196
τ John xi. en ay xvii. eid ite 6 τος γ.
ε joke ν. 26; Heb. viil. 16, x. 6 16 (Jer.
A ε Ln} r > 4 J 3 καὶ οἱ τρεῖς ‘eis τὸ Ev εἶσιν. μα Ἰομβάνομεν, ἡ παν τοῦ Θεοῦ μείζων ἐστίν 31-37, Vill. ἐστὶν * ἡ ος τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἣν
Ve
9. Ei τὴν µαρτυρίαν τῶν ὅτι αὕτη 1 μεμαρτύρηκε περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ.
a id A ΙΟ. 6 πιστεύων cis τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἔχει τὴν µαρτυρίαν t ἐν ἑαυτῷ -* x. , a ~3u , , Sue > , μὴ πιστεύων τῷ Od, ης πεποίηκεν αὐτόν, ὅτι OU πεπίσ-
ΧΧΧΙ. 33). Τευκεν εἲς τὴν µαρτυρίαν, my ο. 6 cds περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ
ui. 10.
vi.2; John αὐτοῦ. v. 26. none P ὶ
w Johniii. uty 6 Θεός κα 36; 1 Cor. Ae iii. 21-23. τὸν υἱόν, ἔχει τὴν Loy’
ἔχει.
γ ov ε A. cal Ca > “a 3 αὕτη ἡ ζωὴ ἐν τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ ἐστιν.
ΤΙ. Καὶ αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ μαρτυρία ὅτι ζωὴν αἰώνιον ἔδωκεν
12. "6 ἔχων
ς Ae uae a ει A A ‘ Ν 3 ὁ μὴ έχων τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ, τὴν ζωὴν οὐκ
1ην KLP; οτι SAB, Ve. (testimonium Dei, quod majus est, quoniam testificatus
est), Cop., Sah., Arm., edd. *eauTo NS;
Punct. ο τι. αντω ABKLP; αὐτῷ Tisch., WH (marg.), Nest. ;
αὐτῷ WH.
ὃπω θεω SSBKLP, Syrvg, Cop., edd.; τω viw A, Syrph, Vg.
Vv. g-12. Our attitude to the Three- fold Testimony. ‘“ If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony οἱ God is greater, because this is the testimony of God—what He hath testified concern- ing His Son. He that believeth in the Son of God hath the testimony in him- self. He that believeth not God hath made Him a liar, because he hath not believed in the testimony which God hath testified concerning His Son. And this is the testimony, that God gave us life eternal; and this life is in His Son. He that hath the Son hath the life; he that hath not the Son of God the life hath not.”
Ver. 9. According to the Jewish law threefold testimony was valid (Deut. xix. 15; ¢f. Matt. xviii. 16; John viii. 17-18). Read (as in iil. 20) ὅ,τι pepaptupykey, ‘‘what He hath testified concerning His Son,” i.e. the testimony of His miracles and especially His Resurrection (Rom. i. 4). The variant qv is a marginal gloss indicating the reative (6, τι), not the conjunction (ὅτι). The latter is incap- able of satisfactory explanation. The alternatives are: (1) ‘‘ Because the te ti- mony οἱ God is this—the fact that He hath testified,” which is meaningless and involves an abrupt variation in the use of ὅτι. (2) ‘‘ Because this is the testimony of God, because, I say, He hath testi- fied,” which is intolerable. The Apostle appeals here to his readers 10 be as reasonable with God as with their fellow men. Cf. Pascal: “' Would the heir to an estate on finding the title-deeds say, ‘Perhaps they are false’? and would he neglect to examine them ?”
Ver.10. A subtle and profound analy-
sis of the exercise of soul which issues in assured faith. Three stages: (1) ‘‘ Be- lieve God” (πιστεύειν τῷ Θεῷ, credere Deo), accept His testimony concerning His Son, {.6., not simply His testimony at the Baptism (Matt. iii. 17) but the historic manifestation of God in Christ, the Incarnation. God speaks not by words but by acts, and to set aside His supreme act, and all the forces which it has set in operation is to ‘make Hima liar” by treating His historic testimony as unworthy of credit. (2) ‘‘ Believe in the Son of God” (πιστεύειν εἰς τὸν Υἱὸν' τοῦ Θεοῦ, credere in Filium Dei), make the believing s2lf-surrender which is the reasonable and inevitable consequence of contemplating the Incarnation and reco 2- nising the wonder of it. (3) The Inward Testimony (τὴν µαρτυρίαν ἐν αὐτῷ, testimonium in seipso). '' Fecisti nos ad te, et inquietum est cor nostrum donec requiescat in te” (Aug.). The love of Jesus satisfies the deepest need of our nature. When He is welcomed, the soul rises up and greets Him as ‘‘all its salvation and all its desire,” and the testimony is no longer external in history but an inward experience (cf. note on iv.Q: ἐν ἡμῖν), and therefore indubitable. These three stages are, according to the