Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 5:32
There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true.
32. There is another ] Not the Baptist, as seems clear from Joh 5:34; but the Father, comp. Joh 7:28, Joh 8:26. It has been already remarked how much there is in this Gospel about ‘witness,’ ‘bearing witness,’ and the like: see on Joh 1:7.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
There is another – That is, God. See Joh 5:36.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 32. There is another] God the Father, who, by his Spirit in your prophets, described my person, office, and miracles. You read these scriptures, and you cannot help seeing that they testify of me:- no person ever did answer the description there given, but myself; and I answer to that description in the fullest sense of the word. See Joh 5:39.
And I know] Instead of , I know, , ye know, is the reading of the Codex Bezae, Armenian, and two of the Itala. Ye believe the Scriptures to be of God, and that he cannot lie; and yet ye will not believe in me, though these Scriptures have so clearly foretold and described me! It is not one of the least evils attending unbelief, that it acts not only in opposition to God, but it also acts inconsistently with itself. It receives the Scriptures in bulk, and acknowledges them to have come through Divine inspiration; and yet believes no part separately. With it the whole is true, but no part is true! The very unreasonableness of this conduct shows the principle to have come from beneath, were there no other evidences against it.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The Father by a voice from heaven testified of Christ, that he was his well beloved Son, in whom he was well pleased, Mat 3:17. Some understand it of John the Baptist, of whom he speaketh, Joh 5:33. But he naming John in the next verse, it seems most proper to understand this of the Father testifying of Christ, both at his baptism, and also at his transfiguration; and to interpret the next verse, as speaking of another testimony distinct from that of John.
And (saith our Saviour) I know, that is, I am fully assured, that his testimony of me is true; for God is that God who cannot lie, but is truth itself. So that I do not barely testify of myself; for my Father, whom you all own to be a God of truth, and who cannot lie, and whom know to be such, he testifieth of me, and none can contradict his testimony.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
32. There is anotherthat is,the Father, as is plain from the connection. How brightly thedistinction of the Persons shines out here!
and I know that the witness,c.”This is the Son’s testimony to the Father’s truth (seeJoh 7:28 Joh 8:26;Joh 8:55). It testifies to thefull consciousness on the part of the Son, even in the days of Hishumiliation, of the righteousness of the Father” [ALFORD].And thus He cheered His spirit under the cloud of human oppositionwhich was already gathering over His head.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
There is another that beareth witness of me,…. Meaning not his Father, who is another, and a distinct person, from him, as the Spirit is another comforter; and both distinct testifiers from him, as well as of him. This is indeed the sense of some interpreters; but the Father is particularly mentioned in Joh 5:37; and the thread of the discourse, and the climax, or gradation, here used, show, that it is to be understood of “another man”, as Nonnus paraphrases it; of John the Baptist, who is spoken of by name in the next verse, as a witness; and then a greater than he, the works of Christ, and then the Father:
and I know that the witness, which he witnesseth of me, is true; for John was now alive, though in prison, and continued to bear a testimony to Christ; and therefore he speaks of him as now bearing witness of him, and abiding by that which he had bore; and Christ knew not only that what he testified of him was true in itself, but that his testimony was a valid and authentic testimony, with the generality of the Jews; who held John to be a prophet, and looked upon him as a man of great probity and integrity, and whose word was to be taken: nor indeed could the sanhedrim, before whom Christ now was, object to his character, nor to him as a witness; nor ought they, since they themselves had so judged of him, as appears by their message to him, which Christ next fails not to take notice of.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Another (). The Father, not the Baptist who is mentioned in verse 33. This continual witness of the Father ( , who is bearing witness, and , present active indicative) is mentioned again in verses 36-38 as in 8:17.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “There is another that beareth witness of me; (allos estin ho marturon peri emou) “There is, exists another who continually bears witness (testamentary witness) concerning me,” that was God, the Father, both at Jesus’ baptism and His transfiguration, Mat 3:17; Mat 17:5.
2) “And I know that,” (kai oida hoti) “And I know, realize, recognize, or perceive that,” whether you all door not, in holding to your disclaimer supposition as expressed Joh 5:31.
3) “The witness which he witnesseth of me is true.” (alethes estin he marturia hen marturei peri emou) “True or trustworthy is the testimony which he testifies concerning me,” Joh 5:31. Both His Fatherly voice of audible testimony and the miraculous deeds He gave me to do before you all, that you might believe are true, Joh 8:18; 1Jn 5:7-9; Joh 20:30-31.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(32) There is another . . .i.e., the Father. The reference to the Baptist is excluded by the words which follow. The difficulty which has been seen in this indirect reference to the Father is removed if we connect the words closely with those preceding them. The point is in the fact that another, different in personality from Himself, bore witness of Him. (Comp. Joh. 8:50; Mat. 10:28, et al.)
I know . . .This has seemed to have a natural meaning if it is the authority given to Johns witness, but to be less fitting if applied to the Fathers. In two of the oldest MSS., and some of the earliest versions, we read ye know, and this has been adopted by some modern editors; but the origin of this reading is obvious, and there is no sufficient reason for departing from the common text. Its meaning is quite in harmony with the relation of the Son to the Father, which has been dwelt upon. The Father beareth witness, is bearing witness (comp. Joh. 5:37), in the unity of work which Son and Father alike work (Joh. 5:17; Joh. 5:19-20; Joh. 5:30), and the Son knows that His power to do this work can come from no other source. His own nature responds to the Fathers voice; He knows it to be true. (Comp. Joh. 3:33.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
32. There is another Who is properly the sole original testifier, namely, God. All others are his signatures and seals.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
“There is another who bears witness to me, and I know that the witness that he witnesses of me is true.”
He does not need to bear witness concerning Himself because there is Another Who bears witness to Him, Someone Whose witness is undoubted. As He will demonstrate later, God bears witness to Him, indeed has already borne witness to Him through the miracle of the lame man. This is the testimony which really counts. But prior to this He will point to an earthly witness.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Joh 5:32-33. There is another that beareth witness, &c. This proof, taken from the testimony of John the Baptist, though our Lord seems to speak slightingly of it, when he compares it with the proof drawn from his own miracles, yet was an argument of particular force to the Jews, and could not fail to convince and confound them; for, as we read in another place, they durst not openly speak against John, because the people generally had him in esteem, and thought him a prophet. A proof, therefore, from his testimony would either remove their doubts, or reduce them to silence. The following observations will prove that the testimony of John ought to be received. He affirms that he knew Jesus to be the Messiah; and this knowledge he acquires, not by any observations which he made upon the life and behaviour of Christ, nor from comparing his actions with the prophesies relating to the Messiah; for it appears that at the time he gave his testimony, Christ had not discovered his divine mission, and was but just entering into his office; nor does it appear that Christ had declared any thing of it to him. He is not guided by conjectures, but by immediate revelation, and by a voice from heaven, declaring Christ to be the Son of God. He assures us, that God discovered to him that Christ was the Messiah. From the testimonywhich John gave, and from the manner in which he gave it, we may discover the character of a great and a good man. We see in him great austerity of life, self-denial, contempt of the pleasures and vanities of the world, an active yet discreet zeal, a courage and constancy arising from true piety; and a sincere modesty and humility. He flattered not the Pharisees and Sadducees; he assumed no honours which belonged not to him; he said less of himself than he might have said with truth. When his disciples were afraid that Christ would draw all men after him, and lessen the reputation of their master, he was not to be moved by such improper motives; nor did he cease to bear testimony to Christ, and acknowledge his own inferiority. Appointed of God to exhort and approve, he reproved even Herod, though he could not be ignorant of the danger to which he exposed himself. By his blameless and upright behaviour he gained the esteem of the Jews; and, after his death, was spoken of with the greatest veneration. He was a man who practised the austerities that he preached, severely virtuous, exhorted all men to righteousness, and lived suitably to his own doctrine. He could not act this part with a view to any worldly profit, and to enrich himself; he sought no such advantages; and if he had sought them, he would never have attained them by pretending to slight them, by dwelling in a wilderness, and by exhorting men to virtues and graces of which he had not set them an example. Nothing therefore can be thought to have influenced him, unless religion, vanity, and the love of fame. If he was guided by ambition, he had reason to be satisfied with his success; all Jerusalem was moved at his preaching. They had so good an opinion of him, that they thought him certainly one sent from God, perhaps one of the old prophets returned into the world; perhaps the Messiah himself. What use did he make of this favourable disposition of the people? He spake of himself with much lowliness and modesty, and exhorted them to acknowledge Christ as the Messiah. If he had been a proud and ambitious man, he would not have set Jesus above himself; he would at least have been silent, and have left the Jews to judge for themselves. We may therefore affirm, that he was what he seemed to be, a gracious man and a sincere lover of truth; and that he would not have deceived the people in any case; above all, not in a case so important. He decided a question, not of small importance, but concerning the Messiah foretold by the prophets, expected at that time, to whom the nation was bound to pay obedience, who should be a ruler, a deliverer, and the founderofan everlasting kingdom. If we suppose him capable of deceiving the people in this point, we must suppose him to be wicked to the highest degree; one who feared not God, nor regarded man; who endeavoured to lead into a fatal error his own nation, by whom he was honoured and respected. But it is unreasonable to suppose him guilty of so foul a crime. We may also conclude, that he could not have borne testimony to one whom he did not well know to be the Messiah, because common prudence would have kept him from throwing away, so foolishly, his good name and reputation. The character of the Messiah could not be long personated by the most artful impostor. He was to be a teacher of truth; in him the prophesies were to be accomplished, and by him many miracles were to be performed. If therefore John had directed the Jews to a false Messiah, to one in whom none of these characters appeared, his fraud or his error would have been discovered; he would have exposed himself to the punishment of a false prophet; at least, he would have lost the esteem and favour of the Jews, and the fair and unblemished reputation which till then he had preserved, and would have been the object of Jewish contempt and hatred. Nothing can make us suspect that he would have acted a part so inconsistent and extravagant, or hinder us from believing that he spake as he was directed by the Spirit of God. Nor is it less evident, that he acted on this occasion from no motives of interest or partiality. It was of no advantage to him; on the contrary, he saw that if Christ were acknowledged to be the Messiah, he would be no longer followed and admired. Nor can we suppose him to have been partial out of friendship, for there appears not to have been any intimacy between him and Christ. We may observe, that John was a person of eminent grace and virtue; that he had borne witness to Christ; that he was related to him, and that, upon all these accounts, he seemed to deserve distinguished marks of favour. But Christ, as far as we can learn from the evangelists, seldom conversed with him; the reason for which probably was, that the testimony of John might appear of more weight, where none could suspect him prejudiced for his friendand relation. But still it may be alleged against his testimony, that he was an enthusiast. Some of the Jews in the days of our Saviour said, that John the Baptist had lost his senses, because they had nothing else to say against him. The accusation is groundless; his discourses and his reputation sufficiently confute it; his prophetic character proves it to be false. He foretold the appearance of the Messiah, the calamities which should befal the unconverted Jews, the death of Christ, and the descent of the Holy Ghost. Enthusiasm may make a man fancy extraordinary communications with God, and it may lead him to austerities and self-denial; but it will not enable him to declare future events. If we put all these things together, we may conclude as we set out, that the Baptist’s veracity in the testimony that he gave of Christ is unquestionable.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Joh 5:32 . Another is He who bears witness of me . This is understood either of John the Baptist (Chrysostom, Theophylact, Nonnus, Euthymius Zigabenus, Erasmus, Grotius, Paulus, Baumgarten Crusius, de Wette, Ewald) or of God (Cyril, Augustine, Bede, Rupertius, Beza, Aretius, Cornelius a Lapide, Calovius, Bengel, Kuinoel, Lcke, Tholuck, Olshausen, Maier, Luthardt, Lange, Hengstenberg, Brckner, Baeumlein, Godet). The latter is the right reference; for Jesus Himself, Joh 5:34 , does not attach importance to John’s witness, but rather lays claim, Joh 5:36-37 , only to the higher, the divine witness.
, , . . .] not a feeble assurance concerning God (de Wette’s objection), but all the weightier from its simplicity, to which the very form of the expression is adapted ( , ), and, moreover, far too solemn for the Baptist’s testimony. On , comp. Isa 3:11-12 ; Isa 3:25 ; Plato, Eryx . p. 399 B; Dem. 1131. 4.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
32 There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true.
Ver. 32. There is another that beareth witness ] God the Father, by this miracle wrought upon the impotent man. Give we real testimony to our profession by our practice. Mallem obedire quam miracula facere, I prefer to obey than to do miracles, said Luther. Profligate professors put religion to an open shame. a
a
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
32. ] can, by the inner coherence of the discourse, be no other than THE FATHER, of Whom so much has been said in the former part, but Who is hinted at rather than mentioned in this ( in Joh 5:30 is spurious). It cannot be John , from whom ( Joh 5:34 ) our Lord took not his testimony . Similar modes of alluding to the Father occur ch. Joh 8:50 : see also ch. Joh 8:18 , and Mat 10:28 and [83] . Many interpreters however understand it of John , Chrysostom, Nonnus, Theophylact, Euthym [84] : and lately De Wette has defended the view with some acuteness. But he has certainly missed the inner coherence of the passage. The reason why our Lord mentions John is not ‘as ascending from the lesser witness to the greater,’ but purposely to remove the idea that He meant him only or principally by these words , and to set his testimony in its right place: then at Joh 5:36 He returns again to the . .
[83] When, in the Gospels, and in the Evangelic statement, 1Co 11:23-25 , the sign () occurs in a reference, it is signified that the word occurs in the parallel place in the other Gospels, which will always be found indicated at the head of the note on the paragraph. When the sign () is qualified , thus, ‘ Mk.,’ or ‘ Mt. Mk.,’ &c., it is signified that the word occurs in the parallel place in that Gospel or Gospels, but not in the other or others .
[84] Euthymius Zigabenus, 1116
. ] This is the Son’s testimony to the Father’s truth: see ch. ( Joh 3:33 ) Joh 7:28 ; Joh 8:26 ; Joh 8:55 . It testifies to the full consciousness on the part of the Son, even in the days of his humiliation, of the righteousness of the Father: and (for the testimony of the Father to the Son is contained in the Scriptures) also to His distinct recognition and approval ( Psa 40:6-8 ) of psalm and type and prophecy, as applied to Himself and His work.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
There is. See Joh 5:31 with Joh 7:28; Joh 8:26.
know. Greek. oida. App-132.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
32.] can, by the inner coherence of the discourse, be no other than THE FATHER, of Whom so much has been said in the former part, but Who is hinted at rather than mentioned in this ( in Joh 5:30 is spurious). It cannot be John,-from whom (Joh 5:34) our Lord took not his testimony. Similar modes of alluding to the Father occur ch. Joh 8:50 : see also ch. Joh 8:18, and Mat 10:28 and [83]. Many interpreters however understand it of John,-Chrysostom, Nonnus, Theophylact, Euthym[84]:-and lately De Wette has defended the view with some acuteness. But he has certainly missed the inner coherence of the passage. The reason why our Lord mentions John is not as ascending from the lesser witness to the greater, but purposely to remove the idea that He meant him only or principally by these words, and to set his testimony in its right place: then at Joh 5:36 He returns again to the . .
[83] When, in the Gospels, and in the Evangelic statement, 1Co 11:23-25, the sign () occurs in a reference, it is signified that the word occurs in the parallel place in the other Gospels, which will always be found indicated at the head of the note on the paragraph. When the sign () is qualified, thus, Mk., or Mt. Mk., &c., it is signified that the word occurs in the parallel place in that Gospel or Gospels, but not in the other or others.
[84] Euthymius Zigabenus, 1116
.] This is the Sons testimony to the Fathers truth: see ch. (Joh 3:33) Joh 7:28; Joh 8:26; Joh 8:55. It testifies to the full consciousness on the part of the Son, even in the days of his humiliation, of the righteousness of the Father: and (for the testimony of the Father to the Son is contained in the Scriptures) also to His distinct recognition and approval (Psa 40:6-8) of psalm and type and prophecy, as applied to Himself and His work.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Joh 5:32. , Another) concerning whom, see Joh 5:37, The Father Himself, which hath sent Me, hath borne witness of Me. The plurality of persons is here shown. Comp. the expressions, that Being, and this One [, ; whom He hath sent, this one-Him-ye believe not], Joh 5:38; and another, used of the Holy Spirit, ch. Joh 14:16, I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Comforter.-, beareth witness) in the present; ch. Joh 8:18, I am One that bear witness of Myself, and the Father that sent Me beareth witness of Me.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Joh 5:32
Joh 5:32
It is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true.-In compliance with the law requiring two witnesses to prove a thing, Jesus announces that another beareth witness of him than himself, and Jesus knew that the testimony of this witness is true.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
is another: Joh 5:36, Joh 5:37, Joh 1:33, Joh 8:17, Joh 8:18, Joh 12:28-30, Mat 3:17, Mat 17:5, Mar 1:11, Luk 3:22, 1Jo 5:6-9
and I: Joh 12:50
Reciprocal: Mat 17:12 – and they Joh 1:32 – I saw Joh 5:39 – they which Joh 7:28 – is true Joh 8:54 – If Joh 16:10 – because
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2
Not only did God verify the Sonship of Christ (Mat 3:17), but there was another among men who added his testimony to the divine witness, to be named soon.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Joh 5:32. It is another that beareth witness concerning me. Not There is another, as if He would merely cite an additional witness. He would lay the whole stress of the witnessing upon this other witness. This witness is the Father,not John the Baptist, who is mentioned in the next verse only that it may be shown that his testimony is not that on which Jesus relies.
And I know that the witness which he witnesseth concerning me is true. These words are not said in attestation of the Fathers truth, a point admitted by all: they are the utterance of the Sons profound consciousness of His own dignity and union with the Father.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 32
Another; not John, mentioned in the John 5:33,–for he says (John 5:34) that he will not appeal to the testimony of John,–but the Father, as stated below. (John 5:36.)