness, and substitution, — is enough for all the spiritual
necessities of all mankind. It is not worn out. It is not
obsolete. It has not lost its power. We want nothing new, —
nothing more broad and kind, — nothing more intellectual, —
nothing more efficacious. We Vfant nothing but the true
bread of life which Christ bestows, distributed faithfully
among starving souls. Let men sneer or ridicule as they
will. Nothing else can do good in this sinful world. No
other teaching can fill hungry consciences, and give thera
peace. We are all in a wilderness. We must feed on Christ
crucified, and the atonement made by His death, or we shall
die in our sins. Notes. John VI. I — 14.
I. — [After these things.] The remark made in chapter v., Ist verse,
applies here. The expression denotes an interval of time having
elapsed between the end of the fifth chapter and the beginning
of the sixth. John pa-ses over all the events which happened at
the conclusion of our Lord's defence of Himself at Jerusalem.
In fact, if the feast spoken of at the beginning of tiie fifch
chapter was really the passover, almost an entire year of our
Lord's ministry is unnoticed by John.
The events in this chapter, we should reraark, are the only events
in our Lord's rainistry in Galilee described by St. John, except
ing the miracle of turning the water into wine at Cana, and the
heaUng of the ruler's son. (Chapter ii. and iv.)
[Went ov^r the sea of Galilee... .Tiberias.] This sea so-called

JOHN^, CHAP. VI. 327
was a fresh- water lake in Galilee, through which the Jc.rdan runs.
According to Thomson, one of the most recent and accurate
travellers in the Holy Land, it is about fourteen miles long, and
nine wide, at the widest part. It lies no less than six hundred
feet below the level of the sea, and is often agitated by sudden
and violent storms.
Tiberias was a town on the west side of the lake, built by
Hero! about the time of our Lord's birth, and comparatively a
molern place in our L-ord's time. In the days of Josephu-?,
forty years after our Lord's crucifixion, Tiberias had become au
important city. It was spared by the Eomans, when Vespasian's
army destroyed almost every other city in Galilee, for its adherence
to the Roman cause, and was made capital of the province.
John is the only Gospel- writer who calls the lake the "sea of
Tiberias." His doing so is an incidental confirmation of the
opinion that he wrote much later than Matthew, Mark, and
Luke, and after the taking of Jerusalem. He naturally used
the name by which the lake was best known when he wrote,
and most familiar to the Gentile readers whora he had especially
in view.
The reason of our Lord going over tlie sea would appear to be
His desire to withdraw Himself from public notice (Mark vi. 31),
aud perhaps from the persecution of Herod's party, afcer the death
of John the Baptist. Comparing John's account with that of
Matthew, Mark, and Luke, it seems most likely that he " went
over fhe sea" fi-ora the west coast, and landed on the north-east
side of the lake, not far frora Bethsaida. Luke tells us distinclly
that the miracle which John here records, was wrought in " a
desert place, belonging to the city, called Bethsaida." (Luke ix.
10.) Add to this the fact that no less than three of our Lord's
disciples were inhabitants of Bethsaida, viz., Philip, Andrew, and
Peter, and our Lord's retirement to this neighbourhood seems
natural and reasonable. — The notion held by many Ihat there
were two Bethsaidas, one in Galilee, where Andrew, Peter, and
Philip Uved, and one in Gaulanitis, where this miracle of feeding
the multitude was wrought, seems both groundless and needless.
Bethsaida was at the head of the lake, in Galilee, near the point
where the river Jordan entered the lake, and the district belong
ing to it extended most probably beyond the river into Gaulanitis.
Thomson shows this satisfactorily.
2.— [A great multitude foTlowed....diseased] There seems no reason
to suppose that this multitude followed our Lord for any but low
motives. They " saw His miracles : " that was alL Some few,
perhaps, were in doubt and suspense, wondering wdiether He
who wrought such miracles could possibly be fhe Messiah. The
great majority probably " foUowed " from that vague, idle curiosity

328 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
and love of excitement, which are the principles that gather nearly
every crowd in the world.
St. Mark says that "the people saw them departing, aud many
knew hm: and ran afoot thither out of all cities, and outwent
thera, and carae together unto him." (Mark vi. 33.) This they
might easily do by going round the head of the lake, to ihe
point where Betiisaida was.
3. — [./e5MS loent up info a mountain.] The Greek here would be
more correctly rendered " into the mountain." "Whether there is
any special reason for this we cannot tell. — It may be the one
mountain which stood there, in contradi.stinofioii fo the raore level
ground composing the district. Thomson, fhe American traveller,
expressly says that there is a " bold headland " here, with " a
smooth gr.assy spot" at the base, "capable of seating many
thousand people." — It may possibly be "that particulav hU" to
wliich our Lord was in the h.ibit of going when He visited the
district near Bethsaida. — It may be the "hill country " generally,
or mountainous district near Bethsaida.
[His disciples.] This expression includes not only fhe twelve
who ha 1 been chosen and set apart by our Lord by this time, but
raany others who professed themselves His disciples. Many of
them, it would appear from this very chapter (verse 66), were
not really be'ievers, an 1 in course of time fell away. If Christ
Hiraself had many sush dirc'ples and foUowers, ministers now-
a-day-i (even the very best) raust not be surprised fo find ihe
sauie state of things araong fhrir people.
4. — [The passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh.] John's habit of
exp'aining Jewish custcms for fhe benefit of Gentile readers,
should here be noticed.
The approach of fhe passover feast is no doubt specially men-
fione 1 in order lo show the suitableness of our Lord's discourse
in this ehiptor to the season of the ye.ir. The minds of His
h arers would doubtless be thinking of the passover lamb, and
its flesh about to be eaten and blood about to be sprinkled. Our
Lord takes occasion to speak of that "flesh and blood" which
must be eaten and drunk by aU who would not perish in sin. It
is au instance of that divine wisdom with which our Master spoke
"words in season," and turned everything to account.
Let it be noted that our Lord did not keep this passover in
Jerusalem to aU aopearance, but remained in'Oalilee. Yet He
generally observed aU the ordinances of tiie law of Moses most
strictiy, aid "fjlflUed aU righteousness." The reason evidentiy
is, as Rollock remarks, that the enmity and persecution of the
leading Jews at Jerus:ilem made it impossible for. Him -to go there.
It would have cut short His ministry and brought on His death

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 329
befire the tirae. May we not also learn here that the use of
outward ordinances and ceremonies is not so absolutely neces
sary that they can never be dispensed with? Grace, and repen-
t.ince, and failh are absolutely needful fo salvation. Saoraraenis
and ordinances are not.
The near approach of the passover may possibly account in
part for the crowds who were assembled on this occasion. Not
a few of the people peihaps were on their way to Jerusalem, to
keep the passover feast, and were drawn out cf their road by
hearing of our Lord's miracles.
o.—\ When Jesus then lifted up His eyes and saw a great company!]
We must not conclude from these expression.^, that our Lord was
suddenly surprised by the appearance of a great crowd. On fhe
contrary, Matthew and Mark both tell us that before He wrought
the miracle which we are about to read of. He had felt Cora-
passion for the multitude, because fhey were " a^ sheep not having
a shepherl," and had " taught thera many things." (Mark vi. 34.)
— When this teaching was over. He seeras to have taken a survey
of the crowd before Him, and seeing how large it was, proceeded
to show His fender concern for the wants of men's bodies as weU
as of their sou's. A great crowd is always an impressive and
solemn sight. It is an interesting thought that the same eyes
which looked compassionately on ihe crowd here, are still look
ing at every crowd, and especially at every crowd of persons
assembled in God's narae.
[He saith unio Philip, whence....buy....eat] Our Lord's reason
for asking this question is given in the next verse. But it is
worth notice that there was a certain propriety in asking Philip
this question, because PhiUp "was of Beihsaida," the very town
near which they were all asserablcd. (John i. 44.) Our Lord
therefore might reasonably appeal to Philip, as one raost likely
and able to answer His question, whether it were possible to
buy bread for such a multitude, tie would of course know the
capabilities of the neighbourhood. The idea, maintained by
C.hrysojrom, Burgon, and olher.--, that PhiUp was a disciple pecu
Uarly slow to recognize Christ's Godhead, and therefore requiring
special appeals, seems to me a fur less satisfactory solution.
G.~[T!iis He said to prove him!] "We find the same kind of pro
cedure on other oc:,-asions When our Lord appeared to the
two disciples at Emraaus, we read that after H:s discourse witii
them, " He male as though He would have gone further."
(Luke xxi. 28.) Thi;; was '• fo prove" whether they rcaUy wished
for more of His corariany. — Wh-^n on aiother oeoasion lie came
to the I i ;, ipl '3 wal.%i.ig on the sea, St. M..rk sa'/s, '- He would
have passed by thera." (iilark vi. 48.) "When in this very
chapter He would draw forth an expression of faith f om His dis-

330 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
ci[ les, He says, " "WiU ye also go away ?" (John vi. 67.) Our
Lord knows the sluggishness and coldness of our hearts, and He
see? it good to stir our spiritual senses, and draw forth our
spiritual desires by such a mode of dealing with us.
Explana,tory observations like this, made by the Gospel-writer
himself, are more frequent in St. John's Gospel than iu any cf the
other three.
[He himself knew...would do!] This would be rendered more
literally ''what He was about to do." Our Lord's foreknowledge
of the miracle He was about fo do should be noted. The words
He used in the last chapter should be remembered. They were
not works which were done by chance and accidentally, in conse-
cjuence of unforeseen circumstances, but foreseen and pre
determined. They were " the works which the Father had
given him to finish." (John v. 36.)
7. — [Philip answered Him, Two hundred penny ivorth, etc!] What
quantify of bread this sum would have procured we have no
accurate raeans of knowing. But we may remember that fhe
Eoman " denarius," or penny, represented a very much larger
sum than a penny does araong ourselves. "We raust remember
also that bread was rauch cheaper then than it is now. Tho
quantity Philip named was probaUy much larger than we sup
pose. Burgon thinks that the sum named by Philip v.'as the whole
"store of money contained in their common purse," — viz., about
six or seven pounds. But this cannot be proved.
8. — [One of His disciples, Andrew, etc.] Let it be noted here that
Andrew, as well as PhUip, was a native of fhe di.^trict of Beth
saida, where all these things happened. There is a propriety
therefore in his speaking and giving information on the present
occasion.
9. — [There is a lad.. .five barley loaves and two small fishes.] We
should note in this verse how sraaU were the provisions which
our Lord miraculously multiplied. The fact that ono " lit'lo
boy " (for this is the meaning of the word we render "lad")
could carry all the supply that Andrew mention', is a plain proof
that the " loaves " could not have been large, nor the " fish '' of
great size.
The " fishes " were probably sraall dried fish, such as are not
uncommonly used as food now in hot countries, and near the
sea of Galilee would be of course common.
Bailey was regarded, according to the Talmud, as a coarse
food, only fit for horses and asccs.
[ What are they among so many.] This expression of Andrew's

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 331
is purposely reported, no doubt, in order fo shovvf how strong
was the conviction of our Lord's disciples that they had not suf
ficient provision to feed the multitude, and then to bring out
into clearer Ught the greatness of ihe miracle which our Lord
wrought. It also helps fo prove that the wonderful feeUng of
the multitude was not .1 preconcerted and prepared thing, ar
ranged by our Lord and His disciples. Even His own immedi
ate followers were taken by surprise.
10. — [Jesits said, make the men sit down.] This arrangement pre
vented confusion and preserved order, points of vast importance
when any large assembly of people is gathered together. More
over, it made it less easy to practise any iraposifion or deceit in
the feeding of the multitude. When every man was sitting
steadily in his appointed place, no one could be passed over in
the distribution of food, without it being observed. St. Mark
teUs us that they " sat down in ranks, by hundreds and by fif
ties." (Mark vi. 40.)
[There was much grass in the place.] The time of the year
when ihese things happened would be the very time when there
was most " grass." It was in the spring-time, just before the
passover, when the winter was gone, and the parching heat of
summer had not begun. Thorason, the American traveller, re
ports that at this very day there is an open space of green grass
at the foot of a hUl, at the very place where in aU probabdity
this miracle took place.
Let us note our Lord's consideration for the bodily comfort of
His followers. He chooses a place -where there was " much grass"
to sit down on.
[So the men sat down.. five thousand.] The word "mon" here
is probably emphatic, in contradistinction fo the "women and
children," whom Matthew expressly mentions as having been
present beside the five thousand men. In the Greek the word
is not the same as that rendered " men " in the first clause of
this verse.
11. — [Jesus ionk ihe loaves...given thanks.] The expression here
seems rather to imply a solemn action of prayer and blessing, as
well as of giving thanks, as the first preliminary to the raighty
miracle about to follow. In fact St. Luke says, " He took ihe
five loaves and the two fishes, and looking np to heaven He
blessed them, and brake, and gave," etc. (Luke ix. 16.) Tl.is
al-o seems imp'ie 1 in St. John's subsequent reference to this
miraole, where He speak"S of " the place where they did eat
bread af or that the Lord had given thanks." (John vi.'23.) The
Greek word here used is precisely the same that is used in the
account of the institution of the Lord's Supper given by St.
Matthew St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. Paul St. Matthew and

332 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
St. Mark say that our Lord " gave thanks " when He took " tha
cup." St. Luke and St. Paul say tha" He also did it when He
took ''fhebiead." So here we can hardly doubt that blessing
and giving thanks went together. The Greek word is tho one
which We have borrowed and transferred to our own language
in the expression " Eacharist."
[He distributed to ihe disciples, etc.] I think there can be no
djubt tiiat this was the point af which the mighty miracle here
wrought by our Lord caine in. As fast as He broke the loaves
and the disciples carried fhem away to distribute them, so fast
did ihe loaves muliiply unler His hands. It was in the act of
breaking and distribut ng to the disciples that the miraculous
multiplication took place. In f lot there was a continual act of
creati n going on. Bread was continuaUy called into existence
which did not exist before. The greatness of this miracle is per
haps not suffieiently reaUzed. One loaf and less than half a lish
to every thousand men ! It is evident ihiTO could not have been
raore than a sraa I morsel tor each one wiihout a miraculous in
crease of fhe food.
Bishop Hall remarks, " Ho could as well have multiplied fhe
loaves whole; why would He rather do it in the breaking?
'Was it not to teach us that in the distribution of our goods we
should expect His blessing, not in their entireness and reserva
tion'? There is that scattereth and yet increaseth."
12. — [When ihey were filled!] That expression deserves notice. It
is one of the strongest proofs of the reality of the miracle we are
reading. It would be impossible to convince five thousand hun
gry men in a wilderness that they were really filled, if they were
not. A few enthusiasis and fanatics might possibly have been
found who might have fancied they had eaten when they had
not. But it is abs^ird to suppose that so strong a bodily sensa
tion as hunger could possibly be relieved in five thousand men,
if there had not been a real supply of food, and real eating of it.
[He said unto h's disciphs, Gather up ihe fragments, etc.] In
this lit'le cirfumsiance again we have a proof that real food waa
supphed, and in sufiicieiit quanti y for all. There was n.'t merely
a moisel for each man, but an abundant supply, enough and to
spare. Our Lord's care for htlle thing,=, and dishke of waste and
extrivagance, appear strongly in this sentence. It would be weU
if tlie principle contained in the words was more remembered by
Christians, — '-Let nothing be lost." It is ii deep principle of
y ry wide app'ica ion. Time, money, and opportunities of show
ing kindness aud doing good are speciaUy to be remembered in
applying the principle.
It admits of question whether the "disciples" who distributed

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 338
the bread on this occasion, and afterwards gathered the frag
ment-, did not include other he'per.-i beside the twelve apo^tle^.
The time necessarv for ihe d stribution of bread among five tlioii-
saiid peopl:', U'only twelve pairs of hands were employed, would
prove on calculation fo be very great.
13. — [Therefore they gathered....fi'led twelve baskets, etc.] This simple
fact is enough to prove that a mighty miracle had been wroujiht.
Oar common sense can tell us that five l;avts and two fisiies
alone could not have filled a single basket. Now if ihe frag
ments left after the meal were enough to fill "twelve ba-kets,"
there must evidently have been a miraculous raultiplication of
the food at some stage of the proceedings. The fragmen's alone
were probably fifty t m.s raore bulky than the original supply of
food with -which the raeal began. The identity between the
number of the baskets fiUed, and the nuraber of the apostles, will
of course strike any reader. One might think that each apostie
had a basket.
St. Mak mentions that there were fragments of "fishes " put
into fhe baskets as well as loaves, so that the fishes also were
miraculously multiplied as well as the bread.
Some early writers, not without justice, call this the greatest
miracle that our Lord ever wrought. Perhaps we are poor
judges of such points, and littie able fo make comparisons. But
it is certain that on no other occasion did our Lord manifest so
clearly His creative power. No doubt it was as easy to Him to
cause bread to be, as to say "let there be Ught," or to make the
earth bring forth herbs and corn at the creation of the world.
But the miracle was clearly intended to be one which Christ-ans
should hold in special remembrance. It is at any rate note
worthy that this is the only passage in Christ's life which all ihe
four Gospel-writers alike record. In this respect the miracle
stands alone.
The attempts of Neologians to explain away this miraole are
eimply contemptible and ridiculous. It requires more faith fo
beUeve their explanations than to believe tiie miracle and take it
as we find it. None but a person determined to disbelieve aU
miracles, and cast them out of the Sacred narrative, would ever
try to make out (as some actuaUy have tried) Ihat the four times
repeated story of the miraculous feeding which we have consi
dered, only meant that ihe multitude brought out the hidden
stores of provisions which they had carried with thera, and
shared them with one another I
14. — [Then those men.] This probably means the whole crowd and
multitude which had been fed on this occasion.
[WAcre they had seen ihe miracle!] Signs and wonders were ex-

334 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
pected to accompany the appearance of any prophet Or messen
ger from God. Here was a mighty miracle, and at once tho
minds of all who saw it were excited.
[This is of a truth that prophet, etc] This meant that " pro
phet like unto Moses," whom aU well-instructed Jews expected
to appear, and for whose speedy appearing the ministry of John
the Baptist had prepared the minds of all the dwellers in Pales
tine. " Of a truth '' would be more Uterally rendered " truly," — i. e.,
really and indeed.
" That prophet " would be more literaUy " tho prophet."

JOHN VL 15—21.

15 "When Jesus therefore per
ceived that they would como and
take him by force, to make him a
king, he departed again into a moun
tain himself aloue.
16 And when even was now
come, his disciples went down uuto
the sea,
1'? And entered into u, ship,
and went over the sea toward
Capernaum. And it was now
dark, and Jesus was not come to
them.

18 And the sea arose by reason
of a great wind that blew.
19 So when they had rowed
about five and twenty or thirty fur
longs, thej' see Jesus walking on
the sea, and drawing nigh uuto the
ship ; aud they were afraid.
20 But ho saith unto them, It is
I ; be not afraid.
21 'Then they willingly received
him into the ship : and immediately
the ship was at the land whither
they went.

We should notice, in these verses, our Lord Jesus Christ's
humility. We are told that, after feeding the multitude.
He "perceived that they would come and take him by
force to make him a king." At once He departed, and
left thom. He wanted no such honours as these. He
had come, "not to be ministered unto, but to minister
and to give his life a ransom for many." (Matt. xx. 28.)
We see the same spirit and frame of mind all through
our Lord's earthly ministry. Fi'om His cradle to His grave
He was " clothed with humility." (1 Pet. v. 5.) He was
born of a poor woman, and spent the first thirty years
of His life in a carpenter's house at Nazareth. He was

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 335
followed hy poor companions, — many of them no better
than fishermen. He was poor in his manner of living :
"The foxes had holes, and the birds of the air their nests:
but the Son of man had not where to lay his head."
(Matt. viii. 20.) AVhen He went on the Sea of Galilee,
it was in a borrowed boat. When He rode into Jerusalem,
it -was on a borrowed ass. When He was buried, it was
in a borrowed tomb. " Though he was rich, yet for our
sakes he became poor." (2 Cor. viii. 9.)
The example is one which ought to be far more
remembered than it is. How common are pride, and
ambition, and high-mindedness ! How rare are humility
and lowly-mindedness ! How few ever refuse greatness
when offered to them ! How many are continually
seeking great things for themselves, and forgetting the
Injunction, — " Seek them not ! " (Jer. xiv. 5.) Surely
it was not for nothing that our Lord, after washing the
disciples' feet, said, — " I have given you an example that
ye should do as I have done." (John xiii. 15.) There is
little, it may be feared, of that feet-washing spirit among
Christians. But whether men will hear or forbear, humi-.
lity is the queen of the graces. " Tell me," it has been
said, "how much humility a man has, and I will tell you
how much rehgion he has." Humility is the first step
toward heaven, and the true way to honour. " He that
humbleth himself shall be exalted." (Luke xviii. 14.)
We should notice, secondly, in these verses, the trials
through which Christ's disciples had to pass. We are
told that they were sent over the lake by themselves, while
their Master tarried behind. And then we see them alone
in a dark night, tossed about by a great wind on stormy
waters, and, worst of all, Christ not with them. It
was a strange transition. From -witnessing a mighty
miracle, and helping it instrumentally, amidst an admir
ing crowd, to solitude, darkness, winds, waves, storm,

336 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
anxiety, and danger, the change was very great ! But
Christ knew it, and Christ appointed it, and it was
worldng for their good.
Trial, we must distinctly understand, is part of the diet
which all true Christians raust expect. It is one of tho
means by which their grace is proved, and by which they
hud out what there is in themselves. Winter as well as
summer, — cold as -well as heat, — clouds as well .as sun
shine, — are all necessary to bring the fruit of the Spirit to
ripeness and maturity. We do not naturally like this.
We would rather cross the lake wilh calm weather and
favourable -winds, with Christ always by our side, and the
sun shining down on our faces. But it may not be. It is
not in this way that God's children are made "partakers
of His holiness." (Heb. xii. 10.) Abraham, and Jacob,
and Moses, and David, and Job were all men of many
trials. Let us be content to walk in their footsteps, and
to drink of their cup. In our darkest hours we may seem
to be left, — ^but we are never really alone.
Let us notice, in the last place, our Lord Jesus Christ's
poioer over the waves of the sea. Pie came to His disciples as
they were rowing on the stormy lake, " walking on " the
waters. He walked on them as easily as we walk on dry
land. They bore Him as firmly as the pavement of the
Temple, or the hills around Nazareth. That which ia
contrary to all natural reason was perfectly possible to
Christ. The Lord Jesus, we must remember, is not only the
Lord, but the Maker of all creation. "All things were
made by him; and without him was not anything made
that was made." (John i. 3.) It -was just as easy for Hira
to walk on the sea as to form the sea at the beffiiming, —
just as easy to suspend the common laws of nature, as they
are called, as to impose those laws at tho first. Learned
men talk solemn nonsense sometimes about the eternal

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 337
fixity of the "laws of nature," as if they were above God
Himself, and could never be suspended. It is well to be
reminded sometimes by such miracles as that before us,
that these so-called " laws of nature " are neither immu
table nor eternal. They had a beginning, and will one
day have an end.
Let all true Christians take comfort in the thought that
their Saviour is Lord of waves and winds, of storms and
tempests, and can come to thom in the darkest hour,
"walking upon the sea." There are -waves of trouble far
heavier than an)' on the Lake of Galilee. There are days
of darkness which try the faith of the holiest Christian.
But let us never despair if Christ is our Friend. He can
come to our aid in an hour when we think not, and in
ways that we did not expect. And when He comes, all
will be calm. Notes. John VI. 15—21.
15. — [When Jesus therefore perceived.] This would be more Ute
raUy rendered, " Jesus knowing, or having known." It seems to
imply Divine knowledge of the multitude's secret intentions.
Jesus knew men's hearls and thoughts.
[That they would come.] This would be more literaUy, " that
they are about to come."
[TjJce him by force fo make him a king.] The intention or wish
was probably to place Him at their head, and proclaim Him
their king, wi*h or without His consent, and theu fo hurry Him
away to Jerusalem, so as fo arrive there at the passover feast,
and announce Hira as a DeUverer fo ihe crowd assembled at
that lime. — The idea evidently in their mind was, that one who
cou'd work such a mighty mira-le must be a raighty temporal
Eedeemer, raised up, like the Judges of old, to break the bonds
of the Romish government, and restore the old independence
and kingdom to Israel. There is no reason to suppose that there
was any raore spiritual feeling in the minds of the multitude.
Of sense of spiritual need, and of faith in our Lord as a Saviour
from sin, there is no trace. Popularity and the good opinion of
excited crowds are both worthless and temporary things.
IBollock remarks that the Jews wore very sensitive about the
15

838 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
tyranny and dominion of the Romans, while they did not feel
the far greater tyranny and dominion of sin. He points out
that we who are expecting the second advent of Christ iu the
present day should take care that we increasingly feel the burden
and yoke of sin, from which Christ's second advent will deUver
the creation. Otherwise Christ's second advent will do us no
raore good than his fi'St advent did to the Jews.
[He departed again into a mouniain....alone.] This would be
more literally rendered, " the mountain," as at verse 3.
St. Matthew and St. Mark both mention another reason why
our Lord withdrew fo the mountain, beside His desire to avoid
the intention of the multitude. They tell us that He "sent the
multitude away and departed to pray." (Matt. xiv. 23 ; Mark
ix. 46.)
Some think that a miracle must have been wrought when our
Lord withdrew Himself from fhe multitude, and that He must
have passed through thera invisibly, as after fhe miracle at Be
thesda, and at Nazareth. Yet it seems hardly necessary to sup
pose this.
It is worth noticing that after St. Luke's account of this mira
cle, he immediately relates that our Lord asked the disciples,
" Whom say the people that I am ?" (Luke ix. 18.) It does not
however follow that He asked immediately, but after an interval
of sorae days. But the wish of the multitude here related may
have occasioned the question.
16. — When even....disciples, went down unto the sea.] St. Matthew
and St. Mark both say that our Lord " constrained " them to
embark in fhe ship and depart. He "obliged" or "compeUed"
them. He probably saw that in their ignorance of the spiritual
nature of His kingdom they were ready to faU in with the wishes
of the muliitude, and to proclaim Hira a king.
17. — [Entered into a ship.] This would be more literally " the
ship." It seeras to mean that particular vessel or fishing-boat
which our Lord and His disciples ahvays used on the lake of
Ga'ilee, and which probably was lent for His use by the relatives
of those of His disciples who were fishermen, if not by fhe four
themselves, — viz., James, John, Andrew, and Peter. There is
no necessity for supposing that when they left their caUing to
become disciples they gave up their boats so entirely as fo have
no more use of them when they wished. The last chapter of
this very Gospel seems to prove the contrary. 'When Peter said,
" I go a fishing," there was " the boat " ready for them at once.
(John xxi. 3.)
[ Went over the sea.... Capernaum.] This would be more literally
" were going," " were in the act of going." Capernaum lay on

JOHN, CHAP. vr. 339
the north-west shore of fhe lake of Galilee, and the point -where
the disciples embarked was on the noith-east shore. To reach
Capernaum they would pass fhe point where the Jordan ran into
the lake, and leave that point and the town of Bethsaida ou their
right hand. The place where the miracle was wrought was not
at Bethsaida itself, we must remember, but in the desert coun
try and district lying to the east of Bethsaida. St. Luke specially
mentions this (Luke ix. 10), .and unless we keep it in mind we
shall not understand St. Mark's words, that our Lord made Hia
discip'es " go fo fhe other side before unto Bethsaida." To go
to Capernaum they must need go " in the direction of " Belh-
saida, though the}' would leave it on fhe right as Ihey passed.
ThotusoD. ill the " Land and the Book," maintains this view, and
RoUock, 250 years ago, held the same opinion.
I repeat the opin'on that I see no neces-ity for the theory of
Alford aud other commentators that there were two Bethsaidas.
Capernaum was the city where our Lord passed more timo,
and probably woiked more miracles, than He did in any other
place during His ministry. This is probably fhe reason why
our Lord speaks of it as " exalted unto heaven." (Matt. xi. 23.)
No city had such piivileges and saw so much of the Son of God
while He was manifest in the fle&h.
[II teas vow dark, and Jesus was not come.] The Greek -word
for " dark " is always rendered " darkness " in other places, except
John XX. 1. The simple circumstance of the disciples being alone
in the boat, on the sea, and in darkness, has been felt in every
age to be an instructive emblem of the position of the Church
of Christ between fhe first and second advents. Like fhem, the
Church is on a sea of trouble, and separate frora its Head. In
estima'ing, however, the position and feelings of the disciples,
we must not forget that four of them at least were fishei men,
and familiar from their 3'outh with the management of boats,
and all the dangers of the lake. "We must not therefore think of
them as inexperienced landsmen, or as Uttle children unable to
take care of themselves.
"We learn fo know the value of Christ's company, when we
have it, by the discomfort we expeiience when we have it not.
18. — [And the sea, arose....great wind that blew!] The Greek word
rendered " arose " would be raore Uterally rendered " was being
raised or stirred."
At first sight it may seem surprising that the waters of an
inland lake, like the sea of GaUlee, could be so rauch agitated.
But if is rema-kable that the testimony of travellers in modern
times is distinct, ihat this lake is peculiaily liable to be visited
by violent sqUaUs of wind, and to become very rough while they

84:0 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
last. Thomson, the American traveller, says,— "My experience
in this region enabled me to sympallizo wi'li the dis-cinles in
their long night's confest with tiie wind. — I hive seen Ihe facj
of the lake hke a huge boiling ca'dron. 'I'he wind howled down
the valleys from the north-ea^t and ea-t with such fury tliat no
effo- ts of rower.s coild have brought a boat to shore at any point
along that coast. — To understand the cause-; of these sudden and
violent tempests we must remember the like lies low, — si.x
hundred feet lower than fhe ocean, — that water-courses have cut
out profound ravines and wild gorges, converging to the head
of the lake, and that these act like gigantic funnels to draw down
the cold w-nds from fhe mountains. On the occasion referred to
W'l pitched our tents on the shore, and remained for three days
and nights exposed to this tremendous wind. We had to dou
ble-pin all the tent-ropes, and frequently were obliged to hang
with our whole weight upon them, to keep the quivering taber
nacle frora being carried up bod.ly into fhe air. No wonder the
disciples toiled and rowed hard all thit nigh.t." In ano'.her
place he says, — '¦ Small as the lake is, and placid in general as a
molten mirror, I have repeatedly seen it quiver, and leap, and
boil like a caldron, when driven by fierce winds." — Thomson's
" L.VND AND THE BoOK."
Burkitt remirks that the position of the disciples, immediately
terapest-tossed after witnessing and partaking in a mighty mira
cle, IS an instructive type of fhe common experience of believers.
After seasons of peculiar privileges there often come sharp trials
of faith and patience.
This sudden trial of faith by danger was no doubt intended to
be a lesson to the disciples as to what fhey must expect in the
exercise of their ministry. Affliction and crosses are the grind
stones on which God is constantly sharpening those instruments
which He uses most.
19. — [Sj when...rowed about five andtweniy or thirty furlongs.] 'We
might gather from the disciples "rowing," and not sailing, that
the wind was again t ihem, and wo are expressly told, both by
St. Matthew and St. Mark, that " the wind was contrary." Prom
fhe distance fhey had rowed, and the known width of tiie lake,
at that particular part of it, they were probably now about the
middle of their passage. St. Matthew says, — they were •' in tiie
midst of the sea." (.Matt. xiv. 24.) This would make them at
lea t two or three miles frora shore, a fact which should be care-
fiilly noted with reference to what follows.
Let the expression "twenty-five or thirty'' be noted. Itis
not necessary to define to a hair's breadth distances and quantities
in narrating an event. Even an inspired writer does not. He
uses the common language of men, and such language as those

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 341
present on the occasion would have used. In a dark niiht they
could not jiossibly have spoken with precise accuracy. John was
there hinis.;lf, and knew that excessive aceua-y is someti res
suspicious, and looks lUce a made-up story. John ii. 6 is a simi
lar expression.
Bengel says, " Tlie Holy Spirit knew, and could have told
John precisely how many furlongs there were. But in Scripture
he imitates popular modes of expression."
[Tliey see Jesus ivaVcing on ihe sea, etc, etc.] This was undoubt
edly as great a miracle as any that our Lord wrought,
" Moses," says Theophylact, " as a servant, by the power of
God divided the sea. But Christ, the Lord of all, by His own
power walked on the sea."
For a solid body fo walk on the face of fhe water as on dry
laud, is an entire suspension of what are called the laws of nature.
It was, of course, as easy for Him by whom the waters were
first created to walk upon thera as to create them. But the
whole proceeding was so entirely supeinatur.il, t'lat we can iho-
roughly understand the disciples being "afraid." Nothing is
found to alarm huraan nature so rauch a? being suddenly brought
into contact with anything apparently supernatural and belonging
to another world, and especially in fhe night. The feelings called
forth on sueh occasions, even in ungodly and irreligious raen, are
one of the strongest indirect proofs, fha; all men's consciences
recognize an unseen world.
That a mighty miracle really was wrought upon this occasion
is the only reasonable arcount that can be given of the fact that
we are told. St Mark adds to St. John's account, that when
Jesus came near the ship, " He wou'd have passed by them."
(Mark vi. 48.) St. Matthew adds another fact of even greater
importance. He tells us that Peter said, " Lord, if it be thou,
bid me come unto thee on the wa- er. And he said, Come. And
when Peter was come down out of fhe ship, he walked on the
water to go to Jesus." (Matt. xiv. 28, 29.) Such a fact as this
cannot possibly be explained away. Not only did our Lord walk
on the watjr HimseU', but He also gave one of His twelve
apostles power to do the sarae.
To say in the fice of such facts as these, that there was in
reality no miracle, — that the disciples were mistaken, — that our
Lord was only walking on the shore near the vessel, — that the
supei'.-titious fear of the disciples made thera fancy that lie was
walking on the sea, — that they finally put to shore, and took
Him on board, — to say such things as these pleases some persons
who profeiS not to believe any miracles at all! But such views
cannot possibly be reconciled with the account of what really

S42 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
happened, given by two witnesses, Matthew and John, who
were actually present on the occasion, and by another writer, —
viz., Mark, who was intiraate with that very Peter who walked
on the water himself.
If the disciples were " in the midst of the sea," and two or
three miles li-om shore, how could they possibly have seen our
Lord walking on the shore ?
If it was " dark '' when these things happened, it stands to
reason that they could not distinguish anyone on shore, even
supposing that they were not two miles off.
If there was a heavy gale blowing, and the waves were rough,
it is absurd to suppose that they could hold a conversation with
anyone walking on shore.
The plain truth is that it requires fir more faith to accept such
improbable and preposterous explanations as these, than to take
the whole account simply as we find it, and to believe that a real
m'ghtv miraole was wrought. — Unless men are prepared to say
that Matihew, Mark, and John, wrote accounts of the events of
tills night, which are incorrect, and not trustworthy, it is impos
sible for any honest and unprejudiced person to avoid the con
clusion, that a miracle took place. — Of course, if M'atthew, Mark,
and John give incorrect accounts, and are not to be trusted here,
they are not to be trusted anywhere, and all their records of our
Lor i's doings and sayings become utterly worthless. This
unhappi'y is the very result to which raany -would be glad to
lead us. Frora denying all miracles to downright infidelity is
nothing but a regular succession of steps. If a man begins with
throwing overboard ths m'racles, he c.innot stop logicaUy tiU he
has given up the Bible and Christianity.
20. — [But he .saith, If is I; be not afraid.] Our Lord's tenderness
for Hij disciples' feelings appears beautifully here. No sooner
does lie see fear than He proceeds to calm it. He assures them
that fhe figure they see walking on the deep is no spirit or ghost,
— no enemy or object of dread. It is their own beloved Master.
His voice, well-known as it must have been, would, of course,
help to calm their fears. Yet even that was not enough till
Peler had s.iid, "If it be thou, bid rae come to thee.''
The practical remark has often been raade, Ihat many of the
things which now fritiifen Christians an I fill them with anxiety,
would ce ise to fii^hlen thera if they would endeavour to see the
Lord Jesis in all, orderim;- every providence, and overruling
everything, so that not a hair fills to the gi ound without Him.
They are happy who can hear His voice thiough fhe thickest
clouds and darkness, and above the loudest winds and storms,
Baying, "Itis I; be not afraid."

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 343
It has been thought by some that the words, " It is I," might
be more literaUy rendered, " I am," and that they are intended
to refer to the name of God, so familiar to Jews, " I am." But
I doubt the correctness of the idea. It is a pious thought, but
hardly in keeping with the context and fhe circumstances of the
occurrence. Our Lord desired first to relieve the fears of His
disciples by showing thera who it was that they feared ; and the
Greek words for " It is I," are the only words that He could
well have used.
It may be noted here that there seeras to be no feeling or
passion fo which Christians are so liable as "fear." There is
none, certainly, against which our Lord so often exhorts His
disciples. "Fear not: — be not afraid: — let not your heart be
troubled :" are very common sayings of His.
21. — [Then they willingly reeeived...ship.] This would be rendered
more literally : " Then they were -wiUing," " they were glad, and
wish-ed." — It evidently impUes, that at first the disciples were
afraid of our Lord. But as soon as they recognized Him, their
fears departed ; and so far from wishing to be rid of the figure
they ha'l seen walking on the sea, their great desire now was to
receive Him on board.
[Immediately the ship was at the land whither they went!] This
sentence either raeans that shortly after our Lord joined the dis
ciples in the boat they reached their destination, or that imme
diately, by rairaculous agency, they arrived at the shore. There
is, perhaps, no occasion to suppose any other miracle. Both
Matthew and Mark distinctly say that " the wind ceased," as
soon as our Lord entered the boat. The storm, according to fhe
custom of storms on the lake, suddenly ceased, and the disciples
consequently had no trouble in rowing fo the shore. The wind
was no longer against them; and the sea, in so smaU a compass
as the Lake of GalUee, would naturally soon go down.
The old practical lesson still remains to be remembered.
Christ's Church is now a tossed ship, in the midst of a stormy sea.
The great Master has gone up into heaven to intercede for His
people, left alone for awhile, and to return. "When Jesus returns
again to His tossed and aftlicted Church, at the second advent,
their troubles will soon be over. They will soon be in harbour.
His voice, which will fUl the wicked with terror, will fiU His
people with joy.
The place where they landed was evidently Oapernaura, or
close to it. The discourse which foUows was at any rate finished
(wherever it may have begun) in " the synagogue at Capernaum,"
and fbUows in unbroken succession after the events we have now
been considering. The statement of St. Matthew and St Mark,

344

KXI'OSITOKY THOUGHTS.

that our Lord and His disciples reached the shore in ' the land
of Genesaret," is quite reconcileable with St. John's account.
The "land of Genesaret" was a plain, on the north-west coast
of the Lake of Galilee, extending from Magdala at tiie south, to
Capernaum at the north.
In leaving this passage, I call the reader's attention to the
very inarked and peculiar position which the two miracles
recorded by St. John in this chapter occupy. They immediately
precede that wonderful discourss in the synagogue of C.-pernaum,
in which our Lord proclaims Himself to he "the living bread
which carae down frora heaven and giveth life lo the world,"
and declares that " except we eat His flesh and drink His blood
we have no life in us." — I beUeve that the two miracles were
intended fo prepare fhe rainds of the disciples to receive tiio
mighty truths which the discourse contained. Did Ihey stumble
at the announcement that He was the "bread of God," and
" gave life to the world " ? It w juld surely help their weak faith
to remember that the very day before they had seen Him sud
denly supply the wants of a mighty multitude wilh five loives
and two fishes. — Did they stumble at the doctrine, that " His
flesh was meat indeed and bis blood drink inde-ed " ? It would
surely assist their feeble spiritual apprehen-ion to remember
that the very night before they had seen that body walking on
the face of the sea. They had had ocular proof that there was a
deep mystery about our Lord's human nature, and that although
He was real and true man, there was at the same time soiue-
tliiiig about Him far above man. These things I bel'eve are
worth noticing. The cjiinection between our Lord's miraeles
aud His teaching is often far closer than at firet sight appears.

JOHN VL 22— 2'7.

22 The day followmg, wheu the
people which stood on the other
side of the sea saw that thera was
uono other boat there, save that one
./•licreinto his disciples were^ntor-
sd, an'l that Jesus went not with
his disciples into the boat, but thai
his disciples were gone away
alone ;
;;:; (llowbeit there camo other
boats from Tiberias nigh unto the
place where they did eat bread,
after that tho Lord had given
thanks :)

24 "When tho people therefore
saw that Jesus was not there,
neither his disciples, they also took
shipping, and camo to Capernaum,
seeking for Jesus.
25 And when they had found
him on the other side of tiio siki
they said uuto him, Eabbi, vvlini
earnest tliou hither '?
26 Jesus auswerod them and
said, Verily, verily, I say unco you,
Ye seek me, not because yo saw tlia
miracles, but because ye did eat of
the loaves, and were fiUed.

jOHiSr, CHAP. VI. 345

21 Labour not for the meat which
perisheth, but for that meat which
eudureth unto everlasting Ufe,

which the Sou of man shall give
uuto you: for him hath (Jod tho
Pather sealed.

Wt should mark first, in this passage, what knowledge
of man's heart our Lord Jesus Christ piossesses. We see
liim exposing the false motives of those who followed
Him for the sake of the loaves and fishes. They had fol
lowed Him across the Lake of Galilee. They seemed at
first sight ready to believe in Hira, and do Him honour.
But He knew the inward springs of their conduct, and
was not deceived. "Ye seek me," He said, "not becuisc
ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves,
and were filled."
The Lord Jesus, we should never forget, is still the
same. He never changes. He reads the secret motives
of all -who profess and call themselves Christians. He
knows exactly why they do all they do in their religion.
The reasons why they go to Church, and why they receive
the sacrament, — why they attend family prayers, and why
they keep Sunday holy, — all are naked and opened to the
eyes of the gre.at Head of the Church. By Him actions
are weighed as well as seen. " Man looketh on the out
ward appearance, but the Lord looketh at the heart." (1
Sam. xvi. V.)
Let us be real, true, and sincere in our religion, what
ever else we are. The sinfulness of hypocrisy is very great,
but its folly is greater still, Tt is not hard to deceive minis
ters, relatives, and friends. A little decent outward profes
sion will often go a long way. But it is impossible to deceive
Christ. " His eyes are as a flame of fire." (Rev. i. 14.)
He sees us through and through. Happy are those who
can say, — " Thou, Lord, who knowest all things, knowest
that we love thee." (John xxi. 1'7.)
We should mark, secondly, hi this passage, what Christ
forbids. He told the crowds who followed Him so dili
15*

346 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
gently for tho loaves and fishes, " not to labour for the
meat that perisheth." It was a remarkable saying, and
demands explanation.
Our Lord, we may ba sure, did not mean to encourage
idleness. It would be a great mistake to suppose tliis.
Labour was the appointed lot of Adam in Paradise.
Labour was ordained to be man's occupation after the
fall. Labour is honourable in all men. No one need be
ashamed of belonging to " the working classes." Our
Lord himself worked in the carpenter's shop at Naza
reth. St. Paul wrought as a tent-maker with his o wn hands.
What our Lord did mean to rebuke was, that excessive
attention to labour for the body, while the soul is neglected,
which prevails everywhere in the world. What He re-
pi'oved was, the common habit of labouring only for the
things of time, and letting alone the things of eternity
¦ — of minding only the life that now is, and disregarding
the life to come. Against this habit He delivers a solemn
warning. Surely, we must all feel our Lord did not say tho word.'!
before us without good cause. They are a startling cau
tion which should ring iu the ears of many in these latter
days. How many in every rank of life are doing the very
thing against which Jesus warns us ! They are labouring
night and day for " tho meat that perisheth," and doing
nothing for their immortal souls. Happy are those who
learn betimes the respective value of soul and body, and
give the first and best jDlace in their thoughts to salvation.
One tiling is needful. He that seeks first the kingdom of
God, will never fail to find " all other things added to him."
(Matt. vi. 33.)
We should mark, thirdly, in this pass.age, what Christ
advises. He tells us to " labour for the meat that cndiiretli
to everlasting life." He would have us take p.iins to find
food and sntisfactioii for our souls. That food is provided

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 347
in rich abundance in Him. But he that would have it
must diligently seek it.
How are we to labour ? There is but one answer. We
mu.st labour in the use of all appointed means. We must
read our Bibles, like men digging for hidden treasure. We
must wrestle earnestly in prayer, like men contending with
a deadly enemy for life. We must take our whole heart
to the house of God, and worship and hear like those who
listen to the reading of a will. We must fight daily against
sin, the world, and the devil, like those who fight for
liberty, and must conquer, or be slaves. These are the
ways we must walk in if we would find Christ, and be
found of Him. This is " labouring." This is the secret
of getting on about our souls.
Labour like this no doubt is very uncommon. In carry
ing it on we shall have little encouragement from man, and
shall often be told that we are " extreme," and go too far.
Strange and absurd as it is, the natural man is always
fancying that we may take too much thought about reli
gion, and refusing to see that we are far more likely to
take too much thought about the world. But whatever
man may say, the soul will never get spiritual food without
labour. We must " strive," we must " run," we must
"fight," we must throw our whole heart into our soul's
affairs. It is " the violent" who take the kingdom. (Matt.
xi. 12.)
We should mark, lastly, in this passage, what ap>romise
Christ holds out. He tells us that He himself will give
eternal food to all who seek it : " The Son of man shall
give you the meat that endureth unto everlasting life."
How gracious and encouraging these words are ! What
ever we need for the relief of our hungering souls, Christ
is ready and willing to bestow. Whatever mercy, gruce,
peace, strength we require, the Son of man will give f reel 3',
immediately, abundantly, and eternally. He is " sealed,"

348 KXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
and appointed, and commissioned by God tiie Father for
this very purpose. Like Joseph in the Egyptian famine, it
is His office to be the Friend, and Almoner, and E,elie\-er
of a sinful world. He is far more willing to give than man
is to receive. The more sinners apply to Him, tho better
ile is pleased.
And now, as we leave this rich passage, let us ask our
selves, what use we make of it ? For what are we labour
ing ourselves? What do we know of lasthig food and
satisfaction for our inward man ? Never let us rest till
¦we have eaten of the moat v/hich Christ alone cnn give.
They that are content with any other spiritual food will
sooner or later "lie down in sorrow." (Isa. 1. 11.)
Notes. John VI. 22—27.
22. — [The day fallowing, etc] In this, and the three following
ve ses, we have an instance of the pxireme minuteness with
"which Sr. John describes all the particulars connected with any
of the miracles of our Lord which he records. — Here, for exam
ple, he tells us that our Lord's remaining behind, and not aciom-
panying Ilis disciples when they went into the boat, was
observed by fhe multitude; and that neveitheless they could
not find our Lord the next morning, and were puzzled to account
for His being found at Capernaum when they got there. — AU
these little things help to prove tiint th-3 circumstances of our
Lord's jo'ning the disciples was something miraculous, and c.n-
not be explained away, as some rationalis'iS pretend to say. In
particular, the que'iiou, "'When cara-.-sl fhtiu hither? " (ver. 25)
is plain evidence that the multi ude did not tiiink it possible for
our Lord to have walked along- tiie shore, as some modern writ
ers suggest, and did not understand how He got to Capernaum
except in a boat.
In each of tiie seven great miracles recorded by St. John, this
fulness and minuteness is very noticeable. Had he been inspired
to relate as many miracles as we find in Matthew and Mark, his
G-ospel would have been fifty chapters, instead of twenty-one.
Writing long after the other (jospel writers, and at a time whon
many who witnessed our Lord's miracles were dead, there was a
fitness and wisdom in his supplying the abundant particulars
which characterizg his descriptions.
[The peop'e which stood on the other side of ihe sea!] This

JOHN', CHAP. VI. 349
moans the multitude, or sorae of ihem, whom .Jesus l.-ad fed on
tlie iio;t';-e:isc shore of the lake, and whom fhe disciples had
1 ft standing near the banks when they embarked, be:oi-e our
Lord S'ent ihem away. Malthe-iv nnd Mark both mention that
our Lord first raade the disciples embark, and then sent the mul
titude away, and retired to the mountain to pray.
23. — [Howbeii there came other boats, etc] This verse either means
that other boat? came fro n Tiberias the morning- after the mira
cle of feeding- the multitude, which were not there the evening
that the disciples embarked ; or else it means that there were
other boats from Tiberias not far from the place where the mira
cle was worked, though there were none actually at the spot
where the disciples embarked, except their one boat. "The
verse is careluUy inserted parentiielicaUy, in order to account
for the muliitude following our Lord to Capernaura. Had
it not been inserted, the infidel would have asked us tri
umphantly, to exp ain how the people could have followed
our Lord, when tiiey had no boats ! 'VVe need not doubt that
every apparent discrepancy and difficuliy in the Gospel narrative
would equ.iliy admit of explanation, if we only knew how to
fill up the gaps.
[After that the Lord had given thanks.] This is purposely
inser.ed to remind us that it was no common eating of bread
that had taken place, but an eating of food miraculously multi
plied after our Lord had blessed it.
24. — [When the people.] There is no occasion to suppose that this
expression means the whole five thousand, whom our Lord
had fed. Por one thing, we are distinctly told that our Lord
" sent them av/ay," and the greater part probably dispeised, and
went their way to their homes, or to Jerusalem to Ihe passover.
For another thing, it is absurd io suppose that so large a multi
tude could find boats enough to convey thera across the lake.
It evidentiy means the remaining portion of the multitude, and
probably included many who followed our Lord about frora
place to p'ace wherever He Went in G-alilee, without any spiritual
feeling, frora a vague love of excitement, and in the hope of
ultimately getting something by it.
[They also took shipping.] This means that they embarked
in the boats which oam.j from Tiberias, and cros-.ed over the
lake.
25. — [And when ihey found Him on ihe other side nf the sea.] Tho
place where they found our Lord was on the north-west i-ide of
the lake of Galilee, on the opposite side frora that -ivhere the
miraole of feeding the multitude was wrough^ The precse
spot however where they found Him is a point, which it is not
very easy to decide. — Of course if we read the discoui-.-,,' -wh.ch

350 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
foUows as one unbroken discourse, all spoken at one time with
out breaks or pauses, except such as arise from tiie remarks of the
people who heard our Lord, there can be no doubt where our
Lord was. The fifty-ninth verse settles the question. '' These
things said he in the synagogue as he t lught in Capernaum.'' —
But if we suppose a break at the fortieth verse, where the Jews
begin "to murmur," and a short interval before ihe dscouise
was resumed, it seems highly probable that the crowd found
our Lord at the landing-place at Capernaum, or just outside ihe
city, — that the discourse began there and continued up to the
fortieth verse, — and that then after a short pause it was resumed
" in the synagogue of Capernaum." It certainly does seem
rather abrupt and unna'ural to suppose the crowd landing at
Capernaum, going up to the synagogue, and there beginning the
conversation with the question, " 'When camest thou hither ? "
[When camest thou hither?] The question evidently implies
surprise at finding our Lord, and inability to understand how
He could possibly have got fo Capernau-n, if He did not go in
the boat with His disciples. It is a question, be it remarked, to
w-hich our Lord returned no answer. He knew the state of
mind of those who asked it, and knew that it would be of no
use to tell them when He had corae, or how.
"Wordsworth's idea that there is a raystical reference in this
question to the manner and tirae of Christ's presence in the
Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, appears to me very fanciful and
far-fetched.
26. — [Jesus answered. Verily, verily, I say.] This solemn expression,
as usual in St. J.din's Gospel, introduces a series of sayings of
the deepest importance. The very first was a sharp and cutting
rebuke of the carnal-mindedness of those whora our Lord
addressed. [Ye seek me.. . not. ..mira.cles...eai... filled.] This was a severe say
ing, and one which Ho, who knew all hearts and read all secret
motives, could say with peculiar power. It is a sad exposure of
the true reason why many followed our Lord, both o:i this occa
sion and on others. It was not now even desire to see miracle;.
performed, as it nad been the day before (see verso 2). These,
after a lime, when the novelty was passed, would cease to asto
nish and attract. It was a lower and more carnal motive still. It
was the raere wish to be fed again ^vith loaves and fishes. The y
waiifed to get something raore out of our Loid. They had been
fed once, and they would like to be fed again.
Tho poor, and raean, and carnal mof-' res which induce raen fo
rrike some religious [jrofession, are painfully e.-'chibited here.
Perhaps we have but a faint notion how little the reasons of
many for coming to , public worship or communion would bear

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 351
sifting and examination. "VVe may be sure that aU is not gold
that glitters, and that raany a professor is rotten at heart." If
was so even under our Lord's rainistry, and much more now.
Augustine remarks how seldom " Jesus is sought for the sake
of Jesus."
Our Lord's perfect knowledge of the S3cret springs of men's
actions is strikingly exhibited here. "VVe cannot deceive Him
even if we deceive man ; and our true characters wUl be exposed
in the day of judgment, if they are not found out before we die.
"Whatever we are in religion, let us be honest and true.
To foUow Christ for the sake of a few loaves and fishes seems
miserable work. To some who know nothing of poverty, it raay
appear almost incredible that a crowd of people shoiild have
done it. Perhaps those only can thoroughly understand it who
have seen much of the poor in pauperized rural parishes. They
can understand the immense importance which a poor raan
attaches to having his belly filled, and getting a dinner or a sup
per. Most of our Lord's foUowers in Galilee were probably
very poor.
To deal plainly with people about their spiritual condition
and faithfuUy expose their false motives, if we know them, is the
positive duty of ministers and teachers. It is no kindness or
charity to flatter professing Christians, and tell them they are
children of God, and going to heaven, if we know that they only
make a religious profession for fhe sake of what they can get.
"Wisdom and discrimination in giving temporal relief to the
poor are very necessary things in ministers, and indeed in all
Christians. Unless we take heed what we do in such matters,
we do more harm than good. To be always feeding the poor
and giving money to those who make some profession of religion,
is the surest way to train up a generation of hypocrites, and to
inflict lasting injury on souls.
27. — [Labour not, etc... sealed.] This verse is peculiarly fuU of in
structive lessons. (I.) There is something forbidden. "We are
not to labour exclusively, or excessively, for the satisfaction of
our bodily wants, for that food which only perishes in the using,
and only does us a little temporary good. (2.) There is something
commanded. "We ought to work hard and strive for that spiritual
food, — that supply for the wants of our souls, which once obtained
is an everlasting possession. (3.) There is something promised.
The Son of man, even Jesus Christ, is ready to give to every one
who desires to have it, that spiritual food which endures for ever.
(4.) There is something dzclared. The Son of raan. Jesus Christ,
has been designated and appointed by God ihe Father for this
very purpose, to be the dispenser of this spiritual food to all who
desire it.

352 EXPOSlTOPvY THOUGHTS.
The whole verse is a strong proof that however carnal and
wicked men may be, we should never hesitate to offer to them
i'reely and fully the salvation of fhe Gospel. Bad as the raofiveg
of these Jews were, we see our Lord, in the same breath, first
exposing their sin, and then showing thera their remedy.
The figure of speech used by our Lord, which supflies the
key-note to Ihe whole subsequent discourse, is a beautiful in
stance of that divino wisdom with which He suited His language
to the mental condition of those He spoke to. He saw the
crowd coining to Hira for food. He seizes the idea, and bids
fhem labour not for bodily but spiritual food. Just so when He
saw the rich young raan come to Him, He bade hira "sell all and
give to the poor." — Just so when the Samaritan woman raetllim
at the well, as she carae to draw water. He told her of living
wa'er. — Just so when ISficodemus came to Him, proud of his
Jewish birth, He tells hira of a new birth which he needed.
When our Lord said, " labour not for the meat that perisheth,''
we must not for a moment suppose that He meant to encourage
idleness, and the neglect of all lawful means in order to get our
Uving. It is a kind of expression which is not uncommon iu
the Bible, when two things aie put in comparison. Thus, when
our Lor.l says " If any man come after me, and hate not his faiher
and mother and wife ana chUdren, etc., he cannot be my disi^iple,"
-we see at a glance that th-.'se words cannot be taken litera'ly.
They only mean " if any man does not love rae raore than f itlier,"
etc. (Luke .xiv. 20.) So here the simple meaning is t'lat we
ought to take far more pains about the supp'y of the -n-rats of
our souls than of our bodies. See also 1 Cor. vii. 29 ; 2 Cor. iv.
18 ; 1 Sara. viii. 7 ; John xii. 44.
When our Lord says, " labour for the meat that endureth,''
etc., I think He teaches very plainly that it is the duty of every
one to use every means, and endeavour in every way to prouioDe
the welfare of his soul. In the use of prayer, the Bible, and
the public preaching of God's Word we are speoiaUy -"jo labour.
Our responsibidty and .accountibleness, the duty of eff'ort and
exerton, appear to mo to stand out unmistixkea't-ly in the
expression. It ia Uke the commands '' Strive, Eepent, Believe.
Be eouverted, Save yourselves from this untoward generation,
Awake, Ar se, Come, Pray." It is nothing less than wicked to
stand stdl, splitting hairs, raising difficulties, and pretending
inability, in the face of such expressions as these. What God
commands man must always try to obey. Whatever language
Chiist uses, ministers and teachers must never shrink from
using likewise.
The " meat that endureth to everlasting life," must doubtiess
mean that satislaction of the cravings of soul and con3ciEni">,

353
which is the grand want of human nature. Mercy and crace
pardon of sin and a new heart, are the two great gifts -which
alone can fill tho soul, and oiu-o given are never taken away, but
endure for ever. Both here and in raany other places, we must
always reraeniber, that " meat' did not raean exclusively '- flesh''
iu the days when fhe Bible was translated, as it does now. The
Greek word rendered '-meat" here means simp'y " food " of any
kind. When our Lord says, " The Son of man shall give you the
meat that endureth to everlasting life," He appears to rao fo
make one of the widest and most griieral offers fo unconveited
sinneis that we have anywhere i:i the Bifile. The men to
whom He was speaking were, beyond question, carnal-minded
and unconverted men. Yet even to them Jesus says, " The Son
of mail shall give unto you." To me it seems an unmistakeable
statement of Christ's wilUngness and readiness to give pardon
and grace to any sinner. It seems to me to warrant ministers
in pioclaiming Christ's readiness to save any one, and in ofl'ering
salvation to any one, if he will only repent and believe the Gos
pel. The favourite notion of sorae, that Christ is to be offered
onljr to the elect, — that grace and pardon are to be exhibited but
not oll'eied to a congreg.-:tion, — that we ought not to say broadly
and fully to all whora we preach to, Christ is ready and willing
to i-ave you, — such notions, I sa.y, apj^car to rae entirely irrecon-
cUeable with the language of our Lord. Election, no doubt,
is a mighty truth and a precious privilege. Complete and full
redemption no doubt is the po.^session of none but the elect
But how easy it is, in holding these glorious truths, to become
more sys'ematio than the Bible, and to spoU the Gospel by
cramping and limiting it!
When our Lord says, " Him hatJi God the Father sealed," He
probably refers to the custom of setting apart fbr any specific
purpose, and marking for any peculiar use by a seal. So also
deeds and public documents were sealed to testify their execution
and validity, and give thera authority. vSo it is said in Esther :
"The writing that is written in the king's name, and sealed with
fhe king's ring, may no man reverie." (Esther viii. 8.) The
expression applied to our Lord in this pLiee certainly stands
alone, but I ihink there can be li'tle doul.it as to its iiieauing. It
sig'iiiies tiiat in the eternal eouns.ds of God fhe P.^th r, He has
Sealed, comraifsi incd, designated, and iippo.nicd the Son of mm,
the Incarnate Wca-.l, to bo the Giver of eve lasting life to man.
It is an office for which He has been soleomly set apart by tho
Patlior. Parkhur=t thinks that llie word n-r-'ans " Ilim bath God ihe
Faiher authorized with sufficient evidence, particularly by Ihe
voice from heaven ;" and he refers the sealing entirely to the

354 ESPOSITOKY THOUGHTS.
testiraony which fhe Father had borne to the Son's Messiahship.
This also is Suicer's view, and AUbrd's.
Stier reraarks, " This sealing is not to be understood merely of
miracles, but of the stamp of divinity which was impressed upon
His whole life and teaching." This is Poole's view, and
Hutcheson's. It has been thought by some that there is a tacit reference
here to the history of Joseph ; and that our Lord meant that ag
Josei'h was appointed to be the great almoner and reliever of
the Egyptians by the king of Egypt, so He is appointed by the
King of kings to relieve the spiritual famine of mankind. At
any rate it is an apt and suifable iUustration.
The idea of Hilary and some others that the expression
"sealed" refers to our Lord being the "express image of the
Father's presence," appears to me far-fetched and without foun
dation. The last words of the verse should be rendered more literally,
" Him hath fhe Father sealed, even God." It almost suggests
the idea that our Lord desired to pi-event His hearers supposing
that He referred to Joseph as His Father. It is as if He said,
" the Father I mean, remember, is not an earthly father, but
God." Eollock remarks on this verse, that our Lord does not confine
Himself to showing fhe folly of only seeking " the meat that
perisheth," but is careful fo show fhe true food of fhe .=oul, and
to point out who alone cnn give it. He observes that this is
an example to us in teaching man the Gospel. The remedy
must be as plainly taught and lifted up as the disease. He
observes truly that none can speak better of the van'ty of
earthly things and the glory of heaven, than many Papists do.
But it is when they corae to the feeding of man's soul that
they fail. They try to feed hira with man's merits, tiie infer-
cestion of saints, purgatory, and the like, aud do not show him
Clirist. It is note-worthy that it was the remerabrance of this verse
whii-h made Henry Martyn persevere in preaching to poor
Hindoos at Dinapore in India. He had found tiiey only came
for temporal relief, and ca-o.l nothing for his preaching, and
he was on the point of giving up in despair. But this ver-:e
came across his mind. '¦ If the Lord Jesus was not ashamed
f 0 preaeh fo mere bread-seekers," he thought, '¦ who am I, that
1 should give over in disgust 'I"

JOHN, CHAP. VI.

355

JOHN "VI. 2S— 3i

28 Then said they unto him,
'What shall we do, that we might
work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto
them. This is the work of God, that
ye beUeve ou him whom he hath
sent. 30 They said therefore unto him,
'What sign showest thou then, that
we may see, and beUeve thee?
what dost thou work ?
31 Our fathers did eat manna iu

the desert; as it is -wr.tten. He
gave them bread from heaveu to eat.
32 Theu Jesus said uuto tliem,
Verily, verily, I say unto you,
IMoses gave you not that bread
from heaven ; but my Father giveth
you tiie true broad from heaven.
33 Por the bread of God is he
which cometh down from heaven,
and giveth life unto the word.
34 Theu said they unto him.
Lord, evermore give us this bread.

These verses form the beginning of one of the most
remarkable passages in the Gospels. None, perhaps, of
our Lord's discourses has occasioned more controversy,
and been more misunderstood, than that which we find
in the Sixth Chapter of John.
We should observe, for one thing, in these verses, the
spiritual ignorance and unbelief of the natural man.
Twice over we see this brought out and exeinpliSed.
When our Lord bade his hearers " labour for the meat
which endureth to eternal life," they immediately began to
think of works to be done, and a goodness of their own to
be established. " What shall we do that we might work
the works of God ?" Doing, doing, doing, was their only
idea of the way to heaven. — Again, when our Lord spoke
of Himself as One sent of God, and the need of believing
on Him at once, they tum round with the question, —
"What sign showest thou? what dost thou work?"
Fresh from the mighty miracle of the loaves and fishes, one
might have thought thoy had had a sign sufficient to con
vince them. Taught by our Lord Jesus Christ himself,
one might have expected a greater readiness to believe.
Butala.s! there are no limits to man's dulness, prejudice,
aud unbelief in spiritual matters. It is a striking fact that
the only thing which our Lord is said to have " marvelled"

356 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
at during His earthly ministry, was man's "unbelief"
(Mark vi. 6.)
We shall do well to remember this, if we ever tiy to do
good to others in the matter of religion. We must not bo
cast down because our words are not believed, and our
efforts seem thrown away. We must not complain of it
as a strange thing, and sui)pose that the peoj)le we have to
deal with are peculiarly stubborn and hard. We must I'e-
coUect that this is the very cup of which our Lord had to
drink, and like Him we must patiently work on. If even
He, so perfect and so plain a Teacher, was not believed,
what right have we to wonder if men do not believe us?
Happy are the ministers, and missionaries, and teachers
who keep these things in mind ! It -(vill save them much
bitter disappointment. In working for God, it is of first
importance to understand what we must expect in man.
Few things are so little realized as the extent of human
unbelief We should observe, for another thing, in these verses,
the high honour Christ puts on faith in Himself, The
Jews had asked Him, — " What shall we do, that we might
work the works of God?" In reply He says, — "This is
the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath
sent." A truly striking and remarkable expression ! If
any two things are put in strong contrast, in the New
Testament, they are faith and works. Not working, but
believing, — not of works, but through faith, — are words
familiar to all careful Bible-readers. Yet hero the great
IIe;id of the Church dcchires that believing on Him is tlie
highest and greatest of all " works ! " It} is " the work of
God." Doubtlps.3 our Lord did not nie.nn that there is anytiiing
meritorious in believing. Man's failh, at the very best, is
feeble aud defective. Regarded as a " woi-k," it cannot
stand the severity of God's judgment, deserve pr^rdon, or

JOHiST, CHAP. VI. S57
purchase heaven. But our Lord did mean that faith in
Himself, as the only Saviour, is the first act of tiie soul
which God requires at a simier's bands. Till a man believes
on Jesus, and rests on Jesns as a lost sinner, he is nothing.
—Our Lord did mean that faith in Himself is thnt act of
tho soul which specially pleases God. When the Father
sees a sinner casting aside his own righteousness, and
simply trusting in His dear Son, He is well pleased.
Without such faith it is impossible to please God. — Our
Lord did mean that faith in Himself is the root of all sav
ing religion. There is no life in a man till he believes. —
Above all, our Lord did mean that faith in Himself is the
hardest of all spiritual acts to the natural man. Did the
.Tews want somethhig to do in religion ? Let them know
lUat the greatest thing they had to do was, to cast aside
their pride, confess their guilt and need, and humbly
believe. Let all who knov/ anything of true faith thank God and
rejoice. Blessed are they that believe ! It is an attain
ment which many of the wise of this world have never yet
reached. We may feel ourselves poor, weak sinners. But
do we believe ? — We may fail and come short in many
things. But do we believe ? — He that has learned to feel
his sins, and to trust Christ as a Saviour, has learned the
two hardest and greatest lessons in Christianity. He has
been in the best of schools. He has been taught by the
Holy Ghost.
We shall observe, lastly, in these verses, the far greater
pr'ivileges of Christ's hearers than of those who lived in
the times of Moses. Wonderful and mii'aculous as the
manna was which fell from heaven, it -was nothing in com
parison to the true bread which Christ had to bestow on
His disciples. He himself was the bread of God, who had
corae down from heaven to give life to the world. — -The
bread which fell in the days of Moses could only feed and

358 ESPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
satisfy the body. The Son of man had come to feed the
soul. — The bread -ndiich fell in tlie days of Moses was only
for the benefit of Israel. The Son of man had come to
offer eternal life to the world. — Those who ate the manna
died and were buried, and many of them -svere lost for
ever. But those who ate the bread which the Son of man
provided, would be eternally saved.
And now let us take heed to ourselves, and make sure
that we are among those who eat the bread of God and
live. Let us not be content with lazy waiting, but let
us actually come to Christ, and eat the bread of life, and
believe to the saving of our souls. The Jews could say,
—"Evermore give us this bread." But it may be feared
they went no further. Let us never rest tdl, by faith, we
have eaten this bread, and can say, " Christ is mine. I
have tasted that the Lord is gracious. I know and feel
that I am His." Notes. John VI. 23—34.
28. — [Then said they unio him.] These words begin one of the
most important of our Lord's discourses, and one about which
the widest diiferences of opinion prevaiL These differences it
will be tin-ie enough lo consider, when we como to the passage
out of which fhey arise. In fhe raean time let us remember
that the speakers before us were men whom our Lord had
miraeulously fed the day before, and on whom He had just
urged fhe paramount importance of seeking food and safisfiiction
for their souls. For anything we can see they were Jews in a
s'ate of great spititual ignorance and daikness. Yet even with
them our Li rd patiently condescends to hold a long conversation.
Teaihes \\ho desire to walk in Christ's steps must aim at this
kind of patienc, and be willing to talk with and teach the
darkest aud most ignorant men. It needs wisdom, faith, and
jiaticnce. [What slall ice do...wGrks of God?] This question is fhe
language of men who wire somewhat aroused and impressed,
but ft II tota'ly in the dark about the way to heaven. They
feel Ihat ihey are in the wrong road, and that fhey ought to do
somelhing. But tiiey are utterly ignorant what to do, and their
only noliun is the old self-righteous ono of the natural man, —

JOHN, CHAP. VI 359
"I must do something, I raust perform some works to ple.';se
God and buy admission to heaven." — This seems to me fhe
leading idea of the question before us. "Your command lo
labour or work for the meat that endureth pricks our conscience.
'We admit that we ought to do something. Tell us what we
must do, and we wUl try to do it." — It is a case of a conscience
partially aroused and put on its defence, groping after light. It
is like the rich young man who came running to our Lord and
saying, "'What good thing shaU I do." (Matt. xix. 16.)
The expression "what shall we do?" would be more literally
rendered, "what do we?" or "what must we do?" or "what
are we to do ?"
The expression " that we might work," might have been
rendered " that we might labour." It is the sarae Greek word
that is translated in the previous verse "labour." The expres
sion, "the works of God," cannot of course mean "the sime
works fhjf God works." It means "the works that please God,
that are agreeable to God's mind, and in accordance wilh God's
will." Thus 1 Cor. xv. 58, and xvi. 10. This is the view of
Glassius. This question, "what shall we do?" we must remember,
ought never to be despised. Though it may often be the lazy
expression of languid religious feeling, just half awakened, it is
at any rate much better fhan having no feeling at all. The
v/orst part of many persons' spiritual condition lies here, that
they are quite indifferent about their salvation ; they never
ask "what shall we do?" — Many no doubt content themselves
with saying "what shaU we do?" and like those of whom we
are reading, never get any further. But, on the other hand,
in many cases, "what shaU I do?" is the beginning of eternal
life, the first step toward heaven, fhe first breath of grace, fhe
first spiritual pulsation. The Jews on the day of peiifeco;t
said, " what must we do ?" Saul, when the Lord met hiin near
Damascus, said, " Lord, what wUt thou have me to do ?" The
Philippian j:iilor said, " What must I do to be saved ?" 'When
ever therefore we hear a person ask fhe question about his soul,
" what shall I do ?" we must try f o help him and put him in
the right way. 'We never know what it may lead to. It may
perhaps end in nothing, and prove a mere temporary feeling.
But it may also come to something, and end in the conversion
of a soul.
29. — [Jesus answered.. .this... .work.. .believe...sent.] In this verse our
Lord takes hold of the expression used by the Jews tibout
"work," and answers fhem according to their state of mind
Did they ask what work they should do ? Let thera know that
the first thing God caUed them to do, was to believe in His Son,

860 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
the Messiah whom He had sent, and whom -ihey saw before
fhem. "When our Loid caUs faith "the work of God," we niu=t not
suppose He means here, that it is the work of His Spirit, aud
His gift. This is undoubtedly true, but not the ti uth of ihe text
Ile only means that believing is " the work that pleases God,"
and is most agreeable to God's will and mind.
Of course every well-instructed Bible-reader will remember,
that, strictly speaking, believing is so far frora being a "work,"
that it is the very opposite of working. " To him tiiat workeih
not, but beUeveth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is
counted to hira for righteousness." (Rom. iv. 5.) But it is evi
dent that our Lord accommodates His manner of speaking to fhe
ignorant minds with which He had to deal. Thus St. Paul calls
fhe doctrine of faitii the "hiw of faith." (Rom. iii. 27.) Itis
much the sarae as it we said to an ignorant but awakened inquirer
after salvation, who fancies he can do great thins s for his soul, —
" You talk of doiug. But know that the first thing to be done,
is to believe on Christ. This is the Urst step toward heaven.
You have done notiiing until you believe. This is the thing fhat
pleases God most. "Without fidth it is impossible to please
Him. This is the hardest thing after all Nothing will test
the reality of your feelings so rauch as a wUlingness to believe
on Christ, and cease from your own works. Begin therefore by
believing." The very attempt to beUeve, ia such a case, might
prove useful.
Let us note in this verse the marvellous wisdom with which
our Lord suited His language to fhe minds of those He spoke to.
It should be the constant aim of a religious teacher, not merely
to teach truth, but to teach truth wisely and witii tact, so as to
arrest the attention of those he teaches. Half the reUgious
teaching in the churches and schools of our day, is entirely
thrown away for want of tact and power of adaptation in impart
ing it. To profess truth is one thing: to ba able to impart it
wisely, qui;e another.
Let us note in this verse the high honour our Lord puts upon
faith in Hiraself. He makes it fhe root of all religion, the foun-
datiim-stone of His kingdom, the very first step toward heave...
Christians sometimes talk ignorantly about faith and work^, as
if they were things that could be compared with one another as
equals, or opposed to one another as enemies. But let them
observe here that faith in Christ is so immeasurably the first
tiling in Christianity, that in a certain sense it is th- great work
of works. In a certain sense if is the seed and root of aU reli-
giira, and we can do notiiing unt'l we believe. In short, the
right answer to "what must I do?" is "believe."'

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 361
30. — [They said therefore unto him.] The secret unbelief of the
Jews begins to come out in this verse. Nothing so thoroughly
reveals the hearts of men as a, summons to beUeve on Christ.
Exhortations to work excite no prejudice and enmity. It is the
exhortation to believe that offends.
[What sign showest thou then!] The word "thou," in this sen
tence is emphatic in the Greek. It is as though the Jews said,
" Who art thou indeed to talk in this way ?" " "What miraculous
evidence of thy Messiahship hast thou got to show ?" There is
an evident sneer or sarcasm in the question.
[That we may see and believe thee!] This seems to mean, " that
we may see in the miracle wrought unanswerable proof that
Thou art the Messiah, and seeing the miracle may thus be able
to believe Thee." This is the common language of many uncon
verted hearts. They want fo see first, and then to believe. But
this is inverting God's order. Faith must come first, and sight
wiU foUow.
There is a difference that ought to be marked between the
" beUeving thee " of this verse, and fhe " believing on him whom
he hath sent," of the preceding verse. " Believing on " is saving
faith. " Believing " alone, is merely believing a person to speak
fhe truth. The devils " believe Christ," but do not believe
" on Christ." We beUeve John, but do not believe " on him."
[ What dost thou work!] It seems at first most extraordinary
that men who had seen such a miracle as that of feeding the five
thousand with five loaves, and had been themselves of fhe nura
ber fed, and this only twenty-four hours before, could ask such a
question as this I Our first thought is, that no greater sign or
miracle could have been shown. But they speak as if it was
forgotten 1 Surely when we see such proofs of the extreme dul
ness and deadness of man's heart, we have no reason to be sur
prised at what we see among professing Christians.
Bucer and Grotius suggest, that the speakers here can hardly
be those who were witnesses of the miraole of feeding fhe five
thousand. But I see no need for fhe suggestion, when we look
round us and observe what human nature is capable of, or even
look at the book of Exodus, and see how soon Israel in the wil
derness forgot the miracles they had seen.
Let us remember that this demand for " a sign," or great mira
cle, was common during our Lord's ministry. It seems to have
been a habit of mind among the Jews. St. Paul says, " The
Jews require a sign." (I Cor.'i. 22.) They were always deceiv
ing themselves with the idea, that they wanted more evidence,
and pretending that if they bad this evidence ihey would beUeve.
Thousands in every age do just the same. They Uve on waiting
16

362 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
for something to convince them, and fancying that if they were
convinced, they would be different men in reUgion. The plain
truth is, that it is want of heart, not want of evidence, that keeps
people back from Christ. The Jews had signs, aud evidences,
and proofs of Christis Messiahship in abundance, but they would
not see them. Just so, many a professed unbeliever of our day
has plenty of evidence around hira, but he wiU neither look at it
nor examine it. So true it is that " none are so blind as those
that will not see."
Quesnel remarks, " The atheist is stUl seeking after proofs of
a Deity, though he walks every day amidst apparent miracles."
'Wo should observe that the Jews were wiUing enough to
honour Christ as " a prophet." It was the doctrine of faith in
Hira that fhey could not receive. Christ the "teacher," is
always more popular than Christ the " sacrifice and substitute."
31. — [Our fathers... .manna... .written.. ..to eat] The intention of the
Jews in saying what they do in this verse is plain. They evi
dently implied a disparaging comparison between our Lord and
Moses, and our Lord's miraole of feeding the multitude, and the
feeding of Israel with manna. It is as though they said,
"Although Thou didst work a miraole yesterday, Thou hasi;
done nothing greater than the thing that happened in the days
when our fathers were fed with manna in the wilderness. The
sign Thou hast given is not so great a sign as that which Moses
gave our fathers when he gave them bread from heaven to eat.
Why then should we be called on to believe Thee ? "What proof
have we that Thou art a prophet greater than Moses ?"
The word " manna " would have been more correctly rendered
" the manna," i. c, " the well-known and famous manna."
Let us note in this verse how prone men are to refer back at
once to things done in fhe days of their " fathers," when saving
religion is pressed home on their consciences. The woman of
Samaria began talking about " our father Jacob." — " Art thou
greater than our father Jacob ?" (John iv. 12.) The Pharisees
" built the sepulchres of fhe prophets." (Luke xi. 47.) Dead
teachers have always more authority than Uving ones.
Let us mark that the miraculous feeding of Israel in the wil
derness with manna is spoken of by the Jews as a notorious
historical fact. Our Lord moreover in the foUowing verse en
tirely assumes the truth of the miraole. The modern attempts
to deny or explain away the miraculous facts recorded in the Old
Testament, are here, as well as elsewhere, entirely irreconcile
able with the manner in which they are always spoken of in the
New Testament. He that denies old Testament miracles, is
assaulting the knowledge and veracity of Christ and the Apes-

JOHisr, CHAP. VI. 363
ties. Th'dy beUeved them, and spoke of fnem, as historical facts.
We never need be ashamed of being on their side.
Let us observe the acquaintance with Scripture which the
Jews exhibit. They quote the seventy-eighth Psalm (ver. 24,
25), as a sufficient proof of the fact they had just mentioned.
A certain knowledge of Scripture, unhappily, may often be found
in a very unbelieving heart. Knowledge of the letter of Scrip
ture at any rate seems to have been very common among the
Jews. (See Deut. vi. 6, 7.)
Whether or not they applied the sentence they quoted to
Moses, rather than God, I think, admits of a question. Our
Lord's words, in the foUowing verse, would rather lead one to
think that they meant that "Moses gave them bread from
heaven."
i2.—[Then Jesus....verily.... Moses gave you not that bread!] The
object of our Lord in this verse is very plain. He replies to
the argument of the J'ews, that the miracle of the manna was
a greater miracle than any He had come into the world to work,
and that Moses was consequently a greater prophet fhan He was.
Yet in the words he uses, it is not very easy to settle where the
stress should be laid, and what is the precise word on which the
point of the answer rests.
(a.) Some think that it means, — "It was not Moses who gave
you the bread fro.m heaven, but God." They lay the stress on

(5.) Some think that it means, — "Moses did not give you
bread from the real heaven of heavens, where God the Father
dweUs, but only a material food from the upper part of that
atmosphere which surrounds this earth." They lay the stress
on heaven.
(c.) Some think that it means,^" Moses did not give the true
spiritual bread from heaven, though he gave you bread." They
lay the stress on " that bread."
The second of these opinions seems to me quite inadmissible.
The distinction between the heaven where God dweUs and the
upper region of our atmosphere was not, I believe, in our Lord's
mind, when He used the language He uses here. Moreover it
cannot be denied that the manna, though only material food,
was hea-venly food, i. c, food supplied by God's miraculous inter
position. The true view seems to me to be contained in the first and
third opinions taken together. The Greek bears it out by put
ting the word " not " in the very forefront of the sentence. " It
was not Moses who gave you that bread from heaven, and even

364 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
the bread that was given you was not that true bread which
endures to everlasting life."
[But my Faiher giveth you the true bread from heaven.] The
use of the present tense should be noticed in this sentence. The
idea seems to be, " What Moses could not give you, even the
true bread which feeds the soul, my Father does give you,
and is actually giving you at this moment, in that He gives you
myself." The expression, " giveth you," must not be supposed to im
ply actual reception on the part of the Jews. It rather means
"giving" in the sense of "offering" for acceptance a thing
which those to whom it is offered may not receive. — It is a very
remarkable saying, and one of those which seems to me to prove
unanswerably that Christ is God's gift to the whole world, — that
His redemption was made for all mankind,— -that He died for all,
— and is offered to all. It is like the famous texts, " God so
loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son " (John iii.
16) ; and, " God hath given to us eternal Ufe, and this life is in
his Son." (I John v. II.) It is a gift no doubt which is utterly
thrown away, like many other gifts of God to man, and is profit
able to none but those that believe. But that God nevertheless
does in a, certain sense actually " give " His Son, as the true bread
from heaven, even to the wicked and unbeUeving, appears to me
incontrovertibly proved by the words before us. It is a remark
able fact that Erskine, the famous Scotch seceder, based his right
to offer Christ to all, on these very words, and defended himself
before the General Assembly of the Kirk of Scotland on the
strength of thera. He asked the Moderator to tell him what
Christ meant when He said, " My Father giveth you the true
bread from heaven," — and got no answer. The truth is, I ven
ture to think, that the text cannot be answered by the advocates
of an extreme view of particular redemption. Fairly inter
preted, the words mean that iu some sense or another the Father
does actually " give " the Son to those who are not beUevers.
They warrant preachers and teachers in making a wide, broad,
full, free, unlimited offer if Christ to all mankind without ex
ception. Everi Hutcheson, the Scotch divine, though a strong advocate
of particular redemption, remarks, — "Even such as are, at pre
sent, but carnal and unsound, are not secluded from the offer of
Christ ; but upon right terms may expect that He wiU be gifted
to them."
The expression " true," in this place, when applied to bread,
means " true " as opposed to that which is only typical, emble
matical, and temporal. The manna was undoubtedly real true
food for the body. But it was a type of a far better food, and

JOHiSr, CHAP. VI. 365
was itself a thing which could not benefit the soul. Christ was
the true spiritual food of which the manna was the type. Ex
amples of " true " in this sense may be seen in John i. 9 ; xv. I ¦
Heb. viii. 2 ; ix. 24.
33. — [The bread of God is that, etc] At first sight, this verse seems
to mean, that " Christ coming down from heaven, and giving life
unto the world, is the true bread of God, — the Divine food of
man's soul." But it may well be doubted whether this is the
precise meaning of the Greek words. I think with Rollock,
Bengel, Scholefield, Alford, and others, they would be more cor
rectly rendered, — " The bread of God is that bread which cometh
down from heaven."
(a.) For one thing, the Jews do not appear to have under
stood our Lord as yet to speak directly of Hiraself, or of any
person. Else why should they have said, — " Lord, give us this
bread." Moreover, they did not murmur, when they heard these
words. (5.) For another thing, our Lord does not appear as yet to re
veal fuUy that He was the bread of God. He reserves this tiU
the thirty-fifth verse, and then declares it. At present He only
gives a general intimation of a certain Divine Ufe-giving bread.
(c.) For another thing, it is more in keeping with the gradual
unfolding of truth, — which appears so strikingly in this chapter,
— to suppose that our Lord begins with a general statement, than
to suppose that He speaks at once of Himself personally. First,
(1.) the bread generally, — then, (2.) I am the bread, — then, (8.)
the bread is My flesh, — then, (4.) except ye eat fhe flesh, and
drink the blood, no Ufe, etc., — such seem the gradual steps by
which our Lord leads on His hearers in this wonderful chapter.
I freely admit that the point is doubtful. Happily, whether we
read, " the bread of God is He," or " the bread of God is that
bread," the doctrine is sound, and Scriptural, and edifying.
The expression, " the bread of God," seems equivalent to the
expression of the preceding verse, "the true bread." It is that
real satisfying food for the soul which God has provided.
The expression, which " cometh down from heaven," is an as
sertion of the Divine origin of that spiritual food which God had
provided. Like the manna, it came down from heaven, but in a
lar higher, fiiller, and deeper sense, than the manna did. It was
'' that personal bread," of which they would soon hear more dis
tinctly. The expression, " giveth life to the world " implies a contrast
between the " bread of God," and the manna. 'The manna only
suppUed the hunger of the twelve tribes of Israel, — viz., 600,000
men and their famiUes. The bread of God was for the whole

366 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
world, and provided eternal life for every member of Adani'a
family who would eat of it, whether Jew or Gentile.
"We should mark, again, what a strong argument these words
supply in favour of the doctrine of Christ being God's gift to all.
That aU the world has not hfe from Christ, and does not beUeve
in Him, is undoubtedly true. But that life is provided in Christ,
and salvation suflcient for all the world, appears tp be the natu
ral interpretation of the text.
34. — [Then said ihey...Lord...give us this bread!] There is a striking
resemblance between the thought expressed in this verse, and
the thought of the Samaritan woman, when she heard of the
Uving water that Christ could give : — " Sir, give me this water,
that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw." (John iv. 15.) In
both cases we see desire caUed forth and excited by our Lord's
words. There is a vague sense of something great and good
being close at hand, and a vague wish expressed to have it. In
the case of the Samaritan woman, the wish proved the first
spark in a thorough conversion to God. In fhe case of the Jews
before us, the wish seems to have been nothing more than the
" desire of the slothful," and to have gone no further. "Wishing
and admiring are not oonve'rsion.
Let us note, carefully, that there is nothing hitherto to show
that the Jews understood our Lord to caU Himself ilixei "bread of
God," or "the true bread." That there was such a thing as the
true and satisfying bread, — that it must be the same as that
" meat which endureth to everlasting life," they seem to have
concluded; — and that it was something which our Lord could
give, they inferred. But there is not a word to make us think
they saw it at present to mean Christ himself. This is a weighty
argument in favour of that -view of the preceding verse which I
have tried to support, viz., — that it ought to be translated " the
bread of God is that bread," not " He."
There is some probability in Lightfoot's remark, that our Lord's
hearers, like most Jews, had their minds stufl'ed with foolish and
superstitious notions about great banquets and feasts, which
they expected Messiah to give the-m, whenever He appeared.
They had a tradition that Leviathan and Behemoth were to bo
slain, and their flesh made into a great feast for Israel when
Missiah carae. Our Lord, possibly, had this tradition in Hia
mind, and desired to turn the minds of the Jews to the true food
which Messiah had come to give.

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 367

JOHN VL 35—40.

36 And Jesus said unto them, I
am the bread of Ufe : he that cometh
to me shall never hunger ; and he
that believeth on me shaU never
thirst 36 But I said unto you. That ye
also have seen me, and believe not.
37 AU that the iFather giveth me
shall come to me; and him that
cometh to me I -wiU in no wise cast
out 38 For I came down from heaven.

not to do mine own -wiU, but the
wiU of him that sent me.
39 And this is the Father's will
which hath sent me, that of all
whieh he hath given me I should
lose nothing, but should raise it up
again at the last day.
40 And this is the -wiU of him
that sent me, that every one which
seeth the Son, aud beUeveth ou him,
may have everlasting life : and I
wUl raise him up at the last day.

Three of our Lord Jesus Christ's great sayings are
strung together, like pearls, in this passage. Each of them
ought to be precious to every true Christian. AU taken
together, they form a mine of truth, into which he that
searches need never search in vain.
"We have, first, in these verses, a saying of Christ about
Himself. We read that Jesus said, — " I am the bread of
life : he that cometh to me shall never hunger, and he that
believeth on me shall never thirst."
Our Lord would have us know that He himself is the
appointed food of man's soul. The soul of every man is
naturally starving and famishing through sin. Christ is
given by God the Father, to be the Satisder, the Reliever,
and the Physician of man's spiritual need. In Him and
His mediatorial office, — in Him and His atoning death, —
in Him and His priesthood, — ^in Him and His grace, love,
and power, — in Him alone will empty souls find their
wants supplied. In Him there is life. He is " the bread
of life."
With -what divine and perfect wdsdom this name ia
chosen ! Bread is necessary food. We can manage tole
rably well without many things on our table, but not with
out bread. So is it with Christ. We must have Christ,
or die in our own sins. — Bread is food that suits all. Some
cannot eat meat, and some cannot eat vegetables. But all

368 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
like bread. It is food both for the Queen and the pauper.
So is it with Christ. He is just the Saviour that meets the
wants of every class. — Bread is food that we need daily.
Other kinds of food we take, perhaps, only occasionally.
But we want bread every morning and evening in our lives.
So is it with Christ. There is no day in our lives but we
need His blood, His righteousness. His intercession, and
His grace. — ^Well may He be called, " The bread of life !"
Do we know anything of spiritual hunger? Do we
feel anything of craving and emptiness in conscience,
heart, and affections ? Let us distinctly understand that
Christ alone can relieve and supply us, and that it is His
office to relieve. We must come to Him by faith. We
must believe on Him, and commit our souls into His
hands. So coming. He pledges His royal word we shall
find lasting satisfaction both for time and eternity. — It is
written, — "He that cometh unto me shall never hunger,
and he that believeth on me shall never thirst."
We have, secondly, in these verses, a saying of Christ
about those who co7ne to Him. We read that Jesus said,
— " Him that cometh to me I will in nowise cast out."
What does "coming" mean? It means that moveiuent
of the soul v.'hieh takes place when a man, feeling his
sins, and finding out that he cannot save himself, hoars
of Christ, applies to Christ, trusts in Christ, lays hold on
Christ, and leans all his weight on Christ for salvation.
When this happens, a man is said, in Scripture language,
to " come" to Christ.
What did our Lord mean by sayiug, — " I will in no
wise cast him out"? He meant that He will not refuse
to save any one who comes to Him, no matter what he
may have been. His past sins may have been verv
great. His present weakness and infirmity may be very
great. But does he come to Christ by faith ? Theu
Clirist will receive him graciously, pardon him freely,

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 369
place him in the number of His dear children, and give
him everlasting life.
These are golden words indeed ! They have smoothed
down many a dying pillow, and calmed many a troubled
conscience. Let them sink down deeply into our memo
ries, and abide there continually. A day will come when
flesh and heart shall fail, and the world can help us no
more. Happy shall we be in that day, if the Spirit -wit
nesses with our spirit that we have really come to Christ !
We have, lastly, in these verses, a saying of Christ
about the will of His Father, Twice over come the
solemn words, — "This is the wUl of him that sent me."
Once we are told it is His will, " that every one that seeth
the Son may have everlasting life." Once we are told it
is His wiU that, " of all which he hath given to Christ he
shall lose nothing."
We are taught by these words that Christ has brought
into the world a salvation open and free to every one.
Our Lord draws a picture of it, from the story of the
brazen serpent, by which bitten Israelites in the wilder^
ness were healed. Every one that chose to "look" at the
brazen serpent might live. Just in the same way, every
one who desires eternal life may "look" at Christ by
faith, and have it freely. There is no barrier, no limit, no
restriction. The terms of the Gospel are wide and simple.
Every one may " look and live."
We are taught, furthermore, that Christ will never
allow any soul that is committed to Him to be lost and
cast away. He will keep it safe, from grace to glory, in
spite of the world, the flesh, and the devil. Not one
bone of His mystical body shall ever be broken. "NTot
one lamb of His flock shall ever be left behind in the
wilderness. He will raise to glory, in the last day, the
whole flock entrusted to His charge, and not one shall be
found missing. 16*

370 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Let the true Christian feed on the truths contained in
this passage, and thank God for them. Christ the Bread
of life, — Christ the Receiver of all who come to Him, —
Christ the Preserver of all believers, — Christ is for every
man who is willing to believe on Him, and Christ is the
eternal possession of all who so believe. Surely this is
glad tidings and good news !
Notes. John VL 35—40.
35. — [Jesus said.. I am ihe bread of life.] In this verse our Lord
begins to speak in the first person. Henceforth in this discourse
we hear directly of " I " and " Me " no less than thirty-five times.
He drops aU further reserve as to His meaning, and teUs the
Jews plainly, " I am the bread of life," — the true bread from
heaven, — the bread of God which, coming down from heaven,
giveth Ufe to the world.
The " bread of Ufe " means that spiritual bread which conveys
life to the soul, — that Uving bread which does not merely feed the
body, like common bread, but supplies eternal sustenance and
nourishment to the eternal soul. It is Uke "fhe water of life"
(Rev. xxii. 17), and " Uving water." (John iv. 10.)
The reasons why Christ calls Himself "bread," appear to be
such as these. He is intended to be to the soul what bread is
to the body, — its food.— Bread is necessary food: when men can
afford to eat nothing else, they eat bread. — It is food that all
need : the king and the pauper both eat bread. — It is food that
suits all : old and young, weak and strong, all Uke bread. — It is
the most nourishing kind of food: noihing does so much good,
and is so indispensable to bodily health, as bread. — It is food
that we need daily and are never tired of: morning and night
we go on all our lives eating bread. — The application of these
various points to Christ is too plain to need any explanation.
One great general lesson is doubtiess intended to be drawn
from Christ's selection of "bread" as an emblem of Himself
He is given to be the great supply of aU the wants of men's
souls. "Whatever our spiritual necessity may be, however starv
ing, famished, weak, and desperate our condition, there is enough
in Christ, and to spare. — He is " bread."
EoUock remarks, that as soon as the slightest spiritual desire
is manifested by any ono, however ignorant and weak, he should
be at once directed to Christ. It is what our Lord himself did.
As scon as the Jews s dd, — "Lord, evermore give us this bread "

JOHN, CHAP. VL 371
He cried, — " I am the bread of Ufe." He never " quenched the
smoking flax."
[He ihat cometh...hunger... believeth.. .thirst] The worf^s "comiu n-"
and " beUeving" in this sentence, appear to mean very nearly one
and the same thing. To "come" to Christ is to "beUeve" on
Hiin, and to " believe '' on Him is to " come" to Him, — both ex
pressions mean that act of the soul whereby, under a sense of its
sins and necessity, it applies to Christ, lays hold on Christ, trusts
itself to Christ, casts itself on Christ. — "Coming," is the soul's
movement towards Christ. " Believing," is the soul's venture on
Christ. — If there is any difference, it is that " coming" is the Ci st
act of the soul when it is taught by fhe Holy Ghost, and that
" believing" is a continued act or habit which never ends. No
man " comes" who does not believe ; and all who come go on
believing. When our Lord says " shaU never hunger," and "shall never
thirst," He does not mean that a believer on Christ shall no longer
feel any want, or emptiness, or deficiency within him. This
would not be correct. The best of believers wiU often cry, like
St. Paul, " Oh, wretched man that I am!" (Rom. vii. 24.) The
man who " hungers and thirsts after righteousness," is blessed.
(Matt V. 6.) — What our Lord does mean is, that faith in Christ
shaU supply a man's soul with a peace and satisfaction that shall
never be entirely taken from him, — that shall endure for ever.
The man who eats and drinks material food shaU soon be hungry
and thirsty as ever. But the man who comes to Christ by faith,
gets hold of something that is an everlasting possession. He
shall never die of spiritual famine, and perish for want of soul
nourishment. He may have his low feelings at seasons. He
may even lose his sense of pardon, and his enjoyment of religion
But once in Christ by faith, he shall never be cast away and
starved in hell. He shaU never die in his sins.
(a.) Let us note in this verse how simple are the figures by
which our Lord brings His own sufficiency within the reach of
man's understanding. He calls himself ''bread." It was an idea
that even the poorest hearer could understand. He that would
do good to the poor, need never be ashamed of using the simplest
and most familiar illustrations.
(J.) Let us note that faith is a movement of the soul. Its first
action is "coming to Christ" Its subsequent life is a constant
daily repetition of its first action. To feU people to " sit still and
wait," is poor theology. We should bid them arise and come.
(c.) Let us note that coming to Chri.st is the true secret of
obtaining soul satisfaction and inward peace. Until we take that
step our consciences are never easy. "We " hunger and thirst,
and find no relief.

372 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
(d.) Let us note that true believers shall never be altogether
cast (.ff and forsaken of God. The man that comes to Christ
shall "never hunger nor thhsf." The text is one among many
proofs of the perseverance of the saints.
(e.) Let us note, finally, how simple are the terms of tha
Go.spel. It is but coming and beUeving that Christ asks at oui
hands. The most ignorant, the most sinful, the most hardened,
need not despair. They have but to " come and beUeve."
Luther, quoted by Besser, remarks on this verse : — " These
are indeed dear and precious words, which it is not enough for
us merely to know. "VVe must turn them to account, and say.
Upon the.^e words I will go to sleep at night and get up in the
morning; leaning upon them wiU I sleep and wake, and work
and travel. Por though everything v/ere to go to ruin, and
though father and mother, emperor and pope, princes and lords,
all forsook rae, though even Moses could not help me, and I had
only Christ to look to, yet He will help me. Por His words are
sure, and He says ' Hold fast by me : come thou to me, and thou
shalt live.' The meaning of these words is, that whoever can
beUeve on that one Man who is called Jesus Christ, shaU be
satisfied, and cannot suffer either hunger or thir.st."
36. — [But I said....ye also have seen Me and believe not] It is not
quite clear to what our Lord refers in this verse, when He says,
— " I said." Some think that He is referring speciaUy to His
own words in the 26th verse, — " Ye seek rae, not because ye
saw the miracles," etc. Others think that He refers generally
to fhe testimony He had frequently borne against the unbelief
of the Jewish people, in almost every place where He preached.
It seems to me most natural fo connect the verse with the
sp.ying of the Jews, in the 30th verse. They had there said, — ¦
" "What sign showest thou then, that we may see and believe
thee ? " "Why should we not suppose our Lord in this verse fo
take up that saying and replj', — " You talk of seeing and believ
ing; I tell you again, and have long told you, that ye have seen
me, and yet do not believe " ?
The connecting link with fhe preceding verse, appears to bo
something of this kind: — "I am quite asvare that I speak in
vain to many of you of the bread of Ufe and of b;Ueving. Por
I have said often, and now say it again, that m.any of you have
both seen me and my miracles, and yet do not believe. Never
theless, I ara not discouraged. I know, in spite of your unbe
lief^ that somo wiU be saved."
The unbelief of human nature is painfully exhibited in this
verse. Sorae could even see and hear Christ himself while He
was on earth, and yet rem^iin unbelieving I Surely we have no

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 373
right to be surprised if we find like unbelief now. Men may
aotuaUy see Christ with their bodily ej-es and have no faith.
37. — [All that the Father giveth me shall come to me.] The con
nection of this verse with the preceding one seems to be this :
" Your unbelief does not move me or surprice me. I foresaw it,
and have been aware of it. Nevertheless, your unbelief will
not prevent God's purposes taking effect Some will believe
though you remain unbelieving. Everything that the Pather
gives mo wiU come unto me in due time; believe, and be saved.
In spite of your unbelief, all my sheep shall sooner or later come
to rae by faith, and be gathered within my fold. I see your
unbelief with sorrow, but not with anxiety and surprise. I am
prepared for it. I know that you cannot alter God's purposes :
and in accordance with those purposes, a people wiU come to
me, though you do not."
Lufher, quoted by Besser, supposes our Lord to say, " This
sermon shall not on your account be of none effect, and remain
without fruit If you wiU not, another wUl ; if you do not
believe, yet another does."
The English language fails to give the full sense of the Greek
in this sentence. The literal meaning of fhe Greek is, not " all
persons whom the Pather giveth shall come," but " everything,
— the whole thing." It is not a masculine plural, but a neuter
singular. The idea is either " that whole mystical body, fhe
corapany of my believing people, shall come fo me," or else
" every single part or jot or member of my mystical body shall
come to me, and not one be found missing at last"
"We learn from these words the great and deep truth of God's
election and appointment to eternal life of a people out of this
world. The Father from all eternity has given to the Son a
people to be His own pecuUar people. The saints are given to
Christ by the Pather as a flock, which Christ undertakes to save
completely, and to present complete at the last day. (See John
xvii. 2, 6, 9, II, 12 ; and xviii. 9.) However wicked men may
abuse this doctrine, it is full of comfort to a humble believer.
He did not begin the work of his salvation. He was given to
Christ by the Pather, by an everlasting covenant.
"We learn from these words the great mark of God's elect,
whom He has given to Christ. They all come fo Christ by faith.
It is useless for any one to boast of his election unless he comes
to Christ by faith. Hntil a man comes hurably to Jesus, and
commits his soul to him as a believer, wc have no dependable
evidence of the man's election.
Beza remarks, "Paith in Christ is a certain testimony of our
election, and consequently of our future gloiification."

74 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
Ferus says, '' Cleaving to Christ by faith, thou art sure of thy
predestination." "We learn from these words the irresistible power of God's
electing grace. All who are given to Christ shall come to Him.
No obstacle, no difficulty, no power of the world, the flesh, and
the devil, can prevent them. Sooner or later they wiU break
through all, and surmount all. If "given," they wiU "come."
To ministers the words are full of comfort.
[Him that cometh unto me IwiU in no wise cast out] These
words declare Christ's willingness to save every one that comes
to Him. There is an infinite readiness in Christ to receive, pardon,
justify, and glorify sinners. The expression "I will in no wise
cast out," implies this. It is a very powerful form of negation.
" So far from casting out the man that comes to me, I will receive
him with joy when he comes. I will not refuse him on account
of past sins. I wUl not oast him off again because of present
weaknesses and infirmities. I wiU keep him to the end by my
grace. I will confess him before my Pather in the judgment-
day, and glorify him for ever. In short, I will do the very opposite
of casting him out."
The distinction between the language of this clause of the text
and that of the former clause, should be carefuUy noticed. They
who "shaU come to Christ," are " that whole thing" which the
Pather gives. But it is " each individual man " that comes, of
whom Jesus says " I Will in no wise cast him out"
To " cast out of the synagogue,"— to "cut off from the con
gregation of Israel," — to " shut out of the camp," as the leper
was shut out (Lev. xiii. 46), were ideas with which all Jews wore
famUiar. Our Lord seems to say, " I will do the very opposite
of aU this."
A. Clarke thinks that the idea is that of a poor person coming
to a rich man's bouse for shelter and relief, who is kindly treated
and not " cast out." But may we not suppose after all that the
latent thought is that of the man fleeing to the city of refuge,
according to the law of Moses, who, once admitted, is safe and
not "cast out"? (Num. xxxv. II, 12.)
"We learn from these words that fhe one point we should look
to is, "whether we do really come to Christ" Our past lives
may have been very bad. Our present faith may be very weak.
Our repentance and prayers may be very imperfect and poor. Our
knowledge of religion may be very scanty. But do we come to
Christ ? That is the question. If so, the promise belongs to us.
Christ wUl not cast us out "We may remind Him boldly of Ilia
own word.
"We learn from these words, that Christ's offers to sinners are

JOHN", CHAP. VI. 375
•wide, broad, free, unlimited, and unconditional. "We must take
care that we do not spoil and hamper them by narrow statements.
God's election must never be thrust nakedly at unconverted sin
ners, in preaching the Gospel. It is a point with which at present
fhey have nothing to do.' No doubt it is true that none wiU come
to Christ but those who are given to Him by the Pather. But
who those are that are so given we cannot tell, and must not
attempt to define. AU we have to do is to invite every one,
without exception, to come to Christ, and to teU men that every
one who does corae to Christ shaU be received and saved. To
this point we must carefuUy stick.
Rollock observes, how close this glorious promise stands to our
Lord's words about God's election and predestination. Election
should never be stated nakedly and baldly, without reminding
those who hear it of Christ's infinite wiUingness to receive and
save aU.
Hutcheson remarks, " Saints do indeed ofttimes complain of
casting off; but they are the words of sense and not of faith:
they may seem to be cast off when reaUy it is not so."
38. — [For I came down....not mine own will, etc.] The meaning of
this verse appears to be as foUows. " I did not become man and
enter this world to do anything of my own independent will and
volition, and without reference to the will of my Pather. On
the contrary, I have come to carry out His wiU. As God, my
wUl is in entire harmony and unify with my Father's will, because
I and my Father are one. As man, I have no other wUl and
desire than to do that which is in entire accordance with the wiU
of Him who has sent me to be the Mediator and Friend of sin
ners." — "What the Father's will about man is, our Lord goes on
immediately to state in the two foUowing verses. One part of
the Father's will is, that nothing should be lost that He has given
to fhe Son. That "will" Christ came to carry out and accom
pUsh. — Another part of the Father's wUl is, that every one who
trusts in Christ, may be saved. That "will" again Christ came
fo carry out and accomplish. — The verse before us and the two
foUowing are closely connected, and should be looked at as one
great thought. It was the Father's " will " that free salvation by
Christ should be brought near and within the reach of every one,
and it was also His "wiU" that every believer in Christ should
be completely and finaUy saved. To work out and accomplish
this -wiU of His Father was Christ's object in coming into the
world. The expression, "I came down from heaven," is a strong
proof of the pre-existence of Christ It could not possibly be said
of any prophet or apostle, that he " came down from heaven."
It is a heavy blow at the Socinian theory that Chnst was nothing
more thau a man.

376 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
39. — [This is fhe Father's will which hath sent me.] In this versa
and the foUowing, Christ explains fully what was the Father's
will concerning the Son's mission into the world. It was that
He should receive all and lose none, that any one might come
to Him, and that no comer should be lost. It is a cheering and
pleasant thought, that free and full salvation, and the final per^
severance of believers, should be so expressly declared to be " the
wUl of the Father."
[Of all...given...lose nothing.] Here again there is the same
form of speech as in the thirty-seventh verse. Literally rendered,
the sentence would be, — " that of the whole thing which He
has given me, I should not lose anything out of it" The
"losing" must necessarily mean, that "I should let nothing be
taken away by the power of Satan, and allow nothing to come
to ruin by its own inherent weakness." The general sense of
the sentence must be, " that I should allow no member of my
mystical body to be lost"
"We have in these words the doctrine of the final perseverance
of true believers. It seems hard to imagine stronger words than
these to express the doctrine. It is the Father's wUI that no
one whom He has given fo Christ should be lost. His wiU must
surely take efl'ect. True beUevers may err and fail in raany
things, but they shaU never finaUy be cast away. The wUl of
God the Father, and the power of Christ the Son, are both
engaged on their side.
"We have in these words abundant comfort for all fearful and
faint-hearted believers. Let such remember that if they " come"
to Christ by faith, they have been " given " to Christ by the
Father ; and if given by the Father to Christ, it is the Father's
will that they should never be cast away. Let them lean back
on this thought, when cast down and disquieted; — "It is the
Father's wiU that I should not be lost"
[Should raise it vp again at ihe last day.] "We have in these
words the Father's wUl that all Christ's members shaU have a
glorious resurrection. They shaU not only not be lost and cast
away while they live : they shaU be raised again to glory after
they die. Christ wUl not only justify and pardon, keep and
sanctify. He wiU do even more. He wiU raise them up at tho
last day to a life of glory. It is the Father's wiU that He should
do so. The bodies of the saints are provided for no less than
their souls.
The idea of some writers, which BuUinger mentions with some
favour, that the " last day" raeans the day of each believer's
death, and the " raising" his translation in the hour of death to
paradise, seems to me utterly destitute of foundation.

JOHN, CHAP. VI. .^77
The -words before us are a strong argument for the ' liist
resurrection," as a peculiar privUege of believers. It is said he, l-
that beUevers shaU be "raised again," as a special honour and
mercy conferred upon them. Yet it is no less clearly said in the
5th chapter, verse 29, that "all that are in the graves shall
come forth," both good and bad. It foUows, therefore, that there
is a resurrection of which saints alone are to be the partakers,
distinct fi-om the resurrection of the wicked. What can this be
but the first resurrection ? (Rev. xx. 5.) — It must however in
fairness be remembered that resurrection is sometiraes spoken of
in Scripture as if it was the pecuUar privilege of believers, and a
thing in which the wicked have no part. In the fi-imous chapter
in Corinthians, it is clear that the resurrection of the saints ia
the only thing in St. Paul's mind. (I Cor. xv.) That the wicked
wiU be raised again, as weU as the righteous, is clearly asserted
in several places. But it is sometimes a thing kept in the back
ground.
40. — [This is fhe will of him that sent me.] These words are
repeated in this verse, to show that it is no less the Father's
wiU that Christ should receive sinners, than that Christ should
preserve saints. Both things are aUke the purpose and intention
of God.
[Every one which seeth the Son and believeth...life.] These words
mean that " every one, without exception, who by faith looks to
Christ and trusts in Him for salvation, is allowed by God the
Father's appointment to have part in the salvation Christ has
provided." There is no barrier, difficulty, or objfCtion. " Every
one," is the expression. No one can say he is excluded. — " Seeing
and believing,"' are the only things required. No one can say
that the terms are too hard. Does he see and believe ? Theu
he may have everlasting life.
The expression " seeth the Son,'' in this sentence, must evi
dently mean more than mere seeing with the bodily eyes. It is
the looking with faith at Christ. (See John xii. -45, where the
same Greek word is used.) It is such a look as that of the
Israelites, who looked at the brazen serpent, and, looking, were
healed. (See John iii. 14, 15, and Num. xxi. 9.) I believe that
this was in our Lord's mind when He spake the words of this
verse. Just as every serpent-bitten Israelite might look at the
brazen serpent — and, as soon as he looked, was cured, so every
sin-stricken man may look to Christ and be saved.
[I will raise him up at ihe last day.] These words are repeated,
I believe, in order to make it sure that a glorious resurrection
shaU be the portion of every one that only " looks" at Christ and
believes, as weU as of those who enjoy the " assurance" that
they are given to Christ and shall never be cast away. The

878

EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.

humblest believer shall be raised again by Christ at the first resur
rection, aud eternaUy glorified, just as certainly as the oldest
saint in the famUy of God.
Stier remarks, " This raising up at thelast day, twice empha
tically afiirmed, points out to us the final goal of salvation, and
preserving power; after the attainment of which there is no
more danger of perishing, or losing again that eternal life, which
is now, the body being raised, consummate."
Let us mark what abundant comfort there is in this verse for
all doubting, trembling sinners, who feel their sins and yet fancy
there is no hope for thera. Let such observe that it is the will
of God fhe Father, that " every one " who looks at' Christ by faith
may have everlasting Ufe. It would be impossible to open a
wider door. Let men look and live. The will of God is on their
side. Calvin remarks on this verse, " The way to obtain salvation is
to obey the Gospel of Christ If it is the will of God that those
whom He have elected shall be saved, and if in this manner He
ratifies and executes His eternal decrees, whoever he be that is
not satisfied with Christ, but indulges in curious inquiries about
eternal predestination, such a person desires to be saved contrary
to the purposes of God. They are madmen who seek their own
salvation, or that of others, in the whirlpool of predestination,
not keeping the way of salvation which is exhibited to fhem." —
" To every man, therefore, his faith is a sufficient attestation of
the eternal predestination of God."

JOHN "VI. 41—51.

¦41 The Jews then murmured at
him, because he said, I am the bread
which came down from heaveu.
42 And they said, Is not this Je
sus, the son of Joseph, whose father
and mother we know? how is it
then that he saith, I came down
from heaven ?
43 Jesus therefore answered and
said uuto them, IMIurmiu- not among
yourselves. 44 No man can come to me, ex
cept the Father which hath sent me
draw him : and I -mU raise him up
at the last day.

45 It is written in the Prophets,
And they shaU be all taught of God.
Everyman therefore that hath heard,
and hath learned of the Pather,
cometh unto me.
46 Not that any man hath seen
the Pather, save he which is of G od,
he hath seen the iFat'ner.
47 VerUy, verily, I say uuto you,
He that believeth on me hath ever-
lasting life.
48 I am that bread of Ufe.
49 Your fathers did eat manna in
the wilderness, and are dead.
50 This is the bread which corn-

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 379

eth down from heaven, that a man
may eat thereof, and not die.
51 I am the U-nng bread which
came do-wn from heaven ; if any mau

eat of this bread, he shaU live for
ever : and the bread that I wUl give
is my flesh, which IwiU give for the
life of the world.

Teuths of the weightiest importance foUow each other
in rapid succession in the chapter we are now reading.
There are probably very few parts of the Bible which
contain so many " deep things " as the Sixth Chapter of
St. John. Of this the passage before us is a signal
example. We learn, for one thing, from this passage, that Christ's
lowly condition, when He was upon earth, is a stumbling-
block to the natural man. We read that "the Jews
mtu-mured, because Jesus said, I am the bread that came
down from heaven. And they said, Is not this Jesus, the
son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know ? How
is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven ?" — Had
our Lord come as a conquering king, with wealth and
honours to bestow on His followers, and mighty armies in
His train, they would have been willing enough to receive
Him. But a poor, and lowly, and suffering Messiah was
an offence to them. Their pride refused to believe that
such an one was sent from God.
There is nothing that need surprise us in this. It is
human nature showing itself in its true colours. We see
the same thing in the days of the Apostles. Christ
crucified was " to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to the
Greeks foolishness." (I Cor. i. 23.) The cross was an
offence to many wherever the Gospel -n^as preached. — We
may see the same thing in our own times. There are
thousands around us who loathe the distinctive doctrines
of the Gospel on account of their humbling character.
They cannot away with the atonement, and the sacrifice,
and the substitution of Christ. His moral teaching they
approve. His example and self-denial they admire. But
speak to them of Christ's blood,— of Christ being made sin

380 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
for us, — of Christ's death being the corner-stone of our
hope, — of Christ's poverty being our riches, — and you will
find they hate these things with a deadly hatred. Tiuly
the offence of the cross is not yet ceased !
We learn, for another thing, from this passage, man's
natural helplessness and inability to repent or believe. We
find our Lord saying, — " No man can come unto me,
except the Father which hath sent me draw him." Until
the Father draws the heart of man by His grace, man will
not believe.
The solemn truth contained in these words is one that
needs careful weighing. It is vain to deny that without
the grace of God no one ever can become a true Chris
tian. We are spiritually dead, and have no power to
give ourselves life. We need a new principle put in us
from above. Facts prove it. Preachers see it. The
Tenth Article of our own Church expressly declares it :
"The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such
that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own
natural strength and good works, to faith and calling
upon God." This witness is true.
But after all, of what does this inability of man con
sist? In what part of our inward nature does this
impotence reside ? Here is a point on which many mis
takes arise. For ever let us remember that the will of
man is the part of him which is in fault. His inability is
not physical, but moral. It would not be true to say that
a man has a real wish and desire to come to Christ, but no
power to come. It would be far more true to say that a
man has no power to come because he has no desire or
wish. — It is not true that he would come if he could. It
is true that he could come if he would. — The corrupt will,
— the secret disinclination, — the want of heart, are the
real causes of unbelief. It is here the mischief lies.
The power that we w.ant is a new will. It is pre-

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 381
cisely at this point that we need the " drawing " of the
Father. These things, no doubt, are deep and mysterious. By
truths like these God proves the faith and patience of His
people. Can they believe Him? Can they wait for a
fuller explanation at the last day ? What they see not
now they shall see hereafter. One thing at any rate is
abundantly clear, and that is man's responsibility for his
own soul. His inability to come to Christ does not make
an end of his accountableness. Both things are equally
true. If lost at last, it will prove to have been his own
fault. His blood will be on his own head. Christ would
have saved him, but he would not be saved. He would
not come to Christ, that he might have life.
We learn, lastly, in this passage, that the salvation of
a believer is a present thing. Our Lord Jesus Christ says,
— " "Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on
me hath everlasting life." Life, we should observe, is
a present possession. It is not said that he shall have
it at last, in the judgment day. It is now, even now, in
this world, his property. He hath it the very day that
he believes.
The subject is one which it much concerns our peace to
understand, and one about which errors abound. How
many seem to think that forgiveness and acceptance with
God are things which we cannot attain in this life, — that
they are things which are to be earned by a long course
of repentance and faith and holiness, — things which we
may receive at the bar of God at last, but must never
pretend to touch while we are ia this world ! It is a com
plete mistake to think so. The very moment a sinner
believes on Christ he is justified and accepted. There is
no condemnation for hun. He has peace with God, and
that immediately and without delay. His name is in the
book of life, however little he may be aware of it. He

382 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
has a title to heaven, which death and hell and Satan can
not overthrow. Happy are they that know this truth !
It is an essential part of the good news of the Gospel.
After all, the great point we have to consider is whether
we believe. What shall it profit us that Christ has died
for sinners, if we do not believe on Him ? " He that
believeth on the Son hath everlasting life : and he that
believeth not the Son shall not see life ; but the wrath of
God abideth on him." (John iii. 36.)
Notes. John VI. 41 — 51.
41. — [The Jews then murmured af him.] The verb is here in the
imperfect tense. It seeras to mean " the Jews were theu mur
muring, or beginning to murmur about Him." It was a mur
muring that went on among themselves concerning our Lord,
and was not openly expressed. "At Him," would be more
hterally rendered "about Him."
I venture to think there is a break, pause, or slight interval
implied at this point of the conversation. The speakers called
here " the Jews," do not appear fo be the same who foUowed
our Lord over the lake after being fed with fhe loaves and
fishes, and began the conversation by saying, " "When camest
thou hither ?" (Verse 25.) They would rather appear to be
the principal people, or leaders, in fhe synagogue at Caper
naum. They had probably heard our Lord's words to the people
who had followed Him over the lake, and were murmuring at
them. — To my own mind it; is by no means clear that there was
not at this point a change in the place where the conversation
was carried on. Up to this point it looks as if the conversation
was carried on in the open air. At this point our Lord may
have gone into fhe synagogue, and the rulers of it may have
taken up the subject and been murmuring about it when He
went in. — I throw out this theory with diffidence. It must at
least be conceded, that the expressions at verse 25, "when they
had found him at the other side of the sea,....when camest thou
hither ?" can hardly be supposed to mean that our Lord was
then in the synagogue. On fhe other hand, it is perfectly clear
from verse 59. that the latter part of His discourse, at any rate,
was spoken " in the synagogue at Capernaum." "Where, then',
I ask, does the slight break come in, which is necessary fo
reconcile these beginning and ending statements ? I reply that
it seems to me to corae in here, at this very 41st verse. The
language, I think, implies a slight pause in time, and a change

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 383
in the speake- Stier, I am aware, caUs this idea "highly arti
ficial." But I cannot see any force in the objection, and I see
much difiiculty in any other view.
Cyril remarks that a readiness to murmur seemed to be here
ditary with the Jews. From the days when they murmured in
the wUderness, it was always the same.
[Because he said I am the bread.. ..heaven.] It does not appear
that our Lord had actuaUy used these words. "We must there
fore suppose that fhe Jews constructed the saying out of three
things that our Lord had said. One was, "I am the bread of
Ufe ;" — another, " I came down fl^om heaven ;" — and another,
"The bread of God is he (or it) which cometh down from
heaven."
i2. — [Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph ?] The word " this," in
the Greek, has a latent sneer of contempt about it, which our
English version cannot fuUy convey. It is as if they said, " Is
not this feUow," etc.
The expression " the son of Joseph," shows what was the
impression that the Jews coramonly had about our Lord's birth.
They beUeved Him to be the naturaUy begotten son of Joseph
the husband of Mary. The annunciation by the angel Gabriel,
the miraculous conception, fhe miraculous birth of our Lord,
are matters of which the Jews apparently had not any know
ledge. Throughout the whole of our Lord's ministry, we never
find them mentioned. For some wise reason a total silence was
observed about them until after our Lord's death, resurrection,
and ascension. It was not probably tUl after the death of the
Virgin Mary and all her family, that this great and deep subject
was aUowed to be much brought forward in the Church. We
Can easily see that an unhallowed curiosity might have arisen on
questions connected with the incarnation, which would only
have done harm.
[IV^ose father and mother we know!] These words seem to
show that Joseph was stiU living at this time. They could
hardly have been used if Joseph was dead. They also show
that Joseph and Mary were known at Capernaum, where this
conversation was held. They had cither removed there from
Nazareth, or else were so connected with Capernaum and such
frequent visitors there, that the inhabitants knew them.
[How is it then ihat he saith.] These words would have been
more Uterally rendered, "How then does this fellow say?"
Again, like the beginning of the verse, there is something scorn
ful in the phrase.
[7 came down from heaven.] The thing that seems to have
vexed and angered the Jews was that our Lord should so openly

SB-i EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
declare His divine origin, by talking of " coming down from
heaven." They were oS'ended at the idea of one so lowly in
dress, and circumstances, and position, taking- on Himself to say,
that He was one who had " come down frora heaven." Here,
as elsewhere, Christ's humiUation was the great stumbling-block.
Human nature would not so much object to a conquering Christ,
— a Christ with a crown and an army, — a Christ with wealth to
shower on all His followfrs. But a Christ in poverty, — a Christ
preaching nothing but heart reUgion, — a Chiist foUowed by
none but poor fishermen and publicans, — a Christ coming to
suffer and die and not to reign, — such a Christ was always an
ofi'ence to many in this world, and always will be.
EoUock remarks with great truth, that with many persons,
" reasoning " (so caUed) is the grand obstacle to conversion.
43. — [Jesus answered and said.] This phrase is almost the same as
that used in chapter v. verse 19, when our Lord began what
many think was His formal defence of Himself before the San
hedrim. It leads me to think, as I have already said, that there
is a slight break at this point of the chapter, and a slight pause,
if only of a few hours in time. Our Lord knew by His divine
knowledge that the Jews were murmuring and saying contemp
tuous things about Him, and He therefore took up their thoughts,
and made a reply to them.
[Murmur not among yourselves.] This seems a mild hint that
they need not waste their time in murmuring. It neither sur
prised our Lord, nor discouraged Him. It is as though He said,
"Your murmuring is only what I am prepared to expect. I
know what human nature is. I am not moved by it Think
not that your unbelief will shake my confidence in my divine
mission, or prevent my saying what I do. I know that you
cannot naturally understand such things as I am speaking of, and
I will proceed to teU you why. But cease from these useless
murmurings, which neither surprise nor stop me."
"Webster thinks that the idea is the same as that in John iiL
7 — 12, " I have harder things still to say." (See v. 28.)
44. — [No man can come.. .except fhe Father draw him.] The con
nection between this verse and the preceding one is not clear.
Like many passages in St. John's writings, the language is ellipti
cal and the Unk must be supplied. But the precise link in tlie
present case is not very evident. I believe it is something of this
sort: — "You are murmuring among yourselves because I speak
of coming down from heaven ; and you are making ray apparently
low origin an excuse for not believing on me. But all the time
the fault is not in my sayings, but in your want of grace, and
your unbelief. There is a deeper and more solemn truth, to

JOHN. CHAP. VI. 385
which_ you seem totally blind : and that is, man's need of God's
grace in order to beUeve on rae. Tou are never Ukely to believe
until you acknowledge your own corruption, and ask for grace
to draw your souls to me. I am aware that it needs something
more than argument and reasoning to make any one beUeve in
me. Your unbelief and murmuring do not surprise me or dis
courage me. I neither expect to see you or any one else believe,
until you are drawn by my Father." — This, or something Uke it,
seems to me the connecting link. One thing at any rate is cer
tain. Our Lord did not raean to excuse the unbelief of His
hearers. He rather desired to raagnify their danger and guilt,
and fo make them see that faith in Hira was not so easy an affair
as they supposed. It was not knowledge of His origin alone,
but the drawing grace of God the Fatiier which they needed.
Let them awake to see that, and cry for grace before it was foo
late. The general lesson of the sentence, apart from the connection,
is one of vast importance. Our Lord lays down the great prin
ciple, — " That no man whatsoever can come to Christ by faith,
and really believe in Him, unless God the Father draws him so
to come, and inchnes his wiU to believe." The nature of man
since the fall is so corrupt and depraved, that even when Christ
is made known and preached to him, he will not come to Him
and beUeve in Him without the special grace of God inclining
his wiU, and giving him a disposition to come. Moral suasion
and advice alone wiU not bring him. He must be " drawn."
This is no doubt a very humbling truth, and one which in
every age has called forth the hatred and opposition of man.
The favourite notion of man is that he can do what he likes, re
pent or not repent, believe or not believe, come to Christ or not
come, — entirely at his own discretion. In fact man Ukes to think
that his salvation is in his own power. Such notions are flatly
contradictory to the text before us. The words of our Lord here
are clear and unmistakeable, and cannot be explained away.
(a.) This doctrine of human impotence, whether raan likes
it or not, is the uniform teaching of the Bible. The natural
man is dead, and must be born again, and brought to life.
"(Ephesians u. 1.) He has neither knowledge, nor faith, nor
inclination toward Christ, until grace comes into his heart.
Man never of himself begins with God. God must first begin
with man. And this beginning is just the " drawing " of the
text (5.) It is the doctrine of the Church of England, as shown
in the 10th Article, and of every Protestant confession of faith
which dates from the I6th and ITth centuries,
ir

86 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
(c.) Last, but not least, it is the doctrine of experience. The
longer ministers of the Gospel live, the more do they find that
there is something to be done in every heart which neither
preaching, teaching, arguing, exhorting, or means of grace can
do. "When all has been done, God must " draw," or there is no
fruit. — The more the holiest Christians are examined, the more
general is their testimony found, that without grace they never
would have been converted, and that God " drew" them, or else
they never would have come to Christ And it is a curious fact,
moreover, that many who profess to deny man's impotence in
theory, often confess it in their prayers and praises, almost in
spite of themselves. Many people are very low Arminians in
print or in the pulpit, but excellent Calvinists on their knees.
"When our Lord says, " No raan can come unto me," we must
carefully remeraber that it is moral inability and not physical
inabiUty that he speaks of. We are not to suppose that any
man can have a sincere and hearty wish to come to Christ, and
yet be prevented by some mysterious impotence. The impo
tence lies in man's will. He cannot come because he wiU not
come. — There is an Old Testament sentence which throws much
I'ght on the expression before us. It is said of Joseph's
brethren, that " they hated him, and could not speak peaceably
unto hira." (Genesis xxxvu. 4.) Any one must see at a glance
what this "could not" means. They " could not" because they
would not.
¦When our Lord says, "Except the Father draw him," we
raust not suppose that the " drawing " means such a violent
drawing, as the drawing of a prisoner to a jail, or of an ox to
fhe slaughterhouse, a "drawing" in short against a man's wiU.
It is a drawing which a Father effects through the man's own
will, by creating a new principle within him. By the unseen
agency of the Holy Ghost, He works on the man's heart, with
out the man himself knowing it at the time, inchnes him to
-think, induces him to feel, shows him his sinfulness, and so
leads him at length to Christ. Every one that comes to Christ
is so drawn.
Scott remarks, " The Pather as it were cures the fever of the
soul ; He creates the appetite ; He sets the provisions before the
sinner; He convinces him that they are wholesome and pleasant,
and that he is welcome ; and thus the man is dra'wn to come and
eat and live for ever."
The well-known quotation from Augustine, which seems so
great a favourite with many commentators on this text, appears
to me defective. He argues that God's drawing of men fo Christ
is so entirely a drawing through man's will, that it is like draw
ing the sheep by ofl'ering to it food, — ^Uke drawing and aUuring

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 387
a child by oficring him nuts. — But there is this wide differ
ence, that both fhe sheep and the child have a natural taste and
inelination for the thing offered. Man, on fhe contrary, has
none at all. God's first act is to give man a will to come to
Christ As the lOtii Article of the Church of England says, we
need " the grace of Christ preventing us, that we may have a
good will, and working with us when we have that good wiU."
The theory that all members of the Church and all baptized
people are " drawn by God," appears to me a, most baseless
theory, and practically a most mischievous one. It would re
duce the " drawing" to nothing, and make it a thing which the
majority of Christians resist. I beUeve the drawing is a thing
that belongs to none but God's elect, and is a part of the pro
cedure by which their salvation is effected. They are chosen in
Christ from aU eternity, and then drawn to Christ in time.
There are several very important principles of theology con
nected with this remarkable sentence, which it may be useful
to put down together, before we leave the passage.
(o.) We must never suppose that the doctrine of this verse
fakes away man's responsibility and accountableness to God for
his soul. On the contrary, the Bible always distinctly declares
that if any man is lost, it is his own fault. He " loses his own
souL" (Mark vin. 36.) If we cannot reconcile God's sovereignty
and man's responsibility now, we need not doubt that it will
be all plaiu at the last day.
(b.) 'We must not allow fhe doctrine of this verse to make
us limit or narrow the offer of salvation to sinners. On the
contrary, we must hold firmly that pardon and peace are to be
offered freely through Christ to every man and woraan without
exception. We never know who they are that God will draw,
and have nothing to do with it. Our duty is to invite aU, and
leave it to God to choose the vessels of mercy.
(c.) 'We must not suppose that we, or anybody else, are
drawn, unless we come to Christ by faith. This is the grand
mark and evidence of any one being the subject of the Father's
drawing work. If " drawn," he comes to Christ, believes, and
loves. Where there is no faith and love, there may be talk, self-
conceit, and high profession; But there is no " drawing" of the
Father. (d.) "We must always remember that God ordinarily works
by means, and speciaUy by such means as He himself has
appointed. No doubt He acts as a Sovereign in drawing souls
to Christ "We cannot pretend to explain why some are drawn
and others are not drawn. Nevertheless, we must carefully
maintain the great principle that God ordinarily draws through

388 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
the instrumentaUty of His "Word. The man that neglects the
public preaching and private reading of God's Word, has no
right to expect that God wUl draw him. The thing is possible,
but highly improbable.
(e.) "We must never allow ourselves or others to waste time
in trying to find out, as a first question in religion, whether we
are drawn of God the Father, elect, chosen, and the like. The
first and indeed the main question we have to do with is,
whether we have come to Christ by faith. If we have, let us
take comfort and be thankfuh None come to Him unless they
are drawn.
Augustine remarks : " If thou dost not desire to err, do not
seek to determine whom God draws, and whom He does not
draw; nor why He draws one man and not another. But if thou
thyseU' art not drawn by God, pray to Him that thou mayest be
drawn." The words of the I7th Article of the Church of England are
weighty and wise: — "We must receive God's promises in such
wise as they are generaUy set forth to us in Holy Scripture : and
in our doings, that wiU of God is fo be foUowed which we have
expressly declared unto us in the Word of God."
Whether the "drawing" of God the Father is irresistible or
not, is a point on which good men differ greatly. My own
opinion is decided that it is irresistible. Those whom the
Pather draws and calls, always " obey the caUing." (See 17th
Article of the Church of England.) As EoUock truly remarks,
there is often a great fight and struggle when the drawing grace
of God first begins to work on the soul, and the consequence is
great distress and depression. But when grace once begins it
always wins the victory at last
[/ will raise him up af the last day.] This is the same sen
tence that we have had twice already, and shall have once
again. Whosoever does come to Christ, and has the great mark
of faith, shall be raised by Christ to a life of eternal glory at the
last day. None come but those who are "drawn;" but aU who
do come shaU be raised.
45. — [It is written.. .prophets.. .taught of God.] Our Lord here
confirms the doctrine of the necessity of divines teaching, by
reference to fhe Scriptures. He had told the Jews nothing but
what their own Scriptures taught, and what they ought to have
known themselves. It is not quite clear whether our Lord
referred to one particular quotation, or to the general testimony
of the prophetical Scriptures. The words of Isaiah (liv. 13) are
most Uke the sentence before us: — -"All thy children shall bo
toiught of God." The Greek of the Septuagint version of that

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 389
text rather favours the idea that our Lord referred to it. On the
whole, however, I incline to the opinion that no one particular
text is referred to. It was the general doctrine of the prophets
that in the days of the Gospel men should have the direct teach
ing of God.
The words do not mean that under the Gospel aU mankind,
or aU members of the professing Christian Church, shall be
" taught of God." It rather means that all who are God's chil
dren, and come to Christ under the Gospel, shall be taught
of God. It is Uke " this is the true light that lighteth every
man," (John i. 9,) where it does not mean that aU are lighted,
but that such as are lighted are Ughted by Christ.
[Eoery man...heard...learned of the Father, cometh unto me.]
The meaning of this sentence seeras to be — "Everyman that
comes to me has first heard and learned of the Pather." It is
useless to talk of being taught by God, and of God being our
Pather, if we do not come to Christ for salvation.
Bishop Hooper remarks, "Many men understand the words,
'except the Father draws him,' in a wrong sense, as though God
did require in a reasonable man no more than in a dead post,
and do not mark the words that follow, ' every man that hath
heard Christ,' God draweth with His "Word and the Holy Ghost.
Man's duty is to hear and learn : that is to say, receive the grace
offered, consent unto the promises, and not refuse the God that
caUeth." — Hooper on Ten Commandments.
46. — [Not that any man hath seen the Father.] This sentence
seems put in, by way of parenthesis, to prevent mistakes in the
minds of our Lord's hearers, both as to the kind of teaching Ho
meant, and the person He intended when He spake of the
Father. The Father was the eternal God whom no man had
seen nor could see. The teaching was that inward teaching of
the heart which the Pather gave by His Spirit
[He which is of God, he hath seen the Father.] Our Lord
plainly means Himself in this verse. It is Uke John i.l8. "No
man hath seen God at any time ; the only begotten Son, which
is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."
I cannot but think that one object our Lord has in view, both
here and in ch. v. 37, is to impress on the Jews' minds, that aU
the appearances of God which are recorded in the Old Testament,
were appearances not of the First Person in the Trinity but of
the Second. His object in both places, I suspect, was to prepare
their minds for the great truth which as yet they were unable to
receive, that, however unbelieving they now were, Christ who
was now with them, was that very Person who had appeared to
Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and Moses.

390 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
47. — [Verily, verily... He ihat believeth on me...life.] In this versa
our Lord returns to the main thread of his discourse, which
had been interrupted at the 40th verse. He now speaks out
much more clearly and plainly about Himself, dropping aU
reserve, and reveaUng Himself as the object of faith, openly
and without figure. It is one of those great, broad, simple
declarations of the Gospel way of salvation, which we can never
know too weU.
He that would have his sins pardoned and his soul saved must
go to Christ for it It is to " me," says Christ, that he must
apply. — "What are the terms held out ? He must simply trust,
lean back, rest on Christ, and commit his soul to His hand. In
a word, he must "believe." "What shall such a man get by
believing? He "hath everlasting life." The very moment he
beUeves, Ufe and peace with God are liis own. — (a.) Paith, (5.)
the great object of faith, (c.) the present privileges to which faith
admits a man, are three subjects which, however often repeated
in the Gospel, ought never to weary the Christian's ear.
The frequent repetition of this doctrine of "believing," is a
strong proof of its great necessity and importance, and of man's
infinite backwardness to see, understand, and receive it " We
must believe, — we must believe," says Eollock, "is a truth that
needs constant repetition."
48. — [lam that bread of life] Here our Lord distinctly proclaims
to the Jews, that He himself is that "bread of Ufe," that
soul-satisfying food, the true bread, the bread of God, of which
He had spoken generally in the earher part of His discourse.
He had awakened their curiosity by speaking of that bread as
a real thing, and a thing worth their attention. He now unveUs
the whole truth to thera, and teUs them plainly, "I am that
bread." — " If you ask what it is, and where it is, you have only
to look at me."
49. — [Your fathers did eat manna....dead.] In this verse our Lord
points out the inferiority of the manna which the Jews ate in the
wilderness, to the bread which He hiraself offered. The manna
not only could do nothing for the soul, but was unable to pre
serve from death those who ate it.
Here, as before, we should observe how our Lord speaks of
the miraculous feeding of Israel in the wUderness, as an un
doubted historical fact.
Piscator remarks, that our Lord here says emphaticaUy, " your
fathers," and not ''our fathers." — He thinks it was intentionaUy
done to remind the Jews how Uttle lasting good their fathers
got from the manna, and how unbeUeving they were even while

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 391
they ate of it; for they aU died in the wUderness. It was a
tacit caution to beware of doing like them.
50. — [This is the bread...heaven...eat...and not die.] The object of
this verse is to show the superiority of the " true bread from
heaven " to the manna. It is as though our Lord said, — " This
bread that cometh down from heaven is bread of such a nature,
that he that eateth of it shaU never die. His soul shall not be
hurt by the second death, and his body shaU have a glorious
resurrection." I am not without doubt whether our Lord did not point to
Himself in speaking the words of this verse: — "This person
who now stands before you is that bread which came down from
heaven, that any one eating of it should not die." But I
throw out the conjecture with much difiidence. Lampe seems
fo favour the idea, — saying, " the pronoun ' this ' is here demon
strative and pointed to Himself." Trapp and Beza also take
this view.
51.— [/ am the living bread...heaven.] This sentence is a repetition
of the idea that has been already given out in the 50th and 49th
verses. The thought is repeated in order to impress it on the
minds of the Jews, and make it impossible for them to mis
understand our Lord's meaning.
"We must never be ashamed of repetition in religious
teaching. [Tf any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever.] The
thought here is only an expansion of the one contained in the
35th verse. There it is said, " He that comes to Christ shall never
hunger." Here it is " The eater of the bread of life shall Uve
for ever." The meaning is that the soul of the man who feeds
on Christ by faith, shall never die and be cast away in hell.
There is no condemnation for him. His sins are put away.
He shall not be hurt by the second death.
[The bread...give is my flesh.] In these words our Lord goes
even further than he has gone yet, in explaining the great
theme of His discourse. "When He speaks of " my flesh," I
beUeve he means, " my body offered up in sacrifice on the cross,
as an atonement for man's sins." It is our Lord's death that is
speciaUy meant. It is not merely His human nature. His
incarnation, that feeds souls. It is His death as our substitute,
bearing our sins and carrying our transgressions.
[ Which I will give for the life of the world.] These words
appear to me to make it certain that the Lord meant " His body
offered in sacrifice as an atonement for sin," when He said
"my flesh is the bread." For He does not say, "I have
giren" or, "I do give," but "I wUl give." That use of the

392 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
future tense seeras to me a conclusive proof that " my flesh "
cannot mean only "my incarnation." The "giving" was about
to take place, but had not taken place yet It could only be
His death.
"When our Lord says, "I will give my flesh," it appears to me
that He can only mean, " I wUl give it to die, to suU'er, to be
offered up on the cross, as a sacrifice for sin."
"When our Lord says, " I wUl give my flesh for the life of the
world," I believe He means, " I will give my body to death, on
account of, for the sake of, to procure, purchase, and obtain the
life of the world." I wiU give my death to procure the world's
life. My death shall be the ransom, the payment, and the re
demption-money, by which eternal life shall be purchased for a
world of sinners."
I hold strongly that the idea of substitution is contained in
these words of our Lord, and that the great doctrine of his vica
rious death, which is so directly stated elsewhere (Eom v. 6 — 8)
is indirectly imphed in this sentence.
When our Lord says, " I wiU give my fle-h for the li.fe of the
world," I can only see one meaning in the word " world." It
means all mankind. And the idea contained, I believe, is the
same as we have elsewhere, — viz., that Christ died for all man
kind, not for the elect only, but for all mankind. (See John i.
29, and iu. 16, and my notes on each text.) That all the world
is not saved is perfectly certain. That raany die in unbelief and
get no benefit from Christ's death is certain. But that Christis
death was enough for all mankind, and that when He died He
made sufficient atonement for all the world, are truths which,
both in this text and others like it, appear to my mind incontro
vertible. Let us note in this verse what a full and broad offer Chiist
holds out to sinners. He says, — " If any man, no matter who
or what he may have been, if any raan eat of this bread, he
shall live for ever." Happy would it be for raany, whose whole
hearts are set on eating and drinking, and feasting their poor
perishable bodies, if they would only look at these words I It
is only those who eat this bread who shaU Uve for ever.
Let us remeraber how irapossible it is for any one to explain
the end of this verse who denies the sacrificial character of
Christ's death. Once grant that Christ is only a great teacher
and exaraple, and that His death is only a great pattern of self-
denial, and what sense or meaning can be got out of the end of
this verse ? "I will give my flesh for the life of the world " 1
I unhesitatingly say that the words are uninteUigible nonsense
if we receive the teaching of many modern divines about

JOHN, CHAP. VI.

393

Christ's death, and that nothing can make them mteUigible and
instructive but the doctrme of Christ's vicarious death and satis
faction on the cross as our Substitute. '

JOHN VL 52—59

drinketh my blood, dweUeth in me
and I iu him.
51 As the Uving Father hath
sent me, and I Uve by the Father :
so he that eateth me, even he shaU
Uve by ms.
58 This is that bread which
came down from heaven: not as
your fathers did eat manna, and are
dead : he that eateth of this bread
shaU Uve for ever.
59 These things said he in the
synagogue, as he taught in Caper
naum.

62 The Jews therefore strove
among themselves, saying, How can
this man give us his flesh to eat ?
53 Theu Jesus said uuto them.
Verily, verUy, I say unto you. Ex
cept ye eat the flesh of the Sou of
man, and drink His blood, ye have
no life in you.
54 "Whoso eateth my flesh, and
drinketh my blood, hath eternal
life ; and I wiU raise him up at the
last day.
55 IFor my flesh is meat indeed,
and my blood is drink indeed.
56 iHe that eateth my flesh, and
Few passages of Scripture have been so painfully wrested
and perverted as that which we have now read. The Jews
are not the only people who have striven about its mean
ing. A sense has been put upon it, which it was never in
tended to bear. Fallen man, iu interpreting the Bible, has
an unhappy aptitude for turning meat into poison. The
things that were written for his benefit, he often makes an
occasion for faUing.
Let us first consider carefully, what these verses do not
mean. The " eating and drinking " of which Christ speaks
do not mean any literal eating and drinking. Above all,
the words were not spoken with any reference to the Sa
crament of the Lord's Supper. We may eat the Lord's
Supper, and yet not eat and drink Christ's body and blood.
We may eat and drink Christ's body and blood, and yet
not eat the Lord's Supper. Let this never be forgotten.
The opinion here expressed may startle some who hava
17*

394 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
not looked closely into the subject. But it is an opinion
which is supported by three weighty reasons. — For one
thing, a literal " eating and drinking " of Christ's body
and blood would have been an idea utterly revolting to all
Jews, and flatly contradictory to an often-repeated precept
of their la-w. — For another thing, to take a literal view of
" eating and drinking," is to interpose a bodily act between
the soul of man and salvation. This is a thing for which
there is no precedent in Scripture. The only things with
out which we cannot be saved are repentance and faith. —
Last, but not least, to take a literal view of " eating and
drinking," -would involve most blasphemous and profane
consequences. It would shut out of heaven the penitent
thief. He died long after these words were spoken, with
out any literal eating and drinking. Will any dare to say
he had "no life" in Him? — It would admit to heaven
thousands of ignorant, godless communicants in the pre
sent day. They literally eat and drink, no doubt ! But
they have no eternal life, and will not be raised to glory at
the last day. Let these reasons be carefully pondered.
The plain truth is, there is a morbid anxiety in fallen
man to put a carnal sense on Scriptural expressions,
wherever he possibly can. He struggles hard to make
religion a matter of forms and ceremonies, — of doing and
performing, — of sacraments and ordinances, — of sense and
of sight. He secretly dislikes that system of Christianity
which makes the state of the heart the principal thing, and
labours to keep sacraments and ordinances in the second
place. Hiippy is that Christian who remembers these
things, and stands on his guard! Baptism and the Lord's
supper, no doubt, are holy sacraments, and mighty bless
ings, wdien rightly used. But it is worse than useless to
drag them in everywhere, and to see them everywhere in
God's Word.
Let us next consider carefully, toliat these verses do mean.

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 395
Ihe expressions they contain are, no doubt, very re
markable. Let us try to get some clear notion of their
meaning. The "flesh and blood of the Son of man" mean
that sacrifice of His own body, which Christ offered up on
the cross, when He died for sinners. The .atonement made
by Ilis death, the satisfaction made by his sufferings, as
our Substitute, the redemption effected by His enduring
the penalty of our sins in His own body on the tree, — this
seems to be the true idea that we should set before our
minds, The " eating and drinking," without which there is no
Ufe in us, means that reception of Christ's sacrifice which
takes place when a man believes on Christ crucified for
salvation. It is an inward and spiritual act of the heart,
and has nothing to do with the body. Whenever a man,
feeling his own guilt and sinfulness, lays hold on Christ,
and trusts in the atonement made for him by Christ's
death, at once he " eats the flesh of the Son of man, and
drinks His blood." His soul feeds on Christ's sacrifice, by
faith, just as his body would feed on bread. Believing, he
is said to " eat." Believing, he is said to " drink." And
the special thing that he eats, and drinks, and gets benefit
from, is the atonement made for his sins by Christ's death
for him on Calvary.
The practical lessons which may be gathered from the
whole passage are weighty and important. The point
being once settled, that " the flesh and blood " in these
verses means Christ's atonement, and the " eating and
drinking " mean faith, we may find in these verses great
principles of truth, which lie at the very root of Chris
tianity. We may learn, that faith in Christ's atonement is a thing
of absolute necessity to salvation. Just as there was no
safety for the Israelite in Egypt who did not eat the pass-

396 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
over-lamb, iu the night when the first-born were slain, so
there is no life for the sinner who does not eat the flesh of
Christ and drink His blood.
We may learn that faith in Christ's atonement unites us
by the closest possible bonds to our Saviour, and entitles
us to the highest privileges. Our souls shall find full satis
faction for all their wants : — " His flesh is meat indeed, and
His blood is drink indeed." All things are secured to us
that we can need for time and eternity: — " Whoso eateth
my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life, and I
will raise him up at the last day."
Last, but not least, we may learn that faith in Christ's
atonement is a personal act, a dailj act, and an act that
can be felt. No one can eat and drink for us, and no one,
in like manner, can believe for us. — ^We need food every
day, and not once a week or once a month, — and, in like
manner, we need to employ faith every day. — We feel
benefit when we have eaten and drunk, we feel strength
ened, nourished, and refreshed ; and, in like manner, if we
believe truly, we shall feel the better for it, by sensible
hope and peace in our inward man.
Let us take heed that we use these truths, as well as
know them. The food of this world, for which so many
take thought, will perish in the using, and not feed our
souls. He only that eats of " the bread that came down
from heaven " shall live for ever.
Notes. John VI. 52—59.
52. — [Tlie Jews therefore strove among themselves.] — This expression
shows an increasingly strong feeUng among the Jews. "When
our Lord talked of "coming down frora heaven" they "mur
mured." — When He speaks of giving His "flesh to eat" they
"strove." — It is the word rendered "ye fight," in James iv. 2.
In what way fhe Jews strove it is not very clear to see. "Wo
cannot suppose that there were two contending parties, — one
favourable to our Lord, and one opposed to Him. It probably
means that they began to reason and argue among themselves in

JOHISR CHAP. VI. 397'
an angry, violent, and excited manner, such as St Paul forbids
when he says, " The servant of the Lord must not strive."
(2 Tim. ii. 24.) The same word is used there as here.
[How can this man givc.flesh to eat!] The likeness should be
observed between this question and that of Nieoderaus (John iii.
4), and that of the Samaritan woman. (John iv. II.)
There is an implied scornful sense about the expression " this
man." CyrU in commenting on this verse, points out the unreason
ableness and inconsistency of the Jews, above all men, in raising
difficulties and denying the possibiUty of things, because they are
hard to explain and preternatural. He sumraons the Jews to ex
plain the miracles in Egj'pt, and those in the wilderness, and
He concludes, — " There are innuraerable things, in which if thou
inquirest 'how' they can be, thou must overthrow the whole
Scripture, and despise Moses and the Prophets."
53. — [Jesu^ said... Verily, verily, I say!] "We come now to one of the
most solemn and important sayings that ever fell frora our Lord's
Ups. Having brought the Jews step by step up to this point, He
now declares fo thera the highest and most startling doctrine of
the G-ospel.
[Except ye eat the flesh...drinlc his blood...no life in you.] When
our Lord uses this phrase "except" at the beginning of a sen
tence, we generaUy find something of more than ordinary import
ance, in it. Thus, " Except a man be born again," — "Except ye
be converted and become as little chUdren," — "Except ye re
pent." (John iii. 3, Matt. xvni. 3, Luke xui. 3.) Here He tells
the Jews that they " have no life," — no spiritual life, no title to
eternal life, — that they are in fact dead, legally dead, spiritually
dead, and on the way to the second death, if they do not " eat
the flesh and drink the blood" of the Son of man, — that is, of
HimseE In a word, He lays down the principle that eating His
flesh and drinking His blood is a thing not only possible but abso
lutely necessary to salvation — ^is a thing without which no man
can go to heaven.
Considering that the Jewish passover was nigh at hand, and
that many of our Lord's hearers were probably on their way to
Jerusalem to attend it, it seems highly probable that our Lord
desired to direct the minds of those He addressed to Himself as
the true passover and sacrifice for sin.
The latent idea of the sentence, I firmly believe, is that first
passover in the land of Egypt, which was kept on the night wlien
the first-born was slain. The flesh and blood of the lamb slain
that night were the means of life, safety, and deUveranoe to fhe
Israelites. In like manner, I bel'eve, O'.ir Lord raeant tho Ji-wa

898 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
to understand that His flesh and blood were to be the means of
Ufe and deliverance from the wrath to come to sinners. To a
Jewish ear therefore there would be nothing so entirely new and
strange in fhe sentence as at first sight may appear to us. The
thing that would startle them no doubt would be our Lord's
assertion that eating His flesh and drinking His blood could be
the means of Ufe to their souls, as the flesh and blood of fhe pass-
over lamb had been to their fathers the salvation of their bodie.?.
But what did our Lord mean when He spoke of " eating his
flesh and drinking his blood," as things indispensably necessary
to Ufe ? This is a point on which wide differences of opinion
prevail, have prevailed in every age of the Church, and probably
will prevail as long as the world stands.
(a!) Some think that our Lord meant a literal " eating and
drinking" with the mouth of our bodies, and that the "flesh and
blood " mean the bread and wine in the sacrament of the Lord's
supper. This is the opinion of almost all the Fathers, though
occasional passages may be pointed out in the writings of some,
which seem irreconcileable with it. It is the opinion of most
Eoraan Catholic writers, but certairfly not of all. It is the opinion
of some modern English divines, such as "Wordsworth and
Burgon. (Z>.) Some think that the "eating and drinking" here mean
the eating and drinking of heart and soul by faith, not of the
body, — and that the " flesh and blood " mean Christ's vicarious
sacrifice of His body on the cross. They deny entirely that
there is any reference whatever to the Lord's supper in the words.
They consider that our Lord meant to teach the absolute neces
sity of feeding by faith on His atonement for sin on the cross.
Except a man's soul lays hold by faith on Christ's sacrifice of
His body and blood as the only hope of his Salvation, he has
no title to or part in eternal life. This is the opinion of Luther,
Melancthon, Zwingle, Calvin, Ecolarapadius, Brentius, Gualter,
Bullinger, Pellican, Beza, Musculus, Placius, Calovius, Cocceius,
Gomarus, Nifanius, Poole, Cartwright, Hammond, Eollock,
Hutcheson, Lightfoot, Henry, Burkitt, "Whitby, Leigh, Pearce,
Lampe, GiU, Tittman, A. Clarke, Barnes, and most modern
divines. Among Romanist writers, this opinion is held by Cardinal
Cajetan, Ferus, and Jansenius of Ghent Even Toletus, one of
the ablest Eomanist commentators on John, admits that the
opinions of writers are not unanimous.
(c.) Some think that our Lord did not mean any literal eating
and dritking, and that He did not refer directly to the Lord's
suppei- when He spake of His flesh and blood. But they do

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 39t,
think that our Lord had the sacrament in view aud prospect
when He spoke these words, and that He did tacitly refer to that
peculiar communion with His flesh and blood, which He after
wards appointed the Lord's supper to be the means of imparting
to believing communicants. This is the opinion, apparently of
Trapp, Doddridge, Olshausen, Tholuck, Stier, Bengel, Besser
Scott, Alford, and some others. '
I decidedly agree wilh those who held the second of these
opinions. I beUeve that our Lord, both in this text and ali
through this chapter, did not, either directly or indireotiy, refer
to the Lord's supper, — that by His flesh and blood He did not
mean the bread and wine, — that by eating and drinking He did
not mean any bodily act I beUeve, that by " flesh and blood "
He meant the sacrifice of His own body for us, when He offered
it up as our Substitute on Calvary. I believe that by " eating
and drinking," He meant that communion and participation of
the benefits of His sacrifice which faith, and faith only, conveys
to the soul. I beUeve His meaning to be,— " Except yd bfelieve
on me as the one sacrifice for sin, and by faith receive into your
hearts the redemption purchased by my blood, ye have no
spiritual Ufe, and will not be saved." The atonement of Chiist,
His vicarious death and sacrifice, and faith in it, — these things
are the key to the whole passage. I beUeve this must be kept
steadily in view.
It is easy to call the opinion to which I adhere Zwinglian,
and low, and irreverent. Hard words are not arguments. It
is easier to make such assertions than to prove them. I have
already shown that many writers, wholly unconnected with
Zwingle or Z-wingUanism, maintain the opinion. But I submit
that the foUowing reasons are weighty and unanswerable : —
(1.) To say that our Lord meant the Lord's supper in this text
is a most cruel and uncharitable opinion. It cuts off from eternal
life all who do not receive the communion. At this rate all who
die in infancy and childhood, — aU who die of full age without
coming to the communion, — the whole body of the Quakers in
modern times, — the penitent thief on the cross, all — all are lost
for ever in hell ! Our Lord's words are stringent and exclusive.
Such an opinion is too monstrous to be true. In fact, it was to
avoid this painful conclusion that many early Christians, in
Cyprian's time, held_the doctrine of infant communion.
Ferus, the Eoman Catholic commentator, who considers the
eating and drinking here to be only spiritual, and not to refer
to the sacrament, sees this objection clearly and puts it strongly.
(2.) To say that our Lord meant the Lord's supper in this
text, opens a wide door to formaUsm and superstition. Thou
sands would wish nothing better than to hear, — " He that eateth

400 iEXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
my flesh and drinketh my blood, — that is, eats the sacramental
bread and drinks the sacramental wine, — has eternal lile." Here
is precisely what the natural heart of man likes I He likes to
go to heaven by formally using ordinances. This is fhe very
way in which millions in the Eomish Church have made and aie
making shipwreck of their souls.
(3.) To say Ihat our Lord meant the Lord's supper in fhe text,
is to make a thing absolutely necessary to salvation which Christ
never intended to be so. Our Lord commanded us to use fhe
Lord's supper, but He never said that all who did use it would
be saved, and all who did not use it would be lost How many
hundreds repent and are converted on their death-beds, far awa}'
from ministers and sacraments, and never receive the Lord's sup
per 1 And will any one dare to say they are all lost? A new
heart and an interest in Christ's cleansing blood are the two
things needful to salvation. "We must have the Blood and the
Spirit, or we have no life in us. "Without them no heaven I
But the Scripture never puts between a sinner and salvation an
outward ordinance, over which the poor sinner may have no
control, and may be unable to receive if, without any fault of his
own. Archbishop Cranmer remarks, iu his " Defence of the True
Doctrine of the Sacrament," — "The Eomanists say that good
men eat the body of Christ and drink His blood, only at that
time when they receive the sacrament : we say that they eat,
drink, and feed on Christ continuaUy, so long as they are mem
bers of His body. — They say that the body of Christ which is in
the saeramenf, hath its own proper form and quantity ; we say
that Christ is there sacramentally and spiritually without form
or quantify. — They say that the fathers and prophets of the Old
Testament did not eat the body nor drink the blood of Christ;
we say that they did eat His body and drink His blood, although
He was not yet born or incarnate."
Ferus says, — " "We must fake hold of Christ's flesh and blood,
not with our hands, but with our faith. He therefore that be
lieves that Christ has given up His body for us, and has shed
His blood for the remission of our sins, and through this places
all his hope and confidence in Christ crucified, that man really
eats the body and blood of Christ."
Cardinal Cajetan, quoted by Ford, says, — "To eat the flesh
of Christ and to drink His blood is faith in fhe death of Jesus
Christ So that the sense is this : if ye use not the death of the
Son of God, as meat and drink, ye have not the Ufe of the Spirit
in you."
The opinion which many hold, that although our Lord did not
directly mean the Lord's supper in this text. He did refer to

JOH^r, CHAP. VI. 401
it indirectly, and had it in view, seems to me very vao-ue and
nnsatisfaotory, and only calculated to confuse our minds.- Our
Lord is speaking of soraefhing which He says is absolutely and
indispensably necessary fo eternal life. "Where is the use of
dragging in an ordinance which is not absolutely necessary, and
insisting that He had it in view ?— The truth of the matter, I
beUeve, lies precisely in the opposite direction. I beUeve that
afterwards, when our Lord appointed the Lord's supper, He had
in view the doctrine of this text, and used words intended to
remind the disciples of the doctrine. But here, I beUeve, He
was speaking of something far higher and greater than the Lord's
supper. — "When He spoke of the lesser thing, I have no doubt
that He intended to refer to fhe greater, and to turn the dis
ciples' minds back to it. But when He spoke as He did here of
the greater thing, I am quite unable to beUeve that He intended
to refer to the lesser.
If our Lord did really refer to the Lord's supper when He
spake of eating His flesh and drinking His blood, it seems im
possible to understand how Eoman Catholics can deny the cup
to the laity. " Drinking Christis blood " is distinctly said to be
as necessary to eternal Ufe as " eating Christ's body." Yet the
Eomish Church wfll not allow the laity to drink Christ's blood I
It is evidently the pressure of this argument which makes some
Eoman Catholic -writers deny that this passage refers to the
sacrament. It is a mistake to suppose that they are unanimous
on the point.
EoUock starts the question, why our Lord did not plainly teU
His hearers that by eating and drinking He meant not a bodily
but a spiritual act, — viz., beUeving. He repUes, that in this as
in every case, our Lord did not strive so much to make men
understand words, as to beget feeling and experimental acquaint
ance with things, '^'hen the heart reaUy begins to feel, words
are soon understood.
The distinction that Alford and some others draw between
the ''flesh" and "blood" in this text, appears to me very doubt
ful. They think that "eating the flesh" refers generally to
participation in fhe benefits of Christ's incarnation and ascen
sion with a human body into heaven ; and that " drinking the
blood " refers specially to an interest in the benefits purchased
by His death.— I am not satisfied that this is correct. At the
57th verse, our Lord, speaking briefly of the truth just before
enunciated, only says, '' He that eatetii me, even he shall Uve
by me." Surely "eating" there stands for participation in the
benefits of Christ's death as well as Ufe 1
My own impression is that both " flesh and blood " are men
tioned here by our Lord to make it certain to the Jewa that He

402 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
spoke of His death, and of the offering of His whole body in
sacrifice on the cross. The body of the sin-offering was just as
essential a part of the sacrifice as the blood. (See Lev. iv. I — 12.)
So also the body of the passover lamb had to be eaten, as well as
the blood sprinkled. The " flesh and blood " are both mentioned
here because our Lord had in view the offering of Himself as a
sin-ofi'ering, — and because he would make it sure that He meant
the '-' death " of His body to be the life of man's soul. It is not
Christ incarnate merely, but Christ crucified as our atonement
and sin-oflering, that man must feed upon if he would have
life.
54. — [Whoso eateih...drinkefh... eternal life!] This verse is just fhe
converse of the preceding one. As it had been said that with
out eating and drinking there was no life, so it is now said that
he who eats and drinks has Ufe. These words, as I have already
remarked, appear to me to make it irapossible to interpret the
passage of the Lord's supper. Myriads are Communicants who
have no spiritual Ufe whatever. Every one, on the other hand,
who by faith feeds his soul on Christ's sacrifice for sin, has even
now everlasting Ufe. "He that beUeveih on Him is not con
demned." — "He that beUeveth on me hath everlasting life."
(John iii. 18 ; vi. 47.)
The word '' whoso '' wcald have been more simply and UteraUy
rendered " he that"
The " presentness " of a true Christian's privileges should be
remarked here again: — "He hath eternal life."
The Greek word for " eateth," in this verse and 56th, is quite
a different word from that used in the 53rd verse. The reason
of the difference is not very clear, and no commentator has
hitherto explained it Leigh, Parkhurst, and Schleusner, aU
agree that the Greek word used in this verse ordinarUy denotes
the eating of an animal, in contradistinction to that of a man.
Leigh observes that the word " noteth a continuance of eating,
as brute beasts will eat all day, and some part of the night." I
venture to suggest that the word is purposely used, in order to
show that our Lord meant the habit of continuaUy feeding on
Him aU day long by faith. He did not mean the occasional eat
ing of material food in an ordinance.
The word is only used in this and the 56th, 57th, and 58tii
verses, and in Matt. xxiv. 38, and John xiii. 18.
[I will raise him up at the last day.] These words are a fourth
time repeated, and purposely, in my judgraent, to show who they
are of whom Christ is speaking. He is not speaking of all who
receive the Lord's supper, but of those persons who are " given
to hira by fhe Father," — " who see the Son and believe on him,"

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 403
— who "are dra-wn by the Father and come to Christ" (John vi.
39, 40, 44.) These are tiie same persons who eat His flesh and
drink His blood by faith. To them belongs the privilege of a part
in that first and glorious resurrection, when Christ shall caU aU His
people from the grave at His second coming.
55. — [For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.] The
word "indeed " here would be more literaUy rendered "truly; "
and the word " meat " answers to our word "food." The mean
ing is, " My flesh is more truly food, and my blood is more truly
drink, than any other food and drink can be. It is food and drink
in fhe highest, fullest, noblest sense, — food and drink for the soul,
food and drink that satisfies, food and drink that endures to ever
lasting life.'' (See 35th verse.)
EoUock remarks, that the best way to understand this verse is
to make trial of Christ, and to feed on Him by faith. "We shall
soon discover how true the words are.
Ferus suggests, that there may be a latent reference here to the
forbidden fruit which Satan promised should be " meat and drink
indeed " to Adam and Eve. This stands out in contrast to thai
food. By eating the food Satan held out, carae sin and death.
By eating the food Christ holds out, comes life and heaven.
56. — [He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood.] — These words
are precisely the same as those at the beginning of the 54th
verse ; and there is no reason why " whoso " there, should not
have been " he that," as here. In the one case, the raan who
eats and drinks Christ's flesh and blood, is said to possess eternal
life, and in the other, to be intimately joined to Christ. Bu't it
is the same person.
[DweUeth in me and I in him.] This expression is meant to
convey to our minds the close and intiraate union that there is
between Christ and a true Christian. Such a man is said to
dwell, or abide in Christ, and Christ to dwell, or abide in him.
Christ is the house, or home, or hiding-place, within which the
believer's soul, as it were, resides ; — and Christ dwells iu the
believer's heart by His Spirit, comforting, nourishing, and
strengthening hira. (See I John iii. 24, and iv. 15, 16.) See also
John XV. 4, where " Abide in me and I in you," might have been
equally weU rendered, " dwell in me and I in you."
Just as " food and drink '' received into a man's body become
part of the man's self, and are incorporated into his system,
and add to his health, comfort, and strength, — so when a man
by faith feeds his soul on Christis sacrifice for bis sins, Christ
becomes as it were part of himself, and he becomes part of
Chrisf. In a word, there Ls as intimate an union between Christ

404 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS,
and the believer's soul, as there is between a man's food and a
man's body.
57. — [As ihe Jiving Faiher, etc] This verse explains the intimate
union between Christ and fhe true believer, by a far higher and
more mysterious figure than that of the union of our food and
our body. The Ulustration used, is drawn from that unspeak
able and inexplicable union which exists between the Two I'irst
Persons in fhe Trinity — G-od the Pather and God the Son. — It
is as though our Lord said, " Just as the Father sent rae into
the world, to be born of a woman, and take the manhood into
God, and yet, though I am araong you as man, I live in Ihe
closest union and communion with G-od, — even so the man that
by faith feeds his soul on my sacrifice for sin, shaU live in the
closest union and communion with me." — In a word, the union
between Christ and the true Christian, is as real and true and
close and inseparable as the union between God the Father and
God the Son. — While the Son was in the world, the carnal eye
discerned little or nothing of His union with the Father. "Yet
it was a true thing and existed. Just so the carnal eye raay see
littie or nothing of the union between Christ and the raan who
feeds by faith on Christ. Yet it is a real true union. — Just as
the Son, though equal to the Father as touching His Godhead,
does live, in an ineffable and inscrutable way, through and by
the Father, the Son never being without the Father nor the
Father without the Son, — so in like manner the man that feeds
on Christ enjoys spiritual life, only through and by Clirist. Is
not this St Paul's thought: — "I Uve, yet not I, but Christ
liveth in me."—" To me to Uve is Christ." (Gal. ii. 20. Phil. i.
21.) "Whether our Lord is here speaking of His human nature or
of His Divine nature, is not quite clear. I incline to think with
Cyril and Chrysostom, that it is the Divine nature.
Eollock remarks, that we have three living Ones spoken of
here. (I.) The living Fatiier. (2.) The living Son. (3.) The
living believer. As we are sure of the life of the Father, so we
may be sure of the life of the believer. The three lives are
linked together.
Hutchesoij remarks, " Christ's living by the Father, is not
only a pledge of our hfe, but our Ufe holds also sorae proportion
cr similitude to His. For as He hath life communicated by
eternal generation, so by regeneration we are made partakers of
the Divine nature."
"Winer remarks, that the Greek preposition rendered " by " in
this verse, means literally " on account of; " and that the sen
tence moans, stric'tiy and properly, " I live owing to the Father: "

JOHN, CHAP. VL 405
that is, " I live because the Father lives." Schleusner and Park
hurst say much the same.
The " living Father " is a remarkable phrase. It is like the
"living God." (John vi. 69. Acts xiv. 15. Eom. ix. 26. 2
' Cor. xxxiii. 6, 9. 1 Thess. i. 9. I Tim. vi. 17.) It must mean
/ the Father who is fhe source of life, who ''hath hfe in himself."
5 (John v. 26.)
yri, — [Ihis is that bread, etc.] Here our Lord sums up the whole
I discourse. He reverts to the saying with which the Jews had
; begun, about the fathers eating manna in the wilderness, and
repeats the main points He would have His hearers carry away.
These points were as follows : — (1.) That He himself was the
true bread which had come down fi:om heaven, to feed the world
by the sacrifice of Himself. (2.) That fhey must not cUng to the
idea that their fathers had ever eaten this true bread, for they aU
died iu the wilderness, and their souls received no benefit from
the manna. (3.) And that those, on the contrary, who would
eat of the bread He had come down to give, should live for ever,
have everlasting life, and their souls never die. — It is as though
He said, — " This sacrifice of Myself is the true bread from
heaven, of which I spoke at the beginning. The eaters of this
bread are in far better circumstances than your fathers when
they ate manna in the wilderness. Your fathers died in spite
of the manna, and beside that received from it no .spiritual
benefit whatever. He, on the contrary, who by faith eats the
bread of my sacrifice for sin, shaU have everlasting Ufe, and his
soul shall never die." — All the expressions in the verse, we should
remark, have been used frequently in the discourse, and now all
are grouped together, and presented in one view.
59. — [These things said.. .synagogue.. .Capernaum.] This verse is
not sufficientiy noticed, I venture to think. I ask any one to
compare it with the beginning of the discourse in this chapter,
at the 25th verse, — "'When they had found him on the olher
side of the sea, they said," etc. Are we to suppose that they
found Him in the synagogue ? I cannot think it To me it
seems that there must have been a shght break or pause in the
discourse. It began at the landing-place, or outside the city.
It was resumed after a short interval, of a few hours perhaps, in
fhe synagogue. And as I have said before, the break appears
to me to be at verse 41.
Both the discourse of this chapter, and that of the preceding
one, have this point in common, that they seem to have been
delivered before formal assembUes of Jews.
In concluding the notes on this very important passage, I take
occasion to express my entire dissent from the common opinion
held by many, that the sixth chapter of John was intended to

406

EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.

teach the true doctrine of the Lord's supper, as the third was
intended to teach the truth about baptism. — My own opinion
is flatly contrary. I hold that in neither chapter are the sacra
ments referred to at aU. I beUeve that the third chapter was
intended to counteract erroneous views about baptisra, by teach
ing the far higher truth of spiritual regeneration; and I believe
that the sixth chapter was intended to counteract erroneous
views about the Lord's supper, by teaching the far higher truth
of the necessity of feeding on Christ's s.icrifioe by faith. — In
fact, the true antidote to wrong views of baptisra and the Lord's
supper, is a right understanding of the 3d aud 6th chapters of
St. John's Gospel, and the whole of St. John's first Epistie.
"Writing, as St. John did, the last of all the inspired writers, I
believe he was divinely inspired to record things which the
Church of Christ needed most to know. And I regard it as a
most striking fact, that while he altogether omits to describe the
institution of the Lord's supper, and says little or nothing about
baptism in the Gospel, he dwells at the same time most strongly
on these two mighty truths, which he foresaw were in danger
of being forgotten, — viz. : the new birth, and faitli in the Atone
ment. — -Surely it is possible to honour baptism and the Lord's
supper, without thrusting them iu everywhere in our interpreta
tion of Scripture.

JOHN VL 60— G5.

60 iMany therefore of his disci
ples, when they had heard this, said,
This is an hard saying; who can
hear it ?
61 "When Jesus knew in himself
that his disciples murmured at it,
he said unto them, Doth this offend
you? 62 What and if ye shall see the
Son of man ascend up where he
was before ?
63 It is the Spirit that quicken

eth; tho flesh profiteth nothing: the
words that I speak unto you, they
are spirit, and iliey are life.
64 But there are some of you
that beUeve not. Por Jesus knew
from tho beginning who they were
that believed not, and who should
betray him.
65 Aud he said. Therefore said I
unto you, that no man can come
unto me, except it were given unto
him of my Pather.

We learn from these verses that some of Christ's sayings
seem hard to flesh and blood. We are told that " many "
who had followed our Lord for a season, -were offended
when He spoke of " eating his flesh and drinking his
blood." They murmured and said " This is an hard say
ing ; who can hear it ?"

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 407
Murmurs and complaints of this kind are very common.
It must never surprise us to hear them. They have been
they are, they will be as long as the world stands. To
some Christ's sayings appear hard to understand. To
others, as in the present case, they appear hard to believe,
and harder still to obey. It is just one of the many ways
iu which the natural corruption of man shows itself. So
long as the heart is naturally proud, worldly, unbelieving,
and fond of selt-indulgence, if not of sin, so long there -will
never be wanting people who wiU say of Christian doc-
trmes and precepts, " These are hard sayings ; Avho can
hear them ?"
Humility is the frame of mind which we should labour
and pray for, if we would not be offended. If we find
any of Christ's sayings hard to understand, we should
humbly remember our present ignorance, and believe that
we shall know more by and bye. If we find any of His
sayings difficult to obey, we should humbly recollect that
He win never require of us impossibilities, and that what
He bids us do, He will give us grace to perform.
We learn, secondly, from these verses, that we must
beware of putting a carnal meaning on spiritual words.
We read that our Lord said to the murmuring Jews who
stumbled at the idea of eating His flesh and drinking His
blood, " It is the Spirit that quickeneth ; the flesh profiteth
nothing : the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit
and they are life."
It is useless to deny that this verse is full of difficulties.
It contains exi^ressions " hard to be understood." It is
far more easy to have a general impression of the meaning
of the whole sentence, than to explain it word by word.
Some things nevertheless we can see clearly and grasp
firmly. Let us consider what they are.
Our Lord says, " It is the Spirit that quickeneth." By
this He means that it is the Holy Ghost who is the special

408 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
author of spiritual life in man's soul. By His agency it is
firs-t imparted, and afterwards sustained and kept up. If
the Jews thought He meant that man could have spiritual
life by bodily eating or drinking, they were greatly mis
taken. Our Lord says, " The flesh profiteth nothing." By this
He means that neither His flesh nor any other flesh, lite
rally eaten, can do good to the soul. Spiritual benefit is
not to be had through the mouth, but through the heart.
The soul is not a material thing, and cannot therefore be
nourished by material food.
Our Lord says, " the words that I speak unto you, they
are spirit and they are Ufe." By this He signifies that His
words and teachings, applied to the heart by the Holy
Ghost, are the true means of producing spiritual influence
and conveying spiritual life. By words thoughts are be
gotten and aroused. By words mind and conscience are
stirred. And Christ's words especially are spirit-stirring
and life-giving.
The principle contained in this verse, however faintly
we may grasp its full meaning, deserves peculiar attention
in these times. There is a tendency in many minds to
attach an excessive importance to the outward and visible
or " doing" part of religion. They seem to think that the
sum and substance of Christianity consists in Baptism and
the Supper of the Lord, in public ceremonies and forms, in
appeals to the eye and ear and bodily excitement. Surely
they forget that it is " the Spirit that quickeneth," and that
the "flesh profiteth nothing." It is not so much by noisy
public demonstrations as by the still quiet work of the Holy
Ghost on hearts that God's cause prospers. It is Christ's
words entering into consciences, which " are spirit and
life." We learn, lastly, frora these verses, that Christ has a
perfect knowledge of the hearts of meii. We read that

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 409
" He knew from the beginning who they were that believed
not, and who should betray him."
Sentences like this are found so frequently in the Gospels
that we are apt to underrate their importance. Yet there
are few truths which we shaU find it so good for om* souls
to remember as that which is contained in the sentence
before us. The Saviour with whom we have to do is one
who knows all things !
What light this throws on the marvellous patience of the
Lord Jesusin the days of His earthly ministry ! He knew
the sorrow and humiliation before Him, and the manner
of His death. He knew the unbelief and treachery of some
who professed to be His familiar friends. But " for the
joy that was set before Him " he endured it all. (Heb.
xii. 2.)
What light this throws on the folly of hypocrisy and
false profession ia religion I Let those who are guilty of
it recoUect that they cannot deceive Christ. He sees
them, knows them, and will expose them at the last day,
except they repent. Whatever we are as Christians, and
however weak, let us be real, true, and sincere.
Finally, what light this throws on the daily pUgrimage
of all true Chiistians ! Let them take comfort in the
thought that their Master knows them. However much
unknown and misunderstood by the world, their Master
knows their hearts, and will comfort them at the last day.
Happy is he who, in spite of many infirmities, can say
with Peter : " Lord, thou knowest all things ; thou
knowest that I love thee." (John xxi. 17.)
Notes. John VI. 60 — 65.
iO,—[Many therefore of his disciples.] It is plain that these were
not true beUevers. Many who foUowed our Lord about, and
wore called His " disciples," had no real grace in their hearts,
and foUowed Him from carnal motives. We must expect to see
the same thing in every age. Not aU who come to church, nor
18

410 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
all who profess to admire and foUow popular preachers, are real
Christians. This is far too much forgotten.
[This is an hard saying.] This does not mean "hard" in
the sense of being " difficult to understand." It is not so rauch
"hard to the comprehension," as "hard to fhe feeUngs." Park
hurst defines it as "shocking to the mind." It is the same word
that is used in the parable of the talents : " Thou art an hard
man " (Matt xxv. 24) : and in the Epistle of Jude : " the hard
speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
(Jude 15.)
Some think that the " hard saying " means the whole dis
course. My own opinion is, that it refers specially to our Lord's
concluding words about eating His flesh and drinking His
blood. [Who can hear it?] The "hearing" here is evidently the
hearing so as to beUeve, receive, and obey. " Who can believe,
receive, and obey such a saying as this ? " (See John v. 24 ;
viii. 43; x. 3, IC, 27; xviU. 37; I John iv. 6.)
61. — [Jesus knew in himself] This means, that He knew by that
divine knowledge, through which He always " knew what was
in man." (John ii. 25.)
[His disciples murmured at if.] This would be more literally
rendered " His disciples are murmuring about this." He spoke
at the very moment of their murmuring.
[Doth this offend you ? ] This means, " Is this saying of
mine a stumbling-block to you ? Is the doctrine of eating my
flesh and drinking ray blood, too humbling a doctrine for your
hearts to receive ? "
62. — r What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend.'] This means,
" "What will ye think and say of my ascension into heaven ? "
" What -will your feeUngs be, if you behold tUis body of mine
going up to that heaven from whence I came down? WiU
you not be much more offended ? " (See John iU. 12.)
The first thing, we must remember, that the Jews "mur
mured " about, was our Lord's saying that He " came down from
heaven." The second thing was. His saying that He would
" give them His flesh to eat" Both times our Lord's human
body was the subject — Here our Lord asks them what they
would think, if they saw that sarae body " ascending up " into
heaven. Even then, after his ascension, they would have to
" eat His flesh, and drink His blood," if they desired eternal life.
What would they think of that ? Would they not find it even
more difiicult to receive and behove ?
[Where He was before.] This is an expression which no

JOHN, CHAP. VI. '411
Socinian can explain. It is a clear assertion of the " pre-exist
ence " of Christ
Some think, as Olshausen and Tholuck, that our Lord only
means generally, " If you are offended and unbeUeving, even
now, while I am with you, how much more will ye be, when I
go away." But this is a frigid and unsatisfactory interpretation.
It is fair to say that Stier thinks, with Chrysostom, Cyril,
Theophylact, and others, that our Lord did not mean that His
ascension would be a greater difiiculty to His disciples, but that,
on the contrary, it would remove their doubts and weaken the
offence which they now felt. Hutcheson and Alford seem to
agree wilh this. But I cannot see it. Stier thinks our Lord
implied, " Then, after my ascension, it wiU be disclosed to
you how, and in what way, my human corporeity, become
heavenly and glorified, may be given to be eaten, and to be
drunk." (Compare John vin. 28.)
63. — [It is the Spirit, Sc] This text is, perhaps, one of the most
difficult in the G-ospel of St. John. It is easy to slur it over,
and be satisfied with a vague impression that it means " We
are to put a spiritual sense on our Lord's words." That, no
doubt, is a true idea. But when we come to a close examina
tion of the words which compose the verse, I think no one can
be satisfied with such a loose interpretation of Scripture. That
our Lord's words " are to be taken spiritually," may be very
true. But to say so is not to explain the verse.
What is meant by the expression, "It is the Spirit that
quickeneth " ?
(a.) Some think that " the Spirit " here means, " the divine
nature of Christ " (as Rom. i. 4 ; I Pet. iii. 18), in contradis
tinction to His human nature, here caUed, His " flesh." (See
1 Cor. XV. -45.) They consider our Lord to mean, "It is my
divine nature, as God, wbich is the raeans of comraunicating
spiritual benefit to men. My human nature, as flesh, could of
itself do no good to souls. It is not, therefore, any carnal
eating of my flesh, that could be of use to you, and I did not
mean any such eating."
This is the opinion of Cyril, Cartwright, Poole, Bishop HaU,
Trapp, Toletus, Bollock, Hutcheson, Leigh, Burkitt, Quesnel,
Burgon, and Wordsworth.
(5.) Some think that "the Spirit" here means "the Holy
Spirit " the Third Person of the Trinity. They consider our
Lord to raean, "It is the Holy Spirit who alone can convey
spiritual Ufe to the soul of man. The mere eating ol flesh,
whether my flesh, or any other flesh, cannot do good to the
inn-^r man When, therefore, I spoke of ' eating my flesh, I did

412 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
not mean the bodily act of eating any literal flesh, birt a very
different kind of eating, and a very different sort of flesh." This
is the opinion of Zwingle, Melancthon, Calvin, Bucer, Ecolampa
dius, PeUican, Flacius, Bullinger, Cocceius, Diodati, Piscator, Mus
culus, Baxter, Lampe, Henry, Scott, Stier, Besser^ Alford.
(c.) Some think that " the Spirit " here means, " the spiritual
doctrine, or sense," as opposed to "the letter," or literal sense of
scriptural language. (2 Cor. iii. 6.) They con.sider the sentence
to mean, " It is the spiritual sense of my words, and not the lite
ral, which is quickening, or life-giving to the soul. When I
spoke of ' my flesh,' I did not mean my flesh literally, but my
flesh in a spiritual sense. My flesh literaUy could be of no use to
any one." This seems to be the opinion of Chrysostom, Theo
phylact, Euthymius, Brentius, Beza, Ferus, Cornelius S, Lapide,
Schottgen, Pearce, Parkhurst, A. Clarke, Faber, Barnes, Webster.
But it is not easy to make out clearly, in every instance, what is
the precise meaning put on the words, " the Spirit," by the in
terpreters who take this third view. There are not a few shades
of variety in their opinions.
I must acknowledge, that I find it difficult to give a decided
opinion on the comparative merits of these three views of the
expression before us. There is something fo be said for each of
the three. On the whole, I think the second and third are more
satisfactory than the first ; and I incline to prefer the second to
the third. But I say this with much hesitation.
RoUock, who holds strongly that "the Spirit" means Christ's
divine nature, maintains, that " the flesh," means the whole
human nature of Christ He thinks that the meaning of " the
flesh profiteth nothing " is, that all the works of our Lord's body,
whether in life or death, His fulfilling the law. His sufferings on
the cross, derive their whole efficacy from the union of the two
natures — " It is the divine nature that is life-giving. The human
nature, alone and separate from the divine, is useless and unpro
fitable." — He holds, therefore, that to eat the human nature of
Christ alone, i. e., His flesh, could do us no good ; as, unless we
could eat His divine nature also, it would be unprofitable. He
concludes, therefore, that the only eating of Christ that can be
useful to the soul, must, of necessity, be the spiritual eating of
faith, and not any carnal eating of the Lord's Supper. Hutche
son agrees with this view.
The expression, " the words that I speak unto you, they are
spirit and they are Ufe," is just as difficult as the former part of
the text. The word " spirit," here, at any rate, cannot mean the
divine nature of Christ. If it were so taken, the sentence would
be unmeaning. — The word Spirit must either mean the " Holy
Spirit," or " fhe spiritual sense," as opposed to the letter. The

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 413
sentence then might be paraphrased in either of the following
v/ays : — (I.) " The words that I speak to you, received into your
hearts and beUeved, are the Spiritis influence, the ministration of
the Spirit, and the Spirit's means of giving you life." This is
RoUock's view. Or else, (2.) " The words that I speak unto you,
are to be taken in a spiritual sense ; or, are spiritual words, and'
taken in that sense, are Ufe-giving to the souL" — This is Augus
tine's view.
I must honestly confess that neither of these explanations is
quite satisfactory ; but they are the nearest approach I can see
to a satisfactory interpretation. The sentence is evidently a con
cise eUiptical one, and it seems impossible to convey it in English,
without a paraphrase.
Alford paraphrases the sentence thus : " The words that I have
spoken, viz., the words 'my flesh and blood,' are spirit and life,
— spirit, not flesh only, — Uving food, not carnal and perishable."
I venture to think, that this explanation is not more precise, or
satisfactory, than either of those I have suggested.
The expression " the words that I speak unto you," must pro
bably be confined to the words our Lord had spoken about eat
ing His flesh and drinking His blood, and not referred to the
whole discourse.
After all, however difficult and elliptical the sentence before us
may be, there is a truth which throws light on it, with which
every true Christian must be famUiar. It is the words of Christ
brought home to the hearts of men by the Spirit, which are the
great agents employed in quickening and giving spiritual life to
men. The Spirit impresses Christ's words on a man's conscience.
These words become the parent of thoughts and convictions in
the man's mind. From these thoughts springs all the man's
spiritual hfe. The soul is not benefited by bodily actions, such
as eating or drinking, but by spiritual impressions, which the
Holy Spirit alone can produce. In producing these spiritual
impressions the Spirit specially employs the agency of Christ's
"words," and hence comes the great principle, that " His words
are spirit and life."
64. — [Ihere are some of you, that believe not] The connection of
this sentence with the preceding verses seems to be t'nis : — ' The
true .account of your murmuring and thinking ray sayings 'hard'
is your want of faith. You do not reaUy believe me to be
the Messiah, though you have foUowed me aud professed your
selves my disciples. And not really believing in me, you are
oS'ended at the idea of eating my flesh and drmkmg my blood."
[Jesus knew from ihe beginning who...believed not.] This is one
of the many places which declare our Lord's Divme knowledge

[li

EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.

of all hearts and characters. He was never deceived by crowds
and apparent popularity, as His min'sters often are. When it
s.a3'S "from the beginning," it probably means "from the begin
ning of His ministry, and frora the tirae when the unbelieving
' many ' before Him first professed to be His disciples." Of course
cur Lord, as God, knew all things "from the beginning" of the
world. But it does not seem necessary to suppose that this ia
meant here.
RoUock remarks our Lord's example of patient teaching and
preaching to all without exception, though He knew that many
did not and would not beUeve. He points out what a pattern it
is to ministers. Christ knew exactly who would beUeve. Minis
ters do not know.
[ Who should betray him.] "We should not fail to notice in this
expression our Lord's marvellous patience in allowing one whom
He knew to be about to betray Him to be one of His Apostles.
It was doubtless meant to teach us that false profession must be
expected everywhere, and must not surprise us. How much we
ought to tolerate and put up with, if our Lord tolerated Judas
near him I The pain and sorrow which the foreknowledge of
the conduct of Judas must have caused fo our Lord's heart, is a
circumstance in our Lord's sufferings which ought not to be
forgotten.
65. — [And he said, Therefore said I, etc, etc.] The connection of
this verse seems to be as follows : — " 'There are some of you that
believe not and that is the reason why I said fo you, that no
man can come to me unless the Father gives him grace to come,
and draws his heart to me. The Father has not given you grace,
and drawn you to me, and therefore you do not believe."

Jons' VL 66— Tl.

G6 From that time many of his
disciples went back, and walked no
more with him.
67 Theu said Jesus unto tho
twelve, T/iU ye also go away?
68 Then Simon Peter auswerod
him, Lord, to whora shall we go '?
thou hast tho words of eternal Ufe.
69 And we believe and are sure

that thou art that Christ, the Son
of the living God.
10 Jesus answered them, Have
not I chosen you twelve, aud oue
of you is a de-vU?
71 He spake of Judas Iscariot,
the son of Simon : for he it was that
should betray Mm, being one of
tho twelve.

These verses form a sorrowful conclusion to the famous
discourse of Christ which occupies tho greater part of the

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 415
sixth chapter. They supply a melancholy proof of the
hardness and corruption of man's heart. Even when the
Son of God was the preacher, many seem to have heard in
vain. Let us mark in this passage what an old sin backsliding
is. We read that when our Lord had explained what He
meant by " eating and drinking his flesh and blood," —
" From that time many went back and walked no more
with him."
The true grace of God no doubt is an everlasting
possession. From this men never faU away entirely, when
they have once received it. "The foundation of God
standeth sure." "My sheep shall never perish." (2 Tim. ii.
19 ; John X. 28.) But there is counterfeit grace and un
real religion in the Church, wherever there is true ; and
from counterfeit gi'ace thousands may and do fall away.
Like the stony ground hearers, in the parable of the sower,
many " have no root in themselves, and so in time of temp
tation fall away." All is not gold that glitters. All
blossoms do not come to fruit. All are not Israel which
are called Israel. Men may have feelings, desires, convic
tions, resolutions, hopes, joys, sorrows in religion, and yet
never have the grace of God. They may run well for a
season, and bid fair to reach heaven, and yet break down
entirely after a time, go back to the world, and end Uke
Demas, Judas Iscariot, and Lot's wife.
It must never surprise us to see and hear of such cases
in our own days. If it happened in our Lord's time and
under our Lord's teacliing, much more may we expect it
to happen now. Above all, it must never shake our faith
and discourage us in our course. On the contrary, we
raust make up our minds that there will be backsliders in
the Church as long as the world stands. The sneering in
fidel, who defends his unbelief by pointing at them, must
find some. better argument than their example. He forgets

416 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
that there will ahvays be counterfeit coin wheie there is
true money.
Let us mark, secondly, in this ]Dassage, the noble declara
tion of faith which the Apostle JPeter made. Our Lord
had said to the twelve, when many went back, " Will ye
also go avr^ay ?" At once Peter replied, with character
istic zeal and fervour, " Lord, to whom shall we go ? thou
hast the words of eternal life. And we believe and art
sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living
God." The confession contained in these words is a very re
markable one. Living in a professedly Christian land, and
surrounded by Christian privileges, we can hardly form an
adequate idea of its real value. For a humble Jew to say
of one whom Scribes, and Pharisees, and Sadducees agreed
in rejecting, "Thou hast the words of eternal life; thou
art the Christ," was an act of mighty faith. No wonder
that our Lord said, in another place, " Blessed art thou,
Simon Bar-jona : for flesh and blood hath not revealed it
unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." (Matt.
xvi. 18.)
But the question with which Peter begins, is just as re
markable as his confession. " To whom shall we go ?" said
the noble-hearted Apostle. " Whom shall we follow ? To
what teacher shall we betake ourselves ? Where shall we
find any guide to heaven to compare with thee ? What
shall we gain by forsaking thee? What Scribe, what
Pharisee, what Sadducee, what Priest, what Rabbi
can show us such words of eternal life as thou showest ?"
The question is one which every true Christian may
boldly ask, when urged and tempted to give up his reli
gion, and go back to the world. It is easy for those who
hate religion to pick holes in our conduct, to make objec
tions to our doctrines, to find fault with our practices. It
may be hard sometimes to give them any answer. But

JOHN, CHAP. VI. 417
after all, « To whom shall we go," if we give up our reli-
gion ? Where shall we find such peace, and hope, and
solid comfort as in serving Christ, however poorly we
serve Him ? Can we better ourselves by turning our back
on Christ, and going back to our old ways ? We cannot.
Then let us hold on our way and persevere.
Let us mark, lastly, in this passage, what little benefit
some men get from religious privileges. We read that
our Lord said, " Have not I chosen you twelve, and one
of you is a devil." And it goes on, "He spake of Judas
Iscariot, the son of Simon."
If ever there was a man who had great privileges and
opportunities, that man was Judas Iscariot. A chosen dis
ciple, a constant companion of Christ, a witness of His
miracles, a hearer of His sermons, a commissioned preach
er of His kingdom, a fellow and friend of Peter, Jaraes,
and John, — it would be impossible to imagine a more fa
vourable position for a man's soul. Tet if anyone ever fell
hopelessly into hell, and made shipwreck at last for eter
nity, that man was Judas Iscariot. The character of that
man must have been black indeed, of whom our Lord could
say he is " a devil."
Let us settle it firmly in our minds, that the possession
of religious privileges alone is not enough to save our souls.
It is neither place, nor light, nor company, nor opportuni
ties, but grace that man needs to make him a Christian.
With grace we may serve God in the most difficult posi
tion, — like Daniel in Babylon, Obadiah in Ahab's court,
and the saints in Nero's household. Without grace we
may live in the full sunshine of Christ's countenance, and
yet, like Judas, be miserably cast away. Then let us never
rest till we have grace reigning in our souls. Grace is to
be had for the askmg. There is One sitting at the right
hand of God who has said,—" Ask, and it shall be given
you." (Matt. vii. 7.) The Lord Jesus is more willing to
18'*

418 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS.
give grace than man is to seek it. If men have it not, it ia
because they do not ask it.
Notes. John VI. GG— 71.
66. — [From ihat time.] It is doubtful whether the Greek words
here might not have been better translated, "Upon this," —
" After this conversation."
[Many of his disciples.] This expression shows that the num
ber of persons who followed our Lord about, and professed them
selves His disciples, must have been large.
[ Went backward.] This is a metaphorical expression, signifying
"retreat, desertion, forsaking a position once occupied." It is
the same that is rendered in the account of the Jews coming to
take our Lord in the garden, " they went backward, and fell to
the ground." (John xviii. 6.)
[ Walked no m,ore with him!] The simplest view of this expres
sion is, that these deserters from our Lord walked no longer in His
company as He went about teaching, as they had done, but re
turned to their own homes. No minister of the Gospel should
feel surprised if the same thing happens to him.
Not a few of these very " disciples," probably, had been for
ward in wishing to make our Lord a "king," the day before.
Such is popularity, here to-day and gone to-morrow 1
G7. — [CTew said Jesus unto the twelve, WiU ye also go away ?] We
cannot suppose that our Lord asked this, as if He did not know
what the Apostles were going to do. "We may be sure that He
wliO "knew from the beginning who they were that believed
not" (verse 64), knew the hearts of His Apostles. The question
was evidently asked to prove His chosen followers, and to draw
forth from thom an expression of feeling. (See John vi. 6.)
Tho word "will" here, would be more accurately rendered,
" Do you wish ?" " Have you a wUl?"
We should note that this is the first tirae St. John speaks
of "the twelve." We know from the other Gospels, that " the
twelve" were eraployed in distributing the loaves and fishes to
the five thousand. (Luke ix. 12, 17.)
08. — [Then Simon Peter answered him!] The fervour and impetu
osity of Peler's character come out here, as in other places in the
Gospels. He is the first to speak, and to speak for his brethren
as well as himself. Only the night before this very scene, he had
been the first, in the storm on the lake, to say, "Lord, if it be
thou, bid me to come unto thee on the water." (Matt xiv. 28.)
And here, in like manner, he is the first to profess loudly his
determination not to go away, and his faith in Christ

JOHX, CHAP. VI. 419
[To whom shall we go ?] This question is a strong burst of
leelnig _ To what teacher, to what master, to what leader shall
we go, if we leave thee ? Where are we to find any one like
thee '? What could we gain by leaving thee ?" The question
was one which might weU be asked, when we remember the
state of the Jewish nation, and fhe universal prevalence of Pha
risaism or Sadduceeism. But this is not all. It may always
be asked by true Christian men, when tempted to give up Christ's
service. True Christianity undoubtedly has its cross. It entaUs
trial and persecution. But to whom shall we go, if we give up
Christ? WiU Infidelity, Deism, Socinianism, Eomanisra, For
malism, nationalism, or WorldUness give us anything better?
There is but one answer 1 They cannot.
[Thou hasf the words of eternal life.] This would be more
literally rendered, "thou hast words of eternal hfe." "Thou
possessest instruction about everlasting life, such as we can hear
nowhere else, aud such as we find soul-comforting and edifying.
The sayings that fall continually from thy Ups, about eternal
life, are such as we cannot leave." Our Lord's expression should
be remembered, " I have given unto them the words which thou
gavest me." (John xvii. 8.)
69. — [And we believe and are sure.] This would bo more literally
rendered, " we have beUeved and have known." Moreover, the
"we" is emphatic. — "Whatever others may please to think,
however many may go away and forsake thee, after foUowing
thee for a little, it is not so with us. We have believed and
known, and do believe and know."
[Thou art thai Christ, ihe son of the living God.] This might
equally weU have been rendered, " Thou art the Clirist" The
sentence is a noble confession, when we remember the time in
which it was made, and the universal unbelief of the leaders of
the Jewish nation. We may remeraber, that it is precisely the
same confession that is recorded to have been made by Peter,
after our Lord said fo him, "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona, for
flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father
which is in heaven." (Matt. xvi. 17.)
We must not, however, misunderstand the extent of Peter's
confession. He declared his faith that our Lord was the Anointed
Messiah, the Son of the living God. The Messiahship and
divinity of Christ, were the points on which he and the other
aposties laid firm hold. But the sacrifice and death of Christ,
and His substitution for us on the cross, were not thinga
which he either saw or understood at present. (See Matt, xvi
22, 23.)
(a.) We should notice, that a man's heart may be right to
wards God, while he reraains very ignorant of some great doc-

420 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS.
trines of the Christian faith. It certainly was so wilh Peter and
the apostles, at this time.
(b.) We should also notice, that there is nothing man is so
backward to see, as the sacrifice of the death of Christ, the sub
stitution, and the atoneraent. It is possible to be right about
Christ's divinity and Messiahship, and yet be in the dark about
His death.
(c.) We should notice how ignorant Christians often are of
the state of others' soul=. Peter never suspected any one of the
twelve to be a false apost'e. It is a fearful proof that Judas must
have been, in all outward demeanour and pro.''ession, just like the
rest of the apostles.
70. — [Have not I chosen you twelve?] I do not think that the
" choosing" here spoken of, means anything more than selec
tion for office. The word is evidently used in this simple sense,
in Luke vi. 1.3, — "Of them he chose twelve, whom he caUed
apostles;" Acts vi. 5, — "They chose Stephen, a man full of
faitli ; " Acts xv. 22, — " It pleased the apostles, — to send
chosen men of their own company to Antioch." I say confi
dently, that in each one of these cases, the Greek word rendered
" chosen," the very sarae word that is used here, can mean no
thing raore than "chosen or selected for an office." Tlus I
believe, with Poole. Henry, and Hutcheson, is the meaning
here. I disagree with Alford's remark, that " the selection of the
twelve, was the consequence of the giving of them to Him
by the Father," aud that Christ's " selecting, and the Father's
giving, and fhe Father's giving and drawing, do not exclude
final faUing away." — This remark is built on the gratuitous
assumption, that Christ's " choosing " here spoken of is the
sarae as that " choosing unto salvation," wliich is the special
privilege of believers. Of that " choosing unto salvation,"
our Lord speaks in another place, where He carefully draws
the distinction between the true disciples and the false : — " I
si>eak not of you all : I know whom I have chosen." (John
xiii. 18.) Of that choosing unto salvation, Judas was not a
partaker. Of the other choosing unto office, as in the verse
before us, undoubtedly he was a partaker.
Burgon, and many others, agree with Alford, and dwell on
the expression before us, as an apparent proof, that men
"chosen to salvation" may fall away. But their reasoning
appears to me inconclusive.
Even Quesnel, the Eomanist commentator, remarks, " The
being duly caUed fo the ecclesiastical oflice is not sufficient, if
a man live not suitably to that holy vocation." Toletus, tha
Spanish Jesuit, says much the same.

JOHN", CHjip. vr. 421
[One of you is a devil] This is a singularly strong expres-
Bion, and gives an awfully vivid impression of the wickedness
ot Judas. Of course, he was not UteraUy and really "a devil "
but a man. The meaning is, "one out of your number is so
completely under the mfluence of the devil, such a servant oi
the devil, that he deserves to be called nothing less than a
devih Our Lord, in another place, says of the wicked Jews
" Ye are of your father, the devU." (John viii. 44.) So St.
Paul says to Elymas, "Thou child of the devil." (Acts xiii. 10.)
When we read at a later period, "The devil having now put
into the heart of Judas Iscariot, to betray him" (John xiU. 2),
it must mean the final working out of a wicked purpose, which,
under the mfluence of the devil, Judas had long had in his heart.
Let us note, that even now, Judas is called "a devil," long
before our Lord's betrayal and crucifixion. This helps to show
that he never was a faithful disciple, even from the first.
Let us note, that the only other expression of our Lord's,
which at aU approaches the one before us in strength is the one
which, on another occasion, our Lord appKes to His zealous
apostie Peter, — " Get thee behind me, Satan." (Matt. xvi. 23.)
"While we condemn the wickedness of Judas, let us not forget
that even a true-hearted apostle may so far err and be mistaken,
that he needs to be sharply rebuked and caUed " Satan." A tho
roughly bad man is "a devil;" but even a good man may need to
be caUed" Satan 1"
KoUock observes, that Jesus never used so strong an expres
sion about His open enemies who went about to slay Him. It
was a hypocrite and a false apostle, whom he called " a devil."
Nothing is so wicked as false profession.
ri. — [He spake of Judas Iscariot tlie son of Simon.] The word
"Iscariot," according to some, means " a man of Kerioth." Ke-
rioth was a town of Judah, (Josh. xv. 25.) — According to others,
it means " a man of Issachar." — ^According to Lampe, and others,
itis a Syriac word, meaning "the bearer of the purse." — ^We are
told that " He had the bag." (John xm. 29.)
It is remarkable, that St. John, four times in his Gospel, calls
Judas " the son of Simon." We do not exactly know why, un
less it is that Simon was a person weU-known by name, or that
St John -wished fo make it quite clear, that Judas Iscariot was
not St Jude, the faithful apostle and cousin of Christ, by naming
his father. There is no proof whatever, that Judas was the son
of " Shnon the Canaanite," the apostle; though it is somewhat
curious, that in the Ust of apostles given by Matthew and Mark,
Simon and Judas Iscariot are named in close juxta-position.
(Matt. X. 4; Mark. iu. IS.)
[He it was that should betray him,] This would be more lite-

422 EXPOsiTOBr thoughts.
raUy rendered, " He was about to betray Him." The expressiot
seems to imply, that to betray such a master as Christ, was so
eminently a work of the devil, that the betrayer ought to be
spoken of as " a devU."
The frequency of our Lord's warnings and hints, addressed to
Judas Iscariot, is very remarkable. Rollock observes, what an
awful proof it is of the hardness of the heart, that a man so
warned should not be conscience-stricken and repent.

3 9002 08837 5028