Joh 10:22-39 | RWP | e4.org | And it was the feast of the dedication at Jerusalem ( εγενετο δε τα ενκαινια εν τοις Ιεροσολυμοις ). But Westcott and Hort read τοτε (then) instead of δε (and) on the authority of B L W 33 and some versions. This is probably correct: "At that time came the feast of dedication in Jerusalem." Τοτε does not mean that the preceding events followed immediately after the incidents in . Bernard brings chapter 9 up to this date (possibly also chapter 8) and rearranges chapter 10 in a purely arbitrary way. There is no real reason for this arrangement. Clearly there is a considerable lapse between the events in and , possibly nearly three months (from just after tabernacles to dedication ). The Pharisees greet his return with the same desire to catch him. This feast of dedication, celebrated for eight days about the middle of our December, was instituted by Judas Maccabeus B.C. 164 in commemoration of the cleansing of the temple from the defilements of pagan worship by Antiochus Epiphanes (1Macc. 4:59). The word ενκαινια ( εν , καινος , new) occurs here only in the N.T. It was not one of the great feasts and could be observed elsewhere without coming to Jerusalem. Jesus had apparently spent the time between tabernacles and dedication in Judea ( ). Winter ( χειμων ). Old word from χειμα ( χεω , to pour, rain, or from χιων , snow). See .

‏ John 10:22-39

And it was the feast of the dedication at Jerusalem ( εγενετο δε τα ενκαινια εν τοις Ιεροσολυμοις ). But Westcott and Hort read τοτε (then) instead of δε (and) on the authority of B L W 33 and some versions. This is probably correct: "At that time came the feast of dedication in Jerusalem." Τοτε does not mean that the preceding events followed immediately after the incidents in 10:1-21. Bernard brings chapter 9 up to this date (possibly also chapter 8) and rearranges chapter 10 in a purely arbitrary way. There is no real reason for this arrangement. Clearly there is a considerable lapse between the events in 10:22-39 and 10:1-21, possibly nearly three months (from just after tabernacles 7:37 to dedication 10:22). The Pharisees greet his return with the same desire to catch him. This feast of dedication, celebrated for eight days about the middle of our December, was instituted by Judas Maccabeus B.C. 164 in commemoration of the cleansing of the temple from the defilements of pagan worship by Antiochus Epiphanes (1Macc. 4:59). The word ενκαινια ( εν, καινος, new) occurs here only in the N.T. It was not one of the great feasts and could be observed elsewhere without coming to Jerusalem. Jesus had apparently spent the time between tabernacles and dedication in Judea (Lu 10:1-13:21).

Winter ( χειμων ). Old word from χειμα ( χεω, to pour, rain, or from χιων, snow). See Mt 24:20.

Was walking ( περιεπατε ). Imperfect active of περιπατεω, to walk around, picturesque imperfect.

In Solomon's porch ( εν τη στοα του Σολομωνος ). A covered colonnade or portico in which people could walk in all weather. See Ac 3:11; 5:12 for this porch. This particular part of Solomon's temple was left uninjured by the Babylonians and survived apparently till the destruction of the temple by Titus A.D. 70 (Josephus, Ant. XX. 9,7). When John wrote, it was, of course, gone.

Came round about him ( εκυκλωσαν αυτον ). Aorist active indicative of κυκλοω, old verb from κυκλος (cycle, circle). See Ac 14:20 for the circle of disciples around Paul when stoned. Evidently the hostile Jews cherished the memory of the stinging rebuke given them by Jesus when here last, particularly the allegory of the Good Shepherd (10:1-19), in which he drew so sharply their own picture.

How long dost thou hold us in suspense? ( εως ποτε την ψυχην ημων αιρεισ; ). Literally, "Until when dost thou lift up our soul?" But what do they mean by this metaphor? Αιρω is common enough to lift up the eyes (Joh 11:41), the voice (Lu 17:13), and in Ps 25:1; 86:4 (Josephus, Ant. III. ii. 3) we have "to lift up the soul." We are left to the context to judge the precise meaning. Clearly the Jews mean to imply doubt and suspense. The next remark makes it clear.

If thou art the Christ ( ε συ ε ο Χριστος ). Condition of first class assumed to be true for the sake of argument.

Tell us plainly ( ειπον ημιν παρρησια ). Conclusion with ειπον rather than the usual ειπε as if first aorist active imperative like λυσον. The point is in "plainly" ( παρρησια ), adverb as in 7:13, 26 which see. That is to say "I am the Christ" in so many words. See 11:14; 16:29 for the same use of παρρησια. The demand seemed fair enough on the surface. They had made it before when here at the feast of tabernacles (8:25). Jesus declined to use the word Χριστος (Messiah) then as now because of the political bearing of the word in their minds. The populace in Galilee had once tried to make him king in opposition to Pilate (Joh 6:14f.). When Jesus does confess on oath before Caiaphas that he is the Christ the Son of God (Mr 14:61f.; Mt 26:63f.), the Sanhedrin instantly vote him guilty of blasphemy and then bring him to Pilate with the charge of claiming to be king as a rival to Caesar. Jesus knew their minds too well to be caught now.

I told you, and you believe not ( ειπον υμιν κα ου πιστευετε ). It was useless to say more. In 7:14-10:18 Jesus had shown that he was the Son of the Father as he had previously claimed (5:17-47), but it was all to no purpose save to increase their rage towards him.

These bear witness of me ( ταυτα μαρτυρε περ εμου ). His works confirm his words as he had shown before (5:36). They believe neither his words nor his works.

Because ye are not of my sheep ( οτ εκ των προβατων μου ). This had been the point in the allegory of the Good Shepherd. In fact, they were the children of the devil in spirit and conduct (8:43), pious ecclesiastics though they seemed, veritable wolves in sheep's clothing (Mt 7:15).

My sheep ( τα προβατα τα εμα ). In contrast with you they are not in doubt and suspense. They know my voice and follow me. Repetition of the idea in 10:4, 14.

And I give unto them eternal life ( καγω διδωμ αυτοις ζωην αιωνιον ). This is the gift of Jesus now to his sheep as stated in 6:27, 40 (cf. 1Jo 2:25; 5:11).

And they shall never perish ( κα ου μη απολωντα ). Emphatic double negative with second aorist middle (intransitive) subjunctive of απολλυμ, to destroy. The sheep may feel secure (3:16; 6:39; 17:12; 18:9).

And no one shall snatch them out of my hand ( κα ουχ αρπασε τις αυτα εκ της χειρος μου ). Jesus had promised this security in Galilee (6:37, 39). No wolf, no thief, no bandit, no hireling, no demon, not even the devil can pluck the sheep out of my hand. Cf. Col 3:3 (Your life is hid together with Christ in God).

Which ( ος ). Who. If ο (which) is correct, we have to take ο πατηρ as nominative absolute or independent, "As for my Father."

Is greater than all ( παντων μειζων εστιν ). If we read ος. But Aleph B L W read ο and A B Theta have μειζον. The neuter seems to be correct (Westcott and Hort). But is it? If so, the meaning is: "As for my Father, that which he hath given me is greater than all." But the context calls for ος ... μειζων with ο πατηρ as the subject of εστιν. The greatness of the Father, not of the flock, is the ground of the safety of the flock. Hence the conclusion that "no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand."

One ( εν ). Neuter, not masculine ( εις ). Not one person (cf. εις in Ga 3:28), but one essence or nature. By the plural συμυς (separate persons) Sabellius is refuted, by υνυμ Arius. So Bengel rightly argues, though Jesus is not referring, of course, to either Sabellius or Arius. The Pharisees had accused Jesus of making himself equal with God as his own special Father (Joh 5:18). Jesus then admitted and proved this claim (5:19-30). Now he states it tersely in this great saying repeated later (17:11, 21). Note εν used in 1Co 3:3 of the oneness in work of the planter and the waterer and in 17:11, 23 of the hoped for unity of Christ's disciples. This crisp statement is the climax of Christ's claims concerning the relation between the Father and himself (the Son). They stir the Pharisees to uncontrollable anger.

Took up stones again ( εβαστασαν παλιν λιθους ). First aorist active indicative of βασταζω, old verb to pick up, to carry (Joh 12:6), to bear (Ga 6:5). The παλιν refers to Joh 8:59 where ηραν was used. They wanted to kill him also when he made himself equal to God in 5:18. Perhaps here εβαστασαν means "they fetched stones from a distance."

To stone him ( ινα λιθασωσιν αυτον ). Final clause with ινα and the first aorist active subjunctive of λιθαζω, late verb (Aristotle, Polybius) from λιθος (stone, small, Mt 4:6, or large, Mt 28:2), in Joh 10:31-33; 11:8; Ac 5:26; 14:19; 2Co 11:25; Heb 11:37, but not in the Synoptics. It means to pelt with stones, to overwhelm with stones.

From the Father ( εκ του πατρος ). Proceeding out of the Father as in 6:65; 16:28 (cf. 7:17; 8:42, 47) rather than παρα as in 1:14; 6:46; 7:29; 17:7.

For which of those works ( δια ποιον αυτων εργον ). Literally, "For what kind of work of them" (referring to the "many good works" πολλα εργα καλα ). Noble and beautiful deeds Jesus had done in Jerusalem like healing the impotent man (chapter 5) and the blind man (chapter 9). Ποιον is a qualitative interrogative pronoun pointing to καλα (good).

Do ye stone me ( λιθαζετε ). Conative present active indicative, "are ye trying to stone me." They had the stones in their hands stretched back to fling at him, a threatening attitude.

For a good work we stone thee not ( περ καλου εργου ου λιθαζομεν ). "Concerning a good deed we are not stoning thee." Flat denial that the healing of the blind man on the Sabbath had led them to this attempt (8:59) in spite of the facts.

But for blasphemy ( αλλα περ βλασφημιας ). See Ac 26:7 where περ with the genitive is also used with εγκαλουμα for the charge against Paul. This is the only example in John of the word βλασφημια (cf. Mt 12:31).

And because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God ( κα οτ συ ανθρωπος ων ποιεις σεαυτον θεον ). In 5:18 they stated the charge more accurately: "He called God his own Father, making himself equal with God." That is, he made himself the Son of God. This he did beyond a doubt. But was it blasphemy? Only if he was not the Son of God. The penalty for blasphemy was death by stoning (Le 24:16; 1Ki 21:10, 13).

Is it not written? ( ουκ εστιν γεγραμμενον; ). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of γραφω (as in 2:17) in place of the usual γεγραπτα. "Does it not stand written?"

In your law ( εν τω νομω υμων ). From Ps 82:6. The term νομος (law) applying here to the entire O.T. as in 12:34; 15:25; Ro 3:19; 1Co 14:21. Aleph D Syr-sin. omit υμων, but needlessly. We have it already so from Jesus in 8:17. They posed as the special custodians of the O.T.

I said ( οτ εγω ειπα ). Recitative οτ before a direct quotation like our quotation marks. Ειπα is a late second aorist form of indicative with -α instead of -ον.

Ye are gods ( θεο εστε ). Another direct quotation after ειπα but without οτ. The judges of Israel abused their office and God is represented in Ps 82:6 as calling them "gods" ( θεο, elohim) because they were God's representatives. See the same use of elohim in Ex 21:6; 22:9, 28. Jesus meets the rabbis on their own ground in a thoroughly Jewish way.

If he called them gods ( ε εκεινους ειπεν θεους ). Condition of first class, assumed as true. The conclusion (verse 36) is υμεις λεγετε; ( Do ye say?). As Jews (and rabbis) they are shut out from charging Jesus with blasphemy because of this usage in the O.T. It is a complete ad hominem argument. To be sure, it is in Ps 82:6 a lower use of the term θεος, but Jesus did not call himself "Son of Jahweh," but " υιος θεου " which can mean only "Son of Elohim." It must not be argued, as some modern men do, that Jesus thus disclaims his own deity. He does nothing of the kind. He is simply stopping the mouths of the rabbis from the charge of blasphemy and he does it effectually. The sentence is quite involved, but can be cleared up.

To whom the word of God came ( προς ους ο λογος του θεου εγενετο ). The relative points to εκεινους, before. These judges had no other claim to the term θεο (elohim).

And the scripture cannot be broken ( κα ου δυνατα λυθηνα η γραφη ). A parenthesis that drives home the pertinency of the appeal, one that the Pharisees had to accept. Λυθηνα is first aorist passive infinitive of λυω, to loosen, to break.

Of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world ( ον ο πατηρ ηγιασεν κα απεστειλεν εις τον κοσμον ). Another relative clause with the antecedent ( τουτον, it would be, object of λεγετε ) unexpressed. Every word counts heavily here in contrast with the mere judges of Ps 82:6.

Thou blasphemest ( οτ βλασφημεις ). Recitative οτ again before direct quotation.

Because I said ( οτ ειπον ). Causal use of οτ and regular form ειπον (cf. ειπα in verse 34).

I am the Son of God ( υιος του θεου ειμ ). Direct quotation again after ειπον. This Jesus had implied long before as in 2:16 (my Father) and had said in 5:18-30 (the Father, the Son), in 9:35 in some MSS., and virtually in 10:30. They will make this charge against Jesus before Pilate (19:7). Jesus does not use the article here with υιος, perhaps (Westcott) fixing attention on the character of Son rather than on the person as in Heb 1:2. There is no answer to this question with its arguments.

If I do not ( ε ου ποιω ). Condition of first class, assumed as true, with negative ου, not ε μη =unless.

Believe me not ( μη πιστευετε μο ). Prohibition with μη and the present active imperative. Either "cease believing me" or "do not have the habit of believing me." Jesus rests his case on his doing the works of "my Father" ( του πατρος μου ), repeating his claims to sonship and deity.

But if I do ( ε δε ποιω ). Condition again of the first class, assumed as true, but with the opposite results.

Though ye believe not me ( καν εμο μη πιστευητε ). Condition now of third class, undetermined (but with prospect), "Even if you keep on (present active subjunctive of πιστευο ) not believing me."

Believe the works ( τοις εργοις πιστευετε ). These stand irrefutable. The claims, character, words, and works of Jesus challenge the world today as then.

That ye may know and understand ( ινα γνωτε κα γινωσκητε ). Purpose clause with ινα and the same verb γινωσκω repeated in different tenses (first γνωτε, the second ingressive aorist active subjunctive, that ye may come to know; then the present active subjunctive, "that ye may keep on knowing"). This is Christ's deepest wish about his enemies who stand with stones in their uplifted hands to fling at him.

That the Father is in me, and I in the Father ( οτ εν εμο ο πατηρ καγω εν τω πατρ ). Thus he repeats (verse 30) sharply his real claim to oneness with the Father as his Son, to actual deity. It was a hopeless wish.

They sought again to seize him ( εζητουν αυτον παλιν πιαζα ). Imperfect active, "They kept on seeking to seize (ingressive aorist active infinitive of πιαζω for which see 7:30) as they had tried repeatedly (7:1, 30, 44; 8:20), but in vain. They gave up the effort to stone him.

Out of their hand ( εκ της χειρος αυτων ). Overawed, but still angry, the stones fell to the ground, and Jesus walked out.