t Mal. iii. 1.

Matt. iii. 6.
Luke i. 17,
76, 77:
iii. 3, 4.

t

Mark i. 10.

ch. v. 32.

Acts i. 5:

x Matt. i. 11. remaining on him, .:.: the Holy Ghost.

Σίχ. θ.

X

this is the Son of God.

8 render, came I.

i render, have beheld. 1 render, whomsoever.

saw,

and bare record that

indeed may have in his own mind believed Him to be the Christ:-but having (ver. 33) a special sign appointed him, by which to recognize Him as such,-until that sign was given, he, like the rest of the people (the words may be rendered, I also, as well as you, see ver. 26), had no certain knowledge of Him. De Wette gives the sense well: "This testimony (ver. 30) does not rest upon my long personal acquaintance with Him, but on that which happened during my work of baptizing." but that

he should be made manifest] Justin Martyr represents Trypho the Jew saying, "Even if Christ has been born and exists somewhere, he is unknown, and is not even conscious of his own identity, until Elias shall come and anoint him, and make him manifest to all." But our narrative is not built upon any such Jewish belief, for it is evidently only as a spiritual preparation, through repentance, for the knowledge of Him, that John regarded his baptism, not as any thing making Him manifest to all.

32, 33.] "What follows, is testimony, properly so called: what is said from ver. 29 f. was demonstration following on testimony. In the continued discourse of the Baptist the Evangelist as it were interposes a parenthesis, And John bare witness, saying," " Bengel. The occurrence related by John happened at the baptism of Jesus, which is therefore here pre-supposed as known. Although this has been questioned, I cannot see how it can be reasonably doubted. We cannot surely suppose that such a sign was twice shewn. On the appearance itself, see note Matt. iii. 16. The account here given confirms the view which I have there maintained, that the appearance was confined to our Lord and the Baptist: he was to receive the sign, and then to testify to the

others, who were not themselves yet the bearers, but the recipients of testimony:It was seen, in a kind of spiritual vision, by John alone." Theodore of Mopsuestia. I have beheld, in reference to the sign divinely intimated to him, in the abiding fulfilment of which he now stood. So again, below, ver. 34. it remained upon him] By some appearance which is not described, the Holy Spirit was manifested to John as not removing from Jesus again, but remaining on Him. But we are not to understand that he had seen the Spirit descending on others, and not remaining; for (see ch. vii. 39; Acts i. 5; xix. 2 ff. (the gift of the Holy Spirit did not ordinarily accompany John's baptism, but only in this one case; and its occurrence was to point out to him the Messiah. the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost] Here again we seem to have a reference to the cycle of narratives of the three other Gospels, for our Evangelist has not before mentioned this office of the Messiah. 34.] A solemn reiteration of his testimony, after the mention of the giving of this token by Him who sent him;-And I have seen (accordingly) &c.

The token must have been given to the Baptist by a special revelation, which also revealed to him his own errand and office; so Luke iii. 2, "The word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness." The perfect tense in this verse is stronger than the present, -I have seen (on the perf. see above ver. 32) and have borne witness-it is a reference to his testimony at the time, as a thing on record in their memories, and as still continuing. the Son of God] See ver. 18 the Word made flesh, the Messiah. On the import of the descent of the Spirit

• render, But.

on Jesus at his baptism, I may reinark, that the Personal Word, Who became flesh in our Lord, and was subjected to all the laws of human development in infancy, childhood, youth,-evermore in an especial degree under the leading of the Holy Spirit, by whose agency the Incarnation had taken place,-was the Recipient of this fulness of the indwelling of the Holy Ghost and that herein consisted the real depth and propriety of this sign;-the abiding of the Spirit without_measure (ch. iii. 34) on Him indicated beyond doubt that He was the Word become flesh-for no mere human intelligence could be thus receptive of the Holy Spirit of God; we receive Him only as we can, only as far as our receptivity extends,by measure; but HE, into the very fulness and infinite capacities of His divine Being.

35-43.] On account of the testimony of John, first Andrew, and another of his disciples, and through Andrew, Simon Peter, become acquainted with Jesus. 35. the next day after] See on ver. 29. I can hardly suppose, with De Wette, that these two had been absent on the preceding day. Rather, what they then heard seems to have made a powerful impression on their minds, so that the repetition of the notice is now the signal for them to follow Jesus. (On the second disciple, see below on ver. 40.) 37.] We must not understand followed in the narrower sense which it bears when they left all and followed Him; but here only of mechanical going after Him, "wishing to know somewhat of Him," as Euthymius says. 38.] On What seek ye? Euthymius remarks, “This was not asked in ignorance, seeing that He witnesses the inner thoughts VOL. I.

Pomit.

of men's minds, but that He might attach them to Himself by the enquiry, and give them confidence. It is likely that they were bashful as yet and in perplexity, as being unacquainted with Him."

They ask where dwellest thou? wishing to find Him alone and in quiet. Euthymius. They enquire after His place of lodging for the night, intending to visit Him there; or perhaps He was then apparently going thither, as it was late in the day. But He furthers their wish by inviting them to follow, and they will see.

39. about the tenth hour] i. e. 4 P.M., according to the Jewish reckoning; not, as some have thought, 10 A.M., according to that of the Romans. Our Evangelist appears always to reckon according to the Jewish method, see ch. iv. 6, 52; xix. 14, and notes, but especially ch. xi. 9. And as Lücke remarks, even among the Romans, the division of the day into twelve equal hours was, though not the civil, the popular way of computing time.

They remained with Him the rest of that day, which would be four or five hours, and need not strictly be limited by sunset.

40.] Who the other disciple was, is not certain but considering (1) that the Evangelist never names himself in his Gospel, and (2) that this account is so minutely accurate as to specify even the hours of the day, and in all respects bears marks of an eye-witness, and again (3) that this other disciple, from this last circumstance, certainly would have been named, had not the name been suppressed for some especial reason, we are justified in inferring that it was the Evangelist himself. And such has been the general opinion. Euthymius, mentioning this, gives an alternative which is hardly probable:

II

42, 52.

Ps. xxxil. 2:
Rom. ii. 28,

lxxiii. 1.
ch. viii. 39.

i

ance on the part of Philip with Jesus. No stress can be laid, as has been most unfairly done, on Jesus being called by Philip, the son of Joseph, as indicating that the his tory of His birth and childhood, as related by St. Matthew and St. Luke, was unknown to St. John. Philip expresses what was the prevailing belief, in the ordinary words, as Olshausen remarks. In an admirable note, Neander remarks, that by combining the two declarations of John, that in Jesus the Eternal Word of God became flesh (ver. 14), and that that which is born of the flesh is flesh' (ch. iii. 6), we cannot cscape the inference, that a supernatural working of God in the conception of the Man Christ Jesus is implied.

46.]

29: ix. 6.

i Matt. xiv. 33.

Matt. xxi. 5: chxvi 37:

xxvii. 11, 42.

xix. 3.

Our Lord probably referred to Ps. xv. 48. The remark was overheard by Nathanael, and recognized as indicating perfect knowledge of his character. The question, Whence knowest thou me ? is one of astonishment, but not perhaps yet of suspicion of any thing supernatural. Our Lord's answer first opens this to him. Before that &c.] The whole form of our Lord's answer seems to indicate that the place where Philip called Nathanael was not now in sight, nor had been. The declaration that Jesus had seen him there, at once brings the conviction which he expresses in the next verse. This would not have been the case, unless the sight had been evidently and unquestionably supernatural: and unless the words "when thou wast under the fig tree" involved this. Had Jesus merely seen Nathanael without being seen by him, or had "I saw thee" only expressed, I knew thy character,' at first sight, although at a distance, no such immediate conviction would have followed.' when thou wast under the fig tree, says Wordsw., "is something more than merely under the fig tree' would be it indicates retirement thither as well as concealment there,-perhaps for purposes of prayer and meditation." In fact it contains in it, "when thou wentest under the fig tree, and while thou wert there.' 49.] The answer expresses, Thou art the Messiah;' see Ps. ii. 7: ch. xi. 27: Matt. xvi. 16: Luke xxii. 70. Olshausen maintains that the Son of God was not a Jewish appellation for the Messiah,-on account of the Jews taking up stones to cast at Jesus when He so called Himself, ch. x. 33. But as Lücke observes, it was not for the mere use of this Name,-but for using it in a close and literal sense which was unintelligible and appeared blasphemous to them, I and My Father are one,'-that they wished to stone Him; see note on ch. x. 36. It was certainly not so common a name as the Son of David,' for the Messiah. Nathanael can hardly have meant the name in other than its popular mean

As Lücke observes, the meaning of this question is simpler than at first sight appears. It is impossible that Nathanael, himself a Galilæan, could speak from any feeling of contempt for Galilee generally and we have no evidence that Nazareth was held in contempt among the Galilæans. He alluded therefore to the smallness and insignificance of the town in proportion to the great things which were now predicated of it. Nazareth is never named in the O. T. nor in Josephus. 47.] The Evangelist certainly intends a supernatural insight by the Lord into Nathanael's character to be here understood; and there is probably no reference at all to the question which Nathanael had just asked. To suppose that Jesus overheard that question, is just one of those perfectly gratuitous assumptions which the very Commentators who here make this supposition are usually the first to blame. Compare ch. ii. 25.

an Israelite indeed] An Israelite who truly answers to the inner and honourable meaning of the name.' When we reflect what was contained in that name, and Who it is that speaks, we can hardly agree with De Wette that the words are spoken merely in the spirit in which every nation attaches some peculiar virtue, and especially those of openness and straightforwardness, to itself.

V

12. Matt.

iv. 11.

Luke ii. 9.

13: xxii. 43:

xxiv. 4.

Acts 1. 10.

ing; and the synonymous and better known appellation which he adds, confirms this. 50.] Our Lord says this not in blame, rather in praise of the simple and honest expression of Nathanael's conviction; but principally to shew him, that if he believed by reason of this comparatively small proof of His divine power, his faith would increase from strength to strength at the greater proofs which should from that time forward be given. There is no need to understand our Lord's reply as a question; it may be, thou believest. The question is perhaps most natural here: but see notes on the similar sentences, ch. xvi. 31, and ch. xx. 29.

51.] Verily,

verily is peculiar to St. John. The other Evangelists use 'verily' once only in such asseverations. Stier remarks, that the Verily, verily, I say unto you of the Lord, is spoken in His coequality with the Father: not as the Thus saith the Lord' of the prophets. unto you] The words following are then spoken to all the disciples present, not only to Nathanael. With

or without From henceforth, the meaning will be much the same. The glories of a period beginning from the opening of the Lord's public ministry, and at this day not yet completed, are described. For it is not the outward visible opening of the material heavens, nor ascent and descent of angels in the sight of men, which our Lord here announces; but the series of glories which was about to be unfolded in His Person and Work from that time forward. Luther beautifully says: "When Christ became man and had entered on His ministerial office and begun to preach, then was the heaven opened, and remains open; and has from that time, since the baptism of Christ in the Jordan, never been shut, and never will be shut, although we do not see it with our bodily eyes... Christ says this: Ye are now heavenly citizens, and have your citizenship above in the heavenly Jerusalem, and are in communion with the holy angels, who shall without intermission ascend and descend about you.""

That

The opening of heaven is a symbolical expression, signifying the imparting of divine grace, help, and revelation. See Gen. xxviii. 10-17: Ezek. i. 1: Isa. vi. 1: Mal. iii. 10: Isa. lxiv. 1: also Deut. xi. 17: 1 Kings viii. 35. The words have a plain reference to the ladder of Jacob, and imply that what he then saw was now to receive its fulfilment: that He, the Son of Man, was the dwelling of God and the gate of Heaven, and that through Him, and on Him in the first place, was to descend all communication of help and grace from above. no allusion is meant to the Transfiguration, or the Agony, is plain; for all those here addressed did not witness these appearances, but Peter and John only; nor to the Ascension, for they did not see heaven opened, nor did angels ascend nor descend. The above has, remarks Olshausen, been the interpretation of all Commentators of any depth in all times: Origen as well as Augustine, Luther as well as Calvin, Lücke as well as Tholuck : and I may add, De Wette as well as Stier. the Son of man] An expression originally (as appears) derived, in its Messianic sense, from Dan. vii. 13, 14, and thenceforward used as one of the titles of the Messiah (see ch. xii. 34). It is never predicated of our Lord by any but Himself, except in Acts vii. 56 by Stephen, in allusion apparently to Matt. xxvi. 64, and— which is hardly an exception-in the passages of the Revelation (ch. i. 13; xiv. 14) which are almost citations from Daniel.

CHAP. II. 1-11.] The miracle of turning water into wine: the first fulfilment of the announcement in ch. i. 51. see ver. 11. 1.] the third day-reckoned from the day of Nathanael's calling. There would thus be but one day between that event and the marriage. Cana of Galilee, see ch. iv. 46;-not far from Capernaum. Josephus calls it "a village of Galilee." There is a Kanah in Josh. xix. 28, in the tribe of Asher, which must be distinct from this. Jerome