Skip to content

John 7:23

“Jesus Teaches in the Temple”John 7:14–24
King James Version
If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?

Bible text: King James Version (1769 Blayney text) · Public domain

KJV (with Strong's)
If G1487 a man G444 on G1722 the sabbath day G4521 receive G2983 circumcision G4061, that G3363 the law G3551 of Moses G3475 should G3089 not G3363 be broken G3089; are ye angry G5520 at me G1698, because G3754 I have made G4160 a man G444 every whit G3650 whole G5199 on G1722 the sabbath day G4521?

Bible text: King James Version with Strong's numbers · Public domain

Berean Standard Bible
If a boy can be circumcised on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses will not be broken, why are you angry with Me for making the whole man well on the Sabbath?

Bible text: Berean Standard Bible · Public domain

American Standard Version
If a man receiveth circumcision on the sabbath, that the law of Moses may not be broken; are ye wroth with me, because I made a man every whit whole on the sabbath?

Bible text: American Standard Version (1901) · Public domain

World English Bible Messianic
If a boy receives circumcision on the Sabbath, that the Torah of Moses may not be broken, are you angry with me, because I made a man completely healthy on the Sabbath?

Bible text: World English Bible, Messianic edition · Public domain

Geneva Bible (1599)
If a man on the Sabbath receiue circumcision, that the Lawe of Moses should not be broken, be ye angrie with me, because I haue made a man euery whit whole on the Sabbath day?

Bible text: Geneva Bible (1599) · Public domain

Young's Literal Translation
if a man doth receive circumcision on a sabbath that the law of Moses may not be broken, are ye wroth with me that I made a man all whole on a sabbath?

Bible text: Young's Literal Translation · Public domain

King James Version — Interlinear
21 Greek words
  1. εἰeiIfG1487CONDConjunction
  2. περιτομὴνperitomēncircumcisionG4061N-ASFNoun Accusative Singular Feminine
  3. λαμβάνειlambaneireceivesG2983V-PAI-3SVerb Present Active Indicative 3rd Singular
  4. ἄνθρωποςanthrōposa manG444N-NSMNoun Nominative Singular Masculine
  5. ἐνenonG1722PREPPreposition
  6. σαββάτῳsabbatōSabbathG4521N-DSNNoun Dative Singular Neuter
  7. ἵναinaso thatG2443CONJConjunction
  8. μὴmēnotG3361PRT-NNegative Particle Negative
  9. λυθῇluthēashall be brokenG3089V-APS-3SVerb Aorist Passive Subjunctive 3rd Singular
  10. ὁhotheG3588T-NSMDefinite article Nominative Singular Masculine
  11. νόμοςnomoslawG3551N-NSMNoun Nominative Singular Masculine
  12. ΜωϋσέωςMōuseōsof MosesG3475N-GSM-PNoun Genitive Singular Masculine Individual
  13. ἐμοὶemoiwith Me myselfG1473P-1DSPersonal pronoun Dative 1st Singular
  14. χολᾶτεcholateare you angryG5520V-PAI-2PVerb Present Active Indicative 2nd Plural
  15. ὅτιhotibecauseG3754CONJConjunction
  16. ὅλονholonentirelyG3650A-ASMAdjective Accusative Singular Masculine
  17. ἄνθρωπονanthrōpona manG444N-ASMNoun Accusative Singular Masculine
  18. ὑγιῆhugiēsoundG5199A-ASMAdjective Accusative Singular Masculine
  19. ἐποίησαepoiēsaI madeG4160V-AAI-1SVerb Aorist Active Indicative 1st Singular
  20. ἐνenonG1722PREPPreposition
  21. σαββάτῳ;sabbatō[the] Sabbath?G4521N-DSNNoun Dative Singular Neuter
English is a literal word-by-word gloss of the Greek, not the KJV's wording. Why?

This is the original text the KJV's translators worked from — each Greek word with its own literal English meaning in this verse, prepared by scholars at Tyndale House, Cambridge. The KJV translates whole sentences, not word by word, so its wording differs: one Greek word can become several English words, and the KJV may choose “charity” where the gloss reads “love”. Both are faithful — they answer different questions. For the KJV's own rendering, switch to the KJV text.

Translation
Details
See on the biblical-era maps
All John Sites (Jerusalem)
All John Sites (Jerusalem) View full PDF
Jesus' Third Journey from Galilee to Jerusalem
Jesus' Third Journey from Galilee to Jerusalem View full PDF
All John Sites (Levant)
All John Sites (Levant) View full PDF

Map © Biblica Open Bible Maps · CC BY-SA 4.0

In the KJVVerse 26,352 of 31,102 · 84.7%

Study this verse

Summary

In John 7:23, Jesus masterfully confronts the hypocrisy of the Jewish leaders who condemn His healing on the Sabbath while permitting circumcision on the same day. He uses a powerful a fortiori argument to expose their misplaced priorities, asserting that if a minor ritualistic act is permissible to uphold the Law, then a comprehensive act of mercy and restoration, bringing complete wholeness to a person, is undeniably more aligned with God's true intent for the Sabbath.

Context

Literary Context

This verse is embedded within Jesus' discourse at the Feast of Tabernacles in Jerusalem, a period marked by intense scrutiny and escalating tension between Jesus and the Jewish authorities. The immediate backdrop is the ongoing controversy surrounding Jesus' healing of a paralytic at the Pool of Bethesda, which occurred on the Sabbath (see John 5:1-18). The leaders sought to kill Jesus because of this act, accusing Him of breaking the Sabbath and making Himself equal with God. In John 7:21, Jesus refers back to "one work" that has astonished them. His argument in John 7:23 is a direct defense, challenging their judgment and setting the stage for His call to "judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment" in John 7:24.

Historical & Cultural Context

The Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot) was one of the three major pilgrimage festivals, drawing large crowds to Jerusalem. During this time, religious observance was heightened, and adherence to the Mosaic Law, particularly the Sabbath, was a cornerstone of Jewish identity. Jewish tradition, based on the Law of Moses (specifically Leviticus 12:3), mandated circumcision on the eighth day after birth, even if that day fell on the Sabbath. This practice was considered essential for upholding the covenant given to Abraham (Genesis 17:12). The prevailing rabbinic interpretation allowed for the "work" of circumcision on the Sabbath because it was seen as a divine command that superseded the general Sabbath prohibition against labor, demonstrating a hierarchical understanding of the Law. Jesus leverages this accepted practice to expose the inconsistency of His accusers.

Key Themes

This verse powerfully contributes to several overarching themes in John's Gospel and the broader biblical narrative. It highlights Jesus' challenge to the prevailing, overly strict interpretation of the Sabbath, emphasizing that the Sabbath was intended for man's good and for acts of mercy, not as an oppressive burden, a principle Jesus articulates in Mark 2:27-28. Furthermore, by equating His healing with the upholding of the Law, Jesus subtly asserts His divine authority over the Law itself and the Sabbath, demonstrating that His actions are consistent with, and indeed fulfill, the spirit of God's commands. The Jewish leaders' anger reveals their misplaced priorities, condemning a life-giving miracle while upholding a ritualistic requirement, thus exposing their spiritual blindness and legalistic hypocrisy. Ultimately, the verse underscores the biblical principle that God desires mercy over sacrifice, and genuine acts of compassion are more pleasing than mere adherence to external rituals, a truth found in Hosea 6:6 and reiterated by Jesus in Matthew 9:13.

Exposition and Analysis

Key Word Analysis

receive lambánō G2983

This verb signifies "to take," "to get hold of," or "to obtain." In the context of "receive circumcision," it refers to undergoing the rite, emphasizing the active participation in or submission to the procedure as a fulfillment of the covenant command.

broken lýō G3089

Meaning "to loosen," "to destroy," or "to dissolve," this word is used here in the sense of violating or annulling the Law of Moses. Jesus' accusers believed His Sabbath healing "broke" the Law, yet they permitted circumcision on the Sabbath to prevent the Law itself from being "broken" regarding the eighth-day requirement.

every whit whole hólos hygiḗs

This powerful phrase combines hólos, meaning "whole" or "complete," and hygiḗs, meaning "healthy" or "sound." Together, they emphasize that Jesus' healing was not partial or temporary, but a full, comprehensive, and perfect restoration to health. This contrasts sharply with the minor incision of circumcision, making Jesus' argument for the greater good of His miracle even more potent.

Verse Breakdown

"If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken;"

Jesus initiates a rhetorical argument by acknowledging a universally accepted Jewish practice. He points out that it was permissible, indeed obligatory, to perform circumcision on the eighth day after a male child's birth, even if that day fell on the Sabbath. The rationale for this exception was to ensure that the command of Moses (and the Abrahamic covenant) regarding the timing of circumcision was not violated or "broken." This act, while involving a minor "work" (an incision), was seen as upholding a higher principle of the Law.

"are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?"

This is the crux of Jesus' challenge, highlighting the profound inconsistency and hypocrisy of His accusers. He contrasts the minor, ritualistic act of circumcision, which involves a partial "breaking" of the skin, with His miraculous act of making a man "every whit whole"—a complete and total restoration of health and well-being. Jesus' question exposes the absurdity of their anger: if a small act of "work" is permitted for a ritualistic purpose to uphold the Law, why is a far greater act of life-giving mercy and comprehensive healing condemned? Their anger reveals their misplaced priorities, valuing rigid legalistic adherence over divine compassion and the well-being of a human life.

Literary Devices

Jesus employs several potent literary devices in this verse to underscore His argument and expose the spiritual blindness of His opponents. The primary device is a Rhetorical Question, where Jesus poses a question not to elicit an answer, but to make a point and highlight the illogical nature of their accusations. By framing His defense as a question, He forces His listeners to confront the inherent contradiction in their judgment. This rhetorical question is built upon an A Fortiori Argument (Latin for "from the stronger"), also known as an "all the more" argument. Jesus argues that if a lesser act (circumcision, which involves a minor wound and is performed to prevent the Law from being "broken") is permissible on the Sabbath, then an infinitely greater act (making a man "every whit whole," which brings complete restoration and life) should be "all the more" permissible and celebrated. This argument highlights the disproportionate nature of their condemnation. Furthermore, the verse relies heavily on Contrast, juxtaposing the "breaking" of the skin in circumcision with the "making whole" of a man, and the minor ritualistic act with a profound act of divine compassion and healing. This sharp contrast serves to expose the misplaced priorities and spiritual hypocrisy of the Jewish leaders.

Theological and Thematic Connections

John 7:23 is a profound theological statement on the true nature of God's law and the character of God Himself. It reveals Jesus' understanding of the Sabbath as a day for life and mercy, not rigid legalism. By comparing His healing to circumcision, Jesus asserts that acts of compassion and restoration are not only permissible but are, in fact, a higher fulfillment of God's will than mere ritualistic observance. This challenges the prevailing legalistic interpretations of His day, which often elevated human traditions above the divine intent for human flourishing. The passage underscores that God's desire is for holistic well-being and mercy, exposing the spiritual blindness of those who prioritize external rules over the transformative power of divine love.

Reflection and Application

This passage serves as a powerful mirror for believers, prompting us to critically examine our own spiritual priorities and interpretations of God's commands. Are we, like the Jewish leaders, at risk of prioritizing outward appearances, rigid rules, or established traditions over genuine compassion, mercy, and the holistic well-being of others? Jesus' argument challenges us to move beyond a superficial, legalistic understanding of faith to embrace the heart of God, which consistently leans towards grace, healing, and life. True spirituality is not merely about adhering to a set of regulations, but about embodying the character of Christ, who consistently sought to bring wholeness to broken lives. We are called to discern what truly honors God: is it strict adherence to a rule that may hinder human flourishing, or is it an act of love and mercy that brings healing and restoration? This verse encourages us to prioritize love and grace, especially when interacting with those in need, rather than being bound by traditions that miss the profound, life-giving essence of God's law.

Questions for Reflection

  1. How do I balance adherence to spiritual principles with acts of compassion and mercy in my own life and community?
  2. Am I ever guilty of spiritual hypocrisy, prioritizing outward observance or my own comfort over genuine love and care for others?
  3. In what practical ways can I seek to bring "wholeness" to those around me, reflecting Christ's character and prioritizing human flourishing?
  4. What "laws" or traditions in my life or church might be hindering a more expansive and compassionate expression of faith?

FAQ

Why was circumcision permitted on the Sabbath, and how does this relate to Jesus' argument?

Circumcision was permitted on the Sabbath because it was a direct command from God in the Law of Moses (Leviticus 12:3) and the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 17:12) to be performed on the eighth day. Rabbinic interpretation held that this specific divine command superseded the general Sabbath prohibition against work, as it was essential for upholding the covenant. Jesus uses this accepted practice to highlight the hypocrisy of His accusers: if a minor "work" (an incision) is permissible to uphold the Law, then a far greater act of healing and restoration, which brings complete wholeness, should be even more permissible and celebrated.

What does "every whit whole" mean in this context?

The phrase "every whit whole" translates the Greek words holos hygiḗs, which together emphasize a complete, total, and perfect restoration to health. It signifies that Jesus' healing was not partial or temporary but a comprehensive and permanent transformation of the individual's condition. This highlights the profound nature of His miracle, contrasting sharply with the minor incision involved in circumcision and underscoring the greater good achieved by His act of mercy.

How does this verse relate to the "spirit of the law" versus the "letter of the law"?

This verse is a quintessential example of Jesus emphasizing the "spirit of the law" over a rigid adherence to the "letter of the law." The Jewish leaders were focused on the letter of the Sabbath law, which they interpreted as prohibiting all work, including healing. However, Jesus argues that the true spirit and purpose of the Sabbath, and indeed all of God's law, is to bring life, healing, and mercy. By healing on the Sabbath, Jesus was not "breaking" the law but fulfilling its deeper, divine intent. He demonstrates that God desires compassion and life-giving acts more than mere external ritualistic observance.

Christ-Centered Fulfillment

John 7:23 profoundly reveals Jesus as the Lord of the Sabbath and the ultimate bringer of wholeness, demonstrating His divine authority and compassionate nature. His argument, rooted in the accepted practice of circumcision on the Sabbath, subtly elevates His identity and mission. If a ritualistic act that "breaks" the skin is permissible to uphold the Law, how much more so is an act that makes a man "every whit whole" in body and spirit? Jesus' healing on the Sabbath is a powerful sign of His kingdom, where life and restoration supersede mere legalistic observance. He is not merely a healer of physical ailments but the one who comes to bring complete spiritual wholeness, fulfilling the prophetic promise that by His wounds we are healed (Isaiah 53:5 and 1 Peter 2:24). His actions foreshadow the ultimate Sabbath rest and spiritual healing found in Him, as He is the fulfillment of the Law and the true rest for our souls, making obsolete the shadows of ritualistic observances (Colossians 2:16-17 and Hebrews 4:9-10). He is the true "Lord of the Sabbath" (Matthew 12:8), embodying its purpose to bring life and freedom.

Public-domain commentary

Matthew Henry

From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers John 7:14–36. His four-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.

1662–1714 · 23 verses
Passage under commentJohn 7:14–36
I. II. Main points1. 2. Sub-points(1.) (2.) Details[1.] [2.] Fine details

Here is, I. Christ's public preaching in the temple (v. 14): He went up into the temple, and taught, according to his custom when he was at Jerusalem. His business was to preach the gospel of the kingdom, and he did it in every place of concourse. His sermon is not recorded, because, probably, it was to the same purport with the sermons he had preached in Galilee, which were recorded by the other evangelists. For the gospel is the same to the plain and to the polite. But that which is observable here is that it was about the midst of the feast; the fourth or fifth day of the eight. Whether he did not come up to Jerusalem till the middle of the feast, or whether he came up at the beginning, but kept private till now, is not certain. But, Query, Why did he not go to the temple sooner, to preach? Answer, 1. Because the people would have more leisure to hear him, and, it might be hoped, would be better disposed to hear him, when they had spent some days in their booths, as they did at the feast of tabernacles. 2. Because he would choose to appear when both his friends and his enemies had done looking for him; and so give a specimen of the method he would observe in his appearances, which is to come at midnight, Matt. xxv. 6. But why did he appear thus publicly now? Surely it was to shame his persecutors, the chief priests and elders. (1.) By showing that, though they were very bitter against him, yet he did not fear them, nor their power. See Isa. l. 7, 8. (2.) By taking their work out of their hands. Their office was to teach the people in the temple, and particularly at the feast of tabernacles, Neh. viii. 17, 18. But they either did not teach them at all or taught for doctrines the commandments of men, and therefore he goes up to the temple and teaches the people. When the shepherds of Israel made a prey of the flock it was time for the chief Shepherd to appear, as was promised. Ezek. xxxiv. 22, 23; Mal. iii. 1.

II.His discourse with the Jews hereupon; and the conference is reducible to four heads:

1.Concerning his doctrine. See here,

(1.)How the Jews admired it (v. 15): They marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned? Observe here,

[1.]That our Lord Jesus was not educated in the schools of the prophets, or at the feet of the rabbin; not only did not travel for learning, as the philosophers did, but did not make any use of the schools and academies in his own country. Moses was taught the learning of the Egyptians, but Christ was not taught so much as the learning of the Jews; having received the Spirit without measure, he needed not receive any knowledge from man, or by man. At the time of Christ's appearing, learning flourished both in the Roman empire and in the Jewish church more than in any age before or since, and in such a time of enquiry Christ chose to establish his religion, not in an illiterate age, lest it should look like a design to impose upon the world; yet he himself studied not the learning then in vogue.

[2.]That Christ had letters, though he had never learned them; was mighty in the scriptures, though he never had any doctor of the law for his tutor. It is necessary that Christ's ministers should have learning, as he had; and since they cannot expect to have it as he had it, by inspiration, they must take pains to get it in an ordinary way.

[3.]That Christ's having learning, though he had not been taught it, made him truly great and wonderful; the Jews speak of it here with wonder. First, Some, it is likely, took notice of it to his honour: He that had no human learning, and yet so far excelled all that had, certainly must be endued with a divine knowledge. Secondly, Others, probably, mentioned it in disparagement and contempt of him: Whatever he seems to have, he cannot really have any true learning, for he was never at the university, nor took his degree. Thirdly, Some perhaps suggested that he had got his learning by magic arts, or some unlawful means or other. Since they know not how he could be a scholar, they will think him a conjurer.

(2.)What he asserted concerning it; three things:—

[1.]That his doctrine is divine (v. 16): My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. They were offended because he undertook to teach though he had never learned, in answer to which he tells them that his doctrine was such as was not to be learned, for it was not the product of human thought and natural powers enlarged and elevated by reading and conversation, but it was a divine revelation. As God, equal with the Father, he might truly have said, My doctrine is mine, and his that sent me; but being now in his estate of humiliation, and being, as Mediator, God's servant, it was more congruous to say, "My doctrine is not mine, not mine only, nor mine originally, as man and mediator, but his that sent me; it does not centre in myself, nor lead ultimately to myself, but to him that sent me." God had promised concerning the great prophet that he would put his words into his mouth (Deut. xviii. 18), to which Christ seems here to refer. Note, It is the comfort of those who embrace Christ's doctrine, and the condemnation of those who reject it, that it is a divine doctrine: it is of God and not of man.

[2.]That the most competent judges of the truth and divine authority of Christ's doctrine are those that with a sincere and upright heart desire and endeavour to do the will of God (v. 17): If any man be willing to do the will of God, have his will melted into the will of God, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God or whether I speak of myself. Observe here, First, What the question is, concerning the doctrine of Christ, whether it be of God or no; whether the gospel be a divine revelation or an imposture. Christ himself was willing to have his doctrine enquired into, whether it were of God or no, much more should his ministers; and we are concerned to examine what grounds we go upon, for, if we be deceived, we are miserably deceived. Secondly, Who are likely to succeed in this search: those that do the will of God, at least are desirous to do it. Now see, 1. Who they are that will do the will of God. They are such as are impartial in their enquiries concerning the will of God, and are not biassed by any lust or interest, and such as are resolved by the grace of God, when they find out what the will of God is, to conform to it. They are such as have an honest principle of regard to God, and are truly desirous to glorify and please him. 2. Whence it is that such a one shall know of the truth of Christ's doctrine. (1.) Christ has promised to give knowledge to such; he hath said, He shall know, and he can give an understanding. Those who improve the light they have, and carefully live up to it, shall be secured by divine grace from destructive mistakes. (2.) They are disposed and prepared to receive that knowledge. He that is inclined to submit to the rules of the divine law is disposed to admit the rays of divine light. To him that has shall be given; those have a good understanding that do his commandments, Ps. cxi. 10. Those who resemble God are most likely to understand him.

[3.]That hereby it appeared that Christ, as a teacher, did not speak of himself, because he did not seek himself, v. 18. First, See here the character of a deceiver: he seeketh his own glory, which is a sign that he speaks of himself, as the false Christs and false prophets did. Here is the description of the cheat: they speak of themselves, and have no commission nor instructions from God; no warrant but their own will, no inspiration but their own imagination, their own policy and artifice. Ambassadors speak not of themselves; those ministers disclaim that character who glory in this that they speak of themselves. But see the discovery of the cheat; by this their pretensions are disproved, they consult purely their own glory; self-seekers are self-speakers. Those who speak from God will speak for God, and for his glory; those who aim at their own preferment and interest make it to appear that they had no commission form God. Secondly, See the contrary character Christ gives of himself and his doctrine: He that seeks his glory that sent him, as I do, makes it to appear that he is true. 1. He was sent of God. Those teachers, and those only, who are sent of God, are to be received and entertained by us. Those who bring a divine message must prove a divine mission, either by special revelation or by regular institution. 2. He sought the glory of God. It was both the tendency of his doctrine and the tenour of his whole conversation to glorify God. 3. This was a proof that he was true, and there was no unrighteousness in him. False teachers are most unrighteous; they are unjust to God whose name they abuse, and unjust to the souls of men whom they impose upon. There cannot be a greater piece of unrighteousness than this. But Christ made it appear that he was true, that he was really what he said he was, that there was no unrighteousness in him, no falsehood in his doctrine, no fallacy nor fraud in his dealings with us.

2.They discourse concerning the crime that was laid to his charge for curing the impotent man, and bidding him carry his bed on the sabbath day, for which they had formerly prosecuted him, and which was still the pretence of their enmity to him.

(1.)He argues against them by way of recrimination, convicting them of far worse practices, v. 19. How could they for shame censure him for a breach of the law of Moses, when they themselves were such notorious breakers of it? Did not Moses give you the law? And it was their privilege that they had the law, no nation had such a law; but it was their wickedness that none of them kept the law, that they rebelled against it, and lived contrary to it. Many that have the law given them, when they have it do not keep it. Their neglect of the law was universal: None of you keepeth it: neither those of them that were in posts of honour, who should have been most knowing, nor those who were in posts of subjection, who should have been most obedient. They boasted of the law, and pretended a zeal for it, and were enraged at Christ for seeming to transgress it, and yet none of them kept it; like those who say that they are for the church, and yet never go to church. It was an aggravation of their wickedness, in persecuting Christ for breaking the law, that they themselves did not keep it: "None of you keepeth the law, why then go ye about to kill me for not keeping it?" Note, Those are commonly most censorious of others who are most faulty themselves. Thus hypocrites, who are forward to pull a mote out of their brother's eye, are not aware of a beam in their own. Why go ye about to kill me? Some take this as the evidence of their not keeping the law: "You keep not the law; if you did, you would understand yourselves better than to go about to kill me for doing a good work." Those that support themselves and their interest by persecution and violence, whatever they pretend (though they may call themselves custodes utriusque tabulæ—the guardians of both tables), are not keepers of the law of God. Chemnitius understands this as a reason why it was time to supersede the law of Moses by the gospel, because the law was found insufficient to restrain sin: "Moses gave you the law, but you do not keep it, nor are kept by it from the greatest wickedness; there is therefore need of a clearer light and better law to be brought in; why then do you aim to kill me for introducing it?"

Here the people rudely interrupted him in his discourse, and contradicted what he said (v. 20): Thou has a devil; who goes about to kill thee? This intimates, [1.] The good opinion they had of their rulers, who, they think, would never attempt so atrocious a thing as to kill him; no, such a veneration they had for their elders and chief priests that they would swear for them they would do no harm to an innocent man. Probably the rulers had their little emissaries among the people who suggested this to them; many deny that wickedness which at the same time they are contriving. [2.] The ill opinion they had of our Lord Jesus: "Thou hast a devil, thou art possessed with a lying spirit, and art a bad man for saying so;" so some: or rather, "Thou art melancholy, and art a weak man; thou frightenest thyself with causeless fears, as hypochondriacal people are apt to do." Not only open frenzies, but silent melancholies, were then commonly imputed to the power of Satan. "Thou art crazed, has a distempered brain." Let us not think it strange if the best of men are put under the worst of characters. To this vile calumny our Saviour returns no direct answer, but seems as if he took no notice of it. Note, Those who would be like Christ must put up with affronts, and pass by the indignities and injuries done them; must not regard them, much less resent them, and least of all revenge them. I, as a deaf man, heard not. When Christ was reviled, he reviled not again,

(2.)He argues by way of appeal and vindication.

[1.]He appeals to their own sentiments of this miracle: "I have done one work, and you all marvel, v. 21. You cannot choose but marvel at it as truly great, and altogether supernatural; you must all own it to be marvellous." Or, "Though I have done but one work that you have any colour to find fault with, yet you marvel, you are offended and displeased as if I had been guilty of some heinous or enormous crime."

[2.]He appeals to their own practice in other instances: "I have done one work on the sabbath, and it was done easily, with a word's speaking, and you all marvel, you make a mighty strange thing of it, that a religious man should dare do such a thing, whereas you yourselves many a time do that which is a much more servile work on the sabbath day, in the case of circumcision; if it be lawful for you, nay, and your duty, to circumcise a child on the sabbath day, when it happens to be the eighth day, as no doubt it is, much more was it lawful and good for me to heal a diseased man on that day." Observe,

First, The rise and origin of circumcision: Moses gave you circumcision, gave you the law concerning it. Here, 1. Circumcision is said to be given, and (v. 23) they are said to receive it; it was not imposed upon them as a yoke, but conferred upon them as a favour. Note, The ordinances of God, and particularly those which are seals of the covenant, are gifts given to men, and are to be received as such. 2. Moses is said to give it, because it was a part of that law which was given by Moses; yet, as Christ said of the manna (ch. vi. 32), Moses did not give it them, but God; nay, and it was not of Moses first, but of the fathers, v. 22. Though it was incorporated into the Mosaic institution, yet it was ordained long before, for it was a seal of the righteousness of faith, and therefore commenced with the promise four hundred and thirty years before, Gal. iii. 17. The church membership of believers and their seed was not of Moses or his law, and therefore did not fall with it; but was of the fathers, belonged to the patriarchal church, and was part of that blessing of Abraham which was to come upon the Gentiles, Gal. iii. 14.

Secondly, The respect paid to the law of circumcision above that of the sabbath, in the constant practice of the Jewish church. The Jewish casuists frequently take notice of it, Circumcisio et ejus sanatio pellit sabbbatum—Circumcision and its cure drive away the sabbath; so that if a child was born one sabbath day it was without fail circumcised the next. If then, when the sabbath rest was more strictly insisted on, yet those works were allowed which were in ordine ad spiritualia—for the keeping up of religion, much more are they allowed now under the gospel, when the stress is laid more upon the sabbath work.

Thirdly, The inference Christ draws hence in justification of himself, and of what he had done (v. 23): A man-child on the sabbath day receives circumcision, that the law of circumcision might not be broken; or, as the margin reads it, without breaking the law, namely, of the sabbath. Divine commands must be construed so as to agree with each other. "Now, if this be allowed by yourselves, how unreasonable are you, who are angry with me because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day!" emoi cholate. The word is used only here, from choge—fel, gall. They were angry at him with the greatest indignation; it was a spiteful anger, anger with gall in it. Note, It is very absurd and unreasonable for us to condemn others for that in which we justify ourselves. Observe the comparison Christ here makes between their circumcising a child and his healing a man on the sabbath day. 1. Circumcision was but a ceremonial institution; it was of the fathers indeed, but not from the beginning; but what Christ did was a good work by the law of nature, a more excellent law than that which made circumcision a good work. 2. Circumcision was a bloody ordinance, and made sore; but what Christ did was healing, and made whole. The law works pain, and, if that work may be done on the sabbath day, much more a gospel work, which produces peace. 3. Especially considering that whereas, when they had circumcised a child, their care was only to heal up that part which was circumcised, which might be done and yet the child remain under other illnesses, Christ had made this man every whit whole, holon anthropon hygie—I have made the whole man healthful and sound. The whole body was healed, for the disease affected the whole body; and it was a perfect cure, such as left no relics of the disease behind; nay, Christ not only healed his body, but his soul too, by that admonition, Go, and sin no more, and so indeed made the whole man sound, for the soul is the man. Circumcision indeed was intended for the good of the soul, and to make the whole man as it should be; but they had perverted it, and turned it into a mere carnal ordinance; but Christ accompanied his outward cures with inward grace, and so made them sacramental, and healed the whole man.

He concludes this argument with that rule (v. 24): Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. This may be applied, either, First, In particular, to this work which they quarrelled with as a violation of the law. Be not partial in your judgment; judge not, kat opsin—with respect of persons; knowing faces, as the Hebrew phrase is, Deut. i. 17. It is contrary to the law of justice, as well as charity, to censure those who differ in opinion from us as transgressors, in taking that liberty which yet in those of our own party, and way, and opinion, we allow of; as it is also to commend that in some as necessary strictness and severity which in others we condemn as imposition and persecution. Or, Secondly, In general, to Christ's person and preaching, which they were offended at and prejudiced against. Those things that are false, and designed to impose upon men, commonly appear best when they are judged of according to the outward appearance, they appear most plausible prima facie—at the first glance. It was this that gained the Pharisees such an interest and reputation, that they appeared right unto men (Matt. xxiii. 27, 28), and men judged of them by that appearance, and so were sadly mistaken in them. "But," saith Christ, "be not too confident that all are real saints who are seeming ones." With reference to himself, his outward appearance was far short of his real dignity and excellency, for he took upon him the form of a servant (Phil. ii. 7), was in the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom. viii. 3), had no form nor comeliness, Isa. liii. 2. So that those who undertook to judge whether he was the Son of God or no by his outward appearance were not likely to judge righteous judgment. The Jews expected the outward appearance of the Messiah to be pompous and magnificent, and attended with all the ceremonies of secular grandeur; and, judging of Christ by that rule, their judgment was from first to last a continual mistake, for the kingdom of Christ was not to be of this world, nor to come with observation. If a divine power accompanied him, and God bore him witness, and the scriptures were fulfilled in him, though his appearance was ever so mean, they ought to receive him, and to judge by faith, and not by the sight of the eye. See Isa. xi. 3, and 1 Sam. xvi. 7. Christ and his doctrine and doings desire nothing but righteous judgment; if truth and justice may but pass the sentence, Christ and his cause will carry the day. We must not judge concerning any by their outward appearance, not by their titles, the figure they make in the world, and their fluttering show, but by their intrinsic worth, and the gifts and graces of God's Spirit in them.

3.Christ discourses with them here concerning himself, whence he came, and whither he was going, v. 25-36.

(1.)Whence he came, v. 25-31. In the account of this observe,

[1.]The objection concerning this stated by some of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, who seem to have been of all others most prejudiced against him, v. 25. One would think that those who lived at the fountain-head of knowledge and religion should have been most ready to receive the Messiah: but it proved quite contrary. Those that have plenty of the means of knowledge and grace, if they are not made better by them, are commonly made worse; and our Lord Jesus has often met with the least welcome from those that one would expect the best from. But it was not without some just cause that it came into a proverb, The nearer the church the further from God. These people of Jerusalem showed their ill-will to Christ,

First, By their reflecting on the rulers, because they let him alone: Is not this he whom they seek to kill? The multitude of the people that came up out of the country to the feast did not suspect there was any design on foot against him, and therefore they said, Who goes about to kill thee? v. 20. But those of Jerusalem knew the plot, and irritated their rulers to put it into execution: "Is not this he whom they seek to kill? Why do they not do it then? Who hinders them? They say that they have a mind to get him out of the way, and yet, lo, he speaketh boldly, and they say nothing to him; do the rulers know indeed that this is the very Christ?" v. 26. Here they slyly and maliciously insinuate two things, to exasperate the rulers against Christ, when indeed they needed to spur. 1. That by conniving at his preaching they brought their authority into contempt. "Must a man that is condemned by the sanhedrim as a deceiver be permitted to speak boldly, without any check or contradiction? This makes their sentence to be but brutem fulmen—a vain menace; if our rulers will suffer themselves to be thus trampled upon, they may thank themselves if none stand in awe of them and their laws." Note, The worst of persecutions have often been carried on under colour of the necessary support of authority and government. 2. That hereby they brought their judgment into suspicion. Do they know that this is the Christ? It is spoken ironically, "How came they to change their mind? What new discovery have they lighted on? They give people occasion to think that they believe him to be the Christ, and it behoves them to act vigorously against him to clear themselves from the suspicion." Thus the rulers, who had made the people enemies to Christ, made them seven times more the children of hell than themselves, Matt. xxiii. 15. When religion and the profession of Christ's name are out of fashion, and consequently out of repute, many are strongly tempted to persecute and oppose them, only that they may not be thought to favour them and incline to them. And for this reason apostates, and the degenerate offspring of good parents, have been sometimes worse than others, as it were to wipe off the stain of their profession. It was strange that the rulers, thus irritated, did not seize Christ; but his hour was not yet come; and God can tie men's hands to admiration, though he should not turn their hearts.

Secondly, By their exception against his being the Christ, in which appeared more malice than matter, v. 27. "If the rulers think him to be the Christ, we neither can nor will believe him to be so, for we have this argument against it, that we know this man, whence he is; but when Christ comes no man knows whence he is." Here is a fallacy in the argument, for the propositions are not body ad idem—adapted to the same view of the subject. 1. If they speak of his divine nature, it is true that when Christ comes no man knows whence he is, for he is a priest after the order of Melchizedek, who was without descent, and his goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting, Mic. v. 2. But then it is not true that as for this man they knew whence he was, for they knew not his divine nature, nor how the Word was made flesh. 2. If they speak of his human nature, it is true that they knew whence he was, who was his mother, and where he was bred up; but then it is false that ever it was said of the Messiah that none should know whence he was, for it was known before where he should be born, Matt. ii. 4, 5. Observe, (1.) How they despised him, because they knew whence he was. Familiarity breeds contempt, and we are apt to disdain the use of those whom we know the rise of. Christ's own received him not, because he was their own, for which very reason they should the rather have loved him, and been thankful that their nation and their age were honoured with his appearance. (2.) How they endeavoured unjustly to fasten the ground of their prejudice upon the scriptures, as if they countenanced them, when there was no such thing. Therefore people err concerning Christ, because they know not the scripture.

[2.]Christ's answer to this objection, v. 28, 29.

First, He spoke freely and boldly, he cried in the temple, as he taught, he spoke this louder than the rest of his discourse, 1. To express his earnestness, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts. There may be a vehemency in contending for the truth where yet there is no intemperate heat nor passion. We may instruct gainsayers with warmth, and yet with meekness. 2. The priests and those that were prejudiced against him, did not come near enough to hear his preaching, and therefore he must speak louder than ordinary what he will have them to hear. Whoever has ears to hear, let him hear this.

Secondly, His answer to their cavil is, 1. By way of concession, granting that they did or might know his origin as to the flesh: "You both know me, and you know whence I am. You know I am of your own nation, and one of yourselves." It is no disparagement to the doctrine of Christ that there is that in it which is level to the capacities of the meanest, plain truths, discovered even by nature's light, of which we may say, We know whence they are. "You know me, you think you know me; but you are mistaken; you take me to be the carpenter's son, and born at Nazareth, but it is not so." 2. By way of negation, denying that that which they did see in him, and know of him, was all that was to be known; and therefore, if they looked no further, they judged by the outward appearance only. They knew whence he came perhaps, and where he had his birth, but he will tell them what they knew not, from whom he came. (1.) That he did not come of himself; that he did not run without sending, nor come as a private person, but with a public character. (2.) That he was sent of his Father; this is twice mentioned: He hath sent me. And again, "He hath sent me, to say what I say, and do what I do." This he was himself well assured of, and therefore knew that his Father would bear him out; and it is well for us that we are assured of it too, that we may with holy confidence go to God by him. (3.) That he was from his Father, par autou eimi—I am from him; not only sent from him as a servant from his master, but from him by eternal generation, as a son from his father, by essential emanation, as the beams from the sun. (4.) That the Father who sent him is true; he had promised to give the Messiah, and, though the Jews had forfeited the promise, yet he that made the promise is true, and has performed it. He had promised that the Messiah should see his seed, and be successful in his undertaking; and, though the generality of the Jews reject him and his gospel, yet he is true, and will fulfil the promise in the calling of the Gentiles. (5.) That these unbelieving Jews did not know the Father: He that sent me, whom you know not. There is much ignorance of God even with many that have a form of knowledge; and the true reason why people reject Christ is because they do not know God; for there is such a harmony of the divine attributes in the work of redemption, and such an admirable agreement between natural and revealed religion, that the right knowledge of the former would not only admit, but introduce, the latter. (6.) Our Lord Jesus was intimately acquainted with the Father that sent him: but I know him. He knew him so well that he was not at all in doubt concerning his mission from him, but perfectly assured of it; nor at all in the dark concerning the work he had to do, but perfectly apprized of it, Matt. xi. 27.

[3.]The provocation which this gave to his enemies, who hated him because he told them the truth, v. 30. They sought therefore to take him, to lay violent hands on him, not only to do him a mischief, but some way or other to be the death of him; but by the restraint of an invisible power it was prevented; nobody touched him, because his hour was not yet come; this was not their reason why they did it not, but God's reason why he hindered them from doing it. Note, First, The faithful preachers of the truths of God, though they behave themselves with ever so much prudence and meekness, must expect to be hated and persecuted by those who think themselves tormented by their testimony, Rev. xi. 10. Secondly, God has wicked men in a chain, and, whatever mischief they would do, they can do no more than God will suffer them to do. The malice of persecutors is impotent even when it is most impetuous, and, when Satan fills their hearts, yet God ties their hands. Thirdly, God's servants are sometimes wonderfully protected by indiscernible unaccountable means. Their enemies do not do the mischief they designed, and yet neither they themselves nor any one else can tell why they do not. Fourthly, Christ had his hour set, which was to put a period to his day and work on earth; so have all his people and all his ministers, and, till that hour comes, the attempts of their enemies against them are ineffectual, and their day shall be lengthened as long as their Master has any work for them to do; nor can all the powers of hell and earth prevail against them, until they have finished their testimony.

[4.]The good effect which Christ's discourse had, notwithstanding this, upon some of his hearers (v. 31): Many of the people believed on him. As he was set for the fall of some, so for the rising again of others. Even where the gospel meets with opposition there may yet be a great deal of good done, 1 Thess. ii. 2. Observe here, First, Who they were that believed; not a few, but many, more than one would have expected when the stream ran so strongly the other way. But these many were of the people, ek tou ochlou—of the multitude, the crowd, the inferior sort, the mob, the rabble, some would have called them. We must not measure the prosperity of the gospel by its success among the great ones; nor much ministers say that they labour in vain, though none but the poor, and those of no figure, receive the gospel, 1 Cor. i. 26. Secondly, What induced them to believe: the miracles which he did, which were not only the accomplishment of the Old-Testament prophecies (Isa. xxxv. 5, 6), but an argument of a divine power. He that had an ability to do that which none but God can do, to control and overrule the powers of nature, no doubt had authority to enact that which none but God can enact, a law that shall bind conscience, and a covenant that shall give life. Thirdly, How weak their faith was: they do not positively assert, as the Samaritans did, This is indeed the Christ, but they only argue, When Christ comes will he do more miracles than these? They take it for granted that Christ will come, and, when he comes, will do many miracles. "Is not this he then? In him we see, though not all the worldly pomp we have fancied, yet all the divine power we have believed the Messiah should appear in; and therefore why may not this be he?" They believe it, but have not courage to own it. Note, Even weak faith may be true faith, and so accounted, so accepted, by the Lord Jesus, who despises not the day of small things.

(2.)Whither he was going, v. 32-36. Here observe,

[1.]The design of the Pharisees and chief priests against him, v. 32. First, The provocation given them was that they had information brought them by their spies, who insinuated themselves into the conversation of the people, and gathered stories to carry to their jealous masters, that the people murmured such things concerning him, that there were many who had a respect and value for him, notwithstanding all they had done to render him odious. Though the people did but whisper these things, and had not courage to speak out, yet the Pharisees were enraged at it. The equity of that government is justly suspected by others which is so suspicious of itself as to take notice of, or be influenced by, the secret, various, uncertain mutterings of the common people. The Pharisees valued themselves very much upon the respect of the people, and were sensible that if Christ did thus increase they must decrease. Secondly, The project they laid hereupon was to seize Jesus, and take him into custody: They sent officers to take him, not to take up those who murmured concerning him and frighten them; no, the most effectual way to disperse the flock is to smite the shepherd. The Pharisees seem to have been the ringleaders in this prosecution, but they, as such, had no power, and therefore they god the chief priests, the judges of the ecclesiastical court, to join with them, who were ready enough to do so. The Pharisees were the great pretenders to learning, and the chief priests to sanctify. As the world by wisdom knew not God, but the greatest philosophers were guilty of the greatest blunders in natural religion, so the Jewish church by their wisdom knew not Christ, but their greatest rabbin were the greatest fools concerning him, nay, they were the most inveterate enemies to him. Those wicked rulers had their officers, officers of their court, church-officers, whom they employed to take Christ, and who were ready to go on their errand, though it was an ill errand. If Saul's footmen will not turn and fall upon the priests of the Lord, he has a herdsman that will, 1 Sam. xxii. 17, 18.

[2.]The discourse of our Lord Jesus hereupon (v. 33, 34): Yet a little while I am with you, and then I go to him that sent me; you shall seek me, and shall not find me; and where I am, thither you cannot come. These words, like the pillar of cloud and fire, have a bright side and a dark side.

First, They have a bright side towards our Lord Jesus himself, and speak abundance of comfort to him and all his faithful followers that are exposed to difficulties and dangers for his sake. Three things Christ here comforted himself with:—1. That he had but a little time to continue here in this troublesome world. He sees that he is never likely to have a quiet day among them; but the best of it is his warfare will shortly be accomplished, and then he shall be no more in this world, ch. xvii. 11. Whomsoever we are with in this world, friends or foes, it is but a little while that we shall be with them; and it is a matter of comfort to those who are in the world, but not of it, and therefore are hated by it and sick of it, that they shall not be in it always, they shall not be in it long. We must be awhile with those that are pricking briars and grieving thorns; but thanks be to God, it is but a little while, and we shall be out of their reach. Our days being evil, it is well they are few. 2. That, when he should quit this troublesome world, he should go to him that sent him; I go. Not, "I am driven away by force," but, "I voluntarily go; having finished my embassy, I return to him on whose errand I came. When I have done my work with you, then, and not till then, I go to him that sent me, and will receive me, will prefer me, as ambassadors are preferred when they return." Their rage against him would not only not hinder him from, but would hasten him to the glory and joy that were set before him. Let those who suffer for Christ comfort themselves with this, that they have a God to go to, and are going to him, going apace, to be for ever with him. 3. That, though they persecuted him here, wherever he went, yet none of their persecutions could follow him to heaven: You shall seek me, and shall not find me. It appears, by their enmity to his followers when he was gone, that if they could have reached him they would have persecuted him: "But you cannot enter into that temple as you do into this." Where I am, that is, where I then shall be; but he expressed it thus because, even when he was on earth, by his divine nature and divine affections he was in heaven, ch. iii. 13. Or it denotes that he should be so soon there that he was as good as there already. Note, It adds to the happiness of glorified saints that they are out of the reach of the devil and all his wicked instruments.

Secondly, These words have a black and dark side towards those wicked Jews that hated and persecuted Christ. They now longed to be rid of him, Away with him from the earth; but let them know, 1. That according to their choice so shall their doom be. They were industrious to drive him from them, and their sin shall be their punishment; he will not trouble them long, yet a little while and he will depart from them. It is just with God to forsake those that think his presence a burden. They that are weary of Christ need no more to make them miserable than to have their wish. 2. That they would certainly repent their choice when it was too late. (1.) They should in vain seek the presence of the Messiah: "You shall seek me, and shall not find me. You shall expect the Christ to come, but your eyes shall fail with looking for him, and you shall never find him." Those who rejected the true Messiah when he did come were justly abandoned to a miserable and endless expectation of one that should never come. Or, it may refer to the final rejection of sinners from the favours and grace of Christ at the great day: those who now seek Christ shall find him, but the day is coming when those who now refuse him shall seek him, and shall not find him. See Prov. i. 28. They will in vain cry, Lord, Lord, open to us. Or, perhaps, these words might be fulfilled in the despair of some of the Jews, who possibly might be convinced and not converted, who would wish in vain to see Christ, and to hear him preach again; but the day of grace is over (Luke xvii. 22); yet this is not all. (2.) They should in vain expect a place in heaven: Where I am, and where all believers shall be with me, thither ye cannot come. Not only because they are excluded by the just and irreversible sentence of the judge, and the sword of the angel at every gate of the new Jerusalem, to keep the way of the tree of life against those who have no right to enter, but because they are disabled by their own iniquity and infidelity: You cannot come, because you will not. Those who hate to be where Christ is, in his word and ordinances on earth, are very unfit to be where he is in his glory in heaven; for indeed heaven would be no heaven to them, such are the antipathies of an unsanctified soul to the felicities of that state.

Historical interpretation

Six Centuries of Reception

17 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.

17 quotes · AD 165–804
Ante-NicenePost-NiceneEarly Medieval
200300400500600700800

Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.

For, tell me, did God wish the priests to sin when they offer the sacrifices on the Sabbaths? or those to sin, who are circumcised and do circumcise on the Sabbaths; since He commands that on the eighth day-even though it happen to be a Sabbath-those who are born shall be always circumcised? or could not the infants be operated upon one day previous or one day subsequent to the Sabbath, if He knew that it is a sinful act upon the Sabbaths? Or why did He not teach those-who are called righteous and pleasing to Him, who lived before Moses and Abraham, who were not circumcised in their foreskin, and observed no Sabbaths-to keep these institutions?
AD 202IrenaeusAnte-NiceneSourceAGAINST HERESIES 4.8.2
The Lord reproved those who unjustly blamed him for having healed on the sabbath days. For he did not make void but fulfilled the law by performing the offices of the high priest, propitiating God for people, and cleansing the lepers, healing the sick and himself suffering death, that exiled people might go forth from condemnation and might return without fear to their own inheritance.
The meaning of, "Ye marvel" is, "Ye are confused," "are troubled." For if the Law was to be lasting, circumcision would not have been more authoritative than it. And He said not, "I have done a thing greater than circumcision," but abundantly refuteth them by saying, "If a man receive circumcision." "Seest thou that the Law is most established when a man breaketh it? Seest thou that the breaking of the Sabbath is the keeping of the Law? that if the Sabbath were not broken, the Law must needs have been broken? so that I also have established the Law."
"I have done one work, and ye all marvel." Observe how He argueth, where it is necessary to defend Himself, and make His defense a charge against them. For with respect to that which had been wrought, He introduceth not the Person of the Father, but His own: "I have done one work." He would show, that not to have done it would have been to break the Law, and that there are many things more authoritative than the Law, and that "Moses" endured to receive a command against the Law, and more authoritative than the Law. For "circumcision" is more authoritative than the Sabbath, and yet circumcision is not of the Law, but of "the fathers." "But I," He saith, "have done that which is more authoritative and better than circumcision."
AD 407John Chrysostomas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Post-NiceneSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
(Hom. xlix. 2) Observe, the reason why He spake so humbly of Himself, is to let men know, that He does not aim at glory, or power; and to accommodate Himself to their weakness, and to teach them moderation, and a humble, as distinguished from an assuming, way of speaking of themselves.

(Hom. xlix. 2) The Jews brought two charges against Christ; one, that He broke the sabbath; the other, that He said God was His Father, making Himself equal with God. The latter He confirmed first by showing, that He did nothing in opposition to God, but that both taught the same. Then turning to the charge of breaking the sabbath, He says, did not Moses give you a law, and none of you keepeth the law? as much as to say, The law says, Thou shalt not kill, whereas ye kill. And then, Why go ye about to kill Me? As if to say, If I broke a law to heal a man, it was a transgression, but a beneficial one; whereas ye transgress for an evil end; so you have no right to judge Me for breaking the law. He rebukes them then for two things; first, because they went about to kill Him; secondly, because they were going about to kill another, when they had not even any right to judge Him.

(Hom. xlix. 3) Ye marvel, i. e. are disturbed, are in commotion. Observe how well He argues with them from the law. He wishes to prove that this work was not a violation of the law; and shows accordingly that there are many things more important than the law for the observance of the sabbath, by the observance of which that law is not broken but fulfilled. Moses therefore, He says, gave unto you circumcision, not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers, and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man.

(Hom. xlix. 3) Which is as much as to tell them, The breaking of the sabbath in circumcision is a keeping of the law; and in the same way I by healing on the sabbath have kept the law. Ye, who are not the legislators, enforce the law beyond its proper bounds; whereas Moses made the law give way to the observance of a commandment, which did not come from the law, but from the fathers. His saying, I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day, implies that circumcision was a partial recovering.

(Hom. xlix. 3) He does not say, however, I have done a greater work than circumcision; but only states the matter of fact, and leaves the judgment to them, saying, Judge not according to the appearance, but Judge righteous judgment: as if to say, Do not, because Moses has a greater name with you than I, decide by degree of personal eminence; but decide by the nature of the thing itself, for this is to judge righteously. No one however has blamed Moses for making the sabbath give place to the commandment of circumcision, which was not derived from the law, but from another source. Moses then commands the law to be broken to give effect to a commandment not of the law: and he is more worthy of credit than you.
By saying then, (I have made) "a whole man (healthy)," He showeth that circumcision also was "partial" health. And what was the health procured by circumcision? "Every soul," It saith, "that is not circumcised, shall be utterly destroyed." (Gen. xvii. 14.) "But I have raised up a man not partially afflicted, but wholly undone." "Judge not," therefore, "according to appearance."
"Judge not according to appearance." What is, "according to appearance"? "Do not, since Moses hath the greatest honor among you, give your decision according to your estimation of persons, but according to the nature of things; for this is to judge rightly. Wherefore hath no one of you reproved Moses? Wherefore hath no one disobeyed him when he ordereth that the Sabbath be broken by a commandment introduced from without into the Law? He alloweth a commandment to be of more authority than his own Law; a commandment not introduced by the Law, but from without, which is especially wonderful; while ye who are not lawgivers are beyond measure jealous for the Law, and defend it. Yet Moses, who ordereth that the Law be broken by a commandment which is not of the Law, is more worthy of confidence than you."
"Did not Moses give you the Law? and yet none of you keepeth the Law? Why go ye about to kill Me?" The Jews brought against Him two accusations; one, that He broke the Sabbath; the other, that He called God His Father, making Himself equal with God. And that this was no imagination of theirs, but His own declared judgment, and that He spake not as do the many, but in a special and peculiar sense, is clear from this circumstance. Many often called God their Father; as "Have we not all one Father, hath not one God created us?" (Mal. ii. 10), but not for that was the people equal to God, on which account the hearers were not offended. As then when the Jews said, "This man is not from God," He often healed them, and made defense for the violation of the Sabbath; so now had the sense they assigned to His words been according to their imagination, not according to His intention, He would have corrected them, and said, "Why suppose ye Me equal to God? I am not equal"; yet He said nothing of the kind, but, on the contrary, declared by what followed, that He is equal.
He said not, "Ye are wroth with Me because I have wrought a thing which is greater than circumcision," but having merely mentioned what had been done, He left it to them to judge, whether entire health was not a more necessary thing than circumcision. "The Law," He saith, "is broken, that a man may receive a sign which contributeth nothing to health; are ye vexed and indignant at its being broken, that one might be freed from so grievous a disease?"
"The Law saith, Thou shalt not kill; but ye kill, and yet accuse Me as transgressing the Law." "And if," He saith, "I even have broken the Law, it was in saving a man, but ye transgress it for evil. And if My action was even a transgression, yet it was in order to save, and I ought not to be judged by you who transgress in the greatest matters. For your conduct is a subverting of the whole Law."
"Thou hast a devil; who goeth about to kill thee?" The expression is one of wrath and anger, and of a soul made shameless by an unexpected reproof, and put to confusion before their time, as they thought. For just as a sort of robbers who sing over their plots, then when they desire to put him against whom they are plotting off his guard, effect their object by keeping silence, so also do these.
AD 428Theodore of MopsuestiaPost-NiceneSourceCOMMENTARY ON JOHN 3.7.21-24
Jesus then employs a very convincing argument: Moses, he says, established circumcision and the sabbath and ordered that men were to be circumcised on the sabbath. But Moses established the sabbath out of convenience. Indeed, at that time nobody observed it.… He also established circumcision needlessly because it had been already established by the patriarchs. But he established this rule [about circumcision] too, in order to teach that this observance [of the sabbath] does not exist when there are cases of necessity and that sometimes it must be broken. If the sabbath can be broken for circumcision, because Moses ordered it so—and this is not considered to be a violation of the law—why then do you think the fact that a man was healed on the sabbath is a violation of the law? And, he added, making them ashamed: “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.” If a transgressor of the law is one who performs something on the sabbath, the first one to be blamed should be Moses. But if Moses is not considered to be a transgressor of the law, my action is the more excellent and I am even more above reproach.
"I have done one work, and ye all marvel." And immediately He subjoined: "Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision." It was well done that ye received circumcision from Moses. "Not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers;" since it was Abraham that first received circumcision from the Lord. "And ye circumcise on the Sabbath-day." Moses has convicted you: ye have received in the law to circumcise on the eighth day; ye have received in the law to cease from labor on the seventh day; if the eighth day from the child's birth fall on the seventh day of the week, what will ye do? Will ye abstain from work to keep the Sabbath, or will ye circumcise to fulfill the sacrament of the eighth day? But I know, saith He, what ye do. "Ye circumcise a man." Why? Because circumcision relates to what is a kind of seal of salvation, and men ought not to abstain from the work of salvation on the Sabbath-day. Therefore be ye not "angry with me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the Sabbath-day." "If," saith He, "a man on the Sabbath-day receiveth circumcision that the law should not be broken" (for it was something saving that was ordained by Moses in that ordinance of circumcision), why are ye angry at me for working a healing on the Sabbath-day?

Perhaps, indeed, that circumcision pointed to the Lord Himself, at whom they were indignant, because He worked cures and healing. For circumcision was commanded to be applied on the eighth day: and what is circumcision but the spoiling of the flesh? This circumcision, then, signified the removal of carnal lusts from the heart. Therefore not without cause was it given, and ordered to be made in that member; since by that member the creature of mortal kind is procreated. By one man came death, just as by one man the resurrection of the dead; and by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin. Therefore every man is born with a foreskin, because every man is born with the vice of propagation; and God cleanses not, either from the vice with which we are born, or from the vices which we add thereto by ill living, except by the stony knife, the Lord Christ. For Christ was the Rock. Now they used to circumcise with stone knives, and by the name of rock they prefigured Christ; and yet when He was present with them they did not acknowledge Him, but besides, they sought to kill Him. But why on the eighth day, unless because after the seventh day of the week the Lord rose again on the Lord's day? Therefore Christ's resurrection, which happened on the third day indeed of His passion, but on the eighth day in the days of the week, that same resurrection it is that doth circumcise us. Hear of those that were circumcised with the real stone, while the apostle admonishes them: "If then ye be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting on the right hand of God; set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth." He speaks to the circumcised: Christ has risen; He has taken away from you carnal desires, evil lusts, the superfluity with which you were born, and that far worse which you had added thereto by ill living; being circumcised by the Rock, why do you still set your affections on the earth? And finally, for that "Moses gave you the law, and ye circumcise a man on the Sabbath-day," understand that by this is signified the good work which I have done, in that I have made a man every whit whole on the Sabbath-day; because he was cured that he might be whole in body, and also he believed that he might be whole in soul.
AD 430Augustine of Hippoas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Post-NiceneSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
(Tr. xxx. s. 4) As if He said, Ye have done well to receive circumcision from Moses, not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers; for Abraham first received circumcision from the Lord. And ye circumcise on the sabbath. Moses has convicted you: ye received a law to circumcise on the eighth day; and ye received a law to rest on the seventh day. If the eighth day after a child is born happen to be the sabbath, ye circumcise the child; because circumcision appertaineth to, is a kind of sign of, salvation; and men ought not to rest from the work of salvation on the sabbath.

(Tr. xxx. 5) Circumcision also was perhaps a type of our Lord Himself. For what is circumcision but a robbing of the flesh, to signify the robbing the heart of its carnal lusts. And therefore it was not without reason that it was applied to that member by which the mortal creature is propagated: for by one man sin entered into the world. (Rom. 5:12) And therefore every one is born with the foreskin, because every one is born with the fault of his propagation. (vite propagenis) And God does not change us either from the corruption of our birth, or from that we have contracted ourselves by a bad life, except by Christ: and therefore they circumcised with knives of stone, to prefigure Christ, who is the stone; and on the eighth day, because our Lord's resurrection took place on the day after the seventh day; which resurrection circumcises us, i. e. destroys our carnal appetites. Regard this, saith our Lord, as a type of My good work in making a man every whit whole on the sabbath day: for he was healed, that he might be whole in body, and he believed, that he might be whole in mind. Ye are forbidden indeed to do servile work on the sabbath; but is it a servile work to heal on the sabbath? Ye eat and drink on the sabbath, because it is necessary for your health: which shows that works of healing are by no means to be omitted on the sabbath.
AD 444Cyril of AlexandriaPost-NiceneSourceCOMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 4.6
Many sources in Scripture tell us that we should do no work on the sabbath. We are to rest as it were and quit doing all those tasks that invite sweat and labor. For he says in Exodus, “Six years you shall sow your land and gather in the fruit, but in the seventh year you shall let it rest and lie still.” … Now, it is not the land—which does not even know what work is—that he releases; nor is it to the land that he gives this law. It was given to those who possessed the land. He gave rest to the land so that they would not work on it. In this and many other ways he pointed toward our feast with Christ, a feast in which those who have lived in divine fear will hurry toward that perfect and complete liberty that is in holiness and will run to that most wealthy grace of the Spirit. This is clear in the commands themselves of Moses. It is written, “If your brother, a Hebrew man or a Hebrew woman, is sold to you, he shall serve you six years, and in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you.” We, who were originally slaves to sin, had, after a fashion, sold ourselves to the devil by taking pleasure in evil. But now, being justified in Christ through faith, we shall mount up to the true and holy keeping of the sabbath, clothed with the liberty that comes through grace and glorified with the good things of God.
CHAPTER VI. A dissertation upon the rest of the Sabbath, manifoldly showing of what it is significant.

The verse is unintelligible to the many and not very clear as to its subdivisions; we will therefore speak of that first. We will therefore read it bit by bit, changing the structure of the verse; for thus you will clearly understand the meaning. If then (He says) a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, are ye angry at Me, that the law of Moses should not be broken, because I made a whole man well on the sabbath day? For a man does not receive circumcision on the sabbath day, that the Law of Moses be not broken: for it is broken when the sabbath is made void by circumcision. For as we taught before, yea rather as the Saviour Himself said, circumcision is not of Moses but of the fathers. So that by reason of the circumcision from the fathers, the Law of Moses is broken, I mean that respecting the sabbath. Therefore we must connect the words, that the Law of Moses should not be broken, to our Saviour's words: for He says, are ye angry at Me, that the Law of Moses should not be broken, because I made a whole man well on the sabbath day? The case of the sub-division then has been now herein settled, we must go to the interpretation of the things signified too, even though they are exceedingly hard to understand. Circumcision, then (He says) is a way of taking care for a man, and it surpasses the ordinance itself of the sabbath. For it was of necessity that the suffering should be made whole. What then is |488 the hindrance, or how will the ordinance of the sabbath reasonably stand in the way of healing the whole body, since it permits already without blame its breach by a partial and slight healing? for a man is circumcised and healed of the wound without blame on the Sabbath day. Vainly then (He says) are ye indignant, to the Worker of the better things objecting the transgression of the Law, when the law is not grieved at being put aside by Moses for a petty circumcision. By these things is enwoven an argument, persuading them to agree that they ought not vainly to be annoyed, since Moses had already been a type thereof, whom they foolishly thought they ought to take the part of, and making no account of his law, were being hurried off to the duty of committing murder.
AD 804Alcuin of Yorkas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Early MedievalSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
Circumcision was given for three reasons; first, as a sign of Abraham's great faith; secondly, to distinguish the Jews from other nations; thirdly, that the receiving of it on the organ of virility, might admonish us to observe chastity both of body and mind. And circumcision then possessed the same virtue that baptism does now; only that the gate was not yet open. Our Lord concludes: If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at Me because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.

Continue studying John 7:23 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.

TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.

Related study articles8