John 7

John 7:1-53

The Gospel According to John John 7:1-53 - John 8:1 John 7:1-24. In relation to the chronological sequence in the ministry of our Lord, we come now to the commencement of the third and final period, that is, from John’s standpoint.

The first verse is a general one.

“And after these things Jesus walked in Galilee; for He would not walk in Judζa, because the Jews sought to kill Him.” The tenses there are all imperfects, and I think we gather the sense better if we render it, “After these things Jesus was walking in Galilee, for He did not desire to walk in Judζa, because the Jews were seeking to kill Him.”

We find the parallels in Matthew sixteen, in Mark eight, and in Luke nine, all connected with the visit to Cζsarea Philippi. John does not record that visit, nor has he put on record the great confession which Peter made there. There are those who have suggested that at the close of chapter six we have John’s account of the confession. I do not think the view is tenable; but there is a marked similarity between the two incidents. At Cζsarea Philippi our Lord asked His disciples, “Who do ye say that I am”; and Simon Peter answered, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” John tells of an occasion when Jesus said to the twelve,-the same group,-“Would ye also go away? Simon Peter answered Him, Lord, to whom shall we go?

Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed and know that Thou art the Holy One of God.”

The similarity is self-evident, and yet the difference is so patent that the two occasions cannot be confused. Nevertheless they breathe the same atmosphere. The time had come for the commencement of the final movement in the work of the Messiah, and I think that the incident recorded by John antedated the confession at Cζsarea Philippi. He had been saying strange things, “hard sayings” as they said, and there was a break, “Many of His disciples went back, and walked no more with Him.” Then He said to the twelve, Do you also want to go? It was Simon who said, “To whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life.

And we have believed and know that Thou art the Holy One of God.” After that they travelled up to Tyre and Sidon, and moving back towards Decapolis, they came to Cζsarea Philippi; where He said, Who do you say that I am? and the great confession was made. Then the last six months began.

The first incident which John records in that period is that of the occurrence of the feast of Tabernacles. At the time He was in Galilee, and we are told the reason. He would not, that is, He did not desire, to walk in Judζa because the Jews were seeking to kill Him. The hostility was becoming more and more intense. All the conditions were characterized by unrest. Everything was in turmoil around our Lord. He was the one calm, poised, majestic soul. His friends were perplexed. Some of them had gone back to walk no more with Him. His enemies were becoming more and more bitter. Controversy was surging round Him. He was engaged in discussions with His enemies, discussions with enquirers, discussions presently with His own.

The feast of Tabernacles was the occasion upon which Jesus, although staying almost exclusively in Galilee, broke with that habit, and went back to Jerusalem. This whole chapter, seven, is occupied with the story of that feast.

It is quite evident too that on this visit to Jerusalem, our Lord tarried for some days. The full story occupies chapters seven, eight, nine and ten.

In the story of the feast there are three movements; first He is seen in connection with His brethren and the rulers. Then the citizens of the city are perplexed, and He is seen in connection with them and the Pharisees. The last movement is the story of what happened on the final day, when He stood and gave His great invitation; and the account of the division that followed it. We are now concerned with the story of our Lord and His brethren, and the rulers.

As to His brethren. The approach of the feast precipitated an action on their part. “His brethren therefore said unto Him, Depart hence, and go into Judζa.” Multitudes were going up to perhaps the most joyous feast of all the year. It lasted seven days, plus one. Seven days strictly of ceremony and elaborate ritual; and one final day of less ritual, and probably more rejoicing, completing the octave.

It was as the caravans of pilgrims were travelling to Jerusalem for this feast that His brethren came to Him, and offered Him advice:

“His brethren therefore said unto Him, Depart hence, and go into Judaea, that Thy disciples also may behold the works which Thou doest.” Surely a reference to those who had become His disciples in the first year, who were still in Judaea, and had not seen Him much for the past two years. They reinforced their advice by argument as they said:

“For no man doeth anything in secret, and himself seeketh to be known openly. If Thou doest these things, manifest Thyself to the world.”

What lay behind this advice of His brethren? John does not leave us to surmise. “For even His brethren did not believe on Him.” That does not mean that they were definitely hostile to Him. There are those who hold that the mother of our Lord bore no other child. There is no warrant for such a view, except what has been called an undue solicitude for God, and a mistaken conception of the high and holy sanctity of motherhood. There is no doubt whatever that these were the actual brethren of Jesus after the flesh, by the same mother, and born subsequently to our Lord. There is no question that He was her Firstborn; but why Firstborn if there were no others? Luke says when Jesus began His ministry He was about thirty years. By this time He would be three and thirty probably.

We know of His two brethren, James and Jude. Probably one of them would be a couple of years younger, say thirty-one, and the other, say twenty-nine. They had grown up in closest association with Him in all His boyhood’s days, and young manhood’s days. Now here they appear after three years’ ministry. We saw them with Him at the wedding feast in Cana. A little later they came again, on the occasion when His mother went for very love of Him, to persuade Him to give up His work, and go home with her. She had come to the conclusion, together with them-they were associated with her-that He was beside Himself. When they came, and one told Him His mother and brethren were without, seeking Him, He said, Who is My mother and My brethren?

We do not see them again till now. And now John says, “Even His brethren did not believe on Him,” that is, they were not convinced, they were not sure. They had evidently travelled with Him in those earliest weeks. They had seen the sign at Cana. They had been interested enough to join their mother in an attempt to save Him from Himself. But so far they were not convinced as to His Messiahship. Therefore they came to Him with the advice of worldly wisdom. Everything they said seemed to be reasonable.

What they said in effect was, Why are You stopping here in obscure Galilee? If Your claims are justified, go to the centre of things. Their whole thought is revealed in the words, “Manifest Thyself to the world.”

With very great reverence let us think of what this advice meant to Jesus. He answered them quite definitely as we shall see; but when pondering this, .the words which came to me were, “Tempted in all points like as we are.” It was such wise advice by the standards of worldly wisdom. Do not hug the shadows. Get into the limelight. Worldly wisdom, yes, quite worldly; and if you want another word, devilish wisdom. Get out to the crowds; go into the limelight; do something that leaves no room for doubt. Tempted, Oh yes, but without sin. There was no yielding, not for a moment; and yet the very affection of His heart on the human level, must have made Him susceptible to the good intention of His brethren after the flesh, however mistaken they were.

What then was His answer? First He answered in words; and then in action.

The answer in words, “My time is not yet come.” This is not quite the same word He had used to His mother when He said, “Mine hour is not yet come,” but it is the same thought. The word “time” here means the season, the set season. Whenever reference is made to the hour, the hour is the ultimate, the Cross. Now with the same conception of an arranged programme, He said, My season is not come. They said, “Manifest Thyself to the world.” He said, It cannot be done. As for them, He told them their time was always ready.

I do not think it was an unkind word, or intended to be an unkind word. It was a recognition on His part, and a declaration to them, that they were not called to His ministry and work. They could go on with their work in the ordinary way. For Him the season was not come for doing that which should prove His claims. As He had said to His mother, “Mine hour is not yet come”; so now to these His brethren after the flesh He said, " My time is not yet come."

Moreover, He explained the difference between them and Him.

“The world cannot hate you.” There is nothing to prevent you going on. “But Me it hateth, because I testify of it, that its works are evil.” A hostile world cannot see Me. The world is hostile to Me, therefore it cannot see. I shall never make the world understand until something is done that breaks down the hostility of the human heart. His hour came for the manifestation of His glory, when He went all the way to the Cross, and through it; and was lifted up out of the earth. That was the manifestation of redeeming love, which broke the heart of hostile man. That then was the first part of His answer.

What was the next? He went up. The consistency of Divine action is often obscure to the small consistencies of human wisdom. He said, I am not going up yet; but He went up. But He did not go up to do something spectacular in order to produce conviction. John tells us that He went up privately, “as it were in secret.” I wonder what that really means geographically. I do not know, but I have an idea that when He went up, He did not take the high road where the caravans travelled, the usual route. Possibly He went through Samaria.

At that time He was the centre of interest in Jerusalem. He was the One around Whom the thoughts of all the multitudes were gathered. By this time His fame had spread wider and wider afield, and thousands upon thousands had looked upon Him, had heard Him on many occasions; and many in the countryside were in health because of His healing. Therefore " there was much murmuring among the multitudes concerning Him; some said, He is a good Man; others said, Not so, but He leadeth the multitude astray." He went up into the midst of that confusion and that questioning, and that curious interest; and “no man spake openly of Him for fear of the Jews.” The atmosphere is revealed in that statement. The growing and bitter hostility of all authority was so evident, that if people talked about Him they did it under their breath.

So we come to the second movement, and we see Him in connection with the rulers.

“When it was now in the midst of the feast Jesus went up into the Temple.” That would be about the fourth day. Three days had run their course. How long He was there before, we cannot tell; but now He went openly into the Temple, and began to teach. He knew the hostility. Had He not told His brethren so; but He went up. There was something to be said at that feast.

One of His greatest utterances must be spoken there and then. There is no account given here of the early stages of His teaching; but what John does record, is the effect produced upon those people by His teaching. The Temple in Jerusalem was the home and centre of all the learning of the national life. Of His teaching there we are told, “The Jews therefore marvelled.” Marvelled I For the time being any outburst of hostility was suppressed. They said, “How knoweth this Man letters, having never learned?”

Once again, they were failing of the highest. They were not impressed with the spiritual note, or the ethical intention. They would have made Him King because He had fed them. When He talked about bread from heaven to eat, they challenged Him, and said it was absurd, because they were carnal. Now again they were impressed, not by any high spiritual and moral significance in what He said. What dip impress them? That He had the “letters,” the grammata. “How hath this Man the letters never having learned?” What impressed them was the intellectual accent, and knowledge of Jesus. That is the meaning of “the grammata, the letters.” We speak to-day of a man as being a man of letters. Yet, while their marvel reveals their failure, it is significant that these people, not in provincial Nazareth, but in the centre of culture heard, not a Man with a Galilean accent, but a Man of intellectual and cultured speech. He stood there among men who talked the language of learning, and were learned men; they stood and listened to Him, and said, He has our accent. How did He get it?

It was a remarkable admission, but a revelation of their failure. Not the spiritual emphasis, not the moral intention, but the learned accent impressed them. It is always a revelation of disastrous failure when people are impressed with a learned accent, and miss the spiritual intention and moral value. They had missed it.

Yet thank God, they said it; because it reveals this among other things, that our Lord had the accent of the learned. It is a great mistake to suppose that Jesus made no arresting appeal to any except the illiterate. He did, and the literati were caught by the language, and the intelligentsia by the accent of scholarship. It is as though a lad from the country, who might be expected to have the accent of the provinces, should arrive in the University, and begin to speak in the language of the schools. I can almost hear them. Really, this is most remarkable. This young fellow never went to the Varsity, but he seems to have the accent of the schoolmen. That is exactly what they said about Jesus.

What then was His answer to their “How?”

“My teaching is not Mine, but His that sent Me.” That is the first time in the records that He distinctly declared that whatever He said, was directly from God. He repeated it often afterwards.

Observe carefully that He referred to His “teaching,” not His accent. They were captured by the accent of the learned. It was as though He said to them; Do not waste your time with the accent. Get hold of the teaching. My teaching is not Mine; it is His that sent Me. I am the Mouth-piece of God, and if you want to prove it, there is one way, said Jesus.

“He that willeth to do God’s will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it be from God, or whether I speak from Myself.” This is a passage of which we have often made wrong use. It is said to mean that if we will to do God’s will we shall know what God’s will is. But that is not the statement. It is rather that if we will to do God’s will, we shall know whether His teaching is God’s or not. The attitude of soul for the detection of final authority, is that of willing to do God’s will. When men are wholly, completely consecrated to the will of God, and want to do that above everything else, then they find out that Christ’s teaching is Divine, that it is the teaching of God.

John 7:25-36. Our reading began with the words, “Some therefore of them of Jerusalem said.” The “therefore” marks continuity, and shows that what we have read, and are now to consider, is intimately related with that which has immediately preceded it. Let us remember that here in chapter seven we begin John’s account of the final period in the ministry of our Lord. Chronologically we are just beyond Cζsarea Philippi, and the confession of Peter. The Lord had now told His disciples for the first time that He was going to the Cross; and all recorded from now on, is in the atmosphere of the Cross. John’s “therefore” makes us enquire, Wherefore? What is the reference? Chapter seven is wholly occupied with the visit of Jesus to Jerusalem in connection with the Feast of Tabernacles. He had very largely abandoned Judζa, because Judζa had proved its hostility to Him. We were told, at the beginning of the chapter, that He walked in Galilee, for He did not desire to walk in Judζa, because the Jews sought to kill Him. But now we find that for a time, a comparatively brief one, He went up again to Jerusalem.

The account of that visit runs on to the end of chapter ten. We have had the account, in the first movement, of His presence and teaching at the feast, and the problem created by that teaching in the midst of the rulers, so that they marvelled and said, “Whence hath this Man letters, having never learned?” We have considered how He answered them, by telling them that His teaching was not His own, that what He was saying He had received directly from God. That explains the “therefore” which introduces the present section.

To summarize the section. The inactivity of the hostile rulers raised discussion among some of the citizens. Having recorded the story of Jesus and His brethren, and the rulers in connection with the feast, John now gives the account of Jesus and the citizens, and the discussion that resulted.

Now let us examine this story of discussion, ending as it did in a futile attempt to arrest Him. We are in the atmosphere of definite and fierce hostility; and the story opens by telling us, “Some therefore of them of Jerusalem said, Is not this He Whom they seek to kill? And lo, He speaketh openly, and they say nothing unto Him.” The words, “Some … of them of Jerusalem” refers to citizens rather than the rulers. They were confronted with something that puzzled them. These citizens evidently knew the determination of the rulers to put Him to death. They knew more than the Galileans did, who did not measure or understand the hostility of the rulers.

They said, Is not this the Man they are seeking to kill? The thing that perplexed them was the fact of His open speech; and that these hostile rulers were doing nothing. They could not understand it. What had happened to the rulers? Why this apparent change of attitude? Was not this the Man they wanted to arrest and put to death?

Yet here He was, standing in the midst of the multitudes, preaching and teaching openly; and the rulers were doing nothing. It was a perplexing situation. If we put ourselves in their place, we shall understand their perplexity. What had happened to the rulers? There was the Object of their bitter hostility, right in the midst of the feast, and in the midst of the crowds in the open courts of the Temple, teaching the multitudes, and the rulers were doing nothing. His brethren had advised Him to go up to Jerusalem, and show Himself openly, to manifest Himself to the world.

He had said, My season is not come. He had dismissed their suggestion. Nevertheless He was now there. We are not told that He was working any miracles, but teaching; and the rulers were laying no hands on Him. It was a perplexing situation to the citizens. We know why the rulers lay no hand on Him.

I do not think they knew themselves. The reason is declared presently, but we will postpone the reading of it until we reach it.

Then these citizens discussed the situation. I have no doubt we get the discussion in brief, but it is very clear.

They made a suggestion to account for the inactivity of the rulers; “Can it be that the rulers indeed know that this is the Christ?” The verb to know there means to acquire knowledge, and we get nearer the real meaning of what they suggested, if we read, Have they found out after all that this is the Christ? These citizens were not affirming that He was the Christ, but were trying to account for this sudden strange inactivity of the rulers, when Jesus had put Himself in their power by coming and standing in Temple courts and teaching openly. They say, What has happened? Can it be that they have found out that He is the Christ?

But they at once dismissed their own suggestion. “Howbeit we know this Man whence He is; but when the Christ cometh, no one knoweth whence He is.” Two statements, first that they knew Him; secondly that when the Christ came, none would know whence He came. The second was the current opinion at the time. It was being taught by the rabbis that the Christ would suddenly appear, and no one would know whence He came, an opinion probably based upon a sentence in Isaiah, which, it may be, they misinterpreted, “Who shall declare His generation.” It was the popular view at the time that no one would know whence He came. That was their conviction, and so they said, We know all about Him; we know whence He came; and the fact that we know whence He came proves He cannot be Messiah. So that cannot be the reason for the inactivity of the rulers, for they must know, as we citizens do, whence He is. So their own suggestion had to be dismissed.

In the midst of the discussion our Lord intervened. He knew what they were saying; He knew their perplexity. “Jesus therefore cried in the Temple.” This word “cried” is a very strong word, showing that what was now said was not said quietly, but under the stress of great emotion. Remember all that had preceded this. He had come up to the feast, and had been teaching. He had claimed that the authority for His teaching was that it was not His own, it was the teaching of God. Then this discussion had broken out about the impotence of the rulers. Then “Jesus cried.” It was a great outburst of emotion. One writer has said that writing long years after, as John assuredly did, he could still hear the protesting accents of Jesus. It was not a quiet statement this. He “cried in the Temple.”

Now let us listen to what He said. I wonder if we know what He meant. He said, “Ye both know Me, and know whence I am.” Let us halt with that. Did He mean that to be taken literally? Was He admitting they were correct when they said, “We know this Man whence He is”? Or was it a statement characterized by irony? You know Me; and you know Me whence I Amos 1 Or was it said in the accents of scorn for them, and as a rebuke of their suppressed conviction concerning Him? Perhaps it is better to leave that question an open one. I am not going to answer my questions save to say that perhaps the two elements merge in what He said.

But He had not done. “And I am not come of Myself, but He that sent Me is true, Whom ye know not.” They said, We know all about Him. He cannot be the Messiah. He said, You know Me; is that your claim? Well, listen again, what I have been telling you before, I am not come of Myself-I am sent.

And then this final statement, “Whom ye know not.” The One Who sent Me, “ye know not.” It is as though our Lord said to these men, whether they knew Him or not, whether their boast was an empty one or not, whether they were suppressing a conviction and certainty or not; the one sure thing was that they did not know God. On the other hand He did, “I know Him; because I am from Him.”

“They sought therefore to take Him.” Mark these “therefores.” “Therefore,” why? Because of the claim He was making. All through this Gospel of John there is the revelation of the fact that the deepest reason of hostility to Him was, as they supposed, His blasphemy. It began in chapter five, when He said, “My Father worketh even until now, and I work.” They then had said, He makes Himself equal with God. Here again for the same reason, they sought to take Him.

Then we come to the real reason for the inactivity of the rulers. “No man laid his hand on Him.” Why not? “His hour was not yet come.” That revealing sentence at once sets the Lord before us in the deepest truth concerning Himself, His presence, and His mission. That is why they could not lay hands on Him. His hour was not yet come. The rulers of the people would have killed Him, and the citizens were inclined to arrest Him, and bring Him before the Sanhedrim, and put an end to His supposed blasphemy; but they could not lay a hand on Him. Surrounded by the protecting power of God, they could not lift a hand to touch Him. If we study this story of the life of Jesus, and try to account for it on the ground of that which is purely natural, we constantly break down.

Why did they not lay hands on Him? There He was, an unarmed citizen, just a Galilean peasant; and there were the men of authority and power, hostile, wanting to kill Him, but they laid no hands on Him.

Then follows the statement: “But of the multitude many believed on Him.” Two things are seen operating. He was winning His way with some, “They believed on Him.” Such talked in His defence, “When the Christ shall come,-when the fact materializes,-will He do more signs than those which this Man hath done?” That reveals a popular reaction in favour of Him. Then the Pharisees heard the multitude “murmuring these things concerning Him.” Therefore they would act. The expression “chief priests” refers not merely to Annas and Caiaphas, but to the whole priestly caste, as banded together. It had become a political party. “The chief priests and the Pharisees sent officers to take Him.” They were determined to lay hands on Him, determined to stop this kind of thing, determined to put an end to the movement in His favour that was ever and anon manifesting itself. They would act officially.

They sent officers. They could not do so except under the authority of the Sanhedrim. That authority gained, they sent officers to take Him. That is all so far. We will finish that in our next study.

“Jesus therefore said.” Once more a revealing “therefore.” These men were sent, He knew, He saw them come. We can visualize the crowds all about Him. The strange conflict and discussion, ebbing and flowing for and against Him. He saw these officers arrive, and knew the purpose of their coming. Therefore He spoke. Among all the things recorded as having fallen from the lips of Jesus, none, when rightly apprehended, are more startling and arresting than these. “Yet a little while am I with you, and I go unto Him that sent Me. Ye shall seek Me, and shall not find Me; and where I am, ye cannot come.”

The significance of those few sentences is not discovered until among other things, we watch the tenses. He said, “Yet a little while am I with you.” Present tense. I am here, and I am going to stay here a little while; and then I am going back to Him that sent Me. I am here, as I have told you, sent; not on My own authority, sent. Presently I am going back. He did not tell them when. He did not tell them how. He simply said in effect to them, I am here in a programme, a Divinely arranged programme. I am here, sent, and I am remaining a little while; and then I am going back. You shall seek Me; future tense. Then finally, the present tense, “and where I am, ye cannot come.” Not where I am going, ye cannot come; but, “Where I am, ye cannot come.” There He stood. The officers had come to arrest Him, and He talked in language such as we can find on the lips of none other man in all human history. He talked in a language in which there merged all tenses. He talked with cosmic consciousness. He talked as One utterly disdainful of the hostility directed against Him. It is as though He had said, I know what you are here for.

I know you have been sent, you have been seeking Me. Therefore, hear Me. I am staying a little while, and then I am going back to the One Who sent Me. I am here because I am sent; and I am here until that is accomplished for which I have been sent. Then I am going back. Mark the quiet august majesty of it.

Again; presently you will seek Me and you will not find Me; I shall not be here presently. I am going back to the One Who sent Me. I am here now, but where I am, you cannot come. You cannot arrest Me. You cannot lay hands on Me, until the time in the economy of God arrives, and that will be when that is done for which I am here. I am here yet a little while, and then I am going back to Him Who sent Me, and in the mean time you are powerless.

Ye cannot come where I am.

And they did not come, and they did not arrest Him. There is something of sanctified and glorious humour in the situation. They were sent to arrest Him, the representatives of authority.

They went, and when they arrived, they heard Him talking. Then they went back empty-handed. When they arrived, their masters said, Where is He? and they made that significant answer, “Never man so spake.” We were sent to arrest Him, but He arrested us. We were sent to lay hands on Him; He laid no hands on us, but He paralyzed us by the majesty of His speech. “Never man so spake.”

Keep all this in its setting. It was the last period of His ministry; hostility was becoming more and more marked; difficulties were crowding upon Him; challenges were constantly offered to Him concerning His Person, concerning His purpose, concerning His teaching, concerning Himself. The conflict round Him thickened. The supreme revelation, while we are made conscious of the conflict and the difficulties, is that of the quiet, calm dignity of “the Word made flesh.” His language was that of eternal consciousness, governing temporal conditions. Sent of God, and therefore all the ages in harmony with the span of His earthly life. The three and a half years of ministry linked with eternity.

No blundering man is this, no earthly politician, manipulating events in order to produce results; but One Who says, I am sent; I will be here a little longer; presently you won’t find Me. In the meantime, where I am, ye cannot come. Eternal consciousness governing temporal conditions; and therefore, cosmic procedure amid chaotic conditions. Chaos everywhere, break-up everywhere; and yet we hear Him speak, and we find the speech of One Who is no victim, no child of circumstances; but the Son of God, the Logos incarnate, and all the majesty of the eternities, and the authority of God merge in His attitudes and in His speech.

John 7:37-53 - John 8:1. In this paragraph we have the account of the last things in connection with the feast of Tabernacles. Everything preceding, in this chapter, has been preliminary, and leading to this. Here we have recorded the great call of Jesus, fittingly uttered at this feast.

The relation of our Lord to the great feasts is a subject of interest. Here we see Him at the feast of Tabernacles, with all its historic associations, virtually showing how in and through Him, all that the feast had. typified, was being fulfilled. At the Cross, we see Him fulfilling the significance of Passover. Luke put it very clearly about Pentecost, when he said, “The Day of Pentecost was now being fulfilled.”

John tells us that this was the last day; and the last day of the feast was the eighth. The feast proper lasted seven days, but to the seven-there was added an eighth; and by Levitical law, that day was always observed as a Sabbath. We are familiar with the facts of the ritual of the feast as it was then observed. A great deal had been added to the Mosaic requirements in the ritual of the Temple at the time. A recognition of this will help us in considering the call of Jesus.

Some Jewish writers tell us that during the observance of the feast for seven days, on each day water was carried in golden vessels from the Pool of Siloam, and poured out in the presence of assembled worshippers in the Temple. Other Jewish writers tell us that for seven days there was a procession of the priests, who went with empty vessels, either to Siloam’s Pool, or outside the city to the brook Kidron, filled their vessels with water, and came back, chanting parts of the Great Hallel, then pouring out the water within the Temple courts. They tell us moreover that the symbolism related to two facts, one, that God had supplied their need with water in the wilderness, a physical provision; the other, that promises had been made, as in Ezekiel, and more briefly in Joel, and in Zechariah; that there should come a day when rivers of water should revivify the desert lands, a spiritual significance. This observance continued for seven days. On the last day there was no procession of the priests, no carrying of the golden vessels of water; and the omission was as significant as the observance had been. The omission was to show, first that now there was no need for the supernatural supply of water, because they were no longer in the wilderness, but in the land; and secondly, that the great promises of spiritual refreshment had not yet been fulfilled.

That is the background; and the moment we recognize it, we see that for those listening multitudes, especially such as appreciated the value of their own ritual, there was something very significant in the fact that Jesus stood that day, the day when they were no longer carrying the waters, and cried, “If any man thirst, let him come unto Me, and drink. He that believeth on Me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his inner life shall flow the rivers of living water.”

John says, “Jesus stood and cried.” We are arrested by that word “stood,” because the attitude of the teacher was never that of standing. The teacher always sat. But on this occasion it is distinctly and emphatically stated that He stood; which means that He was taking the position of a Herald, with a great proclamation to make.

Again we are arrested by the word John uses here, when he says not that Jesus stood and said, but that “Jesus stood and cried.” We came across that word in our previous study, in verse twenty-eight (John 7:28). There we read that “Jesus therefore cried in the Temple, teaching and saying.” The verb is one that shows He spoke with strong emotion. In each case it was a great outburst. A little while before, it was an outburst of protest; now it was an outburst, not of protest, but of invitation. In each case a great emotional cry passed the lips of Jesus. He stood as a Herald, and He cried. What He said, and the effects produced, are recorded in this paragraph.

After the record of what Jesus said, John, in verse thirty-nine (John 7:39), has given us an interpretation. “This spake He of the Spirit, which they that believed on Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet,"-and our translators have supplied a word-“given.” The text says, “The Spirit was not yet.” Of course that cannot mean that the Spirit was not yet in existence, nor that the Spirit had not previously been active. The sense cannot be interpreted better than by the word “given.” Let us consider this interpretation, before considering the call in itself.

“This spake He of the Spirit,” Who “was not yet given; because Jesus was not yet glorified.” We have to remember that John was writing this long years after; and, from his knowledge of all that transpired subsequently. Looking back, he understood what Jesus had meant that day. I wonder if John understood at the time. I very much doubt it. In an earlier stage in his story he recorded something Jesus said, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up”; and then said that the disciples understood it after He was risen from the dead. So here, I have no doubt he was looking back,and looking back, in the light of the things that had transpired, from the hour in which he heard his Lord utter this great proclamation, he said. He spake of the Spirit, which was not then yet given.

These words reveal the Lord’s consciousness of the persistent lack that characterized those among whom His ministry was exercised. We have seen it all the way through. We have seen the people listening to Jesus from a material standpoint only, always seeming to miss the spiritual. After the feeding of the five thousand, John records how He rebuked them for that very thing. When He spoke of His own flesh as meat for the world, He told them the flesh profited nothing; the Spirit was the supreme thing. Here was a recognition of that persistent lack.

From the hour when He said to Nicodemus a man must be born anew, born of the Spirit; all the way through we have seen materialized thinking, and materialized living. “The Spirit not yet.” “Not yet” was an evident reference to something new that took place afterwards; an evident reference to Pentecost, and the coming of the Holy Spirit then. Jesus was thinking of that, and speaking in terms which revealed that fulfillment would come by the coming of the Holy Spirit, in that new way.

Then mark the significance of this. John tells us why the Spirit was not yet given in that new way. “Jesus was not yet glorified.” And again John, looking back, was writing as the result of what he had learned. On the last page in John concerning the public ministry of Jesus, in chapter twelve, we have the story of the coming of the Greeks, in connection with which Jesus said; “The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a grain of wheat fall into the earth and die, it abideth by itself alone; but if it die, it beareth much fruit.” “The hour is come when the Son of God should be glorified.” He was referring to His Cross. Here John referred to the same thing, and in the same way, in terms of victory, of glory. Jesus was not then glorified. He had not passed to His Cross, and His passion baptism, and to His resurrection; and therefore “the Spirit was not yet.” But though the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified, nevertheless He uttered this great call, the full significance of which could only come by the way of His Cross, and by the way of that which resulted from the Cross, the coming in a new manner, of the Holy Spirit.

Now we listen to the voice of Jesus. He said two things, quite separate from each other, but for ever joined to each other. First, “If any man thirst, let him come unto Me, and drink”; a most amazing thing. Notice carefully. “If any man”-mark the universality of it. “Thirst,” mark the absence of anything in the nature of specializing. Whatever the thirst may be, whether it be spiritual, a passion for purity and power; or whether it be in the region of the affectional nature; He challenges the agony of humanity, the clamant cry of the race, thirsting, thirsting. “If any man thirst,” whatever his thirst may be, “let him come to Me, and drink.” He challenged universal thirst, and declared that He was able to quench it, whatever it might be. Now, in that first saying, there is only room for two people.

Who are they? A thirsty soul and Jesus. “If any man”-He is individualizing. The crowds were all round about Him. He broke the crowds up into their component parts, and separated every man from every other man. Any man, individually, to Him. Two people can get into that first word, only two.

Who are they? Jesus and me. Let each say that for himself or herself. What am I thirsty for? What is the clamant cry in the centre of my life? Whatever it is, Christ is still saying, “Come to Me, and drink.” He claimed, and He claims, to be able to quench all human thirst. The next saying was not purely personal. It was entirely relative, but it is linked with the personal. “He that believeth on Me “-that is the man who hears My call and obeys it, the man that comes to Me with his thirst that it may be quenched, “he that believeth on Me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his inner life shall flow the rivers.” How many people are in that verse? You never know. Supposing I hear that call and obey it; my thirst is quenched, then what? Out of me the rivers flow, and how far they will flow I shall never know, how many people’s thirst will be quenched from the rivers flowing out of my life, because I am satisfied with Jesus, no one will ever know. “He that believeth on Me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his life shall flow the rivers " ; all the rivers, described by Ezekiel, that come by the way of the altar, and underneath the threshold, and spread to the Arabah, the desert land; and everywhere they come, there is life.

Mark the inter-relationship between these two sayings. I never can get into the second part of that verse, save through the first part. As long as I am a thirsty soul, I can supply no rivers that quench the thirst of other souls. In one of our great hymns there are two lines, which I never sing without thinking of this call of Jesus,

“Thou, O Christ, art all I want.” That is the language of the man who has heard His call, and has gone to Him for the quenching of his thirst. What is the next line?

“More than all in Thee, I find.” That is the overflowing life. There can be no overflowing life, until the life is filled and satisfied.

In passing, do not forget that group of men standing there, listening to Jesus, sent by the high priests to arrest Him. They heard Him speak those things of stupendous significance. A little while ago they had heard Him say, Where I am, you cannot come. You cannot touch Me; you cannot lay hands on Me. I am here now. I am going back when the programme is done, to Him that sent Me; and until that programme is done, you cannot touch Me. They heard that; and then they heard this. They were listening, and they listened to words more wonderful than human ears had ever heard uttered before. All the suggestiveness of the past, claimed by One as being fulfilled in Himself.

And so we pass to consider the immediate results. What happened? There was division. Christ has always been divisive, and will be until, in the process of time, and in the fulfillment of the Divine economy, He shall have gathered all wheat into His garner, and flung out all chaff to be burned. “Some . . . said, This is of a truth the prophet.” We have come across that reference two or three times, “The Prophet.” Undoubtedly the reference was to Moses’ prediction in Deuteronomy, that God would send them a prophet like unto himself. They did not for a single moment seem to think of this as a Messianic promise. They believed a prophet was coming, and they said, This is He.

That thought had emerged when they had talked about manna, so now, when He talks about water. Had not Moses produced water super-naturally in the wilderness? Yes, they said, This is undoubtedly the prophet. Others said, This is the Christ. Then “Some of them said, What, doth the Christ come out of Galilee?” These people had been saying, We know all about Him, whence He is; and a little earlier they had said, We know His father and mother; and on this very day they had declared they knew whence He was, and they still thought that they did. But how ignorant they were still, even as to the actual facts of the case.

Out of Galilee, they said; we know perfectly well the Messiah is coming from Bethlehem, the city of David. That was where He had come from. So, not only were they at fault, in that they had no recognition of the spiritual and profound fact of His personality, they were also ignorant of the local facts. Finally, some were so hostile that they would fain have laid hands on Him, and taken Him before the Sanhedrim.

Why would they have taken Him to the Sanhedrim? What inspired that section of the crowd that would like to have arrested Him, and handed Him over to His enemies? They had caught the tremendous significance of what He had said about being able to quench human thirst, and His claim that if men believed on Him, through them should flow the rivers. They thought it was blasphemy. We have seen that before. It began in chapter five, when He made Himself equal with God, and again and again they understood His claim, but rejected it. They were quite right in their understanding of the claims He was making, but they did not accept them; therefore they would arrest Him. So after that great proclamation we see that divided crowd.

Now what followed? The return of the officers without Him. These were orderlies from the Temple, who were under the command of the Sanhedrim. When it is said that the priests and the Pharisees sent to take Him, it is a way of declaring that an official decision had been arrived at to arrest Him. These orderlies would not have proceeded at the command of any one single ruler, and the Sanhedrim was still sitting, waiting for the officers to bring Jesus back. All the attitudes of high priests and scribes and elders (to name the constituent parts of the Sanhedrim) in connection with Jesus were illegal. The Sanhedrim never met on the Sabbath day, but they met that day. It was a Sabbath, it was the eighth day.

All the sanctity of the Sabbath was round about it, and yet their hostility permitted them to break the law. When these orderlies went back without Him, they challenged them; “Why did ye not bring Him?” Their answer stands on record, another of those incidental things which are sublime, “Never man so spake.” What a curious reason to give for disobedience. I hardly like suggest a similitude, but supposing, that for any reason, the officers of the Government were sent to arrest a man in Hyde Park, and they came back presently without him; and the authorities said, Where is he? and they said, Never man spoke like that. It is a most amazing thing. They were sent to arrest Him. They could not do it; they could not lay hands on Him.

Why have you not brought Him? The only answer is, Never Man spoke like that.

We could not stretch a hand out to touch Him, and the reason was we heard Him talk. They may have heard a great deal more than is recorded in those few sentences, but they were enough. They heard Him speak in the language of supreme disdain in the presence of hostility manifested by the rulers. Then they had heard Him utter those tremendous words, challenging the thirst of humanity, and declaring that if men would believe on Him, out of their lives should flow rivers of water and blessing. They went back, and said, No, we did not arrest Him; He arrested us. We laid no hands on Him, but He laid on us the superlative spell of His speech.

We heard Him say such things as we never heard before. I am not going to suggest that they meant this; but whether they meant it or not, this is the full significance of what they said.

They said, “Never Man so spake.” They were quite right. It was not the voice of a man merely; it was the voice of God. That is what He had said, when the rulers said, “Whence hath this Man these letters,” “My doctrine is not Mine, but His that sent Me.” Here it was ratified in the confession of a group of men, not perhaps apprehending the fullness of what they said; but saying honestly what they felt at the moment, “Never man so spake.” We may put the emphasis where perhaps they never put it-“Never man so spake.” No mere man can challenge all humanity, and declare his ability to quench its thirst; no mere man could say that by confidence in him, rivers shall flow from those reposing such confidence, for the blessing of others. That was the speech of God.

The story ends with the account of the anger of the rulers, and their scorn, and their satire, Are you also deceived?

And then that word, so singularly human, “Hath any of the rulers believed on Him, or of the Pharisees?” Has any notable person taken up this matter? The question of false pride. And finally the contempt for the crowd. Remember these were the spiritual and moral and civil rulers, whose chief concern ought to have been the welfare of the people. Listen, “But this multitude which knoweth not the law are accursed.” We see the type of those who were in opposition to Christ.

But there was one voice raised in defence. Nicodemus, being one of them, which means he was a member of the Sanhedrim, raised his voice on behalf of Jesus on the lines of strict justice. Then again the contempt expressed itself, “Art thou also of Galilee? Search and see that out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.” That is all. It is a story of strange tumult.

How does it end? There is no question whatever that the fifty-third verse of chapter seven, and verse one of chapter eight should be kept together. “They went, they went every man unto his own house; but Jesus went to the mount of Olives.” That is all I know. If I may be allowed the figure of speech, there the curtain drops.

“They went every man to his own house.” There may be so much in that. They had houses to go to, and they went. Jesus-“Foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay His head.” He “went unto the Mount of Olives.” They scattered, that promiscuous crowd, to their own homes, back to the quietness and the comfort, oh, it may be to the disturbance created by conscience, I do not know. Jesus went to the Mount of Olives; and He went into a greater peace than they, a greater quietness than they. He went, as His custom was, unquestionably to the peace and the strength of communion with God.