Chapter III: 1‐21. *Nicodemus comes to Christ; their discourse

22‐36. *Christ begins to baptize; complaints of the Baptist’s
disciples, and testimony of the Baptist to Christ’s divine origin,
and to the necessity of faith in Him.*

1. Erat autem homo ex 1. And there was a man of the pharisaeis, Nicodemus nomine, Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a princeps Iudaeorum. ruler of the Jews.

1. This chapter is closely connected with the end of the preceding. Among the many who believed (ii. 23) was *a man of the Pharisees* (see i. 24). The sect, name, and dignity of the man are mentioned, because of his importance, and because of the importance of the discourse about to be narrated.

*A ruler of the Jews*; that is to say, as we gather from vii. 45, 50, he was a member of the Sanhedrim.

2. Hic venit ad Iesum nocte, 2. This man came to Jesus by et dixit ei: Rabbi, scimus night, and said to him: Rabbi, quia a Deo venisti magister: we know that thou art come a nemo enim potest haec signa teacher from God: for no man facere quae tu facis, nisi can do these signs which thou fuerit Deus cum eo. dost, unless God be with him.

2. Because he believed in Jesus, he came; but because he feared the Jews, he came by night.

*We know.* Nicodemus may have come in the name of several, to learn more about Jesus, or he may be merely alluding to the fact that some others were of the same belief. He professed his faith in Jesus as a heaven‐sent teacher, stating the nature of his belief. “Nicodemus estimates accurately, we may almost say with theological precision, the force of the evidence of the miracles of our Lord, if they were to be taken apart from other considerations which belonged to the same subject‐matter. The miracles _in themselves_ proved exactly that God was with Him; but if they were taken in conjunction with the witness of St. John the Baptist, with our Lord’s manner of working them, that is, _as one who was using His own power_, and with His way of speaking of Himself, and of God as His Father, they might have been enough to form the ground of a still higher faith concerning our Blessed Lord” (Coleridge, _Life of our Lord_, vol. i., page 256).

3. Respondit Iesus, et dixit 3. Jesus answered and said to ei: Amen, amen, dico tibi, him: Amen, amen, I say to nisi quis renatus fuerit thee, unless a man be born denuo, non potest videre again, he cannot see the regnum Dei. kingdom of God.

3. *Jesus answered.* This might merely mean that He went on to speak, the verb to answer being again and again found in this sense in the New Testament. Here, however, it may be used in its strict sense of replying to a question, for it seems to us extremely probable that a portion of the discourse leading up to the statement made in verse 3 is omitted by the Evangelist. It is highly improbable that the whole discourse between Christ and Nicodemus is here recorded, as it seems very unlikely that Nicodemus, after the trouble of coming specially to Christ by night, left Him, or would be allowed to leave, after the two or three minutes in which the discourse here reported was spoken.

*Born again.* The Greek word ἄνωθενα, which is rendered “again,” may mean—(_a_) from above, or (_b_) again. The latter meaning, however, is more probable here, for so Nicodemus understood our Lord’s words (see verse 4): so, also S. Chrysostom, and nearly all the Latin fathers. Compare, too, Tit. iii. 5; 1 Pet. i. 23. The truth expressed in this verse is universal; whoever is born needs to be reborn in order to see (= “to enter into,” verse 5) the kingdom of God in Christ’s Church here, and in heaven hereafter.

4. Dicit ad eum Nicodemus: 4. Nicodemus saith to him: How Quomodo potest homo nasci, cum can a man be born when he is sit senex? numquid potest in old? can he enter a second ventrem matris suae iterato time into his mother’s womb, introire, et renasci? and be born again?

4. Nicodemus either understood our Lord to speak of a second carnal birth; or perhaps, not understanding the words at all, he may have pretended to misunderstand, in order to get Christ to explain. His motive, at all events, was good—to obtain light and instruction.

5. Respondit Iesus: Amen, amen 5. Jesus answered: Amen amen, dico tibi, nisi quis renatus I say to thee, unless a man be fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu born again of water and the sancto, non potest intriore in Holy Ghost, he cannot enter regnum Dei. into the kingdom of God.

5. Hence Christ goes on to give a more precise statement of the truth contained in verse 3, with an additional explanation regarding the means of regeneration under the new dispensation.

*Amen, Amen.* This formula indicates the importance of the pronouncement. It has been defined by the Council of Trent—(_a_) that there is question in this fifth verse of natural water, and (_b_) of that natural water as necessary for Baptism. “Si quis dixerit aquam veram et naturalem non esse de necessitate baptismi, atque ideo verba illa D. N. J. C.: ‘Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua, et Spiritu Sancto,’ ad metaphoram aliquam detorserit, anathema sit” (Sess. vii. Can. 2. De bapt.).

This solemn declaration of the infallible Church settles, for Catholics, the question as to whether there is reference here to Christian Baptism. But even against heretics, for whom the Council of Trent speaks in vain, it is not difficult to show that there must be reference here to _Christian Baptism_. For (1) it cannot be denied that Christ inaugurated some external rite of baptism (John iii. 25, 26; iv. 11). (2) Christ and His disciples are represented (verse 22) as beginning to baptize after this discourse with Nicodemus. (3) Every circumstance of this second birth spoken of to Nicodemus is found in Christian Baptism. (_a_) Here we are said to be born again; so, too, are we in Baptism:—“According to His mercy He saved us by the laver of _regeneration_ and renovation of the Holy Ghost” (Tit. iii. 5). (_b_) This second birth is necessary that we may be saved and enter the kingdom of God; so is Christian Baptism (Mark xvi. 16; Acts iii. 37, 38), (_c_) This second birth is through water and the Holy Ghost; so is Baptism. See Acts viii. 36‐47; Tit. iii. 5.

Seeing that there is reference in the text to Christian Baptism, the word “water” in the text, as the Council of Trent defined, is to be understood, not metaphorically, but literally. Moreover, since this new birth is attributed to the water as to the Holy Ghost “(ex aqua et Spiritu Sancto”), water is not merely an empty symbol in the sacrament, but an efficient cause of grace like the Holy Ghost; He being the principal, the water the instrumental, efficient cause.

This new birth in Baptism implies—(1) that we die to the old man of sin, “for we are buried together with Him by Baptism into death” (Rom. vi. 4). It implies (2) that we are born through the divine gift of God’s grace to a new and spiritual life, in which we are His adopted children. “So do you also reckon that you are dead to sin, but _alive_ unto God in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. vi. 11).

We may remark, before passing from this text—(1) against the Pelagians and Anabaptists, that Baptism is here declared necessary for all who have been born, and therefore for infants before the use of reason; (2) against the Calvinists and Socinians, who hold that children of Christian parents need not be baptized, that no exception is here made in favour of the children of Christians; (3) against Protestants, that water in Baptism is not a mere symbol of regeneration, but is as truly its efficient cause as the Holy Ghost Himself; with this difference, however, that whereas the water is the instrumental, the Holy Ghost is the principal, cause.

6. Quod natum est ex carne, 6. That which is born of the caro est: et quod natum est ex flesh, is flesh: and that spiritu, spiritus est. which is born of the Spirit, is spirit.

6. Christ explains why the agent of the regeneration of which He speaks must be the Holy Ghost. What is born of man (flesh here is taken for human nature without grace), is merely human; what is born of the Holy Ghost, is spiritual, and partakes of the Divine (2 Pet. i. 4). Since, then, the new life to which a man must be born again is spiritual, a spiritual and supernatural principle is required.

7. Non mireris quia dixi tibi: 7. Wonder not, that I said to Oportet vos nasci denuo. thee, you must be born again.

7. Wonder not, therefore, that I said to you: ye must be born again, for if that which is born of the flesh is flesh, certainly you need a new birth to be born to a life which is so far above the flesh.

8. Spiritus ubi vult spirat: 8. The Spirit breatheth where et vocen eius audis, sed he will: and thou hearest his nescis unde veniat, aut quo voice, but thou knowest not vadat: sic est omnis qui natus whence he cometh, and whither est ex spiritu. he goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

8. Christ goes on to show how a difficulty in knowing the way in which the regeneration takes place is no proof of its impossibility, nor a reason for incredulity regarding its possibility. The sense of this verse depends upon the meaning given to the first “spirit,” τὸ πνεῦμα. Some understand this of the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost acts in men according to His own good pleasure; “you hear His voice that cannot be mistaken—its power, its sweetness, the peace which it breathes, the light which it pours on you; but you cannot tell that He is approaching, or when He will come, or how He will work on your soul; _in such manner_ is it that everyone is born of the Spirit who is so born” (Coleridge, _Public Life of our Lord_, vol. i., page 262). Others understand the first spirit here of the wind; and this is the more common opinion among commentators. In this view, by means of a simple and obvious illustration from nature, Christ shows Nicodemus that he must believe in the possibility of this second birth, even though he know not the manner in which it takes place. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and you know not whence it cometh or whither it goeth: _so is it_ in regeneration; you are regenerated, though you cannot comprehend the process. That πνεῦμα sometimes means wind in Biblical Greek, is undeniable (see, _e.g._, Gen. vii. 1; Ps. civ. 4; Matt. xxiv. 31; Heb. i. 7), and the use of the word here in different senses is plain from the comparison (*so is it*, &c.), according to the patrons of this second opinion. Nor does the fact that it is preceded by the article here oblige us, according to these, to refer it to the Holy Ghost; for, just as in verse 5, without the article, it refers to the Holy Ghost, so here, with the article, it may not refer to Him.

9. Respondit Nicodemus, et 9. Nicodemus answered, and dixit ei: Quomodo possunt haec said to him: How can these fieri? things be done? 10. Respondit Iesus, et dixit 10. Jesus answered, and said ei: Tu es magister in Israel, to him: Art thou a master in et haec ignoras? Israel, and knowest not these things?

9, 10. Nicodemus again asks how these things can come to pass, and Jesus gently upbraids him for his ignorance. As one of the chief teachers of Israel ὁ διδάσκαλος(36) (see also vii. 45‐50), one of the seventy‐one members of the Sanhedrim, or supreme Council of the Jews, he should be familiar with the Sacred Scriptures, and ought to have read in them the promise of a spiritual regeneration. See Ezech. xxxvi. 25; Zach. xiii. 1.

11. Amen, amen, dico tibi, 11. Amen, amen I say to thee, quia quod scimus loquimur, et that we speak what we know, quod vidimus testamur, et and we testify what we have testimonium nostrum non seen, and you receive not our accipitis. testimony.

11. Christ continues using the solemn form of asseveration. *What we know.* The plural is used not of Himself and the Holy Spirit, nor of Himself and the Prophets, nor of all born of the Spirit, nor of the Three Persons of the Trinity, but simply as a plural of majesty. *What we have seen.* Sight, says St. Chrys. on this verse, we consider the most certain of all the senses, so that when we say we saw such a thing with our eyes, we seem to compel men to believe us. In like manner, Christ, speaking after the manner of men, does not indeed mean that He has seen actually with the bodily eye the mysteries He reveals, but it is manifest that He means He has the most certain and absolute (and we may add, immediate: see above on i. 18) knowledge of them. In these words, then, Christ insists upon His authority to teach, and His claim to be believed.

12. Si terrena dixi vobis, et 12. If I have spoken to you non creditis: quomodo, si earthly things, and you dixero vobis coelestia, believe not: how will you credetis? believe if I shall speak to you heavenly things?

12. If you will not believe Me when I teach you the comparatively elementary doctrine of Baptism, which regards the regeneration of man here on earth, how shall you believe if I go on to speak of truths more sublime, more removed from the realms of sense and human comprehension? The spiritual vision of Nicodemus was hardly able to bear the first ray of truth; how then was it to bear the full flood of the light of higher revelation?

13. Et nemo ascendit in 13. And no man hath ascended coelum, nisi qui descendit de into heaven, but he that coelo, Filius hominis, qui est descended from heaven, the son in coelo. of man who is in heaven.

13. The meaning is: No one was in heaven except Him who has descended from heaven, and now speaks to you; namely, the Son of Man, who still remains in heaven. In this view, which is that of St. Thomas, Toletus, and Beelen, Christ speaks of Himself as _having ascended_ into heaven only to accommodate His language to human ideas, which conceive of _ascent_ to heaven as necessary, in order to our being there. The Son of Man, *as Son of God*, had, of course, been there from all eternity and needed not to ascend. Some think that Christ here begins to explain the “heavenly things” referred to in the preceding verse; but a more probable connection is the following:—He had said: how shall you believe heavenly things from Me since you question even the elementary truths which I tell you? And yet from Me alone you must learn such things, for no one else has been in heaven, so as to know and be able to teach you the mysteries of God.

14. Et sicut Moyses exaltavit 14. And as Moses lifted up the serpentem in deserto, ita serpent in the desert, so must exaltarioportet Filium the son of man be lifted up: hominis: 15. Ut omnis, qui credit in 15. That whosoever believeth ipsum, non pereat, sed habeat in him, may not perish, but vitam aeternam. may have life everlasting.

14, 15. Christ now goes on to speak of some of the more sublime doctrines. As Moses raised up the serpent, upon which whosoever looked was healed (Numbers xxi. 4‐9), so must Christ be lifted up on the cross (see John viii. 28; xii. 32‐34), to save those who believe in Him. The best supported Greek reading of verse 15 would be rendered:—*That everyone who believes may, through him, have eternal life*; μὴ ἀπόληται αλλ᾽ (may not perish, but) not being genuine, and ἐν αὐτώ standing instead of εἰς αὐτόν. Though faith is the only condition to salvation which is mentioned in verse 15, others are supposed, as is evident from verse 5:—“Unless a man be born again.” &c. Faith, however, is often specially referred to, because as the Council of Trent (Sess. vi., c. 8) says:—“Fides est humanae salutis initium, fundamentum, et radix omnis justificationis.”

16. Sic enim Deus dilexit 16. For God so loved the mundum, ut Filium suum world, as to give his only unigenitum daret: ut omnis, begotten Son; that whosoever qui credit in eum, non pereat, believeth in him, may not sed habeat vitam aeternam. perish, but may have life everlasting.

16. Some commentators, following Erasmus, hold that what follows to the end of verse 21, is not the language of Christ, but a comment of the Evangelist; but more probably Christ still continues. The boundless love of God for the world, and not merely for the elect, is declared to be the cause of the incarnation, and the world’s salvation its object. It was this love that made God give His _only‐begotten Son_ to suffer for men and save them.

17. Non enim misit Deus Filium 17. For God sent not his Son, suum in mundum, ut iudicet into the world, to judge the mundum, sed ut salvetur mundus world, but that the world may per ipsum. be saved by him.

17. For it was to save, not to judge the world, that the Son of God came at His first coming. Hereafter in His second coming He will come to judge and to condemn (the context proves there is question of the judgment of condemnation).

18. Qui credit in eum, non 18. He that believeth in him iudicatur: qui autem non is not judged. But he that credit, iam iudicatus est, doth not believe is already quia non credit in nomine judged: because he believeth unigeniti Filii Dei. not in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

18. He who believeth in Christ escapes the judgment of condemnation; but he who believeth not is already condemned, because, inasmuch as he has not believed, “the wrath of God,” _i.e._, original sin (Eph. ii. 3) and its effects in actual sin, remain upon him (verse 36); and he has rejected the only means whereby he could be delivered from them. It is as it a physician were sent to the sick, says St. Augustine, they who come to him are cured; they who come not, perish; not through him, however, but because of their disease.

19. Hoc est autem iudicium: 19. And this is the judgment: quia lux venit in mundum, et because the light is come into dilexerunt homines magis the world, and men loved tenebras quam lucem: erant darkness rather than the enim eorum mala opera. light: for their works were evil.

19. This is the _reason_ of the condemnation, namely, that men do not come to the light, but rather shrink from it, through the fear of being forced by an awakened conscience to abandon sin.

20. Omnis enim qui male agit, 20. For every one that doth odit lucem, et non venit ad evil hateth the light, and lucem, ut non arguantur opera cometh not to the light, that eius: his works may not be reproved:

20. *For every one that doth evil*, and, as St. Chrys. explains determines to _remain_ in his wickedness, *hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved*.

21. Qui autem facit veritatem, 21. But he that doth truth, venit ad lucem, ut cometh to the light, that his manifestentur opera eius, quia works may be made manifest, in Deo sunt facta. because they are done in God.

21. *But he that doth the ** truth*; that is to say, what truth directs, or rather the practical truth of good works, for right action is the realization of true thought, *cometh to the light*, by accepting the faith of Christ, by believing (v. 18). *That his works may be made manifest.* Just as he who does evil, and intends to persist in it, shuns the light, in order that his works may not be reproved (v. 20), so he who does good, and means to persevere in it, comes to the light and believes, in order that his works may be approved. The antithesis between this and the preceding verse, shows that the manifestation of which there is question here is equivalent to approval; and indeed, from the nature of the case, the manifestation of such works in the light of Christian truth would be necessarily followed by their approval, not only by God, but also by the enlightened judgment of him who wrought them.

*Because* (ὅτι) *they are done* (Gr. _have been done_) *in God*. These words may be differently connected. They may give the reason why he who does good, readily comes to the light, namely, because his works have been good, and he is not afraid to have them tested. Or, they might be understood to give the reason why such a one’s works are approved, namely because they are done in God. Or again, ὅτι may be taken to mean not, “because,” but “that;” and then the sense will be, that he who does good comes to the light and believes, that his works may be made manifest as having been (that they have been) done in God. The last is perhaps the simplest and most natural interpretation, but the first also is probable.

But in any of these interpretations, the question arises—how can the works of a man who has not yet believed, be said to have been “done in God.” Various answers have been given. We cannot agree with those commentators who reply that there is question of future works to be performed after the reception of faith; for the whole context, and the Greek text (_have been_ done), show that there is question of past works done before their author has come to the light. Nor do we think that there is question merely of natural works done in the past with the aid of medicinal grace, for such works would scarcely be said to have been “done in God.” We hold, then, that there is reference to the “initium fidei,” that is to say, to all those works that sprang from supernatural grace, were salutary in themselves, and led up to faith. These are the only works of one who has not yet believed, that can be properly said to have been done in God, done according to His will and pleasure. That there are such works antecedent to faith, cannot be denied; for the proposition: “Faith is the first grace,” put forward in the schismatical Council of Pistoia, was condemned by Pius VI., in the Bull _Auctorem Fidei_. Besides, it is _de fide_, against the Semipelagians, that supernatural grace is necessary for the “initium fidei,” from which it follows that the works included in the “initium fidei,” are salutary, and “done in God.”

22. Post haec venit Iesus, et 22. After these things Jesus discipuli eius, in terram and his disciples came into Iudaeam: et illic demorabatur the land of Judea; and there cum eis, et baptizabat. he abode with them and baptized.

22. *After these things*; that is to say, after this discourse with Nicodemus. How long our Lord remained in Jerusalem on the occasion of this first Pasch, we know not. By *the land of Judea*, is meant the country parts of that province, as distinguished from the city of Jerusalem, where the discourse with Nicodemus had taken place. In these country parts, then, Jesus baptized through His disciples (iv. 2), the baptism most probably being sacramental.

23. Erat autem et Ioannes 23. And John also was baptizans in Aennon, iuxta baptizing in Ennon near Salim; Salim: quia aquae multae erant because there was much water illic, et veniebant, et there, and they came, and were baptizabantur. baptized.

23. *Ennon, near Salim.* The site of Aennon (Gr. Αἰνών, from a Chaldaic word meaning springs) is difficult to determine. If we compare verse 26 of this chapter with John i. 28, it would seem that Aennon was west of the Jordan. Eusebius and Jerome place it eight miles south of Scythopolis, “juxta Salim et Jordanem;” and the latter states that the ruins of Melchizedek’s palace existed in his day at Salim. These statements are so positive that they cannot lightly be set aside. In the Jordan valley, about seven and a‐half miles from Beisan (Scythopolis), there is a remarkable group of seven springs, all lying within a radius of a quarter of a mile, which answers well to the description “many waters.”(37) According to this view, Aennon was situated in the north‐east corner of Samaria. Others, however, think, from the connection between this verse and verse 22, in which Jesus is said to baptize in Judea, that Aennon also was in Judea, and refer to Josue xv. 32, where the cities of Selim and _Aen_ are mentioned as in the tribe of Juda.

24. Nondum enim missus fuerat 24. For John was not yet cast Ioannes in carcerem. into prison.

24. The Evangelist notes that the Baptist had not yet been imprisoned, probably lest it should be thought, from Matt. iv. 11, 12, that the imprisonment of the Baptist followed at once upon the return of Christ from the forty days’ fast in the desert. This verse, therefore, affords a strong proof that our Evangelist was acquainted with the Gospel of St. Matthew.

25. Facta est autem quaestio 25. And there arose a question ex discipulis Ioannis cum between some of John’s Iudaeis de purificatione. disciples and the Jews concerning purification: 26. Et venerunt ad Ioannem, et 26. And they came to John, and dixerunt ei: Rabbi, qui erat said to him: Rabbi, he that tecum trans Iordanem, cui tu was with thee beyond the testimonium perhibuisti, ecce Jordan, to whom thou gavest hic baptizat, et omnes veniunt testimony, behold he ad eum. baptizeth, and all men come to him.

25, 26. A question arose between (ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν Ἰωάννου μετα Ἰονδαίου, _i.e._, “cujus auctores extitere discipuli Joannis,” Beel, _Gr. Gram._, § 51, B. 2, 8) John’s disciples and _the Jews_, _i.e._, some leading Jews, perhaps members of the Sanhedrim, concerning the relative merits of John’s baptism and Christ’s; and John’s disciples come to their master, jealous that his fame is being eclipsed by that of Him whom he had been the means of bringing before the public notice. The best supported reading is _a Jew_, not the Jews.

27. Respondit Ioannes, et 27. John answered and said: A dixit: Non potest homo man cannot receive anything, accipere quidquam, nisi fuerit unless it be given him from ei datum de coelo. heaven. 28. Ipsi vos mihi testimonium 28. You yourselves do bear me perhibetis, quod dixerim: Non witness, that I said, I am not sum ego Christus, sed quia Christ, but that I am sent missus sum ante illum. before him.

27, 28. John’s answer to his disciples is his last recorded testimony to Christ. It is to the effect that a man may not arrogate to himself power or office unless he have authority from God, and that his own office is merely that of precursor to the Messias.

29. Qui habet sponsam, sponsus 29. He that hath the bride, is est: amicus autem sponsi, qui the bridegroom: but the friend stat, et audit eum, gaudio of the bridegroom, who gaudet propter vocem sponsi. standeth and heareth him, Hoc ergo gaudium meum impletum rejoiceth with joy because of est. the bridegroom’s voice. This my joy therefore is fulfilled.

29. By a familiar example the Baptist illustrates the difference between himself and Christ. On the occasion of a Jewish marriage it was usual for the bridegroom to have a friend (“amicus sponsi,” corresponding to the παράνυμφος of the Greeks), whose duty it was to arrange the preliminaries to the marriage, and at the marriage feast to minister to the bridegroom. The sense of the Baptist’s words then is, that though many are present to a wedding, only one, he who hath the bride, is the bridegroom. His friend, who has helped to bring about the marriage, is satisfied to stand and minister to him, rejoicing exceedingly to hear the bridegroom speaking with his bride, nor jealous of the happy relations which subsist between them. *This, my joy, therefore, is fulfilled.* In these words the Baptist points the application of the comparison to Christ and himself. The Baptist is the “amicus sponsi,” who prepared the disciples for Christ; Christ is the bridegroom, and the disciples flocking to Christ (verse 26) were to constitute the Church, which is His spouse. See 2 Cor. xi. 2; Eph. v. 25, 27.

30. Illum oportet crescere, me 30. He must increase, but I autem minui. must decrease.

30. John had fulfilled his mission; thenceforward, therefore, whereas Christ, in virtue of His nature, and His office of Messias, should increase, the Baptist himself should decrease, in influence and fame.

31. Qui desursum venit, super 31. He that cometh from above, omnes est. Qui est de terra, is above all. He that is of de terra est, et de terra the earth, of the earth he is, loquitur. Qui de coelo venit, and of the earth he speaketh. super omnes est. He that cometh from heaven, is above all.

31. He that hath a divine origin is above all men, and so above me; but He that is of the earth by origin, of the earth he is in nature, and of the earth He speaks (compare verse 6). This is true of all men, in comparison with Christ: their thoughts are earthly, weak, and limited; His divine and inexhaustible; but it is also true absolutely, if we consider them apart from faith and grace. “Hoc autem in Joanne verum est primo, si ejus nudam naturam spectes, et seclusa Dei gratia, vocatione, et revelatione: sic enim Joannes non nisi terreus et terrenus erat, nec nisi terrena sapiebat; quia ‘si quid divinum audisti a Joanne illuminantis est, non recipientis,’ ait St. Augustinus, quasi dicat, id accepit a Deo, non habet a se” (A Lap.).

32. Et quod vidit, et audivit, 32. And what he hath seen and hoc testatur: et testimonium, heard, that he testifieth: and eius nemo accipit. no man receiveth his testimony.

32. What Christ knoweth of His own _immediate_ divine knowledge, as being “in the bosom of the Father” (i. 18), this He testifieth; and yet hardly anyone (“no man” being an hyperbole) receiveth His testimony. Christ is metaphorically spoken of here as seeing and hearing, to indicate His direct and _immediate_ knowledge of things divine. Compare v. 19; vi. 46; viii. 38; xv. 15; xvi. 13.

According to Patrizzi and others, this and the following verses are the words of the Evangelist; but more probably the Baptist continues to the end of the chapter, developing the reason why Christ must increase.

33. Qui accepit eius 33. He that hath received his testimonium, signavit quia testimony, hath set to his Deus verax est. seal that God is true.

33. He who has believed in Christ has thereby testified solemnly (as though he set his _seal_ to the testimony) that God is truthful. *God* here refers to the Father; and the meaning is, that by believing what Christ teaches, we believe Him to be truthful, and therefore believe the Father also, from whom He has received His divine nature and knowledge, and His mission as Messias, to be truthful. This is better than to refer God here to the Son (Christ), as Maldonatus does; for in the next verse, which proves this, God plainly refers to the Father.

34. Quem enim misit Deus, 34. For he whom God hath sent, verba Dei loquitur: non enim speaketh the words of God: for ad mensuram dat Deus spiritum. God doth not give the spirit by measure.

34. *For he whom God* (the Father) *hath sent* (*as His Son*, verse 35), as the Messias, *speaketh the words of God, for God doth not give the spirit by measure*. The contrast is between the abundant gift of the Spirit to Christ, as man, and the stinted participation of the same Spirit by those who are merely of the earth (Rom. xii. 3; 1 Cor. xii. 14). The sense, then, is, that the gifts of the Holy Spirit were poured out in abundance on Christ as man; that “He unceasingly possessed them all at once to the greatest extent of which human nature is capable” (M’Ev.); and this plenitude of the gifts of the Holy Ghost within Him is the reason why He speaks the words of God.

35. Pater diligit Filium: et 35. The Father loveth the Son: omnia dedit in manu eius. and he hath given all things into his hand.

35. This plenitude of the Spirit in Christ, this fulness of grace and truth (i. 16, 17), in Christ as man, is the effect of the love of the Father for His Incarnate Son, which love has also caused the Father to grant to Christ, as _man_, the _bestowal_ (He hath given all things *into His hand*) of all the gifts of the Spirit required for the salvation of men.

36. Qui credit in Filium habet 36. He that believeth in the vitam aeternam: qui autem Son, hath life everlasting: incredulus est Filio, non but he that believeth not the videbit vitam, sed ira Dei Son, shall not see life, but manet super eum. the wrath of God abideth on him.

36. Since, then, Jesus Christ has been constituted our help unto salvation, he that believes _in Him_ as Son of God (and acts accordingly) hath eternal life begun in him by justification; he that believeth not, &c. See verse 18.

This splendid testimony of the Baptist in favour of Christ was intended to detach his disciples from himself, and win them to Christ, of whom, as we learn from verse 26, they had shown themselves jealous.