39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was xvi. 7.

s Is. xliv. 3. Joel ii. 28. ch.

Acts

ii. 17, 33, 38.

ch. xii. 16. & xvi. 7.

39. "Given" is expressed in B., Old Latin, Vulg., and Syriac.

drink, as the scripture saith." Others have joined "he that believeth on me" with "as the scripture saith," i.e., according to the teaching of scripture respecting Me, making it to mean "he that believeth on me as I am revealed in scripture," but both seem inadmissible.

39. "But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive," &c. This verse teaches us, on the authority of the Apostle himself, that the Lord, in His discourses in this Gospel, said things which none at the time could understand. They must be received in implicit faith, and they must wait His time for explanation. In this case they would not have to wait long. It was as difficult for them to connect this with the Pentecostal gift as it was to interpret the promise of the living Bread, that is, His Flesh and Blood, of the Eucharist.

For consider what was the Pentecostal gift of the Spirit. It was the gift of the Spirit as proceeding from the Person, the human Nature of the risen and glorified Lord. It depended on His Atoning Death, His Resurrection, and His Ascension. It was the same Spirit as was given of old, but given through a new channel, the glorified Body of the God-Man; and for a new purpose, to unite men to Christ, and make them partakers of His Life and His Character.

This verse teaches us, also, that, however the Holy Ghost might have been given of old, He was given so abundantly through Christ, and for such high purposes, that it could be said that before Pentecost the Spirit was not yet [given]. If the word "given" be not in the original it must be understood, as there is no other way of completing the sense. The difference between the two dispensations seems to be that, under the old, He was given singly to individuals to act on their old nature only, whilst, under the new, He was given to the whole mystical body, the Church, through its Head, very abundantly. [Titus iii. 6, 1 Cor. xii. 7, 13.]

u

40

Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is "the Prophet.

Deut. xvii.

15, 18. ch. i, 21. & vi. 14.

1 ch. iv. 42.

& vi. 69.

y ver. 52. ch.

i. 46.

41 Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee?

y

42 Hath not the scripture said, That Christ

1 Ps. cxxxii. 11. cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town

Jer. xxiii. 5.

Mic. v. 2.

Matt. ii, 5.

Luke ii. 4.

a 1 Sam. xvi.

1, 4.

b ver. 12. ch.

ix. 16. & x. 19.

40. "Many." More probably "some" (N, B., D., L., Vulg., Old Latin, and some versions). "Many" read by later Uncials, Cureton and Peshito Syriacs, and most Cursives.

40. "Many of the people therefore. . . . Of a truth this is the Prophet. Others said, This is the Christ." Notice how here, as before, Christ subdues hearts prepared to receive Him by the unqualified assertion of His highest claims. He sets Himself forth as the one Bestower and Channel of the Spirit of God, and some exclaim "He is the Prophet," the Prophet like unto Moses, others "This is the Christ." Did then the Jews of that day make a difference between the "Prophet" of Moses and the "Christ" of David, and the later prophets? We can hardly think so. The Coming One is set forth in prophecy under many names and figures. Some might choose to call Him by one name, and some by another; and yet, if they were questioned, all would be found to mean the same. There was assuredly but one Person looked for as the final Revealer of God.

41. "But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee?" It appears from this and other places, that the memory of the signs which had attended the Lord's Birth, the angels appearing to the shepherds, and the visit of the Magi, had long been lost, or that if there was a tradition of them they were in no respect connected with One Who, having lived so long in Nazareth, was supposed to have been born there. The miracles which Christ wrought and the power of His discourses should have taught them, if they had been at all in earnest about the coming of God's special Messenger, that it was their duty to ascertain all facts respecting One Who had such credentials.

43. "So there was a division." The word rendered division

с

44 And some of them would have taken him; but no man laid hands on him.

c ver. 30.

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 man spake & Matt. vii. 29. like this man.

47 Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived?

48 Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him?

49 But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed.

ech. xii. 42.
Acts vi. 7.
1 Cor. i. 20, 26.
& ii. 8.

46. "Spake like this man." MSS. of Neutral Text read, "so spake." Revisers have adopted the reading.

(schisma, schism) seems to imply more than a difference of opinion. The Vulgate translates it, "Therefore there arose a dissension in the multitude for him, and so some of them would have taken him," i.e. some of the multitude sided with the chief priests and Pharisees, and would have assisted them to apprehend Him.

45, 46. "Then came the officers .... never man spake like this man." Here then the chief priests had the most unprejudiced testimony, which they could possibly receive, as to the power and majesty of Christ's words. Such things as these made them inexcusable in not looking, on the one hand, to the prophetical intimations respecting the Messiah, to see whether they did not correspond to the witness which Christ gave of His relation to God; and, on the other hand, to His character and mighty works, whether they did not altogether accord with what He said of Himself as the Son of God.

47, 48. "Then answered them . . . . Have any of the rulers," &c. This shows the evil of believing secretly, and not having the courage to confess our convictions. If Nicodemus, and those whom he represented, when he said, "We know that thou art a teacher come from God," had only borne faithful witness, the enemies of Christ would not have been able to say as much as this.

49. "This people who knoweth not the law are cursed." Accord

50 Nicodemus saith unto them, ('he that came † to Jesus by night, being one of them,)

f ch. iii. 2.

+ Gr. to him.

g Deut. i. 17.

& xvii. 8, &c. & xix. 15.

h Is. ix. 1, 2. Matt. iv. 15. ch. i. 46. ver. 41.

་་

51 Doth our law judge any man, before it hear him, and know what he doeth?

52 They answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and look: for "out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.

53 And every man went unto his own house.

50. He that came to Jesus by night." Perhaps, rather, "He that came to Him before (B., L.); but there is much uncertainty about the words within brackets. Vulgate reads, ad eum nocte; Syriac as in Text Receptus.

51. "Before it hear him." "Except it first hear from himself” (Revisers); nisi prius audierit ab ipso (Vulg.).

ing to their views this following of Christ was only to be explained by ignorance. They look down upon the people with proud contempt. Nowhere was the pride of scholars greater than in Israel. They called the people of the land sheketz, an abomination, and one of their proverbs was, "The ignorant is impious, only the learned shall have part in the Resurrection."

50, 51. "Nicodemus saith unto them. . . . Doth our law judge any man," &c. These words "Have any of the rulers," &c., seem to have touched the conscience of Nicodemus, who (apparently) without confessing that he believed in Jesus, yet demands that He should be treated with something like justice. "Doth our law judge any man," &c.?

52. "They answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Galilee ? Even this slight concession to fairness and equity they would not tolerate. "Art thou also of Galilee?" they rejoined.

"Out of Galilee ariseth no prophet." This appeal to history has been supposed to be false, and has been used to disparage the correctness of St. John's narrative. Four prophets are supposed to have come out of Galilee-Elijah, Nahum, Hosea, and Jonah; but, as Godet shows, of these Elijah was of Gilead, Hosea of Samaria, Nahum of Elkosh, a place unknown, and the place of Jonah's birth, Gath Hephir, probably was not within the bounds of the original Galilee.

CHAP. VIII.

ESUS went unto the mount of Olives.

JES

2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

vii. 53—viii. 1-11. The only Manuscript of the first importance which contains this paragraph of the woman taken in adultery is D. (but Tregelles remarks that its text here is very dissimilar to others). The later Uncials, F., G., H., K., U., г., contain it. E., M., A contain it, but marked as doubtful by asterisks. It is omitted by N, B., T. (the latter is supposed by Tischendorf to be of the fifth century, and contains this part of St. John, omitting this section). A. is wanting from John vi. 50 to viii. 52, but by measuring the space it is certain that it could not possibly have had this section. So also C. L., A. have a vacant space here, so that the writers omit, but are conscious of the omission. It is thus rejected by N, A., B., C., L. It is omitted by an extraordinary number of Cursives (among these the most important ones), and relegated by a large number to the end of the Gospel. It is omitted by the Old Latin (a. f.). It is wanting in the best MSS. of the Peshito (though inserted in some printed editions as Leusden and Schaaf's, who in a note enumerate the editions in which it is wanting); the Cureton Syriac is here deficient. It is wanting also in most ancient versions. Chrysostom and Cyril take no notice of it whatsoever in their commentaries. Tregelles writes: "Respecting this section all the more ancient writers are silent." With this array of evidence against it, it is impossible to regard it as a genuine part of St. John's Gospel, though it bears every mark of being an account by an eye-witness inserted in later copies, but still very ancient ones. The authorities for it are Latin only.

All the evidence by which we judge respecting the genuineness of any passage of the New Testament, is against the retention of ch. vii. 53—viii. 12, as an original part of St. John's Gospel. Whether, however, it be not a true account of a remarkable incident in our Lord's ministry is another matter altogether. It bears every mark of being a primitive tradition, but not inserted in the Gospel as first published. I think we are bound to treat it as a record of what actually took place. And as in most copies of the New Testament it is inserted here, this seems the proper place for us to comment on its teaching.

1. "Jesus went up unto the mount of Olives." The fact of the Mount of Olives being mentioned nowhere else in this Gospel is taken, by most editors, as a sign of doubtfulness.

2. "He sat down and taught them." This was the posture of