279
THE KING’S BUSINESS
the feast called (rather, calleth) the bridegroom and saith unto him, Every man at the beginning (rather, first) doth set forth (the) good wine; and when men have well drunk (rather, are become drunk) then that which is zvorse: but (omit, but) thou hast kept good wine until now.” The servants were witnesses of what the water was when they put it into the jars; the ruler of the feast was a witness of what the water had become when it was brought to him after Jesus had willed the change. There could be no possible collusion between the witnesses, and the inde pendent witnesses served to establish the reality and certainty of the mir acle. Of the excellency of the wine that Jesus made there could be no mistake, the ruler of the feast was doubtless a man of large experience in such matters and he never had tasted such wine as that before. Our Lord Jesus is the One who gives the best wine. There is none other like it and today He is giving out water that becomes wine (John 4:14; 7:37- 39; cf. Acts 2:13; Eph. 5:18). The wine that Jesus gives exhilarates but never intoxicates (Eph. 5:18). Some have seen in Jesus providing wine for this feast an occasion for criticism, but there is no objection to any one’s drinking wine that Jesus makes. That the wine was not in toxicating is evident from the fact that new made wine never is intoxi cating. This wine was as the pure fresh juice of the grapes only of the very best quality. The alcohol in ordi nary wines is the product of a process of decay that takes place in the wine after it is made. The one who tastes the wine that Jesus gives will have ho more taste for this world’s poor wine. Occasion for criticism is also found in the supposed fact that the men at this feast were already drunk, but there is not a word to indicate
ply something superior to the ordi nary processes of nature. True mir acles do not contradict the laws of nature; they simply transcend the or dinary working of natural forces. There is a wide gulf between this mir acle, as well as the other miracles of the Bible, and the false miracles of the apocryphal Gospels and of church tra dition. There is a divine simplicity here and the whole simple story im presses the mind with the stupendous nature of this act of our Lord; it was a creative act. There is a remarkable reticence on John’s part in not de scribing the miraculous change which had taken place in the water; he sim ply presupposes it. Presumably he himself did not know how the change was wrought and records no more than he knew. He does not even en thuse over the miracle. Some one has said, “The writer seems as im passive as an angel. Do men write history after this fashion?” The ruler of the feast was one ap pointed from among the guests to pre side over the festivities. Seemingly He first tasted the wine and then sent it around to all the guests. It is worthy of note how the Lord Him self had regard to all the convention alities which were not distinctly wrong, He commanded that the wine be borne to the one who had been chosen as the ruler of the feast. Even in the little niceties of social life, our Lord was a perfect gentleman. Very unlike those in our own day who seem to fancy that loyalty to God requires a man to be boorish in social life. Vs. 9, 10. ‘‘When (rather, And when) the ruler of the feast had (omit, had) tasted the water that was (omit, that was) made (rather, now become) wine and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) (rather, but the ser vant which had drawn the water knew) the governor (rather, ruler) of
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker