it was hasty; according to the mere appearance LECT. and surface of things. It was not based upon XXX. careful examination, thought, and enquiry: the rash effect of a first impression, instead of the calm deliberate result of sober reflection and integrity; those eminently judicial attributes in which our Lord delicately hints these judges of their people to be wanting. We see a peculiar propriety in His remarks when we consider to whom they were in particular addressed. A true definition of judgment would have an especial fitness when uttered in the audience of unrighteous judges. The whole of the passage is an appeal to common candour, which nothing stifles more than sectarian prejudice.

LECTURE XXXI.

CHRIST TEACHETH IN THE TEMPLE.

LECT.

XXXI.

JOHN Vii. 25-36.

CERTAIN of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, who were let into the secrets of the council, or who at least were well aware of the rulers' deadly disposition towards Jesus, of which the body of the people were at this time ignorant, express to one another their surprise at His bold front, and their utter remissness; and they half suspect some change of purpose or opinion: possibly, after all, our rulers may be coming round to acknowledge and adopt Him. Him. And they And they begin to think whether they would be right to do so. Our Evangelist briefly notes the chain of reasoning passing through their minds, (if indeed that which proceeds upon such false premises can be called reasoning,) and expressed to one another in their mutual but confidential communications. But they presently correct their former half supposition as to a change of mind in the rulers regarding Him. Their seeming toleration of Him made them half imagine this;

a Not the oxλos, as composed of the whole body of dwellers at Jerusalem, and the visitors there from Galilee and elsewhere on the occasion of this festival; but certain of those former, the select few who in every city interest themselves in national or municipal politics.

"Qui scirent quid in urbe ageretur." Bengel.

XXXI.

but His utter want of qualification, according to LECT. their ideas, makes them at once dismiss the unwarrantable supposition.

We may observe in their statement a twofold mistake: first, as to the origin of this Jesus; they imagined Him to be the son of the carpenter Joseph at Nazareth: and, secondly, besides their mistake as to the parentage and birthplace of Jesus, they were misled by their "blind guides," and so mistaken, as to the origin of the Christ. There was a notion prevalent that His origin would be veiled in obscurity, and that He would burst suddenly upon an astonished world. Though they knew and admitted that in Bethlehem He should be born', according to the prophet Micah, yet, as another prophet, Isaiah, had declared His generation to be unknown, they feel convinced that the case cannot suit this man, whose generation they knew. But while we notice their twofold error, we may note also, as in most errors, the truth which underlies. Their data were true, their conclusions false. It was not the Scripture which was at fault, but their own misinterpretation of the same. But observe farther the unreasonableness and inconsistency and self-contradictions of these men who were not willing to believe in Jesus. who here say, "we know this

The very men man whence he

is," say elsewhere, "As for this fellow we know not from whence he is."

b v. 42. This is decisive to shew that they here referred not, as might appear, to birthplace, but to origin. e Is. liii. 8. "Hauserant autem hunc errorem Judæi ex Prophetarum testimoniis perperam intellectis." Beza. See Bp. Butler, Analogy, Part ii. ch. 7. e ch. ix. 29.

LECT.

f

ye can

Our Lord's answer here is not contradictory XXXI. to His statement elsewhere, though now He says, "ye know whence I am," and there, “ not tell whence I come:" for in the one place He spake of heavenly knowledge, but in the other He speaks of mere earthly acquaintanceship. They knew Him as an inhabitant of Galilee, and an occasional dweller at Jerusalem. "In this sense they knew whence He was;' but further than this they knew not." They knew Him as the son, as was supposed, of Joseph the carpenter of Nazareth; but they knew Him not, they would not know Him, as the true Son of God from heaven 1.

Their communications were in secret, one to another; but our Lord's answer is open, aloud, outspoken: "then cried Jesus in the temple as He taught." He answered them openly what they had asked one another secretly; thus fulfilling another Scripture, "Lo, there is not a word in my tongue, but Thou, O Lord, knowest it altogether;" giving them this incidental proof of His Divine omniscience, and that He was indeed what He claimed to be, the Very Son of God. open teaching too He could afterwards appeal, "I spake openly to the world: I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothingi."

fch. viii. 14.

Alford in loc.

To His

h Grotius interprets: "Puto legendum cum interrogatione, Itane vero me nostis quo sim patre genitus? Nec aliter puto legisse Tertullianum, qui Ad Praxeam sic citat: Neque me scitis unde sim, interrogationem negative exponens. Christus sicut ab Aqua vulgari ad spiritualem, a Cibo corporis ad cibum animi, ita a Patre terrestri ad cœlestem sermonem traducit." ich. xviii. 20.

XXXI.

And what was the subject of His cry, His open LECT. and convincing answer? It is to this effect: Though ye know me and my whereabout, this is no reason why ye should reject and resist me : for I am not come of myself; I am no upstart, no unauthorized person, running without being sent; but I have a commission; I am sent on a mission by Him that is true, whom ye know not for had ye known Him, ye would have received and recognised me: but I know Him; I have intimate relations with Him, and "the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me1." The Lord too may hint at their readiness to receive pretenders, as their subsequent history shewed, whilst they rejected Him who alone could produce the Divine credentials and testimony; as He said before, "I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive

Periphrases of this kind our Lord frequently employed, where direct mention would have been attended with direct danger without any commensurate advantage.

"The matter here impressed on them is the genuineness, the reality of the fact; that Jesus was sent, and there was One who sent Him.... Objectively, not subjectively, true; 'really existent,' not 'truthful, which the word aλnowds will not bear." Alford.

See ch. viii. 26. and Lect. 35. The anons there not being less objective, but perhaps still more comprehensive than the aλnoids here.

1 ch. v. 36. "And because He is from the Father, therefore He is called by those of the Nicene Council in their Creed, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God. The Father is God, but not of God; Light, but not of Light: Christ is God, but of God; Light, but of Light. There is no difference or inequality in the nature or essence, because the same in both; but the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ hath that essence of Himself, from none; Christ hath the same not of Himself, but from Him." Pearson on the Creed, Art. ii. And so Augustine,

Tr. xxxi. 4.