18—30,
ea ε Φ ΑΡΑ ἡμιν “παρρησίᾳ. καὶ οὗ πιστεύετε.
τὰ ἔργα ἃ ἐγὼ ποιῶ ἕν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ πατρός .
793
25. ᾿Απεκρίθη αὐτοῖς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, ““Εἶπον ὑμῖν, c xi. 14;
XVi. 15.
µου, ταῦτα μαρτυρεῖ περὶ ἐμοῦ: 26. GAN’ ὑμεῖς οὗ πιστεύετε’ οὐ
Ὑάρ ἐστε ἐκ τῶν προβάτων τῶν ἐμῶν, καθὼς εἶπον ὑμῖν.
275 τα
a [ο 9 πρόβατα τὰ ἐμὰ τῆς φωνῆς µου ἀκούει, Kayo γινώσκω αὐτά: καὶ
ἀκολουθοῦσί por, 28. Kayo ζωὴν αἰώνιον δίδωµι αὐτοῖς: καὶ οὐ μὴ
ἀπόλωνται eis τὸν αἰῶνα, καὶ οὐχ 3 ἁρπάσει τις αὐτὰ ἐκ τῆς χειρός d Ps. vii. 2,
μου.
οὐδεὶς δύναται ἁρπάζειν ἐκ τῆς χειρὸς τοῦ πατρός µου.
20. 6 πατήρ pou ὃς δέδωκέ por, μείζων Ἰ πάντων ἐστί: καὶ
2 Sam.
XXiil. 21. νο. Vi. 15.
30. εγω
1 Instead of ος and µειζων of Τ.Ε. ο and µειζον are read by Tr.Ti.W.H. follow- ing [for αἱ NBL and [for µειζον] AB and versions. This reading seems exegetically
impossible. See Weiss.
It gives a sense irrelevant to the passage. my Father has given me is greater than all.”
“That which Very possibly µειζον was originally
read, cp. Mt. xii. 6, and og may have been changed into o through a misunderstand-
ing of µειζον.
character of their demand: “Ews πότε τὴν ψΨυχὴν ἡμῶν αἴρεις; Beza renders αἴρεις by ‘“suspendis, 1... anxiam et sSuspensam tenes?”’ For which Elsner blames him and prefers ‘why do you kill us with delay?” But atpw occurs not infrequently in the sense of “ dis- τρ”... Soph., Oed. Tyr., 914, atper θυμὸν Οἰδίπους, Oedipus excites his soul ; Eurip., Hecuba, 69, τί wor’ αἴρομαι Evvuxos οὕτω δείµασι; cf. Virgil, Aeneid, iv. 9, ‘‘quae me suspensam insomnia terrent?’’ ‘Why do you keep us in suspense ?” is a legitimate translation. “If Thou art the Christ tell us plainly.”’ ---παρρησίᾳ, in so many words, devoid of all ambiguity; ο. xvi. 29. This request has a show of reasonableness and honesty, as if they only needed to hear from Himself that He was the Christ. But it is never honest to ask for further explanation after enough has been given. Nothing more surely evinces unwillingness to believe. Besides, there was always the difficulty that, if He categorically said He was the Christ, they would understand Him to mean the Christ of their expectation.—Ver. 25. Therefore He replies: “1 told you and ye believe not. The works which I do in my Father’s name, these witness con- cerning me.” These works tell you what I am. They are works done in my Father’s name, that is, wholly as His representative. These show what kind ot Christ He sends you and that I am He.—Ver. 26. ‘But you on your part do not believe”? —the reason being that you are not of the number οἱ my sheep. Had you been oi my sheep you must have believed; because my sheep
have these two characteristics, (ver. 27) they hear my voice and they follow me: (ver. 28) and these characteristics meet a twofold response in me, ‘“‘ I know them” and “I give them life eternal”. Kayo in each case emphatically exhibits the response of Christ to believers. They acknowiedge Him by hearing His voice; He acknowledges them, ‘‘ knows them”. Cf. νετ. 14. They follow Him, and He leads them into life eternal. ‘ Sequela et vita arcte connectuntur,” Bengel. This mention of the gift of life leads Him to enlarge on its perpetuity and its security.—ov pn ἁπόλωνται eis τὸν αἰῶνα, “they shall never perish ” (cf. νετ. 10), but shall enjoy the abundant life I am come to Ῥερίον.- καὶ οὐχ ἁρπάσει τις αὐτὰ ἐκ τῆς χειρός pov, “and no one shall carry them off (ver. 12) out of my hand” or keeping. Throughout He uses the phraseology of the ‘“‘Shepherd”’ parable.—Ver. 20. These strong assertions He bases, as always, on the Father’s will and power. 6 πατήρ pov... éopev. ‘* My Father who has given me these sheep is greater than all: and therefore no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. But this is equivalent to my saying no one can snatch them out of my hand, for I and the Father are one.”—éy® καὶ 6 Πατὴρ ἔν ἐσμεν. Cf. xvii. 21, 22, 23, ἵνα πάντες ἓν Gov. Bengel says: ‘* Unum, non solum voluntatis consensu, sed unitate potentiae, adeoque naturae. Nam omnipotentia est attributum naturale ; et sermo est de unitate Patris et Filii. In his verbis Jesu plus viderunt caeci Judaei, quam hodie vident Antitrinitarii.” But Calvin is right when