The Pulpit Commentary — John — Volume 1 — Section 345

reasonable to ('.nn11lude from this that Christ's by "the Jews" to be unlRwful; nnd the d0clrine, lik<' that of Job's friends, i1wolved couree of <'ruel persecutioll nnd dcndly hnto the inclissolnble oonnootion of sin with sick- which w1ts there nm! then innugumted ness, or runde the amcnmt of pnin in any case against the Saviour of the world. 'l'he six- the criterion of individual sin. Our Lord teenth \'tlrse represents n course of conduct on repndiat.cs this position in eh. ix. 3 nnd in the part of the Jews which led lo open con• Luke xiii. 1-5; but speoial oalamities hllve fliot with the dominant po.rty. Ohrist's view unquestionably followed wrong-doing, o.nd of the 81tbbo.th lny, indeed, in the heart of e11n, in many insta.noes, be referred t.o ob- the old Law, e.nd wos even reooguized by vious trnnsgressions, to specifio nets, or in- some of the wisest nnd noblest spirits of vetemte hllbits. The man's own consoienoe Judnism; but it re.n counter to tho curren\ wonld respond to the ohargo. Jesus added: tre.ditione.ry interpretation, nnd out ns with Le&t a WOllle thing befall thee. There a shRrp sabre through tho )mots nnd enc is, tben, something worse than thirty-eight tanglerucnt of the schools. It wns the un- years of apparently hopeless 'I\Tctohedness I pnrdono.ble sin that ide&B and rules which J()sus so.id, cvon.as reported by the npostle sustnincd nnd fed the authority of the of love, the most terrible things that ever hierarchical party should be swept away as fell from human lips. The "sin no longer" ve.lueless an<l perilous nccumulations, and makes it seem ns though man's will could flB fungoid enorustntions upon the Law of accomplish much(cf. Isa. i. 16," Ccnse," etc.), Moses. Weiss justly rema.rks that there is and as though all the futnreof our life were, no colour for the charge that the fourth so far as human responsibility goes, depen- evangelist antedated the sabbath contro- dent upon ourselves. We are to act as if it versy, for Mark (iii. 6) shows that it had were. Let it be noticed that he who said, already commenced iu Galilee. In eh. iv. "Sin no more," saicl, "Rise up, t.a.ke thy bed, 1-3 we see that the Pharisaio party dis- nnd U"B.!k." Three things, which appeared trusted Jesus; here we see that the authori- utterly beyond the power of lhe impotent ties a.re in 11.l'IIlS ago.inst him. man, were, nevertheless, done by him through the grace of Christ, which he then and there Vere. 17-47.-(3) The reply of JeBU8 to appropriat.ed. the hostil.e Jews. The discourse of .the Lord Vera. 15, 16.-The man departed, and told 1 the J'ewa that it 'WIIB J'esus who had leans, in reply to the persecuting spirit and made him whole. Therefore the lewe per- deadly purpose of the Jewish authorities, is seouted J'eSUII, (and s<Nght to slay him'), be- now given at length. There is a fulness and c,aUBe he was doing these things on the sab- order e.nd progress observable throughout of bath. Tho motive of the me.n may have been immense importance a~ esta.biishing .the one of gratitude, or may have arisen from sacred origin of the words. The simplioity a sense of duty, seeing l.ha.t he had not an- swered the qneetion of the Jews, and had of the style, quite Hebro.io in its freedom been himself charged with doing the unlaw- from oonjunotive forms, discriminates it ful thing (Weiss). He may hnve sought to from the Philonio presento.tion of ocr,to.in win from his interlocutors some reverence for analogous 'but difi'erent ideas. If; 11B o·oaet his Healer; bnt evezything points the other h:ia remarked,, we venture on the hazardous wo.y. He was a lo\Eeless being; he seems to have been nettled by the charge and warning speculation that the prologue to the Gospel he ho.d juet received, and went with the merely places before us the Philonio concep• name of his Benefactor on hls lips to those tion of 0EOl ·and Aorol, ma.king God to who in his hearing had already condemned be the inconceivable, una.pproa.cho.ble, . im- the Saviour's conduct. The connection is personal Essence, comillg into activity in close between the two facts, viz. the man's eu."'er implication of his Healer in the re- the AOrOl, who is self.dependent, but who sp~nsibility of his own act, which was ea.id exhausts all the vitality e.nd activity of the supreme e,or, we may, with Reuss, find hero 1 R.T. and T.Il. rco.d clv,fyye1Ae; there are what is contrary to both the prologue and to severe.I variants. T.i.sohendorf (8th edit.), the views of the Divine Being, which repu- Westcott and Hort, with N, C, L, Syriae, Coptic, read elrev. diate the correlative subordination of the 1 The o.uthorities on which Westcott and Son ofGod. But the prologue is based on Hort, R.T,. Meyer, Tregelles, and Tischen- the identity of nature between 0EOl o.nd dorf (8th edit.) omit the clause, Kai i(,/, 01111 AOrol, and the ,ubordinate and yet eternal a/n-011 o.roK-riiva.,, o.re II(, B, C, L, with 1, 33, relation of the latter to the former. 'l'hore ia 69, o.nd certain other cursi-res, Vulgate, Cure-- an infinite fnlueBS of being o.nd activity in the tonie.n Syriae, Coptic, etc. The phrose WBII probably drawn from ver. 18. Father, who yet ~ nnd loves an<l energizes in OR, V, 1-47.] TUE GOSPUL ACCORDING 'fO ST. JOHN. 211