power, and the Jews deemed His claim Blasphemy, as it certainly would have been, had He been a mere man; and their preparing to stone Him, as on a former occasion, is the best exposition of His words. Our Lord, in His intercession for us, prays that all His disciples may be One, as He and the Father are One; but there the context shows, since they are men and His Father God, that He must be speaking of unity of will and disposition, while here it is as plain that the attribute referred to is power. They then expressly declared, that they would stone Him, because He made Himself God. Our Lord did not deny the charge, yet, not judging it proper at that time to bring that mysterious truth into discussion, lest He should farther irritate them, He showed that in a subordinate sense their Law called men gods, meaning their priests and magistrates, who were types of the Deity; and therefore they had no right to object to the title of Son of God being claimed by one whom the Father had consecrated in a higher degree, and for a higher purpose. To this He added, that they might have had reason for refusing credit to His words, if He did not do the works of His Father; but if He gave that evidence of almighty power, though they disregarded His testimony, they ought not to despise His credentials, but acknowledge them, that they might know that the Father was in Him, and He in the Father. The context must decide the nature of the union of which He speaks. He had just said as Messiah, The works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of Me. Therefore, in justifying Himself by the Scripture in taking the name of God, He only meant to refute the charge of blasphemy, not to deny that it belonged to Him also in the higher sense. And that they so understood Him appears from their not being satisfied with His explanation, and His being obliged to withdraw from their violence.

The discourse was abruptly closed by their endeavour to seize Him; and the mildness and meekness of our Lord's replies, even while they were endeavouring to destroy Him, are the more worthy to fix our attention, as we often see the most exemplary of His followers exasperated by malicious opposition, very far short of the violence to which He was continually exposed, and which He always endured with perfect patience. He then retired to Bethabara, where John had originally baptized; and His ministry there of some months, in a part of the country in which He had not taught before, was attended with great success; many of the people, who remembered John's testimony to Him, believing on Him in consequence.

102. Jesus restores Lazarus to life. John xi. 1–47.

Jesus was recalled into the vicinity of Jerusalem by Martha and Mary, who entreated Him, by His affection for their brother, who was dangerously ill, to come and cure him. However, contrary to their expectations, on hearing of the sickness of Lazarus, He remained two days where He was, to allow time for his death. His delay would excite anxiety, and perhaps hard thoughts of Him in this family which was dear to Him, and for a season it greatly augmented their distress; but if they and His disciples had attended to His answer, they would have been prepared for the result, for He declared that the sickness was not unto death, and afterwards that He would awake him out of sleep. The event showed the fitness of His proceeding, for the ensuing miracle redounded more to His glory and their benefit, than an immediate compliance with their request. His delay must also have given pain to Himself, for on witnessing the weeping of the sisters and their friends, He shed tears. On this occasion, and when meditating on the impending ruin of His country,

He is recorded to have given way to His feelings; thus proving, contrary to the theory of some moral philosophers, that both friendship and patriotism are compatible with perfect virtue. He now not only shed tears, but groaned twice. According to some, from the misery which sin had brought into the world; according to others, at the unbelief shown even at this advanced period of His ministry. We may adopt both opinions, supposing that it was both for sin, and for their incredulity; for when He ordered the stone to be removed from the tomb, even Martha's faith and hope seem to have died away again. On the third day He intimated His purpose of returning; and this surprised His disciples, who doubted whether He would be able to protect Himself and them from the rage of His enemies. He answered in figurative language, implying, that as men labour and travel securely while the sun affords light, but are liable to stumble in the dark; so He was safe, and ought to walk in His vocation during His allotted period. The Apostles accompanied Him, agreeing in sentiment with Thomas, who declared his intention to die with Him rather than desert Him. Jesus did not arrive till the fourth day after the death of His friend. As the village was scarcely two miles from Jerusalem, many of the inhabitants came to condole with the sisters; and this circumstance was overruled to make the miracle more extensively known, and more fully attested. Martha, on hearing of His arrival, left the company to meet and welcome Him at some distance; and expressed her assurance, that He both could and would have cured her brother if He had been on the spot. She seems to have had a faint hope of her brother's restoration to life, but she addressed Him only as a Prophet who wrought miracles by faith and prayer, not as the incarnate God, who commanded by His own omnipotence. He assured her that Lazarus should rise again, and she declared her belief in the general Resurrection.

To enlarge her expectations, and to bring her to a right idea of His real character, He informed her that He was the Author of the Resurrection and of Life; and such was the constraining influence of His words, that she acknowledged Him for the Messiah. She immediately went to call her sister, evidently having now a strong expectation excited, that He who had announced Himself as the Author of life, would restore it to her brother. Mary accompanied her, and addressed Him in the same words as her sister: and her friends, following, presuming she was gone to weep at the grave, brought, accidentally as it were, a numerous party to witness this most convincing of Miracles. It was too evident to be denied, and our Lord was desirous that they should draw from it the proper conclusion, that He was sent from God. For this reason He first prayed, and His prayer is thanksgiving to His Father, that He always heard Him, anticipating, as if already wrought, the miracle which He then performed, by calling Lazarus out of the tomb; who at the call came forth again alive, after he had been dead four days. Many of the spectators believed, that is the conclusion that Jesus wished them to draw; for the fact of Lazarus's resurrection none could deny. Others, who were governed by an implacable enmity, immediately reported the event to the rulers, who (such was their infatuation and wickedness) summoned a council to consider how they might best destroy Him, at the very time that they confessed that He had wrought not only this, but many Miracles. This last surprising one was the cause of their coming to this decision, as we learn from St. John, the only Evangelist that records it.

There is a tradition, that Lazarus was then a young man, and that he survived our Lord thirty years'; and this Miracle is supposed to have been omitted by the earlier Evangelists, Recorded by Epiphanius, Hæres. 65, §. 54.

upon the same principle as St. Peter's being the disciple who cut off Malchus's ear, lest it should have exposed him to persecution. Jesus retired in consequence to Ephraim, but continued His usual occupation of teaching and working miraculous cures.

103. Jesus answers the question of the Pharisees concerning Divorce. Matt. xix. 3–12. Mark x. 1-12.

The next snare contrived by the Pharisees to entrap Jesus, was to obtain His opinion upon Divorce. The Rabbis were divided into two parties upon this question, so He could not decide in favour of either without giving offence to the other. The school of Shammah had determined that a wife ought not to be divorced, except for some gross misconduct, or some bodily defect unknown before marriage; while that of Hillel, who had only lately died, maintained that the will of the husband was a sufficient cause. This determination was the more popular. Long before, the author of the Apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus had said, If a wife go not as thou wouldest have her, cut her off from thy flesh, give her a bill of divorce, and let her go. (xxv. 26.) And Josephus acknowledges, that he himself put away his, after she had borne him three children, because he was not pleased with her manners. (Ant. iv. 8.) Our Saviour, as before, declared. that Adultery, which violates this sacred contract, is the only justifiable cause, and He showed that His decision was just, by referring to the history of the institution of Marriage, which was appointed by God Himself in Paradise before sin and death had entered. In the beginning, God created a male and a female. Now if a plurality of wives, or a succession of them at the discretion of the husband, that is, in other words, if either Polygamy or Divorce, except for Adultery, were to be allowed, God, instead of saying, that