Ch. 7:1-52. JESUS AT THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES. THE DEMAND OF THE
UNBELIEVER FOR AN EXHIBITORY CHRIST.--THE WORLD NEVER READY FOR ITS
REFORMERS AND REGENERATORS; ALWAYS READY FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FOR IT
NO MESSAGE.--THE TRUE AUTHORITY AND ORDINATION OF THE CHRISTIAN
TEACHER.--LAY PREACHING SANCTIONED BY THE EXAMPLE OF CHRIST.--THE LAW
OF THE CHRISTIAN SABBATH AND THE LAW OF CHRISTIAN JUDGMENT.--WHENCE
CHRIST COMETH; WHITHER HE GOETH.--THE POWER OF FAITH: TO RECEIVE; TO
IMPART.--THE MORAL POWER OF CHRIST ILLUSTRATED.
PRELIMINARY NOTE.--Between the close of ch. 6 and the beginning of ch.
7 occurred a period of retirement, employed by Christ in giving to his
apostles especial instructions concerning the kingdom of God. The
fullest account of these instructions is afforded in Matthew, chaps.
15, 16, 17, 18. During this time occurred the healing of the
Syrophenician woman’s daughter and the transfiguration. The public
ministry of Christ in Galilee was substantially brought to an end by
his sermon in the synagogue at Capernaum and his consequent rejection
by the people. The ministry in Judea begins with this chapter and
continues to ver. 39 of the tenth chapter, verses 40-42 affording a
concise statement of that ministry in Perea, of which Luke alone gives
any extended account. The journey to Jerusalem mentioned below (ver.
10) is, I think erroneously, identified by some harmonists with that
described by Luke, ch. 9:51, 52. That journey was immediately before
his passion, and was notably public, messengers going before his face
to prepare the way for him; this was “as it were in secret,” and six
months of instruction in Judea and Perea intervened between it and his
death. See Luke 9:51-56, Prel. Note, and Tabular Harmony, Vol. I, p.
45.
1 After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would
not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him.
[Illustration: BOOTH ON THE HOUSETOP.]
2 Now the Jews’ feast[260] of tabernacles was at hand.
[260] Lev. 23:34.
3 His brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and
go into Judæa, that thy disciples also may see the works
that thou doest.
4 For _there is_ no man _that_ doeth anything in secret,
and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou do these
things, shew thyself to the world.
=2-4. Now the Jews’ feast of Tabernacles was at hand.= This was one of
the three greater festivals to be observed by Israel. It was also
called the feast of Ingathering, from the fact that it was held at the
year’s end, when all the labors of the field were consummated. It thus
resembled nearly our own Thanksgiving Day. It commenced on the
fifteenth of the seventh month, answering to our October, and lasted
seven days. It was instituted to commemorate the dwelling in tents
when in the desert; accordingly, while the feast lasted the people
dwelt in booths or tents placed on the flat roofs of the houses, in
the courts of the temple, and in the squares and open places, and the
streets when their width allowed. The particular sacrifices to be
offered are detailed in Num. 29:1-38, and notices of the observance
are to be found in Neh. 8:13-18; Hos. 12:9; Zech. 14:16-19.--=His
brethren.= Their names are given in Matt. 13:55. I believe his half
brothers, children of Joseph and Mary, are intended. See Note on
Brethren of the Lord, Vol. I, p. 187.--=That thy disciples also may
see the works that thou doest.= This was after the commission, the
missionary tour, and the return of the twelve (Matt., ch. 10), through
whose ministry probably many had become in a certain loose sense
disciples of our Lord, regarding him as a Jewish rabbi, and perhaps as
an inspired prophet, who had never seen him personally. The language
of Christ’s brothers is that of contempt. Leave this province, said
they, and go up into Judea, the religious centre of the Holy Land, and
show yourself to those who have heard of you, and exhibit to them what
you can do. Additional significance is given to this language if we
remember that it was used after a period of retirement of more than
six months. See above.--=For no one does anything in secret, and yet
seeks himself to be frank and open= (ἐν παῤῥησίᾳ). The intimation is
that the reason why Jesus does not make more public exhibition of
himself and his work is that he is deceiving the people. His brothers
attempt to compel him to adopt their policy by imputing to him,
because of his course, a lack of frankness and fearlessness.--=If thou
do these things, show thyself to the world.= _If_ implies a doubt. In
a worldly view the policy of these brothers would seem wise; but it
was really, in a more subtle form, the policy suggested by Satan in
the second temptation (Matt. 4:5-7). Christ would be accepted by faith
and love, not by wonder and fear; for the sake of his truth, not
because of his miracles. These he persistently refused to show to the
world as a means of compelling allegiance.
5 For neither did his brethren[261] believe in him.
[261] Mark 3:21.
=5. For neither had his brethren faith in him.= This verse seems to me
quite conclusive that none of the brethren here mentioned were among
the twelve, and therefore that James, Simon, and Judas, the brethren
of the Lord, cannot be the apostles who bore the same name. They
afterward became believers (Acts 1:14; 1 Cor. 9:5). They may at this
time have recognized that Jesus possessed extraordinary powers,
without recognizing in him the Messiah, or even an inspired teacher,
whose instructions they were willing to follow. “They expected him to
make a startling exhibition of his power to the eye. They did not
believe in HIM; for faith rests upon that which is not seen; it
confesses an inward vital power.”--(_Maurice._)
6 Then Jesus said unto them, My[262] time is not yet come:
but your time is alway ready.
[262] verses 8, 30; chaps. 2:4; 8:20.
7 The[263] world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because
I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.
[263] ch. 15:19.
8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this
feast; for my time is not yet full come.
9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode _still_
in Galilee.
=6-9. My time is not yet; but your time is always prepared.= The
context indicates the meaning. They had urged him to show himself to
the world; his answer is, My time to show myself to the world is not
yet. This manifestation of himself is gradual and successive; he
partially manifested himself in the discourse delivered in Jerusalem
at this very feast (see vers. 16, 18, 28, 29, 37, 38); more fully by
his subsequent discourses in the temple during the Passion week
(Matthew, chaps. 21, 22, 23); still more fully by his crucifixion, in
which was disclosed that love which is the wisdom and power of God
unto salvation (1 Cor. 1:24), and in which, even at the time and by
the manner of his death, his divine Sonship was revealed to the Roman
centurion (Mark 15:39); yet again by his resurrection from the dead
(Acts 2:32-36; 3:15); increasingly in the ages since, by his personal
presence and power in the church (Matt. 28:18, 20; Rom. 1:3, 4); a
manifestation to be finally consummated when he is revealed from
heaven in his second coming (Matt. 24:27; Col. 3:4; 2 Thess. 1:7). For
this final coming the church is ever preparing the world, casting up a
highway for him; and not till this highway is completed and he comes
again shall all flesh see the salvation of God (Luke 3:4-6). The time
of his brothers was always prepared; for the world is always ready for
him who has no message for it. “If I,” said Luther, “would speak what
the Papists like to hear, I would be very glad, too, to take lodgings
with the Bishop of Magdeburg at Rome.” “The Son of man feels all the
difference between those whose time was always ready, who could go up
to the feasts whenever it pleased them, merely with the expectation of
meeting friends and mixing in a crowd, and him who had the straitening
consciousness of a message which he must bear, of a baptism which he
must be baptized with.”--(_Maurice._)--=The world cannot hate you=,
etc. Comp. chaps. 15:18; 17:14; 1 John 3:13; Luke 6:26. He that would
preach the gospel of salvation to the world must first testify of it
that its deeds are evil. The Holy Spirit convinces the world of
righteousness only after convincing it of sin (John 16:8, 9). For
illustrations of Christ’s preaching against the works of the world,
see Matt. 5:20; 6:1, 2, 5, 16; 7:22; 11:16-24; 12:39-15; Luke 6:46;
10:12-16; 11:45-54; 12:54-57, etc. A study of the preaching of Christ
and the apostles, and of the writings of Paul, will show that the
divine method is always to convince of sin as a preparation for
proclaiming the good news of salvation from it.--=I go not unto this
feast.= The word yet is not in the original, though it probably
correctly interprets the real meaning of Christ’s answer. This was
not, =I shall not go= (future), but, =I am not now going= (present).
Perhaps Christ did not know whether he should go or not; he who acted
constantly under the guidance of the Divine Spirit may not have
received guidance on this point. It would at all events have defeated
his purpose to have gone up with those who were determined that he
should make an exhibition of himself and his work. There is no ground
for either the reproach that he deceived his brethren, or that he
acted in a fickle manner in subsequently going up to the feast.
10 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up
unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.
11 Then[264] the Jews sought him at the feast, and said,
Where is he?
[264] ch. 11:56.
12 And[265] there was much murmuring among the people
concerning him: for some said, He is a good man: others
said, Nay; but he deceiveth the people.
[265] ch. 9:16.
13 Howbeit, no man spake openly of him, for fear of the
Jews.
=10-13. Not openly, but as it were in secret.= Not _secretly_, but _as
if_ in secret, that is, quietly, unostentatiously, _incognito_, in
contrast to the way in which his brothers wished him to go up. “Not in
the company of a caravan of pilgrims or in any other way of outward
observation, but so that the journey to that feast is represented as
made in secrecy, and consequently quite differently from his last entry
at the feast of the Passover.”--(_Meyer._) The description of this
journey to Jerusalem renders it improbable that it is to be identified
with the journey described in Luke 9:51, 52. See Prel. Note.--=Then
the Jews sought him.= By the _Jews_ John generally if not invariably
means the inhabitants of Judea, in contradistinction to the other
inhabitants of the Holy Land. See ch. 6:41, note.--=Where is that
fellow= (ἐκεῖνος)? The language is derisive. “Thus contemptuously can
they speak of the man, that they cannot name him.”--(_Luther._)--=And
there was much murmuring.= The original (γογγυσμός) implies suppressed
discourse.--=Some indeed said.= The Greek particle which I have
rendered _indeed_ (μέν) implies a concession, at the same time
pointing forward to something antithetic. The implication is that
among the Judeans the believers were a minority.--=No! but he
deceiveth the people.= He that is popular with the multitude is
generally looked upon with aversion by the hierarchy.--=No one spoke
openly.= “Both mistrusted the hierarchy; even those hostile in their
judgment were afraid, so long as they had not given their official
decision, that their verdict might be reversed. A true indication of
an utterly Jesuitical domination of the people.”--(_Meyer._) Hostility
to Christianity fears nothing so much as free discussion; and it quite
accords with human nature that the consideration of Christ’s claims by
the people at all should be dreaded by the priesthood. The
interpretation of Alford, Godet, Tholuck, and others, that only the
friends of Christ feared to speak openly, is in direct conflict with
the explicit language of the narrative. Maurice pictures the scene
well: “It is a hum of voices. There is a fear of something, the people
do not well know of what. It is a fear of the Jews; the apostle says
each fears the other. There is a concentrated Jewish feeling in the
Sanhedrim, among the rulers, which all tremble at. Till that has been
pronounced--above all, while there is a suspicion that it will come
forth in condemnation--it is not wise for any to commit themselves.
Brethren, do we not know that this is a true story? Must it not have
happened in Jerusalem then, for would it not happen in London now?”
14 Now about the midst of the feast, Jesus went up into the
temple, and taught.
15 And[266] the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweth this
man letters, having never learned?
[266] Matt. 13:54.
=14, 15. About the midst of the feast.= Bengel calculates that on this
year the middle of the feast would be the Sabbath; the temple would in
that case be especially crowded, and the day would suggest the remarks
respecting the Sabbath.--=Jesus went up into the temple and taught.=
He came to Judea privately, he went into the temple publicly; he would
not exhibit himself, he would not conceal his doctrine.--=And the
Judeans marvelled, saying.= The form of the question which follows
indicates a hostile spirit; but it may have been raised, not by the
scribes or teachers (_Meyer_, _Alford_), but by the people
(_Tholuck_).--=How knoweth this fellow learning, never having been
taught?= “A rule analogous to that which still prevails in most church
communions forbade any rabbi to teach new truths except he was a
regular graduate of one of the theological schools. He might
catechise, but he could not preach. This rule the Jews cited against
Jesus. ‘How,’ said they contemptuously, ‘does this man know anything
of sacred literature, being no graduate?’”--(_Abbott’s Jesus of
Nazareth._) _Letters_ (γράμμα) is here the sacred writings of the
Jews, _i. e._, the sacred Scriptures and the comments thereon. This
question affords the key to the interpretation of the discourse which
follows, which is upon the authority, primarily of Christ, secondarily
of every Christian teacher, an authority derived, not from theological
schools or clerical ordination, but from the indwelling Spirit of God.
Christ was himself a “lay preacher;” his example and his precept alike
sanction unordained preaching.
16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not[267]
mine, but his that sent me.
[267] chaps. 8:28; 12:49.
17 If[268] any man will do his will, he shall know of the
doctrine, whether it be of God, or _whether_ I speak of
myself.
[268] ch. 8:43.
=16, 17. My teaching is not mine, but his that sent me.= For
_doctrine_ read _teaching_; for not merely the subject-matter taught,
but the power with which it was presented, was divine. _My teaching is
not mine_ is not a hyperbole. It is not merely equivalent to “not
acquired by any labor on my part in learning” (_Bengel_), or “not an
invention of my own” (_Geikie_). Neither in origin nor in aim was
Christ’s teaching his own. Ever about his Father’s business, he was
ever teaching his Father’s words and doing his Father’s works (ch.
5:19, 30). In a sense every true Christian teacher should be able to
repeat this saying of Christ (chaps. 14:26; 16:13). It does not follow
that the Christian teacher need not be a Christian student; but it
does follow that he should be a student only of those things which
enable him better to understand and interpret the Father’s will and
nature. Only so far as schools of theological thought help him to do
this are they truly Christian schools.--=If any one wills to do his
will, he shall know concerning the teaching, whether it be of God or
whether I speak of myself.= An often misunderstood declaration. The
promise is not that if any man does God’s will all theology shall be
made clear to him, nor even that he shall be brought to a correct
apprehension of the most important truths of the Christian system. The
last clause qualifies the first; the declaration is that if any man
purposes to do God’s will, _makes that his ultimate and supreme
choice_ (1 Tim. 6:11-16), he shall know respecting Christianity
_whether it is of divine or human origin_. The declaration is both a
promise and the enunciation of a spiritual law. The purpose to do
God’s will itself clarifies the spiritual sight, so that the soul
recognizes the Spirit of God in the life, the character, and the
teachings of his Son. The degree of advancement which one subsequently
makes in comprehending the full significance of those teachings will
depend partly upon the purity of his spiritual purposes, but partly
upon other conditions. Not the mere outward obedience to God’s
commandments, but a true spiritual purpose, is declared to be the
condition of spiritual light; and to that purpose is attached, not a
promise of _all_ light, but only of so much as will enable the soul to
know the source from which it may obtain constantly increasing
illumination. Nevertheless, the first step toward the solution of any
theological difficulty whatever, is repentance of sin and practical
obedience to the voice of God in the soul. Except a man be born again
he cannot _see_ the kingdom of God.
18 He[269] that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory:
but he that[270] seeketh his glory that sent him, the same
is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.
[269] ch. 8:50.
[270] Prov. 25:27.
19 Did not Moses[271] give you the law, and _yet_ none[272]
of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill[273] me?
[271] John 1:17; Gal. 3:19.
[272] Rom. 3:10-19.
[273] ch. 5:16, 18; Matt. 12:14.
=18, 19. He that speaketh from himself seeketh his own glory.= _From_
(ἀπό) represents the remote cause; _out of_ (ἐκ) represents the more
immediate cause. The former refers to what is general, the latter to
what is special. See _Rob. Lex._, ἀπό. Every Christian teacher must
speak _out of_ himself, _i. e._, out of his own experience of truth
internally possessed and become a part of his nature; but no Christian
teacher may speak, _from_ himself, _i. e._, of his own notions and by
his own authority. The inward experience out of which he speaks is
powerful only as it is derived from the Spirit of God. Egotism is the
natural expression of him who speaks from himself, and has not the
rhetorical skill to conceal the inherent weakness.--=But he
that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no
unrighteousness is in him.= This is a general proposition. In so far
as any one seeks the divine glory he is preserved both from error and
from unrighteousness (Rom. 8:1, 2; 1 John 1:5, 7; 3:6). Christ is the
only one who is absolutely true, and in whom is no unrighteousness,
because he is the only one in whom there is no self-seeking.--=Did not
Moses give you the law=, etc. The connection is well given by Alford:
“There is a close connection with the foregoing. The will to do his
will was to be the great key to a true appreciation of his teaching;
but of this there was no example among _them_; and therefore it was
that they were no fair judges of the teaching, but bitter opponents
and persecutors of Jesus, of whom, had they been anxious to fulfil the
law, they would have been earnest and humble disciples” (ch.
5:46).--=Why go ye about to kill me?= The reference is to the purposed
assassination at a previous visit to Jerusalem (ch. 5:18), a purpose
from which the Pharisees had evidently not relented (ch. 7:1).
20 The people answered and said,[274] Thou hast a devil:
who goeth about to kill thee?
[274] ch. 8:48.
21 Jesus answered and said unto them, I have done one work,
and ye all marvel.
22 Moses[275] therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not
because it is of Moses, but[276] of the fathers;) and ye on
the sabbath day circumcise a man.
[275] Lev. 12:3.
[276] Gen. 17:10.
23 If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that
the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me,
because[277] I have made a man every whit whole on the
sabbath day?
[277] ch. 5:8.
24 Judge[278] not according to the appearance, but judge
righteous judgment.
[278] Deut. 1:16, 17.
=20-24. Thou hast a devil; who goeth about to kill thee?= It is evident
from ver. 25 that some of his auditors knew the secret design which had
been formed for Christ’s assassination. Their language here is that
of foulest abuse. I judge then that they were startled by Christ’s
sudden revealing of the secret designs against him; and with that
inconsistency which is common to the self-condemned, they in the same
sentence denied that his death had been compassed, and implied that the
fact that it was compassed had been disclosed to him by an evil spirit
which possessed him.--=Jesus answered * * * * I have done one work,
and ye all marvel.= The work referred to is that described in the
fifth chapter of John, the only miracle in Jerusalem up to this time
which is described in detail; not the only one which he had wrought
(chaps. 2:23; 3:2), but presumptively the last one. They wondered not
at the miracle, but at the fact that he had performed it on
the Sabbath day (ch. 5:16). It is not necessary to give to the
word _wonder_ here any accessory idea, as of doubt (_Bengel_)
or disquietude (_Chrysostom_); Christ begins with the mildest
characterization of their sentiment as that of mere surprise. Here, as
habitually, he does not proceed to severe language till milder
language has proved unavailing.--=Moses therefore gave unto you
circumcision.= There is some doubt whether the word _therefore_
belongs to this or to the preceding verse; _i. e._, whether Christ
says, _I have done one work, and ye all therefore marvel_, or, _Moses
therefore gave unto you circumcision, not because it is of Moses, but
of the fathers_. The latter reading is preferred by the later
scholars, _e. g._, Bengel, Meyer, Alford, against Olshausen, Tholuck.
Either is grammatically possible; and the purely grammatical
considerations appear to me to be about equally balanced. The latter
interpretation is preferable, because it gives a better meaning to the
sentence. Accepting this rendering, the meaning appears to be, Moses
gave unto you circumcision for this reason, viz., because it was
patriarchal, not because it originated with him. And this statement of
the reason of the Mosaic law respecting circumcision affords a basis
for the argument which follows. It was a saying of the rabbis “that
circumcision drives away the Sabbath,” and they held that the rite,
notwithstanding the work which it necessarily entailed, might be
performed on the Sabbath day, because it was of patriarchal origin,
and so antedated the Mosaic institution of the Sabbath. Christ,
referring to this fact, convicts the Jews of inconsistency in being
angry with him for placing the law of mercy above the law of the
Sabbath. For the law of mercy was older than either; it belongs to the
eternal law of God’s nature.--=That the law of Moses should not be
broken.= That law prescribed that circumcision should be performed on
the eighth day (Lev. 12:3); to allow that day to pass by, therefore,
without circumcision would be a breach of the law.--=Because I have
made an entire man= (ὅλον ἄνθρωπον) =well on the Sabbath day=. We can
hardly suppose, with Bengel and Olshausen, that the _entire man_ here
signifies the healing of both soul and body; for there is no evidence
in the original account that the physical was accompanied with a
spiritual healing, and no likelihood that Christ’s auditors would have
understood him here to refer to spiritual healing. The contrast rather
seems to be between circumcision as an act of wounding, which brought
only ceremonial cleanness, and the miracle at the pool of Bethesda,
which gave relief from the consequences of sin (ch. 5:14), and gave
health to the whole body.--=Judge not according to appearance, but
judge righteous judgment.= See Zech. 7:9. One of Christ’s Sabbath
laws; we are ourselves to avoid, but we are not to condemn in others,
the appearance of evil. What is Sabbath observance and what Sabbath
transgression is to be determined, not by the external act, but by the
inward motive and the ultimate end.
25 Then said some of them of Jerusalem, Is not this he,
whom they seek to kill?
26 But, lo, he speaketh boldly, and they say nothing unto
him. Do[279] the rulers know indeed that this is the very
Christ?
[279] verse 48.
27 Howbeit[280] we know this man whence he is: but when
Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence he is.
[280] Matt. 13:55.
=25-27. Then said some of them of Jerusalem.= Residents of Jerusalem,
who were therefore more likely than the pilgrim strangers to know the
designs of the hierarchy.--=Whom they seek to kill.= See chaps. 5:18;
7:19, 32.--=Surely= (μήποτε) =the rulers do not know that this is
indeed the Messiah=? The form of the sentence is an inquiry, strongly
implying a negative answer.--=Howbeit as to this fellow, we know
whence he is; but when the Messiah cometh, no man knoweth whence he
is.= It is true that prophecy foretold that the Messiah should be born
in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2; Matt. 2:6); but according to the Rabbinical
teaching he was straightway to be snatched away by spirits and
tempests, lie hidden for a while, and unexpectedly and supernaturally
reappear to enter upon his miraculous mission (Lightfoot on Matt.
2:1). The people here bore an unconscious testimony to the Messiahship
of Jesus; for they neither knew his earthly nor his heavenly origin.
They believed him who was born in Bethlehem to be a native of
Nazareth, and the Son of God to be the son of a carpenter.
28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye
both know me, and ye know whence I am: and[281] I am not
come of myself, but he that sent me[282] is true, whom[283]
ye know not.
[281] ch. 5:43.
[282] Rom. 3:4.
[283] chaps. 1:18; 8:55.
29 But[284] I know him: for I am from him, and he hath sent
me.
[284] ch. 10:15; Matt. 11:27.
=28, 29. Then Jesus cried aloud teaching in the temple, and said, Ye
do indeed know me, and ye know whence I am; and I am not come of
myself, but it is the True One who hath sent me; him ye do not know. I
know him, for I have come from him, and he it is that hath sent me
forth.= As I read it, this is one of those outbursts of indignation
with which we occasionally meet in the teachings of Christ. The
obduracy and resoluteness in evil of the Jews aroused his indignation
and elicited his stern rebuke. Comp. chaps. 8:41, 44; 9:41; Matthew,
ch. 23. I understand then his language to be neither ironical nor
interrogative, but affirmative, and not to refer to his human nature
and origin, but to his divine character and mission. In his miracles
and his instructions they had seen and heard enough to assure them
that he was from God (chaps. 3:2; 11:47, 48). Their contemptuous
declaration, _We know this fellow_, he transformed into an indictment
against them. They had whispered it; he proclaimed it aloud. “Ye do
know me,” he says, “and ye know whence I am, for the authentication of
my divine mission is ample. Ye do know that I am not come of myself,
for my whole life is a conclusive demonstration that I am not a
self-seeker.” The _True One_ is not equivalent to the Truthful One nor
the Really Existent One merely, but the One True God (2 Chron. 15:3;
Jer. 10:10; John 17:3; 1 Thess. 1:9; 1 John 5:20). Him they did not
and could not know, because the knowledge of God is only for the pure
in heart (Matt. 5:8). Jesus knew him, for he had been his companion
from eternity. In a sense we are all from God, but not in the sense in
which Christ here indicates that he is from God. The preposition used
(παρά) has the sense of _from beside, from near_, French _de chez_
(_Rob. Lex._). The declaration is interpreted by ch. 1:1; Phil. 2:6.
The public exposure of their whispered contempt, the equally public
exposure of the secret thought of their own hearts, which they had not
themselves read as clearly as Christ read it for them, and the tone of
fearless assumption in which he at once claimed to be the companion of
the Only True God and declared that they did not even know Him, whose
peculiar people it was their peculiar boast to be, angered the
Judeans, and especially the hierarchy, and led to the unsuccessful
attempt to arrest Jesus recorded in the succeeding verse.
30 Then[285] they sought to take him: but no man laid hands
on him, because his hour was not yet come.
[285] ch. 8:37; Mark 11:18; Luke 20:19.
31 And many[286] of the people believed on him, and said,
When Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these
which this _man_ hath done?
[286] ch. 4:39.
=30, 31. They sought therefore to arrest him.= An arrest for the
purpose of bringing him before the authorities, not a mere lawless act
of a mob, is indicated by the original (πιάζω). The attempt, however,
was probably made by some of the people, acting without special
authority; this is implied by the account of the official action
subsequently taken (ver. 32).--=Because his hour was not yet come.=
The hour appointed in the divine counsel for his passion and death.
The immediate cause of the failure to arrest may have been a fear of
the Galileans and others with whom Christ was popular; but John passes
this wholly by to speak of the real reason in the divine counsels.
Predestination is quite as strongly marked in John as in Paul.--=But
of the multitude many believed on him.= The degree of faith is not
indicated. Its spirituality may have been very slight; yet the rest of
the sentence certainly indicates that they were inclined to think that
this might be the promised Messiah.--=More miracles than these which
this one hath done.= To those which had been wrought in Jerusalem were
probably added, in their thought, those which had been wrought in
Galilee; some of these had doubtless been witnessed by many of the
Galileans present.
32 The Pharisees heard that the people murmured such things
concerning him; and the Pharisees and the chief priests
sent officers to take him.
33 Then said Jesus unto them, Yet[287] a little while am I
with you, and _then_ I go unto him that sent me.
[287] chaps. 13:33; 16:16.
34 Ye[288] shall seek me, and shall not find _me_: and
where I am, _thither_ ye cannot come.
[288] ch. 8:21; Hos. 5:6.
=32-34. The Pharisees and the chief priests sent officers to take
him.= This was an official act on the part of the Sanhedrim or its
officers, carrying out the design of certain of the people, as
indicated in ver. 30; and it is the first official endeavor to arrest
him, the beginning of a course of action consummated in his final
arrest, trial, and crucifixion.--=Therefore said Jesus unto them.= A
break evidently occurs between verses 31 and 32. The discourse up to
ver. 31 is continuous, and took place about the middle of the feast,
that is, the third or fourth day; the discourse in verses 37-39 was on
the last day of the feast; between the two the orders for Christ’s
arrest were given. Verses 33, 34 are founded on Christ’s knowledge of
those orders, and it is a reasonable surmise that the presence of the
officers suggested it to him and interpreted its meaning to some at
least of his auditors.--=Yet a little while am I with you.= About six
months after this address he was crucified.--=And I go unto him that
sent me.= With this explicit statement of his meaning, interpreted as
it was by the previous declaration that it was the true God who had
sent him, it is difficult to understand how the Jews could have been
perplexed respecting his meaning. De Wette’s explanation that they
knew not the One who had sent him, and therefore that this saying was
a dark one to them, is not wholly satisfactory, for surely they did
know who was meant by the phrase, _he that sent me_, and as surely
they could not fail to understand that going to God was equivalent to
death. Meyer supposes that the words _him that sent me_ in this verse
were not a part of Christ’s discourse, but added, perhaps by John
himself; but they are not wanting in any of the manuscripts; and that
is both a doubtful and a dangerous kind of criticism which removes a
difficulty by the summary process of removing the difficult words,
without any external authority for so doing. I believe therefore that
Christ was explicit, that he was understood, and that the assumed
perplexity of his hearers was a piece of hypocrisy. See on verses 35,
36.--=Ye shall seek and shall not find me; and where I am ye cannot
come.= The key to the true interpretation of this passage, is afforded
by Luke 17:22; John 8:21; 13:33. Christ does not refer to an inimical
seeking; the _search_ here is the same as the _desire_ to see one of
the days of the Son of man in Luke 17:22; _i. e._ the Jewish desire
for a manifestation of the Messiah. He does not refer to a true
spiritual seeking, for in ch. 8:21 he declares, to the same Jewish
auditors, _Ye shall seek me and ye shall die in your sins_. Eusebius
declares that many Jews in consequence of the judgments of God on
Jerusalem became believers; such did indeed seek Christ, but they
found him. The meaning then is that in the coming days of travail and
sorrow, when many should go out after false Christs (Matt. 24:23, 24),
the Jews would earnestly desire a Messiah for their deliverer, whom,
however, they could not have, because with their own hands they had
put him to death. They would seek, but theirs would be a temporal, not
a spiritual seeking; the seeking of fear and self-interest, not of
repentance, faith, and love. This verse affords no authority whatever
for the opinion that any earnest spiritual soul ever seeks Christ in
vain.
35 Then said the Jews among themselves, Whither will he
go, that we shall not find him? will he go unto the
dispersed[289] among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles?
[289] Isa. 11:12; James 1:1; 1 Pet. 1:1.
36 What _manner of_ saying is this that he said, Ye shall
seek me, and shall not find _me_; and where I am, _thither_
ye cannot come?
=35, 36. Then said the Jews among themselves.= Their utterance has
been by some regarded as the utterance of a genuine perplexity. So
apparently Maurice: “He had broken down the barriers between different
classes of Israelites--between Galileans, Samaritans, and Jews. Why
might he not carry his designs further? Why might he not go to the
dispersed tribes in heathen lands? Why might he not preach to the
heathen themselves?” By others it is regarded as the language of scorn
and contempt. So Meyer: “An insolent and scornful supposition, which
they themselves, however, do not deem probable (therefore the question
is asked with μή), regarding the meaning of words to them so utterly
enigmatical. The bolder mode of teaching adopted by Jesus, his
universalistic declarations, his partial non-observance of the law of
the Sabbath, would lead them, perhaps, to associate with the
unintelligible statement a mocking thought like this, and all the more
because much interest was felt among the heathen, partly of an earnest
kind, and partly (comp. St. Paul in Athens) arising from curiosity
merely, regarding the Oriental religions, especially Judaism.” The
latter view seems to me the more probable, because (1) it is
inconceivable that the Jews should have misapprehended Christ’s
meaning (ver. 33, note); (2) his analogous language in the next
chapter they clearly did understand to refer to his death (ch. 8:22);
(3) the fact that what was said was “among themselves” indicates that
it was not an honest perplexity, in which case they would have asked
Christ for an explanation, but of the same quality as the murmuring
reported in verses 26, 27.
37 In the last[290] day, that great _day_ of the feast,
Jesus stood and cried, saying, If[291] any man thirst, let
him come unto me, and drink.
[290] Lev. 23:36.
[291] Isa. 55:1; Rev. 22:17.
=37. In the last day, that great day of the feast.= The feast of the
Tabernacles proper lasted for seven days (Lev. 23:34, 41, 42), but on
the eighth day a solemn assembly kept as a feast-Sabbath was directed
to be held (Lev. 23:36; Numb. 29:35; Neh. 8:18); and though the people
dwelt in the booths only the seven days, this eighth day was reckoned
by the Jews as a part of the feast. Whether the seventh or the eighth
is intended here by the “last day of the feast” is a little uncertain,
as it also is whether the drawing of water from the brook Siloah,
which was a characteristic ceremonial of the other days of the feast,
took place also on the eighth day. This ceremonial recalled the
miraculous supply of water in the wilderness from the riven rock; it
was connected by the more superstitious of the people with the notion
that at this time God determined the amount of rain which should fall
during the year; and the more spiritual saw in it a symbol of the time
when the promised gift of the Holy Spirit should be bestowed upon
Israel (Isa. 12:3). Whether the words of Christ were uttered, as Dr.
Geikie supposes, during this ceremonial, or, as Alford supposes, the
day after this service had come to an end, the reference to it is
unmistakable. Dr. Geikie’s supposition certainly makes this reference
more striking, and gives, if not peculiar significance, at least
peculiar force, to Christ’s words. “The last day of the feast, known
as ‘the Hosanna Rabba’ and the ‘Great Day,’ found him, as each day
before, doubtless, had done, in the temple arcades. He had gone
thither early, to meet the crowds assembled for morning prayer. It was
a day of special rejoicing. A great procession of pilgrims marched
seven times round the city, with their lulabs, music, and loud-voiced
choirs preceding, and the air was rent with shouts of Hosanna, in
commemoration of the taking of Jericho, the first city in the Holy
Land that fell into the hands of their fathers. Other multitudes
streamed to the brook of Siloah, after the priests and Levites,
bearing the golden vessels with which to draw some of the water. As
many as could get near the stream drank of it amidst loud shouting of
the words of Isaiah--‘Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the
waters,’ ‘With joy shall we draw water from the wells of
salvation’--rising in jubilant chants on every side. The water drawn
by the priests was, meanwhile, borne up to the temple, amidst the
boundless excitement of a vast throng. Such a crowd was, apparently,
passing at this moment. Rising as the throng went by, his spirit was
moved at such honest enthusiasm, yet saddened at the moral decay which
mistook a mere ceremony for religion. It was burning autumn weather,
when the sun had for months shone in a cloudless sky, and the early
rains were longed for as the monsoons in India after the summer heat.
Water at all times is a magic word in a sultry climate like Palestine,
but at this moment it had a double power. Standing, therefore, to give
his words more solemnity, his voice now sounded far and near over the
throng, with soft clearness, which arrested all: If any man thirst,
let him come unto me and drink.”--(_Geikie._)--=If any man thirst.=
This is not an unconditional promise; it is conditioned, not merely on
desire, but on a fervent desire. Comp. Isa. 55:1; Matt. 5:6; Rev.
22:17. “None are called to obtain the riches of the Spirit but those
who burn with the desire of them. For we know that the pain of thirst
is most acute and tormenting, so that the very strongest men, and
those who can endure any amount of toil, are overpowered by
thirst.”--(_Calvin._) An illustration of this spiritual thirst is
afforded by David in Psalms 42, 43, and by Paul in Phil. 3:8-14.--=Let
him come unto me.= If one can imagine these words spoken to the throng
while the procession is marching into the temple, or even just after
the solemn service is over and the minds of the people are still full
of it, he will form a faint conception of the divine assumption
implied in them; and if he further considers the effect produced, both
on the multitude (verses 40, 41) and on the officers sent to arrest
Jesus (ver. 46), he will form a faint conception of the divine dignity
with which those words were uttered.
38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said,
out[292] of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
[292] ch. 4:14; Prov. 18:4; Isa. 58:11.
=38. He that hath faith in me.= As in ch. 6 to eat the flesh and drink
the blood of Christ is to have faith in him and live by him, so here,
to come unto him and drink is to come with the affections and receive
him into the soul.--=As the Scripture hath said.= There is no passage
in the O. T. which directly sustains this citation, and no reason to
suppose that Christ refers to any lost book. Alford refers to Ezek.
47:1-12, where the river of the water of life is described as flowing
from under the temple, which Alford regards as a symbol of the
believer; similarly Olshausen; but both this reference and that to
Zech. 14:8 are remote and unnatural. We are either to suppose that the
phrase “as the Scripture hath said” refers only to the preceding
clause, “he that believeth on me,” so that the meaning is, He that
according to the O. T. believeth on me; or else we are to suppose that
John by the following verse (39) not only interprets the meaning of
Christ’s promise, but also the meaning of his reference, and that we
are to look for the Scripture in those passages which refer to
and promise the gift of the Holy Ghost. The former of these
interpretations is that of Chrysostom, the latter that of Meyer, who
refers to Isa. 44:3; 55:1; 58:1; Joel 3:18; Zech. 13:1.--=Shall flow
rivers of living water.= This declaration is not to be limited so that
it shall be simply equivalent to the promise in John 4:14, “Whosoever
drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst.” The
language _out of his belly_ clearly implies something received that it
may flow _from_ the recipient unto others. The water which he drinks
becomes in him a spring from which living waters flow, as the light
which illuminates him makes him in turn one of the lights which
illuminate the world (Matt. 5:14; Phil. 2:15). That this is the
meaning is clear, not only from the language here, but from John’s
interpretation in the succeeding verse. “The mutual and inspired
intercourse of Christians from Pentecost downwards, the speaking in
psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, the mutual edification in
Christian assemblies by means of the charismata even to the speaking
with tongues, the entire work of the apostles, of a Stephen and so on,
furnish an abundant historical commentary upon this text.”--(_Meyer._)
39 (But this spake he of the[293] Spirit, which they that
believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not
yet _given_; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
[293] ch. 16:7; Isa. 44:3; Joel 2:28; Acts 2:17, 33.
=39. But this spake he of the Spirit.= This declaration of John makes
the second chapter of Acts and the succeeding history of the Church of
Christ the true commentary on Christ’s promise.--=For the Spirit was
not yet.= The meaning cannot of course be that the Holy Spirit had no
existence, for “this would be not only in flat contradiction to chaps.
1:32, 33; 3:5, 8, 34, but to the whole O. T., in which the agency of
the Spirit in the _outward world_ is recognized even more vividly than
in the N. T.” (_Alford._) And it is not only in the outward world that
the O. T. recognizes the Holy Spirit, but also in the hearts of
individual prophets, who thus became the ministers of divine grace to
others (Gen. 41:38; Exod. 4:11, 12; 31:3; 2 Chron. 15:1; Ps. 51:11;
Isa. 63:11, 14). Nor does the addition by the translators of the word
_given_ adequately represent the meaning, for the Holy Ghost was given
before the glorification of Christ, but not to all men; he was not a
universal gift. The meaning is that the dispensation of the Holy Ghost
had not yet begun; he had not yet been so given that whoever had faith
in the Son of God received the gift of the Holy Ghost and became one
of the Lord’s prophets (Acts 2:38). See Acts 2:4, note.--=Because
Jesus was not yet glorified.= The death and resurrection of Christ
were the conditions precedent of the outpouring of the Holy Ghost (ch.
14:16, 17; 16:7; Acts 1:7-9).
40 Many of the people therefore, when they heard this
saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet.[294]
[294] ch. 6:14; Deut. 18:15, 18.
41 Others said, This is the[295] Christ. But some said,
Shall[296] Christ come out of Galilee?
[295] chaps. 4:42, 6:69.
[296] verse 52; ch. 1:46.
42 Hath not the scripture said, That Christ[297] cometh of
the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem,[298]
where David[299] was?
[297] Ps. 132:11; Jer. 23:5.
[298] Micah 5:2; Luke 2:4.
[299] 1 Sam. 16:1-4.
43 So there was a division among the people because of him.
44 And some of them would have taken him; but no man laid
hands on him.
=40-44.= These verses give the impressions produced on different
auditors by Christ’s discourses at the feast. The word _many_ is
wanting in the best manuscripts, and is omitted by Lachmann,
Tischendorf, Meyer, Alford, Schaff; for it read _some_. Some regarded
Jesus as the prophet foretold in Deut. 18:15 (comp. ch. 1:21; Matt.
16:14); others thought that he might even be the Messiah. See ver. 31.
The opponents of Christ based their opposition not upon his character
or that of his teaching, but upon their Jewish prejudice to his
supposed Galilean origin. There is no good ground for the conclusion,
arrived at by some rationalistic critics from John’s language here,
that he did not know that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Writing his
Gospel many years after the main facts of Christ’s birth, life, and
death were known throughout the church, he here simply narrates as an
historian the objections which the Judeans made to the claim that
Jesus was the Messiah; to have pointed out their mistake would have
been a work of supererogation. Alford’s note on this point is quite
conclusive: “De Wette’s ‘probability that John knew nothing of the
birth at Bethlehem’ reaches much further than may appear at first. If
John knew nothing of it, and yet the mother of the Lord lived with
him, the inference must be that _she_ knew nothing of it--in other
words, that it never happened.”
[Illustration: OFFICERS OF THE CHIEF PRIESTS.]
45 Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees;
and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him?
46 The officers answered, Never[300] man spake like this
man.
[300] Luke 4:22.
=45, 46. Then came the officers.= Not Roman soldiers, but temple
police, answering to the modern constable or the Roman lictor or the
English beadle. They had been directed by the officers of the
Sanhedrim to arrest Jesus (ver. 32). Presumptively this return of the
officers occurred several days after their commission to make the
arrest. They had been watching him during the feast.--=Never man spake
like this man.= They were not overawed by the multitude, but by the
words of Christ himself. There is no stronger testimony, even in the
Gospels, to the marvellous moral power of Christ’s personality and
words than this declaration of the temple police, who were probably
ignorant but also simple men, without the culture, but also without
the religious prejudices, of the rulers. In the life of Whitefield are
several illustrations of analogous moral power over roughs who had
come to the preaching to break it up, but who remained spell-bound
under its influence. To have elicited such testimony as this from such
men as these, Jesus must have possessed the power of a true oratory.
47 Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived?
48 Have any of the rulers[301] or of the Pharisees believed
on him?
[301] ch. 12:42; Jer. 5:4, 5; 1 Cor. 1:26.
49 But this people, who knoweth not the law, are cursed.
=47-49.= The language of the Pharisaic rulers is that of unbounded
scorn for Jesus and for the multitude. The latter are declared to be
under divine wrath and cursed with moral blindness because they have
an admiration for such a Sabbath-breaker. “All here is wonderfully
living and characteristic. The faint effort of the officers to execute
the command of their masters; the awe which held them back; their
simple confession of the power which they found in the words of Jesus;
the surprise of the Sanhedrim that the infection should have reached
even their servants; their terror lest there might be traitors in the
camp, lest any Pharisee or lawyer (probably some eyes were turned on
Nicodemus) should have been carried away by the impulse to which the
crowd, naturally enough, had yielded; their scorn of the people, as
wretched, ‘accursed’ men, utterly ignorant of the law--who does not
feel as if he were present in that convocation of doctors? as if he
were looking at their perplexed and angry faces? as if he were hearing
their contemptuous words?”--(_Maurice._)
50 Nicodemus saith unto them, (he[302] that came to Jesus
by night, being one of them,)
[302] ch. 3:2.
51 Doth[303] our law judge _any_ man before it hear him,
and know what he doeth?
[303] Deut. 17:8; Prov. 18:13.
52 They answered and said unto him, Art thou also of
Galilee? Search and look: for out of Galilee[304] ariseth
no prophet.
[304] Isa. 9:1, 2.
=50-52.= On the character of Nicodemus, see notes on ch. 3. The
impression which Jesus had made upon him in that interview was an
abiding one. There is a covert sarcasm in his question here, _Doth our
law judge the man except it first hear him and know what he doeth?_
They themselves knew not the law, and were openly disregarding it. The
Rabbinical laws explicitly required that every accused person should
have a hearing, with an opportunity to confront the witnesses against
him and to cross-examine them. See Vol. I, p. 298. That Nicodemus’
rebuke was felt by the Pharisees is shown by the tone of their answer.
They replied, not by argument, but by a sneer, _Art thou also of
Galilee?_ and by a falsehood, _Out of Galilee hath arisen_ (perfect,
not present) _no prophet_. Jonah was of Galilee (2 Kings 14:25),
Elijah very probably so (1 Kings 17:1;--_Alford_), and Nahum either of
Galilee or of Assyria, a heathen land (Nahum 1:1). The prejudices of
the Pharisees led them to forget their history as well as their law.
In lieu of _doth our law judge any man?_ read _the man_, _i. e._, this
man; Nicodemus refers specifically to Jesus. In lieu of _ariseth_ read
_hath arisen_; though there is some uncertainty. Alford gives the
present tense, _ariseth_; Lachmann, Tischendorf, and Meyer, with
greater probability, the past tense, _hath arisen_. With either
reading the meaning is substantially the same; not, as Godet, The
promised prophet is not now arising, but, as Meyer and Alford, No
prophet ever ariseth from Galilee.
53 And every man went unto his own house.
=53.= This verse belongs with the next chapter.