Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 5:45

Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is [one] that accuseth you, [even] Moses, in whom ye trust.

45. Do not think ] As you might be disposed to do after hearing these reproaches.

that I will accuse you ] If this refers to the day of judgment (and the future tense seems to point to that), there are two reasons why Christ will not act as accuser (1) because it would be needless; there is another accuser ready; (2) because He will be acting as Judge.

there is one ] Your accuser exists already; he is there with his charge. Note the change from future to present: Christ will not be, because Moses is, their accuser.

in whom ye trust ] Literally, on whom ye have set your hope.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

45 47. Do not appeal to Moses; his writings condemn you.

Thus the whole basis of their confidence is cut away. Moses on whom they trust as a defender is their accuser.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Do not think that I will accuse you – Do not suppose that I intend to follow your example. They had accused Jesus of breaking the law of God, Joh 5:16. He says that he will not imitate their example, though he implies that he might accuse them.

To the Father – To God.

There is one that accuseth you – Moses might be said to accuse or reprove them. He wrote of the Messiah, clearly foretold his coming, and commanded them to hear him. As they did not do it, it might be said that they had disregarded his command; and as Moses was divinely commissioned and had a right to be obeyed, so his command reproved them: they were disobedient and rebellious.

He wrote of me – He wrote of the Messiah, and I am the Messiah, Gen 3:15; Gen 12:3; compare Joh 8:56; Gen 49:10; Deu 18:15.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Joh 5:45-47

Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

The day of judgment is likened to a trial, and we learn that with every verdict there will be given reasons which shall satisfy the intelligent creation. When we read of books and witnesses, we may be sure there will be evidence we shall not be able to contradict.

1. Conscience will probably be the great accuser. This may now be torpid; but circumstances constantly occur to show that it is not dead.

2. Conscience now awakens with memory, and so it will be then; and so memory will reproduce every action, and conscience will determine its character. Addressing Himself to Jews, our Lord, notwithstanding the testimony of His miracles, avers that He will not accuse them for their infidelity. There were such clear attestations in the writings of Moses to Himself, that it would be sufficient only to produce them. And what a forgetfulness of the element of their religion, and what a stifling of conscience must there have been ere they could profess to trust in a lawgiver whose laws they set at nought!

I. Our Lord makes it A NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE ON MENS BELIEVING MOSES, THAT THEY SHOULD BELIEVE IN HIM.

1. The law and the gospel, therefore, must be parts of the same system.

(1) If you consider the law as a system of types, and compare it with the gospel as the antitype, it seems impossible to avoid being struck by the correspondence.

(2) The gospel furnishes us with the character in which the law is written, and thus enables us to decipher its hieroglyphics.

2. How can we account for this? Not by chance; for there is not here and there an accidental resemblance. But when it is the business of a lifetime to find out all the reciprocities, and the impossibility of a lifetime to detect one disagreement, we are compelled to believe that, whoever constructed the gospel, formed it for the purpose of adapting it to the law.

3. Let us see how the argument stands.

(1) The founders of Christianity must, if impostors, have laboured to give plausibility to their system by assimilating it to the law; but in order to success, they must have had unbounded familiarity with the Mosaic institution and unbounded ingenuity in giving substance to shadows.

(2) Had the apostles been learned rabbis, they would not have been equal to this; but they were unlearned peasants.

(3) The only theory on which we can account for this mutual adaptation, is that both come from God.

4. Consequently, to reject one is to reject both. The Jews, indeed, had no such acquaintance with the gospel as we have; but they had abundant opportunity of noting the correspondence of Christ with the Messianic prophecies. They rejected the former, and hence the latter also.

5. To follow the same line of thought further. The Bible, though composed in different ages and by different writers, is an uniform book, presenting throughout the same truths, though with a great variety of exhibition and marked by a surprising similarity of style. This is convincing alike of the unity and Divinity of its authorship, and to believe one part of it is to believe the whole.

II. THE FORCE OF THE REASONING THAT IF MOSES WERE NOT BELIEVED NEITHER WOULD CHRIST BE.

1. We are wont to think that were Christ to speak and work now as He did eighteen hundred years ago, that His ministry would result in widespread conviction of unbelievers and conversion of sinners. But if the fact that the Jews resisted the writings of Moses proved that there was no hope of them being overcome by the words of Christ, we might infer that those who reject the preaching of Christs ministers would reject Christ Himself. The amount of necessary resistance would not be greater in the one case than the other, except that the Jews had an incomplete, but Christians have a perfect Bible. But would not Divine eloquence and miracles be more powerful than the written Word? No.

(1) Because the Holy Spirit is the Agent of conversion in either case.

(2) Because there being no respect of persons with God, one generation is dealt with by the same laws as another; and we have no right to believe that in handling a miracle the Spirit would apply a greater effort than in handling the Word.

(3) In resisting the writings of Moses the Jews had resisted the Holy Spirit speaking in those writings, and henceforward, in resisting the word of Christ, they were to resist the Spirit speaking in those words. And so now the Spirit turns upon us sufficient evidence to convince, but not to compel.

(4) To think that we should be converted by miracle who are unconverted by Scripture is to apologize for infidelity by throwing the blame upon God. It holds good to-day, If we will not hear Moses and the prophets, neither shall we be persuaded though one rose from the dead. (H. Melvill, B. D.)

Christs testimony to the Bible

There is much controversy about the Book. It will be interesting, amid the din and tumult, to find out what Christ thought of it. If He makes it out to be a good Book, I shall continue my faith in it. If He is hesitant or doubtful, I shall not hesitate to give it up.

I. IN REGARD TO OTHERS.

1. He commended it as an object of study.

(1) Without one word of caution. He points to it as you would point your child to a garden, where you give him liberty to roam where and eat what it may. If there was a pit there, or a poisonous serpent, and your child came to harm, you would be to blame. So Christ sends us to the Bible, and takes the entire responsibility.

(2) Authoritatively; not with a polite wish, but with a command. We want to do away with the imperative mood, and are inviting people to be courteous enough to let the sunlight into their chambers. If you have any doubt about your Bible, then go like a crouching dog and ask people to kindly listen to your tale. But if it be in your heart as the life of your life, then speak it boldly and lovingly.

(3) Completely. He does not say, When you come upon anything that taxes your fancy, put that into the waste-paper basket, and go on; when you meet with a difficulty, pass it by, and accept what you can accept; when something appears incredible, reject it, and pass on to what you can accept. Had there been anything wrong there I know, because I know His truth and nobleness, that He would have told me of it.

2. He declared its absolute integrity, and exactly as a truth-speaking man would do. Persons came to Him with a difficulty, and in His answer there is this parenthesis: The Scriptures cannot be broken. This was not special pleading. The subject had no reference to Scripture. The remark is casual and unstudied, and one on which those who examine witnesses place great reliance. He had the opportunity of making annotations, of saying, I now refer to the moral parts, or I am speaking eclectically; but His whole assumption, on the contrary, broadens out into an infinite confidence in the integrity of the Scriptures.

3. He taught that it contains the great answers to all the great questions of the soul

(1) As regards duty. A man came to Him, asking, What shall I do to inherit eternal life? Jesus instantly replied, What is written in the law? and showed that that great question had been answered from the beginning.

(2) As regards destiny. In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus He showed that the men of olden time did not go down to hell without warning. If they hear not Moses, etc.

II. IN REGARD TO HIMSELF. He was not a mere lecturer about the Bible.

1. He fled Himself to it in the time of His temptation and agony. It is written. In His great crisis He goes to the Bible; He has it in His heart; He quotes it as if He had written it.

2. Coming out of the wilderness into society, we find Him even quoting it in self-vindication. Again and again He said to learned men, Have ye never read? To His own disciples, How is it that ye do not understand? And when He began to read, their hearts began to burn. They had been reading the Scriptures, and yet had made nothing of them, like many today. Read it with Christ, and you will find His person, claims, promises, vindicated everywhere.

3. Christ found Himself in the whole Bible. Had ye believed Moses, etc. Beginning at Moses, etc. And what is the Old Testament testimony to Him? That He is Creator, Preserver, Redeemer, Sovereign, Friend; the same to-day, yesterday, and for ever. Then search the Scriptures; read them through.

1. This alone will qualify you for criticizing it.

2. This alone will give you solid comfort and eternal life. (J. Parker, D. D.)

The unity of the Bible an argument for its Divinity

In reading the Bible I seem always to hear the same voice: whether the volume is informing me how the unshapen chaos resolved itself at the Creators bidding into symmetry and life–or men, who, familiar with the scenes, are gathering centuries into sentences; or the lawgiver is arranging the ceremonies of the mystic volume; or historians are discoursing of battles and captivities; or evangelists describing the institutions, and apostles unfolding the doctrines of Christianity–I seem always to hear the same voice, as though the words of John, the exile in Patmos, were the echo of those of Moses, the leader of Israel. There is vast difference in the subjects successively, touched on; but, notwithstanding, there is a tone which I always recognize, and which always impresses the feeling that I am hearkening to the same speaker. There seems no change in the instrument, though continual change in the sound; as if at one time the whirlwind swept the chords, that I may be astonished with the utterance of wrath and devastation, and at another they were touched by an angels hand, that I might be soothed by the melody of mercy. There is the same scheme carried on by the wanderings of patriarchs, the sacrifices of priests, the ambition of kings, and the sufferings of martyrs. The same style is preserved by the poet in his hymns, by the prophet in his visions, the lawgiver in his codes, the historian in his annals; so that, as though the Author never died, but appeared at one time in one character, and another in another, the Bible comes to me as the dictate of one mind, and the writing of one pen. Inspiration only accounts for this; but we cannot imagine any other solution. And if (for it is on this our text bids us fasten) there be such a sameness between the Jewish and Christian dispensations, that all the types in the one find exact antitypes in the other, and thus the two have such a relationship, that they compose one uniform system, we must receive both or reject both. If we believe Moses we must believe Christ, and if we believe Christ we must believe Moses; and this serves to vindicate what might otherwise seem difficult, that no Jew can truly believe his own religion and yet deny the Christian religion. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed Me; for he wrote of Me. (H. Melvill, B. D.)

The impossibility of inventing the correspondence between Moses testimony and Christs work

We should like to see a company of acute and scientific reasoners, but ignorant of Christianity, sit down to the study of the books of Leviticus and Exodus; they shall be told, These books are full of types, and emblems, and figures, and ceremonies, and you must strive to devise a simple religious system, which shall give significance to every item of this symbolic array; there are mysterious intimations, we will tell them, in every page, couched in parabolic language, or under sacrificial institutions, and your endeavour must be to invent a scheme of theology which shall afford a plausible and rational explanation of all that is thus obscure. Now do you honestly think that our company of ingenious and intelligent writers would make much way with their task? Can you believe that, as the result of their joint labours, there would be sent into the world any scheme of religion which should fix the plain meaning, or at least afford a clue, to all the mysteries of the books of Exodus and Leviticus? Yet this is precisely what is done by the system of Christianity; done with so unvarying a carefulness, that you cannot find a point to which there is nothing corresponding. The men, moreover, who effected this were ignorant and illiterate; so that the books were compiled when there was none of those human appliances which at best would but ensure the most limited success. What alternative, then, have we but that of admitting a supernatural interference, and ascribing to God the whole system of Christianity? (H. Melvill, B. D.)

Christ in the Old Testament and in the New

Christ was in the faith of the patriarchs like corn in the ear; in the faith of the law like corn grown into flower; but since the Incarnation He is in our faith completely as when corn is made into bread. (Bernard.)

.

THE HISTORICAL CONNECTION BETWEEN CHAPTERS 5. AND 6.–Our Lord is in Galilee. It has been, perhaps, a year since the healing at Bethesda. His ministry in Galilee has gone forward, as described by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, including many miracles, the Sermon on the Mount, the early parables, and the mission of the twelve. Returning from this mission, on which they went two and two throughout Galilee, teaching and healing, the twelve were weary and worn, as Jesus Himself had been when He reclined beside Jacobs well. So He compassionately said to them (Mar 6:31), Come ye yourselves apart into a desert place, and rest awhile. That project led to his feeding the five thousand. This is the first narrative in which John has been parallel to all three of the other Gospels (Mat 14:13-33; Mar 6:31-52; Luk 9:10-17), and it will not be so again until the triumphal entry. Johns chief object is to present the Saviours discourses, and he probably gives this one Galilean event in common with the other Gospels only by way of introducing the great discourse on the Bread of life. (J. A. Broadus, D. D.)

The moral connection between Chapters 5 and 6.

The record of a critical scene in Christs work in Galilee follows the record of the critical scene at Jerusalem. At Jerusalem Christ revealed Himself as the Giver of life; here He reveals Himself as the Support and Guide of life. In the former case the central teaching was upon the relation of the Son to the Father; in this case it is in the relation of Christ to the believer. The episode contains the whole essence of the Galilean ministry. It places in decisive contrast the true and false conceptions of the Messianic kingship, the one universal and spiritual, the other local and material. (Bp. Westcott.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 45. Do not think that I will accuse you] You have accused me with a breach of the Sabbath, which accusation I have demonstrated to be false: I could, in return, accuse you, and substantiate the accusation, with the breach of the whole law; but this I need not do, for Moses, in whom ye trust, accuses you. You read his law, acknowledge you should obey it, and yet break it both in the letter and in the spirit. This law, therefore, accuses and condemns you. It was a maxim among the Jews that none could accuse them but Moses: the spirit of which seems to be, that only so pure and enlightened a legislator could find fault with such a noble and excellent people! For, notwithstanding their abominations, they supposed themselves the most excellent of mankind!

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

There will be no need of my accusing you, you will need no other accuser than that Moses for whom you have so great a reverence, and for whose sake you contemn me. Joh 9:28,29, they said, We are Mosess disciples. We know that God spake unto Moses: as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is. This Moses (saith our Saviour) will accuse you unto the Father.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

45. Do not think I will accuse youto the Father“My errand hither is not to collect evidenceto condemn you at God’s bar.”

one thataccuseth you, even Moses, &c.”Alas!that will be too well done by another, and him the object of all yourreligious boastingsMoses,” here put for “the Law,“the basis of the Old Testament Scriptures.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father,…. To God the Father, as the Ethiopic version reads. The Syriac and Persic versions read by way of interrogation, “do ye think that I will?” c. Christ is no accuser of men no, not of the worst of men; see Joh 8:10; he came not into the world to bring charges against men and condemn them, but to save them; to be an accuser is not agreeable to his characters of a Surety, a Saviour, an Advocate, and Judge: there were enough to accuse these persons of; as their perverseness and stubbornness, in not coming to Christ for life; their want of love to God; their rejection of him, though he came in his Father’s name; their reception of another, that should come in his own name; their taking honour one of another, and not seeking the true spiritual and eternal honour, which God gives; but though he hints these things to them, he would not have them think that he accused them of them to the Father: the Jews have a notion, that when the Messiah comes, there will be accusations lodged against their doctors and wise men t.

“R. Zeira says, that R. Jeremiah bar Aba said, that in the generation in which the son of David shall come, there will be , “accusations against the disciples of the wise men”.”

And one of their writers u thus interprets, Da 12:1:

“and at that time “shall Michael stand up”; he shall be as silent as a dumb man, when he shall see the holy blessed God contending with him, and saying, how shall I destroy a nation so great as this, for the sake of Israel? “and there shall be a time of trouble” in the family above, and there shall be “accusations” against the disciples of the wise men.”

However, there was no need for Christ to accuse them; for as it follows,

there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust; by whom is meant, not Moses personally; for when on earth, he was a mediator between God and the people of Israel, and an intercessor for them; and since he has been in heaven, as the dead know not any thing, he knew nothing of their affairs; and when he was on the mount with Christ, his discourse with him turned upon another subject: but either the writings of Moses, as in Lu 16:29; or the doctrine of Moses, as 1Co 10:2; or rather the law of Moses, Mt 22:24. And in this the Jews trusted; they rested in it, and made their boast of it; and expected eternal life and salvation on account of their having it, and through their hearing it read every sabbath day, and by their obedience to it: and now sin being a transgression of the law, this same law brings charges against them, and accuses them of the breach of the several precepts of it, and pronounces them guilty before God; it curses and passes a sentence of condemnation on them, and according to it, will they perish eternally, without an interest in Christ; for their own righteousness by the law of works, will be of no avail to them; the law in which they trust for life, will rise up in judgment, and be a swift witness against them: so the Jews sometimes speak of the law, as witnessing against the people of Israel w.

t T. Bab. Cetubot, fol. 112. 2. u Jarchi in Dan xii. 1. Vid. Abkath Rocel, par. 2. p. 265. w Prefat. Echa Rabbati, fol. 40. 1.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Think not ( ). Prohibition with and the present imperative. See on verse 39 for for mistaken opinions in John.

I will accuse you ( ). Emphasis on (I). Future active indicative of (, against, , to speak in the assembly , to bring an accusation in court, a public accusation). See Ro 3:9 for for making previous charge and Lu 16:1 for , a secret malicious accusation, and Ro 8:33 for , for public charge, not necessarily before tribunal.

Even Moses (). No “even” in the Greek.

On whom ye have set your hope ( ). Perfect active indicative of , state of repose in Moses. Only example of in John. See 2Co 1:10 for use of with instead of the usual (1Ti 4:10).

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

I will accuse [] . From kata, against, and ajgoreuw, to speak in the assembly [] . Hence, properly, to bring an accusation in court. John uses no other verb for accuse, and this only here, Joh 8:6, and Rev 12:10. Once in the New Testament diaballw occurs (Luk 16:1, on which see note), signifying malicious accusation, and secret, as distinguished from public, accusation [] . Aijtiaomai occurs once in the compound prohtiasameqa, we before laid to the charge (Rom 3:9). This has reference especially to the ground of accusation [] . Egkalew occurs only in Acts, with the exception of Rom 8:33. It means to accuse publicly, but not necessarily before a tribunal. See Act 23:28, 29; Act 26:2, 7.

In whom ye trust [ ] . A strong expression. Literally, into whom ye have hoped. Rev., admirably, on whom ye have set your hope.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: (me dokeite hoti ego kategoreso humon pros ton patera) “Do not think that I will accuse you all to the Father,” for I came to save not to condemn, Joh 3:17; Luk 19:10. Jesus did not come to accuse of sin or indict sinners; The law did, this to all men, Rom 3:19.

2) “There is one that accuseth you, even Moses,” (estin ho kategoron humon Mouses) ”There exists one who continually accuses or indicts you, that is Moses,” Rom 2:12; Rom 3:8-23; Exo 20:1-17 1Ki 8:46; and our Lord asserted that if men did not heed the law and the prophets they would not though one arose from the dead, which He Himself later did, and they hired men to lie about His resurrection, Luk 16:31; Mat 28:12-15.

3) “In whom ye trust.” (eis hon humeis elpikate) “In whom you all have hoped,” vainly hoped, trusted in vain. They vainly trusted Moses, trusting that by outward conformity to the ceremonies to His law they would thereby acquire salvation, by their own good works, but such was a perversion of what Moses taught, Deu 18:15-18; Act 10:43; Rom 10:1-4.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

45. Think not that I shall accuse you to the Father. This is the way in which we ought to deal with obstinate and hardened persons, when they learn nothing by instruction and friendly warnings. They must be summoned to the judgment-seat of God. There are few persons, indeed, who openly mock God, but there are very many who, believing that God, whom they oppose as enemies, is gracious to them, amuse themselves at their ease with empty flatteries. Thus, in the present day, our Giants, (114) though they wickedly trample under foot the whole doctrine of Christ, haughtily plume themselves on being the intimate friends of God. For who will persuade the Papists that Christianity exists anywhere else than among them? Such were the scribes, with whom Christ is here disputing. Though they were the greatest despisers of the Law, yet they boasted of Moses in lofty terms, so that they did not hesitate to make use of him as a shield in opposing Christ. If he had threatened that he would be a powerful and formidable adversary to them, he knew that this would have been treated with the utmost contempt; and, therefore, he threatens that an accusation, drawn up by Moses, will be preferred against them.

Moses, in whom you trust. There are some who think, that Christ here points out the distinction between his own office and that of Moses, because it belongs to the Law to convict men of being unbelievers. But this is a mistake; for Christ did not intend that, but only intended to shake off the confidence of hypocrites, who falsely boasted of entertaining reverence for Moses; just as if a person in the present day, in order to foil the Papists with their own weapon, (115) were to say, that they will find no enemies more decidedly opposed to them than the holy doctors of the Church, under whose authority they falsely and wickedly take shelter. (116) Let us also learn from it, that we ought not to glory in the Scriptures without a good reason; for if we do not honor the Son of God by the true obedience of faith, all whom God hath raised up to be his witnesses will rise up against us as accusers at the last day. When he says, that they trust in Moses, he does not accuse them of superstition, as if they ascribed to Moses the cause of their salvation; but his meaning is, that they do wrong in relying on the protection of Moses, as if they had him to defend their wicked obstinacy.

(114) The wars of the Giants held a conspicuous place in the ancient mythology, and in the popular belief. Not to mention the poets, whose imaginations were kindled by such topics, they are formally introduced by Cicero, in a philosophical treatise, though only for the purpose of instructing his readers to “despise and reject these fables.” “The gods,” says he, “as the fables relate, were not without wars and battles; and that not only as in those described by Homer, when some of the gods were ranged on the one side, and some on the other side, of two opposing armies; but even, as in the case of the Titans and Giants, they carried on their own battles. Such things (he adds) are said, and are very foolishly believed, and are full of absurdity and downright silliness.” — (De Nat. Deorum, lib. 2.) The daring presumption and utter discomfiture of the Giants, in their fabulous wars, are sometimes alluded to by Calvin, and other Christian writers, in describing the wickedness and folly of man, who stretcheth out his hand against God, and strengtheneth himself against the Almighty, (Job 15:25.) — Ed.

(115) “ Pour rembarrer les Papistes de leur baston mesme.”

(116) “ Du titre desquels ils se couvrent faussement et meschamment.”

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(45) Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father.His words were words of direct accusation, which must have cut to the very quick. He had come from the Father, and it might have seemed to follow from what He said, that He would accuse them to the Father. He guards against this misinterpretation. Love cannot accuse; He cannot be an accuser. He is ever a judge, only because love must judge hatred, and light must judge darkness, by revealing it. (Comp. Note on Joh. 3:19.) And yet the very revelation of love and light condemns hatred and darkness. The heart, then, needs no accuser, for it accuses itself; it needs no sentence, for it condemns itself. There is no penalty so fearful as that of the soul which is awakened to its own sin, and cannot itself forgive that sin, and, therefore, cannot receive the forgiveness of the Infinite Love, which always forgives. Their accusation was their rejection of light and love in the past, and Moses was their accuser. This is the thought of the following verses.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

Who is their accuser? not Christ, but their own Moses, Joh 5:45-47.

Though in all these misdoings he is their Admonisher, (in order to be their Saviour, as he must be their final Judge,) he is not their Accuser. Their true accuser is their own Moses. Christ is the gospel, and Moses is the law, and the law condemns. Their own Old Testament is the indictment. Through its representative, Moses, it charges them with rejecting the true Messiah. And as in rejecting the Messiah they reject the propitiation for sin, so they stand exposed to the indictment from Moses as wholly guilty before the Father.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

“Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father, there is one who accuses you, Moses on whom you have set your hope. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?”

But let them not think that He would act as their accuser. It was not necessary. Moses himself accused them, the Moses on whom they had set their hope. They should take note of the fact that when they face God at the final judgment it is Moses who will be their accuser, the very one whom they have exalted and relied on, and it will be because they have refused to listen to his testimony to Jesus. So their failure to believe in Jesus is very much a failure to believe the very writings of Moses which they revered and meditated in constantly.

Indeed had they believed Moses they would have recognised in Jesus, from the very purity and impact of His words, the ‘prophet like unto Moses’ of whom God said ‘I will put my words in his mouth and he will speak to them all that I command them’ (Deu 18:18). They would have seen in Him the One Who was bruising the serpent’s head by His power over evil spirits (Gen 3:15). They would have recognised the Seed through Whom the whole world would be blessed as large numbers, including Samaritans, experienced the blessing of God through Him (Gen 22:18). They would have recognised the One from the house of Judah, to Whom all the obedience of the peoples would be (Gen 49:10). They would have recognised the Star and Sceptre from Israel (Num 24:17).

Had they listened to Moses they would not have tried to build around themselves a wall of righteousness by making a multitude of requirements that they were actually unable to fulfil, and have ignored the deeper implications of the Law which would have convinced them of their own sinfulness and need for God’s mercy. The sacrificial system was itself proof that they could not keep the Law, and yet they were trying to use the Law as a means of justifying themselves. But even the sacrificial system pointed to Him, for as Isaiah had drawn out in his interpretation of the Law, in the end the sacrificial lamb must be a unique human being, suffering for the sins of His people (Isaiah 53).

‘His writings — my words.’ Compare Luk 16:31 where it is said that those who refuse to listen to Moses and the prophets will not be persuaded though one rose from the dead. The Scribes and Pharisees laid huge stress on the written ‘Law of Moses’. They thought that eternal life was available through meditation in it and response to it as proof that they were in the covenant. Yet they did not listen to what it was saying because of the darkness in their hearts. Their spiritual senses were dulled. No wonder then that they did not hear the words of the One Who was greater than Moses, for, vital though they were, His words were not in their eyes sanctified by age.

‘On whom you have set your hope’. They had set everything aside apart from their trust in Moses and his writings. These determined the course of their whole lives. And yet because of their blindness, and because of their desire for the approbation of their fellow seekers, they had missed Moses’ essential message, the message of a Coming One Who would bring all to rights. There is also some evidence that first century Jews believed that Moses would intercede for them at the judgment. But if only they realised it there was only One Who could do that, the One Whom they were now rejecting.

So Jesus left the Judaisers in no doubt as to what they were doing when they rejected Him. They had rejected God’s bevy of witnesses.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Joh 5:45. Do not think, that I will accuse you, &c. Do you think, &c.? Syriac. Our Lord told them in conclusion, that they were not to imagine that in rejecting him, they sinned against no person but him, and that he alone would accuse them to the Father for their infidelity. Moses, through whose law they trusted to have salvation, was likewise dishonoured by it; inasmuch as he wrote of him under the names of the Seed of Abraham,Shiloh,A prophet like to himself, &c. Wherefore, seeing theyrefused to believe on him, Moses would accuse them as guilty of disbelieving his writings. This is one of the most express passages that can be imagined, in which Moses is represented as looking down with indignation upon these elders, who gloried in being the most distinguishedof his disciples: and seeing how injuriously they treated the Lord Jesus, the great Prophet predicted by Moses, that great lawgiver is represented as turning to God with a severe accusation against them, and urging his own predictions as an aggravation of their inexcusable infidelity.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Joh 5:45-47 . In concluding, Jesus sweeps away from under their feet the entire ground and foundation upon which they based their hope, by representing Moses, their supposed saviour, as really their accuser , seeing that their unbelief implied unbelief in Moses, and this latter unbelief made it impossible for them to believe in Jesus. This last completely annihilating stroke at the unbelievers is not only in itself, but also in its implied reference to the cause of the hostility of the Jews (Joh 5:15 ), “maxime aptus ad conclusionem,” Bengel.

] as you might perhaps believe from my previous denunciation.

] not of the final judgment (Ewald and early writers), where certainly Christ is Judge; but in general, Jesus, by virtue of His permanent intercourse with the Father, might at any time have accused them before Him.

. .] The emphatic : there exists your accuser Moses he as the representative of the law (not of the whole of the O. T., as Ewald thinks); therefore not again the future , but the present participle used as a substantive, expressing continuous accusation.

] has tragic emphasis.

] ye have set your hope, and do hope; comp. Joh 3:18 , and see on 2Co 1:10 . As a reward for their zeal for the law, and their obedience (Rom 2:17 ff; Rom 9:31 f.), the Jews hoped for the salvation of the Messianic kingdom, towards the attainment of which Moses was accordingly their patron and mediator.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

DISCOURSE: 1634
UNBELIEF REBUKED

Joh 5:45-46. Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.

THERE is nothing more painful to a pious Minister, than to reflect, that, instead of having to present all his hearers to God as his children, saying, Here am I, and the children thou hast given me, he will have to stand at the bar of judgment as an accuser of by far the greater part of them, and to appear as a swift witness against them. To the majority of them, the most successful minister must say, with our blessed Lord, If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin. But, whether they be called as accusers or not, the inspired writers will undoubtedly execute that painful office; as our Lord here testifies to his unbelieving audience: Think not that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuses you, even Moses, in whom ye trust: for had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.
Let me now, in faithfulness to your souls,

I.

Set before you the charge which the whole inspired volume brings against us

Strong was that charge which Moses exhibited against the Jews
[Much had he written respecting Christ. The whole ceremonial law was one typical adumbration of him the moral law itself, as denouncing a curse against every one that should transgress it in the slightest instance, was, in fact, intended to shew men their need of Christ, and to shut them up to that way of salvation which he should open for them [Note: Rom 3:21-22 and Gal 3:22-24.]. The prophecies which he revealed were many and clear: he set forth Christ as the seed of the woman who should bruise the serpents head; and as the seed of Abraham, in whom all the nations of the world should be blessed; and above all, as that prophet who should in due time be raised up like unto himself; to whom all must take heed, at the peril of their souls.

Now to these writings our blessed Lord appealed continually, in confirmation of his divine mission. But the Jews, whilst they pretended the highest veneration for Moses, actually made their regard for him their plea for rejecting Christ. But this shewed that they did not understand the writings of Moses, and that they did not, in fact, believe any one of those things which he had spoken: for if they had understood him, and believed his testimony, they would of necessity have believed in Christ, of whom he testified. We may suppose him, then, as accusing these people before God the Father to this effect: Thou seest, O God, what a zeal they profess for me: but it is all hypocrisy, for, instead of receiving my testimony respecting their Messiah, they shut their eyes and ears against every word that I have spoken; and make no other use of my testimony, but to pervert it, and to found upon it their rejection of that very Saviour whom I have revealed.]
But stronger far is that charge which the whole inspired volume brings against us
[We profess to believe in the written word, both of the Old and New Testament: and if any one were to brand us with the name of infidels and deists, we should be filled with indignation against him, as uttering a gross calumny. But how do we manifest our faith? The Scriptures tell us, that except we repent, we must perish. But who believes it? Who is stirred up, by that declaration, to real penitence and contrition? The Scriptures tell us, that we must look to Christ for salvation, as the wounded Israelites did to the brazen serpent. But where do we find that intense earnestness to obtain relief, and that utter renunciation of every other hope but that revealed to us in the cross of Christ? The Scriptures require us to live by Christ, exactly as the Israelites lived by the manna which they gathered, and the waters of the rock that followed them. But where do we find persons making this continual use of Christ, if I may so speak; and living altogether by faith in the Son of God, who loved them and gave himself for them? The Scriptures tell us, that having been bought with a price, we must glorify Christ with our bodies and our spirits, which are his. But where do we find persons employing every member of their body, and every faculty of their soul, for the glory of Christ?
Behold, then, what an accusation the whole inspired volume brings against us. See, Lord, this people! Thou knowest how fully thy holy will is revealed in every page of thy word: yet who regards it? Who regards any word contained in this volume, provided he has any interest to serve, or any lust to gratify, by the violation of it? I accuse the whole Christian world, with the exception of a very few, as hypocrites: for, with all their professed regard for thy revealed will, they violate it in all its most essential points; and with their boast of being Christians, they live altogether as if they were down-right heathens.]
Now then, having stated the charge, I will proceed to,

II.

Put you upon your trial in relation to it

Of the little flock who believe in Christ, I will say nothing. I will confine myself to the great mass of my hearers, who have never yet been renewed by the grace of God. And I ask,

1.

Is not the charge true of you?

[Look, I pray you, and examine the matters before proposed. See in what state you are, as it respects repentance for sin, and faith in Christ, and holy obedience to the commands of God. Compare yourselves with the Scriptures which ye profess to believe: see whether you are cast into them, as into a mould; and whether ye are really living as the Apostles did? I will not ask whether you have attained the eminence of Paul; for to that none of us can pretend: but are we followers of him, as he was of Christ? And if he were to see the daily habit of our minds, would he acknowledge us as imbued with the same spirit with him, and as treading in the same steps? It is evident, then, that we are guilty before God; and that the accusations which Moses, and the Prophets, and the Apostles, are exhibiting against us, are true [Note: See Joh 12:48. where all this is plainly asserted.].]

2.

Are ye not then deeply criminal?

[We are in the habit of reprobating infidels as amongst the vilest of men. And far am I from intending, in any respect, to lessen the abhorrence with which they are viewed, and should be viewed. But it may well be doubted, whether the great mass of Christians be not in a worse state than they. For infidels, however profane, are at least consistent: they do not profess to believe the Scriptures: they regard them all, and every thing contained in them, as a cunningly-devised fable. But the Christian world profess to receive the Bible as the word of God, and to expect that men shall be dealt with in judgment according to the plan proposed in it: yet do they in their lives give the lie to all that they profess. If they really believed in that word, they would believe in Christ, and love him, and serve him, and glorify him. Could a man believe that his house was on fire, and ready to fall upon him, and not flee out of it? It is a delusion altogether: and in pretending to believe at all, they only lie unto the Holy Ghost.]

3.

Are ye not utterly inexcusable?

[What excuse can you offer in vindication of yourselves? Is not every part of the inspired volume brought before you in its season? Ye know that we have kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have declared unto you the whole counsel of God. But, at all events, the inspired volume has been in your hands, and ye might have drunk water at the fountain-head. It has been accessible to you at all times: and if it have been a fountain sealed, whose fault is that? Has not God promised, by his Holy Spirit to open it? and has not Christ told you, that if you would ask of him, he would give you living waters, which should be in you a well of water springing up unto everlasting life? What is there that has been wanting to you? Has there been any defect of evidence? No: the evidence has shone forth as bright as the sun. Has there been any want of encouragement? No: there is not any species of encouragement that has not been poured upon you as a flood. Nothing has been wanting, but a humble and docile spirit. It is your own pride, and worldliness, and unbelief, that has kept from you the blessings of salvation: and you have none but yourselves to blame.]

Application

[I say, then, confess your hypocrisy, and humble yourselves for it And take the Holy Scriptures, and search them with all diligence; and pray to the Holy Spirit to guide you into all truth. But mark more especially what they speak of Christ; for of Him they testify in every part [Note: ver. 39.]: and, having found him, believe in him, and surrender up yourselves to him: and let your whole life attest the consistency of your character, and the integrity of your hearts before God.]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

Ver. 45. Do not think that I ] That is, that I only.

Even Moses ] So your faithful ministers (whom men pretend to love and reverence, but obey not their doctrine), these shall judge you.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

45. ] The work of Christ is not , even as He is Judge; but , by the appointment of the Father. And therefore though He has said so much of the unbelief of the Jews, and charged them in the last verse with breach of the central law of God He will not accuse them; nay, it is not needful; for Moses, whom they disbelieved, while vainly hoping in him (see above on Joh 5:39 ), , Rom 2:17 , already accused them: see Deu 31:21 ; Deu 31:26 , and ch. Joh 7:19 .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Joh 5:45 . These words bear in them the mark of truth. They spring from Jesus’ own consciousness of His intimacy with the Father. To suppose that the Jews feared He would accuse them, is to suppose that they believed Him to have influence with God. Chiefly in view is the fact that Moses will accuse them. They thought they were defending Moses’ law in accusing Christ for Sabbath-breaking: but, on the contrary, they were themselves open to the accusation of Moses; , in Vulgate “Moyses in quo vos speratis”.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Moses. See note on Joh 1:17.

in = on. Greek. eis. App-104.

ye trust = ye have set your hope.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

45.] The work of Christ is not , even as He is Judge;-but , by the appointment of the Father. And therefore-though He has said so much of the unbelief of the Jews, and charged them in the last verse with breach of the central law of God-He will not accuse them; nay, it is not needful;-for Moses, whom they disbelieved, while vainly hoping in him (see above on Joh 5:39),- , Rom 2:17,-already accused them: see Deu 31:21; Deu 31:26, and ch. Joh 7:19.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Joh 5:45. , do not think) A new argument against the unbelief of the Jews, and one most suitable to establish His conclusion.-, I) in particular and only, just as if Moses were on your side. I am a reconciler [not one come to condemn].-, you) who do not believe in Me.-, Moses) i.e. the writings of Moses. Luk 16:29, [Abraham to the rich man] They have Moses and the prophets [i.e. their writings]; 2Co 3:15, When Moses is read.- , in whom ye have placed your trust) Joh 5:39.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Joh 5:45

Joh 5:45

Think not that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, on whom ye have set your hope.-They claimed to believe in Moses as their teacher and ruler. They so vitiated his law that they would fall under his condemnation and Moses in whom they claimed to believe would be their accuser.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

there: Joh 7:19, Joh 8:5, Joh 8:9, Rom 2:12, Rom 2:17-29, Rom 3:19, Rom 3:20, Rom 7:9-14, 2Co 3:7-11, Gal 3:10

in: Joh 8:5, Joh 8:6, Joh 9:28, Joh 9:29, Mat 19:7, Mat 19:8, Rom 10:5-10

Reciprocal: Psa 103:7 – He made Mat 17:3 – Moses Mar 9:4 – appeared Luk 24:27 – beginning Joh 1:17 – the law Joh 1:45 – of whom Joh 3:17 – God Joh 8:50 – there Joh 12:47 – I judge Act 6:11 – against Moses Rom 2:23 – that makest Gal 3:19 – It was added

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

5

The thought in this verse is that Jesus is not alone in condemning these Jews. The giver of the law of which they boasted to be followers, already accused them by his predictions. In Deu 18:18-20, Moses predicted that a prophet was to come among the Jews, and we know that was Christ. In that prophecy, a condemnation is uttered against the man who would not hearken to the words of that prophet.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Joh 5:45. Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye have placed your hope. These words do not diminish, but increase the severity of our Lords condemning words. Their objects of trust have been successively taken away. They have the Scriptures, but they have so used them as to miss their whole design; they are rejecting Him of whom they witness, and are offering to God a labour and a zeal which have no value in His sight. The chief tenet in their faith is that God is one (Deu 6:4; Jas 2:19); but, in the absence of the love of God from their hearts, their zeal for orthodox faith has not gained for them the glory that is from the only God. There has been more, however, than misuse and loss. Their very lawgiver Moses, in whom they had set their hope, is already their accuser before God. No further accusation is needed. No more crushing blow could be given to their pride. Moses their accuser before God! Yet it was so. When we refuse to enter into all the parts of Gods plan, the very parts of it for whose sake our refusal is given, and whose honour we imagine we are maintaining, turn round upon us and disown our aid.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Think not that I will accuse you; that is, that I only will accuse you to the Father; there is one that accuseth you, even Moses; that is, the writings of Moses, which you pretend to depend upon, and to trust to; for had you believed his writings, that is, the prophecies and types contained in his writings, you would have been led by them to believe in me; for they all pointed at me, and recieved their accomplishment in me; but if Moses cannot be heard by you, I must expect no authority with you.

Learn, 1. That the whole scope of Moses’s ceremonial law, was to point out and prefigure Jesus Christ; Christ was the sum of the law, as well as the substance of the gospel; he was Abraham’s promised seed, Moses’s great Prophet, Jacob’s Shilo, Esay’s Emanuel, Daniel’s Holy One, Zachary’s Branch, and Malachi’s Angel.

2. That such as believed the ancient prophesies before Christ came, did see their accomplishment in him, when he was come.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Joh 5:45. Do not think that I only will accuse you to the Father Our Lord proceeds to caution them against supposing, that in rejecting him they sinned against no person but him, and that he alone would accuse them to the Father for their infidelity; for that Moses, in whose laws they trusted to have salvation, was likewise dishonoured by it, inasmuch as he wrote of him, namely, under the names of the Seed of Abraham; Shiloh; and a Prophet like to himself whom God would raise up unto them from among their brethren, and whom he commanded them to hear. Wherefore, seeing they refused to believe in him, Moses would accuse them as guilty of disbelieving his writings. This, says Dr. Doddridge, is one of the most expressive passages that can be imagined, in which Moses, their great lawgiver, is represented as looking down with indignation upon these elders, who gloried in being the most distinguished of his disciples; and seeing how injuriously they treated Jesus, the great Prophet, turning himself to God with a severe accusation against them, and urging his own predictions as an aggravation of their inexcusable infidelity. For had ye believed Moses Had ye believed his writings, which are daily read in your synagogues; you would have believed me For these writings describe me not by types and figures only, but by particular and direct prophecies. See the margin. But if ye believe not his writings Which it is plain from your conduct that you do not, though they are daily in your hands, and you strenuously assert their divine authority; how shall ye believe my words I have no reason to be surprised that you do not credit me upon my own testimony. Thus Jesus asserted his own personal dignity, as the Son of God and Judge of the world, at the same time that he proposed the evidences of his mission from God with such strength of reason, perspicuity, and brevity, as are unequalled.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Vv. 45-47. Think not that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, Moses, on whom ye have set your hope. 46. For if ye believed Moses, ye would believe me; for he wrote of me. 47. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words.

After having unveiled to them the moral cause of their unbelief, Jesus shows to His hearers the danger to which it exposes them,that of being condemned in the name of that very law, on the observance of which they have founded their hopes of salvation. It is not He, the Messiah rejected by them, it is Moses himself, in whose name they condemn Him, who will demand their condemnation. Jesus pursues them here on their own ground. His word assumes an aggressive and dramatic form.

He causes to rise before them that grand figure of the ancient deliverer, to whom their hopes were attached ( ), and transforms this alleged advocate into an accuser. The words: that I will accuse you, show that, already at that time, a sentiment of hostility to His own people was imputed to Jesus. It was His severe discourses which gave rise to this accusation. , is very solemn: He is there, he who… The words: on whom you hope, allude to the zeal for the law, which the adversaries of Jesus had manifested on this very day; this zeal was their title, in their eyes an assured title, to the Messianic glory. It will be found that this Moses, whom you invoke against me will testify for me against you. What an overturning of all their ideas! Meyerand Weiss claim that the words: who will accuse you cannot refer to the last judgment, since Jesus will then fill the office, not of accuser, but of judge. But Jesus does not enter into this question, which would have had no meaning with people who did not recognize Him as the Messiah. To the Father: who will judge by means of Christ.

The two verses, Joh 5:46-47, prove the thesis of Joh 5:45, by showing, the first, the connection between faith in Moses and faith in Christ; the second, the no less necessary connection between the two unbeliefs in the one and in the other. In other words: Every true disciple of Moses is on the way to becoming a Christian; every bad Jew is on that towards rejecting the Gospel. These two propositions are founded on the principle that the two covenants are the development of one and the same fundamental thought and have the same moral substance. To accept or reject the revelation of salvation at its first stage, is implicitly to accept or reject it in its complete form. This is exactly the thesis which St. Paul develops in Rom 2:6-10; Rom 2:26-29.

The words: wrote of me, allude to the Proto-gospel, to the patriarchal promises, to the types such as that of the brazen serpent, to the Levitical ceremonies which were the shadow of things to come (Col 2:17), more especially to the promise Deu 18:18 : I will raise up unto them a prophet like unto thee;this last promise, while including the sending of all the prophets who followed Moses, finds its consummation in Jesus Christ. Ye would believe on me: in me as the one whom Moses thus announced. In truth, many of the prophecies had not yet found in Jesus their fulfillment. But we must think especially of the spirit of holiness in the law of Moses and the theocratic institutions, which found in Jesus its full realization. Moses tended to awaken the sense of sin and the thirst for righteousness, which Jesus came to satisfy. To give access to this spirit, was to open one’s heart in advance to the great life-giver (Gess).

ADDITIONAL NOTES BY THE AMERICAN EDITOR.

XXXI.

Vv. 45-47.

1. Meyer and Weiss hold that the last judgment is not referred to in these verses, because Christ is represented as the judge on that day, and therefore cannot be spoken of as an accuser in connection with it. Keil affirms the opposite, saying that, as the Jews did not acknowledge Jesus to be the Messiah or the judge, this consideration can have no weight in the decision of the question. The true view of this matter is, not improbably, to be found as we observe the peculiarity of the thought of this chapter and of other parts of this Gospel which are kindred to it. This writer does not leave out of view the final judgment, but his mind moves in the sphere of the present and permanent inward life, and the end is only the consummation. In a certain sense, therefore, judgment is present, though it is also in a certain sense future. The mind of the hearer or reader is left to pass from the one to the other, and thus to include both.

2. Moses is here spoken of as the foundation of the Jewish legal system and thus as, in a sense, the foundation or centre of the Old Testament. It may be that, according to this view of the matter, he and his writings are referred to as if including the whole idea of the Old Testament Scriptures; see Joh 5:39. If the reference is to the Pentateuch only, the allusion is doubtless to Deu 18:15, and the other points which Godet mentions in his note.

That this first formal discourse of Jesus, which is recorded in this Gospel, is intended by the evangelist to serve as testimony to his readers cannot be questioned. That it is, in this respect, an advance upon what has preceded, is also clear. The relation of Jesus to the Father is here set forth not indeed as fully as it is in later chapters, but in a part of the unfolding of its true idea, and as it is not in the conversation with Nicodemus. The occasion on which this discourse was given, it must be remembered, was a year, or nearly a year later than that conversation, and much must have been done and said by Jesus in the interval. That Jesus in the opening of the second year of His ministry should have advanced in His teaching as far as this discourse might indicate, cannot justly be regarded as improbable. It was, moreover, with the leading Jews that He carried on this discussion, not with the common people. If the deeper truths respecting His person and His relations to the Father were to be set forth in His earthly ministry at alland how strange it would have been, if no such declaration had been made,it would seem that, at this time, the beginnings of the full teachings might appear. The discourse of this chapter stands no less truly in its legitimate and natural historical position, as related to the teachings of the chapters which precede and follow, than it does in its proper place in the progress of the testimony, which the author brings before his readers in proof of the great doctrine of his book.

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

Verse 45

Moses; referring to the predictions of Moses in respect to the Messiah, which they would not receive.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

5:45 {s} Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is [one] that accuseth you, [even] Moses, in whom ye trust.

(s) This denial does not set aside that which is said here, but corrects it, as if Christ said, the most severe accuser the Jews will have is Moses, not him.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

These critics’ most severe indictment would not come from Jesus but from Moses whom they so strongly professed to follow but did not. Moses never taught that the Law was an end in itself. He pointed the people to the coming Prophet and urged them to listen to Him (Deu 18:15-19). They had refused to do this. Moreover these Jews had broken the law that Moses had urged them to follow. Furthermore Jesus’ primary function was to save, not to judge (Joh 3:17). The Jews typically hoped that they could earn salvation by keeping the Law and believed that their relationship to it as Jews gave them a special advantage with God. They had set their hope on Moses in that respect. They foolishly hoped in Moses rather than in the One to whom Moses pointed. If they had paid attention to Moses, they would have felt conviction for their sin and would have been eager to receive the Savior. If they had really believed Moses, they would also have believed Jesus.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)