Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 8:23
And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.
23. Ye are from beneath ] At first sight it might seem as if this meant ‘ye are from hell.’ Christ uses strong language later on ( Joh 8:44), and this interpretation would make good sense with what precedes. ‘Ye suggest that I am going to hell by self-destruction: it is ye who come from thence.’ But what follows forbids this. The two halves of the verse are manifestly equivalent, and ‘ye are from beneath’ = ‘ye are of this world.’ The pronouns throughout are emphatically opposed. The whole verse is a good instance of ‘the spirit of parallelism, the informing power of Hebrew poetry,’ which runs more or less through the whole Gospel. Comp. Joh 14:27.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Ye are from beneath – The expression from bequeath, here, is opposed to the phrase from above. It means, You are of the earth, or are influenced by earthly, sensual, and corrupt passions. You are governed by the lowest and vilest views and feelings, such as are opposed to heaven, and such as have their origin in earth or in hell.
I am from above – From heaven. My views are heavenly, and my words should have been so interpreted.
Ye are of this world – You think and act like the corrupt men of this world.
I am not of this world – My views are above these earthly and corrupt notions. The meaning of the verse is: Your reference to self-murder shows that you are earthly and corrupt in your views. You are governed by the mad passions of men, and can think only of these. We see here how difficult it is to excite wicked men to the contemplation of heavenly things. They interpret all things in a low and corrupt sense, and suppose all others to be governed as they are themselves.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 23. Ye are from beneath] Ye are capable of murder, and of self-murder too, because ye have nothing of God in you. Ye are altogether earthly, sensual, and devilish. They verified this character in murdering the Lord Jesus; and many of them afterwards, to escape famine, &c., put an end to their own lives.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Ye are not only of an earthly extraction, creatures of the earth, not descended from heaven, as I am; but also of earthly spirits and principles; you savour nothing that is sublime and spiritual, and therefore you do not understand me. I tell you,
I am not of this world; my original is not from it, nor am I to determine my being in it. I shall die, but I shall rise again from the dead, and ascend into heaven, where you cannot come. Still our Saviour asserts his Divine nature; and the stress of all, he saith, lieth there; their unbelief of which was the cause of all their disputings and errors. He had given them the greatest evidence of it imaginable in the works which he had done in their sight, which were not only above the power of nature, but such as God had never authorized, or enabled any creature to do; yet they, being destitute of supernatural grace, did not believe in him. And they were inexcusable, because that grace was denied them for their wilful corruption and wickedness, which they might have avoided by the use of that common grace which was not denied them.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
23. Ye are from beneath; I am fromabovecontrasting Himself, not as in Joh3:31, simply with earthborn messengers of God, but withmen sprung from and breathing an opposite element from His, whichrendered it impossible that He and they should have any presentfellowship, or dwell eternally together. (Again see on Joh7:33; also see on Joh 8:44).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And he said unto them,…. Upon this wicked remark of theirs, and query on his words:
ye are from beneath: not only of the earth, earthy, and so spoke of the earth, and as carnal men; but even of hell, they were the children of the devil; they breathed his Spirit, spoke his language, and did his lusts, as in Joh 8:44.
I am from above; not with respect to his human body, which he did not bring with him from heaven, that was formed below, in the Virgin’s womb; otherwise he would not have been the seed of the woman, the son of Abraham, David, and Mary: but either with regard to his divine nature and person, he was of God, the Son of God, the only begotten of the Father, who then lay in his bosom, and was in heaven above at that time; or to his mission, which was from heaven.
Ye are of this world; they were, as they were born into the world, sinful, carnal, and corrupt; they were in it, and belonged to it, had never been chosen, or called out of it; they had their conversation according to the course of it, and conformed to its evil customs and manners; they were under the influence of the God of the world, and were taken with the sinful and sensual lasts thereof; they were men of worldly spirits; they minded earth, and earthly things, and had their portion in this world, and might be truly called the men of it.
I am not of this world; he was in it, but not of it; he was come into it to save the chief of sinners, but he did not belong to it, nor did he conform to it; for though he conversed with sinners, ate with them, and received them, being called to repentance by him; yet he was separate from them, and did not as they did: nor did he pursue the pleasures, honours, and riches of this world, being all his days a man of sorrows, and despised of men; and though Lord of all, had not where to lay his head.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Ye are from beneath ( ). This language, peculiar to John, could take up the idea in Josephus that these rabbis came from Gehenna whence they will go as children of the devil (8:44), but the use of (“of this world” in origin) as parallel to what we have here seems to prove that the contrast between and here is between the earthly (sensual) and the heavenly as in Jas 3:15-17. See also Col 3:1. This is the only use of in John (except 8:6). These proud rabbis had their origin in this world of darkness (1:9) with all its limitations.
I am from above ( ). The contrast is complete in origin and character, already stated in 3:31, and calculated to intensify their anger.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Ye are from beneath [ ] . A phrase peculiar to John and to his Gospel. Jesus states the radical antagonism between His opposers and Himself, as based upon difference of origin and nature. They spring from the lower, sensual, earthly economy; He from the heavenly. Compare Jas 3:15 sqq.
From above [ ] . Also peculiar to John’s Gospel. Compare Col 3:1. On the phrase to be of [ ] see on 1 46.
Ye are of this world [ ] . Peculiar to John, and occurring in the First Epistle. On kosmou, world, see on 1 9. Ye are of this earthly order or economy.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And he said unto them,” (kai elegen autois) “And he said to them,” directly, very plainly, to those Jews who “did not know Him,” Joh 8:14; Joh 8:19.
2) “Ye are from beneath; (humeis ek ton kato este) “You all are or exist out of the things below,” the worldly depraved order of things that are sinful by nature; you are unregenerate, have only a natural, depraved, ignorant spiritual mind, 1Co 2:14; 2Co 4:3-4; Eph 4:18.
3) “I am from above: ye are of this world; (ego ek ton ano eimi) “I exist out of and from the nature of the things above,” from the heavenly and the holy, Joh 1:1-4; Joh 1:14; 2Co 8:9; (humeis ek toutou tou kosmou este) “You all are (by existence) out of and from this world order of people and things,” by nature children of wrath, sinners, Rom 3:8-23; Eph 2:3.
4) “I am not of this world.” (ego ouk eimi ek tou kosmou toutou) “I am not (exist not) out of this world order,” or have not been begotten out of and from the fallen human race, of this world order of darkness, or wickedness, 1Jn 2:15-17; 1Jn 5:19; He instead came down from above, of a Divine supernatural birth, 1Ti 3:16; Gal 4:4-5; Joh 1:14.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
23. You are from beneath, I am from above. As they did not deserve that he should teach them, he wished only to strike them with reproofs conveyed in few words, as in this passage he declares that they do not receive his doctrine, because they have an utter dislike of the kingdom of God. Under the words, world and beneath, he includes all that men naturally possess, and thus points out the disagreement which exists between his Gospel and the ingenuity and sagacity of the human mind; for the Gospel is heavenly wisdom, but our mind grovels on the earth. No man, therefore, will ever be qualified to become a disciple of Christ, till Christ has formed him by his Spirit. And hence it arises that faith is so seldom found in the world, because all mankind are naturally opposed and averse to Christ, except those whom he elevates by the special grace of his Holy Spirit.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(23) There is indeed a gulf which they cannot pass, but it is not that between souls in Abrahams bosom and souls in Hades. It is the gulf between heaven and earth. This He brings out in two pairs of antithetic clauses. (Comp. Note on Joh. 1:3.) These clauses interpret each other, and no deeper meaning is to be given to the first pair than is borne by the second. We may arrange them in a pair of affirmatives and a pair of negatives
Ye are from beneath; ye are of this world.
I am from above (not from beneath); I am not of this world.
We have thus the full Hebrew expression of one thought, and this is the thought which John the Baptist, from another point of view, taught his disciples in Joh. 3:31. They are by origin and nature of the earth. He was by origin and nature from heaven. Of the earth, their feelings and thoughts and life were of the earth, and, by devotion to things of the earth, they are destroying the spirit made in the image of God, which is within them, and the link between them and heaven. He is from heaven in origin, and is divine in nature. He has come to reveal the heavenly and the divine to the earthly and the human. In Him, and in Him only, can their spirits find deliverance from sin, and find the true life; for in Him, and in Him only, the divine and the human meet.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
23. From beneath An expression quite as strong as (Joh 8:44) of your father, the devil. As opposed to from above or heaven, it must mean from the infernal, from hell. The fact that they were thus infernal is verified both by their infernal suggestion in regard to suicide, and by the fact that dying in sin their destiny is hell.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And he said to them “You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world. That is why I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am you will die in your sins”.’
Jesus now faced them with the central issue. He was as totally different from them as Heaven was from earth. They were from below. They had no knowledge or experience of where God dwells. They were tied to the ideas of this world. Their minds were unopened. But in contrast to them He was from above, He was not of this world. That is what they needed to recognise. The phrase ‘from above’ reflects Psa 18:16; Psa 144:7. It is the abode of God and His power.
And the reason why He has stated that they were without hope is because they would not recognise Him for what He was, the One from above, the One Who is not of this world. They did not recognise Him as the ‘I am’, something only hinted at here, but made clear in Joh 8:58. This phrase ‘I am’, used in partly hidden form in Joh 8:12; Joh 8:28, and used again specifically and unequivocally in Joh 8:58, is the Name that God revealed to Moses and it was the root of the divine name YHWH (‘the One Who is’ – ‘I am what I am’ – Exo 3:14). That is why in Isa 43:10 God says, ‘that you may know and believe and understand that I am’. Jesus almost certainly had that verse in mind. He wanted them to know and believe and understand that He was the ‘I am’.
So if they wished to be have eternal life they must accept His otherness, and His power to act, and His eternal being. (See also Isa 41:4; Isa 43:13; Isa 46:4; Isa 48:12). At this stage, however, the phrase ‘I am’ was not unequivocal and it was thus not seen as provocative. It could alternately mean ‘that I am the Messiah’ (Mar 13:6). Some would in fact limit it to meaning ‘that I am He’, that is, ‘I am the coming One’.
‘You will die in your sins.’ Compare Eze 3:18 where these words are used. The Pharisees’ total aim was so to live as to obey all God’s laws and by doing so prove themselves faithful members of the covenant. They strove manfully to do this, seeking to fulfil hundreds of requirements, expanded in detail by themselves, in order to attempt to do so, hoping eventually to rise above their sins and prove themselves true members of the covenant. For they were sure that once the covenant was truly fulfilled God would show His favour. But Jesus warned them that unless they came to know Him they would for ever be unsuccessful. What they were striving for would be in vain.
The word for sins here is plural (contrast Joh 8:21). A sinful attitude of heart results in many sins in the life, and the Pharisees above all, with their hundreds of regulations, were conscious of numerous failings.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Joh 8:23-24 . Without further noticing their venomous scorn, Jesus simply holds up before them, with more firm and elevated calmness, their own low nature , which made them capable of thus mocking Him, because they did not understand Him, the heavenly One.
] from the lower regions, i.e . (comp. Act 2:19 ), the opposite of , the heavenly regions; being used of heavenly relations in solemn discourse (Col 3:1-2 ; Gal 4:26 ; Phi 3:14 ); comp. on , Joh 3:31 . designates derivation ; you spring from the earth, I from the heaven. To understand as denoting the lower world (Origen, Nonnus, Lange), a meaning which Godet also considers as included in it, would correspond, indeed, to the current classical usage, but is opposed by the parallel of the second half of the verse.
. ] I do not spring from this (pre-Messianic, comp. ) world; negative expression of His supramundane, heavenly derivation. [13] Comp. Joh 18:36 . Both halves of the verse contain the same thought; and the clauses and imply, in their full signification, that those men are also of such a character and disposition as correspond to their low extraction, without higher wisdom and divine life. Comp. Joh 3:31 . Therefore had Jesus said to them
He refers them again to His words in Joh 8:24 they would die in their sins; and now He adds the reason: , etc.; for only faith can help those to the higher divine in time and eternity (Joh 1:12 , Joh 3:15 f., Joh 6:40 ff., Joh 17:3 , al .), who are and , and consequently, as such, are born flesh of flesh.
Notice, that in this repetition of the minatory words the emphasis, which in Joh 8:20 rested on . . ., is laid on .; and that thus prominence is given to the perishing itself , which could only be averted by conversion to faith.
] namely, the Messiah , the great name which every one understood without explanation, which concentrated in itself the highest hopes of all Israel on the basis of the old prophecies, and which was the most present thought both to Jesus and the Jews, especially in all their discussions to Jesus, in the form, “I am the Messiah;” to the Jews, in the form of either, “Is He the Messiah?” or, “ This is not the Messiah, but another, who is yet to come.” Comp. Joh 8:28 ; Joh 13:19 . In opposition to the notion of there being another, Jesus uses the emphatic . The non-mention of the name, which was taken for granted (it had been mentioned in Joh 4:25-26 ), confers on it a quiet majesty that makes an irresistible impression on the minds of the hearers whilst Christ gives utterance to the brief words, . As God comprehended the sum of the Old Testament faith in (Deu 32:39 ; Isa 41:13 ; Isa 43:10 ), so Christ that of the New Testament in . Comp. Hofmann, Schrifbew . I. p. 63 f. The definite confession of this faith is given in Joh 16:3 , Joh 6:68-69 ; 1Jn 4:2 .
[13] Not merely of the heavenly direction of His spirit (Weizscker), which must be taken for granted in the Christ who springs from above (comp. Joh 3:31 ). Wherever Christ speaks of His heavenly descent, He speaks in the consciousness of having had a pre-human, supra-mundane existence (in the consciousness of the Logos), Joh 17:5 , and lays claim to a transcendent relation of His essential nature. (Comp. Weiss, Lehrbegr. p. 215 f. Nonnus: .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.
Ver. 23. Ye are from beneath ] Vos infernales estis, Ego Supernus. (Beza.) So the wicked are called the inhabitants of the earth and of the sea, Rev 12:12 , in opposition to the Church, which is said to be in heaven, and called “Jerusalem which is above,”Gal 4:26Gal 4:26 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
23. ] ‘Ye cannot come where I am going, because we both shall return thither whence we came: I to the Father from Whom ( ) I came: ye to the earth and under the earth (for that more awful meaning surely is not excluded) whence ye came’ ( ).
Then of course does not only imply ‘ this present state of things ,’ but involves the deeper meaning, of the origin of that state of things (see Joh 8:44 ) and its end , Joh 8:24 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Joh 8:23 . But disregarding the interruption, and wishing more clearly to show why they could not follow Him, and what constituted the real separation in destiny between Him and them, He says: , “You belong to the things below, I to the things above: you are of this world, I am not of this world”. The two clauses balance and interpret one another: “things below” being equivalent to “this world”. It was because this gulf naturally separated them from Him and His destiny and because their destiny was that of the world that He had warned them.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
ye are from beneath; i.e. of the earth. See 1Co 15:47. The phrase occurs only in this Gospel.
from = out from. Greek. ek. App-104. Compare Joh 1:46.
from above. Greek ek ton ano (plural) = the heavens. See Joh 3:13, Joh 3:31; Joh 6:33, Joh 6:38, Joh 6:42. Col 3:1
of. Gr ek, as above.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
23.] Ye cannot come where I am going, because we both shall return thither whence we came: I to the Father from Whom ( ) I came: ye to the earth and under the earth (for that more awful meaning surely is not excluded) whence ye came ( ).
Then of course does not only imply this present state of things, but involves the deeper meaning, of the origin of that state of things (see Joh 8:44) and its end, Joh 8:24.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Joh 8:23. , ye) Again Jesus passes by their interrogatory; and proves what He said, Joh 8:21, Ye shall die in your sins; whither I go ye cannot come; comp. ch. Joh 3:13, No man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man, which is in heaven.- , from those things which are below) from the earth.-, I) He shows whence He is, and hath come, and whither He is about to go; from the world to the Father.-, of this) By this being added, it is shown that there is also another world: ch. Joh 9:39, For judgment I am come into this world.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Joh 8:23
Joh 8:23
And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above:-In answer to the question of killing himself, he tells them that he is from heaven and will after his death return there. [They had referred to the underworld in their question to each other so Jesus in his reply to them states where each are from and that when he departs he will go to the place from whence he came.]
ye are of this world; I am not of this world.-They will tend downward in the world to come. [They will go to the place for which they are prepared, while he goes to his Father.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
world
kosmos = world-system. Joh 12:25; Joh 12:31; Joh 7:7 (See Scofield “Rev 13:8”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Ye are from: Joh 1:14, Joh 3:13, Joh 3:31, Psa 17:4, Rom 8:7, Rom 8:8, 1Co 15:47, 1Co 15:48, Phi 3:19-21, Jam 3:15-17, 1Jo 2:15, 1Jo 2:16
ye are of: Joh 15:18, Joh 15:19, Joh 17:14, Joh 17:16, Jam 4:4, 1Jo 2:15, 1Jo 2:16, 1Jo 4:5, 1Jo 4:6, 1Jo 5:19, 1Jo 5:20
Reciprocal: Psa 17:14 – men of Joh 6:64 – there Joh 13:19 – that I Joh 16:9 – General 1Co 5:10 – of this Eph 2:2 – walked according
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
3
The human side of the person of Christ was from beneath, but otherwise he was from above the earth. This verse is another statement of the divinity of Jesus.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Joh 8:23-24. And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins; for if ye shall not believe that I am, ye shall die in your sins. The second of these verses is important as fixing the meaning of the first. The words, I said that ye shall die in your sins, are so connected both with what precedes (by means of therefore) and with what follows (by means of for), that the ground of this sentence of death is brought under our notice by each of these particles,it is to be found in the unbelief of which the following clause speaks, and in the fact stated in the preceding verse. As then this ground of condemnation is distinctly moral (Joh 8:24), the expressions in Joh 8:23 must also have a moral and not a fatalistic meaning. The condemnation results from something in the men themselves, not from any original necessity; should they believe, no longer would Jesus say to them, Ye are from beneath. The origin of their spirit and action, dominated by unbelief, is to be sought, not above, but beneath,not in heaven, but in earth: nay rather (for the thought distinctly expressed in Joh 8:44 is implicitly present here also), whereas He whom they are in thought consigning to the lowest depths of woe and punishment is of God, they are of the devil. It is at first sight difficult to believe that the sense does not sink but really rises in the second half of Joh 8:23, and yet the whole structure of this Gospel teaches us that it must be so. If, however, we remember the moral reference of the terms of the verse, an explanation soon suggests itself: for the latter clause expresses much more distinctly than the former the element of deliberate choice. The first might be thought to point to origin only, did not the second show that it implies an evil nature retained by evil choice. From this second clause we see clearly that Jesus speaks of a voluntary association,of the dependence of their spirit on the evil principles belonging to this world. Because such is their self-chosen state, Jesus has told them that their sinsthe sins which manifest the nature of every one who is of this worldshall bring them ruin: for nothing but belief in Him who is from above can save them from dying in their sins. His words, it will be seen, grow more and more distinct in their awful import, and yet they are words of mercy: for the meaning is not, Except ye are now believers, the sentence is passed,but, Except ye shall believe (most literally shall have believed): even now they may receive Him, and the sentence will have no existence for them.But the most striking point in this verse is the mode in which our Lord expresses the object of belief,Except ye shall believe that I am. Something apparently like this has occurred before in chap. Joh 4:26; but the two cases are really widely different. There the word Messiah has just been spoken, and the answer. It is I, is perfectly plain in its meaning. Here there is no such word in the context; and to assume an ellipsis, and then supply the very word on which all the emphasis must rest is surely a most dangerous step: to act thus is not to bring out the meaning of the passage, but to bring our own meaning into it. Besides, as we have already seen, our Lord is wont elsewhere to use the expression I am in a very emphatic sense (see chap. Joh 7:34, etc.), with distinct reference to that continuous, unchanging existence which only He who is Divine can claim. The most remarkable example of these exalted words is found in the 58th verse of this chapter (comp. also Joh 8:28). Without forestalling this, however (but referring to the note on that verse for some points connected with the full explanation), we may safely say that it is of His Divine Being that Jesus here speaks. The thought of existence is clearly present in the verse. Ye shall die, He says, unless ye shall have been brought to see in menot what the impious words of Joh 8:22 imply, butOne who is,who, belonging to the realms above, possesses lifewho, being of God, has life as His own and as His own gift. So understood, our Lords words speak of belief, not directly in His Messiahship, but in that other nature of His, that Divine nature, on His possession of which He makes all His other claims to rest. Observe in Joh 8:24 as compared with Joh 8:21 not only the mention of sins instead of sin (comp. on Joh 8:21), but also the change of place given to ye shall die in Joh 8:21 what led to their fate, here their fate itself, being the prominent thought.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Vv. 23-25. And he said to them, you are from beneath, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world. 24. Therefore I said to you, that you shall die in your sins; for, if you do not believe that I am he, you shall die in your sins. 25. They said therefore to him, Who art thou? Jesus said to them, Precisely that which I also declare to you.
Jesus lets their jesting go unnoticed. He continues the warning which was begun in Joh 8:21. An abyss separates them from Him; this is the reason why He cannot serve them as a Saviour and raise them with Himself to heaven, His own country. The parallelism between the expressions: from beneath and of this world (Joh 8:23) does not permit us to include in the former the idea of Hades. We must rather see in the first antithesis: from beneath and from above, the opposition of nature, and in the second: of this world and not of this world, the contrast of disposition and moral activity. The world designates human life constituted independently of the divine will and consequently in opposition to it. One may be from beneath (by nature), without being of the world (by tendency), in case the soul attains to the desire of the higher good. The negative form: I am not of this world, expresses forcibly the repugnance inspired in Jesus by this whole course of human life, which is destitute of the divine inspiring breath.
Their perdition is consequently certain, if they refuse to attach themselves to Him, for He alone could have been for them the bridge between beneath and above. The brief clause by which Jesus formulates the contents of faith: If you believe not that I am … (literally), is remarkable because of the absence of a predicate. The whole attention is thus evidently directed to the subject, , I: that it is I who am…and no other. It seems to me difficult to suppose that, in using this expression, Jesus is not thinking of that by which Jehovah often expresses what He is for Israel (e.g., Deu 32:39; Isa 43:10 : ki ani hou, literally, for I am He). As has been said: in this word is summed up by God Himself the whole faith of the Old Testament: I am your God, besides whom there is no other. In the same way, Jesus sums up in this word the whole faith of the new covenant: I am the Saviour besides whom there is no other. It is remarkable that in the passage in Deuteronomy, the LXX. use, for the translation of these words, precisely the same Greek expression which we find here: ; which leads us to think that Jesus used the same Hebrew expression as the Old Testament. The understood predicate was certainly the Christ.But Jesus carefully avoided this term, because of the political coloring which it had assumed in Israel. The hearers could understand paraphrases such as these: He whom you are expecting: He who alone can answer the true aspirations of your soul; He who can save you from sin and lead you to God. But this word Christ which He carefully avoids is precisely the one which His hearers desired to wrest from Him; this is the aim of their question: who art thou then? In other words: Have at last the courage to speak out plainly! His enemies might indeed use to their advantage as against His life an express declaration on His part on this decisive point.
The reply of Jesus is one of the most controverted passages in the Gospel. There are two principal classes of interpretations, in accordance with the two chief meanings of : beginning (temporal) and origin (substantial or logical). In the first class must be reckoned that of Cyril, Fritzsche, Hengstenberg: From eternity (, Joh 1:1), I am that which I declare unto you. But why not, instead of the unusual phrase , simply say , as in Joh 1:1? Then, in this sense, would not the perfect have been more suitable than the present ? Besides, the thought of Jesus would in any case have been altogether impenetrable for His hearers. The Latin Fathers, e.g.,, Augustine, translated as if it were the nominative: who art thou? The beginning (the origin of things). There would be but one way of justifying this sense grammatically; it would be to make the accusative a case of attraction from the following : The beginning, that which I also say to you. But the construction, as well as the idea, remains none the less forced. Tholuck, abandoning this transcendental sense of , applies this word to the beginning of Jesus’ ministry: I am what I have unceasingly said to you ever since I began to speak to you. But why not simply say , as in Joh 15:27?
And it must be admitted that the inversion of cannot well be explained, any more than can the , also, before . There remains, in the temporal sense of, the explanation of Meyer. He holds that there is at once an interrogation and an ellipsis: What I say to you concerning Myself from the beginning (is this what you ask me)? The ellipsis is as forced as the thought is idle. And how can we explain the , the choice of the unusual term , and the use of the present , instead of the perfect which would certainly be better suited to this meaning? The interpreters who give to alogical sense and make an adverbial phrase: before all, in general, absolutely, are able to cite numerous examples drawn from the classic Greek. Thus Luthardt and Reuss: At first, I am what I say to youwhich means: This is the first and only answer that I have to give to you. If you wish to know who I am, you have only to weigh, in the first place, my testimonies respecting My own person. The sense is good; but to what subsequent way of explaining Himself would this in the first place allude (see, however, below)? And why not, in this sense, simply say (Rom 3:2)? Chrysostom, Lucke, Weiss, Westcott explain thus: In general, why do I still speak with you? Understand: I do not myself know (Lucke), or: This is what you should ask me. I confess that I do not understand how it is possible to put into the mouth of Jesus anything so insignificant. Then, if we could overlook these ellipses, which are, however, quite unnatural, what are we to do with the ? Are we to take it in the sense of or , why, or because of what? Weiss acknowledges that the examples from the New Testament which are cited for one of these senses (e.g.,, Mar 9:11), are not to be thus explained. The only analogous use of this word seems to me to be found in the LXX., 1Ch 17:6; comp. with 2Sa 7:7. Is this sufficient to legitimate this use in our passage? Moreover, the very rare phrase is not sufficiently justified on this interpretation.
The only logical sense of this expression which seems to me probable is that which Winer has defended in his Grammar of the New Testament ( 54, 1) and to which de Wette, Bruckner, Keil, etc., have given their adhesion, and in the main Reuss also: Absolutely what I also declare unto you, that is to say: neither more nor less than what my word contains. Jesus appeals thus to His testimonies respecting His person as the adequate expression of His nature. Fathom myspeech and you will discern my nature. This sense fully accounts for the minutest details of the text: 1. The striking position of the word , absolutely; 2. The choice of the pronoun all that which: whatever it may be that I may have said to you; they have only to sum up His affirmations respecting Himself, the light of the world, the rock from which flows the living water, the bread which came down from heaven…, etc., and they will know what He is; 3. The particle , also, which brings out distinctly the identity between His nature and His speech; 4. The use of the verb , to declare, instead of , to say, to teach. As Keil well says in reply to Weiss: His does not designate what He has said of Himself on this or that occasion; it is His discourse in general, presented as an adequate expression of His nature; finally, 5. The present tense of the verb, which gives us to understand that His testimonies are not yet at their end. It is objected, it is true, that does not have this sense ofabsolutely except in negative propositions. But, in the first place, the sense of the proposition is essentially negative: Absolutely nothing else than what I declare.
And can we demand of the New Testament all the strictness of the classical forms? Besides, Baumlein cites the following example from Herodotus: (Joh 1:9; Joh 1:1), an example whose value seems to be but little diminished by the fact that the phrase is followed by a negative proposition. This explanation seems to me indisputably preferable to all the others. I still ask myself, however, whether we cannot revert to the temporal sense of , beginning, and in that case explain: To begin, that is to say, for the moment, and find the afterwards or at the end, which should correspond to the beginning, in Joh 8:28 : When you shall have lifted up the Son of man, then you shall know… At present, Jesus reveals Himself only by His speech; but when the great facts of salvation shall have been accomplished, then they will receive a new revelation still more luminous. If this relation between Joh 8:25 and Joh 8:28 seems forced, we must, as I think, abide by the preceding explanation. We omit a multitude of explanations which are only varieties of the preceding meanings, or which are too entirely erroneous to make it possible to consider them.
The application of this answer of Jesus was that the thorough examination of the testimony which He bore continually to Himself was enough to lead to the discovery therein of His nature and of His mission as related to Israel and to the world. On this path, one will learn to know Him successively as the true temple (chap. 2), as the living water (chap. 4), as the true Son (chap. 5), as the bread from heaven (chap. 6), etc. And in this way it is that His name Christ will be in a manner spelled out, letter after letter, in the heart of the believer, and will formulate itself there as a spontaneous discovery, which will be worth infinitely more than if he had learned it in the form of a lesson from an outward teaching. To be salutary indeed, this profession: Thou art the Christ, must be, as in the case of Peter (Joh 6:66-69), the fruit of the experiences of faith. Comp. Mat 16:17 : Flesh and blood have not revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven. Such was the way in which the homage of Palm-day arose. Jesus never either sought or accepted an adhesion arising from any other origin than that of moral conviction. This reply is one of the most marvelous touches of Jesus’ wisdom. It perfectly explains why, in the Synoptics, He forbade the Twelve to say that He was the Christ.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Jesus explained their reason for misunderstanding Him as being traceable to their origin. Jesus was from God above whereas they came from His fallen and rebellious creation below. The second contrast in this verse clarifies the first. To understand Jesus’ meaning His hearers needed new birth (Joh 3:3; Joh 3:5) and the Father’s illumination (Joh 6:45).