The works of the Reverend and learned John Lightfoot D. D., late Master of Katherine Hall in Cambridge such as were, and such as never before were printed : in two volumes : with the authors life and large and useful tables to each volume : also three maps : one of the temple drawn by the author himself, the others of Jervsalem and the Holy Land drawn according to the author's chorography, with a description collected out of his writings.

§. Having five Porches.

We observed before that these Porches are to be understood for Cloister walks: five in number according to the quinque lateral, or five-angle form of the pool and place: for so it is more proper to hold, concerning the number rather than to look after allusions and allegories about it, which give but little satisfaction as to the historical matter: whether these Cloisters were built before the healing virtue of the water first appeared for the conveniency of those that had occasion to come to the waters, or after the appearing of that miraculous excellency for the accommodation of them that stayed there for healing, it is not much worth the labour to inquire, and there is but little hope to find it out. It is more generally thought that they were built upon the latter occasion, and so we leave them.

The general silence of the Jews about the race and wondrous virtue of this pool is something strange, who in the abundant praises and privileges and particulars of Jerusalem, which they give, yet speak not one syllable that I have ever found, towards the story of Bethesda, though it might have been a story of so remarkable recognisance: which makes me the rather to believe that this healing virtue of it, was, and was taken for a presage of the near approach of the Messias, as we have spoken, because they to weaken the truth of his coming have subtilly been silent in such a matter.

I may not utterly omit to say something about the opinions of others concerning the soveraign efficacy of these waters, the two that are the most current, and that carry the fairest probability and colour with them are these,

1. That in this pool the Sacrifices were washed, and God would honour the rite of Sacrifice with such a miraculous work in the place where they were washed and fitted for the Altar: which if the thing were true, were not impertinent in the application, but the truth I question. For if they mean that the beasts that were to be sacrificed were washed here whilst they were alive, as some, and those not a few will have it, it is neither to be proved by the Scripture, nor dreamed of by any Jews that write upon that subject, that any sacrificed beast was to be washed till he was slain: But if they mean that the inwards of the slain Sacrifice was washed here (as the inwards indeed were the only things ex∣cept the legs, that were to be washed, Lev. 1. 9.) it is easie to be proved by Scripture that the inwards were washed at the Temple, and never brought out thence; and the Talmudists shew us a room at the Temple for this very purpose, called The washing room, which we have spoken of in its place, where they had their first scouring, and marble Ta∣bles in the Court, where they had a second.

2. Another opinion is, that God by this wondrous virtue of Bethesda waters would antedate, as it were, honour to the waters of Baptism which was now to come in.

But might not the Pharisees as well misconstrue the matter, and say it sealed the honour of their washings, which were of use already and so long before, as well as of Baptism that was now coming in? I am not ignorant of the conception of Tremellius in this matter, in his marginal notes to Nehem. 3. but when I consider what kind of man Eliashib was, to whom that opinion refers so much, I can see but little satisfaction in that conjecture: especially considering how dead the appearing of Angels or miracles had been, from the times of Eliashib, till near the appearing of Christ in hu∣mane flesh.

Vers. 4. For an Angel went down at a certain season, &c.

It is but a kind of labour lost to stand to debate; whether this season were fixed to all the three festivals, or to Passover time alone, or to Pentecost alone, or to some other de∣terminate time of the year, for these opinions are severally asserted; it is most probable the time was uncertain, and the waiters there could not guess when the Angel would

come, but stood in continual expectation and attendance for his coming: Whether he appeared in visible shape is also questionable, but though he were not to be seen, which is the more probable, yet did he give so visible and apparent evidence of his being there, by troubling the water, either causing it to boyl, or tumble in waves, or some such thing, that the parties present did perceive well enough when he was come. The Lord would use an Angel in this imployment, and the Angel must use the troubling of the water, for the healing effect, not only because it is Gods ordinary way of providence to use the ministra∣tion of Angels in such things, nor altogether because the meer troubling of the water did produce such an efficacy, but because the people might the more visibly observe the restoring of sensible ministration of Angels, and of works miraculous, which had been either a very meer stranger, or if at all appearing, exceeding rare, ever since the death of the last Prophets or thereabout: And upon this reason I cannot but hold that this mi∣raculous virtue was but of a later date; because miracles and Angels had not been so con∣spicuous among them till near Christs coming.

Vers. 5. A certain man which had an infirmity 38. years.

Our Saviour is pleased to choose out for his cure, a man and malady of the longest languishing and of the greatest unlikelihood of recovery. If we run back these eight and thirty years to the first beginning of his infirmity, we shall find that he was entred into this his disease seven years and an half before Christ was born, for Christ was now compleat thirty years old and an half: and it may be his disease was as old as was this vir∣tue of Bethesda waters. It began upon him immediately after the Temple was finished and completed by Herod, as it will appear to him that will calculate and compute the times. Now I should assoon date this healing virtue of Bethesda from about those times as any times I can think upon. For as the providence of God did bring on and usher in the coming of the Messias (when it drew near) by several dispensations and degrees, so the bringing of the Temple to the highest glory that ever it must have (but only that the King of glory came into it,) and the restoring of Angelical and miraculous admi∣nistrations were not the least of those dispensations.

But be it how it will, whether the mans disease were as old as the pools virtue or no, it was so old, as doubtless the oldest in all the pack, and as to glorifie the power of Christ most singularly in the healing of it.

Vers. 6. He saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole?

Christ doth not question this as doubting of his desire, but to stir up his faith and ex∣pectation. His lying and waiting there so long, did resolve the question, That he would be made whole; but the greater question was, Whether he had faith to be healed, as Acts 14. 7. and that our Saviour puts to trial by this interrogation.

Vers. 8. Iesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed and walk.

Here is a question also not unjustly moved; Why would Christ injoyn him to carry his bed on the Sabbath day? It was contrary to the letter of the Law, Jer. 17. 21, 22. Bear no burden on the Sabbath day, &c. It was extreamly contrary to their Traditions. For bringing a thing out and in from one place to another was a work, and one of the special works forbidden to be done on the Sabbath day. Mayim. in Shab. per. 12. And he that car∣ryeth any thing on the Sabbath, in his right hand, or left, or in his bosom, or upon his shoulder, he is guilty. Talm. in Sab. per. 10. And it was dangerous to bring him either to whipping or to suffer death. The most general answer that is given is, that Christ would have him hereby to shew that he was perfectly and entirely healed, when he that could not stir before, is able now to carry his bed: and so by this action, at once he gives a publick testimony of the benefit received, and an evident demonstration of the perfectness of the cure.

But both these might have been done abundantly, only by his walking sound and well, seeing that he could not walk nor stir of so long before. A man that had been so diseased so long a space, and had lain at these waters so great a time, for him now to walk strongly and well, would shew the benefit received, and the cure done as well as walking with his bed on his back. There was therefore more in this command of Christ, than what did barely refer to the publication of the miracle; and that may be appre∣hended to have been, partly in respect of the man, and partly in respect of the day.

In respect of the man, it was to trie his faith and obedience, whether upon the com∣mand of Christ, he durst and would venture upon so hazardous an action, as to car∣ry his bed on the Sabbath day, which might prove death, or sore beating to him:

and he relies upon the word of him that commanded, and casts off fear and does it▪ And to this sense his own words do construe the command when the Jews question him upon the fact, He that made me whole gave me warrant to do it, for he bad me, and said, Take up thy bed and walk. He whose power was able for such a cure, his word was warrant for such an action. And as our Saviour stirs up his faith in his question before, Wilt thou be made whole? so he tries what it is in this command, Take up thy bed and carry it home: for so we must construe that Christ ment by walking, from the like expression, Mark 2. 9. with vers. 11.

In respect of the day, it was to shew Christs power over the Sabbath: And as in healing of the palsick man, Mark 2. 9. he would not only shew his power over the di∣sease, but also over sin, and so forgave it: So it pleased him in this passage, to shew his power over the Sabbath, to dispence with it, and to dispose of it as he thought good, as he shewed his command over the malady that he cured.

And here is the first apparent sign toward the shaking and alteration of the Sabbath in regard of the day that we meet withall, and indeed a greater we hardly meet with, till the the alteration of the day came. To heal diseases and to pluck off ears of corn for necessary repast on the Sabbath day, had their warrant even in the Law it self, and in all reason: but to enjoin this man to carry his bed on that day, and to bear it home, whereas the bed might very well have lain there till the Sabbath was over; and his home was no one knows how far off; certainly it sheweth that he intended to shew his au∣thority over the Sabbath, and to try the mans faith and obedience in a singular man∣ner. It was easie to foresee how offensive and unpleasing this would be to the Jews (for it stuck with them a long time after, Joh. 7. 23.) and how dangerous it might prove to the man himself, and yet he purposely puts him upon it, that he might here∣by assert his own divine power and God-head, as it appeareth by his arguing for it, when they cavil at him all along the Chapter. Even the same power that could war∣rant Abraham to sacrifice his own son, and Joshua to march about Jericho on the Sab∣bath day.

Vers. 14. Afterward Iesus findeth him in the Temple, &c.

The Faith and Obedience of the man upon Christs command (though it were of so nice consequence) do argue to us, that his appearance at the Temple, was to render his thanks for the great benefit he had received. The poor wretch had hardly been at this Temple for eight and thirty years together, (the date of Israels wandring in the Wilderness after Gods decree upon them, Numb. 14.) and now seeing he is miraculously inabled to go thither, it is time to go to give praises to him who had done so great things for him. It was at the Passover that he was recovered, a time when all the people upon the ingagement of the command, were to present themselves before the Lord: but his long absence and his present miraculous inabling to appear, did double and treble the ingagement upon him.

There Christ findeth him, where it was fittest he should be found, owns him again, and giveth him the wholsome admonition, Sin no more lest a worse thing come unto thee. Not only implying that all our maladies come for sin, but as it seemeth concluding that this long and sore diseasedness had seised upon him, for some particular and notorious offence.

Vers. 15. The man departed and told the Iews that it was Iesus, &c.

Not with an evil will or intention, to have Christ indangered or persecuted for his work on the Sabbath day, but in zeal to profess and publish him to the Jews, for the wonder wrought so powerfully by him: we need no other argument to prove the negative; namely, that he sought not to endanger Christ, than even common sense and reason: For, for a man so gratiously recovered from so sad and so long a malady, to go about in requital of this, to forward and seek the destruction of him that did recover him, is a thing so horrid and incredible to conceive, that it would speak a Devil ra∣ther than a man that did it. It is true indeed that the Jews to whom he went to tell this, were the Sanhedrin, or the men of authority; but that he did it for the honour of Jesus who had cured him, his obedience to Christs command, his pleading the war∣rant of that command, his resorting upon his healing to the Temple, his lesson given him by Christ there, and his mentioning only the miracle of healing, and not the com∣mand to carry his bed, are arguments sufficient to evince. So that this healed mans er∣rand to the Jews is not to accuse Christ, but to preach him, and to incite them to take such notice and respect of him, as was fit for one that had done so great a miracle.

Vers. 17. My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.

The speech of Christ from hence to the end of the Chapter, was made by him (as hath been said) before the Sanhedrin, before which he was called to answer for what he had done on the Sabbath day: for whereas it is said the Jews did persecute him and sought to kill him, it is most proper to understand it, that they went about it in a Judi∣cial way, (as they would pretend) even as they did when they put him to death in∣deed. Now through all the speech he pleads himself to be the Messias, in as plain terms and with as strong arguments as could be uttered, and yet that Court that was to judge of true and false Prophets, doth neither believe him for the true Messias, because of the wickedness of their own hearts, nor yet punish him for a false, because of the fear they had of the people, and because his time was not yet come. It is something strange that the Evangelist hath not given us intelligence of the issue of this so plain and so full a plea, which Christ pleadeth even for his life: but by his silence in such a thing, we may well conclude the irresistible power and truth and clearness wherwith he spake, which though the Jews would not comply with, nor entertain, yet were they not able to deny or contradict it.

For the asserting of the act that he had done on the Sabbath, he averreth his power as he was the Messias, and alledgeth the Testimony of John, of his own miracles, of the voice from Heaven, and of the Scriptures to prove he was so: And though he do acknowledge that he had received his copy and power of working from the Father, yet doth he account it no robbery to equal himself with him in his mighty working, and authority, and particularly in those three great affairs, the managing of which are on∣ly proper for the hands of God, and those are, raising of the dead, judging of the world, and disposing of the Sabbath: He proves this last which was the matter that he had in pleading, by his authority and power that he had in the two former: That as God raised the dead, so he raised whom he would, and as God judged men, so he also judged; nay, the father had committed all judgement to him, and therefore as the Fa∣ther had authority over the Sabbath, so had he also authority over it: That is his ar∣gument in these words that we have in hand, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work: in which he referreth to what is spoken concerning God, in relation to the Sab∣bath, That God rested on the seventh day, and blessed that day, and sanctified it: and yet God by his providential actings worketh hitherto, even every Sabbath, and so saith he, do I also work; doing good on the Sabbath, and dispensing providences for the be∣nefit of man, and for the accomplishing of his ministration: But how does the parallel be∣tween Gods works of providence on the Sabbath, and this acting of Christ on the Sab∣bath, hold throughout, or in all the parts of it? As God doth good on the Sabbath, di∣spensing his Ordinances, sending rains and Sun-shine, providing food for all flesh, &c. so Christ did good on this Sabbath, healing a disease, and recovering a man from so long an infirmity. Herein the parallel holdeth clearly: but Christ went a step further, for he commanded the man to carry his bed, which tended to the visible violation of the Sabbath, which Gods providential actings do not do. It is true indeed that God also commanded the Priests of the Temple to work on the Sabbath in killing, slaying, and sacrificing beasts, but this was for the greater promotion of his service: and he comman∣ded Joshuah to march about Jericho on the Sabbath day, but that was for the more for∣warding of the publick good: but this command to the man to carry his bed, tended neither to the one end, nor to the other, but meerly and mainly to shew the power and authority that Christ had over the Sabbath: Skan but considerately that com∣mand and action, and you will find the tendency of it, so directly and properly to nothing, as to this very thing: Say it was to shew the compleatness of the cure, that might have been sufficiently, and indeed as much shewed, either by the mans found walk∣ing without his bed, or by carrying his bed the next day; Was it more for the glorify∣ing of God? Regarding the bare action, one would suppose, that to have kept the Sabbath and not giving offence to others, might have tended to that end more fairly. There was therefore this chief thing in it, besides the tryal of the mans faith and obe∣dience, That Christ would glorifie his divine power and authority, in shewing his com∣mand and disposal that he had over the Sabbath.

Therefore whereas his pleading, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work, does answer most directly but to one objection that lay against him, namely, for healing on the Sabbath, yet doth it satisfie the other sufficiently, which was his command to the man to carry his bed; for he that wrought in other things with the same authority that the Fa∣ther worketh, he also hath the same authority over the Sabbath that the Father hath; who as he ordained it, so can he dispense with it as pleaseth him.

Now Christ in this command cannot be conceived to have intended to vilifie the Sab∣bath, as it was a day of rest, or to lay that Ordinance of keeping such a day of rest un∣to the Lord, in the dirt; but he that was to alter the Sabbath to a new day, and in that equality of working which he had with the Father, he was to set a new Sabbath day up∣on the finishing of the work of Redemption, as the Father had done the old upon the Creation: and therefore as in preface to such a thing, he both giveth such a command, and pleadeth for what he had done, from his divine authority, as beginning to shake the day which within two years was to be changed to another, The proof of the divine institution of the day of the Christian Sabbath, may be begun here.

Vers. 19. The Son can do nothing of himself but what he seeth the Father do.

1. By the Son in this place, and in the discourse following, we are to understand, not the second person in the Trinity, simply and solely considered in his God-head, which while some have done, they have intricated these words with endless and needless scruples: but the Son, as he stood there before them, when he speaketh these words, namely, as the Messias, God and Man; and so he himself doth teach us to understand it at vers. 27. The Father hath given authority to the Son to execute Judgement because he is the Son of man.

2. The terms of Father and Son, do not only speak that relation of the Father and the Son in the God-head, which doth peculiarly regard the eternal generation of the Son begotten of the Father, and the mutual and natural notion of Fatherhood and Sonship that is betwixt them by that generation, but it more singularly referreth to the several or distinct managings of the Father, as to the affairs of the old Testament, and the Son as to those of the new. For though it is most true, and undeniable, that the Fa∣ther in times of the old Testament, did work by the Son in his dispensations to the Church and World; as by him he made the World, and him he made Lord of all things: yet was his acting by the Son in the times of the new Testament, infinitely more ap∣parent and discernable, because the Son appeared in humane and visible shape, the Messias sent of God, God blessed for ever: and did great and powerful things parallel to any done by the Father in the administration of the old Testament. And this construction of the Relative terms Father and Son, the very scope of Christs discourse, doth call upon us to make, and the particulars of it as we come to take them up, will help to clear unto us and confirm: For 1. the matter that Christ was pleading now about, which was concerning his present demeanour towards the Sabbath, needeth not so much a discourse to tell the Jews how far the second person in the Trinity simply considered as God, could act of himself, or how far he received his activity from the first Person, or how far the first person shewed his Counsels to the Second, as to shew how far the Lord gave power, and imparted himself unto the Messias; and how far he in his King∣dom and Administrations did come neer to the Lord in his: For 2. the Jews were not so well acquainted with the distinction of the Persons in the Trinity, the first and the second, as they were with the distinction of the Father or the Lord, that had ruled in the world hitherto, and the Massias, that in his time should be the King and Ruler by the Lords appointment; and it was proper for Christ to speak to them so as they might best understand him, and so he doth according to their own distinction, which indeed was most true and proper. And 3. Observe the whole speech of Christ throughout this Chapter, and you find it divided into these two parts, 1. To shew what was the power and acting of the Messias to vers. 31, 32. and 2. to prove and evidence that he was he: Not so much to shew what is the power and acting of the second Person in the Trinity simply considered in his Godhead and compared with the first, nor so much to prove that he was the second Person in the Trinity, as to shew and to prove himself to be the Messias.

3. When he saith therefore, The Son can do nothing of himself: he meaneth, that the Messias cometh not in his own power, though the second person in Trinity be Omni∣potent, but he is sent and hath his Commission from God the Father, as he doth conti∣nually both in this speech and in other places inculcate, that the Father sent him. As he is the Son of God, he is all powerfull in his nature, and as he is the Messias he hath all power put into his hand by the Father, and yet he saith He can do nothing of himself, because he owns the appointment by which he was sent as Messias by the Father. He could do all things of himself as he was God, but he could do nothing of himself as he was Messias, because he was a servant, and bare that Office upon the designment. And there∣fore the Arrians were miserably wide and wilfully blind, when they produced these words of the Son himself to infringe the glory of the Son, and to prove him not equal to God the Father; not distinguishing, what a Child might have done, betwixt his divine Nature which could do all things, and his Mediatorial Office, which could not do,

but what he that sent him had appointed. In the former they might have owned infinite power, and in the latter infinite obedience: for it was not imperfection in him that he could do nothing of himself as Messias, but it was perfection of obedience and compli∣ance to the will of him that sent him: and this does not only argue the readiness of his will, but the impeccableness of his nature, for he could do nothing of himself, but his actings were wholly and necessarily wrapped up in the Will of God.

4. Now to apply this part of his speech to the occasion of his present plea: He had done a great miracle, and he had, as they thought, violated the Sabbath, and he was especially to speak unto the latter, for thereupon lay his accusation: and he argueth that he had not done what he did on the Sabbath of his own mind, but that it was com∣prehended within his Commission, as Messias: and as he had in that his Office received authority from the Father to do wonders, to raise the dead, and to judge the world, so had he also, no have command and disposal over the Sabbath peculiarly.

5. His words, But what he seeth the Father do, are to be pointed and referred to the same sense, and limitation, to which the preceding part of the verse hath been re∣ferred: To understand the words properly, and in their first apparent signification is something difficult: To say strictly that Christ could do nothing but those individual and singular things which he had seen God the Father actually to do before him, would be very rugged, and such a saying as would not be proved. For fecit mundum, tamen non vidit Patrem ante facientem, it is the objection of some of the Fathes: He made the world, and yet he saw not the Father make another world before him: He took up∣on him humane nature, yet he saw not the Father do so before him, and so of other particulars. But his meaning is, according to the thing that he was speaking of, name∣ly, that in his administrations under the Gospel, he could do nothing, but according as the Father had done under the administration of the Old Testament: not as to every sin∣gular and particular administration, as if Christ in the administration of the New Testa∣ment was to do no particular thing, the like to which the Father had not done before, but it is to be understood in reference to the general, of power, authority and dispo∣sal, according to which the Messias acted in the Gospel, even as the Father had done before: And so the words immediately following do expound it, Whatsoever he doth, the same doth the Son likewise.

Vers. 20. For the Father loveth the Son.

This God proclaimed twice in a voyce from Heaven, Matth. 3. 17. & 17. 5. which very words do teach how to understand the term Son all along this discourse, namely for the Messias, God and man; Esay 42. 1. Eph. 1. 6. whom as David represented in other things, so did he even in his name, which signifieth Beloved, and Solomon in his name Jedidiah, 1 Sam. 12. 24. The Father, besides the infinite and eternal love he bear∣eth to the Son, as God the second person in the Trinity, Prov. 8. 30. is said to love the Son as Messias, because of his undertaking mans redemption, and promoting Judgment, righteousness, knowledge, mercy, &c. the glory of the Father, &c. Esay 42. 1, 2, 3, 4. Heb. 1. 8, 9. John 10. 17.