αλ, Gen. vi. 12, Is. xl. 6, etc., and denotes the human race as possessed
δώση | adtots ζωὴν αἰώνιον.
841
3. αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ αἰώνιος ζωὴ, 3 ἵνα ἆ vi. 29 reff.
e1 Thess. i.
, γινώσκωσί σε τὸν µόνον " ἀληθινὸν Θεὸν, καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας ᾿Ιησοῦν 9. Heb.
Χριστόν.
A A δόξ me 3 1 Ν a x , = σεαυτω» τη ο η η ειχον προ του τον KOO}LOV ειναι παρὰ σοι. Εν. 36.
4. ἐγώ σε ἐδόξασα ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς᾽ τὸ ἔργον ΄ ἐτελείωσα 3 ὃ δέδωκάς por Siva ποιήσω: 5. καὶ νῦν " δόξασόν µε σὺ, πάτερ, ' παρὰ _ iii
i Prov. il. 1; iii. 13.
1x. 14 (A) cp.1 Jo.v.
. » ΕΝεΠ. vi.16.
: ν Xiil. 33. j Prov. viii. 24. Ps, Ixxi. §
* For δωση and γινωσκωσι some read δωσει and γινωσκονσι, but vide Simcox, Gram., p. 1009, and W.H., Appendix, p. 171.
2 τελειωσας in SABCLN 33 adopted by Tr.Ti.W.H.R.
of a frail, terrestrial existence, lacking ζωὴν αἰώνιον. ἵνα wav ὃ δέδωκας αὐτῷ, the neuter, as in vi. 39, resolved into the individuals in αὐτοῖς; and on the nominative absolute, see Buttmann’s N.T. Gram., 379; and Kypke in loc.— Ver. 3. αὕτη δέἐστιν ἡ αἰώνιος ζωή ἵνα ... On ἵνα in this construction, see Burton, 213, and cf. xv. 8; ὅτι in iii. I9 is not quite equivalent. In Is. xxxvii. 20 God is designated 6 Θεὸς povos, and in Exod. xxxiv. 6 ἀληθινός; cf. 2 Thess. i. ro. He is the only true God in contrast to many that are ‘‘called gods,” 1 Cor. viii. 5,6. But cf. especially 1 John v. 20. It was by mak- ing known to them this God, and thus glorifying the Father, that Christ ‘‘ gave men eternal life”. The life He gave consisted in and was maintained by this knowledge. But to the knowledge of the Father, the knowledge of ‘‘ Him whom Thou didst send, Jesus Christ,” was necessary, i. 18, xiv.6. Asini, 17, so here, ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστόν is the double name which became common in Apos- tolic times, and not (as Meyer and others) ‘‘an appellative predicate,’’ ‘‘Jesus as the Messiah”. Whether Jesus’ nam- ing of Himself as a third person can be accounted for by the solemnity of the occasion (‘der feierliche Gebetstyl,” Licke), or is to be ascribed to John, is much debated. Westcott seems justified in saying that ‘‘the use of the name ‘Jesus Christ’ by the Lord Himself at this time is in the highest degree un- likely. . . . It is no derogation from the truthfulness of the record that St. John has thus given parenthetically, and in conventional language (so to speak), the substance of what the Lord said at greater length.”—Ver. 4. ἐγώσε. . . ποιήσω. This is a fresh ground for the petition of ver. I renewed in νετ. 5: “' glorify Thou me’’. The ground is ‘I have glorified Thee on the earth; having finished “perfectly accomplished, cf. τετέλεσται
of the cross] the work which Thou gavest me todo”. But it is not the idea of reward that is prominent here, although that idea is found in Phil. ii. 6-11 ; Heb. ii. Q-II ; v. 4-10; the immediate thought here is of the necessary progress which the hour demanded. There remained no longer any reason for His continuance on earth. He did not desire, and did not need, any prolongation of life below. Beyschlag’s objection (N.T. Theol., i. 254) is therefore baseless, as also is Grotius’ ‘‘ostendit, non iniquum se pe- tere”.—Ver. 5. καὶ viv δόξασον ... got. The precise character of the glori- fication He looks for is here presented. It is παρὰ σεαυτῷ, and it is a restoration to the glory He had enjoyed πρὸ τοῦ τὸν κόσμον εἶναι. By παρὰ σεαυτῷ it 15 rendered impossible to understand παρὰ σοί of an “ideal ”’ pre-existence ; because these two expressions are here equiva- lents, and Christ cannot be supposed to have prayed for an ‘“‘ideal” glory when He asked that God would glorify Him παρὰ σεαυτῷ. ‘There is, con- sequently, here, as in vi. 62, viii. 58, a continuity of the consciousness of the historical Christ with the Logos.” Tho- luck. On this verse Beyschlag remarks (i. 254): ‘The possibility of such a position was first won by Jesus through His lite and death on earth, so that, in point of fact, it forms the divine reward of that life and death; how then could He have possessed it realiter before the world was?” But the representation given by Paul in Phil. ii. is open to the same objection. Christ is represented as leaving a glory He originally enjoyed and returning to it when His work on earth was done and as the result of that work. The humanity was nowto share in and to be in some way the organ of that divine glory; and this it could not be until it had been perfected by the experience of a human life. Wendt (Teaching of Fesus, ii. 169) says: “' Ac-