John 2 commentary

It is very desirable when there is a marriage, to have Christ own and bless it. Those that would have Christ with them at their marriage, must invite him by prayer, and he will come. While in this world we sometimes find ourselves in straits, even when we think ourselves in fulness. There was want at a marriage feast. Those who are come to care for the things of the world, must look for trouble, and count upon disappointment. In our addresses to Christ, we must humbly spread our case before him, and then refer ourselves to him to do as he pleases. In Christ's reply to his mother there was no disrespect. He used the same word when speaking to her with affection from the cross; yet it is a standing testimony against the idolatry of after-ages, in giving undue honours to his mother. His hour is come when we know not what to do. Delays of mercy are not denials of prayer. Those that expect Christ's favours, must observe his orders with ready obedience. The way of duty is the way to mercy; and Christ's methods must not be objected against. The beginning of Moses' miracles was turning water into blood, Ex 7:20; the beginning of Christ's miracles was turning water into wine; which may remind us of the difference between the law of Moses and the gospel of Christ. He showed that he improves creature-comforts to all true believers, and make them comforts indeed. And Christ's works are all for use. Has he turned thy water into wine, given thee knowledge and grace? it is to profit withal; therefore draw out now, and use it. It was the best wine. Christ's works commend themselves even to those who know not their Author. What was produced by miracles, always was the best in its kind. Though Christ hereby allows a right use of wine, he does not in the least do away his own caution, which is, that our hearts be not at any time overcharged with surfeiting and drunkenness, Lu 21:34. Though we need not scruple to feast with our friends on proper occasions, yet every social interview should be so conducted, that we might invite the Redeemer to join with us, if he were now on earth; and all levity, luxury, and excess offend him.

The first public work in which we find Christ engaged, was driving from the temple the traders whom the covetous priests and rulers encouraged to make a market-place of its courts. Those now make God's house a house of merchandise, whose minds are filled with cares about worldly business when attending religious exercises, or who perform Divine offices for love of gain. Christ, having thus cleansed the temple, gave a sign to those who demanded it, to prove his authority for so doing. He foretells his death by the Jews' malice, Destroy ye this temple; I will permit you to destroy it. He foretells his resurrection by his own power; In three days I will raise it up. Christ took again his own life. Men mistake by understanding that according to the letter, which the Scripture speaks by way of figure. When Jesus was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered he has said this. It helps much in understanding the Divine word, to observe the fulfilling of the Scriptures.

Our Lord knew all men, their nature, dispositions, affections, designs, so as we do not know any man, not even ourselves. He knows his crafty enemies, and all their secret projects; his false friends, and their true characters. He knows who are truly his, knows their uprightness, and knows their weaknesses. We know what is done by men; Christ knows what is in them, he tries the heart. Beware of a dead faith, or a formal profession: carnal, empty professors are not to be trusted, and however men impose on others or themselves, they cannot impose on the heart-searching God.

1. There was a marriage in Cana of Galilee. As this narrative contains the first miracle which Christ performed, it would be proper for us, were it on this ground alone, to consider the narrative attentively; though — as we shall afterwards see — there are other reasons which recommend it to our notice. But while we proceed, the various advantages arising from it will be more clearly seen. The Evangelist first mentions Cana of Galilee, not that which was situated towards Zare-phath (1 Kings 17:9; Obadiah 20; Luke 4:26) or Sarepta, between Tyre and Sidon, and was called the greater in comparison of this latter Cana, which is placed by some in the tribe of Zebulun, and by others in the tribe of Asher. For Jerome too assures us that, even in his time, there existed a small town which bore that name. There is reason to believe that it was near the city of Nazareth, since the mother of Christ came there to attend the marriage. From the fourth chapter of this book it will be seen that it was not more than one day’s journey distant from Capernaum. That it lay not far from the city of Bethsaida may also be inferred from the circumstance, that three days after Christ had been in those territories, the marriage was celebrated — the Evangelist tells us — in Cana of Galilee. There may have been also a third Cana, not far from Jerusalem, and yet out of Galilee; but I leave this undetermined, because I am unacquainted with it.

And the mother of Jesus was there. It was probably one of Christ’s near relations who married a wife; for Jesus is mentioned as having accompanied his mother. From the fact that the disciples also are invited, we may infer how plain and frugal was his way of living; for he lived in common with them. It may be thought strange, however, that a man who has no great wealth or abundance (as will be made evident from the scarcity of the wine) invites four or five other persons, on Christ’s account. But the poor are readier and more frank in their invitations; because they are not, like the rich, afraid of being disgraced, if they do not treat their guests with great costliness and splendor; for the poor adhere more zealously to the ancient custom of having an extended acquaintance.

Again, it may be supposed to show a want of courtesy, that the bridegroom allows his guests, in the middle of the entertainment, to be in want of wine; for it looks like a man of little thoughtfulness not to have a sufficiency of wine for his guests. I reply, nothing is here related which does not frequently happen, especially when people are not accustomed to the daily use of wine. Besides, the context shows, that it was towards the conclusion of the banquet that the wine fell short, when, according to custom, it might be supposed that they had already drunk enough; for the master of the feast thus speaks, Other men place worse wine before those who have drunk enough, but thou hast kept the best till now. Besides, I have no doubt that all this was regulated by the Providence of God, that there might be room for the miracle.

3. The mother of Jesus saith to him. It may be doubted if she expected or asked any thing from her Son, since he had not yet performed any miracle; and it is possible that, without expecting any remedy of this sort, she advised him to give some pious exhortations which would have the effect of preventing the guests from feeling uneasiness, and at the same time of relieving the shame of the bridegroom. I consider her words to be expressive of (συμπαθεία) earnest compassion; for the holy woman, perceiving that those who had been invited were likely to consider themselves as having been treated with disrespect, and to murmur against the bridegroom, and that the entertainment might in that way be disturbed, wished that some means of soothing them could be adopted. Chrysostom throws out a suspicion that she was moved by the feelings of a woman to seek I know not what favor for herself and her Son; but this conjecture is not supported by any argument.

4. Woman, what have I to do with thee? Why does Christ repel her so rashly? I reply, though she was not moved by ambition, nor by any carnal affection, still she did wrong in going beyond her proper bounds. Her anxiety about the inconvenience endured by others, and her desire to have it in some way mitigated, proceeded from humanity, and ought to be regarded as a virtue; but still, by putting herself forward, she might obscure the glory of Christ. Though it ought also to be observed, that what Christ spoke was not so much for her sake as for the sake of others. Her modesty and piety were too great, to need so severe a chastisement. Besides, she did not knowingly and willingly offend; but Christ only meets the danger, that no improper use may be made of what his mother had said, as if it were in obedience to her command that he afterwards performed the miracle.

The Greek words (Τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοὶ) literally mean, What to me and to thee? But the Greek phraseology is of the same import with the Latin — Quid tibi mecum? (what hast thou to do with me?) The old translator led many people into a mistake, by supposing Christ to have asserted, that it was no concern of his, or of his mother’s, if the wine fell short. But from the second clause we may easily conclude how far removed this is from Christ’s meaning; for he takes upon himself this concern, and declares that it belongs to him to do so, when he adds, my hour is not yet come. Both ought to be joined together — that Christ understands what it is necessary for him to do, and yet that he will not act in this matter at his mother’s suggestion.

It is a remarkable passage certainly; for why does he absolutely refuse to his mother what he freely granted afterwards, on so many occasions, to all sorts of persons? Again, why is he not satisfied with a bare refusal? and why does he reduce her to the ordinary rank of women, and not even deign to call her mother? This saying of Christ openly and manifestly warns men to beware lest, by too superstitiously elevating the honor of the name of mother in the Virgin Mary, “En la vierge Marie.” they transfer to her what belongs exclusively to God. Christ, therefore, addresses his mother in this manner, in order to lay down a perpetual and general instruction to all ages, that his divine glory must not be obscured by excessive honor paid to his mother.

How necessary this warning became, in consequence of the gross and disgraceful superstitions which followed afterwards, is too well known. For Mary has been constituted the Queen of Heaven, the Hope, the Life, and the Salvation of the world; and, in short, their fury and madness proceeded so far that they stripped Christ of his spoils, and left him almost naked. And when we condemn those horrid blasphemies against the Son of God, the Papists call us malignant and envious; and — what is worse — they maliciously slander us as deadly foes to the honor of the holy Virgin. As if she had not all the honor that is due to her, unless she were made a Goddess; or as if it were treating her with respect, to adorn her with blasphemous titles, and to substitute her in the room of Christ. The Papists, therefore, offer a grievous insult to Mary when, in order to disfigure her by false praises, they take from God what belongs to Him.

My hour is not yet come. He means that he has not hitherto delayed through carelessness or indolence, but at the same time he states indirectly that he will attend to the matter, when the proper time for it shall arrive. As he reproves his mother for unseasonable haste, so, on the other hand, he gives reason to expect a miracle. The holy Virgin acknowledges both, for she abstains from addressing him any farther; and when she advises the servants to do whatever he commands, she shows that she expects something now. But the instruction conveyed here is still more extensive that whenever the Lord holds us in suspense, and delays his aid, he is not therefore asleep, but, on the contrary, regulates all His works in such a manner that he does nothing but at the proper time. Those who have applied this passage to prove that the time of events is appointed by Fate, are too ridiculous to require a single word to be said for refuting them. The hour of Christ sometimes denotes the hour which had been appointed to him by the Father; and by his time he will afterwards designate what he found to be convenient and suitable for executing the commands of his Father; but in this place he claims the right to take and choose the time for working and for displaying his Divine power. “De bosongner et desployer sa virtue Divine.”

5. His mother saith to the servants. Here the holy Virgin gives an instance of true obedience which she owed to her Son, “a son Fils.” when the question related, not to the relative duties of mankind, but to his divine power. She modestly acquiesces, therefore, in Christ’s reply; and in like manner exhorts others to comply with his injunctions. I acknowledge, indeed, that what the Virgin now said related to the present occurrence, and amounted to a declaration that, in this instance, she had no authority, and that Christ would do, according to his own pleasure, whatever he thought right. But if you attend closely to her design, the statement which she made is still more extensive; for she first disclaims and lays aside the power which she might seem to have improperly usurped; and next, she ascribes the whole authority to Christ, when she bids them do whatever he shall command. We are taught generally by these words, that if we desire any thing from Christ, we will not obtain our wishes, unless we depend on him alone, look to him, and, in short, do whatever he commands On the other hand, he does not send us to his mother, but rather invites us to himself.

6. And there were there six water-pots of stone. According to the computation of Budaeus, we infer that these water-pots were very large; for as the metreta The exact size of the firkin cannot be easily ascertained. If μετρητὴς be here used by the Evangelist as a purely Greek word, we must conclude it to be an Attic measure, which was nearly equal to nine English gallons. If, again, it be placed here as a substitute for the Hebrew word בת, (Bath,) as the Septuagint has done in 2 Chronicles 4:5, it will probably be rated at seven gallons and a half. — Ed (μετρητὴς) contains twenty congii, each contained, at least, a Sextier of this country. “De ce pays de Savoye;” — “of this country, Savoy.” Christ supplied them, therefore, with a great abundance of wine, as much as would be sufficient for a banquet to a hundred and fifty men. Besides, both the number and the size of the water-pots serve to prove the truth of the miracle. If there had been only two or three jars, many might have suspected that they had been brought from some other place. If in one vessel only the water had been changed into wine, the certainty of the miracle would not have been so obvious, or so well ascertained. It is not, therefore, without a good reason that the Evangelist mentions the number of the water-pots, and states how much they contained.

It arose from superstition that vessels so numerous and so large were placed there. They had the ceremony of washing, indeed, prescribed to them by the Law of God; but as the world is prone to excess in outward matters, the Jews, not satisfied with the simplicity which God had enjoined, amused themselves with continual washings; and as superstition is ambitious, they undoubtedly served the purpose of display, as we see at the present day in Popery, that every thing which is said to belong to the worship of God is arranged for pure display. There was, then, a twofold error: that without the command of God, they engaged in a superfluous ceremony of their own invention; and next, that, under the pretense of religion, ambition reigned amidst that display. Some Popish scoundrels have manifested an amazing degree of wickedness, when they had the effrontery to say that they had among their relics those water-pots with which Christ performed this miracle in Cana, and exhibited some of them, “Qu’ils avoyent entre leurs reliques de ces cruches, esquelles Christ avoit fait ce miracle en Cana, et en monstroyent.” which, first, are of small size, and, next, are unequal in size. And in the present day, when the light of the Gospel shines so clearly around us, they are not ashamed to practice those tricks, which certainly is not to deceive by enchantments, but daringly to mock men as if they were blind; and the world, which does not perceive such gross mockery, is evidently bewitched by Satan.

7. Fill the water-pots with water. The servants might be apt to look upon this injunction as absurd; for they had already more than enough of water. But in this way the Lord often acts towards us, that his power may be more illustriously displayed by an unexpected result; though this circumstance is added to magnify the miracle; for when the servants drew wine out of vessels which had been filled with water, no suspicion can remain.

8. And carry to the master of the feast. For the same reason as before, Christ wished that the flavor of the wine should be tried by the master of the feast, before it had been tasted by himself, or by any other of the guests; and the readiness with which the servants obey him in all things shows us the great reverence and respect in which he was held by them. The Evangelist gives the name of the master of the feast to him who had the charge of preparing the banquet and arranging the tables; not that the banquet was costly and magnificent, but because the honorable appellations borrowed from the luxury and splendor of the rich are applied even to the marriages of the poor. But it is wonderful that a large quantity of wine, and of the very best wine, is supplied by Christ, who is a teacher of sobriety. I reply, when God daily gives us a large supply of wine, it is our own fault if his kindness is an excitement to luxury; but, on the other hand, it is an undoubted trial of our sobriety, if we are sparing and moderate in the midst of abundance; as Paul boasts that he had learned to know both how to be full and to be hungry, (Philippians 4:12.)

11. This beginning of miracles. The meaning is, that this was the first of Christ’s miracles; for when the angels announced to the shepherds that he was born in Bethlehem, (Luke 2:8,) when the star appeared to the Magi, (Matthew 2:2,) when the Holy Spirit descended on him in the shape of a dove, (Matthew 3:16; Mark 1:10; John 1:32,) though these were miracles, yet, strictly speaking, they were not performed by him; but the Evangelist now speaks of the miracles of which he was himself the Author. For it is a frivolous and absurd interpretation which some give, that this is reckoned the first among; the miracles which Christ performed in Cana of Galilee; as if a place, in which we do not read that he ever was more than twice, had been selected by him for a display of his power. It was rather the design of the Evangelist to mark the order of time which Christ followed in the exercise of his power. For until he was thirty years of age, he kept himself concealed at home, like one who held no public office. Having been consecrated, at his baptism, to the discharge of his office, he then began to appear in public, and to show by clear proofs for what purpose he was sent by the Father. We need not wonder, therefore, if he delayed till this time the first proof of his Divinity. It is a high honor given to marriage, that Christ not only deigned to be present at a nuptial banquet, but honored it with his first miracle. There are some ancient Canons which forbid the clergy to attend a marriage. The reason of the prohibition was, that by being the spectators of the wickedness which was usually practiced on such occasions, they might in some measure be regarded as approving of it. But it would have been far better to carry to such places so much gravity as to restrain the licentiousness in which unprincipled and abandoned men indulge, when they are withdrawn from the eyes of others. Let us, on the contrary, take Christ’s example for our rule; and let us not suppose that any thing else than what we read that he did can be profitable to us.

And manifested his glory; that is, because he then gave a striking and illustrious proof, by which it was ascertained that he was the Son of God; for all the miracles which he exhibited to the world were so many demonstrations of his divine power. The proper time for displaying his glory was now come, when he wished to make himself known agreeably to the command of his Father. Hence, also, we learn the end of miracles; for this expression amounts to a declaration that Christ, in order to manifest his glory, performed this miracle. What, then, ought we to think of those miracles which obscure the glory of Christ?

And his disciples believed on him. If they were disciples, they must already have possessed some faith; but as they had hitherto followed him with a faith which was not distinct and firm, they began at that time to devote themselves to him, so as to acknowledge him to be the Messiah, such as he had already been announced to them. The forbearance of Christ is great in reckoning as disciples those whose faith is so small. And indeed this doctrine extends generally to us all; for the faith which is now full grown had at first its infancy, nor is it so perfect in any as not to make it necessary that all to a man should make progress in believing. Thus, they who now believed may be said to begin to believe, so far as they daily make progress towards the end of their faith. Let those who have obtained the first-fruits of faith labor always to make progress. These words point out likewise the advantage of miracles; namely, that they ought to be viewed as intended for the confirmation and progress of faith. Whoever twists them to any other purpose corrupts and debases the whole use of them; as we see that Papists boast of their pretended miracles for no other purpose than to bury faith, and to turn away the minds of men from Christ to the creatures.

John 2:12-17

12. After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples and he remained there not many days. 13. And the passover of the Jews was at hand; therefore, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14. And found in the temple some who sold oxen, and sheep, and doves, and money-changers also sitting. 15. And having made a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen, and threw down the money of the changers, and overturned the tables; 16. And said to those who sold doves, Take those things hence; do not make my Father’s house a house of merchandise. 17. And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thy house hath eaten me up.

12. He went down to Capernaum. The Evangelist passes to an additional narrative; for having resolved to collect a few things worthy of remembrance which the other three had left out, he states the time when the occurrence which he is about to relate took place; for the other three also relate what we here read that Christ did, but the diversity of the time shows that it was a similar event, but not the same. On two occasions, then, did Christ cleanse the temple from base and profane merchandise; once, when he was beginning to discharge his commission, and another time, (Matthew 21:12; Mark 11:15; Luke 19:45,) when he was about to leave the world and go to the Father, (John 16:28.)

To obtain a general view of the passage, it will be necessary briefly to examine the details in their order. That oxen, and sheep, and doves, were exposed to sale in the temple, and that money-changers were sitting there, was not without a plausible excuse. For they might allege that the merchandise transacted there was not irreligious, but, on the contrary, related to the sacred worship of God, that every person might obtain, without difficulty, what he might offer to the Lord; and, certainly, it was exceedingly convenient for godly persons to find oblations of any sort laid ready to their hand, and in this way to be freed from the trouble of running about in various directions to obtain them. We are apt to wonder, therefore, why Christ was so highly displeased with it. But there are two reasons which deserve our attention. First, as the Priests abused this merchandise for their own gain and avarice, such a mockery of God could not be endured. Secondly, whatever excuse men may plead, as soon as they depart, however slightly, from the command of God, they deserve reproof and need correction. And this is the chief reason why Christ undertook to purify the temple; for he distinctly states that the temple of God is not a place of merchandise

But it may be asked, Why did he not rather begin with doctrine? For it seems to be a disorderly and improper method to apply the hand for correcting faults, before the remedy of doctrine has been applied. But Christ had a different object in view: for the time being now at hand when he would publicly discharge the office assigned to him by the Father, he wished in some way to take possession of the temple, and to give a proof of his divine authority. And that all might be attentive to his doctrine, it was necessary that something new and strange should be done to awaken their sluggish and drowsy minds. Now, the temple was a sanctuary of heavenly doctrine and of true religion. Since he wished to restore purity of doctrine, it was of great importance that he should prove himself to be the Lord of the temple. Besides, there was no other way in which he could bring back sacrifices and the other exercises of religion to their spiritual design than by removing the abuse of them. What he did at that time was, therefore, a sort of preface to that reformation which the Father had sent him to accomplish. In a word, it was proper that the Jews should be aroused by this example to expect from Christ something that was unusual and out of the ordinary course; and it was also necessary to remind them that the worship of God had been corrupted and perverted, that they might not object to the reformation of those abuses

And his brethren. Why the brethren of Christ accompanied him, cannot be determined with certainty, unless, perhaps, they intended to go along with him to Jerusalem. The word brethren, it is well known, is employed, in the Hebrew language, to denote cousins and other relatives.

13. And the passover of the Jews was at hand; therefore Jesus went up to Jerusalem. The Greek words καὶ ἀνέβη, may be literally rendered, and he went up; but the Evangelist has used the copulative and instead of therefore; for he means that Christ went up at that time, in order to celebrate the passover at Jerusalem. There were two reasons why he did so; for since the Son of God became subject to the Law on our account, he intended, by observing with exactness all the precepts of the Law, to present in his own person a pattern of entire subjection and obedience. Again, as he could do more good, when there was a multitude of people, he almost always availed himself of such an occasion. Whenever, therefore, we shall afterwards find it said that Christ came to Jerusalem at the feast, let the reader observe that he did so, first, that along with others he might observe the exercises of religion which God had appointed, and, next, that he might publish his doctrine amidst a larger concourse of people.

16. Make not my Father’s house a house of merchandise. At the second time that he drove the traders out of the Temple, the Evangelists relate that he used sharper and more severe language; for he said, that they had made the Temple of God a den of robbers, (Matthew 21:13;) and this was proper to be done, when a milder chastisement was of no avail. At present, he merely warns them not to profane the Temple of God by applying it to improper uses. The Temple was called the house of God; because it was the will of God that there He should be peculiarly invoked; because there He displayed his power; because, finally, he had set it apart to spiritual and holy services.

My Father’s house. Christ declares himself to be the Son of God, in order to show that he has a right and authority to cleanse the Temple. As Christ here assigns a reason for what he did, if we wish to derive any advantage from it, we must attend chiefly to this sentence. Why, then, does he drive the buyers and sellers out of the Temple? It is that he may bring back to its original purity the worship of God, which had been corrupted by the wickedness of men, and in this way may restore and maintain the holiness of the Temple. Now that temple, we know, was erected, that it might be a shadow of those things the lively image of which is to be found in Christ. Thai; it might continue to be devoted to God, it was necessary that it should be applied exclusively to spiritual purposes. For this reason he pronounces it to be unlawful that it should be converted into a market-place; for he founds his statement on the command of God, which we ought always to observe. Whatever deceptions Satan may employ, let us know that any departure — however small — from the command of God is wicked. It was a plausible and imposing disguise, that; the worship of God was aided and promoted, when the sacrifices which were to be offered by believers were laid ready to their hand; but as God had appropriated his Temple to different purposes, Christ disregards the objections that might be offered against the order which God had appointed.

The same arguments do not apply, in the present day, to our buildings for public worship; but what is said about the ancient Temple applies properly and strictly to the Church, for it is the heavenly sanctuary of God on earth. We ought always, therefore, to keep before our eyes the majesty of God, which dwells in the Church, that it may not be defiled by any pollutions; and the only way in which its holiness can remain unimpaired is, that nothing shall be admitted into it that is at variance with the word of God.

17. And his disciples remembered. It is to no purpose that some people tease themselves with the inquiry how the disciples remembered a passage of Scripture, with the meaning of which they were hitherto unacquainted. For we must not understand that this passage of Scripture came to their remembrance at that time; but afterwards, when, having been taught by God, they considered with themselves what was the meaning of this action of Christ, by the direction of the Holy Spirit this passage of Scripture occurred to them. And, indeed, it does not always happen that the reason of God’s works is immediately perceived by us, but afterwards, in process of time, He makes known to us his purpose. And this is a bridle exceedingly well adapted to restrain our presumption, that we may not murmur against God, if at any time our judgment does not entirely approve of what he does. We are at the same time reminded, that when God holds us as it were in suspense, it is our duty to wait for the time of more abundant knowledge, and to restrain the excessive haste which is natural to us; for the reason why God delays the full manifestation of his works is, that he may keep us humble.

The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up. The meaning is, that the disciples at length came to know, that the zeal for the house of God, with which Christ burned, excited him to drive out of it those profanations. By a figure of speech, in which a part is taken for the whole, David employs the name of the temple to denote the whole worship of God; for the entire verse runs thus:

the zeal of thy house hath eaten me up, and the reproaches of them who reproached thee have fallen on me, (Psalm 69:9.)

The second clause corresponds to the first, or rather it is nothing else than a repetition explaining what had been said. The amount of both clauses is, that David’s anxiety about maintaining the worship of God was so intense, that he cheerfully laid down his head to receive all the reproaches which wicked men threw against God; and that he burned with such zeal, that this single feeling swallowed up every other. He tells us that he himself had such feelings; but there can be no doubt that he described in his own person what strictly belonged to the Messiah.

Accordingly, the Evangelist says, that this was one of the marks by which the disciples knew that it was Jesus who protected and restored the kingdom of God. Now observe that they followed the guidance of Scripture, in order to form such an opinion concerning Christ as they ought to entertain; and, indeed, no man will ever learn what Christ is, or the object of what he did and suffered, unless he has been taught and guided by Scripture. So far, then, as each of us shall desire to make progress in the knowledge of Christ, it will be necessary that Scripture shall be the subject of our diligent and constant meditation. Igor is it without a good reason that David mentions the house of God, when the divine glory is concerned; for though God is sufficient for himself, and needs not the services of any, yet he wishes that his glory should be displayed in the Church. In this way he gives a remarkable proof of his love towards us, because he unites his glory — as it were, by an indissoluble link — with our salvation.

Now as Paul informs us that, in the example of the head, a general doctrine is presented to the whole body, (Romans 15:3,) let each of us apply to the invitation of Christ, that — so far as lies in our power — we may not permit the temple of God to be in any way polluted. But, at the same time, we must beware lest any man transgress the bounds of his calling. All of us ought to have zeal in common with the Son of God; but all are not at liberty to seize a whip, that we may correct vices with our hands; for we have not received the same power, nor have we been entrusted with the same commission.

John 2:18-22

18. The Jews then answered and said to him, What sign “Quel signe, ou, miracle?” — “What sign? or, What miracle?” showest thou to us, that thou doest these things? 19. Jesus answered and said to them, Destroy this temple, and I will raise it up in three days. 20. The Jews therefore said, Forty and six years was this temple in building; and wilt thou raise it up in three days? 21. But he spoke of the temple of his body. 22. When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this to them; and they believed the Scripture, and the word which Jesus had spoken.

18. What sign showest thou to us? When in so large an assembly no man laid hands on Christ, and none of the dealers in cattle or of the money-changers repelled him by violence, we may conclude that they were all stunned and struck with astonishment by the hand of God. And, therefore, if they had not been utterly blinded, this would have been a sufficiently evident miracle, that one man against a great multitude, an unarmed man against strong men, all unknown man against so great rulers, attempted so great an achievement. For since they were far stronger, why did they not oppose him, but because their hands were loosened and — as it were — broken?

Yet they have some ground for putting the question; for it does not belong to every man to change suddenly, if any thing is faulty or displeases him in the temple of God. All are, indeed, at liberty to condemn corruptions; but if a private man put forth his hand to remove them, he will be accused of rashness. As the custom of selling in the temple had been generally received, Christ attempted what was new and uncommon; and therefore they properly call on him to prove that he was sent by God; for they found their argument on this principle, that in public administration it is not lawful to make any change without an undoubted calling and command of God. But they erred on another point, by refusing to admit the calling of Christ, unless he had performed a miracle; for it was not an invariable rule that the Prophets and other ministers of God should perform miracles; and God did not limit himself to this necessity. They do wrong, therefore, in laying down a law to God by demanding a sign. When the Evangelist says that the Jews asked him, he unquestionably means by that term the multitude who were standing there, and, as it were, the whole body of the Church; as if he had said, that it was not the speech of one or two persons, but of the people.

19. Destroy this temple. This is an allegorical mode of expression; and Christ intentionally spoke with that degree of obscurity, because he reckoned them unworthy of a direct reply; as he elsewhere declares that he speaks to them in parables, because they are unable to comprehend the mysteries of the heavenly kingdom, (Matthew 13:13.) But first he refuses to them the sign which they demanded, either because it would have been of no advantage, or because he knew that it was not the proper time. Some compliances he occasionally made even with their unreasonable requests, and there must have been a strong reason why he now refused. Yet that they may not seize on this as a pretense for excusing themselves, he declares that his power will be approved and confirmed by a sign of no ordinary value; for no greater approbation of the divine power in Christ could be desired than his resurrection from the dead. But he conveys this information figuratively, because he does not reckon them worthy of an explicit promise. In short, he treats unbelievers as they deserve, and at the same time protects himself against all contempt. It was not yet made evident, indeed, that they were obstinate, but Christ knew well what was the state of their feelings.

But it may be asked, since he performed so many miracles, and of various kinds, why does he now mention but one? I answer, he said nothing about all the other miracles, First, because his resurrection alone was sufficient to shut their mouth: Secondly, he was unwilling to expose the power of God to their ridicule; for even respecting the glory of his resurrection he spoke allegorically: Thirdly, I say that he produced what was appropriate to the case in hand; for, by these words, he shows that all authority over the Temple belongs to him, since his power is so great in building the true Temple of God.

This temple. Though he uses the word temple in accommodation to the present occurrence, yet the body of Christ is justly and appropriately called a temple. The body of each of us is called a tabernacle, (2 Corinthians 5:4; 2 Peter 1:13,) because the soul dwells in it; but the body of Christ was the abode of his Divinity. For we know that the Son of God clothed himself with our nature in such a manner that the eternal majesty of God dwelt in the flesh which he assumed, as in his sanctuary.

The argument of Nestorius, who abused this passage to prove that it is not one and the same Christ who is God and man, may be easily refuted. He reasoned thus: the Son of God dwelt in the flesh, as in a temple; therefore the natures are distinct, so that the same person was not God and man. But this argument might be applied to men; for it will follow that it is not one man whose soul dwells in the body as in a tabernacle; and, therefore, it is folly to torture this form of expression for the purpose of taking away the unity of Person in Christ. It ought to be observed, that our bodies also are called temples of God, (1 Corinthians 3:16, and 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16) but it is in a different sense, namely, because God dwells in us by the power and grace of his Spirit; but in Christ the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily, so that he is truly God manifested in flesh, (1 Timothy 3:16.)

I will raise it up again. Here Christ claims for himself the glory of his resurrection, though, in many passages of Scripture, it is declared to be the work of God the Father. But these two statements perfectly agree with each other; for, in order to give us exalted conceptions of the power of God, Scripture expressly ascribes to the Father that he raised up his Son from the dead; but here, Christ in a special manner asserts his own Divinity. And Paul reconciles both.

If the Spirit of Him, that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you, (Romans 8:11.)

While he makes the Spirit the Author of the resurrection, he calls Him indiscriminately sometimes the Spirit of Christ, and sometimes the Spirit of the Father.

20. Forty and six years. The computation of Daniel agrees with this passage, (Daniel 9:25;) for he reckons seven weeks, which make Forty-nine years; but, before the last of these weeks had ended, the temple was finished. The time described in the history of Ezra is much shorter; but, though it has some appearance of contradiction, it is not at all at variance with the words of the Prophet. For, when the sanctuary had been reared, before the building of the temple was completed, they began to offer sacrifices. The work was afterwards stopped for a long time through the indolence of the people, as plainly appears from the complaints of the Prophet Haggai 1:4; for he severely reproves the Jews for being too earnestly engaged in building their private dwellings, while they left the Temple of God in an unfinished state.

But why does he mention that temple which had been destroyed by Herod about forty years before that time? For the temple which they had at that time, though it had been built with great magnificence and at a vast expense, had been completed by Herod, contrary to the expectation of men, as is related by Josephus, (Ant. Book 15. chapter 11.) I think it probable that this new building of the temple was reckoned as if the ancient temple had always remained in its original condition, that it might be regarded with greater veneration; and that they spoke in the usual and ordinary manner, that their fathers, with the greatest difficulty, had scarcely built the temple in Forty-six, years

This reply shows plainly enough what was their intention in asking a sign; for if they had been ready to obey, with reverence, a Prophet sent by God, they would not have so disdainfully rejected what he had said to them about the confirmation of his office. They wish to have some testimony of divine power, and yet they receive nothing which does not correspond to the feeble capacity of man. Thus the Papists in the present day demand miracles, not that they would give way to the power of God, (for it is a settled principle with them to prefer men to God, and not to move a hair’s breadth from what they have received by custom and usage;) but that they may not appear to have no reason for rebelling against God, they hold out this excuse as a cloak for their obstinacy. In such a manner do the minds of unbelievers storm in them with blind impetuosity, that they desire to have the hand of God exhibited to them and yet do not wish that it should be divine.

When therefore he was risen from the dead. This recollection was similar to the former, which the Evangelist lately mentioned, (verse 17.) The Evangelist did not understand Christ when he said this; but the doctrine, which appeared to have been useless, and to have vanished into air, afterwards produced fruit in its own time. Although, therefore, many of the actions and sayings of our Lord are obscure for a time, we must not give them up in despair, or despise that which we do not all at once understand. “Il ne faut pas pourtant quitter la tout par desespoir, ne mespriser ce que nous n’entendons pas tout incontinent.” We ought to observe the connection of the words, that they believed the Scripture, and the word which Jesus had spoken; for the Evangelist means that, by comparing the Scripture with the word of Christ, they were aided in making progress in faith.

John 2:23-25

23. And when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, many believed in his name, beholding the signs which he performed. 24. But Jesus himself did not confide in them, because he knew them all. “Il les cognoissoient tous,” 25. And needed not that any should testify of man; for he knew what was in man.

23. Many believed. The Evangelist appropriately connects this narrative with the former. Christ had not given such a sign as the Jews demanded; and now, when he produced no good effect on them by many miracles — except that they entertained a cold faith, which was only the shadow of faith — this event sufficiently proves that they did not deserve that he should comply with their wishes. It was, indeed, some fruit of the signs, that many believed in Christ, and in his name, so as to profess that they wished to follow his doctrine; for name is here put for authority. This appearance of faith, which hitherto was fruitless, might ultimately be changed into true faith, and might be a useful preparation for celebrating the name of Christ among others; and yet what we have said is true, that they were far from having proper feelings, so as to profit by the works of God, as they ought to have done.

Yet this was not a pretended faith by which they wished to gain reputation among men; for they were convinced that Christ was some great Prophet, and perhaps they even ascribed to him the honor of being the Messiah, of whom there was at that time a strong and general expectation. But as they did not understand the peculiar office of the Messiah, their faith was absurd, because it was exclusively directed to the world and earthly things. It was also a cold belief, and unaccompanied by the true feelings of the heart. For hypocrites assent to the Gospel, not that they may devote themselves in obedience to Christ, nor that with sincere piety they may follow Christ when he calls them, but because they do not venture to reject entirely the truth which they have known, and especially when they can find no reason for opposing it. For as they do not voluntarily, or of their own accord, make war with God, so when they perceive that his doctrine is opposed to their flesh and to their perverse desires, they are immediately offended, or at least withdraw from the faith which they had already embraced.

When the Evangelist says, therefore, that those men believed, I do not understand that they counterfeited a faith which did not exist, but that they were in some way constrained to enroll themselves as the followers of Christ; and yet it appears that their faith was not true and genuine, because Christ excludes them from the number of those on whose sentiments reliance might be placed. Besides, that faith depended solely on miracles, and had no root in the Gospel, and therefore could not be steady or permanent. Miracles do indeed assist the children of God in arriving at the truth; but it does not amount to actual believing, when they admire the power of God so as merely to believe that it is true, but not to subject themselves wholly to it. And, therefore, when we speak generally about faith, let us know that there is a kind of faith which is perceived by the understanding only, and afterwards quickly disappears, because it is not fixed in the heart; and that is the faith which James calls dead; but true faith always depends on the Spirit of regeneration, (James 2:17, 20, 26.) Observe, that all do not derive equal profit from the works of God; for some are led by them to God, and others are only driven by a blind impulse, so that, while they perceive indeed the power of God, still they do not cease to wander in their own imaginations.

24. But Christ did not rely on them. Those who explain the meaning to be, that Christ was on his guard against them, because he knew that they were not upright and faithful, do not appear to me to express sufficiently well the meaning of the Evangelist. Still less do I agree with what Augustine says about recent converts. The Evangelist rather means, in my opinion, that Christ did not reckon them to be genuine disciples, but despised them as volatile and unsteady. It is a passage which ought to be carefully observed, that not all who profess to be Christ’s followers are such in his estimation. But we ought also to add the reason which immediately follows:

Because he knew them all. Nothing is more dangerous than hypocrisy, for this reason among others, that it is an exceedingly common fault. There is scarcely any man who is not pleased with himself; and while we deceive ourselves by empty flatteries, we imagine that God is blind like ourselves. But here we are reminded how widely his judgment differs from ours; for he sees clearly those things which we cannot perceive, because they are concealed by some disguise; and he estimates according to their hidden source, that is, according to the most secret feeling of the heart, those things which dazzle our eyes by false luster. This is what Solomon says, that

God weighs in his balance the hearts of men, while they flatter themselves in their ways, (Proverbs 21:2.)

Let us remember, therefore, that none are the true disciples of Christ but those whom He approves, because in such a matter He alone is competent to decide and to judge.

A question now arises: when the Evangelist says that Christ knew them all, does he mean those only of whom he had lately spoken, or does the expression refer to the whole human race? Some extend it to the universal nature of man, and think that the whole world is here condemned for wicked and perfidious hypocrisy. And, certainly, it is a true statement, that Christ can find in men no reason why he should deign to place them in the number of his followers; but I do not see that this agrees with the context, and therefore I limit it to those who had been formerly mentioned.

25. For he knew what was in man. As it might be doubted whence Christ obtained this knowledge, the Evangelist anticipates this question, and replies that Christ perceived every thing in men that is concealed from our view, so that he could on his own authority make a distinction among men. Christ, therefore, who knows the hearts, had no need of any one to inform him what sort of men they were. He knew them to have such a disposition and such feelings, that he justly regarded them as persons who did not belong to him.

The question put by some — whether we too are authorized by the example of Christ to hold those persons as suspected who have not given us proof of their sincerity — has nothing to do with the present passage. There is a wide difference between him and us; for Christ knew the very roots of the trees, but, except from the fruits which appear outwardly, we cannot discover what is the nature of any one tree. Besides, as Paul tells us, that charity is not suspicious, (1 Corinthians 13:5,) we have no right to entertain unfavorable suspicions about men who are unknown to us. But, that we may not always be deceived by hypocrites, and that the Church may not be too much exposed to their wicked impostures, it belongs to Christ to impart to us the Spirit of discretion.

CHAPTER 3

John 3:1-6

1. Now there was a man of the Pharisees, called Nicodemus, a ruler among the Jews. 2. He came to Jesus by night, and said to him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God, for no man can do these signs which thou doest, unless God be with him. 3. Jesus answered and said to him, Verily, verily, I say to thee, Unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4. Nicodemus saith to him, How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter again into his mother’s womb and be born? 5. Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say to thee, Unless a man be: born of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6. That which is born of flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

CHAPTER 2

Joh 2:1-12. First Miracle, Water Made Wine--Brief Visit to Capernaum.

1. third day--He would take two days to reach Galilee, and this was the third.

mother there--it being probably some relative's marriage. John never names her [Bengel].

3. no wine--evidently expecting some display of His glory, and hinting that now was His time.

4-5. Woman--no term of disrespect in the language of that day (Joh 19:26).

what ... to do with thee--that is, "In my Father's business I have to do with Him only." It was a gentle rebuke for officious interference, entering a region from which all creatures were excluded (compare Ac 4:19, 20).

mine hour, &c.--hinting that He would do something, but at His own time; and so she understood it (Joh 2:5).

6. firkins--about seven and a half gallons in Jewish, or nine in Attic measure; each of these huge water jars, therefore, holding some twenty or more gallons, for washings at such feasts (Mr 7:4).

7-8. Fill ... draw ... bear--directing all, but Himself touching nothing, to prevent all appearance of collusion.

9-10. well drunk--"drunk abundantly" (as So 5:1), speaking of the general practice.

11. manifested forth his glory--Nothing in the least like this is said of the miracles of prophet or apostle, nor could without manifest blasphemy be said of any mere creature. Observe, (1) At a marriage Christ made His first public appearance in any company, and at a marriage He wrought His first miracle--the noblest sanction that could be given to that God-given institution. (2) As the miracle did not make bad good, but good better, so Christianity only redeems, sanctifies, and ennobles the beneficent but abused institution of marriage; and Christ's whole work only turns the water of earth into the wine of heaven. Thus "this beginning of miracles" exhibited the character and "manifested forth the glory" of His entire Mission. (3) As Christ countenanced our seasons of festivity, so also that greater fulness which befits such; so far was He from encouraging that asceticism which has since been so often put for all religion. (4) The character and authority ascribed by Romanists to the Virgin is directly in the teeth of this and other scriptures.

12. Capernaum--on the Sea of Galilee. (See on Mt 9:1).

his mother and his brethren--(See on Lu 2:51, and Mt 13:54-56).

Joh 2:13-25. Christ's First Passover--First Cleansing of the Temple.

14-17. in the temple--not the temple itself, as Joh 2:19-21, but the temple-court.

sold oxen, &c.--for the convenience of those who had to offer them in sacrifice.

changers of money--of Roman into Jewish money, in which the temple dues (see on Mt 17:24) had to be paid.

18-22. What sign showest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things?--Though the act and the words of Christ, taken together, were sign enough, they were unconvinced: yet they were awed, and though at His very next appearance at Jerusalem they "sought to kill Him" for speaking of "His Father" just as He did now (Joh 5:18), they, at this early stage, only ask a sign.

23-25. in the feast day--the foregoing things occurring probably before the feast began.

many believed--superficially, struck merely by "the miracles He did." Of these we have no record.

Cana of Galilee - This was a small city in the tribe of Asher, Jos 19:28, and by saying this was Cana of Galilee, the evangelist distinguishes it from another Cana, which was in the tribe of Ephraim, in the Samaritan country. See Jos 16:8; Jos 17:9.

Some suppose that the third day, mentioned here, refers to the third day of the marriage feast: such feasts lasting among the Jews seven days. See Jdg 14:12, Jdg 14:17, Jdg 14:18, and Bishop Pearce.

The mother of Jesus was there - Some of the ancients have thought that this was the marriage of John the evangelist, who is supposed to have been a near relative of our Lord. See the sketch of his life prefixed to these notes.

And both Jesus was called, and his disciples - There are several remarkable circumstances here.

1. This was probably the first Christian wedding that was ever in the world.

2. The great Author of the Christian religion, with his disciples, (probably then only four or five in number, see Joh 1:37, etc.), were invited to it.

3. The first miracle Jesus Christ wrought was at it, and in honor of it.

4. The mother of Christ, the most pure of all virgins, the most holy of all wives, and the first Christian mother, was also at it.

5. The marriage was according to God, or these holy persons would not have attended it.

6. The bride and bridegroom must have been a holy pair, otherwise they would have had nothing to do with such holy company.

Marriage is ever honorable in itself; but it is not at all times used honourably. Where Jesus is not invited to bless the union, no good can be expected; and where the disciples of sin and Satan are preferred to the disciples of Christ, on such occasions, it is a melancholy intimation that so bad a beginning will have a bad ending. I am afraid we may search long, before we find a marriage conducted on such principles as this appears to have been, even among those who make more than a common profession of the religion of Christ.

They have no wine - Though the blessed virgin is supposed to have never seen her son work a miracle before this time, yet she seems to have expected him to do something extraordinary on this occasion; as, from her acquaintance with him, she must have formed some adequate idea of his power and goodness.

Woman, what have I to do with thee? - Τι εμοι και σοι, γυναι: O, woman, what is this to thee and me? This is an abrupt denial, as if he had said: "We are not employed to provide the necessaries for this feast: this matter belongs to others, who should have made a proper and sufficient provision for the persons they had invited." The words seem to convey a reproof to the virgin, for meddling with that which did not particularly concern her. The holiest persons are always liable to errors of judgment: and should ever conduct themselves with modesty and humility, especially in those things in which the providence of God is particularly concerned. But here indeed there appears to be no blame. It is very likely the bride or bridegroom's family were relatives of the blessed virgin; and she would naturally suppose that our Lord would feel interested for the honor and comfort of the family, and, knowing that he possessed extraordinary power, made this application to him to come forward to their assistance. Our Lord's answer to his mother, if properly translated, is far from being disrespectful. He addresses the virgin as he did the Syrophoenician woman, Mat 15:28; as he did the Samaritan woman, Joh 4:21, as he addressed his disconsolate mother when he hung upon the cross, Joh 19:26; as he did his most affectionate friend Mary Magdalene, Joh 20:15, and as the angels had addressed her before, Joh 20:13; and as St. Paul does the believing Christian woman, 1Cor 7:16; in all which places the same term, γυναι which occurs in this verse, is used; and where certainly no kind of disrespect is intended, but, on the contrary, complaisance, affability, tenderness, and concern and in this sense it is used in the best Greek writers.

Mine hour is not yet come - Or, my time, for in this sense the word ὡρα is often taken. My time for working a miracle is not yet fully come. What I do, I do when necessary, and not before. Nature is unsteady - full of haste; and ever blundering, in consequence. It is the folly and sin of men that they are ever finding fault with the Divine providence. According to them, God never does any thing in due time - he is too early or too late: whereas it is utterly impossible for the Divine wisdom to forestall itself; or for the Divine goodness to delay what is necessary.

His mother saith, etc. - The virgin seems to have understood our Lord as hinted above. It was not yet time to grant them a supply, because the want had not as yet been generally felt. But, silently receiving the respectful caution, she saw that the miracle should be wrought when it best suited the purposes of the Divine wisdom.

After the manner of the purifying of the Jews - Or, for the purpose of the purifying of the Jews. The preposition κατα, which I have translated, for the purpose, often denotes in the best Greek writers the final cause of a thing. See several examples produced by Raphelius, from Arrian and Herodotus. These six vessels were set in a convenient place, for the purpose of the Jews washing their hands before they sat down to meat, and probably for other purposes of purification. See this custom referred to in Mat 15:2 (note). As to the number six, we need seek for no mystery in it; the number of pots was proportioned to the number of the guests.

Containing two or three firkins apiece - Measures or metretes, μετρητας. Bishop Cumberland supposes that the Syrian metretes is here meant, which he computes to have held seven pints and one eighth of a pint; and, if this computation be right, the whole six water pots might have contained about fourteen gallons and a quart. Others make each metretes to contain ten gallons and two pints: see Arbuthnot. But the contents of the measures of the ancients are so very uncertain that it is best, in this and numberless other cases, to attempt to determine nothing.

Governor of the feast - The original word, αρχιτρικλινος, signifies one who is chief or head over three couches, or tables. In the Asiatic countries, they take their meals sitting, or rather reclining, on small low couches. And when many people are present, so that they cannot all eat together, three of these low tables or couches are put together in form of a crescent, and some one of the guests is appointed to take charge of the persons who sit at these tables. Hence the appellation of architriclinus, the chief over three couches or tables, which in process of time became applied to the governor or steward of a feast, let the guests be many or few; and such person, having conducted the business well, had a festive crown put on his head by the guests, at the conclusion of the feast. See Ecclesiasticus, 32:1-3. It is very common for the Hindoos to appoint a person who is expert in conducting the ceremonies of a feast to manage as governor. This person is seldom the master of the house.

And they bare it - A question has been asked, "Did our Lord turn all the water into wine which the six measures contained?" To which I answer: There is no proof that he did; and I take it for granted that he did not. It may be asked, "How could a part be turned into wine, and not the whole?" To which I answer: The water, in all likelihood, was changed into wine as it was drawn out, and not otherwise. "But did not our Lord by this miracle minister to vice, by producing an excess of inebriating liquor?" No; for the following reasons:

1. The company was a select and holy company, where no excess could be permitted. And,

2. Our Lord does not appear to have furnished any extra quantity, but only what was necessary. "But it is intimated in the text that the guests were nearly intoxicated before this miraculous addition to their wine took place; for the evangelist says, ὁταν μεθυσθωσι, when they have become intoxicated." I answer:

1. It is not intimated, even in the most indirect manner, that these guests were at all intoxicated.

2. The words are not spoken of the persons at that wedding at all: the governor of the feast only states that such was the common custom at feasts of this nature; without intimating that any such custom prevailed there.

3. The original word bears a widely different meaning from that which the objection forces upon it. The verbs μεθυσκω and μεθυω, from μεθυ, wine, which, from μετα θυειν, to drink after sacrificing, signify not only to inebriate, but to take wine, to drink wine, to drink enough: and in this sense the verb is evidently used in the Septuagint, Gen 43:34; Sol 5:1; 1 Maccabees 16:16; Hag 1:6; Ecclus. 1:16. And the Prophet Isaiah, Isa 58:11, speaking of the abundant blessings of the godly, compares them to a watered garden, which the Septuagint translate, ὡς κηπος μεθυων, by which is certainly understood, not a garden drowned with water, but one sufficiently saturated with it, not having one drop too much, nor too little.

The good wine until now - That which our Lord now made being perfectly pure, and highly nutritive!

This beginning of miracles - It was probably the first he ever wrought: - at any rate, it was the first he wrought after his baptism, and the first he wrought publicly.

His glory - His supreme Divinity: Joh 1:14.

His disciples believed on him - Were more abundantly confirmed in their faith, that he was either the promised Messiah, or a most extraordinary prophet, in the fullest intercourse with the ever blessed God.

And the Jews' passover was at hand - This was the reason why he stayed but a few days at Capernaum, Joh 2:12, as he wished to be present at the celebration of this feast at Jerusalem.

This was the first passover after Christ's baptism. The second is mentioned, Luk 6:1. The third, Joh 6:4. And the fourth, which was that at which he was crucified, Joh 11:55. From which it appears,

1. That our blessed Lord continued his public ministry about three years and a half, according to the prophecy of Daniel, Dan 9:27. And,

2. That, having been baptized about the beginning of his thirtieth year, he was crucified precisely in the middle of his thirty-third. See Martin.

Found in the temple those that sold oxen, etc. - This is a similar fact to that mentioned Mat 21:12; Mar 11:15; Luk 19:45. See it explained on Mat 21:12 (note). If it be the same fact, then John anticipates three years of time in relating it here; as that cleansing of the temple mentioned by the other evangelists took place in the last week of our Lord's life. Mr. Mann, Dr. Priestley, and Bp. Pearce, contend that our Lord cleansed the temple only once; and that was at the last passover. Calvin, Mr. Mede, L'Enfant and Beausobre, Dr. Lardner, Bp. Hurd, and Bp. Newcome, contend that he purged the temple twice; and that this, mentioned by John, was the first cleansing, which none of the other evangelists have mentioned. Let the reader, says Bp. Newcome, observe the order of events. "Jesus works his first miracle at Cana of Galilee, Joh 2:11; then he passes a few days at Capernaum, which bring him on his way to Jerusalem, Joh 2:12. The passover being near, he goes up to Jerusalem, Joh 2:13, and casts the traders out of the temple, Joh 2:15, Joh 2:16, At the passover he works many miracles, Joh 2:23. While he is in Jerusalem, which city he does not leave till, Joh 3:22, Nicodemus comes to him by night, Joh 3:1, Joh 3:2. Joh 3:2 contains a reference to Joh 2:23. After these things, Jesus departs from Jerusalem, and dwells and baptizes in Judea, Joh 3:22. And all these incidents take place before John was cast into prison, Joh 3:24. But the second cleansing of the temple happens most clearly during the last week of our Lord's life, after the death of the Baptist, and at a time when it would be absurd to say that afterwards Jesus dwelt and baptized in Judea."

The vindication of God's house from profanation was the first and the last care of our Lord; and it is probable he began and finished his public ministry by this significant act.

It certainly appears that John directly asserts an early cleansing of the temple, by the series of his history; as the other three evangelists assert a later cleansing of it. And though the act mentioned here seems to be nearly the same with that mentioned by the other evangelists, yet there are some differences. St. John alone mentions the scourge of rushes, and the casting out of the sheep and oxen. Besides, there is a considerable difference in our Lord's manner of doing it: in the cleansing mentioned by the three evangelists, he assumes a vast deal of authority, and speaks more pointedly concerning himself, than he appears to do in this cleansing mentioned by St. John: the reason which has been given is, In the first cleansing he was just entering upon his public ministry, and therefore avoided (as much as was consistent with the accomplishment of his work) the giving any offense to the Jewish rulers; but, in the last cleansing, he was just concluding his ministry, being about to offer up his life for the salvation of the world, in consequence of which he speaks fully and without reserve. For answers to all the objections made against two cleansings of the temple, see the notes at the end of Bp. Newcome's Greek Harmony of the Gospels, pp. 7-9.

The zeal of thine house - See Psa 59:10. Zeal to promote thy glory, and to keep thy worship pure.

What sign showest thou - See on Mat 12:38 (note); Mat 16:1 (note). When Moses came to deliver Israel, he gave signs, or miracles, that he acted under a Divine commission. What miracle dost thou work to show us that thou art vested with similar authority?

Destroy this temple - Τον ναον τουτον, This very temple; perhaps pointing to his body at the same time.

Forty and six years was this temple in building - The temple of which the Jews spake was begun to be rebuilt by Herod the Great, in the 18th year of his reign: Josephus. Ant. b. xv. c. 11, s. 1; and xx. c. 9, s. 5, 7. But though he finished the main work in nine years and a half, yet some additional buildings or repairs were constantly carried on for many years afterwards. Herod began the work sixteen years before the birth of our Lord: the transactions which are here related took place in the thirtieth year of our Lord, which make the term exactly forty-six years. Rosenmuller. Josephus, Ant. b. xx. c. 8, s. 5, 7, has told us that the whole of the buildings belonging to the temple were not finished till Nero's reign, when Albinus, the governor of Judea, was succeeded by Gessius Florus, which was eighty years after the eighteenth year of Herod's reign. See Bp. Pearce.

Of the temple of his body - Rather, the temple, his body: his body had no particular temple: but it was the temple of his Divinity - the place in which, as in the ancient temple, his Godhead dwelt; See how the Jews perverted these words, Mat 26:60 (note), and the notes there.

Remembered that he had said this unto them - Αυτοις, to them, is wanting in AEHLMS, Matt. BV, upwards of one hundred others; both the Syriac; Persic, Arabic, Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Slavonic, Vulgate, and Itala. Griesbach has left it out of the text.

They believed the scripture - The scripture which the evangelist immediately refers to may have been Psa 16:10. Compare this with Act 2:31, Act 2:32, and with Act 13:35-37. See also Psa 2:7, and compare it with Heb 1:5, and Heb 5:5, and with Act 13:33. They understood these scriptures in a sense in which they never before understood them.

It is the property of many prophecies never to be understood except by their accomplishment; but these are so marked that, when their fulfillment takes place, they cannot be misunderstood, or applied to any other event.

Many believed in his name - They believed him to be the promised Messiah, but did not believe in him to the salvation of their souls: for we find, from the following verse, that their hearts were not at all changed, because our blessed Lord could not trust himself to them.

He knew all men - Instead of παντας all men, EGH, and about thirty others, read παντα, every man, or all things; and this I am inclined to believe is the true reading. Jesus knew all things; and why? Because he made all things, Joh 1:3, and because he was the all-wise God, Joh 1:1; and he knew all men, because he alone searches the heart, and tries the reins. He knows who are sincere, and who are hypocritical: he knows those in whom he can confide, and those to whom he can neither trust himself nor his gifts. Reader, he also knows thee: thy cares, fears, perplexities, temptations, afflictions, desires, and hopes; thy helps and hinderances; the progress thou hast made in the Divine life, or thy declension from it. If he know thee to be hypocritical or iniquitous, he looks upon thee with abhorrence: if he know thee to be of a meek and broken spirit, he looks on thee with pity, complacency, and delight. Take courage - thou canst say, Lord, thou knowest all things, thou knowest that I do love thee, and mourn because I love and serve thee so little: then expect him to come in unto thee, and make his abode with thee: while thy eye and heart are simple, he will love thee, and thy whole soul shall be full of light. To him be glory and dominion for ever!

And the third day - After he had said this. In Cana of Galilee - There were two other towns of the same name, one in the tribe of Ephraim, the other in Caelosyria.

Jesus and his disciples were invited to the marriage - Christ does not take away human society, but sanctifies it. Water might have quenched thirst; yet our Lord allows wine; especially at a festival solemnity. Such was his facility in drawing his disciples at first, who were afterward to go through rougher ways.

And wine falling short - How many days the solemnity had lasted, and on which day our Lord came, or how many disciples might follow him, does not appear. His mother saith to him, They have not wine - Either she might mean, supply them by miracle; or, Go away, that others may go also, before the want appears.

Jesus saith to her, Woman - So our Lord speaks also, John 19:26. It is probable this was the constant appellation which he used to her. He regarded his Father above all, not knowing even his mother after the flesh. What is it to me and thee? A mild reproof of her inordinate concern and untimely interposal. Mine hour is not yet come - The time of my working this miracle, or of my going away. May we not learn hence, if his mother was rebuked for attempting to direct him in the days of his flesh, how absurd it is to address her as if she had a right to command him, on the throne of his glory? Likewise how indecent it is for us to direct his supreme wisdom, as to the time or manner in which he shall appear for us in any of the exigencies of life!

His mother saith to the servants - Gathering from his answer he was about to do something extraordinary.

The purifying of the Jews - Who purified themselves by frequent washings particularly before eating.

The governor of the feast - The bridegroom generally procured some friend to order all things at the entertainment.

And saith - St. John barely relates the words he spoke, which does not imply his approving them. When they have well drunk - does not mean any more than toward the close of the entertainment.

And his disciples believed - More steadfastly.

Oxen, and sheep, and doves - Used for sacrifice: And the changers of money - Those who changed foreign money for that which was current at Jerusalem, for the convenience of them that came from distant countries.

Having made a scourge of rushes - (Which were strewed on the ground,) he drove all out of the temple, (that is, the court of it,) both the sheep and the oxen - Though it does not appear that he struck even them; and much less, any of the men. But a terror from God, it is evident, fell upon them.

Psa 69:9.

Then answered the Jews - Either some of those whom he had just driven out, or their friends: What sign showest thou? - So they require a miracle, to confirm a miracle!

This temple - Doubtless pointing, while he spoke, to his body, the temple and habitation of the Godhead.

Forty and six years - Just so many years before the time of this conversation, Herod the Great had begun his most magnificent reparation of the temple, (one part after another,) which he continued all his life, and which was now going on, and was continued thirty - six years longer, till within six or seven years of the destruction of the state, city, and temple by the Romans.

They believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said - Concerning his resurrection.

Many believed - That he was a teacher sent from God.

He did not trust himself to them - Let us learn hence not rashly to put ourselves into the power of others. Let us study a wise and happy medium between universal suspiciousness and that easiness which would make us the property of every pretender to kindness and respect.

He - To whom all things are naked, knew what was in man - Namely, a desperately deceitful heart.

AND the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee , and the mother of Jesus was there .

Whether it was the third day after that our Saviour had left the Province of Iudea, or the third day after Philip came to him, or after Peter, or Nathan[illegible: 1 letter]el came to him, is hardly worth the disputing; if it be to be interpreted with relation to v. 43. of the former Chapter, (which speaks of the day following) it must be, the third day after Simon came to Christ, there happened to be a marriage in Cana of Galilee. Some reckon three Cities of this name; one in the lot of Manasses, another in the lot of Ephraim, another in the lo[illegible: 1 letter] of Assur. This Cana is concluded by most Interpreters, to be the same mentioned, Ios. 19.28. which was in the Tribe of Assur. which was in Galilee; some others say, it was another Cana, near to Capernaum.

At this Wedding-feast was the Virgin Mary, our Lords Mother; and 'tis probable, that the persons for whose Marriage the Feast was Solemnized, were some of the Virgins Kindred, or near Relations. Some think from the Virgins taking notice of the want of Wine, that it was a family where she had either a constant charge, or the charge for that day.

2 And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage .

Whether onely the five Disciples mentioned in the former Chapter, or some others also, the Scripture doth not say. Christ and his Disciples being at this Marriage-feast, both lets us know, that feasting at such a time is proper, and that the most severe Religious persons may lawfully be present at such meetings, only they are obliged to keep to rules of Frugality, Modesty, and Sobriety, to a breach of which possibly such meetings may give more temptations.

3 And when they wanted wine , the mother of Jesus saith unto him. They have no wine .

The word [non-Latin text not transcribed], may as well be translated, coming short, or behind, as wanting; and so some think it is to be understood; but

Mary tells Jesus, they had no Wine; they either had none, or she discerned it came short; they had not enough. It lets us know the Frugality of him who made the Feast. But whether Mary told her Son of it, in expectation that he should supply it by a Miracle, or that he should entertain the Company with some Pious discourse, while the want should be supplied, is not so easie to determine; that which seems to oppose the first, (and most generally received) opinion, is, That this was the first Miracle he wrought, which we have upon record; nor had our Saviour by any words given her hope to see any miraculous Operations from him; for tho some say, he had, from the last verse of the former Chapter; yet the words can hardly be strained to such a sense; nor doth it appear that Mary was in Iudea to hear them. But yet it seems probable, she had some such Expectation, both from our Saviours answer, v. 5. and from her saying to the Servants, v. 4. Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it; and tho Christ had as yet done no publick miracle; yet what the Virgin might have seen of him in thirty years time, while he lived at home with her, we cannot tell.

4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman , What have I to do with thee ? mine hour is not yet come .

That it was ordinary with the Iews, speaking to Women, to call them by the name of their Sex, is plain from Matth. 15.28. Luke 13.11, 12. and 22.57. Ioh. 4.11, 12. But that speaking to their Relations, they were wont to own their Relation in their Compellation, sometimes is also evident, from 1 King. 2.20. Ask on, my Mother. So as our Saviours here calling the blessed Virgin, Woman, not Mother, is agreed by most, to signifie to her, that in this thing he did not own her as his Mother, and so clothed with an authority to command him. And indeed so much

the next words signifie, which is a form of Speech that both signifies some displeasure for her unseasonable interrupting him, and also that she had no right nor authority upon him in this thing. See the use of the same Phrase, Iudg. 11.12. 2 Sam. 16.10. Ezra 4.3. Matth. 8.29. and 27.19. None was more obedient and respective to his Parents, than our Saviour, Luk. 2.51. therein fulfilling the Will of God, Ier. 35.13, 14. but in the business of his calling, he regarded them not, Matth. 12.48. Luk. 2.49. and hath thereby taught us our Duty, to refer our Obedience to our heavenly Father, before our Obedience to any earthly Relation, Mat. 10.35. Luk. 14.26. He hath also hereby taught us, that the blessed Virgin is not to be preferred before her Son, (as the Papists do.)

Besides this, our Lord giveth another reason for his not present hearkning to his Mother; either, because the time was not yet come to work miracles publickly; or to shew her, that she was not to prescribe the time to him when he should work miraculously; thereby also shewing us, that for things in this Life, we are to submit our desires to the Divine will; and to wait Gods leisure; yet by this expression he also gives her some hopes, that he would in his own time supply this want.

5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it .

She plainly by these words, declareth her confidence, that Christ (notwithstanding the Repulse he gave her) would supply this want; and therefore taking no notice of Christs reprehension of her, she orders the Servants to be absolutely Obedient to him, doing, without disputing, whatsoever he bid them; and indeed such is the Obedience which we all owe to God and Jesus Christ.

6 And there were set there six water-pots of stone after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins a piece .

The Iews were wont in their Dining rooms, to have Water-pots standing; whether one for every guest, (upon which account some think here were six) doth not appear.

For, the content of these Vessels, it is uncertain; the reason is, because the Jewish measures, both for things dry and liquid, are much unknown to us, most Countreys varying in their measures. According to our measures, these Vessels should contain three Hogsheads, or near it; but it is not probable that so great Vessels of Stone should stand in a room; the end of their standing there, was for the people to wash in, before they did eat, Matth. 15.2. Mar. 7.3. and to wash their Vessels in, v. 4. We are certain of the number of the Vessels, but not of the content of them. Some say, they held so much Water, as being turned into Wine, was enough for 150. Persons; but we can make no certain Judgment of it.

7 Jesus saith unto them, Fill the water-pots with water . And they filled them up to the brim m.

Either the Water was defiled by some Persons washing in it, or else the Vessels were not full. Our Lord commands them to be filled, the Water-pots, not Wine vessels, with Water, [illegible: 1 word] Water; he commands them all to be filled by the Servants, who could attest the miracle, that there was nothing in the Vessels but pure Water. Here was no new Creature to be produced; he doth not therefore command the production of Wine out of nothing; but only the transformation of a Creature already existent, into a Creature of another kind. The Servants dispute not his commands, nor ask any reason of his command, but yeild that ready and absolute Obedience which we all of us owe to Divine Precepts. They fill them, and so full, that they could hold no more.

8 And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governour of the feast . And they bare it .

The Iews had one who was to order the affairs of their Feast, and who is upon that account called the Master, or Governour of it; to whom our Saviour directs, that some of this newly-made Wine should be carried; either that they might not suspect it was by some art provided by him, or because he was of the best Judgment in those affairs.

The Servants yield the same ready Obedience to his commands, which they had before yielded.

9 When the ruler of the fearst had tasted the water that was made wine , and knew not whence it was, but the servants which drew the water, knew ; the governour of the feast called the bridegroom,

Our Saviours action, by which he turned the Water into Wine, being not obvious to the senses of any; but onely the secret motion of his Will, willing the thing to be, is not recorded, onely the effect, and the consequents of it are. The Papists would from hence argue, that the Bread in the Sacrament, may be called Bread, tho it be transubstantiated, as the Water here is called Water, tho it were turned into Wine; but it must be observed, that it is not here called Water, without the addition of that was made Wine; we have no such addition in the Gospel, where the Sacramental Bread is called Bread; it is not said, the Bread which now is turned into the flesh of Christ; nor doth the Scripture any where, (as here) attest any such Transubstantiation.

The Governour of the Feast had a Cup of Wine presented to him, but knew not whence it came, onely the Servants, who by Christs command first filled the Vessels, and drew out this Cup full, they knew.

10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine ; and when men have well drunk , then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now .

The Governour calls the Bridegroom (at whose cost the Provision for the Feast was to be provided) and mindeth him, that he seemed to have done contrary to the common practice of such as made Feasts; for they used to bring forth their best Wine first, when mens Pallates were quickest, and least adulterated; and worse

after that they had drank well; so the word [non-Latin text not transcribed] signifies, (as appears by the Septuagints Translation of the Hebrew word so signifying, Gen. 43.34. Hag. 1.6. Not onely mens distempering themselves with Wine, (which it also sometimes signifieth), and this speaketh our Translation of it, 1 Cor. 11.21. are drunken, Something hard, the word not necessarily nor always so signifieth; and they must be very uncharitable to the Primitive Church of Corinth, who can think, that it would permit persons actually drunken to the Lords table. But the custom, it seems, was, if they had any Wine worse than other, to bring it out to their Guests after that the edg of their Pallates was a little blunted with the tast of better.

Now this Bridegroom, as the Governour of the Feast (who knew nothing of the Miracle) thought, had kept his briskest and most generous Wine to the last, thereby giving a great Approbation of the Miracle, not onely owning it to be true Win[illegible: 1 letter], but much better than they had had before at the Feast.

11 This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee , and manifested forth his glory : and his disciples believed on him .

The sense is not, That this was the first Miracle which Christ wrought in Cana of Galilee; but this was the first Miracle which Christ wrought after he was entred upon the publick Ministry, and it was wrought in that Cana, which is within the confines of Galilee, either in the lot of Zebulon or Asher; yet there are some, who would not have it the first Miracle which Christ wrought, but the first which he wrought in that place, but there is no reason for such an Interpretation; for then there had been no reason for the following words, for Christ did not manifest his glory there onely; tho some object those wonderful, or miraculous things, happening at our Saviours Birth, of which we read, Matth. 2.9. Luk. 2.11. Yet as some distinguish betwixt mira and miracula; so others give a more plain and satisfactory answer, telling us those were miraculous Operations, more proper to the Father and the Spirit; thereby attesting the Deity of Christ, than to Christ considered as God-man. This was the first of those miraculous Operations which were wrought by Christ Jesus as God-man, by which

he manifested his Glory, the Glory mentioned, chap. 1.14. as of the onely begotten of the father; his Divine Majesty and Power.

And his Disciples, who before believed on him, Ioh. 1.41, 42. now more firmly believed on him, Ioh. 14.1. as Mediator. In Scripture that is often said to be, which doth not commence, but increase from that time and occasion.

12 ¶ After this he went down to Capernaum , he, and his mother, and his brethren , and his disciples: and they continued there not many days :

Capernaum was a City lifted up to Heaven, for mercies of all sorts, which Christ foretold, Matth. 11.23. should be brought down to Hell for their contempt of his Doctrine and Miracles. It was in the Tribe of Napthali, whose Lot was contiguous to Zebulon, and lay on the North-East of it, a place where Christ afterwards Preached much, and wrought many miracles, Matth. 8.13, 14. and 9.18. Mar. 2.1. and 5.22. a place brought so low in Hieroms time, that it scarce consisted of seven poor Cottages of Fishermen.

Thither at this time went Christ and his Mother, and his brethren; (by which term the Scripture often expresseth any near Kinsmen) and his Disciples; whether only the five mentioned in the former Chapter, or others also, is not said:

But they did not at that time stay long there, probably because the Passover time (when they were to be at Hierusalem), was so nigh, as would not admit any long stay before they began their Journey; and it is likely, that the company mentioned here, to be with Christ at Capernaum, did also design to go along with him to the Passover, of which we next read.

13 ¶ And the Jews passover was at hand: and Jesus went up to Hierusalem ,

Concerning the Jewish Passover, we have once and again spoken in our Notes on the other Evangelists; the Institution of it, was Exod. 12. It was to be solemnized yearly in the place which the Lord should chuse, according to the Law, Deut. 16.6. Christ, tho he was not naturally subject to the Law, yet to fulfil all Righteousness, and to Redeem his people from the Curse of the Law, Gal. 4.5. kept the passover yearly, taking also advantage from the conflux of the people to Hierusalem at that time, to make himself and his Doctrine more known. None of the other Evangelists make mention of more than one Passover betwixt the time of Christs Baptism and Death: Iohn plainly mentions three, one here, another in chap. 6.4. The last, chap. 18.39. and some think, that he mentioneth another, tho more obscurely, chap. 5.1. Our Lord was at them all.

14 And found in the temple those that sold oxen, and sheep, and doves , and the changers of money sitting .

Matth. 21.12. Luk. 19.45. Is a peice of History so like this, that some have questioned whether it mentioneth not the same individual matter of fact; but it is apparent that it doth not. 1. Because St. Iohn mentioneth it as done three years before it, at the first Passover; all the other Evangelists mention what they report, as done at the fourth Passover. 2. The circumstances of the Narrative make it appear. 1. Iohn mentions onely the Ejection of the Sellers, all the other mention the Ejection both of the Buyers and Sellers. 2. Here, he onely saith, they had made his Fathers house a Place of Merchandise. The others say, that whereas it was written, it should be called an House of Prayer, hey had made it a Den of Thieves. 3. Here he onely bids them that sold Doves, take their goods away. The others say, he overturned the Seats of them that sold Doves; so as our Saviour plainly appeareth to have done this twice at his first Passover, and at the last. For the more full Explication of the parts of this History; see our Notes on Matth. 21.12. Luk. 19.14. Mark 11.15. The reason of their bringing Oxen, and Sheep, and Doves, into the Temple, was to supply those that came a far off, and could not bring their Sacrifices with them, with such Sacrifices as the Law required in several cases.

The money-Changers were there, to change the peoples money into half-Shekels; every one being obliged to Offer his half Shekel, Exod. 30. v. 13. Our Saviour did not condemn this course of accommodating of people; but blameth the covetousness of the Priests, who for their private lucre had made the Temple their Market-place▪ when as there was room enough elsewhere.

15 And when he had made a scourge of small cords , he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers money , and overthrew the tables .

It concerns not us to inquire, where our Saviour had the small cords, of which he made his Whip; there were doubtless, Cords enough at hand, taken off from Beasts brought thither, (tho he was himself in no Franciscan habit (as the Papists idly dream.)

But herein was the mighty Power of God seen, that Christ, a single, private, obscure Person, should without any more noise or opposition, drive out the multitude of these Hucksters, and overturn their Tables. Nor I think (after the consideration of this circumstance need we enquire, By what authority he did this? It was prophecied of him M[illegible: 1 letter]l 3.1. That he should come to his temple; and v. 3. Should sit as a refiner, and purifier of silver: and purifie the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver. Christ here according to that Prophecy, cometh to his Temple, and begins to purge it.

But herein was the mighty Power of God seen, that Christ, a single, private, obscure Person, should without any more noise or opposition, drive out the multitude of these Hucksters, and overturn their Tables. Nor I think (after the consideration of this circumstance need we enquire, By what authority he did this? It was prophecied of him, M[illegible: 1 letter]l 3.1. That he should come to his temple; and v. 3. Should sit as a refiner, and purifier of silver: and purifie the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver. Christ here according to that Prophecy, cometh to his Temple, and begins to purge it.

16 And said unto them that sold doves. Take these things hence: make not my Fathers house an house of merchandise .

At this his first coming, he gives them that sold Doves a liberty to take their goods away; but at the last coming, Matth. 21.12. it is said, he overturned their seats. Those that think this president sufficient to vindicate private Persons tumultuous pulling down Images, seem not to consider, that Christ was no private Person (tho so esteemed) and did what he did as Lord of his house: Those who urge it, as inferring Magistrates and Superiors duty in this case; urge it well; for it may well be from hence concluded, That it is the Will of Christ, that places set a part for publick Worship, should neither wickedly be made Dens of Thieves, nor yet indecently made places for men to buy and sell in; tho we can ascribe no such holiness to any place, as to the Temple, which had not only a particlar Dedication, but was built by Gods order, his acceptation of it declared, and had peculiar Promises annexed to it; besides its Prefiguration of Christ (of which we shall speak more afterwad); yet even nature it self teacheth, That there is a decent reverence and respect due to such places. This Action of Christs, also, before he had published the Doctrine of the Gospel, instructs us, That those who have authority, are not always to refrain from removing instruments of Superstition and Idolatry, or gross and indecent Corruptions; until people be first by the preaching of the true Doctrine perswaded, willingly to part with them. But if this were to make Gods house a place of Merchandise for men, there to sell Oxen, and Sheep, and Doves, and keep Shops for Changing money: What do Papists make such houses, by their shewing their Relicks and Images to people, thereby to get money for their Priests; and for selling Pardons, Indulgences? &c. Never were Gods Houses to that degree made places of Merchandises, and Dens of Thieves, if every one that cheateth for his profit be (as he is) a Theif.

17 And his disciples remembred that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up .

The Disciples, as well as the rest of the people there present, could not but be astonished at this so strange a thing, to see a single Person, and he in no repute but as a private Person, to make a Whip, and with authority drive the Buyers and Sellers out of the Temple, and no body to oppose him; but they remembred the words of David, Psal. 69.9. Some think that Iohn here reports what they did after Christs Resurrection; and indeed, who so considereth the following part of the Gospel History, would think that it were so; for they did not seem so early to have had a perswasion of Christs Divine nature, nor that he was the Messiah. Or if they at this time remembred it, and apprehended that Christ was the Son of David, the Impression seems to have worn off. It is a greater Question, whether Psal. 69. (from whence this quotation is,) is to be understood of Christ, properly and literally? Or meerly as the Antitype to David, of whom that Psalm is literally to be understood. Some of the Lutheranes think that Psalm primarily concerned Christ. Mr. Calvin, and others, think it onely concerned Christ as David's antitype: The former for their Opinion, take notice of the frequent Quotation of it in the New Testament, Matth. 27.48. Ioh. 19.28. Acts 1.20. Rom. 15.3. The other urge, that there are some things in that Psalm which cannot agree to Christ. The matter is not much; Zeal is nothing but a warmth of Love and Anger. It is good to be Zealous; yea, swallowed up with Zeal in a good cause; but men must take heed of the pharisaical Zeal, not according to Knowledg; Christ was zealous, but the cause was good.

18 ¶ Then answered the Jews , and said unto him , What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things l?

Which of the Iews, whether some of the Magistrates, or the Priests, (who were more specially concerned for their profit) or the common people, or all together, is not said. They undertake not to justifie their fact, nor could they deny it, but they ask him what sign he could shew them, to justifie his Divine Authority. For this seemeth to have been their principle, That let Corruptions and Abuses in a Church be never so great, yet they were not to be reformed, but either by the ordinary Authority of the Magistrate, or by an extraordinary Authority from God. Such an extraordinary Authority they would acknowledg in Prophets, but they expected that those who pretented to such an extraordinary Divine Mission, should be able to confirm that Mission by some miraculous Operations, (as Moses did, Exod. 4.30.) They had had no Prophets now for 400 years amongst them; the Iews required therefore a sign, 1 Cor. 1.22 The Papists were at the same point with the first Reformers; but they mistook; for they brought no new Doctrine; but still cried, to the Law, and to the Testimony; and where the true Doctrine and Sacraments are upheld, there is a true Church, which hath power to call and send out Preachers.

Marginal references: Matt. 12.38. Chap. 6.30.

19 Jesus answered and said unto them , Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up .

Our Saviour refuseth to give them any sign, but that of his Resurrection the third day from the Dead. This was the sign to which he afterwards referreth the Pharisees, Matth. 12.39. Luk. 11.29. Our Saviours words must not be understood, as commanding or licensing them to destroy him; but as foretelling what they would do. It is in Scripture, very ordinary to use the Imperative mood for the Future tense of the Indicative, see Gen. 42.18. Deut. 32.50. Isa. 8.9, 10. and 54. 1. Ioh. 13.27. Destroy, is as much as, I know you will destroy, or if you do destroy this Temple, I will build it up in three days. The Resurrection of Christ from the dead, is ordinarily in Scripture attributed to the Father; but here Christ saith he would do it, and the Spirit by whom he is said to have been quickned, equally proceedeth both from the Father and his Son. Nor is this the onely Text, where it is attributed to Christ, see chap. 20.17, 18. It was the work of the Trinity, out of it self, and so the work of all the three Persons. These words were three years after this made a great charge against Christ, Matth. 26.61. but they reported them thus: This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days. He said onely, the Temple, meaning his Body.

Marginal references: Matt. 27.40. Mark 14.58. and 15.29.

20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building , and wilt thou rear it up in three days ?

The Iews understood his words of that material Temple in which they at this time were, which the best Interpreters think was the Temple builded by Ezra and Zerobabel: but how to make it out, that it was 46 years building, they were not well agreed. Some say, Cyrus reigned 30. Cambyses 8. Darius 6. These added together make 44. Others say that the Magi reigned more, 2. years. Some reckon to Cyrus 31. to his Son Cambyses 9. Darius 6. Others say that the years wherein the building was hindred, during Artaxerxes time, Ezra 4.21. added to the 2. year of Darius, v. 24. in whose 6th year it was finished; are reckoned together.

The Iews thought it strange that our Saviour should undertake in three days, to rear a building which had cost their Forefathers so many years.

21 But he spake of the temple of his body .

But alas, our Saviour spake not of their material Temple, but of the Temple of his Body, which yet was proper speaking; for if the Apostle calleth our Bodies the Temple of God, as he doth, 1 Cor. 3.16. and 6.19. 2 Cor. 6.16. It much more may be said so of the Body of Christ; for as God dwelt in the Temple, and there revealed his Will, and would be there Worshipped; how properly must the Notion of the Temple agree to Christ, in whom the fulness of the Godhead dwelt bodily? Col. 2.9. who revealeth his Fathers nature and will to men, Matth. 11.27. and in whom all must worship him? So as the Temple at H[illegible: 1 letter]erusalem was every way a most Illustrious Type of Christ, and Christ might well, speaking concerning his Body, say, destroy this Temple; and thus Christ (would these blind Iews have seen it) drew off the Iews from glorying in their Temple, Ier. 7.4. and from the Temple, which was but a Type, (as the Tabernacle was before, Acts 7.47. Heb. 9.23, 24.) to himself, prefigurated by those houses, Heb. 9.11. Nor doth he think fit as this time to speak more plainly; for as he knew, that the perverse Iews, in seeing, would not see, nor bear any such Doctrine; so he also knew, that his better Disciples were as yet weak in Faith; and none putteth new Wine into old Bottles.

22 When therefore he was risen from the dead , his disciples remembred that he had said this unto them : and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said .

Even Christs own Disciples at the first rather admired, than prefectly understood their Lord. It is said of Christ, Luke 24.45. a little before his Ascension into Heaven, Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scripture. The Disciples did not distinctly understand many things, till after Christs Resurrection from the Dead, when they saw the things accomplished; and when Christ further opened their eyes, which was also further done, when the Holy Ghost came upon them in the days of Pentecost. Thus we hear for the time to come; and the Seed which lieth a long time under the Clods, at last springeth up through the Influence of Heaven upon it.

The Disciples then more clearly and more firmly believed the Scriptures, and were able to make a clearer Application and Interpretation of them. By the Scriptures here, are meant the Scriptures of the Old Testament; to which is added, and the words of Iesus. Christs word[illegible: 1 letter] gave them a clearer insight into the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and the harmony of the writings of the Old Testament, with Christs words under the New Testament, confirmed the Disciples Faith in both.

Marginal references: Luke 24.[illegible: 1 letter].

23 ¶ Now when he was at Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his Name , when they saw the miracles which he did .

To believe in Christs name, and to believe in Christ himself, are one and the same thing; as it is the same to call upon God, and to call upon the Name of God: so Acts 3.16. The meaning is, that they believed the things which were published concerning his Person and Office, yet the Periphrasis, Believing in his name, is not vain; but declareth a mutual relation betwixt God and the Word, by the Preaching of which he maketh himself known to the World. True faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God. I think it is to no purpose disputed here by some, Whether the Faith here mentioned was true Faith, yea or no. It appeareth by what followeth, that it was not true justifying Faith; but it was true in its kind. To make up true justifying saving Faith, which the Apostle calls the Faith of Gods elect, three things are required, 1. A knowledg of the Proposition of the Word revealing Christ; this is acquired by Reading, Hearing, Meditation, &c. 2. The second i[illegible: 1 letter] Assent, which is the act of the understanding, agreeing in the truth of the word revealed, when such an Assent is given to a Proposition, if merely upon the Divine Revelation of it; this is Faith, a true Faith in its kind. 3. Upon this now (in those who savingly believe), the Will closeth with Christ as an adequate object; for it receiveth him, accepteth him, relies on him as its Saviour, and moveth by the Affections, to Love, Desire, Hope, Rejoyce in him; and commandeth the outward man into an Obedience to his Law. Now it is very possible, that through a common Influence of the Holy Spirit of God, men upon the hearing of the Word; especially, having the advantage of seeing miraculous Operations confirming the Word, may give a true Assent to the Proposition of the Word, as a Proposition of Truth, and yet may never receive Christ as their Saviour, close with him, trust in him, desire, love, or obey him; this was the case of these Persons (many at least of them.)

They believed, seeing the miracles which Christ did; they wanted a due knowledg of Christ founded in the Word; neither had they any certain, steady, fixed Assent, founded in the discerning the Truth of the Proposition; their Assent was sudden, founded onely upon the Miracles they saw wrought, so as tho they might have some confidence in him, as a famous Person, and some great Prince, from whom they might expect some earthly good; yet this was all, which was far enough from true saving Faith.

24 But Jesus did not commit himself unto them , because he knew all men .

Christ did not take all these seeming Believers into his Bosom, nor call them after him, nor maintained any familiar fellowship and communion with them; but made hast again into Galilee, till his time was come, knowing that in so publick a place of danger, they were not to be trusted;

for being God blessed for ever, he had knowledg of the hearts of all men,

25 And needed not that any should testifie of man for he knew what was in many y.

And needed not any information concerning the Principles and Humours of all Men; for he perfectly knew men, not onely from their more external Acts and Behaviours, (as we know them); but he knew what was in them, searching the hearts, and trying the reins, which is the property of God alone, 1 Kings 8.39. Psal. 33.15. Here what we formerly observed, is again observable; that oft times in holy writ, for the further Confirmation of a Proposition, to an universal Affirmative is added, a contrary Negative. Here ariseth a question, agitated betwixt the Lutherans and the Calvinists, Whether Christ as man knew all things, and what is in the heart of man; they affirm it, because of the personal Vnion of the Divine and Humane Nature in Christ. We say, that altho there be such a personal Union, yet the properties of each nature remain distinct; upon which account Christ denyeth that he, as the Son of Man, knew the day and hour of the end of the World. Besides, by the same reason, that Omniscience belongeth to the Humane Nature of Christ; Omnipotence, Infiniteness, and Omnipresence also must; which last indeed they affirm, seeing that without it, they were not able to defend their Doctrine of Consubstantiation, or the presence of the Body and Blood of Christ, wherever the Sacrament of his Supper is Administred; but this being a matter Polemical, we shall not here discourse it. Those who would be satisfied as to what is said on either side, may find enough in Gerard, Hunnius, and Farnovius, on the Lutheran side; and in Zanchius, and others, on the Calvinists side; Zanchius de natura & Attributis Dei; lib▪ 3. cap. 2. qu. 16.

Marginal references: 1 Sam. 16.7. 1 Chron. 28.9. Chap. 6.64. Act. 1.24. Rev. 2.23.

Water Turned into Wine.

1 And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: 2 And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. 3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. 4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. 5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. 6 And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. 7 Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. 8 And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. 9 When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, 10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now. 11 This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.

We have here the story of Christ's miraculous conversion of water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee. There were some few so well disposed as to believe in Christ, and to follow him, when he did no miracle; yet it was not likely that many should be wrought upon till he had something wherewith to answer those that asked, What sign showest thou? He could have wrought miracles before, could have made them the common actions of his life and the common entertainments of his friends; but, miracles being designed for the sacred and solemn seals of his doctrine, he began not to work any till he began to preach his doctrine. Now observe,

I. The occasion of this miracle. Maimonides observes it to be to the honour of Moses that all the signs he did in the wilderness he did upon necessity; we needed food, he brought us manna, and so did Christ. Observe,

1. The time: the third day after he came into Galilee. The evangelist keeps a journal of occurrences, for no day passed without something extraordinary done or said. Our Master filled up his time better than his servants do, and never lay down at night complaining, as the Roman emperor did, that he had lost a day.

2. The place: it was at Cana in Galilee, in the tribe of Asher (Josh. xix. 28), of which, before, it was said that he shall yield royal dainties, Gen. xlix. 20. Christ began to work miracles in an obscure corner of the country, remote from Jerusalem, which was the public scene of action, to show that he sought not honour from men (ch. v. 41), but would put honour upon the lowly. His doctrine and miracles would not be so much opposed by the plain and honest Galileans as they would be by the proud and prejudiced rabbies, politicians, and grandees, at Jerusalem.

3. The occasion itself was a marriage; probably one or both of the parties were akin to our Lord Jesus. The mother of Jesus is said to be there, and not to be called, as Jesus and his disciples were, which intimates that she was there as one at home. Observe the honour which Christ hereby put upon the ordinance of marriage, that he graced the solemnity of it, not only with his presence, but with his first miracle; because it was instituted and blessed in innocency, because by it he would still seek a godly seed, because it resembles the mystical union between him and his church, and because he foresaw that in the papal kingdom, while the marriage ceremony would be unduly dignified and advanced into a sacrament, the married state would be unduly vilified, as inconsistent with any sacred function. There was a marriage—gamos, a marriage-feast, to grace the solemnity. Marriages were usually celebrated with festivals (Gen. xxix. 22; Judg. xiv. 10), in token of joy and friendly respect, and for the confirming of love.

4. Christ and his mother and disciples were principal guests at this entertainment. The mother of Jesus (that was her most honourable title) was there; no mention being made of Joseph, we conclude him dead before this. Jesus was called, and he came, accepted the invitation, and feasted with them, to teach us to be respectful to our relations, and sociable with them, though they be mean. Christ was to come in a way different from that of John Baptist, who came neither eating nor drinking, Matt. xi. 18, 19. It is the wisdom of the prudent to study how to improve conversation rather than how to decline it.

(1.) There was a marriage, and Jesus was called. Note, [1.] It is very desirable, when there is a marriage, to have Jesus Christ present at it; to have his spiritual gracious presence, to have the marriage owned and blessed by him: the marriage is then honourable indeed; and they that marry in the Lord (1 Cor. vii. 39) do not marry without him. [2.] They that would have Christ with them at their marriage must invite him by prayer; that is the messenger that must be sent to heaven for him; and he will come: Thou shalt call, and I will answer. And he will turn the water into wine.

(2.) The disciples also were invited, those five whom he had called ( ch. 1), for as yet he had no more; they were his family, and were invited with him. They had thrown themselves upon his care, and they soon found that, though he had no wealth, he had good friends. Note, [1.] Those that follow Christ shall feast with him, they shall fare as he fares, so he has bespoken for them (ch. xii. 26): Where I am, there shall my servant be also. [2.] Love to Christ is testified by a love to those that are his, for his sake; our goodness extendeth not to him, but to the saints. Calvin observes how generous the maker of the feast was, though he seems to have been but of small substance, to invite four or five strangers more than he thought of, because they were followers of Christ, which shows, saith he, that there is more of freedom, and liberality, and true friendship, in the conversation of some meaner persons than among many of higher rank.

II. The miracle itself. In which observe,

1. They wanted wine, v. 3. (1.) There was want at a feast; though much was provided, yet all was spent. While we are in this world we sometimes find ourselves in straits, even then when we think ourselves in the fulness of our sufficiency. If always spending, perhaps all is spent ere we are aware. (2.) There was want at a marriage feast. Note, They who, being married, are come to care for the things of the world must expect trouble in the flesh, and count upon disappointment. (3.) It should seem, Christ and his disciples were the occasion of this want, because there was more company than was expected when the provision was made; but they who straiten themselves for Christ shall not lose by him.

2. The mother of Jesus solicited him to assist her friends in this strait. We are told (v. 3-5) what passed between Christ and his mother upon this occasion.

(1.) She acquaints him with the difficulty they were in (v. 3): She saith unto him, They have no wine. Some think that she did not expect from him any miraculous supply (he having as yet wrought no miracle), but that she would have him make some decent excuse to the company, and make the best of it, to save the bridegroom's reputation, and keep him in countenance; or (as Calvin suggests) would have him make up the want of wine with some holy profitable discourse. But, most probably, she looked for a miracle; for she knew he was now appearing as the great prophet, like unto Moses, who so often seasonably supplied the wants of Israel; and, though this was his first public miracle, perhaps he had sometimes relieved her and her husband in their low estate. The bridegroom might have sent out for more wine, but she was for going to the fountain-head. Note, [1.] We ought to be concerned for the wants and straits of our friends, and not seek our own things only. [2.] In our own and our friends' straits it is our wisdom and duty to apply ourselves to Christ by prayer. [3.] In our addresses to Christ, we must not prescribe to him, but humbly spread our case before him, and then refer ourselves to him to do as he pleases.

(2.) He gave her a reprimand for it, for he saw more amiss in it than we do, else he had not treated it thus.—Here is,

[1.] The rebuke itself: Woman, what have I to do with thee? As many as Christ loves, he rebukes and chastens. He calls her woman, not mother. When we begin to be assuming, we should be reminded what we are, men and women, frail, foolish, and corrupt. The question, ti emoi kai soi, might be read, What is that to me and thee? What is it to us if they do want? But it is always as we render it, What have I to do with thee? as Judges xi. 12; 2 Sam. xvi. 10; Ezra iv. 3; Matt. viii. 29. It therefore bespeaks a resentment, yet not at all inconsistent with the reverence and subjection which he paid to his mother, according to the fifth commandment (Luke ii. 51); for there was a time when it was Levi's praise that he said to his father, I have not known him, Deut. xxxiii. 9. Now this was intended to be, First, A check to his mother for interposing in a matter which was the act of his Godhead, which had no dependence on her, and which she was not the mother of. Though, as man, he was David's Son and hers; yet, as God, he was David's Lord and hers, and he would have her know it. The greatest advancements must not make us forget ourselves and our place, nor the familiarity to which the covenant of grace admits us breed contempt, irreverence, or any kind or degree of presumption. Secondly, It was an instruction to others of his relations (many of whom were present here) that they must never expect him to have any regard to his kindred according to the flesh, in his working miracles, or that therein he should gratify them, who in this matter were no more to him than other people. In the things of God we must not know faces. Thirdly, It is a standing testimony against that idolatry which he foresaw his church would in after-ages sink into, in giving undue honours to the virgin Mary, a crime which the Roman catholics, as they call themselves, are notoriously guilty of, when they call her the queen of heaven, the salvation of the world, their mediatrix, their life and hope; not only depending upon her merit and intercession, but beseeching her to command her Son to do them good: Monstra te esse matrem—Show that thou art his mother. Jussu matris impera salvatori—Lay thy maternal commands on the Saviour. Does he not here expressly say, when a miracle was to be wrought, even in the days of his humiliation, and his mother did but tacitly hint an intercession, Woman, what have I to do with thee? This was plainly designed either to prevent or aggravate such gross idolatry, such horrid blasphemy. The Son of God is appointed our Advocate with the Father; but the mother of our Lord was never designed to be our advocate with the Son.

[2.] The reason of this rebuke: Mine hour is not yet come. For every thing Christ did, and that was done to him, he had his hour, the fixed time and the fittest time, which was punctually observed. First, "Mine hour for working miracles is not yet come." Yet afterwards he wrought this, before the hour, because he foresaw it would confirm the faith of his infant disciples (v. 11), which was the end of all his miracles: so that this was an earnest of the many miracles he would work when his hour was come. Secondly, "Mine hour of working miracles openly is not yet come; therefore do not talk of it thus publicly." Thirdly, "It not the hour of my exemption from thy authority yet come, now that I have begun to act as a prophet?" So Gregory Nyssen. Fourthly, "Mine hour for working this miracle is not yet come." His mother moved him to help them when the wine began to fail (so it may be read, v. 3), but his hour was not yet come till it was quite spent, and there was a total want; not only to prevent any suspicion of mixing some of the wine that was left with the water, but to teach us that man's extremity is God's opportunity to appear for the help and relief of his people. Then his hour is come when we are reduced to the utmost strait, and know not what to do. This encouraged those that waited for him to believe that though his hour was not yet come it would come. Note, The delays of mercy are not to be construed the denials of prayer. At the end it shall speak.

(3.) Notwithstanding this, she encouraged herself with expectations that he would help her friends in this strait, for she bade the servants observe his orders, v. 5. [1.] She took the reproof very submissively, and did not reply to it. It is best not to deserve reproof from Christ, but next best to be meek and quiet under it, and to count it a kindness, Ps. cxli. 5. [2.] She kept her hope in Christ's mercy, that he would yet grant her desire. When we come to God in Christ for any mercy, two things discourage us:—First, Sense of our own follies and infirmities "Surely such imperfect prayers as ours cannot speed." Secondly, Sense of our Lord's frowns and rebukes. Afflictions are continued, deliverances delayed, and God seems angry at our prayers. This was the case of the mother of our Lord here, and yet she encourages herself with hope that he will at length give in an answer of peace, to teach us to wrestle with God by faith and fervency in prayer, even when he seems in his providence to walk contrary to us. We must against hope believe in hope, Rom. iv. 18. [3.] She directed the servants to have an eye to him immediately, and not to make their applications to her, as it is probable they had done. She quits all pretensions to an influence upon him, or intercession with him; let their souls wait only on him, Ps. lxii. 5. [4.] She directed them punctually to observe his orders, without disputing, or asking questions. Being conscious to herself of a fault in prescribing to him, she cautions the servants to take heed of the same fault, and to attend both his time and his way for supply: "Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it, though you may think it ever so improper. If he saith, Give the guests water, when they call for wine, do it. If he saith, Pour out from the bottoms of the vessels that are spent, do it. He can make a few drops of wine multiply to so many draughts." Note, Those that expect Christ's favours must with an implicit obedience observe his orders. The way of duty is the way to mercy; and Christ's methods must not be objected against.

(4.) Christ did at length miraculously supply them; for he is often better than his word, but never worse.

[1.] The miracle itself was turning water into wine; the substance of water acquiring a new form, and having all the accidents and qualities of wine. Such a transformation is a miracle; but the popish transubstantiation, the substance changed, the accidents remaining the same, is a monster. By this Christ showed himself to be the God of nature, who maketh the earth to bring forth wine, Ps. civ. 14, 15. The extracting of the blood of the grape every year from the moisture of the earth is no less a work of power, though, being according to the common law of nature, it is not such a work of wonder, as this. The beginning of Moses's miracles was turning water into blood (Exod. iv. 9; vii. 20), the beginning of Christ's miracles was turning water into wine; which intimates the difference between the law of Moses and the gospel of Christ. The curse of the law turns water into blood, common comforts into bitterness and terror; the blessing of the gospel turns water into wine. Christ hereby showed that his errand into the world was to heighten and improve creature-comforts to all believers, and make them comforts indeed. Shiloh is said to wash his garments in wine (Gen. xlix. 11), the water for washing being turned into wine. And the gospel call is, Come ye to the waters, and buy wine, Isa. lv. 1.

[2.] The circumstances of it magnified it and freed it from all suspicion of cheat or collusion; for,

First, It was done in water-pots (v. 6): There were set there six water-pots of stone. Observe, 1. For what use these water-pots were intended: for the legal purifications from ceremonial pollutions enjoined by the law of God, and many more by the tradition of the elders. The Jews eat not, except they wash often (Mark vii. 3), and they used much water in their washing, for which reason here were six large water-pots provided. It was a saying among them, Qui multâ utitur aquâ in lavando, multas consequetur in hoc mundo divitias—He who uses much water in washing will gain much wealth in this world. 2. To what use Christ put them, quite different from what they were intended for; to be the receptacles of the miraculous wine. Thus Christ came to bring in the grace of the gospel, which is as wine, that cheereth God and man (Judg. ix. 13), instead of the shadows of the law, which were as water, weak and beggarly elements. These were water-pots, that had never been used to have wine in them; and of stone, which is not apt to retain the scent of former liquors, if ever they had had wine in them. They contained two or three firkins apiece; two or three measures, baths, or ephahs; the quantity is uncertain, but very considerable. We may be sure that it was not intended to be all drank at this feast, but for a further kindness to the new-married couple, as the multiplied oil was to the poor widow, out of which she might pay her debt, and live of the rest, 2 Kings iv. 7. Christ gives like himself, gives abundantly, according to his riches in glory. It is the penman's language to say, They contained two or three firkins, for the Holy Spirit could have ascertained just how much; thus (as ch. vi. 19) teaching us to speak cautiously, and not confidently, of those things of which we have not good assurance.

Secondly, The water-pots were filled up to the brim by the servants at Christ's word, v. 7. As Moses, the servant of the Lord, when God bade him, went to the rock, to draw water; so these servants, when Christ bade them, went to the water, to fetch wine. Note, Since no difficulties can be opposed to the arm of God's power, no improbabilities are to be objected against the word of his command.

Thirdly, The miracle was wrought suddenly, and in such a manner as greatly magnified it.

a. As soon as they had filled the water-pots, presently he said, Draw out now (v. 8), and it was done, (a.) Without any ceremony, in the eye of the spectators. One would have thought, as Naaman, he should have come out, and stood, and called on the name of God, 2 Kings v. 11. No, he sits still in his place, says not a word, but wills the thing, and so works it. Note, Christ does great things and marvellous without noise, works manifest changes in a hidden way. Sometimes Christ, in working miracles, used words and signs, but it was for their sakes that stood by, ch. xi. 42. (b.) Without any hesitation or uncertainty in his own breast. He did not say, Draw out now, and let me taste it, questioning whether the thing were done as he willed it or no; but with the greatest assurance imaginable, though it was his first miracle, he recommends it to the master of the feast first. As he knew what he would do, so he knew what he could do, and made no essay in his work; but all was good, very good, even in the beginning.

b. Our Lord Jesus directed the servants, (a.) To draw it out; not to let it alone in the vessel, to be admired, but to draw it out, to be drank. Note, [a.] Christ's works are all for use; he gives no man a talent to be buried, but to be traded with. Has he turned thy water into wine, given thee knowledge and grace? It is to profit withal; and therefore draw out now. [b.] Those that would know Christ must make trial of him, must attend upon him in the use of ordinary means, and then may expect extraordinary influence. That which is laid up for all that fear God is wrought for those that trust in him (Ps. xxxi. 19), that by the exercise of faith draw out what is laid up. (b.) To present it to the governor of the feast. Some think that this governor of the feast was only the chief guest, that sat at the upper end of the table; but, if so, surely our Lord Jesus should have had that place, for he was, upon all accounts, the principal guest; but it seems another had the uppermost room, probably one that loved it (Matt. xxiii. 6), and chose it, Luke xiv. 7. And Christ, according to his own rule, sat down in the lowest room; but, though he was not treated as the Master of the feast, he kindly approved himself a friend to the feast, and, if not its founder, yet its best benefactor. Others think that this governor was the inspector and monitor of the feast: the same with Plutarch's symposiarcha, whose office it was to see that each had enough, and none did exceed, and that there were no indecencies or disorders. Note, Feasts have need of governors, because too many, when they are at feasts, have not the government of themselves. Some think that this governor was the chaplain, some priest or Levite that craved a blessing and gave thanks, and Christ would have the cup brought to him, that he might bless it, and bless God for it; for the extraordinary tokens of Christ's presence and power were not to supersede, or jostle out, the ordinary rules and methods of piety and devotion.

Fourthly, The wine which was thus miraculously provided was of the best and richest kind, which was acknowledged by the governor of the feast; and that it was really so, and not his fancy, is certain, because he knew not whence it was, v. 9, 10. 1. It was certain that this was wine. The governor knew this when he drank it, though he knew not whence it was; the servants knew whence it was, but had not yet tasted it. If the taster had seen the drawing of it, or the drawers had had the tasting of it, something might have been imputed to fancy; but now no room is left for suspicion. 2. That it was the best wine. Note, Christ's works commend themselves even to those that know not their author. The products of miracles were always the best in their kind. This wine had a stronger body, and better flavour, than ordinary. This the governor of the feast takes notice of to the bridegroom, with an air of pleasantness, as uncommon. (1.) The common method was otherwise. Good wine is brought out to the best advantage at the beginning of a feast, when the guests have their heads clear and their appetites fresh, and can relish it, and will commend it; but when they have well drank, when their heads are confused, and their appetites palled, good wine is but thrown away upon them, worse will serve then. See the vanity of all the pleasures of sense; they soon surfeit, but never satisfy; the longer they are enjoyed, the less pleasant they grow. (2.) This bridegroom obliged his friends with a reserve of the best wine for the grace-cup: Thou hast kept the good wine until now; not knowing to whom they were indebted for this good wine, he returns the thanks of the table to the bridegroom. She did not know that I gave her corn and wine, Hos. ii. 8. Now, [1.] Christ, in providing thus plentifully for the guests, though he hereby allows a sober cheerful use of wine, especially in times of rejoicing (Neh. viii. 10), yet he does not invalidate his own caution, nor invade it, in the least, which is, that our hearts be not at any time, no not at a marriage feast, overcharged with surfeiting and drunkenness, Luke xxi. 34. When Christ provided so much good wine for them that had well drunk, he intended to try their sobriety, and to teach them how to abound, as well as how to want. Temperance per force is a thankless virtue; but if divine providence gives us abundance of the delights of sense, and divine grace enables us to use them moderately, this is self-denial that is praiseworthy. He also intended that some should be left for the confirmation of the truth of the miracle to the faith of others. And we have reason to think that the guests at this table were so well taught, or at least were now so well awed by the presence of Christ, that none of them abused this wine to excess. Theses two considerations, drawn from this story, may be sufficient at any time to fortify us against temptations to intemperance: First, That our meat and drink are the gifts of God's bounty to us, and we owe our liberty to use them, and our comfort in the use of them, to the mediation of Christ; it is therefore ungrateful and impious to abuse them. Secondly, That, wherever we are, Christ has his eye upon us; we should eat bread before God (Exod. xviii. 12), and then we should not feed ourselves without fear. [2.] He has given us a specimen of the method he takes in dealing with those that deal with him, which is, to reserve the best for the last, and therefore they must deal upon trust. The recompence of their services and sufferings is reserved for the other world; it is a glory to be revealed. The pleasures of sin give their colour in the cup, but at the last bite; but the pleasures of religion will be pleasures for evermore.

III. In the conclusion of this story (v. 11) we are told, 1. That this was the beginning of miracles which Jesus did. Many miracles had been wrought concerning him at his birth and baptism, and he himself was the greatest miracle of all; but this was the first that was wrought by him. He could have wrought miracles when he disputed with the doctors, but his hour was not come. He had power, but there was a time of the hiding of his power. 2. That herein he manifested his glory; hereby he proved himself to be the Son of God, and his glory to be that of the only-begotten of the Father. He also discovered the nature and end of his office; the power of a God, and the grace of a Saviour, appearing in all his miracles, and particularly in this, manifested the glory of the long-expected Messiah. 3. That his disciples believed on him. Those whom he had called (ch. i.), who had seen no miracle, and yet followed him, now saw this, shared in it, and had their faith strengthened by it. Note, (1.) Even the faith that is true is at first but weak. The strongest men were once babes, so were the strongest Christians. (2.) The manifesting of the glory of Christ is the great confirmation of the faith of Christians.

Temple-Merchandise Punished; Christ's Death and Resurrection Foretold.

12 After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples: and they continued there not many days. 13 And the Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem, 14 And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: 15 And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables; 16 And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house a house of merchandise. 17 And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up. 18 Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign showest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? 19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. 20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? 21 But he spake of the temple of his body. 22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

Here we have,

I. The short visit Christ made to Capernaum, v. 12. It was a large and populous city, about a day's journey from Cana; it is called his own city (Matt. ix. 1), because he made it his head-quarters in Galilee, and what little rest he had was there. It was a place of concourse, and therefore Christ chose it, that the fame of his doctrine and miracles might thence spread the further. Observe,

1. The company that attended him thither: his mother, his brethren, and his disciples. Wherever Christ went, (1.) He would not go alone, but would take those with him who had put themselves under his guidance, that he might instruct them, and that they might attest his miracles. (2.) He could not go alone, but they would follow him, because they liked the sweetness either of his doctrine or of his wine, ch. vi. 26. His mother, though he had lately given her to understand that in the works of his ministry he should pay no more respect to her than to any other person, yet followed him; not to intercede with him, but to learn of him. His brethren also and relations, who were at the marriage and were wrought upon by the miracle there, and his disciples, who attended him wherever he went. It should seem, people were more affected with Christ's miracles at first than they were afterwards, when custom made them seem less strange.

2. His continuance there, which was at this time not many days, designing now only to begin the acquaintance he would afterwards improve there. Christ was still upon the remove, would not confine his usefulness to one place, because many needed him. And he would teach his followers to look upon themselves but as sojourners in this world, and his ministers to follow their opportunities, and go where their work led them. We do not now find Christ in the synagogues, but he privately instructed his friends, and thus entered upon his work by degrees. It is good for young ministers to accustom themselves to pious and edifying discourse in private, that they may with the better preparation, and greater awe, approach their public work. He did not stay long at Capernaum, because the passover was at hand, and he must attend it at Jerusalem; for every thing is beautiful in its season. The less good must give way to the greater, and all the dwellings of Jacob must give place to the gates of Zion.

II. The passover he kept at Jerusalem; it is the first after his baptism, and the evangelist takes notice of all the passovers he kept henceforward, which were four in all, the fourth that at which he suffered (three years after this), and half a year was now past since his baptism. Christ, being made under the law, observed the passover at Jerusalem; see Exod. xxiii. 17. Thus he taught us by his example a strict observance of divine institutions, and a diligent attendance on religious assemblies. He went up to Jerusalem when the passover was at hand, that he might be there with the first. It is called the Jews' passover, because it was peculiar to them (Christ is our Passover); now shortly God will no longer own it for his. Christ kept the passover at Jerusalem yearly, ever since he was twelve years old, in obedience to the law; but now that he has entered upon his public ministry we may expect something more from him than before; and two things we are here told he did there:—

1. He purged the temple, v. 14-17. Observe here,

(1.) The first place we find him in at Jerusalem was the temple, and, it should seem, he did not make any public appearance till he came thither; for his presence and preaching there were that glory of the latter house which was to exceed the glory of the former, Hag. ii. 9. It was foretold (Mal. iii. 1): I will send my messenger, John Baptist; he never preached in the temple, but the Lord, whom ye seek, he shall suddenly come to his temple, suddenly after the appearing of John Baptist; so that this was the time, and the temple the place, when, and where, the Messiah was to be expected.

(2.) The first work we find him at in the temple was the purging of it; for so it was foretold there (Mal. iii. 2, 3): He shall sit as a refiner and purify the sons of Levi. Now was come the time of reformation. Christ came to be the great reformer; and, according to the method of the reforming kings of Judah, he first purged out what was amiss (and that used to be passover-work too, as in Hezekiah's time, 2 Chron. xxx. 14, 15, and Josiah's, 2 Kings xxiii. 4, &c.), and then taught them to do well. First purge out the old leaven, and then keep the feast. Christ's design in coming into the world was to reform the world; and he expects that all who come to him should reform their hearts and lives, Gen. xxxv. 2. And this he has taught us by purging the temple. See here,

[1.] What were the corruptions that were to be purged out. He found a market in one of the courts of the temple, that which was called the court of the Gentiles, within the mountain of that house. There, First, They sold oxen, and sheep, and doves, for sacrifice; we will suppose, not for common use, but for the convenience of those who came out of the country, and could not bring their sacrifices in kind along with them; see Deut. xiv. 24-26. This market perhaps had been kept by the pool of Bethesda (ch. v. 2), but was admitted into the temple by the chief priests, for filthy lucre; for, no doubt, the rents for standing there, and fees for searching the beasts sold there, and certifying that they were without blemish, would be a considerable revenue to them. Great corruptions in the church owe their rise to the love of money, 1 Tim. vi. 5, 10. Secondly, They changed money, for the convenience of those that were to pay a half-shekel in specie every year, by way of poll, for the service of the tabernacle (Exod. xxx. 12), and no doubt they got by it.

[2.] What course our Lord took to purge out those corruptions. He had seen these in the temple formerly, when he was in a private station; but never went about to drive them out till now, when he had taken upon him the public character of a prophet. He did not complain to the chief priests, for he knew they countenanced those corruptions. But he himself,

First, Drove out the sheep and oxen, and those that sold them, out of the temple. He never used force to drive any into the temple, but only to drive those out that profaned it. He did not seize the sheep and oxen for himself, did not distrain and impound them, though he found them damage faissant-actual trespassers upon his Father's ground; he only drove them out, and their owners with them. He made a scourge of small cords, which probably they had led their sheep and oxen with, and thrown them away upon the ground, whence Christ gathered them. Sinners prepare the scourges with which they themselves will be driven out from the temple of the Lord. He did not make a scourge to chastise the offenders (his punishments are of another nature), but only to drive out the cattle; he aimed no further than at reformation. See Rom. xiii. 3, 4; 2 Cor. x. 8.

Secondly, He poured out the changers' money, to kerma—the small money—the Nummorum Famulus. In pouring out the money, he showed his contempt of it; he threw it to the ground, to the earth as it was. In overthrowing the tables, he showed his displeasure against those that make religion a matter of worldly gain. Money-changers in the temple are the scandal of it. Note, In reformation, it is good to make thorough work; he drove them all out; and not only threw out the money, but, in overturning the tables, threw out the trade too.

Thirdly, He said to them that sold doves (sacrifices for the poor), Take these things hence. The doves, though they took up less room, and were a less nuisance than the oxen and sheep, yet must not be allowed there. The sparrows and swallows were welcome, that were left to God's providence (Ps. lxxxiv. 3), but not the doves, that were appropriated to man's profit. God's temple must not be made a pigeon-house. But see Christ's prudence in his zeal. When he drove out the sheep and oxen, the owners might follow them; when he poured out the money, they might gather it up again; but, if he had turned the doves flying, perhaps they could not have been retrieved; therefore to them that sold doves he said, Take these things hence. Note, Discretion must always guide and govern our zeal, that we do nothing unbecoming ourselves, or mischievous to others.

Fourthly, He gave them a good reason for what he did: Make not my Father's house a house of merchandise. Reason for conviction should accompany force for correction.

a. Here is a reason why they should not profane the temple, because it was the house of God, and not to be made a house of merchandise. Merchandise is a good thing in the exchange, but not in the temple. This was, (a.) to alienate that which was dedicated to the honour of God; it was sacrilege; it was robbing God. (b.) It was to debase that which was solemn and awful, and to make it mean. (c.) It was to disturb and distract those services in which men ought to be most solemn, serious, and intent. It was particularly an affront to the sons of the stranger in their worship to be forced to herd themselves with the sheep and oxen, and to be distracted in their worship by the noise of a market, for this market was kept in the court of the Gentiles. (d.) It was to make the business of religion subservient to a secular interest; for the holiness of the place must advance the market, and promote the sale of their commodities. Those make God's house a house of merchandise, [a.] Whose minds are filled with cares about worldly business when they are attending on religious exercises, as those, Amos viii. 5; Ezek. xxxiii. 31. [b.] Who perform divine offices for filthy lucre, and sell the gifts of the Holy Ghost, Acts viii. 18.

b. Here is a reason why he was concerned to purge it, because it was his Father's house. And, (a.) Therefore he had authority to purge it, for he was faithful, as a Son over his own house. Heb. iii. 5, 6. In calling God his Father, he intimates that he was the Messiah, of whom it was said, He shall build a house for my name, and I will be his Father, 2 Sam. vii. 13, 14. (b.) Therefore he had a zeal for the purging of it: "It is my Father's house, and therefore I cannot bear to see it profaned, and him dishonoured." Note, If God be our Father in heaven, and it be therefore our desire that his name may be sanctified, it cannot but be our grief to see it polluted. Christ's purging the temple thus may justly be reckoned among his wonderful works. Inter omnia signa quæ fecit Dominus, hoc mihi videtur esse mirabilius—Of all Christ's wonderful works this appears to me the most wonderful.—Hieron. Considering, [a.] That he did it without the assistance of any of his friends; probably it had been no hard matter to have raised the mob, who had a great veneration for the temple, against these profaners of it; but Christ never countenanced any thing that was tumultuous or disorderly. There was one to uphold, but his own arm did it. [b.] That he did it without the resistance of any of his enemies, either the market-people themselves, or the chief priests that gave them their licences, and had the posse templi—temple force, at their command. But the corruption was too plain to be justified; sinners' own consciences are reformers' best friends; yet that was not all, there was a divine power put forth herein, a power over the spirits of men; and in this non-resistance of theirs that scripture was fulfilled (Mal. iii. 2, 3), Who shall stand when he appeareth?

Fifthly, Here is the remark which his disciples made upon it (v. 17): They remembered that it was written, The Zeal of thine house hath eaten me up. They were somewhat surprised at first to see him to whom they were directed as the Lamb of God in such a heat, and him whom they believed to be the King of Israel take so little state upon him as to do this himself; but one scripture came to their thoughts, which taught them to reconcile this action both with the meekness of the Lamb of God and with the majesty of the King of Israel; for David, speaking of the Messiah, takes notice of his zeal for God's house, as so great that it even ate him up, it made him forget himself, Ps. lxix. 9. Observe, 1. The disciples came to understand the meaning of what Christ did, by remembering the scriptures: They remembered now that it was written. Note, The word of God and the works of God do mutually explain and illustrate each other. Dark scriptures are expounded by their accomplishment in providence, and difficult providences are made easy by comparing them with the scriptures. See of what great use it is to the disciples of Christ to be ready and mighty in the scriptures, and to have their memories well stored with scripture truths, by which they will be furnished for every good work, 2. The scripture they remembered was very apposite: The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up. David was in this a type of Christ that he was zealous for God's house, Ps. cxxxii. 2, 3. What he did for it was with all his might; see 1 Chron. xxix. 2. The latter part of that verse (Ps. lxix. 9) is applied to Christ (Rom. xv. 3), as the former part of it here. All the graces that were to be found among the Old-Testament saints were eminently in Christ, and particularly this of zeal for the house of God, and in them, as they were patterns to us, so they were types of him. Observe, (1.) Jesus Christ was zealously affected to the house of God, his church: he loved it, and was always jealous for its honour and welfare. (2.) This zeal did even eat him up; it made him humble himself, and spend himself, and expose himself. My zeal has consumed me, Ps. cxix. 139. Zeal for the house of God forbids us to consult our own credit, ease, and safety, when they come in competition with our duty and Christ's service, and sometimes carries on our souls in our duty so far and so fast that our bodies cannot keep pace with them, and makes us as deaf as our Master was to those who suggested, Spare thyself. The grievances here redressed might seem but small, and such as should have been connived at; but such was Christ's zeal that he could not bear even those that sold and bought in the temple. Si ibi ebrios inveniret quid faceret Dominus! (saith St. Austin.) If he had found drunkards in the temple, how much more would he have been displeased!

2. Christ, having thus purged the temple, gave a sign to those who demanded it to prove his authority for so doing. Observe here,

(1.) Their demand of a sign: Then answered the Jews, that is the multitude of the people, with their leaders. Being Jews, they should rather have stood by him, and assisted him to vindicate the honour of their temple; but, instead of this, they objected against it. Note, Those who apply themselves in good earnest to the work of reformation must expect to meet with opposition. When they could object nothing against the thing itself, they questioned his authority to do it: "What sign showest thou unto us, to prove thyself authorized and commissioned to do these things?" It was indeed a good work to purge the temple; but what had he to do to undertake it, who was in no office there? They looked upon it as an act of jurisdiction, and that he must prove himself a prophet, yea, more than a prophet. But was not the thing itself sign enough? His ability to drive so many from their posts, without opposition, was a proof of his authority; he that was armed with such a divine power was surely armed with a divine commission. What ailed these buyers and sellers, that they fled, that they were driven back? Surely it was at the presence of the Lord (Ps. cxiv. 5, 7), no less a presence.

(2.) Christ's answer to this demand, v. 19. He did not immediately work a miracle to convince them, but gave them a sign in something to come, the truth of which must appear by the event, according to Deut. xviii. 21, 22.

Now, [1.] The sign that he gives them is his own death and resurrection. He refers them to that which would be, First, His last sign. If they would not be convinced by what they saw and heard, let them wait. Secondly, The great sign to prove him to be the Messiah; for concerning him it was foretold that he should be bruised (Isa. liii. 5), cut off (Dan. ix. 26), and yet that he should not see corruption, Ps. xvi. 10. These things were fulfilled in the blessed Jesus, and therefore truly he was the Son of God, and had authority in the temple, his Father's house.

[2.] He foretels his death and resurrection, not in plain terms, as he often did to his disciples, but in figurative expressions; as afterwards, when he gave this for a sign, he called it the sign of the prophet Jonas, so here, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Thus he spoke in parables to those who were willingly ignorant, that they might not perceive, Matt. xiii. 13, 14. Those that will not see shall not see. Nay, this figurative speech used here proved such a stumbling-block to them that it was produced in evidence against him at his trial to prove him a blasphemer. Matt. xxvi. 60, 61. Had they humbly asked him the meaning of what he said, he would have told them, and it had been a savour of life unto life to them, but they were resolved to cavil, and it proved a savour of death unto death. They that would not be convinced were hardened, and the manner of expressing this prediction occasioned the accomplishment of the prediction itself. First, He foretels his death by the Jews' malice, in these words, Destroy you this temple; that is, "You will destroy it, I know you will. I will permit you to destroy it." Note, Christ, even at the beginning of his ministry, had a clear foresight of all his sufferings at the end of it, and yet went on cheerfully in it. It is good, at setting out, to expect the worst. Secondly, He foretels his resurrection by his own power: In three days I will raise it up. There were others that were raised, but Christ raised himself, resumed his own life.

[3.] He chose to express this by destroying and re-edifying the temple, First, Because he was now to justify himself in purging the temple, which they had profaned; as if he had said, "You that defile one temple will destroy another; and I will prove my authority to purge what you have defiled by raising what you will destroy." The profaning of the temple is the destroying of it, and its reformation its resurrection. Secondly, Because the death of Christ was indeed the destruction of the Jewish temple, the procuring cause of it; and his resurrection was the raising up of another temple, the gospel church, Zech. vi. 12. The ruins of their place and nation (ch. xi. 48) were the riches of the world. See Amos ix. 11; Acts xv. 16.

(3.) Their cavil at this answer: "Forty and six years was this temple in building, v. 20. Temple work was always slow work, and canst thou make such quick work of it?" Now here, [1.] They show some knowledge; they could tell how long the temple was in building. Dr. Lightfoot computes that it was just forty-six years from the founding of Zerubbabel's temple, in the second year of Cyrus, to the complete settlement of the temple service, in the 32nd year of Artaxerxes; and the same from Herod's beginning to build this temple, in the 18th year of his reign, to this very time, when the Jews said that this as just forty-six years: okodomethe—hath this temple been built. [2.] They show more ignorance, First, Of the meaning of Christ's words. Note, Men often run into gross mistakes by understanding that literally which the scripture speaks figuratively. What abundance of mischief has been done by interpreting, This is my body, after a corporal and carnal manner! Secondly, Of the almighty power of Christ, as if he could do no more than another man. Had they known that this was he who built all things in six days they would not have made it such an absurdity that he should build a temple in three days.

(4.) A vindication of Christ's answer from their cavil. The difficulty is soon solved by explaining the terms: He spoke of the temple of his body, v. 21. Though Christ had discovered a great respect for the temple, in purging it, yet he will have us know that the holiness of it, which he was so jealous for, was but typical, and leads us to the consideration of another temple of which that was but a shadow, the substance being Christ, Heb. ix. 9; Col. ii. 17. Some think that when he said, Destroy this temple, he pointed to his own body, or laid his hand upon it; however, it is certain that he spoke of the temple of his body. Note, The body of Christ is the true temple, of which that at Jerusalem was a type. [1.] Like the temple, it was built by immediate divine direction: "A body hast thou prepared me," 1 Chron. xxviii. 19. [2.] Like the temple, it was a holy house; it is called that holy thing. [3.] It was, like the temple, the habitation of God's glory; there the eternal Word dwelt, the true shechinah. He is Emmanuel—God with us. [4.] The temple was the place and medium of intercourse between God and Israel: there God revealed himself to them; there they presented themselves and their services to him. Thus by Christ God speaks to us, and we speak to him. Worshippers looked towards that house, 1 Kings viii. 30, 35. So we must worship God with an eye to Christ.

(5.) A reflection which the disciples made upon this, long after, inserted here, to illustrate the story (v. 22): When he was risen from the dead, some years after, his disciples remembered that he had said this. We found them, v. 17, remembering what had been written before of him, and here we find them remembering what they had heard from him. Note, The memories of Christ's disciples should be like the treasure of the good house-holder, furnished with things both new and old, Matt. xiii. 52. Now observe,

[1.] When they remembered that saying: When he was risen from the dead. It seems, they did not at this time fully understand Christ's meaning, for they were as yet but babes in knowledge; but they laid up the saying in their hearts, and afterwards it became both intelligible and useful. Note, It is good to hear for the time to come, Isa. xlii. 23. The juniors in years and profession should treasure up those truths of which at present they do not well understand either the meaning or the use, for they will be serviceable to them hereafter, when they come to greater proficiency. It was said of the scholars of Pythagoras that his precepts seemed to freeze in them till they were forty years old, and then they began to thaw; so this saying of Christ revived in the memories of his disciples when he was risen from the dead; and why the? First, Because then the Spirit was poured out to bring things to their remembrance which Christ had said to them, and to make them both easy and ready to them, ch. xiv. 26. That very day that Christ rose form the dead he opened their understandings, Luke xxiv. 45. Secondly, Because then this saying of Christ was fulfilled. When the temple of his body had been destroyed and was raised again, and that upon the third day, then they remembered this among other words which Christ had said to this purport. Note, It contributes much to the understanding of the scripture to observe the fulfilling of the scripture. The event will expound the prophecy.

[2.] What use they made of it: They believed the scripture, and the word that Jesus had said; their belief of these was confirmed and received fresh support and vigour. They were slow of heart to believe (Luke xxiv. 25), but they were sure. The scripture and the word of Christ are here put together, not because they concur and exactly agree together, but because they mutually illustrate and strengthen each other. When the disciples saw both what they had read in the Old Testament, and what they had heard from Christ's own mouth, fulfilled in his death and resurrection, they were the more confirmed in their belief of both.

The Success of Christ's Ministry.

23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did. 24 But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men, 25 And needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man.

We have here an account of the success, the poor success, of Christ's preaching and miracles at Jerusalem, while he kept the passover there. Observe,

I. That our Lord Jesus, when he was at Jerusalem at the passover, did preach and work miracles. People's believing on him implied that he preached; and it is expressly said, They saw the miracles he did. He was now in Jerusalem, the holy city, whence the word of the Lord was to go froth. His residence was mostly in Galilee, and therefore when he was in Jerusalem he was very busy. The time was holy time, the feast-day, time appointed for the service of God; at the passover the Levites taught the good knowledge of the Lord (2 Chron. xxx. 22), and Christ took that opportunity of preaching, when the concourse of people was great, and thus he would own and honour the divine institution of the passover.

II. That hereby many were brought to believe in his name, to acknowledge him a teacher come from God, as Nicodemus did (ch. iii. 2), a great prophet; and, probably, some of those who looked for redemption in Jerusalem believed him to be the Messiah promised, so ready were they to welcome the first appearance of that bright and morning star.

III. That yet Jesus did not commit himself unto them (v. 24): ouk episteuen heauton autois—He did not trust himself with them. It is the same word that is used for believing in him. So that to believe in Christ is to commit ourselves to him and to his guidance. Christ did not see cause to repose any confidence in these new converts at Jerusalem, where he had many enemies that sought to destroy him, either, 1. Because they were false, at least some of them, and would betray him if they had an opportunity, or were strongly tempted to do so. He had more disciples that he could trust among the Galileans than among the dwellers at Jerusalem. In dangerous times and places, it is wisdom to take heed in whom you confide; memneso apistein—learn to distrust. Or, 2. Because they were weak, and I would hope that this was the worst of it; not that they were treacherous and designed him a mischief, but, (1.) They were timorous, and wanted zeal and courage, and might perhaps be frightened to do a wrong thing. In times of difficulty and danger, cowards are not fit to be trusted. Or, (2.) They were tumultuous, and wanted discretion and management. These in Jerusalem perhaps had their expectations of the temporal reign of the Messiah more raised than others, and, in that expectation, would be ready to give some bold strokes at the government if Christ would have committed himself to them and put himself at the head of them; but he would not, for his kingdom is not of this world. We should be shy of turbulent unquiet people, as our Master here was, though they profess to believe in Christ, as these did.

IV. That the reason why he did not commit himself to them was because he knew them (v. 25), knew the wickedness of some and the weakness of others. The evangelist takes this occasion to assert Christ's omniscience. 1. He knew all men, not only their names and faces, as it is possible for us to know many, but their nature, dispositions, affections, designs, as we do not know any man, scarcely ourselves. He knows all men, for his powerful hand made them all, his piercing eye sees them all, sees into them. He knows his subtle enemies, and all their secret projects; his false friends, and their true characters; what they really are, whatever they pretend to be. He knows them that are truly his, knows their integrity, and knows their infirmity too. He knows their frame. 2. He needed not that any should testify of man. His knowledge was not by information from others, but by his own infallible intuition. It is the infelicity of earthly princes that they must see with other men's eyes, and hear with other men's ears, and take things as they are represented to them; but Christ goes purely upon his own knowledge. Angels are his messengers, but not his spies, for his own eyes run to and fro through the earth, 2 Chron. xvi. 9. This may comfort us in reference to Satan's accusations, that Christ will not take men's characters from him. 3. He knew what was in man; in particular persons, in the nature and race of man. We know what is done by men; Christ knows what is in them, tries the heart and the reins. This is the prerogative of that essential eternal Word, Heb. iv. 12, 13. We invade his prerogative if we presume to judge men's hearts. How fit is Christ to be the Saviour of men, very fit to be the physician, who has such a perfect knowledge of the patient's state and case, temper and distemper; knows what is in him! How fit also to be the Judge of all! For the judgment of him who knows all men, all in men, must needs be according to truth.

Now this is all the success of Christ's preaching and miracles at Jerusalem, in this journey. The Lord comes to his temple, and none come to him but a parcel of weak simple people, that he can neither have credit from nor put confidence in; yet he shall at length see of the travail of his soul.

CHAP. II.

VVHether St. Johns marriage, I have not to ſay: Some will have it ſo.

Verſe 2. Jeſus was called. That was the way to have all ſanctified, 1 Tim. 4.3. and diſorders prevented. Cave, ſpectat Cato, was the old watch-word.

Verſe 3. Mendicato pane bic vivamus, annon boc pulchrè ſar[illegible: 1 letter]itur, in eo quod paſcimur pane cum angelis? &c. Luther. And when they wanted wine,] Wine then may be wanting, though Chriſt be at the Wedding: yea bread, though Chriſt be at the Board. But the hidden Manna is ever ready; and anon in our Fathers houſe will be bread enough, and wine, Gods-plenty. What though we beg our bread here, heaven will make up all: and it is but winking, and we are there preſently, ſaid that Martyr.

The Mother of Jeſus ſaith unto him,] To ſhew her authority, belike over him. Howſoever, ſhe was too haſty with him, and is taken up for halting. It is not for us to ſet the ſun by our dyall.

Verſe 4. What have I to do with thee? &c.] Is it fit to preſcribe to the only wiſe God? to ſend for the King by a poſt? The Chinois whip their gods, if they come not at a call.

Verſe 5. His Mother ſaith to the ſervants,] Not a word to her Son, Iob. 40.5. Ion. 4. though he had publikely reproved her. Once I have ſpoken, but I will not anſwer, ſaith Job. Jonah, reprehended by God, ſhuts up his prophecie in ſilence, in token of his true repentance. David was dumb, becauſe it was Gods doing, Pſal. 39.9. Bring God into the heart, and all will be huſht.

Verſe 6. After the manner of the purifying, &c. But who required theſe things at their hands? Men are apt to over-do in externals. The Devil ſtrove to bring this ſuperſtition into the Chriſtian Church, by the heretick Ebion, and hath done it by the Pſeudo-Catholikes, with their luſtrall-water, and ſprinkling of ſepulchres; for the riſe whereof, Baronius refers us not to the Jewes, Baron. Annal. but to Juvenals ſixth Satyre.

Containing two or three firkins] For oſtentation ſake. Superſtition, is pompous and ambitious.

Verſe 7. Ʋp to the brim.] God permits his people an honeſt affluence. Nimirun ad libras mille octingentas: quod pertiuet ad miraculi magnitudinem. Chriſt ſupplies them here with great ſtore of wine, to the quantity of a thouſand and eight hundred pounds, as Beza computes it: No ſmall gifts fall from ſo great a hand, Jam. 1.5.

Verſe 8. The governour of the feaſt.] The Jewes had a ſort of officers at their feaſts, called praefecti morum, [non-Latin text not transcribed], Gaudentius. Caſaubon. the Eyes and Overſeers of the feaſt, that tooke care that none ſhould drink too much. The Latines called them Dictatours; the Greeks, plautus. Sympoſiarchs: Howbeit, among the Greeks, thoſe officers power extended no further, then to ſee, that at feaſts or banquets, Heyl. Geog. [illegible: 1 letter]79. Hin[illegible: 1 letter] pergraecari[illegible: 1 letter] and, as merry as a Greeke. men dranke ſmall draughts only at firſt, which by degrees they increaſed, till they came to their height of intemperancy: At which point, when they were arrived, they kept no rule, nor order: whereas before, to drink out of ones turn, or beyond his allowance, was counted incivility.

Verſe 9. The water that was made wine.] Doth not Chriſt daily turn water into wine; when of water falling upon the Vine, and concocted by the heat of the ſun, he produceth the grape, whence wine is expreſſed? His love (that is better then wine, Cant. 1.2.) turned brown bread and water into Manchet, and wine, to the Martyrs in priſon.

Verſe 10. Every man at the beginning,] Ingenium bominem adumbrat, naturâ fallax et ſophiſticum. Sic Satan nos ad ſe allicere ſolet, Pantheris in morem: Chriſtus contra. His worke is worſt at firſt; the beſt is behinde: the ſweeteſt of honey lyes in the bottome.

Verſe 11. This beginning, &c.] For as for his miraculous diſputation with the Doctours, and faſting fourty dayes; theſe were rather miracles wrought upon Chriſt, then by him. He works his firſt miracle for confirmation of God the Fathers firſt Ordinance.

His Diſciples beleeved on him.] So they did before, but now more. So 1 John 5.13. The Apoſtle writes to them that beleeved on the name of the Son of God, that they might beleeve on the name of the Son of God. 1. e. that they might be confirmed, continued, and increaſed in it. Faith is not like Jonahs Gourd, that grew up in a night; or like a bullet in a mould, that is made in a moment, &c. But as the ſound of the trumpet grew louder and louder; and as they went up to Salomons throne, by ſteps and ſtairs; ſo men proceed from faith to faith, till they come to full aſſurance.

Verſe 12. Matth 8. To Capernaum.] Where he had hired him an houſe; for Foxes had holes, &c. but the Son of man had not a houſe of his own to put his head in.

Verſe 14. And found in the Temple.] The Talmudiſts tell us, that it was grown to a cuſtome to ſet up tables in the Temple, and money-changers at them; that thoſe that ought to offer halfe a ſhekel, might have thoſe at hand that might change their bigger money, or take to pledge what elſe they brought. Here alſo they might buy oxen, ſheep, doves for ſacrifice, which the covetous Prieſts oft received, and then ſold them again to others.

Sitting, Pleri que emnes menſari[illegible: 1 letter] [illegible: 1 letter]unt, fanerat[illegible: 1 letter]riam exercentes, ideò faetent. ] The Jewes at this day being great Uſurers, and thorow much ſitting, and not ſtirring about, are thought to ſtinke, ſo as they are ſaid to do: Sedentary lives, are ſubject to diſeaſes.

Verſe 15. And when he had made a ſcourge,] Here he put forth a beam of his Deity; whiles, as another Sampſon, he layes heaps upon heaps (yet without bloudſhed) with the jaw-bone of an aſſe. Zeal is attended by revenge, Ber. Annot. 2 Cor. 7.11.

The changers money, Non exp[illegible: 3 letters]o plenam [illegible: 1 span] &c. R[illegible: 2 letters]o[illegible: 1 letter]. [illegible: 1 word]. ] Gr. ſmall money [non-Latin text not transcribed] in minuta frusta concidere.

Verſe 16. And ſaid to the Dove-ſellers,] Theſe (belike, as more tractable, and not ſo groſſe offenders) he deals more gently with, but bids them be packing. I expect not (ſaith Reverend Rolloc) a plenary and perfect reformation of the Church, Nota, Eſt E[illegible: 2 letters]le[illegible: 2 letters]ae, Scoticanae praev leg[illegible: 1 letter]u raru[illegible: 1 letter], prae [illegible: 1 letter]ultis, quod [illegible: 1 letter]ine [illegible: 1 letter]chi[illegible: 1 letter] mate, [illegible: 1 word] b[illegible: 2 letters]reſi unita te[illegible: 1 letter] cum p[illegible: 1 letter]ritat[illegible: 1 letter] doct[illegible: 1 letter]inae retinu[illegible: 1 letter]rit. Sic in Elo[illegible: 1 letter] prafator: de co [illegible: 1 letter]feſſ. in princip. Syntag Confeſſ p 6 edu. G[illegible: 2 letters]ev. after ſo horrible an apoſtacie under Antichriſt, till Chriſt come again to judgement. And yet that Church of Scotland is ſaid to have this rare priviledge above many others; that ſince the Reformation there wrought, they have, without hereſie, or ſo much as ſchiſme, retained unity, with purity of doctrine.

An houſe of merchandiſe.] So he cals it, for all their goodly pretexts of good intentions. So the Church-warden of Ipſwich was much trounced and troubled in the High-commiſſion, for writing over the place where the ſpirituall Court was kept, My houſe ſhall be called an houſe of prayer, but ye have made it a den of theeves, Novemb. 6. 1635.

Verſe 17. The zeal of thine houſe.] Apoſtates, on the otherſide, eat up their zeal of Gods houſe. But as in falling forward is nothing ſo much danger, as backward: So the zealot, though not ſo diſcreet, is better then the Apoſtate: Howbeit, zeale ſhould eat us up, (ſaith one) but not eat up our wiſdome, Mr. Vines. nor ſhould pride eat up our zeale.

Verſe 18. What ſigne.] They might have ſeen ſigne enough, in his ſo powerfull ejecting of thoſe money-merchants. But Church-Reformations are commonly thus diverſly entertained. The Diſciples call it zeal, the Jewes, raſhneſſe.

Verſe 19. Deſtroy this Temple.] This was the ſame in effect, Rom. 1.4. with that ſigne of the Prophet Jonas, Matth. 12.39, 40. His reſurrection was a plain demonſtration of his Deity. Superas evadere ad auras, hic labor, hoc opus eſt, befitting a God.

Verſe 20. Fourty and ſix yeers,] All, ſo what lacks; for it was ſix years work only, but they reckon the interim of interruption, Ezra 3. to the 7th, to aggravate the matter. So they are not onely blinded, but hardned.

Verſe 21. The temple of his Body.] Wherein the God-head dwelt bodily, Coloſ. 2.9. that is, perſonally, as he dwelt in the materiall Temple, ſacramentally, and doth dwell in the hearts of his people, ſpiritually. This Tabernacle of Chriſts Body, Heb. 9.21. was not made with hands, not built by the power of nature.

Verſe 22. His Diſciples remembred,] In the mean, time they murmured not, much leſſe oppoſed. We can do nothing againſt the truth; when at worſt, but for the truth, 2 Cor. 13.8. They layd up what they underſtood not: and as the water caſts up her dead, ſo did their memories; that which ſeemed dead therein, by the help of the holy Ghoſt.

Verſe 23. Many beleeved.] Fides fuit minimè fida, quippe hiſtoricae, ex miraculis nata. Theſe thought they had layd hold on Chriſt: but they did but as Children, that thinke they catch the ſhadow on the wall. Ther's a great deal of this falſe faith abroad. The ſorcerers ſeemed to do as much as Moſes.

Verſe 24. Did not commit himſelfe unto them.] Who yet would needs obtrude upon him. None are ſo impudent as hypocrites; they deceive themſelves, they would do others; God too. I read not (ſaith one) in Scripture of an hypocrites converſion; and what wonder? for whereas, after ſin, converſion is left as a means to cure all other ſinners; what means to recover him, Pract, of piety, pag. 261. who hath converted converſion it ſelfe into ſin?

Verſe 25. Nihil corde ac renibus magis intimum; adeo ut per multos meatus atque incurvos ans fractus de[illegible: 1 letter]erri elaborati cibi debeant, antequam eò poſſint perduci. Lemnius de complex. lib. 1. p. 26. For he knew what was in man.] Artificers know the nature and properties of their works; and ſhall not Chriſt of the heart? He ſearcheth mens hearts, and tryeth the reins, which of all their inwards are the moſt inward: beſides, that they are the ſeats and ſprings of all our thoughts and luſts. Deus intimior nobis intimo noſtro, ſaith one; God is neerer to us, then we are to our ſelves, and knowes our thoughts long before; as a Gardiner knowes what flowers he ſhall have at ſpring, becauſe he knowes the roots.

And the third day. On the third day after his conversation with Nathanael.

Cana. This was a small town about 15 miles north-west of Tiberias and 6 miles north-east of Nazareth. It is now called Kefr Kenna, is under the government of a Turkish officer, and contains perhaps three hundred inhabitants, chiefly Catholics. The natives still pretend to show the place where the water was turned into wine, and even one of the large stone water-pots. "A Greek church," says Professor Hackett (Illustrations of Scripture, p. 322), "stands at the entrance of the town, deriving its special sanctity, as I understood, from its being supposed to occupy the site of the house in which the marriage was celebrated to which Jesus and his friends were invited. A priest to whom we were referred as the custodian soon arrived, in obedience to our call, and unlocked the doors of the church. It is a low stone building, wretchedly neglected and out of repair."

"The houses," says Dr. Thomson (The Land and the Book, vol. 2. p. 126),

"were built of limestone, cut and laid up after the fashion still common in this region, and some of them may have been inhabited within the last fifty years. There are many ancient cisterns about it, and fragments of water-jars in abundance, and both reminded us of the beginning of miracles. Some of my companions gathered bits of these water-jars as mementoes--witnesses they could hardly be, for those of the narrative were of stone, while these were baked earth."

"The place is now quite deserted. Dr. Thomson (ibid.) says: "There is not now a habitable house in the humble village where our blessed Lord sanctioned, by his presence and miraculous assistance, the all-important and world-wide institution of marriage." It was called Cana of Galilee to distinguish it from another Cana in the tribe of Ephraim, Josh 16:9. This was the native place of Nathanael, Jn 21:2.

The mother of Jesus. Mary. It is not improbable that she was a relative of the family where the marriage took place.

(a) "Cana of Galilee" Josh 19:28, Jn 4:46

His disciples. Those that he had made when in Judea. These were Peter, Andrew, Philip, and Nathanael. They were not yet called to be apostles, but they believed that he was the Messiah. The miracle wrought here was doubtless to convince them more fully that he was the Christ.

(b) "the marriage" Heb 13:4

When they wanted wine. A marriage feast among the Jews was commonly observed for seven or eight days. It is not probable that there would be a want of wine at the marriage itself, and it is possible, therefore, that Jesus came there some time during the marriage feast.

They have no wine. It is not known why Mary told this to Jesus. It would seem that she had a belief that he was able to supply it, though he had as yet worked no miracle.

(c) "And when they wanted wine" Eccl 10:19, Isa 24:11

Woman. This term, as used here, seems to imply reproof, as if she was interfering in that which did not properly concern her; but it is evident that no such reproof or disrespect was intended by the use of the term woman instead of mother. It is the same term by which he tenderly addressed Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:15), and his mother when he was on the cross, Jn 19:26. Comp. also Mt 15:28, Jn 4:21, 1Cor 7:16.

What have I to do with thee? Mt 8:29. This expression is sometimes used to denote indignation or contempt. See Jud 11:12, 2Sam 16, 1Kgs 17:18. But it is not probable that it denoted either in this place; if it did, it was a mild reproof of Mary for attempting to control or direct him in his power of working miracles. Most of the ancients supposed this to be the intention of Jesus. The words sound to us harsh, but they might have been spoken in a tender manner, and not have been intended as a reproof. It is clear that he did not intend to refuse to provide wine, but only to delay it a little; and the design was, therefore, to compose the anxiety of Mary, and to prevent her being solicitous about it. It may, then, be thus expressed: "My mother, be not anxious. To you and to me this should not be a matter of solicitude. The proper time of my interfering has not yet come. When that is come I will furnish a supply, and in the meantime neither you nor I should be solicitous."

Thus understood, it is so far from being a harsh reproof, that it was a mild exhortation for her to dismiss her fears and to put proper trust in him.

Mine hour, &c. My time. The proper time for my interposing. Perhaps the wine was not yet entirely exhausted. The wine had begun to fail, but he would not work a miracle until it was entirely gone, that the miracle might be free from all possibility of suspicion. It does not mean that the proper time for his working a miracle, or entering on his public work had not come, but that the proper time for his interposing there had not arrived.

His mother saith, &c. It is evident from this verse that his mother did not understand what he had said as a harsh reproof and repulse, but as an indication of his willingness at the proper time to furnish wine. In all this transaction he evinced the appropriate feelings of a son toward a mother.

(d) "Whatsoever he sayeth" Lk 5:5,6

Six water-pots of stone. Made of stone; or, as we should say, stoneware.

After the manner. After the usual custom.

Of the purifying. Of the washings or ablutions of the Jews. They were for the purpose of washing the hands before and after eating (Mt 15:2), and for the formal washing of vessels, and even articles of furniture, Lk 11:39, Mk 7:3,4.

Two or three firkins. It is not quite certain what is meant here by the word firkins. It is probable that the measure intended is the Hebrew bath, containing about 7 gallons.

With water. This was done by the servants employed at the feast. It was done by them, so that there might be no opportunity of saying that the disciples of Jesus had filled them with wine to produce the appearance of a miracle. In this case there could be no deception. The quantity was very considerable. The servants would know whether the wine or water had been put in these vessels. It could not be believed that they had either the power or the disposition to impose on others in this manner, and the way was therefore clear for the proof that Jesus had really changed what was known to be water into wine.

To the brim. To the top. So full that no wine could be poured in to give the appearance of a mixture. Farther, vessels were used for this miracle in which wine had not been kept. These pots were never used to put wine in, but simply to keep water in for the various purposes of ablution. A large number was used on this occasion, because there were many guests.

Draw out now. This command was given to the servants. It showed that the miracle had been immediately wrought. As soon as they were filled the servants were directed to take to the governor of the feast. Jesus made no parade about it, and it does not even appear that he approached the water-pots. He willed it, and it was done. This was a clear exertion of divine power, and made in such a manner as to leave no doubt of its reality.

The governor. One who presided on the occasion. The one who stood at the head or upper end of the table. He had the charge of the entertainment, provided the food, gave directions to the servants, etc.

(e) "Draw out" Eccl 9:7 (f) "governor of the feast" Rom 13.7

And knew not whence it was. This is said, probably, to indicate that his judgment was not biased by any favour, or any want of favour, toward Jesus. Had he known what was done, he would have been less likely to have judged impartially. As it is, we have his testimony that this was real wine, and of so fine a body and flavour as to surpass that which had been provided for the occasion. Everything in this miracle shows that there was no collusion or understanding between Jesus and any of the persons at the feast.

(g) "servants" Ps 119:100, Jn 7:17

Every man. It is customary, or it is generally done.

When men have well drunk. This word does not of necessity mean that they were intoxicated, though it is usually employed in that sense. It may mean when they have drunk sufficient, or to satiety; or have drunk so much as to produce hilarity, and to destroy the keenness of their taste, so that they could not readily distinguish the good from that which was worse. But this cannot be adduced in favour of drunkenness, even if it means to be intoxicated; for,

1st. It is not said of those who were present at that feast, but of what generally occurred. For anything that appears, at that feast all were perfectly temperate and sober.

2nd. It is not the saying of Jesus that is here recorded, but of the governor of the feast, who is declaring what usually occurred as a fact.

3rd. There is not any expression of opinion in regard to its propriety, or in approval of it, even by that governor.

4th. It does not appear that our Saviour even heard the observation.

5th. Still less is there any evidence that he approved such a state of things, or that he designed that it should take place here. Farther, the word translated "well drunk" cannot be shown to mean intoxication; but it may mean when they had drunk as much as they judged proper or as they desired, then the other was presented. It is clear that neither our Saviour, nor the sacred writer, nor the speaker here expresses any approbation of intemperance, nor is there the least evidence that anything of the kind occurred here. It is not proof that we approve of intemperance when we mention, as this man did, what occurs usually among men at feasts.

Is worse. Is of an inferior quality.

The good wine. This shows that this had all the qualities of real wine. We should not be deceived by the phrase "good wine." We often use the phrase to denote that it is good in proportion to its strength and its power to intoxicate; but no such sense is to be attached to the word here. Pliny, Plutarch, and Horace describe wine as good, or mention that as the best wine, which was harmless or innocent--poculo vini innocentis. The most useful wine -- utilissimum vinum-- was that which had little strength; and the most wholesome wine-- saluberrimum vinum-- was that which had not been adulterated by "the addition of anything to the must or juice." Pliny expressly says that a "good wine" was one that was destitute of spirit (lib. iv. c. 13). It should not be assumed, therefore, that the "good wine" was stronger than the other: it is rather to be presumed that it was milder. The wine referred to here was doubtless such as was commonly drunk in Palestine. That was the pure juice of the grape. It was not brandied wine, nor drugged wine, nor wine compounded of various substances, such as we drink in this land. The common wine drunk in Palestine was that which was the simple juice of the grape. We use the word wine now to denote the kind of liquid which passes under that name in this country--always containing a considerable portion of alcohol --not only the alcohol produced by fermentation, but alcohol added to keep it or make it stronger. But we have no right to take that sense of the word, and go with it to the interpretation of the Scriptures. We should endeavour to place ourselves in the exact circumstances of those times, ascertain precisely what idea the word would convey to those who used it then, and apply that sense to the word in the interpretation of the Bible; and there is not the slightest evidence that the word so used would have conveyed any idea but that of the pure juice of the grape, nor the slightest circumstance mentioned in this account that would not be fully met by such a supposition. No man should adduce this instance in favour of drinking wine unless he can prove that the wine made in the" water-pots" of Cana was just like the wine which he proposes to drink. The Saviour's example may be always pleaded JUST AS IT WAS; but it is a matter of obvious and simple justice that we should find out exactly what the example was before we plead it. There is, moreover, no evidence that any other part of the water was converted into wine than that which was drawn out of the water-casks for the use of the guests. On this supposition, certainly, all the circumstances of the case are met, and the miracle would be more striking. All that was needed was to furnish a supply when the wine that had been prepared was nearly exhausted. The object was not to furnish a large quantity for future use. The miracle, too, would in this way be more apparent and impressive. On this supposition, the casks would appear to be filled with water only; as it was drawn out, it was pure wine. Who could doubt, then, that there was the exertion of miraculous power? All, therefore, that has been said about the Redeemer's furnishing a large quantity of wine for the newly-married pair, and about his benevolence in doing it, is wholly gratuitous. There is no evidence of it whatever; and it is not necessary to suppose it in order to an explanation of the circumstances of the case.

(h) "kept" Ps 104:15, Prov 9:2,5

This beginning of miracles. This his first public miracle. This is declared by the sacred writer to be a miracle-- that is, an exertion of divine power, producing a change of the substance of water into wine, which no human power could do.

Manifested forth. Showed; exhibited.

His glory. His power, and proper character as the Messiah; showed that he had divine power, and that God had certainly commissioned him. This is shown to be a real miracle by the following considerations: 1st. Real water was placed in the vessels. This the servants believed, and there was no possibility of deception.

2nd. The water was placed where it was not customary to keep wine. It could not be pretended that it was merely a mixture of water and wine.

3rd. It was judged to be wine without knowing whence it came. There was no agreement between Jesus and the governor of the feast to impose on the guests.

4th. It was a change which nothing but divine power could effect. He that can change water into a substance like the juice of the grape must be clothed with divine power.

Believed on him. This does not mean that they did not before believe on him, but that their faith was confirmed or strengthened. They saw a miracle, and it satisfied them that he was the Messiah. Before this they believed on the testimony of John, and from conversation with Jesus (Jn 1:35-51); now they saw that he was invested with almighty power, and their faith was established. From this narrative we may learn,

1st. That marriage is honourable, and that Jesus, if sought, will not refuse his presence and blessing on such an occasion.

2nd. On such an occasion the presence and approbation of Christ should be sought. No compact formed on earth is more important; none enters so deeply into our comfort in this world; perhaps none will so much affect our destiny in the world to come. It should be entered into, then, in the fear of God.

3rd. On all such occasions our conduct should be such that the presence of Jesus would be no interruption or disturbance. He is holy. He is always present in every place; and on all festival occasions our deportment should be such as that we should welcome the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ. That is not a proper state of feeling or employment which would be interrupted by the presence of the Saviour.

4th. Jesus delighted to do good. In the very beginning of his ministry he worked a miracle to show his benevolence. This was the appropriate commencement of a life in which he was to go about doing good. He seized every opportunity of doing it; and at a marriage feast, as well as among the sick and poor, he showed the character which he always sustained --that of a benefactor of mankind.

5th. An argument cannot be drawn from this instance in favour of intemperate drinking. There is no evidence that any who were present on that occasion drank too freely.

6th. Nor can an argument be drawn from this case in favour even of drinking wine such as we have. The common wine of Judea was the pure juice of the grape, without any mixture of alcohol, and was harmless. It was the common drink of the people, and did not tend to produce intoxication. Our wines are a mixture of the juice of the grape and of brandy, and often of infusions of various substances to give it colour and taste, and the appearance of wine. Those wines are little less injurious than brandy, and the habit of drinking them should be classed with the drinking of all other liquid fires.

The following table will show the danger of drinking the wines that are in common use : Brandy has fifty-three parts and 39 hundredths in a hundred of alcohol; or .........................53.39 per cent. Rum ................................53.68 " Whisky, Scotch .....................54.32 " Holland Gin ........................51.60 " Port Wine, highest kind ............25.83 " lowest ..................21.40 " Madeira, highest .............. 29.42 " lowest .............. 19.34 " Lisbon .............................18.94 " Malaga .............................17.26 " Red Champagne ......................11.30 " White " ..................... 12.80 " Currant Wine .......................20.25 "

It follows that a man who drinks two glasses of most of the wines used has taken as much alcohol as if he had taken one glass of brandy or whisky, and why should he not as well drink the alcohol in the brandy as in the Wine? What difference can it make in morals? What difference in its effects on his system? The experience of the world has shown that water, pure water, is the most wholesome, safe, and invigorating drink for man.

(i) "manifested forth his glory" Jn 1:14 (k) "and his disciples" Jn 5:13

To Capernaum. Mt 4:13.

Not many days. The reason why he remained there no longer was that the Passover was near, and they went up to Jerusalem to attend it.

The Jews' passover. The feast among the Jews called the Passover. Mt 26:2, also Mt 26:3-17.

And Jesus went up to Jerusalem. Every male among the Jews was required to appear at this feast. Jesus, in obedience to the law, went up to observe it. This is the first Passover on which he attended after he entered on the work of the ministry. It is commonly supposed that he observed three others-- one recorded Lk 6:1, another Jn 6:4, and the last one on the night before he was crucified, Jn 11:55. As his baptism when he entered on his ministry had taken place some time before this --probably not far from six months-- it follows that the period of his ministry was not far from three years and a half, agreeably to the prophecy in Dan 9:27.

(l) "passover" Ex 12:14 (m) "Jesus" Jn 2:23, 5:1, 6:4, 11:55

Found in the temple, &c. The transaction here recorded is in almost all respects similar to that which has been explained in the Mt 21:12. This took place at the commencement of his public ministry; that at the close. On each occasion he showed that his great regard was for the pure worship of his Father; and one great design of his coming was to reform the abuses which had crept into that worship, and to bring man to a proper regard for the glory of God. If it be asked how it was that those engaged in this traffic so readily yielded to Jesus of Nazareth, and that they left their gains and their property, and fled from the temple at the command of one so obscure as he was, it may be replied,

1st. That their consciences reproved them for their impiety, and they could not set up the appearance of self-defence.

2nd. It was customary in the nation to cherish a profound regard for the authority of a prophet; and the appearance and manner of Jesus--so fearless, so decided, so authoritative--led them to suppose he was a prophet, and they were afraid to resist him.

3rd. He had even then a wide reputation among the people, and it is not improbable that many supposed him to be the Messiah.

4th. Jesus on all occasions had a most wonderful control over men. None could resist him. There was something in his manner, as well as in his doctrine, that awed men, and made them tremble at his presence. Comp. Jn 18:5,6. On this occasion he had the manner of a prophet, the authority of God, and the testimony of their own consciences, and they could not, therefore, resist the authority by which he spoke.

Though Jesus thus purified the temple at the commencement of his ministry, yet in three years the same scene was to be repeated. See Mt 21:12. And from this we may learn,

1st. How soon men forget the most solemn reproofs, and return to evil practices.

2nd. That no sacredness of time or place will guard them from sin. In the very temple, under the very eye of God, these men soon returned to practices for which their consciences reproved them, and which they knew God disapproved.

3rd. We see here how strong is the love of gain--the ruling passion of mankind. Not even the sacredness of the temple, the presence of God, the awful ceremonials of religion, deterred them from this unholy traffic. So wicked men and hypocrites will always turn religion, if possible, into gain; and not even the sanctuary, the Sabbath, or the most awful and sacred scenes, will deter them from schemes of gain. Comp. Amos 8:5. So strong is this grovelling passion, and so deep is that depravity which fears not God, and regards not his Sabbaths, his sanctuary, or his law.

(n) "And found in the temple" Mt 21:12, Mk 11:15, Lk 19:45

A scourge. A whip.

Of small cords. This whip was made as an emblem of authority, and also for the purpose of driving from the temple the cattle which had been brought there for sale. There is no evidence that he used any violence to the men engaged in that unhallowed traffic. The original word implies that these cords were made of twisted rushes or reeds-- probably the ancient material for making ropes.

It was written, &c. This is recorded in Ps 69:9. Its meaning is, that he was affected with great zeal or concern for the pure worship of God.

The zeal of thine house. Zeal is intense ardour in reference to any object. The zeal of thine house means extraordinary concern for the temple of God; intense solicitude that the worship there should be pure, and such as God would approve.

Hath eaten me up. Hath absorbed me, or engaged my entire attention and affection; hath surpassed all other feelings, so that it may be said to be the one great absorbing affection and desire of the mind. Here is an example set for ministers and for all Christians. In Jesus this was the great commanding sentiment of his life. In us it should be also. In this manifestation of zeal he began and ended his ministry. In this we should begin and end our lives. We learn, also, that ministers of religion should aim to purify the church of God. Wicked men, conscience-smitten, will tremble when they see proper zeal in the ministers of Jesus Christ; and there is no combination of wicked men, and no form of depravity, that can stand before the faithful, zealous, pure preaching of the gospel. The preaching of every minister should be such that wicked men will feel that they must either become Christians or leave the house of God, or spend their lives there in the consciousness of guilt and the fear of hell.

(o) "The zeal" Ps 69:9

What sign, &c. What miracle dost thou work? He assumed the character of a prophet. He was reforming, by his authority, the temple. It was natural to ask by what authority this was done; and as they had been accustomed to miracles in the life of Moses, and Elijah, and the other prophets, so they demanded evidence that he had authority thus to cleanse the house of God.

Seeing that thou doest. Rather "by what title or authority thou doest these things." Our translation is ambiguous. They wished to know by what miracle he had shown, or could show, his right to do those things.

(p) "What sign" Mt 12:38, Jn 6:30

Destroy this temple. The evangelist informs us (Jn 2:21) that by temple, here, he meant his body. It is not improbable that he pointed with his finger to his body as he spoke. The word destroy, used here in the imperative, has rather the force of the future. Its meaning may thus be expressed: "You are now profaners of the temple of God. You have defiled the sanctuary; you have made it a place of traffic. You have also despised my authority, and been unmoved by the miracles which I have already wrought. But your wickedness will not end here. You will oppose me more and more; you will reject and despise me, until in your wickedness you will take my life and destroy my body." Here was therefore a distinct prediction both of his death and the cause of it. The word temple, or dwelling, was not unfrequently used by the Jews to denote the body as being the residence of the spirit, 2Cor 5:1. Christians are not unfrequently called the temple of God, as being those in whom the Holy Spirit dwells on earth, 1Cor 3:16,17; 1Cor 6:19, 2Cor 6:16. Our Saviour called his body a temple in accordance with the common use of language, and more particularly because in him the fulness of the Godhead dwelt bodily, Col 2:9. The temple at Jerusalem was the appropriate dwelling-place of God. His visible presence was there peculiarly manifested, 2Chr 36:15, Ps 76:2. As the Lord Jesus was divine--as the fulness of the Godhead dwelt in him--so his body might be called a temple.

In three days I will raise it up. The Jews had asked a miracle of him in proof of his authority--that is, a proof that he was the Messiah. He tells them that a full and decided proof of that would be his resurrection from the dead. Though they would not be satisfied by any other miracle, yet by this they ought to be convinced that he came from heaven, and was the long-expected Messiah. To the same evidence that he was the Christ he refers them on other occasions. See Mt 12:38,39. Thus early did he foretell his death and resurrection, for at the beginning of his work he had a clear foresight of all that was to take place. This knowledge shows clearly that he came from heaven, and it evinces, also, the extent of his love--that he was willing to come to save us, knowing clearly what it would cost him. Had he come without such an expectation of suffering, his love might have been far less; but when he fully knew all that was before him, when he saw that it would involve him in contempt and death, it shows compassion "worthy of a God" that he was willing to endure the load of all our sorrows, and die to save us from death everlasting. When Jesus says, "I will raise it up," it is proof, also, of divine power. A mere man could not say this. No deceased man can have such power over his body; and there must have been, therefore, in the person of Jesus a nature superior to human to which the term "I" could be applied, and which had power to raise the dead--that is, which was divine.

(q) "Destroy this temple" Mt 26:61, 27:40

Then said the Jews, &c. The Jews, either from the ambiguity of his language, or more probably from a design to cavil, understood him as speaking of the temple at Jerusalem. What he said here is all the evidence that they could adduce on his trial (Mt 26:61, Mk 14:58), and they reproached him with it when on the cross, Mt 27:40. The Jews frequently perverted our Saviour's meaning. The language which he used was often that of parables or metaphor; and as they sought to misunderstand him and pervert his language, so he often left them to their own delusions, as he himself says, "that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand," Mt 13:13. This was a case which they might, if they had been disposed, have easily understood. They were in the temple; the conversation was about the temple; and though he probably pointed to his body, or designated it in some plain way, yet they chose to understand him as referring to the temple itself; and as it appeared so improbable that he could raise up that in three days, they sought to pervert his words and pour ridicule on his pretensions.

Forty and six years, &c. The temple in which they then were was that which was commonly called the second temple, built after the return of the Jews from Babylon. Mt 21:12. This temple Herod the Great commenced repairing, or began to rebuild, in the eighteenth year of his reign--that is, sixteen years before the birth of Christ (Jos. Ant., b. xv. 1). The main body of the temple he completed in nine years and a half (Jos. Ant., xv. 5, 6), yet the temple, with its outbuildings, was not entirely complete in the time of our Saviour. Herod continued to ornament it and to perfect it even till the time of Agrippa (Jos. Ant., b. xx. ch. viii.  11). As Herod began to rebuild the temple sixteen years before the birth of Jesus, and as what is here mentioned happened in the thirtieth year of the age of Jesus, so the time which had been occupied in it was forty-six years. This circumstance is one of the many in the New Testament which show the accuracy of the evangelists, and which prove that they were well acquainted with what they recorded. It demonstrates that their narration is true. Impostors do not trouble themselves to be very accurate about names and dates, and there is nothing in which they are more liable to make mistakes.

Wilt thou, &c. This is an expression of contempt. Herod, with all his wealth and power, had been engaged in this work almost half a century. Can you, an obscure and unknown Galilean, accomplish it in three days? The thing, in their judgment, was ridiculous, and showed, as they supposed, that he had no authority to do what he had done in the temple.

When he was risen from the dead, &c. This saying of our Saviour at that time seemed obscure and difficult. The disciples did not understand it, but they treasured it up in their memory, and the event showed what was its true meaning. Many prophecies are obscure when spoken which are perfectly plain when the event takes place. We learn from this, also, the importance of treasuring up the truths of the Bible now, though we may not perfectly understand them. Hereafter they may be plain to us. It is therefore important that children should learn the truths of the sacred Scriptures. Treasured up in their memory, they may not be understood now, but hereafter they may be clear to them. Every one engaged in teaching a Sunday-school, therefore, may be imparting instruction which may be understood, and may impart comfort, long after the teacher has gone to eternity.

They believed. That is, after he rose from the dead.

The scripture. The Old Testament, which predicted his resurrection. Reference here must be made to Ps 16:10, comp. Acts 2:27-32, Acts 13:35-37, Ps 2:7, comp. Acts 13:33. They understood those Scriptures in a sense different from what they did before.

The word which Jesus had said. The prediction which he had made respecting his resurrection in this place and on other occasions. See Mt 20:19, Lk 18:32,33.

(s) "his disciples" Lk 24:8

Feast-day. Feast. During the celebration of the Passover, which continued eight days.

Miracles which he did. These miracles are not particularly recorded. Jesus took occasion to work miracles, and to preach at that time, for a great multitude were present from all parts of Judea. It was a favourable opportunity for making known his doctrines and showing the evidence that he was the Christ, and he embraced it. We should always seek and embrace opportunities of doing good, and we should not be deterred, but rather excited, by the multitude around us to make known our real sentiments on the subject of religion.

Did not commit himself. The word translated commit here is the same which in Jn 2:23 is translated believed. It means to put trust or confidence in. Jesus did not put trust or reliance in them. He did not leave himself in their hands. He acted cautiously and prudently. The proper time for him to die had not come, and he secured his own safety. The reason why he did not commit himself to them is that he knew all men. He knew the inconstancy and fickleness of the multitude. He knew how easily they might be turned against him by the Jewish leaders, and how unsafe he would be if they should be moved to sedition and tumult.

(t) "he knew all men" 1Sam 16:7, 1Chr 28:9, 29:17, Jer 17:9,10, Mt 9:4 Lk 16:30, Acts 1:24, re 2:23

Should testify of man. Should give him the character of any man.

He knew what was in man. This he did because he had made all Jn 1:3, and because he was God, Jn 1:1. There can be no higher evidence than this that he was omniscient, and was therefore divine. To search the heart is the prerogative of God alone (Jer 17:10); and as Jesus knew what was in these disciples, and as it is expressly said that he knew what was in man--that is, in all men-- so it follows that he must be equal with God. As he knows all, he is acquainted with the false pretentions and professions of hypocrites. None can deceive him. He also knows the wants and desires of all his real friends. He hears their groans, he sees their sighs, he counts their tears, and in the day of need will come to their relief.

[And the third day there was a marriage, &c.] A virgin marries on the fourth day of the week, and a widow on the fifth. "This custom came not in but from the decree of Ezra, and so onward: for the Sanhedrim doth not sit but on the second and the fifth days; but before the decree of Ezra, when the Sanhedrim assembled every day, then was it lawful to take a wife on any day." There is a twofold reason given for this restraint:

I. The virgin was to be married on the fourth day of the week because the assembly of the twenty-three met on the fifth: so that if the husband should find his wife to be no virgin, but already violated, he might have recourse to the consistory in the heat of his displeasure, and procure just punishment for her according to law. But why then might they not as well marry on the first day of the week, seeing the Beth Din met on the second as well as the fifth?

II. Lest the sabbath should be polluted by preparations for the nuptials: for the first, second, and third days of the week are allowed for those kind of preparations. And the reason why the widow was to be married on the fifth day was, that her husband might rejoice with her for three days together, viz. fifth, sixth, and the sabbath day.

If therefore our bride in this place was a virgin, then the nuptials were celebrated on the fourth day of the week, which is our Wednesday: if she was a widow, then she was married on the fifth day of the week, which is our Thursday. Let us therefore number our days according to our evangelist, and let it be but granted that that was the sabbath in which it is said, "They abode with him all that day," chapter 1, verse 39; then on the first day of the week Christ went into Galilee and met with Nathanael. So that the third day from thence is the fourth day of the week; but as to that, let every one reckon as he himself shall think fit.

[A marriage.] I. The virgin to be married cometh forth from her father's house to that of her husband, "in some veil, but with her hair dishevelled, or her head uncovered."

II. If any person meets her upon that day, he gives her the way; which once was done by king Agrippa himself.

III. They carry before her a cup of wine, which they were wont to call the cup of Trumah, which denoted that she, for her unspotted virginity, might have married a priest, and eaten of the Trumah.

IV. Skipping and dancing, they were wont to sing the praises of the bride. In Palestine they used these words "She needs no paint nor stibium, no plaiting of the hair, or any such thing; for she is of herself most beautiful."

V. They scattered some kind of grain or corn amongst the children; that they, if occasion should serve, might bear witness hereafter that they saw that woman a married virgin.

VI. They sprinkled also or sowed barley before them, by that ceremony denoting their fruitfulness. Whether these sports were used at the wedding where our Saviour was present, let others inquire.

VII. In Sotah there is mention of crowns which the bride and bridegroom wore; as also what fashion they were of, and of what materials they were made.

VIII. Because of the mirth that was expected at nuptial solemnities, they forbade all weddings celebrating within the feasts of the Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles, "because there were great rejoicings at nuptials, and they must not intermingle one joy with another"; that is, the joy of nuptials with the joy of a festival.

IX. The nuptial festivity was continued for the whole seven days; which we also see of old, Judges 19:12.

[And the mother of Jesus was there.] The mother of Jesus was there, not invited (as it should seem) with Christ and his disciples, but had been there before the invitation made to them.

You may conceive who were the usual nuptial guests by those words of Maimonides: "The bridegroom and his companions, the children of the bridechamber, are not bound to make a tabernacle."

I. In a more general sense, denotes a friend or companion, as in the Targum, Judges 14:2; 2 Samuel 13:3: but it is more particularly applied to those friends that are the nuptial guests.

II. But in a most strict sense to those two mentioned Chetubb. fol. 12. 1: "Of old they appointed two Shoshbenin, one for the bridegroom, the other for the bride, that they should minister to them especially at their entry into the bridal chamber." They were especially instituted for this end, that they should take care and provide that there should be no fraud nor deceit as to the tokens of the bride's virginity. So Gloss upon the place. The Rabbins very ridiculously (as they almost always do) tell a trifling story, that Michael and Gabriel were the two Shoshbenin at Adam and Eve's wedding.

III. But as to the signification of this nuptial term in a more large sense, we may see farther: "If any amongst the brethren make a Shoshbenuth while the father is yet alive, when the Shoshbenuth returns, that also is returned too; for the Shoshbenuth is required even before the Beth Din; but if any one send to his friend any measures of wine, those are not required before the Beth Din; for this was a deed of gift? or work of charity."

The words are very obscure, but they seem to bear this sense, viz.: This was the manner of the Shoshbenuth: some bachelor or single person, for joy of his friend's marriage, takes something along with him to eat and be merry with the bridegroom: when it comes to the turn of this single person to marry, this bridegroom, to whom he had brought this portion, is bound to return the same kindness again. Nay, if the father should make a wedding for his son, and his friends should bring gifts along with them in honour of the nuptials, and give them to his son [the bridegroom], the father was bound to return the same kindness whenever any of those friends should think fit to marry themselves. But if any one should send the bridegroom to congratulate his nuptials, either wine or oil, or any such gift, and not come himself to eat and make merry with them, this was not of the nature of the Shoshbenuth, nor could be required back again before the tribunal, because that was a free gift.

IV. Christ therefore, and five of his disciples, were not of these voluntary Shoshbenin at this wedding, for they were invited guests, and so of the number of those that were called the children of the bridechamber, distinguished from the Shoshbenin. But whether our Saviour's mother was to be accounted either the one or the other is a vain and needless question. Perhaps she had the care of preparing and managing the necessaries for the wedding, as having some relation either with the bridegroom or the bride.

[Six waterpots.] Gloss, "If any one have water fit to drink, and that water by chance contract any uncleanness, let him fill the stone vessel with it."

The number of the six waterpots, I suppose, needs not be ascribed to any custom of the nation, but rather to the multitude then present. It is true indeed that at nuptials and other feasts, there were waterpots always set for the guests to wash their hands at; but the number of the vessels and the quantity of water was always proportioned according to the number of the guests; for both the hands and vessels, and perhaps the feet of some of them, were wont to be washed.

Mashicala mashi culla, the greater vessel out of which all wash; maschilta mashia callatha, the lesser vessel in which the bride washes, and (saith the Gloss) the better sort of the guests.

[Firkins.] The Greek version thus expresseth the measure of a bath, 2 Chronicles 4:5: so Haggai 2:16, where the same measure of a bath is to be understood. Now if every one of these waterpots in our story contained two or three baths apiece, how great a quantity of wine must that be which all that water was changed into!

The waterpots of Lydda and Bethlehem: where the Gloss, "They were wont to make pots in Lydda from the measure of the seah to that of the log; and in Bethlehem from the measure of two seahs to that of one." How big were these pots that contained six or nine seahs: for every bath contained three seahs.

As to the washing of the hands, we have this in Jadaim; "they allot a fourth part of a log for the washing of one person's hands, it may be of two; half a log for three or four; a whole log to five or ten, nay, to a hundred; with this provision, saith R. Jose, that the last that washeth hath no less than a fourth part of a log for himself."

[Jesus said, Fill, &c.] I. It is probable that the discourse betwixt Jesus and his mother was not public and before the whole company, but privately and betwixt themselves: which if we suppose, the words of the son towards the mother, "Woman, what have I to do with thee?" will not seem so harsh as we might apprehend them if spoken in the hearing of all the guests. And although the son did seem by his first answer to give a plain denial to what was propounded to him, yet perhaps by something which he afterward said to her, (though not expressed by the evangelist,) or some other token, the mother understood his mind so far, that when they came into company again she could intimate to them, "Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it."

II. He answered his mother, "Mine hour is not yet come": for it might be justly expected that the first miracle he would exert should be done in Jerusalem, the metropolis of that nation.

[The governor of the feast.] This governor of the feast I would understand to have been in the place of chaplain, to give thanks, and pronounce blessings in such kind of feasts as these were. There was the bridegroom's blessing, recited every day for the whole space of the seven days, besides other benedictions during the whole festival time, requisite upon a cup of wine (for over a cup of wine there used to be a blessing pronounced;) especially that which was called the cup of good news, when the virginity of the bride is declared and certified. He, therefore, who gave the blessing for the whole company, I presume, might be called the governor of the feast. Hence to him it is that our Saviour directs the wine that was made of water, as he who, after some blessing pronounced over the cup, should first drink of it to the whole company, and after him the guests pledging and partaking of it.

As to what is contained in verses 14, 15, and 16 of this chapter, I have already discussed that in Matthew 21:12.

[What sign showest thou unto us?] "Noah, Hezekiah, &c., require a sign; much more the wicked and ungodly."

Since there had been so many, no less than four hundred years past, from the time that the Holy Spirit had departed from that nation, and prophecies had ceased, in which space there had not appeared any one person that pretended to the gift either of prophesying or working miracles, it is no wonder if they were suspicious of one that now claimed the character, and required a sign of him.

[Destroy this Temple.] I. Christ showeth them no sign that was a mere sign, Matthew 12:39. The turning of Moses' rod into a serpent, and returning the serpent into a rod again; the hand becoming leprous, and restored to its proper temperament again; these were mere signs; but those wonders which Moses afterward wrought in Egypt were not mere signs, but beneficent miracles; and whoever would not believe upon those infinite miracles which he wrought, would much less have believed upon mere signs. And, indeed, it was unbecoming our blessed Lord so far to indulge to their obstinate incredulity, to be showing new signs still at every beck of theirs, who would not believe upon those infinite numbers he put forth upon every proper occasion.

II. Matthew 12:39,40. When they had required a sign, Christ remits them to the sign of the prophet Jonah; and he points at the very same sense in these words, Destroy this Temple, &c.: that is, "My resurrection from the dead will be a sign beyond all denial, proving and affirming, that what I do I act upon divine authority, and that I am he who is to come (Rom 1:4). Further than this you must expect no other sign from me. If you believe me not while I do such works, at least believe me when I arise from the dead."

He acted here, while he is purging the Temple, under that notion as he was the authorized Messiah, Malachi 3:1,3, and expressly calls it "his Father's house," verse 16. Show us therefore some sign, (say the Jews,) by which it may appear that thou art the Messiah the Son of God; at least, that thou art a prophet. I will show you a sufficient sign, saith Christ: destroy this temple, viz. of my body, and I will raise it from the dead again; a thing which was never yet done, nor could be done by any of the prophets.

[Forty-and-six years.] I. That this was spoken of the Temple as beautified and repaired by Herod, not as built by Zorobabel, these reasons seem to sway with me:

1. That these things were done and discoursed betwixt Christ and the Jews in Herod's Temple.

2. That the account, if meant of the Temple of Zorobabel, will not fall in either with the years of the kings of Persia; or those seven weeks mentioned Daniel 9:25, in which Jerusalem was to be built, "even in troublous times." For whoever reckons by the kings of Persia, he must necessarily attribute at least thirty years to Cyrus; which they willingly do that are fond of this account: which thirty years too, if they do not reckon to him after the time that he had taken Babylon, and subverted that monarchy, they prove nothing as to this computation at all.

"Cyrus destroyed the empire of the Medes, and reigned over Persia, having overthrown Astyages, the king of the Medes": and from thence Eusebius reckons to Cyrus thirty years. But by what authority he ascribes the Jews' being set at liberty from their captivity to that very same year, I cannot tell. For Cyrus could not release the Jews from their captivity in Babylon before he had conquered Babylon for himself; and this was a great while after he had subdued the Medes, as appears from all that have treated upon the subversion of that empire: which how they agree with Xenophon, I shall not inquire at this time: content at present with this, that it doth not appear amongst any historians that have committed the acts of Cyrus to memory, that they have given thirty or twenty, no, not ten years to him after he had taken Babylon. Leunclavius gives him but eight years; and Xenophon himself seems to have given him but seven. So that this account of forty-and-six years falls plainly to the ground, as not being able to stand, but with the whole thirty years of Cyrus included into the number.

Their opinion is more probable who make these forty-and-six years parallel with the seven weeks in Daniel 9:25. But the building of the Temple ceased for more years than wherein it was built; and, in truth, if we compute the times wherein any work was done upon the Temple, it was really built within the space of ten years.

II. This number of forty-six years fits well enough with Herod's Temple; for Josephus tells us, that Herod began the work in the eighteenth year of his reign; nor does he contradict himself when he tells us, in the fifteenth year of his reign he repaired the Temple; because the fifteenth year of his reign alone, after he had conquered Antigonus, was the eighteenth year from the time wherein he had been declared king by the Romans. Now Herod (as the same Josephus relates) lived thirty-seven years from the time that the Romans had declared him king; and in his thirty-fifth year Christ was born; and he was now thirty years old when he had this discourse with the Jews. So that between the eighteenth of Herod and the thirtieth of Christ exclusively there were just forty-six years complete.

III. The words of our evangelist therefore may be thus rendered in English: "Forty-and-six years hath this Temple been in building": and this version seems warranted by Josephus, who, beginning the history of G. Florus, the procurator of Judea, about the 11th of Nero, hath this passage; From that time particularly our city began to languish, all things growing worse and worse. He tells us further, that Albinus, when he went off from his government, set open all the gaols and dismissed the prisoners, and so filled the whole province with thieves and robberies. He tells withal, that king Agrippa permitted the Levite singing-men to go about as they pleased in their linen garments: and at length concludes, "And now was the Temple finished [note that]; wherefore the people, seeing the workmen, to the number of eighteen thousand, were at a stand, having nothing to do...besought the king that he would repair the porch upon the east," &c. If therefore the Temple was not finished till that time, then much less was it so when Christ was in it. Whence we may properly enough render those words of the Jews into such a kind of sense as this: "It is forty-and-six years since the repairing of the Temple was first undertook, and indeed to this day is not quite perfected; and wilt thou pretend to build a new one in three days?"

[But he spake of the temple of his body.] If we consider how much the second Temple came behind that of the first, it will the more easily appear why our blessed Saviour should call his body the Temple.

"In the second Temple there wanted the Fire from heaven, the Ark with the Propitiatory and Cherubims, Urim and Thummim, the Divine Glory, the Holy Ghost, and the anointing Oil."

These things were all in Solomon's Temple, which therefore was accounted a full and plenary type of the Messiah: but so long as the second Temple had them not, it wanted what more particularly shadowed and represented him.

I. There was indeed in the second Temple a certain ark in the Holy of Holies; but this was neither Moses' ark nor the ark of the covenant: which may not unfitly come to mind when we read that passage, Revelation 11:19, "The Temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his Temple the ark of his testament." It was not seen, nor indeed was it at all in the second Temple.

The Jews have a tradition, that Josias hid the ark before the Babylonish captivity, lest it should fall into the hands of the enemy, as once it did amongst the Philistines; but there is no mention that it was ever found and restored again.

II. In Moses' Tabernacle and Solomon's Temple the divine presence sat visibly over the Ark in the Propitiatory, in a cloud of glory: but when the destruction of that Temple drew near, it went up from the Propitiatory, Ezekiel 10:4, and never returned into the second Temple, where neither the Ark nor the Propitiatory was ever restored.

III. The high priest, indeed, ministered in the second Temple as in the first, in eight several garments. Amongst these was the pectoral, or breastplate, wherein the precious stones were put (out of which the jasper chanced to fall and was lost): but the oracle by Urim and Thummim was never restored: see Ezra 2:63; Nehemiah 7:63. And if not restored in the days of Ezra or Nehemiah, much less certainly in the ages following, when the spirit of prophecy had forsaken and taken leave of that people. For that is a great truth amongst the Talmudists; "Things are not asked or inquired after now [by Urim and Thummim] by the high priest, because he doth not speak by the Holy Ghost, nor does there any divine afflatus breathe on him."

This, to omit other things, was the state of Zorobabel's Temple with respect to those things which were the peculiar glory of it. And these things being wanting, how much inferior must this needs be to that of Solomon's!

But there was one thing that degraded Herod's Temple still lower; and that was the person of Herod himself, to whom it is ascribed. It was not without scruple, even amongst the Jews themselves, that it was built and repaired by such a one: (and who knew not what Herod was?) and they dispute whether by right such a person ought to have meddled with it; and invent arguments for their own satisfaction as to the lawfulness of the thing.

They object first, It is not permitted to any one to demolish one synagogue till he hath built another: much less to demolish the Temple. But Herod demolished the Temple before he had built another. Ergo,

They answer, "Baba Ben Buta gave Herod that counsel, that he should pull it down." Now this Baba was reckoned amongst the great wise men, and he did not rashly move Herod to such a work; for he saw such clefts and breaches in the Temple that threatened its ruin.

They object, secondly, concerning the person of Herod, that he was a servant to the Asmonean family, that he rose up against his masters and killed them, and had killed the Sanhedrim.

They answer, We were under his power, and could not resist it. And if those hands stained with blood would be building, it was not in their power to hinder it.

These and other things they apologize for their Temple; adding this invention for the greater honour of the thing--that all that space of time wherein it was a building, it never once rained by day, that the work might not be interrupted.

The Rabbins take a great deal of pains, but to no purpose, upon those words, Haggai 2:9, "The glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the former." "R. Jochanan and R. Eliezer say; one, that it was a greater for the fabric; the other, that it was greater for the duration." As if the glory of the Temple consisted in any mathematical reasons of space, dimension, or duration; as if it lay in walls, gilding, or ornament. The glory of the first Temple was the Ark, the divine cloud over the Ark, the Urim and the Thummim, &c. Now where or in what can consist the greater glory of the second Temple when these are gone?

Herein it is indeed that the Lord of the Temple was himself present in his Temple: he himself was present in whom dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily, Colossian 2:9; as the divine glory of old was over the ark typically, or by way of shadow only.

This is the glory, when he himself is present who is the great High Priest and the Prophet; who, answerably to the Urim and Thummim of old, reveals the counsels and will of God; he who is the true and living Temple, whom that Temple shadowed out. "This Temple of yours, O ye Jews, does not answer its first pattern and exemplar: there are wanting in that, what were the chief glory of the former; which very defect intimates that there is another Temple to be expected, that in all things may fall in with its first type, as it is necessary the antitype should do. And this is the Temple of my body." No further did he think fit to reply to them at that time.

The former part of this chapter acquaints us with the first miracle which our Saviour wrought, in turning water into wine; the occasion of it was, his being invited to a marriage-feast.

Here note, 1. That whenever our Saviour was invited to a public entertainment, he never refused the invitation, but constantly went; not so much for the pleasure of eating, as for the opportunity of conversing and doing good, which was meat and drink unto him.

Note, 2. What honour Christ put upon the ordinance of marrige; he honours it with his presence and first miracle. Some think it was St. John that was now the bridegroom; others, that it was some near relation of the virgin mother's; but whoever it might be, doubtless Christ's design was rather to put honour upon the ordinance than upon the person. How bold is the church of Rome in spitting upon the face of this ordinance, by denying its lawfulness to the ministers of religion! When the apostle affirms that marriage is honourable among all. Heb 13:4. Neither the prophets of the Old Testament, nor the apostles of the New, (St. Peter himself not excepted,) did abhor the marriage-bed, or judge themselves too pure for an institution of their Maker.

Note, 3. That it is an ancient and laudable institution, that the rites of marriage should not want a solemn celebration. Feasting with friends upon such an occasion is both lawful and commendable, provided the rules of sobriety and charity, modesty and decency, be observed, and no sinful liberty assumed. But it must be said, that feasting in general, and marriage-feasts in particular, are some of those lawful things which are difficultly managed without sin.

Note, 4. That our Saviour's working a miracle when he was at the marriage-feast, should teach us, by his example, that in our cheerful and free times, when we indulge a little more than ordinary to mirth amongst our friends, we should still be mindful of God's honour and glory, and lay hold upon an occasion of doing all the good we can.

Note lastly, As Christ was personally invited to, and bodily present at this marriage-feast when here on earth; so he will not refuse now in heaven to be spiritually present at his people's marriages. They want his presence with them upon that great occasion, they desire and seek it; he is acquainted with it, and invited to it, whoever is neglected; and where Christ is made acquainted with the match, he will certainly make one at the marriage. Happy is that wedding where Christ and his friends (as here) are the invited, expected, and enjoyed guests.

This want of wine was probably so disposed by the providence of God, to give our Saviour an opportunity to manifest his divine power in working a miracle to supply it.

Observe here, 1. How the Virgin enquires into the family's wants, and then makes them known to Christ.

Learn hence, That it is an argument of piety, and an evidence of Christian love, to enquire into the wants, and to recommend the necessities of others to Christ's care and consideration; whose bounty and munificence can readily and abundantly supply them.

Thus far the Virgin's action was good: she laid open the case to Christ; They have no wine. but Christ, who discerned the thoughts of Mary's heart, finds her guilty of presumption; she thought by her motherly authority, she might have expected, if not commanded, a miracle from him: whereas Christ was subject to her as a man during his private life: but now being entered upon his office a mediator, as God-man, he gives her to understand she had no power over him, nor any motherly authority in the business of his public office; therefore he says to her, Woman, what have I to do with thee?. He that charges his angels with folly, will not be taught when and how to act by poor crawling dust and ashes.

Observe therefore, 2. Christ calls the Virgin, Woman, not Mother; but this was not out of any contempt, but to prevent her being thought more than a woman, above or beyond a woman, having brought forth the Son of God. Woman, says Christ; not Goddess, as the Papists would make her, and proclaim her free from sin, even from venial sin; but Christ's reproving her shows that she was not faultless.

Observe, 3. Christ would not bear with the Virgin's commanding on earth, will he them endure her intercession in heaven? Must she not meddle with matters appertaining to his office here below, and will it be endured by Christ, or endeavoured by her, to interpose, in the work of mediation above? No, no; were it possible for her so far to forget herself in heaven, she would receive the answer from Christ which she had on earth, Woman, what have I to do with thee? or thou with me, in my mediatorial office? But instead of this, she returns answer from heaven to her idolatrous petitioners here on earth, "What have I to do with thee? Get you to my Son, go you to Christ, he that was the Mediator of redemption; he, and only he, continues the Mediator of intercession."

O how foolish, as well as impious, is it to think, that she who had not so much power as to direct the working of one miracle on earth, should have now lodged in her hands all the power of heaven!

In this miracle of our Saviour's turning water into wine, Observe, 1. The reality of the miracle, and the sincerity of Christ in the working of it. The evidencce there was no deceit in the miracle, not wine-casks, but water-pots, are called for; wine-vessels, in which some lees were remaining might have given both a vinous colour and taste to the water; but stonepots could contribute nothing of this nature; and being open pots, there was not stealing wine into them without observation.

Again, our Saviour's employing the servants, and not his disciples, takes off any suspicion of collusion; and his sending it to the ruler or governor of the feast, was an evidence that the miracle would bear examination. Our Saviour's miracles were real and beneficial; they were obvious to sense, not lying wonders, nor fictitious miracles, which the jugglers in the church of Rome cheat the people with. The greatest miracle which they boast of, transubstantiation, is so far from being obvious to sense, that it conrtradicts the sense and reason of mankind, and is the greatest affront to human nature that ever the world was acquainted with.

Observe, 2. Though Christ wrought a real miracle, yet he would not work more of miracle than needed; he would not create wine out of nothing, but turned water into wine. Thus he multiplied the bread, changed the water, restored withered limbs, raised dead bodies, still working upon that which was, and not creating that which was not: Christ never wrought a miracle but when needful, and then wrought no more of miracles than he needed.

Observe, 3. The liberality and bounty of Christ in the miracle here wrought; six water-pots are filled with wine! Enough, says some writers, for an hundred and fifty men; had he turned but one of those large vessels into wine, it had been a sufficient proof of his power; but to fill so many, was an instance both of his power and mercy.

The Lord of the family furnishes his household not barely for necessity, but for delight, giving richly all things to enjoy. And as the bounty of Christ appeared in quantity, so in the excellency, of the wine; Thou hast kept the best wine until now, says the governor of the feast. It was fit that Christ's miraculous wine should be more perfect than the natural.

But, O blessed Saviour, how delicate and delicious shall that wine be, which we shall drink ere long, with thee in thy Father's kingdom! Let thy Holy Spirit fill the vessel of my heart with water, with godly sorrow and contrition, and thou wilt turn it into wine. For blessed are they that mourn, they shall be comforted.

Observe, 4. The double effects of this miracle; Christ hereby manifested forth his glory, and his disciples believed on him.

1. He manifested forth his glory; that is, the glory of his godhead, as doing this by his own power. Here shined forth his omnipotence, his bounty and liberality, every thing that might bespeak him both a great and good God.

The second effect of this miracle was, that the disciples believed on him. The great end of miracles is the confirmation of faith; God never sets the seals of his omnipotence to a lie; all the miracles then that Christ and his apostles did, were as so many seals that the doctrine of the gospel is true. If you believe not me, says Christ, believe the works which I do, for they bear witness of me, Joh 5:36

Observe here, 1. How obedient in all things Christ was to the ceremonial law. he was not naturally subject to the law, but, to fulfil all righteousness, he kept the passover yearly, according to the command of God, That all the males should appear before him Exod 23:17 in the temple at Jerusalem.

Hence it is probably concluded, that Christ came up to the passover continually during his private life; and being now come up to Jerusalem to this first passover after his baptism, and solemn entrance upon his office, his first walk was to purge and reform it from abuses, not to ruin and destroy it, because it had been abused.

Now the abuse and profanation of the temple at that time was this: in the outward court of the Gentiles, there was a public mart or market, where were sold oxen, sheep, and doves, for sacrifice; which otherwise the people, with great labour and trouble, must have brought up along with them for sacrifice. Therefore as a pretended ease to the people, the priests ordered these things to be sold hard by the altar; the intention was commendable, but the action not justifiable. No pretence of good ends can justify that which is forbidden of God: a good end can never justify an irregular action.

Observe, 2. Our Saviour's fervent zeal in purging and reforming his Father's house. The sight of sin in any persons, but especially in and among professors, ought to kindle in our hearts (as it did here in Christ's breast) a burning zeal and indignation against it. Yet was not Christ's zeal so warm as to devote the temple to destruction, because of its abuse and profanation. Places dedicated to the worship and service of God, if idolatrously abused, must not be pulled down, but purged; not ruined, but reformed.

There is a special reverence due to the house of God, but for the Owner's sake, and the service's sake. Nothing but holiness becomes that place, where God is worshipped in the beauty of holiness. Christ by purging the court of the Gentiles from merchandise, not unlawful in itself, but necessary for the sacrifices which were offered in the temple, though not necessary to be brought there, did plainly insinuate, that a distinction is to be made betwixt places sacred and profane; and that what may be done as well elsewhere, ought not to be done in the house of God, the place appointed immediately for his worship.

Observe, 3. The greatness of this miracle, in the weakness of the means which Christ made use of to effect and work it: he drove the buyers and sellers before him out of the temple.

But how and with what?

St. Jerome, in Matt 21:1 and following says, That certain fiery rays or beams, darting from Christ's eyes, drove out these merchants from this place. I dare not avouch this, but I am satisfied that Christ drove them out, unarmed with any weapons that might carry dread and terror with them, at most but with a whip of small cords; which probably might be scattered by the drovers that came thither to sell their cattle.

Behold then the weakness of the means on the one side, and consider the greatness of the opposition on the other. Here was a confluence of people to oppose Christ, this being the most solemn mart of the passover, and here were merchantmen, whose hearts were set upon gain (the world's god) to oppose him. But neither the weakness of the means, nor the greatness of the opposition, did dismay him, or cause our Saviour to desist from the attempt of reforming what was amiss in the house of God.

Learn we hence, that it matters not how weak the means of the church-reformation is, nor how strong the opposing power is; if we engage Christ in the undertaking, the work shall certainly be accomplished.

O, how great was the work, and how weak and unlikely were the means here! a parcel of sturdy fellows, whose hearts were set upon their wealth, Christ no sooner speaks to them, and shakes his whip at them, but like a company of fearful hares they run before him. Christ, in purging of his church, will make every thing yield and give way to his power. Let it comfort the church under all unlikelihood of reformation. Who art thou, O great mountain? before our spiritual Zerubbabel, thou shalt become a plain.

I shall close my observations upon this miracle of Christ's whipping the buyers and sellers out of the temple, which both Origen and St. Jerome do make the greatest miracle that ever Christ wrought, all circumstances considered; I shall close it with this reflection, viz. Was there such power and terror in Christ's countenance and speech here in the temple in the days of his flesh? Oh, how terrible then will his face and his appearance be to the wicked and impenitent world at the great day! Lord! how fearful will his iron courage then be; how terrifying that voice, "Depart, depart from me, depart accursed, depart into fire: depart into everlasting fire, into a fire prepared for the punishment of apostate spirits, the devil and his angels!" God grant we may wisely consider it, and timely flee from the wrath to come.

The disciples upon this occasion called to remembrance the words of David, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up: Ps 69:9 which was verified in Christ as well as in David.

Where observe, 1. The grace described, zeal, which is the ardour of the affections, carrying forth a man to the utmost for God's glory, and his church's good. Zeal is not so much one affection, as the intense degree of all the affections.

Observe, 2. The object about which our Saviour's zeal was conversant, God's house, that is, all things relating to the worship of God, temple, tabernacle, ark, &c. which were the pledges of God's presence.

Observe, 3. The effect of this, it hath eaten me up, like fire that eats up and devours that whereon it lights. What was said of St. Peter, That he was a man made up all of fire; and of St. Paul in respect of his sufferings, that he was a spark of fire burning in the midst of the sea, may much more truly be said of Christ, when he was engaged in the work of church-reformation.

Learn, That as Christ was, so Christians ought to be, very zealous for the glory of God, the honour of his house, and the purity of his worship. The zeal of thine house, that is, for the honour of thine house, hath eaten me up, &c.

Observe here, 1. How exceedingly offended the Jews were at the reformation which our Saviour had made in the house of God; they were awed indeed with the majesty of this great work, and durst not openly oppose, but secretly malign it.

Thence note, That redress of abuses in God's worship, especially if it crosses our ease, and controls our profit, (as this did), is usually distasted.

Observe, 2. How these Jews discover their old inveterate disease of infidelity; they require a sign, and call for a miracle to justify Christ's commission. Why! had they not a miracle before their eyes? Was not the work of purging the temple a wonderful miracle? Yet they demanded another miracle to make this good.

Learn thence, That obstinate infidelity will not be satisfied with the most sufficient means for satisfaction, but still object and oppose against the clearest, the fullest, and most convincing evidence. What sign showest thou us? says the Jews, when they had so many signs and wonders daily before their eyes.

Observe, 3. The Jews demanding a sign. our Saviour grants them one; he remits them to his death and resurrection, to prove that he was the true Messiah. Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. That is, "I know you will destroy this temple of my body, by putting me to deaeth; but I will raise myself again from the grave the third day." Christ did not command them to destroy his body, but only foretold that they would do it. Non est verbum Praecepti, sed Praedictionis: "The words are not imperative, but only predictive and permissive." Christ did not bid them destroy his body, but foretells what they would do. "Ye will destroy this temple, but after three days I will raise it up."

Where note, That Christ asserts his own power in raising his own body from the dead. True! The Father is often said to raise him, and it is necessary that it be so said, that it might appear that divine justice was fully satisfied for our sins, in that he was by him delivered from that death which he underwent for us.

But yet it is often asserted, That Christ raised himself, and that he was quickened by the Spirit, which was as well the Spirit of the Son, as of the Father, dwelling essentially in him.

Now from Christ's foretelling his passion and resurrection, learn thence, that all our Saviour's sufferings wee foreknown unto him, were foretold by him; he would not prevent them, but willingly permitted them, and cheerfully underwent them. Destroy this temple.

Note here, 1. The state and dignity of Christ's holy body: 'Tis a temple. He spake of the temple of his body. The saints' bodies are temples by special sanctification: Christ's body was a temple by substantial inhabitation. The divinity of Christ dwelt in his humanity personally and immediately. God dwells in saints by regal authority; he dwelt in Christ's humanity by personal residence.

Note, 2. The violence and indignity offered to this holy temple at our Saviour's death, it was pulled down and destroyed; death dissolved the union betwixt our Saviour's soul and body; but there was a closer union, which no violence of death could dissolve: namely, the union of his godhead with his manhood; this was incapable either of dissolution or destruction.

Note, 3. The repairing, restoring, and raising up of this temple out of the ruins of it, by our Saviour's resurrection. In three days I will raise it up.

Observe, A full proof of our Saviour's divinity. To raise a dead man exceeds the power of nature; but for a dead man to raise himself, requires the power of God. We read of dead men raised by others; but none but Christ ever raised himself. The Jews could not say, he raised others from the grace, himself he could not raise.

Inference, 1. Was Christ's body a temple? so shall ours be too; temples for the Holy Ghost to dwell in. Temples by special appropriation, temples by solemn consecration, temples by actual employment: If any man defile this temple, him will God destroy.

2. Was the temple of Christ's body pulled down by death, and destroyed; so must also the temples of our bodies ere long. The temple of his body was pulled down for our sin; the temples of our bodies ruined by our sin. Sin brought mortality into our natures, and the wages of our sin is death.

3. Was the temple of Christ's body repaired in the morning of the resurrection? So shall the temple of our bodies also, if we be the members of Christ by a vital union. Thy dead men, O blessed redeemer! shall live; together with thy dead body shall they arise. Awake then and sing, ye that dwell in the dust, for the dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead, Isa 26:19

Observe here, What influence the sight of our Saviour's miracles had upon many of the common people, They believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did; that is, they were convinced by the works which our Saviour wrought that he came from God, and what he said and did was really true, and no imposture. But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men. Our Saviour did not, and would not trust them who yet believed on his name.

Thence note, That a naked assent to the history of the gospel is not sufficient to entitle us to saving faith. We may assent to the truth of all that we find there, and yet be far from the kingdom of God.

Saving faith implies more than the assent of the understanding to the truths of the gospel. We cannot believe or disbelieve what we please, but must needs assent to what is evident to our understanding; so that it is possible for a man to assent to the truth of Christianity and yet remain in a state of of damnation.

If he doth not embrace it as good, as well as assent to it as true; if our faith be not the parent and principle of obedience; if our belief doth not influence our practice; though we pass for believers amongst men, we are no better than unbelievers in the account of Christ.

If we believe Jesus to be the true Messiah, and do not receive him in all his office; if we commit ourselves to his saving mercy, but do not submit ourselves to his ruling power; if we desire him for our Saviour, but disown him for our sovereign; if we expect salvation by him, and do not yield subjection to him; we put a cheat upon ourselves: for he only believes as he should, that lives as he does believe.

St. John's design in writing of this gospel being to assert the divinity of Christ, he scatters evidences of it in almost every chapter. Here he declares his omniscience, He knew what was in man; that is, being God blessed for ever, he had an exact knowledge of the hearts of men, not by any revelation of men's hearts from God, but by immediate intuition from himself. He knows all men, and all that is in men. See here an ample testimony of the divinity of Christ, his knowledge of the secrets of the hearts of all men, which is declared to be the undoubted property of God alone, Thou only knowest the hearts of all the children of men. 1Kgs 8:39