John 2:23

Joh_2:23-25

When He was in Jerusalem at the Passover

The first Jerusalem believers

I.

THE OBJECT OF THEIR FAITH: the name of Christ. The name of anything is that by which it is known; so the name of Christ is that revelation of the Saviour proposed for faiths acceptance. So faith may vary in different ages, persons, and even in the same person according as the object is fully or partially unveiled and apprehended. Faith can never travel beyond the bounds of testimony. What was offered to Abraham was a Saviour to come Joh_8:56); to his descendants, a Saviour come; to Johns disciples, the Lamb of God; to Nathanael, the Son of God and the King of Israel; to the rulers and people of Jerusalem, the Messiah. As such He had been rejected by the former and was now accepted by the latter. The same name, now completely unveiled, is still faiths object (Act_3:16; Act_4:12).

II. THE GROUND OF THEIR FAITH--the miracles of Christ; signs, visible pictures of Christs Messianic work as well as attestations of His Divine mission (Joh_3:2; Act_10:38). In the same sense they are still helps to faith; they are obstacles only when considered impossible. They are not continued because unnecessary, having been superseded by a complete historical revelation and by a conscious indwelling of the Spirit.

III. THE CHARACTER OF THEIR FAITH.

1. Sincere, as far as it went. If afterwards those who believed in Him took up stones to kill Him (Joh_8:31; Joh_8:59) that constituted the damningcharacter of their crime. But some who now believed afterwards became disciples (Joh_4:45).

2. Incomplete. It did not go far enough. Resting satisfied with intellectual acknowledgment of Christ it did not pass on to spiritual surrender. It had taken the preliminary step of believing in Christs name; it wanted that additional of trusting in His person.

3. Superficial: occasioned by the impression produced by miracles and liable consequently to disappear when that impression failed.

IV. THE TREATMENT OF THEIR FAITH.

1. The nature of it: Reserve. He did not trust Himself to them, enter into close relations with them, unite them to Himself as disciples. When Christ puts Himself into the hands of a believer, the result is salvation and eternal Joh_6:50-54).

2. The reason of it: Insight. He knew what was in them saw they had not fully surrendered themselves. When a soul does so faith is complete. Christs knowledge of the human heart was the deepest ground of the different treatment accorded to the Baptists disciples; and that knowledge was

(1) instantaneous. He knew at a glance without investigation Joh_6:64; Joh_13:1; Luk_6:8; Act_1:24; Heb_4:13).

(2) Original (Col_2:13; Rev_2:18).

(3) Universal (Joh_16:30; Joh_18:4; Joh_21:17).

(4) Particular (Joh_4:29; Joh_5:42; Joh_13:11; Joh_20:27).

(5) Complete (Joh_1:48; Joh_6:64; Luk_5:22; Rev_2:23).

Lessons:

1. Christ commonly obtains a readier welcome from the humble than from the great.

2. Faith may sometimes look to the right object and yet be exceedingly defective.

3. The soul that would fully enjoy Christs fellowship must have perfect faith.

4. Christ knows the quality and quantity of every mans faith.

5. He who would have Christ trust Himself to him must first trust himself to Christ. (T. Whitelaw, D. D.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 2:23-25. When he was in Jerusalem, in the feast-day — Or rather, during the feast, as εν τη εορτη, should undoubtedly be translated: that is, during all the days of the solemnity; many believed in his name — Were inwardly persuaded that he was the Messiah, or, at least, that he was a teacher sent from God; when they saw the miracles which he did — This, as well as Joh 3:2; Joh 4:45, plainly refers to some miracles wrought by Christ, the particulars of which are not transmitted to us. But Jesus did not commit himself unto them — Did not repose such confidence in the sincerity of their profession of faith in him, or in their fidelity, courage, or wisdom, as to discover himself to be the Messiah. Because he knew all men — Had perfect knowledge of their dispositions; and needed not that any should testify of man — To give him any information concerning the character of any man, though ever so much a stranger to him; for he knew what was in man — By an immediate and unerring penetration, he knew what was in the heart of every man; and consequently knew, that those people had such gross notions of the Messiah’s kingdom, that there was no room for him to confide in them: or, he knew that the faith of many of them had not yet advanced to a full conviction; and foresaw that they would quickly fall off, when they found he was rejected by the great men, and did not erect a secular empire. 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 and openness of temper which would make us the property of every pretender to kindness and respect.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

II. Eternal Life Imparted:

What it is and What it Includes –

Chapter 2:23-17

The second part of this Gospel contains the blessed teachings the Son of God gave concerning eternal life, how it is imparted and what it includes. Everything in these chapters is new. The story of Nicodemus, the woman at Sychar’s well, the healing of the impotent man, the discourses of our Lord, etc., are not reported by the synoptic Gospels. There is not a word of the Sermon on the Mount reported by John; the many miracles, so significantly arranged in Matthew, are omitted (except the feeding of the 5000); nor do we find a single parable concerning the Kingdom of Heaven. The progressive revelation concerning eternal life will be brought out in the annotations. As already stated the teachings begin with the new birth, in which eternal life is imparted, and end with the destiny of those who are born again. This is revealed in His high priestly prayer, “Father, I will that they also whom Thou hast given me be with me where I am, that they may behold my glory.”

CHAPTER 2:23-3:36

1. The Many Who Believed on Him. (Joh 2:23-25.)

2. Nicodemus and the New Birth. (Joh 3:1-8.)

3. How the New Birth is Accomplished. (Joh 3:9-21.)

4. The Last Testimony of John. (Joh 3:22-36.)

He worked many miracles in Jerusalem, which are unreported by John. Many therefore believed in His name, but the Omniscient One knew that they were only convinced, but their hearts had not been touched and so they did not receive Him as the Son of God. But there was one who was more deeply exercised, an earnest, seeking soul, Nicodemus. He came to Jesus by night and addressed Him as Rabbi, acknowledging that He was a teacher come from God. The Lord did not permit him to go on with his address nor to state the object of his visit. The Lord treated him in an abrupt, almost discourteous, way and informed him at once of the absolute necessity of the new birth. “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again (literally: born from above) he cannot see the Kingdom of God.” Not teaching, mere knowledge, was the need Nicodemus had to see the Kingdom, but to be born from above.

But what Kingdom does our Lord mean? It refers primarily to the Kingdom of the Old Testament, promised to Israel. When that Kingdom comes, with the Return of the Lord, only those of Israel will enter in who are born again. The unbelieving and apostate mass of Jews will be excluded from that earthly, millennial Kingdom. Only the believing remnant inherits that Kingdom to come. This may be learned from Eze 36:1-38 and Isa 4:3, and other passages. That is why the Lord said to Nicodemus: “Art thou the teacher of Israel, and knowest not these things?”

But the truth our Lord gave to Nicodemus has a wider application. Man is spiritually dead, destitute of spiritual life. In order to enter the Kingdom of God, to be in the presence of God, man must be born anew. Such a statement is nowhere found in the preceding Gospels. In the Gospel of John, the Gospel of Eternal Life, it is put into the foreground. Nicodemus is the only person to whom the Lord spoke of the absolute necessity of the new birth. He never made such a statement to the publicans and the harlots. And who was Nicodemus? A Pharisee, and therefore an extremely religious man. A ruler of the Jews, which necessitated a moral life. The teacher of Israel, one who possessed much learning. Religiousness, morality, education and culture are insufficient to save man and give him a place in the Kingdom of God. The new birth is the one thing needed. “That which is born of the flesh is flesh.” The flesh is the old nature which every human being brings into the world; it is a fallen, a corrupt nature and can never be anything else. And “they that are in the flesh cannot please God.” (Rom 8:8). The natural man may do anything he pleases, become religious and philanthropic, but he cannot please God. What then is the new birth? It is not reformation. Nor is it, as so often stated, an action of the Holy Spirit to make an evil nature good. The flesh cannot be changed into something better. The new birth is the impartation of a new nature, the divine nature, by the Holy Spirit. “That which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” This new nature is absolutely holy, as the old nature is absolutely corrupt. This new nature is the only thing which fits man to be in the presence of God.

But what is the meaning of “water” in Joh 3:5? “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God.” The water is claimed by ritualists to mean baptism. If a little water is put upon the head of an infant, they would have us believe, regeneration takes place. Others hold upon this statement of our Lord that the water is Christian baptism, and that therefore water-baptism is necessary to salvation. But the words of our Lord have nothing whatever to do with baptism. (Eze 36:25-27 must be linked with Joh 3:5 and must be considered here as a national promise to Israel, how they will enter the Kingdom. But the verses in Ezekiel have absolutely nothing whatever to do with baptism. To apply them thus is ridiculous.) The water cannot mean Christian baptism. Christian baptism (an entirely different thing from the Jewish baptism of John) was not instituted till after His death and resurrection. If it meant Christian baptism, the Lord’s rebuke to Nicodemus would be unjust. How could he know something that was still undivulged? Water in this passage is the figure of the Word of God, which the Spirit of God uses for the quickening of souls. The following passages will demonstrate this fact: Eph 5:25-26; 1Co 4:15; 1Pe 1:23; Jas 1:18. Begotten again by the Word of God, and water is the figure of that Word.

The Lord speaks next of revealing heavenly things (in distinction from earthly things relating to Israel). Then the Cross is revealed by which the heavenly things are realized, and how lost man is to be saved and receive eternal life (the new nature). The Son of Man must be lifted up. He Who knew no sin was made sin for us. “God so loved the world that He gave His Only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”--”In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because God sent His Only-begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. Herein is love; not that we loved God, but that He loved us, and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.” (1Jn 4:9-10). Blessed words these! It is by believing on the Son of God, who died for our sins, that we are saved and are born again.

John bears his final testimony in Joh 3:23-26. He testifies of Christ as the bridegroom, who is to have the bride. John calls himself the friend of the bridegroom. “He must increase, but I must decrease.” Note the three &(must’s” in this chapter. “Ye must be born again”; the necessity of the new birth. “The Son of Man must be lifted up”; the necessity of the death of the Lord to make salvation possible. “He must increase, but I must decrease”; the result of salvation. The final testimony of John the Baptist takes us beyond the cross. (Joh 3:35-36). Blessed assurance! He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life.--Solemn declaration! He that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Section 1. (Joh 2:23-25; Joh 3:1-21.)

The beginning in new birth.

1. Before we look at new birth itself, we must realize man’s need of it; and this is shown us in the most striking way, -not in the case of those who openly refuse Christ, but on the contrary in that of those who accredit His claim. The miracles he did at Jerusalem at the passover wrought, we are told, conviction in many minds. They believed in His name": the words used in the first chapter as to those to whom He gave authority to become children of God; yet here no such result follows, but the reverse. "Jesus did not commit Himself to them: because He knew all men, and needed not that any should testify of man; for He knew what was in man."

It was a natural work then, this conviction: sincere enough, but merely intellectual; the result of a reasoning process, leading to a correct conclusion, but with no vital change in the men themselves. They were convinced; they were not converted. Their judgment was formed upon evidence strong enough, but not derived from any glory they had seen in Him. It is not said therefore of these, as of those in the first chapter, that they "received Him." Christ had not gained admittance at the door of their hearts. It was still the light shining in darkness: He had still no beauty that they should desire Him. They had no imperative need, that should demand Him. Alas, here was in reality the deepest and most fundamental need, which nothing that was in man, or of man therefore could meet at all. Death could not produce life; and with the Lord’s knowledge of what is in man, He can trust nothing that is from him. This need can only be met from a Source outside of man: he to whom Jesus can trust Himself can only be a man new born.

This brings us to Nicodemus and the Lord’s teaching as to new birth. The circumstances are to be noted under which he comes, with a caution which shows his apprehension of the danger for himself, and which shows therefore his earnestness in coming. His history afterwards, as the evangelist gives us the means of tracing it, confirms both these things as true of him. In the cleansing of the temple the first note had sounded of a conflict whose end (from any human point of view) it was not hard to foresee. The chiefs of the priesthood were implicated in that desecration of the house of God which the young prophet of Galilee had so denounced and broken in upon: a man who had risen up unsanctioned by the leaders of the people, of whom Nicodemus himself was one. Yet at such a juncture he risks reputation and abases his Pharisaic pride to come as an enquirer to the despised Nazarene.

He comes with the distinct acknowledgement that He is a teacher come from God; and that on the same warrant of the signs wrought by Him, which those before had grounded their faith upon, -a faith which He had discredited and set aside. But there was a hunger in the heart of Nicodemus which was not in theirs, and which brought him to the feet of Jesus; and none were ever rejected there. Yet the Lord meets him with an abruptness and peremptoriness which we do not expect from the grace which characterized Him. Putting side by side with this His manner with the Samaritan woman afterwards, it is striking to see the difference. To her was the assurance of God’s readiness to give (if she but asked Him for it) living water; the token of a love she had not known nor sought to know. To him the conditions, strange and impracticable as we know they seemed, upon which alone one could see the Kingdom of God: a shut door, as it might seem, in the face of the real seeker; while she who sought not was to be wooed and won for Him. And this was, no doubt, one reason for the difference; and which makes for Nicodemus, instead of against him. Won he was: his heart drawn, and ready to receive the truth as made known to him, even to face the unwelcome, if it were but truth; and the Lord treats him accordingly.

But there is another side to it in the fact of the Pharisaism that yet cleaves to him, and which knows nothing of the lost condition of man as man. Yet to this he must be brought, stripped of every remnant of his own righteousness, and clothed even with the spotted robe of shame in which she at the well listened in wonder to hear of what God could be, even for her. Grace itself, with Nicodemus, must humble before it can exalt, must teach the worthlessness of man that all God’s glory may shine out for him. The Pharisee must renounce his many years, laboriously built up claim on God, and go back behind infancy itself, to a nothingness which would be shelter to his dishonor if it were only that, there to lie down helpless at the mere pleasure of God to save or to destroy! "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born anew, he cannot see the Kingdom of God;" and who then by his own will was born at the first? So is man born again: "not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

The Kingdom of God was that which the prophets had announced, and for which all Israel waited. We must not think of it in the form it has now taken, the King away, and its administration in the hands of men. We must think of it as established by power at the coming of the Lord, when for Israel a remnant alone will enter it, whose character Isaiah explicitly declares (Isa 4:2-4). For "in that day shall the Branch of the Lord be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel. And it shall come to pass that he that is left in Zion, and he that remaineth in Jerusalem shall be called holy: even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem; when the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughter of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof by the spirit of judgment and by the spirit of burning." Then follows the account of the glory of Jerusalem in millennial days.

It is certain therefore that, when Israel enters the Kingdom, every one will be born again that does so; and it should be clear that this is what a Jew like Nicodemus would expect, and had right to expect, if taught of the prophets. Of the Christian form of the Kingdom he could know nothing, and could be expected to know nothing; for it was not yet revealed. Nor could the Lord’s words even apply to the present time, in which all the parables declare a mingled condition of things, tares and wheat together, wise and foolish virgins. On the other hand, for us, in the perfected form of it, it will, of course, apply in the fullest way; but of all this Nicodemus could as yet know nothing: so that the Lord’s expression of wonder, "Art thou the teacher of Israel and knowest not these things?" forbids all direct reference in this way, and the passage in Eze 36:1-38 from which He takes the words that presently follow are a positive prediction of Israel’s entering the Kingdom in this manner.

This, if true, has an important bearing upon the meaning of new birth which we shall presently consider. The principle of man’s need of it for blessing at any time remains, of course, unaffected. Man is man, naturally the same all through his history; and "as in water face answereth to face, so the heart of man to man." God also remains the same, and the need of renewal, therefore, to be with Him.

Nicodemus is confounded at the thought of such a change as the Lord speaks of. It is not simply the application to Israel over which he stumbles, though this would be, of course, an additional mystery; but as to the thing in itself, how can it be possible? he asks: "How can a man be born when-he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb and be born?" That is naturally impossible; but he has no explanation of it: what spiritual change can there be, so complete, so radical, so entirely beyond man to accomplish, as would be implied in a new birth?

The Lord reaffirms what he has said in the same solemn and emphatic manner; but now with explanations which go to the heart of the matter: "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God." Then He states the need of it: That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born anew."

In considering this it is natural to think first of the need, before we consider how God’s grace has met it. It is evident that when the Lord is declaring the need of man’s being born again, the words that declare it must have in view what man is as fallen. Thus, if with Muller and Weiss we interpreted "that which is born of the flesh is flesh" as meaning that "the corporeal birth produces only the corporeal sensuous part," one would suppose this to be as true if man had never fallen; that is, supposing that man naturally has nothing but this; and what follows would affirm, as in contrast with the sensuous part, that the spirit of man was a product of new birth; or else "that which is born of the Spirit" would refer to creation and not to new creation.

But we may confidently maintain, on the one hand that new birth is spoken of -that it is the Lord’s subject here; and also that man every where has spirit, as well as soul and body, -that is, the sensuous part. Nay, spirit is in man the very seat of personality, as of all human knowledge (1Co 2:11), and that by which naturally men are the "offspring of God" (Act 17:28), as the "Father of spirits" (Heb 12:9). New birth does not create a personality, or make a man out of a mere bestial creature.

If, then, "that which is born of the Spirit" speaks, as it certainly does, of the product of new birth, "that which is born of the flesh" covers all that man is naturally; and that he thus is only "flesh" is the effect of the fall. "Flesh" is not a new element of personality: it is strictly and evidently a degradation of it, a fallen condition. Spirit and soul are in men still, and yet these are but "flesh" after all: sunk into it, penetrated by it, so that in this way it has come to have a "mind," a "will," independent and away from God, "lusts" therefore (Joh 1:13; Rom 8:6-7) of a heart unsatisfied. God and the unseen having ceased to be a reality for the soul, or at most having become a dread reality, the visible, the tangible, the sensible, possess and control it. Man is therefore flesh and only flesh.

In looking at the other side of what is here, the new birth of the Spirit, we have to remember what the trespass-offering teaches us, that God in restoring never merely restores. He does not reconstitute humanity as it was in Adam, but brings in Christ and makes Him the type of a new humanity, another order of manhood. This is according to a definite law of progress which runs through creation, and to which new creation conforms. According to this at each step in advance we find not the higher developing out of the lower: the plant out of the mineral, the animal out of the vegetable, man out of the animal; but a higher principle brought in and made by stooping to it to raise the lower. Thus life does not develop out of the inanimate, the crystal is not the budding of an organization, though it may be a prophecy of it. That life is only from life is admitted by men of science generally as far as observation and experiment can determine. Life then is a new principle which by union with it raises up the inorganic. In the animal again, the soul is not developed out of the life principle, but unites with and raises it up similarly to a higher level. In man spirit unites itself to soul. After the failure of man we may expect a new development after the same manner, by the union of a higher with a lower nature, and thus the formation of a "new man."

Of the "last Adam," however, we do not hear as yet, although we shall before the Gospel is concluded. At present we have only the new birth itself and its product a "spirit" nature. "Except one be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. That which is born of the Spirit is spirit."

Water and Spirit combine to effect this wondrous transformation. What are these two that can thus unite for such a purpose? "Of all ancient writers," says Hooker, "there is not one to be named who ever expounded the text otherwise than as implying external baptism." Among moderns also this is by far the most common view; although some would take water as simply a symbol of purification. Those who make it baptism apply it mostly to Christian baptism, but some to John’s and some to proselyte baptism. The "washing (or bath) of regeneration" (Tit 3:5) and the two baptisms of water and the Spirit are naturally taken to support this view. But the baptism of the Spirit is not in order to new birth, as the Lord’s words after His resurrection clearly prove. He says to the disciples: "For John verily baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days hence" (Act 1:5). But certainly it was not at Pentecost, to which the Lord’s words refer, that they were born again; and as certainly, therefore, when they were born again, they had not received this baptism. Thus, plausible as it may look at first, water and the Spirit cannot be united in this way.

But moreover Christian baptism was not as yet instituted, and the Lord could have expressed no astonishment at a Jewish teacher like Nicodemus being ignorant of such value attaching to it as would be thus expressed in the words we are considering. As for John’s baptism, his own words are against any thought of this. His "I baptize with water" not only contrasts his baptism with that of the Spirit, but deprecates the very thought of water as capable of having so great significance.

As a symbol of purification we come nearer to the truth of it; but here the apostle helps us further with his statement that "Christ loved the Church and gave Himself for it, that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word" (Eph 5:25-26), and Peter adds that we are "born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God which liveth and abideth forever. . . . And this is the word," he goes on, "which by the gospel is preached unto you" (1Pe 1:23-25). Thus it is by the word of the gospel, and not by the word that sanctifies baptismal water, as some have dreamed, that this wondrous change is effected. And if we have difficulty in understanding how the Spirit should unite with the water of baptism to accomplish a spiritual work for which water is plainly incompetent, it is on the other just as easy to see that the Spirit does unite with the Word for this purpose. "For our gospel came unto you," says the apostle to the Thessalonians, not in word only, but in power, and in the Holy Spirit, and in much assurance" (1Th 5:1-28). Thus, by the Spirit and the Word, comes in new birth.

The apostle John under the figure of "living water" speaks of the Spirit in the believer (Joh 7:37-39). We can understand it clearly by this united action of the Spirit and the Word. If Christ by the Word purifies His church, the Spirit is necessary to make the Word effectual. As has been said by another, the Word without the Spirit is merely rationalism; the Spirit without the Word -the claim of that -would be fanaticism. Water is the Word; the Spirit with the Word the "living water." In the Lord’s words to Nicodemus we have the bringing of the two together; and then, as "that which is born of the flesh is flesh," so "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. A fleshly nature is the product of the natural birth; a spiritual nature is the product of the new. It is only the Spirit that is spoken of here; but elsewhere we are reminded that "his seed" -the incorruptible seed, of which Peter speaks, -"abideth in" the one born again (1Jn 3:9); and James in another but similar figure speaks of the "engrafted word" (Jas 1:21), by which, as the word of truth also, God has begotten us (ver. 18).

All this speaks but one language. We see that in the children of God there is implanted a nature in moral likeness to God, -in this sense, a divine nature. The full doctrine of it will develop as we go on: the co-existence of the flesh with it in the believer, the meaning of this, the hindrance resulting, the power over it, all this we shall have to look at elsewhere. So much is clear, that the believer is a true child of God as begotten of Him, and recipient of His nature: and this is what new birth implies.

The words "water" and "spirit" are, no doubt, from Eze 36:25-26, which describes the divine preparation of Israel for the Kingdom; but the Lord makes them stronger than the prophet, who does not use the expression "born again." "A new spirit" also is not the same as "spirit" from the Spirit. Yet the prophet’s words should have made a teacher of Israel recognize the import of the Lord’s words in relation to that change, so complete and so essential, which the people must undergo in order to enter upon the long desired inheritance.

For us also the parabolic mode of speech employed should be no difficulty, constantly as He uses it to convey spiritual truth. The exercise needed for its apprehension He never seems to desire to avoid; for by it that apprehension is made more real, full and heartfelt. As spoken to a Jewish teacher, the words are perfectly natural; as his ignorance of their meaning shows his want of understanding of Israel’s true condition and his own. Marvel it was indeed to her teachers that the people of God should need to be born again; but that need, so real and great, could only be met by the power of the unseen Spirit working in a way uncontrollable, as invisible to man, however plain the effects of it. It was the sovereign grace of God, therefore, which worked and must work, free as the wind, and if grace to Israel, could not be confined to Israel: we all have the same need, and are debtors to it alike.

2. But we have another need, and as imperative, which the Lord goes on to put beside the former. If men must be born again, the Son of man too must be lifted up that they may have eternal life. Death must minister to us as well as life: that which was against us must be put on our side; and then the full reality of His gift will be manifested, -not merely life, but eternal life.

Nicodemus can only express his bewilderment: "How can these things be?" he asks. The Lord asks in turn how he can be the teacher of Israel, and yet not know them. Then He affirms His own knowledge, from which He speaks, not with the uncertainty of their traditional teachers. Yet Israel received not His witness, even when He spoke of things upon earth, where what He said could in many ways be tested. New birth was a thing in this way sufficiently within their knowledge: for the work of the Spirit in men had a voice if they could hear it, and the prophets also had borne witness to it. Now if still they believed not, how would they believe if He spoke of heavenly things? of a sphere as to which they would have no witness but His own? For it was plain that there was no one -He is speaking of accessible witness only, as is manifest, not of Enoch or Elijah or the spirits of the dead -no one who had ascended up to heaven, to give any confirmation. His own witness must stand alone. He, the Son of man, had been in heaven; from heaven He had come down; still, by the mystery of His nature, the One who is in heaven. The divine-human Person comes out distinctly here, the One always in heaven, though a man on earth: of no created being could such a thing be said. And here at once comes in the witness of heavenly things; which, alas, Israel would reject, as we know they rejected Him who bore the witness, and of whom the witness was.

But that rejection itself was controlled of God to work out His purpose, and to this immediately therefore the Lord now goes on: "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so also must the Son of man be lifted up, that every one who believeth on Him should not perish, but have eternal life." Here the Cross is spoken of in its full character, as it clearly would be where the divine purpose is in view as here. Men indeed might lift up the Son of man (Joh 8:28); and man’s sinful act could not work out the righteousness of God; but that lifting up in the divine ordering was to be for us the token of wrath endured, of curse taken and removed: for "cursed is every one that hangeth upon a tree." (See Deut. notes, p. 585). This answers, according to the type which the Lord brings forward, to the lifting up of the serpent in the wilderness, which healed, by looking to it simply, the serpent’s bite. And Christ being made a curse for us, by faith in Him the power of sin in us is overcome, the poison of the serpent is done away for us. "In the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin" -a sin-offering -He has put away sin for us in that which condemns it in us: we are justified, and set upon God’s side as to it. The Cross is salvation for us in this double character, as penalty owned, and penalty removed; which in result turns our eyes away from ourselves to Him who is henceforth to fill them.

The penalty borne for the believer, there can be for him no perdition. The application of the brazen serpent here seems fully to confirm the reading "shall not perish," omitted though it be by some of the earliest MSS. The having eternal life goes beyond the simple removal of death, and beyond the type, while it gives us the connection with the Lord’s theme with Nicodemus. For, if "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit," the possession of the divine nature implies of necessity eternal life. That which is divine is that which is truly "eternal:" not simply unending when begun, but which had no beginning, and thus can have no end. The sacrificial work of Christ is here affirmed as the basis of this priceless gift to men, which in the moment of faith becomes assured to him who has this.

For this the Son of man must be lifted up: atonement must be made, and made by One in the nature of him who sinned; thus capable as man of taking the penalty upon man, and affirming the righteousness of God in it as bowing to it. Righteousness, the first necessity, is therefore met: the righteousness of God is put upon the side of the sinner who believes, as the apostle Paul will show us elsewhere. The ground of blessing is laid for all who will accept it.

But that is the human side; and God, if that be all, is the recipient only. His righteousness is declared, true; but that is not an adequate manifestation of Himself, and God is fully manifested in the gospel. Hence the Lord goes on to that most precious, most familiar statement of it in the Bible: "For God so loved the world, that He gave His Only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish, but have eternal life."

Here we are at the heart of the matter. We have not now the conditions emphasized upon which divine mercy can come to us, though still it remains true that such conditions there are and must be, if God abide faithful to His own nature, as He must. But here we have the moving cause of our salvation, the activity of that nature: "God loved," for "God is love." Then He loved whom? the Jew? the better class among men? those that love Him? No: but the "world," and not even "the world of the elect," as some would put it, but (as what follows should make plain) the world at large, the great world of His creatures, though now estranged from Him. Loved them, then, how much? how can we find measure for this love of His? Here is the measure of it: He "so loved the world that He gave His Only-begotten Son; that every one who believeth on Him should not perish, but have eternal life."

Divine love has thus sought men with an earnestness and seriousness which can only be questioned by questioning the true dignity of Him who has come so far on God’s part, to give us the assurance of it. And to Him all the ages witness, who is Himself above them all, the unique phenomenon in human history, of all God’s miracles the crowning one.

But if God’s love has come out in such a manner, the rejection of it is as fatal as the acceptance is fraught with blessing. "How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation?" "He that believeth not is judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the Only-begotten Son of God." But not for judgment, but for salvation, did God send His Son. That the Redeemer will in fact be the Judge of men (Joh 5:22-23; Joh 5:27) is something very different from this, nay, opposite to it.

3. But light is come into the world, and the light makes everything manifest. Here is the judgment, that men do not desire manifestation when their deeds are evil, but love the darkness which conceals them. By turning from the light, they show that they know where the light is -that it bears witness to the conscience, although they are not in it so as to get the good of it. The practises of truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest as being wrought in God.

Here, for the present, Nicodemus and the Lord part. The Pharisee is yet hindered by his Pharisaism, and these parting words seem words for his conscience, governed as he is so much by the people among whom he is. His name bears the same equivocal stamp with his character as yet. It may be "victory of the people" or "one who conquers the people:" which it will be with him is yet in the balance. But in a darker night than the present he is to come forth at last as conqueror, not conquered. His soul will have passed out of the shadow, just when the light might seem to have failed it. For him, as for many, "it shall come to pass that at eventime it shall be light."*

{*The similarity and the contrast between Nicodemus and Nicolaos, from whom come the Nicolaitans of Revelation (Rev 2:1-29) is to be noted. The Nicolaitans are conquerors of the people (of God); Nicodemus, of the populace. God has a laos, but not a demos.}

F. W. Grant, The Numerical Bible (4th ed., 1903) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter 7

NICODEMUS.

Now when He was in Jerusalem at the passover, during the feast, many believed on His name, beholding His signs which He did. But Jesus did not trust Himself unto them, for that He knew all men, and because He needed not that any one should bear witness concerning man; for He Himself knew what was in man. Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: the same came unto Him by night, and said to Him, Rabbi, we know that Thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these signs that Thou doest, except God be with Him. Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto Him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter a second time into his mothers womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born anew. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the voice thereof, but knowest not whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.- Joh_2:23-25 - Joh_3:1-8.

The first visit of Jesus to Jerusalem was not without considerable effect on the popular mind. Many who saw the miracles He did believed that He was a messenger from God. They saw that His miracles were not the clever tricks of an impostor, and they were prepared to listen to His teaching and enrol themselves as members of the kingdom He came to found. Yet our Lord did not encourage them. He saw that they misunderstood Him. He recognised their worldliness of heart and of aim, and did not admit them to the intimacy He had established with the five simple-minded Galileans. The Jerusalem Jews were glad to fall in with one who seemed likely to do honour to their nation, and their belief in Him was the belief men give to a statesman whose policy they approve. The difference between them and those who rejected Christ was not a difference of disposition such as exists between godly and ungodly men, but consisted merely in the circumstance that they were convinced that His miracles were genuine. Had our Lord encouraged these men they would ultimately have been disappointed in Him. It was better that from the first they should be stimulated to reflect on the whole matter by being coldly received by the Lord.

It is always a point that calls for reflection: we have to consider not only whether we have faith in Christ, but whether He has faith in us-not only whether we have committed ourselves to Him, but whether that committal is so genuine that He can build upon and trust it. Can He count upon us for all service, for fidelity in times when much is needed? Thoroughgoing confidence must always be reciprocal. The person you believe in so utterly that you are entirely his, believes in you and trusts himself to you-his reputation, his interests are safe in your keeping. So is it with Christ. Faith cannot be one-sided here any more than elsewhere. He gives Himself to those who give themselves to Him. They who so trust Him that He is sure they will follow Him even when they cannot see where He is going; they who trust Him, not in one or two matters which they see He can manage, but absolutely and in all things,-to these He will give Himself freely, sharing with them His work, His Spirit, His reward.

To illustrate the state of mind of the Jerusalem Jews and Christs mode of treating them, John selects the case of Nicodemus. He was one of those who were much impressed by the miracles of Jesus, and were prepared to attach themselves to any movement in His favour. He belonged to the Pharisees; to that party which, with all its narrowness, pedantry, dogmatism, and bigotry, still preserved a salt of genuine patriotism and genuine godliness, and reared high-toned and cultivated men like Gamaliel and Saul. Nicodemus, whether a member of the Sanhedrims deputation to the Baptist or not, certainly knew the result of that deputation, and was aware that a crisis in the national history had arrived. He could not wait for the community to move, but felt that whatever conclusion regarding Christ the Pharisees as a body might arrive at, he must on his own responsibility be at the bottom of those extraordinary events and signs that clustered round the person of Jesus. He was a modest, reserved, cautious man, and did not wish openly to commit himself till he was sure of his ground. He has been blamed for timidity. I would only say that, if he felt it dangerous to be seen in the company of Jesus, it was a bold thing to visit Him at all. He went by night; but he went. And would that there were more like him, who, whether cautious to excess or not, do still feel constrained to judge for themselves about Christ; who feel that, no matter what other men think of Him, there is an interest in Him which they cannot wait for others to settle, but must for themselves settle before they sleep.

Probably Nicodemus made his visit by night because he did not wish to precipitate matters by calling undue attention to the position and intentions of Jesus. He probably went with the purpose of urging some special plan of action. This inexperienced Galilean could not be supposed to understand the populace of Jerusalem as well as the old member of the Sanhedrim, who was familiar with all the outs and ins of party politics in the metropolis. Nicodemus would therefore go and advise Him how to proceed in proclaiming the kingdom of God; or at least sound Him, and, if he found Him amenable to reason, encourage Him to proceed, and warn Him against the pitfalls that lay in His path. Modestly, and as if speaking for others as much as for himself, he says: Rabbi, we know that Thou art a Teacher come from God, for no man can do these miracles that Thou doest except God be with Him! There is here neither patronizing acknowledgment nor flattery, but merely the natural first utterance of a man who must say something to show the state of his mind. It served to reveal the point at which Nicodemus had arrived, and the ground on which the conversation might proceed. But Jesus knew what was in man. In this acknowledgment of His miracles on the part of Nicodemus, Jesus saw the whole mental attitude of the man. He saw that if Nicodemus had uttered all that was in his mind he would have said: I believe you are sent to restore the kingdom to Israel, and I am come to advise with you on your plan of operation, and to urge upon you certain lines of action. And therefore Jesus promptly cuts him short by saying: The kingdom of God is quite another thing than you are thinking of; and the way to establish it, to enlist citizens in it, is very different from the way you have been meditating.

In fact, Jesus was becoming embarrassed by His own miracles. They were attracting the wrong kind of people-the superficial worldly people; the people who thought a daring and strong hand with a dash of magic would serve all their turn. His mind was full of this, and as soon as He has an opportunity of uttering Himself on this point He does so, and assures Nicodemus, as a representative of a large number of Jews who needed this teaching, that all their thoughts about the kingdom must be ruled by this principle, and must start from this great truth, that it was a kingdom into which the Spirit of God alone could give entrance, and could give entrance only by making men spiritual. That is to say, that it was a spiritual kingdom, an inward rule over the hearts of men, not an outward empire-a kingdom to be established, not by political craft and midnight meetings, but by internal change and submission in heart to God-a kingdom, therefore, into which admission could be given only on some more spiritual ground than the mere circumstance of a mans natural birth as a Jew.

In our Lords language there was nothing that need have puzzled Nicodemus. In religious circles in Jerusalem there was nothing being talked of but the kingdom of God which John the Baptist had declared to be at hand. And when Jesus told Nicodemus that in order to enter this kingdom he must be born again, He told him just what John had been telling the whole people. John had assured them that, though the King was in their midst, they must not suppose they were already within His kingdom by being the children of Abraham. He excommunicated the whole nation, and taught them that it was something different from natural birth that gave admission to Gods kingdom. And just as they had compelled Gentiles to be baptized, and to submit to other arrangements when they wished to partake of Jewish privileges, so John compelled them to be baptized. The Gentile who wished to become a Jew had to be symbolically born again. He had to be baptized, going down under the cleansing waters, washing away his old and defiled life, being buried by baptism, disappearing, from mens sight as a Gentile, and rising from the water as a new man. He was thus born of water, and this time born, not a Gentile, but a Jew.

The language of our Lord then could scarcely puzzle Nicodemus, but the idea did stagger him that not only Gentiles but Jews must be born again. John had indeed required the same preparation for entrance to the kingdom; but the Pharisees had not listened to John, and were offended precisely on the ground of his baptism. But now Jesus presses upon Nicodemus the very same truth, that as the Gentile had to be naturalized and born again that he might rank as a child of Abraham, and enjoy the external privileges of the Jew, so must the Jew himself be born again if he is to rank as a child of God and to belong to the kingdom of God. He must submit to the double baptism of water and of the Spirit-of water for the pardon and cleansing of past sin and defilement, of the Spirit for the inspiration of a new and holy life.

Our Lord here speaks of the second birth as completed by two agencies, water and the Spirit. To make the one of these merely the symbol of the other is to miss His meaning. The Baptist baptized with water for the remission of sins, but he was always careful to disclaim power to baptize with the Holy Ghost. His baptism with water was of course symbolical; that is to say, the water itself exercised no spiritual influence, but merely represented to the eye what was invisibly done in the heart. But that which it symbolised was not the life-giving influence of the Holy Spirit, but the washing away of sin from the soul. Assurance of pardon John was empowered to give. Those who humbly submitted to his baptism with confession of their sins went from it forgiven and cleansed. But more than that was needed to make them new men-and yet more he could not give. For that which would fill them with new life they must go to a Greater than he, who alone could bestow the Holy Ghost.

These then are the two great incidents of the second birth-the pardon of sin, which is preparatory, and which cuts our connection with the past; the communication of life by the Spirit of God, which fits us for the future. Both of these are represented by Christian baptism because in Christ we have both; but those who were baptized by Johns baptism were only prepared for receiving Christs Spirit by receiving the forgiveness of their sins.

Having thus declared to Nicodemus the necessity of the second birth, He goes on to give the reason of this necessity. Birth by the Spirit is necessary, because that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and the kingdom of God is spiritual. Of course our Lord does not mean by flesh the mere tangible substance of the body; He does not mean that our first and natural birth puts us in possession of nothing but a material frame. By the word flesh He signifies the appetites, desires, faculties, which animate and govern the body, as well as the body itself-the whole equipment with which nature furnishes a man for life in this world. This natural birth gives a man entrance into much, and for ever determines much, that has important bearings on his person, character, and destiny. It determines all differences of nationality, of temperament, of sex; apart altogether from any choice of his it is determined whether he shall be a South Sea Islander or a European; an antediluvian living in a cave or an Englishman of the nineteenth century. But the kingdom of God is a spiritual kingdom, into which entrance can be had only by a mans own will and spiritual condition, only by an attachment to God which is no part of a mans natural equipment.

As soon as we clearly see what the kingdom of God is, we see also that by nature we do not belong to it. The kingdom of God so far as man is concerned is a state of willing subjection to Him-a state in which we are in our right relation to Him. All irrational creatures obey God and do His will: the sun runs his course with an exactness and punctuality we cannot rival; the grace and strength of many of the lower animals, their marvellous instincts and aptitudes, are so superior to anything in ourselves that we cannot even comprehend them. But what we have as our speciality is to render to God a willing service; to understand His purposes and enter sympathetically into them. The lower creatures obey a law impressed upon their nature; they cannot sin; their performance of Gods will is a tribute to the power which made them so skilfully, but it lacks all conscious recognition of His worthiness to be served and all knowledge of His object in creation. It is God serving Himself: He made them so, and therefore they do His will. So it is with men who merely obey their nature: they may do kindly, noble, heroic actions, but they lack all reference to God; and however excellent these actions are, they give no guarantee that the men who do them would sympathize with God in all things, and do His will gladly.

Indeed, to establish the proposition that flesh or nature does not give us entrance into Gods kingdom, we need go no further than our own consciousness. Remove the restraints which grace puts upon our nature, and we are aware that we are not in sympathy with God, fond of His will, disposed for His service. Let nature have its swing, and every man knows it is not the kingdom of God it takes him to. To all men it is natural to eat, drink, sleep, think; we are born to these things, and need to put no constraint on our nature to do them; but can any man say it has come naturally to him to be what he ought to be to God? Do we not to this hour feel drawn away from God as if we were not in our element in His presence? Flesh, nature, in Gods presence is as much out of its element as a stone in the air or a fish out of water. Men who have had the deepest religious experience have seen it most clearly, and have felt, like Paul, that the flesh lusts against the spirit, and draws us ever back from entire submission to God and delight in Him.

Perhaps the necessity of the second birth may be more clearly apprehended if we consider it from another point of view. In this world we find a number of creatures which have what is known as animal life. They can work, and feel, and, in a fashion, think. They have wills, and certain dispositions, and distinctive characteristics. Every creature that has animal life has a certain nature according to its kind, and determined by its parentage; and this nature which the animal receives from its parents determines from the first the capabilities and sphere of the animals life. The mole cannot soar in the face of the sun like the eagle; neither can the bird that comes out of the eagles egg burrow like the mole. No training can possibly make the tortoise as swift as the antelope, or the antelope as strong as the lion. If a mole began to fly and enjoy the sunlight it must be counted a new kind of creature, and no longer a mole. The very fact of its passing certain limitations shows that another nature has somehow been infused into it. Beyond its own nature no animal can act. You might as well attempt to give the eagle the appearance of the serpent as try to teach it to crawl. Each kind of animal is by its birth endowed with its own nature, fitting it to do certain things, and making other things impossible. So is it with us: we are born with certain faculties and endowments, with a certain nature; and just as all animals, without receiving any new, individual, supernatural help from God, can act according to their nature, so can we. We, being human, have a high and richly-endowed animal nature, a nature that leads us not only to eat, drink, sleep, and fight like the lower animals, but a nature which leads us to think and to love, and which, by culture and education, can enjoy a much richer and wider life than the lower creatures. Men need not be in the kingdom of God in order to do much that is admirable, noble, lovely, because their nature as animals fits them for that. If we were to exist at all as a race of animals superior to all others, then all this is just what must be found in us. Irrespective of any kingdom of God at all, irrespective of any knowledge of God or reference to Him, we have a life in this world, and a nature fitting us for it. And it is this we have by our natural birth, a place among our kind, an animal life. The first man, from whom we all descend, was, as St. Paul profoundly says, a living soul, that is to say, an animal, a living human being; but he had not a quickening spirit, could not give to his children spiritual life and make them children of God.

Now if we ask ourselves a little more closely, What is human nature? what are the characteristics by which men are distinguished from all other creatures? what is it which marks off our kind from every other kind, and which is always produced by human parents? we may find it hard to give a definition, but one or two things are obvious and indisputable. In the first place, we could not deny human nature to men who do not love God, or who even know nothing of Him. There are many whom we should naturally speak of as remarkably fine specimens of human nature, who yet never think of God, nor in any way acknowledge Him. It is plain, therefore, that the acknowledgment and love of God, which give us entrance into His kingdom, are not a part of our nature, are not the gifts of our birth.

And yet is there anything that so distinctly separates us from the lower animals as our capacity for God and for eternity? Is it not our capacity to respond to Gods love, to enter into His purposes, to measure things by eternity, that is our real dignity? The capacity is there, even when unused; and it is this capacity which invests man and all his works with an interest and a value which attach to no other creature. Mans nature is capable of being born again, and that is its peculiarity; there is in man a dormant or dead capacity which nothing but contact with God, the touch of the Holy Ghost, can vivify and bring into actual exercise.

That there should be such a capacity, born as if dead, and needing to be quickened by a higher power before it can live and be of use, need not surprise us. Nature is full of examples of such capacities. All seeds are of this nature, dead until favouring circumstances and soil quicken them into life. In our own body there are similar capacities, capacities which may or may not be quickened into life. In the lower animal-creation many analogous capacities are found, which depend for their vivification on some external agency over which they have no control. The egg of a bird has in it the capacity to become a bird like the parent, but it remains a dead thing and will corrupt if the parent forsakes it. There are many of the summer insects which are twice-born, first of their insect parents, and then of the sun: if the frost comes in place of the sun, they die. The caterpillar has already a life of its own, with which, no doubt, it is well content, but enclosed in its nature as a creeping thing it has a capacity for becoming something different and higher. It may become a moth, or a butterfly; but in most the capacity is never developed, they die before they reach this end-their circumstances do not favour their development. These analogies show how common it is for capacities of life to lie dormant: how common a thing it is for a creature in one stage of its existence to have a capacity for passing into a higher stage, a capacity which can be developed only by some agency peculiarly adapted to it.

It is in this condition man is born of his human parents. He is born with a capacity for a higher life than that which he lives as an animal in this world. There is in him a capacity for becoming something different, better and higher than that which he actually is by his natural birth. He has a capacity which lies dormant or dead until the Holy Ghost comes and quickens it. There are many things, and great things, man can do without any further Divine assistance than that which is lodged for the whole race in the natural laws which make no distinction between godly and ungodly; there are many and great things man may do by virtue of his natural birth; but one thing he cannot do-he cannot quicken within himself the capacity to love God and to live for Him. For this there is needed an influence from without, the efficient touch of the Holy Spirit, the impartation of His life. The capacity to be a child of God is mans, but the development of this lies with God. Without the capacity a man is not a man, has not that which is most distinctive of human nature. Every man is born with that in him which the Spirit of God may quicken into Divine life. This is human nature; but when this capacity is so quickened, when the man has begun to live as a child of God, he has not lost his human nature, but has over and above become a partaker of the Divine nature. When the image of God, as well as of his earthly parents, becomes manifest in a man, then his human nature has received its utmost development,-he is born again.

Of the Agent who accomplishes this great transformation there is need only to say that He is free in His operation and also inscrutable. He is like the wind, our Lord tells us, that blows where it lists. We cannot bring the Spirit at will; we cannot use Him as if He were some unintelligent passive instrument; neither can we subject all His operations to our control. The grub must wait for those natural influences which are to transform it; it cannot command them. We cannot command the Spirit; but we, being free agents also, can do more than wait,-we can pray, and we can strive to put ourselves in line with the Spirits operation. Seamen cannot raise the wind nor direct its course, but they can put themselves in the way of the great regular winds. We can do the same: we can slowly, by mechanical helps, creep into the way of the Spirit; we can set our sails, doing all we think likely to catch and utilize His influences-believing always that the Spirit is more desirous than we are to bring us all to good. Why He breathes in one place while all around lies in a dead calm we do not know; but as for the winds variations so for His, there are doubtless sufficient reasons. We need not expect to see the Spirits working separate from the working of our own minds; we cannot see the Spirit in Himself-we cannot see the wind that moves the ships, but we can see the ships moving, and we know that without the wind they could not move.

If this, then, be the line on which our human nature can alone be developed, if a profound harmony with God be that which can alone give permanence and completeness to our nature, if in accordance with all that we see in the world around us some men fail of attaining the end of their creation, and lie for ever blighted and useless, while others are carried forward to fuller and more satisfying life, we cannot but ask with some anxiety to which class we belong. Good and evil are in the world, happiness and misery, victory and defeat; do not let us deceive ourselves by acting as if there were no difference between these opposites, or as if it mattered little in our case whether we belong to the one side or the other. It matters everything: it is just the difference between eternal life and eternal death. Christ did not come to play with us, and startle us with idle tales. He is the centre and fountain of all truth, and what He says fits in with all we see in the world around us.

But in endeavouring to ascertain whether the great change our Lord speaks of has passed upon us, our object must be not so much to ascertain the time and manner of our new birth as its reality. A man may know that he has been born though he is not able to recall, as no man can recall, the circumstances of his birth. Life is the great evidence of birth, natural or spiritual. We may desire to know the time and place of birth for some other reason, but certainly not for this, to make sure we have been born. Of that there is sufficient evidence in the fact of our being alive. And spiritual life quite as certainly implies spiritual birth.

Again, we must keep in view that a man may be born though not yet full grown. The child of a day old has as truly and certainly a human nature as the man in his prime. He has a human heart and mind, every organ of body and soul, though as yet he cannot use them. So the second birth impresses the image of God on every regenerate soul. It may not as yet be developed in every part, but all its parts are there in germ. It is not a partial but a complete result which regeneration effects. It is not one member, a hand or a foot that is born, but a body, a complete equipment of the soul in all graces. The whole character is regenerated, so that the man is fitted for all the duties of the Divine life whensoever these duties shall come before him. A human child does not need additions made to it to fit it for new functions: it requires growth, it requires nurture, it requires education and the practice of human ways, but it requires no new organ to be inserted into its frame; once born it has but to grow in order to adapt itself with ease and success to all human ways and conditions. And if regenerate we have that in us which with care and culture will grow till it brings us to perfect likeness to Christ. If we are not growing, if we remain small, puny, childish while we should be adult and full grown, then there is something seriously wrong, which calls for anxious enquiry.

But above all let us bear in mind that it is a new birth that is required; that no care spent on our conduct, no improvement and refinement of the natural man, suffices. For flying it is not an improved caterpillar that is needed, it is a butterfly; it is not a caterpillar of finer colour or more rapid movement or larger proportions, it is a new creature. We recognise that in this and that man we meet there is something more than men naturally have; we perceive in them a taming, chastening, inspiring principle. We rejoice all the more when we see it, because we know that no man can give it, but only God. And we mourn its absence because even when a man is dutiful, affectionate, temperate, honourable, yet if he have not grace, if he have not that peculiar tone and colour which overspread the whole character, and show that the man is living in the light of Christ, and is moved by love to God, we instinctively feel that the defect is radical, that as yet he has not come into connection with the Eternal, that there is that awanting for which no natural qualities, however excellent, can compensate-nay, the more lovely and complete the natural character is, the more painful and lamentable is the absence of grace, of Spirit.

William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.

Joh 2:23. Ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ, in the feast) the people being collected, ch. Joh 4:45, “The Galilæans received Him, having seen all the things that He did at Jerusalem at the feast.”—ἐπίστευσαν, believed) as those, concerning whom ch. Joh 8:30 speaks: “As He spake these words, many believed on Him;” Joh 12:42, “Among the chief rulers also many believed on Him.”—τὰ σημεῖα, signs) More signs are recorded as having been done by the Evangelists in Galilee, than in Judæa and Jerusalem: Joh 2:1, and chap. Joh 4:46 [The miracle of the wine at Cana, and on the nobleman’s son at Capernaum]. For in Galilee He wrought very many: Mat 11:20, “Then began He to upbraid the cities, wherein most of His mighty works were done:” and those which had been wrought in Jerusalem, were then very well known of themselves.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh_2:23. Δέ] introducing a characteristic summary statement (to Joh_2:25) regarding this stay of Jesus at the feast, in order next to give prominence to a special scene, the story of Nicodemus in Joh_3:1 ff.

ἐν τ. Ἱεροσ. ἐν τ. πάσχα ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ] The latter clause is not added as an explanation for Greek readers (that should have been done at Joh_2:13), but He was at Jerusalem during the passover in the feast (engaged in celebrating the feast); thus the first ἐν is local, the second refers to time, and the third joins on with ἦν, and expresses the surroundings, that in which a person is engaged (versari in aliqua re). See, concerning εἶναι ἐν here, Bernhardy, p. 210; Ast, Lex. Plat. I. 623.

θεωροῦντες, κ.τ.λ.] while they beheld His miracles, etc. αὐτοῦ, comp. Lycurg. 28: ταῦτα ἐμοῦ ἐθεωρήσατε, and Kühner, § 528, ad Xen. Mem. i. 1. 11. Euthymius Zigabenus rightly says: ἐκεῖνοι γὰρ ἀκριβέστερον ἐπίστευον, ὅσοι μὴ διὰ τὰ σημεῖα μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ διὰ τὴν διδασκαλίαν αὐτοῦ ἐπίστευον. Their faith in His name (as that of the Messiah) did not yet amount to any decision of their inner life for Jesus, but was only an opinion, produced by the sight of His miracles, that He was the Messiah; comp. Joh_8:30, Joh_6:26. Luther calls it milk faith. Comp. Mat_13:20. On τὰ σημεῖα, comp. Joh_3:2. None of the miracles of this period has been recorded; Joh_20:30, comp. Joh_4:45. Consequently, not only the Synoptics, but John also speaks summarily of multitudes of miracles, without relating any of them individually (against Schleiermacher, L. J. p. 201).

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 2:23 . Time, place, and circumstance are again given. ὡς δὲ ἦν ἐν τοῖς Ἰεροσολύμοις ἐν τῷ πάσχα ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ . The last clause is added with a reference to Joh 2:13 . Then the feast was near, now it had arrived. We are to hear what happened while Jesus resided in Jerusalem during the feast . πολλοὶ ἐπίστευσαν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ , which can scarcely mean less than that they believed He was the Messiah. Nicodemus, however, seems willing only to admit He is “a teacher come from God”. Their belief was founded on the miracles they saw. θεωροῦντες αὐτοῦ τὰ σημεῖα ἃ ἐποίει , seeing day by day the signs He was doing, and of which John relates none. This faith, resting on miracles, is in this Gospel never commended as the highest kind of faith, although it is by no means despised. It is what Luther calls “milk faith” and may grow into something more trustworthy. Accordingly, although Jesus had at once committed Himself to the men who were attracted without miracle by His personality and the testimony of the Baptist, to these αὐτὸς Ἰησοῦς οὐκ ἐπίστευεν ἑαυτὸν , “Jesus on His part did not commit Himself”. It is necessary to consider not only whether we have faith in Christ but whether Christ has faith in us. Thoroughgoing confidence must always be reciprocal. Christ will commit Himself to the man who thoroughly commits himself to Him. The reason of this reserve is given in a twofold expression: positive, διὰ τὸ αὐτὸν γινώσκειν πάντας , “because He Himself knew all men”; negative, καὶ ὅτι οὐ χρείαν εἶχεν ἵνα τὶς μαρτυρήσῃ περὶ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου , “and because He had no need that any one should witness concerning man”. Holtzmann, following Winer, thinks that the article is inserted because reference is made to the individual with whom Jesus had on each occasion to do. This seems quite unnecessary. ὁ ἄνθρωπος is here, as in A.V [37] , “man,” the ordinary generic use of the article. The reason for this again is given in the closing words, αὐτὸς γὰρ … “For He Himself knew what was in man,” knew human nature, the motives, governing ideas, and ways of man. This knowledge was not supernatural. Westcott has an important note on this point, in which he points out that John describes the knowledge of Jesus “both as relative, acquired ( γινώσκειν ) and absolute, possessed ( εἰδέναι )”. Each constitutes a higher degree of the kind of knowledge found among men. Reynolds says: “There are many other indications of this thought mastery, which the evangelists appear to regard as proofs of divine power; so that I think the real significance of the passage is an ascription to Jesus of Divine power. The supernatural in mind, the superhuman mental processes of Jesus, are part of the proof we have that though He was man He created the irresistible impression that He was more than man.”

[37] Authorised Version.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

23. ἐν τοῖς Ἱεροσολύμοις. This is the true reading here, although rec. text with a few minuscules omits τοῖς, in accordance with Jn.’s usual practice. He has the article with Ἱεροσόλυμα (see on 1:19 for this form) 3 times only, viz. 2:23, 5:2, 11:18 (see on 10:22). No other N.T. writer has this usage, but it appears 2 Macc. 11:8, 12:9. Perhaps τὰ Ἱεροσόλυμα means “the precincts of Jerusalem” in these exceptional passages.

If the traditional order of the verses 2:13-3:21 be correct, then the statement of v. 23 is not easy to interpret. Nothing has been said hitherto of “signs” at Jerusalem, and yet both here and at 3:2 they are mentioned as notorious. The only “sign” that has been mentioned is the “sign” at Cana of Galilee. There would be no difficulty if we could assume that vv. 2:13-3:21 belong to the last week in the ministry of Jesus. The “signs” would then be those which were wrought at Jerusalem or in its neighbourhood on His last visit, “the signs which He was doing” (ἐποίει). The Raising of Lazarus is given by Jn. special prominence among these (12:18), and there was also the Blasting of the Fig Tree (Mar 11:14), as well as others not described in detail (12:37; cf. 7:31).

But, as the text stands, we must suppose that Jn. refers here to “signs” at Jerusalem wrought at the beginning of the ministry of Jesus, which he does not describe (cf. 3:2, 4:45).

πολλοὶ ἐπίστευσαν, including not only inhabitants of Jerusalem, but some from among those who had come up to the feast from the country parts.

For the phrase ἐπίστευσαν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα, see on 1:12. Although these people had been attracted to Jesus because of the “signs” that they saw, their belief was neither stable nor adequate. A similar thing happened in Galilee, ἠκολούθει αὐτῷ ὄχλος πολύς, ὅτι ἐθεώρουν τὰ σημεῖα ἃ ἐποίει (6:2), the same phrase that we have here.

θεωρεῖν is a favourite verb with Jn., occurring 23 times; cf also 1Jn 3:17. It only occurs twice in the Apocalypse (11:11, 12), and never in Paul. It may be used either of bodily vision (20:6, 14) or of mental contemplation (12:45, 14:17), but always connotes intelligent attention. The English word which most nearly represents θεωρεῖν, as used by Jn., is “to notice.” Here and at 6:2, 7:3 it indicates the notice which the observers took of the “signs” of Jesus. See for the difference between θεωρεῖν and ὄπτομαι on 1:51, and cf. 16:16.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vv. 23-25 are a preamble. It is the general picture of the activity of the Lord at Jerusalem, following after His undertaking in the temple. Then, in the following passage, Joh 3:1-21, John gives the remarkable example of the teaching of Jesus and of His Messianic testimony, in this earliest period, in presence of those whom He found disposed to faith.

Ver. 23. “As he was in Jerusalem, at the Passover, at the feast, many believed on his name, seeing the miracles which he did.”

The first clause of the verse contains three designations. One is that of place: in Jerusalem, at the centre of the theocracy, the normal theatre of His work. The second is that of time: at the Passover, in those days when the whole people were assembled in the capital, in greater numbers than on any other occasion in the year. The third designation is that of the mode: at the feast, in the midst of the solemn impressions which the daily ceremonies of that Paschal week awakened. The pronoun πολλοί, many, denotes nothing more than individuals; they form a contrast with the nation which should have collectively believed. Comp. the contrast between οἱ ἴδιοι, His own, and ὅσοι, all those who, Joh 1:11-12. But a still more sorrowful contrast is pointed out by the evangelist; it is that which existed between the faith of these believers and true faith. Their faith, to the view of Jesus, was not faith. No doubt, it had for its object His revelation as Christ and Son of God (His name); but it rested only upon the external fact of His miracles. The logical relation between this aorist believed and the present participle seeing, is expressed by the conjunction because. This faith had nothing inward and moral; it resulted solely from the impression of astonishment produced upon them by these wonders. Signs may, indeed, strengthen and develop true faith, where it is already formed, by displaying to it fully the riches of its object (Joh 2:11). They may even, sometimes, excite attention; but not produce real faith. Faith is a moral act which attaches itself to the moral being in Jesus. The last words: which He did, depict, indeed, the nature of this faith; it was the material operation which impressed these persons. These miracles were, undoubtedly, numerous; allusion is made to them in Joh 4:45. John relates, however, only one of them; so far different is His aim from that of the Synoptics. He wishes only to describe here a spiritual situation.

II. Jesus at Jerusalem: 2:23-3:21.

Jesus, not having been welcomed in the temple, does not force matters forward. The use of violence, even though by divine means, would have led Him to the career, not of a Christ, but of a Mahomet. In presence of the cold reserve which He meets, He retreats; and this retrograde movement characterizes, for a time, the course of His work. The palace has just shut its doors to Him; the capital remains open. Here He acts, yet no longer in the fullness of that Messianic sovereignty with which He had presented Himself in the temple. He confines Himself to teaching and miracles, the two prophetic agencies. Such is the admirable elasticity of the divine work in the midst of the world; it advances only as far as faith permits; in the face of resistance it yields; it retires even to its last entrenchment. Then, having reached this, it all at once resumes the offensive, and, engaging in the last struggle, succumbs externally, to conquer morally.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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 (Ch2 30:22), 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 (Joh 3:2), 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 (Joh 2:24): 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; memnēso 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 (Joh 2:25), 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, Ch2 16:9. 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 4:12, Heb 4:13. 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.

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

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.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 23. 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.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

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.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(23) In the feast day.—Omit the word “day” after feast. The italics show that there is no word to express it in the Greek, and it gives the impression of one day, whereas the feast extended over a week. The idea of time, moreover, is not expressed by “in the feast.” The sentence means, When He was in the feast (engaged in keeping the feast) at Jerusalem, during the Passover.

Many believed.—The persons are distinct from the official representatives of the nation (Joh_2:18-19), as the place, Jerusalem, is distinguished from the Temple.

When they saw the miracles.—Better, as before, signs. The original words imply that their faith was dependent upon the signs which they gazed upon, without entering into their deeper meaning. It was the impulsive response of the moment, not based upon a previous preparation, nor resulting in a present deep conviction. It came far short of the faith of the disciples, who passed from a true knowledge of Moses and the Prophets to a true knowledge of Christ without a sign; but it came far above the disbelief of scribes and Pharisees, who after a sign rejected Him. It was not the prepared good ground bringing forth abundantly; but neither was it the hardened wayside which did not receive the seed at all.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

23–25. Belief without Devotion

23. in Jerusalem at, &c.] More accurately, in Jerusalem, at the Passover, during the Feast. Note the exactness of detail.

when they saw the miracles] None of these have been recorded. Comp. Joh_4:45, Joh_20:30. Faith growing out of such soil would be likely to cease when the miracles ceased. ‘When they saw’ should perhaps be ‘whilst they saw,’ as if implying ‘and no longer.’ For ‘miracles’ read signs, as in Joh_2:11.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But Jesus did not commit himself unto them,.... The sense according to some of the ancients is, that he did not commit the whole of the Gospel to them; he did not make known to them all his mind and will; this he only did to the twelve apostles, his special disciples and friends; nor was the time come, that he would make known, or have made known, the things concerning his person, office, obedience, sufferings, death, and resurrection from the dead: but rather the meaning is, that he did not trust himself with these persons, who believed in him, on the basis of his miracles; he did not take them into the number of his associates; he did not admit them to intimacy with him; nor did he freely converse with them, or make any long stay among them; but soon withdrew himself from hence, and went into other parts of Judea, and into Galilee:

because he knew all men: good and bad: all openly profane sinners, and all their actions; not only their more public ones, but those that are done in the dark, and which are the most secretly devised, and levelled against the saints; and he so knew them, as to bring them into judgment: and all good men, true believers; he knows their persons, as they are his Father's choice, his gift of them to him, his own purchase, and as called by his grace; and so as to distinguish them at the last day, and give up the full account of every one of them to his Father: he knows the worst of them, the sin that dwells in them, their daily infirmities, their secret personal sins; their family sins, both of omission and commission; and their church sins, or which are committed in the house of God; and takes notice of them, so as to resent them, and chastise them for them; he knows the best of them, their graces, their faith, hope, love, patience, humility, self-denial, &c. he knows their good works, and all their weaknesses and their wants: and he knows all nominal professors, on what basis they take up their profession, and what trust they place in it; he can distinguish between grace and mere profession, and discern the secret lusts which such indulge, and the springs and progress of their apostasy: he knew all these men, that upon seeing his miracles, professed at this time to believe in him; he knew the hypocrisy and dissimulation of some of them; and he knew the notions they had of a temporal Messiah, and the temporal views they had in believing in him; and their design to set him up as a temporal prince, as some afterwards would have done: knew the flashy affections of others, who were like John's hearers, that were pleased for a while; he knew what sort of faith it was they believed in him with, that it would not hold long, nor they continue with him; for he knew not only all persons, but "all things", as some copies read here; see Joh 21:17.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

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.

Ver. 23. Many believed] Fides fair minime fida, quippe historica, ex miraculis nata. These thought they had laid hold on Christ, but they did but as children that think they catch the shadow on the wall. There is a great deal of this false faith abroad. The sorcerers seemed to do as much as Moses.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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 favorable 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.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

To believe in Christ’s 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 Act 3:16. The meaning is, that they believed the things which were published concerning his person and office: yet the periphrasis,

Believed in his name, is not vain; but declareth a mutual relation between 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 God’s elect, three things are required:

1. A knowledge of the proposition of the word revealing Christ: this is acquired by reading, hearing, meditation, &c.

2. The second is 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 closes 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, rejoice 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 knowledge 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 only upon the miracles they saw wrought; so as though 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.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

23. Many believed—We have here the net result of our Saviour’s announcement at this first Passover. A party of external, historical believers arose; convinced of his miracles in the head, untouched by his gospel in the heart. They believed that he was a supernatural being, just as they believed that Tiberius was emperor; without any feelings of sin to be by him forgiven, or any love for his holy teaching or character.

Saw the miracles— They recognized the majesty with which he awed his opponents when he cleansed the temple. What other miracles he performed is not said. Miracles are important as the bases of historical belief. At commencement they prove, and so produce a logical faith. So the reasoning of Nicodemus, who was clearly one of this many, “No man can do these things which thou doest, except God be with him,” was conclusive. But this logical faith alone does not regenerate or save the soul; and Jesus proceeded, therefore, to lead Nicodemus to deeper truths. The hearts of these many believed not on Jesus. They gave themselves not to him; he did not therefore trust himself to them as adherents.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Ver. 23-ch. Joh_3:26) The faith that they exercised was neither deep nor appreciative, yet it was worthy of the name of faith.

Vers. 23-25. Our Lord"s work in Jerusalem.

After the temple incident, there seemed to be a disposition upon the part of the people to accept him.

I MARK THE PUBLICITY OUR LORD GIVES TO HIS MISSION. "When he was in Jerusalem at the Passover, in the feast." He selected a time when he could put himself in contact with the whole nation gathered to one of their annual feasts. He must show himself to "Israel," and not only to the people of its capital. He must come "unto his own," whether they will accept him or reject him.

II MARK THE WIDESPREAD MOVEMENT IN HIS FAVOUR. "Many believed in his Name, when they saw the miracles which he did.

1. The nature of their belief.

(1) They did not believe with the heart, but with the understanding. There is a great difference between mere intellectual belief, in which, as in the case of the devils, the will is not implicated, and the saving faith which includes alike the acts of intellect, will, and heart.

(2) They did not trust in his Person, but believed in his miracles. They "believed in his Name" as the Messiah. They recognized his title to Messiah-ship.

2. The ground of their belief. "When they saw the miracles which he did.

(1) There is no detailed account of these miracles in this Gospel. It is evident that our Lord performed a vastly greater number of miracles than are described in the Gospels. (Joh_20:30)

(2) The belief of these Jews arose out of astonishment at the prodigies of Divine power witnessed by them.

(a) Yet it did not spring out of any previous preparations of the heart, and did not lead to any definite or permanent result of a spiritual nature.

(b) Their belief, after all, nominal as it was, was better than the utter unbelief of the Pharisees and scribes after they had witnessed the signs and wonders of the Lord.

III MARK CHRIST"S ATTITUDE TOWARDS THESE MERELY NOMINAL DISCIPLES. "But Jesus did not commit himself unto them.

1. He was not elated by their ready acceptance of him.

2. He had no faith in their faith," and, accordingly, he either withheld from them the fuller instruction intended for disciples, or withdrew from them into the more congenial society of those who were "disciples indeed.

3. Mark the reason of this conduct. "Because he knew all men.

(1) Ministers of the gospel are often deceived in their estimates of men; but Christ cannot be deceived.

(2) He does not need human testimony to guide him into true estimates of character. We are all more or less dependent, in this matter, upon such external help.

(3) His omniscient discernment of man"s inner life made it impossible he should be deceived in his knowledge of men.

(4) It is a solemn thought that our Lord "pondereth the hearts of men;" that is, he weighs them,

(a) not in the scales of worldly estimation,

(b) but in the scale of heavenly realities.

This thought ought to humble us in the deepest self-abasement in his sight.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

The result of Christ’s manifestation in Jerusalem:

v. 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.

v. 24. But Jesus did not commit Himself unto them, because He knew all men,

v. 25. and needed not that any should testify of man; for He knew what was in man.

Since the Passover festival in the wider sense, including the days of Unleavened Bread, lasted for eight days, and since there were pilgrims in Jerusalem from all parts of the Jewish country at that time, Jesus had the best opportunity to reveal Himself by word and work. And the result was that many believed on His name. For the time being, at least, they had the firm conviction that He must be the promised Messiah. And they were strengthened in their conviction by the signs, by the miracles in and through which He revealed His glory. But faith resting on external, physical miracles alone has not the foundation it should have; it should have the basis of the Word alone. Therefore Jesus on His part did not commit Himself. He did not enter into such close relationship with these people but with His disciples, who were gained by His Word only. Christ will commit Himself to the man that commits himself unreservedly to Him. He put no faith and confidence in these people. He had a deeper knowledge of man. He knew that, for the most part, their faith was of a transitory character. There are always many such persons, in the very midst of the Church, as believe for a time only. Human beings cannot see into their hearts and foretell how long faith will last. But Christ knows. He had no need, it was not necessary, that anyone should testify with regard to man, humanity in general, for human nature with all its foibles and weaknesses was very well known to Him. He knew the motives, governing ideas, and ways of man. He was the omniscient God; He knew their inmost thoughts and desires, He also had a knowledge of what would happen later. Note: This proof of the divine omniscience is a warning to the people that make their Christianity a desultory, haphazard manifestation, with only occasional attendance at church and a corresponding use of the Sacrament. The Lord knows the heart. And this same quality is a source of comfort to all sincere Christians. He knows the weakness of the human heart, and will surely come to the aid of those that firmly trust in Him alone.

Summary.Jesus performs His first miracle at the marriage-feast of Cana, establishes His headquarters at Capernaum, goes to Jerusalem for the Passover, purges the Temple for the first time, and answers the challenge of the Jews.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

23. Many believed. The miracles wrought that they saw at this time are not recorded. They are alluded to again in 3:2. These believed that he was a man sent from God, but did not trust in him as the Christ. The nature of their belief is stated in 3:2.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

Now when he was in Jerusalem

The word "now" introduces us to a new event in the story.

believed in his name

Here "name" is a metonym that represents the person of Jesus. AT: "believed in him" or "trusted in him" (See: Metonymy)

the signs that he did

Miracles can also be called "signs" because they are used as evidence that God is the all-powerful one who has complete authority over the universe.

about man, for he knew what was in man

Here the word "man" represents people in general. AT: "about people, for he knew what was in people" (See: When Masculine Words Include Women)

translationWords

Passover

feast

believe

miracle

know

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

23–25. BELIEF WITHOUT TRUST

23. ἐν τοῖς Ἱεροσολύμοις for ἐν Ἱερ. S. John alone gives Ἱεροσόλυμα the article, here, Joh 5:2, Joh 10:22, Joh 11:18; contrast Joh 1:19, Joh 4:20-21, Joh 2:13, Joh 5:1, Joh 11:55, Joh 12:12.

23. Note the different force of ἐν and the exactness of detail: in Jerusalem, at the Passover, during the Feast.

εἰς τὸ ὄνομα. See on Joh 1:12. θεωροῦντες. See on Joh 6:2.

τὰ σημεῖα. None of these ‘signs’ are recorded; comp. Joh 4:45, Joh 7:31, Joh 11:47, Joh 12:35, Joh 20:30, Joh 21:25; Mar 1:34; Mar 6:55-56. The number of miracles wrought by Jesus during His public life was so great (ἐποίει = was habitually doing), that a writer inventing a Gospel would almost inevitably place them throughout His whole life. That the Evangelists rigidly confine them to the last few years, greatly adds to our confidence in their accuracy. But the faith which was born of wonder would be likely to cease when the wonder ceased, as here: comp. Simon Magus (Act 8:13).

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

23-25.] Many believe on Jesus at the Passover: His knowledge of their character, and withholding of Himself from them.

23.] As analogous with ἐν τῷ πάσχα ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ, see ch. 6:4.

θεωρ. αὐτ. τὰ σημ. ἅ ἐπ.] ἐπίστευον εἰς αὐτόν, ἀλλʼ οὐ βεβαίως. ἐκεῖνοι γὰρ ἀκριβέστερον ἐπίστευον, ὅσοι μὴ διὰ τὰ σημεῖα μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ διὰ τὴν διδασκαλίαν αὐτοῦ ἐπίστευον. Euthym.

What miracles these were, is not related:—certainly some notable ones, see ch. 3:2.

The mention of them precludes us from understanding ch. 4:54, as indicating that the healing of the ruler’s son was absolutely His second miracle.

24,

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

At the passover. Note the omission of of the Jews (ver. 13).

In the feast - day [εν τη εορτη] . Rev., during the feast. The feast of unleavened bread, during the seven days succeeding the actual passover (see on Mr 14:1).

Believed on [επιστευσαν εις] . The stronger expression of faith (i. 12). His name. See on 1 12. With the phrase believe on His name, compare believe on Him (viii. 30), which is the stronger expression, indicating a casting of one's self upon Him; while to believe on the name is rather to believe in Him as being that which he claims to be, in this case the Messiah. It is believing recognition rather than appropriation. "Their faith in His name (as that of the Messiah) did not yet amount to any decision of their inner life for Jesus, but was only an opinion produced by the sight of His miracles, that He was the Messiah" (Meyer).

When they saw [θεωρουντες] . Rev., literally and rightly, beholding (see on 1 14, 29).

He did [εποιει] . Better, was doing; the imperfect denoting the wonderful works as in progress.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.