. ὑπάγω. He knows His origin and His destiny. He knows Himself, and therefore the rule mentioned has πο application to Him.—md0ev ἦλθον cannot of course be restricted to His earthly origin. He knows He is from God, so ὑπάγω refers to His going to God. Cf. xili. 3. Moreover, He is compelled to witness to Himself, because tpets οὐκ οἴδατε . . . ὑπάγω. He alone knew the nature of His mission, yet it behoves to be known by all men ; therefore He must declare Himself. They would no doubt have replied, as formerly, vii. 27, Mk. vi. 3, that they did know whence He was. Therefore He reminds them that they judge by appearances only: tpets κατὰ τὴν σάρκα κρίνετε. They had con- stituted themselves His judges, and they decided against Him, because ‘‘ accord- ing to the flesh’? He was born in Galilee, vii. 52. ‘For my part,” He says, “I judge (condemn) no one’”’; ἐγὼ οὐ κρίνω ovdéva. As if He said, “I confine myself (ver. 16) to witnessing, and do not sit in judgment,” cf. iii. 17. ‘ But even if I do judge (as my very appear- ance among you results in judgment, iti. 18-19, v. 22), my judgment is true; there is no fear of its being merely superticial
17. καὶ ἐν τῷ νόµω δὲ τῷ t . .
ὑμετέρῳ γέγραπται, ὅτι δύο ἀνθρώπων ἡ μαρτυρία ἀληθής ἐστιν.
A ‘ A A A 18. ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ μαρτυρῶν περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ, καὶ μαρτυρεῖ περὶ ἐμοῦ 6
774 εἰμὶ, GAN’ ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πέµψας µε πατήρ. πέµψας µε πατήρ.”
Pp Vii. 28. σου; 7
μου *
a Mk. xii. 4r. ῥήματα a tee Ne
ς
5. ἱερῷ " τ Vii. 30. sii.4:vii.6, 21. Εἶπεν οὖν πάλιν αὐτοῖς 6
ο κ. a ¢ , Calta & θ a θ t xiii. 33. µε, καὶ ἐν τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ὑμῶν ἀποθανεῖσθε - uiv.29. οὗ δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν.
ἑαυτὸν, ὅτι λέγει, ““Omou ἐγὼ ὑπάγω, ὑμεῖς
or prejudiced, because I am not alone, but I am inseparably united to the Father who sent me.” Cf. v. 30, ‘as I hear I judge”. In Pivge Aboth, iv. 12, R. Ishmael is cited: ‘‘ He used to say, judge not alone, for none may judge alone save One’’.—Ver. 17. καὶ ἐν τῷ νόμφ εκ. πατήρ. He returns from “judging ” to “‘ witnessing,” and He maintains that His witness (ver. 18) satisfies the Mosaic law (Deut. xvii. 6, xix. 15) because what He witnesses of Himself is confirmed by the Father that sent Him. The nature of this witness was given fully at v. 37- 47.—éy® εἶμι 6 μαρτυρῶν . . . Field maintains the A.V. “I am one ‘that beareth witness,’ against the R.V. ‘I am He that beareth witness”; ἐγώ eipe being equivalent to ‘‘ There is I” or “ It is I”. Misled perhaps by the Lord’s use of ἀνθρώπων (νετ. 17), the Pharisees ask (νετ. 19): Mot ἐστὶν 6 πατήρ σου; ‘¢ Patrem Christi carnaliter acceperunt ” (Augustine), therefore they ask where He is that they may ascertain what He has to say regarding Jesus; as if they said: “It is all very well alleging that you have a second witness in your Father ; but where is He?” The idea of Cyril that it was a coarse allusion to His birth is out of the question, and Cyril himself does not press it. Jesus replies: Owre . ἤδειτε ἄν [or ἂν yderte]. They ought to have known who He meant by His Father and where He was; and their hopeless ignorance Jesus can only deplore. They professed to know Jesus, but had they known Him they would necessarily have known the Father in whom He lived and whom He repre- sented. Their ignorance of the Father proves their ignorance of Jesus.—Tatra . « tep@. On yalod., see ver. 12. Euthy- mius, as usual, hits the nail on the head:
εἰ ἐμὲ ῄδειτε, καὶ τὸν πατέρα µου ᾖδειτε ἄν. ὁ Ιησοῦς ἐν τῷ
ς
” > BAe ACC ay ea 4 Ul 19. Ἔλεγον οὖν αὐτῶ, “Mod ἐστιν ὁ πατήρ 3 , 3 A Απεκρίθη 6 ‘Ingots, ““Ρ Οὔτε ἐμὲ οἴδατε, οὔτε τὸν πατέρα