Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 5:26
For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
26. so hath he given to the Son ] Better, so gave He also to the Son. Comp. ‘the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father’ (Joh 6:57). The Father is the absolutely living One, the Fount of all Life. The Messiah, however, imparts life to all who believe; which He could not do unless He had in Himself a fountain of life; and this the Father gave Him when He sent Him into the world. The Eternal Generation of the Son from the Father is not here in question; it is the Father’s communication of Divine attributes to the Incarnate Word that is meant.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
As the Father hath life – God is the source of all life. He is thence called the living God, in opposition to idols which have no life. Act 14:15; we preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities (idols) unto the living God, Jos 3:10; 1Sa 17:26; Jer 10:10. See also Isa 40:18-31.
In himself – This means that life in God, or existence, is not derived from any other being. Our life is derived from God. Gen 2:7; God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul – that is, a living being. All other creatures derive their life from him. Psa 104:30, Psa 104:29; thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created; thou takest away their breath, they die and return to their dust. But God is underived. He always existed as he is. Psa 90:2; from everlasting to everlasting thou art God. He is unchangeably the same, Jam 1:17. It cannot be said that he is self-existent, because that is an absurdity; no being can originate or create himself; but he is not dependent on any other for life. Of course, no being can take away his existence; and of course, also, no being can take away his happiness. He has in himself infinite sources of happiness, and no other being, no change in his universe can destroy that happiness.
So – In a manner like his. It corresponds to the first as, implying that one is the same as the other; life in the one is the same, and possessed in the same manner, as in the other.
Hath he given – This shows that the power or authority here spoken of was given or committed to the Lord Jesus. This evidently does not refer to the manner in which the second person of the Trinity exists, for the power and authority of which Christ here speaks is that which he exercises as Mediator. It is the power of raising the dead and judging the world. In regard to his divine nature, it is not affirmed here that it is in any manner derived; nor does the fact that God is said to have given him this power prove that he was inferior in his nature or that his existence was derived. For:
1. It has reference merely to office. As Mediator, he may be said to have been appointed by the Father.
2. Appointment to office does not prove that the one who is appointed is inferior in nature to him who appoints him. A son may be appointed to a particular work by a parent, and yet, in regard to talents and every other qualification, may be equal or superior to the father. He sustains the relation of a son, and in this relation there is an official inferiority. General Washington was not inferior in nature and talents to the men who commissioned him. He simply derived authority from them to do what he was otherwise fully able to do. So the Son, as Mediator, is subject to the Father; yet this proves nothing about his nature.
To have life – That is, the right or authority of imparting life to others, whether dead in their graves or in their sins.
In himself – There is much that is remarkable in this expression. It is in Him as it is in God. He has the control of it, and can exercise it as he will. The prophets and apostles are never represented as having such power in themselves. They were dependent; they performed miracles in the name of God and of Jesus Christ Act 3:6; Act 4:30; Act 16:18; but Jesus did it by his own name, authority, and power. He had but to speak, and it was done, Mar 5:41; Luk 7:14; Joh 11:43. This wonderful commission he bore from God to raise up the dead as he pleased; to convert sinners when and where he chose; and finally to raise up all the dead, and pronounce on them an eternal doom according to the deeds done in the body. None could do this but he who had the power of creation – equal in omnipotence to the Father, and the power of searching all hearts – equal in omniscience to God.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 26. Hath he given to the Son to have life, &c.] Here our Lord speaks of himself in his character of Messiah, or envoy of God.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
How the eternal Father hath life in himself, is obvious to every capacity; for he is the First Mover, and therefore must have his life in and from himself, and not from any other; and he is the First Cause, and therefore that life which floweth from him to all created beings, must first be in him, as in its fountain. But in what sense it is said, that he hath
given to the Son to have life in himself whether as God, by his eternal generation, or as the Messiah and Mediator between God and man, and so the fountain of spiritual life to believers, is more questioned. Those who understand it as to the Divine nature, say, that this phrase, hath life in himself, is expressive of the name Jehovah; and that Christ is proved to be the true Jehovah by what is here said, that he hath life in himself. But they distinguish betwixt having life from or by himself, and having life in himself; the text saith, it is given to Christ to have life in himself. But there are other interpreters, who seem better to understand it of Christ as Mediator, to whom it is given to have life in himself, to communicate to his creatures; and think it is well interpreted by Joh 1:4, In him was life, and the life was the light of men.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
26. given to the Son, &c.Doesthis refer to the essential life of the Son before all time (Joh1:4) (as most of the Fathers, and OLSHAUSEN,STIER, ALFORD,&c., among the moderns), or to the purpose of God that thisessential life should reside in the Person of the Incarnate Son, andbe manifested thus to the world? [CALVIN,LUCKE, LUTHARDT,&c.] The question is as difficult as the subject is high. But asall that Christ says of His essential relation to the Fatheris intended to explain and exalt His mediatorial functions, sothe one seems in our Lord’s own mind and language mainly thestarting-point of the other.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For as the Father hath life in himself,…. Is the living God, the fountain of life, and is the author of life to all living creatures; or rather has eternal life in his mind, his heart, his counsel, and his covenant, and in his hands, for all his chosen ones, which seems to he the peculiar sense here:
so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; he hath not only made the purpose of it in him, and given the promise of it to him; but even eternal life itself, he has put into his hands, and secured it in him for them, 1Jo 5:11, to give it to as many as he has given him: and he does give it to all his sheep, so that not one of them shall perish; which shows that he and his Father are one, though not in person, yet as in affection, will and power, so in nature and essence. The Son has life in himself, essentially, originally, and inderivatively as the Father has, being equally the living God, the fountain of life, and donor of it, as he; and therefore this is not a life which he gives, or communicates to him; but eternal life is what the one gives, and the other receives, according to the economy of salvation settled between them: and hence it is, that all that hear Christ’s voice spiritually shall live eternally; for these words are a reason of the former, and confirm the truth of them, as well as show the equality of the Son with the Father, in that he is equal to such a trust, as to have eternal life committed to him.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
In himself ( ). The Living God possesses life wholly in himself and so he has bestowed this power of life to the Son as already stated in the Prologue of the Logos (1:3). For “gave” (, timeless aorist active indicative) see also John 3:35; John 17:2; John 17:24. The particles “as” () and “so” () mark here the fact, not the degree (Westcott).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
As – so [ – ] . The correspondence is that of fact, not of degree.
Hath he given [] . Rev., more strictly, gave, the aorist tense pointing back to the eternal past.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “For as the Father hath life in himself,” (hosper gar ho pater echei zoen en heauto) “For just as the Father has or possesses life in himself,” as expressed Psa 36:9, “For with thee is (or exists) the foundation of life,” the source of life, Jer 2:13.
2) “So hath he given to the Son,” (houtos kai to huio edoken) “Even so he gave to the Son,” or doled out to the Son, Joh 3:34-35.
3) “To have life in himself;” (zoen echein en heauto) “To have, hold, or possess life in himself,” continuously, so that like the Father, the Son imparts life in Him to the dead, Joh 1:4; 1Co 15:45; Joh 4:14; Joh 14:6, as “The way, the truth, and the life.”
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
26. For as the Father hath life in himself. He shows whence his voice derives such efficacy; namely, that he is the fountain of life, and by his voice pours it out on men; for life would not flow to us from his mouth, if he had not in himself the cause and source of it. God is said to have life in himself, not only because he alone lives by his own inherent power, but because, containing in himself the fullness of life, he communicates life to all things. And this, indeed, belongs peculiarly to God, as it is said, With thee is the fountain of life, (Psa 36:9.) But because the majesty of God, being far removed from us, would resemble an unknown and hidden source, for this reason it has been openly manifested in Christ. We have thus an open fountain placed before us, from which we may draw. The meaning of the words is this: “God did not choose to have life hidden, and, as it were, buried within himself, and therefore he poured it into his Son, that it might flow to us.” Hence we conclude, that this title is strictly applied to Christ, so far as he was manifested in the flesh.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(26) Hath he given to the Son.Better, gave He to the Son also.
Life in himself.The Son has spoken of the dead hearing His voice and living, but this giving of life to others can only be by one who has in himself an original source of life. This the Father has, and this the Son also has. To the Son in His pre-existent state it was natural, as being equal with the Father. To the Son who had emptied Himself of the exercise of the attributes which constituted the glory of that state (comp. again Php. 2:6 et seq.), it was part of the Fathers gift by which He exalted Him exceedingly, and gave Him the name which is above every name. It was, then, a gift in time to One who had possessed it before all time, and for the purposes of the mediatorial work had relinquished it. It was a gift, not to the Eternal Son, but to the Incarnate Word.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
“For as the Father has life in himself, so has he granted the Son also to have life in himself.”
And the life that He is now offering has its source not only in the Father but in Himself, for He and the Father are one in having and giving life in themselves. He indeed is Himself the source of spiritual life, that life through which men can come to the Father (Joh 14:6).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Joh 5:26. For as the Father hath life, &c. “For as the Father is the Fountain of life, who has it necessarily and in the most perfect manner in himself, and communicates it to all the living; so in the dispensation, whereby he has constituted his own essentially living Son to be the Messiah, he has granted to him, that in his incarnate state, and in the execution of his office, he shall have this life in himself, with authority to communicate life to others, in raising them from the dead, by his own fund of quickening power, which is inherent in himself.”
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Joh 5:26-27 . The life denoted by the aforesaid , seeing the subjects of it were dead , must be something which is in process of being imparted to them, a life which comes from the Son, the quickener. But He could not impart it if He had not in Himself a divine and independent fountain of life, like the Father, which the Father, the absolutely living One (Joh 6:57 ), gave Him when He sent Him into the world to accomplish His Messianic work; comp. Joh 10:36 . The following (Joh 5:27 ) should itself have prevented the reference to the eternal generation (Augustine and many others, even Gess). Besides (therefore Joh 5:27 ), if only the (comp. , Joh 5:21 ) are to live, and the other not, the Son must have received from the Father the warrant and power of judging and of deciding who are to live and who not. This power is given Him by the Father because He is the Son of man; for in His incarnation, i.e . in the fact that the Son of God (incarnate) is a child of man (comp. Phi 2:7 ; Gal 4:4 ; Rom 1:3 ; Rom 8:3 ), the essence of His nature as Redeemer consists, and this consequently is the reason in the history of redemption why the Father has equipped Him for the Messianic function of judgment. Had the Son of God not become a child of man , He could not have been the fulfiller of the Father’s decree of redemption, nor have been entrusted with judicial power. Luthardt (comp. Hofmann, Schriftbew . II. 1, p. 78) says incorrectly: “for God desired to judge the world by means of a man ,” which is a thought much too vague for this passage, and is borrowed from Act 17:31 . De Wette, with whom Brckner concurs (comp. also Reuss), more correctly says: “It denotes the Logos as a human manifestation, [213] and in this lies the reason why He judges, for the hidden God could not be judge .” But this negative and refined definition of the reason given, “because He is the Son of man,” can all the less appropriately be read between the lines, the more it savours of Philonic speculation, and the more current the view of the Deity as a Judge was among the Jews. So, following Augustine, Luther, Castalio, Jansen, and most others, B. Crusius (comp. also Wetstein, who adduces Heb 4:15 ): “because executing judgment requires direct operation upon mankind.” [214] Others (Grotius, Lampe, Kuinoel, Lcke, Olshausen, Maier, Bumlein, Ewald, and most others, now also Tholuck): “ . is He who is announced in Dan 7 and in the book of Enoch as the Messiah ” (see on Mat 8:20 ), where the thought has been set forth successively in various ways; Lcke (so also Baeumlein): “because He is the Messiah , and judgment essentially belongs to the work of the Messiah” (comp. Ewald). Tholuck comes nearest to the right sense: “because He is become man, i.e . is the Redeemer , but with this redemption itself the also is given.” Hengstenberg: “as a reward for taking humanity upon Him .” Against the whole explanation from Dan 7:13 , however, to which Beyschlag, Christol . p. 29, with his explanation of the ideal man (the personal standard of divine judgment), adheres, it is decisive that in the N. T. throughout, wherever “Son of man” is used to designate the Messiah, both words have the article: (in Joh 1:51 ; Joh 3:13-14 ; Joh 6:27 ; Joh 6:52 ; Joh 6:62 ; Joh 8:28 ; Joh 12:23 ; Joh 12:34 ; Joh 13:31 ): without the article [215] occurs in Rev 1:13 ; Rev 14:14 , but it does not express the idea of the Messiah. Thus the prophecy in Daniel does not enter into consideration here; but “ son of a human being ” is correlative to “ son of God ” (of the Father , Joh 5:25-26 ), although it must frankly be acknowledged that the expression does not necessarily presuppose birth from a virgin . [216] The Peshito, Armenian version, Theophylact, Euthymius Zigabenus, Paulus, connect the words rightly taking . to mean man with what follows: “ Marvel not that He is a man .” This is not in keeping with the context, while witnesses for the ordinary connection.
] in Himself . “Est emphasis in hoc dicto: vitam habere in sese, i. e. alio modo quam creaturae, angeli et homines,” Melancthon. Comp. Joh 1:4 , Joh 14:6 . [217] The words are certainly decisive against Gess ( Pers. Chr . p. 301), who ascribes the gift of life by the Father to the Son as referring only to His pre-existent glory and His state of exaltation, which he considers to have been “ suspended ” during the period of His earthly life. The prayer at the grave of Lazarus only proves that Christ exercised the power of life, which was bestowed upon Him as His own, in accordance with the Father’s will. See on Joh 5:21 .
[213] Or the relative humanity of Him who is God’s Son . The expression is therefore different from: “ because He is man .”
[214] Comp. also Baur in Hilgenfeld’s Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theol . 1860, p. 276 ff., and N. T. Theol . p. 79 ff.; Holtzmann in the same, 1865, p. 234 f. Akin to this interpretation is that of Weiss, p. 224: “so far as He is a son of man, and can in human form bring near to men the life-giving revelation of God .” Even thus, however, what is said to be the point of the reason given has to be supplied. This holds also against Godet, who confounds things that differ: “On one side judgment must proceed from the womb of humanity as an ‘hommage Dieu,’ and on the other it is entrusted by God’s love as a purification of humanity to Him who voluntarily became man.” Groos (in the Stud. u. Krit . 1868, p. 260) substantially agrees with Beyschlag.
[215] Weizscker ( Unters. b. d. evang. Gesch . p. 431) cuts away this objection by the statement, without proof, that . without the article belongs to the explanatory exposition of the fourth Gospel. Baeumlein and Beyschlag, to account for the absence of the article, content themselves with saying that . is the predicate, and therefore (comp. Holtzmann) the point would turn on the meaning of the conception. But the formal and unchanging title, ., not agree with that; and, moreover, in this way the omission only of the first article, and not of the second ( ), would be explained; can only mean son of a man . Comp. Barnabas, Ep . xii. (Dressel.)
[216] He who is Son of God is son of a man the latter , Joh 1:14 ; the former , Rom 9:5 ; Rom 1:3 .
[217] Quite in opposition to the , Weizscker, in the Jahrb. f. Deutsche Theol . 1857, p. 179, understands the possession of life as brought about “by transference or communication from the Father.” Chap. Joh 6:57 likewise indicates life as an essential possession, brought with Him (Joh 1:4 ) from His pre-existent state in His mission from the Father, and according to the Father’s will and appointment, Col 1:19 ; Col 2:10 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
Ver. 26. So hath he given to the Son ] What wonder, then, if faith, apprehending the infinite fountain of life, derive thence some rivulet of life, and apply the same to us for spiritual quickening?
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
26, 27. ] We have here again and bound together as the two great departments of the Son’s working; the former, as substantiating the just uttered; the latter, as leading on to the great announcement of the next verse. But the two departments spring from two distinct sources , united in the Person of the Incarnate Son of God. The Father hath given Him to have life in Himself, as He is THE SON OF GOD. We have none of us life in ourselves: in Him we live and move and have our being. But He, as the Father is, is the source of Life. Then again the Father hath given Him power to pass judgment, because He is THE SON OF MAN; man is to be judged by Man, by that Man whom God hath appointed, who is the inclusive Head of humanity, and to whom mankind, and man’s world , pertain by right of covenant-purchase. This leads the thought to the great occasion when judgment shall be executed; which accordingly is treated of in the next verse.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Joh 5:26 . The 26th verse partly explains the apparent impossibility. . “The particles mark the fact of the gift and not the degrees of it” (Westcott). As the Father has in Himself, and therefore at His own command, life which He can impart as He will: so by His gift the Son has in Himself life which He can communicate directly to whom He will. [similarly used Mar 4:17 , Joh 4:14 , etc.] excludes dependence for life on anything external to self. From this it follows that what is so possessed is possessed with uninter rupted fulness, and can at will be imparted. , “the tense carries us back beyond time,” says Westcott. This is more than doubtful; although several interpreters suppose the eternal generation of the Son is in view. That is precluded both by the word “gave” [which “denotat id quod non per naturalem generationem, sed per benevolam Patris voluntatem est concessum,” Mat 28:18 Luk 1:32 ; Joh 3:34 ; Joh 6:37 , Lampe] and by the context, especially by the last clause of Joh 5:27 . The opinions of the Fathers and Reformers are cited in Lampe. See further Stevens, Johan. Theol. , p. 60.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
as = even as. Greek. hosper.
hath He given = He gave (in eternity past).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
26, 27.] We have here again and bound together as the two great departments of the Sons working;-the former, as substantiating the just uttered; the latter, as leading on to the great announcement of the next verse. But the two departments spring from two distinct sources, united in the Person of the Incarnate Son of God. The Father hath given Him to have life in Himself, as He is THE SON OF GOD. We have none of us life in ourselves: in Him we live and move and have our being. But He, as the Father is, is the source of Life. Then again the Father hath given Him power to pass judgment, because He is THE SON OF MAN; man is to be judged by Man,-by that Man whom God hath appointed, who is the inclusive Head of humanity, and to whom mankind, and mans world, pertain by right of covenant-purchase. This leads the thought to the great occasion when judgment shall be executed; which accordingly is treated of in the next verse.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Joh 5:26. , to have in Himself) Ch. Joh 1:4. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Joh 5:26
Joh 5:26
For as the Father hath life in himself, even so gave he to the Son also to have life in himself:-That life would be bestowed by the Son of God, since God had given the same power to the Son to make alive as he possessed.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
hath life: Exo 3:14, Psa 36:9, Psa 90:2, Jer 10:10, Act 17:25, 1Ti 1:17, 1Ti 6:16
so hath: Joh 1:4, Joh 4:10, Joh 7:37, Joh 7:38, Joh 8:51, Joh 11:26, Joh 14:6, Joh 14:19, Joh 17:2, Joh 17:3, 1Co 15:45, Col 3:3, Col 3:4, 1Jo 1:1-3, Rev 7:17, Rev 21:6, Rev 22:1, Rev 22:17
Reciprocal: Psa 42:2 – living Ecc 3:17 – God Dan 4:34 – him Joh 3:34 – for God Joh 5:19 – and Joh 6:57 – I live Joh 11:25 – the life Act 3:15 – Prince Act 14:15 – the living Act 17:28 – in him Rom 5:10 – we shall 1Ti 6:13 – who quickeneth Heb 9:27 – but 1Pe 2:4 – a living 1Pe 4:6 – to them 2Pe 1:17 – God 1Jo 5:7 – The Father 1Jo 5:11 – this
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
6
A father transfers his characteristics to his offspring as an established rule. This relation between God and Christ is no exception to the rule, for Jesus is able to impart spiritual life to those who will accept it, because He is the Son of the life-giving God.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
The Apologists Bible Commentary
John 5
26″For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself;
CommentaryJesus explains that the reason He is able to call forth the dead into eternal life is because (GAR, “for”) He is self-existent, just as the Father is. The phrase “life in Himself” is unlikely a reference to the Incarnation, for John refers to the pre-incarnate Logos as having life “in Him” (1:4). If it referred only to the Incarnation, it would not seem to provide a reasonable explanation of how the Son is able to give life to those physically and spiritually dead. Since the Father is said to have “life in Himself,” and the Bible teaches that YHWH is self-existent, depending on no one or nothing for life, it seems reasonable that self-existence is Jesus intended meaning here. One who is self-existent can only be God, and only God can give life “to whom He wills.” The “just as…even so” construction – once again – equates the Son to the Father. Jesus is not denying His equality with the Father here, as some would argue (see Other Views Considered, below), but rather explaining exactly how the Son is equal to the Father. The Son did not make Himself equal to God, as the Jews assumed, but rather the Son has “life in Himself” because of the Father. Thus, the intimate, loving, and submissive relationship of the Son to the Father is highlighted. The Son does not derive existence from the Father in the same way that we do – for we do not have “life in ourselves.” Rather, the Son is essentially equal with the Father in terms of the life that is in them – and uniquely so – yet the Son also receives this status from the Father. It is unaccountable in the context of answering the Jews’ accusation that Jesus would say “just so…even as,” unless He wished to establish equality in regards to “life in Himself” with His Father. Earlier in this passage, Jesus says that He does whatever the Father does; He now declares that He possesses life in the same way the Father possesses it. The impartation of life-in-himself to the Son must be an act belonging to eternity, of a piece with the eternal Father/Son relationship, which is itself of a piece with the relationship between the Word and God, a relationship that existed “in the beginning (1:1). That is why the Son himself can be proclaimed as ‘the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us (1 Jn 1:2)…. In the immediate context, it is this eternal impartation of life-in-himself to the Son that ground his authority and power to call the dead to life by his powerful word (Carson , p. 257). The expression “to have life in oneself” is not intended as a general description of the divine “being” but as a reference to the fact that, just as the Father as Creator and Consummator possesses life, he as given that life possession to the Son, not merely as the executor of incidental assignments but in the absolute sense of sharing in the Father’s power (Ridderbos , p. 198). We do not have inherent life within us. Our life is derived from others. In the physical sense, our life is given to us by our parents. However, even that transaction is shrouded in deep mystery. Again Jesus claimed deity by saying he was not dependent on another for life just as the Father derived his life from no one. Jesus possesses inherent life, the power to create and the power to renew life that has been extinguished (EBC ).
Grammatical Analysiszwhn en`eautw ZN EN hEAUTi life in himself EN hEAUTi Have something in oneself (BAGD ). hSPER..hOUTS (just) as … so (BAGD) EDKEN is the aorist indicative form of DIDMI in the active voice. The aorist indicative expresses non-continuous action and does not specify when the action occurs. In himself (en heauti). The Living God possesses life wholly in himself and so he has bestowed this power of life to the Son as already stated in the Prologue of the Logos (1:3). For “gave” (edken, timeless aorist active indicative) see also 3:35; 17:2, 24. The particles “as” (hsper) and “so” (houts) mark here the fact, not the degree (Westcott) (RWP ).
Other Views ConsideredJehovah’s Witnesses objection: Since the Son says the Father “gave” Him life, the Son must derive His existence from the Father. Therefore, He cannot be Almighty God, but must be a creature. response: It is important to note the precise wording of this verse. It does not say that the Father gave the Son life, but rather that He gave the Son “to have life in Himself.” The phrase “life in himself” (ZWHN EN hEAUTWi) is similar “life in yourselves” in 6:53 (ZWHN EN hEAUTOIS): …unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life (John 6:53-54). In both verses, Jesus is describing His ability to grant eternal life to those who believe in Him, and it is clear in John 6:53 that Jesus cannot mean life derived from one’s Father, for the Jews certainly had that. In John 6:53, lacking “life in oneself” is contrasted with eternal life, which the Son grants to all believers. Therefore, “life in oneself” means “eternal life” or “spiritual life.” Witnesses may agree on this point, but argue that the Son’s eternal or spiritual life is nonetheless given by the Father. But, unlike John 6:53, this verse defines the kind of eternal life the Son has by saying it is “just as” the eternal life the Father has. What kind of eternal, spiritual life does the Father have? Uncreated, self-existent life. The simplest meaning of the phrase is completely appropriate here. The Father has life in Himself – that is, His existence is derived from no one or nothing. One of the attributes of true Deity is self-existence, as the Watchtower itself teaches: “[Jehovah] is uncreated, without beginning” (Aid , p. 889). If the Son has the attributes of true Deity, regardless of how He came by them, He must be true Deity. More importantly, we must consider the context of this passage. Jesus is explaining how it is that He has the power to give life to those who are dead – it is because he has life in Himself, just as the Father does. If Jesus merely wanted to say that He had been given power to grant life by the Father, He could have said so without associating that power with the way in which the Father has “life in Himself.” objection: Almighty God does not depend upon another for life, even “life in Himself,” whatever that term may mean. The Father gave “life in Himself” to the Son – one cannot avoid the implication that the Son, therefore, derives His existence from one who is Superior to himself. response: It must first be noted that Trinitarians acknowledge that the Father is “superior” to the Son in terms of rank and authority, though not in terms of nature. Further, many Trinitarians see the Father as the “source” of the Son’s Deity. This concept can be traced to the writings of the early fathers of the church, who spoke of the Son as a ray of light; the Father as the source of the light. Both are light – the same substance, the same God – yet distinct from one another, the Son depending on the Father as His “source” (see, for example, Justin Martyr, Dialog with Trypho, 63). C. S. Lewis in Mere Christianity uses the analogy of a book resting atop another. The book on top derives its position from the book beneath it, and if the book beneath it were suddenly removed, the book on top would fall. The Father grants the Son His position, and the Son depends on the Father – indeed, as we have seen earlier, He does only what He sees the Father doing, and the Father shows Him everything that He does (verses 19-20). Here, Jesus declares that “life in Himself” comes from the Father, and by receiving it, Jesus has “life in Himself,” just as the Father does. Witnesses argue that the Son received “life in Himself” from the Father at some point in the past. They believe that the “giving” in this verse occurred at some point in time, with the results continuing into the present. There is a tense in Greek that would reflect his idea quite nicely: the present perfect. But John didn’t choose to use that tense. Instead, he used the aorist indicative, which is significant in that it purposely avoids attaching a time reference to the verb. It is therefore not possible to prove that the Son received “life in Himself” at some point in time from this verse. Indeed, since he could have done so but chose not to, we must ask what John’s purpose was in choosing to express himself as he did. John tells us that the Logos existed in an intimate relationship with the Father “in the beginning” (1:1) and that “in Him was life” (1:4). So, the pre-Incarnate Logos already had “life in Him” in “the beginning.” If John intended “the beginning” to mean the absolute beginning of God’s creation, He would be teaching that not only was the Logos already existing before all creation, He also had already been given “life in Himself.” This would harmonize well with the “giving” in this verse as being part of the intimate relationship of Father and Son, which has existed from all eternity (see Carson, above). Just as it is not possible to point to a time when the Son did not exist (since He existed before time began), it is also not possible to point to a time when the Son did not have “life in Himself.” Witnesses contest the meaning of “the beginning” in John 1:1 as the absolute beginning of creation, though this argument is difficult to sustain in light of the immediate context (v. 1:3), the parallel to Genesis 1, and Paul’s teaching in Colossians 1:15. Scripture nowhere defines a multi-stage “beginning,” as required by Watchtower theology. Furthermore, the Watchtower itself defines the “beginning” in John 1:1 as “the beginning of Jehovah’s creative works” (Insight , 2, p. 52). Of course, Witnesses are quite correct to point out that Almighty God does not receive “life in Himself” from another. If the Son receives life in Himself from another being, then there are two Gods with “life in themselves,” who are self-existent. Trinitarians, however, believe Scripture teaches us that Father and Son are One God. The Son receives self-existence from His Father with whom He is one. The essential unity of Father and Son – the fact that they are one God – is not mitigated by the Son acknowledging that without the Father, the Son could not exist. Nor could the Father be the Father without the Son. Had Jesus said he had “life in Himself” just as the Father, and said no more, He would have acknowledged – at least in part – what the Jews were accusing Him of: Namely, of claiming to be a second God beside the Father. Saying, instead, that He has received the Divine attribute of self-existence from the Father ensures that we will never see Him as a rival to the Father, yet we will also understand that He is essentially equal with the Father – having “life in Himself” just as does the Father.
Fuente: The Apologists Bible Commentary
Joh 5:26. For even as the Father hath life in himself; so gave he to the Son also to have life in himself. The dead shall hear the voice of the Son and live, for the Son hath life and can impart life. This is the connection between Joh 5:25-26. The Father who is the primal fountain of life gave to the Son to have life in Himself. As in Joh 5:19-21, that which belongs to the Father and that which belongs to the Son are designated by the same words, while the subordination expressed in Joh 5:19-20, by the figurative words showing and seeing, is here (as in Joh 5:22) expressed by the word gave. It is therefore the essential nature of the Son that is spoken of, and not His work in redemption.To have life in Himself is the loftiest expression that can be used: the unchangeable possession of life exactly similar and parallel to that of the Father, such possession as enables Him to be the Giver of life to others, belongs to the Son.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Ver. 26. For, as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he also given to the Son to have life in himself.
The emphasis is on the twice-repeated words (in himself), which terminate the two clauses. The Son not only has a part in life, like the creature: He possesses it in Himself, and He is thereby the source of it, like the Father Himselfhence His voice can give or restore life (Joh 5:25; comp. Joh 1:3-4). But, on the other hand, this divine prerogative the Son does not possess except as a gift of the Father. Here is the boldest paradox which it is possible to declare. Life in Himself, what in theology is called aseity, self-existence, given to the Son! We could not get an insight into the solution of this contradiction, unless we saw an analogous contradiction resolved in ourselves.
We possess, as a thing given, the faculty of determining for ourselves, that is, of ourselves morally creating ourselves. We draw at each instant from this faculty moral decisions which appertain peculiarly to ourselves, for which we are seriously responsible before God, and which are transmuted into our permanent character. It is through making us a gift of this mysterious privilege of free action, that God has placed us in the rank of beings made in His image. What freedom is for man, this the divine faculty of living in Himself is for the Son. It is by this means, also, that thesubordination of the Son to the Father becomes an act of divine freedom, and consequently, of divine love. By the gift of divine independence to the Son, the Father has given Him everything; by His perfect and voluntary subordination, the Son gives back everything to the Father. To give everything, to give back everything, is not this perfect love. God is love. Thus, not only does God love divinely, but He is also divinely loved. The act expressed by the word, (gave), is regarded by Tholuck, Luthardt, Weiss, etc., as a fact falling within the earthly life of Jesus: Jesus possesses, here on earth, spiritual life abiding in Him, and can communicate it to men. But if this were the full meaning of this word, how would it harmonize with Joh 6:57, where Jesus declares that in His earthly condition He lives only by the Father, just as we, believers, live only by Him. It must, therefore, be acknowledged, that He is speaking of an eternal gift, of a unique prerogative appertaining to His divine state and entering into His essential Sonship. The spiritual resurrection of mankind through Him, this is the work which He wishes to explain in this passage; this work is yet to come; it implies the re- instatement of Christ in His divine state (Joh 17:1-2; Joh 17:5). This expression must, consequently, be applied to Him in so far as raised, as man, to the supreme position which He enjoyed, as Logos, before the incarnation. It is from the midst of this glory that He will accomplish the resurrection described in Joh 5:24-25 (the hour cometh); for it is then only that He can pour out the Spirit (Joh 7:39; Joh 17:2). With the spiritual resurrection and judgment is closely connected, as a second divine act, the judgment together with the external resurrection, which is the condition of it.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Verse 26
To have life; to have the power of giving life.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
This verse explains how Jesus can do these things. He can do them because He has life resident within Himself. He is self-existent whereas humans receive their life from Him, the source of life. This quality of the Son is another that came to Him by the Father’s good pleasure before Creation (cf. Joh 5:22; Joh 1:4).