《Preacher’s CompleteHomileticalCommentary–John (Vol. 1)》(Various Authors)

Commentator

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary, by Joseph Exell, William Jones, George Barlow, W. Frank Scott, and others, was published in 37 volumes as a sermon preparation and study resource. It is a commentary "written by preachers for preachers" and offers thousands of pages of:

  • Detailed illustrations suitable for devotional study and preaching
  • Extensive helps in application of Scripture for the listener and reader
  • Suggestive and explanatory comments on verses
  • Theological outlines of passages
  • Expository notes
  • Sketches and relevant quotes
  • Brief critical notes on chapters

Although originally purposed as a minister's preparation tool, the Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary is also a fine personal study supplement.

00 Introduction

The Preacher's Complete Homiletic

COMMENTARY

ON THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO

St. John

By the REV. W. FRANK SCOTT

New York

FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY

LONDON AND TORONTO

1892

THE PREACHER'S

COMPLETE HOMILETIC

COMMENTARY

ON THE BOOKS OF THE BIBLE

WITH CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES, INDEXES, ETC., BY VARIOUS AUTHORS

THE

PREACHER'S HOMILETICAL COMMENTARY

ST. JOHN

INTRODUCTION

I. THE DISCIPLE II. THE APOSTLE III. THE EVANGELIST

(1. The authorship of the Gospel;

2. The time of writing and place of publication;

3. The purpose for which it was written); IV. LIST OF WRITINGS CONSULTED IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS VOLUME.

I. THE DISCIPLE

As this volume is mainly homiletical, the controversies in New Testament criticism which have raged round the questions of the authorship and date of St. John's Gospel need not be dwelt on here. They are fully dealt with in works like the commentaries named at the end of this Introduction, and will be briefly referred to here under the heading The Evangelist. It will be sufficient to state now that the critical discussions of the last half-century have in no way undermined the credibility of the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel, but, on the contrary, have more clearly and firmly established it (see Godet, Pref. to 3rd Ed., pp. 29-32).

John, the son of Zebedee and Salome (Mar : compare Mat 27:56 and Mar 15:40), the brother of James, was one of the three disciples admitted to closest fellowship with our Lord during His public ministry. At the time when the public ministry of our Lord began John's home was in Galilee. With his elder brother James he was engaged in his father's calling as a fisherman on the Galilean lake. It is not certain that he was born in Galilee, however. His intimate acquaintance with Jerusalem and its topography would almost presuppose a prolonged residence in the holy city. He was also known in the high-priestly circle in the capital (Joh 18:15). His connection with the family of Caiaphas may have been one of distant relationship; for it is interesting to note that his name is one which appears among the members of the high priest's family (Act 4:6). He also had a home in Jerusalem (Joh 19:27), it would seem. Indeed Zebedee's family were evidently in good circumstances, as we see from Mar 1:20; and during the greater part of Christ's public ministry Salome is found among the band of pious women from Galilee who "ministered to the Saviour of their substance" (Mat 27:55-56; Luk 8:3). Zebedee must have died, apparently, soon after the Saviour began His public work (see Mat 20:20; whilst Zebedee is not spoken of in Joh 21:1-14). Thus Salome was able to devote herself to the work of ministering to Jesus. In connection with this it is interesting to remember that it is now believed that Salome was the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and that she it was who, under this designation, formed one of the group of women who stood near the cross on Calvary (Joh 19:25 : compare Mar 15:40-41). Salome was one of the company of women who came early on the resurrection morning to the tomb in the garden, bearing sweet spices to anoint the body of Christ, who, though they yet knew it not, had risen from the dead (Mar 16:1, etc.).

Although Zebedee and his family had some close connection with Jerusalem (probably a "commercial" connection, or in relation to property—Joh ), yet John and his brother had evidently been brought up in Galilee. In Jerusalem such a youth as John would have sat at the feet of some great Rabbi; and the reproach of the want of a training in the schools would not have been brought against him later (Act 4:13). But at the opening of our era good public schools existed in all the towns and villages of any importance in Galilee. At one of these, taught no doubt by some one trained in the rabbinical schools, John and his brother would receive an education adequate to their position in life, as sons of a well-to-do middle-class citizen. For the future apostles such a training would be less narrowing than that received in the famous schools in the capital. Prolonged visits to Jerusalem at the great feasts and at other times would give John that acquaintance with the holy city which the Gospel shows he possessed.

His school-days over, with his elder brother James he followed his father's occupation. He would probably be about twenty-five years of age when the whole country began to be stirred by the preaching of one who in words and manner brought to mind the old prophets of Israel. John the Baptist came forth into the wilderness of Juda, clothed in shepherd garb, sternly preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins (Luk ). So earnest and convincing was his preaching that from all the region round about Juda, as well as from the capital, men flocked to his baptism. His appearance after the long interval of prophetic silence led many to think he was Elijah, come according to the promise of the closing prophetic word (Mal 4:5); whilst others "mused in their hearts whether he were the Christ" (Luk 3:15). The two young, pious, and ardent sons of Zebedee were attracted to the Baptist, and were numbered among his disciples. But when the latter pointed his followers to Jesus as the Lamb of God, John was one of the first to obey the Baptist's prompting, and thenceforward with his brother followed the Redeemer (Joh 1:35-42). Their direct call to discipleship came later, when at the word of Jesus they left their occupation and home to become His constant followers, apparently with the full consent of Zebedee and Salome (Mar 1:19-20; Mat 4:22). They may for a time have still occasionally returned to their calling, and may have received a second call (Luk 5:11); but at all events they were soon found in the inner circle of the twelve, chosen by our Lord to be with Him (Mat 10:1-4; Mar 3:14-19; Luk 6:13-16).

Both brothers were originally of an ardent, enthusiastic, and even fiery temperament, and on this account were called Boanerges (Mar ). The fire and force of their natural temperament, however, were to be turned into new channels by divine grace. They possessed the old prophetic zeal and wrath against unrighteousness; and sometimes they would have acted with the old prophetic severity (Luk 9:54). But they soon learned under the benign influence and teaching of the Redeemer that He came to save, not to destroy, that the law was no longer to rule, but grace, and that the Father desired men's salvation (1Ti 2:3-4). They had their ambitions also (Mat 20:20-24; Mar 10:35-41) founded on false Messianic expectations, which were difficult to eradicate (Act 1:6).

John's young and receptive mind and heart were quickly moulded, however, by the Saviour; and no one seems to have understood better our Lord's higher spiritual teaching than John, who combined enthusiasm with contemplation. To our Lord he was the "beloved" disciple, and his gifts of mind and heart made him a fit instrument to be used by the Spirit to record and give forth his divine Master's deeper teaching, and thus show forth His glory.

John was one of the disciples who accompanied Jesus during His Judan ministry; and he was chosen to record the events of this part of our Lord's work, probably because he was more fully able to understand the discussions of the deeper questions which characterised it. He was one of the three who witnessed the Transfiguration and the agony in Gethsemane. When the Supper was instituted he reclined nearest to our Lord at the table (Joh ), and to him by a sign the traitor was revealed. He (Peter following afar off) followed the crowd of soldiers and others who bound Jesus in the garden and led Him away to the high priest's palace (Joh 18:15). He was present at the trial of our Lord before the high priest and before Pilate, and stood with the mother of Jesus and her friends near the cross. To his care Jesus entrusted Mary (Joh 19:25-27). On the Resurrection morning, when Mary Magdalene announced to Peter and to him that the sepulchre was empty, he was the first to reach it, having outrun Peter, and was the first to rejoice believingly that the Lord had risen. His eye and ear also, quickened by love, made Him recognise in a seeming stranger his divine Master on the shore of the lake of Galilee (Joh 20:8; Joh 21:7).

II. THE APOSTLE

After the Crucifixion John took Mary, the mother of Jesus, to his own home in Jerusalem, where he remained for a number of years—probably till the death of Mary. At the beginning of the book of Acts he is found closely associate with Peter, as in the closing chapters of his gospel. They were present at the Ascension, and in the upper room when Matthias was chosen in the place of Judas Iscariot (Acts 1). They participated in the Pentecostal outpouring of the Spirit (Acts 2), when the promises so fully recorded in John's Gospel (14-16) were marvellously fulfilled. He was associated with Peter in the miracle wrought at the gate of the Temple "called Beautiful" (Acts 3). When the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the Word of God they sent Peter, and along with him John, to aid in reaping those fields, at the first sowing of which he had been present (Joh ). He had to endure the sorrow of his brother's martyrdom (Act 12:2), but still remained at Jerusalem, and was present at the apostolic council, the proceedings of which are recorded in Acts 15, although he does not seem to have spoken. St. Paul, however, speaks of him as apparently a pillar of the Church (Gal 2:9). This would be about twenty years after the Crucifixion. No doubt during that time he was engaged in teaching and preaching, and in such missions as that to Samaria. Of his after-history there are but scanty reliable notices. No valid objection has been urged to the testimony of the early Church Fathers that he finally settled in the province of Roman Asia, where the apostle Paul had planted a Church at Ephesus, and perhaps in other centres, from which the truth spread into all the province. St. John fixed on Ephesus as a convenient place from which to oversee the Churches of the district; and considering the crowds that resorted to that city from all quarters of the then known world, it would thus also be a centre from which the truth might be widely spread abroad. He was banished to Patmos during one of the many persecutions that were directed by the Roman power against the nascent Church; and in that rocky isle the Book of Revelation was written (Rev 1:9). Having been recalled from exile, he returned to Ephesus, and died, during the reign of Trajan, in extreme old age, sixty-eight years after the Crucifixion, Jerome says, and at the close, probably in the last year, of the first century of our era.

Of the many traditionary stories of incidents in the apostle's life during his residence in Ephesus, the following may be noted. That of his refusing to remain under the same roof as Cerinthus is related by Irenæus, who heard it from Polycarp. The apostle one day, entering a public bath, saw, or learned, that Cerinthus was there. Immediately he left the building, saying: "Let us flee lest the house fall on us, since Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within." He is still a "son of thunder" this story would show, though he does not now call for fire from heaven to consume the adversary. But the story certainly reflects the spirit of 2Jn . The following reflects the more gentle and tender side of his nature. A young convert in whom he was interested had, through evil companionship, fallen from grace, and, descending ever lower, had become the chief of a robber band. Braving all danger, the aged apostle penetrated to the haunt of the brigands, and led the young man back to repentance and faith. There is also the beautiful story of a huntsman finding the venerable man one day fondling a tame partridge—still a common pet in countries bordering the Levant. Being asked why he should occupy himself with so trivial an occupation, the apostle said, "What is in thy hand?" "A bow," was the answer. "And why dost thou not ever carry it bent?" "Because," said the huntsman, "in that case it would lose its strength, and would be useless when required for shooting, from the too continuous strain." "Then," said the apostle, "do not let this simple and brief relaxation of mine perplex thee, since without it the spirit would flag from the unremitted strain, and fail when the call of duty came." But the most beautiful and characteristic of all these stories is that which tells how, when old and feeble, with all his senses becoming numbed, the apostle was wont to be borne, at his own request, into the presence of the assembled congregation, and spoke but these words: "Little children, love one another!" And when asked why he always said this, and only this, his answer was: "It is the command of the Lord, and if this only were done, enough were done."

III. THE EVANGELIST

1. THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE GOSPEL

From the end of the second century until the close of the eighteenth, i.e. for about sixteen hundred years, this Gospel was universally received as having been written by John the apostle. The criticism adverse to this opinion, which culminated about half a century ago in the conclusions of F. C. Baur and the Tbingen school, has been met and refuted. Later adherents of that school (e.g. Keim) have had to recede from the opinion of the great Tbingen critic, and to acknowledge that the date fixed by him for the composition of the Gospel cannot be defended, and indeed must be placed much earlier.

It may be useful from the homiletic point of view to see what the Gospel itself tells us as to its authorship. To what conclusion does the internal evidence lead?

1. It is evident that the Gospel was written by an eye-witness of the events recorded, and one who was intimately acquainted with the life of Jesus during His public ministry. Many of the instances which show this are mentioned in the Explanatory Notes. In many of the narrative passages there are minute indications that the writer is narrating what he has seen and heard, e.g. Joh ; John 2, etc., Joh 4:52 (and other notes of time), 11; Joh 18:10, etc.

2. The author was also a Palestinian Jew, (a) intimately acquainted with the localities of which he speaks, and (b) the Jewish customs of his time [(a) Joh ; Joh 3:23; Joh 5:2; Joh 9:7; Joh 18:1; Joh 19:13, etc.; (b) 7 and 8; Joh 3:22; Joh 4:9; Joh 4:27; Joh 19:40, etc.]. And although he wrote this Gospel in Greek, in style and structure his composition is frequently Hebraic, as a reference to critical commentaries will show. But although a Jew, he was evidently writing with a view to a foreign and in part Gentile community, as he gives frequent interpretations of Hebrew place names, and minute topographical notes, which would be unnecessary for Palestinian Jews. Extended lists of passages bearing out these statements will be found in various commentaries, e.g. in that of Archdeacon H. W. Watkins.

3. A careful examination of the Gospel leads to the conclusion that the writer was one of the disciples of Christ, most intimately acquainted with all our Lord's sayings and doings, and the relations of the disciples to Himself and to one another. The discourse and prayer, e.g., 13-17, could have been reported only by one who reverently and eagerly heard them, and thus retained them in a memory no doubt originally good, but also trained to perfection as memory is trained in the East. And who but one intimately acquainted with the men could have given such a vivid conception of Thomas and Philip as this writer gives?

4. Who was this disciple then? "Assuming that he was an eye-witness and an apostle, we are sure he was not Andrew, who is named in the Gospel four times, nor Peter (thirty-three times), nor Philip (twice), nor Nathanael (five times), nor Thomas (five times), nor Judas Iscariot (eight times), nor Judas, not Iscariot (once). Of the five other apostles, Matthew is necessarily excluded, and James the son of Alphæus and Simon the Canaanite occupy too unimportant a position in the Synoptic narrative to bring them within the limits of our hypothesis" (Watkins). The sons of Zebedee are not named, they are relegated to an inferior place in the order of the disciples (Joh ), (their mother even is not mentioned (Joh 19:25) by name), although in the Synoptists these two brothers occupy a prominent position, being, with Peter, of the number of the three who were favoured to accompany the Master when the others were not permitted to do so—e.g. to the Mount of Transfiguration. Of these two James could not have written the Gospel, for he was martyred not long after the Ascension. Thus John alone remains.