« EdellinenJatka »
biblical writings represented as a personal existence, but is the vital power which animates them both, God and the Logos, the principle which actuates both, etc. Here God and the Logos are thus apprehended and represented according to the analogy of natural beings (natur-wesen), animated by a special principle in them. Fromman thinks the reasoning of Stier, in his Hints towards a believing apprehension of Scripture (Andeut. z. glaubigen Schriftverständniss), in which, from the axlos mapáKantns, he draws the conclusion that Jesus speaks of the Holy Spirit as a person, to be absurd. Stier, however, has in the most distinct manner repeated the same view in his Words of the Lord, vi. 220. Without doubt, by strongly distinguishing the second Paraclete from the first, Christ designates the Holy Spirit as a special personality. The remark, that Christ, on the other hand, identifies Himself again with the Paraclete, and describes the coming of the latter as His own coming again, cannot invalidate the strength of that distinction; for the three divine persons are one in their essence. It is, however, just from the divine nature of this unity that the Trinity, or the threefold form of the divine absolute self-consciousness, results. When one has apprehended that in the distinction between the three personalities in God, the question turns on the distinguishing of the three forms of consciousness in the divine being, one has only to distinguish the Sonship-self-consciousness of God in Jesus Christ, from the Fatherhood-self-consciousness of God in the original fountain of life, in order to know the first two persons; and when one learns further to distinguish the third form of consciousness in God from the two first in His (eternal) Church, one has also thus found the third personality. The circumstance, that two of these forms of consciousness have one side of their manifestation in time, cannot perplex us with regard to their eternal immanence, so soon as we cease to regard eternity as merely most ancient pre-mundane time. As thus the personality of the Holy Spirit in the self-consciousness of God makes itself known in the Church, specially strong proofs of His personality are found in this 17th chapter of John, and one of the strongest lies in the expression, ίνα ωσι τετελειωμένοι εις έν.
CHRIST AMONG HIS ENEMIES; OR, THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD
SURROUNDED BY THE CHILDREN AND THE POWERS OF DARKNESS; AND THE VERIFICATION OF HIS VICTORIOUS POWER.
(Chap. xviii. xix.)
In His high-priestly prayer, the Lord had completed the offering of His life in the spirit. How He likewise accomplished it in the department of the soul, is only slightly indicated by the fourth Evangelist, who merely notices the departure of Christ to Gethsemane, and then proceeds immediately to describe the actual voluntary giving up of His life, in the history of His sufferings. For here also his main object is to bring to light those features, in which the heavenly glory of the life of Jesus was manifested.
He therefore omits the history of the agony of Christ's soul in Gethsemane, and even also the kiss of Judas; but draws our attention to that moment in which the guard, overawed by the majesty of Christ's words, went backward and fell to the ground. He passes by the examination of Jesus at the house of Caiaphas, but describes that first hearing before Annas, in which the dignity and freedom of Christ over against the Jewish judges very specially appeared. He likewise omits several smaller circumstances connected with the examination of Christ before Pilate, more especially His being sent to Herod, the dream of Pilate's wife, the washing of Pilate's hands; and narrates, on the other hand, very fully the most essential particulars of this examination, and gives us clearly to see how Christ overawes the Roman judge by His regal bearing, and executes upon him the judgment of the Spirit. He has also given another position to the scourging of Christ; and in the account of the presentation of
: the Lord, with the crown of thorns and in the purple robe, to the people, he makes Hinn stand forth to view as the great King who reigns in the kingdom of ignominy and suffering for the truth's sake. He shows how, everywhere in the procedure adopted against Christ, His royal dignity declares itself, even should He be treated by Pilate and the Jews with mockery and contempt. The last words also of Christ which John has treasured up for us, testify to the glory of Christ in His mortal struggle. The same is true of the treatment of the holy body, as also of the mysterious marks upon it; and not less of the honourable burial which was prepared for Him.
When the Lord had finished His intercessory prayer, He went forth? with His disciples over the brook Kidron. With this passage over the Kidron, was His death-journey itself decided. The passage of this little brook was thus of historical importance, in a quite different sense from that attached to other decisive passages of rivers or streams by worldly conquerors, such as history informs us of. On the other side of the Kidron was a garden, into which Jesus went with His disciples. And Judas also, who betrayed Him, knew the place; for Jesus ofttimes resorted thither with His disciples. The house belonging to that parcel of ground had been placed at His disposal by an unknown friend, and He used it for the purpose of refreshing Himself there in solitary prayer, or also of assembling there with His disciples. Perhaps it was also a retired place of meeting for the disciples of Jesus in Jerusalem.
Here it was that Jesus fell into the power of His enemies, that He began to reveal His glory in the company of the children of darkness.
Judas then, having taken—collected together—the band of soldiers” and temple-servants of the chief priests and scribes, came thither with torches, and lanterns, and weapons. This manifestly immoderate equipment showed the excessive anxiety and agitation into which this assault on the liberty of his Master had thrown the traitor, and with him the rulers of the Jewish people. The same agitation-originating, as it appears, especially in Judas—communicated itself increasingly to the soldiers, who had come to take Jesus prisoner. He knew all that awaited Him, and went forth to meet them with the question, “Whom seek ye?' They answered Him, “Jesus of
From the Shade (chap. xviii. 1) it cannot be concluded that Jesus now first went out from the house wbere the Passover was celebrated, as Stier has again lately asserted. One may easily suppose that the precincts of the city extended themselves as far as the brook Kidron (comp. vol. iv. 189).
2 See above, iv. 291.
Nazareth.' Jesus saith unto them, I am He.' And Judas also, who betrayed Him, stood with them. As soon then as He had said unto them, I am He, they went backward, and fell on the ground. The Evangelist has evidently with very special intention remarked in this place that Judas stood with the soldiers, when Jesus met them. On the one hand, we may conclude from this, that the satanic purpose of the traitor to betray the Lord with a kiss was probably frustrated in part by his own excited haste, in part by the voluntary hastening of Christ past him. On the other hand, we must suppose that it was especially the evil conscience of Judas which spread terror amongst the multitude, driving them back, and throwing them in confusion one upon the other. That the Evangelist means to describe an unheardof spiritual terror, is manifest; and such a fact is quite in harmony with the occasion. That, however, he does not mean to say that all the individual members of the company lay flat on the ground, may be concluded from the circumstance, that Jesus immediately afterwards again asked those who had precipitated themselves backwards, 'Whom seek ye?' And they said, “Jesus of Nazareth,'—a sign that they had regained their courage.Jesus answered, “I have told you that I am He! If therefore ye seek Me, let these go their way.' He thus used their alarmed state of mind to procure safety for His disciples. The Evangelist adds the remark, That the word might be fulfilled which He spake: Of them whom Thou gavest Me, I have lost none. In humility He thus makes the confession, that it might have proved the destruction of the disciples, if at this moment a process of life and death had been instituted against them. And thus far must that word of the intercessory prayer of Jesus, which he mentions as a prospective prophetic word, already receive a special accomplishment. It is important, that the stroke with Peter's sword took place after this interposition of Jesus in their behalf. It appears thus doubly unwarranted, and serves quite to confirm the remark of John. Simon Peter therefore, having a sword, drew it, and smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus. Then said Jesus unto Peter, “Put up thy sword into the sheath: the сир which My Father hath given Me, shall I not drink it?'
This is the first manifestation of the spiritual power of · See vol. iv. 295; comp. Gfrörer, p. 227. 2 See vol. iv. p. 297.
Christ, in the company of His enemies. Each successive part of it contains a new feature of His glory. This is already reflected in the enormous equipment with which His enemies approach against Him, the defenceless. Still more, however, in the terror of conscience, under which they are precipitated to the ground. It exhibits itself in the voluntariness and exalted composure of soul with which He meets His enemies; in the contrast between His terrifying, I am He! and the second, I am He, which again calms; in the collectedness and authority with which He procures for the disciples liberty to depart; as likewise in the equanimity with which He rebukes Peter, and declares Himself ready to drink the cup of the Father. The attempt of Peter with the sword vanishes, as a vain and paltry act of sin, before the grandeur and holiness of the demeanour of the Lord.
The band of soldiers, and the captain, and the servants of the Jews, now took the Lord prisoner, and bound Him. They then led Him away first to Annas; for he was father-in-law to Caiaphas, who was high priest that year. Now Caiaphas was he who gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should be destroyed for the people.—These hints tell us that the fate of Jesus before Caiaphas was already by anticipation decided. They show us, at the same time, that Caiaphas was decidedly under the secret influence of Annas—that he, as the high priest of the year, did what the legitimate, high priest of the Jews purposed to see done.
This second incident of the sufferings of Christ, like the preceding first, and the succeeding third one, was obscured by the conduct of Simon Peter. Simon Peter followed Jesus, and with him another disciple. That disciple, however, was known to the high priest, and therefore could go in with Jesus into the hall of the high priest's palace. But Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other disciple, who was known to the high priest, and spoke a word (eime) to her that kept the door, and brought in Peter. Then said the damsel that kept the door unto Peter, “ Art not thou also one of the disciples of this man?' He said, 'I am not !' And the servants and officers stood there, and had made a fire of coals, for it was cold; and they warmed themselves. And Peter was among them, standing and warming himself.