Thomas Aquinas Commentary John 7:9-24

"And having said these things unto them, he abode [still] in Galilee. But when his brethren were gone up unto the feast, then went he also up, not publicly, but as it were in secret. The Jews therefore sought him at the feast, and said, Where is he? And there was much murmuring among the multitudes concerning him: some said, He is a good man; others said, Not so, but he leadeth the multitude astray. Yet no man spake openly of him for fear of the Jews. But when it was now the midst of the feast Jesus went up into the temple, and taught. The Jews therefore marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned? Jesus therefore answered them and said, My teaching is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man willeth to do his will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God, or [whether] I speak from myself. He that speaketh from himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh the glory of him that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him. Did not Moses give you the law, and [yet] none of you doeth the law? Why seek ye to kill me? The multitude answered, Thou hast a demon: who seeketh to kill thee? Jesus answered and said unto them, I did one work, and ye all marvel because thereof. Moses hath given you circumcision (not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers); and on the sabbath ye circumcise a man. 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? Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment." — John 7:9-24 (ASV)

1. After the Evangelist mentioned how our Lord’s relatives urged him to go to Judea, he also tells us what Christ replied to them. He then tells us of his journey, covering three points:

   • First, his delay in going into Judea.
   • Second, the order of the events.
   • Third, the way Christ went up.

2. He mentions our Lord’s delay in going when he says, when he had said these things, in answer to his relatives, he himself stayed in Galilee. He did this to keep his word: I will not go up to this festival day (John 7:8). As we read, God is not like man, a liar, nor as the son of man, that he should be changed (Numbers 23:19).

3. He gives the order of events when he says, but after his brethren had gone up—that is, his relatives—he also went up to the feast.

   This seems to conflict with what he had said before: I will not go up (John 7:8), for the Apostle says, Jesus Christ, whom we preached among you . . . was not ‘yes’ and ‘no,’ but only ‘yes’ (2 Corinthians 1:19).

   I answer, first, that the festival of Tabernacles lasted for seven days, as was mentioned. Our Lord first stated, I will not go up to this festival day (John 7:8), meaning for its beginning. When it says here that he himself went up to the feast, we should understand this to refer to the middle of the feast. This is why we read a little further on, now on the middle feast day. So it is clear that Christ was not breaking his word.

   Second, as Augustine says, his relatives wanted him to go to Jerusalem to seek temporal glory. So he said to them, I will not go up to this festival day (John 7:8), for the purpose you want me to. But he did go to the festival to teach the people and to tell them about an eternal glory.

   Third, as Chrysostom says, our Lord said, I will not go up to this festival day (John 7:8), to suffer and die, as they wished. But he did go, not in order to suffer, but to teach others.

4. The way he went was not openly, but, as it were, in secret.

   There are three reasons for this. The first, given by Chrysostom, is so that he would not call more attention to his divinity and thus perhaps make his incarnation less certain, as was said above. It was also so that the virtuous would not be ashamed to hide from their persecutors when they cannot openly restrain them. Thus he says, in secret, to show that this was done according to a plan: truly, you are a hidden God (Isaiah 45:15).

   Augustine gives us another reason: to teach us that Christ was hidden in the figures of the Old Testament. I will wait for the Lord, who has hidden his face from the house of Jacob (Isaiah 8:17); so, even to this day . . . a veil is over their hearts (2 Corinthians 3:15). Thus everything that was said to this ancient people was a shadow of the good things to come (Hebrews 10:1). Our Lord went up in secret to show that even this feast was a figure. Scenopegia, as we saw, was the feast of Tabernacles, and the one who celebrates this feast is the one who understands that he is a pilgrim in this world.

   Another reason our Lord went up in secret was to teach us that we should conceal the good things we do, not looking for human approval or desiring the applause of the crowd: take care not to perform your good actions in the sight of men, in order to be seen by them (Matthew 6:1).

5. Then, at the Jews therefore looked for him on the festival day, he mentions the opportunity Christ had to show the origin of his spiritual teaching. He mentions two such opportunities:

   • One was due to the disagreement among the people.
   • The other was due to their amazement, at now on the middle feast day, Jesus went up into the temple and taught.

   The people disagreed in what they thought of Christ. He does three things concerning this:

   • First, he shows what they had in common.
   • Second, how they differed, at and there was much murmuring.
   • Third, whose opinion prevailed, at yet no man spoke openly about him for fear of the Jews.

6. What they had in common was that they looked for him on the festival day and said: where is he? It is obvious that they did not even want to mention his name because of their hatred and hostility: they hated him and could not speak civilly to him (Genesis 37:4).

7. They differed, however, because some looked for him because they wished to learn—seek him, and your soul will live (Psalms 68:33)—while others were looking for him in order to harm him: they seek my soul to carry it away (Psalms 39:15). And so there was much murmuring among the multitude concerning him, because of their disagreements. And although murmuring is neuter in gender, Jerome makes it masculine because he was following the custom of the older grammarians, or else to show that divine Scripture is not subject to the rules of Priscian.

   There was disagreement: for some of the people, that is, those who were right in heart, said of Christ that he is a good man. How good God is to Israel, to those whose heart is right (Psalms 72:1); the Lord is good to those who hope in him, to the one who seeks him (Lamentations 3:25). But others, that is, those who were badly disposed, said: no, meaning, he is not a good man. We can see from this that it was the people who thought he was a good person, while he was considered evil by the chief priests. So they say, he seduces the people: we found this man leading our people astray (Luke 23:2); we have remembered that that seducer said . . . (Matthew 27:63).

8. Here we should note that to seduce is to lead away. A person can be led away either from what is true or from what is false. In either way, a person can be called a seducer: either because he leads one away from the truth, and in this sense it does not apply to Christ, because he is the truth (John 14:6); or because he leads one away from what is false, and in this sense Christ is called a seducer: you seduced me, O Lord, and I was seduced. You were stronger than I, and you have won (Jeremiah 20:7). Would that all of us were called and were seducers in this sense, as Augustine says.

   But we call a person a seducer primarily because he leads others away from the truth and deceives them, because a person is said to be led away if he is drawn from the common way. The common way is the way of truth; heresies, on the other hand, and the way of the wicked, are detours.

9. It was the opinion of the evil, that is, of the chief priests, that finally won out. Thus he continues, yet no man spoke openly about him for fear of the Jews. This was because the people were held back by their fear of the chief priests: if any man should confess him to be Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue (John 9:22).

   This reveals the wickedness with which the leaders plotted against Christ, and it shows that those who were subject to them—the people—were not free to say what they thought.

10. Next, at now on the middle feast day, Jesus went up into the temple, we see the second opportunity Christ had to present his teaching: the amazement of the people. First, we see the object of their amazement; second, their amazement itself; and third, the reason why they were amazed.

11. The object of their amazement is the doctrine or teaching of Christ. Both the time and the place of this teaching are given.

    The time is mentioned when he says, now on the middle feast day, that is, when as many days of the feast had passed as were still remaining. Thus, since the feast lasted seven days, this took place on the fourth day. As we said, when Christ hid himself, it was a sign of his humanity and an example of virtue for us. But when he did come before them, and they could not suppress him, this showed his divinity.

    Furthermore, our Lord went when the feast was half over because at the beginning everyone would be occupied with matters relating to the feast: the good, with the worship of God, and others with trivialities and financial profit. But when it was half over, and such matters had been settled, the people would be better prepared to receive his teaching. Thus our Lord did not go to the first several days of the feast so that he would find them more attentive and better prepared for his teaching. Similarly, Christ’s going to the feast at this time paralleled the arrangement of his teaching, for Christ came to teach us about the kingdom of God not at the beginning of the world, nor at its ending, but during the intervening time. You will make it known in the intervening years (Habakkuk 3:2).

    The place where our Lord taught is mentioned when he says, into the temple. He taught there for two reasons. First, to show that he was teaching the truth, which they could not belittle, and which was necessary for all: I have spoken nothing in secret (John 18:20). Second, because the temple, since it was a sacred place, was appropriate for the very holy teaching of Christ: come! Let us go up the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob. And he will teach us his ways, and we will walk in his steps (Isaiah 2:3).

    The Evangelist does not mention what Christ taught, for, as was said, the evangelists do not report everything our Lord did and said, but only those things which excited the people or produced some controversy. And so here he mentions the excitement his teaching produced in the people: that is, that those who had said before, he seduces the people, were now amazed at his teaching.

12. He mentions this amazement when he says, and the Jews wondered. And this is not surprising, for your testimony is wonderful (Psalms 119:129). For the words of Christ are the words of divine wisdom.

    He adds the reason why they were amazed when he says, how does this man know letters, when he has never learned? For they knew that Jesus was the son of a poor woman and was considered the son of a carpenter. As such, he would be working for a living and devoting his time not to study, but to physical work, according to I am poor, and have labored since my youth (Psalms 88:15). And so when they hear him teach and debate, they are amazed, and say, how does this man know letters when he has never learned? Much the same is said: where did he acquire this wisdom, and these great works? Isn’t he the son of the carpenter? (Matthew 13:54).

13. Having been told of the place and opportunity which Christ had to reveal the origin of his spiritual teaching, he now shows the origin of this teaching.

    First, he shows them that God is the source of this spiritual teaching. Second, he invites them to accept it, at and on the last and great day of the festivity, Jesus stood and cried (John 7:37).

    As to the first, he does two things:

    • First, he shows the origin of this teaching.
    • Second, the origin of the one teaching it, at therefore, some of Jerusalem said: is this not he whom they seek to kill?

    He does two things about the first point:

    • First, he shows the origin of this teaching.
    • Second, he answers an objection, at did not Moses give you the law?

    In regard to the first of these, he does two things:

    • First, he shows the origin of this teaching.
    • Second, he proves that it comes from God, at if any man wants to do his will, he will know of the doctrine.

14. He says, Jesus answered them and said. As if to say: you are wondering where I gained my knowledge, but I say, my doctrine is not mine.

    If he had said, “The doctrine that I am presenting to you is not mine,” there would be no problem. But he says, my doctrine is not mine, and this seems to be a contradiction.

    However, this can be explained, for this statement can be understood in several ways. Our Lord’s doctrine can in some sense be called his own, and in some sense not his own. First, we can understand Christ as the Son of God. Then, since the doctrine of anyone is nothing other than his word, and the Son of God is the Word of God, it follows that the doctrine of the Father is the Son himself. But this same Word belongs to himself through an identity of substance. What does belong to you, if not you yourself? However, as Augustine says, he does not belong to himself through his origin. If you do not belong to yourself, because you are from another, what does? This seems to be the meaning, expressed in summary fashion, of my doctrine is not mine. As if to say: I am not of myself.

    This refutes the Sabellian heresy, which dared to say that the Son is the Father.

    Or, we could understand it as meaning that my doctrine, which I proclaim with created words, is not mine but his who sent me, that is, it is the Father’s. My doctrine is not mine as from myself, but it is from the Father, because the Son has even his knowledge from the Father through an eternal generation. All things have been given to me by my Father (Matthew 11:27).

    Second, we can understand Christ as the Son of man. Then he is saying: my doctrine, which I have in my created soul, and which my lips proclaim, is not mine, that is, it is not mine as from myself, but from God, because every truth, by whomever spoken, is from the Holy Spirit.

    Thus, as Augustine says in On the Trinity (Book 1), our Lord called this doctrine his own from one point of view, and not his own from another. According to his form of God, it was his own; but according to his form of a servant, it was not his own. This is an example for us, that we should realize that all our knowledge is from God and thank him for it: what do you have which you have not been given? And if you have been given it, why do you glory as if you have not been given it? (1 Corinthians 4:7).

15. Then, at if any man wants to do his will, he will know of the doctrine, whether it is from God or whether I speak from myself, he proves that his doctrine is from God. He does this in two ways:

    • First, from the judgment of those who correctly understand such matters.
    • Second, from his own intention, at he who speaks of himself seeks his own glory.

16. With respect to the first, we should note that when there is a question whether someone is performing well in some art, this is decided by one who has experience in that art; just as the question whether someone is speaking French well should be decided by one who is well versed in the French language. With this in mind, our Lord is saying: the question of whether my doctrine is from God must be decided by one who has experience in divine matters, for such a person can judge correctly about these things. The sensual man does not perceive those things that pertain to the Spirit of God. The spiritual man judges all things (1 Corinthians 2:14). Accordingly, he is saying: because you are alienated from God, you do not know whether a doctrine is from God. If anyone wants to do his will, that is, the will of God, he can know whether this doctrine is from God, or whether I speak from myself. Indeed, one who is speaking what is false is speaking on his own, because when he speaks a lie, he speaks of his own (John 8:44).

    Chrysostom explains this text in another way. The will of God is our peace, our love, and our humility: happy are the peacemakers, because they will be called sons of God (Matthew 5:9). But the love of controversy often distorts a person’s mind to such an extent that he thinks that what is really true is false. Thus, when we abandon the spirit of controversy, we possess more surely the certitude of truth. Answer, I entreat you, without contention, and judge, speaking what is just (Job 6:29). So our Lord is saying: if anyone wishes to judge my doctrine correctly, let him do the will of God, that is, abandon the anger, the envy, and the hatred which he has for me without reason. Then, nothing will prevent him from knowing whether this doctrine is from God, or whether I speak from myself, that is, whether I am speaking the words of God.

    Augustine explains it this way. It is the will of God that we know his works, just as it is the will of a head of a household that his servants do his works. The work of God is that we believe in him whom he has sent: this is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent (John 6:29). Thus he says: if any man wants to do his will, that is, God’s will, which is to believe in me, he will know of the doctrine, whether it is from God. As the other version says, if you do not believe, you will not understand (Isaiah 7:9).

17. Then when he says, he who speaks of himself seeks his own glory, he proves the same thing from his intention. He presents two intentions through which we can recognize the two sources of a doctrine.

    Some are said to speak on their own, and others not on their own. Now whoever strives to speak the truth does not speak on his own. All our knowledge of the truth is from another: either from instruction, as from a teacher; from revelation, as from God; or by a process of discovery, as from things themselves, for the invisible things of God are clearly known by the things that have been made (Romans 1:20). Consequently, in whatever way a person acquires his knowledge, he does not acquire it on his own.

    That person speaks on his own who takes what he says neither from things themselves, nor from any human teaching, but from his own heart: they proclaim a vision taken out of their own hearts (Jeremiah 23:16); woe to those foolish prophets who prophesy out of their own hearts (Ezekiel 13:3). Accordingly, when a person devises a doctrine on his own he does it for the sake of human glory, for, as we see from Chrysostom, a person who wishes to present his own private doctrine does so for no other purpose than to acquire glory. And this is what our Lord says, proving that his doctrine is from God: he who speaks of himself, about a certain knowledge of the truth which is really from another, seeks his own glory. It is for this reason, and because of pride, that various heresies and false opinions have arisen. This is a characteristic of the antichrist, who opposes and is exalted above all that is called God, or is worshipped (2 Thessalonians 2:4).

    But the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him, as I do—I do not seek my own glory (John 8:50)—is true, and there is no injustice in him. I am truthful because my doctrine contains the truth; there is no injustice in me because I do not appropriate the glory of another. As Augustine says: He gave us a magnificent example of humility when, in the form of a man, he sought the glory of the Father, and not his own. O man, you should do the same! When you do something good, you seek your glory; when you do something evil, you insult God. It is obvious that he was not looking for his own glory, because if he had not been an enemy of the chief priests, he would not have been persecuted by them.

    So Christ, and everyone who is looking for the glory of God, has knowledge in his intellect—master, we know that you are truthful (Matthew 22:16)—thus he says, he is true. And he has the correct intention in his will; thus he says, and there is no injustice in him. For a person is unjust when he takes for himself what belongs to another, but glory is proper to God alone; therefore, he who seeks glory for himself is unjust.

18. Then, at did not Moses give you the law? he answers an objection.

    For someone could tell Christ that his doctrine was not from God because he broke the sabbath, according to, this man is not of God, who does not keep the Sabbath (John 9:16). This is what he intends to answer, and he does three things:

    • First, he clears himself, by arguing from the actions of those who are accusing him.
    • Second, we see their vicious reply at the multitude answered.
    • Third, he vindicates himself with a reasonable explanation, at Jesus answered and said to them: I have done one work, and you all wonder.

19. He says: even granting, as you say, that my doctrine is not from God because I do not keep the law by breaking the sabbath, you still have no reason to accuse me since you do the same thing. Thus he says: did not Moses give you the law? That is, did he not give it to your people? And yet none of you keep the law. You received the law through the angels, and have not kept it (Acts 7:53). This is why Peter says, a yoke, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear (Acts 15:10). Therefore, if you do not keep the law, why do you want to kill me for not keeping it? You are not doing this because of the law, but out of hatred. If you were acting out of devotion for the law, you would keep it yourselves. Let us lie in wait for the just man, because he is unfavorable to us, and against our works, and he reproaches us for breaking the law ; and a little further on we read: let us condemn him to a most shameful death .

    Or, it could be explained this way: you do not keep the law that Moses gave you, and this is obvious from the fact that you want to kill me, which is against the law: you shall not kill (Exodus 20:13). Another explanation, following Augustine, is: you do not keep the law because I myself am included in the law. If you believed Moses, you would perhaps believe me also, for he wrote of me (John 5:46). But you want to kill me.

20. Then we see the vicious reply of the crowd, when he says, the multitude answered and said: you have a devil! As Augustine says, their reply indicates disorder and confusion, rather than any order, for they are saying that the one who casts out devils has one himself (Matthew 12:24).

21. Then when he says, I have done one work, and you all wonder, our Lord, at peace in his own truth, answers them and justifies himself with a reasonable explanation.

    First, he recalls the incident that is troubling them. Second, he shows that this should not bother them, at therefore, Moses gave you circumcision. And third, he shows the way to a just judgment, at do not judge according to the appearance, but judge according to just judgment.

22. Jesus answered and said to them: I have done one work, and you all wonder. He does not trade one insult for another, nor does he rebuff it, because when he was derided, he did not deride in return (1 Peter 2:23). He instead recalls for them his cure of the paralytic, which was the cause of their amazement. But their amazement was not one of devotion, as in your heart will be amazed and expanded (Isaiah 60:5), but a kind of agitation and disturbance, as in those who see it will be afflicted with terrible fear, and will be amazed .

    So, if you are amazed over one of my works—that is, if you are disturbed and troubled—what would you do if you saw all of my works? For, as Augustine says, his works were those which they saw in the world: even all the sick are healed by him. He sent his word, and healed them (Psalms 107:20); it was neither a herb nor a poultice that healed them, but your word, O Lord, which heals all . Thus, the reason you are disturbed is that you have seen only one of my works, and not all of them.

23. Then, at therefore, Moses gave you circumcision, he shows that there is no reason why they should be disturbed.

    First, he recalls the command given to them by Moses. Second, he states their customary behavior. And third, he presents an argument based on the first two.

24. The command of Moses was about circumcision, so he says: therefore, that is, to signify my works, Moses gave you circumcision. For circumcision was given as a sign, as we read, it will be a sign of the covenant between me and you (Genesis 17:11). For it signified Christ. This is the reason why it was always done on the genital organ: because Christ was to descend, in his human nature, from Abraham, and Christ is the one who spiritually circumcises us, both in mind and body. Or, it was done to the genital organ because it was given in opposition to original sin.

    We do not find it explicitly stated that Moses gave circumcision, except at every slave who is bought shall be circumcised (Exodus 12:44). And although Moses did tell them to circumcise, he was not the one who established this practice, because he was not the first one to receive the command to circumcise; this was Abraham (Genesis 17:10).

25. Now it was the custom among the Jews to circumcise on the sabbath. This is what he says: you circumcise a man on the Sabbath day. They did this because Abraham was told that a boy should be circumcised on the eighth day: he circumcised him on the eighth day, as God had commanded him (Genesis 21:4). On the other hand, they were told by Moses not to do any work on the sabbath. But it sometimes happened that the eighth day was a sabbath. And so, in circumcising a boy on that day, they were breaking a command of Moses for a command of the patriarchs.

26. Our Lord is arguing from those facts when he says: if a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, that the law of Moses may not be broken, why are you angry at me because I have healed a whole man on the Sabbath?

    We should note here that three things make this argument effective; two of these are explicit, and the other is implied. First, although the command given to Abraham was the first to be given, it was not canceled by the command given to Moses concerning observing the sabbath. I say that the covenant, confirmed by God, is not canceled by the law, which came four hundred and thirty years later (Galatians 3:17). And so Christ is arguing from this: although when dealing with human laws, the later ones cancel the earlier laws, in the case of divine laws, the earlier ones have greater authority. Thus the command given to Moses about observing the sabbath does not cancel the command which was given to Abraham concerning circumcision. Therefore, much less does it interfere with me, who am only doing what was decided by God before the creation of the world for the salvation of mankind; and this salvation was symbolized by the sabbath.

    Another point is that the Jews were commanded not to work on the sabbath, yet they did do things that were related to the salvation of the individual. So Christ is saying: if you people, who were commanded not to work on the sabbath, circumcise on that day (and this concerns the salvation of the individual, and thus it was done to an individual organ) and you do this so that the law of Moses may not be broken (from which it is clear that those things that pertain to salvation should not be omitted on the sabbath), it follows with greater reason that a man should do on that day those things that pertain to the salvation of everyone. Therefore, you should not be indignant with me because I have healed a whole man on the Sabbath.

    The third point is that each command was a symbol, for all these things happened to them in symbol (1 Corinthians 10:11). Thus, if one symbol (the command to observe the sabbath) does not cancel the other symbol (the command to circumcise), much less does it cancel the truth. For circumcision symbolized our Lord, as Augustine says. Finally, he says, a whole man, because, since God’s works are perfect, the man was cured so as to be healthy in body, and he believed so as to be healthy in soul.

27. Then when he says, do not judge according to the appearance, but judge according to just judgment, he guides them to a fair consideration of himself, so that they do not judge him according to appearances, but give a judgment which is just. There are two ways in which one is said to judge according to appearances. First, a judge may reach his decision relying on the allegations: men see the things that are evident (1 Samuel 16:7). But this way can lead to error; thus he says, do not judge according to the appearance, that is, by what is immediately evident, but examine the matter diligently: I diligently investigated the stranger’s cause (Job 29:16); he will not judge by appearances (Isaiah 11:3).

    In the second way, do not judge according to the appearance means do not show partiality or favoritism in your judgment, for all judges are forbidden to do this. You will not show favoritism when judging a person who is poor (Exodus 23:3); you have shown partiality in your judgment (Malachi 2:9). To show partiality in a judgment is to not give a just judgment because of love, deference, fear, or the status of a person—things which have nothing to do with the case. So he says: do not judge according to the appearance, but with a just judgment, as if to say: just because Moses is more honored among you than I am, you should not base your decision on our reputations, but on the nature of the facts, because the things I am doing are greater than what Moses did.

    But it should be noted, according to Augustine, that one who loves all equally does not judge with partiality. For when we honor people differently according to their rank, we must beware of showing partiality.