« НазадПродовжити »
4. Isa, xii. 3:
• If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. • Isa. Iv.si 38 p He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out p Prov. Ivil. : of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39 9 But this liv.3. ch." spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him a celi P should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet [9 given]: Acte ii. 17, because r that Jesus was not yet 'glorified. 40 8 Many of the " t people therefore, when they heard a this saying, said, Of a 15, 18,". truth this is 8 the Prophet. 41 Others said, “This is the tch: do:12:
33, 38. reb. xii. 16:
xvi. 7. * Deut. xviii.
21: vi.ll. tcb. iv. 2:
P render, were about to.
9 omit : not in the original.
days the ceremony had been performed, what happened on the day of Pentecost; and the Hallel sung. On the eighth day but of the Spirit, which the believers were the Hallel was sung, but the outpouring about to receive. Their first reception of of the water did not take place: something Him must not be illogically put in the was missed, which took place on the other place of all His indwelling and working, days. “Then Jesus stood and cried, &c.' which are here intended. And the symWas not this the most natural time? Was bolism of the N. T. is fully satisfied by the it not probable that He would have said it interpretation. Granted that the water is at such a time, rather even than while the the water of life, - what is that life but ceremony itself was going on? On the life of the Spirit ? “ The mind of the the sense of our Lord's words, see notes on Spirit, is life," Rom. viii. 6; and again, ch. iv. 13, 14. as the scripture hath “the Spirit, is life,” ib. ver. 10. said] These words must apply to the was not yet] The additions “given," words “out of his belly shall flow, fc.,” “upon them," as some authorities read, since the words “ he that believeth on me" and the like, are all put in by way of excould not form part of the citation. But planation, to avoid a misunderstanding we look in vain for such a text in the (). T., which no intelligent reader could fall and an apocryphal or lost canonical book into. Chrysostom writes, “The Evangelist is out of the question. I believe the says, 'for the Holy Ghost was not yet,' citation to be intimately connected with i. e. was not yet given, because Jesus was the ceremony referred to, and that we must not yet glorified : meaning by the Glory, look for its place by consulting the pas. the Cross.” It is obvious that the word sages where the flowing out of water from was cannot refer to the essential existence the temple (see above) is spoken of. The of the Holy Spirit, as this would be not only most remarkable of these is found in Ezek. in flat contradiction to ch. i. 32, 33; iii. 5, xlvii. 1-12. There a river of water of 8, 34, but to the whole Old Test., in which life (see ver. 9 especially) flows from under the agency of the Spirit in the outward the threshold of the temple. Again in world is recognized even more vividly Zech. xiv. 8, living waters shall go out than in the N. T. The word implied is from Jerusalem. I believe these expres. not exactly “given," but rather 6 work sions to be all to which the citation ap. ing," or some similar word: was not, plies, and the words “out of his belly” had not come in; the dispensation of the to be the interpretation of the correspond. Spirit was not yet.' glorified, through ing words in the prophecies. For the death. The glorified Body of the Lord is temple was symbolic (see ch. ii. 21) of the temple from under whose threshold the Body of the Lord ; and the Spirit the Holy Spirit flows forth to us; see ch. which dwells in and flows forth from i. 16; Rom. viii. 11; Col. ii. 9. His glorified Body, dwells in and flows 40.] the Prophet is here clearly distinforth from His people also, who are made guished from the Christ: see note on ch. i. like unto Him, Gal. iv. 6; Rom. viii. 9- 21, and Deut. xviii, 15. 41-43.] The 11; 1 Cor. iii. 16. 39.7 The diffi. mention of the question about Bethlehem culties raised concerning this interpreta- seems to me rather to corroborate our tion of the saying of our Lord have arisen belief that the Evangelist was well aware from a misapprehension. St. John does how the fact stood, than, as some have not say that the words were a prophecy of said, to imply that he was ignorant of it. VOL. I.
u ver 52. ch.
i. 46. x Ps. cxxxii.
11. Jer, xxiii. 5. Mic. v. 2. Matt, ii. 5.
Luke ii. 4. y 1 Sarn. xvi.
ix. 16: 2. 19. a ver. 30.
u pret 52. ch. Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee? 11. Jer.42 » Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the Niet is. seed of David, and 7 out of the town of Bethlehem, " where y 19km. xvi. David was? 43 So ? there was a division among the z ver. 12. ch. 2 people because of him. 44 And a some of them a would
have taken him; but no man laid hands on him. 45 b Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and
they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him ? b Matt. vii. 29. 46 The officers answered, bc Never man spake like this man.
47 Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deoch. xii. 42; ceived ? 48 c Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees
believed on him ? 49 But this d people who knoweth not the law are cursed. 50 Nicodemus saith unto them, (" he
that came to e Jesus [f by night], being one of them,) e Deut. 1.17: 51 e Doth our law judge any man, 8 before it hear him, and
know what he doeth ? 52 They answered and said unto
Acts vi. 7.
20. ii. 8. d ch. iii. 2.
xvii.s, &c.; xix. 15.
render, Doth the Christ then. y render, from Bethlehem, the town where. z render, multitude. a render, were minded to take. b render, The officers therefore came.
c Some ancient authorities read, Never man spake thus : others rary in other ways.
d render, multitude: it is here a word of contempt,-rabble. e read, him before.
* The reading here varies very much : some ancient copies omitting" by night,” others inserting it in different positions.
8 render, except it first hear from him,
That no more remarks are appended, is 45–52.] Return of the officers to the natural. St. John had one great design in Sanhedrim; consultation on their report. writing his gospel, and does not allow it to Either these officers had been watchbe interfered with by explanations of mat- ing Jesus for some days, or the present ters otherwise known. Besides, we may section goes back a little from what has note that the so-called “probability, that preceded. The latter is more probable. John knew nothing of the birth at Beth
49.] There is no intention to prolehem,” reaches much further than may nounce a formal ban upon the followers of appear at first. If St. John knew nothing Jesus ;-the words are merely a passionate of it, and yet the Mother of the Lord lived expression of contempt. 50.] The with him, the inference must be that she Jews had, since the sabbath-healing, conknew nothing of it,-in other words, that demned Jesus, and were seeking to kill it never happened. The word ren him. But in Exod. xxiii. 1, 2; Deut. i. dered division implies a violent dissension, 16, 17, justice is commanded to be done in - some taking up His cause, some wishing the way here insisted on by Nicodemus. to lay hands on Him. 44.] These Observe the consistency, and development, were from among the multitude. Those of the character of Nicodemus; and see who wished to lay hands on Him were, more on ch. xix. 39. 51.] See Deut. as Euthymius remarks, invisibly re- i. 16. 52.] They taunt him with strained.
being disposed to join those (mostly
him, Art thou also of Galilee ? Search, and h look : for <Isa. Ix. 1, 2 fout of Galilee i ariseth no prophet. b render, see that.
i Some MSS. have, hath arisen.
Matt. iv. 15.
Galilæans) who had attached themselves two prophets at least bad arisen from to Jesus. Whether we read ariseth or Galilee : Jonah of Gathhepher, and the hath arisen, the assertion is much the greatest of the prophets, Elijah of Thisbe; same: for the expression “no prophet” and perhaps also Nahum and Hosea. Their cannot include the Prophet, or the Mes. contempt for Galilee made them lose sight siah. It was not historically true ;- for of historical accuracy.
HISTORY OF THE WOMAN TAKEN IN ADULTERY. [s3 And every man went unto his own house. VIII. 'a Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. ? And early in the morning he b came again into the temple, and all the people came unto himníc; and he sat
a render, But Jesus.
b render, cometh.
c the most ancient MS. omits this.
[This passage is to be treated very differ. pendently of the inserted passage. See ently from the rest of the sacred text. the whole matter discussed and the autho. In the Alexandrine, Vatican, Paris, and rities given, in my Greek Testament. Sinaitic MSS., the ancient Syriac Versions, 53.] The circumstance that this verse is and all the early fathers, it is omitted: the included in the dubious passage is remarkCambridge MS. alone of our most ancient able, and seems to shew, as remarked authorities contains it. Augustine states, above, that the doubt has not arisen from that certain expunged it from their MSS., any ethical difficulty, as Augustine hints, because they thought it might encourage for then the passage would have begun sin. But this will not account for the with ch. viii. 1. Nor can this verse very general omission of it, nor for the bave been expunged to keep up the confact that ch. vii. 53 is included in the nexion with ch. viii. 12—for that is just as omitted portion. Eusebius assigns it ap. good with it,--if understood, as usually, of parently to the apocryphal “Gospel accord. the members of the Sanhedrim. We must ing to the Hebrews.” Other things to be now regard it as fragmentary, forming the noted respecting it are, (1) that in the beginning of the account of the woman MSS. which contain it, the number of taken in adultery. It is therefore not variations is very much greater than in clear to what the words apply. Taken in any equal portion of Seripture: so much is conjunction with what follows (see on ch. this the case, that there are in fact three viji. 5.), I should say that they indicate separate texts, it being hardly possible to some time during the last days of the unite them into one. (2) That in the Lord's ministry, when He spent the nights original, the style, and manner of nar on the Mount of Olives, as the date of the rating, are entirely different from those of occurrence. Certainly the end of Luke our Evangelist. It is not merely that xxi. seems to be its fitter place. many words and idioms occur which John CHAP. VIII. 1.] St. John never elsewhere never uses, but that the whole cast and mentions the Mount of Olives (not even in character of the passage is alien from his ch. xviii. 1): and when he introduces a new manner, in whichever of the existing texts place, it is his habit to give explanations we read it. (3) The great majority of (see ch. i. 45 ; v. 2, and the expressions used those MSS. which contain the passage, in ch. iv. 5; xix. 13, 17). Stier, who says, place it here. Some however insert it after “ The simple answer to Alford's remark is, the end of Luke xxi., which certainly that John here, and here only, mentions seems a more fitting place, seeing that the the Mt. of 0.," omits all allusion to this incidents evidently belong to the later habit of the Evangelist, which alone gives part of our Lord's ministry. (4) I have weight to my remark. Most of the adopted the plan also followed in the last many differences from the style and exedition of my Greek Testament, and have pression of St. John must be gathered printed it beneath the text of St. John, from the notes in the Greek Test., as they which I have allowed to go on inde- cannot be made clear to the mere English
a ch. i. 4, 5, 9:
iii. 19: ix. 5: xii. 35, 36, 46.
a ch. 1. 4, 5,9: VIII. 12 k Then spake Jesus again unto them saying, a I tii. 35, 36, 46. am the light of the world : he that followeth me shall not
k render, Jesus therefore spake.
12 — 597 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN JESUS AND THE JEWS, AT ITS HEIGHT.
12—20.] Testimony to Himself
as the Light. 12.7 The attempts of Bengel, Stier, and others, to establish a connexion with the passage concerning the
adultery, in the
HISTORY OF THE WOMAN TAKEN IN ADULTERY.
[dd unto him] a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her A ler xx. 10. in the midst, * e they say unto him, Master, this woman fwas taken in
adultery, in the very act. Sa Now Moses in the law commanded us, that d read, bring.
dd the most ancient MS. omits this. e the most ancient MS. reads, The priests say unto hiin, tempting him, that they might have matter of accusation against him.
frender, hath been taken. reader. 3.7 St. John never mentions answer need not have been so worded as “the Scribes" elsewhere, but usually calls to trench upon this matter: and (c) the the opponents of Jesus “the Jews,” or “ the accusers would have been more deeply rulers.” “ The Scribes and Pharisees” is involved than Himself, if such had been a very common expression in the three the case, being by the law the prominent Gospels. The account gives no light as persons in the execution. So that I to the capacity in which these Scribes and leave the difficulty unsolved. Lücke Pharisees acted when they brought the observes: “Since Jesus seems to avoid woman. Probably, only as tempting Jesus, every kind of decision on the question put and not in the course of any legal proceed to Him, it follows that He found in it no ings against her. Such would have re. reference to the great subjects of His quired (Lev. xx. 10; Deut. xxii. 22) that teaching, but treated it as a purely civil or the man also should have been put to political matter, with which in His ministry death. 4.] The words “say unto him. He had no concern. Some kind of ciril or tempting him” savour much more of the political collision the question certainly three Gospels than of John : see Mt. xvi. was calculated to provoke: but from the 1; xix. 3; xxii. 18, 35: Mk. viii. 11; brevity of the narration, and our want of x. 2 ; xii. 15, &c. Obviously our ch. vi. 6 more accurate knowledge of criminal prois no example to the contrary. The diffi- ceedings at the time, it is impossible to culty is even greater than the last, to say, lay down definitely, wherein the collision in what sense this was a temptation, to would have consisted.' . 5.] I will lead to His accusation. The principal just remark that the very fact of their solutions of it have been, (1) that the questioning thus, · Moses commanded,... command of the law bad fallen into disuse but what sayest Thou?' belongs to the last from the frequency of the crime, and to days of the Lord's ministry, and cannot re-assert it would be contrary to the well be introduced chronologically where known mildness of Jesus. But what it here stands: nor does St. John any where reason had any of His sayings--who came introduce these questions between the to fu)fil the Law, not to destroy it,-given law of Moses and Jesus; but the other them to expect such mildness in this case ? Gospels often do. The command here And suppose He had re-asserted the law,- mentioned is not to be found, unless how could they have accused Him ? (2) putting to death’generally, is to be interThat some political snare was hereby laid preted as stoning ; --- compare Exod. xxxi. for Him, whereby the Roman power might 14; xxxv. 2, with Num. xv. 35, 36, in which have been brought to bear against Him. the special order given by God would sancBut this does not in any way appear; for tion such a view. But the Rabbis taught (a) the Romans certainly allowed to the that every punishment of death in SeripJews (by connivance) the power of putting ture put absolutely, without specification, to death according to their law,-as they was to be understood as meaning stran. did in the case of Stephen : (6) our Lord's gulation. The passage Ezek. xvi. 38, 40
walk in 1 darkness, but shall have the light of life. 13 The Pharisees therefore said unto him, b Thou bearest m record bch. v. 81. I render, the darkness.
m render, witness. woman taken in adultery are forced and which these words “the light of the harsh. It was, say they, the early morn. world” allude,--and the walking in darking (ver. 2) and the sun was just rising, to ness is an allusion to the woman, whose
Rom. ii, 1.
HISTORY OF THE WOMAN TAKEN IN ADULTERY. g such should be stoned: but what sayest thou ? 6 [h This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him.] But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground[, ias though he heard them not]. ? So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, b He that is without sin among you, let himn first cast a stone at b Deut. xvii. 7. her. 8 And again he stooped down, and k wrote on the ground. 9 And I they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, m even unto the last : and n Jesus was left
g render, such women.
k read, wrote with his finger.
m read, so that all went out.
I read, he. proves nothing, or proves too much ; for it satisfactory: I am much more inclined to is added, "and thrust thee through with think with Luthardt, that the whole artheir swords. I would rather suppose rangement and plan of our Gospel is broken that from Deut. xxii. 21, 23, 24, an in by the insertion of this passage. The ference was drawn what kind of a death Lord Jesus was not sent to be a ruler and was intended in ver. 22, the crime being a judge in this or that particular case of regarded as the same; "he hath humbled crime, see Luke xii, 14; but the Ruler his neighbour's wife.” We have similar in- and Judge of all: and His answer exdefiniteness in ib. ver. 25, where evidently presses this, by convicting thein all of sin the same punishment is meant. 6. before Him. Some of our MSS. read, “ the wrote on the ground] The habit was a stone:” in that case, our Lord refers to usual one to signify pre-occupation of the first stone, which by Deut. xvii. 7 the mind, or intentional inattention. The witnesses were to cast. 8.] Euthymius addition, “as though he heard them not,” remarks that our Lord adopted this gesis an explanatory gloss. It does not ture, of again writing on the ground, in follow that any thing was actually written. His goodness, to allow them to pass out Stier refers to Jer. xvii. 13, but perhaps without being specially observed by Him. without reason. This minute circum One of our MSS. reads, “ He wrote on the stance speaks strongly for the authenticity ground the sins of each of them.” of the narration. 7.] The expression, 9.] They had said, ver. 5, “such women" “ without sin," is not here used in the they now perceive that they themselves general sense, meaning, entirely sinless, were such men. There is no historical nor in the strictest, free from the crime of difficulty in this conduct of the Pharisees, adultery' (it can hardly be that any of the as Olshausen finds ;- they were struck by Pharisees should have held themselves the power of the word of Christ. It was a sinless,- or that all should have been im- case somewhat analogous to that in which plicated in adultery) :-but-as the word His saying, “I am he,” struck His foes to "a sinner,” in Luke vii. 37,-of the sin of the ground, ch. xviii. 6. The variauncleanness generally. Stier, who con- tions of reading are very wide in the latter tends strongly for the genuineness of this part of the verse. We can hardly (with narrative in this place, finds in ver. 46 an some) lay any stress on "beginning at the allusion to this saying. I cannot say that eldest," as indicating the natural order of his attempts to establish a connexion with conviction of sin. If the consciences of the subsequent discourse are to me at all older sinners have heavier loads on them,