The Pulpit Commentary — John — Volume 1 — Section 489

The terrible reverses that they had subse- those "Jews who believed him," but whose quently experienced nt the hn.nd of Antio- retort showed their faith to be of the most chus o.nd of the Roman power, n.ud the galling feeble o.nd imperfect kinrl. and which, if it submission to Romo which 11t the mom~nt were momentarily e.ssnmeci, was rea<ly to dis- wo.s rousing their fiercest passion, would appear e.t tl,e first touch of trial. A promise render o.ny such boost simply preposterons. of Divine lo,e had been treo.tcd by them as an Godet's suggestion, thot they were making insnlt, not so much to their national history. o. boast of their personal civil freedom, tha.t as to their religions triumph over their civil Abrnho.m's seed were not sold into positive and political disasters. There is no reason sin.very, however mortifying their political to believe that in these, or in the following servitude had proved, is for-fetched and too words, the unbelie~ing Jews bad once more fa.r nwa.y from the facts of the cnse; neither become the interlocutors, as Tholuck and does it harmonize with the character of this Hengstenberg have done on different grounds. angry retort. Probably a. reference is ma.de Meyer, Ellicott, Lange, and many others to the idenl freedom from ale.very and from agree with the view here advance,!. The dependence which they ho.d, in their hour answer to them ( a:/n-o,,, those who were the of deepest depression from all and every subjects of u.,re1,p[8710-av) is introduced with form of tyranny whatsoever, religiously peculiar solemnity : Verily, verily I say me.into.ined. They did, a.s their wonderfal unto you, every one ( 1riis) that doeth sin psalter shows, cherish a conviction that -6 ,rolM• 1'µ.atyr Lav is different from .rpd.o-O'r.111 Dnvid's throne a.nd Abraham's inheritance ♦a:iiAa: of oh. iii. 20; it is the precise oppo- ideally stood through all the ages, lnstrou site of ro10,v aA-/iB,uw of eh. iii. 21, and does a.nd magnificent to the eye of faith. When not mean "every one who eommitteth the holy and beautiful house was burned separate acts of transgression." but it means with fire, when their exile wa.s complete, they "every one who is living a life of ,in "-is still saw all visible things, even "heaven the bond-slave (of sin). Godet is strongly and ea.rth," departing or rolled up like a disposed, on the j?1'onnd of the exceedingly scroll, while their Creator a.nd redeeming small authority of D a.nd b alone (and certain King was seated still on his eternal throne. quotations of Origen), to belie,e that the -:-iis From St. Paul's Epistle to the Romane, they ;,µa(Yfia.s is a gloss. Certainly the whole clearly held thnt the mere possession of the passage would be easier to interpret if onr La.w, whether they kept it or not, was their Lord had simply said that the ma,:i under much-prized [pledge of independence from the habitnaJ power of sin is a slave, and bad all other authority or servitude. If so, they then, in vers. 35 and 36. advanced to the may ha.ve been on this occasion boasting of contrast between the slave e.nd the Son. their ideal freedom in virtue of their he- But there is great unanimity among all the reditary privileges, and forgetful of the les- authorities as to the accuracy of the Received sons even of the agelong story of Ishmael and Revised Texts, though Westcott e.nd and Esau, and the deportution and abolition Hort place it in brackets. The interpreta- of Israel as a nation. One can scarcely tion, consequec.tly, is simply this, that Christ refrain a momentary thrill of a.dmimtion did "pass from the idea of bondage under at the hardihood of their eager faith, and the sin to that of bondage generally, and from overwhelming strength of confidence they the idea. of sonship to the Son" (Westcott). manifested in their destiny e.s a people. The notion of personal transgression produc- All the spiritual eo.lvation and ideal free- ing a bondage, and enfettering the soul o.nrl dom which they desired they possessed as the will, a.nd separating it from the glorious ohildren of Abraham. How sayest thon- liberty of true sonship, lay outside of their " Upou what possible principle dost thou notion of discipleship. They were not re- promise to us that which we already are quiring deliverance from sin or its bon<lage : proud of poBBeesing, viz. glorious liberty? " what they wanted wa.s the lull realiwtlon Is it from the emancipo.t.ing power of truth? of the national hope. The language of this We ho.ve the truth; we are the depositnries verse can be paralleled from foe writings of of infallible truth. We already possess e.e the classics and ro.bbis,' o.nd is lil.Igely our birthright what thou art offering to us as the full reimlt of discipleship. How astonishing that so ncute a critic does not sayeet thou, Ye shall be ma.de free 1 see that we have here the originnl principle, Ver. 84.--Jesus answered them; 1 '·"· which wa.s variously developed by St. Paul in his lifelong controversy. 1 Thomn sees here the doctrine of Pnul 1 Wiinsche quotes • Succa.,' fol 52, a: on spiritual freedom, and hie allegorical use "Rabbi Asi said that evil conduct is com- of the story of So.rah and Hagar in the pared nt its beginning to a spider's web, and Epistle to the Galntie.ns. He fiuds a re- aftorwards to e. cart-rope (Isa. v. lS); anJ flection of the oontroversy between Jewish shows that seven no.mes given to the sinner Christians and Gentile Christians. Ii is by the Old Testament writers, reach theil:  362 THE GOSPEL AOCORDING TO ST, ,JOHN, [oH, vm. 1---o~