TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers John 8:12–20. His four-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
The rest of the chapter is taken up with debates between Christ and contradicting sinners, who cavilled at the most gracious words that proceeded out of his mouth. It is not certain whether these disputes were the same day that the adulteress was discharged; it is probable they were, for the evangelist mentions no other day, and takes notice (Joh 8:2) how early Christ began that day's work. Though those Pharisees that accused the woman had absconded, yet there were other Pharisees (Joh 8:13) to confront Christ, who had brass enough in their foreheads to keep them in countenance, though some of their party were put to such a shameful retreat; nay perhaps that made them the more industrious to pick quarrels with him, to retrieve, if possible, the reputation of their baffled party. In these verses we have,
I.A great doctrine laid down, with the application of it.
1.The doctrine is, That Christ is the light of the world (Joh 8:12): Then spoke Jesus again unto them; though he had spoken a great deal to them to little purpose, and what he had said was opposed, yet he spoke again, for he speaketh once, yea, twice. They had turned a deaf ear to what he said, and yet he spoke again to them, saying, I am the light of the world. Note, Jesus Christ is the light of the world. One of the rabbies saith, Light is the name of the Messiah, as it is written, Dan 2:22, And light dwelleth with him. God is light, and Christ is the image of the invisible God; God of gods, Light of lights. He was expected to be a light to enlighten the Gentiles (Luk 2:32), and so the light of the world, and not of the Jewish church only. The visible light of the world is the sun, and Christ is the Sun of righteousness. One sun enlightens the whole world, so does one Christ, and there needs no more. Christ in calling himself the light expresses,
(1.)What he is in himself - most excellent and glorious.
(2.)What he is to the world - the fountain of light, enlightening every man. What a dungeon would the world be without the sun! So would it be without Christ by whom light came into the world, Joh 3:19.
2.The inference from this doctrine is, He that followeth me, as a traveller follows the light in a dark night, shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life. If Christ be the light, then,
(1.)It is our duty to follow him, to submit ourselves to his guidance, and in every thing take directions from him, in the way that leads to happiness. Many follow false lights - ignes fatui, that lead them to destruction; but Christ is the true light. It is not enough to look at this light, and to gaze upon it, but we must follow it, believe in it, and walk in it, for it is a light to our feet, not our eyes only.
(2.)It is the happiness of those who follow Christ that they shall not walk in darkness. They shall not be left destitute of those instructions in the way of truth which are necessary to keep them from destroying error, and those directions in the way of duty which are necessary to keep them from damning sin. They shall have the light of life, that knowledge and enjoyment of God which will be to them the light of spiritual life in this world and of everlasting life in the other world, where there will be no death nor darkness. Follow Christ, and we shall undoubtedly be happy in both worlds. Follow Christ, and we shall follow him to heaven.
II.The objection which the Pharisees made against this doctrine, and it was very trifling and frivolous:
Thou bearest record of thyself; thy record is not true, Joh 8:13. In this objection they went upon the suspicion which we commonly have of men's self-condemnation, which is concluded to be the native language of self-love, such as we are all ready to condemn in others, but few are willing to own in themselves. But in this case the objection was very unjust, for,
1.They made that his crime, and a diminution to the credibility of his doctrine, which in the case of one who introduced a divine revelation was necessary and unavoidable. Did not Moses and all the prophets bear witness of themselves when they avouched themselves to be God's messengers? Did not the Pharisees ask John Baptist, What sayest thou of thyself?
2.They overlooked the testimony of all the other witnesses, which corroborated the testimony he bore of himself. Had he only borne record of himself, his testimony had indeed been suspicious, and the belief of it might have been suspended; but his doctrine was attested by more than two or three credible witnesses, enough to establish every word of it.
III.Christ's reply to this objection, Joh 8:14.
He does not retort upon them as he might ("You profess yourselves to be devout and good men, but your witness is not true"), but plainly vindicates himself; and, though he had waived his own testimony (Joh 5:31), yet here he abides by it, that it did not derogate from the credibility of his other proofs, but was necessary to show the force of them. He is the light of the world, and it is the property of light to be self-evidencing. First principles prove themselves. He urges three things to prove that his testimony, though of himself, was true and cogent.
1.That he was conscious to himself of his own authority, and abundantly satisfied in himself concerning it. He did not speak as one at uncertainty, nor propose a disputable notion, about which he himself hesitated, but declared a decree, and gave such an account of himself as he would abide by: I know whence I came, and whither I go. He was fully apprised of his own undertaking from first to last; knew whose errand he went upon, and what his success would be. He knew what he was before his manifestation to the world, and what he should be after; that he came from the Father, and was going to him (Joh 16:28), came from glory, and was going to glory, (Joh 17:5). This is the satisfaction of all good Christians, that though the world know them not, as it knew him not, yet they know whence their spiritual life comes, and whither it tends, and go upon sure grounds.
2.That they are very incompetent judges of him, and of his doctrine, and not to be regarded.
(1.)Because they were ignorant, willingly and resolvedly ignorant: You cannot tell whence I came, and whither I go. To what purpose is it to talk with those who know nothing of the matter, nor desire to know? He had told them of his coming from heaven and returning to heaven, but it was foolishness to them, they received it not; it was what the brutish man knows not, Psa 92:6. They took upon them to judge of that which they did not understand, which lay quite out of the road of their acquaintance. Those that despise Christ's dominions and dignities speak evil of what they know not, Jude, Jde 1:8, Jde 1:10.
(2.)Because they were partial (Joh 8:15): You judge after the flesh. When fleshly wisdom gives the rule of judgment, and outward appearances only are given in evidence, and the case decided according to them, then men judge after the flesh; and when the consideration of a secular interest turns the scale in judging of spiritual matters, when we judge in favour of that which pleases the carnal mind, and recommends us to a carnal world, we judge after the flesh; and the judgment cannot be right when the rule is wrong. The Jews judged of Christ and his gospel by outward appearances, and, because he appeared so mean, thought it impossible he should be the light of the world; as if the sun under a cloud were no sun.
(3.)Because they were unjust and unfair towards him, intimated in this: "I judge no man; I neither make nor meddle with your political affairs, nor does my doctrine or practice at all intrench upon, or interfere with, your civil rights or secular powers." He thus judged no man. Now, if he did not war after the flesh, it was very unreasonable for them to judge him after the flesh, and to treat him as an offender against the civil government. Or, "I judge no man," that is, "not now in my first coming, that is deferred till I come again," Joh 3:17. Prima dispensatio Christi medicinalis est, non judicialis - The first coming of Christ was for the purpose of administering, not justice, but medicine.
3.That his testimony of himself was sufficiently supported and corroborated by the testimony of his Father with him and for him (Joh 8:16): And yet, if I judge, my judgment is true. He did in his doctrine judge (Joh 9:39), though not politically. Consider him then,
(1.)As a judge, and his own judgment was valid: "If I judge, I who have authority to execute judgments, I to whom all things are delivered, I who am the Son of God, and have the Spirit of God, if I judge, my judgment is true, of incontestable rectitude and uncontrollable authority, Rom 2:2. If I should judge, my judgment must be true, and then you would be condemned; but the judgment-day is not yet come, you are not yet to be condemned, but spared, and therefore now I judge no man;" so Chrysostom. Now that which makes his judgment unexceptionable is,
[1.]His Father's concurrence with him: I am not alone, but I and the Father. He has the Father's concurring counsels to direct; as he was with the Father before the world in forming the counsels, so the Father was with him in the world in prosecuting and executing those counsels, and never left him inops consilii - without advice, Isa 11:2. All the counsels of peace ( and of war too) were between them both, Zac 6:13. He had also the Father's concurring power to authorize and confirm what he did; see Psa 89:21, etc.; Isa 42:1. He did not act separately, but in his own name and his Father's, and by the authority aforesaid, Joh 5:17, and Joh 14:9, Joh 14:10.
[2.]His Father's commission to him: "It is the Father that sent me." Note, God will go along with those that he sends; see Exo 3:10, Exo 3:12 : Come, and I will send thee, and certainly I will be with thee. Now, if Christ had a commission from the Father, and the Father's presence with him in all his administrations, no doubt his judgment was true and valid; no exception lay against it, no appeal lay from it.
(2.)Look upon him as a witness, and now he appeared no otherwise (having not as yet taken the throne of judgment), and as such his testimony was true and unexceptionable; this he shows, Joh 8:17, Joh 8:18, where,
[1.]He quotes a maxim of the Jewish law, Joh 8:17. That the testimony of two men is true. Not as if it were always true in itself, for many a time hand has been joined in hand to bear a false testimony, Kg1 21:10. But it is allowed as sufficient evidence upon which to ground a verdict (verum dictum), and if nothing appear to the contrary it is taken for granted to be true. Reference is here had to that law (Deu 17:6), At the mouth of two witnesses shall he that is worthy of death be put to death. And see Deu 9:15; Num 35:30. It was in favour of life that in capital cases two witnesses wee required, as with us in case of treason. See Heb 6:18.
[2.]He applies this to the case in hand (Joh 8:18): I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me bears witness of me. Behold two witnesses! Though in human courts, where two witnesses are required, the criminal or candidate is not admitted to be a witness for himself; yet in a matter purely divine, which can be proved only by a divine testimony, and God himself must be the witness, if the formality of two or three witnesses be insisted on, there can be no other than the eternal Father, the eternal Son of the Father, and the eternal Spirit. Now if the testimony of two distinct persons, that are men, and therefore may deceive or be deceived, is conclusive, much more ought the testimony of the Son of God concerning himself, backed with the testimony of his Father concerning him, to command assent; see Jo1 5:7, Jo1 5:9-11. Now this proves not only that the Father and the Son are two distinct persons (for their respective testimonies are here spoken of as the testimonies of two several persons), but that these two are one, not only one in their testimony, but equal in power and glory, and therefore the same in substance. St. Austin here takes occasion to caution his hearers against Sabellianism on the one hand, which confounded the persons in the Godhead, and Arianism on the other, which denied the Godhead of the Son and Spirit. Alius est filius, et alius pater, non tamed aliud, sed hoc ipsum est et pater, et filius, scilicet unus Deus est - The Son is one Person, and the Father is another; they do not, however, constitute two Beings, but the Father is the same Being that the Son is, that is, the only true God. Tract. 36, in Joann. Christ here speaks of himself and the Father as witnesses to the world, giving in evidence to the reason and conscience of the children of men, whom he deals with as men. And these witnesses to the world now will in the great day be witnesses against those that persist in unbelief, and their word will judge men.
This was the sum of the first conference between Christ and these carnal Jews, in the conclusion of which we are told how their tongues were let loose, and their hands tied.
First, How their tongues were let loose (such was the malice of hell) to cavil at his discourse, Joh 8:19. Though in what he said there appeared nothing of human policy or artifice, but a divine security, yet they set themselves to cross questions with him. None so incurably blind as those that resolve they will not see. Observe,
a.How they evaded the conviction with a cavil: Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? They might easily have understood, by the tenour of this and his other discourses, that when he spoke of his Father he meant no other than God himself; yet they pretend to understand him of a common person, and, since he appeals to his testimony, they bid him call his witness, and challenge him, if he can, to produce him: Where is thy Father? Thus, as Christ said of them (Joh 8:15), they judge after the flesh. Perhaps they hereby intend a reflection upon the meanness and obscurity of his family: Where is thy Father, that he should be fit to give evidence in such a case as this? Thus they turned it off with a taunt, when they could not resist the wisdom and spirit with which he spoke.
b.How he evaded the cavil with a further conviction; he did not tell them where his Father was, but charged them with wilful ignorance: "You neither know me nor my Father. It is to no purpose to discourse to you about divine things, who talk of them as blind men do of colours. Poor creatures! you know nothing of the matter." (a.) He charges them with ignorance of God: "You know not my Father." In Judah was God known (Psa 76:1); they had some knowledge of him as the God that made the world, but their eyes were darkened that they could not see the light of his glory shining in the face of Jesus Christ. The little children of the Christian church know the Father, know him as a Father (Jo1 2:13); but these rulers of the Jews did not, because they would not so know him. (b.) He shows them the true cause of their ignorance of God: If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. The reason why men are ignorant of God is because they are unacquainted with Jesus Christ. Did we know Christ, [a.] In knowing him we should know the Father, of whose person he is the express image, Joh 14:9. Chrysostom proves hence the Godhead of Christ, and his equality with his Father. We cannot say, "He that knows a man knows an angel," or, "He that knows a creature knows the Creator;" but he that knows Christ knows the Father. [b.] By him we should be instructed in the knowledge of God, and introduced into an acquaintance with him. If we knew Christ better, we should know the Father better; but, where the Christian religion is slighted and opposed, natural religion will soon be lost and laid aside. Deism makes way for atheism. Those become vain in their imaginations concerning God that will not learn of Christ.
Secondly, See how their hands were tied, though their tongues were thus let loose; such was the power of Heaven to restrain the malice of hell. These words spoke Jesus, these bold words, these words of conviction and reproof, in the treasury, an apartment of the temple, where, to be sure, the chief priests, whose gain was their godliness, were mostly resident, attending the business of the revenue. Christ taught in the temple, sometimes in one part, sometimes in another, as he saw occasion. Now the priests who had so great a concern in the temple, and looked upon it as their demesne, might easily, with the assistance of the janizaries that were at their beck, either have seized him and exposed him to the rage of the mob, and that punishment which they called the beating of the rebels; or, at least, have silenced him, and stopped his mouth there, as Amos, though tolerated in the land of Judah, was forbidden to prophesy in the king's chapel, Amo 7:12, Amo 7:13. Yet even in the temple, where they had him in their reach, no man laid hands on him, for his hour was not yet come. See here, 1. The restraint laid upon his persecutors by an invisible power; none of them durst meddle with him. God can set bounds to the wrath of men, as he does to the waves of the sea. Let us not therefore fear danger in the way of duty; for God hath Satan and all his instruments in a chain. 2. The reason of this restraint: His hour was not yet come. The frequent mention of this intimates how much the time of our departure out of the world depends upon the fixed counsel and decree of God. It will come, it is coming; not yet come, but it is at hand. Our enemies cannot hasten it any sooner, nor our friends delay it any longer, than the time appointed of the Father, which is very comfortable to every good man, who can look up and say with pleasure, My times are in thy hands; and better there than in our own. His hour was not yet come, because his work was not done, nor his testimony finished. To all God's purposes there is a time.
Historical interpretation
Four Centuries of Reception
7 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
(Hom. lii. 2) Our Lord having said, I am the Light of the world; and, he that followeth Me, walketh not in darkness, the Jews wish to overthrow what He has said: The Pharisees therefore said unto Him, Thou bearest record of Thyself, Thy record is not true.
(Hom. lii. 2) Our Lord however overthrew their argument: Jesus answered and said, Though I bear record of Myself, yet My record is true. This is an accommodation to those who thought Him no more than a mere man. He adds the reason, For I know whence I come, and whither I go; i. e. I am God, from God, and the Son of God: though this He does not say expressly, from His habit of mingling lofty and lowly words together. Now God is surely a competent witness to Himself.
"Though I bear record of Myself, My record is true, for I know whence I come." What is this? "I am of God, am God, the Son of God, and God Himself is a faithful witness unto Himself, but ye know Him not; ye willingly err, knowing ye pretend not to know, but say all that ye say according to mere human imagination, choosing to understand nothing beyond what is seen."
(Tract. xxxv. 6) The witness of light is true, whether the light show itself, or other things. The Prophet spake the truth, but whence had he it, but by drawing from the fount of truth? Jesus then is a competent witness to Himself. (s. 5). For I know whence I come, and whither I go: this has reference to the Father; for the Son gave glory to the Father who sent Him. How greatly then should man glorify the Creator, who made Him. He did not separate from His Father, however, when He came, or desert us when He returned: unlike that sun which in going to the west, leaves the east. And as that sun throws its light on the faces both of him who sees, and him who sees not; only the one sees with the light, the other sees not: so the Wisdom of God, the Word, is every where present, even to the minds of unbelievers; but they have not the eyes of the understanding, wherewith to see. To distinguish then between believers and enemies among the Jews, as between light and darkness, He adds, But ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go. (Tract. xxxvi. 3). These Jews saw the man, and did not believe in the God, and therefore our Lord says, Ye judge after the flesh, i. e. in saying, Thou bearest record of Thyself, Thy record is not true.
(Tract. xxxvi. 3. in Joan.) Understanding Me not as God, and seeing Me as man, ye think Me arrogant in bearing witness of Myself. For any man who bears high testimony to himself, is thought proud and arrogant. But men are frail, and may either speak the truth, or lie: the Light cannot lie.
You who were present yesterday, bear in mind that we were a long while discoursing of the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, where He says, "I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life;" and if we wished to go on discoursing of that light, we might still speak a long time; for it would be impossible for us to expound the matter in brief. Therefore, my brethren, let us follow Christ, the light of the world, that we may not be walking in darkness. We must fear the darkness,-not the darkness of the eyes, but that of the moral character; and even if it be the darkness of the eyes, it is not of the outer, but of the inner eyes, of those by which we discern, not between white and black, but between right and wrong.
When our Lord Jesus Christ had spoken these things, the Jews answered, "Thou bearest record of thyself; thy record is not true." Before our Lord Jesus Christ came, He lighted and sent many prophetic lamps before Him. Of these was also John Baptist, to whom the great Light itself, which is the Lord Christ, gave a testimony such as was given to no other man; for He said, "Among them that are born of women, there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist." Yet this man, than whom none was greater among those born of women, said of the Lord Jesus Christ, "I indeed baptize you in water; but He that is coming is mightier than I, whose shoe I am not worthy to loose." See how the lamp submits itself to the Day. The Lord Himself bears witness that the same John was indeed a lamp: "He was," saith He, "a burning and a shining lamp; and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light." But when the Jews said to the Lord, "Tell us by what authority thou doest these things," He, knowing that they regarded John the Baptist as a great one, and that the same whom they regarded as a great one had borne witness to them concerning the Lord, answered them, "I also will ask you one thing; tell me, the baptism of John, whence is it from heaven, or from men?" Thrown into confusion, they considered among themselves that, if they said, "From men," they might be stoned by the people, who believed John to be a prophet; if they said, "From heaven," He might answer them, "He whom ye confess to have been a prophet from heaven bore testimony to me, and ye have heard from him by what authority I do these things." They saw, then, that whichever of these two answers they made, they would fall into the snare, and they said, "We do not know." And the Lord answered them, "Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things." "I tell you not what I know, because you will not confess what you know." Most justly, certainly, were they repulsed, and they departed in confusion; and that was fulfilled which God the Father says by the prophet in the psalm, "I have prepared a lamp for my Christ" (the lamp was John); "His enemies I will clothe with confusion."
The Lord Jesus Christ, then, had the witness of prophets sent before Him, of the heralds that preceded the judge: He had witness from John; but He was Himself the greater witness which He bore to Himself. But those men with their feeble eyes sought lamps, because they were not able to bear the day; for that same Apostle John, whose Gospel we have in our hands, says in the beginning of his Gospel, concerning John the Baptist: "There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came for a witness, to bear witness of the light, that all men might believe through him. He was not the light, but was sent to bear witness of the light. That was the true light, that lighteth every man coming into the world." If "every man," therefore also lighteth John. Whence also the same John says, "We all have received out of His fullness." Wherefore discern ye these things, that your minds may profit in the faith of Christ, that ye be not always babes seeking the breasts and shrinking from solid food. You ought to be nourished and to be weaned by our holy mother the Church of Christ, and to come to more solid food by the mind, not by the belly. This discern ye then, that the light which enlighteneth is one thing, another that which is enlightened. For also our eyes are called lights; and every man thus swears, touching his eyes, by these lights of his: "So may my lights live." This is a customary oath. Let these lights, if lights they are, be opened, and shine for thee in thy closed chamber, when the light is not there; they certainly cannot. Therefore, as these which we have in our face, and call lights, when they are both healthy and open, need the help of light from without,-which being removed or not brought in, though they are sound and are open, yet they do not see,-so our mind, which is the eye of the soul, unless it be irradiated by the light of truth, and wondrously shone upon by Him who enlightens and is not enlightened, will not be able to come to wisdom nor to righteousness. For to live righteously is for us the way itself. But how can he on whom the light does not shine but stumble in the way? And hence, in such a way, we have need of seeing, in such a way it is a great thing to see. Now Tobias had the eyes in his face closed, and the son gave his hand to the father; and yet the father, by his instruction, pointed out the way to the son.
Who can rightly say, “I am the light of the world,” except one who is truly God by nature? Let the Pharisees go through the entire divinely inspired Scripture and search into the sacred and divine Word and show us who of the holy prophets ever dared to say such a thing or when an angel ever made such a claim.… The crowd of Pharisees thought that he spoke falsely. In their exceeding foolishness, they had no idea that there are those who set forth their own nature and tell what is essentially inherent in them, not out of boasting or because they are bent on making a name for themselves. Rather, they are simply declaring what they really are.… And so, even when our Savior Christ says that he is the light, he is speaking the truth and will not be found boasting.… But they attack him as though he is one of us. Without hesitation they say “Your record is not true” of the one who cannot lie. And yet, he decided to lead by the hand those who had gone astray … telling them what they had missed about him when they committed sacrilege by ascribing love of lying to him who is from above and begotten of God the Father.
Dull and slow is the Pharisee, and most hardly led unto the power of seeing the Godhead of the Lord: he errs again by reason of the flesh, and imagines nought beyond what he sees. For while seeing that He uses utterances beyond man and hearing words most God-befitting, he yet conceives of bare man, not looking to the illustriousness of the Godhead nor opening the eye of his understanding to look at Emmanuel. For to whom will it belong to say, I am the light of the world, save to One and Alone God That is by Nature? who of the holy Prophets dared to say such a word? what angel ever burst forth such a word? let them traverse the whole God-inspired Scripture and search into the sacred and Divine Word, and show us this. But they making no account of what necessarily follows, deem that they ought to contradict, and advance hotly to what alone they know accurately, accusal out of love of fault-finding, For they depreciate Him as not being the Light of the world, accusing the things spoken by Him, affirming that not true is His record. For they are wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge, and suppose that they can overturn and that by chicanery His record, attempting to invalidate it from just merely our own customary ways, not by the commands of the Law.
For where does the Law (let them tell us) say that a man's testimony of himself is invalid? For wearisome I suppose and unendurable at times is a person's witnessing excellences to himself: and verily the most wise compiler of Proverbs saith, Let thy neighbour praise thee and not thine own mouth, a stranger and not thine own lips. Yet not altogether false is that which is said by any of himself. For let any of the Pharisees come forward, and let him tell us what we shall do when the blessed Samuel testifies most excellent things to his own self. For he is somewhere found to be making his defence to those of Israel and saying, The Lord is witness against you and His anointed is witness this day that ye have not found ought in my hands. But if the Law forbad any one to witness to himself, how (tell me) came Samuel to set it at nought, albeit the Divine Scripture saith of him, Holy was Moses and Aaron among His priests, and Samuel among them that call upon His name, they called upon the Lord and He answered them, in the pillar of the cloud did He speak unto them, they kept His testimonies and the ordinances that He gave them. Seest thou how he was conjoined with Moses as having virtue commensurate with him, and is witnessed to by the Spirit as an accurate keeper of the Law? How then did he trangress the Law by witnessing to himself, will one say? But he did not trangress it; for he is witnessed to as keeping it, and he hath witnessed to himself. The Law then forbids to none to witness to himself. And moreover what shall we say, when we see the blessed David saying, O Lord my God, if I did this, if I recompensed those that recompensed me evil? yea moreover the blessed Jeremy saith, O Lord God of hosts, I sat not in the assembly of the mockers, but was circumspect because of Thy Hand: and the most wise Paul again, though taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, as himself too testified, openly cries out, For I am conscious of nought of myself.
Let the Pharisee therefore say again of each of these, Thou bearest record of thyself, thy record is not true, even though to those who refuse not to chide the very Lord of all, the behaving most ill to the rest is a matter of course. But this we say, resuming again what we were saying, that the contradiction of the Pharisees is no necessary one taken out of the ordinances of the Law, but made only out of what prevails in common custom, and from the habit not seeming to be one befitting good people. And their contradiction out of the Law is rather railing, to steal away those who are already marvelling at Him and are persuaded that they ought to believe. For they revile Him as not true, and damaging the credit of what He just now said, the wretched ones draw forth the destruction of blasphemy upon their own heads.
As if our Lord Himself were the only (one that bore) witness to Himself; whereas the truth was that He had, before His incarnation, sent many witnesses to prophesy of His Sacraments.
Continue studying John 8:13 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
In John 8:13, the Pharisees directly challenge Jesus' profound declaration of being "the light of the world" by accusing Him of bearing self-testimony, which they deem invalid according to their interpretation of Mosaic Law. This verse encapsulates the escalating conflict between Jesus and the Jewish religious authorities, highlighting their legalistic mindset and spiritual blindness in the face of divine truth and authority. It sets the stage for Jesus' subsequent defense, where He redefines the nature of true witness, asserting His unique divine origin and the corroborating testimony of the Father.
Context
Literary Context
This verse immediately follows Jesus' monumental claim in John 8:12, "I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." This declaration, made during the Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot), likely within the Temple courts where large menorahs illuminated the celebration, was a direct and audacious assertion of His divine identity and salvific mission. The Pharisees' response in John 8:13 is a predictable, legalistic counter-argument, designed to undermine Jesus' authority by questioning the validity of His self-testimony. The subsequent verses (John 8:14-18) present Jesus' detailed defense, where He not only justifies His own witness but also introduces the Father's corroborating testimony, further escalating the theological debate.
Historical & Cultural Context
The objection raised by the Pharisees in John 8:13 is deeply rooted in the legal principles of ancient Israel, particularly as found in the Mosaic Law. Passages like Deuteronomy 17:6 and Deuteronomy 19:15 explicitly state that "at the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall the matter be established." This legal standard was crucial for ensuring justice and preventing false accusations in a judicial system. The Pharisees, as guardians and interpreters of the Law, applied this human legal standard to Jesus' divine claims. They failed to grasp that Jesus' testimony, originating from His unique relationship with the Father and His divine nature, operated on a different plane of authority, one that transcended human legal requirements. Their cultural emphasis on external adherence to the Law blinded them to the spiritual truth embodied in Jesus.
Key Themes
The exchange in John 8:13 contributes significantly to several major themes in the Gospel of John. Firstly, it underscores the theme of Jesus' Self-Attestation and Divine Authority. Throughout John, Jesus consistently makes direct claims about His identity and relationship with God, often using "I AM" statements, as seen in John 8:12. Secondly, it highlights the Conflict between Light and Darkness, and the Spiritual Blindness of those who reject Jesus. The Pharisees, despite their religious erudition, represent the "darkness" that cannot comprehend or accept the "light" of Christ (John 1:5). Their legalistic approach prevents them from discerning the spiritual reality of Jesus' claims. Finally, the theme of Witness and Testimony is central, as the validity of Jesus' "record" (testimony) becomes the focal point of contention, setting the stage for Jesus to explain the true nature of His divine witness, including that of the Father in John 8:18.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This term refers to a prominent Jewish sect known for their strict adherence to the Mosaic Law and oral traditions. In the Gospels, they frequently appear as antagonists to Jesus, challenging His authority and interpretations of the Law. Their objection here is consistent with their legalistic worldview, which often prioritized external observance over spiritual discernment.
Derived from the word for "witness," this verb means "to be a witness, to testify, or to bear record." It carries a strong legal connotation, referring to the act of providing evidence or testimony. The Pharisees' use of this term highlights their framing of Jesus' statement as a legal claim that requires corroboration.
This noun, closely related to martyréō, refers to the "evidence given," "testimony," or "witness." It is the substance of what is attested. The Pharisees argue that the "record" Jesus provides about Himself is insufficient because it lacks external validation.
This adjective means "true" in the sense of not concealing, genuine, or actual. The Pharisees' assertion that Jesus' record is "not true" implies it is invalid, unreliable, or even false, specifically because it lacks the required corroboration under their legal framework.
Verse Breakdown
"The Pharisees therefore said unto him,"
This opening clause establishes the speakers and their immediate response to Jesus' declaration in John 8:12. The "therefore" (oûn) indicates that their statement is a direct consequence or reaction to Jesus' bold claim of being the "light of the world," which they perceived as a self-aggrandizing and unsubstantiated assertion.
"Thou bearest record of thyself;"
This is the core of the Pharisees' accusation. They are pointing out that Jesus is the sole witness to His own claims. Their objection stems from the Old Testament legal principle that a single witness's testimony is insufficient to establish a fact, particularly in serious matters. They apply this human legal standard to Jesus' divine self-revelation, thereby dismissing His authority.
"thy record is not true."
This concluding clause delivers their verdict. Because Jesus' testimony about Himself lacks external corroboration, they declare it "not true" or invalid. This is not necessarily an accusation of outright falsehood, but rather a declaration of its legal insufficiency and therefore unreliability from their perspective. They are asserting that His claim, being unverified by another, cannot be accepted as credible.
Literary Devices
The passage employs several significant literary devices. Legal Language or Forensic Metaphor is central, as the entire exchange is framed in terms of witness, testimony, and legal validity. The Greek words martyréō (to bear record) and martyría (record/testimony) are legal terms, indicating that the Pharisees are attempting to put Jesus on trial, judging His claims by their established judicial standards. There is also a profound Antithesis at play: Jesus, the embodiment of truth, is accused of having a "not true" record by those who claim to uphold truth. This highlights the stark contrast between divine truth and human, legalistic understanding. Furthermore, Irony is evident in the fact that the religious leaders, who should be most attuned to God's revelation, are spiritually blind to the Truth standing before them, clinging instead to rigid interpretations of the Law that prevent them from recognizing the divine.
Theological and Thematic Connections
The Pharisees' challenge to Jesus' self-testimony in John 8:13 exposes a fundamental misunderstanding of divine authority and the nature of truth. While human courts require multiple witnesses for corroboration, God's testimony, and by extension, the testimony of His Son, stands on its own inherent divine authority. Jesus is not merely a human claimant; He is the Son of God, whose origin and destiny are known only to Himself and the Father. Therefore, His witness, though singular in human terms, is ultimately corroborated by the Father, making it supremely true and valid. This exchange underscores the unique nature of Jesus' identity and the inadequacy of human legal frameworks to fully comprehend or validate divine revelation.
Reflection and Application
The confrontation in John 8:13 serves as a powerful reminder that human logic and legalistic adherence, while valuable in their own spheres, can become formidable barriers to spiritual understanding when applied rigidly to divine truths. The Pharisees, with their meticulous focus on external rules, missed the profound spiritual reality embodied in Jesus. For believers today, this passage challenges us to move beyond superficial or purely intellectual assessments of faith. It calls us to cultivate a heart that is open to divine revelation, even when it transcends our preconceived notions or challenges our comfortable frameworks. True spiritual discernment requires not just knowledge of the Law, but a willingness to recognize and receive the living Truth. It encourages us to trust in the inherent authority of God's Word and the testimony of Jesus Christ, rather than seeking external validation for truths that are self-authenticating by virtue of their divine origin.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why did the Pharisees claim Jesus' testimony was "not true"?
The Pharisees claimed Jesus' testimony was "not true" not necessarily because they believed He was lying, but because they understood it to be legally invalid according to their interpretation of Mosaic Law. The Law, as found in Deuteronomy 17:6 and Deuteronomy 19:15, required the testimony of two or three witnesses to establish a matter, especially in serious accusations. Since Jesus was testifying about Himself, they considered His "record" or "witness" to be uncorroborated and therefore inadmissible or unreliable by their legal standards. They were applying a human judicial principle to a divine claim, failing to recognize Jesus' unique authority.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
John 8:13 profoundly underscores the unique nature of Christ's identity and the divine authority of His witness. While the Pharisees, bound by human legal frameworks, dismissed Jesus' self-testimony as "not true," Jesus later clarifies that His testimony is indeed valid because He knows His divine origin and destination (John 8:14). More importantly, He asserts that the Father who sent Him also bears witness of Him (John 8:18). This points to Christ as the ultimate and faithful witness, whose testimony is not merely human but divine. In the New Testament, Jesus is called "the faithful and true witness" (Revelation 3:14), and His life, death, and resurrection serve as God's ultimate testimony to humanity. The Holy Spirit also bears witness to Christ (John 15:26), empowering believers to proclaim this truth. Thus, the very "record" the Pharisees dismissed is the foundational truth of the Gospel, validated by the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, inviting all to believe in the One who is the Light of the World (John 8:12).