Bible Commentary (1871–1879 Edition) (continued)
Christ, Jppears to Tuo of His Disciples. LUKE XXIV. He Appears to the Assembled Disciples, why, (tc.—Astonishing question ! not ' the risen,' but " the Living One" (cf. Revelation 1. 18); and the surprise expressed in it implies an inconyruity in His being thereat for it: We could not understand the glow of self-evidencing light, love, glory that ravished our hearts; but now we do.' They cannot rest—liow could they?—they must go straight back and tell the news. They find the eleven, but ere they have time to tell their tale, their ears are saluted with the thrilling news, "The Lord is risen Indeed, and hath appeared to <S'«)io/t." Most touching and precious intelligence this. The oul.y one of the Eleven to whom He appeared alone was he, it seems, who had so shamefully denied Him. Wluit passed at that interview we shall never know here. Probaljly it was too sacred for disclosure. See on Mark 1(3. 7. The two from Emmaus now relate what had happened to them, and while thus comparing notes of their Lord's appearances, lo ! Himself stands in the midst of them. What encouragement to doubting, dark, true-hearted disciples!
all, as if, though he might *t(6mit to it, "il was impossible He should be holden of it" (Acts 2. 24). G. In Gnlllee—to which tliese women themselves belonged, cli. 23. 55. 7.
remarkable it is to hear angels quoting u whole sentence of Christ's to the disciples, mentioning where it was uttered, and wondering it was not fresh on tiielr memory, as doubtless it was in theirs! (1 Timothy
8. Ifi, "seen of angels," and 1 Peter 1. 12.) 10. JoannaSee on ch. 8. 1-3. liJ. Peter, &c.—See on John 20. 1, &c.
13-35. Christ Appears to the Two Going to Emmaus.
13. Two of titcm—one was C'leopas (IH), who the other was is mere conjecture. Einmaws—about seven and a half miles from Jerusalem. They probably lived there, and were going home after the Passover. 14-16. communed and reasoned—exchanged views and feelings, weighing afresh all the facts, as detailed in i\ 18-21. drew near—coming up behind them as from Jerusalem, eyes holden—Partly He was " in another form" (Mark 16. 12), and partly tliere seems to have been an operation on their own vision ; though certainly, as thej' did not believe that
36-53. Jesus Appears to the A.sse.hhled Disciples— His Ascension. 36. Jesus stood—Sec on John 20. 19. 37, 38. a spirit—the ghost of their dead Lord, but not Himself in the body. (Acts 12. 15; Mattliew 14. 26.) thoughts —rather ' reasonings;' ('.e., whether He were risen or no, and whether this was His very self. 39-43. Belxold, &c. lovingl.v otfering them both ocular and tangible demonstration of the realit.v of His resurrection, a spirit liath not—an important statement regarding "spirits." flesh and bones—He says not " flesh and blood;" for the blood
was alive, His company as a fellow-traveller was the last thing they would expect. 17-^4. communications, Ac—The words imply the earnest discussion that had appeared in their manner. 18. kuoweiit not, <Sc.—If he knew not the events of the last lew days in Jerusalem, he must be a mere sojourner; if lie did, how could he suppose tlioy would be talking of anything else? How artis the life of the animal and corruptible body (Genesis 9.
4), which "cannot inherit the kingdom of God," 1 Corinthians 15.50; but "flesh and bones," implying the tcie/i<//^, but with diversity of laws, of th* resurrection-body. See on John 20.24-28. believed not for joy, Ac-They did believe, else they had not rejoiced. [Bengel.] But it seemed too good to be true. (Psalm 126. 1, 2.) lioneycomb —common frugal fare, anciently, eat before them i. e., let them see Him doing it : not for His own necessity, but their conviction. 44-49. Tlvese are tl»c words, &c. q. d., "Now you will understand what seemed so dark to .you when I told you about " the Sou of man being put to death and rising again" (ch. 18.31-34). while yet with you— striking expression, implying that He was now, as the dead and risen Saviour, virtually dissevered from this scene of mortal it.v, and from all ordinary intercourse with His mortal disciples, law . . . prophets . . . psalms The three Jewish divisions of the Old Testament Scriptures, then opened he, &c.—a statement of unspeakable value; expressing, on the one hand, Christ's immediate access to the human spirit and absolute power oier it, to the adjustment of its vision, and permanent rectification for spiritual discernment (than which it is impossible to conceive a stronger evidence of His proper divinity); and, on the other hand, making it certain Umtthetnanner of interpreting the Old Testament ivhich the apostles afterwards emless all this! concerning Jesus, Ac—As if feeling it a relief to have some one to unburden his thoughts and feelings to, this disciple goes over the main facts in his own desponding style, and this was just what our Lord wished, we trusted, &c.—They expected the promised Deliverance at His hand, but in the current sense of it, not by His death, besides all this—not only did his death seem to give the fatal blow to their hopes, but He had been two days dead already, and this was the third. It is true, they add, some of our women gave us a surprise, telling us of a vision of angels they had at the empty grave this morning that said He was alive, and some of ourselves who went thither confirmed their statement; but then Himself they saw not. A doleful tale truly, told out of the deepest despondency. 25-27. foolssenseless, without understanding, ought not Christ—
' the Christ,' ' the Messiali.' to suffer . . . and enter f. e., through the gate of suflfering (and snt Tering "these thm{/s," or such a dealh.) to enter into His glory. 'Ye believe in the glory; but these very suH'erings are the predicted gate of entrance into it.' Moses and all tlie prophets, Ac—Here our Lord l)oth teaches us the reverencedue to Old Testament Scripture, and the great burden of it^" Himself." 28-31. made as though, <tec.—Cf. Mark ployed (see the Acts and Epistles), /tax the direct sanction of Christ Himself, behoved Clirist—See on v. 26. beginning at Jenisalem—(1. ) As the metropolis and heart of the then e-xisting kingdom of God:—"to the Jew first," Romans 1.16; Acts 13. 46; Isaiah 2. 3 (see on Matthew 10.
6. 18; Genesis 18. 3, 5; 32. 24-28. eonstrained, *c.—But for this, the whole design of the interview had been last; but U wfts not to be lost, for He who only wished to be constrained had kindled a longing in the hearts of His travelling companions which was not to be so eaiIy put olt'. And <loes not this still repeat itself In the interviews of the Saviour with His loving, longing disciples? Else why do they say,
6). (2.) .\s the great reservoir and laborator.y of all the sin and crime of the nation, thus procdaiming for all titne that there is morc.v in Christ for the chief of sinners. (See on Matthew 23. 37.) witness—Cf. Acts 1. 8, 22. I send—the present tense, to intimate its nearness, promise of my Father1, e., ' what my Father hath promised ;' the Holy Ghost, of which Christ is the authoritative Dispenser. (John U. 7; Revelation 3.1; 5.6.) endued— ' invested,' or 'clothed with;' implying, as the parallels show (Romans
Abide with me from morn to eve, For without Tlu-e I cannot live;
Aliide with mc when night is nigh. For without Thec' I cannot die. Ki:ble.
13. 14; 1 Corinthians 15.53; Galatians 27; Colossians 3, he look . , , and Idcsaied . . . and tlieir eyes wei-e opened—The stranger first startles tliem by taking the place of ma.ster at their own table, but on proceeding to that act which reproduced the whole scene of the last Supper, a rush of associations and recollections disclosed their guest, and He stood confessed before their itstoiilshed |{a/e—TUKiR KisEN Lokd! They were going to gaze on Hitn, perhaps embrace Him, but that moment He is gone!
9, 10), tlu'ir being so penetrated and acted upon by consciotti siipernoiiiral "power" (in the full sense of that word) as to stamp with Divine authority the whole exercise of their apostot ic office, including, of course, their pc/i as well as their mouth. 50-53. to Betliaoiy-not to tlie village Itself, but on the descent to it from Mount Olivet, wliilc lie blessed. . . parted, Ac. — Sweet intimation! Iiuarnate Love, Crucified Love, Risen Love, now on the wing for heaven, waiting only tliose o<Ioro\is gales which were to waft Him to the skies, goes away in benedictions, that in the character of Glorified, Enthroned Love, He might continue
It w:ui enough. 32-34. They now toll each to the other how their heart* burned—were fired-within them at His talk and liia expois Uions of Scripture. 'Ah ! this accounts ir Utcdudion. JOHN. Inlrodiiclion.
His benedictions, out in yet higher form, until He come again ! And oh if angels were so transported at His birth into this scene of tears and death, what must have been their ecstasy as tliey welcomed and attended Him "far above all heavens" into the presence-chamber, and conducted Him to the right hand of the Majesty on High! Thou hast an everlasting right, O my Saviour, to that august place. The brightness of the Father's glory, enshrined in our natuie, hath won it well, for He poured out His soul unto death, and led captivity captive, receiving gifts for men, yea for the rebellious, that the Lord God might dwell among them. 'Thou art the King of glory, O Christ.' Lift up your heads, O ye gates, be lifted up, ye everlasting doors, that the King of glory may come in !
Even so wilt thou change these Tile bodies of onrs, that they may be like unto thine own glorious body; and then witli gladness and rejoicing shall they be brought, they shall enter into the King's palace! -vronliipped Ulin—certainly in the strictest sense of adoration, returned to Jerusalem—as instructed to do: but not till after gazing, as if entranced, up into the bine vault in which he had disappeared, they were gently checked by two shining ones, wlio assured them He would come again to them in the like manner as He had gone into heaven. (.See on Acts 1. 10, 11.) This made them return, not with disappointment at His removal, but " with great joy." were continually 111 tlie temple i. e., every day at the regular hours of piuyer tiU the day of Pentecost.
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO
INTRODUCTION.
TnE author of the Fourth Gospel was the younger of the two sons of Zeoedee, a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, who resided at Bethsaida, where were born Peter and Andrew his brother, and Philip also. His mother's name was Balome, who, though not wiyiout her imperfections (Mattliew 20. 20, &c.), was one of those dear and honoured women who accompanied the Lord on one of His preaching circuits through Galilee, ministering to his bodily wants; who followed Him to thecross, and bought, sweet spices to anoint Him after His burial, but, on bringing them to the grave, on the morning of the First Day of the week, found their loving services gloriously superseded by His resurrection ere they arrived. His father, Zebedee, appears to have been in good circumstances, owning a vessel of his own and having hired servants (Mark 1. 20). Our Evangelist, whose occupation was that of a fisherman with his father, was beyond doubt a disciple of the Bapdst, and one of the two who had the first interview with Jesus. He waa called while engaged at his secular occupation (Matthew 4. 21, 22), and again on a memorable occasion (Luke 5. 1-11), and finally chosen as one of the Twelve Apostles (Matthew 10. 2). He was the youngest of the Twelve—the " Benjamin," as Da Costa calls him—and he and James his brother were named in the native tongue by Him who knew the heart, "Boanerges," which the Evangelist Mark (3. 17) explains to mean "Sons of thunder;" no doubt from their natural vehemence of character. They and Peter constituted that select triumvirate of whom see on Luke 9. 2S. But the highest honour bestowed on this disciple was liis being admitted to the bosom-place with his Lord at the table, as "the d'»- oiple whom Jesus loved" (John 13. '2;3; 20. 2; 21. 7, 20. 21), and to have committed to him by the dying Redeemer the care of His mother (19. 26, 27). There can be no reasonable doubt that this distinction was due to a sympathy with His own spirit and mind on the part of John which the all-penetrating Eye of their common Master beheld In none oJ the rest; and although this was probably never seen either in his life or in his ministry by his fellow-apostles, it Is brought wonderfully out in his writings, which, in Christ-like spirituality, heavenliuess, and love, surpass, we may freely say, all the other inspired writings.
After the efl'usion of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, we find him in constant but silent company with Peter, the great spokesman and actor in the Infant Cliurch until the accession of Paul. While his love to the Lord Jesus drew him spontaneously to the side of His eminent servant, and his chastened vehemence made him ready to stand courageously by him, and suffer with him, In all that his testimony to Jesus might cost him, his motlest humility, as the youngest of all the apostles, made him an admiring listener and faithful supporter of his brother apostle rather than a speaker or separate actor. Ecclesiastical history is uniform in testifying that John went to Asia Minor; but it is next to certain that this could not have been till after the death both of Peter and Paul; that he resided at Ephesus, wlience, as from a centre, he superintended the churches of that region, paying them occasional visits; and that he long survived the other apostles. Whether the motlicr of J^>sus died before this, or went with John to Ephesus, wliere slie died and was buried, is not agreed. One or two anecdotes of his later days have been handed down by tradition, one at least bearing marks of reasonable probability. But it is not necessary to give them liero. In the reigu of Domltian (A. D. 81-90) he was banished to "the isle that is called Patraos" (a small rocky and then almost uninhabited island in the iEgean Sea), " for the word of God and for tlie testimony of Jesus Christ" (Revelation 1. 9). Irenieus and Euseblus say that this took place about the end of Domitian's reign. That he was thrown into a cauldron of lioiling oil, and miraculously delivered, is one of those legends which, though reported by Tertullian and Jerome, is entitled to no credit. His return from exile to<5k place during the brief but tolerant reign of Nerva' ne died at Ephesus in the reign of Trajan [Euskbius, Ecclesinxlical Ilislwn, 3. 23], at an age above 90, according to some; according to others, 100; and even 120, according to others still. The Intermediate number Is generally regarded o» probably the nearest to the truth. • * As to the dale of this Gospel, the arguments for Its having been composed before the destruction of Jerusalem (though relied on l>y some superior critics) are of the slendercst nalUJ'e; such as the expression in ch. 5. 2, " there is at Jerusalem, by the sheep-gate, a pool," &c. ; there being no allusion to Peter's martyrdom as having occurred accordlug to tlie prediction In ch. 21. 18—a thing too well known to require mention. Tliat It was composed long after the destruction of Jerusalem, and after the decease of all tlie other apostles, Is next to certain, though the precise tlmo cannot be determined. Probably it was before his banishment, however; and if we date It between the years 90 and
94, we shall i)robably be pretty near the truth. As to tlie readers for whom it was more Immediately designed, that they were Gentiles we might naturally presume
The Divinity, Humanity, JOHN L and 0£ice of Jesus Christ, from the lateness of the date; bui the multitude of explanations of things familiar to every Jew puts this beyond all question.
No doubt was ever thrown upon the genuineness and authenticity of this Gospel till about the close of the last cenury, nor were these embodied in any formal attack upon it till Bretschneider, in 1820, issued liis famous treatise •Probabilia,' <S:c.), the conclusions of which he afterwards was candid enough to admit had been satisfactorily disproved. To advert to these would be as painful as unnecessary; consisting as tliey mostly do of assertions regarding the Discourses of our Lord recorded in tliis Gospel wliicli are revoltlug to every spiritual mind. The Tubingen school lid their best, on their peculiar mode of reasoning, to galvanize into fresh life this theory of the post-Joauneun date f the Fourth Gospel ; and some Unitarian critics in tliis country still cling to it. But to use the striking language of 'AK OSTERZEE regarding similar speculations on the Third Gospel, 'Behold, the feet of them that shall carry it out idead are already at the door' (Acts 5. 9). Is there one mind of tlie least elevation of spiritual discernment that does not see in this Gospel marks of historical truth and a surpassing glory such as none of the other Gospels possess, brightly as they too attest their own verity; and who will not be ready to say that if not historically true, and true
Just as U stands, it never could have been by mortal man composed or conceived?
Of tlie peculiarities of this Gospel, we note here only two. The one is its reflective character. While the others are purely narrative, the Fourth Evangelist 'pauses, as it were, at every turn,' as Da Costa says (' Four Witnesses,' p.
234), 'at one time to give a reason, at another to fix the attention, to deduce consequences, or make applications, or to give utterance to the language of praise.' See chs. 2. 20, 21, 23-25 ; 4. 1, 2 ; 7. 37-;39 ; 11. 12, 13, 49-52 ; 21. 18, 19, 22, 23. The Other peculiarity of this Gospel is its supplementary character. By this, in the present instance, we mean something more than the studiousness with which he omits many most important particulars in our Lord's history, for no conceivable reason but that they were already familiar ^s household words to all his readers, through the tliree preceding Gospels, and liis substituting in place of these an immense quantity of the richest matter not found in the other Gospels. We refer here more particularly to the nature of the additions which distinguish this Gospel ; particularly the notices of the different Passovers which occurred during our Lord's public ministry, and the record of His teaching at Jerusalem, without whicli it is not too much to say that we could have had but a most imperfect conception either of the duration of His ministry or of the plan of it. But another feature of these additions is quite as noticeable and ndt less important. * We find,' to use again the words of Da Costa (pp. 238, 239), sliglitly abridged, 'only six of our
Ijord's miracles recorded in tliis Gospel, but these are all of the most remarkable kind, and surpass the rest in depth, Bpeclalty of application, and fulness of meaning. Of these six we find only one in the other three Gospels—the multiplication of the loaves. That miracle chiefly, it would seem, on account of the important instructions of which it fiirnished the occasion (ch. 6.), is here recorded anew. The five other tokens of Divine power are distinguished from among the many recorded in the three other Gospels by their furnishing a still higher display of power and command over the ordinary laws and course of nature. Thus we find recorded here the first of all tlie miracles that Jesus wrought—the changing of water into wine (ch. 2.), the cure of the nobleman's son at a distance (ch. 4.) ; of the numerous cures of the lame and the paralytic by the word of Jesus, only one—of the man impotent for thirty and eight yeart
(cU.5.); of the many cures of the blind, one only—of the man born blind tlie restoration of Lazarus, not from a death-bed, like Jairus' daughter, nor from a bier, like the widow of Naln's son, but from the grave, and after lying there four days, and there sinking into corruption (ch. 11.); and lastly, after His resurrection, the miraculous draught of fishes on the Sea of Tiberias (eh. 21). But tliese are all recorded chiefly to give occasion for the record of those astonishing discourses and conversations, alike with friends and with foes, with His disciples and with the multitude Which tliey drew forth.'
Other illustrations of the peculiarities of this Gospel will occur, and other points connected with it be adverted to, In the course of the Commentary.
CHAPTER I.
about certain mysterious distinctions in the Godhead, but solely to let the reader know Wtwitwas that in the fulness of time " was made flesh." After each verse, then, the reader must say, " It was He who is thus, and thus, and thus described. Who was made flesh." it. The same, &c.—.See what property of the Word the stress is laid upon —His eternal distinctness, in unity, from God—the Father. (John 1. 2.) 3. all thiugs, &c.—all things absolutely, as is evident from u. 10; 1 Corinthians 8. 6; Colossians 1. Ifi, 17; but put beyond question by what follows. "Without Him was ?io< one thing made (brought into being) tliat was made." This is a denial of the eternity and non-creation of matter, which was held by the whole thinking world outside of Judaism and Christianity : or rather, its proper creation, was never so much as dreamt of save by the children of revealed religion. 4. In Hlni was life—essentially and originally, as the previous verses sliow to be tlie meaning. Thus He is the Living Word, or, as He is called in 1 John 1. 1, 2, "the Word of Life." the life the light of men-all that in men which is true light—knowledie. Integrity, intelligent, willing subjection to God, love to Him and to their fellow-creatures, wisdom, purity, holy Joy, rational happiness—all this "light of men" has its fountain In the essential original "life" of "the Word."
Ver. 1-14. The Word Made Flesh. 1. In the beginning—of all time and created existence, for this Word gave
It being (V. 3, 10); therefore, "before the world was" (ch.
17. 5, 24); or, from all eternity, was tlie Word—He ivho is to God what man's word is to himself, the manifestnlion or expression of himself to those without him. (See on v. 18.) On the origin of this most lofty and now for ever consecrated title of Christ, this Is not tlie place to speak. It occurs only in tlie writings of this seraphic apostle, was with God—having a conscious personal existence distinct from
God ("as one is from tlie person he is "with"), but inseparable from Him and associated luilh Him {v. 18; ch. 17.
5; I John 1. 2), where "the Father" is used in the same sense as "God" here, was God—in substance and essence GOT); or was pf)S8esse<l of essential or proper divinity. Thus, each of these brief but pregnant statements Is the complement of the other, correcting any misapprehensions wliich the others miglitoccasion. Was the Word eternal f It was not the eternity of " the Father," but of a coii.3clous personal existence distinct from Him and associated tvith Him. Was the Word thus "with God?" It. was not the distinctness an<l the fellowship of another being, as If there were more Gods than one, but of One who was Himself God—in such sense that the «6«olule unity of the Godhead, the great principle of all religion, U only transferred from the region of shadowy aijstractlon to the region of essential life and love. But why all UtJa deflnltlon? Not to give us any abstract information
(1 John 1. .W; Psalm 36. 9.) 5. shiiieth lu dnrkiiexs, ir.— in this dark, fallen world, or in mankind " sitting in darkness and the shadow of death," with no ability to find the way either of truth or of holiness. In this thick darkness, and consequent intellectual and moral oblhiuity, "the light of the Word" ah'melh—by all the rays whether of naU