Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 3:13 - 3:13
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_3:13. “And no other than I can reveal to you heavenly things.” This is what Jesus means, if we rightly take His words, not an assertion of His divinity as the first of the heavenly things (Hengstenberg), which would make the negative form of expression quite inexplicable. Comp. Joh_1:18, Joh_6:46.
The καὶ is simply continuative in its force, not antithetic (Knapp, Olshausen), nor furnishing a basis, or explanatory of the motive (Beza, Tholuck; Lücke, Lange).
οὐδεὶς ἀναβέβηκεν , κ . τ . λ .] which, on account of the perfect tense, obviously cannot refer to the actual ascension of Christ[158] (against Augustine, Beda, Theophylact, Rupertus, Calovius, Bengel, etc.); nor does it give any support to the unscriptural raptus in coelum of the Socinians (see Oeder ad Catech. Racov. p. 348 ff.); nor is it to be explained by the unio hypostatica of Christ’s human nature with the divine, by virtue of which the former may be said to have entered into heaven (Calovius, Maldonatus, Steinfass, and others). It is usually understood in a figurative sense, as meaning a spiritual elevation of the soul to God in order to knowledge of divine things, a coming to the perception of divine mysteries, which thus were brought down, as it were, by Christ from heaven (see of late especially Beyschlag); to support which, reference is made to Deu_30:12, Pro_30:4, Bar_3:29, Rom_10:6-7. But this is incorrect, because Christ brought along with Him out of His pre-existent state His immediate knowledge of divine things (Joh_3:11; Joh_1:18; Joh_8:26, al.), and possesses it in uninterrupted fellowship with the Father; consequently the figurative method of representation, that during His earthly life He brought down this knowledge through having been raised up into heaven, would be inappropriate and strange. Ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρ . καταβ . also must be taken literally, of an actual descent; and there is therefore nothing in the context to warrant our taking ἀναβ . εἰς τ . οὐρ . symbolically. Hengstenberg rightly renders the words literally, but at the end of the verse he would complete the sense by adding, “who will ascend up into heaven.” This in itself is arbitrary, and not at all what we should look for in John; it is not in keeping with the connection, and would certainly not have been understood as a matter of course by a person like Nicodemus, though it were the point of the declaration: consequently it could not fitly be suppressed, and least of all as a saying concerning the future. Godet does not get beyond the explanation of essential communion with God on the part of Jesus from the time of His birth. The only rendering true to the words is simply this: Instead of saying, “No one has been in heaven except,” etc., Jesus says, as this could only have happened to any other by his ascending thither, “No one has ascended into heaven except,” etc.; and thus the εἰ μή refers to an actual existence in heaven, which is implied in the ἀναβέβηκεν . And thus Jansenius rightly renders: Nullus hominum in coelo fuit, quod ascendendo fieri solet, ut ibi coelestia contemplaretur, nisi, etc.; and of late Fritzsche the elder in his Novis opusc. p. 230; and now also Tholuck, and likewise Holtzmann in Hilgenfield’s Zeitschr. 1865, p. 222.
ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρ . καταβάς ] which took place by means of the incarnation. These words, like ὁ ὢν ἐν τ . οὐρ ., are argumentative, for they necessarily imply the fact of existence in heaven; but ὁ ὢν , which must be taken as an attributive definition of ὁ υἱὸς τ . ἀνθρ ., and not as belonging to καταβάς , and therefore taking the article, cannot be equivalent to ὃς ἦν (Luthardt; Hofmman, I. 134; Weiss, etc.), as if ποτε , τὸ πρότερον or the like were there, but is equivalent to ὅς ἐστι , whose existence is in heaven, who has there His proper abode, His home.[159]
ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρ .] Messianic designation which Christ applies to Himself, in harmony with the fulfilment of the prophetic representation in Dan_7:13, which began with the καταβάς (comp. on Joh_1:51). Nicodemus could understand this only by means of a fuller development of faith and knowledge.
[158] So also Weizsäcker, who assumes that we have here an experience belonging to the apostolic age, carried back and placed in the mouth of Christ. An anachronism which would amount to literary carelessness.
[159] Nonnus: ἀστερόεντι μελάθρῳ πάτριον οὖδας ἔχων .—Joh_9:25 is similar: τυφλὸς ὤν : blind from one’s birth. Schleie macher refers the coming down from heaven to the conception of His mission, and the being in heaven to the continuity of His God-consciousness. See e.g. his Leben Jesu, p. 287 ff.
Note.
According to Beyschlag, p. 99 ff., this verse is utterly opposed to the derivation of Christ’s higher knowledge from the recollection of a pre-existent life in heaven. But we must bear in mind, (1) that the notion of an ascent to God to attain a knowledge of His mysteries (which Beyschlag considers the only right explanation) never occurs in the N. T. with reference to Jesus—a circumstance which would surprise us, especially in John, if it had been declared by Jesus Himself. But it was not declared by Him, because He has it not, but knows His knowledge to be the gift of His Father which accompanied Him in His mission (Joh_10:36). (2) He could not have claimed such an ascent to heaven for Himself alone, for a like ascent, though not in equal degree, must belong to other men of God. He must, therefore, at least have expressed Himself comparatively: οὐδεὶς οὓτως ἀναβέβηκεν ἐ . τ . οὐρ . ὡς ὁ , κ . τ . λ . Even the church now sings:
“Rise, rise, my soul, and stretch Thy wings
Towards heaven, Thy native place.”
But something distinct and more than this was the case with Christ, viz. as to the past, that He had His existence in heaven, and had come down therefrom; and as to His earthly presence, that He is in heaven.