1‐2. *Christ having spent the night on the Mount of Olives,
returns in the morning to the temple and teaches.*
3‐11. *The story of the woman taken in adultery.*
12‐20. *Discourse of Christ with the Pharisees in the treasury.*
21‐29. *He upbraids them for their incredulity, and foretells His
own crucifixion.*
30‐50. *Many believed in Him, but others remained incredulous
(33), and to these He says that they are not the children of
Abraham, but of the devil.*
51‐59. *Challenged by the Jews, He declares Himself greater than
Abraham; and when they were about to stone Him for this
declaration, He hides Himself.*
Authenticity of John vii. 53‐viii. 11.
This is the second of the three passages in our Gospel, whose authenticity
has been seriously questioned. See Introd. VI. We shall sum up the
evidence by which the critical question must be decided, and then say what
we think as to the genuineness of the passage.
Evidence against Authenticity.
1. _Manuscripts._—The passage is wanting in the four oldest Greek MSS.
that we possess, viz., in B, א, A, C; the two former of which are thought
by critics to belong to the fourth, and the two latter, to the fifth
century; also in four other _uncial_ MSS., in more than sixty _cursives_,
and in thirty‐three Evangelistaries.(63) In about fifty other MSS., though
read, it is marked as doubtful.
2. _Versions._—It is wanting in the best MSS. of the “Vetus Itala;” in the
“Simple” and “Figured” Syriac; in most MSS. of the Coptic; in all of
Gothic, and in some of the Armenian.
3. _Fathers._—The passage is not commented upon by any of the Greek
fathers that wrote upon this Gospel.
4. _Internal evidence_ is said to prove the passage spurious, because of
the use of many words and phrases not elsewhere used by St. John.(64)
Evidence in favour of Authenticity.
1. _Manuscripts._—The passage is found in seven _uncial_ MSS. (one of
which, D, though itself only of the sixth century, is thought to represent
the text of the Gospels as it stood in the second century); in more than
three hundred cursives, and in six Evangelistaries.
2. _Versions._—The passage is found in the Latin Vulgate, in the Arabic,
Persian, Ethiopic, Syriac of Jerusalem, Slavic, and Anglo‐Saxon.
3. _Fathers._—_The passage_ is read by nearly all the Latin
fathers—Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, Leo the Great, Chrysologus, Sedulius,
Cassiodorus, &c.; and in the _Apostolic Constitutions_, a work of the
third, or, at the latest, the fourth century.
4. _Internal Evidence_—(_a_) Christ’s merciful treatment of the adulteress
harmonizes beautifully with His declaration immediately after (viii. 15),
that at His first coming He condemned no man. (_b_) It is inconceivable
how a passage _of this nature_ could ever have found its way into so many
MSS., unless it was written by St. John. On the other hand, it is easy to
see how, though genuine, it came to be omitted in many MSS., through the
fear that Christ’s merciful treatment of the adulteress might encourage
sinners. This is exactly what St. Augustine says:—“Nonnulli modicae fidei,
vel potius inimici verae fidei, credo metuentes peccandi impunitatem dari
mulieribus suis, illud quod de adulterae indulgentia Dominus fecit,
abstulerunt de codicibus suis, quasi permissionem peccandi tribuerit qui
dixit: ‘Jam deinceps noli peccare’ ” (St. Aug., _De Conj. Adult._, 2, 7).
As regards the arguments _against_ the passage, we believe that the reason
given by St. Augustine in the words just quoted, explains the absence of
the passage in so many MSS., versions, and fathers. As to the internal
arguments against the passage, it must be admitted that a number of words
are used here which are not met with elsewhere in the writings of St.
John; but then the subject is peculiar, and besides in many other passages
which are unquestioned, we meet with several words not used elsewhere by
the Evangelist.(65) Even Renan admits that there is nothing in the passage
that is at variance with the style of the fourth Gospel.(66)
Conclusion.
From the evidence, which has been impartially laid before the reader, we
hold we are justified in concluding that even on mere critical grounds the
passage is more probably genuine. Some, as Franzelin (_De Sacra. Script._,
Thes. xix., pp. 466, 467), go farther, and hold, that since the decree of
the Council of Trent (Sess. iv.), which defined all the sacred books of
the Bible, and _all their parts_, as found in the Latin Vulgate, to be
canonical, it is not lawful for any Catholic to question the authenticity
of this passage. They argue that this passage constitutes a _part_ (not
merely a “particula”) of the Gospel of St. John, and is, therefore,
covered by the decree of Trent. Nor can it be said in reply that the
Council, in the words “cum omnibus suis partibus,” meant to define the
authenticity of the Deuterocanonical fragments of the _Old_ Testament
only, for the Acts(67) of the Council show that these words were intended
to refer especially to the fragments of the Gospels.
To conclude, then, we hold that we are not only critically justified in
accepting John vii. 53‐viii. 11, as authentic, but that it is extremely
probable that as Catholics we are _bound_ to accept it.
Text.
1. Iesus autem perrexit in 1. And Jesus went unto mount
montem Oliveti: Olivet.
1. In contrast to those who retired to their homes (vii. 53), Jesus
retired to Mount Olivet, where He often spent the night in prayer (Luke
xxi. 37; vi. 12). Mount Olivet, separated from Jerusalem by the brook of
Cedron, was a Sabbath day’s journey from the City (Acts i. 12); that is to
say, about seven and a‐half stadia, and therefore less than an English
mile.
2. Et diluculo iterum venit in 2. And early in the morning he
templum, et omnis populus came again into the temple,
venit ad eum, et sedens and all the people came to
docebat eos. him, and sitting down he
taught them.
2. Early on the morning that followed the eight days of the Feast of
Tabernacles (see vii. 37), He came again to the temple, and all the people
who were assembled in the City from the various parts of Palestine, came
to Him, and He was teaching them.
3. Adducunt autem scribae et 3. And the scribes and
pharisaei mulierem in Pharisees bring unto him a
adulterio deprehensam: et woman taken in adultery; and
statuerunt eam in medio. they set her in the midst,
3. While Jesus was engaged in teaching the people, the Pharisees bring to
him a woman who had been caught in adultery, *in the very act*, as we
learn from the Greek of verse 4.
4. Et dixerunt ei: Magister, 4. And said to him: Master,
haec mulier modo deprehensa this woman was even now taken
est in adulterio. in adultery.
5. In lege autem Moyses 5. Now Moses in the law
mandavit nobis huiusmodi commanded us to stone such a
lapidare. Tu ergo quid dicis? one. But what sayest thou?
5. It is not stated anywhere in the Pentateuch that the adulterer and
adulteress should be _stoned_, but it is, that they should be put to death
(Lev. xx. 10). Doubtless the death was by stoning, as is indicated in
Ezech. xvi. 38‐40.
6. Hoc autem dicebant 6. And this they said,
tentantes eum, ut possent tempting him, that they might
accusare eum. Iesus autem accuse him. But Jesus bowing
inclinans se deorsum, digito himself down, wrote with his
scribebat in terra. finger on the ground.
6. They hoped to entrap our Lord; for if he acquitted the woman they could
charge him with being an adversary of the Mosaic Law (Lev. xx. 10); while
if He condemned her to death, they could charge Him with defying the Roman
Law, which at this time denied to the Jews the right of inflicting capital
punishment (John xviii. 31). What Jesus wrote it is impossible to say.
Probably it was His intention to signify by this turning away to something
else that He wished not to have anything to do with the matter in
question.
7. Cum ergo perseverarent 7. When therefore they
interrogantes eum, erexit se, continued asking him, he
et dixit eis: Qui sine peccato lifted up himself and said to
est vestrum, primus in illam them: He that is without sin
lapidem mittat. among you, let him first cast
a stone at her.
7. *Let him first cast a stone at her.* The deep wisdom of this answer
gave them no ground for charging Him with opposition to any law, and at
the same time referred them to their own guilty consciences. He does not
say that sinners may not be punished by sinners, but implies that it was
not seemly that they who were guilty of the same or greater sins should be
the accusers of the poor wretch who stood before them.
8. Et iterum se inclinans, 8. And again stooping down, he
scribebat in terra. wrote on the ground.
8. Having shamed them by this appeal to the tribunal of their conscience,
He again stooped down to write, probably to afford them an opportunity to
depart.
9. Audientes autem unus post 9. But they hearing _this_
unum exibant, incipientes a went out one by one, beginning
senioribus: et remansit solus at the eldest. And Jesus alone
Iesus, et mulier in medio remained, and the woman
stans. standing in the midst.
10. Erigens autem se Iesus, 10. Then Jesus lifting up
dixit ei: Mulier, ubi sunt qui himself, said to her: Woman,
te accusabant? nemo te where are they that accused
condemnavit? thee? Hath no man condemned
thee?
11. Quae dixit: Nemo, Domine. 11. Who said: No man, Lord.
Dixit autem Iesus: Nec ego te And Jesus said: Neither will I
condemnabo: vade, et iam condemn thee. Go, and now sin
amplius noli peccare. no more.
11. *Neither will I condemn thee. Go, and now sin no more.* Doubtless the
treatment of her accusers by Christ, and abundant grace poured into her
soul, had already moved the woman’s heart to repentance, and Christ,
exercising His Divine power, absolved her from her sin. He did not condemn
her, but, in telling her to sin no more, He showed that she had done what
was wrong, and warned her as to the future. Thus the incident shows the
boundless mercy of Christ for sinners, His hatred of sin, and, what St.
John probably had chiefly before his mind in recording it, Christ’s Divine
power to forgive sin.
12. Iterum ergo locutus est 12. Again therefore Jesus
eis Iesus, dicens. Ego sum lux spoke to them, saying: I am
mundi: qui sequitur me non the light of the world: he
ambulat in tenebris, sed that followeth me, walketh not
habebit lumen vitae. in darkness, but shall have
the light of life.
12. We do not know whether this is a new discourse, or only a continuation
of that referred to above in verse 2. On Christ’s words here recorded, see
above on i. 5. They follow Christ, who believe in Him, and obey Him.
13. Dixerunt ergo ei 13. The Pharisees therefore
pharisaei: Tu de teipso said to him: Thou givest
testimonium perhibes: testimony of thyself: thy
testimonium tuum non est testimony is not true.
verum.
13. *Thy testimony is not true*; that is to say, is not juridical, such as
ought to be accepted.
14. Respondit Iesus, et dixit 14. Jesus answered, and said
eis: Et si ego testimonium to them: Although I give
perhibeo de meipso, verum est testimony of myself, my
testimonium meum: quia scio testimony is true: For I know
unde veni, et quo vado: vos whence I came, and whither I
autem nescitis unde venio, aut go: but you know not whence I
quo vado. come, or whither I go.
14. Christ’s answer is: though I bear testimony of Myself, My testimony
should be accepted, because I am God (I know whence I came, and whither I
go); self‐interest and self‐love can have no influence on Me, so as to
warp My judgment or weaken My testimony.
15. Vos secundum carnem 15. You judge according to the
iudicatis: ego non iudico flesh: I judge not any man.
quemquam:
15. *You judge according to the flesh*; _i.e._, according to appearances,
as though I were a mere man; or, more probably, according to your carnal
ideas (Rom. viii. 4‐6); thinking Me an impostor, you condemn Me. *I judge
not any man.* The sense is that Christ at His first coming, condemned no
one, for it is of the judgment of condemnation there is question,
according to what seems the most probable view. Compare iii. 17; xii. 47.
16. Et si iudico ego, iudicium 16. And if I do judge, my
meum verum est, quia solus non judgment is true: because I am
sum: sed ego, et qui misit me, not alone, but I and the
Pater. Father that sent me.
16. The meaning is: if I did judge, My judgment would be just, because not
the judgment of a mere man, but identical with the judgment of My Father.
See x. 30; xiv. 10.
17. Et in lege vestra scriptum 17. And in your law it is
est, quia duorum hominum written, that the testimony of
testimonium verum est. two men is true.
17. Καὶ ... δὲ, indicate the transition in which He passes from speaking
of condemnation to speak of His testimony. Your law, He says, requires and
is satisfied with two Witnesses (Deut. xvii. 6).
18. Ego sum qui testimonium 18. I am one that give
perhibeo de meipso: et testimony of myself: and the
testimonium perhibet de me, Father that sent me, giveth
qui misit me, Pater. testimony of me.
18. Now, two bear testimony to Me. Two _Persons_ bore testimony that the
man Christ, who spoke to the Jews, was God. The Son Himself, as God bore
this testimony by word and work, and the Father by the miracles that He
gave the Son to perform (v. 36).
19. Dicebant ergo ei: Ubi est 19. They said therefore to
Pater tuus? Respondit Iesus: him: Where is thy Father?
Neque me scitis, neque Patrem Jesus answered: Neither me do
meum: si me sciretis forsitan you know, nor my Father: if
et Patrem meum sciretis. you did know me, perhaps you
would know my Father also.
19. To their question Jesus answers: *Neither me do you know, nor my
Father*. The sense is: You know not who I am, _that I am God_; if you knew
and recognised Me to be God, you would also know who My Father is, that He
must be God; and thus you would know the answer to your question, since
God dwells in heaven. On the use of “forsitan,” see above on iv. 10.
20. Haec verba locutus est 20. These words Jesus spoke in
Iesus in gazophylacio, docens the treasury, teaching in the
in templo: et nemo apprehendit temple: and no man laid hands
eum, quia necdum venerat hora on him, because his hour was
eius. not yet come.
20. The Greek word translated by “treasury” is γαζοφυλακίῳ, derived from
the Persian _gaza_ (money), and φυλάσσω (to guard). This treasury was a
chest or safe for holding money (see Luke xxi. 1), but by metonymy the
name was given to the cloister in which it stood. This cloister was in the
court of the women. See above on ii. 14.
21. Dixit ergo iterum eis 21. Again therefore Jesus said
Iesus: Ego vado, et quaeretis to them: I go, and you shall
me, et in peccato vestro seek me, and you shall die in
moriemini. Quo ego vado, vos your sin. Whither I go, you
non potestis venire? cannot come.
21. It is doubtful whether this is a continuation of the preceding, or a
new discourse. For the meaning of the verse, see above on vii. 34. The
particular _sin_ referred to here is infidelity; but dying in infidelity,
meant dying in many sins besides; and hence the plural _sins_, is used in
verse 24.
22. Dicebant ergo Iudaei: 22. The Jews therefore said:
Numquid interficiet Will he kill himself, because
semetipsum, quia dixit: Quo he said: Whither I go, you
ego vado, vos non potestis cannot come?
venire?
22. Josephus (_De Bello Jud._, iii. 8, 5) tells us that the Pharisees
believed that the lowest depths of hell are reserved for suicides. The
words of this verse may refer to that superstition; as if they said: does
He mean to go into the depths of hell, where we the children of Abraham
cannot, of course, follow Him? But the more simple explanation is: He
cannot escape from us wherever He may go on this earth. Does He then mean
to take His own life, that so He may be out of our reach?
23. Et dicebat eis: Vos de 23. And he said to them: You
deorsum estis, ego de supernis are from beneath, I am from
sum. Vos de mundo hoc estis, above. You are of this world,
ego non sum de hoc mundo. I am not of this world.
23. Taking no notice of what had just been said, Jesus proceeds in His
discourse. *You*, He says, *are from beneath, I am from above* (see iii.
31); _i.e._, you are earthly in origin and nature, I am of heaven;
moreover, you are earthly in sentiment, you belong to the _wicked_ world
(see xv. 19), I do not belong to it. Thus He shows them there is a twofold
difference between Him and them; and unless by the supernatural principle
of faith they are lifted above their nature, and taken out of the wicked
world, they shall die in their sins, and shall never here or hereafter be
able to follow whither He goeth. Instead of _peccato_ (Vulg.) in the end
of verse 24, read _peccatis_. *For if you believe not that I am he.* “He”
is not represented in the Greek or Latin text, and ought not to stand in
the English. The predicate may be purposely suppressed in order to leave
the meaning, which was still sufficiently intelligible, obscure, and thus
afford no opportunity to His enemies of charging Him with blasphemy.
24. Dixi ergo vobis quia 24. Therefore I said to you,
moriemini in peccatis vestris: that you shall die in your
si enim non credideritis quia sins. For if you believe not
ego sum, moriemini in peccato that I am he, you shall die in
vestro. your sin.
25. Dicebant ergo ei: Tu quis 25. They said therefore to
es? Dixit eis Iesus: him: Who art thou? Jesus said
Principium, qui et loquor to them: The beginning, who
vobis. also speak unto you.
25. This is a very obscure verse. Christ had just spoken of faith in
Himself; but in Himself _under what aspect_ He had not defined; and now in
the hope of evoking an answer for which they could punish Him, they ask:
*Who art thou?* His answer is purposely obscure. It is according to the
Greek text, τὴν ἀρχὴν ὅτι (or ὅ τι) καὶ λαλῶ ὑμῖν; which is rendered in
the Vulgate: _Principium qui et loquor vobis_, and in our Rheims version:
*The beginning, who also speak unto you*.
About the meaning of this answer there is a great diversity opinion. Some
take the words affirmatively, others interrogatively; some understand τὴν
ἀρχήν as a substantive, others as an adverb; some regard ὅ τι as a
relative (that which), others as an interrogative = τί (how or why?) and
others again as a conjunction, ὅτι (for, or, because). The Vulgate
translator may have read ὅστις (who) instead of ὅ τι, or ὅτι; or possibly
“Qui et” of our Vulgate is a corruption of “quia,” which is found in the
oldest Vulgate MSS. The objection against the Vulgate and English
translations is that while τῆν ἀρχήν is an accusative, they _seem_ to
understand it as a nominative. Nor can it be replied, that it is attracted
into the accusative case of the relative which follows; for, apart from
the fact that there is no other instance of such attraction in St. John,
the explanation is inadmissible here, inasmuch as these translations
understand the relative not as an accusative, but as a nominative. A
better defence is that of St. Augustine, who would supply some such words
as: “Believe Me to be,” before the sentence, thus making _principium_ the
accusative after _esse_: Believe Me to be the beginning, &c.
(2) Others, understanding τὴν ἀρχήν in the same way as the preceding
opinion, take ὁ τι as a relative, and render: I am the beginning, that
which I also declare unto you. Here there is room for attraction, since
the relative is now taken as an accusative; but against such attraction is
the usage of St. John, as already stated.
(3) Others, taking τὴν ἀρχήν as an adverb (from the beginning), render: I
am from the beginning, from eternity, what I even declare unto you. But it
is objected to this view that τὴν ἀρχήν is not found elsewhere in Sacred
Scripture in this sense, and moreover that the verb λαλῶ (to discuss with,
to converse) is wrongly taken to be equivalent to λέγω (to declare). To
this latter point, however, it is replied that the two verbs are
frequently interchanged in later Greek.
(4) Others thus: Even that which I have also spoken to you from the
beginning.(68) But this view is open to the same objections as the
preceding.
(5) Others again: Essentially (or, in very deed) that which I speak unto
you. So Alford.
(6) Others: On the whole, why do I even speak with you? So St. Chrys.,
Corluy, &c.
(7) Others: Absolutely, or most certainly, that which I also tell you. So
Beel., Kuin, &c. Τὴν ἀρχήν is thus taken as equivalent to _omnino_, for
which sense Beelen quotes several classical writers.
We prefer the sixth and seventh opinions; but rather the seventh, since it
supposes Christ to answer their question, though in language purposely
obscure. In the sixth opinion, Christ vouchsafes no answer to their
question, and we should naturally expect an impatient interruption from
them immediately after, were that opinion correct.
26. Multa habeo de vobis 26. Many things I have to
loqui, et iudicare: sed qui me speak and to judge of you. But
misit, verax est: et ego quae he that sent me is true; and
audivi ab eo, haec loquor in the things I have heard of
mundo. him, these same I speak in the
world.
26. Some explain thus: I have many things to say of you, and to condemn in
you, _but with this only will I charge you now_, namely, that you are
guilty of incredulity, since He who sent Me is true (truthful), and I
speak His words, and yet you refuse to believe in Me. But the ellipsis
here is not sufficiently obvious; and, hence, we prefer to understand
thus: I have many things, &c., but My judgments will be just, and such as
cannot be gainsaid.
27. Et non cognoverunt quia 27. And they understood not
Patrem eius dicebat Deum. that he called God his father.
27. The Greek is: _They knew not that He spoke to them of the Father_.
28. Dixit ergo eis Iesus: Cum 28. Jesus therefore said to
exaltaveritis Filium hominis, them: When you shall have
tunc cognoscetis quia ego sum, lifted up the son of man, then
et a meipso facio nihil, sed shall you know that I am he,
sicut docuit me Pater, haec and that I do nothing of
loquor: myself, but as the Father hath
taught me, these things I
speak.
28. *Lifted up.* The reference is to Christ’s crucifixion as is clear from
xii. 32, 33. The substance of Christ’s prediction is, that after His death
they will come to recognise Him as God. We know how truly this prediction
was fulfilled, not merely in the centurion and his soldiers (Matt. xxvii.
54), and in the crowd that returned from Calvary, striking their breasts
(Luke xxiii. 48), but all along from that time through the preaching of
the Apostles. On the Father’s teaching the Son, see above on v. 19, 20.
29. Et qui me misit, mecum est 29. And he that sent me is
et non reliquit me solum, quia with me, and he hath not left
ego quae placita sunt ei, me alone: for I do always the
facio semper. things that please him.
29. *For.* “The word seems to be used as in Luke vii. 47, to indicate the
sign of the truth of the statement made, and not to give the ground of the
fact stated” (Westc.).
30. Haec illo loquente, multi 30. When he spoke these
crediderunt in eum. things, many believed in him.
31. Dicebat ergo Iesus ad eos, 31. Then Jesus said to those
qui crediderunt ei Iudaeos: Si Jews who believed him: If you
vos manseritis in sermone meo, continue in my word, you shall
vere discipuli mei eritis: be my disciples indeed.
31. Christ here lays down the test by which His disciples are to be known.
It is only when we accept His words, and conform our works thereto, that
we can be truly said to be His disciples.
32. Et cognoscetis veritatem, 32. And you shall know the
et veritas liberabit vos. truth, and the truth shall
make you free.
32. *The truth*; _i.e._, the whole body of revelation.
33. Responderunt ei: Semen 33. They answered him: We are
Abrahae sumus, et nemini the seed of Abraham, and we
servivimus unquam: quomodo tu have never been slaves to any
dicis: Liberi eritis? man: how sayest thou: You
shall be free?
34. Respondit eis Iesus: Amen, 34. Jesus answered them: Amen,
amen dico vobis: quia omnis amen, I say unto you, that
qui facit peccatum, servus est whosoever committeth sin, is
peccati: the servant of sin.
35. Servus autem non manet in 35. Now the servant abideth
domo in aeternum: filius autem not in the house for ever: but
manet in aeternum: the son abideth for ever:
36. Si ergo vos filius 36. If therefore the son shall
liberaverit, vere liberi make you free, you shall be
eritis. free indeed.
33‐36. To Christ’s promise that the truth should make them free, some of
the crowd who remained incredulous, replied that they were never slaves,
to which Christ makes answer that they are the slaves of sin: and only
when the Son of God shall free them, shall they be truly free. Verse 35 is
an illustration drawn from ordinary life. As slaves who displease their
masters may be sold, or expelled from the household, so you who, instead
of serving God, are the slaves of sin, are, and shall remain, excluded
from the household of God here and hereafter.
37. Scio quia filii Abrahae 37. I know that you are the
estis: sed quaeritis me children of Abraham: but you
interficere, quia sermo meus seek to kill me, because my
non capit in vobis. word hath no place in you.
38. Ego quod vidi apud Patrem 38. I speak that which I have
meum loquor, et vos quae seen with my Father: and you
vidistis apud patrem vestrum, do the things that you have
facitis. seen with your father.
38. *Your father*; _i.e._, the devil (see verse 44). Others understand
ποιεῖτε as an imperative; do then the works which you have seen with your
father (Abraham). But since the following verse proves that the Jews
understood Christ to speak of another father than Abraham, for this
reason, and because of verse 44, the first interpretation is preferable.
The sense then is: You do the works that you have learned from your father
the devil.
39. Responderunt, et dixerunt 39. They answered, and said to
ei: Pater noster Abraham est. him: Abraham is our father.
Dicit eis Iesus: Si filii Jesus saith to them: If you be
Abrahae estis, opera Abrahae the children of Abraham, do
facite. the works of Abraham.
39. *If you be the children of Abraham, do the works of Abraham.* The
Greek is: If you _were_ the (true) children of Abraham, you would do the
works of Abraham.
40. Nunc autem quaeritis me 40. But now you seek to kill
interficere, hominem qui me, a man who have spoken the
veritatem vobis locutus sum, truth to you, which I have
quam audivi a Deo: hoc Abraham heard of God. This Abraham did
non fecit. not.
41. Vos facitis opera patris 41. You do the works of your
vestri. Dixerunt itaque ei: father. They said therefore to
Nos ex fornicatione non sumus him: We are not born of
nati: unum patrem habemus fornication: we have one
Deum. Father _even_ God.
42. Dixit ergo eis Iesus: Si 42. Jesus therefore said to
Deus pater vester esset, them: If God were your father,
diligeretis utique me: ego you would indeed love me. For
enim ex Deo processi, et veni: from God I proceeded, and
neque enim a me ipso veni, sed came: for I came not of
ille me misit. myself, but he sent me.
41, 42. Understanding Christ to mean that they were not true Jews, but
idolaters (πορνέια being frequently used of idolatry in the Bible; _e.g._,
Ezech. xvi. 15, foll.; see ii. 4, 5,), they protest that they are not
idolaters, and that they worship but one God. To this Christ replies, that
if they were true children of God, they would love Himself. *I proceeded
and came*, denote respectively the eternal generation, and mission in
time.
43. Quare loquelam meam non 43. Why do you not know my
cognoscitis? Quia non potestis speech? Because you cannot
audire sermonem meum. hear my word.
43. The sense is: why do you not understand My discourses (λαλιάν) on this
and on other occasions? The reason is, because you cannot, you _will not_,
receive My doctrine (λόγος). What we do not desire to hear, we are slow to
understand. Christ’s teaching, so opposed to flesh and blood, so much at
variance with all that the Jews had hoped for from their Messias, they
were very unwilling to accept. “Ideo audire non poterant, quia corrigi
credendo nolebant” (St. August.).
44. Vos ex patre diabolo 44. You are of _your_ father
estis: et desideria patris the devil, and the desires of
vestri vultis facere. Ille your father you will do. He
homicida erat ab initio, et in was a murderer from the
veritate non stetit: quia non beginning, and he stood not in
est veritas in eo: cum the truth; because truth is
loquitur mendacium, ex not in him. When he speaketh a
propriis loquitur, quia mendax lie, he speaketh of his own:
est, et pater eius. for he is a liar, and the
father thereof.
44. At last He plainly tells them who their father is. *He was a murderer
from the beginning*, for he tempted Eve, and thus brought death upon the
human race, and he prompted Cain to slay Abel.
*And he stood not in the truth*; or rather, he _standeth_ not in the truth
(the perfect of this verb having a present signification. See Winer, _Gr.
Gram. N. T._, p. 342(69)), because there is no truth in his nature. St.
Augustine argued from this verse to prove the fall of the rebel angels:
“Ergo in veritate fuit, sed non stando cecidit, et de veritate lapsus
est.” But the conclusion is not warranted by this verse, for the true
meaning of ἕστηκεν, and the reason given by our Lord for the devil’s not
standing in the truth—namely, _because truth is not in him_, show that
there is no reference to the devil as he was before the fall, but only to
his nature and methods since. *Of his own*, _i.e._, in accordance with his
nature. *The father thereof*, namely, of _lying_. We thus, with Beelen,
refer αὐτοῦ (ejus) to ψεύδους (understood). “Αὐτοῦ, scil. ψεύδους quae vox
sumi debet ex antegressa ψεύστης in qua veluti continetur” (_Gr. Gram. N.
T._, page 104).
45. Ego autem si veritatem 45. But if I say the truth,
dico, non creditis mihi. you believe me not.
45. Instead of “si” (Vulg.) the Greek has ὅτι (quia): because I speak the
truth.
46. Quis ex vobis arguet me de 46. Which of you shall
peccato? Si veritatem dico convince me of sin? If I say
vobis, quare non creditis the truth to you, why do you
mihi? not believe me?
46. Christ appeals to His integrity of character and innocence of life; as
if He said: it cannot be My life that prevents you from believing: so that
if My doctrine is true, you have no excuse.
47. Qui ex Deo est, verba Dei 47. He that is of God, heareth
audit. Propterea vos non the words of God. Therefore
auditis, quia ex Deo non you hear them not, because you
estis. are not of God.
47. “He assigns the cause of their not believing or obeying His words,
viz., because they are not of God. They are not children of God, sharers
in His spirit; but rather children of the devil, filled with his spirit”
(M’Evilly).
48. Responderunt ergo Iudaei, 48. The Jews therefore
et dixerunt ei: Nonne bene answered and said to him: Do
dicimus nos quia Samaritanus not we say well that thou art
es tu, et daemonium habes? a Samaritan, and hast a devil?
49. Respondit Iesus: Ego 49. Jesus answered: I have not
daemonium non habeo: sed a devil; but I honour my
honorifico Patrem meum, et vos Father, and you have
inhonorastis me. dishonoured me.
48, 49. They say to Him that He is a Samaritan, and has a devil. The first
charge He passes over as unworthy of notice; to the second He replies
that, so far from having a devil, He honours His Father, while they
dishonour Himself. On account of His language, strange to them, and His
earnest fervour, they say that He is possessed; and He replies that His
words and manner are due to the fact that He is seeking the glory of His
Father.
50. Ego autem non quaero 50. But I seek not my own
gloriam meam: est qui quaerat, glory: there is one that
et iudicet. seeketh and judgeth.
50. But though _you dishonour_ (the Greek has the present in end of 49)
_Me_, I will not seek to avenge the dishonour; the Father will avenge it.
See Deut. xviii. 19.
51. Amen, amen dico vobis: si 51. Amen, amen, I say to you:
quis sermonem meum servaverit, If any man keep my word, he
mortem non videbit in shall not see death for ever.
aeternum.
51. In verse 32, He promised freedom, now He promises immortality, to
those that hearken to His words.
52. Dixerunt ergo Iudaei: Nunc 52. The Jews therefore said:
cognovimus quia daemonium Now we know that thou hast a
habes. Abraham mortuus est, et devil. Abraham is dead, and
prophetae: et tu dicis: Si the prophets: and thou sayest:
quis sermonem meum servaverit, If any man keep my word he
non gustabit mortem in shall not taste death for
aeternum. ever.
53. Numquid tu maior es patre 53. Art thou greater than our
nostro Abraham, qui mortuus father Abraham, who is dead?
est? et prophetae mortui sunt. and the prophets are dead.
Quem teipsum facis? Whom dost thou make thyself?
52, 53. The Jews accuse Him of preferring Himself to Abraham and the
prophets, to which He replies—
54. Respondit Iesus: Si ego 54. Jesus answered: If I
glorifico, meipsum, gloria mea glorify myself, my glory is
nihil est: est Pater meus, qui nothing. It is my Father that
glorificat me, quem vos glorifieth me, of whom you say
dicitis quia Deus vester est. that he is your God.
54. If I glorify Myself, _let it go for nought_; it is My Father, &c.
55. Et non cognovistis eum. 55. And you have not known
Ego autem novi eum: et si him, but I know him. And if I
dixero quia non scio eum, ero shall say that I know him not,
similis vobis, mendax. Sed I shall be like to you, a
scio eum, et sermonem eius liar. But I do know him, and
servo. do keep his word.
55. The Jews knew not the Father as the Father of Christ; moreover, they
knew Him not at all with a practical knowledge so as to serve Him.
56. Abraham pater vester 56. Abraham your father
exultavit ut videret diem rejoiced that he might see my
meum: vidit, et gavisus est. day: he saw it, and was glad.
56. *Abraham your father rejoiced*, &c. He leaves it to be inferred that
He, being the object of Abraham’s hope and joy, is greater than Abraham,
and still not opposed to him. Our Lord’s _day_ here is not the eternal
existence of the Son, nor the day of His death, nor Himself, the day‐star
of justice, but the day for which all the ancient just had so long prayed
and sighed: “_drop down dew, ye heavens, from above, and let the clouds
rain the just_” (Is. xlv. 8), the day or time of Christ’s mortal life on
earth. *Rejoiced that he might see* (ἵνα ἴδη). Most probably the meaning
is, that Abraham, after God had revealed to him that the Messias was to be
born of his seed, hoped and yearned in joyful confidence that he might see
Christ on earth. *He saw it, and was glad.* It would seem from these words
that Abraham saw in the way in which he had yearned to see. And since he
cannot have yearned to see Christ’s day merely by faith, for he already
saw it by faith; hence there must be question here of some other vision.
Mald., A Lap., and most commentators hold that Abraham’s mental vision was
elevated by God, so that from limbo he saw and knew that Christ was on
earth just as the angels and saints in heaven know what happens on earth
and in hell. The aorist tenses in the Greek (εἶδεν καὶ ἐχάρη), with their
past definite signification, are not easily reconciled with this view, and
hence others prefer to suppose that there is reference to some very
special revelation made to Abraham during his life on earth, in which he
saw with something more than the vision of ordinary faith the time and
various circumstances of Christ’s mortal life (compare Heb. xi. 13).
57. Dixerunt ergo Iudaei ad 57. The Jews therefore said to
eum: Quinquaginta annos nondum him: Thou art not yet fifty
habes, et Abraham vidisti? years old, and hast thou seen
Abraham?
57. In saying Christ was not yet fifty years of age, they take an age
about which there could be no dispute, as if they said: at the very
outside Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast Thou seen Abraham? The
common opinion is that Christ died in his thirty‐fourth year, though,
strange to say, St. Irenæus held the singular view that he lived to be
fifty. (Iren., _Adv. Haer._, ii. 39, 40.)
58. Dixit eis Iesus: Amen, 58. Jesus said to them: Amen,
amen dico vobis, antequam amen, I say to you, before
Abraham fieret, ego sum. Abraham was made, I am.
58. In verse 56, He spoke of the day of His mortal life, now He declares
His eternity. *Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham was made*
(γενέσθαι, came into being), *I am* (ἐγώ εἴμι).
59. Tulerunt ergo lapides, ut 59. They took up stones
iacerent in eum. Iesus autem therefore to cast at him. But
abscondit se, et exivit de Jesus hid himself, and went
templo. out of the temple.
59. Understanding Him to claim to be eternal, as He really did, they took
up stones to stone Him, the Law commanding that a blasphemer, as they
accounted Him, should be stoned (Lev. xxiv. 16). But Jesus hid Himself,
most probably rendered Himself invisible, and thus passed out of the
temple, showing us that it is sometimes advisable, and conducive to the
greater glory of God, that we should flee from danger, even when we are
persecuted for God’s sake. Many ancient authorities add at the end of this
verse: “And going through the midst of them went His way, and so passed
by;” but more probably the words are a gloss.