time (2190)-does John use or before direct speech of the Lord after "he said" consequently when we find "I said" a little later on, xviii. 8 εἶπον ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι, there is some reason for thinking that this is reported speech, “I said to you that I am1." There are many instances of this phrase ("I said that") because John (differing from the Synoptists) frequently represents Christ as referring to what He Himself has previously said, e.g. i. 50 “Because I said unto thee that (OT) I saw thee under the fig-tree," vi. 36 "But I said to you that ye have seen me," viii. 24 “I said...to you that ye shall die in your sins,” xi. 40 "Did I not say to thee that, if thou wilt believe, thou shalt see the glory of God?," xvi. 15 "For this cause I said to you that he taketh from that which is mine and [that he] will declare it unto you." In all these passages there is nothing to shew whether or introduces (1) direct or (2) reported speech; but W.H. print the text as the latter, and their view agrees with the general absence of or recitativum elsewhere after "he said" introducing words of Christ.

66

[2190] The text varies somewhat in xiii. 33 "Even as I said to the Jews that 'Where I go, ye are not able to come,' [so] to you also I say for the moment"; but if the text is correct and if the reference is to viii. 21, then or recitativum is here used in exact quotation of a saying of the Lord. The quotation is not exact in xviii. 9 ἵνα πληρωθῇ ὁ λόγος ὃν εἶπεν ὅτι Οὓς δέδωκάς μοι οὐκ ἀπώλεσα

1 [21896] For the omission of örɩ elsewhere before ¿yú elm, in words of the Lord, see vi. 20 λέγει αὐτοῖς Ἐγώ εἰμι, and vi. 35 εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος τὴν ζωῆς.

[2189] In the Baptist's words, W.H. print iii. 28 elπov [éyú] Ovk eiμì ¿yw ỏ χριστός, ἀλλ ̓ ὅτι ̓Απεσταλμένος εἰμὶ ἔμπροσθεν ἐκείνου. However printed, the text seems to blend (1) "I said "I am not the Christ but am one sent,"" (2) "I did not say 'I am the Christ,' but I said, 'I am one sent."

* [2190 a] "Or is om. by ND b, e. SS has "that, where I go they cannot come." Christ had said in vii. 34 "Where I am, ye are not able to come," and (perhaps for this reason) a and e read "sum" in xiii. 33; 6 reads "eo" which may be intended for eu accented ei "I go" (in vii. 34, a renders eiui "I am" by "vado" and sim. SS "go"). Another instance where or is omitted by Bruder (following NA) but ins. by W. H. is xiii. 11 d‹à toûto elmev öti Ovxì mávтes kaðaρоí έστε. What Jesus had actually said, was Ὑμεῖς καθαροί ἐστε ἀλλ ̓ οὐχὶ πάντες, 50 that this quotation is not exact. In view of a future consideration of Johannine quotations it is worth while noting that (a) vii. 34 ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγὼ ὑμεῖς οὐ δύνασθε Oev is exactly repeated by the Jews in vii. 36, that (6) viii. 21 ŏrov ¿yù vτáyw vμeîs où dúvaσbe éxoeîv is exactly repeated by the Jews in viii. 22, and that (c) the second of these sayings is exactly repeated by Christ, with 87ɩ in xiii. 33 öтɩ "Оπoυ ἐγώ.....ἐλθεῖν.

ἐξ αὐτῶν οὐδένα, which is a certain instance of ὅτι recitativum before words of the Lord. It is assumed by Westcott and Alford that the reference is to xvii. 12 ετήρουν αὐτοὺς ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου ᾧ δέδωκάς μοι ...καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀπώλετο. But there is a great difference between "Those whom thou hast given me I lost not one of them" and "I kept them in thy name which thou hast given me...and not one of them was lost." Why does not the evangelist give the words exactly? This question must be considered under "Variation" (2544 foll.). It does not come under the present heading except so far as it suggests a possibility that the writer may sometimes use or to mean "[to this effect] that"—when he does not propose to give the exact words in a quotation'.

(xvi) Obv

(a) In Christ's words.

[2191] Ovv, in Matthew and Luke, when used by our Lord, introduces a precept, or inference, as being based on something that precedes (often a parable or statement of considerable length) of a very cogent nature: "Be not ye therefore anxious," "Look to it therefore whether the light within thee be darkness," "If therefore ye,

1 [21906] Thus our Lord says to the Jews ix. 41 Xéyete őtɩ Bλétoμev, and x. 36 λéYETE ÖTɩ Bλaopnuɛîs, meaning "Ye say in effect." In reality (1) they had not said, "We see," but "Are we blind also?" and (2) they had not said "Thou blasphemest," but "We stone thee for blasphemy and because thou, being a man, makest thyself God."

[2190] It will be found that almost all Jn's quotations and repetitions, with or without or, are given with variations (2544 foll.). But or introduces an exact quotation (soon after the passage last quoted) in x. 34 Oúk kσtɩ Yeɣpaμμévov èv Tậ νόμῳ ὑμῶν ὅτι Ἐγὼ εἶπα Θεοί έστε, where a short saying is quoted exactly to illustrate the pervading thought in the whole of what Jesus calls “your own Law,” that those to whom the word of God comes are in some sense "gods." In xx. 18 ἀγγέλλουσα τοῖς μαθηταῖς ὅτι Εώρακα τὸν κύριον καὶ ταῦτα εἶπεν αὐτῇ, the tidings of Christ's Resurrection are first summed up in one phrase of direct speech "I have seen," and then the fact that He said certain things is expressed in reported speech.

[2190 ] In xvi. 17 τί ἐστιν τοῦτο δ λέγει ἡμῖν Μικρὸν καὶ οὐκαὶ "Οτι ὑπάγω πρὸς τὸν πατέρα, ὅτι is probably because.” Jn would hardly omit ότι recit. before Mukpóv and insert it before 'Trάyw-if both were the first words of quotations. "Because" may be the first word of "Because I go to the Father" repeated from xvi. 10 “because I go to the Father and ye no longer behold me." Several authorities interpolate the italicised words in xvi. 16, and it is clear that these took or as "because."

being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more...?” “ If therefore in the unrighteous mammon ye were not faithful, who shall entrust to you...1?" John (1883) uses ovv very frequently in his Gospel, about 195 times in all, but in Christ's words very rarely, only 8 times. It occurs most frequently when He is arguing with unbelievers or doubters; but He uses it twice in the Discourse with the disciples before the Passion, and, for the last time, to the soldiers arresting Him. He has twice asked them "Whom seek ye?" And they have twice replied, "Jesus of Nazareth." Now He replies (xviii. 8) "I told you that I am he. Therefore, if it is I that ye seek, let these depart." "Therefore," in R. V., has the advantage of uniformity, but "then" would sometimes be preferable.

[2192] The other instances in Christ's words are as follows : vi. 62 “ Doth this cause you to stumble? (lit.) If therefore ye should be beholding (ἐὰν οὖν θεωρῆτε) the Son of man ascending where he

1 [2191 a] Mt. vi. 31, Lk. xi. 35, Mt. vii. 11, Lk. xvi. 11. Luke often inserts it as follows-mostly in Christ's words-where the parall. Mk omits it :

In the last five passages of Lk., only Lk. xx. 44 is in Christ's words. The result indicates a general preference of ovv in Lk.

was before". Here there is an ellipsis of the apodosis-"What will ye do?" or "What is to happen?" The passage is extremely obscure (2210-12): but the meaning appears to be that, if they stumble already at the truth, they will, as an inevitable consequence, stumble again when a higher truth is set before them. In viii. 24 "I said therefore to you 'Ye shall die in your sins,'" after "Ye are of this world," Jesus assumes that "this world” (1 Jn v. 19) “lieth wholly in the evil [one]," i.e. in the hands of sin and death, so that those who "are of this world" will "therefore die" in their sins; in viii. 36 "The Son abideth [in the house] for ever. If therefore the Son shall free you, ye shall be free indeed," it is assumed that what the Son of the house does will be ratified by the Father, and "therefore" will be permanent and "real.”

[2193] In the following difficult passage, ovv may help to decide between the alternative renderings given by R.V., (viii. 37-8) (lit.) "Ye seek to kill me... The things that I (emph.) have seen in the house of the (mapa T) Father I speak: ye also therefore (kai vμeîs ovr)the things that ye heard from the (rapà тoû) father, ye do (å ŋkovσATE Tара τоÛ патρÒS TOLETE)." Here R.V. txt has "and ye also do” (apparently rendering xaí by "and," our by "also "), but R.V. marg. "do ye also therefore the things which ye heard from the Father." In R.V. txt, it is affirmed that the Jews do the works suggested from the devil, who is to them "the father"; in R.V. margin, the Jews are exhorted to do the works suggested by the Father, God.

[2194] In favour of the former rendering ("ye do ") there is the precedent of kaì vμeîs ovv quoted from xvi. 22 above (2149, comp. 2196-7) with the indicative, where it meant "ye also in a corresponding way." So here, the meaning seems to be that there is a correspondence between the conduct of Christ and that of His persecutors. They are as consistent in evil as He in good: “The things that I have seen in the house of Light I speak: ye, by the law of your nature as I by the law of mine-I do not say ye 'speak,' but, more than that-the things that ye have heard from the house of darkness, ye do'."

1 [2194 a] It is implied that they "see" nothing, being children of darkness; but they execute the whispered suggestions of evil that come to them from "the father" of the house of darkness (somewhat as the mutterings of Satan are represented by Milton as coming to Eve in her sleep). There is a paradoxical antithesis: "What I see, I speak; what ye hear, ye do.”

[21946] For "the father" used to mean "Satan," comp. viii. 44 "Ye are of

[2195] In xii. 49-50 "The Father that sent me he hath given me commandment what I should say and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is eternal life. The things therefore that I (emph.) speak-even as the father hath said [them] to me, so speak I," Chrysostom has excellently expressed the force of our by the paraphrase “It is not natural (ovê ëxeɩ þúσɩ тò πрâyμa) that the Father should say one thing and I utter another." The meaning is, "I not only know what I am commanded to say, but also know that it is my Life, Life Eternal, to fulfil the commandment, it follows therefore that I must speak the Father's words." There is an argument a fortiori in xiii. 13-14 “Ye address me [with the titles] 'the Teacher' and 'the Master (kúptos),' and ye say well, for such I am. If therefore I washed your feet-'the Teacher' and 'the Master 'ye also are bound to wash each other's feet." In Matthew and Luke this cogent "therefore" would perhaps have been accompanied by "How much more!" and SS has something like it here "And if I, your Rabbi...how much doth it behove you...!"

:

[2196] In xvi. 21-2 "The woman [or, wife] when she is in travail (ötav Tíkty) hath sorrow because her hour hath come but when she hath given birth to (yevvýoy) the child she remembereth no more the anguish because of the joy that a man is born into the world. Ye also therefore (kai vμeis ovr) now indeed (vôv μév) have sorrow but I will see you again and your heart shall rejoice and your joy no man shall take from you," we may explain "therefore " in a broad and general way by saying that the argument takes child

64

the father the devil." As in French "the head" means my, your, his head" according to the context, so may "the father" in Greek; and the writer deliberately uses the ambiguous expression "the father" in order to prepare for the defining climax in viii. 44, (1) "the father," (2) "the devil," (3) "your father."

[2194] The view that roere is indicative is supported not only by the analogy of xvi. 22, but also by the fact it is in Jn's manner to repeat a statement twice or thrice with variations, and we find the indicative again in viii. 41 “ye do the deeds of your father," viii. 44 "ye are fain to do the lusts of your father." Moreover the imperative rendering, "Do ye also the things that ye heard from the Father," i.e. God, would imply that the Jews had heard the Father's voice, which (though theoretically arguable as referring to the Law of Sinai) is somewhat inconsistent with v. 37 and viii. 43. The statement in viii. 37 "ye seek to kill me" implies, "ye are doing the work of your father Satan," as appears from viii. 44 (he was a murderer from the beginning") and from 1 Jn iii. 10-12 "in this the children of God are manifest and the children of the devil...Cain was of the evil one and slew his brother."