[4070] vv. 25, 26.
[4071] ver. 26.
[4072] ver. 27.
[4073] As Canon Westcott rightly points out (St. John xii. 32), the term lifting up' includes both the death and the glory. If we ask ourselves what corresponding Hebrew word, including the sensus malus as well as the sensus bonus would have been used, the verb Nasa ({hebrew}) naturally occurs (comp. Gen xl. 19 with ver. 13). For we suppose, that the word used by Christ at this early part of His Ministry could not have necessarily involved a prediction of His Crucifixion, and that they who heard it rather imagined it to refer to His Exaltation. There is a curiously illustrative passage here (in Pesiqta R. 10), when a king, having given orders that the head of his son should be lifted up' ({hebrew}), that it should be hanged up ({hebrew}), is exhorted by the tutor to spare what was his moneginos' (only begotten). On the king's replying that he was bound by the orders he had given, the tutor answers by pointing out that the verb Nasa means lifting up in the sense of exalting, as well as of executing. But, besides the verb Nasa, there is also the verb Zeqaph ({hebrew}), which in the Aramaic and in the Syriac is used both for lifting up and for hanging - specifically for crucifying; and, lastly, the verb Tela ({hebrew} or {hebrew}), which means in the first place to lift up, and secondarily to hang or crucify (see Levy, Targum, Wörterb. ii. p. 539 a and b). It this latter verb was used, then the Jewish expression Taluy, which is still opprobriously given to Jesus, would after all represent the original designation by which He described His own death as the lifted-up One.'
[4074] ver. 28.
[4075] ver. 28 (comp. ver. 24).
[4076] Not my,' as in A.V.
[4077] A new sentence; and He,' not the Father,' as in the A.V.
[4078] vv. 30-32.
[4079] Ab. Baraitha vi. 2, p. 23 b; Erub. 54 a, line 13 from bottom.
[4080] With reference to Exod. xxxii. 16, a play being made on the word Charuth (graven') which is interpreted Cheyruth (liberty'). The passage quoted by Wünsche (Baba Mets. 85 b) is not applicable.
[4081] Shabb. 67 a; 128 a.
[4082] Baba Mets. vii. 1.
[4083] St. John viii. 34.
[4084] Here there should be a full stop, and not as in the A.V.
[4085] ver. 35.
[4086] ntos. Comp. Westcott ad loc.
[4087] So Canon Westcott aptly renders it.
[4088] Not My Father,' as in the A.V. These little changes are most important, as we remember that the hearers would so far understand and could have sympathised, had the truth been in them.
[4089] According to the proper reading, the rendering must be from your father,' not with your father,' as in the A.V.
[4090] vv. 37-40.
[4091] ver. 41.
[4092] ver. 42.
[4093] The word here is lali.
[4094] vv. 43-47.
[4095] See Book II. ch. v.
[4096] I cannot here regard Canon Westcott's rendering, which is placed in the margin of the Revised Version, as satisfactory.
[4097] In the text without the article.
[4098] vii. 52.
[4099] St. Luke ix. 53.
[4100] The passage quoted by Schöttgen (Yebam. 47 a) is inapplicable, as it really refers to a non-Israelite. More apt, but also unsuitable, is Sot. 22 a, quoted by Wetstein.
[4101] from Kuth or Kutha; comp. 2 Kings xvii. 24, 30.
[4102] Comp. Kohut, Jüd. Angelol. p. 95.
[4103] Ber. R. 36, ed. Warsh. p. 65 b, line 5 from bottom; Yalkut on Job xxi. vol. ii. p. 150 b line 16 from bottom.
[4104] See the Appendix on Jewish-Angelology and Demonology.
[4105] L'Alcoran trad.par le Sieur du Ryer, p. 247.
[4106] Pirqé de R. Eliez. 45 ed. Lemb. p. 59 b, line 10 from top.
[4107] I need scarcely point out how strongly evidential this is of the Jewish authorship of the Fourth Gospel.