At the close of ch. 3 we revert, apparently in words of the Bai)tist, really in words of the Evan- gelist, to the idea of the Spirit as bestowed on Jesus by God. He whom God sent speaks the words of God ; He does this, and can do it, because God gives not the Spirit by measure to Him (S**). Here the idea is like tliat in 1 Co 2" : 'As no man knows the thiiiu^ nf a man save the .siiirit of a man wliicl] is in liini. even so the things of God no man knows, but the Spirit of God.' It is in virtue of having this Spirit, not partially but completely, that Jesus speaks the words of God ; in distinction from those who had only partial and transient illumination, He has received the Spirit in its ful- ness and is the Word incarnate. To have the Spirit in this sense and measure, to be the Word made flesh, and to have all things put into His hand by the Father (3'^'- 5-°), are one and the same thing.
The absence of any allusion to the Spirit in ch. 4 (where Jesus ofi'ers t^ie ' living water ') and in ch. 5 (where we are told that the Son gives life to whom He will : with fMOTroic?;', v.=', cf. St. Paul's Tpevfi.a fuoTToioOj', 1 Co 15''*, and Jn 6*') is very remarkable ; but it has an exact parallel in the complete absence of the Spirit from Ho 6. When we come to ch. 6 it is different. Tlu^ reference here to the Supper is as unmistakable as that to Baptism in ch. 3. The discourse starts from the bread of life, but the general idea of feeding on Christ or living on Him by faith, is specified as it proceeds, in agreement with the ritual of the Supper, into eating His flesh and drinking His blood. In the most intense and vehement expressions of this kind, indeed, there is never anything more than in v.-"(' He that bilicM'th hath etern.al life') or in v." ('lie that .■'ifr//i i,ir shall live by me'). It is ncit only cdnrcivalile, but highly probable, especially in view cjf a passage like 1 Co 10, that when tl'iis ili:i|itcr was written materialistic and superstitions i.Iras about the sacrament of the Supper were already current in
the Church, and that the Evangelist has the ex- press design of correcting them. He has no hesita- tion in using the boldest liturgical language : he speaks of eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the Son of Man in a tone whi(-li .seems almost intended to challenge, if not to defy, inli'lligence ; he recognizes by doing so that only ianiiuage of poetic intensity like this, to whicli it. is al.surdto say that a symbol is imly a .symbul, is appropriate in worslii]. ; yit jnst as in ch. 3 water is mentioned only <inic, ami I In- Spirit afterwards spoken of inde- pendently M. hrir any risk of religious materialism is s%\e|.t. a« ay in the words, ' It is the spirit which gives life . . . the worils th.at I have spoken to you are s/,inl ami are lifr. ' (v.e=). There is no deprecia- sacianieiit here any more than in ch. 3,
Itaf " ^ ^ . _ ■
a safeguard a-aiiis( (he 'super- It is iKilIiini; material, no res lich the l.elievrr A,-]H-uds for donl.t Clirisl, tin- Christ who as true lood and His blood as in all llie truth of His hnmanit'
tion of
and no
to it ; but ther
stitious abuse of i
sacrui/ioiti, on v
eternal life. IS'i
speaks of His lUs
true drink (V.'"), is, m all I lie truth ot Ills Mnmanity
and His I'.ission, the meat and drink of the soul,
and the believer realizes this in the sacrament;
but it is not through the material elements that
Christ sustains sinritual life ; if His words are read
in this sense, their character is misconceived ; they
are taken out of the region of spirit and life to
which they belong, and in which alone Christ
vivifies men.
One of the most characteristic passages on the Spirit is V"-. On the last day of the Feast of Tabernacles, Jesus stands in the Temple and cries, ' If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink. The words are on a level with those in ch. 4, in which He promises the living water to the woman at the well. But here Jesus goes further. 'He that believeth in me,' He adds, 'as said the Scripture, Gut of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.' Without discussing the reference to ' Scripture,' what does this mean? The Evan- gelist himself interprets the words : ' This he said of the Spirit which those who believed on him were to receive, for as yet there was no Spirit {oiliroi yap fiv iri'eO/j.a), for Jesus was not yet glorified.' Tliis is clearly written from the standpoint of experi- ence and fulfilment. After Jesus was glorified through death and resurrection, those who be- lieved had experience of His power such as they had never had before. They had owed Him much while they were with Him on earth ; He had in a sense satisfied their own spiritual needs (6"*'-) ; He had given them the bread of life to eat and the living water to drink. But now He did more. He came to them in a power which enabled them to be witnesses to Him ; others obtained the Spirit through them ; the living water which He had given them overflowed from them as from an in- exhaustilde spring. Whether this is what Jesus meant or not, it is true ; it answers to the facts of the case as the whole of the NT reveals them. Pentecost was inconceivable to the Evangelist ex- cept as the sequel to the Passion and Exaltation of Jesus ; the possession of the Spirit which is the characteristic of the new era is determined in point of fact by these antecedents. We have seen the same connexion of ideas already in the chapters on the sacraments : the Passion of Christ is as un- mistakably present in 3'= and 6"-=" as in 1'". It s(>ems very uraluilous, then, to argue with Wendt that till' JAanjili I has mistaken Jesus, and that our l.oid mraii no more here than in ch. 4.