Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadCharles Simeon Commentary - John 5:21 - 5:23
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
CHRIST’S VINDICATION OF HIS OWN DIVINE CHARACTER
AMONGST the various beauties by which the Holy Scriptures are distinguished, we cannot but notice the artless simplicity with which the most sublime doctrines are delivered: they are not introduced with studied care, as they would be in human compositions; but arise incidentally, as it were, out of things which have but a remote connexion with them. Our blessed Lord had healed an impotent man at the pool of Bethesda, and had bidden him to take up his bed whereon he had lain, and walk away with it. The Jews, instead of glorifying God on the occasion, accused Jesus of violating the Sabbath, and sought to kill him for having wrought this miracle on the Sabbath-day. Our Lord, in vindication of himself, said, that he did no more than what his heavenly Father did; for his Father carried on his works both of providence and grace on the Sabbath, as well as on other days; and that he himself did the same. At this answer the Jews took still greater offence. They saw that Jesus arrogated to himself a peculiar relation to God, even such a relation as was in effect an assumption of equality with God [Note: ver. 18.]. Hence “they sought the more to kill him,” on account of what they conceived to be the summit of impiety and blasphemy. Jesus was now compelled to answer for himself on these grounds: and he told the Jews, that though they were correct in supposing him to claim an equality with God, they were mistaken in imagining that he therefore set up himself against God: on the contrary, there was a perfect union of sentiment and affection, of will and operation, between them; and neither did his Father, nor he, do any thing, without the most perfect concurrence and co-operation of the other: and so far was this from interfering with God’s honour, that it was purposely arranged in the eternal counsels, in order that God might be honoured in the person of his Son: nor would God consider himself as honoured by any one, who would not honour him in the precise way which he himself had appointed.
Thus, out of this perverse conduct of the Jews arose an assertion and vindication of the divinity of Christ: they forced him to vindicate his apparent violation of the Sabbath, and then to maintain the ground he had assumed in his vindication of it: and thus we are indebted to their perverseness for one of the clearest and most important statements in all the sacred volume.
Let us now, in discoursing on these assertions of our Lord, consider,
I. The account he gives of his own character—
Had the Jews been mistaken in what they supposed to be the scope of our Lord’s assertions, he would have set them right: he would have told them plainly, that he did not intend to claim equality with God. But, instead of intimating that they had misunderstood his meaning, our Lord acknowledged that he did claim an equality with God; and, in confirmation of that claim, he asserted that a Divine authority belonged to him, both essentially, as God, and officially, as Mediator.
1. Essentially, as God—
[It is undoubtedly the Divine prerogative to “kill and to make alive [Note: Deu_32:39.]:” nor is it possible for any creature to restore to life that which is really dead. But the Lord Jesus Christ “quickeneth whom he will.” As the Father had, by the instrumentality of his prophets, raised some to life, so Christ declared, that he would raise some by his own power. The persons, the time, the manner, were altogether at the disposal of his own will, by which alone he would be regulated in the dispensing of his favours. Moreover, he “quickeneth also the souls of men when dead in trespasses and sins;” and administers this gift also according to his own sovereign will and pleasure.
Would any mere creature have dared to arrogate to himself such a power as this? or would Jesus have given such an answer as this, if he have not designed to maintain his claim to an equality with God?]
2. Officially, as Mediator—
[When it was determined in the Divine counsels that the Son of God should assume our nature, it was determined also that the government of the universe, and of the Church more especially, should be committed to his hands; and that he should judge the world whom he had redeemed by his blood [Note: Act_10:42; Act_17:31.]. This, though primarily belonging, as it were, to the Father, was delegated to the Son, because he had assumed our nature [Note: ver. 27.], and because it was expedient that he who had “purchased the Church with his blood” should be empowered in his own person both to reward his friends and punish his enemies. But this office could not be executed by him, if he were not omniscient: he must know, not only every thought, word, and action, of all mankind from the beginning of the world to the end of it, but every possible circumstance that can at all tend to determine the precise quality of each. In a word, to exercise this office, he must be the omniscient God.
Judge then, whether in claiming this office he did not yet further confirm the suspicion of the Jews, that he affected an equality with God. It is not to he conceived, that, if this had not been his design, he would have answered in such a way: for, if he was not really and truly God, the whole tendency of his answer was to mislead their judgment, and to justify their accusations against him as an impious blasphemer.]
But, not contented with establishing his equality with the Father, he informs them of,
II. The regard which, in that character, he demands—
Though he affected not the honour that cometh of man [Note: ver. 41.], yet he could not possibly relinquish the honour which belonged to him both in his personal and official capacity: he could no more absolve the people from their allegiance to him as God, that he could cease to be God. He therefore shews them,
1. The extent of that honour which he requires—
[Whatever honour is due unto the Father, that Jesus claims as due unto himself; and he requires “all men” to pay it to him. Is God to be adored on account of his infinite perfections? Is he to be the one great object of our faith and love? Are we to confide in him under all circumstances, to obey him at all events, to delight ourselves in him at all seasons, even though death be threatened as the recompence of our fidelity? Such adoration, such faith, such love, such confidence, such obedience, are the unalienable right of the Lord Jesus: and it is particularly to be observed, that the putting of this honour upon the Lord Jesus was the very end and design of God the Father, when he delegated to the Son the office of governing and judging the world; “He committed all judgment to the Son, that all men might honour the Son, even as they honour the Father.”]
2. The necessity of paying it to him—
[It might be thought sufficient to honour the Father: and so it was whilst the Father alone was known: but when he had revealed himself in the person of Christ, and “made all his glory to shine in his face;” when “in Christ he had reconciled the world unto himself,” and had “treasured up all fulness in Christ,” and invested him with “all power in heaven and earth” for the completion of the great work that had been assigned him; then he demanded, that all men should honour him in the person of Christ: and, if any should refuse so to honour him, he would reject their persons, and abhor their offerings: yea, whatever reverence they might profess towards him, he would deal with them as rebels against his authority, and as contemners of his mercy.
Thus our Lord obviates the great objections which might be supposed to lie against the validity of his claim. It might have been thought, that the Father would be jealous of his own honour, and consider any communication of Divine glory to his Son as an infringement of his own peculiar rights. But, behold! the very contrary is here declared: for, not only is that very communication designed by God, but all honour that is not accompanied with that communication is abhorred by him.]
Surely we may see from hence,
1. How defective are the views of the generality—
[The religion of the generality is only Judaism divested of its rites and ceremonies. They acknowledge a God, who, they think, has given us commandments; in obeying which we shall secure his favour, and by disobedience to which we shall incur his displeasure. It is true, if you begin to speak of Christ, they will acknowledge all that the Gospel relates concerning him: but they make very little account of him in their religious system. How different are their views from those suggested in the text! There we see, that Christ is the fountain of all spiritual life; and that he dispenses life to men according to his sovereign will and pleasure. There we see, that to honour Christ is the only true way of honouring the Father. There we see, also, what unsearchable riches of consolation are treasured up for the believer; in that the very Person who bought him with his blood, is set over all things both in heaven and earth; and the very Person who paid that ransom for him, and renewed and sanctified him by his grace, shall judge him in the last day. Ah! what do nominal Christians lose by their ignorance of Christ! Dear brethren, know that Christ is “the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” in God’s account; and that, if you would be saved by him, you must make him your “All in all.”]
2. How defective is the practice of us all—
[We have spoken a little of the honour due unto the Father: but if we would have a fuller apprehension of it, let us contemplate the honour that is paid to him in heaven: let us imagine what are the feelings of all the angelic hosts, and of all the spirits of the just made perfect — — — Such then should be our views, and such our feelings towards the Lord Jesus Christ. We should begin our heaven upon earth. True it is, that when we speak of such a state, men will immediately begin to caution you against excess: they will tell you also that such a state would be incompatible with the necessary affairs of life. But where does God caution us against excess in religion, provided our religion be of a right kind? or what are those affairs which could not be conducted, if all men possessed the highest measure of true religion? Were Joseph, David, Daniel, impeded in their temporal duties by their religion? Or is there any one relation of life which will not be filled to more advantage by one who possesses true piety? The true reason why men so decry religion is, that they feel themselves condemned when they behold it exhibited in the conduct of the godly; and the less of such light they behold, the more quiet they hope to be in the prosecution of their evil ways. But we must not regard the cavils of men, or put them in competition with the commands of God. We know full well how all the ransomed of the Lord are occupied in singing praises “to Him that sitteth on the throne, and unto the Lamb:” What forbids then that we should be so occupied now? It is our duty, our interest, and our happiness, to “follow the Lord fully:” and I pray God we may also follow him, and delight ourselves in him; that when we are dismissed from the body, and translated to the realms of bliss, we may change our place and our company, but not our employment!]