Biblia

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 6:68

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 6:68

Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.

68. Then Simon Peter ] Omit ‘Then.’ S. Peter, as leader, primus inter pares, answers here as elsewhere in the name of the Twelve (see note on Mar 3:17), and answers with characteristic impetuosity. The firmness of His conviction shews the appropriateness of the name given to him Joh 1:42. His answer contains three reasons in logical order why they cannot desert their Master: (1) there is no one else to whom they can go; the Baptist is dead. Even if there were (2) Jesus has all that they need; He has ‘sayings of eternal life.’ And if there be other teachers who have them also, yet (3) there is but one Messiah, and Jesus is He. See on Joh 6:47.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Simon Peter answered him – With characteristic ardor and promptness. Peter was probably one of the oldest of the apostles, and it was his character to be first and most ardent in his professions.

To whom shall we go – This implied their firm conviction that Jesus was the Messiah, and that he alone was able to save them. It is one of Peters noble confessions – the instinctive promptings of a pious heart and of ardent love. There was no one else who could teach them. The Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the scribes were corrupt, and unable to guide them aright; and, though the doctrines of Jesus were mysterious, yet they were the only doctrines that could instruct and save them.

Thou hast … – The meaning of this is, thou teachest the doctrines which lead to eternal life. And from this we may learn:

1.That we are to expect that some of the doctrines of the Bible will be mysterious.

2.That, though they are difficult to be understood, yet we should not therefore reject them.

3.That nothing would be gained by rejecting them. The atheist, the infidel – nay, the philosopher, believes, or professes to believe, propositions quite as mysterious as any in the Bible.

4.That poor, lost, sinful man has nowhere else to go but to Jesus. He is the way, the truth, and the life, and if the sinner betakes himself to any other way he will wander and die.

  1. We should, therefore, on no account forsake the teachings of the Son of God. The words that he speaks are spirit and are life.

    2. Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

    Verse 68. Simon Peter answered] With his usual zeal and readiness, speaking in behalf of the whole, To whom shall we go? Where shall we find a more gracious master-a more powerful Redeemer – a more suitable Saviour? Thou alone hast the words of eternal life. None can teach the doctrine of salvation but thyself; and none can confer the gift of eternal life but thou alone. Reader, let me ask, whither art thou going? Has the world-the devil-the flesh – the words of eternal life? Art thou turning thy back upon God and Christ? For thy zealous services, what has Satan to give thee? Death! hell! and eternal misery! O stop! Cleave to Jesus; he will give thee that happiness which, in vain, thou seekest in the pleasures of sin.

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

    Peter, who is observed in the whole history of the gospel to have discovered the hottest and quickest spirit, and to have been first in answering questions propounded to the twelve, as Mat 16:16, &c., replies,

    Lord, to whom shall we go? &c., thereby teaching us under temptations to apostasy, first, to consider what we shall get by it, as the following words teach us, that an abiding with Christ in a steady adherence to the truths of his gospel, is the best choice that we can make.

    Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

    68. Then Simon Peterwhoseforwardness in this case was noble, and to the wounded spirit of HisLord doubtless very grateful.

    Lord, to whom, c.thatis, “We cannot deny that we have been staggered as wellas they, and seeing so many go away who, as we thought, might havebeen retained by teaching a little less hard to take in, our ownendurance has been severely tried, nor have we been able to stopshort of the question, Shall we follow the rest, and give itup? But when it came to this, our light returned, and our hearts werereassured. For as soon as we thought of going away, there arose uponus that awful question, ‘TO WHOMshall we go?’ To the lifeless formalism and wretched traditions ofthe elders? to the gods many and lords many of the heathen around us?or to blank unbelief? Nay, Lord, we are shut up. They havenone of that ‘ETERNAL LIFE’to offer us whereof Thou hast been discoursing, in words rich andravishing as well as in words staggering to human wisdom. That lifewe cannot want that life we have learnt to crave as a necessity ofthe deeper nature which Thou hast awakened: ‘the words of thateternal life’ (the authority to reveal it and the power toconfer it). Thou hast: Therefore will we stay with Theewe must.“

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

    Then Simon Peter answered him,…. Who was strong in the faith of Christ, and full of zeal for him, and love to him; and who was the mouth of the apostles, and always forward to speak out of the abundance and sincerity of his heart, in their name; believing, that they all of them, for he had now no suspicion of Judas, no more than of the rest, had the same faith in Christ, love to him, and esteem of him, as he himself had; wherefore out of a good opinion of them, and love to Christ, he thus addressed him:

    Lord; or “my Lord”; as the Syriac version renders it; which was either a title of respect, and the same with “Sir” with us; or else, as acknowledging the dominion and authority of Christ, as Lord of all, and especially of the saints, and as claiming his interest in him; and which carries in it a reason, why he should abide by him:

    to whom shall we go? as a teacher, whose ministry we can attend upon, to greater profit and advantage? not to the Scribes and Pharisees, whose leaven, or doctrine, Christ had bid them beware of; who taught for doctrines the commandments of men, and were blind leaders of the blind; nor to John the Baptist, who had declared he was not the Messiah; but had pointed him out to them in his person, as the son of God; and in his office as the Lamb of God, that takes away the sins of men; and perhaps, he might not be now living; and if he was, he would have encouraged them not to follow him, but abide with their master; so that there was no other, that was “better”, as Nonnus expresses it, that they could go unto; and therefore it would be folly and madness in them to leave him: and as it was with Peter and the rest of the disciples, so it is with all sensible sinners, and true believers, who see there is no other to go to for life and salvation, but Christ; not to the law of Moses, which accuses, curses, and condemns, and by which there is neither life nor righteousness; nor to any creature, or creature performance, for there is a curse on him that trusts in man, and makes flesh his arm; nor to their own righteousness, which is impure and imperfect, and cannot justify before God, nor answer for them in a time to come; nor to their tears of repentance, which will not satisfy the law, atone for sins, or wash them away; nor to carnal descent, birth privileges, a religious education, sobriety, and civility, to trust to which, is to have confidence in the flesh, which will be of no avail; nor to ceremonial services, or moral duties, or even evangelical ordinances, neither of which can take away sin. There is no other Saviour, but Christ, to look to; no other Mediator between God and man, to make use of; no other physician of value, for diseased and sin sick souls to apply unto; no other fountain but his blood, for polluted souls to wash in, and be cleansed; no other city of refuge, or strong hold, for souls sensible of danger, to flee unto and be safe; no other to come to as the bread of life, where hungry souls may be fed; no other place of rest, for those that are weary and heavy laden; nor is there any other, where there is plenty of all grace, and security from every enemy, as in him: and therefore, to whom can they have recourse, but unto him? and that for the following reason,

    thou hast the words of eternal life: meaning, either the promises of eternal life, which were made before the world began, and were put into Christ’s hands, for his people, and are yea and amen in him; or the doctrines of eternal life; for so the Gospel, and the truths of it, are called, Ac 5:20; and that because the Gospel brings life and immortality to light, gives an account of eternal life; of the nature of it, that it is a glorious life, a life free from all the sorrows of the present one; a life of pleasure, and of perfect knowledge and holiness, and which will last for ever: and because it points out the way to it, that it is not by the works of the law, but by the grace of God; that it is his free gift, through Christ; and that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life, or the true way to eternal life: and because it is a means of quickening dead sinners, and of reviving true believers, and of nourishing them up unto everlasting life: or this phrase may design the power and authority which Christ has, to dispose of, and dispense eternal life; for he has the firing itself in his hands, and a power to give it to as many as the father has given him; and to them he does give it: and each of these senses carry in them a reason why souls should go to Christ, and to him only, for life and salvation.

    Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

    Lord, to whom shall we go? (, ;). Peter is the spokesman as usual and his words mean that, if such a thought as desertion crossed their minds when the crowd left, they dismissed it instantly. They had made their choice. They accepted these very words of Jesus that had caused the defection as “the words of eternal life.”

    Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

    Simon Peter. Assailants of the authenticity of John’s Gospel have asserted that it reveals an effort on the part of the writer to claim for the disciple whom Jesus loved a pre – eminence above Peter. The assertion is effectually contradicted by the narrative itself. See Joh 1:42; Joh 6:68; Joh 13:6; Joh 18:10, 16; Joh 20:2, 7; Joh 21:3, 7, 11, and notes on those passages. Peter’s replying for the twelve, in this passage, is a case in point.

    The words of eternal life [ ] . There is no article. Thou hast words. Words of life are words which carry life with them.

    Compare the phrases bread of life, light of life, water of life, tree of life.

    Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

    1) “Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord,” (apekrithe auto Simon Petros kurie) “Simon Peter responded to him directly, Lord,” or master, the one of the twelve who would often fumble and stumble and fall, but always rise to go on again, to help others, Gal 6:1.

    2) ”To whom shall we go?” (pros tina apeleusometha) “To or toward whom shall we go away?” To Moses, to the prophets? These all spoke of and pointed to Jesus, Deu 18:15-18; Luk 24:25-27; Luk 24:44-45; Act 10:43. ”Neither is there salvation in any other,” he later affirmed, Act 4:12.

    3) “Thou hast the words of eternal life.” (hremata zoes aioniou echeis) “You possess the words of eternal life,” Joh 6:27; Joh 3:15; Joh 8:12; Joh 10:27-29; 1Jn 5:13; Rev 19:10. See also Act 5:10; Act 7:38.

    Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

    68. Simon Peter therefore answered him. Peter replies here in the name of all, as he does on other occasions; because all of them were of the same mind, except that in Judas there was no sincerity. This reply contains two clauses; for Peter first states the reason why he cheerfully adheres to Christ, along with his brethren; namely, because they feel that his doctrine is wholesome and quickening; and, secondly, he acknowledges that to whomsoever they might go, if they left Christ, there remained for them nothing but death.

    Thou hast the words of eternal life. When he says the words of life, by the phrase of life, he means quickening, using the genitive case instead of the adjective, which is a very common mode of expression among the Hebrews. It is a remarkable commendation bestowed on the Gospel, that it administers to us eternal life, as Paul testifies, that

    it is the power of God for salvation to every one who believeth, (Rom 1:16.)

    True, the Law also contains life, but because it denounces against all transgressors (177) the condemnation of eternal death, it can do nothing but kill. Widely different is the manner in which life is offered to us in the Gospel, that is, when God reconciles us to himself through free grace, by not imputing our sins, (2Co 5:19.) It is no ordinary assertion that Peter makes concerning Christ, when he says that he has the words of eternal life; but he ascribes this to Christ as belonging to him alone. Hence follows the second statement which I glanced at a little ago, that as soon as they have gone away from Christ, there remains for them everywhere nothing but death. Certain destruction, therefore, awaits all who, not satisfied with that Teacher, fly to the inventions of men.

    (177) “ A tous transgresseurs.”

    Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

    (68) Then Simon Peter answered.The look may have been directed to Peter, or here, as elsewhere, his natural character makes him spokesman for the Twelve. And striking is his speech. Go away? To whom? They had left all to follow Him, and find all in Him. The Baptist is not living, and they know no other teacher. Go away? How could it be, when His words are spirit and eternal life? (Joh. 6:63.)

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

    68. Peter answered John was one of these twelve present on this occasion. And although semi-infidels have pretended to find traces of rivalry between him and Peter, yet to Peter he assigns the honour of this memorable confession.

    To whom go None of the founders of religions, or philosophies, or priesthoods, can fill this place.

    Words of eternal life Peter might have said, Thou alone workest true divine miracles, and doubtless he so believed; and believed that the divinity in the miracles was full proof of the eternal life to be in his words; but it was the words of eternal life of which he truly stood in need.

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

    ‘Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, and we have believed and come to know that you are the Holy One of God”.’

    Peter’s reply was forthright, typical of the man. ‘To whom shall we go?’ As a consequence of the teaching of Jesus they had recognised the inadequacy of other teachers and their message. Where else then could they turn? They accepted that eternal life could only be received through what He was and what He was teaching them.

    While they did not yet fully understand everything, the faith of eleven of the twelve was real and was growing. They had recognised that Jesus was unique in His relationship with the Father, was the promised One (no matter what the title) and was able to offer them eternal life. That was enough for them.

    ‘The Holy One of God.’ The title here is ‘The Holy One of God’ in the most ancient manuscripts and is almost certainly correct. Later additions and changes were made in order to harmonise with the other Gospels. But ‘the Holy One of God’ says all that needs to be said. The idea was Messianic. In Psalms 16 God ‘Holy One’ is mentioned and that Psalm was seen by the Jews as connected with the Messiah (compare Act 2:22), And this was a different incident from any mentioned in the other Gospels. Peter’s reply emphasises that they have recognised the uniqueness of Jesus. Jesus no doubt challenged this belief a number of times, and there is no reason to suppose that this is the same incident as that at Caesarea Philippi.

    Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

    Joh 6:68-69 . Peter , according to the position, for which the foundation is already laid in Joh 1:43 , makes the confession, and with a resolution how deep and conscious!

    ] Future, at any time. “Da nobis alterum Te ,” Augustine.

    , . . .] Twofold reason for stedfastness: (1) , and (2) , . . . Thou hast the words of everlasting life ( , Euthymius Zigabenus; more literally: “whose specific power it is to secure eternal life”); an echo of Joh 6:63 . The which proceed from the Teacher are represented as belonging to Him , a possession which He has at His disposal. Comp. 1Co 14:26 .

    ] and we for our part, as contrasted with those who had fallen away.

    . . .] “ the faith and the knowledge to which we have attained, and which we possess, is that ,” etc. (Perfect). Conversely, Joh 17:8 ; 1Jn 4:16 . Practical conviction may precede (Phi 3:10 ) and follow (comp. Joh 8:32 ) the insight which is the product of reason. The former quite corresponds to the immediate and overpowering impressions by which the apostles had been won over to Jesus, chap. 1. Both, therefore, are conformable with experience, and mutually include, and do not exclude, each other.

    (see the critical notes): He who is consecrated of God to be the Messiah through the fulness of the Spirit and salvation vouchsafed Him. See on Joh 10:36 ; 1Jn 2:20 ; comp. Mar 1:24 ; Luk 4:34 ; Act 4:27 ; Rev 3:7 .

    The similar confession, Mat 16:16 , is so different in its occasion, connection, and circumstances, that the assumption that our passage is only another version of the synoptical account (Weisse and others) is unwarrantable. Who can take exception to the repetition of a confession (of which the apostles’ hearts were so full) upon every occasion which presented itself? Certainly, according to John (see already Joh 1:42 ff., Joh 2:19 ), it is untenable to suppose that in our passage, according to the right reading (see the critical notes), we have not yet a complete and unhesitating confession of the Messiah (Ewald); or that the disciples had only now attained a full faith in Him (Weizscker). We would have to assume in the earlier passages of chap. 1 a very awkward on the part of the evangelist, a view in which even Holtzmann acquiesces ( Judenth. u. Christenth . p. 376).

    Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

    68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.

    Ver. 68. Thou hast the words of eternal life. ] In going from thee, therefore, we shall go out of God’s blessing. Nay, we shall go upon our own death, upon hell’s mouth. The Roman law was, Transfugas, ubicunque inventi fuerint, quasi hostes interficere licet. Renagades are sure to die for it; when those that live by those lively oracles of the gospel shall live for ever.

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

    68. ] Peter answers quickly and earnestly for the rest, as in Mat 16:16 .

    ] What they had heard and seen had awakened in them the desire of being led on by some teacher towards eternal life; and to whom else should they go from Him who had , and brought out of His stores for their instruction, the words (see Joh 6:63 ) of eternal life?

    Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

    Joh 6:68 . Simon Peter answered in name of all, . He gives a threefold reason why they remained faithful while others left. (1) ; “To whom shall we go away?” implying that they must attach themselves to some one as a teacher and mediator in divine things. They cannot imagine that any one should be to them what already Jesus had been. (2) Especially are they bound to Him. because He has words of eternal life, . They had experienced that His words were spirit and life, Joh 6:63 . In themselves a new life had been quickened by His words, a life they recognised as the true, highest, eternal life. To have received eternal life from Christ makes it impossible to abandon Him. (3) (Joh 6:69 ), “we for our part,” whatever others think, “have believed and know,” cf. 1Jn 4:16 , , which shows we cannot press the order [ cf. Augustine’s “credimus ut intelligamus”] but must accept the double expression as a strong asseveration of conviction: we have believed and we know by experience occurs in Mar 1:24 , Luk 6:34 ; cf. Act 3:14 ; Act 4:27 ; Act 4:30 ; Rev 3:7 . The expression is not Johannine; but the idea of the Messiah as consecrated or set apart is found in Joh 10:36 , . Peter’s confession here is equivalent to his confession at Caesarea Philippi, recorded in the Synoptic Gospels.

    Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

    68.] Peter answers quickly and earnestly for the rest, as in Mat 16:16.

    ] What they had heard and seen had awakened in them the desire of being led on by some teacher towards eternal life; and to whom else should they go from Him who had, and brought out of His stores for their instruction, the words (see Joh 6:63) of eternal life?

    Fuente: The Greek Testament

    Joh 6:68.[153] , the words) The disciples, even though as yet they do not comprehend the special principles of the discourses of Christ, yet hold the general foundation. A most noble instance of implicit faith, involved in the explicit faith [faith involved in the faith evolved].[154] The whole of the phraseology, the words of eternal life-we have believed-the Son of God, is repeated from Joh 6:63-65.[155] So Martha, ch. Joh 11:27, upholds her faith in Jesus Christ, although she did not as yet perceive the grounds and bearings of the resurrection. [In answer to Jesus, I am the resurrection and the life, etc., she replies, I believe that Thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.]

    [153] , to whom) It is a blessed thing for that man, into whose mind, if even it should see the door open, nothing whatever else glides in.-V. g.

    [154] i.e. Universal faith implied in the faith expressed by Peter.

    [155] To which therefore Peter alludes, contrasting the Twelve with the unbelievers.-E. and T.

    Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

    Joh 6:68

    Joh 6:68

    Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go?-Peter with his accustomed boldness and frankness responds. He knew of none other who could bring eternal life. That is the only thing worth living for in this world. This indicates the depth of his thoughts and his appreciation of the teaching of Jesus.

    thou hast the words of eternal life.-Only the words of Jesus can give us the words of eternal life. [The world may well ask this question. If it turns from Christ, to whom shall it go? He only has the words of eternal life.] Many followed for a time, especially when the loaves and the fishes abounded, but when self-denial was required the multitudes turned back and walked no more with him. A feeling of discouragement seems to have crept over Jesus and he turned to his disciples and asked, Would ye also go away? Of the multitudes that were taught by him during his mission on earth, only a few were with him at his betrayal and death. A multitude welcomed him to Jerusalem when he came to the Passover feast with shouts of Hosanna to the King! In a few days the multitude cried, Crucify him, crucify him! One of his chosen twelve betrayed him, another denied him, and all forsook him.

    Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

    To Whom shall We go?

    Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.Joh 6:68.

    1. The situation in which our Lord found Himself at this stage in His career is full of pathos. He began His ministry in Juda, and His success there seemed to be all that could be desired. But it soon became apparent that the crowds who followed Him misunderstood or wilfully ignored His purpose. They resorted to Him chiefly, if not solely, for material advantages and political ends. He was in danger of being accounted the most skilful metropolitan physician, or in the greater danger of being courted by politicians as a likely popular leader, who might be used as a revolutionary flag or party cry. He, therefore, left Jerusalem at an early period in His ministry and betook Himself to Galilee; and now, after some months preaching and mingling with the people, things have worked round in Galilee to precisely the same point as they had reached in Juda. Great crowds are following Him to be healed and to be fed, while the politically inclined have at last made a distinct effort to make Him a king, to force Him into a collision with the authorities. His proper work is in danger of being lost sight of. He finds it necessary to sift the crowds who follow Him. And He does so by addressing them in terms which can be acceptable only to truly spiritual menby plainly assuring them that He is among them, not to give them political privileges and the bread that perisheth, but the bread that endureth. They find Him to be what they would call an impracticable dreamer. They profess to go away because they cannot understand Him; but they understand Him well enough to see that He is not the person for their purposes. They seek earth, and heaven is thrust upon them. They turn away disappointed, and many walk no more with Him. The great crowd melts away, and He is left with His original following of twelve men. His months of teaching and toil seem to have gone for nothing. It might seem doubtful if even the Twelve would be faithfulif any result of His work would remain, if any would cordially and lovingly adhere to Him. Wearily and wistfully He turns to the Twelve, asking, Will ye also go away? And Simon Peter answers Him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.

    2. This answer of Peters contains a great assumption. There is a postulate in the reply, which being removed, the whole drops to pieces. It is that man must have some one to go to. It is that the soul wants, demands, cries out for, not some thing only but some One: cannot live without a Master, without a Guide, without a Revealer and a Comforter: is so constituted that it cannot live alone, cannot grope its own way, except as searching for One who shall be its rest: will not, cannot, ought not to be self-sufficing; inasmuch as this is the law of its being, and God has made it natural to usnatural, not as a malady or weakness, but as a part of our original constitutionnot to inquire whether to any one, but only, confidently, this: To whom shall we go? So in the text we have these three things

    I.The Factthat we need some one to go to.

    II.The QuestionTo whom shall we go?

    III.The Answerthat only Christ can satisfy our wants, because He alone has the words of eternal life.

    I

    We need Some One to go to

    1. St. Peter grasped the situation at once. He saw that they must go to some one. It may be that there flashed before his eyes certain possible masterssuch as Moses the lawgiver, or John the Baptist, or perhaps some of the Gentile leaders; but in the light of Jesus Christ all these seemed absolutely impossible, and so he cried, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. Underlying this question, there is the same feeling which pervaded that saying of Amiels, Men think they can do without religion; they do not know that religion is indestructible, and that the question simply is, Which will you have? The only question possible for men is, To whom shall we go?

    There is a deep law of our nature in virtue of which men are ever haunted with a sense of need, a consciousness of dependence. In every age, in every country, this is what man has keenly felt. The instinct is irresistible, because it is set deep in the very roots of our being. There is no want more real, more imperative than thiswe must have leaders whom we can follow, else nothing is done, no progress is made; there is no upward tendency, but, on the contrary, we fall back into loss and ruin. We must have our ideals, and from them alone can we draw the inspiration for better things. To put it in a well-known phrase, though one which has a heathenish smack about it, Man must swear by his gods. No man liveth to himself is a text which is fertile in its significance, and which among other meanings carries this, that we all of usthe best and wisestwant a stronger and a wiser to whom we can look, who shall be our highest example, whom we can follow, reverence, obey, exalt.1 [Note: G. T. Candlin, On Service with the King, 53.]

    2. It is not a question of choice between Christ and some thing else, but between Christ and some one else. For, singularly enough, since the world was, man has never been able, amid ten thousand forms of faith, to have a religion without a personality enshrined in the very heart of it. The disciples did not ask: What shall we take up with if we leave Jesus; what system shall we believe in? but: To whom shall we go? Ask not what the hundreds of millions of the human race believe in to-day. If you speak of abstract things, abstract principles, they believe in ten thousand things, or they believe in nothing. But ask in whom they believe, and the reply will be definite enough: Christ, Mohammed, Sakyamuni, Confucius, Zoroaster! It may be questioned if to an abstract principle men have ever yet, since the world was, built one solitary temple, reared a single altar, offered a single sacrifice, or breathed a single prayer. Where there is worship the demand for a person is quite inexorable. So when the Greeks created their sun-myths and worshipped the god of day, they had first to personify it and make it Apollo, the youth with golden locks and radiant countenance.

    (1) What Peter wantedand what we wantis, first of all, some One who can raise us above Circumstance. A vast multitude of the mighty family are so placed as to be in perpetual depression. Circumstances, we say, are against them. Poverty, or its twin sister anxietythe perpetual question of the days or the morrows bodily suppliesthis is one case. Sickness, or its more trying and yet commoner likeness, ill-healththis is another. Disappointmenta perpetual experience, the bitterness of which is never quite lost, that the honours and distinctions of an academical or professional career are always for another, never for methis is another depressing influence; and we might multiply them without limit. The sense of inferiority, physical or mentalthe dulness of lifes routinethe dreary unmarked round of duties, scarcely worth calling by so grave a namethe seeing no end, the having no prospect, the being placed where we would not be, and the hopelessness of change from itthe presence of uncongenial, unamiable, or unfriendly kinsfolkthe denial, in some definite point, of the wish of the heart, the final irreversible defeating of the lifes hopeall these are common experiences. And it is a want, a primal necessity, of our being, that we should find Onefor a thing it cannot beto lift us above circumstance.

    When thou hast been compelled by circumstances to be disturbed in a manner, quickly return to thyself and do not continue out of tune longer than the compulsion lasts; for thou wilt have more mastery over the harmony by continually recurring to it.1 [Note: Marcus Aurelius.]

    There is more cause for joy than for complaint in the hard and disagreeable circumstances of life. Browning said, I count life just a stuff to try the souls strength on. Spell the word discipline with a final g,discipling. We are here to learn Times lesson for Eternitys business. What does it signify if the circumstances about us are not of our choice, if by them we can be trained, learning the lessons of patience, fortitude, perseverance, self-denying service, acquiescence with Gods will, and the hearty doing of it? Circumstances do not make character. The noblest character can emerge from the worst surroundings, and moral failures come out of the best. Just where you are, take the things of life as tools, and use them for Gods glory; so you will help the kingdom come, and the Master will use the things of life in cutting and polishing you so that there shall some day be seen in you a soul conformed to His likeness.1 [Note: M. D. Babcock, Thoughts for Every-Day Living, 72.]

    (2) A second want of our nature is some personal help to lift us above Sin. Of all the wants of the world, none is deeper than this. No misery is greater than the consciousness that having had a tendency to love and justice, to purity and pity, to wisdom and temperance, we have become unjust, envious, full of hatred, dissolute, fond of the baseness of all the flesh, cruel, living in folly and shame, intemperate in selfish desire, tyrannized over by self; and, living with these companions, restless and unsatisfied, inwardly ashamed. Men keep their unhappy hearts to themselves, but that silent, bitter cry of unquiet shame and fear, of longing for release, for peace and goodness, rises like a vast cloud of sorrow towards heaven from the universal heart of man. Ethics do not cure that, nor science, nor philosophy, nor humanitarianism; it is an inward matter of misery. Religious discussions do not help it. It is no remedy for that to be able to balance doctrine against doctrine and to analyse by logic the schemes of the Churches. It does not cure that to be a master-critic, to apply science to the miracles, and the laws of history to the Bible. The real matter is deep within, beyond these transitory things. Knowledge, the mind of man, can do nothing to help this sorrow to a final cure.

    I looked at the sky, I looked at the sea,

    I thought of the stars and moon,

    And my soul went forth on the desolate slopes,

    Of the wastes of endless doom:

    And I knew myself for that filthy thing,

    That loves the death of its soul;

    For myself and my soul agreed to cling

    To the things we hate and loathe:

    And we seek the way and we hunt the path,

    To death, and hell, and shame,

    And we lightly do with a gloating laugh,

    Foul deeds-without-a-name.2 [Note: Desmond Mountjoy, The Hills of Hell. 20.]

    (3) There is another universal, primal want of mans natureand that is, some One who shall raise us above Death itself. The writer to the Hebrews does not say one word too much upon this subject, when he declares that through fear of death all men through all their lifetime are subject to bondage. How else can we describe it? And our experience is of Christian timesof days, and of thoughts too, upon which Gospel light has shined, making it not only a figure of speech, but also something of a traditional feeling, that of course, now, death has lost its sting. Yet is not death, is not the shadow of death cast before in sickness, a terror and a tyranny still? We may forget him in healthwe can lock and bar him out while we are in work and in societybut there he stands, just outside our door, now and then threatening, sometimes striking within, always in prospect, always an apprehension. May not this too be spoken of as a want, a natural want, an original want?

    Sir James Affleck, speaking about his visits to Dr. Alexander McLaren as his doctor, says: As the burden of weakness and infirmity bore down upon him, he became more silent, while touches of sombreness were now and then discernible. On one of these occasions, in speaking of death, he remarked, I cannot say I am more reconciled to death now than I was twenty years ago. I replied in the words of Watts

    But timorous mortals start and shrink,

    To cross this narrow sea.

    Ah! he said, its not only the sea, its what is beyond the sea; and then after a pause, I cannot perhaps always but sometimes I can say

    But tis enough that Christ knows all,

    And I shall be with Him.

    It is interesting to recall that Richard Baxter, who wrote these lines, himself said as he drew near to the end of life, To get satisfying apprehensions of the other world is the great and grievous difficulty.

    Dr. McLarens crossing of the narrow sea proved somewhat tedious, but eminently peaceful, and he is now safe with Him who knows all. 1 [Note: Dr. McLaren of Manchester, 264.]

    (4) We need some one to go to for our ideals. There is a story that a certain eminent painter kept always in his studio a set of precious stones. They cost him the proceeds of many a canvas. But he said he needed them in order to refresh his jaded sense of colour. Back to them he would often turn when he had lost the vivid sense of blue or crimson. And in their calm, unfading depths he never failed to find new tone and beauty. So we need some one to give us back the glory of lost ideals, to tone up our stale lives, to keep our hearts up to pitch. To whom can we turn for such things?

    It was reserved for Christianity to present to the world an ideal character, which through all the changes of eighteen centuries has filled the hearts of men with an impassioned love; has shown itself capable of acting on all ages, nations, temperaments, and conditions; has been not only the highest pattern of virtue, but the strongest incentive to its practice; and has exercised so deep an influence that it may be truly said that the simple record of three short years of active life has done more to regenerate and to soften mankind than all the disquisitions of philosophers, and all the exhortations of moralists.1 [Note: W. E. H. Lecky, History of European Morals, ii. 8.]

    In the Sermon on the Mount Christ has expressed the eternal ideal toward which it is proper for men to tend, and that degree of its attainment which can be reached even in our time.

    The ideal consists in having no ill-will against any one, in calling forth no ill-will, in loving all; but the commandment, below which, in the attainment of this ideal, it is absolutely possible not to descend, consists in not offending any one with a word. And this forms the first commandment.

    The ideal is complete chastity, even in thought; the commandment which points out the degree of attainment, below which, in the attainment of this ideal, it is absolutely possible not to descend, is the purity of the marital life, the abstaining from fornication. And this forms the second commandment.

    The ideal is not to care for the future, to live only in the present; the commandment which points out the degree of the attainment, below which it is absolutely possible hot to descend is not to swear, not to promise anything to men. And this is the third commandment.

    The ideal is never, under any condition, to make use of violence; the commandment which points out the degree below which it is absolutely possible not to descend is not to repay evil with evil, but to suffer insult, to give up ones cloak. And this is the fourth commandment.

    The ideal is to love our enemies, who hate us; the commandment which points out the degree of the attainment, below which it is possible not to descend, is to do no evil to our enemies, to speak well of them, to make no distinction between them and our fellow-citizens.

    All these commandments are indications of what we are fully able not to do on the path of striving after perfection, of what we ought to work over now, of what we must by degrees transfer into the sphere of habit, into the sphere of the unconscious. But these commandments fail to form a teaching, and do not exhaust it, and form only one of the endless steps in the approximation toward perfection.1 [Note: Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (Works, xx. 104).]

    O well for him that loves the sun,

    That sees the heaven-race ridden or run,

    The splashing seas of sunset won,

    And shouts for victory.

    God made the sun to crown his head,

    And when deaths dart at last is sped,

    At least it will not find him dead,

    And pass the carrion by.

    O ill for him that loves the sun;

    Shall the sun stoop for anyone?

    Shall the sun weep for hearts undone

    Or heavy souls that pray?

    Not less for us and everyone

    Was that white web of splendour spun;

    O well for him who loves the sun

    Although the sun should slay.2 [Note: G. K. Chesterton, Ballad of the Sun.]

    II

    To Whom shall We go?

    Virtually, the question is, What will you substitute for the gospel of the Son of God? This is the pith of it, and it is a standing challenge to all comers and to all centuries. It is not hard to destroy, to pluck up, to pull down, to undermine by ridicule, by satire, and by sceptical objections. But when the house is down and dismantled, what next? What and how shall we build? We want a shelter, a roof overhead, a doctrine, a hope, a promise, a prospect, in view of the dark future that confronts us. Men obliterate creeds, cast miracle and prophecy out of the world, and declare that the young, lusty Samson of modern thought will not be bound by the tattered traditions of antiquity in an age of scientific experiment. They talk about intellectual emancipation; the abolition of intellectual servitude to a set of ideas that originated with an insignificant Semitic tribe who once lived in a corner of the earth. It is easy to carp and criticize, to deal in shadowy negations; men may demonstrate the absurdity of prayer, the impossibility of miracle, the antecedent unlikelihood of the Incarnation; they may call the resurrection of Christ a myth; they may account for Isaiah, Ezekiel, and the Apocalypse and all moral inspiration upon natural principles; but meantime all this does not feed men. We need something positive, some great spiritual affirmation, a ray of hope, a word of promise, as we stand huddled, frightened, shivering on this sandbank of finite existence. And where shall we get these?

    The modern man lives in a sort of supreme fear of being duped. But when this fear of self-deception goes so far as to get itself built into a sort of shrine and worshipped as Clifford worshipped it, we are at least candidates for commiseration. It is like keeping out of battle for the sake of avoiding wounds. And when all the deeper interests of the heart are the stake to be fought for! How bleak it all is! It is not easy to forget those frosted words of Clifford, written after he had cast out all his native beliefs. I have seen the spring sun shine out of an empty heaven upon a soulless earth, and I have felt with utter loneliness that the Great Companion was dead.

    1. To whom shall we go? Shall we cast in our lot with the worldling? Shall we smother our fears, our misgivings, our aspirations, our hopes, in the amusements, the interests, the pleasures of this lower world, and thus by a determined effort quench the Divine light which is in us? We cannot do this. We cannot forget the home from which we came. Ever and again, the memory of the Father whom we left intrudes itself upon us. We began our career of self-will in riotous living; and we have ended it in famine and destitution. These husks may be good enough for the swine that perish; but to us, the children of our Father, to us, the heirs of heaven, they are vile, they are loathsome, they are sickening.

    A large section of humanity has espoused for its creed an abject materialism. Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die. What a vanity fair is modern social life! Multitudes are trying to drown their disgust in deeper cups of pleasure and riot. Men call the doctrine of Jesus hard. But how much harder, cries Tolstoy, how much harder is the doctrine of the world! In my own life I can reckon up as much suffering caused by following the doctrine of the world as many martyrs have endured for the doctrine of Jesus. Yet this doctrine of the world is preached to human hearts as a doctrine of good news, and crowds have turned away from the Man of Nazareth to hear it. What a travesty upon hearts, what a mockery of happiness! The modern martyrs are not in the church; they are in the world. For real martyrdom to-day, name the frenzies of contemporaneous finance. Ask the women who are racked in an inquisition worse than Torquemadas. Watch the young people training for the enjoyment of a diet of husks and sawdust. And worst of all, these crucifixions are entirely gratuitous. They give the cross without the crown or the promise of it. They yield the pang without the palm.1 [Note: G. C. Peck, Vision and Task, 134.]

    2. To whom shall we go? Shall we seek counsel of the secularist? Shall we be content to bind our hopes and fears by the limitations of time and space? Will it suffice us to extend our scientific knowledge, to perfect our machinery, to improve our police regulations, to study our sanitary conditions, shutting our eyes meanwhile to the immensity which lies above and around us? Nay, our eternal spirit would lash itself into agony against the bars of this narrow cage. Our immortality broods over us like the day, a presence which is not to be put by.

    The late Mr. Winwood Reade unhappily thought and published that there was no God. His wild book he called the Martyrdom of Man; and without God in the world man is a martyr. A personal creator he asserted was an impossibility, and, to prevent any approach to hope, the existence of a soul an improbability, but not as the other, a demonstrable falsehood. These wild and whirling words were uttered by one who in his last book, issued as he died, said that he often sighed for his old belief, when to him God was semi-human and man was half Divine, and after life death began (?) and happiness never ceased, and my mother and my Margaret would be joined to me again. Now my heart rebels against the fate of the human race, doomed to work like coral insects of the sea. This he wrote, says his biographer, his uncle, Charles Reade, with the hand of death upon him. We need not wonder at the mournfulness of one without hope in the world. We quote these words because the storm which lifts aside the waters shows the depths beneath. Let no man reject faith carelessly. No Christian hand could have painted more truly the want which Revelation, and that alone, supplies. The reviewer of a contemporary, with a full sympathy with Winwood Reade, quotes Schopenhauer, who, probably with like thoughts, says that, if we take into account the pain and misery, the unhappiness and sin, with which the earth abounds, we can only wonder whether it would not have been better for us if the surface of the earth had remained like that of the moon, devoid of atmosphere, an inert mass of cinder and slag. Can our readers blame us if we put a firm foot on the old ways, and insist again and again, out of pure love for our fellows, on the reasonable expectation of the larger hope and the fuller life, the warmth and happiness given by Him who is the Light of the world, in whose light we no longer walk in darkness, and who lighteth every man that cometh into the world, unless the heart rejects His light and crawls back into the hopeless gloom?1 [Note: J. H. Friswell, This Wicked World, 35.]

    As some most pure and noble face,

    Seen in the thronged and hurrying street,

    Sheds oer the world a sudden grace,

    A flying odour sweet,

    Then passing leaves the cheated sense

    Balked with a phantom excellence.

    So in our soul, the visions rise

    Of that fair life we never led;

    They flash a splendour past our eyes,

    We start, and they are fled;

    They pass and leave us with blank gaze,

    Resigned to our ignoble days.2 [Note: William Watson, The Fugitive Ideal.]

    3. To whom shall we go? Shall we close with the teaching of the philosophical deist? What will he give us in return for our confidence? A cold abstraction, a far-off something, a personified tendency, a hard law, a rigid and lifeless thing like the marble statues which men worshipped of old, more imposing indeed but less beautiful, a being unknown and unknowable, whom we cannot approach, cannot realize, cannot pray to, cannot love. What consolation is there here in our sorrow? What strength is there here in our temptation? What purification is there here in our sin?

    Did Herbert Spencer ever convince youdid he ever convince anybodydid he ever for one mad moment convince himselfthat it must be to the interest of the individual to feel a public spirit? Do you believe that, if you rule your department badly, you stand any more chance, or one-half of the chance, of being guillotined than an angler stands of being pulled into the river by a strong pike? Herbert Spencer refrained from theft for the same reason he refrained from wearing feathers in his hair, because he was an English gentleman with different tastes.1 [Note: G. K. Chesterton, The Napoleon of Notting Hill.]

    4. Shall we turn to the other religions of the world? There is a little group of people in Liverpool who have built a mosque and profess the tenets of Mohammedanism. There are a few people in England who profess to find in Buddhism that which meets their religious craving. But would it be uncharitable to say that such persons are religious curiosities, more eager for that which is novel than for that which is true? Can we imagine any serious sober-minded Englishman deliberately choosing any religion the world has ever seen in preference to Christianitychoosing, say, Buddhism, that religion of despair which takes away God, who is the very object of religion; or Confucianism, which calls to the worship of ancestors, no more worthy of worship than our contemporaries; or Brahmanism, with its many gods rather than one; or Zoroastrianism, with evil raised almost to the level of the good?

    I own in full the spiritual power which there is in every attempt of heathenism after God, but though there be other religions than the Christian, surely the full notion of religion is not to be gathered out of their imperfection, but out of the more perfect faith which does what they try to do and is what they try to be. If a man asks me what a tree is, I will not send him to a stunted, frost-bitten bush high up Mount Washington, but to the oak or elm which under the best conditions has opened the tree life into fullest glory. If any one asks me what a man is, I will not show him a Kafir or a Hottentot, but the best specimen of manhood that Europe or America can bring. And yet the mountain shrub is certainly a tree, and the Hottentot is certainly a man. So if anybody asks me what religion is, I will not point to Mohammedanism or to Buddhism, though they surely are religions; I will go to Christianity and in its central motive take out the real central force of all religion.1 [Note: Phillips Brooks, New Starts in Life, 323.]

    5. To whom shall we go? Shall we turn to self? Shall we make ourselves our standard? Instead of having before our eyes, in our thoughts, in our ideals, in our prayers, something that all men acknowledge as superhumanly lovely and ennobling, and all Christians deem assuredly Divine, shall we look to ourselves, to our own meagre selves, with our faults and our appetites, our tastes, our pettinesses; if so we shall lack the one thing that elevates, the sympathy with the best. Soon our path curves farther and farther away; it leads to absorbing and unsatisfied hunger after lower ends; and finally a death is felt approaching to which we look forward with reluctant acquiescence and secret terror, instead of with trustful expectation as but a step in the upward path.

    (1) Expediency may be a motive of good living and a means of human development. We all know how frequently it appears and what power it very often has. We are told that a good life is the best life, the safest and the happiest. If you do what is wrong, no matter what may be the present pleasure of it, you certainly will suffer. If you do what is right, no matter how hard the struggle to which it sets you now, you certainly will prosper. Therefore, it is not well, it is not prudent, it is not expedient to be wicked. The doctrine is immensely true. Its certainty is emphasized by all that we already know of human history, and misgivings of still more terrible assertions of it stretch forward into the other world. And the doctrine certainly is lofty, inasmuch as it asserts that right and wrong are not mere whims and fashions, but essential and eternal things, that they have to do with the very structure of man and of the world, that both man and the world are built so that the wrong finds its punishment and the right its reward. And certainly it is a doctrine which does to a very great extent control the actions of mankind. Some people will even call it religion. Some people will make religion to be nothing but a great system of expediency stretching out into the world beyond the grave. But clearly this is not religion. The religious man says, This is right, and I will do it because God wants me to and I love Him for the great love wherewith He has loved me. The prudent man says, This is right, and I will do it because it will be best for me. The first is religious and the second is not religious, only prudent.

    If a man merely holds that on the whole it is better and wiser to abstain from the sins of the flesh, but that there is no Divine command against them, depend upon it, occasions will arise when passion will be so strong that the mere notion of what is better will not stand for an instant before its storm. If a man merely considers that it is on the whole wiser to speak the truth, but that no Divine message has ever declared that all liars shall have their portion in the banishment of the wicked from the presence of the Lord, depend upon it that occasions will come to him when concealment, evasion, and duplicity will be irresistibly attractive. Where there is no belief in a Divine revelation, there can be no sense of sin.1 [Note: W. M. Sinclair, A Young Mans Life, 183.]

    (2) There is another power which men attempt to substitute for religion as the ruler and inspirer of life. It is that feeling which is in the heart of almost every man, the sense of self-respect which makes him say, It is beneath my dignity to do a mean or wicked action. Poor indeed is the man who does not know what that feeling is. You offer a man a temptation to steal. He turns away and will not steal because he is loyal to his master, God. That is religion. He draws back and will not steal because he knows that Honour is the best policy. That is expediency. He turns indignantly upon you and says, Do you take me for a thief? That is honour. What this great instinct of honour has done, it is hard to over-value. It has been the overruling power of whole sections of society, almost of whole periods of history. It has shone with splendid lustre in the eyes of many men, till it seemed to them all that humanity needed for its full consummation. It has had its martyrs who have given up their lives under its inspiration. It is romantic. It is the power of chivalry. There is hardly an age of history so dark that it may not be found burning there. It is a strong and, as it seems to many people, a sufficient power here to-day. There are many who would substitute the principle of honour for the principle of religion, many who think that the self-respect of the gentleman is enough without the loving consecration of the servant of God. But what is this honour that shines so splendidly? Is it conscience quickened and filled with pride? Its very principle of life is pride. It is a mans supreme consciousness of his own value, so strong that he recognizes the obligations which rest upon one so valuable as he is. His nobility obliges him. The deficiencies of it seem to be premised in this very definition, and they show out all through the history of its influence on men.

    We believe that we have an immortal future, and are destined hereafter to an eternal weight of glory, not of enjoymentfor that is a mere libelbut of perfection and enlargement of all our noblest faculties. We believe that we can even here become partakers of the Divine nature. We believe that we have dwelling in us by faith and communion with the Most High, the very Spirit of God Himself, weaning us from the world, setting our affections on things above, purifying our thoughts, putting into our minds good desires, and daily bringing the same to true effect, strengthening our resolves, subduing our passions, and making us fit for the companionship of all that is best and most esteemed in humanity, in the pure and tranquil radiance of the regions of light, yes, and of the fellowship of God Himself the Father and the Son. Then I ask what moral scheme or persuasive ideal could be devised by the wit of man which would go anywhere near to produce in us such reason for that truest self-respect which is a humble and grateful union with God Himself?1 [Note: W. M. Sinclair, A Young Mans Life, 185.]

    III

    None but Christ can Satisfy

    1. Men have offered to us many phantoms of religion. Many societies, each with its theory to bind human creatures together in worship and love, have knocked at our door to tell us the truth of life. Materialism has sought our suffrages, and humanitarianism. Ethics and science have offered us their dishes and said: Eat and be satisfied. Vague optimisms and mud-rooted pessimisms; a religion of humanity and a religion of unchristian theism have filled our ears with their cries; but when we have found the more excellent, we are not likely to descend to the less. We wish them all good fortune so far as they minister to love. But when we are asked for the foundation of life, we turn to Jesus and say: Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.

    There are too many witnesses in His favour for us to leave Him. Call the roll of philosophers: Bacon, Locke, Johnson, Edwards, Hopkins, McCosh. They were Christians, and it was Locke who said, If I had my life to live over, I would spend it studying the Epistles of Paul and the Psalms. Call the roll of astronomers: Copernicus, Kepler, Sir Isaac Newton. They were Christians, and it was Kepler who said, I am thinking the thoughts of God. I am overawed with the sense of His majesty. In the firmament God is passing before me in the grandeur of His way. Call the roll of scientists: Agassiz, Miller, Proctor, Guizot. They were Christians. Then add the name of John George Romanes, who was an unbeliever, but became a devoted Christian, accepting the divinity of Jesus and the atonement of Christ, and died a triumphant death. The greatest historians, among whom were Bancroft and Green, were Christians. The greatest discoverers, among whom were Raleigh, Livingstone, and Stanley, were Christians. The greatest statesmen, among whom were Constantine, Charlemagne, Alfred the Great, Webster, Gladstone, and Bismarck, were Christians.1 [Note: J. W. Chapman.]

    (1) Thou hast the words of eternal life. St. Peter was convinced not only that Jesus had the words of eternal life, but that no one else had. To whom shall we go? St. Peter had not an exhaustive knowledge of all sources of human wisdom; but speaking from his own experience he affirmed his conviction that it was useless to seek life eternal anywhere else than in Jesus. And it seems equally hopeless still to look to any other quarter for sufficient teaching, for words that are spirit and life. Where but in Christ do we find a God we can accept as God? Where but in Him do we find that which can not only encourage men striving after virtue, but also reclaim the vicious? To put any one alongside of Christ as a revealer of God, as a pattern of virtue, as a Saviour of men, is absurd. There is that in Him which we recognize as not merely superior, but of another kind; so that those who reject Him, or set Him on a level with other teachers, have first of all to reject the chief part of what His contemporaries were struck with and reported, and to fashion a Christ of their own.

    No student of history doubts for a moment that Jesus Christ appeals to man as does no other character in human history. His appeal is not only to the whole man, that is, to the entire range of his faculties; in a remarkable way, He appeals to the whole of humanity. Mohammed appeals to the Arab, the Turk, the fierce and fatalistic nomad of the East. Buddha appeals to the reflective mind of the Orient. Jesus Christs appeal is uniquely cosmopolitan. He holds the sceptre of the Western world, and yet a learned Hindu has said, None but Jesus deserves, and none but He shall have, the diadem of India.1 [Note: C. C. Albertson, College Sermons, 45.]

    (2) Thou hast the words of eternal life. St. Peters confession expressed the grounds on which he believed Jesus to be what He said, and our faith has the same proof to rest on. It does not rest on St. Peters certainty, but on the reason here stated, common to all who receive the evidence. The grounds of Christian faith in the Divine person of Jesus are His works, His words, and His character; what He did, what He said, and what He was. But prominence is here given to the words. For the words were at that time in some danger of being disparaged in favour of the deeds. An incident had just happened which implied that, and St. Peter here puts in, so to speak, his protest against the multitude. It is not for the loaves or for the miracles we either believe or follow Thee: it is because Thou hast the words of eternal life.

    The words are precisely that part of the evidence which is now just as valid for us as it was for St. Peter. The words are here, just as fresh and full of life and spiritually mighty as when they were first spoken. And what is still more to the point, the words interpret and explain all the rest. The relation of the miracles and the character of Jesus to His words may be stated as the relation of a seal or stamp to a document. It is the documentthe writingthat defines and explains the authority conveyed by the seal.2 [Note: J. Laidlaw, Studies in the Parables, 339.]

    (3) Thou hast the words of eternal life. That expression eternal life must have been very familiar to St. Peter and all the twelve, while Jesus went in and out among them. There were few days when they did not hear it fall from His lips, and they caught it up if they did not fully understand it. In the brief record of our Lords teaching, contained in the four Gospels, we have it twenty-five times. In St. Johns Gospel alone it occurs seventeen times. In this very chapter we read it five times over. No doubt it was ringing in St. Peters ears when he spoke. Christs words of eternal life were words about the nature of that life which He came into the world to proclaim,a life begun in the soul by faith while we live, and perfected in glory when we die. They were words about the way in which this eternal life is provided for sinful man, even the way of His atoning death, as our Substitute, on the Cross. They were words about the terms on which this eternal life is made our own, if we feel our need of it, even the terms of simple faith. As Latimer said, it is but believe and have. They were words about the training and discipline on the way to eternal life, which are so much needed by man and so richly provided, even the renewing and sanctifying grace of the Holy Ghost. They were words about the comforts and encouragements by the way, even Christs daily help, sympathy, and watchful care.

    Christ is the source of spiritual life to all who believe in His name. The idea of Divine personality carries with it the idea of revelation, as all our modern discussions show. If the power that is behind the world is a personal powera character or moral will, and not a mere blind force issuing endlessly into space, it cannot, in its very nature, but make itself known to man. And so the Word of God, God in Christ, becomes the essential correlative of the idea of God. If, in other words, there is an eternal life, a moral sphere beyond the present, of which the present is only a faint reflection, this can be known to us only through its expressions in such an one as Christ. That others have a spiritual life like ours we know only through communion with them in word or act. That there is a spiritual life, transcending the world and embracing an eternal life, on which the world and humanity rest, and out of which all good that is in the world or man comes, we can know only through its coming near to us in word or act. This is what the Apostles felt Christ had done for them. He had not merely spoken to them of an eternal life. He had not said, It is a part of My teaching that there is such a life. The Pharisees might have said this But all He said or did was the revelation of this life. They felt themselves, in contact with Him, to be at the same time in contact with a sphere of spiritual being above the world. And so the assurance of the eternal life can only come to any of us straight out of the words of Christ rather than out of any other source. The word of Christ is the highest evidence for us that there is any higher life at all, any ground of existence that is really eternal beneath all the changes of experience. If we cannot rest here, or get conviction here, as we look at Christ, we cannot rest anywhere, or touch the eternal as by faintest contact. In Him, in communion with His spirit, in all that He had ever said to them, the Apostles felt themselves assured of a higher being. They felt the outflow of the eternal life bathing their souls and suffusing them with its own deep serenity. This was why they could not go away with others. Where else could they turn? Thou, O Christ, art the only true light of our souls. Thou hast the words of eternal life.1 [Note: J. Tulloch, Sundays at Balmoral, 94.]

    2. What did Jesus purpose to do? We see what He is doing among men, but the question is, What did He purpose to do? Some men go all through life without a purpose. But most of us form a purpose before we have passed far into the years of youth. With one, it is to make a fortune, with another to win fame, with others, to carve, or paint, or write, or fight, or build, or heal, or plough. Now what did Jesus conceive His lifes task to be? Our wonder increases when we learn that He seriously purposed to found a kingdom, to destroy the works of evil, to institute the reign of love among men and among nations, to redeem society by bringing back to goodness and to God all the individuals of which society is composed. Did any other ever undertake a task like that? Compared with it, the emancipation of a race of slaves, or even the founding of a new nation, is a small thing. Go a little further into His life and we find He purposed and professed to solve the three greatest and gravest problems of lifethe problems of sin, and sorrow, and death. Now look at His philosophy, His theology, His metaphysics, His ethics, His system, whatever it may be called, His Gospel, let us say, and you will see, potentially if not actually, the materials out of which all this is to be done. There is love, pure and sacrificial, upon which to found a kingdom in the hearts of men, love as the basis of a new brotherhood; there is grace abounding much more than ever sin abounded; inward strength and comfort for the heart with sorrow laden; and there is immortality with which to face the fearful phantasm of death. All these elements are in His Gospel, and they must impress us with their absolute adequacy.

    Surprise at first, and afterwards a sense of adequacy, are awakened by a study of the fact of Christ. Then follows in our minds the tribute we instinctively pay to greatness, to simplicity, and power. A good part of the admiration we have for Abraham Lincoln is based upon our perception of his native nobility, his elemental simplicity. He was so free from anything like artificial greatness, from the counterfeit semblance of dignity, and yet so masterful, so completely captain of his soul, and of the Ship of State he guided through the seething sea of war. It is easy to admire a man of our own flesh and blood, so near us that there are those still living who have touched his hand. It is not so easy to admire a personality separated from us by sixty generations. Yet admiration is a feeble word to measure the response in our hearts when we hear the name of Marys Son. He seems not so far away, after all. We read the Gospels and rise with a kind of feeling that if we have not seen Him, we have at least heard His footfall on the temples marble pavement or the street, that we have caught some accent of His voice, or touched the hem of His passing garments. Whittier puts it so

    But warm, sweet, tender, even yet

    A present help is He;

    And faith has still its Olivet,

    And love its Galilee.

    The healing of His seamless dress

    Is by our beds of pain;

    We touch Him in lifes throng and press,

    And we are whole again.1 [Note: C. C. Albertson, College Sermons, 48.]

    (1) When we know that we love God and that God loves us, we are healed of the grievous wounds of life. In the infinite flood of Divine and human love our sins and sorrows are drowned, and the ark of joy and peace alone survives. To have the heart full of love, and to feel that we are infinitely loved, is so Divine a passion that it lifts us into a world where we forget our pain and wrong. We feel our pains and sins, but even when we feel themand many are our days of depressionwe feel them only for a time. We know they will come to an end, and all the arguments based on them against the goodness and love of God drift away like feeble clouds before the summer wind. The soul is at peace, though life be shipwrecked in the storm. We know, though we have been battered by sin, that through love of Love we are becoming righteous. We know, though sorrows are deep, that out of hunger for righteousness we are attaining joy. We understand, though we are left as lonely often as a mountain peak, that we are not alone, for the Father is with us. This is the first truth as it is in Jesus.

    Lord, weary of a painful way,

    All night our heads we would not lay

    Under the naked sky;

    But ask who worthiest? who will best

    Entreat a tired and lowly guest

    With promptest courtesy?

    And Thou art worthiest; there will not

    One loving usage be forgot

    By Thee; Thy kiss will greet

    Us entering; Thou wilt not disdain

    To wash away each guilty stain

    From off our soild feet.

    We enter, from this time to prove

    Thy hospitality and love

    Shown towrd Thy meanest guest:

    From house to house we would not stray,

    For whither should we go away?

    With Thee is perfect rest.1 [Note: Trench, Poems, 145.]

    (2) The second declaration Christ made followed on the first. It was the declaration of the forgiveness of sins. The removal of the natural results of wrong-doing, of what we call punishment, is not forgiveness. Forgiveness is to feel at one with love, with our Fathers heart; to feel like a child to God; to feel the strange delight that we are in union with God and His righteousness, and to do what the feeling urges; to feel the emotion of joy urging us to the act of good. Yes, that is the forgiveness of sins. A new life is open to us. We hear the voice of Jesus: Go, you will sin no more. For nearly twenty centuries, the words, the character, the life, the teaching, and the death of Jesus, all they were, and all they mean, have brought healing to this universal misery of man. There are millions of lives to testify to the truth of this. The lost have found themselves; the sinners have ceased to sin, the miserable have become happy; the restless have reached peace; the dissolute have become pure; the malicious and envious have learned to love; the selfish have devoted themselves to others; the poor of soul have become rich, the useless useful, the fearful brave, and the enslaved free. Where the secret lies we cannot altogether know, but we shall know hereafter. What we do know is the facts; the result of the words of Christ. Men are redeemed; and beneath every form of Christianity that is the permanent thing. The dogmas do not count, the criticism, the discussions are nothing: the healing power, the forgiveness of sinsthat is all. It is the power within to lead a new life and to forget the burden of the pasta mighty thing indeed! And the reason of it all is contained in those words of Jesus, if we could but reach their infinite depth in thought: Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much. That was the second declaration of Jesus, and it followed from His doctrine of a Father of men who, being good, loved them, and could not, consistently with fatherhood, leave His children to be mastered by evil. He was bound to make them, in the end, holy with Himself.

    Wife murder was also considered quite legitimate. In one of our inland villages dwelt a young couple, happy in every respect except that they had no children. The man, being a Heathen, resolved to take home another wife, a widow with two children. This was naturally opposed by his young wife. And, without the slightest warning, while she sat plaiting a basket, he discharged a ball into her from his loaded musket. It crashed through her arm and lodged in her side. Everything was done that was in my power to save her life; but on the tenth day tetanus came on, and she soon after passed away. The man appeared very attentive to her all the time; but, being a Heathen, he insisted that she had no right to oppose his wishes! He was not in any way punished or disrespected by the people of his village, but went out and in amongst them as usual, and took home the other woman as his wife a few weeks thereafter. His second wife began to attend Church and School regularly with her children; and at last he also came along with them, changing very manifestly from his sullen and savage former self. They have a large family; they are avowedly trying to train them all for the Lord Jesus; and they take their places meekly at the Lords Table.

    It would give a wonderful shock, I suppose, to many namby-pamby Christians, to whom the title Mighty to Save conveys no ideas of reality, to be told that nine or ten converted murderers were partaking with them the Holy Communion of Jesus! But the Lord who reads the heart, and weighs every motive and circumstance, has perhaps much more reason to be shocked by the presence of some of themselves. Penitence opens all the Heart of GodTo-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.1 [Note: John G. Paton, ii. 160.]

    (3) But Christs words infer a third truththe immortality of the soul, of the conscious personality of the child of God. The Father is immortal, therefore the child. Goodness and lovetwo names of the same thingare necessarily eternal. If the child is to reach the goodness and love of the Father, he must be as eternal as the Father. If all this trouble be taken with the individual child, it is ridiculous to the reason, and inconceivable to the heart, that the Father should fling that which He laboured for and loved into annihilation. If we allow that God is a Father that conclusion of death is unthinkable.

    We then went for a three miles walk, my father talking of the Passion Play at Ober-Ammergau, of religion, of faith, and of immortality. While touching on the life after death he spoke of Carlyle, and his dimness of faith in the closing years of his life. He said that when he was stopping at a coffee-house in London, Carlyle had come to smoke a pipe with him in the evening and the talk turned upon the immortality of the soul; upon which Carlyle said: Eh! old Jewish rags: you must clear your mind of all that. Why should we expect a hereafter? Your traveller comes to an inn, and he takes his bed, its only for one night, he leaves next day, and another man takes his place and sleeps in the bed that he has vacated. My father continued: I answered, Your traveller comes to his inn, and lies down in his bed, and leaves the inn in the morning, and goes on his way rejoicing, with the sure and certain hope and belief that he is going somewhere, where he will sleep the next night, and then Edward Fitzgerald, who was present, said, You have him there : which proves, said my father, how dangerous an illustration is.2 [Note: Tennyson: A Memoir, ii. 410.]

    Dr. McLaren of Manchester gave an address at the Union Assembly in Edinburgh on the 9th of October 1901. His biographer says: There was one passage in particular, towards the end of the address, when his radiant look told even more than his words. It ran as follows:

    Consider how the conscious possession of that higher life in Christ brings with it an absolute incapacity of believing that what men call death can affect it. Christ in us is the hope of glory. The true evidence for immortality lies in the deep experience of the Christian spirit. It is when a man can say, Thou art the strength of my heart that the conviction springs up inevitable and triumphant, that such a union can no more be severed by the physical accident of death than a spirit can be wounded by a sword, and that, therefore, he has the right to say further, and my portion for ever.

    In the short pause that came after these words, and during the rustle of movement (preparation for another spell of sustained attention) one listener turned to another and whispered, It is like seeing a spirit. And it was true.1 [Note: Dr. McLaren of Manchester, 189.]

    3. This, then, is the teaching of Christ in relation to the individual soul. But if that were all, more than half of our deepest interests would be left out. More than half of human life would be unappealed to. The expansion of the soul in love would not only be unsecured, it would even be injured. If that were the whole of religion, it might end in fixing our thoughts only on ourselves, and so end, through engendering selfishness, in the death of religion. Men have made this personal religion all; but that was not the way of Christ. He secured a personal religion by bringing each of us into the closest contact with our Father, but He swept us far beyond that individual relation. His whole life and His death maintained that we were to pass beyond ourselves into union with mankind, and that only in sacrifice of self for those not ourselves could we win our true life. He that loveth his life shall lose it, he that loseth his life the same shall find it. Die for men; die for the truths that bless and redeem men; die for the love of your brethren, if you would live. Death of self for loves sake is life eternal.

    Not cloistered saints, that bid the world

    Remember they forgetits lure defy,

    Whose abnegating robes accost the glance

    Of lost humanity;

    Not they whose moving lips attest

    Repeated prayer, to shame the throng or mart,

    Whose fingers outward clasp a crucifix;

    Not they who stand apart

    Are Thy swift followers alone,

    Sweet Christ! Unveiled, untonsured, they there be

    Who hold their mired brothers to their heart,

    Even for love of Thee,

    Who didst remember to the end

    Thy world, though they had Thee forgot and fled

    A hillside Calvary Thy holy lot,

    Mountain and sea Thy bed.1 [Note: Martha Gilbert Dickinson.]

    To Whom shall We go?

    Literature

    Aitken (W. H. M. H.), What is your Life? 164.

    Albertson (C. C.), College Sermons, 45.

    Brooke (S. A.), The Gospel of Joy, 339.

    Brooks (P.), New Starts in Life, 320.

    Calthrop (G.), Hints to my Younger Friends, 3.

    Candlin (G. T.), On Service with the King, 45.

    Chapman (J. W.), Another Mile, 57.

    Clark (H. W.), Meanings and Methods of the Spiritual Life, 134.

    Jones (J. S.), Saved by Hope, 79.

    Kellogg (S. H.), The Past a Prophecy of the Future, 95.

    Laidlaw (J.), Studies in the Parables, 329.

    Lightfoot (J. B.), Ordination Addresses, 225.

    Mayor (J. B.), The Worlds Desire, 15.

    Merson (D.), Words of Life, 1.

    Parker (J.), The City Temple Pulpit, vi. 280.

    Pearson (J. B.), Disciples in Doubt, 90.

    Peck (G. C.), Vision and Task, 123.

    Price (A. C.), Fifty Sermons, x. 281.

    Ryle (J. C.), The Upper Room, 192.

    Salmon (G.), Non-Miraculous Christianity, 72.

    Spurgeon (C. H.), Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, xxviii. (1882) No. 1646; lvi. (1910) No. 3210.

    Taylor (W. M.), The Limitations of Life, 144.

    Tulloch (J.), Sundays at Balmoral, 76.

    Vaughan (C. J.), Counsels to Young Students, 1.

    Vaughan (C. J.), University Sermons, 292.

    Wilson (J. M.), Sermons in Clifton College Chapel, i. 224.

    Cambridge Review, xv. Supplement No. 367 (Whitworth).

    Christian World Pulpit, xl. 72 (Thomas); xlix. 357 (Plunket); Iii. 197 (Davidson); lix. 50 (Horder); lxxii. 49 (Simon); lxxvi. 55 (Shaw).

    Churchmans Pulpit: The Old and New Year: ii. 464 (Evans).

    Fuente: The Great Texts of the Bible

    to whom: Psa 73:25

    thou hast: Joh 6:40, Joh 6:63, Joh 5:24, Joh 5:39, Joh 5:40, Act 4:12, Act 5:20, Act 7:38, 1Jo 5:11-13

    Reciprocal: Jos 24:15 – as for me 2Ki 2:2 – Tarry here 1Ch 12:18 – thy God Psa 133:3 – even life Pro 4:13 – she Pro 16:22 – a wellspring Jer 18:14 – Will Mat 14:28 – bid Mat 19:16 – eternal Mat 22:42 – What Luk 22:28 – General Joh 4:42 – and know Joh 6:27 – which endureth Joh 10:28 – I give Joh 12:50 – his Joh 14:4 – and the Joh 14:6 – the life Joh 15:4 – Abide Joh 17:8 – I have Act 8:37 – I believe Act 10:22 – and to Act 11:14 – words Rom 6:23 – but the 1Co 15:45 – a quickening Gal 2:16 – we have Phi 2:16 – the word Tit 1:2 – hope Jam 1:21 – the engrafted 1Pe 2:7 – you 1Jo 2:25 – General

    Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

    ABIDING WITH CHRIST

    Then Simon Peter answered Him, Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life.

    Joh 6:68

    Other teachers may do good or not, but they will do no great harm so long as they do not keep men away from Christ, nor take men away, nor tempt them to go away. Temptation to this there always has been of some sort. The disciples must have felt it when they were being left in a small minority, especially when those who had a reputation for clear-headedness and learning were mostly in the majority. They must have felt also, as others did, that in the teaching of Jesus there was much beyond their comprehension. From such temptations how were they saved?

    I. The disciples conviction.Not by their admiration of His character or of His teaching, nor by their affection for His Person, but by this conviction, Thou hast the words of eternal life. His words supplied what had been wanting in the words of man from the beginning. Lifelife of soul and bodywhat is it; will it continue, or will it come to an end? Such questions had weighed on the minds of all generations. Not only this, but we take all life to be that power in soul and body which is always fighting for health, and is itself untouched by decay, untainted by disease or death, so that any one who could tell of life which is everlasting could tell also of palliative or remedy for everything that would cut us off from life. It was no wonder that the disciples, persuaded of this, should refuse to go away.

    II. How had the conviction come to them?For two years they had been with Him, carefully listening and observing. They heard Him speak, as never man spake, such things as they felt in their inmost hearts that all men required to hear. They saw in Him the power to give life, healing all manner of diseases, bidding even the dead arise; they saw that all the powers of Nature were at His command; they saw Him holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners, boundless in compassion and love; they saw that all He was, and all He said and did, was in full accordance with what He professed to be; and, above all, those outward facts were crowned by the profound experience of new life and new power in themselves, which had come to them from Him. Before other two years had passed by they had seen and experienced greater things than these, and as they communed with their own hearts, or spake one with another, in their recollections of the past, there would always be the glad thought that they had not gone away.

    III. Their conviction may be ours.Let no one, be he teacher or not, step between us and our portion. Its value would be gladly proclaimed out of the fullness of our own hearts and minds, if we did but give them liberty, and thus and thus would they speak: The teacher and friend I need and long for, who alone can meet my case, is one who knows at least what it is to live in the body, as well as to be tempted through the soul and the body; who could speak to me with the voice of authority about sin and pardon; who could be always with me, and go where I go and stay where I stay; who could see me in the darkness as well as in the light, and see my whole being throughout, for how else could he bring me help? One who could say to me, It is I; be not afraid, and to the storm, Peace, be still, and to the power of evil, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further; one who could fathom my perplexities, enlighten my darkness, and never misunderstand me; who could heal the sores of my conscience, rule my passions, and understand the groanings that I cannot utter; one who knows what the valley of death is, and would be with me there, and who can speak for me in the Day of Judgment, and receive me to glory. To whom then shall I go? To whom but to Thee, Lord Jesus? Thou art offering Thyself to us for all this and more, able to save to the uttermost, to the glory of God the Father.

    Illustration

    The Bishop of Manchester (Dr. E. A. Knox), speaking at the Blackpool Sands Mission in August, 1906, said that as a boy he had been brought up in a godly home, but when he went to Oxford he had, in preparing for examinations, to read infidel books, and he felt as though he were losing the grip of his faith. In his distress he took down the Bible his father had given him, and as he opened it his eye lighted on a text he had marked, Will ye also go away? and the reply of the disciple, Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. This forced him to consider to whom he could go if he gave up Christ. Could he go to Aristotle? There were no words of eternal life there. Could he go to Plato? There were no words of eternal life there. Could he go to Hobbes? There were no words of eternal life there. Could he go to John Stuart Mill? There were no words of eternal life there. He saw from his mothers Christ-like life and his sisters bright example, that Christ had the words of eternal life, and he determined that before he left Christ he must find some one who could give him the words of eternal life. But he knew of no one then; he had found no one since, and never expected to find any one, for Christ and Christ alone had the words of eternal life.

    Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

    8

    Peter’s answer showed he had caught the point in the speech of Jesus. Thou hast the words of eternal life. This was the very thought with which Jesus concluded according to verse 63. The words received from the Lord constituted the spiritual food that he offered as the meat that would sustain mankind unto life everlasting.

    Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

    Joh 6:68-69. Simon Peter answered him. In accordance with the earlier records Peter stands forth as the spokesman of the Twelve, and in answer to the question of Jesus makes a confession of their faith.

    Lord, to whom shall we go away? thou hast words of eternal life. (Joh 6:69) And we have believed, and we know that thou art the Holy One of God. The confession consists of three parts(1) Thou hast words of eternal life (see Joh 6:63); (2) And we have believed (in contrast with Joh 6:64,there are of you some that believe not); (3) And we know, etc. These disciples have answered the revelation of Jesus by the faith which it demands; and now they know with the practical knowledge of experience that Jesus is the Sent of God. The expression which Peter uses is the Holy One of God. A similar phrase occurs in Psa 106:16 in regard to Aaron, who is called the holy one of Jehovah. In the case of the human priest and in that of his antitype our Lord, the general meaning is the same,the consecrated one of God, or, in other words, He whom the Father sealed, He whom God has sent. The meaning of the word used here, holy, must receive special consideration in other passages: see the notes on Joh 10:36; Joh 10:17. It is hardly necessary to say that the confession of Peter does not seem to be the same as that related in Matthew 16.

    Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

    Typically, Peter spoke for the Twelve. "Lord" (Gr. kurios) can mean simply "sir," but here it probably has a deeper meaning. These disciples were reaffirming their allegiance to the One whom Peter now identified as the Holy One of God (cf. Psa 16:10; Isa 41:14; Isa 43:3; Isa 47:4; Isa 48:17; Mar 1:24; Luk 4:34). Peter probably did not mean that they viewed Jesus as their last resort but that Jesus was their only hope. They believed that Jesus’ teachings resulted in eternal life for those who believed (Joh 6:63), and they had believed in Him as the holy Messiah whom God had sent.

    Peter’s confession of faith here is not the same as the one He made later at Caesarea Philippi (Mat 16:16; Mar 8:29; Luk 9:20). The content is different as is the chronology. Probably Peter’s confession of Jesus’ full deity occurred first at Caesarea Philippi. Here he evidently meant that the Twelve believed that Jesus was who He had claimed to be in the preceding discourse, namely, the Messiah who had come with divine revelation from God. Peter referred to Jesus as the Holy One later in his preaching, but that was after receiving much more insight, particularly from Jesus’ resurrection (Act 2:27; Act 3:14).

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