"Much people of the Jews therefore knew that he was there. And they came, not for Jesus' sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the dead. But the chief priests consulted, that they might put Lazarus also to death: because that by reason of him many of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus," ver. 9-11. And here is an account of some Greeks, or Gentiles, who were desirous to see Jesus, ver. 20-22. Whose readiness, accompanied with humility, may be reasonably understood to cast a reflection upon the pride and obstinacy of those, who were unmoved by the most powerful arguments, and the most gracious invitations. The remainder of that chapter, from ver. 35 to 50, is a most proper conclusion of this part of the gospel, in which are these things very observable. "Then Jesus said unto them: Yet a little while the light is with you; walk while ye have the light, lest darkness come upon you While ye have the light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light. But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him that the saying of Esaias might be fulfilled.-Jesus cried, and said: He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me. I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me, should not abide in darkness.——I have not spoken of myself, but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting. Whatsoever I speak, therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak."

Then in the xiii. xiv. xv. xvi. and xviith chapters our Lord instructs and comforts, prays with and for, his disciples; showing tokens of the tenderest affection, and the most faithful concern for those, who had paid a due regard to the evidences of his mission, and adhered to him under difficulties and discouragements. So begins the next, that is, the thirteenth chapter: "Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come, that he should depart out of the world unto the Father; having loved his own, which were in the world, he loved them unto the end."

And indeed it was very natural for the evangelist, who had largely shown the unreasonableness, and the aggravated

▾ Sicut vero hactenus severitatem Domini in Judæos defendit evangelista, ita in sequentibus a capite xii. ad finem usque fidelitatem Christi illibatam, quam discipulis suis addixit, ex ultimis verbis adserit. Hæc intentio haud obscure addiscitur ex novâ, quæ alteri hujus evangelii parti prefigitur præfatiunculâ, cap. xiii. 1.——Lamp. Prol. 1. 2. c. 4. num. xxxvi.

guilt of the Jews, who did not believe in Jesus, but reject ed him, to give also a particular account of our Lord's kind acceptance of those who believed in him, and persevered in their faith. So that the design of showing how inexcusable the Jewish people were, in rejecting Jesus, and of vindicating Divine Providence in the calamities brought upon them, is what produced the whole order and economy of this gospel.

The two following chapters, the xviiith and xixth, contain the account of our Lord's prosecution, condemnation, death, and interment. In the two last chapters, the xxth and the xxist, are the accounts of our Lord's resurrection, and the evidences of it, with many tokens of kind regard for his disciples, who had followed him in the time of his abode on this earth, and were now to be his witnesses in the world, and to preach, under many difficulties, the saine doctrine which he had taught.

There is another thing, which may induce us to think, that one great design of St. John in writing his gospel, was to show the unreasonableness, and the great guilt of the Jews, in rejecting Jesus: that in his gospel are inserted more instances of their attempts upon our Lord's life, than in the other gospels. Some such things there are in them. Accounts of the pharisees' consulting how they might destroy Jesus, may be seen in Matt. xii. 14; Mark iii. 6; Luke vi. 11; beside their last attempt, when they were permitted to accomplish their evil design. But there are more such instances in St. John's, than in any of the other gospels. As John vii. 1, "After these things Jesus walked in Galilee. For he would not walk in Judea, because the Jews sought to kill him." However, he came up to Jerusalem at the next feast of tabernacles, ver. 2. And their designs were renewed. Ch. vii. 25," Then said some of them at Jerusalem: Is not this be, whom they seek to kill?”—Ver. 31, 32, "And many of the people believed on him, and said: When the Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these, which this man has done? The pharisees heard that they murmured such things concerning him: and the pharisees and chief priests sent officers to take him." But the officers, overcome by the excellence of his discourses, could not persuade themselves to apprehend him for which they were reproached by the council in a most outrageous manner; but Nicodemus strove to allay their resentment; ver. 45 52. And ch. viii. 20, " These words spake Jesus, in the treasury, as he taught in the temple: and no man laid hands on him, because his time was not yet come." Ver. 37,

"I know, that ye are Abraham's seed: but ye seek to kill ine, a man who has told you the truth, which I have heard of God. This did not Abraham." Ver. 59, "Then took they up stones to cast at him."-And ch. x. 39, 40, "Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand, and went away beyond Jordan." And when our Lord proposed to go to Bethany, upon occasion of the sickness and death of Lazarus, the disciples go unwillingly, and would have dissuaded him from that journey, being apprehensive of the imminent danger therein both to him and themselves, ch. xi. 7-16. See likewise ver. 45-57. All these are things quite omitted by the other evangelists. As is also what is said, ch. xii. 10, 11. And in their last persecution of Jesus before Pilate there are some very aggravating particulars mentioned by St. John, which the other evangelists have not taken notice of. See ch. xviii. 29-32; ch. xix. 1–15.

Our blessed Lord, preparing his disciples for afflictions, reconciling their minds to them, and encouraging them to endure them patiently, says, ch. xv. 21-24, "All these things will they do unto you for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me. If I had not come, and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no excuse for their sin. He that hateth me, hateth my Father also. If I had not done among them the works which no other man did, they had not had sin but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father." That is a strong, but just and true representation of the heinousness of the guilt of the Jewish people. For which reason I could not forbear to allege it here, though it should be thought out of place.

And now having, as I suppose, shown this design of the evangelist, let me mention an observation or two, by way of corollary.

First. We see the reason of St. John's recording the miracle of raising Lazarus, omitted by the other evangelists. There was no necessity that they should mention it: for without it they have recorded sufficient evidences of our Lord's mission and character. Nor was it possible, without an improper prolixity, to record all our Saviour's discourses and miracles, as St. John himself has observed. Moreover the first three evangelists have chiefly insisted upon the most public part of our Lord's ministry: for which reason this miracle did not come so directly in their way. But St. John could not omit it. His design necessarily led him to relate this great miracle done so near Jerusalem, and with

all its circumstances. For it manifestly shows the perverse and incorrigible temper of the Jewish priests and rulers.

Secondly. None ought any more to make a question, whether our Lord twice cleansed the temple, or once only. It was cleansed by him at the time of his last passover, as related by the first three evangelists. But it was very proper for St. John to record that done at the first passover of our Lord's ministry: it affording an alarming evidence of his being the expected Messiah, which should have been taken notice of by the Jewish rulers at Jerusalem. It was an early and open claim of the character of the Messiah. And their neglecting that, and so many other claims and evidences of the same great truth afterwards, manifests the obstinacy of their unbelief: which was fitly shown by this evangelist.

I now proceed to some other arguments.

3. One argument, that St. John's gospel was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, is taken from ch, v. 2, "Now there is at Jerusalem, by the sheep-market," or sheep gate," a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches."

On this passage insist both" Basnage and Lampe. St. John does not say, as they observe, there was, but there is. And though the pool might remain, it could not be said after the ruin of the city, that the five porches still subsisted. Mr. Whiston argues in this manner. 'St. John's speaking of the pool of Bethesda in the present tense, better agrees to the time here assigned, A. D. 63, before the de'struction of Jerusalem, when that pool and porch were certainly in being, than to the time afterwards, when probably both were destroyed.'

6

6

6

Dr. Whitby likewise was somewhat affected by this text, and says: "If" there is" be the true reading, as the con'sent of almost all the Greek copies argues, it seems to in

Porro quod tam sero scriptum Joannis evangelium tradamus, id ex sententiâ potius veterum, quam ex rei veritate, fecimus. Ex ipso quippe evangelio nascitur argumentum ad existimandum, lucem prius aspexisse, quam Hierosolyma everteretur. Est,' inquit, Hierosolymis ad portam ovium piscina.' Stetisse ergo videtur urbs sancta, Joanne ea verba scribente. Secus, non præsens, est, &, sed præteritum adhibuisset. Basn. an. 97. n. xii.

* Habetur igitur hic non tantum mentio portæ ovium,' tanquam tunc adhuc exstantis, cum scriberet evangelista, sed etiam ædificii ex quinque porticibus constantis, quales structuræ post dirutam a Romanis Hierosolymam illic frustra essent quæsitæ. Licet enim piscinam superesse velint itineraria, portæ tamen ac muri solo æquata erant. Inde igitur colligimus, stetisse urbem sanctam, Joanne ea verba scribente. Secus, non præsens, est, sed præteritum adhibuisset. Lamp. Prol. 1. 2. cap. 2. num. xi.

Essay on the Constitutions, ch. i. p. 38.

'timate, that Jerusalem and this pool were standing when 'St. John wrote bis gospel: and therefore, that it was written, as Theophylact and others say, before the destruction ' of Jerusalem, and not, as the more ancient fathers thought, 'long after.'

6

But Mr. Jones, beside other things, says, that in all probability the pool was not filled up, but was still in 'the same state, after the destruction of Jerusalem, as be'fore. To which, however, it might be answered, that supposing the pool not to have been filled up, it would not be reasonable to think, that the porches and the gate still subsisted, after the destruction of the city. But then Mr. Jones adds: Supposing the pool was destroyed, and St. John to have known it, there is no impropriety in using the verb ""is" nothing being more common among writers, than to use verbs in the present tense, to denote the preterperfect.' Having represented this argument, as it has appeared to divers learned men, I leave every one to judge of it.

66

4. In ch. xxi. 18, 19, Christ foretells, that Peter would die by martyrdom. Then it is added: "This spake he, signifying, by what death he should glorify God." Some may hence argue, that Peter was not yet dead when this was written or that St. John did not then know of it. But others may be of opinion, that though Peter had suffered martyrdom a good while before, and St. John knew it very well; yet he was not obliged to take notice of it, but might write as he does.

Indeed, I am of opinion, that St. John could not take notice of Peter's death. It was not a thing within his province. As an evangelist, he wrote the history of our Saviour, not of his apostles.

5. A like argument may be taken from the following verses, 20, 21, 22, " Peter seeing John, saith to Jesus: Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him: if I will, that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me. Then went this saying abroad, that that disciple should not die. Yet Jesus said not unto him, he shall not die,

New and Full Method, Vol. iii. p. 141.

* Post Petri martyrium editum esse Joannis evangelium consensus est patrum omnium. Fit tamen in eâ re scrupulus. Petro Christus mortem diserte portendit, cap. xxi. 18——Quæ si scripta sunt, jam misso ad mortem Petro, injici de eâ re mentio debebat, ut et completi oraculi cognitio caperetur, et martyri Christi laus sua concederetur. Basn. Exercit. p. 384.

b Locus ex Joh. xxi. 18, non magni in hac caussa momenti est. Nullam enim video necessitatem, cur mortem Petri commemoraret, si vel actu notitiam ejus habuisset, quia sic per se satis veritas prædictionis Jesu innotuisset, &c. Lamp. ib. 1. 2. c. 2. sect. xiii.