John 17:3. The continuative δέ adduces, in keeping with the connection, a more precise definition[187] of ζωὴ αἰώνιος (not a transposition of its idea, as Weiss holds), and that with a retrospective glance to the glorification of the Father in John 17:1. On ἐστίν, comp. on Romans 14:17; John 3:19.

In this consists eternal life, that they should recognise (ἵνα, comp. on John 6:29) Thee as the only true God (as Him to whom alone belongs the reality of the idea of God, comp. 1 Corinthians 8:4), and Thy sent one Jesus as Messiah. This knowledge of God here desired (which is hence the believing, living, practical knowledge, καθὼς δεῖ γνῶναι, 1 Corinthians 8:2), is the ζωὴ αἰώνιος, so far as it is the essential subjective principle of the same, unfolding this ζωή out of itself, its continual, ever self-developing germ and impulse (comp. Sap. John 15:1; John 15:3), even now in the temporal evolution of eternal life, and at a future time, besides, after the establishment of the kingdom, in which faith, hope, and love abide (1 Corinthians 3); the fundamental essence of which is in truth nothing else than that knowledge, which in the future αἰών will be the perfected knowledge (1 Corinthians 13:12), comp. 1 John 3:2. The contents of the knowledge are stated with the precision of a Confession,—a summary of faith in opposition[188] to the polytheistic (τ. μόνον ἀληθ. θεόν, comp. John 5:44; Deuteronomy 6:4; 1 Corinthians 8:5; 1 Thessalonians 1:9) and Jewish κόσμος, which latter rejected Jesus as Messiah, although in Him there was given, notwithstanding, the very highest revelation of the only true God. It is in the third person, however, that the praying Jesus speaks of Himself from John 17:1 forwards, placing Himself in an objective relation towards the Father during the first intensity of this solemn mood, and first at John 17:4 continuing the prayer with the familiar ἐγώ; He indeed mentions His name in John 17:3, because in the connection of the self-designation through the third person, it here specifically suggested itself, in correspondence to the confessional thought.

Χριστόν] is an appellative predicate: as Messiah, comp. John 9:22. To connect it as a proper name with Ἰησ. (Jesus Christ, comp. John 1:17), to ascribe to the evangelist an offence against historical decorum (Bretschneider, Lücke, De Wette), and to see in this a proof of a later reproduction (comp. Tholuck and Weizsäcker, p. 286; also Scholten, p. 238), would be to accuse the writer, especially in the report of such a prayer, of a surprising want of consideration. Luthardt also takes Χριστόν as a proper name, which he thinks was here, in this extraordinary moment, used for the first time by Jesus, and thereby at the same time determined the use of the word by the apostles (Acts 2:38). So also Godet, comp. Ebrard. But Jesus prayed in Hebrew, and doubtless said יֵשׁוּע חַמָּשִּׁיהַ, from which expression a proper name could by no means be recognised. The predicative view of Τ. ΜΌΝ. ἈΛ. ΘΕΌΝ and of ΧΡΙΣΤΌΝ is also justly held by Ewald.

Although Τ. ΜΌΝΟΝ ἈΛΗΘ. ΘΕΌΝ refers solely to the Father, the true divine nature of Christ is not thereby excluded (against the Arians and Socinians, who misused this passage), all the less so as this, in accordance with His (Logos) relationship as dependent on the Godhead of the Father, forms the previous assumption in ὋΝ ἈΠΈΣΤΕΙΛΑς, as is certain from the entire connection of the Johannean Christology, and from John 17:5. Comp. Wetstein, and Gess, Pers. Chr. p. 162. Hence it was unnecessary,—moreover, even a perversion of the passage, and running counter to the strict monotheism of John, when Augustine, Ambrose, Hilary, Beda, Thomas, Aretius, and several others explained it as if the language were: ut te et quem misisti Jesum Christum cognoscant solum verum Deum. Only One, the Father, can absolutely be termed the μόνος ἀληθ. θεός (comp. ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεός, Romans 9:5), not at the same time Christ (who is not even in 1 John 5:20 the ἀληθινὸς θεός), since His divine entity stands in the relation of genetic subsistence to the Father, John 1:18, although He, in unity with the Father, works as His commissioner, John 10:30, and is His representative, John 14:9-10.

[187] No formal definition. See the apposite observations of Riehm in the Stud. u. Krit. 1864, p. 539 f.

[188] An antithesis which might present itself naturally and unsought to the world-embracing glance of the praying Jesus, on the boundary line of His work, which includes entire humanity. But He had also thought further of the ἐξουσία πάσης σαρκός, which was given to Him. This likewise in opposition to Weiss, Lehrbegr. p. 56, who considers the antithesis foreign to the connection.

John 17:3. αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ αἰώνιος ζωή ἵνα … On ἵνα in this construction, see Burton, 213, and cf. John 15:8; ὅτι in John 3:19 is not quite equivalent. In Isaiah 37:20 God is designated ὁ Θεὸς μόνος, and in Exodus 34:6 ἀληθινός; cf. 2 Thessalonians 1:10. He is the only true God in contrast to many that are “called gods,” 1 Corinthians 8:5-6. But cf. especially 1 John 5:20. It was by making known to them this God, and thus glorifying the Father, that Christ “gave men eternal life”. The life He gave consisted in and was maintained by this knowledge. But to the knowledge of the Father, the knowledge of “Him whom Thou didst send, Jesus Christ,” was necessary, John 1:18, John 14:6. As in John 1:17, so here, Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν is the double name which became common in Apostolic times, and not (as Meyer and others) “an appellative predicate,” “Jesus as the Messiah”. Whether Jesus’ naming of Himself as a third person can be accounted for by the solemnity of the occasion (“der feierliche Gebetstyl,” Lücke), or is to be ascribed to John, is much debated. Westcott seems justified in saying that “the use of the name ‘Jesus Christ’ by the Lord Himself at this time is in the highest degree unlikely.… It is no derogation from the truthfulness of the record that St. John has thus given parenthetically, and in conventional language (so to speak), the substance of what the Lord said at greater length.”

3. And this is life eternal] More exactly, But the life eternal is this. ‘The life eternal’ means that which has just been mentioned; and ‘is this’ means ‘this is what it consists in:’ comp. John 3:19, John 15:12.

that they might know] Literally, in order that they may recognise; comp. John 6:29, John 15:12; 1 John 3:11; 1 John 3:23; 1 John 5:3; 2 John 1:6. The eternal life is spoken of as already present (see on John 3:36, John 5:24, John 6:47; John 6:54); hence ‘may,’ not ‘might.’ Moreover it is the appropriation of the knowledge that is specially emphasized; hence ‘recognise’ rather than simply ‘know.’ Comp. Wis 15:3.

thee the only true God] i.e. ‘Thee as the only true God.’ For ‘true’ see note on John 1:9 and comp. John 4:23, John 6:32, John 15:1 : ‘the only true God’ is directed against the many false, spurious gods of the heathen. This portion of the truth was what the Gentiles so signally failed to recognise.

Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent] Better, Him whom Thou didst send—Jesus Christ; or, Jesus as Christ. This portion of the truth the Jews failed to recognise. But the words are not without difficulty, even when, we insert the ‘as;’ and the run of the Greek words is rather against the insertion of ‘as.’ If ‘Christ’ were a predicate and not part of the proper name we should expect ‘Jesus, whom Thou didst send, as Christ.’ Probably in this verse we have the substance and not the exact words of Christ’s utterance. That He should use the name ‘Jesus’ here is perhaps improbable; that He should anticipate the use of ‘Jesus Christ’ as a proper name is very improbable; and the expression ‘the true God’ is not used elsewhere by Christ and is used by S. John (1 John 5:20), We conclude, therefore, that the wording here is the Evangelist’s, perhaps abbreviated from the actual words.

John 17:3. Ἔστιν) is; not merely brings with it.—γινώσκωσι, that they may know) Knowledge in the matter of our salvation is of the greatest moment: John 17:26, “The world hath not known Thee, but I have known Thee, and these have known,” etc.—μόνον, the only, the alone) The Son and Holy Spirit are not excluded by this word. Comp. μόνος, ch. John 8:9, “Jesus was left alone, and the woman.” But those meant to be excluded are the false gods, with the idolatrous worship of which the world was crowded. And Jesus in this place speaks of Himself, as the Apostle of the Father [ἀπέστειλας: Hebrews 3:1].—ὃν ἀπέστειλας, whom Thou hast sent) The aspect (relation) under which (the ground upon which) Jesus Christ is to be acknowledged. His being ‘sent,’ presupposes the Son to be one with the Father.—Χριστὸν, Christ) A most open (plain) appellation, which subsequently became altogether prevalent.

Verse 3. - The life eternal, of which Jesus has just spoken, is this (cf. for construction, John 15:12; 1 John 3:11, 23; 1 John 5:3), that they might know - should come to know - thee, the only veritable God. All ideas of God which deviate from or fall short of "the Father" revealed to us by Christ, are not the veritable God, and the knowledge of them is not life eternal. The Father is here set forth as the fens Deitatis. This does not exclude "the Son," but is inconceivable without him. The Fatherhood expresses an eternal relation. The one element involves the ether as integral to itself: "I am in the Father, and the Father in me." There is a knowledge of the Father possible even now. "Henceforth, he has said, ye have seen him, and known him;" yet not till the veil is lifted, and we see face to face, shall we know as we are known (1 Corinthians 13:12; 1 John 3:2), shall we see him as he is. And him whom thou didst send, Jesus the Christ (not Jesus to be, or as Christ, but rather "Jesus the Christ," as the expansion and explanation of the more indefinite term, "him whom thou didst scud"). Why does our Lord add to this expression one that at first sight seems so incompatible with the idea of this prayer? It has led so careful and reverential a commentator as Westcott to remove the difficulty by supposing that the whole verse is a gloss of the evangelist, expressing the sense of what our Lord may have uttered at greater length. We are loath to admit this method of exegesis, especially as the sole reasons for it are the supposed strangeness of our Lord's here using a phrase so unaccustomed, and thus giving himself not only his Personal Name, but his own official title. It is unusual. The phrase does undoubtedly belong to a later period for its current and constant use. Yet it must not be forgotten

(1) that this is a unique moment in his career, and unique expressions may be anticipated;

(2) that it was calculated to strengthen his disciples, to allow them to hear once from his own lips the solemn claim to Messiahship (see Godet);

(3) that John himself at once adopted it as his own (Acts 3:6, 20; 1 John 1:3; 1 John 2:1, 22; 1 John 3:22; 1 John 4:2, 3; 1 John 5:1-20; Revelation 1:1, 2, 5); moreover,

(4) in 1 John 5:20 Jesus Christ is, himself lifted up into the region of the ἀληθίνος, and the apostle adds, "This is the true God, and eternal life" (Hengstenberg). It is from these very words that some critics imagine that the evangelist, rather than the Lord himself, framed the clause;

(5) yet it is quite as rational to suppose that the words uttered by Jesus dwelt like a strain of sacred music in the memory of the apostle. Moreover,

(6) the knowledge of the only true God is really conditioned by the knowledge of him who was indeed the great Revelation, Organ, and Effluence of the Father's glory. The fullness of this knowledge is the end of all Christian striving. Paul said, "I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus... and that I may know him" (Philippians 3:10). How much is there yet to know!

(7) Finally, as our Lord is rising more and more into the glory of an utter self-abandonment, and into the glory which he had with the Father from eternity, the human nature which he still inhabits becomes almost an appendage of his Divine Personality, and he might with awful significance, when referring to the object of human faith and knowledge, say, "Him whom thou hast sent - Jesus the Christ." Moreover, on any hypothesis of the composition or framing of an intercessory prayer for the Logos Christos to utter, there is an equal difficulty in the insertion into such prayer by St. John of this reference to himself as the Christ. The knowledge of the Father as the only true God, in opposition to the heathen traditions and philosophical speculations of the world, coupled with a corresponding knowledge of the only adequate expression of the Father's heart and nature, sent forth from him, as One promised, consecrated, and empowered to represent him, is life - ere half life. John 17:3Life eternal

With the article: the life eternal. Defining the words in the previous verse. The life eternal (of which I spoke) is this.

That (ἵνα)

Expressing the aim.

Might know (γινώσκωσι)

Might recognize or perceive. This is striking, that eternal life consists in knowledge, or rather the pursuit of knowledge, since the present tense marks a continuance, a progressive perception of God in Christ. That they might learn to know. Compare John 17:23; John 10:38; 1 John 5:20; 1 John 4:7, 1 John 4:8.

"I say, the acknowledgment of God in Christ

Accepted by thy reason, solves for thee

All questions in the earth and out of it,

And has so far advanced thee to be wise.

Wouldst thou improve this to reprove the proved?

In life's mere minute, with power to use that proof,

Leave knowledge and revert to how it sprung?

Thou hast it; use it, and forthwith, or die.

continued...

John 17:3 Interlinear
John 17:3 Parallel Texts


John 17:3 NIV
John 17:3 NLT
John 17:3 ESV
John 17:3 NASB
John 17:3 KJV

John 17:3 Bible Apps
John 17:3 Parallel
John 17:3 Biblia Paralela
John 17:3 Chinese Bible
John 17:3 French Bible
John 17:3 German Bible

Bible Hub