100 Verse 1.―Most commentators (including the Reformers) follow Irenæus, Eusebius, and Theodoret, etc., in taking the feast here spoken of as a Passover. Jerome, followed by Norris, thought that it was Pentecost; Neander, Meyer, Weiss, M’Clellan and Milligan, Purim; Zahn (reading the article), Tabernacles, As to the number of Passovers during the ministry, see note 52.
101 Verse 2.― “There is.” Blass (Expository Times, July, 1907) followed Bengel in accepting this as an indication of the date of the writing of the Gospel, as earlier than that of the Roman devastation.
102 Verse 8.― “Took up his couch.” The simplicity of the process has been brought home to those visiting the recent Palestine Exhibitions. See Schor. “Palestine and the Bible,” p. 38. As to its taking place on the Sabbath day, (verse 10), cf. Jer. 17:2121Thus saith the Lord; Take heed to yourselves, and bear no burden on the sabbath day, nor bring it in by the gates of Jerusalem; (Jeremiah 17:21).
103 Verse 13.―For the apparently miraculous withdrawal here, cf. 10:39, as well as Luke 4:3030But he passing through the midst of them went his way, (Luke 4:30). The word used in this place is a solecism. See Westcott or Govett, in loc.
104 Verse 14.― “Sin no more”: a note of our Lord’s omniscience.
105a Verse 22.―As to alleged inconsistency with 15:2, see note there. The ascription of “judgment” to the Son (cf. 5:27) is by no means peculiar to the fourth Gospel. See Matt. 7:2222Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? (Matthew 7:22) and other references in Turton, p. 448.
106 Verse 24 f.―Do Wette, Olshausen, Meyer and Plummer explain this resurrection similarly to the expositor. The passage has been misused by such as those spoken of in 2 Tim. 2:1818Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. (2 Timothy 2:18).
“Cometh.” For this present tense, cf. 4:36, 6:46 f., 54, and 12:25. In the last passage the future is used coordinately.
Observe that the Lord speaks of Himself a second time definitely as “Son of God” (see note 70 above, and cf. 9:35, 10:36, 11:4). It is a favorite notion of critics that such is language merely of the Evangelist.
107 Verse 26.―The all-important words are “in Himself” (cf. 6:57). Athanasius (“Orations against Arians,” iii.) says: “The word gave shows us that the Son is a distinct Person from the Father; but the use of the word ‘so’ is a clear proof of His being the natural Son, equal to, co-essential with the Father... As the Father hath, so hath the Son from the Father, self-existence” (cf. note 8, ad fin.). Observe the aorist ἔδωκεν, “gave,” not the perfect δέδωκεν, “hath given,” for it transcends time.
108 Verse 28 f.―The difference of time in the two judgments is recognized by Meyer and Beyschlag. An objection made that the two resurrections take place in the same hour is rebutted by verse 25, where the spiritual resurrection which has gone on for nearly two millenniums is also called an “hour.” A resurrection of the wicked does not emerge so clearly from the Synoptic accounts. That there is to be no general contemporaneous resurrection was foreshadowed by Ps. 1:5: “The wicked shall not arise in the judgment, nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous.” See LXX. and Vulgate (resurgent). The German critics no more apprehend the sense of קוּם there than English translators, who alike adhere to “stand.” But cf. Matt. 12:4141The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. (Matthew 12:41), where all assign to ἀναστήσονται, in the same form of words, its natural meaning. The usual idea is that the Old Testament uniformly predicates resurrection of the righteous alone; but the point is that they who have done good and those that have done evil will not rise together. Cf. Simcox on Rev. 20: 5. The Pharisees supposed that only the righteous would live again (Josephus, “Antiquities,” 18:14; 2 Macc. 6:26; and other references in Bousset, “Religion of Judaism,” p. 259).
The present passage was so inconvenient to the Tübingen school that Scholten resorted to the usual makeshift suggestion of interpolation―which feeble resource has had to do duty for several others since (see, e.g., amongst recent writers, Briggs, p. 145).
109 Verse 30.―See note on 4:6.
109a Verse 31.―As to supposed conflict of this verse with 8:14, see note there. Observe the use of the word “witness” throughout verses 31-39. It occurs, in one form or other, some fifty times in this Gospel; “believe” about one hundred times.
110 Verse 35.―Cf. Sirach, 48:1.
110a Verse 36.― “Witness greater” representing μείζω, accepted by Blass, who understands “witness in greater measure.” μείζων would mean “I the witness, a greater,” etc. (see Zahn).
As to the evidence of “works” or “signs,” see 3:2 and references there.
111 Verse 37.―The distinction of this witness from that of the Scriptures (verse 38) is maintained by Chrysostom, Bengel, and others, who refer it to the Lord’s baptism, etc. Ryle (following Calvin, Tholuck, Alford, and Burgon) preferred to regard it as coalescing with the testimony borne by the Old Testament writings.
112 Verse 39.―The word ἐραυνᾶτε is taken as indicative by Cyril, Erasmus, Beza, Bengel. Meyer. Olshausen, Tholuck, De Wette, Burgon, Kenrick, Godet, Westcott (citing Hillel), Plummer, Govett, Kennedy, Manning, McRory, and Carr; as imperative by Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius, Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Gro tins, a Lapide, Stier, Luthardt, Alford, Wordsworth, Ryle, M’Clellan, and Field. The last-named very judicious scholar remarks that we should not stop short at “eternal life,” as if the ο̋τι had no influence beyond those words. The revisers, however, having decided to give up the A.V., their rendering will probably establish itself. J. N. Darby, in his versions, had adopted the indicative. Certainly the words “ye think” suggest it.
“Life eternal.” This was a later development accepted by the Pharisees (Watson, “Inspiration,” p. 142).
113 Verse 43.― “Another.” Bousset has rightly taken this of Antichrist, not of Bar Kochba (A.D. 132), as Pfleiderer, followed by Schmiedel (col. 21For I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you, and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh; 2That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ; 3In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. 4And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words. 5For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ. 6As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: 7Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. 8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. 9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. 10And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: 11In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. (Colossians 2:1‑12),551). The absurdity, again, of applying these words to the Popedom is clear from several New Testament passages, commencing with 2 Thess. 2. The Popes have never come in their own name, but in that of Peter; they own the Father and the Son (1 John 2:18-2318Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 19They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. 20But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. 21I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth. 22Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 23Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. (1 John 2:18‑23)), and Jesus Christ coming in the flesh (1 John 4:22Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: (1 John 4:2)). Bousset, in the “Encyclopaedia Britannica” (vol. i., col. 177), following his work on Antichrist, takes 2 Thess. 2:1-121Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 5Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 7For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. 8And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 9Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thessalonians 2:1‑12) as his starting point; he sees that the Antichrist must be a Jew, and that any “praeterist or historical interpretation is out of the question” (col. 181). Swete, in like manner, thinks that the “second beast” of Rev. 131And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. 2And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. 3And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. 4And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? 5And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. 6And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. 7And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. 8And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. 9If any man have an ear, let him hear. 10He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints. 11And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. 12And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. (Revelation 13:1‑12) is in some sense Antichrist (“Commentary on Apocalypse,” ad loc.).
114 Verse 44.―The force of the aorist πιοτεῦσαι is well brought out by Abbott: “to reach the threshold of belief” (§ 2,496 f.; cf. note on 12:39).
115 Verse 46 f.―In connection with the supremacy attached to Holy Scripture by our Lord, it may be helpful to consider what has been said by a few recent writers of repute on FAITH in general, and, in particular, its relation to SCRIPTURE. In the valuable Note 2 appended to Westcott’s “Historic Faith” (pp. 73-77) he discriminates “a conviction of truth [knowledge], a quickening of love [feeling], a readiness for action [will],” which last is represented by “an advance into the unseen... wholly different from a belief in past facts which rests on testimony [intellectual assent].” The present Bishop of Birmingham, in his “Creed of the Christian” (p. 33), has said: “In order to act decisively, we must believe decisively,” which is a repetition, in other words, of the prophet’s teaching: “If ye do not hold fast, ye will not stand fast” (Isa. 7:99And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah's son. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established. (Isaiah 7:9)). Dr. Gore, inquiring as to the essence of faith, answers that it is “the open hand or open mouth of the human soul” (p. 53). Next, where does Scripture come in? Dr. J. H. Newman shall reply. In a letter printed in Miss Mozley’s “Letters and Correspondence” of this eminent man (vol. ii., p. 113), which he wrote to Hurrell Froude in 1835, we find: “The more I read of Athanasius, Theodoret, etc., the more I see that the ancients did make the Scriptures the basis of belief.... The Fathers do certainly rest on Scripture, as upon two tables of stone.” There is, happily, no reason for supposing that when he went over to Rome Newman had to abandon this conviction. And so we are prepared for what Professor Herrmann (a Ritzschlian) says in his “Faith and Morals” (p. 18) “The common idea [of Faith] is an acknowledgment of the whole Bible as God’s Word and true, coupled with firm trust in its narratives and doctrines.” He adds, critically: “That is no more than the Catholic idea of Faith,” but then, as he says, Tradition is annexed to it by “Catholics.” This it is which makes all the difference, for Superstition, which is purely carnal, tends to swamp Faith. “For the writer of this Gospel,” says Inge, “Faith is not an acceptance of a proposition upon evidence. It is the resolution to follow Christ wherever He may lead us” (“Christian Mysticism,” p. 50). See, further, note on 6:69; also Green, iii., pp. 253-276; and chapter 4 of Sir R. Anderson’s “The Gospel and its Ministry.”