Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 15:22
If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin.
22. If I had not come and spoken unto them ] He had spoken as man had never spoken before (Joh 7:46), and His words sufficed to tell unprejudiced minds Who He was. Their hatred was a sin against light; if there had been no light, there would have been no sin. ‘To have sin’ is a phrase peculiar to S. John ( Joh 15:24, Joh 9:41, Joh 19:11; 1Jn 1:8).
no cloke ] Better (with the margin), no excuse: not only have they sin, but they have sin without excuse. The same word is rendered ‘cloke,’ 1Th 2:5. But the notion is not that of hiding, but of excusing what cannot be hid: ‘colour’ (Act 27:30) is a better rendering than ‘cloke.’ Comp. Psa 140:4.
for their sin ] Literally, concerning their sin: comp. Joh 16:8.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And spoken unto them – Declared unto them the will of God, and made known his requirements. Jesus had not less certainly shown by his own arguments that he was the Messiah than by his miracles. By both these kinds of proof their guilt was to be measured. See Joh 15:26. No small part of the gospel of John consists of arguments used by the Saviour to convince the Jews that he came from God. He here says if he had not used these arguments, and proved to them his divine mission, they had not had sin.
Had not had sin – This is evidently to be understood of the particular sin of persecuting and rejecting him. Of this he was speaking; and though, if he had not come, they would have been guilty of many other sins, yet of this, their great crowning sin, they would not have been guilty. We may understand this, then, as teaching:
1. That they would not have been guilty of this kind of sin. They would not have been chargeable with rejecting the signal grace of God if Jesus had not come and made an offer of mercy to them.
2. They would not have been guilty of the same degree of sin. The rejection of the Messiah was the crowning act of rebellion which brought down the vengeance of God, and led on their special national calamities. By way of eminence, therefore, this might be called the sin – the special sin of their age and nation. Compare Mat 23:34-39; Mat 27:25. And this shows us, what is so often taught in the Scriptures, that our guilt will be in proportion to the light that we possess and the mercies that we reject, Mat 11:20-24; Luk 12:47-48. If it was such a crime to reject the Saviour then, it is a crime now; and if the rejection of the Son of God brought such calamities on the Jewish nation, the same rejection will involve the sinner now in woe, and vengeance, and despair.
No cloak – No covering, no excuse. The proof has been so clear that they cannot plead ignorance; it has been so often presented that they cannot allege that they had no opportunity of knowing it. It is still so with all sinners.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Joh 15:22
If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin
Human responsibility
The peculiar sin of the Jews, the sin which aggravated above everything their former iniquities, was their rejection of Christ.
He had been very plainly described in the prophets, and they who waited for Him rejoiced to see Him. But because Jesus had not the outward garnishing of a prince, they shut their eyes against Him, and were not content till they had crucified Him. Now, the sin of the Jews is every day repeated by the Gentiles. As often as ye hear the Word preached and reject it, so often do you in effect once more pierce the hand and the side.
I. IN THE PREACHING OF THE GOSPEL, THERE IS TO MANS CONSCIENCE THE COMING OF OUR LORD. He that despiseth us despiseth not us, but Him that sent us. As for what I may say, as a man, it is but little that I should say it; but if I speak as the Lords ambassador, take heed that ye slight not the message. Have we not all of us grossly sinned against God, in the neglect that we have often put upon the means of grace? How often have you stayed away from the house of God, when God Himself was speaking there? And when ye have come up, how often ye have heard as though ye heard not. In all this you have despised God, and woe unto you, except ye repent, for tis a fearful thing to have despised the voice of Him that speaketh from heaven.
II. THE REJECTION OF THE GOSPEL AGGRAVATES MENS SIN. Now, understand, we do not increase our condemnation by going to the house of God; we are far more likely to increase it by stopping away; for in stopping away there is a double rejection of Christ; you reject Him even with the outward mind, as well as with the inward spirit. Your sin is not aggravated merely by the hearing of the gospel, but by the wilful and wicked rejection of it when it is heard. Because the man who does this
1. Gets a new sin. Bring me a wild savage who has never listened to the Word. That man may have every sin in the catalogue of guilt except one; but that one I am sure he has not. He has not the sin of rejecting the gospel when it is preached to him. But you, when you hear the gospel, if you have rejected it, you have added a fresh iniquity to all others. He that believeth not is condemned already, etc. If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, etc. Woe unto thee, Chorazin! etc. To reject Christ destroys a man hopelessly. The murderer, the thief, the drunkard, may yet enter the kingdom of heaven, if, repenting of his sins, he will lay hold on the cross of Christ; but with these sins, a man is inevitably lost, if he believeth not on Christ. Consider what an awful sin this is. There is murder in this; for if the man on the scaffold rejects a pardon, does he not murder himself? There is pride in this; for you reject Christ, because your proud hearts have turned you aside. There is high treason in this; for you reject a king.
2. He aggravates all the rest. You cannot sin so cheap as other people, you, who have had the gospel. He who sins ignorantly hath some little excuse; but he who sins against light and knowledge sins presumptuously; and under the law there was no atonement for this.
III. THE PREACHING OF THE GOSPEL TAKES AWAY ALL EXCUSE FROM THOSE WHO HEAR IT AND REJECT IT. Now have they no cloke for their sin. A cloak is a very poor covering for sin, when there is an all-seeing eye to look through it. In the great day of the tempest of Gods wrath a cloak will be a very poor shelter; but still man is always fond of a cloak. And so it is with you; you will gather, if you can, an excuse for your sin, and when conscience pricks you, you seek to heal the wound with an excuse. And even in the day of judgment, although a cloak will be a sorry covering, yet it will be better than nothing at all. But now ye have no cloke for your sin. The traveller is left in the rain without his covering, exposed to the tempest without that garment which once did shelter him. Notice how the preaching of the gospel takes away all cloaks for sin.
1. One man might get up and say, I did not know I was doing wrong when I committed such and such an iniquity. Now, that you cannot say. God has by His law told you solemnly what is wrong. If the Mahommedan commits lust, I doubt not his conscience doth prick him, but his sacred books give him liberty. But you profess to believe your Bibles, and therefore when you sin, you do wilfully violate a well-known law.
2. Again you might say, When I sinned, I did not know how great would be the punishment. Of this also, by the gospel, you are left without excuse; for did not Jesus Christ tell you, that those who will not have Him shall be cast into outer darkness?
3. But some of you may say, Ah, I heard the gospel, and I knew that I was doing wrong, but I did not know what I must do to be saved. Is there one among you who can urge such an excuse as this? Believe and live is preached every day in your hearing.
4. I can hear another say, I heard the gospel preached, but I never had a good example set me. Some of you may say that, and it would be partially true; but there are others of you, concerning whom this would be a lying excuse. Ah! man; you have been very fond of speaking of the inconsistencies of Christians. But there was one Christian whom you knew, and whose character you were compelled to admire. It was your mother. That has always been the one difficulty with you up to this day. You could have rejected the gospel very easily, but your mothers example stood before you, and you could not overcome that.
5. But others of you can say that you had no such mother; your first school was the street, and the first example you ever had was that of a swearing father. Recollect, there is one perfect example–Christ.
6. One more excuse is this: I had many advantages, but they were never sent home to my conscience so that I felt them. Now, there are very few of you here who can say that. No, you have not always been unmoved by the gospel; you have grown old now, and it takes a deal to stir you, but it was not always so.
IV. I have now as it were to PRONOUNCE THE SENTENCE OF CONDEMNATION. For those who live and die rejecting Christ there is a most fearful doom. They shall perish with an utter destruction. There are degrees of punishment; but the highest degree is given to the man who rejects Christ. The liar and the whoremonger, and drunkards shall have their portion–whom do you suppose with?–with unbelievers; as if hell was made first of all for unbelievers. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Cloaks for sin: or excuses removed
No excuse for sin? That is a strange statement. Excuses have been one of the specialties of each sinners stock-in-trade from Eden. These cloaks for sin are always on hand. And yet Christ declares of those who wickedly and presumptuously reject the offered pardon and guidance, that they have no good excuse, no cloak for their sin. But you say, I I have a valid excuse for not being a Christian
I. THE HYPOCRISIES AND WRONG-DOINGS OF CHURCH MEMBERS.
1. I admit that some rogues are hiding their wolfish hearts under the deceptive wool of churchly professions. As Jacob, by putting hair upon himself and thus professing to be Esau, secured a blessing from blind Isaac, so some bad men have secured credit and confidence by stealing the livery of heaven to serve the devil in. One Sunday morning a dressmaker told her little niece to put on her things and take a bundle of dress goods under her shawl to the house of one of her patrons, remarking, Nobody will see it. The child replied, But, Aunty, is it not Sunday under my shawl? There are some professors to whom church membership is only a shawl to cover up sin. Such an empty profession affords no cloak for sin.
2. You say then, I believe in a man living up to what he professes! I answer, I believe in a mans daring to profess what he believes. The outward and inward life should fit both ways. Do not think your strange eagerness to point out stains on Christian garments arises from pure love of truth and righteousness. Look down into your heart and ask, Why do I so readily hear and so quickly believe and so promptly circulate, without investigation, reports against professing Christians (Act 8:58)? Besides, Christians never profess perfection in conduct, but only in love, with sincere though imperfect efforts toward goodness.
II. But another says, I have a real excuse–A GOOD MORAL LIFE IS A CHRISTIAN LIFE. I gave my old overcoat the other day to a poor man, and I give away to the poor more than anybody knows. Let it be remembered that Dorcas was saved because she was a disciple. She did not hold up the garments she had made for the poor to cover up the sin of disobeying and rejecting Christ–indeed, she did not exhibit her charity at all; but those to whom she gave them praised her and not her own lips. This effort to cloak our sins is only a repetition of Naamans effort to hide and heal his leprosy by giving away changes of raiment instead of obeying God in His command.
III. Some of you are wrapping yourself in another cloak, which you think is fireproof asbestos–GOD IS TOO MERCIFUL TO PUNISH ME. I dont believe as you do about future punishment. But the laws of the world assert that there must be punishment or atonement for sin, as well as the Old and New Testaments. But questions about endless punishment cannot fairly be made excuses for anyone refusing to accept personal salvation, as the only condition of conversion in the matter of belief is, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved. I dont believe is no cloak for sin when God challenges you to test religion. Come and see.
IV. Another wrap is, I AM TRYING TO BE A CHRISTIAN IN A QUIET WAY. I dont believe in talking about it. As well might our soldiers have said in the late war, We are trying to be loyal, but we dont think that the order to wear blue uniforms and carry the stars and stripes and organize into regiments is essential.
V. Another wraps a cloak of mingled humility and pride over his sin as he says, IM NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO BE A CHRISTIAN. Im very conscientious and I couldnt be a Christian without being a perfect one. Hear that sick man saying, Im not well enough yet to send for the Great Physician.
VI. Or do you say, I TRIED THIS THING ONCE AND FAILED? As well say, I tried to wear an overcoat but I didnt have it made carefully and it came to pieces in a little while, and so Ill never try to wear another, however cold the winds may blow. Throw away that shivering cloak of past failures as an excuse for sin and have another robe made more thoroughly than your first–the robe of Christs righteousness.
VII. Another cloak is, I FEAR I SHOULD FAIL AND NOT LIVE UP TO MY PROFESSION. I have very unfavourable surroundings and a peculiar temperament. Exchange that miserable cloak for the sword of Divine help and defence and the whole armour of God (Eph 6:11). As to unfavourable surroundings, there were saints in Caesars household, and also in the households of Ahab, Pharaoh, and other famous foes of God. Abraham reared his altar in the very midst of idolaters.
VIII. Or do you frankly say, I COULDNT BE A CHRISTIAN AND CONTINUE IN MY BUSINESS, and I cant give that up, for a man must live? Mark you, when every man gives an account of himself to God, church records will never appear in evidence. What is wrong is wrong, whether a mans name is on the church book or not, and it is simply ridiculous to suppose you have a cloak for sin that will wash, because you can say, My name is not on the church book (Jam 5:2).
IX. Or do you wave that cloak for sin aloft?–I WANT TO HAVE FUN AND FREEDOM A LITTLE LONGER. Only use not liberty as a cloak of maliciousness (1Pe 2:16). Joseph, when tempted by the wife of Potiphar, left the outer robs she had seized upon in her hand and fled, saying, How can! do this great wickedness and sin against God?
X. Or do you offer the excuse, CANT AFFORD TO BE A CHRISTIAN? The church of Elijah and John the Baptist, with their rough camels hair coats, and of the widow who gave the two mites, is surely a place for the poorest. Think less of pews and pennies and appearance and more of the penitence and the inward adorning of the hearts.
XI. Or do you say by way of excuse, IM TOO BUSY TO THINK OF RELIGIOUS MATTERS? The care of the body is about all I can attend to just now. That was Dives mistake. He was so busy in robing himself and family in purple and fine linen that he left his soul in rags and at last brought himself to hells robe of fire.
XII. OTHER EXCUSES
1. Too old. He is able to save unto the uttermost.
2. Too young? As Samuel wore the ephod of a priest at three years of age, so in early life any child may wear the robe of righteousness.
3. Dont feel enough? When you have feeling the tempter will suggest the opposite excuse, You feel too much excitement. Between these two halves of his shears he is striving to cut in twain your offered robe of righteousness.
Conclusion:
1. What comedies are these excuses! To be frank and honest, most are mere quibbling, dilatory motions, talking against time. Such shallow excuses for absence from a business engagement would not be accepted–not even offered, and instead of providing a cloak for our sin, weave another scarlet robe of mockery for the Crucified (Mat 27:28). When Joseph was called before Pharaoh, he changed his raiment Gen 41:14). We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ. Are you willing to appear there with no change of raiment, wrapped in these ragged excuses? Thank God that a change of raiment, a wedding garment is provided–a real cloak for sin (Isa 61:10). With this robe of Christs righteousness offered to us a real cloak to cover sin, shall we not, like the returning prodigal, throw away our ragged excuses and accede to that plan of Gods infinite love, bring forth the best robe and put it on him. As Peter threw off his outer robe when he plunged into the sea, that he might the quicker swim to Christ who stood upon the shore; as Lazarus was loosed from the grave clothes, so let us, lay aside every weight and the cloaks of excuse for sin that keep us back from God and Heaven, and let us first hasten to Christ, and run with patience the race that is set before us. As Lord Raleigh gallantly threw his beautiful robe upon the muddy ground for Queen Elizabeth to walk upon, so let us throw all our excusing cloaks of at the feet of Jesus and take instead Christs cloaks of zeal (Isa 59:17). (W. F. Crafts.)
The pleas of gospel impenitents examined and refuted
Gospel impenitents who finally reject Christ have no cloak for their sin
I. FROM ANY PLEAS OR PRENTENCES THEY CAN MAKE RELATING TO GOD THEIR MAKER. They cannot plead
1. That they are not invited to believe in Christ for salvation. The gospel invitation runs in indefinite terms, Whosoever will, let him come.
2. That they are not elected. It is not the undiscovered decree, but the revealed precept, that is our rule, according to which we are to conduct ourselves, and by which we shall finally be judged (Deu 29:29)
3. That God uses any compulsion, or exerts any positive influence, to keep them in unbelief and harden them in sin (Jam 1:13).
4. That there is any deficiency of suitable means on Gods part, or that He does not afford them necessary external helps for their believing in Christ Isa 5:4). He has given men the Bible, the Church, pastors and teachers, sabbaths, etc.
5. That there is a want of internal assistances, and a defect of necessary influences from God to make the means effectual. The fact is
(1) Sinners do not realise what God tells them of the necessity of His grace, and of their own impotency, but are apt vainly to magnify their own abilities, and to think every man of himself more highly than he ought to think.
(2) Sinners do not pray to God for His Spirit as they ought, although they confess their own impotency.
(3) Sinners under the gospel, whether they pray for the Spirit or not, do actually experience those assistances of common grace, which are a full vindication of God, and leave them without all excuse. The Spirit of God is often at work in their consciences. He convinces them of sin, admonishes them of duty, and stirs up their affections, desires, fears, and hopes. But here is the misery and folly of sinners: they do always resist and vex the Holy Ghost.
II. FROM ANY PLEAS THEY CAN MAKE REFERRING TO SATAN, AND AN EVIL WORLD, THEIR SPIRITUAL ADVERSARIES. They suffer no violence from external causes, nor will any impediments they met with in the way of duty, afford them a plea sufficient to justify their not repenting and receiving Christ. What or who should compel the sinner to refuse Christ? They may persuade and entice, but they cannot force. They may indeed use a violence upon the body, and hinder that from external duties; but they cannot reach the soul, to hinder repentance toward God, and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ (Jam 4:7). It is the fault and folly of sinners, they do not resist the devil. And then, if Satan has gained a power over any, which seems almost irresistible (2Ti 2:26), they have brought this upon themselves (Psa 81:11-12).
III. IT REMAINS, THEREFORE, THAT SIINNERS TAKE ALL THE BLAME OF THEIR SIN AND RUIN TO THEMSELVES (Jam 1:14; Joh 3:19). Gospel impenitents
1. Neglect to use, or trifle in using, those means which are in their own power, and which they might probably hope God would bless, in order to their salvation (Joh 6:27; Luk 13:24; Php 2:12).
2. Resist the methods of grace, which the blessed God uses with them, and quench the Holy Spirit striving in them (Isa 63:10; Act 7:51).
3. Do actually commit those sins, which, as they have a natural tendency to hinder their conversion, so they provoke God to withhold His special grace from them (Zec 7:11-12; Eze 24:13).
4. Do all this in a free and voluntary manner, and upon motives which, at the time, appear to them founded in reason.
Conclusion: Have gospel impenitents no cloak for their sin?
1. Hence we may learn the justice of God in the eternal condemnation of such in a future state.
2. Hence the awfulness of our standing under the gospel, and the miserable delusion of such as trust to mere privileges and externals in religion.
3. Hence the folly of delay in the grand affair of conversion.
4. If gospel impenitents are inexusable, who perish in their own iniquity; how much more such sinners as are voluntarily instrumental to the sin and ruin of others!
5. What abundant reason have they to admire the grace of God toward them, who after a course of great sin, under gospel light, have been converted! (T. Foxcroft.)
They hated Me without a cause
Hatred without cause
It is usually understood that the quotation is Psa 35:19. No being was ever more lovely than the Saviour; it would seem almost impossible not to have affection for Him. And yet, loveable as He was, from His first moment to the cross, save the temporary lull while He was a child, it seemed as if all men sought to destroy Him. In different ways that hatred displayed itself, in overt deeds, in words of slander, or in looks of contempt. At other times that hatred dwelt in their thoughts, and they thought within themselves, This man blasphemeth. All grades of men hated Him. Most men have to meet with some opposition; but then it is frequently a class opposition. The demagogue must expect to be despised by the rich, and he who labours for the aristocracy of course meets with the contempt of the many. But here was a man who walked among the people, who loved them, who spoke to the rich and poor as though they were on one level in His blessed sight; and yet all classes conspired to hate Him.
I. LET US JUSTIFY WHAT THE SAVIOUR SAID.
1. In Christs person there was an absence of almost everything which excites hatred between man and man.
(1) There was no great rank in Christ to excite envy. Let a man be ever so good, if he be at all lifted above his fellow creatures the many often speak against him. Now, Christ had none of the outward circumstances of rank. Instead of being lifted above men, He did, in some sense, seem to be below them, for foxes had holes, etc.
(2) Many persons envy those who exercise rule or government over them. If authorities were changed every month, in some countries there would be revolutions as much under one as under another. But this did not operate in Christs case: He did not assume sway over the multitude. In fact, instead of binding laws upon them which were severe, He loosened the rigidity of their system.
(3) Some men make others dislike them because they are proud. Somehow or other the human mind cannot bear pride; we always kick against it. But there was nothing of that in our Saviour. How humble He was! He would wash His disciples feet.
(4) There are others that you cannot help disliking, because they are so snappish, and waspish, and angry. But you cannot find that Christ spake one angry word, save those words of holy wrath against Pharasaic pride. Such a loving, kind, gentle spirit, one would have thought would have gone through the world as easy as possible.
(5) Another set you can scarcely help disliking–selfish people. But whatever Christ did, He did for others. He saved others; Himself He did not save. Self-sacrifice was the life of Christ; but He did it with such an ease that it seemed no sacrifice.
(6) Another sort of people there are that I do not like, viz. the hypocritical. But there never was a more unvarnished man than Christ. Among all the slanders men brought against Christ they never disputed His sincerity.
2. Was there anything in Christs errand which could make people hate Him? He came
(1) To explain mysteries, to tell them what was meant by the sacrificial lamb. Should they have hated one who made dark things light.
(2) To reclaim the wanderer; and is there anything in that that should make men hate Christ?
(3) To heal the diseases of the body. Shall I hate the physician who goes about gratuitously healing all manner of diseases? Surely, He might well say, For which of the works do ye stone Me.
(4) To die, that sinners might not die? Ought I to hate the substitute who takes my sins and griefs upon Him, and carries my sorrows?
3. Was there anything in Christs doctrine that that should have made us hate Him?
(1) Take His preceptive doctrines. Did He not teach us to do to others as we would they should do to us?
(2) Was it the ethical part of His doctrines that men bated? He taught that rich and poor must stand on one level; He taught that His gospel was to be gloriously expansive. This, perhaps, was one principal reason of their hating Him; but surely there was no justifiable cause for their indignation in this.
II. MANS SIN, THAT HE SHOULD HAVE HATED THE SAVIOUR WITHOUT A CAUSE.
1. I will not tell you of mans adulteries, murders, wars, cruelties, and rebellions; if I want to tell you mans sin, I must tell you that man is a deicide–that he put to death his God, and slew his Saviour; and when I have told you that I have given you the essence of all sin. In every other case, when man has hated goodness, there have always been some extenuating circumstances. We never do see goodness in this world without alloy. But because the Saviour had no inconsistencies or infirmities, men were stripped of all their excuses for hating Him, and it came out that man naturally hates goodness, because he is so evil that he cannot but detest it.
2. And now let me appeal to every sinner, and ask him whether he ever had any cause for hating Christ. But someone says, I do not hate Him; if He were to come to my house I would love Him very much. But Christ lives next door to you, in the person of poor Betty there. Why dont you like Betty? She is one of Christs members, and Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these ye have done it unto Me. Dont you know a very holy man you cannot bear because he told you of your faults once? Ah! sir, if you loved Christ you would love His members. I must suppose you to be hostile to Christ, unless you love Him; for I know there are only two opinions of Him. You must either hate Him or love Him. Indifference with regard to Christ is a clear impossibility. A man might as well say, I am indifferent towards honesty.
3. And now, Christian men, I must preach at you. Sure ye have great reason to love Christ now, for ye once hated Him without a cause. Did ye ever treat a friend ill, and did not know it.
III. LESSONS:
1. If your Master was hated without a cause, do not you expect to get off very easily in this world.
2. Take care, if the world does hate you, that it hates you without a cause. (C. H.Spurgeon.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 22. But now they have no cloke for their sin.] They are without excuse. See the margin, and See Clarke on Joh 9:41. Christ had done such works as demonstrated him to be the Messiah – yet they rejected him: here lay their sin; and this sin, and the punishment to which it exposed them, still remain; for they still continue to reject the Lord that bought them.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
They had not had this particular sin, of not knowing him that sent me; or they had not had such degrees of sin as they now have; or they had had more to say in excuse, or for a cover for their sin. Ignorance of the will of God will not excuse sinners wholly, but it will excuse them in part. And this last seemeth to be the sense of the words by the latter part of the verse, because it is opposed to a having no cloak nor excuse for their sin. If Christ had not come in his incarnation, in his preaching the gospel, &c, they could not have been guilty of that hatred and malice which they showed against him, which was their greatest guilt; and they would have had this to say, Lord, we knew not what Christ was, as Mat 25:44; but now, saith our Saviour, they have no cloak, no colour, no pretence; I am come, I have revealed my Fathers mind and will to them, yet they will not receive me; no, though I have done those works before them which no man ever did, nor could do but by a Divine power.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
22-25. (See on Joh9:39-41).
If I had not come and spokenunto them, they had not had sincomparatively none; allother sins being light compared with the rejection of the Son of God.
now they have no cloak fortheir sinrather, “pretext.”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
If I had not come and spoken unto them,…. The ignorance of the Jews is represented as inexcusable, since Christ was come, and had preached unto them; if he had not come and told them that he was the Messiah, they might have pleaded an excuse for their ignorance of him, and his mission, and of the Father that sent him: but inasmuch as he was come in the flesh, and came to them his own; and came also a light into the world, carrying along with him evidence, conviction, and demonstration, of his being the Messiah; speaking such words as never man did; preaching with such authority as the Scribes and Pharisees did not; declaring in plain terms he was the Christ of God, and that if they did not believe him to be so, they would die in their sins; they could have no pretext to make for their ignorance and disbelief: if all this had not been done,
they had not had sin; or been guilty of the sin of unbelief, in the rejection of the Messiah; not that they would have been without sin in any sense, or without any kind of sin, but without this particular sin; at least they would have excused and wiped themselves clean, and would have looked like innocent and sinless persons, under all their ignorance and unbelief:
but now they have no cloak for their sin; they could not say, had he come to us, and told us that he was the Messiah, and given evidence of his being sent by the Father, we would have believed him, and received him as the Messiah; for he did do this, and so cut off all excuses and pretences from them.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
They had not had sin ( ). Conclusion of condition of second class without because context makes it clear ( ) without it (Robertson, Grammar, p. 1013). The imperfect active indicative with – instead of – (also in verse 24) as common in the LXX, and occurs in the papyri and the inscriptions and the Boeotian dialect.
Excuse (). Old word (1Th 2:5) either from , to show forth, or , to speak forth. Mere pretence, in John only here and verse 24.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Had sin [ ] . See on 9 41; 1Jo 1:8.
Cloke [] . From pro, before, in front of, and fhmi, to say or affirm. Hence something which is placed in front of the true cause of a thing, a pretext. Compare 1Th 2:5; Act 27:30. Pretext carries the same idea, Latin, proetextum, something woven in front, with a view to concealment or deception. Rev., excuse. Wyc, excusation. The A. V. follows Tyndale : nothing to cloke their sin withal. Latimer (” Sermons “) : “By such cloaked charity, when thou dost offend before Christ but once, thou hast offended twice herein.” The word appears in the low Latin cloca, a bell (compare the French cloche, and English clock), and the name was given to a horseman’s cloak because of its resemblance to a bell. The word palliate is from the Latin pallium, a cloak.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “If I had not come and spoken unto them,” (ei me althon kai elalesa autois) “Except I had come and spoken directly to them,” to His own Jewish people, about God His Father, Joh 1:11-12; Mat 23:37; Rom 1:16.
2) “They had not had sin:” (hamartian ouk eichosan) “They had not had sin, “the sin of which they were now so gravely guilty in refusing to receive or believe in and receive Him as their Savior, Joh 9:41. But now they are inexcusable, Rom 10:1-4.
3) “But now they have no cloak for their sin.” (nun de propsasin ouk echousin peri tes hamartias auton) “However now and hereafter they do not have a cloak, an excuse (a hiding) concerning their sin,” their sin of unbelief, or rejecting Him , as they had done, Joh 5:43; Joh 8:21; Joh 8:24; Joh 8:32; Joh 8:36; Joh 14:6; Rom 2:1.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
22. If I had not come. He had said that the Jews regarded the Gospel with hatred, because they did not know God. Lest any one should think that this tended to alleviate their guilt, he adds, that it is through malice that they are blind, just as if one were to shut his eyes, that he might not be compelled to see the light. For otherwise it might have been brought as an objection against Christ. “If they do not know thy Father, how comes it that thou dost not cure their ignorance? Why didst thou not at least make trial whether they were altogether incapable of being taught, or not?” He replies, that he has performed the duty of a good and faithful Teacher, but without success, because their malice would not suffer them to acquire soundness of mind. In the person of those men he intended to strike terror into all who reject the truth of God, when it is offered to them, or intentionally fight against it, when it is known. And though a dreadful vengeance awaits them, still Christ, in this passage, looks chiefly to his own disciples, to animate them by the confident and well-grounded expectation of victory, lest, at any time, they should yield to the malice of wicked men; for when we learn that such will be the issue, we may already triumph, as if we were in the midst of the battle.
They would not have sin. It may be thought that Christ intended by these words to say, that there is no other sin but unbelief; and there are some who think so. Augustine speaks more soberly, but he approaches to that opinion; for, since faith forgives and blots out all sins, he says, that the only sin that damns a man is unbelief. This is true, for unbelief not only hinders men from being delivered from the condemnation of death, but is the source and cause of all evils. But the whole of that reasoning is inapplicable to the present passage; for the word sin is not taken in a general sense, but as related to the subject which is now under consideration; as if Christ had said, that their ignorance is utterly inexcusable, because in his person they maliciously rejected God; just as if we were to pronounce a person to be innocent, just, and pure, when we wished merely to acquit him of a single crime of which he had been accused. Christ’s acquittal of them, therefore, is confined to one kind of sin, because it takes away from the Jews every pretense of ignorance in this sin, (87) of despising and hating the Gospel.
But there is still another question that arises: “Was not unbelief sufficient to condemn men before the coming of Christ?” There are fanatics who reason inconclusively from this passage, that all who died before the coming of Christ died without faith, and remained in a state of doubt and suspense till Christ manifested himself to them; as if there were not many passages of Scripture which testify that their conscience alone was sufficient to condemn them. Death, says Paul, reigned in the world even to Moses, (Rom 5:14.) And again he declares, that
they who have sinned without law shall perish without law, (Rom 2:12.)
What, then, does Christ mean? There is undoubtedly an admission made in these words, by which he means that the Jews have nothing more to offer in extenuation of their guilt, since they knowingly and willfully rejected the life which was offered to them. Thus the excuse which he makes for them does not free them from all blame, but only extenuates the heinousness of their crime, according to that saying, The servant, who knoweth the will of his master, and despiseth it, shall be severely punished ? (88) For it was not the intention of Christ here to promise pardon to any, but to hold his enemies convicted, who had obstinately rejected the grace of God, that it might be fully evident that they were unworthy of all pardon and mercy.
If I had not come and SPOKEN TO THEM. It ought to be observed, that he does not speak of his coming, as viewed by itself, but as connected with his doctrine, for they would not have been held guilty of so great a crime on account of his bodily presence alone, but the contempt of the doctrine made them utterly inexcusable.
(87) “ En ce peche.”
(88) The Author quotes, as he often does, from memory; but the passage stands thus:
“
That servant, who knew his master’s will, and did not make himself ready, nor did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes, (Luk 12:47.)
—
Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(22) If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin.In this and the following verses (Joh. 15:22-25) our Lord shows the sinfulness of the worlds hatred, because it was in the face of His revelation to them by both word (Joh. 15:22) and work (Joh. 15:24). Apart from this revelation, their sin would have belonged to the times of ignorance, which God overlooked (Act. 17:30-31). It would have been the negative evil of men who know not. It was now the positive evil of men who, knowing the truth, wilfully reject it.
But now they have no cloke for their sin.Better, as in the margin, they have no excuse for their sin. The Greek phrase occurs only here in the New Testament. The word cloke as used with sin is familiar to us from the exhortation in the Book of Common Prayer. The idea is rather to cover up, to hide as with a garment, so that they may not be seen; whereas here the idea is of excuse for manifest sin.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
22. If There is a supposable case in which they would be without condemnation. If they had no means or power to know, if I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had responsible sin. Their action might have been wrong, but with no means or power to do right instead of wrong, it is not responsible wrong; it could not have incurred just condemnation or penalty. The impossibility in the intellect to know the truth is a cloak, an excuse, for not knowing the truth. The incapacity in the will to do right, arising from a necessary controlling motive force, is a cloak or an excuse for not doing right, and for doing wrong. If that wrong doing be properly called a sin, it is not a responsible sin.
And this is a universal law of a just divine administration. Where there is from the beginning no power for right there can be no guilt for wrong. Were the posterity of Adam born into existence without the means to know the truth, without the volitional power to will the right, or without any personal fault or forfeiture by their own free act, they could not have been held responsible or justly punishable. If Christ had not come, if no sufficient light had been shed, and no sufficient power imparted, there could have been no responsible sin, guilt, or penalty. Hence it was not until a Saviour was promised that Adam was spared and he begat a son. The future Saviour was the previous condition of the continuance of the race. Without that future Saviour there is no proof but that the fulness of the penalty of death would have been suffered in the person of guilty Adam alone, no posterity of his succeeding.
But now Inasmuch as I have come and have spoken the truth, affording them the means of knowing, willing, and doing.
They have no cloak No covering, no justification, no palliation; but a full exposure to the utmost penalty for their excuseless sin. They knew their duty and they did it not.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
“If I had not come and spoken to them, they had not had sin. But now they have no excuse for their sin.”
This is the crux of the matter. Jesus has come as a light into the world (Joh 3:16-21; Joh 8:12). His words have shone like a searchlight piercing into men’s innermost being (compare Joh 7:7). But men shy from the light, for it reveals what they are. They love darkness rather than light because by coming to the light what they do is shown to be evil in God’s eyes (Joh 3:19). Previously such men had been living in a self-satisfied state, not fully aware of the inadequacy of what they believed. They were not aware of how sinful they were. But by His words Jesus has brought home to them that inadequacy, undermining much of what they cherished, especially their sense of their own spiritual achievements. Thus they no longer have any excuse, and if they are unwilling to admit it, and change, they will hate Him for what He has done. It is always difficult to admit that we have been wrong and to begin again.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The hatred of the world and the testimony of the Spirit:
v. 22. If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin; but now they have no cloak for their sin.
v. 23. He that hateth Me hateth My Father also.
v. 24. If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin; but now have they both seen and hated both Me and My Father.
v. 25. But this cometh to pass that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their Law, They hated Me without a cause.
v. 26. But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the spirit of Truth, which proceedeth from the Father, He shall testify of Me.
v. 27. And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with Me from the beginning. The position of the unbelieving Jews at the time of Jesus was much like that of Paul, Rom 7:7. If Jesus had not come and revealed Himself to the world as the Messiah, if He had not taught and preached as He did, then their great sin, unbelief, would not have been committed. After the revelation of Christ, after the open preaching of the Gospel before the world, there is no longer any excuse for unbelief. It is here laid bare as the sin of sins, for Christ earned and offered full atonement for all sins, and in rejecting Him they also rejected His atonement, whereby their sins were returned to them with their full damnation. And in hating Jesus they also hated the Father, thus loading upon themselves a still greater measure of guilt. That is the climax of enmity toward God, that the world despises and rejects the love of God, the grace of God in Christ, that the children of unbelief hate that God who offers them mercy and peace. The situation is perfectly plain. Jesus had not only preached of the Father time and again, but He had revealed Him also through His works, through His miracles. They had rejected this revelation in their unbelief. Seeing the Father in the person of the Son, they had hated Christ and therefore also the Father, with whom He is One. There is no excuse for the world, but there is some measure of comfort for the disciples in the fact that the world’s hatred has been prophesied, Psa 69:4. Without a just cause, from a mere spirit of contrariness, the world hated Christ, and today hates the Christians. Their rejection of Him, of His Word, and of His followers, is inexcusable.
But over against all this hatred and enmity of the world stands the comforting promise of Christ concerning the Holy Spirit and His testimony. The Comforter, the Helper, the Guide, whom He has promised them, will surely come. Christ will send Him from the Father, for such is His power as the exalted Son of God. He is the Spirit of Truth; the teaching of the eternal Gospel and the revealing of its glory and beauties to the hearts of the believers is His principal work. He is sent by the Son, but proceeds also from the Father. There is the most wonderful intimacy between the various persons of the Godhead. To testify of Jesus the Savior: that is the office of the Spirit; for that reason He bears the name Spirit of Truth. “I shall give you, says Christ, the Spirit that will make you sure and certain of the truth, that ye no longer dare doubt with regard to this or that concerning your salvation, but may be sure of the matter and be judges, and even judge all other doctrine. ” Note how strongly the Trinity of the Godhead is here brought out: Jesus, the speaker, as one person, will send the Comforter from the Father, a person distinct from Himself; and this Comforter, in turn, is distinguished from the Father and from the Son. With the aid of this Comforter and Helper the disciples would be able to witness, to testify concerning the redemption of mankind through the work of Christ. And their testimony should have all the greater weight and value because they had been with the Lord from the beginning; they could speak of what they had seen and heard. With such a wonderful witness from on high to support and strengthen them, there was no reason why the disciples should not perform their work with all energy and power, even as this attitude should characterize their work today. “There is therefore no other manner or way to comfort, strengthen, and instruct the consciences, and to protect and defend one’s self, than by this preaching and testimony of the Holy Ghost. That is the Word of God, preached in the world through the Holy Ghost, known also to the children, which also the portals of hell shall not overthrow.”
Summary. Jesus tells His disciples the Parable of the Vine and the Branches with its application, explains and urges the commandment of brotherly love, and speaks of the hatred of the world against the disciples of Christ.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Joh 15:22. If I had not come and spoken, &c. “The ignorance of the Jews in particular will not however excuse them, (see the last note,) since they have had more than sufficient means of information. If I had not appeared in person among them, agreeablyto their own prophesies, and proved my divine mission by arguments which put it beyond all reasonable doubt, they would not have been so much to blame for rejecting the gospel: they had not had sin; that is, their sin would have been comparatively much less than it now is: (see Joh 9:41.) But now that all the things foretold by Moses and the prophets are fulfilled in me; now that my gospel is every wayworthy of God, and that my mission from my Father issufficiently proved by my miracles, they have no plea whatever, [ ], to palliate or excuse their unbelief.”
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Joh 15:22-24 . Sinfulness , not of this non-acquaintance with God (Ebrard, Ewald, Godet), but, as Joh 15:23-25 show, of this hatred of the name of Jesus, in respect of which they are inexcusable, since He has come and spoken to them (Joh 15:22-23 ), and done before their eyes His Messianic works (miracles), Joh 15:24 .
. ] For their hatred of my name would then be excusable , because, without my appearance and discourses, the true knowledge of Him who sent me and the non-acquaintance with whom is in truth the ground of their hatred (Joh 15:21 ) would have remained inaccessible to them. My appearance and discourses ought to have opened their eyes, and brought them to the knowledge of Him who sent me; but since this has not taken place, their hatred against me, which flows from their non-acquaintance with Him who sent me, is inexcusable; it is the hatred of hardened blindness before God’s revelation of Himself in my advent and discourses.
The moment of the protasis lies in and . together (not merely in the latter); is the Messianic , correlative to the preceding . . The , however, referable to the , [168] must not be referred merely to unbelief , which does not correspond to the context in Joh 15:19 ; Joh 15:21 ; Joh 15:23-25 (in answer to Bengel, Luthardt, Lange, Hengstenberg, and several others). The words . , Joh 9:41 , were spoken of unbelief .
The non-occurrence of with is as in Joh 8:39 .
] But thus , since I have appeared and have spoken to them .
, . . .] In that supposed case they would have no sin , so far, namely, as their hatred would be only an excusable peccatum ignorantiae; but as the matter stands, they have no pretext in respect of their sin (to which they are subject through their hatred); they can allege nothing by way of escape . , to have evasions, exculpations , only here in N. T., very frequently in the classics; Dem. 526. 15; Plat. Pol . v. p. 469 C; Xen. Cyr . iii. 1. 27. Antithesis: , Deu 26:2 , 635. 24. Euth. Zigabenus well remarks: .
Joh 15:23 . And how exceedingly great is this sin! Comp. v. 23.
Joh 15:24 , parallel to Joh 15:22 , as there from the discourses, which the unbelieving have heard , so here similarly from that which they have seen , revealing their guilt.
] that is, according to their nature and appearance, divine works, Joh 5:36 , Joh 9:3-4 , Joh 10:37 , Joh 14:10 , et al.
. . .] But thus ( , as in Joh 15:22 ), they have actually seen (as Joh 6:36 ), and yet hated both me and my Father . Not merely ., but also already ., is connected with , . . . ; in the works they have seen Christ (Joh 10:25 ) and the Father (Joh 14:10 ); for both have revealed themselves in them, which, indeed, the unbelieving have seen only as an external sensuous occurrence, not with the inward understanding, giving significance to the outward ; not with the eye of spiritual knowledge and inward being, Joh 6:26 .
[168] Hence, too, on the question as to the salvation of the heathen, to whom Christ has not been preached, nothing is to be gathered from the present passage; and one may now, with Augustine, decide in favour of mitiores poenas for them, or, in confirmation of their condemnation, propose, with Melanchthon, to extend the words of Christ to the protevangelium in paradise, and bring in at the same time the natural moral law, Rom 2 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
DISCOURSE: 1699
THE GREAT SIN OF REJECTING CHRIST
Joh 15:22. If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.
EVERY sin is committed against an infinitely good and gracious God: yet the stoical doctrine of the equality of sins is not therefore true. Guilt may be aggravated or diminished by a variety of circumstances. Hence our Lord denounced peculiar woe against Chorazin and Bethsaida. To the same effect he speaks concerning the Jews in the text.
I.
How greatly aggravated the sin of the Jews was in rejecting Christ
Sin admits of so many degrees of malignity, that one may be considered as no sin in comparison of another; not that any man can be absolutely without sin [Note: 1Jn 1:8.], nor is any man really excusable in the sight of God [Note: Rom 1:19-21.]; but comparatively some may be said to have no sin [Note: Joh 9:41.]. Thus it was with those of whom our Lord spake. If he had not come to them, they might have pleaded a want of the necessary means of salvation: but our Lords preaching rendered them wholly inexcusable. They could not plead any want of
Instruction
[Our Lord often spake in parables. This was the means of inflicting judicial blindness on the proud [Note: Luk 8:10.]; but it was well calculated for the instruction of the humble. Besides, he delivered many things in the simplest terms.]
Evidence
[Our Lord wrought many and stupendous miracles. He performed them by a touch, a word, and even at a distance. His miracles were as benevolent as they were open and undeniable. Those who wished to discredit them, imputed them to the agency of Satan. Our Lord mentions them as aggravating the guilt of those who rejected him [Note: ver. 24.].]
Warning
[There was no want of fidelity on our Lords part. He warned the people in the plainest and most awful manner [Note: Joh 8:21; Joh 8:24.].]
Encouragement
[Every one that thirsted for his benefits was invited by him [Note: Rev 22:17.]. He offered to give spiritual life to all who would come to him [Note: Joh 7:37-38.]. He promised also to crown them with eternal happiness and glory [Note: Joh 12:26.].]
If they were thus without excuse, it becomes us to consider,
II.
How much more inexcusable we are if we reject him
Christ has come and preached to us by his word and ministers, and many reject him after the example of the unbelieving Jews. Though we be not avowed infidels, we practically reject Christ, when we do not receive him for all the ends and purposes for which he was sent; and if we do so, our guilt is peculiarly aggravated.
We have not any Jewish prejudices to encounter
[The Jews had received their law from God; they had been accustomed to expect a temporal Messiah, yet they saw a man altogether destitute and despised, and beheld the law of Moses superseded by a new religion. His works indeed should have obviated all these difficulties: but we have not these difficulties to contend with. We profess that the Gospel is from God. We profess that Christs kingdom is of a spiritual nature. We profess that his cross is his own glory, and his Churchs hope.]
We see the whole design of God unfolded
[The Jews had only partial and contracted views: they could not reconcile many seeming contrarieties. The Disciples, even after Christs resurrection, were at a loss to account for the occurrences they had seen [Note: Luk 24:21.]. But we behold the counsels of God completed; the various prophecies are all accomplished; the characters and offices of Christ are opened; the great ends of his incarnation and death are effected; the glory of God, as shining in his face, is fully displayed.]
We have witnessed the success of the Gospel
[Those to whom our Lord spake, saw his ministry despised: the great and learned of their nation rejected him. His followers were only a few, and those of the lowest class: but we have seen the grain of mustard become a large tree: the Gospel has spread to the remotest corners of the earth; it has triumphed over the prejudices and passions, the interests and powers, of the world; its influence is yet daily exhibited before our eyes.]
How heinous then must be our guilt if we reject him! Surely our sin must be of a crimson or a scarlet die.
Address
1.
Those who make excuses for their neglect of Christ
[With what foolish and weak excuses do men deceive themselves [Note: We may notice a few: I have not time. For what is time given?I am not able. Do you do what you can?It is time enough yet. Shall you certainly live, and have the grace you now slight offered you again?I have the majority on my side. Are you not then in the broad road? and will associates mitigate your pain?Professors are hypocrites. Is that a reason you should not be sincere?God is merciful. To whom? the impenitent?]! Surely God will not be deceived by these. What cloak for your sin will you find when he shall call you to account? Will you plead a want of instruction, evidence, warning, or encouragement? Know that in that day you will be speechless [Note: Mat 22:12.]. Your love of sin and hatred of the light are the true causes of your rejecting Christ [Note: Joh 5:40.], and this will be the ground of a more aggravated condemnation [Note: Joh 3:19.].]
2.
Those who desire to attain the saving knowledge of him
[It is a great mercy to have such a desire formed in the heart; but beware of cloking or extenuating your sin. Remember that awful yet encouraging declaration [Note: Pro 28:13.]Confess your sin with all its aggravations. There is a virtue in the blood of Jesus to cleanse you from it all [Note: 1Jn 1:7.].]
Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)
22 If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.
Ver. 22. If I had not come, &c. ] Here our Saviour shows that their ignorance was affected, as theirs is with us. Qui ut liberius peccent, libenter ignorant, they shut the windows lest the light should come in. (Bernard.) Sic fit, ubi homines maiorem vitae partem in tenebris agunt, ut novissime solem quasi supervacuum fastidiant. (Seneca, Epist.) This is the ignorance to which mercy is denied, Isa 27:11 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
22. ] The sinfulness of this hate . See ch. Joh 9:41 and note.
, discoursed, generally: not, acquainted them with their sin. The sin spoken of is, not the generally sinful state of the world, nor the sin of unbelief in Christ, which they of course could not have committed, had He never come: but the sin of hatred to Him and His , which might have been excused otherwise, but now that He had come and discoursed with them, had no excuse, since He had plainly shewn them the proofs of his mission from the Father.
Euthym [219] says well, .
[219] Euthymius Zigabenus, 1116
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Joh 15:22 . “If I had not come and spoken to them,” as the revealer of the Father, “they would not have sin,” they would still be ignorant of the Father, but would not have incurred the guilt which attaches to ignorance maintained in the presence of light. is Johannine, see Joh 15:24 , Joh 19:11 ; 1Jn 1:8 . . “But now,” as I have come, “they have no excuse for,” etc., , cf. Psa 140:4 : “Incline not my heart ”.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
had . . . come, &c. = came and spake.
had not had sin = would not have (imperf.) sin, i.e. in rejecting Him as the Messiah. Figure of speech Heterasis. App-6. sin. App-128.
now. Greek. nun. See Joh 12:27.
no = not (App-105) any.
cloke = excuse. Greek. prophasis. Occurs seven times, rendered “pretence” in Mat 23:14. Mar 12:40. Php 1:1, Php 1:18; “shew”, Luk 20:47; ‘ colour”, Act 27:30, and “cloke”, here and 1Th 2:5.
for = concerning. Greek. peri. App-104.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
22.] The sinfulness of this hate. See ch. Joh 9:41 and note.
, discoursed, generally: not, acquainted them with their sin. The sin spoken of is, not the generally sinful state of the world,-nor the sin of unbelief in Christ, which they of course could not have committed, had He never come: but the sin of hatred to Him and His, which might have been excused otherwise, but now that He had come and discoursed with them, had no excuse, since He had plainly shewn them the proofs of his mission from the Father.
Euthym[219] says well, .
[219] Euthymius Zigabenus, 1116
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Joh 15:22. ) this sin, viz. the sin of unbelief, conjoined with hatred of Me.-, not) Now they have sin, whilst they have no excuse () for it. It would have been better for them, if they had not seen at all (Joh 15:24).
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Joh 15:22
Joh 15:22
If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin:-[Here are three principles involved: (1) The degree of sin is determined by the measure of our opportunities. They who are in darkness cannot be blamed for not seeing unless they are responsible for being in the darkness. Those who have had no light from heaven will be lightly judged for breaking laws for which they could have no knowledge. (2) Increased opportunities bring the consciousness of sin. A ray from the noonday sun in the parlor reveals, but does not create, the cobweb. It was there before. So, too, the motions of sin in the soul are imperfectly recognized until the spiritual light shines in, but in that light sin is seen to be sin, and the conscience is alive to it. Apart from the law sin is dead. And I was alive apart from the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. (Rom 7:8-9). So the knowledge of Christ, filling the soul with light, brings sin into full view and takes away all excuse for continuance therein. (3) The sin of all sins is the rejection of Christ. He who refuses him deliberately chooses sin. He not only willfully retains all past sins, but he adds to them the sin of rejecting Christs offer of mercy as embodied in the gospel.]
but now they have no excuse for their sin.-[There is no excuse for it, no shelter, no covering, nothing that can extenuate sin. Ignorance might be an excuse, but when the offer of pardon is made and refused, ignorance cannot be pleaded. Christs offer takes away every excuse and leaves the sinner at the judgment day to the sentence of condemnation.] It is frequently said that all were sinners and Jesus came to redeem them from sin. The language here must mean: If Jesus had not come as a messenger from God and spoken the words to them, they would not have been guilty of the sin of rejecting the one sent of God. But since he came and did these works of God, there is no cloak with which to hide themselves.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
sin
Sin. (See Scofield “Rom 3:23”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
they: Joh 3:18-21, Joh 9:41, Joh 12:48, Joh 19:11, Eze 2:5, Eze 33:31-33, Luk 12:46, Act 17:30, 2Co 2:14-16, Heb 6:4-8, Jam 4:17
cloak: or, excuse, Rom 1:20, Rom 2:1, 1Pe 2:16
Reciprocal: 2Ki 21:9 – they hearkened Job 24:13 – rebel Psa 81:15 – The haters Pro 26:28 – lying Isa 37:29 – rage Eze 16:47 – thou wast Amo 5:10 – hate Mal 3:2 – who may abide Mat 10:15 – It Mat 12:45 – Even Mar 6:11 – It shall Luk 2:35 – that Luk 7:41 – the other Luk 10:14 – General Luk 12:47 – knew Luk 12:48 – For Luk 23:34 – they know not Joh 3:19 – this Joh 16:9 – General Rom 4:15 – Because Rom 5:20 – the law Rom 7:8 – For without 1Co 2:8 – for Gal 3:19 – It was added 1Ti 5:8 – and is Heb 10:26 – after 2Pe 2:21 – it had
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2
The subject of responsibility is what Jesus is teaching in this verse, especially that which is dependent upon instruction. The Lord will not hold men responsible for not accepting any truth that was never offered to them. Jesus had come personally among mankind and been teaching by word of mouth. It is true that most of them stopped their ears so they would not hear, yet the opportunity for receiving the gracious truths made them fully responsible for all the teaching offered to them.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin.
[They had not had sin.] So also Joh 15:24; in both places the passage is to be understood of that peculiar sin of rejecting the Messiah: “If I had not spoken to them, and done those things that made it demonstrably evident that I was the Messiah, they had not had sin, that is, they had not been guilty of this sin of rejecting me. But when I have done such things amongst them, it is but too plain that they do what they do in mere hatred to me and to my Father.” Our Saviour explains what sin he here meaneth in Joh 16:9.
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels
In these verses our Lord Jesus Christ handles three subjects of great importance. They are difficult subjects, no doubt, subjects on which we may easily fall into error. But the words before us throw much light upon them.
We should observe, for one thing, how our Lord speaks of the misuse of religious privileges. It intensifies man’s guilt, and will increase his condemnation. He tells His disciples that if He had not “spoken” and “done” among the Jews things which none ever spoke or did before, “they had not had sin.” By this, we must remember, He means, “they had not been so sinful and so guilty as they are now.” But now they were utterly without excuse. They had seen Christ’s works, and heard Christ’s teaching, and yet remained unbelieving. What more could be done for them? Nothing-absolutely nothing! They wilfully sinned against the clearest possible light, and were of all men most guilty.
Let us settle it down as a first principle in our religion, that religious privileges are in a certain sense very dangerous things. If they do not help us toward heaven, they will only sink us deeper into hell. They add to our responsibility. “To whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required.” (Luk 12:48.) He that dwells in a land of open Bibles and preached Gospel, and yet dreams that he will stand in the judgment day on the same level with an untaught Chinese, is fearfully deceived. He will find to his own cost, except he repents, that his judgment will be according to his light. The mere fact that he had knowledge and did not improve it, will of itself prove one of his greatest sins. “He that knew His Master’s will and did it not, shall be beaten with many stripes.” (Luk 12:47.)
Well would it be for all professing Christians in England, if this point was more thoroughly considered! Nothing is more common than to hear men taking comfort in the thought that they “know” what is right, while at the same time they are evidently unconverted, and unfit to die. They rest in that unhappy phrase, “We know it, we know it,” as if knowledge could wash away all their sins,-forgetting that the devil has more knowledge than any of us, and yet is no better for it. Let the burning words of our Lord in the passage now before us, sink down into our hearts, and never be forgotten: “If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin.” To see light and not use it, to possess knowledge and yet not turn it to account, to be able to say “I know,” and yet not to say “I believe,” will place us at the lowest place on Christ’s left hand, in the great day of judgment.
We should observe, for another thing, in these verses, how our Lord speaks of the Holy Ghost.
He speaks of Him as a Person. He is “the Comforter” who is to come; He is One sent and “proceeding;” He is One whose office it is to “testify.” These are not words that can be used of a mere influence or inward feeling. So to interpret them is to contradict common sense, and to strain the meaning of plain language. Reason and fairness require us to understand that it is a personal Being who is here mentioned, even He whom we are justly taught to adore as the third Person in the blessed Trinity.
Again, our Lord speaks of the Holy Ghost as One whom He “will send from the Father,” and One “who proceedeth from the Father.” These are deep sayings, no doubt, so deep that we have no line to fathom them. The mere fact that for centuries the Eastern and Western Churches of Christendom have been divided about their meaning, should teach us to handle them with modesty and reverence. One thing, at all events, is very clear and plain. There is a close and intimate connection between the Spirit, the Father, and the Son. Why the Holy Ghost should be said to be sent by the Son, and to proceed from the Father, in this verse, we cannot tell. But we may quietly repose our minds in the thought expressed in an ancient creed, that “In this Trinity none is afore or after other: none is greater or less than another.”-“Such as the Father is such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost.”-Above all, we may rest in the comfortable truth that in the salvation of our souls all three Persons in the Trinity equally co-operate. It was God in Trinity who said, “Let us create,” and it is God in Trinity who says, “Let us save.”
Forever let us take heed to our doctrine about the Holy Spirit. Let us make sure that we hold sound and Scriptural views of His nature, His Person, and His operations. A religion which entirely leaves Him out, and gives Him no place, is far from uncommon. Let us beware that such a religion is not ours. “Where is the Lamb, the Lord Jesus Christ?” should be the first testing question about our Christianity. “Where is the Holy Ghost?” should be the second question. Let us take good heed that the work of the Spirit is not so buried under extravagant views of the Church, the ministry, and the Sacraments, that the real Holy Ghost of Scripture is completely put out of sight. “If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His.” (Rom 8:9.) No religion deserves to be called Scriptural and apostolic, in which the work of the Spirit does not stand forth prominently, and occupy a principal place.
We should observe lastly, in these verses, how our Lord speaks of the special office of the Apostles. They were to be His witnesses in the world. “Ye also shall bear witness.”
The expression is singularly instructive and full of meaning. It taught the eleven what they must expect their portion to be, so long as they lived. They would have to bear testimony to facts which many would not believe, and to truths which the natural heart would dislike. They would often have to stand alone, a few against many, a little flock against a great multitude. None of these things must move them. They must count it no strange thing to be persecuted, hated, opposed, and discredited. They must not mind it. To witness was their grand duty, whether men believed them or not. So witnessing, their record would be on high, in God’s book of remembrance; and so witnessing, sooner or later, the Judge of all would give them a crown of glory that fadeth not away.
Let us never forget, as we leave this passage, that the position of the Apostles is that which, in a certain sense, every true Christian must fill, as long as the world stands. We must all be witnesses for Christ. We must not be ashamed to stand up for Christ’s cause, to speak out for Christ, and to persist in maintaining the truth of Christ’s Gospel. Wherever we live, in town or in country, in public or in private, abroad or at home, we must boldly confess our Master on every opportunity. So doing, we shall walk in the steps of the Apostles, though at a long interval. So doing, we shall please our Master, and may hope at last that we shall receive the Apostles’ reward.
==================
Notes-
v22.-[If I had not come, etc.] In this and the three following verses our Lord shows the peculiar guilt and wickedness of the Jews in not believing Him.-“If I had not come among them and spoken such words as no one ever spake before, and taught such truths as no one ever taught before, they would not have been so guilty as they are. But now they have no excuse for their unbelief. They cannot say that they were not taught in the plainest way who I am and who sent Me.”
Does not our Lord in this verse point to the famous prophecy (Deu 18:18-19) of a Prophet to be raised up like Moses, to whom the Jews were to hearken? Does He not seem to say, “I have come as that Prophet, and have spoken my Father’s words, and they ought to have received and hearkened to them? The refusal of the promised Prophet is of itself their condemnation, and leaves them without excuse.”
The word rendered “cloke,” would have been better as in the margin, “excuse.” The clause literally is, “They have now no excuse concerning their sin.”
When our Lord says “they had not had sin,” He does not of course mean they would not have been sinners at all. It is only another way of putting the degree of their guilt. “They would have been less guilty than they are now. To have heard Me and not believed will increase their condemnation.” (Compare Joh 9:41.)
Let us note that there are degrees of sin, and that nothing seems to increase man’s guiltiness so much as to have privileges, and not use them aright.
v23.-[He…hateth Me…Father also.] The object of this verse is to supply a reason why the guilt of hearing Christ without believing was so great. It was because Christ’s words were not only His words but the Father’s also.-“He that hears Me, and hates and refuses my teachings, is hating not Me only but my Father, because I and my Father are one.”-Once more we are reminded of the close union between the first and second Persons of the Trinity. The idea that we can worship and serve God while we neglect Christ, is a baseless dream. Neglecting Christ, we neglect the Father. (See Psa 69:9.)
Poole remarks, “It is a common error of the world, that many pretend to love God, while yet they are manifest haters of Christ and His Gospel. Our Saviour saith, this is impossible; whosoever hateth him who is sent, hateth also him who sent him.”
Hengstenberg observes, “The Jews professed that they loved God, and that on the ground of that love they hated Christ; the God, however, whom they loved was not the true God, but a phantom which they named God. The fact that they rejected Christ, in spite of all His words of spirit and truth, showed them to be enemies of the Father.”
v24.-[If I had not done, etc.] In this verse our Lord gives another proof of the exceeding wickedness of the Jews. They had seen works and miracles done under their eyes, in confirmation of Christ’s Divine mission, more numerous and mighty than any one had ever worked before, and yet they continued unbelieving. The more they saw of Him the more they hated Him; and in so hating Him, they hated not Him only, but the Father which sent Him.-“The Jews would not be so guilty as they now are, if they had not seen my miracles as well as heard my words. But now they have both seen and heard overwhelming proofs of my Divine mission, and yet remain unbelieving. They have had the clearest evidence that could be given-the evidence of works and words; and yet they have persisted in hating both Me and the Father which sent Me.”
Burgon here remarks, “It is not meant that every single miracle which our Lord performed, surpassed in wonder any single miracle recorded of Moses, Elijah, or Elisha; for that would not be true. But Christ’s works were made so great by the way He wrought them. Without effort, by a mere word, He showed that all creation was obedient to His will.”
Let us carefully observe how our Lord appeals to His miracles as a proof of His Messiahship, which ought to have convinced the Jews. They are a part of the evidences of Christianity which ought never to be kept back or omitted.
v25.-[But this cometh to pass, etc.] The manner in which our Lord quotes Scripture here is so common in the Gospels that it needs little remark. The things He mentions did not happen in order that Scripture might be fulfilled, but by their happening Scripture was fulfilled.
“Their law” here is a general expression denoting the whole Old Testament Scripture.
“Without a cause” means literally “gratuitously, as a free gift.” The word occurs only nine times in the New Testament. Six times it is rendered “freely,” once “in vain,” once “for nought,” and once “without a cause.”
What precise text our Lord had in view is not quite clear, and some have thought that He only referred generally to Scripture testimony, like Mat 2:23. Others however point to Psa 35:19, and Psa 69:4.
Let us note that gratuitous, ceaseless hatred was our Lord’s portion on earth; and His true disciples in every age must never wonder if they share His lot.
v26.-[But when the Comforter, etc.] The object of this verse appears to be the encouragement of the disciples. They were not to despond or feel hopeless because of the unbelief and hardness of the Jews. A witness would be raised up by and bye, whose evidence the Jews would not be able to resist. There would come One who would give such testimony to the Divine mission of Christ, that even the wicked Jews would be silenced and crushed, although unconverted. Who was this promised witness? It was the Holy Ghost, who was to come forth with peculiar power in the day of Pentecost, and to abide in the early Church. The second chapter of Acts was the first fulfilment of the verse. The irresistible influence which the Gospel obtained in Jerusalem, in spite of all the efforts of scribe and priest, and Pharisee and Sadducee, was another fulfilment.
The “proceeding” here spoken of, we must remember, does not merely mean that the Spirit is sent by the Father, and comes from the Father. All the best interpreters agree in thinking, that it means the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit.
We should carefully note in this verse the language which our Lord uses concerning the Holy Ghost. He is the “Comforter,” or rather the Advocate, as we have seen before. He is the “Spirit of truth,” also, as we have seen before. But we should specially mark that Christ says, “I will send Him;” and also says, He “proceedeth from the Father.” The singular number is used: “He proceedeth,” not “will proceed.”-This then is one of those texts which appears to supply evidence of the Holy Ghost proceeding both from the Father and from the Son, though not direct evidence. The whole Greek Church, however, denies the procession from the Son; and it must be honestly conceded that the Scripture does not so distinctly and directly assert it as the procession from the Father. Yet, on the other hand, it is hard to understand how the Son can send the Spirit, and the Spirit in no sense proceed from the Son. The subject is a deep and mysterious one, and we have not eyes to see everything about it. The difference between the Eastern and Western Churches may after all be more apparent than real; and we must beware of denouncing men as heretics, whom perhaps God has received. But in any case the text before us is one which ought to be carefully noted, as one on which much of the controversy hinges. Let us take care that we ourselves have the Holy Spirit in our hearts; and when we die we shall know all about the point in dispute.
One thing at any rate comes out very plainly here, and that is the personality of the Holy Ghost. In the Greek it stands out very prominently in the gender of the pronouns, which our English language cannot reach. The word we render “whom,” in the Greek text is masculine;-“which” is neuter;-and “he” is masculine again.
v27.-[And ye also shall bear witness.] In this verse our Lord continues the line of encouragement which He began in the preceding verse. Notwithstanding all the hardness and unbelief of the Jews, even the eleven disciples would be enabled to bear a testimony to their Lord’s Divine mission, which none of their enemies would be able to gainsay or resist. How remarkably this was fulfilled we know from the first seven chapters of the Acts of the Apostles. For instance, the verse, “with great power gave the Apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus” (Act 4:33), is an exact accomplishment of the promise of the text.
It is noteworthy that both the verbs in this verse are in the present tense. They would be naturally rendered, “Ye do bear witness,” and, “Ye are with Me.” Does this point to the certainty of the testimony being borne? “Ye do bear witness:” you are sure to be enabled to do it.
In leaving this chapter, let us not fail to note how systematically our blessed Master gave His disciples instruction on three most important points. The first was their relation to Himself. They were to abide in close union with Him, like branches in a vine. The second was their relation to one another. They were to love one another with a deep, self-sacrificing love, like their Master’s. The third was their relation to the world. They were to expect its hatred, not be surprised at it; to bear it patiently, and not be afraid of it.
Fuente: Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospels
Joh 15:22. If I had not come and spoken unto them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin. But in so doing the world is without excuse. Its unbelief, with all that hatred of the disciples to which it led, is its own deliberate act, its ground of condemnation at the bar of God, to be in due time the terrible ground of its own self-condemnation. Everything had been done, alike by the word and the works (Joh 15:24) of Jesus, to lead it to the truth and to a better mind. The revelation of the Father, given by the Son, was not only the highest that could be given, it was such that it ought to have found an answer in that voice which even in the heart of the world echoes to the Divine voice. That it did not do so was the worlds sin,a sin self-chosen, without ground, without excuse. There is not merely instruction, there is also consolation to the persecuted followers of Jesus in the thought.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
These words are not to be understood absolutely, but comparatively; as if Christ had said, “Had not I come amongst them in my incarnation, and preached personally to them the doctrine of salvation, and confirmed that doctrine by miraculous operations, they might have pleaded ignorance in some measure, and they had not had sin; that is, they had not had the sin of unbelief and gospel-contempt of sin to answer for as now they have; but would have had more to say in excuse, or for a cover for their sin, than now they can: But now they have no cloak for their sin: that is, they are totally inexcusable, and have not the least colour or pretence for their obstinate unbelief.”
Learn hence, 1. That sins of ignorance are, as it were, no sins compared with sins committed against light and knowledge.
2. That sins committed against gospel light are of an heinous nature, and aggravated guilt, as being committed against the very remedy.
3. That the gospel, where it is plainly preached, doth take away all pretence and excuse from sinners. Now they have no cloak for their sins.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Joh 15:22-23. If I had not come and spoken unto them Thus plainly; they had not had sin Their guilt would not have been so great. If I had not appeared in person among them, according to their own prophecies, and proved my mission by arguments which put it beyond all reasonable possibility of doubt, they would not have been so much to blame for rejecting the gospel. But now they have no cloak for their sin But now that all the things foretold by Moses and the prophets are fulfilled in me; that my gospel is every way worthy of God; and that my mission from God is sufficiently proved by my miracles; they have no plea whatever to excuse their unbelief. He that hateth me, hateth my Father also As if he had said, This clearness of evidence, wherewith my mission is attended, makes the crime of rejecting me equal to, if not the same with, the crime of rejecting God. Their hatred to me implies also hatred to my Father. How much, says Dr. Doddridge, is it to be wished, that those who make light of Christ, while they pretend a great veneration for the Father, would seriously attend to this weighty admonition, lest haply they be found even to fight against God! Act 5:39.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Ver. 22. This blindness which has prevailed in their entire history (see the discourse of Stephen, Acts 7) might have still been forgiven them, if, at this decisive moment, they had finally yielded. But the rejection of this supreme divine manifestation characterizes their state as an invincible antipathy, as the hatred of God, a sentiment which constitutes the unpardonable sin. Some (Bengel, Luthardt, Lange, Hengstenberg, Keil) think that the sin which would not have been imputed to them is their very unbelief with reference to Jesus. But this sin, if Jesus had not come, would not have been even possible (Weiss). It would be necessary, therefore, to understand the first words in this sense: If I had not come in such or such a way, for example, with the holiness which I have displayed, and had not borne witness for myself in so convincing a manner. But Jesus simply says: If I had not come that is, as Messiah. The meaning, therefore, is this: The former sin of Israel, its long resistance to God, would have been forgiven it, if it had not now crowned all by the rejection of Jesus as He came as Saviour, and bore testimony to Himself as such. This last sin destroys all the excuses which Israel could have alleged for its conduct in general; it proves incontestably that this people is animated by an ill-will towards God; that it does not sin through ignorance. The idea is not altogether the same as in Joh 9:41.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Verse 22
They had not had sin; such aggravated sin.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
15:22 {d} If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.
(d) As one would say, “If I had not come, these men would not have been wrong in saying before God’s judgment seat that they are religious, and void of sin: but since I came to them, and they completely rejected me, they can have no cloak for their wickedness.”
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Jesus obviously did not mean that it would have been better for the world if He had remained in heaven. His point was that by coming into the world and preaching and working miracles He had confronted people with their rebellion against God (cf. Mat 11:20-24; Luk 11:31-32). Jesus’ words and works were the Father’s who had sent Him. Therefore the world’s rejection of them constituted rejection of the Father. To hate Jesus amounted to hating God. This is another strong implication of Jesus’ deity.