Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - John 21:24 - 21:25
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
IV. The Testimony of John and the Testimony of the Church. Infinitude of the Evangelical History
Joh_21:24-25
Of these things [ ὁ ìáñôõñῶí ðåñὶ ôïýôùí ].—Referring to the contents of the 21st chapter.—And who wrote these things [ êáὶ ὁ ãñÜøáò ôáῦôá ].—Particularly, also, to the setting of the Christians right in regard to the tradition which had commenced to gather form. [Mark the difference of the tenses: ìáñôõñῶí —the testimony continues, ãñÜøáò —the writing is an accomplished act.—P. S.]
We know that his testimony [ êáὶïἴäáìåí ὄôé ἀëçèÞò áὐôïῦ ἡ ìáñôõñßá ἐóôßí —Different interpretations:
1. Ïἶäá [I know] ìÝí (Chrysostom, Theophylact). An exegetical conjecture (similarly Beza’s ïἶäåí ).
2. An indication of the ungenuineness of the conclusion or of the whole chapter (modern criticism).
3. John made himself one with his readers (Meyer). [So also Alford; comp. Joh_1:14; 1Jn_4:14; 1Jn_4:16; 1Jn_5:18.]
4. Probably a later addition from the Ephesian church. Not because, as according to Lücke, “John never wrote in the first person, either of the plural or of the singular.” See on the contrary, Joh_1:14. But the corroboration of his own testimony with the words; We know that his testimony is true, would be too strikingly singular. The expression Joh_19:35 runs differently. We have therefore bracketed the words “we know,” etc., considering them to be the only later Ephesian addition in the whole chapter.
[Meyer regards only Joh_21:25 as a later addition; Tholuck, Luthardt, Godet, etc., Joh_21:24-25; Lücke, Bleek, Ewald, etc., the whole chapter; Lange, Alford and Wordsworth accept the whole as Johannean,—Lange, however, excepting the second clause of Joh_21:24.—P. S.]
Joh_21:25. But there are also many other things [ Ἐóôé äὲ êáὶ ἃëëá ðïëëὰ ].—Mayer: “Apocryphal conclusion of the whole Gospel—after the addition of the Johannean supplement Joh_21:1-24.” The Evangelist thinks it important that he should remind his readers that he has not written as a chronicler, but has selected and arranged things in conformity to an organizing principle, as did also his predecessors, though not in the equal power of a concentrated, unitous, ideal view. That this note of the Gospel has not at all an apocryphal aspect, but would, on the contrary, be qualified, were more attention accorded it, to strip our modern criticism of many apocryphal opinions (particularly, of the continually recurring idea that the Evangelists were chroniclers, that their writings were grounded upon one another, etc.), is evident.
If they should be written every one … one by one [ ἄôéíá (quippe quæ, utpote guæ, referring to the largo number) ἐὰí ãñÜöçôáé êáè ’ ἕí (piece for piece), ïὐä ̓ áὐôὸí ïἰìáéôὸí êüóìïí (ne ipsum quidem mundum) ÷ùçñ ́ óåéí ôὰãñáöüìåíá âéâëßá Comp. a somewhat analogous expression Ecc_12:12 : “Of making many books (or chapters) there is no end.” Different interpretations of ÷ùñåῖí ,capere: 1. Locally: Unable to hold (capacitas loci). Restricted by Ebrard: No place in literature. 2. Intellectually: Unable to understand (capacitas intellectus). Jerome, Augustine, Calov, Bengel (“hoc non de capacitate geometrica, sed morali accipiendum est”). 3. Figuratively and hyperbolically: Any number of books would not exhaust the subject. Similarly Godet: “Divin de sa nature, l’objet de l’histoire évangélique est plus grand que le monde et que toutes les narrations que le monde pourrait contenir. L’écrivain exprime, par une image matérielle, le vif sentiment qu’il a de la richesse infinie de cette histoire.”—P. S.] According to the conclusion of the Evangelist, the world itself would be unable to contain the books that would then be written continually ( ãñáöüìåíá ). Even Tholuck agrees with Meyer (who refers to similar hyperboles in Fabricius ad Cod. Apocryph. I., p. 321) in thinking this proposition1 hyperbolical. The apparent hyperbolism of the expression, however, very clearly illustrates the pure infiniteness in the life-development of the Logos, by a quantitative, local measure. We make use of a hundred similar expressions without their hyperbolism being deemed improper or apocryphal, for instance: “O dass ich tausend Zungen hätte” (“O that I had a thousand tongues”)—“Den aller Weltkreis nie umschloss” (“Whom the whole world did ne’er enclose”) —“The whole world lieth in wickedness—in the Evil One,” etc. Weitzel has entered the lists in defence of the propriety of the expression, Studienu. Kritiken 1849, p. 633; comp. my Leben Jesu III., p. 760. L uthardt: “For only an absolute external compass corresponds with the absolute contents of the person and life of Christ;” whereupon Meyer remarks: “Inevident to me!” “Aber, Freunde, im Raum wohnt das Erhabene nicht” (“But, O friends, the sublime dwelleth not in space”), says Schiller elucidatively. The Evangelist, however, in submitting his book to the Church, may well come forward with an unwonted ïἶìáé in order, by a strong expression, to dissuade the reader from the chronistic apprehension of the Gospel, and to urge him to the historico-symbolical view which recognizes in the organically articulated selection of ideally transparent facts, the historical life-picture of the infinite fulness of the life of Jesus.
This symbolical character, presented in pure but speaking facts, is possessed, in a peculiar degree, by the closing chapter, to which the closing words primarily have reference. The interpretation of Jerome, Augustine and others: The world would be spiritually incapable of grasping such books,—would apply even to the four small Gospels, though in sooth a Gospel developed in infinitum would pass the comprehension not only of the present world, but also of Christendom as it here exists. Here, however, emphasis is laid not upon the æonic unfathomableness of the life of Jesus, but upon its ideal infinitude, in the symbolical explicitness of the evangelical history.
With this dynamical character, then, the apostolic presentation of the evangelical history also corresponds. That history is not chronistically, but æonically, executed; not atomistically expanded, but principialiy concentrated; the whole infinitude and fulness of the signs of Jesus must be reflected in a concentric selection of speaking facts, translumined by the idea. Not in outward extension—in transparent concentration, the expression of eternal life is accomplished.
2. The great distance between John’s view of the essence of evangelical historiography and the opinions or prejudices of modern criticism, becomes evident from the foregoing, and from the last Exeg. Note.
3. Even the Christian Gramma may err in the way of profuse book-making. Against this the Christian spirit of a John opposes its final words of warning; the like did the Preacher Solomon in the Old Testament (Ecc_12:12), and also Plato in Phædrus 60. The Christian spirit-word does not aim at converting the world into a vast library of sacred writings, but into the Divine House of the adorned Bride of Christ and of the marriage of the Bridegroom. To this end, Christian literature, with its testimony concerning Christ, is indeed to work, drawing all literature into His service; but the more it extends itself through the world, the more it should concentrate itself, shaping itself into the transparent life-picture of the glory of God in Christ.
Strke: That which by grace we have received from God and done for the honor of God, we may well make known to others, taking care only that all boastfulness on account of our own persons is avoided, 1 Corinthians 11.
Braune: “An individual once appeared on earth who, merely by moral omnipotence, conquered remote times and founded an eternity of His own. It is that calm Spirit whom we call Jesus Christ. Only quiet teaching and quiet striving formed the melodies wherewith this higher Orpheus tamed human beasts and converted rocks into sanctuaries of God. And yet out of so divine a life,—as it were, out of a thirty years’ war against a perverse, insensible people,—we are familiar with but a few weeks. What transactions, what words of His may have been swallowed up from our knowledge before He became acquainted with the four writers of His history, those men by nature so dissimilar! If, then, out of so divine a life-book only scattered leaves have fluttered to us, so that perhaps greater deeds and words of that life are forgotten (?) than were detailed, repine not, nor pass judgment over the ship-wreck of little works and men, but recognize in that Christianity which nevertheless blossomed afterwards, the fulness with which the (All) Spirit yearly suffers the perishing blossoms to exceed in number those that thrive, without therefore forfeiting a future spring” (Jean Paul).
Schleiermacher: “For a long time there has been a fable current among men, and even in these days it is (still) frequently heard; unbelief invented it, and little faith receives it. Thus it runs: ‘There shall come a time, and perhaps it is already here, when His right shall befall even this Jesus of Nazareth. Every human memory is fruitful but for a certain period; much doth the human race owe to Him, great things hath God accomplished by Him, yet He was but one of us, and His hour of oblivion, too, must strike. If He was in earnest in desiring to make the world absolutely free, He must likewise have willed to make it free from Himself, that God might be all in all. Then men would not only perceive that they have strength enough in themselves to fulfil the divine will, but in the true understanding of the same, they would be able to exceed His measure, if they did but wish. Yes, only when the Christian name is forgotten, shall a universal kingdom of love and truth arise, in which no germ more of enmity shall lie, such as has been sown from the beginning betwixt those that believe on this Jesus and the rest of the children of men.’ But it shall not be realized,—this fable; since the days of His flesh, the Redeemer’s image has been indelibly stamped on the race of men! Even though the letter might perish, which is holy only because it preserves us the image, the image itself shall last for ever; too deeply is it graven upon men ever to be effaced, and what the disciple said, shall always be truth: ‘Lord, whither shall we go? Thou alone hast words of eternal life!’
Heubner: The pernicious making and reading of books has been greatly prejudicial to the reading of the Book of Life, and to the Christian life. Luther himself on this account often wished his books done away with, Works i. 1938; xiv. 420; xv. Anh., p. 90; xx. 1031; xxii. 85.
Yet doubtless only in a qualified sense. The books of faith should promote life,—hence should be, as living books, strictly articulated organisms of life. Their foundation and aim is the Book of Life. This is above all true of the Holy Scriptures, particularly of the Gospels, most particularly of our Gospel.
[Craven: From Burkitt: Joh_21:25. The wonderful activity, industry, and diligence of the Lord Jesus Christ; He was never idle, but His whole life was spent in doing good.
[From M. Henry: Joh_21:25. If it be asked why the gospels are not larger, it may be answered, I. It was not because they had exhausted their subject; II. Bat 1. It was not needful to write more; 2. It was not possible to write all; 3. It was not advisable to write much.
[Schaff: Joh_21:24-25. Though but little has been written on the life of Christ by the Evangelists, that little is of more accountthan all the literature of the world, and has been more productive of books, as well as thoughts and deeds, than any number of biographies of sages and saints of ancient and modern times. The Gospels, and the Bible generally, rise like Mount Ararat high above the flood of literature; they are the sacred library for all nations, the literary sanctuary for scholars and the common people; they combine word and work, letter and spirit, earth and heaven, time and eternity. The eloquent tribute of an English divine to the influence of the Bible applies especially to the Gospel of John, and may appropriately conclude this Commentary. “This collection of books has been to the world what no other book has ever been to a nation. States have been founded on its principles. Kings rule by a compact based on it. Men hold the Bible in their hands when they prepare to give solemn evidence affecting life, death, or property; the sick man is almost afraid to die unless the Book be within reach of his hands; the battle-ship goes into action with one on board whose office is to expound it; its prayers, its psalms are the language which we use when we speak to God; eighteen centuries have found no holier, no diviner language. If ever there has been a prayer or a hymn enshrined in the heart of a nation, you are sure to find its basis in the Bible. There is no new religious idea given to the world, but it is merely the development of something given in the Bible. The very translation of it has fixed language and settled the idioms of speech. Germany and England speak as they speak because the Bible was translated. It has made the most illiterate peasant more familiar with the history, customs, and geography of ancient Palestine, than with the localities of his own country. Men who know nothing of the Grampians, of Snowdon, or of Skiddaw, are at home in Zion, the lake of Gennesaret, or among the rills of Carmel. People who know little about London know by heart the palaces in Jerusalem, where those blessed feet trod which were nailed to the Cross. Men who know nothing of the architecture of a Christian cathedral, can yet tell you all about the pattern of the Holy Temple. Even this shows us the influence of the Bible. The orator holds a thousand men for half-an-hour breathless—a thousand men as one, listening to his single word. But this Word of God has held a thousand nations for thrice a thousand years spell-bound; held them by an abiding power, even the universality of its truth; and we feel it to be no more a collection of books, but the Book.”—P. S.]
Footnotes:
Joh_21:24.—[The article before ãñÜøáò is omitted by à 1 A. C. X. Orig., Tischend., inserted by B. D. lat. (et qui scripsit.) Lachm., Treg., Alf., West. Cod. B. inserts êáὶ before ìáñôõñῶí .—P. S.]
Joh_21:24.—[Dr. Lange brackets the last clause: êáὶ ïß ́ äáìåí ὅôé ἀëçèÞò áὐôïῦ ἡ ìáñôõñßá ἐóôßí , considering it an addition of the elders of Ephesus and friends of John, while he ascribes all the rest, including Joh_21:25, to John. See Exeg.—P. S.]
Joh_21:25.—This verse is wanting in Cod. 63 [?],—a circumstance of no importance, however. (On the Sin. see Tischend.) [Lachmann, Tregelles, Alford, and Westcott retain Joh_21:25, except the concluding ἀìÞí , Westcott, however, separates it from the preceding text. Tischendorf alone, ed. VIII., excludes it from the text on the sole authority of the Sinaitic MS. which indeed contains the verse, but, as he asserts, written by another hand, see his note, p. 965. But in the large quasi-fac-simile ed. of the Cod. which I have used all along, there is no perceptible difference. He then also corrects an error with regard to Cod. 63, which was quoted by Mill, Wetstein, Griesbach, Lange (in the preceding remark), etc., in favor of omission, but according to Scrivener, the last page of that Cod. with the 25th verse is lost. Tischendorf here gives too much weight to Cod. Sin. which he had the good fortune to discover. The omission, if such could be proven, has little weight in view of the many instances of carelessness on the part of the copyist, and of the filling up of the lacuna by the first corrector, who, according to Tischendorf, was cotemporary with the copyist. All other known MSS. contain Joh_21:25, though many state in a note that it was regarded by some as a later addition.—P. S.]
Joh_21:25.—The reading ἅ in accordance with Codd. à . B. D. * etc., Lachmann [Treg., Alf., West., instead of text rec. ὅóá which is retained by A. C.2 D. and expresses the quantitative relation, quæet quanta, quotquot, what and how many; comp, Rev_1:2.—P.S.]
Joh_21:25.—[Lachm., Alfd. ÷ùñῆóáé , with A. B. C.2 D. text. rec.; Treg., Tisch., West. ÷ùñÞóåéí , with à . B. C *.—P. S.]
Joh_21:25.—The ἀìÞí of the Recepta (Codd. E. G. H. K. M. etc.) is wanting in Codd. [ à .] A. B. C. D. etc. [Amen is a liturgical or devotional addition, and justly omitted by Lachm., Treg., Alf., Westc. and H.—P. S.] On the various subscriptions: åὑáããÝëéïí êáôὰ ἸùÜííçí (A. C. E. [ à a]); êáôὰ ἸùÜííçí (B.) etc., comp. Tischendorf. K. M. U. X. [also à à .] have no subscription. [Tischendorf states that the subscription in à is not written by the same hand, but by à corr.la On the Latin subscriptions, see Tischend. p. 967.—P. S.]
[So also Alford: “The purpose of this verse seems to be to assert and vindicate the fragmentary character of the
Gospel, considered merely as a historical narrative:—for that the doings of the Lord were so many—His life so rich in matter of record,—that, in a popular hyperbole, we can hardly imagine the world containing them all, if singly written down; thus setting forth the superfluity and cumber-ousness of anything like a perfect detail, in the strongest terms, and in terms which certainly look as if fault had been found with this Gospel for want of completeness, by some objectors.”—P. S.]
[Or, according to the other reading infin. aor. ÷ùñῆóáé , which after ïἶìáé without ἄí is pure Greek, and expresses more strongly the faith in the certainty of the fact stated than the fut. ÷ùñÞóåéí .—P. S.]
“
Des Evangcliums ewige Schrift,
Den Jungern las Er sie Tag und Nacht;
Ein göttlich Wort, es wirkt und trifft.
Er stieg zurück, nahm’s wicder mit,
Sie aber hatten’s gut gefühlt,
Und Jeder schrieb so Schritt für Schritt,
Wie er’s in seinem Sinn behielt.
Verschieden: Es hat nickts zu bedeuten
Sie hatten nicht gleiche Fähigkiten;
Duck damit kinnen sich dic Christen
Bis zu dem jüngsten Tage fristen.”
(Goethe).]
[Wordsworth puts into the first person singular
ïἶìáé
, which John nowhere else uses in the Gospel, the intention of the writer to guard against the inference that Joh_21:25 was written by a person different from John, who wrote in the plural
ïß
́
äáìåí
in the preceding verse. But this would have been done more effectually by using the singular in both cases. Godet conjectures that the subject of the
ïἶìáé
is one of the apostles present with John at Ephesus, probably Andrew, who, with John, was the oldest disciple of Christ (John 1).—P. S.][Lines of two celebrated German hymns. To these may be added similar expressions in English hymns, as,
“Oh! for a thousand tongues to sing,” etc.
“Had I a thousand hearts to give,” etc.
“Were the whole realm of nature mine,” etc.
But these and similar expressions are desires poetically expressed, while here we have a statement in prose.—P. S.]
[I saw it in a respectable Magazine attributed to the Rev. F. Robertson, the late gifted preacher of Brighton, but I have been unable to verify the quotation and cannot vouch for its accuracy.—P. S.]