25

CHAPTER 25.

JESUS AGAIN IN JERUSALEM.


DEPARTURE FROM GALILEE.[834]

Of our Lord's labors during His brief sojourn in Galilee following His
return from the region of Caesarea Philippi we have no record aside from
that of His instructions to the apostles. His Galilean ministry, so far
as the people in general were concerned, had practically ended with the
discourse at Capernaum on His return thither after the miracles of
feeding the five thousand and walking upon the sea. At Capernaum many of
the disciples had turned away from the Master,[835] and now, after
another short visit, He prepared to leave the land in which so great a
part of His public work had been accomplished.

It was autumn; about six months had passed since the return of the
apostles from their missionary tour; and the Feast of Tabernacles was
near at hand. Some of the kinsmen of Jesus came to Him, and proposed
that He go to Jerusalem and take advantage of the opportunity offered by
the great national festival, to declare Himself more openly than He had
theretofore done. His brethren, as the visiting relatives are called,
urged that He seek a broader and more prominent field than Galilee for
the display of His powers, arguing that it was inconsistent for any man
to keep himself in comparative obscurity when he wanted to be widely
known. "Shew thyself to the world," said they. Whatever their motives
may have been, these brethren of His did not advize more extended
publicity through any zeal for His divine mission; indeed, we are
expressly told that they did not believe in Him.[836] Jesus replied to
their presumptuous advice: "My time is not yet come: but your time is
alway ready. The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I
testify of it, that the works thereof are evil. Go ye up unto this
feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full
come." It was not their prerogative to direct His movements, not to say
when He should do even what He intended to do eventually.[837] He made
it plain that between their status and His there was essential
difference; they were of the world, which they loved as the world loved
them; but the world hated Him because of His testimony.

This colloquy between Jesus and His brethren took place in Galilee. They
soon started for Jerusalem leaving Him behind. He had not said that He
would not go to the feast; but only "I go not up yet unto this feast;
for my time is not yet full come." Some time after their departure He
followed, traveling "not openly, but as it were in secret." Whether He
went alone, or accompanied by any or all of the Twelve, we are not told.


AT THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES.[838]

The agitated state of the public mind respecting Jesus is shown by the
interest manifest in Jerusalem as to the probability of His presence at
the feast. His brethren, who probably were questioned, could give no
definite information as to His coming. He was sought for in the crowds;
there was much discussion and some disputation concerning Him. Many
people expressed their conviction that He was a good man, while others
contradicted on the claim that He was a deceiver. There was little open
discussion, however, for the people were afraid of incurring the
displeasure of the rulers.

As originally established, the Feast of Tabernacles was a seven day
festival, followed by a holy convocation on the eighth day. Each day was
marked by special and in some respects distinctive services, all
characterized by ceremonies of thanksgiving and praise.[839] "Now about
the midst of the feast," probably on the third or fourth day, "Jesus
went up into the temple, and taught." The first part of His discourse is
not recorded, but its scriptural soundness is intimated in the surprize
of the Jewish teachers, who asked among themselves: "How knoweth this
man letters, having never learned?" He was no graduate of their schools;
He had never sat at the feet of their rabbis; He had not been officially
accredited by them nor licensed to teach. Whence came His wisdom, before
which all their academic attainments were as nothing? Jesus answered
their troubled queries, saying: "My doctrine is not mine, but his that
sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine,
whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself." His Teacher,
greater even than Himself, was the Eternal Father, whose will He
proclaimed. The test proposed to determine the truth of His doctrine was
in every way fair, and withal simple; anyone who would earnestly seek to
do the will of the Father should know of himself whether Jesus spoke
truth or error.[840] The Master proceeded to show that a man who speaks
on his own authority alone seeks to aggrandize himself. Jesus did not
so; He honored His Teacher, His Father, His God, not Himself; and
therefore was He free from the taint of selfish pride or
unrighteousness. Moses had given them the law, and yet, as Jesus
affirmed, none of them kept the law.

Then, with startling abruptness, He challenged them with the question,
"Why go ye about to kill me?" On many occasions had they held dark
counsel with one another as to how they could get Him into their power
and put Him to death; but they thought that the murderous secret was
hidden within their own circle. The people had heard the seducing
assertions of the ruling classes, that Jesus was possessed by a demon,
and that He wrought wonders through the power of Beelzebub; and in the
spirit of this blasphemous slander, they cried out: "Thou hast a devil:
who goeth about to kill thee?"

Jesus knew that the two specifications of alleged guilt on which the
rulers were striving most assiduously to convict Him in the popular
mind, and so turn the people against Him, were those of Sabbath-breaking
and blasphemy. On an earlier visit to Jerusalem He had healed an
afflicted man on the Sabbath, and had utterly disconcerted the
hypercritical accusers who even then had sought to compass His
death.[841] To this act of mercy and power Jesus now referred, saying:
"I have done one work, and ye all marvel." Seemingly they were still of
unsettled mind, in doubt as to accepting Him because of the miracle or
denouncing Him because He had done it on the Sabbath. Then He showed the
inconsistency of charging Him with Sabbath-desecration for such a
merciful deed, when the law of Moses expressly allowed acts of mercy,
and even required that the mandatory rite of circumcision should not be
deferred because of the Sabbath. "Judge not according to the appearance,
but judge righteous judgment" said He.

The masses were still divided in their estimate of Jesus, and were
moreover puzzled over the indecision of the rulers. Some of the
Jerusalem Jews knew of the plan to arrest Him, and if possible to bring
Him to death, and the people queried why nothing was done when He was
there teaching publicly within reach of the officials. They wondered
whether the rulers had not at last come to believe that Jesus was indeed
the Messiah. The thought, however, was brushed aside when they
remembered that all knew whence He came; He was a Galilean, and from
Nazareth, whereas as they had been taught, however wrongly, the advent
of the Christ was to be mysterious so that none would know whence He
came. Strange it was, indeed, that men should reject Him because of a
lack of mystery and miracle in His advent; when, had they known the
truth, they would have seen in His birth a miracle without precedent or
parallel in the annals of time. Jesus directly answered their weak and
faulty reasoning. Crying aloud within the temple courts, He assured them
that while they knew whence He came as one of their number, yet they did
not know that He had come from God, neither did they know God who had
sent Him: "But," He added, "I know him: for I am from him, and he hath
sent me." At this reiterated testimony of His divine origin, the Jews
were the more enraged, and they determined anew to take Him by force;
nevertheless none laid hands upon him "because his hour was not yet
come."

Many of the people believed in their hearts that He was of God, and
ventured to ask among themselves whether Christ would do greater works
than Jesus had done. The Pharisees and chief priests feared a possible
demonstration in favor of Jesus, and forthwith sent officers to arrest
Him and bring him before the Sanhedrin.[842] The presence of the temple
police caused no interruption to the Master's discourse, though we may
reasonably infer that He knew the purpose of their errand. He spoke on,
saying that He would be with the people but a little while; and that
after He had returned to the Father, they would seek Him vainly, for
where He would then be they could not come. This remark evoked more
bitter discussion. Some of the Jews wondered whether He intended to
leave the borders of the land and go among the Gentiles to teach them
and the dispersed Israelites.

As part of the temple service incident to the feast, the people went in
procession to the Pool of Siloam[843] where a priest filled a golden
ewer, which he then carried to the altar and there poured out the water
to the accompaniment of trumpet blasts and the acclamations of the
assembled hosts.[844] According to authorities on Jewish customs, this
feature was omitted on the closing day of the feast. On this last or
"great day," which was marked by ceremonies of unusual solemnity and
rejoicing, Jesus was again in the temple. It may have been with
reference to the bringing of water from the pool, or to the omission of
the ceremony from the ritualistic procedure of the great day, that Jesus
cried aloud, His voice resounding through the courts and arcades of the
temple: "If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that
believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall
flow rivers of living water."[845]

John, the recorder, remarks parenthetically that this promise had
reference to the bestowal of the Holy Ghost, which at that time had not
been granted, nor was it to be until after the ascension of the risen
Lord.[846]

Again many of the people were so impressed that they declared Jesus
could be none other than the Messiah; but others objected, saying that
the Christ must come from Bethlehem of Judea and Jesus was known to have
come from Galilee.[847] So there was further dissension; and though some
wanted Him apprehended, not a man was found who would venture to lay
hold on Him.

The police officers returned without their intended prisoner. To the
angry demand of the chief priests and Pharisees as to why they had not
brought Him, they acknowledged that they had been so affected by His
teachings as to be unable to make the arrest. "Never man spake like this
man," they said. Their haughty masters were furious. "Are ye also
deceived?" they demanded; and further, "Have any of the rulers or of the
Pharisees believed on him?" What was the opinion of the common people
worth? They had never learned the law, and were therefore accursed and
of no concern. Yet with all this show of proud disdain, the chief
priests and Pharisees were afraid of the common people, and were again
halted in their wicked course.

One voice of mild protest was heard in the assembly. Nicodemus, a member
of the Sanhedrin, and the same who had come to Jesus by night to inquire
into the new teaching,[848] mustered courage enough to ask: "Doth our
law judge any man, before it hear him, and know what he doeth?" The
answer was insulting. Maddened with bigotry and blood-thirsty
fanaticism, some of his colleagues turned upon him with the savage
demand: "Art thou also of Galilee?" meaning, Art thou also a disciple of
this Galilean whom we hate? Nicodemus was curtly told to study the
scriptures, and he would fail to find any prediction of a prophet
arising in Galilee. The anger of these learned bigots had blinded them
even to their own vaunted knowledge, for several of the ancient prophets
were regarded as Galileans;[849] if, however they had meant to refer
only to that Prophet of whom Moses had spoken, the Messiah, they were
correct, since all predictions pointed to Bethlehem in Judea as His
birthplace. It is evident that Jesus was thought of as a native of
Nazareth, and that the circumstances of His birth were not of public
knowledge.


"GO, AND SIN NO MORE."[850]

After the festivities were over, Jesus went to the temple one morning
early; and as He sat, probably in the Court of the Women, which was the
usual place of public resort, many gathered about Him and He proceeded
to teach them as was His custom. His discourse was interrupted by the
arrival of a party of scribes and Pharisees with a woman in charge, who,
they said, was guilty of adultery. To Jesus they presented this
statement and question: "Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such
should be stoned; but what sayest thou?" The submitting of the case to
Jesus was a prearranged snare, a deliberate attempt to find or make a
cause for accusing Him. Though it was not unusual for Jewish officials
to consult rabbis of recognized wisdom and experience when difficult
cases were to be decided, the case in point involved no legal
complications. The woman's guilt seems to have been unquestioned, though
the witnesses required by the statutes are not mentioned as appearing
unless the accusing scribes and Pharisees are to be so considered; the
law was explicit, and the custom of the times in dealing with such
offenders was well known. While it is true that the law of Moses had
decreed death by stoning as the penalty for adultery, the infliction of
the extreme punishment had lapsed long before the time of Christ. One
may reasonably ask why the woman's partner in the crime was not brought
for sentence, since the law so zealously cited by the officious accusers
provided for the punishment of both parties to the offense.[851]

The question of the scribes and Pharisees, "But what sayest thou?" may
have intimated their expectation that Jesus would declare the law
obsolete; perhaps they had heard of the Sermon on the Mount, in which
many requirements in advance of the Mosaic code had been
proclaimed.[852] Had Jesus decided that the wretched woman ought to
suffer death, her accusers might have said that he was defying the
existing authorities; and possibly the charge of opposition to the Roman
government might have been formulated, since power to inflict the death
penalty had been taken from all Jewish tribunals; and moreover, the
crime with which this woman was charged was not a capital offense under
Roman law. Had He said that the woman should go unpunished or suffer
only minor infliction, the crafty Jews could have charged Him with
disrespect for the law of Moses. To these scribes and Pharisees Jesus at
first gave little heed. Stooping down He traced with His finger on the
ground; but as He wrote they continued to question Him. Lifting Himself
up He answered them, in a terse sentence that has become proverbial: "He
that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." Such
was the law; the accusers on whose testimony the death penalty was
pronounced were to be the first to begin the work of execution.[853]

Having spoken, Jesus again stooped and wrote upon the ground. The
woman's accusers were "convicted by their own conscience"; shamed and in
disgrace they slunk away, all of them from the eldest to the youngest.
They knew themselves to be unfit to appear either as accusers or
judges.[854] What cowards doth conscience make! "When Jesus had lifted
up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where
are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man,
Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go and sin no
more."[855]

The woman was repentant; she remained humbly awaiting the Master's
decision, even after her accusers had gone. Jesus did not expressly
condone; He declined to condemn; but He sent the sinner away with a
solemn adjuration to a better life.[856]


THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD.[857]

Sitting within the temple enclosure in the division known as the
Treasury, which was connected with the Court of the Women,[858] our Lord
continued His teaching, saying: "I am the light of the world: he that
followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of
life."[859] The great lamps set up in the court as a feature of the
joyful celebration just ended gave point to our Lord's avowal of Himself
as the Light of the World. It was another proclamation of His divinity
as God and the Son of God. The Pharisees challenged His testimony,
declaring it of no worth because He bore record of Himself. Jesus
admitted that He testified of Himself, but affirmed nevertheless that
what He said was true, for He knew whereof He spoke, whence He came and
whither He would go, while they spoke in ignorance. They thought,
talked, and judged after the ways of men and the frailties of the flesh;
He was not sitting in judgment, but should He choose to judge, then His
judgment would be just, for He was guided by the Father who sent Him.
Their law required the testimony of two witnesses for the legal
determination of any question of fact;[860] and Jesus cited Himself and
His Father as witnesses in support of His affirmation. His opponents
then asked with contemptuous or sarcastic intent, "Where is thy Father?"
The reply was in lofty tone; "Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye
had known me, ye should have known my Father also." Enraged at their own
discomfiture, the Pharisees would have seized Him, but found themselves
impotent. "No man laid hands on him; for his hour was not yet come."


THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE YOU FREE.[861]

Again addressing the mixed assemblage, which probably comprized
Pharisees, scribes, rabbis, priests, Levites, and lay people, Jesus
repeated His former assertion that soon He would leave them, and that
whither He went they could not follow; and added the fateful assurance
that they would seek Him in vain and would die in their sins. His solemn
portent was treated with light concern if not contempt. Some of them
asked querulously, "Will he kill himself?" the implication being that in
such case they surely would not follow Him; for according to their
dogma, Gehenna was the place of suicides, and they, being of the chosen
people, were bound for heaven not hell. The Lord's dignified rejoinder
was: "Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am
not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your
sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins."

This reiteration of His distinctive supremacy brought forth the
challenging question, "Who art thou?" Jesus replied, "Even the same that
I said unto you from the beginning." The many matters on which He might
have judged them He refrained from mentioning, but testified anew of the
Father, saying: "He that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those
things which I have heard of him." Explicit as His earlier explanations
had been, the Jews in their gross prejudice "understood not that he
spake to them of the Father." To His Father Jesus ascribed all honor and
glory, and repeatedly declared Himself as sent to do the Father's will.
"Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then
shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my
Father hath taught me, I speak these things. And he that sent me is with
me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that
please him."

The evident earnestness and profound conviction with which Jesus spoke
caused many of His hearers to believe on Him; and these He addressed
with the promise that if they continued in that belief, and shaped their
lives according to His word, they should be His disciples indeed. A
further promise followed: "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth
shall make you free." At these words, so rich in blessing, so full of
comfort for the believing soul, the people were stirred to angry
demonstrations; their Jewish temper was immediately ablaze. To promise
them freedom was to imply that they were not already free. "We be
Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou,
Ye shall be made free?" In their unbridled fanaticism they had forgotten
the bondage of Egypt, the captivity of Babylon, and were oblivious of
their existing state of vassalage to Rome. To say that Israel had never
been in bondage was not only to convict themselves of falsehood but to
stultify themselves wretchedly.

Jesus made it clear that He had not referred to freedom in its physical
or political sense alone, though to this conception their false
disavowal had been directed; the liberty He proclaimed was spiritual
liberty; the grievous bondage from which He would deliver them was the
serfdom of sin. To their vaunted boast that they were free men, not
slaves, He replied: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever
committeth sin is the servant of sin." As a sinner, every one of them
was in slavery. A bond-servant, Jesus reminded them, was allowed in the
master's house by sufferance only; it was not his inherent right to
remain there; his owner could send him away at any time, and might even
sell him to another; but a son of the family had of his own right a
place in his father's home. Now, if the Son of God made them free they
would be free indeed. Though they were of Abrahamic lineage in the
flesh, they were no heirs of Abraham in spirit or works. Our Lord's
mention of His Father as distinct from their father drew forth the angry
reiteration, "Abraham is our father", to which Jesus replied: "If ye
were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. But now ye
seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard
of God: this did not Abraham. Ye do the deeds of your father." In their
blind anger they apparently construed this to imply that though they
were children of Abraham's household some other man than Abraham was
their actual progenitor, or that they were not of unmixed Israelitish
blood. "We be not born of fornication" they cried, "we have one Father,
even God." Jesus said unto them, "If God were your Father, ye would love
me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself,
but he sent me."

They failed to understand because of their stubborn refusal to listen
dispassionately. With forceful accusation Jesus told them whose children
they actually were, as evinced by the hereditary traits manifest in
their lives: "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your
father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not
in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie,
he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.[862] And
because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not." He challenged them to
find sin in Him; and then asked why, if He spake the truth, they so
persistently refused to believe Him. Answering His own question, He told
them that they were not of God and therefore they understood not the
words of God. The Master was unimpeachable; His terse, cogent assertions
were unanswerable. In impotent rage the discomfited Jews resorted to
invective and calumny. "Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and
hast a devil?" they shrieked. They had before called Him a Galilean;
that appellative was but mildly depreciatory, and moreover was a
truthful designation according to their knowledge; but the epithet
"Samaritan" was inspired by hate,[863] and by its application they meant
to disown Him as a Jew.

The charge that He was a demoniac was but a repetition of earlier
slanders. "Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father,
and ye do dishonour me." Reverting to the eternal riches offered by His
gospel, the Master said: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep
my saying, he shall never see death." This rendered them the more
infuriate: "Now we know that thou hast a devil" they cried, and as
evidence of what they professed to regard as His insanity, they cited
the fact that great as were Abraham and the prophets they were dead, yet
Jesus dared to say that all who kept His sayings should be exempt from
death. Did He pretend to exalt Himself above Abraham and the prophets?
"Whom makest thou thyself?" they demanded. The Lord's reply was a
disclaimer of all self-aggrandizement; His honor was not of His own
seeking, but was the gift of His Father, whom He knew; and were He to
deny that He knew the Father He would be a liar like unto themselves.
Touching the relationship between Himself and the great patriarch of
their race, Jesus thus affirmed and emphasized His own supremacy: "Your
father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad." Not
only angered but puzzled, the Jews demanded further explanation.
Construing the last declaration as applying to the mortal state only,
they said: "Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen
Abraham?" Jesus answered, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before
Abraham was, I am."

This was an unequivocal and unambiguous declaration of our Lord's
eternal Godship. By the awful title I AM He had made Himself known to
Moses and thereafter was so known in Israel.[864] As already shown, it
is the equivalent of "Yahveh," or "Jahveh," now rendered "Jehovah," and
signifies "The Self-existent One," "The Eternal," "The First and the
Last."[865] Jewish traditionalism forbade the utterance of the sacred
Name; yet Jesus claimed it as His own. In an orgy of self-righteous
indignation, the Jews seized upon the stones that lay in the unfinished
courts, and would have crushed their Lord, but the hour of His death had
not yet come, and unseen of them He passed through the crowd and
departed from the temple.

His seniority to Abraham plainly referred to the status of each in the
antemortal or preexistent state; Jesus was as literally the Firstborn in
the spirit-world, as He was the Only Begotten in the flesh. Christ is as
truly the Elder Brother of Abraham and Adam as of the last-born child of
earth.[866]


BODILY AND SPIRITUAL BLINDNESS--SIGHT GIVEN TO A MAN ON THE
SABBATH.[867]

At Jerusalem Jesus mercifully gave sight to a man who had been blind
from his birth.[868] The miracle is an instance of Sabbath-day healing,
of more than ordinary interest because of its attendant incidents. It is
recorded by John alone, and, as usual with that writer, his narrative is
given with descriptive detail. Jesus and His disciples saw the sightless
one upon the street. The poor man lived by begging. The disciples, eager
to learn, asked: "Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he
was born blind?" The Lord's reply was: "Neither hath this man sinned,
nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in
him." The disciples' question implied their belief in a state of moral
agency and choice antedating mortality; else, how could they have
thought of the man having sinned so as to bring upon himself congenital
blindness? We are expressly told that he was born blind. That he might
have been a sufferer from the sins of his parents was conceivable.[869]
The disciples evidently had been taught the great truth of an antemortal
existence. It is further to be seen that they looked upon bodily
affliction as the result of personal sin. Their generalization was too
broad; for, while as shown by instances heretofore cited,[870]
individual wickedness may and does bring physical ills in its train, man
is liable to err in his judgment as to the ultimate cause of affliction.
The Lord's reply was sufficing; the man's blindness would be turned to
account in bringing about a manifestation of divine power. As Jesus
explained respecting His own ministry, it was necessary that He do the
Father's work in the season appointed, for His time was short. With
impressive pertinency as relating to the state of the man who had been
in darkness all his days, our Lord repeated the affirmation before made
in the temple, "I am the light of the world."

The outward ministration to the blind man was different from the usual
course followed by Jesus. "He spat on the ground, and made clay of the
spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay"; and
then directed him to go to the pool of Siloam and wash in its
waters.[871] The man went, washed, and came seeing. He was evidently a
well-known character; many had seen him in his accustomed place begging
alms, and the fact that he had been blind from birth was also of common
knowledge. When, therefore, it was noised about that he could see, there
was much excitement and comment. Some doubted that the man they
questioned was the once sightless beggar; but he assured them of his
identity, and told how he had been made to see. They brought the man to
the Pharisees, who questioned him rigorously; and, having heard his
account of the miracle, tried to undermine his faith by telling him that
Jesus who had healed him could not be a man of God since He had done the
deed on the Sabbath. Some of those who heard demurred to the Pharisaic
deduction, and asked: "How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles?"
The man was questioned as to his personal opinion of Jesus, and promptly
answered: "He is a prophet." The man knew his Benefactor to be more than
any ordinary being; as yet, however, he had no knowledge of Him as the
Christ.

The inquisitorial Jews were afraid of the result of such a wondrous
healing, in that the people would support Jesus whom the rulers were
determined to destroy. They assumed it to be possible that the man had
not been really blind; so they summoned his parents, who answered their
interrogatories by affirming that he was their son, and they knew him to
have been born blind; but as to how he had received sight, or through
whose ministration, they refused to commit themselves, knowing the
rulers had decreed that any one who confessed Jesus to be the Christ
should be cast out from the community of the synagog, or, as we would
say today, excommunicated from the Church. With pardonable astuteness
the parents said of their son: "He is of age; ask him: he shall speak
for himself."

Compelled to acknowledge, to themselves at least, that the fact and the
manner of the man's restoration to sight were supported by irrefutable
evidence, the crafty Jews called the man again, and insinuatingly said
unto him: "Give God the praise: we know that this man is a sinner." He
replied fearlessly, and with such pertinent logic as to completely
offset their skill as cross-examiners: "Whether he be a sinner or no, I
know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see." He
very properly declined to enter into a discussion with his learned
questioners as to what constituted sin under their construction of the
law; of what he was ignorant he declined to speak; but on one matter he
was happily and gratefully certain, that whereas he had been blind, now
he could see.

The Pharisaical inquisitors next tried to get the man to repeat his
story of the means employed in the healing, probably with the subtle
purpose of leading him into inconsistent or contradictory statements;
but he replied with emphasis, and possibly with some show of impatience,
"I have told you already, and ye did not hear:[872] wherefore would ye
hear it again? will ye also be his disciples?" They retorted with anger,
and reviled the man; the ironical insinuation that they perchance wished
to become disciples of Jesus was an insult they would not brook. "Thou
art his disciple," said they, "but we are Moses' disciples. We know that
God spake unto Moses: as for this fellow, we know not from whence he
is." They were enraged that this unlettered mendicant should answer so
boldly in their scholarly presence; but the man was more than a match
for all of them. His rejoinder was maddening because it flouted their
vaunted wisdom, and withal was unanswerable. "Why herein is a marvellous
thing," said he, "that ye know not from whence he is, and yet he hath
opened mine eyes. Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any
man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth. Since
the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one
that was born blind. If this man were not of God, he could do nothing."

For such an affront from a layman there was no precedent in all the lore
of rabbis or scribes. "Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou
teach us?" was their denunciatory though weak and inadequate rejoinder.
Unable to cope with the sometime sightless beggar in argument or
demonstration, they could at least exercize their official authority,
however unjustly, by excommunicating him; and this they promptly did.
"Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he
said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? he answered and
said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him? And Jesus said unto
him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. And
he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him."

In commenting upon the matter Jesus was heard to say that one purpose of
His coming into the world was "that they which see not might see; and
that they which see might be made blind." Some of the Pharisees caught
the remark, and asked in pride: "Are we blind also?" The Lord's reply
was a condemnation: "If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye
say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth."


SHEPHERD AND SHEEPHERDER.[873]

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into
the sheep fold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and
a robber. But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the
sheep." With these words Jesus prefaced one of His most impressive
discourses. The mention of shepherd and sheep must have brought to the
minds of His hearers many of the oft-quoted passages from prophets and
psalms.[874] The figure is an effective one, and all the more so when we
consider the circumstances under which it was used by the Master.
Pastoral conditions prevailed in Palestine, and the dignity of the
shepherd's vocation was very generally recognized. By specific prophecy
a Shepherd had been promised to Israel. David, the king of whom all
Israelites were proud, had been taken directly from the sheepfold, and
had come with a shepherd's crook in his hand to the anointing that made
him royal.

As the Teacher showed, a shepherd has free access to the sheep. When
they are folded within the enclosure of safety, he enters at the gate;
he neither climbs over nor creeps in.[875] He, the owner of the sheep
loves them; they know his voice and follow him as he leads from fold to
pasture, for he goes before the flock; while the stranger, though he be
the herder, they know not; he must needs drive, for he cannot lead.
Continuing the allegory, which the recorder speaks of as a parable,
Jesus designated Himself as the door to the sheepfold, and made plain
that only through Him could the under-shepherds rightly enter. True,
there were some who sought by avoiding the portal and climbing over the
fence to reach the folded flock; but these were robbers, trying to get
at the sheep as prey; their selfish and malignant purpose was to kill
and carry off.

Changing the figure, Christ proclaimed: "I am the good shepherd." He
then further showed, and with eloquent exactness, the difference between
a shepherd and a hireling herder. The one has personal interest in and
love for his flock, and knows each sheep by name, the other knows them
only as a flock, the value of which is gaged by number; to the hireling
they are only as so many or so much. While the shepherd is ready to
fight in defense of his own, and if necessary even imperil his life for
his sheep, the hireling flees when the wolf approaches, leaving the way
open for the ravening beast to scatter, rend, and kill.

Never has been written or spoken a stronger arraignment of false
pastors, unauthorized teachers, self-seeking hirelings who teach for
pelf and divine for dollars, deceivers who pose as shepherds yet avoid
the door and climb over "some other way," prophets in the devil's
employ, who to achieve their master's purpose, hesitate not to robe
themselves in the garments of assumed sanctity, and appear in sheep's
clothing, while inwardly they are ravening wolves.[876]

With effective repetition Jesus continued: "I am the good shepherd, and
know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me, even so
know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep." For this cause
was Jesus the Father's Beloved Son--that He was ready to lay down His
life for the sake of the sheep. That the sacrifice He was soon to render
was in fact voluntary, and not a forfeiture under compulsion, is
solemnly affirmed in the Savior's words: "Therefore doth my Father love
me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man
taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it
down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I
received of my Father." The certainty of His death and of His subsequent
resurrection are here reiterated. A natural effect of His immortal
origin, as the earth-born Son of an immortal Sire, was that He was
immune to death except as He surrendered thereto. The life of Jesus the
Christ could not be taken save as He willed and allowed. The power to
lay down His life was inherent in Himself, as was the power to take up
His slain body in an immortalized state.[877] These teachings caused
further division among the Jews. Some pretended to dispose of the matter
by voicing anew the foolish assumption that Jesus was but an insane
demoniac, and that therefore His words were not worthy of attention.
Others with consistency said "These are not the words of him that hath a
devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?" So it was that a few
believed, many doubted though partly convinced, and some condemned.

As part of this profound discourse, Jesus said: "And other sheep I have,
which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear
my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd."[878] The
"other sheep" here referred to constituted the separated flock or
remnant of the house of Joseph, who, six centuries prior to the birth of
Christ, had been miraculously detached from the Jewish fold in
Palestine, and had been taken beyond the great deep to the American
continent. When to them the resurrected Christ appeared He thus spake:
"And verily, I say unto you, that ye are they of whom I said, other
sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and
they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one
shepherd."[879] The Jews had vaguely understood Christ's reference to
other sheep as meaning in some obscure way, the Gentile nations; and
because of their unbelief and consequent inability to rightly
comprehend, Jesus had withheld any plainer exposition of His meaning,
for so, He informed the Nephites, had the Father directed. "This much
did the Father command me," He explained, "that I should tell unto them,
That other sheep I have, which are not of this fold; them also I must
bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and
one shepherd." On the same occasion the Lord declared that there were
yet other sheep, those of the Lost, or Ten, Tribes, to whom He was then
about to go, and who would eventually be brought forth from their place
of exile, and become part of the one blessed fold under the governance
of the one supreme Shepherd and King.[880]


NOTES TO CHAPTER 25.

1. The Feast of Tabernacles.--In the order of yearly occurrence this was
the third of the great festivals, the observance of which was among the
national characteristics of the people of Israel; the others were the
Passover, and the feast of Weeks or Pentecost; at each of the three all
the males in Israel were required to appear before the Lord in formal
celebration of the respective feast (Exo. 23:17). The feast of
Tabernacles was also known as the "feast of ingathering" (Exo. 23:16);
it was both a memorial and a current harvest celebration. In
commemoration of their long journeying in the wilderness following their
deliverance from Egypt, in the course of which journey they had to live
in tents and improvized booths, the people of Israel were required to
observe annually a festival lasting seven days, with an added day of
holy convocation. During the week the people lived in booths, bowers, or
tabernacles, made of the branches or "boughs of goodly trees" wattled
with willows from the brook (Lev. 23:34-43; Numb. 29:12-38; Deut.
16:13-15; 31:10-13). The festival lasted from the 15th to the 22d of the
month Tizri, the seventh in the Hebrew calendar, corresponding to parts
of our September and October. It was made to follow soon after the
annual Day of Atonement which was a time of penitence and affliction of
the soul in sorrow for sin (Lev. 23:26-32). The altar sacrifices at the
feast of Tabernacles exceeded those prescribed for other festivals, and
comprized a daily offering of two rams, fourteen lambs, and a kid as a
sin offering, and in addition a varying number of young bullocks,
thirteen of which were sacrificed on the first day, twelve on the
second, eleven on the third, and so on to the seventh day, on which
seven were offered, making in all seventy bullocks (Numb. 29:12-38).
Rabbinism invested this number, seventy, and the graded diminution in
the number of altar victims, with much symbolical significance not set
forth in the law.

At the time of Christ, tradition had greatly embellished many of the
prescribed observances. Thus the "boughs of goodly trees," more
literally rendered "fruit" (Lev. 23:40), had come to be understood as
the citron fruit; and this every orthodox Jew carried in one hand, while
in the other he bore a leafy branch or a bunch of twigs, known as the
"lulab," when he repaired to the temple for the morning sacrifice, and
in the joyous processions of the day. The ceremonial carrying of water
from the spring of Siloam to the altar of sacrifice was a prominent
feature of the service. This water was mingled with wine at the altar
and the mixture was poured upon the sacrificial offering. Many
authorities hold that the bringing of water from the pool was omitted on
the last or great day of the feast, and it is inferred that Jesus had in
mind the circumstance of the omission when He cried: "If any man thirst,
let him come unto me, and drink." At night, during the progress of the
feast, great lamps were kept burning in the temple courts, and this
incident Christ may have used as an objective illustration in his
proclamation: "I am the light of the world."

For fuller account see any reliable and comprehensive Bible Dictionary,
and Josephus Ant. viii, 4:1; xv, 3:3, etc. The following is an excerpt
from Edersheim, _Life and Times of Jesus The Messiah_, vol. ii, p.
158-160: "When the Temple-procession had reached the Pool of Siloam, the
priest filled his golden pitcher from its waters. Then they went back to
the Temple, so timing it that they should arrive just as they were
laying the pieces of the sacrifice on the great altar of burnt-offering,
towards the close of the ordinary morning-sacrifice service. A threefold
blast of the priests' trumpets welcomed the arrival of the priest as he
entered through the Water Gate, which obtained its name from this
ceremony, and passed straight into the Court of the Priests....
Immediately after the 'pouring of the water,' the great 'Hallel,'
consisting of Psalms 113 to 118 inclusive, was chanted antiphonally, or
rather, with responses, to the accompaniment of the flute.... In further
symbolism of this Feast, as pointing to the ingathering of the heathen
nations, the public services closed with a procession round the altar by
the priests.... But on 'the last, the Great Day of the Feast,' this
procession of priests made the circuit of the altar, not only once, but
seven times, 'as if they were again compassing, but now with prayer, the
Gentile Jericho which barred their possession of the promised land.'"

2. The Test of our Lord's Doctrine.--Any man may know for himself
whether the doctrine of Christ is of God or not by simply doing the will
of the Father (John 7:17). Surely it is a more convincing course than
that of relying upon another's word. The writer was once approached by
an incredulous student in college, who stated that he could not accept
as true the published results of a certain chemical analysis, since the
specified amounts of some of the ingredients were so infinitesimally
small that he could not believe it possible to determine such minute
quantities. The student was but a beginner in chemistry; and with his
little knowledge he had undertaken to judge as to the possibilities of
the science. He was told to do the things his instructor prescribed, and
he should some day know for himself whether the results were true or
false. In the senior year of his course, he received for laboratory
analysis a portion of the very substance whose composition he had once
questioned. With the skill attained by faithful devotion he successfully
completed the analysis, and reported results similar to those, which in
his inexperience he had thought impossible to obtain. He was manly
enough to acknowledge as unfounded his earlier skepticism and rejoiced
in the fact that he had been able to demonstrate the truth for himself.

3. The Pool of Siloam.--"The names 'Shiloah' ('Shelah,' Neh. 3:15,
'Siloah' in authorized version) and 'Siloam' are the exact equivalent in
Hebrew and Greek, respectively, of 'Silwan' in the modern Arabic name
('Ain Silwan') of the pool at the mouth of El-Wad. All the ancient
references agree with this identification (compare Neh. 3:15; Josephus,
Wars of the Jews, v, 4:1, 2; 6:1; 9:4; 12:2; ii, 16:2; vi, 7:2; 8:5). In
spite of its modern designation as an 'ain' (spring), Siloam is not a
spring, but is fed by a tunnel cut through the rock from the Gihon, or
Virgin's Fountain."--L. B. Paton, in article "Jerusalem," _Stand. Bible
Dictionary_.

4. Whence was the Messiah to Come?--Many stifled their inward promptings
to a belief in Jesus as the Messiah, by the objection that all
prophecies relating to His coming pointed to Bethlehem as His
birthplace, and Jesus was of Galilee. Others rejected Him because they
had been taught that no man was to know whence the Messiah came and they
all knew Jesus came from Galilee. The seeming inconsistency is thus
explained: The city of David, or Bethlehem in Judea, was beyond question
the fore-appointed place of the Messiah's birth; but the rabbis had
erroneously taught that soon after birth the Christ Child would be
caught away, and after a time would appear as a Man, and that no one
would know whence or how He had returned. Geikie (ii, p. 274), citing
Lightfoot in part, thus states the popular criticism: "'Do not the
rabbis tell us' said some, 'that the Messiah will be born at Bethlehem,
but that He will be snatched away by spirits and tempests soon after His
birth, and that when He returns the second time no one will know from
whence He has come?' But we know this man comes from Nazareth."

5. The Record Relating to the Woman Taken in Adultery.--Some modern
critics claim that the verses John 7:53 and 8:1-11 inclusive are out of
place as they appear in the authorized or King James version of the
Bible, on the grounds that the incident therein recorded does not appear
in certain of the ancient manuscript copies of John's Gospel, and that
the style of the narrative is distinctive. In some manuscripts it
appears at the end of the book. Other manuscripts contain the account as
it appears in the English Bible. Canon Farrar pertinently asks (p. 404,
note), why, if the incident is out of place or not of John's authorship,
so many important manuscripts give place to it as we have it?

6. The Treasury, and Court of the Women.--"Part of the space within the
inner courts was open to Israelites of both sexes, and was known
distinctively as the Court of the Women. This was a colonnaded
enclosure, and constituted the place of general assembly in the
prescribed course of public worship. Chambers used for ceremonial
purposes occupied the four corners of this court; and between these and
the houses at the gates, were other buildings, of which one series
constituted the Treasury wherein were set trumpet-shaped receptacles for
gifts." (See Mark 12:41-44.)--_The House of the Lord_, pp. 57-58.

7. The Sheepfold.--Dummelow's _Commentary_ says, on John 10:2: "To
understand the imagery, it must be remembered that Eastern folds are
large open enclosures, into which several flocks are driven at the
approach of night. There is only one door, which a single shepherd
guards, while the others go home to rest. In the morning the shepherds
return, are recognized by the doorkeeper, call their flocks round them,
and lead them forth to pasture."