Lecture 2 — Truth of Christ’s testimony

^8:12^ Jesus spoke to them again, saying: I am the light of the world: he who follows me does not walk in darkness but will have the light of life. [n. 1141]

^8:13^ The Pharisees therefore said to him: you give testimony about yourself, but your testimony is not true. [n. 1146]

^8:14^ Jesus answered and said to them: although I give testimony about myself, my testimony is true: for I know where I came from and where I go, but you do not know where I come from or where I go. [n. 1148]

^8:15^ You judge according to the flesh; I do not judge any man. [n. 1150]

^8:16^ And if I do judge, my judgment is true, because I am not alone, but there is me and the Father who sent me. [n. 1153]

^8:17^ And in your law it is written that the testimony of two men is true. [n. 1155]

^8:18^ I am one who gives testimony about myself, and the Father who sent me gives testimony about me. [n. 1157]

^8:19^ They therefore said to him: where is your father? Jesus answered: you know neither me nor my Father: if you did know me, perhaps you would also know my Father. [n. 1158]

^8:20^ These words Jesus spoke in the treasury, teaching in the temple, and no man laid hands on him, because his hour had not yet come. [n. 1163]

1140. The Evangelist has presented Christ as teaching; now he shows,

first, the power which this teaching has to give light, and

second, what Christ himself said about it, at the Pharisees therefore said to him: you give testimony about yourself.

With respect to the first he does three things:

first, he states Christ’s prerogative concerning spiritual light;

second, the effect of this prerogative, he who follows me does not walk in darkness; and

third, its fruit, but will have the light of life.

1141. He says, concerning the prerogative of Christ, who is the light, to the spiritual light, Jesus spoke to them again, saying: I am the light of the world. We can relate this statement with what went before in this way. Christ had said, when forgiving the woman’s sin, **neither will I condemn you **(John 8:11). And so they would have no doubt that he could forgive and pardon sins, he saw fit to show the power of his divinity more openly by saying that he is the light which drives away the darkness of sin.

Or, we could connect this statement with what the Pharisees said before: search the Scriptures and see that, out of Galilee, a prophet does not rise (John 7:52). For they thought of him as a Galilean and linked to a definite place, and so they rejected his teaching. So our Lord shows them that he is in the universal light of the entire world, saying, I am the light of the world, not just of Galilee, or of Palestine, or of Judea.

1142. The Manicheans, as Augustine relates, misunderstood this: for since they judged by their imagination, which does not rise to intellectual and spiritual realities, they believed that nothing but bodies existed. Thus they said that God was a body; and a certain infinite light. Further, they thought that the sun that we see with our physical eyes was Christ the Lord. And that is why, according to them, Christ said, I am the light of the world.

However, this opinion cannot be held and the Catholic Church rejects such a fiction. For this physical sun is a light which can be perceived by sense. Consequently, it is not the highest light, which intellect alone grasps, and which is the intelligible light characteristic of the rational creature. Christ says about this light here: I am the light of the world. And above we read: he was the true light, which enlightens every man coming into this world (John 1:9).

Since perceptible light, however, is a certain image of spiritual light, for every sensible thing is something particular, whereas intellectual things are a kind of whole. Just as particular light has an effect on the thing seen, inasmuch as it makes colors actually visible, as well as on the one seeing, because through it the eye is conditioned for seeing, so intellectual light makes the intellect to know because whatever light is in the rational creature is all derived from that supreme light which enlightens every man coming into the world. Furthermore, it makes all things to be actually intelligible inasmuch as all forms are derived from it, forms which give things the capability of being known, just as all the forms of artifacts are derived from the art and reason on the artisan: how magnificent are your works, O Lord! You have made all things in wisdom (Ps 103:24). Thus Christ truly says here: I am the light of the world; not the sun which was made, but the one who made the sun. Yet as Augustine says, the light which made the sun was himself made under the sun and covered with a cloud of flesh, not in order to hide but to be moderated.

1143. This also eliminates the heresy of Nestorius, who said that the Son of God was united to human nature by a mere indwelling.

For it is obvious that the one who said, I am the light of the world, was a human being. Therefore, unless the one who spoke and appeared as a human being was also the person of the Son of God, he could not have said, I am the light of the world, but the light of the world dwells in me.

1144. The effect of this light is to expel darkness; and so he says, he who follows me does not walk in darkness. Because this light is universal, it universally expels all darkness.

Now there are three kinds of darkness. There is the darkness of ignorance: they have neither known nor understood; they walk in darkness (Ps 81:5); and this is the darkness reason has of itself, insofar as it is darkened of itself. There is the darkness of sin: you were at one time darkness, but now you are light in the Lord (Eph 5:8). This darkness belongs to human reason not of itself, but from the affections which, by being badly disposed by passion or habit, seek something as good that is not really good. Further, there is the darkness of eternal damnation: cast the unprofitable servant into the exterior darkness (Matt 25:30). The first two kinds of darkness are found in this life; but the third is at the end of life. Thus, he who follows me does not walk in darkness: the darkness of ignorance, because I am the truth; nor the darkness of sin, because I am the way; nor the darkness of eternal damnation, because I am the life.

1145. He next adds the fruit of his teaching, but will have the light of life, for one who has the light is outside the darkness of damnation.

He says, he who follows me, because just as one who does not want to stumble in the dark has to follow the one who is carrying the light, so one who wants to be saved must, by believing and loving, follow Christ, who is the light. This is the way the apostles followed him (Matt 4:20). Because physical light can fail because it sets, it happens that one who follows it meets with darkness. But the light we are talking about here does not set and never fails; consequently, one who follows it has an unfailing light, that is, an unfailing light of life. For the light that is visible does not give life, but gives us an external aid because we live insofar as we have understanding, and this is a certain participation in this light. And when this light completely shines upon us we will then have perfect life: with you is the fountain of life, and in your light we will see the light (Ps 35:10). This is the same as saying: we will have perfectly or completely when we see this light as it is. Thus we read further on: this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent (John 17:3).

Note that the phrase, he who follows me, pertains to our merits; while the statement, will have the light of life, pertains to our reward.

1146. At the Pharisees therefore said to him, the Evangelist mentions three things that Jesus says about himself.

First concerning the first;

second, the second, at again Jesus said to them: I go and you will seek me (John 8:21); and

third, the third, at **amen, amen I say to you: if any man keep my word, he will never see death **(John 8:51).

The first thing he said was, I am the light of the world; and this troubled the Jews.

So first, he shows their opposition;

second, how Jesus proved that they were wrong by showing what he said was true, at Jesus answered and said to them: although I give testimony about myself.

1147. With respect to the first, it is obvious that what Jesus said in the temple, he said in the presence of the people. But now he is speaking before the Pharisees, and so they said to him: you give testimony about yourself, but your testimony is not true. They were saying in effect: because you are bearing witness to yourself, your testimony is not true.

Now in human affairs it is neither acceptable nor fitting that a person praise himself: let another praise you, and not your own mouth (Prov 27:2), because self-praise does not make a person commendable, but being commended by God does: it is not he who commends himself who is approved, but he whom God commends (2 Cor 10:18), because only God perfectly knows a person. But no one can really sufficiently commend God except God himself; and so it is fitting that he bear witness to himself, and also to men: my witness is in heaven (Job 16:20). Thus the opinion of the Jews was mistaken.

1148. Next, at Jesus answered and said to them: although I give testimony about myself, our Lord rejects their opposition:

first, by the authority of his Father;

second, by answering their rejection, which arose concerning his Father, at they therefore said to him: where is your father?

The opposition of the Jews arose from a certain conclusion which they drew: and so

first he shows that their conclusion is not true;

second, he proves that his own testimony is true, at I do not judge any man.

He does two things concerning the first:

first, he shows that their conclusion is false;

second, he adds the reason for their error, at but you do not know where I come from or where I go.

1149. Their conclusion was that the testimony of Christ was not true, because he bore witness to himself. But our Lord says the opposite, namely, that because of this it is true. Jesus replied: although I give testimony about myself, my testimony is true; and it is true because I know where I came from and where I go. It is like saying, according to Chrysostom, my testimony is true because I am from God, and because I am God, and because I am the Son of God: God is truthful (Rom 3:4).

He says, I know where I came from, that is, my origin, and where I go, that is to the Father, whom no one but the Son can know perfectly: no one knows the Father except the Son, and he to whom the Son wishes to reveal him (Matt 11:27). This does not imply that anyone who knows, by love and understanding, where he comes from and where he is going can speak only the truth, for we all come from God and are going to God. But God is truth: how much more, then, does the Son of God speak the truth, he who knows perfectly where he comes from and where he is going.

1150. Then when he says, but you do not know where I come from or where I go, he shows the reason for their error, which was their ignorance of the divinity of Christ. For it was because they did not know this that they judged him according to his human nature.

Thus, there were two reasons for their error. One, because they did not know his divinity; the other, because they judged him only by his human nature. And so he says, with respect to the first, you do not know where I come from, that is, my eternal procession from the Father, or where I go. It says below: he who sent me is truthful, and the things that I have heard from him are the same that I speak to the world (John 8:26); from where, then, does wisdom come? (Job 28:20); who will state his origin? (Isa 53:8).

As for the second reason for their error, he says, you judge according to the flesh, that is, you judge me thinking that I am merely flesh and not God. Or, we could say, according to the flesh, that is, wickedly and unjustly. For just as to live according to the flesh is to live wickedly, so to judge according to the flesh is to judge unjustly.

1151. Then, at I do not judge any man, he shows that his testimony is true, and that it is false to say that he alone is bearing witness to himself. Because mention was now made about judging, he shows,

first, that he is not alone in judging; and

second, that he is not alone in bearing witness, at and in your law it is witten that the testimony of two men is true.

He does three things about the first:

first, he says that his judgment is deferred;

second, that his judgment is true; and

third, he gives the reason why his judgment is true.

1152. He mentions that his judgment is deferred when he says, I do not judge any man. He is saying in effect: you judge wickedly, but I do not judge any man. As it says above: for God did not send his Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through him (John 3:17). Or, we could say, I do not judge any man, according to the flesh, as you judge: he will not judge by the sight of his eyes, or reprove by what his ears hear (Isa 11:3).

1153. Yet, I will judge at some time, because he has given all judgment to the Son (John 5:22). And then, my judgment is true, that is, just: he will judge the people with justice (Ps 95:10); we know that the judgment of God is according to the truth (Rom 2:2). This shows that his judgment is true.

1154. He gives the reason for its truth when he says, because I am not alone. What Christ said before, neither does the Father judge any man (John 5:22), should be understood to refer to the Father in isolation from the Son. Or, again, he said this because the Father will not appear visibly to all at the judgment. Thus he says, I am not alone, because he is not left alone by the Father, but is with him: I am in the Father, and the Father is in me (John 14:10).

This statement rejects the error of Sabellius, who said that the Father and the Son were the same person, the only difference between them being in their names. But if this were true, Christ would not have said: I am not alone, but there is me and the Father who sent me. He would rather have said: I am the Father, and I am the Son. We should, therefore, distinguish between the persons, and realize that the Son is not the Father.

1155. Then, at and in your law it is written that the testimony of two men is true, he shows that he is not alone in bearing witness. He does not defer bearing witness, as he does his judging. Thus he does not say, I do not bear witness.

First, he mentions the law;

second, he gives his conclusion, at I am one who gives testimony about myself.

1156. He says, and it is written in your law, the law which was given to you—Moses imposed a law (Sir 24:33)—that the testimony of two men is true; for it is written: by the mouth of the two or three witnesses the issue will be settled (Deut 19:15).

According to Augustine the statement that the testimony of two men is true, involves a great difficulty. For it could happen that both of them would be lying. Indeed, the chaste Susanna was harassed by two false witnesses (Dan 13:5 ff), and all the people lied about Christ.

I answer that statement, the testimony of two men is true, means that such testimony should be regarded as true when giving a verdict. The reason for this is that true certitude cannot be obtained when human acts are in question, and so in its place one takes what can be considered the more certain, that is, what is said by a number of witnesses: for it is more probable that one person might lie than many: a threefold cord is not easily broken (Eccl 4:12).

When we read, by the mouth of two or three witnesses the issue will be settled (Deut 19:15), we are led, as Augustine says, to a consideration of the Trinity, in which truth is permanently established, from which all truths are derived. It says, of two or three, because in Sacred Scripture sometimes three persons are enumerated and at other times two persons, in which is implied the Holy Spirit, who is the bond of the other two.

1157. If, therefore, the testimony of two or three is true, my testimony is true, because I am one who gives testimony about myself, and the Father who sent me who gives testimony about me; as above: but I have a greater testimony than that of John (John 5:36).

But this does not seem to be to the point. First, because the Father of the Son of God is not a man, while Christ says, the testimony of two men is true. Second, because there are two witnesses to someone when they are testifying about a third person; but if one testifies to one of the two, there are not two witnesses. Thus, since Christ is testifying about himself, and the Father is also testifying about Christ, it does not seem that there are two witnesses.

To answer this we must say that Christ is here arguing from the lesser to the greater. For it is clear that the truth of God is greater than the truth of a man. So, therefore, if they believe in the testimony of men, then they should believe the testimony of God much more. If you receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater (1 John 5:9). In addition, he says this to show that he is consubstantial with the Father, and does not need outside testimony, as Chrysostom says.

1158. Next, at they said therefore to him: where is your father? we see the question arising about Christ’s Father.

First, the Evangelist mentions the question asked by the Jews;

then Christ’s answer; and

third, he intimates the security of Christ.

1159. The question which the Jews had for Christ was about his Father, where his Father was. They said to him: where is your father? for they thought that the Father of Christ was a man, just like their own fathers. Because they heard him say, I am not alone, but there is me and the Father who sent me, and since they saw that he was now alone, they asked him, where is your father?

Or, we could say that they were here speaking with a certain irony and contempt, saying in effect: why do you speak to us so often about your Father? Is he so great that his testimony should be believed? For they were thinking of Joseph, who was an unknown, and a person of low status; and they were ignorant of the Father: so the gentiles will not say: where is their God? (Ps 113:2).

1160. Christ’s answer is mysterious: you know neither me nor my Father. Christ does not reveal the truth to them because they were questioning him not because they desired to learn, but in order to belittle him. Rather, he first shows them that of which they were ignorant; second how they may be able to attain knowledge of the truth.

He shows them their ignorance when he says, you know neither me. He is saying: you should not be asking about my Father, because you do not know me. For since you regard me as a man, you are asking about my Father as though he were a man. But because you do not know me, neither can you know my Father.

1161. This seems to conflict with what he said above: you know me, and you know from where I come (John 7:28).

The answer to this is that they did know him according to his humanity, but not according to his divinity.

We should note, according to Origen, that some have misunderstood this, and they said that the Father of Christ was not the God of the Old Testament: for the Jews knew the God of the Old Testament, according to God is known in Judea (Ps 75:1).

There are four answers to this. First, our Lord says that the Jews did not know his Father because insofar as they do not keep his commandments they are acting like those who do not know him. This answer refers to their conduct. Second, they are said not to know God because they did not cling to him spiritually by love: for one who knows something adheres to it. Third, because although they did know him through faith, they did not have a full knowledge of him: no one has ever seen God: the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, has made him known (John 1:18). Fourth, because in the Old Testament the Father was known under the aspect of God Almighty: I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob as God Almighty, but my name, Lord, I did not show them (Exod 6:3), that is, under the aspect of Father. Thus, although they knew him as God Almighty, they did not know him as the Father of a consubstantial Son.

1162. Christ says that he is the way to arrive at a knowledge of the Father, if you did know me. He is saying in effect: because I speak of my Father, who is hidden, it is first necessary that you know me, perhaps you would also know my Father. For the Son is the way to the knowledge of the Father: if you had known me, you would without doubt have known my Father also (John 14:7). As Augustine says, what does, if you did know me mean, except, I and the Father are one (John 10:30). It is customary when you see someone who is like someone else to say: if you have seen one, you have seen the other; not that the Son is the Father, but he is like the Father.

He says, perhaps, not to indicate a doubt, but as a rebuke. It would be like being irritated with your servant and saying to him: have you no respect for me? Just remember that I might be your master.

1163. The Evangelist shows the security with which Christ answered when he says, these words Jesus spoke in the treasury. We see the first from the place where he taught, that is, in the treasury and in the temple. For gaza is the Persian word for riches, and philaxe for keep. Thus ‘gazophylacium’ is the word used in Sacred Scripture for the chest in which riches are kept. It is used in this sense: and Jehoiada the priest took a chest and bored a hole in its top, and put it by the altar, to the right of those coming into the house of the Lord. And the priests who kept the doors put into it all the money that was brought to the temple of the Lord (2 Kgs 12:9). Sometimes, however, it was used to indicate the building where riches were kept; and this is the way it was used here.

We can also see Christ’s security from the fact that those who had been sent to arrest him could not do so, because he was not willing. Thus the Evangelist says, and no man laid hands on him, because his hour had not yet come, that is, the time for him to suffer, an hour not fixed by fate, but predetermined from all eternity by his own will. Thus Augustine says: his hour had not yet come, not in which he would be forced to die, but in which he would not refuse being killed.

1164. We may note, according to Origen, that whenever the place where our Lord did something is mentioned, this is done because of some mystery. Thus Christ taught in the treasury, the place where riches were kept, to signify that the coins, that is, the words of his teaching, are impressed with the image of the great King.

Note also that when Christ was teaching, no man laid hands on him, because his words were stronger than those who wanted to seize him; but when he willed to be crucified, then he became silent.