John 11:45

“After the Evangelist has set down the death of Lazarus and his resurrection, here he consequently sets down the effect of the resurrection; and first he sets down its effect in the crowd; second he sets down its effect in the princes, at the place, "Therefore the chief priests and Pharisees gathered a council." Concerning the first he does two things. First he brings in certain ones believing, saying, "Many therefore of the Jews who had come to Mary and Martha," to console them, "and had seen the things that Jesus did, believed in him." Nor is it to be wondered at, because such a miracle had not been heard of from the beginning of the world, namely that a dead man of four days in the tomb should be raised again to life. Likewise also the Lord says that he would work this miracle on account of the people standing around, namely so that they might believe in him: and therefore that word did not go out in vain, but from the miracle seen many believed. 1 Corinthians 1:22: "The Jews seek signs." Second he brings in certain ones denouncing, saying, "But certain of them went to the Pharisees," and so on. This indeed can be understood in two ways. In one way, that they told the chief priests the things Jesus had done in order to mollify them against Jesus, and in order to refute them concerning this, that they were plotting against Jesus, who was doing such wondrous things. In another way, and better, that they said this in order to incite them against Christ. For they were unbelieving, and were scandalized by the miracle. And this is clear from the very manner of speaking. For when he had said, "Many therefore of the Jews... believed in him," he subjoins something as though opposed, saying, "But certain of them went away to the Pharisees," and so on. These are the ones of whom it is said below, at John 12:37, that although Jesus had done such great signs before them, "they did not believe in him... for they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God." Consequently, when he says, "Therefore the chief priests and Pharisees gathered a council," the Evangelist sets down the effect of the miracle in the princes, and first he sets down the malice which they devised against Christ; second he shows how Christ avoided it, at the place, "Jesus therefore walked no more openly among the Jews." Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets down the gathering of the council; second he adds the doubt of those gathered, at the place, "and they said: What do we do, for this man does many signs?" Third he assigns the settling of the doubt, at the place, "But one of them," and so on. Now concerning the first, the wickedness of the chief priests is shown from three things. First from the condition of the persons, because they were not common people, but chief priests and Pharisees. Chief priests, moreover, because they were the princes of sacred matters; but Pharisees, because they had the appearance of religion, so that thus what is said in Genesis 49:5 might be fulfilled: "Simeon and Levi, brothers, vessels of iniquity waging war." For from Simeon came the inventors of the sect of the Pharisees. But the chief priests, it is clear, were of the tribe of Levi; 1 Esdras 9:2: "The hand of the princes was first in this transgression." Second, from the deliberation of malice; hence he says "they gathered a council," which is done for taking counsel; Genesis 49:6: "Let my soul not enter into their council"; Psalm 1:1: "Blessed is the man who has not gone in the counsel of the impious," and so on. But, as is said in Proverbs 21:30: "There is no counsel against the Lord." Third, from the depraved intention, because it was against Jesus, that is, against the Savior; Psalm 40:8: "Against me my enemies spoke, against me they devised evils for me"; Jeremiah 18:18: "Come, let us devise devices against Jeremiah." Consequently, when he says, "What do we do, for this man does many signs?" he sets down their doubt, and first he sets down the motive of the doubt; second the matter of the doubt, at the place, "If we let him alone thus, all will believe in him." Now what was moving them to doubt was the miracles of Christ; hence they said, "What do we do, for this man does many signs?" They are blind, still calling him a man, of whom they had received so great a demonstration of divinity. For, as he himself says above, at chapter 5:36: "The works which the Father has given me to accomplish, these give testimony of me." They are also no less foolish than blind: because they are in doubt as to what they ought to do, when nothing else was required of them but to believe; above, at 6:30: "What sign do you do, that we may believe you?" But behold, he has done many signs, and still they say that "this man does many signs." For "their own malice blinded them," Wisdom 2:21. But the matter of the doubt was that they feared the losses that would follow upon them. And he sets down two things as to this. First, the loss of spiritual primacy; and as to this he says, "If we let him alone thus, all will believe in him": which indeed, according to the truth of the matter, was something desirable for all, for the faith that is directed to Christ both saves and leads to eternal life; below, at 20:31: "These things are written that you may believe... and that believing you may have life in his name." But as to their depraved intention it seemed horrible to them, since, if they believed, none of those who believed in Christ would obey them. Hence out of their ambition they draw back both themselves and others from salvation. Hence it is said in the third canonical letter of John: "He who loves to hold the primacy among them, Diotrephes, does not receive us." Second, he sets down the ambition of temporal possession, when he says, "and the Romans will come, and take away our place and nation": which seems to follow from this, according to Augustine, because if all believed in Christ, no one would remain to defend the temple of God against the Romans, since they would abandon the holy temple and their paternal laws, against which they perceived the teaching of Christ to be. But this does not seem to pertain very much to the matter proposed, since they were still serving the Romans, nor had they devised to move war against them. And therefore it seems better to say, according to Chrysostom, that they said this because they saw Christ being honored by the people as a king. And because it was a command of the Romans that no one should be named king except through them, they therefore feared that if the Romans should hear this, that they had Christ as a king, they would reckon the Jews themselves rebellious and rising up against them, and would destroy their city and nation; below, at 19:12: "Everyone who makes himself a king contradicts Caesar." But observe their wretchedness, for they fear to lose nothing except temporal things, taking no thought for eternal life; Deuteronomy 33:28: "The eye of Jacob is toward the earth." But, as is said in Proverbs 16:24 [variant numbering], "what the impious man fears will come upon him." Therefore the Romans, after the passion of the Lord and his glorification, took from them both their place and their nation, by conquering and transferring them. He sets down, however, the settling of the doubt, when he says, "But one of them, Caiaphas by name, being the high priest of that year, said to them." And first the settlement is set down; second the exposition of the settlement, at the place, "This he did not say of himself"; third the acceptance of the sentence by the assembly, at the place, "From that day therefore they devised to put him to death." Concerning the first he does two things. First he describes the person of the one giving the sentence; second he sets down the words of the sentence, at the place, "You know nothing," and so on. The person giving the sentence is described from his name and from his dignity. From his name indeed, because he is Caiaphas, which name indeed suits his malice. For it is interpreted, first, as "one who investigates," which attests to his presumption; Proverbs 25:27: "He who is a searcher of majesty shall be overwhelmed by glory." For he presumed when he said: "I adjure you by the living God, that you tell us if you are the Christ." Second, it is interpreted as "shrewd," which attests to his cunning, because he strives to procure the death of Christ. Third, it is interpreted as "vomiting from the mouth," which attests to his folly; Proverbs 26:11: "As a dog that returns to its vomit." From his dignity, however, he is described, because he was "the high priest of that year." Concerning which it must be known that, as is found in Leviticus 8, the Lord established one high priest, whom, when he died, one would succeed, who would exercise the office of high priest for his whole life. Afterward, however, as ambition and contention grew among the Jews, it was established that there should be several high priests, and that this dignity should come to all of them in turn, and that they should minister by turns for individual years. And sometimes they even procured this for themselves by money, as Josephus relates concerning this. And to show this he says "of that year." Consequently, when he says, "You know nothing," and so on, he sets down the words of the one settling the matter: who indeed first reproaches the others for their sluggishness, saying, "You know nothing, nor do you consider," as if he were saying: you are sluggish, and still you attend to the matter too slowly. And therefore, second, he sets down his own malice, saying, "It is expedient for you that one man should die for the people." These words indeed have one meaning according to Caiaphas's intention, and another according to the Evangelist's exposition. So then, that it may first be explained according to his depraved intention, it must be known that, as is said in Deuteronomy 13:1ff., it is the command of the Lord: "If there shall be in the midst of you a prophet, or one who says he has seen a dream, and he shall wish to draw you back from the Lord, that prophet, as a fabricator of dreams, shall be put to death." According to this law, therefore, this man believed that Christ was turning the people away from the worship of God; Luke 23:2: "We have found this man subverting our nation." And therefore he said, "You know nothing," namely the law, "nor do you consider that it is expedient for you," namely that "one," that is, this man, "should die," lest the whole people be led astray; as if he were saying: the well-being of one man ought to be counted as nothing for the sake of the common commonwealth. Hence there follows, at Deuteronomy 13:5: "and you shall take away the evil from the midst of your people"; 1 Corinthians 5:13: "take away the evil one from among yourselves." But the Evangelist explains it otherwise, saying, "But this he did not say of himself," and so on. Here he sets down three things. First, the author of these words; second, their right sense, at the place, "because Jesus was to die for the nation"; third, the Evangelist adds to the words of Caiaphas, at the place, "and not only for the nation, but that he might gather together in one the children of God who were scattered." Concerning the first it must be known that, because someone could believe that Caiaphas had uttered these words by his own private instinct, the Evangelist, excluding this, says, "But this he did not say of himself." In which it is given to be understood that someone sometimes speaks of himself. For man is that which is principal in him, and this is intellect and reason: hence man is what he is through reason. When, therefore, a man speaks from his own reason, then he speaks of himself; but when he speaks moved by some higher and exterior instinct, he does not speak of himself. This happens, however, in two ways. Sometimes as one moved by the divine Spirit, according to Matthew 10:20: "For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you." Sometimes, however, as one moved by an evil spirit, as those who are seized: and indeed sometimes they are even said to prophesy. That those moved by the divine Spirit prophesy is said at 2 Peter 1:21: "For prophecy was not brought at any time by the will of man, but the holy men of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit, spoke." That those moved by an evil spirit prophesy is found at Jeremiah 29:26: "The Lord has made you priest in the place of Jehoiada the priest, that you should be leader in the house of the Lord over every man that is seized and prophesies." It must also be known that sometimes someone speaks by the instinct of the Holy Spirit or of an evil spirit, who nevertheless loses the use of reason, and is seized. Sometimes, however, the free use of reason remains to him, and he is not seized. For when the sensitive powers superabound from a higher impression, reason is bound, and he is moved, and is seized. But because the demon has the power of making an impression on the imagination, since it is a power attached to an organ, he can sometimes make such an impression on it that, from the abundance of the impression, reason is rendered as it were bound, yet not so that it is forced to consent; and then the man is seized by the evil spirit. There remains, therefore, the question whether Caiaphas spoke these words by the instinct of the Holy Spirit, or of an evil spirit. And it seems that he did not speak by the instinct of the Holy Spirit: for the Holy Spirit is the spirit of truth, as is said in Jeremiah, chapter 15. But the evil spirit is the spirit of lying; 1 Kings [3 Kings] 22:22: "I will go out, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all the prophets." Now it is agreed that Caiaphas spoke a lie, saying, "It is expedient for you that one man should die." He did not, therefore, as it seems, speak by the instinct of the Holy Spirit, but rather prophesied by the instinct of an evil, seizing spirit. This, however, does not seem to agree with the words of the Evangelist: for if it were so, John would not have added, "since he was the high priest of that year." Therefore he added Caiaphas's dignity for this reason, that he might suggest that he had spoken by the instinct of the Holy Spirit. From which it is given to us to understand that the Holy Spirit moves even wicked men established in dignity to speak certain true things, and things to come, for the benefit precisely of their subjects. To that, therefore, which is said to the contrary, namely that what he said is false — "it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people" — a twofold answer can be given. In one way, that the death of Christ, as far as it is in itself, was expedient for all, even for those who killed him; 1 Timothy 4:10: "who is the Savior of all men, most of all of the faithful"; Hebrews 2:9: "that by the grace of God he might taste death for all." In another way, so that it is said "it is expedient for you," that is, for the people. Hence the Evangelist, where Caiaphas says "that he should die for you," puts instead "for the nation." But it seems from the words of the Evangelist that he was a prophet, since he says, "he prophesied." For if someone prophesies, it follows that he is a prophet. But, according to Origen, it does not follow that whoever prophesies is a prophet: but if he is a prophet, he indeed does prophesy; for the act of some thing is sometimes granted to someone, whose condition, however, is not granted to him; just as not everyone who does something just is just, but he who is just does just things. It must be noted, however, that a twofold act concurs for someone to prophesy: namely, to see; 1 Kings [1 Samuel] 9:9: "He who is now called a prophet, was formerly called a seer." Likewise, to announce; 1 Corinthians 14:3: "He who prophesies speaks to all for edification." It happens, however, sometimes that someone has both, and yet is not properly called a prophet: for sometimes someone has a prophetic vision, as Nebuchadnezzar and Pharaoh; and likewise they announced that very vision to others; yet they cannot be called prophets, because something was lacking to them, namely the understanding of the vision, which is needed in a vision, as is said in Daniel 10:1. Caiaphas, however, although he did not have a prophetic vision, nevertheless had the announcing of a prophetic matter, inasmuch as he announced the utility of the death of Christ. For sometimes the Holy Spirit moves someone to the whole of what pertains to prophecy, sometimes, however, only to some part of it. But in Caiaphas's case, he illuminated neither his mind nor his imagination; and therefore his mind and imagination remained bent upon evil: yet he moved his tongue, so that he might utter the manner by which the salvation of the people would be fulfilled. Hence he is not called a prophet except inasmuch as he had a prophetic act in the announcing, his imagination and reason remaining directed to the contrary. From which it is clear that he can no more be called a prophet than Balaam's ass. Consequently, when he says, "and not only for the nation, but that he might gather together in one the children of God who were scattered," the Evangelist adds to the words of the high priest, saying that Jesus was to die not only for the nation of the people, namely of the Jews, as Caiaphas said — Hebrews, last chapter, 12: "Jesus, that he might sanctify the people by his own blood, suffered outside the gate" — but he adds also for the whole world; hence he subjoins, "that he might gather together in one the children of God who were scattered." Here the heresy of the Manichaeans must be guarded against, who say that certain souls are of the divine substance, and are called children of God; and they say that God came in order to gather these together in one. But this is erroneous; because, as is said in Ezekiel 18:4: "All souls are mine," namely by creation. And therefore what he says, "that he might gather together in one the children of God who were scattered," is not to be understood as though they had then already received the spirit of adoption: because, as Gregory says, they were not yet either his sheep or the children of God by adoption. But it is to be understood according to predestination, so that it is said "the children of God," namely those predestined from eternity, Romans 8:29: "whom he foreknew, to be made conformable to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren," who were scattered through diverse rites and nations, "he might gather together in one," namely into the unity of faith; above, at 10:16: "I have other sheep, that are not of this fold, and them also I must bring... and there shall be one fold and one shepherd"; Psalm 146:2: "The Lord building up Jerusalem, will gather together the dispersed of Israel." Consequently, when he says, "From that day therefore they devised to put him to death," the Evangelist sets down the consent of the Jews to the death of Christ. But had they not devised to kill him before this? It seems that they had, since above in several places it is said that the Jews were seeking to kill him. The answer must be given that before this they indeed had an inclination toward killing him; but "from that day," incited to anger by the words of Caiaphas, they dealt with the matter with a firm resolve to kill him. Proverbs 1:16: "Their feet run to evil."”

“We have here an account of the consequences of this glorious miracle, which were as usual; to some it was a savour of life unto life, to others of death unto death. I. Some were invited by it, and induced to believe. Many of the Jews, when they saw the things that Jesus did, believed on him, and well they might, for it was an incontestable proof of his divine mission. They had often heard of his miracles, and yet evaded the conviction of them, by calling in question the matter of fact; but now that they had themselves seen this done their unbelief was conquered, and they yielded at last. But blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed. The more we see of Christ the more cause we shall see to love him and confide in him. These were some of those Jews that came to Mary, to comfort her. When we are doing good offices to others we put ourselves in the way of receiving favours from God, and have opportunities of getting good when we are doing good. II. Others were irritated by it, and hardened in their unbelief. 1. The informers were so (Joh 11:46): Some of them, who were eye-witnesses of the miracle, were so far from being convinced that they went to the Pharisees, whom they knew to be his implacable enemies, and told them what things Jesus had done; not merely as a matter of news worthy their notice, much less as an inducement to them to think more favourably of Christ, but with a spiteful design to excite those who needed no spur the more vigorously to prosecute him. Here is a strange instance, (1.) Of a most obstinate infidelity, refusing to yield to the most powerful means of conviction; and it is hard to imagine how they could evade the force of this evidence, but that the god of this world had blinded their minds. (2.) Of a most inveterate enmity. If they would not be satisfied that he was to be believed in as the Christ, yet one would think they should have been mollified, and persuaded not to persecute him; but, if the water be not sufficient to quench the fire, it will inflame it. They told what Jesus had done, and told no more than what was true; but their malice gave a tincture of diabolism to their information equal to that of lying; perverting what is true is as bad as forging what is false. Doeg is called a false, lying, and deceitful tongue (Psa 52:2-4; Psa 120:2, Psa 120:3), though what he said was true. 2. The judges, the leaders, the blind leaders, of the people were no less exasperated by the report made to them, and here we are told what they did. (1.) A special council is called and held (Joh 11:47): Then gathered the chief priests and Pharisees a council, as was foretold, Psa 2:2, The rulers take counsel together against the Lord. Consultations of the sanhedrim were intended for the public good; but here, under colour of this, the greatest injury and mischief are done to the people. The things that belong to the nation's peace were hid from the eyes of those that were entrusted with its counsels. This council was called, not only for joint advice, but for mutual irritation; that as iron sharpens iron, and as coals are to burning coals and wood to fire, so they might exasperate and inflame one another with enmity and rage against Christ and his doctrine. (2.) The case is proposed, and shown to be weighty and of great consequence. [1.] The matter to be debated was what course they should take with this Jesus, to stop the growth of his interest; they said What do we? For this man doeth many miracles. The information given about the raising of Lazarus was produced, and the men, brethren, and fathers were called in to help as solicitously as if a formidable enemy had been with an army in the heart of their country. First, They own the truth of Christ's miracles, and that he had wrought many of them; they are therefore witnesses against themselves, for they acknowledge his credentials and yet deny his commission. Secondly, They consider what is to be done, and chide themselves that they have not done something sooner effectually to crush him. They do not take it at all into their consideration whether they shall not receive him and own him as the Messiah, though they profess to expect him, and Jesus gave pregnant proofs of his being so; but they take it for granted that he is an enemy, and as such is to be run down: "What do we? Have we no care to support our church? Is it nothing to us that a doctrine so destructive to our interest spreads thus? Shall we tamely yield up the ground we have got in the affections of the people? Shall we see our authority brought into contempt, and the craft by which we get our living ruined, and not bestir ourselves? What have we been doing all this while? And what are we now thinking of? Shall we be always talking, and bring nothing to pass?" [2.] That which made this matter weighty was the peril they apprehended their church and nation to be in from the Romans (Joh 11:48): "If we do not silence him, and take him off, all men will believe on him; and, this being the setting up of a new king, the Romans will take umbrage at it, and will come with an army, and take away our place and nation, and therefore it is no time to trifle." See what an opinion they have, First, Of their own power. They speak as if they thought Christ's progress and success in his work depended upon their connivance; as if he could not go on to work miracles, and make disciples, unless they let him alone; as if it were in their power to conquer him who had conquered death, or as if they could fight against God, and prosper. But he that sits in heaven laughs at the fond conceit which impotent malice has of its own omnipotence. Secondly, Of their own policy. They fancy themselves to be men of mighty insight and foresight, and great sagacity in their moral prognostications. a. They take on them to prophecy that, in a little time, if he have liberty to go on, all men will believe on him, hereby owning, when it was to serve their purpose, that his doctrine and miracles had a very convincing power in them, such as could not be resisted, but that all men would become his proselytes and votaries. Thus do they now make his interest formidable, though, to serve another turn, these same men strove to make it contemptible, Joh 7:48, Have any of the rulers believed on him? This was the thing they were afraid of, that men would believe on him, and then all their measures were broken. Note, The success of the gospel is the dread of its adversaries; if souls be saved, they are undone. b. They foretel that if the generality of the nation be drawn after him, the rage of the Romans will be drawn upon them. They will come and take away our place; the country in general, especially Jerusalem, or the temple, the holy place, and their place, their darling, their idol; or, their preferments in the temple, their places of power and trust. Now it was true that the Romans had a very jealous eye upon them, and knew they wanted nothing but power and opportunity to shake off their yoke. It was likewise true that if the Romans should pour an army in upon them it would be very hard for them to make any head against it; yet here appeared a cowardice which one would not have found in the priests of the Lord if they had not by their wickedness forfeited their interest in God and all good men. Had they kept their integrity, they needed not to have feared the Romans; but they speak like a dispirited people, as the men of Judah when they basely said to Samson, Knowest thou not that the Philistines rule over us? Jdg 15:11. When men lose their piety they lose their courage. But, (a.) It was false that there was any danger of the Romans' being irritated against their nation by the progress of Christ's gospel, for it was no way hurtful to kings nor provinces, but highly beneficial. The Romans had no jealousy at all of his growing interest; for he taught men to give tribute to Caesar, and not to resist evil, but to take up the cross. The Roman governor, at his trial, could find no fault in him. There was more danger of the Romans' being incensed against the Jewish nation by the priests than by Christ. Note, Pretended fears are often the colour of malicious designs. (b.) Had there really been some danger of displeasing the Romans by tolerating Christ's preaching, yet this would not justify their hating and persecuting a good man. Note, [a.] The enemies of Christ and his gospel have often coloured their enmity with a seeming care for the public good and the common safety, and, in order to this, have branded his prophets and ministers as troublers of Israel, and men that turn the world upside down. [b.] Carnal policy commonly sets up reasons of state, in opposition to rules of justice. When men are concerned for their own wealth and safety more than for truth and duty, it is wisdom from beneath, which is earthly, sensual, and devilish. But see what was the issue; they pretended to be afraid that their tolerating Christ's gospel would bring desolation upon them by the Romans, and therefore, right or wrong, set themselves against it; but it proved that their persecuting the gospel brought upon them that which they feared, filled up the measure of their iniquity, and the Romans came and took away their place and nation, and their place knows them no more. Note, That calamity, which we seek to escape by sin we take the most effectual course to bring upon our own heads; and those who think by opposing Christ's kingdom to secure or advance their own secular interest will find Jerusalem a more burdensome stone than they think it is, Zac 12:3. The fear of the wicked it shall come upon them, Pro 10:24. (3.) Caiaphas makes a malicious but mystical speech in the council on this occasion. [1.] The malice of it appears evident at first view, Joh 11:49, Joh 11:50. He, being the high priest, and so president of the council, took upon him to decide the matter before it was debated: "You know nothing at all, your hesitating betrays your ignorance, for it is not a thing that will bear a dispute, it is soon determined, if you consider that received maxim, That it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people." Here, First, The counsellor was Caiaphas, who was high priest that same year. The high priesthood was by divine appointment settled upon the heir male of the house of Aaron, for and during the term of his natural life, and then to his heir male; but in those degenerate times it was become, though not an annual office, like a consulship, yet frequently changed, as they could make an interest with the Roman powers. Now it happened that this year Caiaphas wore the mitre. Secondly, The drift of the advice was, in short, this, That some way or other must be found out to put Jesus to death. We have reason to think that they strongly suspected him to be indeed the Messiah; but his doctrine was so contrary to their darling traditions and secular interest, and his design did so thwart their notions of the Messiah's kingdom, that they resolve, be he who he will, he must be put to death. Caiaphas does not say, Let him be silenced, imprisoned, banished, though amply sufficient for the restraint of one they thought dangerous; but die he must. Note, Those that have set themselves against Christianity have commonly divested themselves of humanity, and been infamous for cruelty. Thirdly, This is plausibly insinuated, with all the subtlety as well as malice of the old serpent. 1. He suggests his own sagacity, which we must suppose him as high priest to excel in, though the Urim and Thummim were long since lost. How scornfully does he say, "You know nothing, who are but common priests; but you must give me leave to see further into things than you do!" Thus it is common for those in authority to impose their corrupt dictates by virtue of that; and, because they should be the wisest and best, to expect that every body should believe they are so. 2. He takes it for granted that the case is plain and past dispute, and that those are very ignorant who do not see it to be so. Note, Reason and justice are often run down with a high hand. Truth is fallen in the streets, and, when it is down, down with it; and equity cannot enter, and, when it is out, out with it, Isa 59:14. 3. He insists upon a maxim in politics, That the welfare of communities is to be preferred before that of particular persons. It is expedient for us as priests, whose all lies at stake, that one man die for the people. Thus far it holds true, that it is expedient, and more than so, it is truly honourable, for a man to hazard his life in the service of his country (Phi 2:17; Jo1 3:16); but to put an innocent man to death under colour of consulting the public safety is the devil's policy. Caiaphas craftily insinuates that the greatest and best man, though major singulis - greater than any one individual, is minor universis - less than the collected mass, and ought to think his life well spent, nay well lost, to save his country from ruin. But what is this to the murdering of one that was evidently a great blessing under pretence of preventing an imaginary mischief to the country? The case ought to have been put thus: Was it expedient for them to bring upon themselves and upon their nation the guilt of blood, a prophet's blood, for the securing of their civil interests from a danger which they had no just reason to be afraid of? Was it expedient for them to drive God and their glory from them, rather than venture the Romans' displeasure, who could do them no harm if they had God on their side? Note, Carnal policy, which steers only by secular considerations, while it thinks to save all by sin, ruins all at last. [2.] The mystery that was in this counsel of Caiaphas does not appear at first view, but the evangelist leads us into it (Joh 11:51, Joh 11:52): This spoke he not of himself, it was not only the language of his own enmity and policy, but in these words he prophesied, though he himself was not aware of it, that Jesus should die for that nation. Here is a precious comment upon a pernicious text; the counsel of cursed Caiaphas so construed as to fall in with the counsels of the blessed God. Charity teaches us to put the most favourable construction upon men's words and actions that they will fear; but piety teaches us to make a good improvement of them, even contrary to that for which they were intended. If wicked men, in what they do against us, are God's hand to humble and reform us, why may they not in what they say against us be God's mouth to instruct and convince us? But in this of Caiaphas there was an extraordinary direction of Heaven prompting him to say that which was capable of a very sublime sense. As the hearts of all men are in God's hand, so are their tongues. Those are deceived who say, "Our tongues are our own, so that either we may say what we will, and are not accountable to God's judgment, or we can say what we will, and are not restrainable by his providence and power." Balaam could not say what he would, when he came to curse Israel, nor Laban when he pursued Jacob. (4.) The evangelist explains and enlarges upon Caiaphas's words. [1.] He explains what he said, and shows how it not only was, but was intended to be, accommodated to an excellent purpose. He did not speak it of himself. As it was an artifice to stir up the council against Christ, he spoke it of himself, or of the devil rather; but as it was an oracle, declaring it the purpose and design of God by the death of Christ to save God's spiritual Israel from sin and wrath, he did not speak it of himself, for he knew nothing of the matter, he meant not so, neither did his heart think so, for nothing was in his heart but to destroy and cut off, Isa 10:7. First, He prophesied, and those that prophesied did not, in their prophesying, speak of themselves. But is Caiaphas also among the prophets? He is so, pro hc vice - this once, though a bad man, and an implacable enemy to Christ and his gospel. Note, 1. God can and often does make wicked men instruments to serve his own purposes, even contrary to their own intentions; for he has them not only in a chain, to restrain them from doing the mischief they would, but in a bridle, to lead them to do the service they would not. 2. Words of prophecy in the mouth are no infallible evidence of a principle of grace in the heart. Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? will be rejected as a frivolous plea. Secondly, He prophesied, being high priest that year; not that his being high priest did at all dispose or qualify him to be a prophet; we cannot suppose the pontifical mitre to have first inspired with prophecy the basest head that ever wore it; but, 1. Being high priest, and therefore of note and eminence in the conclave, God was pleased to put this significant word into his mouth rather than into the mouth of any other, that it might be the more observed or the non-observance of it the more aggravated. The apophthegms of great men have been thought worthy of special regard: A divine sentence is in the lips of the king; therefore this divine sentence was put into the lips of the high priest, that even out of his mouth this word might be established, That Christ died for the good of the nation, and not for any iniquity in his hands. He happened to be high priest that year which was fixed to be the year of the redeemed, when Messiah the prince must be cut off, but not for himself (Dan 9:26), and he must own it. 2. Being high priest that year, that famous year, in which there was to be such a plentiful effusion of the Spirit, more than had ever been yet, according to the prophecy (Joe 2:28, Joe 2:29, compared with Act 2:17), some drops of the blessed shower light upon Caiaphas, as the crumbs (says Dr. Lightfoot) of the children's bread, which fall from the table among the dogs. This year was the year of the expiration of the Levitical priesthood; and out of the mouth of him who was that year high priest was extorted an implicit resignation of it to him who should not (as they had done for many ages) offer beasts for that nation, but offer himself, and so make an end of the sin-offering. This resignation he made inwittingly, as Isaac gave the blessing to Jacob. Thirdly, The matter of his prophecy was that Jesus should die for that nation, the very thing to which all the prophets bore witness, who testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ (Pe1 1:11), that the death of Christ must be the life and salvation of Israel; he meant by that nation those in it that obstinately adhered to Judaism, but God meant those in it that would receive the doctrine of Christ, and become followers of him, all believers, the spiritual seed of Abraham. The death of Christ, which Caiaphas was now projecting, proved the ruin of that interest in the nation of which he intended it should be the security and establishment, for it brought wrath upon them to the uttermost; but it proved the advancement of that interest of which he hoped it would have been the ruin, for Christ, being lifted up from the earth, drew all men unto him. It is a great thing that is here prophesied: That Jesus should die, die for others, not only for their good, but in their stead, dies for that nation, for they had the first offer made them of salvation by his death. If the whole nation of the Jews had unanimously believed in Christ, and received his gospel, they had been not only saved eternally, but saved as a nation from their grievances. The fountain was first opened to the house of David, Zac 13:1. He so died for that nation as that the whole nation should not perish, but that a remnant should be saved, Rom 11:5. [2.] The evangelist enlarges upon this word of Caiaphas (Joh 11:52), not for that nation only, how much soever it thought itself the darling of Heaven, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad. Observe here, First, The persons Christ died for: Not for the nation of the Jews only (it would have been comparatively but a light thing for the Son of God to go through so vast an undertaking only to restore the preserved of Jacob, and the outcasts of Israel); no, he must be salvation to the ends of the earth, Isa 49:6. He must die for the children of God that were scattered abroad. 1. Some understand it of the children of God that were then in being, scattered abroad in the Gentile world, devout men of every nation (Act 2:5), that feared God (Act 10:2), and worshipped him (Act 17:4), proselytes of the gate, who served the God of Abraham, but submitted not to the ceremonial law of Moses, persons that had a savour of natural religion, but were dispersed in the nations, had no solemn assemblies of their own, nor any peculiar profession to unite in or distinguish themselves by. Now Christ died to incorporate these in one great society, to be denominated from him and governed by him; and this was the setting up of a standard, to which all that had a regard to God and a concern for their souls might have recourse, and under which they might enlist themselves. 2. Others take in with these all that belong to the election of grace, who are called the children of God, though not yet born, because they are predestinated to the adoption of children, Eph 1:5. Now these are scattered abroad in several places of the earth, out of all kindreds and tongues (Rev 7:9), and in several ages of the world, to the end of time; there are those that fear him throughout all generations, to all these he had an eye in the atonement he made by his blood; as he prayed, so he died, for all that should believe on him. Secondly, The purpose and intention of his death concerning those persons; he died to gather in those who wandered, and to gather together in one those who were scattered; to invite those to him who were at a distance from him, and to unite those in him who were at a distance from each other. Christ's dying is, 1. The great attractive of our hearts; for this end he is lifted up, to draw men to him. The conversion of souls is the gathering to them in to Christ as their ruler and refuge, as the doves to their windows; and he died to effect this. By dying he purchased them to himself, and the gift of the Holy Ghost for them; his love in dying for us is the great loadstone of our love. 2. The great centre of our unity. He gathers them together in one, Eph 1:10. They are one with him, one body, one spirit, and one with each other in him. All the saints in all places and ages meet in Christ, as all the members in the head, and all the branches in the root. Christ by the merit of his death recommended all the saints in one to the grace and favour of God (Heb 2:11-13), and by the motive of his death recommends them all severally to the love and affection one of another, Joh 13:34. (5.) The result of this debate is a resolve of the council to put Jesus to death (Joh 11:53): From that day they took counsel together, to put him to death. They now understood one another's minds, and so each was fixed in his own, that Jesus must die; and, it should seem, a committee was appointed to sit, de die in diem - daily, to consider of it, to consult about it, and to receive proposals for effecting it. Note, The wickedness of the wicked ripens by degrees, Jam 1:15; Eze 7:10. Two considerable advances were now made in their accursed design against Christ. [1.] What before they had thought of severally now they jointly concurred in, and so strengthened the hands one of another in this wickedness, and proceeded with the greater assurance. Evil men confirm and encourage themselves and one another in evil practices, by comparing notes; men of corrupt minds bless themselves when they find others of the same mind: then the wickedness which before seemed impracticable appears not only possible, but easy to be effected, vis unita fortior - energies, when united, become more efficient. [2.] What before they wished done, but wanted a colour for, now they are furnished with a plausible pretence to justify themselves in, which will serve, if not to take off the guilt (that is the least of their care), yet to take off the odium, and so satisfy, if not the personal, yet the political conscience, as some subtly distinguish. Many will go on very securely in doing an evil thing as long as they have but something to say in excuse for it. Now this resolution of theirs to put him to death, right or wrong, proves that all the formality of a trial, which he afterwards underwent, was but show and pretence; they were before determined what to do. (6.) Christ hereupon absconded, knowing very well what was the vote of their close cabal, Joh 11:54. [1.] He suspended his public appearances: He walked no more openly among the Jews, among the inhabitants of Judea, who were properly called Jews, especially those at Jerusalem; ou periepatei - he did not walk up and down among them, did not go from place to place, preaching and working miracles with the freedom and openness that he had done, but while he staid in Judea, he was there incognito. Thus the chief priests put the light of Israel under a bushel. [2.] He withdrew into an obscure part of the country, so obscure that the name of the town he retired to is scarcely met with any where else. He went to a country near the wilderness, as if he were driven out from among men, or rather wishing, with Jeremiah, that he might have in the wilderness a lodging place of way-faring men, Jer 9:2. He entered into a city called Ephraim, some think Ephratah, that is, Bethlehem, where he was born, and which bordered upon the wilderness of Judah; others think Ephron, or Ephraim, mentioned Ch2 13:19. Thither his disciples went with him; neither would they leave him in solitude, nor would he leave them in danger. There he continued, dietribe, there he conversed, he knew how to improve this time of retirement in private conversation, when he had not an opportunity of preaching publicly. He conversed with his disciples, who were his family, when he was forced from the temple, and his diatribai, or discourses there, no doubt, were very edifying. We must do the good we can, when we cannot do the good we would. But why would Christ abscond now? It was not because he either feared the power of his enemies or distrusted his own power; he had many ways to save himself, and was neither averse to suffering nor unprepared for it; but he retired, First, To put a mark of his displeasure upon Jerusalem and the people of the Jews. They rejected him and his gospel; justly therefore did he remove himself and his gospel from them. The prince of teachers was now removed into a corner (Isa 30:20); there was no open vision of him; and it was a sad presage of that thick darkness which was shortly to come upon Jerusalem, because she knew not the day of her visitation. Secondly, To render the cruelty of his enemies against him the more inexcusable. If that which was grievous to them, and thought dangerous to the public, was his public appearance, he would try whether their anger would be turned away by his retirement into privacy; when David had fled to Gath, Saul was satisfied, and sought no more for him, Sa1 27:4. But it was the life, the precious life, that these wicked men hunted after. Thirdly, His hour was not yet come, and therefore he declined danger, and did it in a way common to men, both to warrant and encourage the flight of his servants in time of persecution and to comfort those who are forced from their usefulness, and buried alive in privacy and obscurity; the disciple is not better than his Lord. Fourthly, His retirement, for awhile, was to make his return into Jerusalem, when his hour was come, the more remarkable and illustrious. This swelled the acclamations of joy with which his well-wishers welcomed him at his next public appearance, when he rode triumphantly into the city. (7.) The strict enquiry made for him during his recess, Joh 11:55-57. [1.] The occasion of it was the approach of the passover, at which they expected his presence, according to custom (Joh 11:55): The Jews' passover was nigh at hand; a festival which shone bright in their calendar, and which there was great expectation of for some time before. This was Christ's fourth and last passover, since he entered upon his public ministry, and it might truly be said (as, Ch2 35:18), There never was such a passover in Israel, for in it Christ our passover was sacrificed for us. Now the passover being at hand, many went out of all parts of the country to Jerusalem, to purify themselves. This was either, First, A necessary purification of those who had contracted any ceremonial pollution; they came to be sprinkled with the water of purification, and to perform the other rites of cleansing according to the law, for they might not eat the passover in their uncleanness, Num 9:6. Thus before our gospel passover we must renew our repentance, and by faith wash in the blood of Christ, and so compass God's altar. Or, Secondly, A voluntary purification, or self-sequestration, by fasting and prayer, and other religious exercises, which many that were more devout than their neighbours spent some time in before the passover, and chose to do it at Jerusalem, because of the advantage of the temple-service. Thus must we by solemn preparation set bounds about the mount on which we expect to meet with God. [2.] The enquiry was very solicitous: They said, What think you, that he will not come to the feast? Joh 11:56. First, Some think this was said by those who wished well to him, and expected his coming, that they might hear his doctrine and see his miracles. Those who came early out of the country, that they might purify themselves, were very desirous to meet with Christ, and perhaps came up the sooner with that expectation, and therefore as they stood in the temple, the place of their purification, they enquired what news of Christ? Could any body give them hopes of seeing him? If there were those, and those of the most devout people, and best affected to religion, who showed this respect to Christ, it was a check to the enmity of the chief priests, and a witness against them. Secondly, It should rather seem that they were his enemies who made this enquiry after him, who wished for an opportunity to lay hands on him. They, seeing the town begin to fill with devout people out of the country, wondered they did not find him among them. When they should have been assisting those that came to purify themselves, according to the duty of their place, they were plotting against Christ. How miserably degenerate was the Jewish church, when the priests of the Lord were become like the priests of the calves, a snare upon Mizpeh, and a net spread upon Tabor, and were profound to make slaughter (Hos 5:1, Hos 5:2), - when, instead of keeping the feast with unleavened bread, they were themselves soured with the leaven of the worst malice! Their asking, What think you? Will he not come up to the feast? implies, 1. An invidious reflection upon Christ, as if he would omit his attendance on the feast of the Lord for fear of exposing himself. If others, through irreligion, be absent, they are not animadverted upon; but if Christ be absent, for his own preservation (for God will have mercy, and not sacrifice), it is turned to his reproach, as it was to David's that his seat was empty at the feast, though Saul wanted him only that he might have an opportunity of nailing him to the wall with his javelin, Sa1 20:25-27, etc. It is sad to see holy ordinances prostituted to such unholy purposes. 2. A fearful apprehension that they had of missing their game: "Will he not come up to the feast? If he do not, our measures are broken, and we are all undone; for there is no sending a pursuivant into the country, to fetch him up." [3.] The orders issued out by the government for the apprehending of him were very strict, Joh 11:57. The great sanhedrim issued out a proclamation, strictly charging and requiring that if any person in city or country knew where he was (pretending that he was a criminal, and had fled from justice) they should show it, that he might be taken, probably promising a reward to any that would discover him, and imposing a penalty on such as harboured him; so that hereby he was represented to the people as an obnoxious dangerous man, an outlaw, whom any one might have a blow at. Saul issued out such a proclamation for the apprehending of David, and Ahab of Elijah. See, First, How intent they were upon this prosecution, and how indefatigably they laboured in it, now at a time when, if they had had any sense of religion and the duty of their function, t”

“Then many of the Jews which came to Mary,.... To her house, to comfort her, and that came along with her to the grave: and had seen the things which Jesus did; in raising the dead body of Lazarus, and causing him to walk, though bound in grave clothes: believed on him; that he was the true Messiah: such an effect the miracle had on them; so that it was a happy day for them, that they came from Jerusalem to Bethany to pay this visit.”

“Many of the Jews - believed on him - They saw that the miracle was incontestable; and they were determined to resist the truth no longer. Their friendly visit to these distressed sisters became the means of their conversion. How true is the saying of the wise man, It is better to go to the house of mourning than to the house of feasting! Ecc 7:2. God never permits men to do any thing, through a principle of kindness to others, without making it instrumental of good to themselves. He that watereth shall be watered also himself, Pro 11:25. Therefore, let no man withhold good, while it is in the power of his hand to do it. Pro 3:27.”

“many . . . which . . . had seen . . . believed . . . But some . . . went . . . to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done--the two classes which continually reappear in the Gospel history; nor is there ever any great work of God which does not produce both. "It is remarkable that on each of the three occasions on which our Lord raised the dead, a large number of persons was assembled. In two instances, the resurrection of the widow's son and of Lazarus, these were all witnesses of the miracle; in the third (of Jairus' daughter) they were necessarily cognizant of it. Yet this important circumstance is in each case only incidentally noticed by the historians, not put forward or appealed to as a proof of their veracity. In regard to this miracle, we observe a greater degree of preparation, both in the provident arrangement of events, and in our Lord's actions and words than in any other. The preceding miracle (cure of the man born blind) is distinguished from all others by the open and formal investigation of its facts. And both these miracles, the most public and best attested of all, are related by John, who wrote long after the other Evangelists" [WEBSTER and WILKINSON].”