them, and go among their brethren of the dispersion: will he ga to the dispersed among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles?, 36. What manner of saying is this that he hath said, Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me, and where I am, thither ye cannot come? This saying is unintelligible and absurd, for though his meaning be, that he is going to preach among the Gentiles, surely it is possible for us to follow him thither.

It is commonly supposed, that while Jesus was thus discoursing in the temple, on the last and great day of the feast, the water from Siloam was brought into the womens court (see the de scription of the temple in the note on § 122.) with the usual solemnities, according to the directions of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, if we may believe the Jewish writers., Part of this water they drank with loud acclamations, in commemoration of the mercy slewed to their fathers, who were relieved by the mi racle of a great stream of water made to gush out of a rock, (Psal. lxxviii. 20.) when the nation was ready to die with thirst in a sandy desert, where was neither river nor spring; and part of it they poured out as a drink-offering, which they accompanied with prayers to almighty God for a plentiful rain to fall at the following seed-time; the people in the mean time singing the passage, Isa. xii. 3. With joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation. Jesus, whose custom it was to raise moral instructions from sensible occurrences, took this opportunity of inviting, in the most solemn and affectionate manner, all who were in pursuit whether of knowledge or happiness, to come unto him and drink, in allusion to the rite they were then employed about, By coming to him and drinking, he meant believing on him, as is plain from chap. vi. 35. § 62. And to encourage them, he pro mised them the gifts of his Spirit, which he represented under the image of a river flowing from their belly, to express the eflicacy and perpetuity of these gifts, together with the divine pleasures which they produce, by quenching the desires of those who possess them, and fructifying others who come within their influ· ence. See on John iv. 14. § 22. John vii. 37. In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood, probably in some conspicuous place, and cried, saying, If any man thirst, (see Isa, lv. 1.) let him come unto me, and drink. 38. He that believeth on me, * as the Scripture hath said, cut of his belly shall flow rivers of living,

Ver. 8. As the Scripture hath said] Some imagine, that our Lord had one or other of the following passages now in his eye, isa. xxxv. 6. xliv. 3. lviii. 11. Ezek. xxxvi 259.7. &c. However, as none of these texts contain the precise words, Castalic, Zegerus, Capellus, and others, acying on the authority of the Syriac version, and of Theophylact, would have the sentence pointed in such a manner, that the clause, as the Scripture bath said (or commanded, 817, see on Matt. ix. 5. § 33-) may be joined to ke that belts celb on me, and separated from out of his belly shall flow, &c. According

living water. The flowing of rivers of living water out of the believer's belly, is an idea taken from receptacles round springs, out of which great quantities of water flow by pipes. This figure, therefore, represented the plentitude of spiritual gifts to be possessed by believers, and the happy effects which they should produce in the world. The faculty of speaking all the different languages on earth fluently, which was the first gift of the Spirit, qualifying them to preach such doctrines of the gospel as the Spirit revealed to them, they were both watered themselves, and in a condition to water the Gentiles, not with small streams, but with large rivers of divine knowledge; and so the land, which till then had been barren, was from that time forth to be exceeding fruitful in righteousness to God. Accordingly the evangelist adds, by way of explication, 39. But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive; for the Holy Ghost was not yet given, because that Jesus was not yet glorified: The gifts of illumination and utterance were not yet communicated to believers, being what they received on the day of Pentecost, to fit them for converting the world. Nevertheless, if the universality of the invitation and promise inclines the reader to think, that on this occasion our Lord had the ordinary influences of the Spirit also in his eye, the evangelist's remark, that the Holy Ghost was not yet given, will not exclude them; because even these might at that time be said not to have been given, as they had been given but sparingly, in comparison of the plentiful distribution which was to be made of them to all believers after Christ's ascension. Accordingly, the ordinary influences of the Spirit, are often in scripture represented as the consequences and reward of faith, Gal. iii. 14. Eph. i. 12.

On this subject Jesus, it seems, was discoursing, when the officers sent by the council to apprehend him (ver. 32.) came up; but as it was an uncommon topic, and he seemed to be speaking with great fervency, their curiosity made them willing to hear him a little before they laid hands on him, ver. 44, 45. The eloquence with which he handled his subject, struck them; every word he uttered being well chosen, aptly placed, and gracefully pronounced, there was not only a sweetness in his sermons that enchanted the ear, but a plainness and perspicuity also, which made the beauties of truth shine before the understanding with that lustre which is peculiar to themselves. Even these his enemies, who were come with an intent to lay violent hands on him, were deeply smitten. The greatness of his subject, made as it were visible by the divine speaker, filled their understandings; the warmth and tenderness with which he delivered himself, peVOL. II. Bb netrated

According to this pointing, our Lord does not say that the Scripture promises rivers shall flow out of the believer's belly, but only that it cummands men to believe on him.

netrated their hearts; they felt new and uncommon emotions; in a word, being overwhelmed with the greatness of their admi ration, they silently stood astonished, condemning themselves for having come on the errand; and after a while returned without accomplishing it, see ver. 44, 45. Had our Lord in this discourse pleaded for his life to the officers of the council, as Plutarch tells us in Mario Marcus Antonius the orator did to Marius' soldiers, who came to kill him, his success with them had been a great and wonderful effect of eloquence; but it must appear unspeak ably greater, and be superior to all praise, when we consider that it was a discourse addressed to others, and on a spiritual subject too, which thus disarmed a band of enemies and rendered them friendly. The officers were not the only persons on whom this sermon made a deep impression; our Lord's hearers in general were greatly affected with it, for many of them gave it as their opinion, that he was certainly one of the ancient prophets risen from the dead to usher in Messiah; others declared, that they believed he was Messiah himself. Nevertheless, some of them, led away with the common mistake that he was born in Nazareth, asked with disdain if Messiah was to come out of Galilee? John vii. 40. Many of the people, therefore, when they heard this say ing, said, Of a truth this is the prophet. 41. Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, shall Christ come out of Galilee? 42. Hath not the Scripture said that Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was? Is not your acknowledging a Galilean for Messiah contrary to the scripture, which has determined Messiah's nativity to Bethlehem, the town of his father David? 43. So there was a division among the people because of him: They fell into a hot dispute about him, and carried their contentions to such a height, that his enemies, knowing on what errand the officers were come, threatened to apprehend him, but were restrained by the providence of God. 44. And some of them would have taken him, but no man laid hands on him. 45. Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them," Why have ye not brought him? 46. The officers answered, Never man spake like this man. But the enraged priests reviled them for presum ing to entertain a favourable opinion of one whom they affirmed to be an impostor. 47. Then answered the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived? Ye who have the advantage of knowing our sentiments concerning this person? 48. Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him? 49. But this people (oxλos TOS, this rabble, so they affected to call Christ's friends) who knoweth not the law are cursed. This was downright railing. Nevertheless, a member of the court, named Nicodemus, who secretly entertained a veneration for Jesus, and was his disciple, defended him, by asking his brethren whether their law authorized them

to

to condemn a man before they had proof of his guilt? John vii. 50. Nicodemus saith unto them (he that came to Jesus by night being one of them) 51. Doth our law judge, (zzivi condemn) any man before it hear him, and know what he doth? From Nicodemus' being present, it appears to have been a meeting of the council whereof he was a member; for had it been a private cabal of the great men to take away Christ's life, Christ's disciple never would have joined them. It seems the council was met to try Jesus on the crime of his being a false prophet; compare verses 31, 32. And as the priests had upbraided their servants with ignorance of the law, Nicodemus' reproof was smooth and sharp. Notwithstanding that perfect knowledge of the law, and that high reverence for its precepts which they made such a boast of, they were acting directly contrary to the most essential principles of equity established by it; a reproof the more poignant and provoking, that it was well founded. Being therefore in a great passion with Nicodemus for condemning their conduct and speaking favourably of Jesus, they asked him with an air of disdain and surprise, mixed with fierceness, 52. Art thou also of Galilee? Art thou one of the ignorant low faction, that has leagued to support a Galilean Messiah, in opposition to the law, which has determined the Messiah's nativity to Bethlehem ?Search, and look for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet: they meant, no Messiah, the prophet foretold by Moses in the law; for they could not but know that Jonah was of Gath-hepher, in Galilee, (2 Kings xiv. 25.) unless they were as ignorant of the Scriptures as they said the common people were, ver. 48. But be this as it will, such blind judges were these masters of law and learning, that an argument which had no force against Jesus, who was actually born in Bethlehem, weighed a great deal more with them than all the solid proofs by which he so fully established his mission. To conclude, the council separated; and Jesus, having perfect knowledge of their designs, went to lodge in the mount of Olives, that he might be out of their reach; see on Luke xxi. 37. § 124. 53. And every man went into his own house, chap. viii. 1. (Invas de) But Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.

{ LXXVII. The woman that was caught committing adultery, is placed before Jesus in the temple, John viii. 2,-59.

EARLY next morning, Jesus returned to the temple, and as usual taught the people. John viii. 2. And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him, and ke sat down and taught them. But while he was thus employed, the scribes and Pharisees set a woman before him that had been taken in the act of adultery; and standing round him, desired his opinion in the affair. 3, And the scribes and Pharisees brought

unte

unto him a woman taken in adultery, and when they had set her in the midst, 4. They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 5. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? The evangelist says, the Pharisees desired our Lord's opinion in this matter with an insidious intention: John viii, 6. † This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. Probably the Romans had modelled the laws of Judea according to the jurisprudence of Rome, and in particular had mitigated the seve rity of the punishment of the adulteress. Wherefore, if Jesus should say that the law of Moses ought to be executed upon this adulteress, the Pharisees hoped the people would stone her immediately, which would afford them an opportunity of accusing him before the governor as a mover of sedition. But if he determined that the innovations practised by the Romans in such cases should take place, they resolved to represent him to the people as one who made void the law, out of complaisance to their heathen masters. This their craft and wickedness Jesus fully knew, and regulated his conduct towards these depraved hypocrites accordingly,

Ver. 5. Moses in the law commanded, &c. The law, Lev. xx. 10. Deut. xxii. 22. required, in the general, that adultery should be punished with death; but did not determine the kind of it. Only because it is ordered, Deut. xxii. 23, 24. that the betrothed damsel, guilty of adultery, should be stoned, it is supposed that in process of time this kind of death was appropriated to such offenders; and that the punishment of the marricd adulteress, Lev. xx. 10. was interpreted to mean strangling. Agree ably to these suppositions, it is conjectured, that the woman now before Jesus was only betrothed. But the distinction has no foundation; for it is evident from Ezek. xvi, that the proper punishment of all kinds of adultery was stoning; ver. 38. I will judge thee as women that break wedlock are judged. And (ver. 40) They shall stone thee with stones.

+ Ver 6. This they said, tempting him, &c.] The reason was, had he declared against stoning the adulteress, they certainly would have represented him to the people as contradicting Moses, and favouring adultery, hoping by that means to have lessened his authority with them. On the other hand, had he ordered her to be stoned, it would have afforded a plausible pretence for accusing him unto the governor, as a person who stirred up the people to rebellion; the Romans, who had now taken the power of life and death into their own hands, not exercising such severity of punishment upon the women who were guilty of adultery. Le Clerc, however, in his Supplement to Hammond's Annotations, affirms, that the Pharisees could not have any intention of this kind, because the answer he might have returned was obvious; namely, that according to the law the woman ought to be stoned, but that, as matters then stood, such a punishment was impracticable, without the governor's permission. Yet the common opinion is more probable, because it is not impossible but that in cases where the Romans had modelled the Jewish laws according to the institutions of Rome, some of the complaisant doctors may have attempted to vindicate the latter as more equitable than the former, especially when they suited the inclinations of mankind better. Wherefore, if the Pharisees imagined he was a teacher of this kind, they might expect his decision would irritate the people; for that they proposed their question with an evil intention, the evangelist expressly affirms.