The Evangelist John's Teaching on the Word

Contents The history of Jesus Christ before the first Easter ministry. John 1:19–51, 2:1–11. a) Testimonies of the Forerunner about Jesus. b) The first followers of Jesus. Events from the first Easter to the second. a) Expulsion of the traders from the church. b) Conversation with Nicodemus, John 3:1-21. c) The last testimony of the Forerunner, John 3:22–36. d) Conversation with the Samaritan woman. John 4:1–42 e) Second miracle at Cana, John 4:43–54. Third part: incidents from the 2nd to the 3rd Easter, ch. 5 and 6. a) Healing of the paralytic (John 5:1-16) with the teaching about the Son of God, v. 17–47. b) Feeding the people with 5 loaves and 2 fish. John 6:1–13 c) The miracle on the lake and the conversation about heavenly bread. John 6:16–71 Fourth section: the works of Christ after the third Passover until the fourth a) Removal from Galilee and sermons in the church on the feast, John 7:1–53. b) The new arrival of Jesus Christ in the church and his preaching. John 8:1–59. c) Healing of the man born blind, John 9:1–41. d) Conversation about the shepherd. John 10:1–42. h) The Raising of Lazarus. John 11:1–57. e) Supper at Simon's house and entry into Jerusalem, John 12:1–50 No evangelist begins his gospel in the same way as St. John. Other evangelists begin either with the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Matthew), then with His birth (Luke), or with baptism (Mark). John, before he says anything about the earthly life of the Messiah Jesus, offers a teaching about the Word. Moreover, special attention is needed to the beginning of the Gospel of John. Who is this Word in John? The question is answered by St. John, when in v. 14 speaks of the incarnation of the Word and directly calls Him the only begotten Son of God. However, it is also visible in St. John, which in v. 1–4 the Word is shown to us in a different way than in vv. 5–18. In the latter case, the incarnation of the Son of God is described as the Messiah, the Savior of people; and in Art. 1–4, the Son of God is shown in His divine nature, without connection with the title of Messiah. Where did John get his Word? Didn’t he take the Word from human wisdom? Celsus, the enemy of Christianity, directly says that Christians invented to call the Son of God the Word. Origen, no matter how much he asked the Jewish teachers whether they knew the name of the Messiah by the Word, received the answer that they had nothing like it either in their books or in their schools (Cont. Cels. Lib. 2. p. 3). So the Word of John is his property, his as a disciple of the revelation of God. He talks about this himself. Before he wrote the gospel, he testified in his apocalypse: and I saw the heavens opened, and behold, a white horse, and he who sat on it was called faithful and true... He was clothed in a robe stained with blood. His name is: the Word of God (Rev. 19:11,13). This is where, from the revelation of God, John learned about the Word! He conveys a teaching about Him that is not human. This must be firmly remembered so that when explaining John’s teaching about the Word, we do not have to cope with the teaching of human wisdom. What thought does the evangelist reveal to us by calling the Son of God the Word? An explanation must be sought from the evangelist. He speaks about the Son of God: He opened the confession, proclaimed a God unknown to anyone, v. 18. No one will deny that these words refer to calling the Son the Word. So, the Son is the Word from the fact that he proclaims to us the mysteries of God, communicates the revelation of God, which people have not yet heard. “Evangelist,” says St. Chrysostom called the Son of God the Word, because the Son came to tell us about the Father. “Everything,” He says, “I heard the Father tell you (John 15:15).” In the beginning, what? In other cases it is said: at the beginning of the gospel (Mark 1:1; Phil. 4:15), the world (Matthew 24:21), creation (Mark 10:6; 2 Peter 3:4). John does not say: in the beginning of what was there? It remains to find out this from the connection of speech. If the evangelist had said: in the beginning the Word came into being, as he says: everything came into being and became εγενετο v. 3; then one might also think, as others thought, whether he is talking about the appearance of the Word at the beginning of time? Moses says: in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (Gen. 1:1). But that is not what the evangelist says. He says: in the beginning there was. – Another meaning cannot be allowed in words, as the Word was at the beginning of being. The Word was already there when there was only the beginning of something; It existed even then, as nothing existed except God. This is the same thing that the Savior says about His glory to the Father: what I had with You, before there was no world (John 17:5). This is how Chrysostom understands the Evangelist: “he did not say: the Word had a beginning, but in the beginning it was; the expression leads you to the idea that the Son is without beginning.” (Interpretation of John.) Since it is not said: from the beginning it was: then in vain others - Origen, Cyril Alex. - they explained the evangelist this way: from the Father. The thought itself is correct, but it is not what the evangelist reveals. Be is used only because for us pre-temporal existence is the past. Otherwise, this is the same thing that is, the Word exists at the beginning of all being: It is neither a creation nor a single thought of ours, but it really exists and exists as something eternal in its own right. This is the same thing that Moses said by command from heaven: He is my messenger (Ex. 3:14). And the word be, according to the ancient and correct translation from God. If the Word existed before all being: then thought asks with St. Basil: where was the Word? or with St. Chrysostom: how was it? It was with God, says the seer. The expression: to be with God, in relation to the saints, means their complete bliss. In relation to the Word, the same expression is explained for us by the words of the Lord: and now Thou, Father, glorify me with the glory which I had with Thee, before the world was not (John 17:6). Since the eternal glory of the Father means not only the fullness of bliss, but also the unlimited power of will and knowledge: then the eternal glory of the Son means the same. Be with God in relation to the pre-temporal Word means the closest communication of the Son with the Father in all the properties of the Divinity. If the Word is with God and not in God, then it means that it is not a property of the Divine, but a separate person. This independence of the word is depicted more clearly by the Evangelist when he calls the Word the only begotten Son, and the One from Whom is the Word, the Father and the Son, assimilates the work of the individual - the confession of God v. 18. And God is the Word. Θεος without a member only because the subject of speech is the Word. This is why the self-will of some Arius, who would like to deprive the Word of the name of God, turns out to be criminal. – On the other hand, Θεος is used without a member about the true God (John 1:6, 18:4; Rom. 1:7), but here the Word and by connection of speech, as eternal, is the true God. This is what the apostle says about the Son of God. Paul (Rom.9:5; Heb.1:2,3). And John himself in his letter teaches that the Son of God is the true God (1 John 5:20). God be. Here there is also a special thought about the Word. Divinity belongs to the Word and in His eternal existence. It cannot be said about Him that the Divinity became His property only from a certain time; the Word was God from eternity, as the true God always is. Art. 2. This has been with God since time immemorial. The thought of the first verse is repeated in order to establish the viewer on the right point when contemplating the Word, and to eliminate the erroneous opinion about the Word. The Word exists from eternity as a person with divine glory. So, in the first two verses three truths are proposed: the Word is eternal being, the Word is an original person, the Word is God. Art. 3. All this was and without Him nothing would have happened. Having shown what the Word is in relation to the Divine, the evangelist lowers the gaze of the finite to the finite, shows what the Word was in relation to the world? All the topics of Bysha. - All Bysha, this is further replaced by the words: the world was then art. 10. So, everything is the same as the world, and not man, saved by the Word, which is especially stated in v. 4. Bysha - εγενετο means the same thing that was created, for example. by that oak tree men were made in the likeness of God (James 3:9; Gen. 2:4; Ps. 146:5, 30:6). Or from John himself: without Him there is nothing to be. The closer to the original through Togo. – This highlights the idea of ​​personal participation in creation, which the Word took together with the Father and the Holy One. Spirit: but does not at all exclude the idea of ​​the omnipotent creativity of the Word. The expression - through Him is used not only when it is said about the Son that He created the grace-filled world, or the world in general (1 John 3:17; Rom. 1:5; Col. 1:16,20), but also when the same is said about the Father, for example. God is faithful, by Him (δìα) we are called quickly (1 Cor. 1:9; Rom. 11:35; Heb. 2:10), and about the Holy Spirit. (Rom.5:5; 1Cor.12:6). The evangelist expressed his thought more precisely in the second hemistich. And without Him nothing could have happened. Here is the same idea as in the first hemistich, but expressed from the negative side - according to the Jewish way of expression (Jer. 42:4; 2 Kings 4:4) - includes everything except God in the realm of what was created by the Word. By this, everything that came into being came into being; Apart from Him, nothing was created in the circle of creatures. Ap. Paul speaks about the same thing: by this all things were created, both in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, if they are dominions, if they were principalities, if they were powers: by this and in Him (for Him) all things were created (Col. 1:16). When you hear the evangelist’s words about the Word: all the same: the thought involuntarily asks: has not much been said about the Word? The answer is the words of the evangelist: there is belly in that. “In Him is life,” - in Him is life-giving power for oneself and for all living things. That is why He could create everything, both the material world and the spiritual world. “Life” in God means life-giving power, by which God not only lives himself, but also gives life to others. He is a living God, not like idols (1 Sam. 26:10; Ps. 41:3; 1 Thess. 1:9; 1 Tim. 6:17), the source of life (Ps. 37:10, 41:9). The same thing means life in the Word - the Son of God. John in his letter calls the Word - the Son - the word of life, which was with the Father and appeared to us (1 John 1:1,2). St. Paul teaches about Him: who is the radiance of glory and the image of His hypostasis, and bears all things by the word of His power (Heb. 1:3), all things will be accomplished in Him (Col. 1:17). And the belly is a light man. The same life-giving power is light for people. There is no doubt that the Word can be called light, man, as his Creator, as the one who kindled in Him the light of reason: the rational of God is manifest in them (in the pagans), for God has shown it to them, says the Apostle Paul (Rom. 1:18). But since the evangelist looks at the Light - the Word in connection with the dark state of man v. 5: then the words light by man should not be understood otherwise than in the sense of the Messiah - the Enlightener. This understanding of the evangelist’s words is also justified by the fact that Jesus Christ himself more than once called himself the light of the world. “I am the light of the world,” He says (John 9:5, 12:46). Righteous Simeon also called Christ the light of the world and the Savior (Luke 2:32). And the evangelist himself further says that the true Light has come into the world, but the world will not recognize Him. 9. 10. The same life-giving force is light. Where does the evangelist begin to say that the Messiah is the life-giving light? The very composition of verse 4, which is not entirely simple and easy to understand, shows that the evangelist had a special reason in modern circumstances to speak this way and not otherwise, taking into account the thoughts of significant contemporaries. Who are these contemporaries who attracted the attention of the evangelist? St. Irenaeus says: “The disciple of the Lord John, wishing with the gospel to destroy the error sown by Cerinthos, began the gospel thus: In the beginning was the Word (Adv. haer. 3, 11. § 1). Both Irenaeus and other ancients testify that the heretics of the apostolic time attributed the creation of the material world to a special artist, and not to God, and Christ Jesus was recognized not as God, but as a special transcendental being who descended on Jesus at baptism. (Adv. haer. I, cap. 26. 1). This is the same as new, variegated neologists. Against such and such, the evangelist teaches that the Word is the Creator of the world and It is also the Enlightener of the world. The creation of the world, according to the teachings of the secret one, is the work of the Almighty: but the transformation of fallen humanity requires forces more than human ones. The work of the most skillful artist can go bad on its own: but the damage must be corrected by the artist. A person could lose the powers given to him, could spoil his body, through the power of freedom: but he is not able to correct himself. The same self-existent life, which gave life to everything, appeared as the Light of the Savior of people. This is what the prophets spoke about the Messiah. Isaiah, at the same time as he called the Messiah Light, called Him the mighty God and ruler of the world (Is. 9: 6,7). Art. 5. And the light shines in the darkness and the darkness does not embrace it. The evangelist calls people in their sinful state darkness. You were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord, teaches the apostle. Paul turned to Christ (Eph.5:8). Etc. Isaiah called the pagans people walking in darkness, sitting in the land and shadow of death (Is. 9:2). The universality of this state is shown by the apostle when he says: all who have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23). The evangelist, keeping silent about the sad story of the fall, turns his attention only to the fact that the Light of heavenly goodness, the life-giving Light did not leave fallen man, but sheds Its Light on Him. - What is it? Following the fall of man, he promised a descendant victorious over the serpent and continued to revive bright hopes through the patriarchs and prophets; and in paganism he aroused sighs for heavenly help with the sorrows and joys of life. The heavenly light not only brightly illuminated the chosen people, but did not leave the pagans without testimonies of Itself. The chosen people with their teaching about the true God were resettled to them; Prophets were sent to them - Jonah, Daniel. The Enlightener did everything for people, but His darkness was not embraced. The words: His darkness is not embraced are further replaced by the words, and His world is not cognizable. Dark people, people of the world, people who loved darkness and not light, did not know, did not assimilate the truth proclaimed by the law, the prophets, and nature. “They killed the very prophets of God. They, by their own will, fell in love with darkness, became close to it, became coarser in it, so that the Light, with all its desire, did not penetrate through the thick layers of darkness. To the hearts that fell in love with darkness, darkness seemed like light, and the light remained inaccessible to their minds. So, in Art. 4 and 5 depicts the relation of the Word to fallen humanity. Art. 6. There was a man sent from God, his name was John. What is the name sent by man here? So that they would not consider him an angel, as others wanted, looking at his strict life. Sent from God: this is not like the self-proclaimed enlighteners of the world, who have only one dignity - pathetic pride, placing themselves above others, appearing either in the rank of special sages - teachers of the people, or in the place of high figures in the political world. - This is not like the figures supposedly beloved by the people, who were placed among the chosen people by their indefatigable sinfulness. Sent from God. Even through the prophet Malachi, Jehovah said: Behold, I send my angel before you (Mal.3:1). The birth of John was foretold to his parent by an angel, and his ministry was also appointed; and his very birth was a true miracle. Do not be afraid, Zechariah, said the heavenly messenger who appeared, your prayer has already been heard, and your wife Elizabeth (hitherto barren) will give birth to a son... He will go before Him with the spirit and the power of Elijah (Luke 1:13,17). At a certain time, this man himself heard the word of God, sending him to the work destined for him (Luke 3:2). His name is John. The name John was given to him by his dumbfounded father, who began to speak as soon as he assigned this name (Luke 1:63,64). This name was so loud that they did not know what to consider John: Elijah, or one of the great prophets, or even the Messiah himself. Art. 7. This one has come as a testimony, that he may testify to the light, that all may have faith in him. John was great, but his purpose was to testify to the Light. Light in itself has no need for others to talk about it: He reveals himself to people, He is light and shines. But people needed it, wanted it, and testify to the Light. You were kind to John and testified to the truth. I do not receive testimony from man, but I say this, that you may be saved (John 5:33,34): thus spoke the Savior. The evangelist says the same thing with the words: let everyone have faith in Him. According to ancient glory. translation - through Him. And this is true to the original - δια. John was only a minister of the Word, awakening in people faith in the Messiah, for the salvation of people, just as Paul and Apollos were only ministers through whom the Corinthians believed (1 Cor. 3:5). Art. 8. Do not be the light, but let it testify to the light. People even considered John the Messiah: but this was a mistake. Although he was a burning lamp (John 5:35), the light was lit by another; although he testified about the Light, he was not yet equal to the One about whom he testified; - he was only at the dawn of the sun that followed him; was a great prophet, the like of whom was not before him: but he himself declared directly that he was not Christ (John 1:20). Art. 9. There is no true light, which enlightens every person coming into the world. The Word is true light, not in the sense that John and the other messengers were false light. You are the light of the world, the Savior said to the apostles (Matthew 5:14). The Word is true light in the sense of unborrowed, eternal light, and pouring its light onto everything that turns out to be luminous; He is the source of all knowledge and all wisdom. Do the words: ερχομενον εις κοσμον refer to the light φως, or to the person ανθρωπον? The latter explanation must be preferred to the first. a) It belongs to almost all ancient teachers - Chrysostom, Cyril Alex., the Syriac translation and others; b) it is natural to combine nearby terms, as here ανθρωπον ερχομενον; c) among the rabbis the usual expression is to come into the world in the sense of the birth of a person; d) the same for St. writers it is common (Job.1:21; Eccl.5:14; Wis.7:6; 1 Tim.1:15) and in John himself (John 16:28). Thus, according to the meaning of the evangelist’s words, there is only one Enlightener for everyone who appears in the world. “The Word is the true light,” says St. Kirill Alex. enlightens everyone who appears in the world; for no man is enlightened except by the light of truth, which is God himself.” The Word is light not only for certain individuals, generations, peoples, but for all people of all places and times, for uneducated and educated peoples (John 12:46; Titus 2:11; Gal.3:28; Col. 1:20). However, this only excludes any other source of true enlightenment: but whether everyone really accepts the enlightenment of the eternal light is another question, more on that later. Art. 10. In the world there was no world, and the world did not know Him. Light was in the world as a principle that revitalized and supported all parts of the world. Self-existent light cannot be anything else. From Him the world received its existence, and by Him the existence of the world is maintained. And yet His world is not known. Here the world is not the totality of everything created, but the totality of people, previously called darkness v. 5. The pagan world changed the truth of God into a lie, served and worshiped the creature, and not the Creator (Rom. 1:23,25). And did not Israel fall into idolatry with its impurities? How many other sins he has, how much oblivion of his heart about God! Why is this so, given such proximity of light to the world? From the careless will of people. The sun sheds its rays of light on everyone: but the blind man does not see the light, just like one who buries himself in the ground. In order to accept the rays of heavenly light and be imbued with them, you need to discover within yourself your acceptability for light, you need to expand the activity of God-created nature by willpower. Art. 11. When they came, they did not receive Him. The Lord came first of all to recover the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15:24). So He determined even earlier. Jehovah called the people of Judah his chosen people (Deut. 7:6; Is. 27:9; Ps. 85:1), and called the land of Israel his own land (Is. 6:6; Matt. 21:38). If the people of Israel were called the people of God; - and in the secret viewer the Eternal Word calls the Jews his people; Just as the Word turns out to be God, so the visit of Israel by the Word is a great, invaluable visit. It’s even stranger if you don’t accept Him with your own people. Their own people did not accept the heavenly guest, they did not accept Him with the disposition of the soul, with the reverent faith of which He was worthy. The Lord depicted this in a parable, where the citizens say: We do not want this, let him reign over us (Luke 19:14). In other words, this sad reality and its reasons are depicted as follows: light came into the world and men loved darkness more than light: for their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds be exposed, for they are evil (John 3:19,20). Art. 12. But the Elites received it, which means that not all of the Jews did not accept the Lord: this is according to the words of the secret man himself. So it is in the history of Christianity. He was accepted, the apostles and other best people believed in Him (John 10:42, 11:45). Paul the persecutor and many others accepted him. The little ones, οσοι, whoever they were - not only from the Jews, but also from the pagans, whom the heavenly shepherd wanted to gather into one flock - gave them the region, the right, or, according to Chrysostom, the honor of being a child of God. By nature we are all children of wrath, like sinners from cradle to grave. But the Son of God, having reconciled the truth of God with us through His suffering on the cross, gave us the honor of children of God, and placed us in the rights of beloved children of God. And the Jews were called children of God, as worshipers of the true God (Deut. 14:1,2). But the new children of God differ from the former in that they serve God not with the compulsions necessary for a slave, but with filial love (Gal.3:6), are not subject to the material elements, ritual statutes, but to the spiritual law; they are not burdened by a feeling of damnation, but feel the closeness of God the Father to them (Gal.4:1; Col.2:14) and breathe hopes for eternal peace ( Rom.6:17 ; John 17:26 ). What is the acceptance of God - the Word, which is so beneficial for people? The evangelist shows this with the words: to those who believe in His name. Those who accepted and accept Him are those who believe in Him! And according to other heavenly instructions, the heavenly guest is accepted by faith. You do not have His word abiding in you, because you do not believe the one whom He sent: thus spoke the Lord Himself (John 5:38). Art. 13. Who was born not of blood, nor of carnal lust, nor of manly lust, but of God. If anyone thought that the honor of the children of God is not difficult to obtain, that some kind of faith in Christ is needed, or even outward closeness to the community of believers, he would be gravely mistaken. The Evangelist exposes those as sons of God who were born not from the blood, not from the seed of Abraham, to which the Jews so readily allowed the contrary (Rom. 9:6,7; John 8:33,34), neither from carnal lust, not according to the desire of the flesh, ordinary human aspirations, nor from the lust of men, not according to the desire of famous people, as they were considered in the Greek world men are heroes, but born of God. This is the rebirth about which the Lord taught Nicodemus. Unless someone is born again (again), he cannot see the kingdom of God (John 3:3,4). Ap. Peter spoke about the same thing: it was not generated from a seed that was corrupted, but was uncorrupted by the Word of the living God (1 Pet. 1:23). St. Chrysostom says: “The evangelist said this (about the heavenly birth) so that we, having learned the insignificance and baseness of birth from flesh and blood and the dignity of the second birth by grace, would have a high concept of it - and then show great concern for it” (Demon 10 on John). So, the evangelist in v. 6–8 described John's attitude towards the Word, in vv. 9–13 people’s attitude to the Light – the Word. Art. 14 And the word became flesh and dwelt in us. The Word, which existed from eternity, created the world, and shone for fallen humanity, finally appeared in the world, and precisely in the flesh. The flesh is the visible part instead of the whole human nature - this is how this word is used in scripture (John 17:2; Matt. 24:22; 1 Tim. 3:16); became flesh σαρξ εγενετο, really, and not ghostly, took upon Himself the weak human nature, even its visible side. Why is this said? There were spirits who did not confess Christ in the flesh to those who came (1 John 4:3). The evangelist speaks against them. According to the teachings of the heavenly secret place, the Word became flesh, not through such a union with flesh as happens between an angel and a ghost, in an accidental way, but through the perception of the real human nature, receiving the seed of Abraham, as Paul taught (Heb. 2:16). The deity united with humanity, accepting the latter into personal unity: since all children have flesh and blood, He also took them in (Heb. 2:14). This is not the same as transformation, e.g. water into wine - humanity remained humanity with its properties and the Divinity did not lose its properties, but was only covered with weak flesh. And move into us. According to the meaning of the word σκηνουν - to live in a tent, to spend the life of a wanderer (Judges 5:17; Rev. 12:12). This means that the Word did not appear instantly, as the angels appeared, but Christ Jesus led an ordinary life among people, ate, drank, talked, and did everything that is usually done not by a spirit without flesh and bones, but by a man, an earthly wanderer; “He endured hunger and thirst, fatigue from work, the needs of a homeless life, not having anywhere to lay his head, endured insults from human ignorance and anger, and finally endured suffering and death on the cross. And we saw His glory, the glory as the only begotten of the Father. For all that Christ Jesus led the life of an earthly pilgrim, he was a true man who saw His glory. We, eyewitnesses of His life and deeds, saw with the eyes not only of our souls, but also of our bodies, His glorious life and glorious deeds. In his epistle, the apostle expresses this more fully: about what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have examined and touched with our hands, about the Word of life we ​​preach to you (1 John 1:1,3). The reality of the wonderful life and wonderful deeds of Jesus Christ was revealed in the most accurate way, with all the rigor of historical criticism. And what is this glory of Christ Jesus? We have seen His glory, like the glory of the only begotten from the Father. – As ως does not mean comparison here, but as Chrysostom says, “a sign of strengthening” (Βεβα ί ωσεις σημειον): a similar expression: they saw the procession of the King as a King, i.e. truly royal, completely worthy of a King. Accordingly, His glory, as the glory of the only begotten Son of God, means glory completely befitting the Son of the eternal Father. What does the only begotten Son mean? Doesn't it mean only the dear Son? LXX replace the Hebrew word iachid, the only one, then with the word, μονος and μονογενης, only, only begotten, and sometimes with the word αγαπητος, αγαπομενος, beloved (Gen. 22:2,12,16; Jer.6:26; Zech.12:10). But this last comes from the fact that the only son is truly the most dear to the parent’s heart, and so on. the last name is a necessary accessory to the first. The very word μονογενης actually means the One who alone was born of the Father. Sl. Comrade 3:15; Luke 7:12, 8:42, 9:38; Hebrews 11:17. For the evangelist, the Son of God is the One who exists from eternity v. 1. was with God in the beginning, v. 2. by whom all things were created, v. 3. next this is not the Son of God in terms of moral qualities alone, especially since He grants the rights of the children of God to people v. 12. They say that the Son of God is nothing more than the Messiah, with the title of the messenger of God, according to popular belief? But a) it is also unfair that the Jewish people did not distinguish the Messiah from the Son of God: when Jesus Christ called himself the Son of God, representatives of the people’s faith raised stones against Him, considering Him a blasphemer because, being a man, he considers himself the Son of God John 10:33. b) Let the name of the Son of God sometimes be combined with the name of the Messiah (Matthew 16:16; John 6:69, 11:27). But we see from history that the disciples of Jesus recognized Jesus as the Christ when they first met him John 1:41. But they recognized Him as the Son of God only after a long stay with Him, according to the revelation of the Father Matthew 16:16. It is clear that the Messiah and the Son of God are two different thoughts, although Christ Jesus, being Christ, was also the Son of God. c) Who is the Son of God according to the evangelist, the evangelist himself showed Art. 1–3. Fill with grace and truth. These words refer to God the Word and the words: videhom, parenfez. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth. This is the connection with the apostle. Although Jesus' humble life on earth showed Him to be a servant and not a Lord: yet He was full of grace and truth. The Evangelist no longer shows us the Son of God here, as in Art. 1 – 4, but the God-man who appeared on earth – Christ. Evangelist Luke describes the adolescence of Jesus this way: the baby grew and became strengthened in spirit, filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was with Him 2:40. The grace of God that was with Jesus means the special gracious love of God, in which He was not touched for any evil and was elevated in spiritual perfections; this is heavenly love with its grace-filled gifts revealed in love and wisdom. Grace and truth in Christ mean the same for the Evangelist John, especially since they are contrasted with the harsh law, v. 17. Grace in Christ, His gracious love called to itself all who labor and are burdened (Matthew 11:28). He taught as truth itself can teach. His most evil enemies could not catch Him in a lie. “I am the way, the truth and the life,” He said (John 14:6). They have not seen and will not see such a bright, such complete and such life-giving teaching as the teaching of Christ. In Him are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Col. 2:3). Art. 15. John testified of Him and cried out: This is the one who killed him, who came before me after me, because he was before me. New proof of the greatness of the God-man Jesus: the testimony of the greatest of the prophets, John. The apostles were not the only ones who saw the glory of the Son of God. The great John knew her and spoke about her. Called, verb. He testified not secretly to his disciples alone, but out loud to all. The Forerunner's sermon is given by the evangelist according to its main content. For me it's coming. Jesus Christ began his preaching after John. John, by the title of Forerunner, was supposed to prepare the way for the Messiah. This was God's determination! John himself spoke about this: I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness: straighten the way of the Lord, as Isaiah the prophet said (John 1:23). Before me (εμπρωσθεν μου) was, as before (πρωτος) me. The words: εμπροσθεν and πρωτος mean either the highest dignity or primacy in time. The evangelist uses Πρωτος to mean time John 5:4; instead of πρωτερος the first (John 15:18). Εμπρωσθεν τινος γενεσθαι in the Evangelist John 3:28 and in LXX Judges 1:23, 3:2 means to be before someone, but nowhere does it mean to be more important than someone. So, the Forerunner testifies: Although He follows me, He is older than me, because He exists far before me; exists before Abraham was born (John 8:58), He is from eternity. Art. 16. And from His fulfillment we all receive and receive grace. Who speaks these words and the following v. 17, 18? Forerunner? But he, if he had understood all the prophets along with himself, could not say: and from His fulfillment we will all receive grace. The apostles received such fullness of grace only after the Lord’s ascension into heaven, at the descent of St. Spirit. So, here the evangelist speaks, continuing his thought about v. full of grace and truth. 14. Of course, we are all not the only apostles, for it speaks of the benefits of the new covenant, common to all Christianity and inaccessible to Judaism (v. 17. His fulfillment, in accordance with the general meaning of πληρομα, meaning fullness and abundance (Ps. 23:1; Eph. 3:19), in Christ signifies the volume of all divine perfections necessary to accomplish the salvation of the human race (Col. 2:9; Eph. 1:23, 4:10) and the abundance of grace-filled gifts deserved by Christ for guilty humanity (Rom.8:32). The words: grace grace χαριν αντί χαριτος, mean abundance of grace; so in Job 2:4 “skin for skin” means all skin, or, as is immediately explained, all property. In Christ Jesus we have received all grace, the grace of baptism and the grace of strengthening and the grace of resolving sins and the grace of communion of His flesh; the gifts of the Holy Spirit are innumerable. poured out on the Church of Christ. Art. 17. For the law was given by Moses: but grace and truth came into being by Jesus Christ. The evangelist justifies his words about the abundance of grace received in Christ. This, he says, is the will of God. By it the law was given through Moses: and grace and truth are the gift of Christ the Son of God. The Mosaic Law is a gift from God: it taught good. But it was a heavy yoke, partly because of the multitude of its rituals, partly because it threatened with a curse: cursed is everyone who does not continue in all the words of this law (Deut. 27:26). The best thing about the law is that it led to Christ (Gal. 3:24), sometimes through its images, sometimes by arousing groaning for infirmities and prayer for heavenly help (Rom. 3:20). This is not the gift of Christ Jesus: there is an abundance of grace-filled help (Matthew 11:30). Here the curse of the law is lifted (Gal.3:23) and everything necessary for a godly and happy life is given (2 Peter 1:3). Here, instead of shadows, there is truth, the purest and highest truth. Art. 18. No one has seen God anywhere: the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, that confession. The reason for the idea of ​​the difference between the Old and New Testaments is proposed. 17. Nobody sees God anywhere. To see, according to usage, means to know clearly and completely, not excluding the most secret aspects of a subject (John 3:11, 14:7; 3 John 1:11). What can a person know about God? What did the prophets themselves know about God? None of the prophets, not Moses himself, who transmitted the law of Art. 17 did not have such close communication with God that he could know all His secrets. Whoever understands the mind of the Lord, or who is His counselor, says the apostle (Rom. 11:34). And the son of Sirach understood this. Who has seen Him and confessed? and who will magnify Him except He is? The Lord honored Moses with close communication with himself, speaking to Moses, as if someone were speaking to his friend (Exodus 33:11): but the secrets of the Divine remained unknown to Moses; Moses could only see the back of God (Ex.33:23). Otherwise, human nature is not able to bear the full revelation of the glory of God, lest man see My face and live, said Jehovah (Ex. 33:20). The Only Begotten Son. The meaning of the only begotten Son of God has already been seen in Art. 14. Shay in the depths of the Father. The expression “to be in someone’s bosom,” used about the happy Lazarus (Luke 16:22), known both among Jews and other eastern peoples, means to have close communication with someone and share the very secrets of his heart. In relation to the Son of God, it means eternal existence with the Father. This can be seen from the connection of thoughts and the meaning of expressions. “Having said: No one has seen God, he does not say: the Son who has seen the Father has revealed, but represents something different, higher than vision: He is in the bosom of the Father. Having spoken about the womb, this alone explained to us everything - the affinity and unity of the being (Father and Son), indivisible knowledge and equality of power. Otherwise, the Father could not have had any other creature in his bosom, and the Son, if he were a slave and one of many, would not have dared to remain in the bosom of the Master.” Chrysostom the demon. 15 on John. That confession. The original word (εξηγησατο) means to open, interpret, among Greek writers - to explain the will of the gods. The Son of God revealed God to us, explained to us the mysteries of God, according to the word of St. Paul, revealed the hidden wisdom of God, which all the famous people of the world did not know (1 Cor. 2:7). The Lord Himself says: No one knows the Father except the Son, and to whom the Son chooses to reveal it (Matthew 11:27). This is the divinely inspired dogma of the evangelist John. It shows what the Son of God is in himself v. 1–2? What is He in relation to the created world? 3–4? His significance for fallen humanity is shown, before his appearance in the flesh v. 4–5, meaning of John v. 6–9, the attitude of the people of the world and the best people to the Word v. 10–13, embodiment of the Word v. 14, testimony of the Forerunner art. 15, glory of the Incarnate v. 16–18. The story of Jesus Christ before the first Easter ministry. John 1:19–51, 2:1–11. a) Testimonies of the Forerunner about Jesus. Just as Evangelist John began his dogmatic teaching about the Messiah-God-Man with the testimony of the Forerunner, so he begins the history of Jesus Christ with the same thing. This is also because the Forerunner, by order of heaven, occupied first place, after Jesus, among the historical persons of the new testament, he was the first preacher about the coming Messiah. The writer who pays such attention to the Forerunner does not repeat what was said about him by other evangelists; he begins his story with the events after the baptism of the Savior, where the other evangelists stopped, namely with his testimony about Jesus before those sent from Jerusalem (John 1:19–28), then with his testimony before the people (John 1:29–34) and before his disciples (John 1:35–36). Art. 19. Those who sent to the Forerunner were Jews from Jerusalem. By this the Evangelist means the rulers of Jerusalem (John 18:12–14), members of the supreme court, called the Sanhedrin. Those sent were priests and Levites, as educated people capable of judging matters of faith with spiritual participation. The Forerunner's sermon, full of power, the severity of his life and many disciples drew the attention of the Jewish authorities to him. – The obligation to observe the purity of faith and morals, prescribed by law (Deut. 17:8, 19:17; Ezek. 44:15-24), inspired well-intentioned fears that harm to the faith would arise from John’s preaching; and the hope of seeing an end to civil disasters along with the appearance of the Messiah prompted the majority to turn to the son of Zechariah with the assumption: is he not the Messiah? Art. 20. To the question: who are you? The Forerunner, knowing in what sense the question was asked, answers that he is not the Messiah. And confession and not denying, and confession. This is a sign of the most decisive denial. The Evangelist presents the answer in such a way as to make the later disciples of the Baptist, who recognized him as more than a prophet - the Forerunner of the Messiah, unanswerable. At the same time, the unselfishness with which the Forerunner refuses such a flattering title is quite worthy of a sincere friend of truth and unparalleled among the uninvited mentors of humanity. Art. 21. Are you not Elijah? The Jews believed that before the coming of the Messiah, Elijah, who had once ascended to heaven, would appear on earth and anoint the Messiah for His service. They based this faith on the prophecy of Malachi (Mal.4:5). The Forerunner refuses the name of Elijah, because he did not descend from heaven, as the Jews expected from Elijah. He was clothed with the power and spirit of Elijah, as Jesus Christ himself spoke about him (Matthew 11:14, 17:12; Luke 1:17); only this is not Elijah of the Jews who did not understand the prophet. Are you a prophet? the messengers also asked. Since the Forerunner had already told the messengers that he was not Christ, the messengers had no need to ask: is he the prophet of the Messiah? According to the Jews, besides Elijah, other prophets must rise before the coming of the Messiah, among them certainly Jeremiah (2 Mac. 15:14; Matt. 16:14). The Forerunner responds in denial because he was not some kind of resurrected prophet. Art. 22–23. Those sent, not content with the Forerunner's negative answers, demand that he directly say who he is? The Forerunner answers: I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness: prepare the way of the Lord, as Isaiah said. The Forerunner answers about himself not from himself, but with the words of the prophet Isaiah (Is. 40:3). The words of the prophet are given not literally, but according to their meaning. In the words of the prophet: “a voice cries in the wilderness: prepare the way of the Lord.” “I am this voice,” says the Forerunner, “I am the messenger of the coming Lord; prepare the way for Him.” Art. 24. The epistles were from the Pharisees. The Evangelist notices this to explain both the persistence with which the sent ones interrogate the Forerunner, and what should be expected from these people for the truth. The Pharisees loved to appear to be friends of the truth, accurate interpreters of Scripture, zealots of the people's glory; but in fact they loved only glory for themselves, and not the glory of God, and therefore turned out to be enemies of heavenly truth. Those sent were from among these people. Art. 25. And I asked him and decided to him: why do you baptize, if you bring Christ, neither Elijah nor the prophet? The Jews baptized the pagans when they accepted the faith of the Jews. But the right to baptize the Jews, in the opinion of the Jews, based on some prophecies that are not entirely well understood (Mal. 3:2, 4:5; Zech. 13:1; Lichtfoot ad h. 1.) belongs to the Messiah and the prophets who must rise before the coming of the Messiah. Since John said that he is not the Messiah and not some resurrected prophet, the Sanhedrin’s trustees consider themselves entitled to question: why is he baptizing the Jews? It is clear that the question of the messengers expresses not so much a desire to know the truth, but evidence to John of his wrongness, a prohibition for him to continue baptism. The poor, without paying due attention to the meaning of the Forerunner's last answer about his heavenly purpose, hastened to present themselves as people who have the right to expose others in error. Art. 26–27. In his answer, the Forerunner, without saying a word of reproach for arrogant pride, will however make her understand her frivolity; he repeats what was said that he is definitely not one of the resurrected prophets, but he, as he has already said, is a messenger about the coming Lord - the Messiah. “Prepare the way of the Lord,” says the prophet’s voice in the desert. The Forerunner said the same thing when he preached: repent. His baptism is preparatory baptism, baptism of repentance and remission of sins (Luke 3:3; Matt. 3:11); He awarded baptism to those who came with confession of their sins. This is not at all the baptism that the Messiah was prophesied to perform. Protestants, like the Pharisees who interrogated the Forerunner, without reason confused the baptism of John with the baptism of Christ - and it turned out that they did not understand either one or the other. There stands in the midst of you, but you do not know Him. “He said this because Christ usually appeared in a crowd of people as a simple man and taught against pride and vanity,” with which the arrogant Jewish scribes appeared (Chrysostom). The Jews waited, they waited greatly for the Messiah: but since they were not waiting for that Messiah - the meek angel who redeems the spiritual freedom of people with his suffering, about whom the prophets spoke, but the Messiah invented by their passions, it turned out that they did not recognize the coming Messiah. He is the one who is coming before Me, but I am not worthy of him, so that I may cut off the thong of His boot. With what love the Forerunner takes this opportunity to speak about the true Messiah, about the Messiah of the prophets. Behold, he says, the one whom the prophets promised is coming. He comes after me, he appeared in time after me with his ministry: but how ancient he is! Was before me, existed far before me. How tall He is! “I am not worthy to untie the thong of His boot.” The eastern boot-sandal was attached to the foot with a belt. Untying the straps of sandals was the job of servants. The students of a respected and beloved teacher considered it an honor if they attached and untied the strap of the teacher’s sandals (Lichtfoot ad h. 1.). John the Baptist does not consider himself a worthy servant and disciple of the One who followed him, Christ Jesus. So great, so high is That teacher, That Lord! Art. 28. The Evangelist, an accurate historian, also points to the place where the Forerunner spoke with the messengers of the Sanhedrin. This indication of the place also conveys the importance of the testimony given about Jesus. The testimony was not given somewhere in a secret place, but where thousands gathered to hear John preach: it was given in the ears of thousands of people, in the ears of all Judea. Origen, revising the text of the Gospel, and bearing in mind that Bethany, where Lazarus was resurrected, was south of Jerusalem, and not beyond the Jordan, considered the reading: “this was in Bethany” as a scribes’ error and introduced the reading: “this was in Bethabara.” But if the Evangelist says: “He is the floor of the Jordan, where John was baptizing,” then no one could enter into the thought of Bethany, where Lazarus was resurrected. Origen also overlooked the fact that Beth-chaniah and Bethavara are identical in meaning: the first means the house of a ship or boat, the second is the house of passage, while Beth-chaniah, southern Bethany, means the house of dates. Therefore, it is natural that the same place, which was later called Bethavara, was called Bethany. So there was no need to replace the reading: Bethany, with the reading: Bethavara, especially since Origen himself said that in most codices they read Βεθανια with him; and even now in the most ancient and best lists it reads: Bethany. Art. 29. In the morning John saw Jesus coming to himself and saying: Behold, Lamb of God, take away the sins of the world. When was this? Was it not before Jesus was baptized in the Jordan? No, not before. Evangelist Luke clearly and definitely says that after Jesus was baptized, an abiye ενθυς spirit led Him into the desert - the word abiye does not allow for a significant period of time between baptism and being taken into the desert, especially since the same word is used by the evangelist about the time of the descent of the Holy Spirit on the baptized Jesus: “and when (Jesus) came up from the water, abiye “Immediately (John) saw the heavens opening.” The Gospel itself. John the Baptist says: I saw the Spirit descending like a dove, and remained on Him (John 1:32). It is clear that even at the direction of the Evangelist John, baptism has already been performed on Jesus, and Christ Jesus now comes to the Forerunner another time. When exactly does it come? Although the true word επαυριον sometimes means an indefinite time, on another day, there is no need to deviate from its main meaning: in the morning, the next day. After the messengers of the Sanhedrin left John, the next day John sees Jesus coming to him from the desert mountain, where He fasted for 40 days. Is it intentional and with what intention that Jesus now goes to John? No doubt intentionally: Jesus is more than a great teacher, with whom every step is calculated. “Since John baptized Him along with many others and many could assume that He came to John for the same reason as others - to confess sins: then Jesus comes again to give John the opportunity to correct such an erroneous assumption. (Chrysostom). Behold, lamb of God, take away the sins of the world, said the Forerunner, pointing his finger at the coming Jesus. Lamb - means the innocence and meekness of Jesus and the fact that He unrequitedly endures humiliation and suffering (Jer.11:19; Is.53:7). The Lamb of God means the one who was appointed by God himself, who was announced by the prophets and who doomed himself to fulfill the will of God. Take away the sins of the world. Αιρειν αμαρτιας, corresponding to the Hebrew expression nasa avon, means to take away sins, to accept punishment for sins. This is how this expression is used in Lev.10:17, 20:19–20; Ezek.18:19-20; Numbers 18:22. In the same sense, we see it in the Evangelist 1 John 3:5. In support of the Socinian thought about Jesus, they say that in the LXX αιρειν is not used in the sense of θερειν. But this is also unfair. See Lamentations of Jeremiah (Lam. 3:27), Job 21:3, Gen. 45:28. On the other hand, wherever Jesus is called a lamb, his death is spoken of everywhere, since He bore it for the people. Ap. Paul, calling Jesus Christ the Passover, or Passover lamb, says: He was devoured for us (1 Cor. 5:7). Ap. Peter in his letter (1 Pet. 1:18-19), comparing Him to a spotless and spotless lamb, says that by His blood, and not by silver, we have been redeemed from a vain life. The same in the revelation of John: Christ Jesus is called the slain lamb, or the lamb slain from the foundation of the world (Rev. 5:6-9, 7:14, 12:11, 13:8; in the prophet Isaiah (Is. 53:7). The Messiah is presented as a meek lamb, but at the same time it is said: He is wounded for our sins, - on Him is the punishment for our peace: v. Isa.53:4,10,11. In the same way, the Forerunner calls Jesus Christ the Lamb of God, not only in the sense of meekness, instructive for people, but as a Sufferer, dying for the sins of the world. New students of Socinus say that the Forerunner not only did not have, but also could not have thought about the propitiatory sacrifice of the Savior; could not, because he was brought up in Jewish opinions about the Messiah - the earthly king; especially since the apostles, before the descent of the Holy Spirit, also expected an earthly kingdom from Jesus. But the Forerunner was not one of the ordinary people to learn about the Messiah from popular opinions. It was said about him even before his birth that he would be filled with the Holy Spirit and go before the Lord in the spirit of Elijah, in order to present to the Lord a people ready. So, his teacher is not the people, but the Holy Spirit, and the people had to learn from him about the Messiah, and not he from the people. If Zechariah (Luke 1:76 ff.) and Simeon (Luke 2:32–33) had heaven as their teacher about the Messiah and therefore knew more about the Messiah than the modern apostles, then it is not surprising that the same teacher was also the greatest among those born of women. John's title was completely different from that of the apostles. The latter fully assumed their rank only when the Risen One sent them preaching into the universe; then they received an abundant outpouring of the Holy Spirit, necessary for their calling. But the Forerunner was appointed for another time and for another ministry; therefore, at a different time than the apostles, he was equipped with the knowledge necessary for his ministry. That is why in his sermon about Jesus we see the same lofty thoughts about Him, namely as the Son of God and the only Redeemer of the world (John 1:27, 33–34, 3:31, 36–38), which were conveyed by the apostles, overshadowed by the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. Art. 30–34. The Forerunner recalls his testimony, which he announced to the messengers of the Sanhedrin. And then he points out how he learned about his destiny and about Jesus. And I did not know him: the Forerunner says these words twice, of course, in order, on the one hand, to reject suspicion of partiality towards someone who was related to him through his mother, a relative of Mary, the Mother of Jesus (Luke 1:36), on the other, to present more clearly the idea that his testimony about Jesus is not evidence of the origin of man. The Forerunner did not know Jesus personally until His appearance on the Jordan. “He lived all the time in the desert, not in his parents’ house” (Chrysostom). How did he say to Jesus: I demand that I be baptized by You (Matthew 3:14)? These words make it clear that John knew the high personality of Jesus. Yes, he recognized by the inner illumination of his mind as soon as Jesus appeared to him. But this knowledge was still not very sufficient. A clearer, more convincing testimony was needed as to who Christ Jesus was. “I saw,” says the Forerunner, “the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove and remaining on Him.” And that was not enough. “He who sent Me to baptize in water said to me: on whomever you see the Spirit descending and remaining on Him; He is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.” – The vision of a dove descending on Jesus, of course, was not an act of imagination, even if excited by the Holy Spirit. The Evangelist Matthew narrates that after Jesus was baptized, he rose up from the water and the heavens opened for him, the clouds opened, as we see when lightning flashes. St. Mark (Mark 1:10) and John say that the Forerunner saw the Spirit of God as a dove, or as St. more specifically expresses it. Luke descending in a bodily manner σωματικω ειδει. It is clear that the Spirit of God descended visibly, in an image tangible to the bodily senses, just as He descended on the apostles. Did others besides the Forerunner see all this? “Even if they saw,” Chrysostom says about the Jews, “then such objects require not only bodily eyes, but mainly the eyes of the mind, so as not to recognize the real object as an empty sign.” This means that capable people, people with the right direction of mind and heart saw it: but there was no need for everyone to see it. In itself, this was very enough to recognize the Messiah in Jesus. But the Jews could still express doubts against the correctness of John’s subject vision. The Forerunner says that just as the Lord appeared to the prophets and proclaimed this or that will of his: and the Lord himself appeared to the son of Zechariah and announced his thought: “on whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining on Him, He is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.” Do you believe the manifestations of the Divine to the prophets? They must also trust me in my preaching that Jesus is the Messiah who will perform a gracious, internal baptism over people, which has the power to transform the very hearts of people. Otherwise you must abandon the entire history of God's people. That is why I have seen and testified that this is the Son of God. When did the Forerunner testify that Jesus is the Son of God? “He called Him a lamb, and said that He would baptize with the Holy Spirit; but that He was the Son of God, He did not say this” in the Gospel of John. “Other evangelists do not write that after baptism he (the Forerunner) said anything, but keeping silent about the events of this time, they talk about the miracles of Christ that happened after John’s imprisonment. From this we can conclude that they (the evangelists) passed through this and much more in silence; This is what this same evangelist (John) showed at the end of his gospel.” (Chrysostom, Zigaben). Here is another testimony of the Forerunner about Jesus, the son of Mary, a testimony showing in Jesus an extraordinary messenger of God, even the Son of God, and a testimony supported by the testimony of heaven. Art. 35. In the morning John stood again and two of his disciples stood. Art. 36. And seeing Jesus coming, the verb: Behold, the lamb of God. Here is John's third testimony about Jesus, and a testimony accompanied by a special consequence. The testimony was the same: Behold, the lamb of God. The Forerunner realized that his duty was to preach about Jesus as the lamb of God. And he fulfilled his duty. He fulfilled it especially when the next day he saw Jesus walking again. This time the listeners of his testimony were two disciples. Who are they? According to the evangelist himself, one of them was Andrew (v. 40). Who else? Of course, the one who, out of humility, did not like to display his name was John (John 13:23, 18:15, 19:26, 35). This can be seen from the accuracy with which the time of the disciples’ stay with Jesus is determined (v. 39). – Were there other disciples of the Forerunner, of whom he had many? The Evangelist John does not mention others. “The others have no hint of that.” So, it is more than likely that only two people listened to John this time. Where are the others? Of course, they separated due to the needs of the home, not having as much love and patience to listen to the teacher as those two. The time was also conducive to this: if it was ten o’clock, it was already past noon, four o’clock in the afternoon. b) The first followers of Jesus. Art. 37–42. The testimony of the Forerunner excited the chosen two of his disciples to follow Jesus - and then the voice of these two calls several more to Jesus. “When Jesus turned and saw them coming, he said to them, “What do you want?” They said to Him: Rabbi (which means: teacher!), where do you live? Jesus saw the secret desire of the disciples and when he asked: what do they need? then with a gentle question he only encouraged their meek, embarrassed hearts. Encouraged, the disciples said that they desired to be in the house where He lived. This meant that they wanted to listen to His instructions in free solitude. “And they stayed with Him that day.” Did the disciples want to follow the Lord everywhere when they asked: where do you live? The Heartbreaker knows. But they stayed with Him the rest of the day. This showed that their question was: where do you live? Not only was it not the fruit of curiosity, but it was also not the work of a fugitive feeling of love. Their appeal also indicates the same: Rabbi! “Not yet being His disciples and having not heard anything from Him, they already call Him teacher” (Chrysostom). True, an honorary title can also be the fruit of soulless politeness; but the simple hearts of the fishermen were not familiar with it. On the contrary, they listened to Jesus with such love and learned so much about Him that they said, “We have found the Messiah” (v. 41). The calling of Peter to Jesus, through brother Andrew, described by the evangelist John is not what the evangelists Matthew (Matthew 4:18 ff.) and Luke (Luke 5:1 ff.) speak about. The first calling was in Judea, near Jordan; and there the Savior calls, walking by the sea of ​​Galilee (Matthew 4:18; Luke 5:2). In John, after the calling of Simon, Jesus leaves Judea for Galilee and comes to Jerusalem for the feast, while the Forerunner was not imprisoned (John 2:13, 3:24). And other evangelists, before the calling of Peter and Andrew, describe the imprisonment of the Forerunner (Matthew 4:12, 18; Mark 1:14, 16). Jesus looked at Simon and said: You are Simon the son of Jonah. You will be called Cephas. As soon as Jesus looked at Simon, he recognized his name and whose son he was; I even knew his future. Orientals in general, as well as Jews, borrowed names for children from the circumstances surrounding their birth, for example. Jacob for his children (Gen. 30). They also took names on special occasions, for example. Joseph in Egypt (Gen.41:45). The rabbis named their students according to the qualities they noticed in them. Christ Jesus, at the first glance at Simon, recognizes the qualities of his soul and what to expect from him in the future. You will be called Cephas - a stone, says Christ. A decisive and frank character, when sanctified by the Holy Spirit, will serve to ensure that others through his influence are confirmed in the faith: this is what Christ sees in the future Simon and gives him the name corresponding to him - Cephas, in Syriac, in Greek Peter. Art. 43–44. On the morning of the morning, you wanted to go to Galilee and you found Philip and said to him: “Come after Me.” Be Philip from Bethsaida, from the city of Andreev and Petrov. Bethsaida, the fatherland of Peter and Andrew, was located on the western shore of Lake Galilee (John 12:21), and there was another Bethsaida, from which the desert began (Luke 9:10). This one lay on the eastern shore of Lake Galilee and was named Juliada, in honor of the daughter of Augustus Julia (Joseph ancient 16:2). The evangelist, noticing Filippov's place of residence, of course, wants to point out that Philip was somewhat prepared to be a listener of Jesus by his close acquaintance with Andrew and Peter, his fellow citizens. The heart-reader saw that Philip’s soul, prepared by the conversation of his fellow citizens, was ready to follow Him. Therefore, he does not offer Philip any instructions or admonitions, but only says: “Follow Me.” And Philip went. What Philip then heard from Jesus lived up to his expectations. Art. 45–46. Philip found Nathanael and said to him: Who wrote Moses in the law and the prophets, who found Jesus the son of Joseph from Nazareth. It was not by chance that Philip met Nathanael, but he sought and found him. Nathanael was known to him as the one who expected the joy of Israel. And these expectations were very alive in Philip’s soul, his thoughts were occupied with them. And so he hurries to share the news about the Messiah with Nathanael. Based on this direction of the hearts of Philip and Nathanael, it is likely that Philip and Nathanael, as well as Andrew, Peter and John, were disciples of the Forerunner. Instead of simply saying: we have found the Messiah, Philip says: we have found the One about whom Moses wrote in the law and the prophets in their books. This means that Philip and Nathanael studied the Holy Scriptures. The lofty teaching of Jesus, His holy life, knowledge of the heart and miracles delighted Philip; this is the great prophet about whom Moses spoke with other prophets, so Philip thought and spoke so to Nathanael. Philip considers Jesus to be the son of Joseph, descended from Nazareth. It is clear that he was unaware of the miraculous circumstances of the birth of Mary’s son in Bethlehem (Matt. 1:18 ff.; Luke 1:26 ff.); according to the voice of the people (Luke 3:23), he calls Jesus only the son of Joseph, the Nazarene. Many knew that Jesus was raised in Nazareth (Luke 4:16); From then on he went with his parents to Jerusalem (Luke 2:41ff.). Nazareth was considered the hometown of Jesus (Luke 4:24; Matt. 13:57). This is how Philip thought about the origin of Jesus. Nathanael, Philip's friend, who knows the scriptures, must be recognized as the same person with Bartholomew the Apostle. Evang. John calls this Nathanael an apostle (John 21:2) and does not mention Bartholomew among the apostles; other evangelists (Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:14), counting Bartholomew among the apostles, do not talk about Nathanael, and Bartholomew is placed after Philip, just as in John Nathanael is called after Philip. Can anything good come from Nazareth? - says Nathanael. Nazareth was a small town not far from Cana of Galilee. According to the general opinion of the Jews, there could be no prophet from Galilee (John 7:52). Mostly pagans, dark people lived in Galilee (Matthew 4:13–16, 26:7). The inhabitants of Cana of Galilee, quite rich and industrial, added that they were quite pleasant for the neighboring town, and spoke contemptuously of the poor inhabitants of Nazareth. Philip, without entering into a dispute with Nathanael about Nazareth, says: come and see. The teachings and works of Jesus themselves can tell who Jesus is: let Nathanael look at them. Art. 47. Just as, meeting Simon, Jesus reveals to Simon his future firmness in faith, so at the first glance at Nathanael he says: Behold, truly an Israelite, there is no flattery in him. The children of Israel are those who imitate the virtues of Israel (Rom.9:6). Israel-Jacob was especially distinguished by the straightforwardness of his soul, which did not allow the subterfuge of guile, being a man who was not wicked (Gen. 25:27). So was Nathanael. He who has no flattery in him means a man without pretense, who sincerely loves what is good (Ps. 31:2, 14:3; 1 Peter 2:21). Nathanael, without any pretense, expresses to Philip his distrust of what happened from Nazareth; but with the same candor he agreed to Philip’s challenge to base his opinion on the words and deeds of Jesus. Surely this is the son of Israel, a man not wicked. Art. 48. “Why do you know me?” - Nathanael says to Jesus. So on this issue, Nathanael speaks out directly and frankly; – he speaks as he thinks, and thinks, going straight to the truth; Jesus’ review of Him was flattering; he could have attracted others with him. Nathanael is not like that - he is not concerned with himself, but with the truth - he seeks it out. “Jesus answered and said to him, Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, he saw you.” Nathanael was under the fig tree when Jesus saw him, and not when Philip called him. This is clearly stated in Art. 50. In what condition Nathanael was under the fig tree, the gospel does not say: but it is clear that the words of the Lord struck Nathanael, opening the vigilance of Jesus’ vision, which penetrated into the depths of Nathanael’s soul. Art. 49. Nathanael answered and said to him: Rabbi, You are the Son of God, You are the King of Israel. It is impossible to determine what meaning Nathanael connected with his words: You are the Son of God, because Nathanael did not explain his words in any other way. But it is clear that the experience of insight into the depths of the heart shown by Jesus resolved Nathanael’s previous doubts and convinced him that Jesus is exactly the promised Messiah, the same one about whom Moses and the prophets spoke. Art. 50–51. The Lord approves of Nathanael's faith and together encourages him to grow in faith. Based on one experience of insight, you believe in the Messiah, this is good: but I expect more from you, you will see more than what you saw. Then the Lord said to Nathanael, turning his speech to the others: from now on you will see heaven open and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of man. In these words the main subject is the Son of man - Christ Jesus: this is clearly visible from the words and from their connection. From the expressions: angels ascend and descend, it is clear that Jesus Christ portrays himself as a king, with many servants; Some servants go away to carry out orders, others come to listen to orders. At the same time, we should recall a completely similar image presented by the Savior on another occasion. “From now on, says the Savior at the trial of Caiaphas, you will see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Matthew 26:64). Let us add that, as at the court of the Sanhedrin, Jesus says the above words in response to Caiaphas’ question: “Are you the Christ the Son of God?” so in the conversation with Nathanael, the words now considered followed Nathanael’s confession: “Rabbi, you are the Son of God.” After this, it is clear that the indication of the royal greatness of the Son of Man, surrounded by angels, serves to reinforce and exalt Nathanael’s faith in the divine dignity of the Messiah Jesus. If we asked ourselves: to what time does such greatness of the Son of Man date back? then according to the expression: from now on, we would not have the right to deprive this glory of the Savior’s earthly life, but we must remain with the conviction that the revelation of the full glory of the Son of Man will follow from the world court of the crucified Son of God. This is how the Son of Man is depicted in other places of scripture (Matthew 25:31, 13:49, 16:27; 2 Thess. 1:7; 1 Thess. 4:16). Art. 1–2. On the third day there was a marriage in Cana Galilee, and the Mother of Jesus was called, and Jesus and His disciples were called to the marriage. The third day, on which the marriage took place, should be counted from the day of Nathanael’s calling: for this is how the evangelist counts the days from the last incident (John 1:29, 35, 43). Cana, where the marriage took place, is called Galilee, in contrast to Trans-Jordan, which was located near Bethsaida Trans-Jordan, while Galilee was not far from Capernaum (John 4:46; Josh. 19:28). The Mother of Jesus Christ was present at the wedding in the form of the manager of the wedding celebration: for she took care of the lack of needs for the feast. Among those who were called were Jesus and His disciples, those about whom it was said before. The Heavenly Comforter honored with his presence the earthly joys of the earthly pilgrims. Marriage is a blessed thing in heaven. He who appeared to return to people the paradise they had lost also blesses him. Art. 3. And I lacked wine, the Mother of Jesus said to Him: They have no wine. The lack of wine prompts the Mother of Jesus to expect help from her Son. Out of modesty and respect, She only reminds Him of the need: they have no wine. Jesus' answer was: What do I and You have, Woman? My time has not come. Jewish proverb: “What is it to me and to you?” depending on the location of the one who pronounces it, it takes on different meanings. In the mouths of Jephthah, who desires peace with the Ammonites (Judg. 11:12), David, who is patient in the face of Shimei’s insults (2 Sam. 16:10), she expresses affection. But it means something else in the mouth of Elisha (2 Kings 3:13), when he reproaches the wicked Joram, or in the mouth of a Somanite woman complaining about the loss of her son (1 Kings 17:18). The appeal γυναι - “wife”, rather unkind in our language, in Greek constitutes a respectful appeal to noble wives - and expresses not a feeling of hostility, but love (John 19:26, 20:15) (in Dion 51 p. 305, Augustus says to Cleopatra: θαρσει, ω γυναι , και θυμον εχε αγαθον . 55 p. 638. Xenoph. 7. 3. 4, in 370 art. So, the Savior says: “Leave me for now, my beloved!” This spirit of love is expressed by the following words: “My hour has not come.” The Savior promises in due time to take care of the need in accordance with the desire of the Mother, but now is not the time for that. He delays his help so that the lack of wine becomes more known and there would be no suspicion later that the water was mixed with the remaining wine. Art. 5. Mother’s verb to his servants: whatever he says to you, do it. The Mother has no doubt that Her desire will be fulfilled: this is how She understood the words of the Son. She orders the servants to be ready to do whatever the great Guest says. Her undoubted expectation of miraculous help shows that She was confident in the miraculous power of the Son through experiments. Chrysostom thinks that before the miracles in Cana of Galilee, Christ did not perform miracles either in Jerusalem or in Galilee (Demons 21, §2). According to the Gospels, the miracle of Cana is the first only among the Galilean miracles. Chrysostom himself has no doubt that not all the words and deeds of the Savior are recorded in the Gospels (Demons 17 §3). We repeat that the confidence of the Mother of Jesus that the Son will perform a miracle shows that She already knew the experiences of His miraculous power. It is also probable that the shortcomings of the poor carpenter Joseph were compensated by the desire of Christ Jesus, who was compassionate towards all the poor. Art. 6. Behu the water-carriers. To show the greatness of the Cana miracle, the evangelist describes in detail the vessels in which the water became wine. In terms of their substance, they were made of stone; in terms of their use, they were designated for water needed according to the custom of “Jewish purification”: from them, water was poured into small vessels for washing hands before dinner (Matthew 15:2) and various utensils (Luke 11:39). Track. Because of this use, they could not be filled with anything else but water. They held two or three meters; Flavius, Ancient. 8, 2, equals the metret to the Jewish bat (2 Chron. 4:5; Is. 5:10); and the baht and metret are not much more than our two buckets. Track. each Kanskaya kad contained from 4 to 6 our buckets; and there were six of them for the wedding feast. With such a size and such a number of cadets, it is impossible to even think that by adding a little wine the taste and color of the water could be brought closer to wine. Art. 7. Jesus commands the empty casks to be filled with water, he commands not his disciples, but his servants, and the casks are filled to the brim; track. In total, up to 35 of our buckets were filled with water. This excess of water increases the greatness of the miracle. Art. 8–10. “Draw it up and bring it to the architricline.” Architriclinus (αρχοτ τρικληνου) is the chief, the manager of the feast, for Pollux τραπεζοποιοτ “the manager of the table, the one who takes care of everything that concerns the table.” This man, who by his rank should have known the value of the needs of the table and, busy with worries about the order of the feast, remained “sober and did not drink anything” (Chrysostom), the Savior orders to offer his new wine to the court. Architriclinus was amazed where such wonderful wine came from and how it was preserved at the end of the meal. Thus, one who knows the price of wine fully approved of the new wine. “The servants knew very well that they were pouring water.” Now not only the servants and not only the architriclin, but all those who were at the feast learned that the water had become excellent wine. Art. 11. Behold, Jesus did the firstfruits as a sign in Cana of Galilee, and showed His glory and made His disciples believe in Him. The words: behold, make the firstfruits a sign, do not mean that the miraculous power of Jesus had not been revealed before; The miracle at Cana was the first performed in Galilee. This explanation is justified by the words of the evangelist himself: Jesus did this second sign when he came from Judea to Galilee (John 4:54). The sign σημειον here is the same as a miracle; this is how it is used in other cases (Is. 38:7, ff. 2 Chron. 32:24; Is. 7:14, ff. Is. 11:12). Show your glory, i.e. characteristic of the Son of God, as explained above (John 1:14). Your disciples were confirmed in the faith, having believed before (John 1:42, 46, 50). So the evangelist eyewitness and the apostles eyewitnesses recognized a true miracle in the event of Cana. Was it necessary, they say, to create a miracle here? Compassion could help the need without a miracle. But to the misfortune of the neologians, the evangelist shows that Jesus did not only help in need in order to reveal his humanity, but actually in order to arouse faith in those who did not have it and strengthen it in those in whom it was still weak. – Christ Jesus is the herald of the will of the Heavenly Father for the salvation of people, and not a preacher of humanism alone. Events from the first Easter to the second. a) Expulsion of the traders from the church. Art. 12–14. After a short stay in Capernaum, Jesus Christ appears in Jerusalem for Easter. The Jewish Passover is near. This is the first Passover mentioned in the Gospel of John, and at this time the Lord expels the merchants from the church. The accuracy with which John indicates the time when the expulsion of the merchants described by him took place undoubtedly convinces that it was in vain that (Zigaben and others) confused this expulsion with the one about which the Gospels tell. Matthew 21:12; Luke 19:45 and Mark 11:15, showing him before the story of the suffering of the Savior. The exile described by John was accompanied by a particularly strict reproof and objection from the Pharisees, which was not the case during the exile before suffering. And you will find in the church (ιερω) those who sell and those who buy. Ιερον the sacred place of the temple of Jerusalem was the very front part of the temple, 500 cubits in length and width, with 5 gates; pagans prayed here; there was a treasury and houses of charity; Doves, lambs, oxen and other sacrificial needs were sold here; here sat the money changers, exchanging large coins for small ones for interest, and foreign coins for Jewish coins. Although in the time of the Savior, taxes to the temple were accepted in every place and they were paid in the month of Adar, and not in Nisan Easter, and therefore before Easter there was no need to exchange Jewish shekels in the courtyard of the pagans to pay taxes to the temple, but calculations of self-interest were now exchanging coins in a sacred place, under various pretexts. The noise of sellers and buyers not only deafened the pious proselytes, but it was also heard in the church, and deceptions, quarrels, and fights completely desecrated the shrine. Blazh. Jerome (Comm ad Mutth 21, 12) wrote that the priests were engaged in trade and money exchange in the church courtyard. Although other monuments do not say this directly about the Jewish priests, it is difficult to believe that the Jewish priesthood, passionate about money, did not have financial transactions with merchants trading in that place, which was under the full control of the priests. Art. 15–16. And having created a scourge from the ropes, everyone was driven out. The Savior, with a whip in his hand, drove everyone out of the sacred place like a herd of cattle. Some people think that the Lord did not use any kind of violence in this, but acted only by conviction. But the words of the evangelist say something completely different. Εκβαλλειν means to drive out by force (Matthew 22:13; Luke 4:29; John 9:34), φραγγελλειον – Latin flagellum – scourge. Broken tables and scattered money also speak of strict force. Καί τον κολλυβιςων εξεχεε το κερμα. Κολλυβιςαι – technical name of a money changer. Κολλυβος meant a kind of small coin equal to an ovol (Scholiast. ud Aristoph Pac. 1199), among the rabbis kolbon was a coin that money changers took for exchanging coins for shekels and which amounted to 18 shares of a shekel. (Buxtort. ad h v. Lichtfoot. Ad Mat. 21, 12). Κερμα is a small coin that was exchanged for a large one, sometimes even a coin (Aristoph. Plut 379). So, the Savior “scattered the money changers and overturned their tables.” “It seems to me,” writes Bl. Jerome, of all the signs performed by Jesus, this is the most amazing. The man of that time, a small and neglected man, drives away such a multitude of people with blows of a whip, despite the anger of the Pharisees, overturns tables, scatters money, one does so many things that a whole crowd would hardly be able to do. A flame burned in His eyes and the majesty of the Divine shone on His face” (Com. in Matt 21, 15). Art. 17. I remembered His disciples, as it is written: pity for your house has consumed me. The disciples were attentive to the actions of the heavenly Teacher. They understood that His action with the merchants of the church was a matter of holy jealousy, which is spoken of in Psalm 68. Did they now understand that this psalm is a song about the suffering Messiah, as explained in the new revelation? (John 15:25, 19:28; Rom.11:9–10, 15:3; Acts 1:20). No, now their spiritual gaze has not yet stretched so far. They looked at the act in the church as a matter of high zeal, but did not yet see that this zeal for the glory of God would lead the Teacher to the cross. Art. 18–19. The crowd of merchants, driven by the great Teacher, unresponsively hurried to leave the church: and their conscience made them aware of their guilt, and the irresistible greatness of the indignant Jesus forced them to leave the church silently. But - they decided to do it. It was painful to endure public shame: but it was our own fault. What to do? Yes, that's it! demand from the accuser whether He has the right to denounce? The Messenger of God - the Prophet, and even more so the Messiah - can improve the worship of the church and correct its shortcomings. "R. Shiya said that the words of Deut. 18:18 refer to the days of the Messiah: He will bring news and renew Israel” (Midrasch. Schir. Haschirim. 2, 13) So, let Jesus bring a sign - as proof that he has the right to change the order of church worship. And so they did. “Destroy this church and I will raise it up in three days” was the Savior’s answer. Philo (De opificio p. 94), prophets (Is. 38:12), ap. Paul (1 Cor. 3:16–17, 6:19; 2 Cor. 6:16) called the body the church or house of the soul. And this name is so common in all languages, with the exception of Epicurean. So the Savior, when they demand a sign from him, points to the most important thing - his resurrection from the dead. He points to this sign on another occasion (Matthew 12:39). Some (ap. Kuinoelium ad h. 1) take the Savior’s answer as a promise to form a new religion in place of the old sensual one, and not as the Apostle explained in Art. 21–22. But everything that is said in defense of the new explanation does not defend it, but accuses it. If, they say, Jesus Christ had pointed his finger at His body, then the Jews would not have referred His words to the Temple of Jerusalem. But quite a few might not have noticed what the Savior was pointing to when he uttered words about the church, and only for this reason could they attribute them to the church. Others maliciously transformed the meaning of the Savior’s clear words (Matthew 26:61, 27:40). They say that the disciples only after the resurrection began to think (v. 22) that He was talking about the resurrection of His Body. But this is not entirely true. Before the resurrection, the apostles did not trust the prophecy words of the Lord about the resurrection (ουκ επιςευσαν τω λογω), just as they did not want to believe that their Lord would die a shameful death (Matthew 16:21); His word about the resurrection of the body lay in their souls, as if buried, and was resurrected with His resurrection (Luke 24:45-46). Even if it were that they did not understand the Savior’s words before the resurrection, but understood after the resurrection: we must follow the explanation of the God-enlightened apostles, and not come up with our own interpretations. Art. 20. In fourscore and six years this church was created, said the Jews. Solomon's Temple was built in seven years (1 Kings 6:38). But the Jews talk about this church that was before their eyes, about the temple that Herod began to rebuild. At the age of 10, Herod managed to build the walls of the sanctuary, and then only in rough form; after him, work on the church continued until the very center. Agrippa (Flavius ​​2, 5. 6; 15, 11; about the war 1, 21). When we talked with the Savior about the church, 46 years had indeed passed since the beginning of construction: but we should have said modestly, with sorrow, and not proudly: “For 46 years this church has been under construction and it is still not finished, because of our sins.” Art. 23–25. Many have believed in His name, seeing His signs and doing them. The evangelist does not say what miracles the Savior performed on the Easter holiday. Many believe in His name; They recognized Him as the promised Prophet, the Messiah. Only the faith of some lasted for two days, and then they pestered His enemies; others believed in one earthly king, without thinking about eternity; still others believed, but without changing anything. Christ Jesus saw the hearts of people, without needing anyone to tell Him what one or the other was like. That is why, despite the fact that many treated him kindly and with respect, He did not entrust himself to everyone, did not reveal the secrets of the kingdom, which others could use for evil. b) Conversation with Nicodemus, John 3:1-21. Art. 1. A certain man was a Pharisee, his name was Nicodemus, the prince of the Jews. The heart-reader did not communicate the secrets of the kingdom to everyone. But here is a man with whom he spoke about the secrets of spiritual life, while according to human reasoning it was difficult to see in this man the ability to understand spiritual life. The evangelist, before describing the Savior’s lengthy conversation with this person, makes a brief sketch of this person. “Among the Pharisees there was a certain man named Nicodemus, one of the leaders of the Jews. He came to Jesus at night." Nicodemus belonged to the sect of the Pharisees. A trait that does not promise much good. The Pharisees loved to seem zealous for the law, but there were proud and hypocritical people who loved to rule and not share power with others; arrogant with their elegant piety, they were ready to persecute anyone who spoke not according to their thoughts. The Savior Himself moved away from their eyes at the beginning of His ministry (John 4:1). They expected the Messiah, but the Messiah was the king of the earth; more than others, they were proud of their descent from Abraham and considered themselves the first heirs of the kingdom of God, but in no case - the pagans. That's what these people were like! But tax collectors were also considered the most sinful people: however, among them were Matthew the Apostle and Zacchaeus. We can think that Nicodemus was not free from the prejudices of the Pharisees. But to what extent he had internalized the bad qualities of the Pharisees, the Knower of the Heart knew this, and this will partly be shown by his conversation. He was a Jewish prince, “one of the leaders of the Jews,” otherwise a member of the supreme Jewish court of the Sanhedrin (John 7:26, 48; Luke 24:20; Acts 3:17). Subsequently, we will see his reasoning between the members of the Sanhedrin (John 7:50). And here, knowing that the Sanhedrin brought the Savior to the cross, human thought is ready to say: what to expect from this prince? But it was not in vain that the evangelist said: Jesus “knew what was in man,” which people do not know. I came to Jesus overnight. It would be unfair to suspect the prince that he came at night with the Pharisee’s intentions to find out the secret thoughts of Jesus in a secret conversation with him and convey them to the Sanhedrin. Subsequently, he spoke for Jesus in the Sanhedrin (John 7:50–51). Why did he come at night? Of course, out of fear for oneself, out of fear of incurring the hatred of powerful people who are not disposed towards Jesus. This is not a matter of strong character. But the Savior did not break even a bruised reed (Matthew 12:20); He is a good Doctor and heals the weak, as long as they want to be treated. “We know that you are a teacher come from God; for no one can do such miracles as you do, unless God is with him,” said Nicodemus to Christ Jesus. “We know,” I and others like me. Who are we? “We know,” this is how the Pharisees and book people thought about themselves, and they spoke about the people with contempt: “this people are ignorant” (John 7:49, 9:24, 29). “The leaders of the Jews,” or what is the same, the members of the Sanhedrin, most of whom were Pharisees, were also considered knowledgeable (John 7:26). Thus, among the Pharisees and members of the Sanhedrin there were those like Nicodemus, quite attentive to themselves, so as not to go against the truth and God: “but for the sake of the Pharisees they did not confess, so as not to be excommunicated from the synagogue,” says. evangelist (John 12:42). One of the believing leaders, and, moreover, high in spirit, is also known by name: this is Joseph of Arimathea (Luke 23:51). The Pharisees spoke reproachfully to their servants, who spoke the unpleasant truth: “Have any of the leaders (members of the Sanhedrin) or of the Pharisees believed in Him (Jesus)” (John 7:48)? But they lied either without knowing the matter, or even deliberately, just to keep people silent about the unpleasant truth. “We know,” says Nicodemus, that you are a teacher come from God: for no one can do such miracles as you do, unless God is with Him.” Nicodemus does not believe in Jesus unaccountably. He believes with the consciousness of reasonable reasons obliging him to believe in the son of Joseph. It is impossible to perform miracles without authority from God, without the help of the omnipotent power of God: this is a truth beyond doubt. “Therefore, there should be no doubt that Jesus, who performs miracles in the sight of everyone, is the Messenger of God: this is how Nicodemus reasoned. And one must abandon common sense if one wanted to condemn Nicodemus. Let the faith of Prince Nicodemus not yet be faith in the Son of God, but only in the Messenger of God. Faith grows like a tree. The good thing is that there is faith, and even better, that this faith is not fruitless, but led the prince to listen to instructions in faith and piety. Art. 3. Jesus answered and said to him: Amen, amen, I say to you: unless someone is born again (ανωθεν), he cannot see the kingdom of God. Ανωθεν means “from above, from heaven, from God” (Job.3:4; John 3:11, 19:11; James 1:17, 3:15), and also means “again, again” (Luke 1:3; Gal.4:9; Wisdom 19:6). Ancient translators (Vulgate, Syriac, Coptic, Arabic), Nonnus and Nicodemus v. 4. understood the second birth in the Savior’s words; Origen, Cyril, Theophylact replaced ανωθεν with the word: ουρανωθεν, “from heaven.” There is no doubt that, according to the Savior’s latest explanation, the second birth can only take place from heaven, by the power of God: but from here it does not follow that in v. 3. it is necessary to translate ανωθεν - “above”, and not “again”; on the contrary, the gradualness with which the Savior leads Nicodemus to the full understanding of the spiritual mystery requires here the word about a new birth, and about birth from heaven we will talk ahead. Seeing the kingdom of God is the same as entering the kingdom of God v. 5, - to participate in its benefits. Nicodemus, having said his confession, did not finish his final thought. According to the Savior’s answer, it was as follows: I ask the heavenly Teacher to tell me what is needed in order to participate in the kingdom of God, which the messenger of God preaches about. The Savior speaks a word to you; - this is already a sign of love for Nicodemus; this is a sign that Nicodemus is recognized as capable and worthy to accept the secret. “Unless someone is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” The verdict is decisive: without rebirth one cannot participate in the blessings of the kingdom of God. Art. 4. Nicodemus did not understand what second birth the great Teacher was talking about? Having understood His words in his own way, attributing them to carnal birth, he was far from following the example of frivolous people to laugh at the words of another; frivolity in this case does not notice that it is laughing at itself, at its short-sighted meaning. Nicodemus was not like that; Yes, otherwise the Savior would have answered him. Thinking that it was a matter of a carnal birth, Nicodemus began to inquire: how could this be a second carnal birth? How can an old man, like Nicodemus, be born again? “Can he really enter his mother’s womb another time and be born”? St. Chrysostom remarks on this: “nothing brings such darkness as the human mind, reasoning about everything in an earthly way and not accepting illumination from above. Earthly thoughts contain a lot of impurity. That is why we need heavenly streams, so that, while driving away the mud, what is pure in our minds ascends to heights and joins in the heavenly teachings.” Art. 5. The Savior repeats to Nicodemus that without rebirth one cannot enter the kingdom of heaven and points out the way in which this rebirth can take place. “Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” Regenerating water is the water of baptism, as if permeated by the power of God; the regenerating spirit is the spirit of grace, the power of God, descending from heaven to water and regenerating human nature. According to your mercy, you saved us by the washing of being and the renewal of the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5), the apostle teaches. This is the way in which saving regeneration takes place. Art. 6. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. The Savior explains the necessity of the rebirth that He speaks of. What is born by nature remains nature: one born from a person is the same person as the parent. And what human nature is most closely demonstrated by death is decay, decay, stench, dust. Such a process with the body indicates to a person that his soul also carries within itself corruption, disorder, rottenness, which can end, by the grace of freedom, in the death of the soul. Only the Spirit of God can impart to man a higher life; spiritual, truly living, imperishable life depends on heaven, on the spirit of grace. Art. 7–8. After what Nicodemus heard from the great Teacher, he stopped thinking about carnal birth: but he thought and was amazed (v. 9), how will the spiritual rebirth of all Israel be accomplished? The Savior answers his thoughts: “Do not be surprised at what I said to you: you must be born again.” You must be born again, and not Nicodemus alone. No matter how highly the Jews and especially the supposed righteous Pharisees thought of themselves, everyone must be reborn. How will this happen? The Savior explains by comparison. “The spirit breathes where it wants, and you hear its voice, but you don’t know where it comes from and where it goes.” The Savior, speaking about the spirit, speaks about the wind, and not about the spirit of grace: He would not have said about the spirit of grace: you hear his voice. Thus, the breezes of the wind are elusive and unstoppable; he knows where and how he wants. In the same way, the actions of the spirit of grace are incomprehensible, and in the same way, neither the laws of nature, nor human opinions, nor the righteousness of the Pharisees, nor the sins of the toll collector can delay them. Art. 9–12. Nicodemus was still perplexed: how could these things be? He heard the sounds of the Savior's words, but their meaning still seemed dark to him. The Good Teacher admonishes him with heavenly goodness. And, firstly, he shames him for not understanding his title. “You, he says, are the teacher of Israel, and do you not know this?” And in the Old Testament they taught about the need for heart circumcision, about the need for heavenly help for those born in sin; they especially said a lot that the Messiah must bring about the rebirth of the entire human race (Deut. 30:6; Ps. 51:9, 12; Jer. 31:31-33; Is. 11:9, 18:3; Mal.3:7; Ezek.36:25-26). How did the teacher of Israel turn out to be unaware of this? The dreams of the Pharisees about the earthly kingdom of the Messiah, about the power of the Jews over the pagans, about earthly glory, about earthly wealth - they hid from Nicodemus the truths revealed by heaven. But Nicodemus, the teacher of Israel, must understand that dreams are deception, human opinions are not the same as will. God's Even vemy, we say. Nicodemus himself recognized Jesus Christ as the Messenger of God. If Jesus is the Messenger of God, then he knows what he is saying; he testifies only to what he saw. This means that Nicodemus was against himself when, listening to the Messenger of God, he did not stop asking: how can these things be? The Sanhedrin was especially guilty with its stubbornness, which did not even want to hear the testimony of Jesus. Wemy, the verb says in accordance with the Pharisaic: wemy, in order to bring the Pharisee Nicodemus to consciousness. Even if the earthly river came to you and you did not believe, what if the heavenly river came to you and you believed? No matter how lofty the doctrine of rebirth is, it relates to the mysteries that Jesus wanted to reveal in the same way as earthly things relate to heavenly things, and the sensible to the supersensible. If what is said seems full of temptation and stupidity, how will they accept heavenly things? The idea of ​​the need for spiritual rebirth is not so far from the human mind that, by observing the soul and the history of the human race, it cannot assimilate it to itself. But the advice and secrets of the deity are another matter. The Teacher of Israel has calmed down, he has now humbled himself. During the subsequent speech of the heavenly Teacher, he no longer says a word, but only listens and listens. Art. 13. And no one ascended into heaven except he who came down from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven. Among the Jews, instead of saying: no one is able to understand this, they said: who can ascend to heaven? ( Prov.30:3-4 ; Deut.30:12 ; 2Chron.30:27 ; Rom.10:6 ). Speaking in this language about ascending to heaven, the Savior teaches the following truth: no one can know the secrets of heaven except He who came down from heaven, the Son of man, He who by human nature lives on earth, and by higher nature dwells in heaven. This cannot be said about a prophet or an angel. The prophets received revelation from God, but did not descend from heaven and, while on earth, could not say that they were in heaven. The One who is both on earth and in heaven is, of course, omnipresent, which cannot be attributed to an angel. So Jesus revealed to Nicodemus about Himself that He is a man and at the same time God. The Son of God said the same about himself on other occasions (John 17:5, 16:28). Art. 14–15. And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness: so it is fitting for the Son of Man to be lifted up. Yes, everyone who believes in him will not perish, but... This is the new secret that Jesus reveals to the good prince. Before that, He said that if anyone can be a teacher about high subjects necessary for human salvation, then, of course, He who, while on earth, is in heaven. Now he says that another purpose of the Son of God’s presence on earth is that He will be crucified for the salvation of people. Some (Paulus and others like him) give this meaning to the observed words of the Savior: The Messiah must be glorified, like the healing serpent. But a) this would not mean leading the Pharisee Nicodemus out of his erroneous opinion about the Messiah as a glorious earthly king, but rather affirming him in error. b) Art. 16 clearly speaks of God’s love for the world, which delivered the Son of God to death for the salvation of people, c) Even the Jews understood such speeches of the Savior only about His death, not excluding the thought of its saving fruits (John 12:32–34). d) The evangelist himself in other cases explains his words in the same way (John 12:33, 8:28). Art. 16. Thus God love the world.... Peace in the language of the evangelist means all people, the entire human race (John 1:10, 29). So, the love of God, which saves the world with His Son, does not apply to the Jewish people alone, but to all people; In the language of the New Testament, the Father betrayed the Son means the same thing as betraying him to death on the cross (John 6:51; Luke 22:19; Gal.1:4; Rom.8:32). On the part of people, one condition is required - complete faith in the Son of God. Art. 17–21. Concludes an explanation of what was said in Art. 16 for the one who, together with the majority of the Jews and especially with the Pharisees, thought that the Gentiles are a lost people, and God is good to the Jews. Art. 17. For God did not send His Son into the world to judge the world, but through Him the world may be saved. The very opposite of the word: let κρινειν judge the word σωθηται be saved, shows that to judge here does not mean to sort it out in court, but to condemn, to subject to punishment; this is how the word κρινειν is used in other cases (Rom. 2:1; Heb. 13:4; John 18:31). The Savior says that the Pharisees, condemning the pagans to destruction, do not have the correct concept of the Heavenly Father, presenting Him as cruel and heartless towards millions of people. No, God is not like that: He only wants to save everyone, and not destroy. The Pharisees did not understand the meaning of the Messiah, preaching that He would appear to make some Jews happy and to punish the pagans. The Messiah, the Son of God, now appears in order to prepare salvation for everyone, both Jews and pagans. – He will be the Judge of the universe, but at another time. Art. 18–19. He who believes in him will not be condemned; but he who does not believe is already condemned. For there is no faith in the name of the only begotten Son of God. This is judgment - men have loved darkness... The condition of salvation is explained. 16. He who believes in the Son of God, cleansed from sins by His blood, is not afraid of execution and is free from condemnation. But whoever does not believe is unhappy because he does not believe in the Son of God. This means that people themselves are to blame for their destruction, because they loved darkness and not the light that appeared for them. The good prince of the Jews was very much concerned with the fate of the Jews. The Savior explains to him what the pitiful fate of the Jews depends on. The Savior often spoke about this (Matthew 22:2; Luke 14:10; 19:14; John 16:4). Art. 20–21. Anything evil does, it hates the light... How is it that love for darkness, for wickedness, destroys people? It is very natural: whoever is accustomed to doing evil hates the light, does not like admonitions, fears them, lest his vileness be revealed both to his conscience and to people. So he, remaining without light, goes more and more into the depths of destruction. On the contrary, he who loves the truth seeks instruction in order to know the worth of his deeds; he is not afraid of the light, because his deeds are done for God and he wants to live for God. This is how the evangelist, describing his conversation with Nicodemus, described: 1) Nicodemus himself, John 3:1–2. 2) Jesus' answer about the need for regeneration to enter the kingdom, v. John 3:3. 3) When Nikodimov is perplexed, a demonstration of the need for spiritual rebirth, Art. John 3:4–8. 4) Reproach to Nicodemus for not understanding what is known, v. John 3:9–12. 5) The purposes of the appearance of the Son of God on earth, v. John 3:13–17. 6) Why do others die? Art. John 3:18–21. c) The last testimony of the Forerunner, John 3:22–36. Describing the last testimony of the Forerunner about Jesus, the evangelist shows: 1) the reason for this testimony, Art. 22–26. 2) The very testimony: a) that Jesus is a special messenger of God, and John is His servant, v. 27–30; b) that Jesus conveys what He heard from the Father and therefore unbelief in Him is destructive, v. 31–36. Art. 22. After this, Jesus and his disciples came to the land of the Jews, and lived with them and were baptized. Leaving Jerusalem, where he had a conversation with Nicodemus, Jesus retired to the northeast to the Jordan, without leaving the land of Judea. The land of Judea is distinguished here from Jerusalem, as the region from the main city; similar to Luke 5:17, 6:17; Joshua 8:1. Jesus lived here with his disciples and baptized. The latter in the evangelist’s news actually means that Jesus expressed his will that those turning to a better life be baptized by His disciples; Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples, the evangelist notes on another occasion (John 4:2). This baptism of Christ's disciples was essentially the same as the baptism of John - it also served only as a preparation for the kingdom of grace, but was not yet the spiritual rebirth about which the Savior talked with Nicodemus. The apostles were authorized to perform baptism of grace after the resurrection of Christ (Matthew 28:19; Mark 16:15) and began to perform it after the descent of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38, 8:38, 10:47–48). “If anyone wanted to know,” says Chrysostom, “whether the baptism of the disciples (Jesus) had any advantage over the baptism of John, then we will say that there is none. For both baptisms equally had no grace, and the purpose of both was only to bring those baptized to Christ.” Art. 23. And John was baptizing in Aenon, near Salem, for there was a great abundance of water. Salim, according to Eusebius, was 8 miles (about 11 versts) from Scythopolis, and near Salim and Jordan, south of Scythopolis, there was Onomasticon; both on the east bank of the Jordan. John did not stop teaching and baptizing, preparing the way for the Lord. And now, while Jesus was teaching on the western side of the Jordan, he performed baptism in Aenon, where the abundance of water did not make it difficult to baptize hundreds; he continued his ministry tirelessly until he was thrown into prison (v. 24). Art. 24–26. With the word: εκ τ. μαθητων is implied by τισι, - among some of the disciples; so in other cases Rev. 2:10, 11:9. Vm. Ιουδαιων in the best and ancient lists reads: Ιουδαιου; the same in the Syriac translation, in Chrysostom (εις, τις), Eusebius, Cyril and others (Wettenius ad h. 1). The dispute was about purification, otherwise about baptism; the Jew, baptized by the disciples of Jesus, praised the baptism he received, from the side that many accepted it; John's disciples extolled the baptism of their teacher. The very fact that John now performed baptism in Aenon, where there was a lot of water, shows that the number of those who wanted to be baptized by John increased compared to before. Many came to Jesus’ disciples to be baptized, and the number of those wishing to quickly increased (John 4:1–2). The growing respect for Christ Jesus and the thought that the teacher John and his disciples might soon lose respect among the people filled the hearts of John’s disciples with sorrow. A dispute about baptism with a Jew gave rise to the fact that they poured out their grief before their teacher. “Rabbi! the one who was with you at the Jordan and about whom you testified, baptizes and everyone goes to Him,” they said. “The one about whom you testified” means the One “Whom you praised and made famous” (Chrysostom), since people “testified” are the same as “approved” (Acts 6:3, in Laertius 1, 24), μαρτυρει δ αυτω και "Heraclitus and Democritus praise him." The poor do not understand themselves, they do not understand that, being annoyed at the growing glory of Jesus, they thereby no longer become disciples of John, who spoke to them out loud: I am not worthy to untie the thong of His sandals; They do not understand that they are not at all concerned about the honor of their teacher, but only about themselves, because the teacher considered it an honor to be a servant of Jesus, and not to be higher than Him. Thus, curiosity and envy darkened their intelligent vision of great events - and of themselves. – It is clear that these proud students were not among the best students of the Forerunner. The best disciples, such as Andrew, Peter, John, Philip, Nathanael, were on the side of Christ Jesus, and not against Him. – Subsequently, Paul found in Ephesus such disciples of John who had no idea about the grace of the Holy Spirit, nor about baptism of grace, and did not understand well the baptism of John: but these were still so obedient that, having listened to Paul’s instructions, they were baptized with baptism of grace (Acts 19:2-5). In other places some of John's disciples appeared who formed a sect hostile to Christianity. Art. 27. The Forerunner admonishes his restless disciples with all meekness, fearing that severity does not push them away from him and from the truth. First of all, he presents them with a general idea: you cannot take on anything special without the special will of God; ου δυναται cannot, without offending his conscience, the same thing that sins (Acts 4:19, 5:29) λαμβανειν to appropriate something for himself (Heb. 5:4). Εκ του ουρανου, from heaven is the same as from God (Matthew 21:25; Luke 15:18). It is a sin to take on anything if it is not given by God. The consequences of this thought are clear. The Forerunner cannot place himself above Jesus when he is not appointed to do so at all. Equally, if Christ Jesus is more than an ordinary messenger of God, that is the will of God. What is the conclusion from this for John's disciples? Those who rebel against Jesus, rebel against the will of God, turn out to be enemies of God; and this is scary! Art. 28. The Forerunner confirms his general thought about himself with his previous testimony, known to his disciples. “You yourselves are my witnesses of this, that I said: I am not the Christ, but I was sent before Him.” For John’s disciples, this testimony should be all the more powerful because, on the one hand, while respecting the Teacher, they should believe his sincerity and not expect him to renounce his words; on the other hand, they would humiliate themselves if they wanted to be disciples of someone who at one time says one thing, at another preaches and acts differently. Art. 29. Having a bride, a groom is... The Forerunner explains his attitude towards Jesus by comparison. He presents Jesus Christ as the groom, those who believe in Jesus as the bride, himself as the groom’s friend, and as a mediator between the bride and groom. Among the Jews, the groom's friend took care of ensuring that the desired marriage took place; before the actual marriage, he brought the groom’s gift to the bride and conveyed the bride’s wishes to the groom, then at the beginning of the marriage he gave the bride’s hand to the groom and he was honored and joyful if the combination was accomplished (Lightf. p. 980). This is how the Forerunner presents himself. He cares about nothing more than that his groom appears as brilliant and glorious to everyone as possible, and that his bride is rich, otherwise the number of followers of Jesus grows more and more. And when this is actually the case, if the number of believers in Jesus is growing rapidly, then he is glad, extremely glad. So, the very thing that saddens some of his disciples so much that it arouses discontent and indignation in them, for him constitutes the subject of the highest joy. After this, John’s disciples are left to choose one of two things - either, following the example of the teacher, to revere Jesus Christ and rejoice in His growing glory, or to renounce the name of John’s disciples. Art. 30. It is fitting for him to grow... The Forerunner would not be what he is and Jesus Christ would not be the Christ, to the misfortune of people, if things went differently than they do. The purpose of the Forerunner is to promote the glorification of Jesus - to increase the number of His followers; His ministry is temporary - to prepare people to accept Jesus; when everyone turns to the heavenly Teacher, his ministry is over, he will leave his path. The circle of activity of the Messiah Jesus must expand more and more. Art. 31–36. The superiority of the Messiah Jesus over all people is shown. Some of the new ones accept all this as the explanation of the evangelist. The ancients, including Chrysostom, see here a continuation of the speech of the Forerunner. We must accept the latter opinion. There is not a word or a hint here that would indicate the beginning of a new speech, the speech of the evangelist himself. And why did the evangelist add his words to the words of the Forerunner? Was it really necessary to confirm the testimony of the Forerunner with your review? On the contrary, the Forerunner had reasons to continue speaking. Until now, he has not yet said why Christ should have been preferred to John? Who is Jesus son of Mary? His disciples, especially the restless ones, really needed to know this unsaid. Art. 31. He who comes from above above all is... The advantage of Jesus, inaccessible to anyone, lies in His unearthly origin. He came down from heaven - not that he receives instruction from heaven - He himself, by his nature, does not belong to the creatures: he is in the bosom of the Father (John 1:18). Therefore, He is above all, has no need for anyone or anything, and can satisfy the needs of everyone. As one who came down from heaven, He teaches the heavenly teaching, in which are all the riches of wisdom and knowledge (Col. 2:3), while descended from earthly parents by natural birth, as he is, John, belongs to earthly people and his earthly teaching is unimportant. Art. 32. And seeing and hearing, this testifies; and no one accepts His testimony. The new advantage of Jesus is the firmness and immutability of His teaching. What He saw and heard in heaven, He declares. “Since we consider ourselves reliable in what we perceive through sight and hearing, because here we are not inventing; Then, wanting to express this, John said: “I saw and heard” (Chrysostom). The mysteries proclaimed by Him are the thoughts of God’s council: and what can be firmer than the definitions of the Divine? And no one accepts His testimony—aren’t people pitiful? Shouldn't we grieve that such little attention is paid to such a teaching and such a Teacher? There is much need to repent for those who say with envy: everyone comes to Him. Art. 33. He who receives His testimony has faith, for he is true God. Verova, εσφραγησεν, sealed, confirmed, showed; the expression is taken from the decrees approved by the royal seal (Tov.7:13). Hence σφραγις – proof, confirmation (Rom.4:11; 1Cor.9:2; 2Tim.2:19). Due to the fact that Jesus came down from heaven and His teaching is the teaching of heaven itself, the one who believes Jesus thereby affirms that God can only proclaim truth and truth; and whoever does not believe Jesus does not believe God, as if God could proclaim a lie. Thought Art. 33 is a visible consequence of the thought of Art. 31. Art. 34. For God sent him, the words of God say: God gives not in measure. John and other prophets were sent by God, but not in the same way as Jesus. Those were born on earth; and He is from heaven, from God. Therefore, the spiritual gifts given to Him are of immeasurable measure; He has the fullness of the Divine. "Spirit of St. says in the Talmud, he did not dwell in the prophets except to a certain extent” (Uetstenius ad h. 1.). Not so - in the Messiah - because whatever He says, He speaks as God. The idea of ​​Art. is explained here. 31 and the consequences of Art. 33. Art. 35. The Father loves the Son... Otherwise, God loves His creation and loves His Son differently. Love for the Son is boundless love. And before it was said: coming from heaven (v. 31). Here He is directly called the Son of the Eternal Father. Therefore, the Father transferred everything into the power of the Son, the name above every name (Phil. 2:9), the power of all flesh (John 17:2). In Art. 35 explanation of the previous thought. Art. 36. Conclusion – general. All salvation lies in faith in the name of the Son, for He is wisdom v. 32–34, power and fullness of the Godhead v. 34–35. Unbelief in Him is ουκ ωψεται ζωην the same thing that will not enjoy life (John 3:3), but brings the wrath of God, the execution of God, since unbelief stubbornly rejects the means given by God to salvation (John 3:5-6; Rom. 5:12 ff.). d) Conversation with the Samaritan woman. John 4:1–42 Preceding circumstances - the removal of Jesus from Judea to Sychar, John 4:1-6. Conversation: a) about living water v. John 4:7–15. b) awakening of faith by the phenomenon of omniscience Art. John 4:16–19; c) the doctrine of true worship v. John 4:20–24; d) the announcement that He is the Messiah v. John 4:25–28; e) conversion of the Shechemites v. John 4:28–42. Art. 1–3. When Jesus realized that the Pharisee had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing many more disciples than John... Leave Judea and go to Galilee. The Pharisees were less afraid of John than they were of Jesus. He seemed to them still belonging to the old order of affairs. With his stern appearance, strict fasting, he seemed to approve of the soulless appearance, their rules: do not taste, below the touch. But the Forerunner soon became the subject of their enmity, which the longer it lasted, the more it flared up. He aroused them against himself by calling himself directly the Forerunner of the Messiah - Jesus. Moreover, he demanded the fruits of repentance; and the supposed righteous did not like to repent. He did not spare these proud teachers of the people, calling them all out loud vipers, degenerates of snakes (Matthew 3:7). This was already too painful for proud people. Josephus says that the Pharisees brought John to prison. But the Pharisees did not love Jesus Christ even more; His glory tormented them like thunder drowning out their fame; His teaching destroyed them. Therefore, not only enmity appeared in them, but also anger against Jesus. When they heard that Jesus “won more disciples than John” - that His miracles, which John did not perform, attracted very many to him (John 2:23, 3:2), this greatly excited them and they decided to take special measures against Jesus. If the Savior had not hastened to retire to Galilee; imprisonment would be the lot of the Messiah Jesus (Matthew 4:12; Mark 1:14; Luke 4:14). Since the removal of Jesus Christ to Galilee, mentioned by St. John, followed after he noticed (John 3:24) that the baptizer was free; and the indicated St. Matthew (Matthew 4:12) and Mark (Mark 1:14) removal to Galilee followed the imprisonment of the baptist; it is clear that the same event is being talked about here and there; and from here it is clear that everything described by St. John (John 1:35–4:3) was omitted by other evangelists. Art. 4. “Whoever wants to quickly reach (Jerusalem) must go through Samaria; they travel this way from Galilee to Jerusalem in three days,” says Eusebius (Onomasticon p. 143). But a strict Jew, who did not want to communicate with the Samaritans, set off through Perea. Art. 5. The city where Jesus came was originally called Shechem. Subsequently, the Jews mockingly called it Sychar, a place of drunkenness, meaning that the prophet Isaiah called the Ephraimites drunk, for whom Shechem was considered the main city (Is. 28: 1, 7, 27:11). The settlement between the cities of Gorazin and Gebala, on a valley irrigated by streams (Judges 9:7), was called Naples by the Romans, and now it is Naplusa. An evangelist from the ancient history of Shechem recalls one event. The dying Jacob said to Joseph: “I give you preferentially over your brothers Shekem, the plot that I took from the Emorites with my sword and my bow” (Gen. 48:22). This place has been marked by special events since ancient times. Here Jacob rested, freed from the persecution of Esau, and erected an altar to the protector God (Gen. 33:18–20). Here he received orders to build an altar in Bethel (Gen. 35:1ff.). Here Joseph was tending his father’s sheep and his brothers wanted to kill him, and then sold him to merchants (Gen. 37:12 ff.). In Shechem, Joshua, before his death, gathered all the people and renewed his covenant with God (Joshua 24:1–25). Here, at a later time, the tempting Samaritan schism opened (1 Kings 12:25). Art. 6. Be that source... As Abraham (Gen. 21:25) and Isaac (Gen. 26:15-18) did, so Jacob dug a well on the land of Shechem, which was later given to Joseph, which after that was always called Jacob’s well. Nowadays this well is located south of Samaria. Here Jesus, tired of the journey and the heat of the day, stopped to rest. It's almost six o'clock. Zigaben: “It was midday, when the sun especially penetrates the body, together I waited for the students who went to buy food. Look how precise the evangelist is. He didn’t say: it was six o’clock, but almost six, inspiring us not to neglect even small things, but to observe the truth in accidents.” Art. 7–8. The woman came from Samaria to draw water... The disciples left him. Samaria here, as above (John 4:5), is the name of a country, not a city. The wife lived in a city near which was Jacob's well (vv. John 4:6,28–30); and this was Shechem, not Samaria. His students left him. This is said to explain why the Savior asked the Samaritan woman for water. They write (Schleiermacher): “We cannot believe that the disciples left Jesus alone; of course one or two remained with Him.” But this means reading something other than what is written. Art. 9. The wife recognizes Jesus as a Jew more by his attire than by the pronunciation of his words, which could hardly be distinguished by two or three words. The simple-minded wife says: “How can you, being a Jew, ask me, a Samaritan woman, for a drink? For Jews do not communicate with Samaritans." Jewish righteousness allowed on the road, out of need, for a Jew to communicate with a Samaritan and buy food from him: but not to ask him for anything or drink from his mug; The Jews did not freely buy food, clothing, or anything else from the Samaritans, considering them unclean, just like our dear Fedoseevites. – Contempt for the Samaritans was born from the fact that the Israelis who returned from captivity, settling together with foreigners, adopted pagan customs and even idol worship from the latter. Art. 10. The Savior draws the attention of the Samaritan woman from an ordinary subject to a higher, spiritual subject. By the word “gift”, others mean Christ himself, showing the following meaning: if you understood what kind of good deed God sends in my face... But then the words: and who is the verb you would be superfluous: they would contain the same thought as in the word “gift”. So, by the word “gift” we should mean “good deed”. The meaning of the words is this: “if you understood the importance of the good deed of God that you are using, and knew Who is speaking to you, you yourself would ask Him.” Living water is clean water gushing from a source, not stagnant water, water from a cistern; people knew only such living water. (Ovid. metam. 8, 57. Martial 2, 90. Hisiod. Εργ. 59). But the Lord is not talking about her: His water is the one that satisfies those who thirst for righteousness (Matthew 5:6) and gives life to eternity (Rev. 7:17, 21:6), the prophets spoke about it (Joel 3:18; Zech. 14:8; Ezek. 47:1). Art. 11–12. Lord, this is what the wife says to her interlocutor - a respectful title (Matt. 8:2; Gen. 24:18; Ruth. 2:13). The Savior’s word had already inspired her with respect for her interlocutor. But she, busy with only earthly things, not previously acquainted with spiritual life, does not understand what the Savior is talking about; Continuing to think that He is talking about simple water, she points to the depth of the well and the fact that there is nothing to draw with. The thought comes to her of Jacob, who left the well, but thinks that he, too, dug a well and barely found water at a depth of 15 fathoms: is the interlocutor greater than Jacob, who can get living water without digging? The Samaritans loved to call Jacob their father, although at other times, writes the historian Flavius, when they had to endure troubles for Judaism, they refused such an advantage and exposed their kinship with the pagans. Art. 13–14. With heavenly patience and wonderful love, the Savior listens to the babble of simplicity and then tries to make his wife understand what kind of water He is talking to her about. Earthly water, all human means to satisfy the thirst of the soul and body - carnal pleasures, money, fame, do not quench the thirst of the soul - the soul soon feels their emptiness. Water supplied from heaven, entering the interior of the soul, becomes the source of undying life and bliss that, starting in time, continues forever. Christ is not talking about faith in Him (as Meyer thinks), which is a matter of man, but about the grace given by Him (John 6:35, 7:38). Art. 15. The Samaritan woman recognizes Jesus as a wondrous man of God, who can miraculously bring water where there is none. And the needs of life are so annoying! What a hassle, how much work, how much time it takes a poor woman to walk far away every day to fetch water! How nice it would be if a great man helped the need for water, the wife thinks. So the Samaritan woman gradually begins to see spiritually, she recognizes Jesus as a prophet, but she still does not understand His spiritual water. Art. 16–18. The man of the heart turns to another way to turn the Samaritan woman’s thoughts to eternity. He, as it were, agrees to give her the water she desires and says: invite your husband. The wife answers with embarrassment that she does not have a husband. Then the Savior reveals to her the story of her life. “Jesus said to her: You said the truth that you have no husband: you have had five husbands, and the one you now have is not your husband; That's right what you said." Did the wife receive a divorce from five husbands, due to the licentiousness of the Samaritan morals, or did they soon die one after another: but the Savior says that only the last one with whom she lives is not her husband, but calls the others husbands; and the wife herself, with a twinge of conscience, speaks about her condition: “he told me everything that I did” (v. 29). Art. 19–20. “You are a prophet,” exclaims the wife, amazed by His insight into her past and present life. Without dwelling on her life, which she now feels impure, she seeks from the great Prophet a solution to the question that occupied all her compatriots: with the solution to the general question, she feels, is connected the solution to the question of her private life. She is looking for the truth that is necessary for everyone, and not for her alone: ​​where should we worship God, on the mountain respected by the Samaritans, or in the temple in Jerusalem? “Do you see how she has become more elevated in her thoughts? She who cared only about quenching her thirst is already asking about dogmas” (Chrysostom). As for the dispute between the Samaritans and the Jews, which occupied the Samaritan woman: the former based the advantage of their place of worship (their church was destroyed and only an altar remained in its place) on the fact that Abraham and Isaac created altars at the place of Samaritan service (Gen. 12:6–7, 13:4, 33:18–20); and that according to the law blessings were pronounced on Mount Gerizim, and curses on Mount Ebal (Deut. 11:29, 13:4, 27:12 ff.); on the contrary, the Jews argued that the blessings were pronounced on Mount Ebal, and not on Gerizim (Ex. 20:25, 27:4 ff.; Josh. 8:30); and then God chose Jerusalem as a place of worship (Ps. 76:3; 1 Chronicles 17:12, 22:1–6; 1 Kings 8:16,48). Art. 21–22. Woman, believe me in them, says the Lord: this is the voice of meek love and special greatness. He doesn’t say: trust us as the ambassadors of heaven; He does not say: “Truly I speak.” But in his response he combines sincerity of love with the importance of a prophet unlike others. “The time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem.” The Savior recalls the words of the prophet Malachi, who predicted that they would worship God in every place (Mal.1:11). From this the Samaritan woman should have concluded that it is in vain to argue whether one should bow to God on the mountain or in Jerusalem. But the Savior does not leave the Samaritan woman to tell her about the significance of the Jewish worship that existed until then. You bow, but you don’t know him. Some saw in these words a denunciation of idolatry to the Samaritans: but such a denunciation at the time of Christ Jesus was no longer necessary - the Samaritans had abandoned idols long before - even Rabbi Maimonides, who was not friendly to the Samaritans, defends them from accusations of paganism (Tract. Berachot. p. 8), the Savior points out to the Samaritans that having arbitrarily chosen the place of worship of God and ignoring the history of the revelation of God and the instructions of the prophets that followed Moses, they cannot give themselves an account of what they are bowing to; they call God the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but then God seemed to cease to be a living God - which cannot be. We bow down to him, for we know that there is salvation from the Jews. “He calls his coming salvation,” says Chrysostom. It should be said: salvation is put in place of the Savior: this is so in other cases (Luke 1:71, 2:30, 3:6), and so the Samaritan woman understood (v. 25). The Savior’s thought was expressed long ago (Ps. 109:2, 49:2; Is.2:3). The prophets after Moses from time to time more clearly showed the image of the Messiah - the Savior of the world, depicting at the same time the properties of the Divinity and the proper worship of Him. Therefore, the Jews could, if they wanted, have the most distinct knowledge of both God and the Savior of the world. Thus, the Savior, with his own voice, affirms the importance of the Old Testament revelation in its entirety. Art. 23–24. Having spoken, as if in passing, about the dignity of Jewish worship, the Savior continues to explain the thought of Art. 21. True worshipers - true and faithful worshipers will worship in spirit and in truth. The new worship is opposed to the old worship of the Jews and Samaritans; therefore, its meaning should be limited to the exclusion of heavy Jewish and Samaritan. It is unfair to think that all Jewish worship was destroyed by Christ Jesus: Jewish worship was not soulless and meaningless worship, and so on. it partly entered into a new spiritual worship. The Jewish is opposed to the Christian as an image of the original, a shadow of the real: only the images and shadows, rituals and sacrifices of Judaism are abolished; but the original and reality, desired by the prophets, remained. Therefore, it was in vain that the uncalled reformers of Christianity referred to the words of the Savior in defense of their arbitrary service, performed only by thoughts and feelings, excluding Christian rituals. Christianity requires that we serve God with the entire composition of the human body, and the living soul has as much need for the body as it controls it. The ministry of reformers is the ministry of pathetic dreamers, not justified by either sound reasoning or the experience of centuries. Worship in the spirit means spiritual worship in its predominant quality, just as the opposite Jewish worship was primarily material, ritual worship. True worship means worship, on the one hand, corresponding to the will of God, on the other, expressing the sincere dispositions of the soul, just as the opposite Samaritan worship was, according to the judgment of the Savior, arbitrary and therefore wavering and insincere. The Father is looking for such fans for Himself. “God is spirit and those who worship him must worship in spirit and in truth.” This is the reason why sacrificial service limited to a known area must cease. On the one hand, the will of the Heavenly Father requires not the old, but the new, worship; on the other hand, the spiritual nature of the Deity requires spiritual worship. Art. 25–26. The Samaritan woman feels that she does not understand many things in the words of Jesus, others seem doubtful to her. Feels that if she continued her questions, she would not be in a better position. In this state, she turns to hopes for the light of people - the Messiah. “I know,” she says, that the Messiah will come; when He comes, He will tell us everything.” The Samaritans read only the Pentateuch; and in the Pentateuch the most striking place pointing to the Messiah is the words of Moses about the coming prophet (Deut. 18:15). The Samaritan woman expresses a more lively and firmer conviction that the Messiah will come than could be expected from a person familiar with the Pentateuch alone; and the conviction is expressed by the wife, who, according to the general property of wives, arranges life more than anything else according to the beliefs of the people. Meanwhile, it is known that before the coming of Christ, belief in the Transformer of the world was exactly common among Jews; Moreover, it also passed to the pagans. Therefore, if the Samaritan woman says: I know that the Messiah will come, then her knowledge is the fruit of acquaintance not only with the Pentateuch, but is the fruit of a common national conviction. (Gesenii de Samorit. theol. fontibus, Galae 1823. Gesen. Carminae Samaritana, Lips. 1824). “It is I who speaks to you,” answers the Lord. Jesus did not reveal Himself to the Jews directly, in unclear words, leaving them, as acquaintances with complete revelation, to seek the truth. He directly tells the Samaritan woman that He is the Messiah. The feature is amazing. Why was she allowed? Of course, because the wife passionately sought the truth - Christ and sought with sincerity simplicity and good nature. “He tells her clearly that He is Christ: the wife was more favored than the Jews; they asked not in order to learn from Him, but in order to constantly mock Him; If they wanted to learn, then the teaching was sufficient for them both in His conversations and in His writings and in His miracles. What the wife said, she spoke from a sincere heart, with pure intention, which is obvious from her subsequent actions.” (Chrysostom). Art. 27. The Jewish rabbis despised the female sex and considered it incapable of receiving instructions in religion. “Whoever instructs a daughter in the law encourages stupidity” (Talmud tract. Sota f. 26). A rabbi speaking to a woman in public is unforgivable stupidity. “Even then you cannot speak to a woman in public when she is your wife, or daughter or sister” (Liettfoot. Wetsten. ad h. 1.). Given such a popular belief, the disciples were greatly amazed when, returning from the city, they saw that Jesus was sincerely and freely talking with his wife and even with the Samaritan woman. But they respected their great Teacher so much that they did not allow themselves to ask any bold question about it. Art. 28–30. The Samaritan woman was so amazed by everything she saw and heard that she forgot, then she came to the well; leaves his waterpots and runs to the city to report his impressions. Both because of the modesty of her soul and because of the position in which her wife was placed at that time, she does not take it upon herself to assure her fellow citizens that she has found the Messiah. She tells them what she heard from Jesus and leaves them to decide whether He is the Messiah. With all her speech, having done so much, she says this: her soul was filled with reverence for the Messenger and dissatisfaction with herself, so that in front of everyone she spoke about her sins and about the glory of God, thinking neither about the rumors of people nor about shame. How she was reborn for a new life! The Shechemites were so prudent that they listened to the prudent wife and went to Jesus. Art. 31–35. The students reminded the teacher that it was time to refresh themselves with food. “I have food,” He answered, which you do not know.” The disciples could understand that the Teacher was talking about spiritual food: but His words: “You do not know this food,” brought doubts to their minds: did the good wife serve Him some food? Jesus brings them out of their doubts. “My food,” He says, “is to do the will of him who sent Me and to finish His work.” Knowing also what is happening in the distance or in secret, He already sees that the words of the Samaritan woman have called forth whole crowds from the city and these crowds are approaching Him. He continues: “Don’t you say that there are still four months and the harvest will come? But I say to you: lift up your eyes and look at the fields, how they are white and ripe for harvest.” “Do you not say” - these words themselves say that Jesus is exhibiting popular speech. In popular language, He expresses to the disciples his joy that whole crowds of Shechemites are coming to Him, either believers or ready to believe. He recently sowed spiritual seeds in the heart of a Samaritan woman, and now the field is ripe, the inhabitants of Sychar with changed hearts. – The Savior often and in other cases compared the gospel to a seed, and the conversion of souls to a harvest (Matthew 9:37, 13:3 ff.; Mark 4:26 ff.; Luke 8:5 ff.). In Palestine, wheat was sown in November and early December. – In February, the bread is already as high as here in May. In the month of Nisan, which corresponds to our April, the firstfruits of barley were brought. Christ Jesus took an image for His thoughts from the green field that surrounded Him. This is important for determining the times of the Savior’s life. From this it is clear that from Easter (April) until the beginning of February, Jesus stayed in the Jewish country (John 3:22, 4:3). Art. 36–38. Continuing to speak in a language other than his own, the Savior encourages his disciples to take a spiritual part in His joy. Both he who sows and he who reaps equally rejoice at the ripe harvest. The Savior sowed; the disciples did not take part in his long conversation with the Samaritan woman. But the harvest is ripening. All that remains for the disciples is to reap and rejoice, just as He who sowed rejoiced. “The saying is true: one sows, and another reaps.” Saying, word (λογος) – a popular proverb: in Plato: “an old saying (λογος): like is always glad to like” (Sympos). The word, dabar, is in the same sense in Isaiah (Is. 65:21–22); at St. Matthew (Matthew 25:24). Turning his gaze to the future, the Savior tells the disciples that they will still have to enjoy the fruits of the harvest, for which they did not work at all, but others worked - the prophets, the Forerunner, He Himself. How will it be? The disciples are assigned to go through the universe with the news of the coming Savior of the world; their teaching will not be a new teaching; they will present what they heard from the Teacher and what the Holy Spirit will explain to them by the will of the Son of God. New seeds are sown by one Sower. These seeds will bear fruit in due time. The disciples will be comforted as they gather the fruits into the heavenly granary (Matthew 13:30). Art. 39–42. The sincerity and self-denial with which the Samaritan woman spoke to the Shechemites about Jesus attracted them to Him. They earnestly asked Jesus to stay with them, and He stayed with them for two days; in this short time the number of believers between them increased greatly. “We ourselves have heard and learned that He is truly the Savior of the world, Christ,” they said. It is amazing how the Shechemites treated Jesus differently from the Jews. The Savior announces to the Jews about the kingdom of heaven and they push him away from themselves; As if He didn’t want to go to the Samaritans, they themselves beg Him to come to them. – Those were the pupils of the complete revelation of the ancient one; – the Samaritans remained only with the Pentateuch. “Those, even with all the miracles, remain incorrigible; and these, even without miracles, showed great faith in Him... So in everything the goodwill of the soul is needed; if the truth touches such a soul, it easily takes possession of it” (Chrysostom). e) Second miracle at Cana, John 4:43–54. Art. 43–45. Two days at a time - I go to Galilee.... A prophet has no honor in his own country. After two days in Shechem, the Savior went to Galilee. On the way He was in Nazareth, but soon left it. This is what St. Matthew (Matthew 4:13). The reason for this is given by St. John. “Jesus himself testified that a prophet has no honor in his own country.” Nazareth was considered the hometown of Jesus because Jesus was raised there (Matthew 4:13). Observation of experience in relation to compatriots was applied to Nazareth at other times (Matthew 13:57; Luke 4:24). So, in vain, this review by John was attributed to Capernaum (Zigaben), which for no reason was not the home city of Jesus. The Galileans received the passing Jesus with respect; and precisely because when, according to the prescription of the law (Deut. 16:16; Ex. 34:23), they were in Jerusalem on the Passover holiday, they were eyewitnesses of the great deeds performed by Jesus on the Passover (John 2:13). Art. 46–47. “Jesus came again to Cana of Galilee, where he turned water into wine.” Cana was on her way from Nazareth to Capernaum and Lake Tiberias. Why did Jesus stop here? To revive by His presence the faith excited by the first miracle (Zigaben). “There was a certain nobleman in Capernaum whose son was sick.” He came to Jesus in Cana asking for his dying son. The evangelist calls the petitioner Βασηλικος. The Syrian translator means one serving the king; in Ethiopian translation: a servant at the king's court. Flavius ​​(de bello 7, 5. 2) calls the ambassadors sent by the Parthian king to Titus Βασιλικοι; he first calls Herod’s ministers υπερεται servants, and then Βασιλικοι (Antig. 15, 8.4). Adding to this the fact that Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee and Cerea, bore the title of king, we come to the conviction that the gospel Βασιλικος was one of Herod’s courtiers. If this courtier, serving under such a king as Herod, who gave the head of the Forerunner to the dancer, is at all a kind person, this means that he had enough firmness for good, so as not to be carried away by examples of sin. The courtier saw that neither wealth nor honor protected from death and he turned to the Prophet of Nazareth for help - he himself appeared to Jesus with a request for his sick son. Art. 48–53. “You will not believe unless you see signs and wonders,” the Savior said to the courtier. Christ Jesus did not answer the requests of those who sought His help in the same way (Matthew 19:21, 8:22, 15:26; Mark 10:51). It depended on what the petitioners were; and the Heart-Knower knew them without their words; people recognized it by their deeds. Others asked for miracles only out of idle curiosity, like Herod, or even with evil intentions, like the Pharisees. This was the kind of refusal. For others who only needed strengthening of their faith and strongly desired to be disciples of Jesus, He quickly provided help. Still others occupied the middle between these two categories. They were only forced by troubles to ask for miraculous help from Jesus and until that time they did not think much about eternity; they needed admonition. Therefore, being admonished, they became sincere worshipers of Jesus. The courtier belonged to this category. He, of course, would not have come to Jesus if he had no faith at all. But Jesus responded to his first request by admonishing him for his insufficient attention to eternal needs. The courtier, having been touched by the word of truth, repeats the request for help, but still in a form that is not entirely correct; he still thinks that Jesus will heal his son no other way than when he sees the sick man. “Go, your son is well,” Jesus tells him. And it turned out that the one who was dying became healthy at the very hour when Jesus said: “Go, your son is well.” The phenomenon that followed: “the courtier himself believed” and his whole house. “Christ, who saw the heart, knew well when he said: unless you see the sign, you will not believe” (Zigaben). Is this story the same as the one told by St. Matthew (Matthew 8:6) and Luke (Luke 7:2)? Irenaeus and some others thought that here and there were the same event. St. Chrysostom and Euthymius Zigaben had a different opinion. For many reasons, it must be accepted that the evangelists describe two different events. At St. In John the sick man is the son of a petitioner; in Matthew and Luke he is a servant. Here is a petitioner from Herod's court, there is a centurion from Capernaum. Here the father comes to Jesus and asks for help twice: there the centurion asks first through the elders of the city, then through his friends. Here Jesus comes from Samaria to Cana, where the courtier’s request is fulfilled; there he comes from the mountain to Capernaum, where the centurion’s request is granted. The personalities - the courtier and the centurion - are completely different from each other in their spiritual dispositions. Art. 54. Jesus performed this second sign... “The second was in Cana” (Zigaben). Third part: incidents from the 2nd to the 3rd Easter, ch. 5 and 6. a) Healing of the paralytic (John 5:1-16) with the teaching about the Son of God, v. 17–47. Art. 1. Still be. After the healing of the courtier's son, before the healing of the paralytic, many events followed, described by other evangelists: Matthew 4:13–26; Mark 1:16–39; Luke 5:1–11; Matthew 8:18–34; Mark 4:35–41, 5:1–21; Luke 8:22–40, 9:57–62; Matthew 9:1-34; Mark 2:13–22, 5:21–43; Luke 5:27–39, 8:41–49. It is not a Jewish holiday. Which? Easter: a) Easter was primarily called ἠ èορτ ἠ holiday (John 12:12; Matt. 26:5) or εορτη without a member (Matt. 27:15; Mark 15:6; Luke 23:17). John would all the more have called here another holiday by name, since before that he called Easter a holiday (John 4:45; words in John 2:23. b) It was said (John 4:35) four months and a harvest. At Easter they brought barley bread to the Lord and then reaped the barley, and four months later, in December, they began to sow. c) St. Irenaeus 2:39 firmly says that this holiday was Easter, precisely the second in the continuation of the ministry of Jesus. d) No other holiday can be understood here: aa) nor Pentecost (Chrysostom, Cyril), because four months do not pass between Easter and Pentecost (John 4:35) and it would be impossible to accommodate from the first Easter to Pentecost the events described in John 2:23–5:1. bb) Neither the Feast of Tabernacles, which began in the 14th day of Tisri (October), although this holiday was sometimes called a holiday (John 7:10, 11, 14, 37) and in Josephus - a great holiday: in John the Feast of Tabernacles is called a holiday, as it was previously called directly by its name, the Feast of Tabernacles (John 7:2). c) Neither the feast of the consecration of the church, which began on the 25th day of Kislev (December), nor the feast of Purim, which took place a month before Easter, were among the great holidays. Art. 2–4. There is in Jerusalem a sheep font (προβατικη κολυμβηθρα), which is called Bethesda in Hebrew. Some, like the Slavic translation, connect the word προβατικη with the word κολυμβηθρα, according to the idea that the sheep designated for sacrifice were first washed in a reservoir that was at the gate. But there is no indication of such a cleansing reservoir not only in the Bible, but also among Jewish writers (Lichtfoot ad h. 1.); Yes, and it would be strange to see him at the gates of the city, into which people were constantly entering and leaving. – On the contrary, the sheep gate (πυλη) is known in the Bible (Neh. 3:1, 32, 12:39). They are known, as is the reservoir located near them, blessed. Jerome and travelers of the Middle Ages (Benjamin of Tudela and others). Therefore, in the Russian translation the thought of the original is correctly expressed: “there is a bathing place at the sheep gate.” Bethesda beth chisda – house of charity. – Eusebius wrote about the bath: “the bath is still shown in the same two lakes, each of which is filled with annual rains: each contains strangely colored water” (Onomatt). Words Art. 4 is not in some lists (Origen) and they note: “it is not in the character of John to introduce news that has no connection with his main thought” (Toluccus). But the remark is incorrect: the news about the peculiarity of the reservoir has a connection with the miracle. The Syriac translation, the Vulgate, Chrysostom, Cyril, Augustine, the ancient scholiast of Matthew read the fourth verse. Whether the angel descended into the reservoir at a certain time - on Easter (Cyril Alex.), or at an indefinite time, at the discretion of God (Zigaben), St. has no news about this. John. He says vaguely: “the angel from time to time (κατà κα ί ρον) went to the pool.” The healing effect of water, in any case, depended not on the water, but on the angel, or what is the same, it was miraculous (Tertullian, Chrysostom). Art. 5–9. 38 years is the age of illness of the unfortunate man, and not the age of age, as others thought. Otherwise it would read: ἦ ν δε τις ανθρωπος εν ασθενεια, τριακοντα και οκτω ετη εχων, and even then it would be not quite Greek. The Greeks said: εχειν εν ασθενεια, and not ειναι, εν àσθενεία, when it was a matter of someone’s illness (Xenophon Cyrop 6, 1.20); from the evangelist in Art. 6. About long-term suffering it is said: πολον ηδη χρονον εχει. The Savior came to the place of suffering humanity and turned the attention of love to the grievous sufferer. The sufferer tells Him about himself that he “lies for a long time” and that there was no “person who would lower” him into the healing bath. Let the sick man not lie at the bathhouse for 38 years and not have there been a compassionate person for him for 38 years. But it must be admitted that even if “many years” passed without attention to such an unfortunate person, the picture is not flattering for Jewish or pagan humanity. They can write a lot about the humanity of people: but this does not mean seeing their humanity in experience or proving their humanity through experience. Only Christ Jesus proved his love for humanity through his deeds, and only with the help of His grace did people become examples of selfless love for humanity. “Get up and walk,” said the Lord. And the sick man “got up and went”; Moreover, according to the word of the Lord, he carried his bed on himself. This is the word of Jesus! No matter how happily a skilled doctor treats a patient, after a long and serious illness, those who receive the doctor’s help feel weak and exhausted for a long time. The heavenly doctor does not heal like that: He said, and who had been sick for 38 years became completely healthy and took the bed with him. Art. 10. “The Jews said to the healed man: Today is the Sabbath; you must not take up your bed.” - These Jews, of course, did not witness the miraculous healing: otherwise they would not have asked the former patient: “Who is the man who said to you: take up your bed”? (v. 12). Combining this circumstance with the expressed humane zeal for the Sabbath, we come to the conviction that these good Jews were from among the venerable members of the Sanhedrin. This conviction finds support in the fact that the evangelist also in other cases calls the Sanhedrists by the name of the Jews, leaving behind them their favorite title of representatives of Judaism (John 5:16, 18, 7:13, 9:22). The Law of Moses forbade working on the Sabbath and nothing else (Exod. 20:8, 16:23, 31:13–16; Deut. 5:12–14; Jer. 17:21, 22, 24, 27). But the pitiful teachers of Judaism stretched the severity of the Sabbath rest to ridiculous proportions. The rabbis included among the 30 types of labor prohibited for the Sabbath the transfer of something from a public place to the home (Tract sabbatum from 8. § 2. f. 6. 11.). Art. 11. Strangeness after strangeness among smart Jewish teachers. “If a prophet told you, break the commandment: listen to him, except for idolatry,” so say the rabbis (Sanhedrin f. 90). And blasphemy against God, and bloodthirsty hatred, and the robbery of the goyim are not excluded?.. In accordance with the charter of the national teachers, the healed one, considering his healing to be the work of the prophet, says: “The one who healed me said: take up your bed and go.” The Prophet restored health to a man who had been sick for 38 years. This is a Prophet unprecedented among the prophets. How can one not listen to such a Prophet if he, at least on Saturday, ordered to take the bed? That's what someone who was sick thought. Art. 12–13. The healed man’s answer did not please the wise men, although he agreed with their charter. “They guessed who this Prophet was: but for them, even if a dead man rose from the grave, they would not have become any better for it. Wanting to see in the healed man a witness - an accuser against the Prophet, they ask him: who exactly is this man? The healed man answered in good conscience that he did not know him, since the wonderful Doctor soon disappeared into the crowd of people. Why did he hide? Partly out of reluctance to be the subject of praise, partly to provide freedom to judge the matter independently of the Acting One. The Pharisees did good things in order to be praised. But we must serve God for God—this is how the Savior taught and acted. Art. 14. Behold, thou art in health: let no man sin, lest any worse befall him. The Heavenly Physician cares not only about healing the disease, but also about eliminating the cause of the disease. He finds the former patient in the church, where he came to thank God for his unexpected mercy. “Behold, you are healed,” Jesus tells him; Don’t sin, lest something worse happen to you.” What exact sin brought the former patient’s body into disorder is not shown: but according to the Lord’s words, there is no doubt that his disorder was a consequence of sin. And the philanthropist, wishing the sick person constant health, says: “Don’t sin.” A return to sin would be too serious for someone who experienced miraculous help from sin and, of course, would entail a more serious disorder of the body than it was before. The Heavenly Physician also points out this terrible danger. Art. 15. Told the Jews that Jesus is the one who made me whole. Since the healed man had not previously shown himself to be a fearful person (v. 11), now he announces to the Jews about the Doctor, “as one who is grateful, preaching about his benefactor” (Zigaben). If he wanted to say something nice to the Sanhedrin, he would say: Jesus told me to take the bed, since he was questioned about this by the Sanhedrin. Art. 16. And for this reason the Jews persecuted Jesus and sought to kill Him, having done this on the Sabbath. What a just cause for persecuting Jesus! Although among the Greeks διωκειν is used in the sense of prosecution, the Evangelist does not see from anything that a trial is now being carried out on Jesus. More than a lawsuit to kill - these words are inappropriate in a trial. Thus Jesus appears as a confessor of the truth before representatives of Judaism, and these respectable people, instead of lovingly accepting the preaching of the truth, persecute the confessor with hostility. The miracle over the paralytic, which aroused enmity among the Jews, caused Jesus to have a long conversation about the equality of the Son of God with the Father. Having proposed this idea to Art. 17–18, the Savior protects her with the properties of the Son of God v. 19–29; earthly and heavenly testimonies v. 30–40 and finally shows the reasons for the unbelief of the Jews v. 41–47. Art. 17. “Jesus said to them: My Father works until now, and I work.” If the Father who gave the law on the Sabbath does it to this day, it means that not every work is prohibited by His law on the Sabbath. And if every work, every work, is prohibited for the Sabbath, then this is not an explanation of the law, but a corruption of its meaning, this is the fruit of pitiful arbitrariness. Who will agree to dispute what “the Father is doing to this day?” He imparts life-giving forces to nature, He directs the elements fighting among themselves to manifest unexpectedly beneficial consequences, “The Father works and I work.” One might think that the Savior assigns to Himself either only one right to do on the Sabbath, as the Father does, or not only the right to do the same as the Father, but also the same power as the Father. The Jews accepted His words in the latter sense (v. 18), and He Himself further proves that equality with the Father belongs to Him (vv. 19–21). since the words of everyone must be accepted as He wants them to be understood, then the words of the Savior should be understood according to His instructions, and not according to the arbitrariness of the listener or reader. Art. 18. And for this reason the Jews sought Him more than ever to kill... The Jews understood that Jesus calls God his Father, not in a figurative sense, but in his own sense, and that He considers himself equal to God. Ί διος πατηρ among the scholiasts συγγενεις, natural father: in the same way ίδιος υιος natural son (Rom. 8:32). Ισος according to the instructions of ισοθεος means equality in essence. - Since the law ordered stoning for blasphemy, they, angry, declaring His confession of their equality with the Father for blasphemy, shouted: stone him, stone him! The evangelist points to this with the words: I seek to kill. If the interpretation that the Jews gave to the words of Jesus was incorrect, then Jesus would not have left them in such an erroneous opinion, but would have corrected it; and “the evangelist would have said clearly that the Jews thought so, but Christ himself did not make himself equal to God” (Chrysostom). Evangelists do not fail to notice, even in cases that are not so important, that certain words of the Savior were misunderstood, for example. words about the church (John 2:19–20) or about the leaven of the Pharisees (Matthew 16:6–7). Art. 19. Jesus not only does not denounce the Jews for their incorrect understanding of His words, on the contrary, he tries to convince them that He is exactly equal to the Father and that there is nothing offensive to the Divinity in this thought. To act εφ έαυτου means to act from oneself, according to one’s own will, independently of another, even against his will (John 16:13, 8:38; Num. 16:21). These are not the works of the Son. If the Son acted arbitrarily, independently of the Father, it would be an affront to the Father's authority. But He acts without separating from the Father. The reason that the Father and the Son act together and do the same thing is the unity of their being; equality in being and essence is revealed by equality of affairs. - “The Son does nothing of Himself, since by the unity of action neither the Son does anything without the Father, nor the Father without the Son” (Ambrose in Ps. 68 orat. 4). Art. 20. The Father loves the Son and shows Him everything that He himself does, and will show Him greater works than these. Δεικνειν here means not only to show what is unknown to the mind, but also to communicate power for action. “I will show him what he must endure for Me,” it is said about Paul (Acts 9:16), I will show him not only by instruction, but also by imparting strength for patience. The same 2 Tim.4:14, Ps.69:2. Kirill Alex. says: “The Father, depicting Himself in the Son, shows in the Son everything that He has in Himself.” So, the Savior, in defense of the idea of ​​equality with the Father, also points out that both the mind and power of the Father are reflected in the Son. Art. 21–22. Is it explained what this greater thing is, which, as it is said, the Father will show in the Son, to the amazement of men? It consists in the resurrection of the dead and the judgment of the universe. By resurrection, does this mean the resurrection of the bodily dead or the correction of the morally dead? From the ancient Ammonii, from the new Eckerman (Theol. Beytr. th. 5. st 2) and others understand moral correction. In defense of this opinion, they say that the dead in Scripture also mean the morally dead, and that the effect of resurrection is assigned to the present time, and not to the future: ζωοποιει, εγειρει, και νυν εςι (vv. 21, 22, 25). But the dead are shown here as those in the tombs (v. 28), and we are not talking about teaching, but about the miraculous power of the Savior (v. 17). Then the Savior showed experiments of physical resurrection on some during his earthly life (Mark 5:41; Luke 7:14; John 11:43). This is what He means with the words: and now there is. From this addition it is clear that in Art. 21 does not speak of a future resurrection, but the Lord assimilates life-giving power to himself, without attributing its actions to a specific time. Another divine advantage of the Son is that He has the right to judge the human race. – The right of judgment over the universe can belong to God alone (Gen. 18:25). But the Father himself does not judge because He did not take upon Himself the work of saving people, but left it to the Son; The Son, having taken upon himself this matter, at the same time accepted the right to judge all people in their loyalty or disloyalty to eternal truth. The apostles and the Savior himself assimilated this judgment to the Son of God, but to none of the people (Matt. 25:31; 2 Cor. 5:10). They told not only the Jews, but also the pagans that there would be a time of judgment on the world (Acts 17:31; Rom. 14:10; 2 Cor. 5:10). The images of this judgment, read in the words of the Savior and the apostles, show that this judgment does not mean the judgment of one Jewish people, which took place in due time, but the judgment of the entire universe. Those who want to understand by this judgment the judgment of conscience, which is carried out by His teaching taught by the heavenly mentor, forget that such a judgment can be learned by the apostles, while what the Judge of the universe says about Himself cannot be attributed to the apostles. Art. 23. Let all honor the Son as they honor the Father... To honor in relation to people means to respect, to bestow honor and honor, in relation to God - to show reverence. If it is necessary to honor the Son as one honors the Father, then it means that one must reverently worship the Son as one worships the Father. So, here is clear proof of the equality of the Son with the Father. – The Jew knew that God is jealous of his glory and does not yield it to any of his creatures. The new revelation says the same thing. And if it teaches that the Son should be revered in the same way as the Father is revered, then this means that the worship of the Son prescribed by him is not the glory that the Father is not inferior to the creation and that the Son is equal to the Father. In order to soften before the Jew the harshness of the unusual thought of worshiping the Son, the Savior points to a general idea: whoever does not honor the Messenger insults the Sender. Art. 24. Here is the thought of Art. 22. attached to the fate of man. He who listens to the Son sent by the Father to have eternal life will not come to judgment. – To ρισις is the same as condemnation (John 3:17–18), as sometimes with secular writers (Wetsten. ad h. 1.). He will not come to judgment - he will not come to condemnation - ουκ ερχεται will not come, but will pass from death to the belly: he will pass untrue to the original, which says: μεταβεβηκεν - passed from death to life; otherwise, the believer is not condemned, but has already entered a state of life - he already has the grace-filled principles of life; the apostle wrote about this: “there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit” (Rom. 8:1). Art. 25–29. They will hear the voice of the Son of God in the same way that they will feel and fulfill the mighty will of the Son of God (1 Cor. 15:51–52; 1 Thess. 4:16). The Lord takes care to awaken repentance in the callous souls of the Jews, pointing out their dependence on the powerful Judge. – The power of the Son of God over the dead depends on the fact that He has life in Him (v. 24) and on the fact that the Father has given Him power (v. 27). The last thought recalls the vision of the prophet Daniel (Dan.7:13–26). There the Son of Man appears before the throne of the Father and receives eternal power over the nations. This is the Messiah. Some (Chrysostom) connect the words: do not marvel at this with the words: as the son of man is. But such a connection is not allowed by the words of the evangelist: for the word: τουτου then would be superfluous. The object of amazement is shown, as the ancients (Origen, Nonnus, Augustine) understood, the resurrecting power of the Son of Man. Captivated by the power of Jesus' words, the Pharisees and scribes forgot their indignation against Jesus and stood amazed at the unheard-of teaching. The Lord says: do not be amazed at what is said; I repeat that the time will come when the dead will be resurrected according to the action of the Son of God, each to his own destiny prepared on earth. Power was given to the Son of man, but the Son of God will bring all the dead back to life by the power of the Divine. The Son of God and the Son of man will execute judgment on the universe, because having prepared all the means for salvation for the human race, having reconciled the truth of God by death and sending abundant grace to people, he has the right to judge the universe in its fidelity or betrayal of the Heavenly Father (Matthew 25:34, 41). Art. 30. At the beginning of His defensive sermon, in Art. 19, the Savior said that complaints about His works and the violation of the Sabbath are in vain, and he proved this. Now He defends His teaching. What does he say in defense? “I do not seek My will, but the will of Him who sent Me,” He says. Otherwise, the highest renunciation of one’s will, exact fulfillment of the will of heaven, sinlessness in desires and actions (and everyone can see this from the outside), this is the true justification for the teaching! If He did not allow a single sin, then He could not allow Himself any lies and deception. Let rationalists take a closer look at this conclusion, which the Savior repeatedly put forward (John 8:26, 28, 30, 46). Philosophers, legislators, and founders of religion will not provide them with such evidence in favor of their theories. The theories of these people remained in books and did not pass into the lives of peoples, precisely because they are the fruit of unclean hearts; and if they crossed over, it was only to the misfortune of people. Art. 31. Even if I testify about Me, My testimony is not true. The Jews said, as the Lord read in their hearts (John 2:25, 8:13–14), that the testimony of Jesus has no power, because He testifies about Himself. The Lord repeats their words to show whether they agree with reality. In your opinion, says Christ, if I testify about Myself, My testimony is insignificant: but is it so? Art. 32. There is another who testifies about Me... There is an outside witness for Jesus Christ. Who is He? The Heavenly Father, and not the Baptist (as Theophylact in vain believed). This is evident both from verses 34 and 36, and from the greatness of the witness. Against His testimony, says Jesus, no one has anything to say (Cyril of Alexandria). Art. 33–35. You are kind to John... The Lord, recalling how the Sanhedrin sent to the Forerunner to learn about the Messiah, calls the Jews’ own conscience to witness their cause. You are sweet, I tell you. The conscience of the Jews told them that John was a great prophet, from him it was necessary to learn the will of God in order to fulfill it. According to the voice of conscience, they sent an embassy to the Forerunner. – But when John told the truth that Christ was coming after him, did they listen to John? Testimony to the truth: out of modesty it is not said: about Me, but the thought is obvious. John testified persistently that the One whose sandal strap he is not worthy to untie is already among them and directly pointed to Jesus - the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:26-30). Did they accept what John indicated? I do not accept testimony from man, but I say this, that you may be saved. The testimony of John as a man is not important to Jesus: but when the conscience of the Jews, as the voice of God, called them to value the voice of John, and yet they, contrary to their conscience, neglected the testimony of John, then they are in danger of losing salvation; and love forces us to remind them of this danger so that they repent and hasten to take the path of salvation. Love, which seeks the salvation of sinners, explains who the Forerunner is. He is a burning and luminous lamp, burning, because he flames with love and is jealous that other hearts will glow with love, a shining lamp, because with teachings and virtues he spreads light around himself, indicating which paths one must follow to eternity; – John is a prophet: prophets were called and were lamps (Prov. 4:18; Matt. 5:14, 18; 2 Peter 1:19). You will want to rejoice at the hour of its shining. The Jews, like children, were amused and amused by the light of the lamp, instead of turning to its instruction; They amused themselves with the light προς ωραν, not for long (2 Cor. 7:8; Gal. 2:5), just as children throw away a toy that has bored them, so they, bored with the strict teaching of the Forerunner, escorted the teacher of repentance to prison. Art. 36–37. Deeds performed according to the will of the Father are the miracles of the Savior. Christ Jesus often pointed them out to his enemies (John 7:21, 23, 9:4–5, 14:12, 15:24; Matt. 11:5, 20). Miracles indicate the messenger of God in the miracle worker and teacher and inspire confidence in His teaching. Ap. Peter calls I. Christ a man attested. How? How? with the powers, wonders, and signs that God did through Him (Acts 2:22). However, if the Savior calls Himself a messenger of God, then He, as the Son of God, is such a messenger as no one else was. – And the Father who sent me bears witness to Me. The Savior once again points to the testimony of the Father, expressed in the miracles of Jesus; This is how He seeks the salvation of people. The voice that was given by the Father at baptism, as heard by John alone, could not be brought as a witness for the Jews; and he, as the voice of John, has already been mentioned. Art. 38. You have neither heard His voice nor seen His vision. And His word shall not abide in you. The Jews objected to the words about the witness Father: we neither heard His voice nor saw His vision, as happened with the fathers at Sinai. The Savior repeats this sad confession of them, but points out the reason for their spiritual dullness. You, he says, do not have in the depths of your soul the words “spoken by the law and the prophets” (Zigaben). The Word of God, revealed in visions and voices, passed by the Jews, was not preserved and did not linger in their hearts, and did not bear any fruit in their lives. This is the meaning of the words, according to John 15:7; Luke 8:15; 1 John 1:8, 10. If the Jews had behaved differently in relation to the will of God expressed in Holy Scripture, they could have understood the new instructions, at least they would not have been against the unprecedented messenger of God. Mental deafness is the fruit of their moral corruption. Art. 39–40. Ἐρευν ᾶ τε τ . γραφάς ... Kirill Alex. wanted to recognize ερευνατε as an expression of reality (for the indicative mood). But Peshito, Chrysostom, Augustine, Zigaben, Slavs. the translation is taken as a command. Since Holy Scripture appears to be the Savior’s last and most important witness about Him, it is natural to see an exhortation here. And in terms of the content of the instruction, the above words about scripture are a command. Blazh. Cyril, while he wanted to see here an expression of the real, in the explanation of the instructions he wrote: “Test the scriptures, only with pure thought, because it testifies to Me.” Masel, under the influence of a preoccupied thought, attributed to the word ερευναν the meaning “to fragment, to pervert”: but such a reproachful meaning of the word is not at all consistent with its use in Scripture (1 Peter 1:11; Rom. 8:27; 1 Cor. 2:10; John 7:52) and is not found at all among the Greeks. Ερευναν means “to explore, to enter into the interior, into the foundation of an object.” Ερευτατε τ . γραφ. means “to enter into the inner meaning, into the spirit of the scriptures, without stopping at the surface, at the letter.” As you believe in them to have an eternal life and that essence testifies to Me. The Talmud (tract Pierce Aboth) says: “Whoever acquires for himself a saying of Scripture acquires for himself eternal life.” – One of the new Christian writers noted: “The Jewish opinion that in the scriptures they have eternal life was as harmful as it was useful for the duty of testing the scriptures and it appeals to the ignorant and frivolous deists.” There is truth here. Only one cannot help but add that the Jewish opinion should still be preferred to contempt for the word of God, the irreplaceable guide of earthly life. As a lie against conscience and intelligence, the opinion of the Jews could not be approved by the Savior. But he does not reject him in his best side. Test, he says, the Scriptures because you yourself think that with the Scriptures and in the Scriptures you have eternal life, in which you are partly correct; the undoubted truth is that the scriptures speak of the Messiah and therefore testify of Me; That is why you go against your conscience, against your conviction about Scripture, when you do not want to come to Me for your salvation. This is the meaning of the Savior’s words! Coming to Jesus is replaced in another case by the word believing (John 6:35–37, 41, 7:37). Thus, the Savior justifies his teaching by his moral character (v. 30), by the conscience of the Jews who turned to the Forerunner (vv. 31–35), by his miracles (vv. 32, 36–38), and finally by St. scripture (39–40). Art. 41–44. The reasons for the blindness and unbelief of the Jews are explained. The most root cause: you do not have the love of God in yourself: the love of God is not rooted in their hearts (John 8:47). They boast of knowing the law of God, but their hearts are far from God; life shows that their thoughts, their desires, their deeds belong to the earth. That is why they do not value the One who was sent to them with the true will of God; they need an earthly Messiah, who would give them gold and means for a free life. Another reason for unbelief: selfish pursuit of human glory. “They do all their deeds so that people can see them; they love to be presented at feasts and to preside in the synagogues and to be greeted in the marketplaces” (Matthew 23:5–7). Therefore, the One who preached self-denial and promised neither honors nor fame, but persecution of the world, could not please these people. Jesus seemed to them an object of temptation (1 Cor. 1:23). If anyone comes in his own name, you will receive him. “Another will come in his own name,” not sent by the Heavenly Father, without any signs of a heavenly messenger and with obvious signs of a seeker of his own interests: “You will receive him.” Why? Because it will flatter human passions and prejudices and promise an earthly kingdom, cherished in the dreams of earthly souls. Since the coming of Christ, more than 60 false messiahs have visited the Jews, and they received each one with delight and triumph. Another Christ will appear, the Antichrist. Just as the heavenly Father was revealed in Christ, so Satan will be revealed with false miracles in Antichrist (2 Thess. 2:9-10). They will accept him, first of all, as their messiah. This is how the ancient fathers Irenaeus (5, 25), Chrysostom, Ambrose and others thought about the Jews, pointing to the considered words of the Savior. Art. 45–47. As a result of one and the other reason, coldness towards God and the search for selfish benefits, a false understanding of Moses was formed in the Jews, which in turn contributes to alienating them from Christ Jesus. Do not remember that I am a river against you to the Father: there are those who say against you, Moses, but you have trusted. The Jews boasted: “we are Moses’ disciples” (John 9:28–29). But the meaning and spirit of the Mosaic Law were lost to them due to the crush of passions. When Jesus rebuked them for corrupting the law, those who were stubborn in their opinions said that Moses was for them. They, in any case, “trusted in Moses,” placed all their hopes on him (Sk. 1 Cor. 15:4; 1 Tim. 5:5). In fact, they went against Moses. Jesus is the preacher of the goodness of God; Moses is a preacher of God's truth. Therefore, it is not Christ, but Moses who will call for vengeance the justice of God against the Jews for all their iniquities. If they believed quickly in Moses, they also believed in Me, and they wrote about Me. – The clearest and most direct prophecy of Moses about the Messiah is his prediction about the great prophet (Deut. 32:15–18). This meaning of this prophecy was preserved by Jewish tradition, and it is also shown in the new revelation (Acts 3:22–23, 7:37). The Jews, not believing in Jesus, went against this prophecy. They also do not believe in the Mosaic story of the fall of people: otherwise they would have accepted with reverence the one who came to crush the head of the serpent. They do not believe the promises given to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, they do not believe the prophecy of Israel about Judah (Gen. 49:10): otherwise they would have joyfully accepted what the nations expected. Even though you do not believe in the Scriptures, you have faith in my words? Prejudice obscures in the minds of the Jews the true meaning of the writings of Moses; in their view there is no real Moses at all, they have their own Moses; when the real Moses is shown to them, they reject him out of prejudice. In this state of theirs, it is natural that they refuse Jesus, proclaimed by Moses, and do not want to listen to Him reverently. b) Feeding the people with 5 loaves and 2 fish. John 6:1–13 Art. 1–4. According to these days, Jesus went to half the sea of ​​Galilee and Tiberias. The expression still means an indefinite time, more or less long. After the paralytic was healed (chap. 5), many miracles were performed. 2, which John does not talk about, there were many events that were described by other evangelists and a lot of time passed. The feeding of the people with 5 loaves, according to John himself, was already near Easter, the Jewish holiday (John 6:4), i.e. before the third Passover, on which Jesus was not in Jerusalem. – The closest events that preceded the miraculous feeding of the people were the sending of the apostles to preach and the return to Jesus with the news of successes (Mark 6:7, 30; Luke 9:2, 10). Another circumstance that had a connection with the preaching of the disciples was the anxiety of Herod Antipas, by whose will the Forerunner was deprived of his head (Matthew 14:12). This Herod, a ruler in name, but in reality a humble servant of a harlot, was as superstitious as he was voluptuous, as vain as he was soulless. Hearing about the preaching and miracles of Jesus, he said anxiously: it was the Baptist who had risen from the dead. Passionate for the miraculous, he wanted to see Jesus and in order to be an eyewitness of His miracles (Luke 9:7–9). It is clear that the Lord Jesus did not want to have anything to do with such an empty person. And so He, both so that His disciples could rest in a secluded place, and so as not to somehow meet with the soulless Herod and his servants, retires beyond the Lake of Galilee (Mark 6:14–16, 31; Matt. 2:13). The Slavic translation: he went to the half of the Sea of ​​Galilee, Tiberias, is just as incorrect and obscure as the Russian: “he went to the other side of the Sea of ​​Galilee in the vicinity of Tiberias.” Jesus was previously in Nazareth and its surroundings (Matthew 13:54; Mark 6:5–6). Tiberias is 4½ hours northeast from Nazareth and 3 hours south from Capernaum. – All these places were on the western side of Lake Galilee. since Tiberias lay on the western shore of Lake Galilee (Plinius hist. 5, 15), upon crossing the lake to the eastern shore, Jesus could not at all be “in the vicinity” of Tiberias. The Slavic translation followed Zigaben's thought: "to the other side of the Lake of Galilee or Tiberias." Only in the original text there is no: ητοι or. Keeping strictly to the text, they translate as follows: “Jesus went to the other side of the Sea of ​​Galilee, opposite Tiberias.” According to St. Luke, Jesus retires to a deserted place near Bethsaida (Luke 9:10). John points out the mountain in this desert where the disciples and the Savior rested (John 6:3). Bethsaida on the eastern side of Lake Galilee was otherwise called Juliada. Not only Ios knows about it. Flavius ​​(de bello iud. 3, 10. 7), but also Pliny (hist nat. 5, 15). Being in the lower Gavlaopitida, it belonged to the tetrarchy of Philippi (Flavius ​​de bello 2, 9. 1. antigv. 18, 2. 1) et seq. was not in the power of Herod Agrippa, the pathetic murderer of the Baptist. And there were many people walking along it. According to St. Mark (Mark 6:33), “footmen from all the cities fled there and came before them.” Jesus and his disciples crossed to the eastern shore in a boat (Matthew 14:13), and the people went around the lake by dry land and, however, ran to the place before Jesus. “The desire was so great, the thirst was so strong that they overcame all obstacles” (Chrysostom). For I have seen His signs, even as He works on the sick. The Evangelist John, saying this, assumes that readers know from other gospels about the healings performed by the Savior before this time. And exactly according to the news of Luke 9:27 (words Matt. 9:35, etc.) before that, many miracles were performed and almost all of them consisted of healing the sick. In the desert of Bethsaida, the Savior, according to Luke, “talked” with those who came “about the kingdom of God and healed those who needed healing.” St. depicted the reality more accurately and more picturesquely. Mark. “Jesus came out (from the boat) and saw a multitude of people and had compassion on them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd, and began to teach them” (Mark 6:34). John notes: “The Passover, the Jewish holiday, was approaching.” Why was this noticed? In all likelihood, to explain why there were so many people around Jesus now: whole caravans went to Jerusalem for Easter. These pilgrims, of course, hoped that the great Teacher would also go to Jerusalem for Easter and they would accompany Him. But while the law prescribed that Easter should be celebrated in Jerusalem, and while not a single case that, according to legend, exempted others from traveling to Easter (illness, old age, blindness, lameness) applied to Jesus Christ, Christ Jesus was not in Jerusalem this Easter, showing in Himself the Lord of the Sabbath and Easter, or, as Chrysostom says, “taking the corruption of the Jews as an opportunity.” The miraculous feeding of the people that followed is described by all four evangelists (Matthew 14:15–21; Mark 6:35–44; Luke 9:12–18); John supplements the description of others with some particular features, although he omits others. Art. 5–9. “Jesus lifted up his eyes and saw that a large crowd was coming towards him, and said to Philip, “Where can we buy bread to feed them?” Before that, the disciples, since evening was approaching and the place was deserted, asked to let the people go so that they could buy themselves as much bread as they could and wanted, but Jesus, saying that there was no need for it, added: “Give them something to eat” (Luke 9:13; Matt. 14:16). Then he asked the question to Philip. “He said this, testing him - πειραζιον; “For he himself knew what he wanted to do,” says John. Through many experiences, Jesus showed his disciples not only the extensive thoughtfulness and wisdom of his actions, but also distant insight into the hearts of others (John 2:24, 6:64, 7:8, 11:4, 41–42). For himself, He had no need to ask Philip what needed to be done. He drew Philip's attention to the state of the matter and encouraged him to examine the matter from all sides. And the other disciples had a need to examine the reality around them, but Philip, more than others, had to pay attention to the state of affairs that preceded the work that Jesus wanted to do; Philip did not quite believe the divine power of Jesus (John 14:8). “200 denarii will not be enough bread for them, so that each of them gets at least a little” (v. 7), answered Philip. – A denarius was equal to 20 kopecks, so you only need up to 40 rubles to buy simple barley loaves, the common food of the poor (2 Kings 7:1, 16–18). Ap. Andrei finds from the boy 5 barley loaves, which are less nutritious than wheat (Judges 7:13), and two baked fish - an insignificant supply against the multitude of people (John 6:8-9). Art. 10–15. By the will of Jesus, the disciples seated the people in rows, 150 in a row; Jesus blessed the loaves of bread and fish and ordered them to be distributed to the people; He did not order it to be distributed before he consecrated it with a prayer of praise. So in order pleasing to God (Luke 24:30; Matthew 15:36; Acts 27:35). After that they all ate and were all filled. The Lord ordered the remains to be collected and 12 koshnitsa were filled with pieces. The people were counted up to 5000. - And only men were counted - that’s how the people were counted during the census, according to the law. Therefore it was noted: 5000, excluding wives and children. A Κοφινος basket according to our measure is equal to a quarter of a bucket: 12 koshnits, three buckets or two fours (Petrushevsky metrology p. 228). - Therefore, in the Russian translation it should have been: 12 baskets, or bodies, and not 12 boxes. The Jews, when they had to pass through pagan or Samaritan villages, stocked up on bread, carrying it in baskets (Matt. 16:7, 8; Deut. 26:2–4). Most of all, they did this out of fear of becoming defiled by unclean food. Juvenal: “Here is for the Jews a grove with a sacred spring and their beggar’s basket” (sat. 3, 15). So, all the baskets of the 12 disciples were filled with the remnants of a wonderful meal. When the people saw the sign that Jesus had done, they said, “This is truly a prophet coming into the world.” “The miraculous multiplication of the five loaves made it possible to see the omnipotent power of the divine creator of nature,” says St. Ilarius. The witnesses to the matter, 5,000 people, recognized the miracle that had happened before their eyes and said that the one who performed this miracle was none other than the expected messenger of God - the Messiah. This is what the people said about Jesus on other occasions (Matthew 16:13, 21:11; Luke 7:16). Neologists (Pavlus and others), not wanting to recognize a miracle in this event, say that the people were not satisfied with only five loaves, but they had their own food. But this means talking about a historical event not what eyewitnesses say, but indulging in fables. Eyewitnesses said to Jesus: let him go, for they have nothing to eat (Mark 6:36; Luke 9:12); The apostles are looking for food for the people and find only one boy with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish (Mark 6:38). The interrogation of Philip was done precisely in order to protect the large event that was being prepared from doubt. Finally, the evangelists directly say that all 5000 were satisfied with the 5 loaves of bread that were offered to them. And all 5000 said the same thing in their review of the event. Jesus already understood that they wanted to come, so that they would capture Him and make Him king, and went back to the mountain alone. The miracle so amazed the people, so convinced them that Jesus is the Messiah - and if the Messiah, then, according to an erroneous belief, also the king of the earth, the restorer of the powerful kingdom of the kings of Israel, that he wanted to immediately proclaim Jesus king, using violence if necessary. But the kingdom of Jesus Christ is not a worldly kingdom (John 18:36); He came to earth to fulfill the will of the Heavenly Father, and not to seek earthly glory for Himself. Therefore, He hid from the people to a secluded mountain, on which he had previously been with his disciples (v. 3), and withdrew to engage in prayer in solitude (Matthew 14:23; Mark 6:46). c) Miracle on the lake and conversation about heavenly bread. John 6:16–71 Art. 16–21. According to St. Mark, Jesus ordered the disciples to sail to Bethsaida (Mark 6:45); according to St. John, “they went to the other side of the sea to Capernaum.” - Capernaum is not far from Bethsaida, - and almost in the same direction for those sailing from the northeast; during the storm, the swimmers could barely reach the shore, somewhat south of Capernaum, where they arrived with the Lord (John 6:24, 59). Lake Galilee is up to 25 versts long, 7 versts wide and 17–20 fathoms deep; it gets very stormy. When the disciples were in the middle of the lake, the storm intensified, “the sea rose up to the great wind,” so according to the ancient translation, according to the later “it rose up”: the latter is closer to the letter of the original διηγηρετο, the first is closer to the idea of ​​the picture. The boat was hit and tossed by the waves. Jesus saw the distress of the disciples from the prayer mountain. Around the “fourth watch,” otherwise, in the morning watch, according to our account, at 4 hours after midnight (Mark 6:48, 47; Matt. 14:23–25), the disciples “see Jesus walking on the sea and approaching a boat and were afraid”; they “thought it was a ghost” (Matthew 14:26). “It is I, do not be afraid,” Jesus tells them. According to St. Matthew, Peter volunteered to walk on the water to Jesus, but was afraid and was saved from death by Jesus (Matthew 14:28–31). Then Jesus entered the boat with the disciples and the wind died down (Matthew 14:32), or, as St. John, and Abiye (ευθειος) the ship was on the ground, the boat landed on the shore. John writes: ηθελον ουν λαβειν αυτον εις το πλοιον. Chrysostom thinks that although the disciples wanted to accept Him, they did not accept Him into the boat: an opinion that disagrees with the story of St. Mark (Mark 6:51) and Matthew (Matthew 14:32); Chrysostom was so carried away by it that he even suggested two different events among the evangelists. But there is no need for the latter if John’s words are understood this way: they wanted to accept; this would only mean that a circumstance known from other news was not proven. Meanwhile, ἦ θελον λαβειν by use (in Plato, Xenophon) means they were glad to receive Him. Art. 22–25. The people who remained on the eastern shore of the lake hurried in the morning to find Jesus. He crossed on a boat that sailed from Tiberias. - Since He knew that the disciples alone entered the boat, and the other was not there in the evening, then, when they saw Jesus in Capernaum, they guessed that He was here not without a miracle. “Rabbi! when did you come here? they asked Him. Art. 26–27. “You are looking for me not because you saw miracles, but because you ate bread and were filled,” said the Lord. He does not answer the question: when did he come? He talks about the state of hearts and what is needed for these poor souls. – These people, who saw several miracles of Jesus, valued only the benefits for earthly life in the miracle itself. They were of the same breed as the utilitarians of modern times. For such people, the spiritual is important only to the extent that it is beneficial for earthly life, otherwise some of them will not give a single breath for it. What is said to such people? “Seek not the food that perishes, but the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of man will give you.” Εργαζεσθαι means to work on something, to acquire (Prov. 21:6; Luke 16:16), but when compared with the word “seek” (v. 26), it requires that one strive to acquire. Food that is perishable in itself shows that it is not worth the soul being full of worries about it. “Food for the belly and the belly for food: but God will destroy both” (1 Cor. 6:13). Food remaining in the soul for an eternity also shows by itself that one must take care of its acquisition with a sincere soul and constantly. The Savior does not say that one must be carefree about the needs of temporary life. This is not in His spirit (1 Thess. 4:11; 2 Thess. 3:12; Eph. 4:28; 1 ​​Cor. 9:18). He teaches to seek first of all spiritual food (Matthew 6:25–33; Luke 10:41). He, in fact, speaks against utilitarians who value the spiritual so low and the conveniences of earthly life too highly. He demands that first of all, attention should be given to spiritual food, that which only He can serve. People give the name spiritual food to many things: sciences, pleasures of elegant objects, etc. But these are the works of people, and not of the Son of God. Mill, in his defense of his beloved utilitarianism, although he placed it above Epicurean life, did not elevate it above the eudaimonism of human earthly life: is such utilitarianism worth the concerns of the immortal spirit? It is painful to see that others certainly want to see themselves as animals, and not as people. According to Renan, man at the beginning was an animal, then he was religious, and then he is a thinker. since the last state, the thinking state, in Renan thinks only about the conveniences of bodily life, and its religiosity is an unconscious feeling: it turns out that this is again the same as the state of an animal. This theory is both anti-philosophical and anti-historical: anti-philosophical because, involuntarily recognizing the baseness of the animal before man, it still leaves man in the state of an animal and without explaining how an animal can pass into a state of religiosity or rationality, it allows for the dishonor of the Creator, as if man could not come out of the hands of the Creator as man, and only becomes man himself. This theory is also ahistorical, because contrary not only to revealed history, but to the histories of all peoples and all religions, it says that religion is not contemporary with the existence of man, whereas, according to the experience of every day, man descends from the state of man to the state of an animal, for example, drunk, or Mr. Renan with his Sadducean theory, which is so shameful for man. So true philosophy is the philosophy of the Son of God. He shows man both his high dignity in his immortal spirit and his humble earthly lot. He, and He alone, gives man the means to achieve his high purpose. The food that gives life to the soul for an entire eternity of happiness is given only by He, the Son of God. “For the Father has set His seal upon Him.” Miracles, insights into the distance invisible to people, known in His activity, assure, like a royal seal, that He is a Messenger beloved by God, such as the world has never seen (Chrysostom), and that He is able to serve the most nutritious, the best, and by no means deceptive food. - (Augustine). Art. 28. “What must we do to do the works of God”? listeners asked. They understood from the reproach spoken to them that they were required to seek spiritual food - good deeds. Meanwhile, they thought that the commandments of Moses were almost enough for them. What other things are needed? - they said. Art. 29. “This is the work of God,” answered the Lord, “believe in Him whom He sent.” – The work of God, the work most pleasing to God (John 4:34) is faith in the Heavenly Messenger. – John wrote: “This is His commandment, that we believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another, as He commanded us” (1 John 3:23). Art. 30–31. Our fathers ate manna in the desert, as it was written. From these words it is clear that those demanding a miracle were bookish people who read scripture. since this was in Capernaum, then we must recognize them as Pharisees - members of the Capernaum synagogue. By the miracle of the multiplication of bread for 5,000 people, the Savior was recognized as the Messiah. This miracle was not enough for the book people: they demanded a new miracle as assurance of the heavenly messenger of Jesus, the same miracle that, according to their understanding, Moses performed by sending manna from heaven (Ex. 16: 4, 14, 25; Num. 11: 7; Ps. 77: 23–24). Art. 32–33. Since those who were proud of the desert manna did not understand the meaning of this manna, before expecting a new miracle from Jesus, they must listen to the instruction about the manna, and then they will be shown (v. 51) the miracle. The Savior admonishes these people that it was not Moses who sent them manna, but the Heavenly Father, that manna is not the best food, but only an image of it, that the best bread comes only from heaven. The first thought was so obvious in itself that it did not require proof; it was clearly expressed both in Moses (Ex. 16:15) and in the Psalm, but those who lost sight of it imagined Moses as some kind of demigod, without whom there is no salvation on earth, while he was only a servant of God, awaiting salvation for people from the Messiah the Prophet. About the manna, the Savior does not deny that it came down from heaven. “He fed them with the bread of heaven,” says the sacred singer (Ps. 104:40). If this were the product of the earth, miraculously multiplying every day, as others think (Tolukk), then there would be no reason to store the manna in the ark of the covenant. However, manna was still material in composition and was not the best food, because it nourished only the body, and not the immortal soul; it only evoked desires for better food and pointed to spiritual bread in the future. The best bread, satisfying all the needs of the soul and, moreover, for all eternity, comes down from heaven; this is the Son of God who appeared on earth to save people. This is such a miracle of the love of the Heavenly Father, which the world has not seen and will not see again. Art. 34. Deciding to him: Lord, always give us this bread. This is said again by simple people, those who saw the miracle of the multiplication of loaves. They think that the Lord is speaking about wonderful material food, and in the simplicity of their souls, oppressed by the needs of the earth, they humbly express a request: if only they always had such wonderful food! Art. 35–36. I am animal bread. He is that bread that imparts eternal life, which all people created for eternity should desire and which many value so little. As He has noticed more than once (John 6:2, 26, 5:17, 36, 3:32), people see Him and do not accept Him; They say: “Give them bread to eat,” and do not take advantage of what is offered. “Whoever comes to Me will never hunger, and whoever believes in Me will never thirst.” According to the Savior’s explanation, coming to Jesus is the same as believing in Jesus, only faith here is, of course, animated by love (John 7:37–38). Art. 37. Everything the Father gives Me will come to Me. Although people like the majority of the listeners do not believe in Him, there will be those who will come to Him - those who will be brought by the Heavenly Father, or, as he says later, who will be taught by God (v. 45). The Savior humbles human arrogance, which thought that all it had to do was see a miracle and it would take heaven into its possession: miracles lead to faith, but a humble soul, as sincerely seeking salvation as it is confident in its powerlessness and in the need of heavenly help. Everything will come to Me: not only people of a certain tribe and a known faith, for example, Jews will come, people will come from all tribes, every religion, every gender, every age and every time, according to the will of God. This is the same as before Art. 33 is called the world, or all flesh (John 17:2). He will come to me. Salvation is not a matter of grace alone; it also depends on our will. Grace does not destroy freedom in us; it only corrects the spiritual organism upset by sin. “Israel is destroyed by you” (Hosea 13:19). He who comes to Me I will not cast away (John 6:37), I will not reject, but will receive him with love (John 10:28). Heavenly love welcomes the returning lost son with open arms (Luke 15:20). Art. 38–40. For I have descended from heaven, let me do My will... the will of him who sent Me, so that I will not destroy everything that I have given. Let them not fear that the fate of the believer in Jesus is hardly as certain as the fate of the disciples of Moses was. The deeds of the highest minds, the strongest characters, acting according to human will alone, are unreliable: it would be good if the brilliant reformers of faith, laws, and social life did not introduce a new disorder into human societies: in fact, this rarely, very rarely happens. And how strong and durable their buildings are, there is no need to talk about this. The Son of Man did not come from heaven to do His will (John 5:19–30). He does the will of the sending Father. Where the will of the Heavenly Father is fulfilled, there is no place for doubts about the fate of people. Confused by the troubles of earthly life, or by the talk of forgetful Sadducees, people come to doubt about the purpose of people: but the Son of the heavenly Father knows for sure that the will of heaven desires salvation for everyone. The chosen people were called the inheritance of God (1 Sam. 26:19; Ps. 27:9, 32:12). Now, according to the will of the Father, the inheritance of God is those who believe in Christ Jesus. The whole work of the Son of God is that all those transferred by the Father to the Son as property, otherwise, all who believe in the Son, should not perish, but live an eternally blessed life (Matthew 13:16). However, the point here is not about how those who believe in Christ are saved, whether according to the unconditional determination of the Heavenly Father or the conditional one. We must look for instructions on this in other places of scripture. Art. 41–42. Some listeners did not want to accept that Jesus Christ is the bread that came down from heaven. We know, they said, His Father and Mother; and He says that He is from heaven! Incompatible thoughts! Similar doubts of the dissatisfied were expressed many times (Matthew 13:55; John 10:19, 24). Here again the voice of the members of the Capernaum synagogue is heard, preoccupied with collecting rumors about the origin of the miracle worker of Capernaum and Cana. Art. 43–46. “Do not murmur among yourselves, answered the Lord: no one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him.” Ελκυση is understood as follows: will lead a child, like a father, to a doctor or teacher. But this is an inaccurate understanding of the matter. According to Art. 45 Ελκυση here means the action of God on the interior of the soul; so in other places of scripture (Song. 1:3; Jer.38:3; Hos. 11:3–5; John 12:32). To believe in Jesus, the action of grace on the mind and will of a person is necessary: ​​a person on his own is not able to come to Jesus by faith and love. Therefore, it is natural that Jewish scientists, like people like the Strauss and Renans, busy with dreams of their learning, which do not allow grace to reach their proud hearts, do not understand the teachings of Jesus. Regarding the revelation of grace to human freedom, Augustine notes: “Do not think that you will be drawn against your will; the spirit will be attracted by love. How can I believe that by will, if I am attracted? I tell you little by will, but much by pleasure. What does it mean to be attracted by pleasure? Open yourself to the Lord and He will fulfill the request of your heart (Ps. 37:4). There is a certain delight of the heart, for which that heavenly food is sweet” (Avgustin in Ioh. tract. 26 § 3–4). It is written in the prophets... The Savior, in defense of his thoughts, is testified by the prophets. He cited the words of Isaiah (Is.54:13). But having said about the prophets, of course, indicates to look for other evidence, which is Jer. 31:33–34. After he said: “the Father will instruct,” he adds that these words do not mean that people can see directly the Father himself; the being of God is contemplated only by the Son (John 1:2–3, 18). This makes it clear that just as in the Divinity there is a Father and a Son, so the salvation of people was and is being arranged by the Father through the Son - and that if they want to know about the Father, they must listen to the Son - otherwise the order of salvation of people depends not on the will of people, but on the will of heaven. Art. 47–50. Just as he previously told the Samaritan woman that earthly water does not quench thirst, but the spiritual water that He teaches quenches the thirst of the soul (John 4:13–14), so now he compares earthly manna (Ex. 16:14) with heavenly manna and says that earthly manna did not impart immortality to the body, but heavenly manna gives immortality to the soul. “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has eternal life,” He says in the face of lack of faith and unbelief, confirming his word with an oath. “Your fathers ate manna in the wilderness and died.” Those who were proud of the manna, pointing to the wonderful manna, forgot that the manna did not save their fathers from death: moreover, for opposing the will of God, they experienced the wrath of God (Ps. 95:10-11, 78:33; 1 Cor. 10:5). Such is everything that utilitarianism invents for man. Is it worth bothering a lot about his instructions, when all his inventions, all his tedious labors do not save from death? No, that would mean thinking too low about your soul, about yourself; this would mean dooming oneself to the fate of a working animal (Ps. 89:3-6). Art. 51. “I am the living bread... And the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” The Savior has said three times: I am living bread. Now he says: “I will give bread—my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” It is clear that we are now talking about a different type of bread. There is bread - He Himself, His teaching and grace, assimilated by faith. Here the bread is His flesh. There is bread already offered. Here he says: I will give bread, he promises to give it. His flesh, which He promises to serve as food, is more than one incarnation of Him (Schleiermacher): the incarnation has already taken place: and here is the flesh that He will give for the life of the world; the latter cannot have any other meaning than that of atoning death. So, the Savior promises to establish a new food, the food of the Eucharist, and predicts his reconciliatory death. Art. 52. “Then the Jews began to argue among themselves and said: How can He give us His flesh to eat?” The Jews realized that Jesus began to speak no longer about purely spiritual food, but about His flesh. They just did not understand: how can His flesh be food? Art. 53–58. In His answer, the Savior did not let it be known by word or hint that the Jews, having understood His words about eating His flesh, understood incorrectly. On the contrary, He confirms this confidence of theirs: “those who, He says, will not eat His flesh and blood will not have life in themselves.” In vain will self-will, whether Jewish or Calvinian, schismatic or rationalistic, avoid new food with invented excuses. They say to self-will: persistent renunciation of this food is accompanied by loss of spiritual life. – Baptism begins spiritual life in a Christian. But it must not only be maintained, but also multiplied. A gracious means to this is eating the body and blood of Christ. If this means is rejected, perseverance punishes itself: spiritual life not only does not increase, but may completely extinguish. - Poisonous My flesh... to have an eternal belly. What was expressed negatively is expressed in the form of a position. It is clearly and directly stated that he who eats His flesh and drinks His blood receives life into himself. To understand here the reception of spiritual food by faith would mean not to hear what the Lord says. - “My flesh is truly food and My blood is truly drink.” The Lord saw that the Jews were greatly offended by His words; to calm them down, in their thoughts, it was necessary to say: just as you, when you eat bread, take it into yourself, so you should take Me into your heart. But He still increases the anxious doubt of the Jews. - He says: “My flesh is truly food and My blood is truly drink,” - truly, with the exception of any inaccuracy or figurativeness. It is in vain to think that until the Eucharist was established, the apostles themselves could not accurately understand the Savior’s words about it, and therefore there was no need to talk about the food of the Eucharist. As in every prophecy, not everything is clear until it is fulfilled; but it cannot be said that, due to this property, prophecy is not necessary: ​​so the prophecy of the Lord about the Eucharist became completely clear to every believer after its fulfillment, but as a promise of a high good deed, it was comforting even before its fulfillment - it elevated faith in the Messiah Jesus, who promised to send food more wonderful than the manna of the time of Moses. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me and I in him. Here is an explanation of the words: My flesh is truly food. Just as material food and material drink become the property of the bodily organism, so whoever eats the body of Christ and drinks His blood will appropriate Christ the Lord for himself. – This is not the same as the moral assimilation of oneself to Christ. This assimilation of the Lord is real, depending on the will of the Lord. St. Hilary writes: “If the Word became flesh and we receive in the food of the Lord the Word truly made flesh, how does He not naturally abide in us, born as a man, taking upon Himself our entire nature and imparting to us in the sacrament flesh united with the eternal nature?” (De Trinit. lib. 8). Those who eat My flesh will enjoy the same blessed life, which “I live through the Father who sent Me,” says the Lord. Since the life of the Messenger is spoken of here, we must understand not the eternal life of the Son, but the life of the Messiah. This is how St. understood Kirill Alex. “This is the bread that came down from heaven,” the Savior concludes, showing in his secret body, offered to people, a higher, more life-giving food than manna was. Truly, the miracle of the Eucharist, which takes place in the Christian world every day in all corners of the globe, is a greatest miracle, before which manna is insignificant, both in terms of its beneficence and in the vastness of the effect of the new miracle. Art. 59. This speech was made to the congregation, teaching in Capernaum. Since they gathered in the synagogue on Saturdays (Luke 4:16; Acts 13:14, 42), the meeting before which the Savior taught instruction in the Capernaum synagogue was, without a doubt, on Saturday. Thus, the Lord offered the teaching about Himself as the bread of life and about the Holy One. Eucharist not only before the apostles, but before the people and before the teachers of the Jewish people. He did not hesitate to speak aloud to the people and representatives of Judaism about the highest mysteries of Christianity. – He acted freely in the rank of heavenly teacher. Art. 60–71. Conversation of the Savior with the disciples. Art. 60–66. “Many of the students said: what strange words!” These disciples are not like the elect 12 (v. 67), and not like the people. Many of them were offended in their minds by what they heard (v. 61) and said to each other: this is unbearable speech, offensive to the senses, so that hardly anyone can listen to it. The prediction of the death of the Messiah destroyed the pleasant dreams of the strong kingdom of the Messiah, which so many enjoyed; and then there are words about serving flesh as food. It all seemed too strange, unbearable. The disciples secretly exchanged words of distrust among themselves (John 10:20). The Savior saw what was happening in their souls. To admonish them, he says that they will see with their own eyes His ascension into heaven. The disciples were tempted that his flesh would be food. It is equally, if not more, incomprehensible that His body will ascend to heaven. But if by the experience of the senses they are convinced of the reality of the ascension of the flesh, then they will have to believe that His power will extend to the fact that His flesh will be wonderful food for the faithful. A similar instruction (John 3:12): “The Spirit gives life, but the flesh profiteth nothing.” By flesh and spirit, others (Cles) mean a sensual and spiritual way of thinking, showing in the first an inability to comprehend spiritual objects. But the Savior does not speak about what can find the truth, but about what can give life or not bring any benefit. He wants to clarify his words about the flesh and remove the reason for temptation. The flesh of Christ gives life because it contains a life-giving and omnipotent spirit; But the flesh that the Jews think about can be useful for anything (2 Cor. 5:16; 1 Peter 3:18)? The verbs that I say to you are spirit and belly. His words referred to His body and blood; so, the verbs should be replaced with the words: body and blood; His body and blood, which He spoke about, are spirit and life, the body carries the spirit, the blood carries life. This is how Cyril Alex and Leonty understood the words of Christ. But the bottom line is that you and others don’t believe. “For this reason, Rekh you, that no one can come to Me unless it is given to him from My Father.” The reason why the words about the body and blood of Christ seem strange lies in the familiarity of the listeners, in their dispositions. Neither the vastness of reason nor the severity of character in themselves will save anyone from a weak and untrue faith: both reason and will are sick in us. It is necessary to ask for heavenly help and ask constantly for every moment of spiritual life. Without this, unbelief will always appear in the soul, incapable of understanding the teaching of the Son of God (John 6:36). It must be assumed that the words: these are not of you, and those who do not believe, were spoken with special expressiveness, a special tone of speech and movement of the eyes. For the evangelist then adds: “Jesus first knew who the unbelievers were and who was His betrayer.” He knew from the beginning, as soon as someone came to him for the first time: at the first meeting, He told Simon that he would be Cephas’s hardness tested by the fall. From the first date I knew who the betrayer was; translation: whoever betrays is inaccurate; the future appeared before the Savior’s gaze as an inherent reality. Judas, during the conversation about the mysterious food, was, according to the evangelist, among the unbelievers. John watches Judas with special attention and outlines his evil character (John 12:4, 13:2, 27, 14:22), he alone shows the name of His Father (v. 71). Judas secretly aroused distrust in others, either with caustic jokes or questions of cunning anger. All this was done behind the eyes of the Teacher, behind the eyes of those who were especially close to the Teacher. The Savior knew all this and endured it. In all likelihood, the cunning of the evil Judas had a great part in the fact that “many of the disciples departed from Him and no longer walked with him.” “Some,” says Blessed Augustine, “were tempted and left, but he (Judas) remained, but not in order to understand Him, but in order not to understand Him,” more precisely, to share the glory of the glorious teacher and collect thieves’ silver pieces. Art. 67–71. “Then Jesus said to the twelve, “Will you also go away?” The evangelist, so accurate in describing historical accessories, does not expose either the names or the very title of the apostles. This can only be explained by the fact that he assumes that both are known to readers from other gospels. The question was proposed by the Savior in such a form that it promises a negative answer and, therefore, expresses the Savior’s trust in the elect. But as a question about the decision of the will of an outsider, it shows that to be or not to be among those saved depends on the will of everyone. The Savior does not force anyone to follow him, although His love desires that they should follow. The proposed choice especially concerned Judas, who wanted to appear one of the best and for whom, of course, it would be better to leave Jesus now than to be brought to the role of a traitor by his passion for glory and self-interest. “Simon Peter answered: Lord, to whom should we go? We have believed and known that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” The disciples now did not understand much in the words of the heavenly Teacher, but the foundations of faith were already in them - they already believed that Jesus was the Messiah and the Son of God, and this grain would subsequently, under the influence of the light and moisture of the Holy Spirit, open into a beautiful tree. – St. Cyril notes: “They had to believe and know. For if faith already accepts the divine, then it does not renounce all investigation; on the contrary, it must strive to elevate itself to a certain knowledge, knowledge, in the words of Paul, in the mirror and in fortune-telling. It is also good to speak not first about knowledge, then about faith, but put faith first, leaving knowledge to follow it. For knowledge comes after faith, and not before faith” (In Ioh. lib VI c 29). Instead of: “Son of the living God” in the best Greek copies it reads: “Holy One of God”: the origin of the first reading is clear: it is taken from the confession of Simon, pronounced at another time (Matthew 16:16). In the prophecy of Daniel (Dan. 9:24), the Holy One of God is the Messiah, who was otherwise called the righteous (Is. 53:11). “Jesus answered them, Have I not chosen you twelve? but one of you is the devil." Jesus not only does not add approval to Peter’s confession, but also admonishes him. Why is this so? “Otherwise the disciples who remained with Him, while others left Him, could imagine that He would flatter them” (Chrysostom). There was now a need not to encourage, but to admonish. Since the love of the Lord distinguished the 12 disciples with special attention, special honor - the name of the messengers - then it had every right to expect that the confession expressed by Peter constitutes the spiritual and irreplaceable property of all 12. - To the sorrow of love, it turned out that one of them was too far from the desired perfection, and love, for the benefit of loved ones, declares: “one of you is the devil.” There is no doubt that Judas, about whom, as the evangelist notes (v. 71), Christ now spoke, was in the beginning a good and pious man, not inferior in many ways to the other chosen ones: otherwise he would not have been among the 12 chosen ones. The leader of the apostates - the spirits - at the beginning of his existence belonged to the highest, best creatures of God, but then, of his own free will, he became the leader of the spirits disobedient to God, who abandoned the service entrusted to them (Jude 1:6). In the same way, Judas did not maintain his high dignity, carried away by pride and passion for money. He is called the devil, in the sense of an enemy, an adversary of Jesus, in whose soul lurks thoughts completely contrary to the confession of Peter. Judas the traitor is called Iscariot in other gospels (Matthew 10:4, 26:14; Luke 22:3). What kind of name is this? One might think that “Iscariot” is the same as ishkariot, a person from the town of Kariot, a native Kariot and in some lists it reads: απο του Καριωτου; Kerioth, the city of the tribe of Judah (Joshua 15:25). Only then should one see in Greek: ανηρ Καρωτης; Otherwise, it is impossible to give an example where ish in conjunction with the name of a place is used without translation. Therefore, it is considered more likely that Iscariot is a nickname given according to the occupation of Judas, and means the bearer of the box, the steward, in the Syriac translation: scariuta - the steward. This occupation of Judas is indicated in the gospel John 13:29. Fourth section: the works of Christ after the third Easter to the fourth a) Removal from Galilee and preaching in the church on the feast, John 7:1-53. Art. 1–13. And Jesus walked still in Galilee: for you did not want to go into Judea, for I sought to kill the Jews. The Jewish holiday is near, the sweating of the canopy (according to the ancient translation - tabernacle). Evang. John omits here the events of six months, namely from the time close to Easter (John 6:4), when he taught in Capernaum, until the Feast of Tabernacles, otherwise from April 15 to October 12. Events omitted by John are described by other evangelists (Matthew 15–18 chapters; Mark 7–9 chapters; Luke 9:18–50). John most of all wants to describe the conversations of Jesus. So he hastens to describe His conversations in the church, on the feast of tabernacles. After Easter until the Feast of Tabernacles, Christ traveled through Galilee, performing various miracles; He was in the vicinity of Tire, in Decapolis, in Magdala, near Bethsaida, in Caesarea Philippi and in Capernaum. He did not want to travel in Judea so that His enemies, who wanted to kill Him when the time had not come, would not be worried about sinful and at the same time vain attempts on His life. But after the Feast of Tabernacles, the place of activity of Christ Jesus was already Judea alone (Luke 9:51–19:28; Mark 10:1–52; Matt.19:1–20:34; John 7:2–12:11). This meant that everything had its time. The Feast of Tabernacles was established in praise of the Israelites' dwelling in booths, or tents, during their journey with Moses through the Arabian desert (Lev. 23:42). The holiday began on the 15th day of Tisri, or on October 12th. This was one of the most solemn holidays for which the Jews came to Jerusalem (Deut. 16:16, ff. Zech. 14:16). The brethren decided to him: go to Judea, so that your disciples may see the works that you do. The new Wolteric, Renan writes that Jesus “apparently was the eldest of his brothers” and points to the words of the Gospel. Matthew “until you gave birth to your firstborn Son” (Matthew 1:25). G. Gege rightly notes: “The question is, did Mary have other children after her firstborn? If she did: Jesus would be undeniably the eldest and the word “apparently” would be funny. If she had no other children, then this expression is not funny, but vile.” – For our part, we have already proven in detail that Mary of Cleopas, the wife of Cleopas, was the sister of the Mother of the Lord Jesus (John 19:25) and the mother of James, Josiah (Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40; Luke 24:10) and two more sons Simon and Judas (Jude 1:1), (see “Experience of explanation on the letter of the Apostle Paul to the Galatians” Chern. 1863). Galilee, Jesus' relatives said, was an unimportant country; in Jerusalem - there will be hundreds of thousands of people for the holiday. There is a place for Your glory. Your disciples who remain in Judea will see Your great deeds and will be confirmed in respect for You. Usually, if someone wants to be something - does not hide his affairs - he seeks publicity (εν παρρησιν). If you do great things, as they say: “show yourself to the world.” It is unfair to accuse these people of wanting Jesus to be captured by those seeking to kill Him” (Zigaben). It is enough that, as Chrysostom says, “they reproach Christ for both cowardice and love of glory.” Apparently they are concerned about the glory of Jesus. But they take care of themselves. They, calling themselves relatives of Jesus, want to live as comfortably as possible due to His fame. They knew the Messiah only as a glorious king. From the Messiah Jesus, they, like His relatives, expected honors and a spacious life. Neither the brethren believed in him, the evangelist notes. They did not recognize the spiritual glory of Jesus; they wanted the earthly one, but Jesus did not want it. Therefore they were more than cold towards Jesus. “The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me.” With these words, Jesus reveals the secret reason for the advice offered by relatives. They were afraid to suffer for Jesus if he did not silence his enemies with the glory of his deeds. Do not be afraid for yourself, He says, the world that hates Me has no enmity towards you - you are one of its people (John 15:19). Subsequently, one of the relatives of Jesus, now not so high in thoughts and feelings, was the first bishop of Jerusalem; this is St. Jacob, who wrote in his epistle: “James, a servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ.” Another cousin Judah was also a high man of faith and love; he wrote in his epistle “Judas, the servant of Jesus Christ, the brother of James” (Jude 1:1). What high humility is combined with love of truth in a few words! And all this is because the teaching of Christ and the grace of Christ transformed and elevated them. – Christ Jesus took nothing for himself from people and the earth. But how He transformed not only relatives, but the entire universe! He knew what was happening in people's hearts and what was happening in the distance and would be done! In Jerusalem, they seemed to be worried and looking for Him, while His relatives were calling Him there. The Sanhedrin guarded Him so that the devotees did not speak about Him out loud (vv. 11–13). “My time has not been fulfilled” - ου πεπληρωται, according to the ancient translation, not nearer. Jesus did not want to unnecessarily increase irritation and hatred against himself. Everything that he did was done according to the plan of divine wisdom, where everything has its own time; He knew the plan and carried it out. Which person, without offending his conscience, can say that he knows the plans of God's providence? Yes, only the Son of God knows them and speaks about them. Art. 14–15. “When the feast was halfway through, Jesus entered the church and taught. And the Jews marveled at how he knew the Scripture without having studied.” The fourth day of the holiday, its middle, 15 Tisri, 18 Oct. fell on Saturday that year (Wiesel chron Sunopse h. Evang. S. 309. 329 Hamb 1843). The Sabbath, and especially the great feast, was a special day for the study of the law. So Jesus, appearing in the church, taught instructions in the law of God. – The Jews marvel: – θαυμαζειν does not contain thoughts of enmity and there is no reason to think about the Jews that they wanted to challenge Jesus’ right to teach. They knew that Jesus had long ago begun to teach in the Synagogues. These scholars thought that without learning bookish wisdom from a rabbi one cannot know anything and therefore were surprised that Jesus expressed deep thoughts about St. scripture, or as the Syrian translator says, about the book of the law, while He was not a student of any rabbi. “It never occurred to these people that the rabbis, with their teaching, their interpretations, only perverted the law and gave the prophecies of the prophets a meaning that did not belong to them at all. The response of Jewish scholars to Jesus is important for the truth of Jesus. In it we see that the enemies of Jesus, moreover, not simple people, but scientists, scientists hardly less than some light Renan, recognized in the teachings of Jesus both knowledge of Scripture and objective truth and deep wisdom. For people like Renan, we can give another review of the teachings of Jesus, a response from a people sensitive to the voice of truth. “The people marveled at His teaching. For He taught them as one who had authority, and not as the scribes and Pharisees” (Matthew 7:28–29). Art. 16–17. Jesus explains the origin of his wisdom. “My teaching,” he says, “is not Mine, but of Him who sent Me.” He said this more than once (John 8:28, 14:10, 24). To justify his words, he points to the experience of the best souls. He who lives according to the will of God, who is attentive to the dignity of his soul and gives it freedom to live according to its best desires, will soon be convinced that the teaching of Christ is the teaching that only the soul can desire, not finding anything similar among people; it is so holy and so high that it could only have been given by God. Same idea John 8:31–32. Art. 18. A new proof of the divinity of Christ’s teaching is the high morality of the Teacher. There is no truth in it. Untruth, contrasted here with truth (αληθης), means lie, deception, delusion of the mind and heart. He who is so unselfish, who is so selfless that he lives entirely for the glory of the Heavenly Father, cannot speak a lie, and there cannot be deception in his words. “Every heretic is a working animal of glory,” says the blessed one in the voice of experience. Jerome. Art. 19–24. The Savior defends himself against those who accused Him of breaking the Sabbath. In relation to the previous one, this constitutes a refutation of the objection to the purity of His moral character, which is spoken of in Art. 18. The Jews accused Jesus because He healed the paralytic on the Sabbath, v. 22 (John 5:10–16). The law of the Sabbath was given to you, says Christ, but you freely break this law by performing circumcision on the Sabbath day. Why do you seek to kill Me for the good deed shown on the Sabbath? “The people answered, “Isn’t there a devil in you?” Who is looking to kill you? If these were the words of the members of the Sanhedrin, then it would be clear that their words are the words of the rage of people condemned in a secret bloody plot. - But “the people said.” How did it happen that the people raised their voice, so impudent and rude, when the majority of the people were in favor of Jesus? In Jerusalem they knew that the Sanhedrin had decided to bring Jesus to death (John 7:13, 25–26, 44). But the people, who came from different places, did not know about the bloody plot against Jesus. Δαιμονιον εχεις is a Jewish proverb, which means: you have no common sense, it is known in both Arabic and Aramaic. So, the words spoken by the people expressed in a somewhat rude way the people’s amazement at the news, which was completely incredible to them. The Savior, dealing with the Pharisees, who understood His words well, continued to defend himself in healing the paralytic. I have done one thing and you all marvel - marvel with the doubts of unbelief. Such is the wonder (Acts 2:7, 12). If, the Savior continued, you freely perform circumcision on the Sabbath, then you are unjust in being angry because the paralytic was healed in his whole body on the Sabbath. The Talmud said: “circumcision and its healing drives out the Sabbath” (Tanchuma. 9). If the Savior, pointing to circumcision, did not have in mind the healing value of circumcision (as protection from carbuncles and infertility): the Jews’ respect for the ancient law of circumcision, which preferred it to the law of the Sabbath, served as a defense of His good deeds and exposed the injustice of the Jewish reproaches. Do not judge by face (κατ οψιν). To judge κατ οψιν, lephanim, by face, means to direct the court, depending on the personality of the judge; if a person is not liked, if they hate her, then they condemn her every action. Translation: “Do not judge by appearance” corresponds to the Greek expression, but not to the Hebrew one and is not reconciled with the connection of speech and with the thought of the Savior, pointing to the law of judgment (Deut. 1:16–17). Judge righteous judgment - these are the words of the prophet (Zech. 7:9). Art. 25–31. Jesus' audience consisted of three classes of people. There were: firstly, Jews (v. 14), representatives of Judaism, members of the Sanhedrin; then the Jerusalemites, and finally the people gathered for the holiday. Now the people of Jerusalem are speaking out. What does it mean? they said. The leaders decided to capture and kill Him. And yet He teaches freely in the church. Did the leaders really begin to believe that He was the Messiah? But we know that Jesus is from Nazareth; and where the Messiah will come from, no one knows. The people who talked about Jesus and the Messiah in this way pretended to be knowledgeable and knowledgeable people, while many knew just as little about the history of Jesus as they did about the prophecies about the Messiah. According to prophecy, the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem (Mic. 5:2). If it was said: His goings forth from the days of the world (Isa. 53:8; Mic. 5:2), then this did not refer to the unknown of earthly origin, but to the eternal existence of the Messiah, the Son of God. Jesus answered in a solemn voice in the church: You think you know who and where I come from. Pathetic dreamers! You do not know the one who alone has the right to send and sent Me into the world. He who knows the Father does not live the way you live. “They say they know God; but by works they deny it, being vile, disobedient, and incapable of any good work” (Titus 1:16). The reproof of Jesus removed from those who boasted of knowledge the beautiful appearance with which they shone before the people, and removed from them both piety and knowledge of the law. This irritated people's pride. And the irritated wanted to immediately seize Jesus: but His hour had not come, the time appointed for His suffering (John 8:20, 12:23, 13:1; Luke 13:32–33). And many of the people believed in Him and said, “When Christ comes, he will do great signs like this one is doing?” Simple people turned out to be more intelligent than educated people. They believed in Jesus and justified their faith by the fact that the Messiah, who according to prophecies should perform miracles, can do no more miracles than Jesus can do. The reasoning is thorough! This is a lesson for learned unbelievers of all times. Art. 32–53. The Sanhedrin's unsuccessful attempt to deprive Jesus of his freedom. Art. 32–34. The people's comments about Jesus, so favorable to His glory, increased the anger in the members of the Sanhedrin. The Pharisees, teachers of the people, were torn with envy that all their fame was suppressed among the people by the glory of Jesus. The leaders of the priests (1 Chronicles 24:6) were afraid that they would lose their power, while even without that they were not respected for their lives. The longer, they thought, Jesus enjoyed freedom, the more His fame among the people would increase, and therefore the more the misfortune of the leaders of the people would increase (John 11:47). We need to put an end to this. Having denounced Jesus as a lawbreaker, they sent servants to arrest Him. "Jesus told them." Who should they use? From the content of the speech it is clear that those to whom the speech was addressed were not people from among the people quite devoted to Jesus; these are the same ones who wanted to seize Jesus. You will seek Me and will not find: and where I am, you cannot come. You will seek it. With what location? With the hostile, what is it like now? (Origen). Or demanding help? (Theophylact). The first does not apply to the state in which Christ allows himself to be seen. The latter is justified by the use (Am. 8:12; Prov. 1:28; Ps. 65:1) by John himself (John 13:33, 8:21). If the Jews seek Him for help, will it be with pure faith or not? In the latter case, the search is inappropriate. In the first, is it possible for the judgment of God to strike? Difficulties are resolved if we assume that they will not be looking for Jesus, but the Messiah. That's how it was. During their terrible troubles, the Jews accepted with open arms several false messiahs, expecting from them protection from political troubles. Christ Jesus clearly warned them against this (Matthew 24:23), blindness only led to new troubles. Some of those who were subjected to God's judgment then had a thought: isn't Jesus the true Messiah? But the time for repentance was lost, and they did not see the true Messiah and therefore remained excluded from the kingdom of heaven. What a terrible phenomenon is the Jewish people of Christian times. This is the Cain of new times, marked with the seal of rejection! You don’t know what is more worthy of tears in him - an unhappy fate, or a soul corroded by a passion for self-interest and lies? Art. 35–36. The easy listeners mockingly accepted the words of Jesus, while they should have been crying, crying because they did not understand the Heavenly Teacher, crying because, in order to justify the Teacher, they had assigned themselves a sad fate - humiliation before the pagans. He wants, they said with mockery, to go teach the pagans, to go to the countries where our poor brothers live scattered; He does not want to be in the land of Israel. Let him go to the pagans (Chrysostom, Cyril, Augustine). Poor Israel! You don’t think about what will happen to you if the light that has been awaited for centuries leaves you and illuminates the pagans. Art. 37–44. The promise to believers and the controversy about Jesus. On the last day of the great holiday, Jesus stood and shouted. The Feast of Tabernacles lasted eight days (Lev. 23:34, 36, 44; Num. 29:12–36; Neh. 8:18). “Whoever has not seen these celebrations does not know what gaiety means,” said the rabbis (Tr. Sucia c. 5. § 1). The last day of the holiday was called great because it was distinguished by a special celebration (Lev. 23:34; Num. 29:12; Neh. 8:18; 2 Chron. 7:8 ff.). On this day, the priest triumphantly brought water from Siloam in a golden vessel for the altar. The church mount had no water, while the sacrifices required a lot of water. This in itself suggested the need for a better order of affairs. Meanwhile, when the priest carried water from Siloam, other priests sang on the trumpets the song of the prophet: “You will draw with joy water from the springs of salvation” (Is. 12:3), a song that Jewish tradition took to be a song about the time of the Messiah. Jonathan translated this song this way: “you will receive new teaching from the chosen righteous.” The Jewish tradition also gave a symbolic meaning to the pouring of Siloam water on the altar, showing the outpouring of grace (Bareschit rabba f. 70). - When this solemn and significant ceremony of searching for water was being performed, the Lord Jesus called out, saying: If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink. The thirst he speaks of is the thirst of an immortal soul, dissatisfied with nothing on earth and seeking heaven (Matthew 5:6). This thirst in others is weakened by passions and earthly vanities. In the best, it is tormenting because earthly wisdom, no matter how much it offers means to quench it, all its means turn out to be either completely unsuitable or of little use. As at another time the Savior said: come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest (Matthew 11:28), so now he offers his water to the thirsty. The Lord does not force anyone to listen to His saving teaching; If anyone is thirsty, he says, let him go and quench his thirst. It’s a pity if they don’t feel thirsty and don’t go, but this is already the work of spoiled souls. Believe in Me - from his belly will flow the waters of life - a turn of phrase in Hebrew, not Greek. Likewise, according to the Jewish use of words, the womb is generally taken to be the inside of a person, and especially the spirit (Prov. 20:27; Job 38:8; Sir. 19:12). Your law is in the midst of my belly (Ps. 39:9). The Savior, having before his eyes the Old Testament thirst for water and the ritual search for it, speaks in the same figurative language about the action of faith in Him. – Whoever truly and sincerely believes in Him, by the power of faith, will have within himself a source of life, the true Siloam, and so abundant that living water will overflow in streams and flow uncontrollably, for the benefit of many, many. “Everyone will clearly see the truth of what has been said if they imagine the wisdom of Stephen, the language of Peter, the strength of Paul, how nothing stopped them, nothing held them back, neither the rage of the people, nor the uprisings of the tormentors, nor the daily deaths; they, like rivers rushing with great desire, carried everything along with them” (Chrysostom). Just like scripture speaks. The abundance of grace that was to be revealed during the Messiah was predicted by the prophets: Joel. 3:18; Zach. 14:18; Isa.12:3, 47:1–12, 43:20, 44:3. The Savior does not speak in the exact words of this or that prophet; it only indicates the thought of the prophets. This, speaking about Dus, he wants to accept, the evangelist notes. The remark is very necessary. The Savior's promise is expressed in figurative and, therefore, unclear language; it was necessary to convey the thought in one’s own language. The promise does not specify the time of the opening of the waters, nor the process of the flow of the waters. The evangelist points to this time and resolves the question of the connection of that miraculous phenomenon with the story of Jesus. He did not have the Holy Spirit, just as Jesus was not glorified. In the ancient Slavic translation they read: the Holy Spirit was not given; the word: given was added according to the interpretation of Chrysostom. The Holy Spirit has not yet appeared in the abundance of gifts in which He appeared on the day of Pentecost. Why? because Jesus had not yet accomplished through his suffering the reconciliation of the truth of God with guilty humanity and had not yet been glorified in heaven to accept gifts for the justified human race (John 1:14). Art. 40–49. The Savior's sermon about living water had a strong effect on the visitors to the holiday (v. 20). The controversy about Jesus, which had existed before, now became even more heated. “Many said: he is definitely a prophet, others said: this is Christ.” Since those who called Jesus Christ were not the same as those who called Him a prophet, it would be a mistake to believe that by prophet they meant the prophet promised by Moses, otherwise the Messiah (Deut. 18:15). Calling Jesus a prophet, they considered Him one of those prophets whose appearance was expected at the time of the Messiah, as those sent by the Sanhedrin expressed this expectation to the Forerunner (see explanation John 1:21). Others said: Does Christ come from Galilee? Isn’t the scripture saying that from the seed of David and from Bethlehem, where David was, Christ will come? This was said by those who did not admit that Jesus is the Christ - the Messiah; they speak the book, refer to scripture. So these are unbelieving scientists. Poor scholarship! Scientists repeat the talk of the crowd that Jesus is a Galilean and do not ask where exactly Jesus was born? Isn't this a shame for scholarship? If these scientists valued the truth, they could have asked the relatives and the Mother of Jesus what tribe Joseph and Mary came from and in what place was Jesus born? How many fifty-year-old Bethlehemites and Jerusalemites could be found who remembered the wonderful and sad circumstances that accompanied the birth of Jesus under King Herod? If bookish people wanted, they would know very well that Jesus definitely comes from the tribe of David, according to the prophecies about the Messiah, and that he definitely, according to the prophecy about the Messiah, was born in Bethlehem. But poor learning is rich only in pride, and not in humble love for the truth. From this category are the contemporary Strauss and Renans, who even when they read detailed news about the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem from the Evangelist Matthew (Matthew 2:1-18) and Luke (Luke 2:1-21), shamelessly write that Jesus was born in Nazareth. – Obviously, modern scribes value the truth less than the scribes of Jesus’ time. The debate about Jesus then reached such an extreme that some of the stubborn ones, who did not want to recognize Jesus as the Messiah, wanted to seize Jesus to bring him to a bloody trial; but whether out of fear inspired by the people (v. 32), or out of an unconscious sense of respect, no one raised a hand against Jesus (vv. 45–49). When the ministers sent by the Sanhedrin returned, the Sanhedrists indignantly asked: why didn’t they bring Jesus as they were ordered? “Nikolizhe said that there is a man like this man,” the servants answered. The Pharisees were experts in the Scriptures and, however, did not recognize Jesus as the Messiah. The ministers were not learned men, and yet they recognized Jesus as the Messiah, and they recognized him not by miracles, but by the power of His word. The effect of the word of Jesus on the ministers was so strong that they decided to expose themselves to trouble for failure to comply with the orders of their superiors, rather than, contrary to their conscience, lay hands on the unprecedented Teacher. This is not just one recognition of Jesus as the Messiah; it is the determination to suffer for the conviction of conscience. “Never has a man spoken like this man,” said the ministers. What a truth this is! Since the beginning of the world there has been no one who taught such pure, such high and such life-giving teaching as was taught by Jesus. They can believe it with history, they can believe it with their mind and heart. Even Renan, who is otherwise a pure Epicurean and atheist, speaks with delight about the height and purity of the teachings of Christ. The Pharisees answered them: Are you quickly deceived by food? Who is the food from the prince who believed in him, or from the Pharisees? But this people, who know no law, are curses. What pride can lead to! People who act on the firm conviction of their conscience are declared deceived, without asking what was special in the preaching of Jesus? They consider themselves to be the only and sinless judges of matters of faith (Matthew 11:25), their literal understanding of the law as a model of understanding the truth. Those who are carried away by a proud opinion of their knowledge do not want to know the inner judge who is placed in the soul of each by the Creator of the soul, nor the revelation of God, so much possible by the goodness of heaven. Pharisaic pride declares those who did not listen to rabbinic wisdom to be an earthly crowd, dross (Sata f. 22). – The law says: “Cursed is he who does not abide in the words of this law” (Deut. 27:26), otherwise he who does not fulfill the revealed will of God. And Pharisee pride pronounced a terrible sentence on the people who did not learn from it: the people, as those who do not know the law, are cursed. Will some of those who work so hard to spread knowledge among the people, without caring about good morality either for themselves or for the people, have to count themselves among these unenviable scientists? Art. 50–53. Nicodemus, a member of the Sanhedrin who listened to Jesus at night (John 3:1), tries to weaken the Sanhedrin’s hatred of Jesus, which was expressed so sharply more than once. - He says: “Does our law judge a person if they do not first listen to him and find out what he is doing?” The law required that a person be condemned after a careful examination of his deeds (Ex. 23:1–2; Deut. 1:16–17, 13:14, 17:48). This was even demanded of pagan judges (Acts 25:16). – Nicodemus, recalling the legal court, lets those know that blind hatred, unaccountable enmity against Jesus humiliates the judges themselves. Not much was said in defense of Jesus, but even this remained useless for the judges. Nicodemus was sarcastically ridiculed: “And are you not from Galilee?” According to their judgment, only an uneducated Galilean, and not a member of the Sanhedrin, can say anything in favor of Jesus. Hatred does not understand what it says that is irrelevant: Nicodemus called for the correct consideration of the case, and she rushes at Nicodemus. One lie is not enough; they add another, even more humiliating to learned people. They say: no prophet came from Galilee. Meanwhile, it is known from St. scriptures that there were prophets from Galilee - Nahum, Jonah, Elijah and others (Joshua 19:13–14; 2 Kings 14:25). So blind is the hatred of the Pharisees. And each one goes to his own house. The congregation went home with annoyance at Nicodemus and hatred of Jesus; but together and with shame for himself, having failed in what they had gathered for, Jesus remained free, despite the orders of the Sanhedrin, which were so hostile to the freedom of Jesus. b) The new arrival of Jesus Christ in the church and his preaching. John 8:1–59. Art. 1–12. Review of the sinner. “You need to know,” says Zigaben, “that this part is either not at all in the best lists, or it is marked with a sign of doubt, why it seems to have been included. The latter is confirmed by the fact that no one explained it.” In Origen, Chrysostom, Theodore Mopsueste, Cyril Alex. There are definitely no interpretations on the story of the sinner. But the interpretation of Origen and Theodore on John has not reached us in full. Chrysostom and Cyril could pass in silence out of caution, which spared the weak. Meanwhile, this story was placed in the consolidated gospel of Tatian and Ammonius. According to Eusebius, who read the works of Papias, a disciple of the Apostle, Papias “tells the story of a wife who was accused of many crimes before the Lord, as the Gospel of the Jews also speaks of” (Hist. 3:39). The wife's story was recognized as genuine by Ambrose (De Spir s. III, 2 Ep. 58 ut 76), Augustine (Cont. Favstum 22, 25, in Iohan. tract. 50, ile cons. tvang. 4, 10), in the synopsis of Athanasius and in the regulation. apostle 2, 24. Augustine wrote: “I think that this story was omitted so as not to give a reason for frivolity to violate the marriage” (De adult. coning 2, 7). St. said the same thing. Ambrose. Nikon the Armenian directly wrote that the Armenian Church did not read this story due to its seductiveness. Blazh. Jerome testified: “In the Gospel of John, according to many Greek and Latin copies, there is a story about an adulterous wife who was accused before Jesus” (adv. Pelag. 2, 6). In the Scholia they noted: “it is in the ancient lists.” – Of the lists now known, it is not in the incomplete list, but it is in the best and most ancient Cambridge list (Grisbach ad h l) and other similar ones (Matthaei N. T. 1, 568. 569). The content of the story is completely consistent with the spirit of the Gospel of John; Only those who did not understand the spirit of Christ considered it seductive and, due to such an unfair thought, did not read it; but nothing can explain why they would want to include it in the gospel. Art. 1–2. The last, great day of the holiday was Wednesday, October 22, 25 Tisri. The hatred of the Sanhedrin forced the Savior to leave Jerusalem for a time; he retired to the Mount of Olives. On the first Saturday after the holiday, early in the morning He appeared again in the courtyard of the church to teach the people (Wieseler s. 329). And the people came in crowds to Him. The Savior reminded the enemies of this thirst of the people to listen to Him and their readiness to satisfy it when they came to take Him at night (Matthew 26:55). Art. 3–5. The Pharisees, who loved to be zealots of the law and bookish people, well acquainted with the letter of the law, bring the convicted adulteress to Jesus and say: “Moses in the law commanded us to stone such people: what do you say?” I would like to think that those who appeared to Jesus were judges offering their doubts to Jesus’ decision. But the Pharisees were too proud to admit their misunderstanding before Jesus. “They said this, tempting Him, in order to find something to accuse Him.” They acted with evil intentions against Jesus. They knew from many experiences that Jesus was lenient towards sinners. They hoped that now He would defend the guilty woman. But they would also turn a decision of a different kind against Jesus. If Christ Jesus began to speak to them about leniency towards the guilty, they would declare Him before the Sanhedrin as an enemy of the law of Moses. If He said: do what is prescribed by the law, they would accuse Him of cruelty before the people, whereas in a people corrupted by vices and bad teachers, the strict prescriptions of the law have already lost their force; and besides, they would not have allowed Him to be accused before the Roman authorities, who reserved for themselves the right to pronounce death sentences on criminals, having taken it away from the Sanhedrin. Art. 6–7. Jesus, bow down, write with your finger on the ground, without laying it down. Μη προσποιουμενος “without paying attention” is an addition made in the form of an explanation. According to Jerome, the Savior wrote on earth the sins of the sinner’s strict accusers; according to Ambrose, he wrote a denunciation of inattention to himself. But the evangelist does not see whether the Savior depicted any specific words, or only made features; it is only clear that He wanted to show that those who accuse others with a bad conscience are not worth talking to them and that they must first of all turn their attention to themselves, must think about themselves, who and what are they? The zealots of the law could be reminded that they were not correctly conveying the injunction of Moses. The law condemns him to death for adultery, but he did not define the type of death, did not say: stone (Lev.20:10; Deut.22:22). But the Lord Jesus remained silent, leaving them to his conscience. They again asked Him for an answer. And He answered with heavenly wisdom: “He who is without sin among you, be the first to throw a stone at her.” According to the law, the witnesses were the first to throw stones at the exposed criminal (but not at the adulterer), then the people (Deut. 13:10, 17:7; Josh. 7:25). The Lord, pointing to this law, also points to the shameful history of Susanna's accusers (Dan.13). If you, he says, are not the same accusers as those who accused Susanna; If you are not the kind of judges who only want to present themselves before people as zealots of truth and purity, while remaining the darkest sinners in your hearts, it is left to you to act according to the severity of the law. Art. 8–9. Having said his review, the Savior “bent low again and wrote.” He did not want to embarrass them with a stern look or word, but he did not want to allow their sinful self-justification to speak out. His majestic silence in itself caused anxiety in their conscience. According to history (Wagenseil ad Sota p. 525. Iustini mart. dial. c Tryph p. 333), many rabbis of that time lived very uncleanly. If those who now stood before Jesus were not one of these, then their conscience, already summoned to judgment, screamed at them about many, many sins. Let the Pharisee's conscience not be so tender that, at the Teacher's reminder of their sins, it would force them to change their lives. But pride was ticklish, alarmed by the failure of the black plans for the sinner. So, persecuted partly by the consciousness of their sins, partly by the shame of failure, “they began to leave, one after another, starting from the eldest to the last.” The elders, the leaders of the Pharisees and scribes, had to leave quickly, since they were more insolent before Jesus, out of their pride, and now they felt their defeat more. Those who were carried away by their example followed them. Art. 10–11. When the accusers left, the Lord said to the wife: “And I do not condemn you; go and sin forward without sin." – On another occasion he said: “Who made me judge you”? (Luke 12:14). He did not come to earth to sort out and judge worldly affairs. He came to encourage the sinner: “Sin no more.” Sin is not joy or honor to the soul, but grief: do not repeat it. From the fact that Jesus did not throw a stone at the adulteress, one should not conclude that it is unfair to punish adultery. Otherwise, from His refusal to divide the property of the brothers, one would have to conclude that it is a sinful thing to divide property between brothers. “Don’t sin now,” He told his wife. It is clear that according to His judgment, adultery is a sin that must be avoided and which the authorities must look upon as an insult to the order of God. – The Apostle calls leaders servants of God, who bear the sword to take vengeance on those who do evil (Rom. 13:4). To the leaders, the Savior’s act with the Pharisees only tells them that, while carrying out judgment and vengeance, they should not seek in it for themselves either glory, self-interest, or feeding for any other passion of theirs. Art. 12. Then, continuing the interrupted sermon to the people (v. 2), the Lord said: I am the light of the world. Just as the instruction about the water of life was aroused by looking at the source of Siloam, so the lamps of the church served as a reason for preaching about the light of the world. The prophets pointed to the light, which was not supposed to spill out from the church throughout the whole world, but from the Messiah - light for the Gentiles themselves (Isa. 40: 1-3; 42: 6, 49: 6, 60: 1-3; Mal. 4: 2). The Lord now points to the fulfillment of prophecies in His person. What the sun is to the earth, He is to the entire human race. Just as no plant or animal can live without the light and warmth of the sun, so without Him there is no life for people. He who walks, thinks and acts in His illumination cannot get lost and will enjoy a blessed life. In that life was and life was the light of man (John 1:4). Art. 13–15. The Pharisees hastened to object to the Lord, only so unsuccessfully that, repeating His misunderstood words (John 5:31), they discovered the stupidity of their meaning. If the prophecies about the Messiah, as the true light, were fulfilled in Jesus, then it was not Jesus alone who testified about Jesus, but the entire host of Prophets. At the same time, His testimony about Himself was true, since He knew where He came from and why. – Only the soul knows what is happening in the soul; internal, spiritual phenomena, changes and events occurring in the depths of the spirit are known to self-consciousness alone (1 Cor. 2:11). The enemies of Jesus, demanding third-party witnesses for events accessible to self-consciousness alone, did not understand what they were demanding. They could verify the responses of self-consciousness with the testimony of the prophets and the life of Jesus; it was only necessary that their mind and soul were not sick. They neglected Jesus because they judged according to the flesh, according to the whims of a disturbed soul. And they were mired in thoughts and desires in the interests of one earthly life, they sought only earthly happiness, they expected only earthly glory. The Messiah of the prophets for them was only the king of the earth and the spiritual greatness of Jesus was inaccessible to their souls. - In such a state, what can they expect from themselves, except lies, delusions and sins? The words: I do not judge anyone were supplemented either with the word: according to the flesh (Cyril Alek.) or with the word: now (Chrysostom, Augustine). The first addition is justified by the connection of speech, but the last is irreconcilable with it. The Savior, in support of the response of self-consciousness about Himself, says that in all cases and about all people He judges not according to the flesh, but according to the eternal laws of the spirit; That is why His judgments are true judgments. Art. 16–18. A new refutation of the Jewish remark: He testifies of Himself. His testimony is not the testimony of Him alone. The Messenger of the Heavenly Father is in constant communication with the One who sent Him. Therefore, the words of the Messenger about Himself are not the words of Him alone, but together the voice of the Sender. The communication of the Father with the Son takes place in the invisible realm of the spirit: it is all the more terrible to touch the testimony of the Son with daring judgments. “And in your law it is written that the testimony of two men is true,” says the Savior. The Son of God stands above the measure of human truth, and the law of witnesses was introduced only for sinful humanity; otherwise the testimony of a clear conscience is true testimony. This is the meaning of the expressions: “in your law”, “people”. But arguing with the stubbornness of the pitiful Jews, the Lord causes the law they respect to be revoked against them. They measure everything by the letter of the law. So be it! But He and the Father, man and God, are not two witnesses? The Son testifies of Himself with words; The heavenly Father testifies with miracles performed for the glory of the Son. Art. 19. “Then they said to Him, Where is your Father?” They thought (Augustine) that they were asking about an earthly father by misunderstanding. In vain. Many times the Savior spoke in the hearing of everyone about the heavenly Father, so that they would not understand Him. And the Savior’s answer shows that they were not asking about an earthly father. Those who asked understood well that Jesus, speaking about the witness Father, was speaking about God. But they say with mocking anger: Where is this second witness, your Father? I would like to see Him. They refused to believe their eyes and ears, which saw and heard the miracles performed by Jesus by the power and will of the Divine. They laughed at all this in impotent anger. And at the same time, if Jesus now directly said that He and God the Father are one, they would immediately declare this blasphemy and demand Him to be brought before the Sanhedrin. “Jesus answered: You know neither Me nor My Father.” The answer is the best. They deflect the blows of malice. And with quiet love he calls enemies to the path of self-awareness. Let these people come to their senses; let them check their opinions about Jesus, are they not prejudices of a clouded sense, are they not the fruits of sinful passions? If they manage to be convinced of the correct concepts about the Son - the heavenly messenger; and these concepts are easily accessible - miracles, holy life, the lofty teaching of Jesus - before the eyes of everyone, then they will recognize His Father. Art. 20. This is the verb of Jesus in gasophilia, teaching in church. Gasophilakia - a huge building with 13 departments, where the people’s offerings to the temple were received and stored (Mark 12:41); this building stood in the wives' front yard; here, above the Corinthian gates, there was a synagogue where the law was taught (Allioli Altherth. § 140). The evangelist, presenting Jesus as a teacher and pointing to the place where the verb Jesus, makes it clear, on the one hand, that Jesus taught the teaching about his heavenly messenger not secretly, but in the hearing of a huge mass of people, on the other hand, that despite such an area where the members of the Sanhedrin could easily seize Jesus, no one is waiting for Him, as if His hour had not come; He, the heavenly Teacher, was under the special supervision of heaven. Art. 21–24. To the same listeners who were offered the previous teaching (as the words show: I spoke to them again), the Lord continued to offer teaching about Himself. Responding to the secret plans of the enemies who encroached on His freedom and life, Jesus says: I am coming and you will seek Me and die in your sins. “The time is near when He will leave the earth.” This is undeniable, as is the fact that if it were not His will and not the will of the Heavenly Father, not only the malice of the Sanhedrin, but also the malice of hell, would not have brought Him to a violent death. I am going, he says, with complete freedom. But it’s not just about that one thing, it’s also about the Jews. Seek Me. And before, His love pointed to the sad future of the Jews, who did not want to recognize the Messiah in Jesus (John 7:34). Now she again points to the same future in order to bring poor people to consciousness of themselves. Now a new and terrible feature is indicated in this future: in your sin you will die. In sin, not only what is sin, but sin will become such a ruler that death will be found in its power. This is the same as the state of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. (John 16:9). Freedom, weakening more and more under long-term submission to sin, will finally turn into willing service to sin. They will look for the Messiah, but not the Messiah of the prophets, not the Messiah Jesus, but with a thirst for earthly happiness, with a thirst for gold, without a Savior of the soul, they will pass into a sad eternity. The fate of a hardened Jew is the fate of every hardened sinner (Ezek. 3:19, 18:26, 33:9, 18). The verb to the Jews: food will kill itself, as it says: Even though I am going, you cannot come? Previously, in response to the same words of Jesus, they said: “Does He want to go into the Greek dispersion”? (John 7:35). Now they almost curse with a mockery of proud malice. – Suicide was considered by the Jews to be a serious crime, which relegates the perpetrator to the depths of hell. Josephus (de bello iud. 1, 3. 8. 5) says about suicides: “the darkest hell takes their souls.” So, the Jews, instead of gratefully appreciating the love that cares for them, say: if He wants to kill himself and go to Gehenna; then, of course, we will not follow Him. “He said to them: you are from below (εκ τ. κατω), I am from above (εκ τ. ανω); You are of this world, I am not of this world.” The lower, lower limits are the earth (John 3:31), otherwise, the world is fussy and transitory. The highest is heaven, both in contrast to the lower and in use (John 3:13, 31; Col. 3:1–2; Phil. 3:14; Gal. 4:26). The thoughts and life of the Jews belong to the earth; they live for her; here is their heart, here is all the love; They judge everything according to the calculations of earthly life, turning the most spiritual things into the circle of an earthly fair. This is the very thing that is now so praised - the utilitarian system. Does the Lord praise her? “This is why I told you that you would die in your sins,” He says. This is the consequence of a life arranged according to a utilitarian system. “You will die in your sins.” It cannot be otherwise. Man was created for God, and not for himself, for heaven, and not for earth, for eternal bliss, and not for temporary, deceptive bliss. Christ the Lord came from heaven to earth for this purpose, to restore in man his normal life, spoiled by sin, life for God and eternity. If all this is thrown down with proud contempt by utilitarian people, there is no hope of salvation. – People living for the earth do not understand and do not accept the teachings of heaven. The Jews misunderstood the words of Christ Jesus because their soul and mind had long ago received the wrong direction, towards one land. “If you do not believe that I am, you will die in your sins.” Whom does the Savior want to see in himself, saying: I am? This is evident from the content of His speech. According to everything that He said to the Jews, He is the One who saves from sin and sinful death, the promised Messiah, the Son of God. Jesus instills in the Jews the same thought that the Apostle later preached: there is another name under heaven given among men, and through Him we must be saved (Acts 4:12). Art. 25–26. “After such a long time, after signs and wonders, they still ask: Who are you?” (Chrysostom). The Savior's answer: την αρχην, oh τι καì λαλώ υμῖν, is not easy to understand. a) Translate: firstfruits, as I say to you. So does bl. Augustine. But this is the most unfortunate explanation: it is said - την αρχην, not αρχη; the subsequent words of the translation are not clear and are not entirely faithful to the original. b) Others explain it this way: “I am what I said at the beginning,” otherwise: I am the same. Here the translation: την αρχην agrees with the use of LXX (Gen.13:4, 41:21, 43:18–20). But “I say,” and did not say, says the Savior. c) The best translation: “Above all, I am what I am telling you,” otherwise, “Truly I am what I am telling you.” This explanation is consistent both with the meaning of the words and with the connection of thoughts. Την αρχην is the same as ολως - in Chrysostom and in secular writers (Elsnerus, Losnerus ad h. 1.). Those who proposed the question did not deserve any other answer. Repeating the same thing for them is a waste of words and time. He, as the Messiah - the Son of God, cannot speak lies, as he spoke about before (v. 24); You need to listen to him, and not test him with questions of insolence and anger. The Imam has spoken and judged many things about you: but He who sent Me is true, and I have spoken these things in the world, even as I have heard from Him. The Jews did not want to believe what Jesus said about their sad future, for their own benefit (v. 24). They boldly asked: Who is He? assumed the right to judge Him himself. But although He knows who they are, although He could say even more about them and about Himself than He said, it is enough for them to say that just as He who sent Him is faithful, so He says only what He heard from Him. He stays true to himself; as he said, he now does not take upon himself the rights of a judge (v. 15). But since His words are the will of the Heavenly Father, let them be sure that no stubbornness of the evil will, no plans and enterprises of human pride will change the fate determined for the Jews. Art. 27–29. For I did not understand, for you spoke to them of the Father. Jesus said to them: When you lift up the Son of man, then you will understand that I am... It was not because it was difficult to understand that I did not understand—the words were clear. “They didn’t understand” here means the same thing as not accepting; they understood, but did not want to admit that He was sent by the Heavenly Father and was telling them the will of God about Himself and about them. This is how the evangelist judged the Jews. - Under the words: when you exalt, of course the death of Christ on the cross; so in other cases (John 3:14, 12:32–34). To expose the injustice of the present unbelief of the Jews, the Lord points to their future state, saying that they themselves will blame themselves for their present unbelief. And the prophecy came true. It began to be fulfilled at the cross itself (Luke 23:48; Mark 15:39). It was completely fulfilled over thousands after the descent of the Spirit of Enlightenment. – Then some voluntarily repented of their former enmity towards Jesus and recognized Him as the promised Savior of the world (Acts 2:41). To others, the course of historical events showed that all efforts to stop the work of Christ Jesus were wasted. – Gloomy are the sufferings of Jesus on the cross; They were so terrible that not only did His disciples abandon Jesus, but He Himself prayed: My God, my God, where have you forsaken Me? But this only showed how great the task entrusted to the Son of God by the Heavenly Father. After the resurrection of Christ Jesus, after the illumination of human minds with the light of the Holy Spirit, people saw that His teaching and deeds were the will of the heavenly Father (John 5:20) and that the Father did not abandon Him as a faithful doer of His will (John 4:34, 17:4). Art. 30–32. This is what I say to Him, and many believe in Him. How could you not come to your senses when the amazing Teacher speaks of the future as the present? The power of Jesus' answers to the cunning scribes made them feel His superiority over earthly teachers. He said to the Jews who believed Him: if you continue in My word, you will truly be My disciples,” the Heavenly Teacher, penetrating the hearts of people with His gaze, saw that the faith of the new believers was not yet firm, and could easily waver when meeting the troubles of life. And He hastens to give help to the young children of faith. A worthy student, he says, is faithful to the teachings of the teacher in the most difficult moments of life. He dwells in the word with thoughts, feelings, desires; he proves by his deeds that the word abides in his heart. Otherwise, his faith would be a sprout without a reliable root (Matthew 13:20). The Apostle wrote: “Be doers of the word, and not merely hearers, deceiving yourselves. For whoever listens to the word and does not do it is like a man who sees his own face in a mirror, who looked at himself, walked away and immediately forgot what he is like. But whoever will delve into the perfect law of freedom and abide in it: being not a forgetful listener, but a doer of the work, he will be blessed in his action” (James 1:22-25). And you will know the truth, said the Lord. Truth is Christ's truth, Christ's teaching (Gal.3:1; Col.1:6). The Lord makes knowledge of the truth dependent on remaining in His word. When the teaching of Christ passes from word into life, then they will know all the dignity and all the meaning of the truth of Christ. And the truth will set you free. Freedom rooted in lies and delusion is false freedom, miserable slavery. With the growth of the truth of Christ in the soul, the true freedom of the soul is revealed. Just as abiding in the word precedes the correct knowledge of the truth, so the knowledge of the truth precedes the freedom of the spirit. This is the order indicated by the Lord! It happens from time to time that they try to change this order. At first they want to be free in order to freely explore and find out the truth, but from this only delusions and crimes come out, to the misfortune of people. It cannot be otherwise because this perverse order of discovering the truth is psychologically incorrect. And the truth will set you free. From what? First of all, from prejudices and delusions of the mind, of which there are so many among people. This is justified by experience. From what thick darkness of pagan and Jewish life humanity has been freed by the grace of the teachings of Christ! What else will it free you from? From sin, not only actual sin, but also pleasure in sin, which is so close to a corrupt soul. Whoever in the depths of his soul believes the divine truth that we, guilty of condemnation for sins, are reconciled with the righteousness of God by the death of the Son of God, in him, by the grace of God, a child’s love for God appears and grows, gradually liberating him from pleasure in sin (1 John 3:1, 4:19; Rom. 6:18, 8:21; James 1:25), and at the same time he is freed from slavery. law (Rom.7:6; Gal.5:1, 13, 4:26, 31; 1 Tim.1:9). Art. 33–40. A new objection came from the stubborn unbelief of the Pharisee, who sought to kill Jesus (vv. 37-40). In this circle of people there were Zealots who considered Roman power unbearable and, powerless before the iron will of Rome, were tormented themselves and agitated the people against the legitimate power. They considered it a crime to recognize another Ruler over themselves, a Master other than God. People of this category appear from time to time in the Christian world and always to the misfortune of those societies where they appear - since for them freedom is the same as unbridled passions and, above all, their own pride. The Zealots told Christ: “We are Abram’s seed and have never been slaves to anyone.” And the Forerunner admonished these people: “Do not dream about yourself, do not say: we have Abraham for our father” (Matthew 3:9). The Savior again had to speak against this destructive daydreaming. He omits the blatant lies in the words of wild dreamers: he does not say that they were slaves of Egypt, and during the time of the judges, and in Babylonian captivity, and are now under the iron rule of Rome. This is the truth known to them, and the truth, apparently, is not so important that the heavenly Teacher speaks about it. The Savior shows a more important and more necessary truth for everyone. Everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin. Moral slavery, involuntary service to vicious passions, is the hardest and most unfortunate slavery. This is what revelation teaches (Isa.42:7; 1 Kings 21:20–24; Proverbs 5:2; Rom.6:12, 16, 20; 2 Pet.2:19). This is what pagan wisdom taught. Plato said: “Do not consider free any of those who are devoted to shameful passions; they serve these despots with a more difficult service than random slaves.” And Cicero wrote: “Who will deny that all the wicked are slaves?” – Yes, and observation tells everyone the same thing. A worldly person is a slave to the passions of the world. Self-interest says to him: you are mine, because your money was bought at the price of your freedom. You are mine, says luxury, because your feasts cost you your life, you are mine, says vanity, because your fame was sold for faithful service to me. – The Savior teaches: “But the servant does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So, if your son sets you free, you will be truly free.” – The means to get rid of the bitter fate of slavery are explained. The slave of sin serves sin as a master; therefore he is not a servant of God; if he is tolerated in the house of the heavenly Master, then only for a while, otherwise he is constantly in danger of being expelled from the house of God. This is the state of Israel left to its own devices! This is the condition of all people, servants of sin! In this form the apostle represents the state of Israel. Paul (Gal.4:1-7, 22-31). Where is the remedy to get rid of such a sad state? Nowhere else than in the mercy of the Son of God. He, as the Son of God, has the right and opportunity to provide slaves of the enemy with the children of God. The little ones received Him, and gave them the realm to become children of God (John 1:12). Those who believe in Jesus, if they firmly remain in the faith and keep the commandments of Christ, by the grace of the Lord Jesus, being transformed into children of God, receive the right to a blissful stay in the abodes of the Heavenly Father (Rom. 8:17). In vain did the Zealots of civil liberty point out that they were the descendants of Abraham. The true children of Abraham are the same in their spiritual dispositions as Abraham, a friend of the truth and a friend of the friends of God. Are they like that? If they want to kill the preacher of the truth, it is clear that their souls are related to sin, and not to Abraham. Same John 7:19. Art. 41–47. “We have one Father, God,” say those who pursue civil freedom. If God were your Father, you would sooner love Me: for I went out and came back from God, I came not for Myself, but for Her who sent Me. It is unnatural for the children of God to persecute the Messenger of God. The children of God, reverent for the will of the Heavenly Father, revere His messenger. If not, they are not children of God. The reasoning is simple and undeniably true. It is easy for them to trust the dignity of every zealot of civil freedom. If he rebels against legitimate authority, if he violates the law of God to achieve his goal, he is a scoundrel, no matter what he says about himself. “I came from God and came into the world,” says the Savior. The origin indicates the point of departure of the origin; arrival - to the point of approach for the purpose of movement. Here and here, movement is not in the proper sense, as it is used about God (Gen. 15:4, 35:11; Exod. 1:5; Is. 48:1). The procession of the Son of God from the Father is twofold: He came from eternity, otherwise He was born and came out in time when He took upon Himself human nature for the salvation of people. Here the Savior speaks of his temporary origin. And we are always with Him, but we come to Him when we believe in Him with living and fruitful faith. So He, although always with us, was among us when he lived on earth. “His coming is His humanity; His abiding is His divinity. His deity is where we go; His humanity is the path we follow. If He were not the path along which we could go, we would never have reached Him who abides,” this is how the blessed one reasons. Augustine, (In Iohan. tract. 42. n. 8). He did not come about Himself - it is said so that the arrogant would not consider Him to be one of the false prophets, about whom it was said: “I did not send them, they themselves came: I did not tell them, they themselves prophesied” (Jer. 23:21). Why don’t you understand My conversation? because you cannot hear My word. If the Jews could receive the spiritual word of God, the grace that speaks to the conscience and mind, then they would understand the language of Christ. Therefore, if they are tempted by His words, if they find nonsense in them, it is obvious that they have no soul communion with God, and they boast in vain about their relationship with God. – This inability to hear the words of God is not an innocent matter; on the contrary, it is very criminal, because people, by repeating sins, have brought themselves to this sad state, to deafness and mental blindness (Matt. 23:37; 1 Cor. 2:14); you are your father the devil... He is a murderer from time immemorial... Ammonius: “The meaning of the instruction is this: of course, it is more fitting for the devil to be called your father.” Origen: “To be the son of the devil, it is enough if they want to fulfill his desires.” Why is the devil called the original murderer? Kirill Alex. and some others saw this as a reference to the story of Cain. Origen, Chrysostom, Augustine have no doubt that the devil is the original murderer because he destroyed the first people. The latter should be preferred to the first opinion. Christ Jesus speaks about the kinship of the Jews with the devil, not just because of the murder of Christ, but also because of other relationships. The deception of the first people is the initial work of the devil, which entailed all the sins in people, including the murder of Cain. In his letter to St. John, just like the Savior, says: he who commits sin is of the devil, for the devil sinned from the beginning (1 John 3:8). Christ calls the devil a lie; and the deceitfulness of the devil definitely appeared in the fall of the first people (Gen. 3:4-5). This is how the Savior exposes the sad story of the first people. He is a murderer from the beginning, απ αρχης from the beginning of creation (Mk.10:6; Sir.16:26; Rev.12:9). Ἐν αληθεια ουκ εςηκεν, according to the Vulgate non stelit, according to Russian. lane “I couldn’t resist.” But this is not true. Ἐςηκεν means the present state: so among the classics; so in the new language. covenant; This is how the Greek interpreters understood it - Origen, Theophylact, Euthynius; so in the Syriac and Ethiopian translations. – The words: “it does not stand in the truth” and the following: “for there is no truth in it,” are in this relationship with each other: since the devil, in his falling away from God, has become completely alien to the truth, then when he encounters the truth, he cannot hold on to it and keep it in himself; due to his inner hostility to the truth, he has become in a state of centrifugal force, running away from the truth. The words: “there is no truth in it” are parallel to the words: there is a lie; Likewise, the words: “does not stand in truth” are parallel to the words: Father of lies. Who of you will convict Me of sin? says the Lord to the Jews. Some, bearing in mind what was said before about truth and lies, mistook sin here for a delusion of the mind. – But there is no need to deviate from the ordinary meaning of sin. – Sin and error are related to each other (John 8:55). The Savior says: if your unbelief depends not on your hatred of good and truth, but on my moral character, let them point out in my activities any deviation from the eternal law of God. The Savior's sinlessness is also shown in other places of scripture (John 5:30, 8:29). In Art. 47 repeats the conclusion expressed in Art. 43, but with greater clarity. Only he has an affinity with God in whom there is acceptance for the revelations of God (John 10:27, 6:44–45), and the Jews do not have such acceptance and therefore they are not God’s. Art. 48–51. Do we not say well, for You are a Samaritan and a demon? The Savior showed the true reason why the Jews resist Him. – But the property of malice is such that the more clearly the truth is shown to it, the more irresistible the truth appears to the eyes, the more angry it becomes and the more it showers abuse on the Teacher of Truth. This is what convicted Jews do. They say that they rightly consider Him to be a Samaritan and a man possessed by a demon. A Samaritan, according to the thoughts of the Jews, is the same as a “heretic or epicurean” (Tract Ievamoth f. 47), otherwise one who does not know the God of Israel and rejects the right faith of Israel. The more alarming, the more frantic the enemies of Jesus appeared, the calmer, the more meek the heavenly truth—Christ Jesus—appears in its answers. There is no demon in Him, because He honors the Father, while the Jews dishonor Him with their deeds. In response to the accusation of heresy, he says that He does not seek human glory, as every heretic seeks, and does not need to seek, because “there is one who seeks and judges” - the Heavenly Father seeks the glory of His Messenger, because He glorifies Him with miracles; He is a righteous Judge, Whom people who do not love the truth should fear. If anyone keeps My word, he will never see death forever. Keeping a word or commandment is the same as accepting it with respect and putting it into practice (John 17:8; 1 John 3:22–23). To see death is the same as to die (Acts 2:25, 31; Eccl. 7:11). No matter how self-willed people think, whoever will assimilate the teachings of Christ will thereby assimilate for himself the principles of immortal life (John 6:47). Moses promised earthly happiness for preserving his law. The new legislator promises eternal bliss for loyalty to the law. – Both are by order of the Heavenly Father. The Son of God, undeservedly insulted by the Jews, does not subject them to judgment; full of love for everyone, He lets them know that just as the punishment of the righteous Judge awaits them, so a blessed Eternity is ready for His sincere worshipers. Art. 52–56. Not understanding what the Lord says about spiritual immortality, the Jews maliciously accuse the Savior of vanity, as if He wants to appear superior to Abraham, without having the right to do so. The Lord answers that He does not seek glory for Himself (John 7:18, 5:31), like passing and empty people: My Father glorifies Me, whom you say, for He is our God. Here is a clear and sharp denunciation of both the Gnostic distinction between the Demiurge and the New Testament God, and the rationalistic humiliation of the Old Testament. If “God, the Father of Christ Jesus,” is really one and the same with Jehovah, the God of Israel, then He could not have revealed himself to be essentially different before He was revealed afterwards. Without a doubt, there is a difference, historical and economic, between the revelation of the Old and New Testaments. But the essential content here and there is the same: there is one Savior and one God. The books of the Old Testament are sacred to every Christian, like divinely inspired scripture; this is not like the monuments of ancient pagan literature. However, a new revelation is not only a revelation of the same deity; it is a fuller and clearer revelation of the deity known from ancient revelation. Therefore, the higher and the deeper should be our reverence for the new revelation. And I have not known Him, but I know Him. Another thing is the revelation of God about God and Christ, a different understanding of revelation in the Jewish people. The Savior says to the Jews: I have not known Him, the Heavenly Father. Does this rebuke apply only to Jesus' contemporaries? “You always persist against the Holy Spirit. As your fathers, so are you,” says St. Stephen (Acts 7:51). The people of Israel were the chosen people, the best people. And, however, his own monuments, historical and prophetic books, clearly say that he poorly understood the revelation of God. This is how he appeared in his relationship with Christ Jesus. He does not recognize in Jesus the One about whom the prophets spoke; he will not know because he has formed false ideas about the Messiah and the God of the prophets; in the crush of earthly passions, he lost the pure concepts of saving people. “I know Him,” says the Savior. This knowledge is not received from the outside, like with people; it is a consequence of the internal consubstantiality of the Son with the Father. The Savior speaks of this because the truth demands it; if He had said otherwise, He would have resembled the Jews, who are so prone to lie. The faithfulness of such a response can be verified by deeds: His whole life is devoted to the glory of the Heavenly Father. So, it is not vanity, but love of truth that testifies to the Jews that He knows the Father. Therefore, whoever values ​​the truth must value His testimony. “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and rejoiced.” The Jews in vain consider the greatness of Abraham to be inaccessible to Jesus: on the contrary, Jesus is far superior to Abraham - He is the Messiah, awaited by the Father of believers. – “Day” of Jesus – “the time of His coming” (Kirill Al.); this is how the Savior himself explained it (John 9:4–5); otherwise, this is the time of light indicated by the prophets (2 Pet. 1:19), the time of salvation, “to which the research and investigation of the prophets related” (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Abraham longed to see this day and saw it with delight. How and when did Abraham see the time of Jesus Christ? It is believed that he saw this in prototypes, for example, in the sacrifice of his son (Zigaben, Augustine, Origen). But Jesus Christ distinguishes the expectation of the appearance from the vision and in the latter makes it possible to see the special state of Abraham. Abraham was not only happy when he received promises about the Messiah or was taught about Him by prototypes, but he saw with delight the very time of Christ or, what is the same, His appearance to the world. When and how? By revelation given in the afterlife. This idea is confirmed by the example of Moses and Elijah, who appeared on Tabor and talked with Jesus about the cross (Matthew 17:4). Art. 57–59. The Pharisees gave the words of Jesus their own, false meaning. He said that Abraham saw His day with joy. And they interpret that according to His words, He lived during the time of Abraham. Why did they say: “You are not yet 50 years old”? The age of fifty was considered by the Jews to be the most mature age of courage, followed by old age. The Levites could continue their service only up to 50 years (Num. 4:3, 23, 35–39, 8:24–25). So, the Jews wanted to say to Christ: you have not yet achieved mature courage, but you are presenting yourself as a contemporary of Abraham. “Before Abraham was born, I am,” answered the Savior. Πριν – γενεσθαι – was not, but was born: γενεσθαι – contrast to being ειναι; so according to usage (Mark 4:22; Acts 26:29; 1 Cor. 3:18). Nonnus: Πριν γενοτ εχον, “before he was born.” I am expresses an ever-continuing and never-begun existence (Jer.50:5; Ps.40:5). This is the same thing that later the Holy Spirit said through the mouth of Paul: the firstborn of all creation, first of all (Col. 1:15-17). So now the Savior tells the Jews more clearly than before that He is the true Son of God. This is how the Jews understood His words; but considering them to be blasphemy, they wanted to stone Him with stones, of which there were many near the church, ready to rebuild the church (Flavius ​​ancient. 20, 7. 9). Since the time for Jesus’ death had not yet come, Jesus hid himself and left the church. The example of the Savior responding to the offensive comments of the Jews provides lessons for our lives. If, despite all your weakness, you teach the truth, do not sin either by diminishing its appearance or by turning away from love to anger. Do not seek your honor: otherwise God will seek dishonor for you, like a Judge. Forgive for everything that relates to your face, to yourself, but not for a single word that offends God. Be silent, instead of making excuses where your honor is at stake. But where the truth is at stake, where lies are brazenly spoken and even sanctified, you should not remain silent - speak there until they raise stones against you. Heavy duty! Tricky art! c) Healing of the man born blind, John 9:1–41. Art. 1–5. And the sight of a man blind from Christmas. The word: mimoid, does not show either the time or place of the event. The Evangelist noted (v. 14) that the event took place on Saturday, but whether soon or long after the conversation with the Pharisees is not determined. Based on the well-known feature that near the church there were always many blind, lame, poor people waiting for alms (Acts 3:1-2), we can assume that the blind man was met at the church; and if the disciples knew that this blind man was blind from birth, then this, of course, was because they often saw this blind man at the church and knew his history. Rabbi! Who sinned, this one or his parents, because he was born blind? asked the students. The question was aroused by the observation that physical troubles, especially illnesses, are often the fruit of a sinful life. Both experience and scripture (Ex.20:5, 34:7; Deut.28:18) say that the sins of the parents are punished in the children. If the blindness of the blind man was the work of the blind man himself, during his years of free activity, why did he suffer misfortune from birth? Was the sin foreseen? Was his inclination toward sin, from the beginning of his life, restrained by blindness? Of course, this is how the disciples of Jesus reasoned, but they could not at all connect with their words thoughts about the transmigration of the soul from one body to another, as others thought on the contrary. The later Jews adopted this pagan stupidity, but it was unknown even to the writers of the Kabbalah (Eisenmenger iudenthum 11, 85 - 88). The Lord answered the disciples’ question in word and deed. Let the works of God be revealed about him, He said. The works of God are manifestations of the greatness of God (Ps. 32:4, 143:3). Sins were not the cause of blindness, but this did not mean that the blind man and his parents were holy people before God, and, therefore, had no need for instruction. St. Chrysostom reasons: “What then? without punishment it was impossible for him to appear to the glory of God? But that is not at all what is said, that it should not be done. Of course, it was possible, but let him appear on it too. Will you say that he was offended for the glory of God? Why are you offended? What if the Lord had wished that he had not been born at all? He received a benefit from his blindness, because he received his sight with his inner eyes.” – In other words: to be chosen as an instrument of the glory of God is the highest dignity for a person; and to be brought by bodily blindness to spiritual insight is the most desirable benefit for the soul, completely repaying for the inconvenience of blindness. “It is fitting for me to do things,” says the Savior. He allows you to see yourself as a representative of God, who is entrusted with accomplishing the works of God and completing them at a certain time. Day is the time when the sun of Christ’s earthly life shines (John 12:35); night - the time when this sun sets will hide in the tomb. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. He, the Lord Jesus, could not appear to anyone else while on earth; He is the light of the world. He shines with greatness like the sun in the sky, and disperses all darkness on earth, voluntary and involuntary errors; By teaching and miracles He reveals the glory of God to people. Art. 6–7. The great wonderworker performed miracles only by His own power, without the need for third-party means. If there are any means in the history of a miracle, it is because these means were needed for people as lessons about the spiritual. Saliva was considered a useful remedy against eye inflammation. This is evident from the testimony of Pliny (hist nat. 28, 7). But saliva, especially mixed with earth, could not help a man born blind. And the water of Siloam, although it was useful for some sick people, did not make a single blind person see. Thus, the anointing of the eyes with clay, performed by Jesus in the sight of everyone, puts into full light the power of God, which restored light to the eyes. “Go and wash in the pool of Siloam, which means sent.” – Strauss was in vain to call this explanation inconsistent with the rules of language. Shilo, by analogy with “shikor, kitor,” means water carried, sent (Neh. 3:15). The water of Siloam was the water given by God for Zion (Isa. 8:6); but She also pointed to another, spiritual water, more necessary for people than Siloam, to the grace of the Messiah. – By sending the blind man to Siloam, the Lord Jesus gave a lesson to the blind man to think about the state of his soul and prepare to accept the grace that awaited him, the grace of the Messiah - Jesus. Art. 8–14. One can imagine the delight of a blind man who had not seen the light since the day he was born and, at the word of Jesus, began to see everything. “The neighbors and those who knew him could not believe their eyes that this was the one they knew as a blind man asking for alms.” “I am the one,” the former blind man told them. How was he healed? This curiosity is also satisfied. - For what? It was necessary to glorify God and the Wonderworker. But here's the problem! blind man healed on Saturday. According to the rules of Pharisaic piety, only in mortal danger can a sick person be treated on the Sabbath; but kneading the dough or doing something similar is a grave sin (Tancbuma X, 2. Sabbata VII, 2. Lichtfast adh. 1). The main problem is that Jesus healed the blind man, whom the Sanhedrin and the synagogue are vigilantly watching (John 7:32, 45-50). To avoid persecution, they hastened to present the former blind man to the Pharisees. Art. 15–17. The interrogated blind man simply and frankly told the Sanhedrin how he was healed. Disputes arose between members. There were also good people among the members of the Sanhedrin, “And many of the rulers believed in Him” (John 12:42). The venerable worshipers of the law said: “This man is not from God, because he does not keep the Sabbath.” The sensible ones remarked: “how can a sinful man perform such miracles”? A miracle as great as the healing of a man born blind could only be accomplished by the power of God; and where God himself acts, is there any place for the question of the rest of the Sabbath? Some of the sensible members, at least in their souls, of course, went further. Having taken into account how many other miracles Jesus had performed, they came to the conviction that Jesus was the true Messiah. “What can you say about Him?” - asked the prejudiced blind man. “This is a prophet,” he answered. Without fear, with a free soul, he reveals the conviction of simple, common sense. This is a prophet, he said, this is a man sent by God, because only with the power of God can such a thing be accomplished as the healing of a man born blind. Art. 18–23. The blind man's answer was not to the liking of Jesus' blind enemies. They realized that all that remained for them was to reject the event itself - to pretend that the blind man was not blind and that there was deception. The called parents of the blind man were asked four questions: is this really their son, that is, is he some kind of deceiver? If this is their son, was he really born blind? Who healed him? and finally, how did you heal? The Sanhedrin, apparently, wanted to be a skeptic no less than Academician Renan and subjected the event to the analysis of the strictest logical court. Parents answered affirmatively to the first two questions. This meant a lot for the triumph of truth: the parents say that the healed man was indeed blind from birth. This means that the enemies of Jesus, seeking to eclipse the truth, only contribute to its glory. The parents let their son answer the last two questions of the Sanhedrin. Why? Fearing the Jews. The Jews have already formed, and if anyone confesses Christ to Him, he will be excommunicated from the congregation. There were three types of excommunication. One (piddi) disgraced person was prohibited from having intercourse with any of his own or strangers for 30 days; he could not come within 4 cubits of anyone. The second degree of excommunication (Cherem) is a solemn expulsion from the synagogue, accompanied by an order not to speak a word to anyone, nor to eat or drink with others. Excommunication of the third degree (Chammata) completely excluded the disgraced person from church and civil society (Buxtorfu lexic. talm col. 827. 1304 2463 Udringae Synod. 739). There was something to be afraid of, in any case! Art. 24–34. We know, they say, that this man is a sinner. How do they know this? From the fact that the Sabbath does not keep. But didn’t the Maccabees break the Sabbath to defend their fatherland? (1Mc2:41-47). Are they really sinners because of this? Anger does not want to reason sensibly. Give glory to God, they say to the healed man. These are words that called us to tell the exact truth (Josh. 7:19; 1 Sam. 6:5; Is. 9:8), to prove by deeds that we revere the greatness and righteousness of God (Rom. 4:20). Even though I am a sinner, I do not know: I only know that I was blind, but now I see. I don’t know, the healed man answers, where to derive your strange conclusion: but here is a well-known, most correct position, from which a completely different conclusion should be drawn: I was blind, but now I see. He allows his judges to be assured of the correctness of their thoughts about the Healer and reserves the freedom to remain with his conviction. - Later he will decisively speak out that the opinion of his judges about Jesus is false: but now he remains silent so as not to increase irritation in the venerable judges. What shall I do to you? How should you open your eyes? interrogated by persistent judges. Cunning people are trying to see if he will say anything that could be held against the Wonderworker or against the reality of the miracle. A direct, frank, honest soul was indignant at the cunning of black souls. The one who received his sight mockingly says to them: don’t they also want to be disciples of Jesus, eager to hear the story of the miracle again? Yes, whoever wants to be a disciple of Jesus loves to hear more than once the news about His deeds. “We are disciples of Moses, with whom God spoke, and we do not want to be disciples of someone of unknown origin,” say representatives of Judaism. Their poor pride was offended by the irony of the one who had received the light, and they speak with anger. What are they saying? They contradict themselves, they incriminate themselves, that they are wandering in the darkness of lies. At first they said that they did not accept Jesus as the Messiah on the grounds that it was unknown where the Messiah would come from (John 7:27). Now they say about Jesus: we don’t know where this comes from, and by this they think to justify their unbelief. They are proud that they are disciples of Moses and do not want to listen to the one whom Moses ordered to listen to. They see the miracles of Jesus and do not want to recognize Him as the messenger of God. Who are they going against? Against Moses and against God. It is amazing, the healed man told them, that you who study the will of God, rich in various knowledge, do not know where He comes from, although He opened the eyes of the blind. - Then he exposes to them two truths that are known to the general sense: one is that God listens to the prayer of the saints and rejects the desires of evil sinners (Is. 1:15, 59:1-2; Mal. 2:2; Prov. 28:9; Ps. 33:13-16, 65:18); the other is that no prophet has ever opened the eyes of a man blind from birth; the insight of such a blind man comes not only from the circle of natural events, but also from a number of well-known miracles. – Scientists had only to add that according to the prophecies, the healing of the blind and deaf is one of the distinguishing features of the Messiah (Is. 35:5, 42:7, 61:1; Matt. 11:5), and then turn with reverence to the Messiah Jesus. “But that’s not how the Pharisees were.” They act contrary to revelation and contrary to common sense. They said with anger to the healed one: “You were born in sins and are you teaching us? And they kicked him out." The pride of the people's teachers considered themselves offended by the fact that, at her own request, they told her the truth, which disagreed with her dark plans. They were unable to refute the sound thoughts of the former blind man, and the consciousness of his victory over them only increased their irritation against him. They grab at the last resort: instead of admitting their mistake, they rush to the personality of the blind man. Your blindness, they say, is evidence of your sins—you are the subject of God’s wrath. How dare you, such a sinner, teach us? Not enough. They subject the confessor of truth to public punishment. Because the healed man confessed out loud to everyone that Jesus was a prophet, a righteous man, and a miracle worker, the members of the Sanhedrin kicked him out of the meeting. The judge's hall of the Sanhedrin was located in the buildings of the temple of prayer, between the courtyard of the pagans and the inner courtyard (Tract. ioma f 25). So, expulsion from the Sanhedrin meant that the healed person was prohibited from appearing at general prayer. Art. 35–39. Heavenly love was pleased to reward with a sign of its love the one dishonored by human malice. The Savior sought and found him excommunicated by the unrighteous Sanhedrin. The healed man recognized Jesus as a prophet and miracle worker of unprecedented proportions. He wanted to see Him. But first the news of his own condition caught his attention. Then the Sanhedrin tortured him with its interrogations, which ended with such honor for a witness of the truth. Heavenly goodness wants to reward his patience. Do you believe in the Son of God? the Lord asks him. The entire Gospel of John, especially John 10:33–36, 19:7, puts into clear light the idea that the Son of God and Christ are not at all synonymous words, but the Son of God is a divine person. Therefore, it was unfair (De-Wette and others) to give such meaning to the Savior’s question: do you believe in the Messiah? The question was unnecessary in this form. The one who received his sight believed in the Messiah, the Prophet and Messenger of God. The Savior wants to see in the healed one what was still lacking. You, he says, suffered so many troubles for your faith in Christ Jesus; Do you want to believe in the Son of God? The healed person understands the meaning of the question and feels that he is promised the revelation of a high secret. But “Son of God” exceeds ordinary concepts of him. He, with his characteristic frankness, says that he does not know the Son of God, he is ready to believe in Him - wonderfully high and great - but who is He? You have seen Him, He speaks to you, said the Lord. “I believe, Lord,” the believer says with delight and “worshiped Him,” expressing faith with outward reverence. According to Renan, Jesus is “an incomparable man, to whom the world consciousness has awarded the title of Son of God and justly.” – One might be surprised at Renan’s last confession if it were not the trick of a learned swindler. In any case, from the Gospel we see that the name of the Son of God was given to himself by the Son of God, who knew who and where He came from. The universal consciousness has neither the right nor the opportunity to give on its own behalf to anyone the name of the Son of God; even then, as divine revelation showed the world the Son of God in Jesus, it, in the person of the Jews, Mohammedans, pagans and Renans, stubbornly strives to deprive Him of this high title. And Jesus said: I came into this world for judgment, so that those who do not see may see and those who see will be blind. Even the righteous Simeon spoke in the church about the baby Jesus: behold, this one is destined for the fall and for the rising of many in Israel (Luke 2:34). The Son of God is light for all people. But when others stubbornly reject this light, God’s judgment is revealed to the unfortunate fate of those who persist. The Light of God appeared so that those who feel their poverty, who are aware of their spiritual blindness, would see the heavenly light, to their happiness: but those who are proud of their knowledge, who consider themselves sighted and vigilant, remain with their blindness, satisfied with it, to their misfortune. At another time, the Savior said: “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance” (Luke 5:32; Matt. 11:25). “Do not be arrogant, the apostle also wrote, but follow the humble, do not dream of yourself” (Rom. 12:16; 1 Cor. 1:18-20). It is not learning that is harmful, but the learning of a proud Pharisee; It is not science and knowledge that are harmful, but their abuse. And not all simplicity is salutary, but the simplicity of sober thought, the kind that the healed blind man had. Art. 40–41. “Are we really blind too?” - said the Pharisees who heard the words of the Savior. They understood that the Lord was speaking about their spiritual blindness; but, pretending not to understand, they ask: are we really blind too? Yes, the Savior answers. If they were blind, if they knew little of the law of God, but were aware of their spiritual needs, felt their shortcomings, their sin would be healed; when they consider themselves to be completely healthy, and sighted and strong, having no need for anything, proud pride remains dominant in their soul, and in this state eternal condemnation awaits them. Woe to those who are wise in themselves and understand themselves, said the prophet (Is. 5:21). Same idea Matthew 11:25; Jer.8:8. d) Conversation about the shepherd. John 10:1–42. The conversation was offered following the conversation about the healed blind man. This is evident both from the fact that at its beginning there is no indication or hint of an intermediate time with its events, and from the fact that the listeners of the conversation about the shepherd talk about the healing of the blind man as an event of the same day (John 10:21). The prophets portrayed the Messiah as a shepherd (Hos. 3:5; Is. 40:11; Ezek. 34:23, 37:24; Jer. 23:4–6). The Savior portrays Himself in the same form. In order to make the true features of the Good Shepherd more clearly visible, He first depicts a predator and a mercenary. Art. 1–5. Do not enter through the doors into the sheep yard, because in other words, that thief is also a robber... In the east, the sheep yard is in the open air, but fenced with a low stone wall; there is a watchman at the gate of the courtyard; he opens and closes the gates for the shepherd and the flock. The thief can only climb over the wall to get into the yard to loot, and only at night. The shepherd freely enters the courtyard through the gate: the watchman knows him. The sheepfold is the church of God. This is how she was portrayed by the prophets (Mic.2:12; Ezek.34:14). Sheep are believers (John 21:17). Who is the guardian of the yard? If they were to say that this is God the Father, then such service would not seem befitting to His face. – Guardian – Holy Spirit He sanctifies true shepherds for their ministry; He opens the doors of the flock into the sheepfold, into the church of God. Apart from Him, only thieves and robbers, wolves and wild beasts can appear in the courtyard. - The doorkeeper opens the door to this (shepherd), and the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name, and he drives them out. In the west, a shepherd walks behind the flock. In the east, among the pastoral peoples, among the Kurds, among the Syrians, the shepherd goes ahead of the flock, and the sheep follow him. There, a zealous shepherd accustoms the sheep to himself in such a way that each one, called by a special name, called by the shepherd by its name, leaves the food and runs up to the shepherd with signs of affection and pleasure. He loves them tenderly and takes care of them: if any of them gets sick, he takes care of her. So the sheep do not run away from their shepherd. On the contrary, they do not know a stranger and are afraid of him; he can only grab them by force and he needs to chase the sheep in order to catch it. The meaning of the entire beautiful Eastern picture is the following: whoever sets himself up as a teacher not according to the order established by Christ the Lord is a dishonest impostor and destroyer of souls (v. 1); the true shepherd of the people of God is supplied by the will of Christ the Lord by the Holy Spirit. (ст. 2). He acts freely in his circle; cares with all love for the salvation of every soul and earnestly cares for the happiness of all (v. 3). Members of the Church of God know and love him as their true shepherd, they pay for his love with love (v. 4), but the self-proclaimed teacher is an object of fear and fear for them, his teaching is a foreign thing for them, and he only catches them with cunning and cunning (v. 5). Art. 6. Jesus spoke this parable to them: but they did not understand what was said to them. The parable language, the language of images, was familiar to the Pharisees. Bl. Jerome writes: “The Syrians, and especially the Palestinians, usually mix parables into their speech, so that the thought of simple speech, which is not easily retained by the listeners, is retained through similarity” (Comm. in Matt. 18, 23). The image of the shepherd was familiar to the Pharisees, but they did not quite understand his relationship to Jesus Christ and His Church, especially because they did not want to understand. This happened to them very often (John 3:4–9, 4:11, 6:34, 8:27, 11:12). Art. 7–10. Amen, amen, I say to you, for I am the door of the sheep. Arguing with the unbelief and mistrust of people, the Savior presents Himself in a different image, calling Himself a door. He is a door either for the sheep, so that they can only enter through Him, - this is how St. understood. Chrysostom; - or the door to the sheepfold, as in v. 1, so that the rulers of the church can only enter through Him. – But there is no need to separate one from the other here: He is the door - both for the sheep and for the shepherds. St. Erma wrote: “The Son of God is a new door, because everyone who is saved will enter the kingdom of God through this door.” All of them, since they came before Me, are thieves and robbers. Οσοι ηλθον π ro εμου. Since the Lord calls himself a door in the sense of the only Savior, then in this form the expression π ro εμου should mean: “besides me,” independently of Me; π rho in the meaning except is found in Euripides, equal to John 5:7. Teachers who act apart from the Supreme Shepherd, no matter how many of them come and no matter when they come, are thieves and robbers. No matter how brilliant their gifts may be, no matter how extensive their knowledge may be, offering a teaching about faith not according to the spirit of Jesus, they are predators and destroyers of souls. This is God's will for this! The sheep did not listen to them: true members of the church of Christ do not listen to or accept false teachers. The Savior expresses his thought about his true sheep, who know Him and whom He knows (John 10:14–15). These have the spiritual sense to recognize a wolf covered with sheep's clothing. This is what history shows. Another thing is those who are looking for teachers who are ready to indulge their passions. Whomever they seek, they will find (2 Tim. 4:3–4). “Whoever comes up by Me will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.” The expression “will go in and go out” means freely and happily going about his business (Ps. 121:8; Deut. 28:6; Jer. 37:4; 2 Chron. 1:10), otherwise he will have the strength to carry out his business without hindrance. “And he will find pasture” - for himself and for his flock, if he is a shepherd, or according to the word of the Apostle (1 Tim. 4:16) he will save himself and those who listen to him. “The thief comes only to steal, kill and destroy.” A thief approaches a sheepfold in order to thiefly climb over the wall (v. 1) and steal someone else’s property. But this is not enough for him: he, not being able to attract the lamb to himself with affection, beats it and finally slaughters it. Such are the works of false teachers! (Matt. 23:13–15; Jer. 10:21, 23:1–2). Christ the Lord came with that, that they may have life and have more, περισσον εχωσι την ςωην, - περισσον refers not to ζωην, but to the word εχωσι. This is the meaning. He came so that all believers could enjoy life in God and, moreover, in full abundance, with full abundance of power. And the Old Testament brought life to its children, gave joy to the soul, and led “the paths of righteousness” (Ps. 22:3). But the revelation of Christ provides complete satisfaction to all the best needs of the soul. No Pharisee and no idealist have the right to reproach the teaching of Christ not only for errors or obscurity, but also for any shortcoming; it is pure truth, high truth, all-embracing truth, which the world has never seen before and which only stupidity can replace with another. Art. 11–13. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. “Good” here is the same as “true”, fully worthy of his name, whatever one could desire, an example of a shepherd (Matt. 13:8; 2 Tim. 2:3, 4:7; 1 Tim. 4:6; 1 Pet. 4:10), like true bread (John 6:32), like a true vine (John 15:1). Since here the shepherd is depicted as protecting the safety of his sheep, the expression: lays down his soul for the sheep means only that he brings life for their benefit, although in other cases such an expression means: he dies instead of others, redeems freedom from torment for others. A true shepherd, an example of shepherds, is not like a mercenary. When he sees a danger to the sheep, he takes into account his own benefits, his life, and in case of personal danger, leaves the herd as a sacrifice to a predatory animal. – If only shepherds, obliged to imitate the example of shepherds, would take their own benefits into account as little as possible when discharging their office, would firmly and without fear drive away wolves and other predatory animals from the flock, would they speak loudly against the seducers who are destroying hundreds of souls with their example and thoughts! It’s a sad picture – mercenaries in the place of shepherds. But earthly life is all sad. Blazh. Jerome wrote: “Mercenaries are also needed; Many, although they are looking for their own benefits in the church, preach Christ alone and from them the voice of Christ is heard and the sheep follow not the mercenary, but the voice heard through the mercenary. Listen to how the Lord refers to the mercenaries: the scribes and Pharisees, he says, sit on the seat of Moses: do what they say; but don't do what they do. This means - obey the voice of the Lord, heard through mercenaries... They seek their own benefits, and not the benefit of Christ: however, not a single mercenary will dare to say to the Christian people: seek your own benefits, and not the glory of Christ, he does evil, but does not preach evil from the pulpit of Christ.” Art. 14–15. And I know My and they know My Me. The present God knows His own, says the apostle (2 Tim. 2:19), making it possible to see in this knowledge knowledge combined with love. Exactly the same way, when the Lord says: I know mine: this means that he not only distinguishes his sheep from strangers (Ps. 1:6; Am. 3:2), but also loves his own (Eph. 1:4). They know Me, My. These words point to the words about the sheep: they hear his voice (v. 3). and they know (v. 5). So, if their own know Him, then because the Lord gives them a voice, calls them, attracts them with gracious actions of love, enlightenment, consolation, strengthening in goodness. In the word: Mine, it is also indicated that there are not His sheep; just as there are false teachers, so there are also those who are not genuine sheep of Christ, who bear only the name of Christ’s sheep, but in reality are not His sheep; These are those who know Christ poorly, and find themselves even worse because of their deeds; therefore the words of the Savior do not apply to them: they know My Me. For the Father knows Me, and I know the Father. The heavenly shepherd knows his own and they know him, just as the Father knows the Son and the Son knows the Father. The communication of the Father with the Son is the closest, the closest: “no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son, and to whom the Son chooses to reveal it” (Matthew 11:27). “And I lay down my life for the sheep.” The close communication of the Son with the Father serves as the basis for the Son to sacrifice his life for the sheep; otherwise, he gives his life for the sheep, because such is the will of the Heavenly Father; Christ Jesus sees and shows others that His earthly career will end in violent death, but also shows that such an ending is a matter of His will, sacrificing life for the happiness of people. Art. 16. Other sheep imam... The Lord Jesus said clearly that He was sent by the Father to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 10:5-6, 15:24; Rom.15:8), since the Jews were chosen by God to preserve the promises of God (John 4:21; Rom.3:2), and the pagans “were alienated from the society of Israel, did not participate in the covenants promises" (Eph. 2:12). Now He reveals that He will call the pagan peoples to eternal salvation. This was to be according to the prophecy about the Messiah (Ezek.34:30–31). Christ Jesus says that He will gather all nations to Himself as the Messiah. What a vast promise! what a wonderful prophecy! Before the gaze of the seer - the shepherd - are the peoples of the entire universe with their future. He sees that, despite the diversity of human will, the pagan nations will enter His sheepfold, at His call. Has it come true? It was fulfilled with all precision. After His resurrection, He sent the apostles to preach the gospel to the inhabitants of the entire globe (Matthew 24:14, 28:19; Luke 24:47; Acts 1:2–8, 10:11) and accept them into the new, eternal covenant (Matthew 24:28; Luke 22:20). How many nations are now glorifying the name of Jesus! The title is not over yet. The rest of the nations will also be in the courtyard of Jesus in due time. Art. 17–18. For this sake, the Father loves Me, as I lay down My soul, and again I will receive it... Wonderful love breathes in these words! The Father looks with pleasure at the love with which the Son loves His sheep and at the joy with which He, in accordance with the will of the Father (v. 18), gives His life for their salvation. The Son’s love for people is such that the Heavenly Father Himself looks at it with admiration. And the Father’s love is such that He does not spare His Son. No one will take my (soul) from Me, but I place it in Myself... Out of love for the will of the Father, the Son sacrifices his life for people - not because He is forced to do so. If He wanted to save life, no one could take it away. Of his own free will, with complete freedom, He gives Himself up to death and with the same freedom He will restore life to Himself. – According to these words, not only a free personality is visible in Christ Jesus, but this personality is not separated in him from the limitless power, since only by uniting the human personality with divine power could He have the power to restore life to Himself. I received this commandment from My Father. “Saying that he received a commandment from the Father, he shows that he is doing what is pleasing to Him, so that when they capture Him, they would not think that he was abandoned and betrayed by the Father” (Chrysostom). Art. 19–21. As before about miracles (John 9:16), so now disagreements and disputes arose between the listeners about the words of the Lord. Anger and disbelief of self-satisfied pride showered the teacher with abusive reviews, because they were unable to understand His thoughts. But others, both in words and in Jesus’ deeds, denounced unbelievers for their injustice. “You, these said, do not deny that the healing of the man born blind did not occur due to natural causes, and yet you would rather believe that an evil spirit is at work here than that God is at work. An evil spirit is not a benefactor to anyone. And why believe more in the power of demons than in the power of God? The teaching of Jesus is the teaching of a high mind. To think otherwise means to offend your mind and your conscience. Art. 22–23. Then there was renewal in Jerusalem and there was no winter. And Jesus walked in the church in the porch of Solomon. – The festival of the renewal of the temple, established in memory of the consecration of the temple after its desecration by the paganism of Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Macc. 4:32, 56-59; 2 Macc. 10: 6-8) was celebrated from the 25th day of Kislev, from December 15. – Jews could celebrate this holiday in their homes, but many of the pious went to Jerusalem to celebrate it. The holiday lasted 8 days, and the houses were illuminated with lights (Flavius ​​ancient 12:7). For those unfamiliar with Jewish customs, the evangelist notes the time of the holiday and thus explains why the Savior walked in Solomon's porch. A cold wind was blowing from half of Kislev and it was raining. Solomon's Porch is a gallery with marble columns, on the eastern side of the church, near the magnificent eastern gate. (Flavius ​​on the war 6, 12). Art. 24–28. And when the Jews visited him, they said to him, “How long will you bear our souls?” Even if you are Christ, we don’t hesitate to tell you. Αιρειν ψυχας - to keep hearts on high, to agitate with doubts. If the Jews had proposed their question with pure intentions - to find out the truth, the Savior’s answer would not have been the same as we read. They sought a direct answer to the question: Is He the Messiah? in order to present His answer to the court of the Sanhedrin and demand Jesus there too. Therefore, their complaint about their mental anxieties is a hypocritical complaint. “Look,” says Chrysostom, what depravity and stubbornness they have. When He preached to them and taught them with words, they said: what sign are you doing? (John 6:30). And when he presented evidence in cases, then they said to Him: if you are the Christ, tell us without hesitation. When deeds cry out, they seek words; and when they learn words, they run to deeds, always insisting on the contrary.” Reh you don’t believe. The Savior refers the Jews to his previous sermons about Himself, which they accepted so favorably (John 5:19, 6:32, 7:16, 8:14–16, 10:1). You do not believe because I am not the one you expect for yourself - not a false Messiah who will bring you nothing but troubles and lies. The works that I do testify to Me. If you don’t believe the doctrine, why don’t you believe the works? What is the healing of the blind? Bear from my sheep, as Reh did to you. That's why you don't believe it! When did Jesus say that the Jews are not among His sheep? Then, as he spoke about the shepherd and the obedient sheep (John 10:14–15). My sheep listen to My voice and I will give them eternal life. The Jews must understand that only their corrupted will is the reason that they do not understand who Jesus is and that their condition is pitiful, since they are depriving themselves of eternal life, ready for sincere listeners of His teachings (John 3:16). “And I give them eternal life and they will never perish” - nothing destructive will remain in their souls (1 John 5:18; John 17:12) “and no one will snatch them out of My hand” - no outside hostile force will take away from them the salvation protected by the Son of God. Art. 29–30. The Jews could say that Jesus was taking too much credit for Himself, promising a blissful eternity to His followers. In response to the thoughts of their hearts, the Lord says: no one is able to snatch his sheep from the hands of the Father; and this means that they will not be taken away from the Son, since He and the Father are one. If the unity of which the Savior speaks also applied to one power, then it would be necessary to conclude that the being of the Father and the Son is one. “One in strength, one in divinity” (Zigaben). – But the Savior proves the equality of his power with the power of the Father by the unity of the Father and the Son. Therefore, when he says: I and the Father are one, then in the word: one, he speaks of the unity of essence. The Father and the Son are “one in essence, and not in personality” (Origen Selecta in Ps. 135), not like in Schwedenborg, one in whom the divine is the Father, and the human is the Son; not like in Sabellius - Yιοπατηρ Son-Father, or in Noetus, the Son is the same as the Father. Renan, repeating Swedenborg, writes: “God does not speak to Him (Jesus) as to someone outside Him; God is in Him... He lives in God through moment-to-moment communication... But he does not declare Himself consubstantial with God.” – It is fair that the Son is in constant internal communion with the Father (John 8:16). But it is a lie that the Son did not recognize Himself as consubstantial with the Father: He says directly: I and the Father are one. It is also a lie that “God does not speak to Him as to someone outside of Him.” The Son and the Father act as two separate persons. The Father testifies of the Son with a voice from heaven: I will both glorify and glorify again (John 12:30). Art. 31–38. As before, the Jews took up stones to throw them at Jesus for supposed blasphemy (John 8:59). “I have shown you many good deeds from my Father; for which of these do you want to stone me?” the Lord spoke to them. “Good works” are works of love (1 Tim. 6:18; Gen. 44:4), healing of various sick people, feeding the hungry. And the people testified about Him: “He does everything that is good, making the deaf to hear and the dumb to speak” (Mark 7:37). “He showed from the Father,” by the power of the Father abiding in the Son, he showed the works - a Jewish expression, which means the same thing as having done the works (Ps. 4:7, 70:20, 83:8). He has done many good deeds for you, for which of them do you want to kill? What a bitter complaint, what amazing meekness in this matter! Jehovah complained in the same way through the mouth of the prophet (Micah 6:3). And the apostles preached: “He who did good and healed the sick you put to death” (Acts 10:38–39). “The Jews said - we want to stone you - because you, being a man, make yourself God.” If the Jews thought that Jesus presented himself only as a divine man, they would not have said: “You, being a man, make yourself God.” It is clear that in their understanding Jesus recognized Himself as the true Son of God. For this they accuse Him of blasphemy. The accusation is unfair! The general position is unfair: a person, without committing blasphemy, cannot be called god. The Savior points to Ps.81:6. It says: “I said: you are gods and you are all sons of the Most High.” “He said it was” when and where? In Moses (Ex. 21:6, 22:8–9, 28). Others (Gesenius, DeWette) insist that in Moses Elohim does not refer to judges: but this is contrary to the words of Moses. Both in Moses and in the psalm judges are called gods. They thought that the psalmist meant pagan kings, or kings of Israel. But this is arbitrary. Nowhere in scripture were kings called sons of God. The exception applied only to David and Solomon, and only as images of the king Messiah. The Savior says to the enemies: if in your opinion my honor is too high when I call myself God: will it seem to you a high honor if I, in the words of St. scriptures I call you gods, honorable judges! “Your law” is the same as St. scriptures like John 12:34, 15:25. “The Scripture cannot be ruined” - it cannot remain without action: so John 5:18, 7:23; Sir.28:2. In what sense is it said about Christ: His Father is holy? Since the sending of the Son is here spoken of, sanctification refers, without doubt, to the human nature and ministry of the Messiah. To sanctify, according to usage, means to set apart for a special service, such as the ministry of a prophet or a king (Sir.45:4, 49:7; Jer.1:5; Gal.1:15). The Messiah is par excellence the saint of God (Mark 1:24), predestined even before the foundation of the world (1 Peter 1:20). The miracles that took place at the birth of Jesus, the descent of the Holy Spirit at His baptism, served as proof that Jesus was an unprecedented messenger of God. Even if I do this, even if you do not believe in Me, believe in My work, so that you may understand and believe that the Father is in Me and I am in Him. After it has been shown to the Jews that they are frivolously accusing Jesus of blasphemy, the works of Jesus are presented to them - clear signs of His heavenly mission. Although the words of Jesus are full of the same divine power as the words of the Old Testament Scriptures are full: but let the Jews not believe His words about His unity with the Father; at least, we must believe the works that testify to the extraordinary closeness of the Father to the Son (John 4:9–11:20). The words: the Father is in Me and I am in Him, constitute an explanation of the words: “I am one.” Chrysostom: “I am nothing more than the Father (in essence), only I remain the Son and the Father the Father.” Art. 39–42. Out of their hands. The Evangelist does not say how Christ Jesus was saved from the hands of his enemies. But if they were so irritated that they took up stones, then without a special miracle it was hardly possible to get rid of them from their hands. The Savior leaves the Jerusalem Jews to give the worried ones time to come to their senses. He chooses Perean Bethany for his stay, where the Baptist preached (John 1:28). In addition to the fact that the secluded place was convenient for rest and quiet conversations, one glance at the place of John’s sermon revived the Forerunner’s testimony about Jesus in the disciples. The inhabitants of Perea, prepared by the preaching of the Forerunner, could more easily draw closer by faith to the Lord Jesus. And so it was in reality. “Many came to Him and said that John had done no miracle, but everything that John said about Him was true.” This response from sincere hearts, along with the way it places Jesus above John, gave full honor to the latter. For a herald, one honor is possible, and that is that his words about the greatness of the king following him turn out to be completely consistent with reality. The Trans-Jordanians base their confidence in the divine greatness of Jesus both on the testimony of the Forerunner about Jesus and on the miracles of Jesus. And who would not agree that reasoning is the reasoning of a sober mind? h) The Raising of Lazarus, John 11:1–57. Art. 1–3. St. John passes through the space of time in silence from the feast of renewal, from the end of December until the resurrection of Lazarus, which took place two weeks before Easter. The works and instructions of 3 months are described by other evangelists Luke 13–18 ch. Mark 10 ch. Matthew 23:37–39, 19:3–12, 24:26–41. Moreover, here, as in other cases, the evangelists’ narratives agree with each other. According to Luke (Luke 17:11), Jesus “going to Jerusalem, passed between Samaria and Galilee,” otherwise along the southern border of Samaria and so on. the very area that St. pointed out. John, saying that Jesus withdrew to Perea (John 10:40–42). And according to the news of St. Matthew (Matthew 19:1). Jesus then walked along the Jordanian side. – Therefore, Strauss’s malicious antics (Leben Iesu 2, 276) against the agreement of the Gospels are completely in vain. When the Lord was traveling through Perea, in Bethany, which the evangelist, unlike Perea Bethany, calls the village of Mary and Martha, Lazarus lay sick and Lazarus’s sisters sent to say to Jesus: Lord, love him, he hurts. What a short and what a strong request! Here is tender love, which understands that it is enough for the lover to mention that his loved ones need his help. Here is faith, which has no doubt that if the Lord pleases, He will restore health and life even in absentia. Here is humility, which does not point to oneself and one’s spiritual closeness to the Healer, but expects everything only from the Lord. Art. 4–6. This disease does not lead to death, but for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified for its sake. The Lord Jesus saw Lazarus already dead, about which a little is said after that, v. 14. Why does He say that illness does not lead to death? Because in His sight the future is the same as the present; He already sees that the deceased has risen to the glory of the Son of God. Why is it not said directly that Lazarus will die if he did not die? It is not said for the students who might otherwise be embarrassed that the Teacher is in no hurry to help his beloved family; and still slows down his journey, v. 6. It is not said for the sisters of Lazarus, so that, on the one hand, not to burden their hearts with the heavy truth, on the other, to support their faith in the fight against bitter reality. Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus. Love is also visible in the concern for the spiritual state of the sisters. And this family was rare. Even before the death of Lazarus, his sisters received the Lord Jesus in their home with all tender love and each showed love to Him in their own way, one by fussing over food, the other by listening to His instructions, forgetting about the earth. Then Jesus himself showed his love to his loving sisters: he taught the instructions necessary for their souls (Luke 10:38–42). Since Lazarus is mentioned last in the family, and Martha before the others, it must be assumed that Lazarus was the youngest member of a good family, and Martha was older than both Mary and Lazarus. Then stay in his place for two days. Why stay? “In order for Lazarus to die and be buried, so that no one could say that He raised him when he had not yet died, that it was only deep sleep or relaxation or deprivation of senses, but not death. For this reason, it remained for so long that even decay occurred, so that they said: it already stinks.” This is how St. argues. Chrysostom And according to the meaning of the evangelist’s words and the essence of the matter, it would be more correct to think that the Savior was kept in Perea by the works of his calling, which had to be completed, since the end of His ministry was near, while He could resurrect Lazarus equally in a day or a week. The consequence of His two-day stay in Perea, indicated by Chrysostom, appeared on its own, apart from the efforts of the Savior and to the glory of the preacher of truth, who did not need enhanced measures for his glory. Art. 7–10. We are going to Judea, the Lord said to the disciples. Now I am seeking to stone you, the Jew, and are you still going there? the students said. Now in the Greek language it means recent times (Acts 7:52). “Now, before a little time,” says Plato (Timaens). Less than 3 months passed before they wanted to kill Jesus in Jerusalem. After that, going to Jerusalem meant going into obvious danger of life. The disciples loved their Lord and, seeing the danger to His life in Jerusalem, expressed sorrow for Him. According to the state of affairs, the danger for the Teacher was also a danger for the disciples: the enemies of Jesus were not friends for His sincere followers. According to Thomas (v. 16), it is clear that given the bloodthirstiness of the Sanhedrin, the disciples feared for their lives. Christ Jesus says to them: “Are there not twelve hours in the day?... He who walks at night stumbles.” He who walks by day and is not afraid of stumbling, the day shines: thus the Son of man knows the will of the heavenly Father and acts freely in the heavenly radiance. - How can one not do the deeds of the one who sent it in such light? (John 9:4). May the students remain in peace; with Him they are safe. Another thing is those who go to work without being called from above. They wander at night, in the darkness. Jesus' enemies don't know what they are doing. Even if they wanted to, they could neither speed up nor prolong the time of death of the Son of Man. They are pathetic because in the darkness they prepare their own misfortunes. Art. 11–16. When Jesus said that Lazarus was sleeping, it was necessary to wake him up, the disciples thought that he was talking about an ordinary sleep, although the Jews called death sleep (Sir.46:22, 48:14; Jer.51:39; 1 Thess. 4:13; Acts 7:60, 13:36). “If (Lazarus) fell asleep, he will recover,” said the disciples. The Jews said: “the sleep of a sick person is a sign of recovery” (Misnaiot ap. Grotium). Lazarus died, the Savior said directly and added that He rejoices, not having been at his sick bed. Why? Otherwise, love would have forced Him, at the request of his loved ones, to restore health to the sick, and would this be the same as restoring life to the dead? Since Christ Jesus now expressed an urgent desire to go to Bethany, which was in Judea, Thomas, with confidence in the dangers ready for the Lord in Judea, inflamed with love for the Teacher, says to the other disciples: “Let us also go, we will die with Him.” Where there is a teacher, there must be students; He is running into mortal danger and we must not run from it. Peter said exactly the same thing (Luke 22:33). Great feelings! But that's not done yet! Didymus (twin) is the Greek explanation of the name of Thomas, just as Peter is the Greek name of Cephas. Art. 17–19. You will find him for four days already in the tomb. The Savior stayed in place for two days after they told Him about Lazarus’ illness; More than a day had to be spent on the journey from Perea to Bethany. According to the custom of the Jews, the deceased was placed in a sepulcher cave on the very day of his death (Acts 5:6–10); the dead were not left in the house overnight (Maimonid de luctu c. 4). It becomes so clear that on the same day that Jesus was told about the serious illness of Lazarus, his death followed. Bethany from Jerusalem is 15 stadia, otherwise 3½ ver. (Luke 24:50; Acts 1:12). At such a short distance, many of the Jerusalemites came to Bethany to the sisters of Lazarus to console them in their sorrow. “Many of the Jews came”: the evangelist, as is already known, gives the name of the Jews to the leaders of the Jews. So, if the leaders came: this means that the house of Lazarus was respected. Among the Jews, relatives and acquaintances of the deceased remained for seven days to console relatives who were grieving the separation from the deceased (Maimon. de luctu c. 13. § 2). Art. 20–32. When Martha heard that Jesus was coming, you shredded him: but Mary sat at home. Those mourning for the dead usually sat on the ground, covered with ashes (Job.2:8; Ezek.8:14; 2 Sam.12:16; Neh.1:4). In this position was Mary, immersed in her sorrow. Martha, probably out of domestic concerns (Luke 10:38), left the house and on the street heard that Jesus was coming. Without telling her sister about the rumor, she hurried to meet the distinguished visitor. Lord, if I had been here, my brother would not have died. But even now we know that if you ask for anything from God, God will give it to you, so Martha said to Jesus. Despite all her grief over the loss of her brother, Martha still talks about her brother’s fate and the power of Jesus. She "was not expecting to resurrect him, but rather that he would not be rejected by God," Zigaben says. True, the sad reality forces Martha to limit the meaning of His words to the presence of the Savior: this illness is not leading to death. But Martha’s words do not exclude the thought of her hope for the resurrection of her brother, and the subsequent words of the Savior (v. 23) are such that they strengthen her weak faith in the resurrection of her brother. “Jesus said to her: Your brother will rise again.” Martha said to him: We know that he will rise again at the resurrection on the last day. The Savior knows Martha’s desire, sees her weak faith: but in order to strengthen this faith, he speaks vaguely. Will rise again can mean either he will rise now, as Martha wishes, or he will rise at the general resurrection of the dead. Struck by deep sorrow, Martha accepts the Savior’s promise in the latter sense and says: yes, I believe that he will rise at the general resurrection, but is this enough for me now? Jesus said to her: I am the resurrection and the life: believe in Me, even if you die, you will live. And everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die. – The Savior does not condemn either the joys or sorrows of human life, but only wants to see them holy. He sees Martha's grief and shares it. But he wants this grief not to suppress the best hopes of the soul. Martha thought that eternal fate would come by itself, regardless of Christ, the Savior of the world. The Lord also corrects this erroneous thought of hers: He points her to the only source of consolation, both temporary and eternal, to faith in Him. With faith in Him, Martha’s dear dead will rise and all the dead will live for a blessed eternity, since He is life for the living and resurrection for the dead (John 4:13–14). The verb to him: Yes, Lord, I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, who is coming into the world. She believes that Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah and expects the best from the Messiah - expects, although she does not understand how, when and in what the life-giving power of Jesus will be revealed. - And this reksha, go and invite your sister Mary, this reksha: the teacher came to eat and invites you. “Expecting good from the words of the Lord, he runs to his sister” (Zigaben), informs her secretly about the arrival of the Teacher, secretly, so as not to arouse alarm in others. The teacher calls you, says: this means that “instead of a command, she accepted His very presence” (Kirill), or, more likely, the Lord directly ordered her to notify her crying sister. – Mary hurried to meet Jesus, who was then still at the meeting place with Martha. Those in the house thought that Mary was going to cry at the tomb, as it still happens in the east (Rosenmuller Alterth. V, 258) and they followed her. “When Mary saw Jesus,” she “fell at His feet and said: Lord! If You had been here, my brother would not have died.” In deep grief, concentrated in herself, Maria repeated her sister’s memorized words and could say nothing more. During her grief, the sister was able to reason; Maria, all feeling, could only cry. Art. 33–38. Jesus, seeing her weeping and those who came with her weeping, rebuked the spirit and became indignant himself. Ενεβριμησατο τω πνευματι και εταραξεν εαυτόν; ενεβριμ, or was indignant or grieved. Assuming the first meaning, they thought that Jesus was dissatisfied either with the unbelief of the Jews (Theodore Mops., Leontius), or with the confusion of his soul (Chrysostom, Apollinaris, Ephimius). But this is not justified by the connection of speech. Ancient translations (Coptic and Arabic): “he was saddened in his soul and was indignant.” Clothed with human nature with all its properties, with the exception of sin, Jesus, seeing Mary crying and others crying, was grieved in spirit and indignant: such is His love for poor humanity! Asking: “Where did they put it?” and after hearing the answer: “Lord! come and see,” Jesus “cryed,” both out of love for the dead man and out of thought about the sin that had caused so much trouble to people. The tears of Jesus alone were understood correctly; and unbelief understood them in its own way, as a sign of powerlessness. If, they thought, He did not heal the sick man He loved, it is strange how He could heal the blind? “Because of the death of Lazarus, they slander that miracle as if it did not happen” (Chrysostom), “Jesus again grieved and came to the tomb.” – A look at the disbelief, a look at the increased crying as one approaches the coffin causes grief again. “Why does the evangelist carefully and more than once notice that He wept? So that you know that He was truly clothed with our nature” (Chrysostom). “Again he forbids the senses, so that we may learn that He was a man, without change, like us” (Origen). 39–45. Verbs Jesus: Take the stone. The dead man’s sister Martha said to him: Lord, it already stinks, for it is four-day old. The Jews built coffins outside the settlement, in mountain rocks, which are abundant in Palestine; a cave was carved into the rock, sometimes very spacious; a dead man was laid here; The entrance to the cave was closed with a stone. So there was a stone at the opening of the cave where Lazarus lay. “Why didn’t He resurrect while the stone was still on the tomb? Whoever could move a dead body with his voice could, of course, move a stone with the same voice... Why didn’t he do it? In order to make them themselves witnesses of the miracle, so that they would not say the same thing that they said about the blind man: it is he; this is not him. Their very hands and their very coming to the tomb testified that it was he” (Chrysostom). Martha, when thinking about the four-day-old dead man, is primarily worried that the bad smell will offend the feelings of her beloved teacher; she forgets about His power; forgets that she promised to believe in Jesus Christ in everything. Human faith is not so strong! The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. “Jesus said to her, “Didn’t I tell you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?” The evangelist did not convey such words of the Savior to Martha, but the thought now announced is contained in the words conveyed, v. 25, 26. Jesus meekly reproaches Martha for her lack of faith and shows how much faith means. Faith brings about the revelation of the deity, the manifestation of power, goodness, and boundless wisdom (Rom. 4:20; Luke 9: 4, 3; Exod. 16: 7). “Open your mouth and I will fill it” (Ps. 80:11). Jesus lifted up his eyes to the mountain and said: Father, I give you praise, because you heard me.... I said, that they may have faith, because you sent me. The thought that the humble Jesus was the Son of God, the omnipotent, was heavy for Jewish pride. But it became easier for her when Jesus, when performing a miracle, turned to the heavenly Father and recognized his dependence on Him. So now He appears in the form of a heavenly messenger, turns to the Father and thanks for hearing His desire. The dead have not yet risen: but Jesus, making himself seen as omniscient, speaks of Lazarus as having already risen. - And this river cried with a great voice: Lazarus, come out. “He called with a loud voice,” and not with a dull voice, as the pagan spellcasters called the dead (Is. 29:4, 8:19). This voice is “a command worthy of God, royal” (Cyril Alek.). From the dead, his arms and legs must be covered, and his face must be covered. Jesus says to them: let him go and let him go. The Jews wrapped the dead body in white linen, and tied a special scarf around the head; the linen and scarf were wrapped with still wide ribbons (κεριαις). Svida: “κερια is a kind of belt that clasps clothes.” Since it is not known whether the Jews had their legs and arms wrapped around them separately, like the Egyptian mummies, in which each arm and each leg were wrapped up separately, then one cannot be sure that there was no miracle (as, on the contrary, Vasily V., Theodoret think) in the free procession of the bound Lazarus. The words of the evangelist: “and the deceased came out, wrapped in burial shrouds on his hands and feet,” as if they were making it clear that it was just as uncomfortable for a bound person to walk as for a dead person - Lazarus appeared in the sight of everyone alive and healthy, walking freely, as it was before his illness. – According to Epiphanius, he was 33 years old when he rose from the dead and lived for the same number of years. For many of the Jews came to Mary, and having seen what Jesus had done, they believed in Him. Even the sad people who came from Jerusalem, who were so reluctant to trust Jesus, when they saw the work of God’s power accomplished over Lazarus, recognized Jesus as the Messiah. – A contemporary member of the Academy, Renan, writes: “It was necessary to form a scientific commission of physiologists, physicists, chemists, and people experienced in historical criticism” to convince that Lazarus really died and then rose again. - But if the fourth day has already passed since Lazarus died, if he “already stinks”: pray tell, Mr. Academician, why is a scientific commission of physiologists, physicists, chemists, and especially people experienced in historical criticism needed? The whole settlement of Bethany saw, and dozens of Jerusalem friends of the house of Lazarus saw, that Lazarus had died; with Martha and Mary, crowds of friends went to the burial cave more than once a day and briefly learned by smell that Lazarus stinks. And that no lethargic sleep, no stupor of life is accompanied by decomposition of the body, this is also known, without a commission of scientists. - Let Mr. Academician rest in peace, the Pharisees and scribes would have found out about the death of Lazarus, if it had happened; after all, they were not at all for the resurrection of Lazarus, but against it: but the entire Sanhedrin could not finally deny that Lazarus had indeed been raised from the dead. All the people who had gathered for Easter made a solemn welcome to Jesus in Jerusalem, among other things, for the miracle over Lazarus (John 12:12). Art. 46–50. A wonderful scene opened in the Sanhedrin when those in Bethany reported everything that had happened to Lazarus. The full complement of venerable members assembled. Just as some of them previously assured themselves and others that Jesus was not the messenger of God, now they confess: this man does many signs. They confess that despite all their efforts to humiliate Jesus among the people, the people show more and more respect for Jesus, accepting Him as the expected Messiah. It would seem, what is there to worry about? The members of the Sanhedrin themselves are waiting for the Messiah. Therefore, they should rejoice that the one expected for centuries has appeared. But the majority of the Sanhedrists did not need the Messiah of the prophets, not like Christ Jesus, who preached about self-denial, turned their hearts not to earth, but to heaven, and exposed the vices of the leaders of the people. “If we leave Him,” they say, “the Romans will come and take possession of both our place and our people.” Low hypocrites assimilate their own unclean thoughts and desires to Jesus: they say that Jesus wants to be an earthly king and his followers are ready to rebel against Roman power. “That’s why we got what we expected.” The Romans, 30 years later, took and destroyed the city, and scattered the people all over the world, precisely because, having slandered and put to death heavenly innocence, they rebelled against Roman power. One of them is Caiaphas, the bishop of that year, who said: you know nothing, nor think, as we have not, so that only one person will die, and not the whole language will perish. The bishop of that year means that Caiaphas was the leader that year; so in Art. 51. But this does not exclude the idea that he was a bishop before that. Caiaphas ruled throughout the proconsulship of Pilate, and after Pilate’s removal he was deposed by proconsul Vitellius (Winer Real Wort. 2 Aufl. 1, 759). You don’t know anything, you don’t understand anything, you people are ignorant! The words are harsh, expressing the anxiety of the soul. Who disturbed Caiaphas? Since there was now a full meeting of the Sanhedrin, then, of course, there were such members as: Nicodemus (John 3:2, 7:50, 9:16), Joseph of Arimathea and others like that. – The resurrection of Lazarus increased their respect for Jesus in such members (v. 45), and they did not fail to say a few words for Jesus in the Sanhedrin. It was these words that infuriated Caiaphas. In a movement of anger, he pronounced the sentence that Jesus must die, so that otherwise the whole people would not perish. Art. 51–52. This is not what he said about himself: but the bishop from that year prophesied that Jesus wanted to die for the people, the evangelist notes. – Caiaphas speaks according to his evil policy, not realizing the high truth he is uttering. As a bishop, he was the body through which the will of God was proclaimed to people. “Grace took advantage only of his lips, but did not touch the unclean heart” (Chrysostom). - The Providence of God, caring about the fate of the world, mocked human politics by forcing the deceased high priesthood, against the will and consciousness of its bearer, to talk about a true reconciling sacrifice for the world. Pilate, against his will and consciousness, proclaimed the royal title of Christ Jesus; Caiaphas - about the title of high priest. Art. 53–54. “From that day on, they decided to kill him. Therefore, Jesus no longer walked openly”... “And before, says Euthymius, they were looking to kill Him, but now the council approved the decision.” The fact that the Sanhedrin decided to kill Jesus could have been told to the disciples of Jesus by members of the Sanhedrin Nicodemus and Joseph. As a result, Jesus withdrew into the Judean desert, to the city of Ephraim. “Ephraea, a significant town, was located in the north 8 miles from Jerusalem,” (Onomastiron of Eusebius); it was south of Bethel (Flavius ​​de bello 4.9.4), which was 12 miles from Jerusalem (Eusebius). So Christ did not leave Judea even now (Wiesaler chronol. Synople d. Evangelien. s. 318. 310 Hamb. 1843). He only withdrew from the malice of the Sanhedrists and by his example teaches not to expose life to danger unnecessarily; He was now preparing in solitude for the great feat of the cross, which was soon to come. Desert, near mountains. Ephraim, the same wild desert in which Jesus Christ fasted for 40 days after baptism. Art. 55–57. “The Passover was approaching, and many from the whole country came before the Passover to be cleansed.” The original does not say: they came from the whole country, but “from the country” – απο τ. χωρας: but from the meaning it is clear that this means Jews in general who did not live in Jerusalem itself, or Jews throughout the country. Before the Easter holiday they came to Jerusalem to be cleansed with various rites and sacrifices (Targum Ion. ad Num 9, 10); they appeared earlier or later before the holiday, depending on what purification rituals needed to be performed. Another reason that encouraged people to come to Jerusalem a week or more before Easter was that various preparations had to be made on the spot for the celebration of the holiday itself (Talmud tract. Schekalim). So now, before Easter, many people gathered in Jerusalem. The latest miracles drew everyone's attention to Christ Jesus. But in former times Jesus used to teach the people in the outer court of the church. Here and now they were waiting for him. Meanwhile, in Jerusalem they learned the order of the Sanhedrin: “If anyone knows where he will be, he would announce it in order to take him.” – This raised the rumors about Jesus even more. They asked one another in the church courtyard: Τι δοκει υμιν, οτι ου μη ελθη εις τ. εορτην? Others understand these words as follows: what do you think about the fact that he does not come to the holiday? This explanation is justified by its fidelity to the words of the original. Not omitted here without meaning: οτι; Sosl. the aorist is easier to take for the present tense than for the future; ου μη means strengthened negation. But even if, given the impatient anticipation of the people excited by the resurrection of Lazarus, the early surprise about Jesus Christ not appearing a week before Easter was appropriate. The more important objection to such an interpretation is that the words τι δοκει σοι, in their ordinary use, suggest another question, and do not call for a positive thought. That’s why they prefer this explanation: what do you think? won't he come to the holiday? Moreover, since behind the double negation ου μη in the question, by use, an affirmative answer is expected (John 18:11; Rev. 15:4), then here too those asking express their confidence that it will come. Finishing our consideration of John's narrative about the resurrection of Lazarus and the consequences of the miracle and not finding a word about this great event in the other evangelists, we dwell on the question: why do the other evangelists not talk about the resurrection of Lazarus? Some (Olsgausen and others) thought that the other evangelists kept silent about this event for fear of arousing the hatred of the Sanhedrin against Lazarus and his sisters. But after the resurrection of Christ Jesus, all his disciples, including Lazarus, were no longer afraid to openly testify to the deeds of Christ Jesus, and the Sanhedrin, with many witnesses to the Bethany miracle who were included in the number of Jesus’ disciples, of course, was convinced that its previous decision about Lazarus was very inconvenient to carry out. Others (Kinel) say that the three evangelists considered the story of the resurrection of Lazarus unnecessary after they told about the resurrection of the daughter of Jairus (Matthew 9:18; Mark 5:22; Luke 8:41) and the youth of Nain (Luke 7:11). – True, it is unwise to insist that when choosing incidents for their history, the evangelists were not careful, they were not careful about excess. But since they also talk about many cases of healing the sick, it is clear that in addition to the fear of excesses, they also had a special thought in mind that guided their narrative. What was that thought? The three evangelists, as can be seen from the content of the gospels, dealt with events that took place outside of Judea, and only from the story of the Savior’s suffering do they move to Judea, telling as an introduction to the story of suffering the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem. That's why they don't have the story of Lazarev's resurrection! e) Supper at Simon's house and entry into Jerusalem, John 12:1–50 Art. 1–3. Jesus, before the six days of Passover, came to Bethany... From the solitude of Ephraim (John 11:54) the Savior walked to Jerusalem through Jericho. Here he visited Zacchaeus and, upon leaving Jericho, he healed two blind men (Luke 19:1–28). Then He came to Bethany, before the six days of Passover, six days before Passover. Passover was to begin on Friday evening (John 18:28). The day six days before Easter was Saturday. I made him that supper, the Sabbath supper. Evangelists Matthew (Matthew 26:6) and Mark 14:3–5 describe this supper after describing the Savior’s entry into Jerusalem; and at St. John appears before the entrance. But those evangelists in other cases do not strictly follow the order of time, while St. John is precise in his observation of time. According to the news of St. Matthew (Matthew 26:6) and Mark (Mark 14:3), the supper was prepared in the house of Simon the leper. And according to the news of St. John, Lazarus was one of those reclining, one of the guests, and therefore, was not the host who entertained. Simon, who received the heavenly Guest, is called a leper. This suggests that he was one of those healed by Jesus from that terrible disease that removed the patient from communication with people. Full of gratitude to the heavenly Healer, Simon prepared a supper of love for him and invited the resurrected Lazarus to the same supper, as having been awarded the special mercy of the wonderful Jesus Christ. Martha is an employee. She appeared like this before (Luke 10:40): in this way, and not otherwise, she could express her grateful love for the Resurrected Brother. Lazarus was alone from those around him. This also showed that the former dead man was now quite healthy. Mary, having received a liter of myrrh, spikenard, pistica, is of great value, anointed with the nose of Jesus... The evangelists Matthew and Mark talk about the same thing. But St. speaks of another wife. Luke (Luke 7:37–50). Incident of St. Luke was in the mountains. Naina (Luke 7:11-37), and not in Bethany. This was in the house of Simon the Pharisee, and this is in the house of Simon the leper. There a sinful wife anointed her feet; Here is Mary, the pious sister of Lazarus. There the action is accepted by the Savior as an expression of repentant love (Luke 7:41–50); in the action of Mary the Savior shows the preparation for His burial. The Nain incident took place after the second Easter, and the Bethany incident took place just before the Savior’s suffering on the cross. Therefore, Academician Renan was frivolous if he himself accepted the wife mentioned by St. Luke for Mary's sister Lazareva, and completely shamelessly slandered St. Luke, when he wrote about him: “Mary from Bethany is accepted by him as a converted sinner.” Having taken a liter of the world backgammon, pistika is of great value. Nard is an aromatic plant (Song 1:11, 12, 13, 5:1, 13) grown in southern India. Oil was squeezed out of its roots, the most excellent of aromatic liquids and a luxury item. This aromatic liquid was best prepared in the Asia Minor city of Tarsus. Nard πιςικος, from πιςις, - true, genuine nard, according to the Arabic translation, “pure nard”; according to Pliny, nard was nardus sincera and pseudonardus, pure nard and false, or counterfeit. “Pure spikenard, according to Pliny, is recognized by its lightness, its red color, its pleasant smell, its astringent and pleasant taste.” In the fake, oily extracts of other aromatic plants were mixed with Indian spikenard, most often Cretan or Syrian spikenard, which is inferior in quality in comparison with Indian spikenard. Whole, pure, backgammon was valuable and was valued very dearly. According to Judas’ estimate (v. 5), for Mary’s vessel of spikenard one could get 300 denarii, according to our account, up to 60 rubles. The ancients washed their feet before supper and sometimes anointed them with oil (Talmud tract. Menachot. 85); Children were especially obliged to provide this service to their parents; Aristophanes reads: “the daughter was the first to wash me and anoint my feet” (Vesperae v, 605). - That’s what the blessed one did. Mary, according to St. John. At St. Matthew and Mark mention the anointing of the chapter. Among the Jews, this anointing served as a sign of respect shown to the teacher (Lichtfoot ad Math 26, 7). The same thing happened with the Greeks (Athenaeus). So, Mary first poured precious ointment on the head of the Lord; then she anointed their feet. The ritual expressed Mary's daughterly love for the heavenly Teacher. But only the rich could use a whole pound of fragrant nard for such a ceremony. How rich Mary was in love, without being rich in money! It was not enough for her that expensive oil was used: she wiped her oiled feet not with a towel, but with the hair of her head. What reverent love! Art. 4–6. Why is this ointment not sold quickly and given to the poor? Thus spoke, according to John, Judas Iscariot, the future traitor. According to St. Matthew, an indignant disciple, according to Mark, is not a disciple. And at St. John the Savior says in response to Mary’s reproach: “leave her” - Mary. Next, and St. John made it clear that the reproach did not come from Judas alone. If St. John exposes Judas as grumbling, without directly speaking about others, this means that Judas alone had an evil disposition of soul, and he was the main actor; he secretly confused others too. Some of the disciples expressed displeasure at spending nard out of good-natured, if misplaced, concern for the poor. Although Judas also spoke about the poor, in reality he was concerned about his own self-interest. He was entrusted with a box for accepting alms needed for general expenses, but each time he stole so much from the alms just to avoid being noticed for theft. Εβαςαζε - secretly took: this is the meaning of the word Βαςαζειν (Flavius ​​ancient 1, 8. chapter 2); Yes, otherwise it would be an identity. This is how Origen, Chrysostom, the Ethiopian translator, and Augustine understood it. The latter says: “The Lord Himself had boxes in which offerings and money were placed for the use of those who were with Him (In Ps. 103). Why did the one whom the angels serve have boxes, if not because His church should also have them? (In Iohan. tract. 50). Art. 7–8. The words of the Savior about the case of Mary are more fully conveyed by St. Mark (Mark 14:6–9). Leave her, says the Savior; τι κοπους παρεχετε αυτη ? Why are you making trouble for her? First of all, trouble and insult were inflicted on the Savior, because they placed Him lower than the poor. “But heavenly love forgets itself and cares for good Mary. “She did a good deed for Me.” A good deed is a deed of love for the Lord. Is the Lord not worthy of honor? No, we must love the Lord most of all; then your neighbors should be taken into account. A sacrifice to the glory of God, a sacrifice to the church of God, sacrifices to the servants of God - high sacrifices. People judge actions by the noise they make on society. But the Lord looks at the heart, at its dispositions. And an invisible act, when it is the pure fruit of pure love for God, like Mary’s act, has a high meaning. “You always have the poor with you and whenever you want, you can do them good.” The Savior, saying this, means the words of the law of God. The Lord said in the law: “Because the poor will always be in the midst of your land, I command you, open your hand to your brother, to your needy and to your needy in your land” (Deut. 15:11). Repeating the words of the law, the Savior approves of the care of the good disciples for the poor. At the same time, He draws their attention especially to the words of the law: “You always have the poor with you.” This is a lesson for all visionary philanthropists, for all Saint-Simonists and communists and, in particular, for those of them who mercilessly condemn donations to churches. They are all told: always have a beggar with you. Let them not dream of the greatness of their philanthropy: poverty, illness, and troubles will always remain among people. From what? Because people cannot turn the cursed land into a Garden of Eden. Let them do whatever they can to alleviate the sorrows of earthly life. But at the same time, first of all, let them humble their self-interest, which so often, like Judas, worries about the poor only for its own pocket or for vain fame; let him not increase the misfortune of others with dreams that are pleasing to the passions, and harmful both for them and for entire societies. We must never forget that just as God is above all, so first of all, deeds are needed to glorify His name. The evil deed speaks from the heart of Judas: Why should this destruction come to pass? “You don’t always have me.” Does this apply only to the disciples of Christ - Jesus, who lived with Him on earth? No, such a limitation on the meaning of words is not visible in the words of Jesus. So the best souls cannot say about themselves that Christ is always with them. From what? And the righteous man falls seven times a day. Therefore, the best souls vividly feel the need to thank the Lord when He visits them. “She did what she could; she prepared to anoint my body for burial,” or, as John reads, “she saved it for the day of my burial.” Guided by the hand of the Almighty, Mary was not supposed to sell, but to save the expensive spikenard for funeral honors for the Savior of the world. Are sincere disciples of Jesus Christ able to blame Mary if they see the body of their Teacher in the tomb and Mary paying funeral honors to Him? No, this would be an insult to Providence, which invisibly controls the actions of people, and an insult to the respected Teacher. “Truly I tell you, wherever this gospel is preached, it will be told throughout the whole world, in memory of her, what she has done.” The act of Mary, who loved the Lord, is a monument to her that will stand for centuries in the minds of all who hear the gospel. The price for a person’s actions is not from the arbitrariness of people: it is assigned by God, who speaks in the conscience of people and in revelation. Art. 9–11. Of the people who had gathered in thousands in Jerusalem for Easter, many came to Bethany to see the former dead Lazarus, and many believed in the Lord Jesus. Thus, the holiday of Easter for the people, according to the judgment of the Pharisees, “cursed, not knowing the law” (John 7:49), became a true holiday of liberation from the darkness of the Pharisees and transition into the light of knowledge of the ways of God. What was he like for the members of the Sanhedrin? Their anger grew and assumed monstrous proportions. They wanted to kill Lazarus too. “Let you want to kill Christ because He violated the Sabbath, because He created Himself equal to God, because of the Romans, as you say. – But what can you accuse Lazar of? Is it really his fault that he received a benefit? See how bloodthirsty their desires are! Christ performed many miracles, but not one aroused such rage in them, neither a miracle over the paralytic, nor a miracle over the blind. - This is because the miracle over Lazarus was more amazing than others and happened after those. It was absolutely incredible to see that a four-day-old dead man was walking and talking. And it was a wonderful thing for a holiday to add murder to the (religious) celebration. - At the same time, in those cases they thought to accuse Christ of violating the Sabbath and thereby turn the people away from Him, but here they could not accuse Him of anything and therefore they are plotting against the One whom He raised. “Here they could not even say that he was opposing the Father, because His prayer blocked their lips” (Chrysostom). Art. 12–13. On the morning of the day - priyasha vai from dates. The entry of the Savior into Jerusalem is described by all four evangelists, but its particular circumstances are arranged differently, to the point that something else, not related to the solemn day, may seem to belong to it, as was assumed (see review of the four gospels, St. Petersburg, 1859). At St. Matthew does not determine when Jesus expelled the merchants from the church, but St. Mark clearly shows that this exile took place on the day after His entry into Jerusalem (Mark 11:11–12, 19–20). Exactly the same with St. Matthew connects the curse of the fig tree with an explanation of the event on one day (Matthew 21:19–20), while according to Mark, the explanation of the event is given on the next day after the curse (Mark 11:20). Thus, the particular circumstances of the entry described by the evangelists followed in this order: 1. On Sunday morning, Jesus, on the road to Jerusalem, orders a donkey and a colt to be brought, and when the order was fulfilled, he sits on the colt and rides into the city (John 12:14–16; Matt. 21:1–7; Mark 11:1–7; Luke 19:29–35); the people greet Him solemnly (John 12:12–13, 17–19; Matthew 21:8–11; Mark 11:8–11; Luke 19:36–40) and the Greeks desire to see Him (John 12:12–50). 2. On Monday, on the road to Jerusalem, he curses the fig tree and cries about the fate of Jerusalem (Mark 11:11–14; Luke 19:41–44); drives out merchants from the church, heals the sick and responds to the cries of children (Mark 11:15–20; Matthew 21:12–16; Luke 19:45–46). 3. On Tuesday, an explanation of the event with the fig tree, etc. On the morning of the day, many people took the vaia from the dates and went out to the meeting. – The people gathered for Easter were eagerly awaiting Jesus in Jerusalem (John 11:56). – On Sunday morning we heard that Jesus was going from Bethany to Jerusalem. Pure and impure hopes stirred in the hearts. The people, recognizing Jesus as the Messiah, thought to see in Him not so much an enlightener of people, but a king who would restore political independence to the people. The most chosen disciples of Jesus were not free from such a misconception about the Messiah Jesus: and two of them asked to be given the highest places in the earthly kingdom of the Messiah. The people now decided to meet Jesus with honors worthy of the Messiah. The crowds moved out of the city, towards the Mount of Olives, with palm branches in their hands. “As He rode, many spread out their clothes, and others cut off branches of trees and threw them on the road” (Luke 19:36; Matt. 11:8). This is how kings and victors were greeted in the east. Simon, the leader of the Jews, “went down to Jerusalem with praise and frolics” (1 Macc. 13:51). When Xerxes crossed into Europe, the road was covered with myrtle trees (Herodotus 7, 54). And I called saying: Hosanna, blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, the king of Israel. Shouts were heard in front and behind Jesus (Mark 11:9). Exclamations: “Hosanna” - save now! “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, the king of Israel,” expressed solemn joy that the Messiah, king of Israel, is coming. Others expressed the same thing in other words: “Blessed is the kingdom of our father David that comes in the name of the Lord” (Mark 11:10). Others said: “peace in heaven and glory in the highest” (Luke 19:38). - The people of Jerusalem, especially the leaders, began to move and asked: “Who is this coming?” To this they were answered by the people: “This is Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth of Galilee” (Matthew 21:10–11). – The last answer, like the exclamation: “peace in heaven,” expressed thoughts about the Messiah worthy of the Messiah. Art. 14–16. The entry of Christ Jesus into the city took place not on a proud horse, fit for the noise of war (Prov. 21:31; Hos. 14:4), but on a donkey, fit for the prince of peace, and on a young donkey, on which no one had ridden until that time (Mark 11:2; Luke 19:30) and which still walks with a donkey (Matt. 21:2, 5), since Clean, undefiled animals are designated for sacred use (Deut. 21:3; 1 Sam. 6:7). All this happened in fulfillment of prophecy. Zechariah said: “Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion, rejoice, daughter of Jerusalem: behold, your king comes to you, just and protected by God, meek and sitting on a donkey and on the foal of a donkey” (Zechariah 9:9). The daughter of Zion, the daughter of Jerusalem is the same as the inhabitants of Jerusalem (Is. 1:8, 16:1, 37:22) or the church of Jerusalem. It was the custom of the Jews to call cities and their population daughters or virgins (Am.5:2; Jer.46:24; Ps.44:13, 136:8). Jerusalem with its population was called the daughter of Zion because under David and Solomon it was located on the hill of Zion, the highest between the neighboring hills. The just king, under the special protection of God, and at the same time meek, should have been greeted with triumph by the people of Jerusalem. What kind of King is this? The combination of the barely connected properties of justice and meekness shows an unprecedented king. Righteousness and righteous judgments were pointed out by the prophets in the Messiah as His distinctions (Jer. 33:15–16). An indivisible feature of the king is the ceremonial entrance into the capital on a donkey. Jerusalem must keep a watchful eye on this characteristic of its king. Jewish tradition recognized this prophecy as a prophecy about the Messiah (R. Eheser c. 32. R. Saadius Gaon ad Dan 7, 13 Talmud in tract. Sanhedrir. c. 11). The Evangelist notes: “His disciples did not understand this at first, but when Jesus became glorified, then they remembered that this was what was written about Him, and they did this to Him.” - This remark is a monument to the truthfulness of the priest. a narrator who expresses the truth, even if it is not flattering for the disciples of Jesus, including himself. How could one not remember the prophecy of Zechariah, when the Lord carefully gave instructions to take a donkey and a colt from a famous owner and when the people solemnly greeted Jesus, especially since the meaning of the prophecy was preserved by tradition? But the apostles, without higher enlightenment, did not understand much in the words and actions of Jesus, and only after His resurrection the Lord gave them the ability to understand the prophecies (Luke 24:27, 45; Acts 1:3). Art. 17–18. “The people who were with Him before,” those who had been in Bethany on the previous day and received by questioning information about the circumstances of the death and resurrection of Lazarus, “testified that He called Lazarus from the grave and raised him from the dead.” “Summoned from the grave” - what an accurate depiction of the greatness of the miracle and the ease with which the miracle was performed! The miracle over Lazarus was just as much an undoubted event, against the reality of which nothing could be said in good conscience, as it was a greatest miracle. “That is why the people met Him; for I heard that He performed this miracle.” This means that the meeting with Jesus in Jerusalem is a testimony of hundreds of thousands about the reality of the resurrection of Lazarus, while at the same time it was a statement of the people that Jesus is the Messiah expected for centuries. Art. 19. “The Pharisees said to each other: Do you see that you do not have time to do anything? All the people follow Him." This circumstance was preceded by the case of the Pharisees, mentioned by St. Luka. “Some Pharisees from among the people said to Him: Teacher! forbid your disciples to sing praises: peace in heaven and glory in the highest!” But He answered: “I tell you that if they remain silent, the stones will cry out” (Luke 19:39-40). The Pharisees, those who in the Sanhedrin approved the decision to kill Jesus, are now afraid to allow themselves any violence against Jesus. They pretend before Jesus to fear for civil peace during the ongoing movement of the people. But who did not see that the movement of the people was peaceful, calm, religious, and not civil, and the animation of the people was strengthened by the last miracle? (Matthew 25:16; Luke 19:40). That is why the Savior said: “if they remain silent, the stones will cry out” about the great deeds of God. After what the words of the Pharisees mean: “Do you see that you do not have time to do anything? all the people follow Him.” Chrysostom says: “It seems to me that these words belonged to those who reasoned sensibly, but did not dare to speak openly and therefore, by pointing to events, wanted to keep others from their undertaking as useless.” – But those who speak the words shown are called Pharisees, and by this name the evangelist knows the stubborn enemies of Jesus (John 12:42). Zigaben’s remark is more correct: “They are indignant at themselves because, due to inactivity, they do little.” When they saw that the command to detain Jesus (John 11:57) was not being carried out, on the contrary, the enthusiasm of the people was growing, then their anger was indignant even at themselves and called for the most decisive measures against Jesus. They openly approve of the vote cast by Caiaphas. It was time, they said, to act differently. Art. 20–22. John makes it a special phenomenon that the Greeks wanted to see Jesus. Who were these Hellenes? Not Hellenists, or Jews living among the pagans: such, of course, would freely approach Jesus along with the Palestinian Jews. At St. John “in Hellenic” means “in Greek” (John 19:20). So, these Hellenes were Greeks, but who, as St. says. John, “they came to worship on the feast day” (v. 20). These were the so-called σεβομενοι ελληνες, God-honoring Greeks (Acts 17:4), σεβομενοι προσηλιται, God-honoring zealots (Acts 13:43). These were those pagan Greeks who, realizing the emptiness and lies of idolatry, accepted the Jewish belief in the one true God and came to worship him in the Temple of Jerusalem, but did not accept either circumcision or other Jewish rites. – Is it because they turned to Philip to express their desires because, living on the border with Galilee, they were familiar with Philip, as indicated by the respectful address to Philip: “Master”! or because they noticed in him knowledge of the Greek language, it is not known and it does not matter. What matters is that they want to see Jesus! A wonderful phenomenon! It does not say: they want to know who Jesus is? It would seem like idle curiosity. They want to “see Jesus.” They had already heard a lot about Him while in Jerusalem: the glory of His deeds, the raising of Lazarus, the entry into Jerusalem, as royal as it was humble, His teaching, which delighted many, aroused in their hearts a desire to enter into communication with Jesus, to listen to His teaching, to see His deeds. This is the same phenomenon as the journey of the Eastern Magi, who came to worship the baby King. There are the pagans of the East, filled with higher thoughts about the path of salvation; here are the pagans of the west, with the same dispositions of heart. Philip, out of humility, did not take it upon himself to report to the Lord about the wonderful disciples; he told Andrew about them, as he had been called before him by Jesus, and both told the Lord about them. Art. 23. Jesus answered them. To whom? The Evangelist John is so precise in his description of events that if the Savior, having received the pagans and said a few words to them, sent them away and then spoke with some disciples, He would not have failed to notice what words were spoken to the pagans. But he does not say that the pagans were released. Therefore, it remains to be accepted that the instruction that Jesus spoke after the news of the pagans wanting to see and listen to Him was offered in the ears of both the disciples and the pagans. The hour has come, that the Son of man may be glorified. Just as in a conversation with a Samaritan woman He revealed that the time is near when a new service to God will appear, not limited by place, not burdened by many rituals (John 4:21-24), so in the ear of the firstfruits of converted paganism He says that the time has come for the Son of Man to be glorified, the time has come when the teaching of the Son of Man will become the subject of study not in Palestine alone, but in the whole universe. Art. 24–26. Even if a grain of wheat falls on the ground and does not die, then one remains... He who loves his soul will destroy it. Here is an abbreviation of the teaching needed for the Gentiles! The death of Jesus on the cross and the self-denial of man are the ways of salvation for the pagan world. What a wonderful philosophy this is! No philosopher has yet proposed it. And yet it is not as far from human understanding as it seems at first glance. Look how the heavenly Teacher brings his philosophy closer to the common understanding! He does not now point to the testimony of the prophets. He points to the book of nature, open to everyone. New confirmation that it is not only Jews who listen to Him, but also pagans. He allows us to see the secret of His saving death in the fate of a grain of wheat. A grain of wheat thrown into the ground, having put out a root, all decays, but 100 and 300 grains appear instead of one. The greatness of the self-sacrifice performed by the Son of God is beyond comprehension. – It is not surprising if the thought of His death on the cross seems so strange to a pagan (1 Cor. 1:23). But the history of Christianity shows how fruitful this death is. “Let them not be embarrassed if he dies: then the preaching will especially increase and the pagans will believe” (Ammonius). Through the experience of life they learn that the death on the cross of the Son of God is the only reconciliation of guilty humanity with the truth of God. And that is why pagan peoples accept the teaching of the cross with such thirst. The thought of the self-sacrifice of the Son of God is a fruitful seed not only in relation to the increasing number of confessors of Christ’s name, but it is the same seed in relation to the process of spiritual life in every person. So, here is an abbreviated dogma for a pagan - the doctrine of the death of the Son of God! What is a brief moral teaching for a pagan? He who loves his soul will destroy it. To love your soul means to love yourself (Luke 9:23–24). The pagan is proud and unbridled in his passions. How can he not cherish his passions, his selfhood, his love for fame, honor, money, pleasure? After all, this is all his property, he himself. How to raise a hand against yourself? But as long as he loves himself, as long as he does not rebel against himself, his salvation is not possible; moreover, he only multiplies the disorder in his spiritual body from day to day. Why? From what? From what lives at a distance from God, the beginning and source of life; from the fact that pride in a spoiled person does not wish the person well, but loves only crimes. Each of us can learn all this through experience if we observe ourselves. If anyone serves Me, let him follow Me. If anyone wants to be a true servant of Christ, a true disciple, he must act as He did (1 John 2:6); he must, like Him, take the cross upon himself (Matt. 16:24) and walk the sorrowful path (1 Pet. 2:21). This is the application of the doctrine of the death of the Son of God to our life! It is difficult here, but a person there will not regret doing it. Wherever I am, there my servant will be, my Father will honor him. The constant presence of the Son of God is in heaven, in eternal glory; His faithful disciple will also be there; the Heavenly Father, the author of everything, will reward such a disciple. No earthly king will reward a faithful servant with honors and glory, as the Heavenly King will reward. Art. 27–30. A glance at the depth of self-sacrifice chosen by the Son of God for the salvation of people shudders the soul of the son of man. This self-sacrifice is so hard! But if it were easy, it could not have the value that it has, reconciling the offended truth of God with guilty humanity. That is why, after he said: my soul is troubled, Father! save Me from this hour, the Savior says: but I came to this hour. “This must happen,” He said afterwards (Matthew 26:54). A voice came from heaven: I will glorify and glorify again. This moment in the life of the Savior, who was ready to die, is very important. For the third time, a voice is heard from heaven, from the heavenly Father, over the son of man. The first time it was heard at baptism in the Jordan (Matthew 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22), the second time at Tabor (Matthew 17:5; 2 Pet. 1:17–18; Luke 9:35), the third time now. At the beginning of Christ's ministry, in the middle and at the end of it, the heavenly Father testifies to the significance of the Son. Frivolity may say that “vague thinking mistook the thunder that struck the senses for the voice of God” (De Bette Stud and Krit 1834.4, 939). On the contrary, the eyewitness historian firmly says that it was a voice from heaven, distinct and clear. He also talks about the opinions of people who were not spiritually developed about this subject: “the people who stood and heard the thunder said: this is thunder; and others said, “An angel spoke to him.” The last opinion should be especially noted (and de-Bette completely ignores it): there were also among the people who distinguished sound-separating signs, words, in the heavenly voice, so as not to consider it as silent thunder or a dull rumble. If the other apostles, besides John, had not understood the voice along with the people, an accurate historian would have said that he is not ashamed to expose the misunderstanding of the apostles where it happened. Therefore, we must take it for granted that not only John, but all the apostles heard and understood the heavenly voice as John conveys it. Finally, we must not forget that the voice from heaven, the sound-separating signs, was heard by the ap. Peter and Paul (Acts 9:7, 22:7–10, 13:15); Many saints later heard, for example. St. Polycarp (Ep. de mart Polycapri § 9). And I will glorify and glorify again. The Heavenly Father embraces his entire relationship to the Son, in his past and his future; not something that indicates any particular manifestation of the will of the Son, but embracing the entire course of events of criminal humanity, but taken under the protection of the Son of God, it says that the favor of the Father always rests on the work of the Son of the Redeemer. Not for the sake of this voice, but for the sake of the people. On the Jordan, a voice from heaven was heard by the Baptist; on Tabor - three apostles; now it is heard in the ears of the people, as a warning to the simple-minded from participating in the terrible crime that is being prepared, and as an instruction to those of the people who, if not now, then in the future, will be attentive to the meaning of Christ Jesus. Art. 31–33. Now is the judgment of this world. What does judgment on the world mean? What is peace? The world is a collection of people living according to the demands of passions; the example of such a world was the Sanhedrin with its Pharisees and Sadducees; another example is the pagans. Here and there, people are so strange that they take lies for truth and truth for lies, superstition for piety and piety for superstition, even heinous sins for permitted fun, and feats against sin for the cause of fanaticism, for stupid holiness. There is judgment on this world. Calvin and Grotius philosophized that the judgment of the world, according to the meaning of the Hebrew “mishpat,” means free gifts to the world. Stupid cleverness! Scripture does not know such a judgment on the world. There is no reason to deviate here from the ordinary meaning of the court. The Son of God, suffering death on the cross for the sins of the world, thereby pronounced condemnation on the frivolity of the world. The glorified Son of God by his glory shows everyone that the opinions of the world are stupidity and ungodliness (Rom. 8:3), and that only in His teaching is light and life for people. Now the prince of this world will be cast out. The prince of the world, Satan, will lose his power over the pagan and Jewish world (Luke 10:18). (Read demon about suffering 1, 150–151). And even if I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw everything to myself. The triumph of the Savior is not limited to the victory over the dark forces of evil; His activity is more extensive than that. The words: I will be lifted up mean death on the cross; under this image she was exhibited before (John 3:14, 8:28). But the added word: from the earth, if Jesus Christ spoke only about death on the cross, would be completely unnecessary, without meaning. So, the Savior combines with the thought of death on the cross the thought of his heavenly glorification: He will be lifted up by the way of the cross into eternal glory. This is how the evangelist explained (v. 33). I will attract everyone to me. Since attraction is presented here not as the work of people, but as the work of the Savior, then in vain they saw the faith of people here; talks about the grace of the Holy Spirit. which the glorified Son of God sent down and by which he attracted and continues to attract nations to Himself, not only for their earthly happiness, but, more importantly, for their eternal bliss. This attraction of people is wonderful, powerful and yet not restricting people’s freedom. The word of the apostles quickly spreads throughout the pagan world and everywhere it finds souls carried away and drawn by an invisible force to follow Christ. Their teaching does not flatter any passion, on the contrary, it declares war on everyone: and yet passions are silent before it and hearts breathe only for Christ. Paganism, strong in worldly power, uses all measures of cruelty to suppress Christianity; and Christianity attracts its very enemies. False philosophy, to please passions, either invents slander against Christianity, or introduces heresies into it in order to weaken the heavenly teaching: but the heavenly teaching overcomes its enemies. People and nations of different education, with different characters and habits, with different conditions of climatic life recognize in the teachings of the Galilean Teacher happiness for the earth and salvation for eternity. With what accuracy does the history of nations justify the prophecy of the Son of God: I will draw all things to Myself! Art. 34–36. The Jewish people, corrupted by selfish teachers and leaders, formed such an opinion about the Messiah that he would establish a kingdom on earth and would rule forever. The prophecies about the spiritual kingdom of the Messiah (Isa. 10:7, 11:1; Dan. 2:44, 7:13; Ezek. 37:20) were turned into predictions about a strong earthly kingdom, in which it was very pleasant for self-loving people to occupy prominent and financial positions. The prophecies about the sufferings of the Messiah (Isa. 53; Ps. 21:12-17) were either ignored by the people's teachers and did not speak to the people about them, or they explained them in their own way: this poor Messiah, they said, is the son of Joseph, about whom no one cares. With such an upbringing, the people did not know the suffering Messiah. So the people, having heard the Savior’s words about his ascension to heaven by the way of the cross, did not know what to think? Or Jesus is the Messiah and then He must remain king on earth forever; if He must suffer, then who is He? Poor son of Joseph! Poor people! “For a little while longer, the light is with you; walk while there is light, so that you may be sons of light.” These words express love that grieves for the condition of those with whom it speaks. She calls herself light and presents herself as a mother: children! She says, take advantage of the happy time while I am with you; without Me it is dark for you; learn from the light - Christ; be in relation to Him as children are in relation to their mother; treasure His instructions - without them - misfortune, with them - bliss. Similar expressions, Luke 16:8; 1 Thessalonians 5:5. The true light enlightens every man who comes into the world (John 1:9). The light of Christ is now not seen with bodily eyes, as He was seen when He lived on earth: nevertheless He shines now, and this true light already shines (1 John 2:8). grace? For me and you, until the time of our death; for the whole earthly world - until the time of its universal transformation. Then either the light will be transferred to the area of ​​the most extensive illumination or the light will be hidden from people. You must believe in the light, you must transform its bright thoughts and rules into life. Now is the time acceptable, now is the day of salvation (2 Cor. 6:2). Believe, Dondezhe is the light of the world. Dondezhe, it is said. This means there is no point in deluding ourselves with dreams that we can improve beyond the grave. God's determination is unchangeable. Earthly life is destined for us to be formed into sons of light. If during its continuation we remain sons of darkness, then eternal darkness is our lot beyond the grave. “Having said this, Jesus went away and hid himself from them.” We read exactly similar news from St. Matthew: “And leaving them, he went out of the city to Bethany and spent the night there” (Matthew 21:17); at St. Luke (Luke 21:37): “During the day he taught in the church, and at night he went out and spent time on the mountain called Olivet.” Therefore, in vain they want to see in the words of John the news of the cessation of the Savior’s public instructions to the people, in vain, especially since other evangelists offered many teachings of the Savior that followed the entry into Jerusalem. Art. 37–43. The evangelist's remarks about the state of the Jews follow. “He performed so many miracles before them, and they did not believe in Him”; miracles were performed not secretly, not behind the eyes of representatives of Judaism, but in the sight of the people, in the sight of the bookish people and the rulers of the Jews. And yet the Jews remained unbelievers: “Let the word of Isaiah the prophet come true” ... “Let it come true,” it is said instead of the words: so it came true - the word of Isaiah; otherwise it means not the cause, but the consequence. The Prophet (Is.53:1) said: “Lord! who believed what they heard from us? And to whom was the arm of the Lord revealed? The pride of sensual people did not want to believe that the humble servant of Jehovah, humiliated, tormented, was the Messiah. The same is true in the story of Jesus. The same pride of people who dream of an earthly kingdom, of the earthly glory of the Jewish people, turns away with contempt from Jesus. This means that the prophet described what was happening to Jesus, complaining about the acts of wicked pride of Jesus’ contemporaries. “Therefore they could not believe,” the evangelist continues, because, as Isaiah also said, “this people have blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, lest they see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor should they be converted, so that I might heal them.” The evangelist cites the words of the prophet in a slightly modified form, but retains their exact meaning. The Lord said to the Prophet: “Make the heart of this people fat, and stop their ears and close their eyes, so that they do not see with their own eyes” (Is. 6:10). Prophets sometimes appeared as if they were doing what the people themselves had done, out of the corruption of their will (Jer.1:10, 31:18; Hos.6:5; Ezek.43:3). This only expressed Jehovah’s extreme disgust from these wicked people. Chrysostom writes: “What the prophet predicted, he predicted because it would certainly happen... It had to happen, because the Jews are incurable. Even if the word “couldn’t” is used here, it also means that “they didn’t want to.” - More precisely: the Jews could not believe because, having long abused their freedom, they brought themselves into the moral impossibility of believing, unbelief became the favorite beginning of their lives, just as good people, through long exercise in goodness, achieve the point that they consider it impossible to commit one or another vice. Given the great miracles that Jesus performed, and the pure and high teaching that He taught, the unbelief of the Jews is an amazing phenomenon. It caught the attention of the evangelist’s contemporaries; it raises questions even after the evangelist. In resolving such questions, the Evangelist points to the teaching of the prophets: and they showed that the Jews would bring themselves to such a moral state that they would not see the light. “Isaiah said these things when he saw His glory and spoke of Him.” Whose glory have you seen? According to Chrysostom, the glory of the Father. No. The evangelist explains why they did not believe in Jesus and talks about Jesus. This means, according to the evangelist, Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus. In what form did the prophet see Him? He saw Jehovah surrounded and praised by the heavenly armies and said with awe: “My eyes have seen the King, Jehovah of armies” (Is. 6:1-5). So, the evangelist makes us see the true God in Christ Jesus. “However, many of the rulers believed in Him: but for the sake of the Pharisees they did not confess” ... This more precisely defines the meaning of what was said about the Jews, so that the words: “They did not believe” receive the following meaning: “many did not believe.” Even among the leaders, many were believers. Having said this, the evangelist brings the believing members of the Sanhedrin into a state of mind; he reveals the secrets of their weak conscience. “For the sake of the Pharisees they did not confess, lest they be excommunicated from the synagogue.” The Evangelist points out the same illness in the souls of these people that the Savior pointed out when he said: “How can you believe when you receive glory from each other, but do not seek the glory that comes from the one God?” (John 5:44). The Sanhedrites and Pharisees wanted to seem like high-flying people, but in reality they were low people, groveling before empty people like themselves. Members of the Sanhedrin Joseph and Nicodemus remained faithful to the Savior even at His death on the cross; They also confessed Him before the Sanhedrin (John 7:50; Luke 23:51). Therefore, the stern remark of the evangelist does not mean them, but others who at times also seemed to be believers, but, valuing worldly benefits too much, remained among the obvious enemies of Jesus. Art. 44–50. Contents of the instructions offered by Christ Jesus at different times. Since it is impossible to imagine an example where the entire speech of the Savior would consist of repetitions of what was said before, without any new thought, as can be seen in Art. 44–50, and such an extraction of thoughts from the teachings of the Savior is quite befitting of a disciple of Christ, then in Art. 44–50 we must recognize the continuation of Ioannov’s thinking. The connection with what preceded is this: the words of Christ Jesus show the guilt of the unbelief of the Jews. Jesus cried out and said: the aorist κεκραξε και ειπεν cannot mean something long past, but expresses a repeated action. Jesus proclaimed out loud and said: He who believes in Me does not believe in Me, but in Him who sent Me. And he who sees Me sees the one who sent Me. Both show in Christ more than one human person who would be separate from the deity. Then he teaches that faith passes through Him to God, through the sent one to the sender, through the Son to the Father. Same thoughts John 8:19–42, 5:24–38. This is what the apostles Peter (1 Peter 1:21) and Paul (Heb. 7:25) taught. Seeing, according to the word of the evangelist, is the same as believing, and not as coldly reflecting; see - in the same state as Isaiah saw the glory of Christ in the Lord who appeared (v. 38). Art. 46. ​​I have come as light into the world, so that everyone who believes in Me will not remain in darkness. The idea was suggested by John 8:12. Only here the sad state of a person who remains without faith in Christ is presented in a sharp form. Whoever remains without faith in Jesus will remain in darkness, no matter what measures he takes to get out of darkness. Art. 47–48. And if anyone hears My words and does not believe: I do not judge him... Hearing the blasphemies of the Jews against Jesus, they could be embarrassed by the fact that Jesus Christ leaves them unpunished. To reassure this, it is explained that the Son of God came to save the world, but there will be a time for condemnation of the world. This was indicated in John 3:17–18. The peculiarity here is the state of disbelief. This is not just negligence, inattention, but that state when they understand the dignity of instruction and yet reject it with proud contempt; they see the truth and try not to let it reach the soul (Heb. 3:12-19). Art. 49–50. I did not speak from Himself... The persistent contempt shown to Jesus Christ also applies to the Father, whose instructions He carries out. This has been said more than once, John 5:24–30, 6:39–40, 7:16, 8:38. 1 Chapters XIII-XIX of the Gospel of John are explained in conversations about the suffering of the Savior, part 1. 2. St. Petersburg. 1859. Therefore no explanation for them is offered here.