It was this misunderstanding which Jesus briefly but emphatically corrected by telling
them, that the ground of their separation was the difference of their nature: they were
from beneath, He from above; they of this world, He not of this world. Hence they could
not come where He would be, since they must die in their sin, as He had told them - 'if
ye believe not that I am.'42
42. vv. 23, 24.
The words were intentionally mysteriously spoken, as to a Jewish audience. Believe not
that Thou art! But 'Who art Thou?' Whether or not the words were spoken in scorn, their
question condemned themselves. In His broken sentence, Jesus had tried them - to see
how they would complete it. Then it was so! All this time they had not yet learned Who
He was; had not even a conviction on that point, either for or against Him, but were
ready to be swayed by their leaders! 'Who I am?' - am I not telling you it even from the
beginning; has My testimony by word or deed ever swerved on this point? I am what all
along, from the beginning, I tell you.43 Then, putting aside this interruption, He resumed
His argument.44 Many other things had He to say and to judge concerning them,
besides the bitter truth of their perishing if they believed not that it was He - but He that
had sent Him was true, and He must ever speak into the world the message which He
had received. When Christ referred to it as that which 'He heard from Him,'45 He
evidently wished thereby to emphasise the fact of His Mission from God, as constituting
His claim on their obedience of faith. But it was this very point which, even at that
moment, they were not understanding.46 And they would only learn it, not by His Words,
but by the event, when they had 'lifted Him up,' as they thought, to the Cross, but really
on the way to His Glory.47 48 Then would they perceive the meaning of the designation
He had given of Himself, and the claim founded on it:49 'Then shall ye perceive that I
am.' Meantime: 'And of Myself do I nothing, but as the 50 Father taught Me, these things
do I speak. And He that sent Me is with Me. He 51 hath not left Me alone, because what
pleases Him I do always.'
43. It would be impossible here to enter into a critical analysis or vindication of the
rendering of this much controverted passage, adopted in the text. The method followed
has been to retranslate literally into Hebrew: ytrbd Mg# )wh hlyxtm Mkyl) This might be
rende red either, 'To begin with - He that I also tell you;' or, 'from the beginning He that I
also tell you.' I prefer the latter, and its meaning seems substantially that of our A.V.
44. vv. 25, 26.
45. ver. 26.
46. ver. 27.
47. 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 ()#n) 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' (w#)r t) w)#), that it
should be hanged up (wlt w#)r t)), 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