The Pulpit Commentary — John — Volume 1 — Section 189

Son (lleb. iii. 6); (b) the Law could not justify,-it "worked wrath" (Rom. iv. 15); (c) the inferiority of the Law is implied in its useful pedagogic function, for" it was the schoolmaster to lead us to Christ" (Gal. iii. 24); (rl) it imposed a heavy yoke of service. (:.!) Yet we a.re not to infer that, under the dispensation of Law, there was no grace or truth for Old Testament saints. They were justified by grace like New Testa- ment saints (Rom. iv.), and their spiritual experience showed, especially in the Psalter, their experience of both grace and truth. But the characteristic spirit of the two dispensations is different. The one had a twilight duskiness, which disaweared before the noonday radiance of the other. 2. Mark tl,e dutinguishing glory of the go,pel. "Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." This is the first mention of this name in the Gospel, and it seems fitly to link together the two dispensations; for Jesus is the no.me of the humanity, and Christ is the name that marks his relation to the old dis- pensation. (1) The treasury of grace is in Christ. 'l'ake away Moses from the Law, and yet the Law abides in all its authority; but take away Christ from the gospel, and there is no more grace or truth for man. (a) He gives the gospel of grace. (b) His salvation is entirely by grace. (c) He plants grace in the hearts of men. (2) The treasury of truth is in Christ. (a) He is the Truth itself, as he is the Light (ver. 4). (b) The gospel reveals the" truth as it is in Jesus." (c) He is the fulfilment of all the types of the old dispensation. III. CHRIST THE ONLY REVEALER OF THE FATHER. "No man bath ever yet seen God; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he bath declared him." '.i'he apostle intends here to develop the idea of the fulness of truth as it is in Christ. 1. God 1'.s invisible to man in this life. The eye of mortal man could not bear the sight of God. "There shall no man see me and live" (Exod. xxxiii. 20). (1) The theophanies of the Old Testament were those of the Son, not of the Father. (2) It is a useless question to discuss whether man will ever see God even in heaven. All the allusions to God's invisibility in Scripture apply to man's mortal condition on earth. It is implied that the next life will bring to us the sight of Gorl (1 John iii. 2). 2. God is revealed to us by his Son. (1) As he is" the Brightness of the Father's glory, the express Image of his Person" (Heb. i. 3). " He that hatb seen me bath seen the Father." "God was manifest in the flesh." (2) He is the Revealer of the Father's truth, wisdom, love, holiness, and power. He is, above all, the Revealer of the way of salvation. (3) He is the Revealer, because he is in the bosom of the Father. (a) The Son reveals God, not simply as God, but as the Father. (b) Because he is the only begotteD Son of the Father, dwelling in his bosom, (er.) implying oneness of essence, (fJ) oneness of counsel, (-y) oneness of affection. IV. CONCLUSION. 1. We ought to give due honour to the Son. We cannot think too highly of him. 2. We ought to listen to his words with holy awe, and obey him with all the sincerity of our hearts. Vera. 19-28.-The second testimony of John the Baptist. A deputation, consisting of the priests and Levites from Jerusalem, the ecclesiastical centre of Judaism, visited the Baptist as he was baptizing disciples at Bethany beyond Jordan, for the purpose of ascertaining whether he was t.he Messiah or the forerunner, of ancient prophecy. The scene is interesting as the place where the first disciples were made and the foundation of the Christian Uhurch laid. The interview occurred after the baptism and the temp- tation. We now come to the properly historical part of the Gospel. l. THE POi,ITION ASSERTED FOR HIMSELF BY JOHN. It is 0[10 which displays his true humility. He is clear, frank, and unambiguous. "He confessed, aud denied not." He asserts his position : 1. Negatively. (1) "I am not the Christ." Some mistakenly thought he was. "All men mused in their hearts of John, whether lw were the Christ, or not" (Luke iii. 15). The members of the deputation may have known that John was the son of Zacharias, a priest, and therefore a Levite bimaelf, and remembered the incident in the temple; but, as his mother was of the holl.ie of David, from whom the Messiah was to spring, they might be led to suspect :bat John was himself the Messiah. 'l'hey gave John more honour than Jesus: they esteemed the one for his priestly lineage; the other was only" the carpenter's Son." The answer of John is per- fectly explicit. He claims honour, not for himself, but for Christ. (2) He is not Elias. •· Art thou Elias?" The question was suggested by Malo.chi's prophe,,y com,~rning • roa~ •  fiO THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S'l'. JOHN. [oB, I, 1-61,