Works

§. Having five Porches.

We observed before that these Porches are to be understood for Cloister walks: five in number according to the quinque lateral, or five-angle form of the pool and place: for so it is more proper to hold, concerning the number rather than to look after allusions and allegories about it, which give but little satisfaction as to the historical matter: whether these Cloisters were built before the healing virtue of the water first appeared for the conveniency of those that had occasion to come to the waters, or after the appearing of that miraculous excellency for the accommodation of them that stayed there for healing, it is not much worth the labor to inquire, and there is but little hope to find it out. It is more generally thought that they were built upon the latter occasion, and so we leave them.

The general silence of the Jews about the race and wondrous virtue of this pool is something strange, who in the abundant praises and privileges and particulars of Jerusalem, which they give, yet speak not one syllable that I have ever found, towards the story of Bethesda, though it might have been a story of so remarkable recognisance: which makes me the rather to believe that this healing virtue of it, was, and was taken for a presage of the near approach of the Messias, as we have spoken, because they to weaken the truth of his coming have subtly been silent in such a matter.

I may not utterly omit to say something about the opinions of others concerning the sovereign efficacy of these waters, the two that are the most current, and that carry the fairest probability and color with them are these,

1. That in this pool the Sacrifices were washed, and God would honor the rite of Sacrifice with such a miraculous work in the place where they were washed and fitted for the Altar: which if the thing were true, were not impertinent in the application, but the truth I question. For if they mean that the beasts that were to be sacrificed were washed here whilst they were alive, as some, and those not a few will have it, it is neither to be proved by the Scripture, nor dreamed of by any Jews that write upon that subject, that any sacrificed beast was to be washed till he was slain: But if they mean that the inwards of the slain Sacrifice was washed here (as the inwards indeed were the only things except the legs, that were to be washed, Lev. 1. 9.) it is easy to be proved by Scripture that the inwards were washed at the Temple, and never brought out thence; and the Talmudists show us a room at the Temple for this very purpose, called The washing room, which we have spoken of in its place, where they had their first scouring, and marble Tables in the Court, where they had a second.

2. Another opinion is, that God by this wondrous virtue of Bethesda waters would antedate, as it were, honor to the waters of Baptism which was now to come in.

But might not the Pharisees as well misconstrue the matter, and say it sealed the honor of their washings, which were of use already and so long before, as well as of Baptism that was now coming in? I am not ignorant of the conception of Tremellius in this matter, in his marginal notes to Nehem. 3. but when I consider what kind of man Eliashib was, to whom that opinion refers so much, I can see but little satisfaction in that conjecture: especially considering how dead the appearing of Angels or miracles had been, from the times of Eliashib, till near the appearing of Christ in human flesh.

It is but a kind of labor lost to stand to debate; whether this season were fixed to all the three festivals, or to Passover time alone, or to Pentecost alone, or to some other determinate time of the year, for these opinions are severally asserted; it is most probable the time was uncertain, and the waiters there could not guess when the Angel would come, but stood in continual expectation and attendance for his coming: Whether he appeared in visible shape is also questionable, but though he were not to be seen, which is the more probable, yet did he give so visible and apparent evidence of his being there, by troubling the water, either causing it to boil, or tumble in waves, or some such thing, that the parties present did perceive well enough when he was come. The Lord would use an Angel in this employment, and the Angel must use the troubling of the water, for the healing effect, not only because it is God's ordinary way of providence to use the ministration of Angels in such things, nor altogether because the mere troubling of the water did produce such an efficacy, but because the people might the more visibly observe the restoring of sensible ministration of Angels, and of works miraculous, which had been either a very mere stranger, or if at all appearing, exceeding rare, ever since the death of the last Prophets or thereabout: And upon this reason I cannot but hold that this miraculous virtue was but of a later date; because miracles and Angels had not been so conspicuous among them till near Christ's coming.

Our Savior is pleased to choose out for his cure, a man and malady of the longest languishing and of the greatest unlikelihood of recovery. If we run back these eight and thirty years to the first beginning of his infirmity, we shall find that he was entered into this his disease seven years and an half before Christ was born, for Christ was now complete thirty years old and an half: and it may be his disease was as old as was this virtue of Bethesda waters. It began upon him immediately after the Temple was finished and completed by Herod, as it will appear to him that will calculate and compute the times. Now I should as soon date this healing virtue of Bethesda from about those times as any times I can think upon. For as the providence of God did bring on and usher in the coming of the Messias (when it drew near) by several dispensations and degrees, so the bringing of the Temple to the highest glory that ever it must have (but only that the King of glory came into it,) and the restoring of Angelical and miraculous administrations were not the least of those dispensations.

But be it how it will, whether the man's disease were as old as the pools virtue or no, it was so old, as doubtless the oldest in all the pack, and as to glorify the power of Christ most singularly in the healing of it.

Christ doth not question this as doubting of his desire, but to stir up his faith and expectation. His lying and waiting there so long, did resolve the question, That he would be made whole; but the greater question was, Whether he had faith to be healed, as Acts 14. 7. and that our Savior puts to trial by this interrogation.

Here is a question also not unjustly moved; Why would Christ enjoin him to carry his bed on the Sabbath day? It was contrary to the letter of the Law, Jer. 17. 21, 22. Bear no burden on the Sabbath day, &c. It was extremely contrary to their Traditions. For bringing a thing out and in from one place to another was a work, and one of the special works forbidden to be done on the Sabbath day. Mayim. in Shab. per. 12. And he that carrieth anything on the Sabbath, in his right hand, or left, or in his bosom, or upon his shoulder, he is guilty. Talm. in Sab. per. 10. And it was dangerous to bring him either to whipping or to suffer death. The most general answer that is given is, that Christ would have him hereby to show that he was perfectly and entirely healed, when he that could not stir before, is able now to carry his bed: and so by this action, at once he gives a public testimony of the benefit received, and an evident demonstration of the perfectness of the cure.

But both these might have been done abundantly, only by his walking sound and well, seeing that he could not walk nor stir of so long before. A man that had been so diseased so long a space, and had lain at these waters so great a time, for him now to walk strongly and well, would show the benefit received, and the cure done as well as walking with his bed on his back. There was therefore more in this command of Christ, than what did barely refer to the publication of the miracle; and that may be apprehended to have been, partly in respect of the man, and partly in respect of the day.

In respect of the man, it was to try his faith and obedience, whether upon the command of Christ, he durst and would venture upon so hazardous an action, as to carry his bed on the Sabbath day, which might prove death, or sore beating to him: and he relies upon the word of him that commanded, and casts off fear and does it▪ And to this sense his own words do construe the command when the Jews question him upon the fact, He that made me whole gave me warrant to do it, for he bad me, and said, Take up thy bed and walk. He whose power was able for such a cure, his word was warrant for such an action. And as our Savior stirs up his faith in his question before, Wilt thou be made whole? so he tries what it is in this command, Take up thy bed and carry it home: for so we must construe that Christ meant by walking, from the like expression, Mark 2. 9. with verse. 11.

In respect of the day, it was to show Christ's power over the Sabbath: And as in healing of the palsick man, Mark 2. 9. he would not only show his power over the disease, but also over sin, and so forgave it: So it pleased him in this passage, to show his power over the Sabbath, to dispence with it, and to dispose of it as he thought good, as he shown his command over the malady that he cured.

And here is the first apparent sign toward the shaking and alteration of the Sabbath in regard of the day that we meet withal, and indeed a greater we hardly meet with, till the the alteration of the day came. To heal diseases and to pluck off ears of corn for necessary repast on the Sabbath day, had their warrant even in the Law itself, and in all reason: but to enjoin this man to carry his bed on that day, and to bear it home, whereas the bed might very well have lain there till the Sabbath was over; and his home was no one knows how far off; certainly it showeth that he intended to show his authority over the Sabbath, and to try the man's faith and obedience in a singular manner. It was easy to foresee how offensive and unpleasing this would be to the Jews (for it stuck with them a long time after, Joh. 7. 23.) and how dangerous it might prove to the man himself, and yet he purposely puts him upon it, that he might hereby assert his own divine power and God-head, as it appeareth by his arguing for it, when they cavil at him all along the Chapter. Even the same power that could warrant Abraham to sacrifice his own son, and Joshua to march about Jericho on the Sabbath day.

The Faith and Obedience of the man upon Christ's command (though it were of so nice consequence) do argue to us, that his appearance at the Temple, was to render his thanks for the great benefit he had received. The poor wretch had hardly been at this Temple for eight and thirty years together, (the date of Israel's wandering in the Wilderness after God's decree upon them, Numb. 14.) and now seeing he is miraculously enabled to go thither, it is time to go to give praises to him who had done so great things for him. It was at the Passover that he was recovered, a time when all the people upon the engagement of the command, were to present themselves before the Lord: but his long absence and his present miraculous enabling to appear, did double and treble the engagement upon him.

There Christ findeth him, where it was fittest he should be found, owns him again, and giveth him the wholesome admonition, Sin no more lest a worse thing come unto thee. Not only implying that all our maladies come for sin, but as it seemeth concluding that this long and sore diseasedness had seised upon him, for some particular and notorious offense.

Not with an evil will or intention, to have Christ endangered or persecuted for his work on the Sabbath day, but in zeal to profess and publish him to the Jews, for the wonder wrought so powerfully by him: we need no other argument to prove the negative; namely, that he sought not to endanger Christ, than even common sense and reason: For, for a man so graciously recovered from so sad and so long a malady, to go about in requital of this, to forward and seek the destruction of him that did recover him, is a thing so horrid and incredible to conceive, that it would speak a Devil rather than a man that did it. It is true indeed that the Jews to whom he went to tell this, were the Sanhedrin, or the men of authority; but that he did it for the honor of Jesus who had cured him, his obedience to Christ's command, his pleading the warrant of that command, his resorting upon his healing to the Temple, his lesson given him by Christ there, and his mentioning only the miracle of healing, and not the command to carry his bed, are arguments sufficient to evince. So that this healed man's errand to the Jews is not to accuse Christ, but to preach him, and to incite them to take such notice and respect of him, as was fit for one that had done so great a miracle.

The speech of Christ from hence to the end of the Chapter, was made by him (as hath been said) before the Sanhedrin, before which he was called to answer for what he had done on the Sabbath day: for whereas it is said the Jews did persecute him and sought to kill him, it is most proper to understand it, that they went about it in a Judicial way, (as they would pretend) even as they did when they put him to death indeed. Now through all the speech he pleads himself to be the Messias, in as plain terms and with as strong arguments as could be uttered, and yet that Court that was to judge of true and false Prophets, doth neither believe him for the true Messias, because of the wickedness of their own hearts, nor yet punish him for a false, because of the fear they had of the people, and because his time was not yet come. It is something strange that the Evangelist hath not given us intelligence of the issue of this so plain and so full a plea, which Christ pleadeth even for his life: but by his silence in such a thing, we may well conclude the irresistible power and truth and clearness wherewith he spake, which though the Jews would not comply with, nor entertain, yet were they not able to deny or contradict it.

For the asserting of the act that he had done on the Sabbath, he averreth his power as he was the Messias, and alledgeth the Testimony of John, of his own miracles, of the voice from Heaven, and of the Scriptures to prove he was so: And though he do acknowledge that he had received his copy and power of working from the Father, yet doth he account it no robbery to equal himself with him in his mighty working, and authority, and particularly in those three great affairs, the managing of which are only proper for the hands of God, and those are, raising of the dead, judging of the world, and disposing of the Sabbath: He proves this last which was the matter that he had in pleading, by his authority and power that he had in the two former: That as God raised the dead, so he raised whom he would, and as God judged men, so he also judged; nay, the father had committed all judgment to him, and therefore as the Father had authority over the Sabbath, so had he also authority over it: That is his argument in these words that we have in hand, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work: in which he referreth to what is spoken concerning God, in relation to the Sabbath, That God rested on the seventh day, and blessed that day, and sanctified it: and yet God by his providential actings worketh hitherto, even every Sabbath, and so saith he, do I also work; doing good on the Sabbath, and dispensing providences for the benefit of man, and for the accomplishing of his ministration: But how does the parallel between God's works of providence on the Sabbath, and this acting of Christ on the Sabbath, hold throughout, or in all the parts of it? As God doth good on the Sabbath, dispensing his Ordinances, sending rains and Sun-shine, providing food for all flesh, &c. so Christ did good on this Sabbath, healing a disease, and recovering a man from so long an infirmity. Herein the parallel holdeth clearly: but Christ went a step further, for he commanded the man to carry his bed, which tended to the visible violation of the Sabbath, which God's providential actings do not do. It is true indeed that God also commanded the Priests of the Temple to work on the Sabbath in killing, slaying, and sacrificing beasts, but this was for the greater promotion of his service: and he commanded Joshua to march about Jericho on the Sabbath day, but that was for the more forwarding of the public good: but this command to the man to carry his bed, tended neither to the one end, nor to the other, but merely and mainly to show the power and authority that Christ had over the Sabbath: Skan but considerately that command and action, and you will find the tendency of it, so directly and properly to nothing, as to this very thing: Say it was to show the completeness of the cure, that might have been sufficiently, and indeed as much shown, either by the man's found walking without his bed, or by carrying his bed the next day; Was it more for the glorifying of God? Regarding the bare action, one would suppose, that to have kept the Sabbath and not giving offense to others, might have tended to that end more fairly. There was therefore this chief thing in it, besides the trial of the man's faith and obedience, That Christ would glorify his divine power and authority, in showing his command and disposal that he had over the Sabbath.

Therefore whereas his pleading, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work, does answer most directly but to one objection that lay against him, namely, for healing on the Sabbath, yet doth it satisfy the other sufficiently, which was his command to the man to carry his bed; for he that wrought in other things with the same authority that the Father worketh, he also hath the same authority over the Sabbath that the Father hath; who as he ordained it, so can he dispense with it as pleaseth him.

Now Christ in this command cannot be conceived to have intended to vilify the Sabbath, as it was a day of rest, or to lay that Ordinance of keeping such a day of rest unto the Lord, in the dirt; but he that was to alter the Sabbath to a new day, and in that equality of working which he had with the Father, he was to set a new Sabbath day upon the finishing of the work of Redemption, as the Father had done the old upon the Creation: and therefore as in preface to such a thing, he both giveth such a command, and pleadeth for what he had done, from his divine authority, as beginning to shake the day which within two years was to be changed to another, The proof of the divine institution of the day of the Christian Sabbath, may be begun here.

1. By the Son in this place, and in the discourse following, we are to understand, not the second person in the Trinity, simply and solely considered in his God-head, which while some have done, they have intricated these words with endless and needless scruples: but the Son, as he stood there before them, when he speaketh these words, namely, as the Messias, God and Man; and so he himself doth teach us to understand it at verse. 27. The Father hath given authority to the Son to execute Judgment because he is the Son of man.

2. The terms of Father and Son, do not only speak that relation of the Father and the Son in the God-head, which doth peculiarly regard the eternal generation of the Son begotten of the Father, and the mutual and natural notion of Fatherhood and Sonship that is betwixt them by that generation, but it more singularly referreth to the several or distinct managings of the Father, as to the affairs of the Old Testament, and the Son as to those of the new. For though it is most true, and undeniable, that the Father in times of the Old Testament, did work by the Son in his dispensations to the Church and World; as by him he made the World, and him he made Lord of all things: yet was his acting by the Son in the times of the New Testament, infinitely more apparent and discernible, because the Son appeared in human and visible shape, the Messias sent of God, God blessed forever: and did great and powerful things parallel to any done by the Father in the administration of the Old Testament. And this construction of the Relative terms Father and Son, the very scope of Christ's discourse, doth call upon us to make, and the particulars of it as we come to take them up, will help to clear unto us and confirm: For 1. the matter that Christ was pleading now about, which was concerning his present demeanour towards the Sabbath, needeth not so much a discourse to tell the Jews how far the second person in the Trinity simply considered as God, could act of himself, or how far he received his activity from the first Person, or how far the first person shown his Counsels to the Second, as to show how far the Lord gave power, and imparted himself unto the Messias; and how far he in his Kingdom and Administrations did come near to the Lord in his: For 2. the Jews were not so well acquainted with the distinction of the Persons in the Trinity, the first and the second, as they were with the distinction of the Father or the Lord, that had ruled in the world hitherto, and the Massias, that in his time should be the King and Ruler by the Lord's appointment; and it was proper for Christ to speak to them so as they might best understand him, and so he doth according to their own distinction, which indeed was most true and proper. And 3. Observe the whole speech of Christ throughout this Chapter, and you find it divided into these two parts, 1. To show what was the power and acting of the Messias to verse. 31, 32. and 2. to prove and evidence that he was he: Not so much to show what is the power and acting of the second Person in the Trinity simply considered in his Godhead and compared with the first, nor so much to prove that he was the second Person in the Trinity, as to show and to prove himself to be the Messias.

3. When he saith therefore, The Son can do nothing of himself: he meaneth, that the Messias cometh not in his own power, though the second person in Trinity be Omnipotent, but he is sent and hath his Commission from God the Father, as he doth continually both in this speech and in other places inculcate, that the Father sent him. As he is the Son of God, he is all powerful in his nature, and as he is the Messias he hath all power put into his hand by the Father, and yet he saith He can do nothing of himself, because he owns the appointment by which he was sent as Messias by the Father. He could do all things of himself as he was God, but he could do nothing of himself as he was Messias, because he was a servant, and bare that Office upon the designment. And therefore the Arians were miserably wide and willfully blind, when they produced these words of the Son himself to infringe the glory of the Son, and to prove him not equal to God the Father; not distinguishing, what a Child might have done, betwixt his divine Nature which could do all things, and his Mediatorial Office, which could not do, but what he that sent him had appointed. In the former they might have owned infinite power, and in the latter infinite obedience: for it was not imperfection in him that he could do nothing of himself as Messias, but it was perfection of obedience and compliance to the will of him that sent him: and this does not only argue the readiness of his will, but the impeccableness of his nature, for he could do nothing of himself, but his actings were wholly and necessarily wrapped up in the Will of God.

4. Now to apply this part of his speech to the occasion of his present plea: He had done a great miracle, and he had, as they thought, violated the Sabbath, and he was especially to speak unto the latter, for thereupon lay his accusation: and he argueth that he had not done what he did on the Sabbath of his own mind, but that it was comprehended within his Commission, as Messias: and as he had in that his Office received authority from the Father to do wonders, to raise the dead, and to judge the world, so had he also, no have command and disposal over the Sabbath peculiarly.

5. His words, But what he seeth the Father do, are to be pointed and referred to the same sense, and limitation, to which the preceding part of the verse hath been referred: To understand the words properly, and in their first apparent signification is something difficult: To say strictly that Christ could do nothing but those individual and singular things which he had seen God the Father actually to do before him, would be very rugged, and such a saying as would not be proved. For fecit mundum, tamen non vidit Patrem ante facientem, it is the objection of some of the Fathes: He made the world, and yet he saw not the Father make another world before him: He took upon him human nature, yet he saw not the Father do so before him, and so of other particulars. But his meaning is, according to the thing that he was speaking of, namely, that in his administrations under the Gospel, he could do nothing, but according as the Father had done under the administration of the Old Testament: not as to every singular and particular administration, as if Christ in the administration of the New Testament was to do no particular thing, the like to which the Father had not done before, but it is to be understood in reference to the general, of power, authority and disposal, according to which the Messias acted in the Gospel, even as the Father had done before: And so the words immediately following do expound it, Whatsoever he doth, the same doth the Son likewise.

This God proclaimed twice in a voice from Heaven, Matth. 3. 17. & 17. 5. which very words do teach how to understand the term Son all along this discourse, namely for the Messias, God and man; Isaiah 42. 1. Eph. 1. 6. whom as David represented in other things, so did he even in his name, which signifieth Beloved, and Solomon in his name Jedidiah, 1 Sam. 12. 24. The Father, besides the infinite and eternal love he beareth to the Son, as God the second person in the Trinity, Prov. 8. 30. is said to love the Son as Messias, because of his undertaking man's redemption, and promoting Judgment, righteousness, knowledge, mercy, &c. the glory of the Father, &c. Isaiah 42. 1, 2, 3, 4. Heb. 1. 8, 9. John 10. 17.

§ And showeth him all things that himself doth.

By showing is not meant barely discovering or revealing, but imparting and communicating: As Psal. 4. 6. Who will show us any good: that is, who will bestow any good on us? Psal. 85. 7. Shew us thy mercy: 1 Kings 2. 7. Shew kindness, &c. that is, grant and vouchsafe it. And such is the meaning of Christ's words here, that the Father doth grant and communicate to him, as the Administrator of the New Testament, the same power and activity that he himself exercised under the Old. To do and act in the same divine Authority, and in the same miraculous power, that he himsel used and acted in, doing whatsoever pleased him.

§ And he will show him greater works than these, &c.

It was a great work that Christ had done, in healing a man of so long diseasedness and it was a great matter that he had assumed, when he granted such a dispensation with the Sabbath, and yet he must do greater things than these, before he had done, namely, raise the dead, and change the Sabbath day. It is said in verse 16. The Jews did persecute Jesus because he had done these things on the Sabbath day: These things, that is, healed the man, and commanded him to bear his bed: In answer to those two particulars, our Savior speaketh in this expression greater works than these: and in the two next verses he showeth what greater works those are, namely, raising the dead and power of all Judgment. If any will take the clause, in comparison with the works that the Father had done in the Old Testament, as that he would vouchsafe the Son to do the like, nay greater than these, there may be an innocent construction made of it, for we read of greater miracles done by Christ than done before, but in that he instanceth in the two particulars, verse. 21, 22. it argueth that he speaketh not of doing greater works than the Father had done, (for the Father had done those two works that he instanceth in) but of doing greater works than those that he had done already, for which he was now upon his answer: He had healed a long continued disease; but as the Father raised the dead, so would he raise dead as he thought good, and he had only granted a dispensation for a particular action on the Sabbath; but the Father had committed all Judgment about the affairs of men into his hand; and he might alter the Sabbath if he pleased, and he would do it. Now whereas he referreth these his great works to no higher end in this his speech, but only this, That ye may marvel, he proposeth not this as their ultimate end, for that end you have in verse 23. but he proposeth this only as a fruit of those works that he should work, that they should be to the astonishment and conviction of these that now accuse him, though not to their entertaining of him and believing, Parallel to that Acts, 13. 41.

This relateth to what is spoken of God in the Old Testament, Deut. 32. 39. and to what he did in the Old Testament, by the Ministry of his Prophets. He proclaims himself God alone, in the place cited, because he killeth, and maketh alive, and he raised some dead by the means of Elias and Elisha, &c. Now (saith Christ ) as the Father or God whom ye acknowledge this great Agent in the Old Testament showeth this power, and so thereby shown himself to be God alone: even so the Messias in the New Testament is invested with the very same power to raise and quicken whom he will, that all men should honor the Messias, the Administrator of the New Testament, as they honor the honor the Father, the Administrator of the Old: For to this tenor (that I may say it again) doth he speak all along this Chapter, parallelling the Father and the Son, not in regard of their equal Diety and Divine power as God, but in regard of their dispensations to the sons of men under the two Testaments. As how is it possible to understand this passage in hand, As the Father raiseth the dead, under any other notion, than as is mentioned, when verse. 17, 18, 19. do clearly ascribe the general Resurrection to the Son?

This is but the same in sense and substance with those many places of Scripture, where the Lord setteth up Christ as King and Lord of all things: as Psal. 2. 7, 8. &c. Psal. 89. 27. Isaiah 9. 6, 7. Heb. 1. 2, 6. &c. Dan. 7. 13, 14. Isaiah 42. 1, 2. &c. Jer. 3. 9. Mat. 28. 18. Rev. 16. 19. &c.

It pleased the infinite wisdom of God to use this most divine and mysterious dispensation, that the Son of God should become the Son of man, and this God-man, the Lord Christ should be set up the head of all Principality and power, Col. 2. 9. and King and Ruler and Judge of all things. And this dispensation the Scripture ascribeth to divers reasons.

1. To Christ's natural and essential interest, as I may express it, for he was the only begotten of the Father, and so necessarily the heir of all things, Heb. 1. 2.

2. To God's love of the Son, because he laid down his life for man's redemption, Joh. 10. 17. Philip. 2. 8, 9. He became obedient to the death, &c. Wherefore God hath also highly exalted him.

3. To God's willingness and contrival that man should have the utmost means of the knowledge and for the honoring of God that was possible, namely, by revealing his Son in human flesh, yet in the highest evidence of Divine power, Matth. 21. 37. Heb. 1. 1. When men for all the means that he had used for the bringing of them to the knowledge of himself, yet would not know God, nor worship him as God, but doted after God's that were visible, the Lord sends his own Son in visible shape, and in visible demonstration of his Divinity in that he raised himself from the dead, Rom. 1. 4. and setteth him up as Lord of all things, to be worshipped as God blessed forever, and in and through him the Father to be worshipped who sent him.

4. The Scripture holdeth out Christ as the arm of the Lord, Isaiah 53. 1. & 40. 10. the Combatant and Champion against Satan and all the Lord's enemies, Gen. 3. 15. Revel. 19. 11. &c. And the Lord hath set him up to reign till all these enemies be put under his feet, 1 Cor. 15. 24, 25.

5. God hath given him authority to execute judgment, Because he is the Son of Man, John 5. 27. which we shall speak to when we come to that verse.

The great design of the blessed Trinity was, to reveal itself the eternal God-head to be worshipped Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity: In the times of the Old Testament the Father was worshipped and acknoweledged, dispensing indeed his administrations by the Son, the Angel of the Covenant and the Arm of the Lord, but himself more especially owned, as the Fountain and Original of all Divine dispensations, as Psal. 2. 6. &c. Exod. 23. 20, 21. Prov. 8. 22. Isaiah. 42. 1. &c. Under the New Testament the Son was visibly exalted, and set up as the Lord to whom every knee should bow, and every tongue confess, in that he gave the Gospel as the Father had done the Law, subdued Satan, triumphed over death, ascended visibly by his own power into heaven, and did as visibly pour out and send down the Holy Ghost which he had promised: That as all men had honored the Father under the Old Testament, so all men should equally honor the Son under the New. The Arian in denying the God-head of Christ, and his coequality with the Father, is not only injurious to his person, but also contradicteth the highest and greatest design of heaven, for Christ's exalting: And the Jews, Turks, and whosoever take upon them to honor God, and acknowledge not Christ, their undertaking is but vain, since they honor not the Son whom he hath set up and exalted over all.

These words and those in the verses following, have their rise from verse 21. and lie in connection with the sense of those words, and are in explanation of them. There he had said, that, As the father raised the dead, so the Son quickeneth whom he will, and in these verses he speaketh to that point, and in this verse he showeth how he quickeneth spiritually, and in the following how he quickeneth bodily, and both his assertions he setteth on with this asseveration, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .

The matter of this verse seemeth to be taken from those words in Isaiah 55. 3. Incline your ear and come unto me: Hear and your soul shall live: Upon which last words Ibn Ezra giveth this gloss, It meaneth that the soul abideth though the body die, or it meaneth that the Messias shall revive those that turn to the Law of God. And so likewise do other Jews confess there, that those words, and the context before, do speak of the teaching of the Messias.

Our Savior in the verses before had pleaded his equal acting as he was Messias, with God the Father as he shown himself in the administration of the Old Testament: that as the Father raised the dead by Prophets then, so he quickened whom he pleased: and as the Father had judged, so now he had committed all Judgment unto him: and here he cometh on with a third parallel, and that is, that as the Father had given the Law, or the Word of the Old Testament, so he should give the Gospel the Word of the New: And as it was life to hearken to the Work of the Father, Deut. 30. 15. 20. so he that heareth his Word hath life everlasting, &c. He was the Word of the Father, that came out of his bosom to reveal him, Joh. 1. 18. He was the great Teacher promised and expected, Deut. 18. 15. Acts 3. 23. and sealed and proclaimed, Matth. 17. 5. 1 Pet. 1. 17. He was to be the destroyer of the works of Satan, the hearkening to whose word had been man's confusion, and therefore it would not only be their piety to hearken to him who revealed the Father: nor would it be only suitable to their expectation, who looked for the great Teacher and were resolved to be taught by him, but it would be eternal life, and everlasting healing to the Soul, against those wounds that hearkening to the words of the Tempter had made in it.

Now in that he saith, And believeth on him that sent me, 1. He doth most properly center the ultimate fixing and resting of belief in God the Father: For as from him, as from the fountain, do flow all those things that are the objects of Faith in its living and moving, namely, free Grace, the gift of Christ, the way of redemption, the gracious promises, &c. So unto him as to that Fountain doth Faith betake its self in its final repose and resting, namely, to God in Christ, as 2 Cor. 5. 19. and he doth hereby more clearly open that mystery of God in Christ, than if he had spoken only of believing himself, or only of believing the Father. 2. There are some that conceive that he speaketh of believing him that sent him, rather than of believing him himself, that by this humble reference of all to God, he might make his speech more accceptable to the hearers. 3. Compare this passage with Exod. 20. 19. and Deut. 18. 16, 17, 18.

His expression of passing from death to life, seemeth to refer either to the doom upon Adams not hearkening to the voice of God, thou shalt die the death: or to the codition under which every man is left by the Law, namely, under a curse: from which, hearkening to the voice of the Gospel is deliverance. Or it may be it is spoken in some parallel to the case of the man healed, for he by hearkening to the Word of Christ received health of body, so whosoever heareth his Word obtains life of the Soul: And thus doth Christ still make good the word that he had spoken to the man for a dispensation with the Sabbath: and argueth that he might do such a thing, because he was to give the Law and Word of the New Testament, as the Father had done of the Old: and showeth that though violation of the Sabbath deserved and had been punished with death, yet obedience to his Word and Command, was discharge and a passing from death to life.

1. These words are most generally understood, as aiming at those dead that Christ raised by his voice or word to life again, as saying to Jairus daughter, Talitha Kumi, to the widows son of Naim, Young man arise, and to Lazarus, Lazarus come forth: And being taken in such a relation, the connection of them to the words going immediately before lieth thus. Christ had spoken there of his spiritual reviving, whosoever should believe his Word, and here he either produceth a proof and evidence, of what he had there spoken, or else alledgeth it as another wonder and virtue of his power, that by his voice he would raise those that were bodily deceased. And he ascribeth this reviving to the hearing of his voice, partly because he had ascribed the spiritual reviving to the hearing of his Word, and partly to distinguish his rasing of those dead from the raising of those that were revived under the Old Testament: for they were not raised by a word, but by other applications, 1 King. 17. 21. & 2 King. 4. 34. & 13. 21.

2. It was the opinion of the Jews, that there should be a resurrection in the days of Messias. The Chaldee Paraphrast glosseth Hos. 6. 2. thus, He will revive us in the days of consolation, Luke 2. 25. which are to come in the day of the Resurrection of the dead. And Hos. 14. 8. thus, They shall be gathered out of their captivity, they shall sit under the shadow of their Messias, and the dead shall revive, and good shall be multiplied on the Earth. And Isaiah 49. 9. I give thee for a Covenant to the people, to raise the righteous that lie in the dust. And Kimchi on Isaiah 26. 19. The Holy blessed God will raise the dead at the time of deliverance. And in Jer. 23. 20. In that he saith, Ye shall consider it, and not, They shall consider it, it intimateth the Resurrection of the dead in the days of the Messias. And on Ezek. 37. It may be God shown Ezekiel the vision of the dead bones reviving, to signify to him, that he would raise the dead of Israel at the time of deliverance, that they also might see the deliverance. Ab. Ezr. in Dan. 12. 2. The righteous that died in the captivity shall revive when the Redeemer cometh, &c. And this was so far the opinion of the Nation that they understood the term The World to come of the state of glory, and yet of the days of Messias, as shall be shown when we meet with that phrase: Now there was a Resurrection in the days of the Messias accordingly, not only of those three that have been named, but also of divers Saints whose graves were opened and bodies arose, Mat. 27. 52. And if the words that we have in hand be applied to the raising of dead in a bodily sense, they may most properly be pointed to that Resurrection, which was so parellel to the expectation of the Jews; and Christ asscribing such a matter to himself, doth prove himself to be the Messias, even they and their own opinion being Judges.

3. But the raising of the dead, is taken in Scripture also in a borrowed sense, namely, for the reviving and quickening of those that were dead in trespasses and sins, &c. as Ephes. 2. 1. And that sense doth seem more agreeable to this place, because our Savior in the verse before doth apparently speak of such spiritual reviving. The calling in of the Gentiles to the Gospel, is called a Resurrection in divers places of the Scripture: as Esa. 26. 19. Thy dead men shall live, together with my Body they shall rise: awake and sing ye that dwell in the dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the Earth shall cast out her dead: What dead these are that were to rise with Christ's body from the dead, is not so much intimated in that passage of the Evangelist, The bodies of divers Saints arose, Matth. 27. 52. as in that saying of our Savior, There shall no sign be given them but the sign of Jonah the Prophet: By which he doth not only signify his own death and Resurrection, but he doth also gall the Jews with an intimation of the calling of the Gentiles upon his Resurrection, as the Ninevites were called upon Jonahs Resurrection out of the grave of the Whales belly. And that dew of his that should enliven men as the dew doth herbs, is the dew of the Doctrine of the Gospel, as Deut. 32. 2. And so likewise Hos. 6. 2. speaketh to the very same tenor, of Christ's raising the dead in a spiritual sense, upon his own Resurrection which was on the third day: And so is the Resurrection in Ezek. 37. plainly expounded in that very chapter, to be in a spiritual sense, and so the Apostle construes it, Rom. 11. 15. Amd the calling of the Gentiles is styled the first Resurrection, Rev. 20. 5. &c.

That Christ meaneth the dead, and the raising of the dead in this sense in this place, might be argued upon these observations.

• 1. Because throughout his speech hitherto and some steps further the scope of his discourse is, namely, to prove his all powerful rule and disposal of the affairs under the Gospel, equal to what the Father had under the Law, of which the calling of the Gentiles was one of the most eminent and remarkable.
• 2. Because, as was said before, his very last words preceding, were of passing from death to life in a spiritual sense, which argues that he intends the same sense here.
• 3. In that he ascribeth reviving to his Voice here, as he did there to his Word.
• 4. Because he distinguisheth upon hearing his voice, The dead shall hear it, and as many as hear it shall live: which is applicable a great deal more fairly to the bare, and to the effectual hearing of the Gospel; than to dead in corporal sense.
• And 5. lastly, Because there are so great things spoken of the calling of the Gentiles in the Scripture, and of Christ's work about that matter, and their Heathenish condition so expressly called death, and their embracing the Gospel a resurrection, that when Christ is speaking of his actings in the New Testament, and useth such words as these before us, we may not improperly apply them in that sense: It would have prevented many controversies, and not a few errors, if the Phrases the last days, and the day of the Lord, and the end, and new Heavens, and new Earth, and the dead raised, &c. had been cautelously understood, and as the Scripture means them in several places: But as for the raising of the dead in the verse in hand, it needeth not very much curiosity to fix it to either of those as a determinate sense, since taken either way that hath been mentioned, it carries a fair construction most agreeable to the truth, and not very disagreeable to the scope and context.

It is needless to dispute here how far the second person in the Trinity may be said to have or not to have his being of himself: for the words do not consider him simply as the second person, but as the Messias God and Man, as is the tenor of speech all along: And in this acceptation we may give the words this construction.

1. That they are a Paraphrase upon the name Jehovah, which betokeneth God's eternal being in himself, and his giving of being to the Creature: and that they mean, that as the Father is Jehovah, so also hath he given to the Son the Messias, that name above all names, as Philip. 2. 9. to be owned and worshipped for Jehovah, having life in himself, as being the eternal and living God, and having the disposal of life in his power as being the God of all living.

2. That as the Father is the eternal and immortal God, so also is the Messias; and though he stand there before the Sanhedrin in human appearance, yet should he never see corruption, as Psalm 16. 10. but declare himself mightily to be the Son of God, and to have life in himself, by his raising himself from the dead, Rom. 1. 4. Being the first and last, He that liveth though he died, and is alive for evermore, Amen, and hath the Keys of Hell and death at his disposal, Rev. 1. 17, 18.

3. As the words before may be applied to Christ's raising from the dead those that were either bodily or spiritually deceased; so these are a reason and proof of that assertion, because as the Father hath the absolute disposal of life in his own power, so hath he given to the Messias the same disposal.

By this passage it is apparent in what sense our Savior useth the term The Son, and The Son of God, all along this discourse; namely, for the Son of God as he was also the Son of Man or the Messias.

There hath been some scruple made (as was mentioned before) upon the reason given of Christ's authority of Judging, namely, because he was the Son of Man, which will be removed, by rightly stating the sense of the Son of Man, which we may take up in these three particulars.

1. The Phrase the Son of Man, may be taken to signify simply A Man, and then the words are to be understood in this sense, He hath given him authority of judging, because he is a man; and then is the reason current and apparent under this construction.

First, Because the Son of God humbled himself and became man for the redemption of man, therefore the Lord hath given him authority to be judge of man, as Phil. 2. 8, 9.

And secondly, He hath given the Messias authority of judging, because he is man, that man might be judged by one in his own nature, as Act. 17. 31. He hath appointed a day in which he will judge the World in righteousness, by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

2. The title, The Son of Man, which our Savior so oft applieth to himself in the Gospel, doth not speak him barely A Man, but it owns him as that singular and peculiar seed of the woman, or Son of Man that was promised to Adam to be a repairer of ruined mankind, and the destroyer of the works of Satan, (as the term hath been cleared before.) And in this construction, the reason of Christ's authority of judging because he was the Son of Man, is yet cleared further: namely, because he was the Son of that promise, the Heir of the world, and Redeemer of mankind, and Destroyer of Devils; therefore the Lord did give authority to him to be Lord of the World, and Judge of Men and Devils; to destroy the Serpent and his seed that were his enemies, and to perfect and save the holy seed that should believe in him and obey him; and to do and order all things here in this world, that were in tendency either to the one or the other end.

3. The Messias is thus charactered, in Dan. 7. 13, 14. Behold one like the Son of man came with the clouds of Heaven, and came to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a Kingdom that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him.

Upon which words R. Saadias glosseth thus, This is Messias our righteousness. But is it not written concerning the Messias lowly, and riding upon an Ass? Because he shall come in humility and not in pomp riding upon Horses. And with the Clouds of Heavens, meaneth the Angels the Host of Heaven: this is the abundance of greatness which the Creator shall give unto the Messias, &c. Our Savior in the words that we are upon, seemeth to point at those words of Daniel: and whereas it was confessed by the Nation, that the Son of Man there spoken of, to whom all Dominion was given, was the Messias, he doth here plainly aver that it was himself; and that all Authority and Judicature was given him because he was the Son of Man.

Observe how purposely he changeth expressions: In ver. 25. He speaketh of raising the dead by the voice of the Son of God, and here, of executing judgment, because he is the Son of Man; not only that he might assert the two natures in the Messias: but also that he might distinguish the double power that was in himself, natural as he was God, and dispensed as he was, and because he was the Son of Man.

At what? Cyril thinks, At the healing of the diseased person; and he reduceth the words to this sense, Think not the curing of this disease so great a matter, for I can, and once must raise even all the dead, and judge all the world. But for ought we find they were as much filled with indignation at that cure, as with wonder. Therefore it seemeth more likely that their marvailing must rather refer to the words of Christ that he had now spoken, than to the work that he had done. For comparing his person that they saw standing before them, with the power and acting that they heard him speak of, it is no wonder if they wondered at his words, and it is probable they did little believe his power, See verse. 38, 40, 41, 42.

But how doth he satisfy their wondering and unbelief any whit by the words which follow? Had they believed these things that he had spoken hitherto, then might it have been proper to have added this about raising all the dead: but when they believed not the former, to what purpose was it to bring in this for confirmation, when they would believe neither this nor that?

Answ. 1. Christ was to speak in his authority, and the guilt of their unbelief was to rest upon themselves.

2. They could not deny him for a Prophet because of his miracles, Joh. 3. 2. and he would wind them up to believe that he was the great Prophet.

3. It was a proper proof of his power and authority to judge all men, to assert that he had power to raise all men from the dead, and to bring them to judgment. And those that did believe his former words, would believe these and see the arguing pregnant: but those that would believe neither, are left highly inexcusable, having heard Christ so fully and plainly asserting himself to be the Messias, as in all the Gospel he doth it not plainer.

4. Here we may add one thing more about the term the Son of man, for the clearing of that clause before, He hath given him authority of Judging because he is the Son of man.

It is observable that as the Jews do most constantly call Christ the Son of David, both in the Scripture, as Matth. 21. 9. & 22. 42. Luke 18. 38. and infinitely in their writings, so doth Christ most constantly call himself the Son of man; and that title is only used by himself and in his own speeches: The reason of this his different styling himself from their common title of the Messias, may be conceived to be, partly because whereas they under the term the Son of David, did conceit the Messias for an earthly King, as David was, he in his term the Son of man, would contrary them in that opinion: and partly because by that title he would show what relation his office should have towards all men, even towards the Gentiles as well as the Jews; whereas they expected the Son of David, a King of the Jews only, or at the least, especially: For it is true he was indeed the Son of David, and so the Jews had first interest in him: but withal he was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Son of man, promised to Adam, and so whole mankind had interest in him: And his arguing in verse. 27. may be understood not only in reference to his authority of judging, but also in regard of the generality of that authority; that as in ver. 25. he was to raise even the Gentiles from their dead condition to the life of the Gospel, so in verse. 27. he had authority and dominion given him throughout all the Word, even among the Gentiles, and that because he was the Son of man, or the seed promised to Adam, in whose loins the Gentiles were as well as the Jews when that promise was made, and whose Mediatorship concerned them as well as the other. And if these words be taken up in such an interpretation, this confirmation of them by asserting his power to raise all the dead, cometh on thus: Marvail not at these transactions that I speak of with the Gentiles, as to raise them by the Gospel, and to execute Judgment even through all Nations, for I am to raise the dead of all Nations at the general Judgment, and that by the Testimony of the Scripture itself, Dan. 12. 2.

These words do so directly speak the sense of that place cited in Daniel, though they differ something in expressions, that it is little to be doubted that they were spoken from thence.

An Angel to Daniel is there relating the grievous times that Israel should undergo under the persecution of Antiochus, and because at that time the cursed Doctrine of the Sadducees, which denied the world to come (a desperate Doctrine in times of persecution) should be at a great height and entertainment, therefore with the prophetic story of those times, he doth join the Doctrine of the Resurrection, and of everlasting reward, for the staying of the hearts of those that should live and suffer under those bitter days, and to arm them against fear of death and suffering for the truth.

I might be observed how Christ in this speech which he maketh before the Sanhedrin, which consisted of Pharisees and Sadducees, doth meet with both their Heretical principles, with a cutting doctrine: Against the Pharisees doting upon Traditions, he holdeth out his own word, as the great oracle of truth to be believed, ver. 24. and against the Sadducees denial of the Resurrection, he holdeth out the Doctrine of that in this verse, and his own power to be the Author and effector of it. But this I do but note by the way.

These words might also be applied to a spiritual Resurrection as were the former, (and so coming out of graves meaneth, Ezek. 37. 12.) the words of the verse following being only translated and glossed thus, And they shall come forth, they that do good after they hear his voice in the Gospel, to the Resurrection of life: And they that do evil after they hear the Gospel, unto the Resurrection of damnation: But they are more generally understood of the general Resurrection, and so will we take them; And that the rather because this sense is so exceeding suitable to the method that Christ useth in this speech. The main scope of his oration is to justify himself to be the Messias, and from that very notion, to justify the thing that he had done about the Sabbath. His Speech he divideth into these two heads.

• 1. To show what his work and authority was as he was the Messias. And
• 2. To show what testimony there was of his so being.

The former which he prosecuteth hither, he handleth in these several particulars; His power of miracles to the highest demonstration of Divine Power, equal with the Father, verse. 19, 20, 21. His absolute authority of ordering all things, verse. 22. His Divine Worship under the New Testament, as the Fathers under the Old, verse. 23. His being the Teacher of his Church and preacher of the Gospel, verse. 24. His calling of the Gentiles, verse. 25. His raising of himself from the dead, and having the disposal of life and death in his own hand, verse. 26. His universal dominion over all, verse. 27. His being the powerful raiser and Judge of all at the general resurrection, verse. 28, 29, &c.

All that are in the graves, ] In Daniel it is, Many of those that sleep in the dust, &c. that is, The many, meaning All: Not that all the dead are in graves, for some were drowned, some burnt, &c. but because the grave is the most common receptacle of the dead; and because the Jews did ordinarily render the word Sheol, which betokeneth the place and state of the dead generally, by the grave, as see Targ. Jonath. in Gen. 37. 35. & 44. 29. &c. & Buxtorf. in voice 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 significat (Sheol) in genere locum corporum humanorum post mortem, unde communiter pro Sepulchro, &c.

Shall hear his voice. ] We might here intricate ourselves in a dispute, whether there shall be an audible voice of Christ at the general resurrection, or whether the hearing of his voice do mean the feeling of his power only, (as some do understand it) to the expense of that time, which might be better improved in preparing against that time come: These Scriptures speak about that matter, 1 Cor. 15. 52. The Trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised. 1 Thess. 4. 16. The Lord himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the Archangel and with the Trump of God. 2 Pet. 3. 10. The day of the Lord will come as a Thief in the night, in the which the Heavens shall pass away with a great noise, &c. But as for that Text which is commonly produced to the same purpose, Mark 24. 31. He shall send his Angels with a great sound of a Trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, &c. It plainly speaketh only of Christ's sending his Ministers with the Trumpet of the Gospel to fetch in people to the Faith; for verse. 34. saith that this and the other things spoken with it in the verses before, must be accomplished before that generation that was then alive should pass.

It is not to be doubted but the coming of Christ to Judgment, will be in the dreadfullest state and terror that heart can conceive, (and the terror of that day of accounting for all actions, may well be guessed by the terror of the day of giving the rule of all actions, Exod. 19, & 20.) and that the Lord shall then utter his voice, his mighty voice; it is not to be doubted neither, but this in thunders and dreadful and majestic noises, (for such are called the voice of God ) rather than in any articulate sound of words: The Talmud in Sanhedrin fol. 97. cited before, speaking of Voices and Thunders that should be a little before the coming of the Messias, the Gloss there saith, These are the voices of the Son of David.

I shall leave it to the Readers own thoughts to make the most feeling and dread commentary upon these words that he can, towards the awing of his heart to a preparedness against that dreadful time when it shall come.

Our Savior seemeth in these words to allude to two customs and traditions of the Jews, and to plead with them from their own principles.

1. The Talmudic tract Sanhedrin, speaking concerning men's inquiring of the Judicatories in matters of difficulty, hath this Tradition: They ask first of the Sanhedrin in their own City 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If they had heard it, they resolve them. If not, they go to a Sanhedrin near their City 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If they had heard it they resolve them: If not, they go to that in the gate of the Mountain of the House 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If they had heard it they resolve them, &c. Perek. 11. where by the words, if they had heard, they mean if the Sanhedrin had heard by Tradition what was to be the determination of such a matter, they judge accordingly: but if they had not heard, then the last recourse was to the great Sanhedrin of 71. which was the very Treasury of Traditions. Christ being come now before the Sanhedrin, seemeth here to speak to them according to their own rule, As you judge according as you hear and receive by Tradition, so I judge as I hear: meaning, either as he had heard and received from the Father in the divine and secret Counsels between them, or rather as he received intelligence and warrant for his actions from the Word of God; doing those things that were there written of him: And the words immediately before, I can do nothing of myself, being understood of him as God-Man, may be easily understood, and without straining, in such an exposition.

2. Rambam in his tract about 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Messengers and Partners, and the Talmudists occasionally in the Treatises about Contracts, Espousals, and Divorces, &c. conclude this for a Maxim, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That a Messenger that doth that upon which he was sent, all his acts are good in Law: And 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A Messenger that transgresseth against the words of him that sent him, his act is nu •• : upon this very ground Christ's arguing here is clear and pregnant, and cometh home to their own position: My judging is just, because I being sent of the Father, do not mine own will, but do the errand that he sent me upon and do his will. And to this sense may we also interpret his words in verse. 24. for the fuller clearing of them, He that heareth my word and believeth him that sent me, because his words were but the words of him that sent him, the Doctrine of the Gospel, being but the same with the Doctrine of the Law and Prophets.

This he speaketh also according to their own grounds and manner of proceeding in their Courts: Though he did bear witness of himself, yet his witness was true, Joh. 8. 14. but in their Judicatories, a man was not to be witness in his own cause, but he stood or fell by the witness of others: And so not true here, is to be understood ad modum recipientis, they would not accept it as a current testimony in his pleading for himself to bear witness of himself; therefore in the verses following he produceth other witnesses on his behalf, and this verse is but a transition to the second part of his oration, which was to produce proof that he was the Messias: he had in his discourse hitherto, declared his power, authority, and actings, as he was Messias. But I know (saith he here) that what I say of myself will not be a current Testimony with you, therefore I shall produce you others to witness of me, as John the Baptist, verse. 33. the works he wrought, verse. 36. the Father, verse. 37. the Scriptures, verse. 39. and particularly Moses, in whom ye trust, verse. 46.

This is John the Baptist, as the verses following do explain this: to whom they before whom Christ is now pleading, had sent to inquire, as Joh. 1. 19. and he gave testimony concerning Christ, then near at hand: Now in that he saith, I know that his witness is true, it will admit of a double construction: either I know that his Testimony is current with you, and will pass for sufficient; or though you should sleight his Testimony, as invalid, yet I know it is true. And though I need no human testimony, yet do I refer you to his Testimony, that if it would be, I might bring you to be persuaded and to believe that I am what I take on me to be, that ye might be saved.

Here is a glorious and eminent testimony concerning John who was yet alive, though now that burning and shining candle was put under the bushel of an unworthy prison. It is familiar with Scripture to denote the Ministry of the Word and Ordinances in the Church, under the notion of the Lamps or Candles burning in the Golden Candlestick, as Zech. 4. Revel. 1. & 11. &c. And according to that tenor of speech doth our Savior speak here concerning the Baptist, &c.

The latter part of the verse, which is the more difficult, ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light, is variously understood. By some thus: Ye were taken and affected with his holiness and exemplary life, but his Doctrine and testimony concerning me, ye cared not for: By others, to this sense. You were content to entertain and rejoice in the doctrine of John, for a while, but would none of the true light when he is come whose light lasteth forever. But by others thus and more near the purpose, Though John were so bright a candle, yet ye cared for his light but for a while.

It appeareth by the story of the Gospel, that upon the first breaking forth of this light, it was entertained with exceeding great and general applause and affection, as see Matth. 3. and Luke 3. and the people received John as a Prophet, Maith. 21. 26. But did the Sanhedrin so also? (for to them Christ is speaking) And if they did so, what caused them to cast him off? Answer, It is evident by Luke 7. 30. that these great Doctors and Rulers of the people, refused Johns Baptism, and yet it is as evident by these words, that they rejoiced in his light for a while: which contrary carriages are to be considered with these respects: When the Ministry of John first appeared, it shown itself in so high a demonstration of power and holiness, that the Nation, especially the learned that were most observant, could not but rejoice to see so much dawning of Prophesy appear, which had been so long nighted, and so fair a sign of the coming of Messias which was expected about that time: For though John did no miracles, Joh. 10. 41. which might proclaim him for a Prophet, yet was his Doctrine so powerful and convincing, his conversation so admirably holy and religious, his admonitions so free and fearless, his speech so to the glory of Christ, and not of himself, and the concourse to him so general and wonderful, that it could not but be a rejoicing to them to see so much hopes towards the answering of their long and longing expectation of Messias coming: especially when now they looked that he should shortly appear, Luke 19. 11. and when they also looked for a great change upon his coming, (such a change was Johns baptizing and his doctrine.) But when they found not in John those mistaken carnal characters that they looked after, as that he was neither very Elias from Heaven, nor one of the Prophets from the dead, nor Messias himself, and when they found his doctrine to tend to so dangerous an issue (as they held it) as to the crying down of their self-righteousness of which they so much triumphed, and of their Pedegree-Privileges, and to the alteration of their frame of Religion, then is John the Baptist lost in their repute, and he scandaled to have a Devil, Matth. 11. 18. Observe that Christ saith not Ye were willing to walk in his light, but to rejoice in it: yea and to rejoice in it exceedingly, for so the Original word importeth: Not that they took any holy content, or had any joyful inclination to reform according to the Doctrine that John preached, but that they hoped those glorious times of the Messias that they looked for, did now begin to appear in this new risen Prophet, and that they should see and have their share in those pompous and brave businesses that they had fancied to themselves at Messias his coming: It seemeth by Joh. 1. 19, 20, &c. that they had looked upon John with such thoughts and conceit a great while together before they put him to trial who he was, namely from his first beginning to Preach and Baptize, till after Christ's forty days of temptation was finished in the Wilderness, which was above seven months: conceiting that it was possible that this was the Messias, Luke 3. 15. (and to this conceit it is that John gives his first No, Joh. 1. 20.) but when they found not all things answering their low and carnal apprehensions concerning the Messias, Johns light was no more regarded by them.

Here is the second witness that he produceth to prove himself to be the Messias, namely the undeniable testimony of his great works, which he calleth a testimony greater than Johns, partly because John did no miracles, partly because these miracles that he did, carried with them more pregnant conviction than the words of John: It might be some question quoad rem ipsam, whether the testimony of John were not as Divine a Testimony, as the witness of Christ's miracles, but he speaketh as referring to the influence and validity of them towards the convincing of the people.

The faithless Jews, for the evading of the undeniable force and argument of Christ's miracles, have found out two cursed and damned tergiversations, and they are these.

1. That the Messias when he came should do no miracles at all: this position is asserted in the Talmud in Sanhedrin in that famous Chapter called Helek, where the Gemarists do speak exceeding much concerning the Messias and about his coming: And from thence it is produced by Maymony in Melachin Umilcha moth per. ult. The wretched deceivers having this poor shift to answer to all the miracles that Christ did, which indeed were infinite.

To which they have also 2. joined another, more visibly blasphemous than indeed this, but both rancorous alike at the heart, and that is, That what miracles Jesus did he did them by the power of the Devil: as Matth. 12. 24. The Pharisees said, This man casteth not out Devils but by Beelzebub the Prince of Devils. And so the Talmudists in the Treatise Shabbath, fol. 104. Did not the son of Satda (so they title our Savior, and there is a blasphemy in it) bring Sorceries out of Egypt?

What the unprejudiced opinion of the people was in these two points, we may observe in John 7. 31. And many of the people believed on him, and said, When Christ cometh will he do more miracles than this man hath done? In which they conclude fairly and plainly against the two blasphemous and rancorous opinions that have been alleged and assert, That Messias when he came should do miracles; and that the miracles that Jesus did were suitable to those of the Messias: the Scripture spake the former, and his miracles themselves the latter, so plainly that it was not reasonable, but brutish and devilish to deny either: And when our Savior in the beginning of the verse calls his works, The works which the Father had given him to finish, he both showeth that his works were from God, and that God had appointed that the Messias should do such works, Isaiah 53. 10. The pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand: It was the Lord's pleasure, and he performed it accordingly.

The works that God gave appointment and authority for the Messias to do, were indeed the actions of his whole life, for he was doing the Will of God continually, but those that he meaneth more especially here, when he saith they were given him to finish, may be reduced to these three heads, His fulfilling the Law in the holiness of his life, his Preaching the Gospel, in the demonstration of abundance of the Spirit, and his working miracles for the good of the people: There was none of these three taken singly, but they did resplendently bear witness of him, that he was the person, he took on him to be: much more did they give an undeniable testimony of him, being considered altogether: The Phrase To finish seemeth to reflect upon that Prophesy in Esa. 42. 4. He shall not fail nor be discouraged till he have set judgment in the Earth: Wherein is foretold that the Messias should accomplish and finish whatsoever in the work of his Mediatorship he should undertake: And the title that God puts upon him in the first verse of that Chapter, My servant, declareth that his works were given him to finish by the Father.

1. The holiness of his conversation was so exact, that we need not to go to Testimony of Scripture that doth so highly celebrate it; he himself doth challengethe Jews, who were sufficiently captious, to accuse him of sin if they could, or to find any mote in his holiness, and do their worst.

His lowliness, meekness, zeal, and earnestness to do good, and all these acted in an unfading constancy and in the highest activity, and that to the continual hazard of his person, might be illustrated to this purpose if it were needful. As Johns extraordinary sanctity was the greatest testimony that raised him in the hearts of the people: for miracles he did none, and his Doctrine and Baptizing they could not tell so well what to say to, as to his holiness which was so visible: So Christ in this kind had a testimony beyond him, and as far beyond him, as real and cordial holiness is beyond Ceremonial: For though it is true indeed that John was really and cordially holy, yet that Sanctity that the people admired in him, was in his external and Ceremonial strictness of raiment, diet and conversation.

2. His Doctrine and Preaching was so parallel to the predictions of the Old Testament concerning the Doctrine that was to be revealed by him, it was so high in discovery of the things of Heaven, it was so clear in opening the hard things of the Law, it was so convincing of the Errors of their false Teachers, it was so Divine in its tenor, it was so gracious in his mouth, and so piercing in the hearts of the hearers, that where willful malice and mischief had not blinded, they could not but confess, That never man spake like him, Joh. 7. 46.

3. His miracles were done in such power and number, without difficulty or restriction upon men and Devils, healing all diseases, and denying healing to none that sought it, and all this when working miracles had been dead so long, and in all this he seeking no glory to himself; these gave a testimony so fully of a virtue above human, nay above Prophetick, that where again malice and mischief had not blinded, they could not deny, that the Messias could not do greater miracles than he did, Joh. 7. 31.

This is the third Testimony that he produceth for himself, namely the witness of the Father: which may be taken either for the testimony which God had given him of old in the Law and Prophets, or a late by a voice from Heaven when he was baptized: If we understand the words in the former sense, then the context following, Ye have neither heard his voice, &c. may be taken thus, Though God hath never to your eyes nor ears born witness to me from Heaven by any sensible demonstration and evidence, yet hath he given abundant testimony of me in the Word of the Scriptures: But if we take them in the latter sense, than the context speaketh to this tenor. Although it be a most rare thing to hear any audible voice, or to see any visible appearance of God from Heaven, and you never heard or saw any such thing in your Generations, yet for my sake and to bear witness of me there hath been such a voice and appearance: Or if we understand them jointly both of the Testimony that God gave of the Messias in the Old Testament, and of the witness that he gave by a voice from Heaven, the sense of the words following ariseth to this, The Father of old in the Scriptures, and of late by a voice from Heaven hath born witness of me, but as ye never heard his voice from Heaven, nor saw his shape, so neither do you regard nor retain his Word since ye believe not him whom he hath sent.

Besides those reasons that have been alleged already out of the words of the verse itself, to prove that the verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is to be rendered in the Indicative sense, Ye search, rather than Search ye, these considerations may also be added for the confirmation of that construction.

1. That Christ is speaking to the Doctors of the Sanhedrin, the most acute, diligent and curious searchers of the Scripture of all the Nation. Men that made that their glory and employment: and howsoever it was their arrogancy that they thought their skill in Scripture more than indeed it was, yet was their diligence and scrutinousness in it real and constant even to admiration▪ It was exceedingly in fashion among the Nation to be great Scripture-men, but especially the great Masters of the Sanhedrin were reputed as the very Foundations of the Law and pillars of instruction, as Maymony stiles them in the treatise Mamrim, cap. 1. And therefore it cannot be so proper to think that Christ in this clause, sets them to the study of the Scripture, upon which they spent all their wits and time already, as confessing their studiousness in Scripture, yet showeth them how unprofitably they did it and to little purpose.

2. They did exceeding copiously and accurately observe and take up the Prophesies in Scripture that were of the Messias, and though they missed in expounding some particulars concerning him, yet did they well enough know that the Scriptures did testify of him abundantly.

3. The word that is used 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which betokeneth a narrow search, seemeth to be intended purposely to answer the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which they themselves ascribe to themselves in their unfolding of the Scriptures.

4. It was their conceit that the skill and knowledge in Scripture was now in its flour and prime amongst them, having been restored by Hillel who died about the twelfth year of our Savior's age, even as Ezra had restored the Law when it was forgotten. Juchasin. fol. 55. And let us take a scantling of the rest of the Doctors now present, by this testimony which is given of two of them, namely of Rabban Gamaliel the old, and Rabban Jochanan ben Zaccai who were both of the Sanhedrin at this time: From the time that Rabban Jochanan ben Zaccai died, the beauty of wisdom failed, and from the time that Rabban Gamaliel the old died, the glory of the Law failed, &c. Sotah. per. 9. So that these things considered, and the verse next following looked into, the speech of our Savior in these words appeareth, not to be intended so much to urge them to whom he speaketh to the study of the Scripture, as to speak to them in such a reproof as this, for studying the Scripture they knew not how, Ye search the Scriptures and they are the very things that testify of me, and Yet ye will not come unto me, &c. which is much to the same tenor and effect that those words are to Nicodemus, Chap. 3. 10. Art thou a Master in Israel, and yet knowest not these things?

Now in that he saith, In them ye think to have eternal life, he denieth not that eternal life is to be had in the Scriptures, nor doth he that thinketh to have eternal life in them think amiss, but yet he taxeth the Jews grounds and principles upon which they went, about this matter. They thought that the very study and knowledge of the things in the Scripture was available to Salvation by the very work wrought. And as they thought that the people that did not know the Law were cursed, Joh. 7. 48. so they reputed that they that were skillful in the Law, had blessedness enough by that very thing though they went no further: It were easy to show, how they placed the fruit and efficacy of all duty in opere operato, even as the Romanists do about their devotions. How the repeating of their Phylacteries, saying over their prayers, resorting to their Synagogues, &c. were reputed by them as enough done, if they did but do the outward formal work: And as concerning the bare study and knowledge of Scripture, and the bare historical belief of them, how far they rested in that, we need go no further than to Rom. 2. 17, 18, 19, 20. &c. Jam. 2. 19. &c. otherwise it might be shown out of their own Authors copiously what was their opinion in this point.

In what he addeth, They are they that testify of me, the Emphasis may not be passed unobserved. He saith not only they testify of me, but, they are they that do it: as intimating that the Scriptures are the great, singular and intended witnesses of Christ, the fullest and the highest testimony of him, as 2 Pet. 1. 19. And ye study and search them curiously (saith our Savior,) and they are they that do abundantly, and were given purposely to testify of me, and yet ye will not come to me: Ye think of having eternal life in the Scriptures, now this life is only to be had by coming to me, and not by the bare searching of them, and yet ye will not come to me. And thus doth Christ read unto us,

• 1. The dignity of the Scriptures, as his choicest witness.
• 2. The end of them, himself.
• 3. Their work, to bring men to him.
• 4. And 4. the fruit of all, Eternal Life.

He had said, that he received not testimony from men, before verse 34. and now he speaketh of another matter: He had copiously asserted himself for the Messias in the former part of his speech, and had shown what Divine testimony he had that asserted the same in the latter part; and now he cometh to show the end and manner of his actings and demeanor, namely, not to receive honor from men, or that he might be glorified with any worldly glory, but that he might seek the glory of God, and the glory which is of God only: as the 43 & 44 verses help to explain his speech here: In verse 43. he saith he came not in his own Name but in his Fathers, and that doth teach us to construe the words that we are upon, That therefore he sought not to magnify his own Name with any human or mundane honor, but that he sought God's glory. And in verse 44. he opposeth seeking honor from men and the glory which is from God, as things contrary and inconsistent, and therefore when he saith here, I receive not honor from men, he disclaimeth all human glory and ambition, though he had spoken of his equal power and dignity with the Father before, and of the high testimony that was of him: And he may be conceived to speak this the rather,

1. Because of the conceptions that the Nation had, of the Messias coming in an earthly pomp and glory.

And 2. because of his words that he had spoken immediately before, And ye will not come to me, &c. which he would clear from any carnal or ambitious sense, which might be put upon them, as if he desired to make himself the head of a party. No saith he, it is not honor from men that I look after, but the glory of God, and to approve myself to him, &c.

There needeth no much curious insisting upon the manner of expression, whether to take the verse as it lies verbatim before us, or to make only the sense of it (as some do) I know that you have not the love of God in you: To take it either way it is very sharp and cutting, and carries a smart and a sad, but a most deserved censure in it, compare Exod. 3. 19. Revel. 2. 2, 7. 13. 19. &c. Joh. 2. 25. &c. The juncture of these words with the former (for the word but relates them thither) is first to be looked after, and then the intent of the words themselves. Our Savior had said before that he received not either testimony from men, or glory from men; but that he had his witness from God (for this is plainly expressed) and that he received honor from God (for that is included:) But he concludeth that they for all this would neither receive that Testimony that God had given of him, nor would they regard him himself, nor the honor of God that he looked after, and all because they had not the love of God in them.

Were the love of God in them, they would receive him whom God sent, to whom he bare witness and to whom he gave honor, but I know you (saith he) that ye have not this love in you.

Herein 1. He taxeth their great hypocrisy, who pretended so much religion, and so much love of God and godliness, when as there was indeed no such matter in them.

2. He meeteth particularly with their pretended zeal about the Sabbath, which they charged him that he had violated, and showeth that howsoever they took upon them so much forwardness in that cause of God, yet did it not proceed from any love in them that they bare to God; for they seemed to call the Sabbath a delight, but they did not delight themselves in the Lord, as Isa. 58. 13, 14.

And whereas he saith, He knoweth them, that they are devoid of this love.

1. It may be understood in opposition to the apprehensions of others concerning them, who were deluded with their fair outward shows, and thought they had abundance of piety and the love of God in them, but he knew them that there was no such thing.

2. He speaketh this as the Messias the knower of the heart, and their hearts if they had any stirring in them could not but witness with him that he spake to purpose.

3. He might speak this from that visible evidence and experiment that they gave continually of their want of the love of God, in accepting the persons of men, and disregarding those that came in the name of the Lord, as he prosecutes this argment in the verse following: And thus the Lord is come to his own Temple, as a Refiners fire and Fullers sope, a searcher of hearts and a discerner between dross and silver, betwixt him that loveth the Lord and him that loveth him not, Mal. 3. 2. Judging the great Judges of the Sanhedrin, and charging most justly upon them, who were the great examiners of witnesses, for despising the witness of God, and who were to be custodes utriusque tabulae, that the sum and tenor of the first Table, the love of God, was not at all in their hearts.

1. Here is a proof and confirmation of what he had said before, that the love of God was not in them, for they received not him that came in the name of God.

2. He seemeth to foretell, how ready they should be to embrace false Prophets and false Christ's, which would arise abundantly amongst them after they had refused the true Messias, as Matth. 24. 24. as, to omit all other instances, Rabbi Akibah the very head of the Sanhedrin in his time, became even Armor-bearer to Ben Cozba a false pretended Messias, who drew many thousands into error and ruin in the time of Adrian.

3. He showeth that their principles carried them necessarily to despise those that were sent of God, and to embrace them that came in their own name, because they looked after and regarded human glory.

And upon this point our Savior Christ differed from all false Prophets, and false Christ's, that had appeared either before or after him, because he sought not the praise of men, but of God. The falsest cheats that came, took upon them to come in the name of God, even as he did; and yet he saith they came in their own names, because they sought their own glory and worldly advancement, which he did not. Ben Cozba made wars, obtained great victories, stamped coin in his own name, and looked only after worldly pompousness: But our Savior came poor and lowly, sought nothing of this world, and ascribed all he did to the glory of him that sent him.

How these great ones looked after the praise of men, not caring to approve themselves to God, it is intimated in the Gospel many times over, Matth. 23. 5. All their works they do for to be seen of men, Joh. 12. 43. They loved the praise of men, more than the praise of God, &c. Now this ambitious humor of theirs was as far contrary to believing in Christ, as could be possible; For their high thoughts and his lowly condition were not consistent, or of capacity to suit together: since they that were all for vain glory and the praise of men, did think it scorn to be Disciples to one of so mean a condition as he appeared, Compare James 2. 1, 2, 3. &c. Seeking the honor that cometh from God only, is so to approve heart and ways before him, and unto him, as to have his approval, Euge bone serve, &c. See Rom. 2. 29.

As Elias did Israel, Rom. 11. 2. and Isaiah did, Chap. 6. 5. Coals (saith Rabbi Solomon) are mentioned concerning Isaiah and concerning Elias 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 because they spake accusation against Israel: the one called them a people of uncircumcised lips, and the other said, they have forsaken thy Covenant, &c.

Our Savior in the verses before, had justly taxed these men for divers guilts; as, for want of the love of God, for unbelief, for defect of the Word in them, for ambition and seeking the praise of men and not of God; and upon all these he might take occasion to accuse them to the Father: But the special thing that he aimeth at, in these words that we are about, is their refusal of him whom the Father had sent among them: as verse. 38. Him ye believe not. verse. 40. Ye will not come to me. verse. 43. I am come in my Fathers name and ye receive me not, whereas another coming in his own name ye will receive, &c. And for this might he deservedly make a return of their contempt of him, to the Father which sent him, by praying and complaining to God against them, but Think not that I will accuse you, &c.

Did they think of any such thing? Or did they regard whether he accused them to God or no?

Answ. 1. There might be places alleged out of their Talmudical writers, in which they bring in the Messias sometimes complaining against his generation, and it is their confession, that in the generation when the Son of David should come 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 there should be accusations against the Scholars of the Wise, Cetuboth in Gemar▪ ad fin.

2. It might be supposed they measured the temper of Christ, by their own dispositions, or by common human manners. He was now before the High Court, from which whither should he appeal if he be wronged by it, but to God? And so would passionate and mere men be ready to do, and pray to God against, and they might judge that he would be of the same temper and practice. But

3. Our Savior's meaning is, that he needed not to accuse them to the Father for disregarding him, though the Father had sent him, for they had their accuser already, even Moses in whom they trusted.

Not the person of Moses accusing them, but his doctrine: As when the Apostles are said to sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve Tribes of Israel, it meaneth, by their doctrine, and not in their persons: They trusted in Moses doctrine, as looking to be justified by the works of the Law: whereas his doctrine tended all along to drive men to Christ. And therefore a just accusation lay against them even in his writings, which mainly aimed to show justification by Christ, when they taking on them to be so observant Scholars of Moses, yet utterly disregarded and refused him, whom Moses had clearly, chiefly, and solely proposed as the main and ultimate end of his Law. And so our Savior in these words doth apparently aver the Law of Moses to be a doctrine of Faith.