Joh_8:19. The question of the Pharisees, who only pretend not to understand what Jesus means by the words
ὁ
πέμψας
με
πατήρ
, between which and Joh_8:27 there is no inconsistency, is frivolous mockery. “Where is, then, this second witness, thy Father?” He has no actual existence! He ought, surely, to be here on the spot, if, as thou hast said, He were a witness with thee on thy behalf! To regard their question as the expression of a veritable material apprehension on their part, that He referred to a physical father (Augustine, Bede, and several; also De Wette, Olshausen, Brückner, and, doubtfully, Lücke), some also having found in it a blasphemous allusion to bastardy (Cyril, Ammon), is irreconcilable with the circumstance that Jesus had already so frequently and unmistakeably pointed to God as His Father; the questioners themselves also betray their dissimulation by the word
ποῦ
; they do not ask
τίς
. Totally different is the relation of the question put by Philip in Joh_14:8.
The reply of Jesus unveils to them with clear composure whence it arose that they put so wicked a question. To take the words
οὔτε
ἐμὲ
as far as
μου
as a question is less appropriate (Ewald), as it is scarcely likely that Jesus was taken by surprise.
Εἰ
ἐμὲ
ᾔδειτε
, etc., rest on the fact that the Father reveals Himself in Him. Comp. Joh_14:9, Joh_16:3.