•The phrase used, hk ri «•>«► yj»^^«u* warrxc, does not nccess.irily imply iupematural knowledge ; but it records the •trouij impression which the Master's way of dealing with men hftd made upon His disciples.
(4**). A feeling of reserve and reverence is grow- ing up, which completely prevents all curiona questions. Their conception is developing as their experience widens.
We now come to the period at which hostility, continually increasing in fierceness, is caused by the acts and words of the l>ord. The first scene is at an unnamed feast at Jerusalem, probably occurring some time before the seconil I'.as.sover of our Lord's ministrj'. The controversy arises over the law of the Sabbath. A man who had been cri|>pled with a disea.se for 3S years is cured, and told by our Lord to take up the bed on which he is lying, and carry it away. This was, of course, a breach of the Sabbath law, and it seems, from the expression used (5'" raOra iirolti tv ffa^^dnp), to have been somewhat typical of our Lord's action. In answer to the Jews, the Lord develoiia at length the relation between Himself and the Father ; His answer, in fact, amounts to a claim to stand in the same supreme position as the Father in regard to the law in question. 'My Father worketh up till now, and I work ' (5").
The discourse which follows is of great import- ance for our present purpose. In it the Lord, speaking first of Himself under the title of 'the Son,' athrms the absolute and indissoluble unity of the will of the Father and the Son. The Son certainly has derived Being ; but the Father has given Ilim to have life in Himself (5^) ; in what He does He fulfils the Fathers commission, which includes the power of giving life even to the dead, and the prerogative of judgment (5'-'- -■'■ ^- "). This unity of^ action is based on love (5°°), and carries with it the right on the part of the Son to honour co-ordinate with that of the Father (5^). It is obvious that this claim, if substantiated, com- pletely meets the ch.arge of independent and .self- willecf defiance of a l.iw imposed b^' the Father. In 5* the Lord identifies Himself with the Son, and proceeds to deal with the question of evidence. Here He uses the idea characteristic of this Gospel — witness. This teaching. He saj's, is not a bare assertion of His own ; He has evidence, con- sentient witness to establish it (5^=), besides the inner certainty of His own knowledge. There is first the witness of John (5^"^) temporary and limited, but bearing on the truth. Secondly, there is the witness of the works, done in pursu- ance of the Fatlier's commission (5'"). Thirdly, there is the witness of the F'atlier (o", see below, p. 686), and, lastly, the witness of the Scriptures. From them will come the really damning c-liaiges against the Jews ; they have disbelieved the tcritings of Moses, how can they believe Christ's ivords'i (5'»- •"•■").
St. John does not chronicle the effect of this discourse, either upon the Jews or upon the apostles, important as it obviously is. The next scene does lead to a decisive and significant result. Here, again, it is important to recall the circum- stances under which the scene took place. It occurred immediately after the miracle of the Feeding of the Five "Thou-sand. The persons thus fed seem to have been a body of Galila?an pilgrims going up to, or returning from, the Passover (cf. 6''). The result of the miracle is th.it the pilgrims conceive the i)lan of seizing Jesus and making Him a king ; that is, they see in Him the fulfil- ment of their very uninstructed Messianic hopes. The following day the fact emerges in a dialogue with the Lord that they have compared His act w ith that of Moses, who fed the people in the wilder- ness, and that their allegiance will depend on Christ's rivalling this (6^'). I<"rom this point the discourse takes its start. With increasing clear- ness our Lord points to Himself as the fulfilment of the acted prophecy of Moses. The Jews (who
JOHIf, APOSTLE
JOHN, APOSTLE
681
appear at v.") protest against the claim implied in tins ; but this protest only leads the Lord to the still more startling assertions, that life in any true sense depends upon connexion with Himself, and that this connexion is established by eating His Flesh and drinking His Blood. And He ends by definitely connecting this with the tj'pe of the manna in the wilderness (G", cf. 6'"). The result of this discourse was to separate the Twelve sharply from other followers: these are puzzled, and walk no more with Him ; the apostles, by the mouth of St. Peter, confess Him as the Holy One of Clod (G"").
After this scene, the development of the hostility is comparatively rapid ; there are practically only three more occasions described. The first occurs at the Feast of Tabernacles. In his account of this feast St. John has shown us a perfect turmoil of conflicting ideas and surmises as to the new prophet, witli a background of firm hostility on the part of the ruling class among the Jews. With the various problems and difficulties which were raised by tlie various parties, we have nothing to do ; the decisive utterance from which the discourse or dialogue follows is the phrase, ' I am the Light of the world ' (8'-'). The subsequent passage is of great diiliculty. Kmphasis is laid again upon the witness of the Father (8"- ") and the coincidence of the works with the will and commission of the Father (8^- ^) ; and the result was that many believed on Him (8**). But an attempt made uy the Lord to olVer true freedom to those who had believed Him, rouses their national feelings, so that when Chri.st, after an agitated argument, makes a claim which they understand as coequality with God, they take up stones to cAst at Him as a blasphemer.* In the second of the scenes in question, at the feast of Dedication (reading {yhero Ttyre in 10'--), a similar discussion is piesented to us arising out of a miracle performed upon a Sabbath-day, and involving by its method a ureach of the law. The Jews deUnitely challenge Jesus with the question of His nature (10^). He refuses to answer directly, but refers again to tlie works ( 1(P) and to the Fathers will, ending with the strongest assertion yet made of His union with the lather, ^i xai A jrarrjp Iv iaiitv (10*). In consequence of this He has to withdraw from Jerusalem ; but St. John notes that many believed, seeing how He fulfilled the prophecy of the Baptist (lO"-"). The last scene is that of the raising of Lazarus and its immediate consequence-s. A miracle such as this could not have failed to produce an effect ; and St. John notes that it is the decisive event which leads the authorities to determine on the death of Jesus, and produces the enthusiasm among the crowds which is expressed in the Triumphal Entry (cf. 11"- « 12"-'»). At the end of ch. 12 St. John solemnly sums up the result of the mission of Christ ; the evidence of signs had largely failed (12") ; there were many even of the rulers who really believed, but did not dare to express it (12'-), anil in all this St. John sees the fnililinent of the prophecy of Isaiah, when 'he saw his glory (i.e. of Jesus), and spake concerning him.'