VERSE 15. "John bear witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me, for he was before me." Q. Of whom did John bear witness? A. Christ. It is said of John that he cried, &c. This accords with the prophecy, Isa. xl, 3, which he fulfilled: "The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God." Q. Of whom I spake.—What time does John here refer to? Q. In what sense was Christ before John? A. Both in point of time and honor. Christ was before John as to time, for he was with the Father in the beginning, and in honor he was preferred before angels. Heb. i, 4. Q. What may be said of this text in regard to the pre-existence of Christ? A. It is strong proof on that point, for Christ being younger than John and coming after him, he must have had a pre-existent state to meet the demands of the text. VERSE 16. And of his fullness have all we received, and grace for grace. Q. What do you understand by the term "fullness" in the text? A. It refers to the abundance of grace and truth, verse 14, of which he is possessed, and which he bestows on all those who believe on him. Q. What of "grace for grace?" A. It doubtless means grace in abundance, or grace in the fullest sense. Campbell, however, and some others say, "And of his fullness have all we received, even grace for his grace; that is, of every grace or celestial gift conferred above measure upon him, his disciples have received a portion according to their measure." Dr. Bloomfield says: "χάριν ἀντὶ χάριτος, is a periphrasis of the superlative, an idiom not unknown to the Greek. Thus the sense is, 'benefits upon benefits,' abundance of benefits." VERSE 17. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. Q. What law is here spoken of? A. The law dispensation is referred to, and is mentioned as being inferior to that of Christ here represented by grace and truth. VERSE 18. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. Q. Did not Moses see God? Q. What is meant by being in the bosom of the Father? A. It intimates a very near relation; being specially dear to the Father, and present in all his secret counsels. "In the bosom." This expression probably had its origin from the custom of the ancients in sitting or reclining at meals; so that he who sat or reclined immediately below another seemed to lie in his bosom; and the most favored guests, who were placed nearest the host, sometimes literally did so. VERSE 19. And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? Q. Why were priests and Levites sent to catechise him thus? A. Because they represented the Jewish church, and took cognizance of all matters pertaining to religion. Q. Why did they consider it a matter of such importance as to send such a commission to wait upon John? A. His surprising appearance in the world and manner of life (Matt. iii, 4), together with the fame that he was rapidly gaining, and the inroads that his doctrine was making into their church (verses 5, 6,) excited to such an extent their curiosity, their fears and their jealousy; and the fact that they were looking for the Messiah or some noted personage to make his advent about that time, all combined to make his case of peculiar importance to them. VERSE 20. And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. Q. What was the import of his answer? A. That he was not that great personage that some took him to be. The answer implies that Messiah was especially the subject of conversation. VERSE 21. And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that Prophet? And he answered, No. Q. Why did they ask if he was Elias? A. Because they were looking for Elias (Elijah) to come in person to fulfill the prophecy of Malachi iv, 5. Q. How do you understand this prophecy? A. He was to come in the spirit and power of Elias, Luke i, 17, and not literally, and that John was indeed the Elias that was to come. Matt. xi, 14. Q. Did John then give a truthful answer? A. He answered according to the intent and understanding of the questioner, viz: that he was not the literal person of Elias. Q. Whom did they mean by that prophet? A. They probably had reference to that prophet which Moses said the Lord would raise up to them of their brethren like unto him. Deut. xviii, 15-18. VERSE 22. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? Q. Why do they press their question? A. That it might not be said of them that they were sent on a fool's errand. They were anxious to be the bearer of some positive information to the high court that sent them. And, doubtless, judging from John's plainness and sincerity that he was a truthful man and would give a true account of himself, they were anxious to hear what he would say of himself. VERSE 23. He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias. Q. What of John's answer? A. He gave it in the words of scripture, which showed that the prophecy (Isa. xl, 3,) was fulfilled in him, and that his office was supported by divine authority. In this his answer seems very discreet. It shows also that the agents employed in the fulfillment of prophecy may, and should, understand their mission, and the work they are accomplishing. VERSES 24, 25. And they which were sent were of the Pharisees. And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou, then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that Prophet. Q. Why is it said that the persons sent to inquire of John were Pharisees? A. Probably as explanatory of the reason for asking the questions they did. The Pharisees were extremely tenacious of rites and ceremonies, and considered themselves the only proper defenders of the religious liberties of the people; and, therefore, indignantly ask John why he baptized, seeing that he was neither Christ, nor Elias, nor that prophet. They doubtless considered John's baptism a gross encroachment on the privileges that they claimed for themselves, and insinuated that he, being only an ordinary person, had no right to exercise this new important rite. VERSE 26. John answered them saying, I baptize with water; but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not. Q. What of John's reply, that he baptized with water? A. He signified that his baptism was unto repentance, and was only introductory to the more important baptism of the Holy Ghost, which Christ should afterward give. See Matt. iii, 11. Q. What of the expression, There standeth one among you? A. Reference was made to Christ, that he was one of their own nation, that he was brought up among them, and moved about in their midst. And though they had opportunity to know him as one of the common people, yet they knew him not as the real person that he was—the Messiah to come. VERSE 27. He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose. Q. In what sense was he preferred before John? A. In point of office and honor. His office and mission were of such a high and exalted character, that John counted it too great an honor for him to even unloose his shoe-buckles. It was a custom of the ancients to remove from their feet their shoes or sandals293on becoming the guest of another, and it was deemed a mark of respect for one to stoop down and unloose the same for that purpose. VERSE 28. These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing. Q. Which side of the river Jordan are we to understand the term, "beyond Jordan?" A. East side, being farthest from Jerusalem or the land of Judea. Q. Where was Bethabara, and what is the meaning of the word? A. It was on the east bank of Jordan a little north of east of Jerusalem, and is thought to be the place where the Israelites passed the river under the leadership of Joshua; and its meaning, literally, is said to be, "the house of passage." QUESTIONS. 1. Is it right for those who have jewelry that they do not wish to wear themselves, to sell it to others, or have another sell it for them?
Decided that it would be right. 2. 1 Cor. xi, 15: "But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given her for a covering (or vail, margin). How reconcile this scripture with the mode adopted by many of our sisters in cutting their hair? This question was given to the class two weeks ago; and meantime, A. S., another correspondent, sent in the same text for the consideration of the class, giving also his own comments, which we also append. The two correspondents evidently had different ideas in regard to the text which they wished the class to consider respectively. The first correspondent, doubtless, had in mind the practice of many in cutting the hair short, contrary to what might be inferred from the text as proving that they should wear it long; while the question in the mind of the second correspondent seems to relate to the covering of the head while prophesying or praying, as introduced and discussed in the former part of the chapter. After considerable discussion, it was quite unanimously decided that the questions of hair-cutting, and head-covering, both related more specially to the taste, custom, and opinions of society and the church at the time the apostle wrote, than to divine authority or apostolic injunction to perpetuate such a taste, custom, or opinion in the church. Matt. vi, 16-18, was cited as an illustration: "Moreover, when ye fast be not as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance; for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face; that thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." At the time our Saviour instructed his disciples thus, it seems that it was proper on occasions of fasting to anoint the head and wash the face, in order not to appear unto men to fast, or to avoid outward show. But now, it was argued, the case would be reversed. If one should now anoint his head to fast, it would have the contrary effect, i. e., to appear unto men; so that the very thing that was formerly enjoined, to avoid an outward show of our devotions, would now have just the opposite effect. It was decided that the same rule would apply in regard to the questions under consideration. We give the remarks of A. S. as follows: "Paul, in his first epistle to his Corinthian brethren, reasons that on the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man; so for man to pray or prophesy with his head covered would dishonor Christ, and for woman to pray or prophesy with her head uncovered, would be dishonor to her head. "Commentators have frequently puzzled their brains as to what constitutes the covering above alluded to, very strangely losing sight of the plain declaration of our text that 'her hair is given her for a covering' (or vail). But I would ask, How in the name of reason could long hair when twisted and secured with pins and combs in a knot behind the head, or when confined in a net, in any sense answer as a covering, or vail; might it not as well be shorn? Has woman of our day borrowed the custom of plaiting or braiding the hair or of confining it in a net, from the practice of the holy women of old, whose outward adorning was not in plaiting the hair, &c., but in the exercise of a meek and quiet spirit, which in the sight of God is of great price? If our sisters justify themselves in wearing nets or cauls, whose bravery shall be taken away in the day of the Lord, and baldness take the place of well set hair, because it is customary, might they not also for the same reason justify themselves in wearing chignons, nay, in devoting themselves unreservedly to the worship of the goddess Fashion? "As a people, we profess to be led by the Spirit of God according to his revealed will. If, therefore, to plait the hair, or to inclose it in a net, be contrary to the word, it seems to me that it only remains for our sisters to wear it in its full length, which would be inconvenient, untidy, and not at all uniform; or to crop it at a point reaching just to the shoulders, allowing it to hang unconfined about the neck, thus in every sense serving as a vail or covering, and so fulfilling the word of God. "I seldom notice female apparel, but so much has been said and written about the dress reform, that, when in the congregation of the saints, I cannot well help observing a difference in the practice of sisters in regard to this matter. My attention has been more particularly drawn to the text which I have inscribed at the head of this article, from the practice of certain sisters in laying aside their hats or bonnets when worshipping God in the congregation, while others would retain them upon their heads. If, though, I, the hat or bonnet is the covering to be worn by the women when worshiping God, it is as much the duty of one to wear it, as of another; and for any woman to disregard such duty would be as coming into the presence of Royalty unbidden. "Hats and bonnets are worn as a protection against heat, and cold, and storm; but when in a heated room, no such protection is needed; reason would therefore seem to dictate that for health's sake they should be laid aside, (a proper regard of course being had to custom, lest the hearts of unbelievers be steeled against the truth,) and resumed again on going out of doors." Remarks. We are of the opinion that A. S. does not rightly apprehend the apostle's argument. We think the question discussed by the apostle did not relate primarily to the hair, but to the covering or veil worn by women, in accordance with the custom and law of the times. He argued that it was not comely or proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered (verses 5, 13,), i. e., with the veil removed. By so doing, she would dishonor her head, i. e., the man, the same as the man would dishonor his head, i. e. Christ, by praying with his head covered. (See also verse 10, with marginal comment.) After presenting his argument in the former part of the chapter on the impropriety of a woman having her head uncovered when praying, &c., he makes an appeal to what nature teaches in regard to the hair, for the purpose of illustrating his argument. (Verses 14, 15.) Possibly the foregoing opinion is not correct. It is respectfully submitted to the reader. J. M. A.