When the word clearly demonstrates its intention so that none of the listeners can oppose it, and even if it says these things to implore those not consenting; because if you cannot convict the words spoken as erroneous, you might justly demand assent. The statement also has, according to the saying, the frankness of the Savior, with no person being able to say with confidence from not having sinned, "Who among you convicts me of sin?" except our Lord alone, who did not commit sin, yet was tempted "in every way in likeness without sin," being able to say this to all who have ever known him. I hear "Who among you" being said not only to those present but also to the entire human race, as if it were clarified in this way: who from your race? or what kind of person will be able to convict me of sin? But I know well that none. And insofar as it is possible for human nature through the "Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ" in every way should strive to take up such a pure conscience's frankness towards all people, so as to say about subsequent times and after the beginning of faith to each of those who know us, "Who among you convicts me of sin?" although it may not be possible to say this from the time we completed the word. And this not only would the Savior say to people but also to the devil and the powers under him, having nothing to say against regarding his sin. And this is indeed consistent with "The ruler of this world comes, and he has nothing in me." It is also possible for us with much diligence to take up from a certain period such frankness to say to the devil seeking occasion against us and his angels before the time of departure: "Who among you convicts me of sin?"
[John 8:46] If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?
It is worth seeing what appears from the puffiness. But we shall see this if even those to whom the word was directed did not bring forth the proper response. For someone might say: For this reason we do not believe, because we do not perceive in what way what is said is true; and we do not perceive because our natural faculties of perceiving the truth have not yet been cleansed; and since we are such, we are not of God; if we are not yet of God, but also the faculties of perceiving the truth are not cleansed, due to them being covered or thickened or clouded by wickedness. Understanding, then, what it means to truly believe according to which "Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God," and realizing how far we fall short of believing in this way, let us answer these things, asking the physician of the sight of the soul to do everything by his wisdom and benevolence to uncover our eyes, which are still covered by the dishonor brought about by our wickedness, as it is said somewhere: "Our dishonor has covered us"; for he will listen to us confessing the reasons for our not yet believing, and, as he assists, will aid in us receiving the gift to believe, placed third in Paul’s list of gifts after the word of wisdom and the word of knowledge, to which he adds: "To another faith by the same Spirit"; about which he also says elsewhere: "For to you it has been granted not only to believe in Christ but also to suffer for him." And from this operation it will be evident that it is no chance gift of God, among the many different teachings preached by many who claim to teach the truth, to believe in no one or only the true one; for this is already the work of an approved banker, whom you would not err in calling perfect, as also is written in the epistle to the Hebrews: "But solid food belongs to those who are mature, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil."
[John 8:47] He who is from God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear, because you are not from God.
Those who introduce myths about different natures and say that they are sons of God by nature and from the initial construction, only because of kinship with God, are receptive to God's words, and from this they demonstrate what is at hand for them. But they indeed seize upon even this saying, applying it to those who are uncritical and unable to respond to the plausibility of the use of the saying, nor seeing its solution thus lying: if all those who received “the true light, which enlightens every man coming into the world," did not receive it by being from God (for if they had received it by being from God, it would not have been written about them: “But as many as received him, he gave them the authority to become children of God, to those who believe in his name”), it is evident that those who are not from God, before receiving the light, they in no way have authority to become children of God; but when they receive it, they do not yet become children of God, but they receive authority through accepting the light to become children of God. Then, having become from God, they also hear His words, no longer merely believing simply but now understanding the matters of piety more insightfully. Moreover, those who are not such, having not aspired to be children, do not become of God, and for that reason do not hear His words nor understand His will; but they remain in the state of those who, before they were children of God, only believed, being servants of God by having received the spirit of slavery in fear and not having strived to advance and progress to also occupy the place of adoption, in which those who have it cry out: “Abba, Father.” For it is clear that no person is initially a son of God, as also is demonstrated by Paul's saying, “We were by nature children of wrath;” this he also said about himself. It is evident from “But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may become sons of your Father in heaven.” For if Paul was by nature a “son of wrath,” who, more so than Paul, as far as nature is concerned, would not be a son of wrath before receiving the authority to become a child of God and before becoming a child of God? And if one can only become a son of the heavenly Father by loving his enemies and praying for those who persecute him, it is clear that no one hears God’s words by being from God by nature, but by receiving the authority to become a child of God and properly using the authority, and by loving his enemies and praying for those who offend him, thus becoming a son of the heavenly Father. Then it is from God and hears the words of God, understanding them and acquiring knowledge of them; which is characteristic not of slaves but of children of God, who have abandoned all fleshly genesis and have taken up the one from God through "the spirit of adoption." Simultaneously, it should be understood more carefully how to accept "He hears the words of God" in a manner similar to "My sheep hear My voice." For if we take hearing in the sense of mere consent, even those who believe for a time would be from God, as testified by the Word that some believe for a time. But if we take "hearing" in the sense of keeping the commandments, it is clear that even if someone sins in one matter, he would not be a son of God; this would not trouble us who say that someone becomes a son of God through change, but it would trouble those who are unable to show themselves entirely sinless and those involved in similar teachings. But if we take "hearing" in the sense of understanding and comprehending, let them show anyone who hears all the words of the new covenant in such a manner, so that we may call them sons of God if this definition of theirs does not accept reversal into the holy scriptures. For we imagine even in these matters a great and marvelous person who is already a son of God, and we will not be condemned unworthily as those from God receiving "The one who is from God hears the words of God."
Now, from the contrary, it may be possible to demonstrate something paradoxical. What is the paradox or the matter that one may be more a son of God than another, and doubly that another is a son of God over another? How this is shown from the opposite we shall present as follows: In Matthew, the second rebuke against the scribes and Pharisees is as follows: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you traverse sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves." Hence, according to this, there are no natural children of hell, nor are the children of hell equally children of it if one is doubly a child of it over another. But if one person is twice the son of Gehenna as another, why not also twice the son of destruction and death and darkness and of the other things, of which those who sin differently are sons? But if in these cases, why also not sons of light twice as much as others, and sons of life, and sons of wisdom, and thus sons of God? If indeed one becomes a son of God twice as much as another, why not also many times and as many times as one can conceive the firstborn of all creation to be the son of God compared to the other sons of God and those no longer having a spirit of bondage to fear but having received the spirit of adoption? Consequently therefore, since there are more sayings of God, not only those that are written but also those which are unspeakable, which it is not lawful for a man to speak, and of those about which John says, "I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written," anyone hearing any of the sayings of God is already from God; and the more one hears the sayings of God, by that much more will he become from God; so that if one hears all the sayings of God, if indeed it comes to pass for any of those receiving the spirit of adoption, he absolutely and consummately becomes a son of God, and wholly and entirely from God. It is necessary to interpret the phrase "wholly and entirely" with understanding in relation to all doctrines and all knowledge and all mysteries, so that it might be said that one has become wholly and entirely from God who knows all the mysteries and all knowledge, and has accomplished those of perfect love. Consider then if it is possible consistently with "We know in part and we prophesy in part" to say, "we are sons of God in part," and again, "when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away," the perfection of becoming a son of God will come, abolishing the partial becoming a son of God. Nor should it be left unexamined whether it is possible to be a son in part of the distinguished portion concerning the divine, and in part of the contrary, or whether this is impossible to be so. With which examination, consider how many sons can be called of one father, whether through the forefathers and those of their lineage, or according to such an intention. Therefore having received the authority to become children of God, let us do all things so that we may become from God and hear His words, and advance in being from God, so that we may advance also in hearing the words of God, always proclaiming more of these, until we grasp all the words of God, as many as it is possible to grasp now and after this for those deemed worthy of the spirit of adoption. As often as we do not hear the words of God that are spoken, that is, do not understand them, it must be supposed that we are rebuked as not being from God. For because of this, he who does not hear the words of God does not hear them, because he is not from God, and he is not from God regardless of himself. And yet sometimes having already received authority to become a child of God, and being able from loving the enemies and praying for those who persecute, to become a son of the Father in heaven.
[John 8:48] The Jews answered him, saying, "Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?"
It is likely that many often said these things silently among themselves about the Savior, calling him a Samaritan as one who distorts Jewish [ways] similarly to the Samaritans; "For Jews do not associate with Samaritans," differing in many doctrines from them. But it is worth investigating how, with the Samaritans denying the future age and not admitting even the survival of the soul, they dared to call the Savior [a Samaritan], who taught much about the resurrection and judgment. But perhaps they said this as an insult to him and not because he actually shared the same doctrines as those people. And it is likely that some also thought he did not teach about the future age and about judgment and resurrection with sincere intent, being disposed like a Samaritan, as if nothing awaited humans after life, but feigned it for the sake of glory and to please the Jews by presenting things about resurrection and eternal life; and they also said he had a demon because of his superhuman words, by which he called God his own father, and claimed to have come down from heaven, and that he himself was the bread of life much better than manna, so that whoever eats this bread will live forever, and countless other things with which the Gospels are filled. It could also have been said because of their suspicion about Beelzebul: "You have a demon," since some thought "by Beelzebul, the prince of demons," he was casting out demons, as if having Beelzebul within himself. Indeed, the enemies will know, saying he has a demon; but we believe him when he says, "I do not have a demon"; for neither can a demon open the eyes of the blind or perform these signs which are recorded, of which traces and remnants remain in the churches to this day in the name of Jesus. After this, anyone would seek to understand why, of the two accusations directed at him, "You are a Samaritan" and "You have a demon," the Jews responded to him not by those who believed in him, but by answering to the second accusation only, saying, "I do not have a demon." And look if this can compare to the parable in the Gospel according to Luke about the man going down from Jerusalem to Jericho who fell among robbers, whom the priest and the Levite passed by, but the traveling Samaritan came upon him and, seeing him, had compassion, and approached, bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. For if anyone is able to explain the parable, showing that no one but the Savior is represented by the Samaritan, who healed the half-dead man fallen among robbers, he will explain why he did not deny being a Samaritan. Another considering the distinction between Jews and those under the law, bringing those under the law to the Samaritans, and realizing the Savior was made all things to all men to win everyone, will say that because he was among those under the law as under the law, it is as though he became a Samaritan, and thus did not deny being a Samaritan. And a third, interpreting the Samaritan as "guardian," will say that even if the Jews called him a Samaritan in another sense, he did not deny the meaning derived from the name, knowing that he is the guardian of human souls, as it is said, "Behold, he who keeps Israel will neither slumber nor sleep," and "The Lord guards the little ones." The Hebrews call the guardian "Shomer," and they relate that the Samaritans got their name because they were appointed by the king of the Assyrians to guard the land of Israel after the captivity, when another Israel fell into Assyrian captivity because of many sins.
[John 8:49-50] Jesus answered, "I do not have a demon, but I honor my Father, and you dishonor me. I do not seek my own glory. There is one who seeks and judges."
If the planted tree 'by the rivers of water' is such that it yields its fruit 'in its season' and its leaf does not wither but prospers in whatever it does, what should be thought concerning our Savior Jesus, who Himself is the tree of life in being wisdom, and that wisdom is 'a tree of life to those who lay hold of her,' and who bears fruit and whose other leaves are such that not one of them withers? Therefore, no word of Jesus, as also these granted worthy to be recorded by His holy disciples, should be disregarded, but every scrutiny even to those deemed clear should be applied, not denying that even about His simple and straightforward words an apt thing will be found for those rightly seeking as worthy of that sacred mouth. Now when we do not find, we should blame ourselves and not the word of Jesus as if it does not breathe doctrines full of truth and wisdom from the entirety.
These things I have said to examine 'I do not have a demon,' through which we all who encounter the gospel learn something we did not know before encountering the gospel. What then is to be understood by this? It pleases scripture for those who err to do mostly against reason because they have become receptive to the activity of an evil spirit or impure will of a demon. Therefore, they did not shrink even those considered minimal sins to attribute to demons, calling anger a demon, similarly slander too. Likewise, countless other things fantasized by and acting in us according to their will; and among men, just as no one is 'pure from filth,' and no 'one is righteous on earth who does good and does not sin,' so too no one is always cleansed of demons and never susceptible to their activity. Consequently, interpreting the healings in the gospel allegorically, which include the expulsions of demons, we will say that always demons are expelled by Jesus from those who no longer accept the demons' activities upon being healed by the word. Therefore, I think it is only Jesus' voice, who alone stripped the principalities and powers and made a public example of them triumphing over them in it, setting the cross as a trophy against all opposing power, just as 'The ruler of this world is coming, but he has no claim on me,' so also 'I neither had, nor have, nor will have a demon.' We too can utter the voice and say, 'I do not have a demon,' but we will be refuted like those who denied their possession and were proven by their very deeds that they lied." Or is it not proof that we are demonized when we, having the condition of madmen, shout, burning with anger and rage, or neighing like horses and mounting our own wives like frenzied stallions, casting aside the words of God regarding impassibility? But even if we are humbled and dragged down by sorrow and have lost the inherent pride of rational beings, let us not forget that a sparrow does not fall into a snare without God and that the judgments concerning each event that happens to people are just. What shall we say but that we suffer these things because the demon has overcome us and obscured our governing faculty? But what about fears of things not to be feared and excessive delight in worthless things—what are these but the activities of demons filling those who cannot truthfully say, "I have no demon"? But suppose some of the holy patriarchs, or the sacred servant, or the wonderful prophets, or the most powerful apostles of our savior Jesus, were brought in for examination. Would they not also say, like Jesus, "I have no demon"? To whom it can be said: Did these also ever sin, or is the statement "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God" false, and is it not true that "No one is pure from filth"? Or has it not been considered when it is said, "There is no righteous person on earth who does good and never sins"? But clearly all scriptures are true and those who have turned to a virtuous life were not always, nor from the beginning, able to say, "I have no demon," but this phrase originally belonged only to the one conceived as our savior. Therefore, most sovereignly and truly, this was the voice of the only one who honored the Father: for no one honoring something that is not honored by God honors the one who despises what is honored by Him. How can it be said that one honors the Father if he has not even received the spirit of adoption initially? And no one who sins has the spirit of adoption, for the one born of God does not sin. And how does one who honors earthly glory or money or the material wealth or the beauty born of flesh and blood or anything attached to matter and corruption honor the Father? It is clear then how this is the voice of the savior, "I honor the Father," which, as far as we can, we ought to strive to say with a conscience bearing witness with us in the Holy Spirit, rendering to "Him honor to whom honor is due," and not bestowing it elsewhere. And indeed, at the fulfillment of time, he who was sent by God to be born of a woman and born under the law, complying with the law that says "Honor your father and your mother so that you may have a long life," having no other father but the God in heaven, says, "But I honor my Father." So we too shall say this phrase, understanding the baptism of regeneration and having been washed in it to become sons of God and no longer calling anyone on earth "father" because we have become sons of the Father in heaven and brothers of the one who said, "I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." Thus, it is clear that when Jesus most sovereignly and perfectly said, "I have no demon but I honor my Father," his imitators, each according to his ability, being strengthened in Christ Jesus who empowers them, will also say, "I have no demon but I honor my Father." Who, being among the dead and dwelling in tombs, could possibly say, “I do not have a demon”? Or who, honoring anything other than God and His word and the commands given by the Word, giving honor to another when it should be rendered to Him who deserves the honor, would as a disciple of Jesus say, “But I honor my father”? Following this is the statement, “And you dishonor Me,” spoken to those who dishonored Him and said to Him, “Do we not rightly say that You are a Samaritan and have a demon?” thinking that their evil statement was spoken correctly; for by wrongly judging, they declared the Savior to be a Samaritan and demon-possessed. It should be assumed that the statement “And you dishonor Me” was not just spoken to those at that time, but also to those who always dishonor Him by doing things contrary to the right reasoning of God, and who dishonor Him by wronging Christ, who is justice, and dishonor Him by performing acts of weakness and infirmity against the power of God, which is the Savior; “For Christ is the power of God.” And to everyone who disregards wisdom could it be said, “You dishonor Me,” since Christ is also wisdom. But even if it were necessary for someone to be at peace with all men, so as to be able to say that prophetic phrase, “I am for peace, but when I speak, they are for war,” and if it were necessary to take up the peace of God which surpasses all understanding, guarding the heart and the thoughts of the one who has taken it up. If someone is warlike, biting, accusing, and consuming their neighbor, and filled with the stirring of passions within their dominant part, to them as well could it be said, “You dishonor Me.” For Christ is our peace. Further, “Everyone who does evil hates the light and does not come to the light,” and the light is He who said, “I am the light of the world”; clearly, the one who does evil, dishonoring the light, dishonors Christ, and will also hear, “And you dishonor Me.” And why do I need to extend the discourse further, unfolding and showing who are those reproved by Jesus and hearing from him “You dishonor me,” being clear from the stated facts and those that can be logically connected to them? After these things, let us see what is the meaning of “I do not seek my own glory; there is one who seeks and judges.” God seeks, having given us his Son, in each of those who have received him the glory of Christ; which he will indeed find in those who care for themselves and work out the virtues implanted in them; he will not find it in those who are not such, and in those whom he does not find the glory of his Son, he will judge them, saying to them: “Because of you, my name is blasphemed among the nations continuously.”
But one might be puzzled about the statement “There is one who seeks and judges,” if it should be referred to God, clearly the Savior having said: “For not even the Father judges anyone, but he has given all judgment to the Son, so that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father.” But see if you can use this: “I can do nothing on my own initiative; as I hear I judge, and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.” For if as he hears, our Savior judges according to the Father, not seeking his own will but the will of the Father who sent him, and therefore his judgment is just, perhaps the authority of judgment, which the hearing one executes, is not of the hearer but of the one who speaks to him.
And even if he says that “My judgment is just,” hear in the same Gospel it is being said: “All that is mine is yours.” For if what the Savior says is true, “All that is mine is yours,” it is clear that even the judgment about which he says “My judgment is just” is the Father’s judgment. But if it is the Father’s judgment, the puzzle concerning “I do not seek my own glory; there is One who seeks and judges” can be resolved. Moreover, the statement “I do not seek my own glory” holds a certain significance of humility appropriate to the Savior; for it would not be fitting for him to demand his own glory and judge those who have not given it, but the Father who gave glory to the Son should demand it from those who withhold it and judge them for it. Moreover, the Savior, as an imitator of the Father, seeks the glory of God from those who learn about God; and if he does not find the Father’s glory in some, he would judge them, having received authority to execute judgment because he is the Son of Man.
However, Heracleon does not attribute the phrase “There is one who seeks and judges” to the Father, saying such things: The one who seeks and judges is the avenger of me, the servant appointed for this, not bearing the sword in vain, the avenger of the king; this is Moses, according to what he had previously said to them: “In whom you have hoped.”
Then he adds that the one who judges and punishes is Moses, that is, the lawgiver himself.
And after this Heracleon is perplexed within himself, saying: How then does he not say that all judgment has been given to him? And thinking to resolve the objection, he says these things: He speaks correctly; for the judge, acting as a servant, carrying out the will of this one, judges, just as it is seen happening among men.
But how does he attribute the judgment to someone else as inferior to the Savior, as he considers the Creator, nor can he demonstrate it this way, clearly written that "For the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son"; and that "He has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man."
[John 8:51] Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.
Just as there is a sort of indifferent life, which is neither good nor evil, in which we say that both the impious and the irrational animals live; and another different, but good life, about which Paul says: "Our life is hidden with Christ in God"; and our Lord himself about himself: "I am the life," thus you would call the death opposite to the indifferent life indifferent; but the enemy of the one who says, "I am the life," you would call a certain evil and grievous death, in which the one who dies is in death; about which it is written: "The last enemy to be destroyed is death." And concerning this death, the apostle must surely mean these things: "Therefore, just as by one man sin entered into the world and by sin death, so also death passed upon all men, for which all sinned. For until the law, sin was in the world (for sin is not imputed when there is no law), but death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who did not sin in the likeness of Adam's transgression"; and soon after: "For if by one man's trespass death reigned through that one, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one, Jesus Christ." For what is the death that came into the world through sin, but the last enemy of Christ to be destroyed? And what is the death that passed unto all men, by which all sinned, but this very one which also reigned from Adam to Moses? But Moses, that is, the law, was until the manifestation of our Lord Jesus, and it reigned in one man's trespass through the one, until those who received the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one, Jesus Christ. Therefore, this death will not be seen forever by the one who keeps the word of the only-begotten and firstborn of all creation, as it naturally prevents death from being seen. In this way, therefore, one must understand the saying, "If anyone keeps my word, he will never see death," as if the one who said this, having granted light to those who hear, were saying to them: if anyone keeps this light of mine, he will never see darkness. For it is impossible for darkness to be to the one who keeps the light; but if one loses this light, it follows immediately that he sees the darkness who has lost it. So also, then, in the beginning with the Word, which was with God, life came into being. Hence the beginning (that is, the wisdom that says, “God created me as the beginning of his ways for his works”) regarding the Word in her, in which came into being the life, will teach and say: “If anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.” For one will keep the word and the life inseparable from it, which also is the light of men, shining in the darkness and the darkness not overcoming it. If, then, the prophet asks, as it were, “Who is the man who will live and not see death?” we answer, having learned from our Savior, and we say that the man who “will live and will not see death” is the one who keeps the word of the one who said, “If anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.” Together in the same place, I inquire whether “for eternity” ought to be taken generally, so that the whole should be such: if anyone keeps my word for eternity, he will never see death. For, indeed, it seems that one does not see death as long as he keeps the word of Jesus; for as soon as one loses it, he sees death.
If one also can go back to deeper words and understand how it might be said by a man, “You have brought me down to the dust of death,” and by Paul, “Who will deliver me from this body of death?” he will see in what way, as long as the word was kept, death was not seen by the one keeping it. But when one, being weary in attention and keeping the word, or having been careless in keeping it, no longer has kept it, then he saw death by none other than himself. And this must be considered a doctrine and an eternal law, always to be spoken to us who receive the word of “If anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.” Just as, if the darkness might be observed to flow over, it obliterates the sight of the one observing, so also, observed death kills and deadens the sight that saw it and blinds, as therefore needing the one who opens the eyes of the blind. And I think, indeed, because of this the blind, of whom the blind in the gospel were a symbol, have lost their sight, since not keeping the word, they saw death.
[John 8:52] The Jews said to him, "Now we know that you have a demon."
Many, even among the wise, think that every kind of sin, including sin in word, arises from evil judgments; but those who trust in the holy scriptures as divine believe that what is done by men contrary to reason is not without the influence of demons or some other opposing powers. So the Jews attributed the saying of Jesus, "Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he shall never see death," to the influence of a demon. They did not understand this because they neither kept his word nor understood its power. For Jesus, knowing of a certain kind of death as an enemy to his word, which sinners experience, said that this death would never be seen by anyone who kept his word. However, they, thinking he spoke of the physical death experienced by common people, believed that he was insane, considering that Abraham and the prophets had died, and so did not understand that anyone who keeps his word would never experience death in the eternal sense.
[John 8:52-53] Abraham died, and the prophets, and you say: "If anyone keeps my word, he will never taste death." Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died? And the prophets died; whom do you make yourself out to be?
If, according to the simpler interpretation, as we ourselves too have delivered, it seems clear the understanding of the Jews, answering the word of the Savior about Abraham and the prophets as having died, nevertheless, it does not permit the examination without comparison to other similar ones. For did they think without any reason that the Savior had said, "If anyone keeps my word, he will never see death," and for this reason replied clearly to his word? Or did they understand that he was not speaking about common death, and considering Abraham and the prophets, as also having once died the worse death, they did not accept his word nor thought him to be as great as he claimed to be, saying: "Now we know that you have a demon"? The same is examined in other statements of his and their responses in the above instances; as with the Samaritan woman, when Jesus said to her, "Give me a drink," and added other such words: "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, 'Give me a drink,' you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water." And the woman said to him, "Lord, you have no vessel, and the well is deep; where do you get that living water?" And again, "Lord, give me this water, so that I will not be thirsty or come here to draw." For it is not likely that the Samaritan woman would respond to him concerning perceptible water and ask him for physical water so as not to thirst anymore or come to draw from the perceptible well of Jacob. But also when the Lord said, "The bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh," when the Jews were disputing among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" we showed that the listeners would not be so foolish as to think that the speaker was inviting them to come and eat his flesh. And it is likely that the Jews, referring to the words being examined by us now, said, “Abraham died and the prophets,” having learned how “through one man sin entered the world, and through sin, death; and so death passed to all men, for all sinned,” and they saw that “death reigned over those who had sinned in the likeness of Adam’s transgression,” and the word was about how, because of sin, death passed to all men, since all have sinned. But having learned these things following, as they did not accept the words of Jesus, they did not know that “the gift is not like the transgression.” Neither could they reason that “if by the transgression of one many died, much more the grace of God and the gift in grace by the one man Jesus Christ abounded to many.” They also did not understand how the gift was not like the death resulting from one who sinned; because they had not yet learned that the gift came from many transgressions into justification. Nor did they see that “those who receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the one, Jesus Christ.” And they focused on the death of Abraham and the prophets, hearing that even Samuel, as being under the earth because of death, was brought up by the witch, thinking that there were gods somewhere under the earth and saying, “I have seen gods ascending from the earth”; but they did not grasp the life of Abraham and the prophets, nor that the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob was not the God of the dead but of the living. And assuming the prophets to be dead, they built their tombs, and thus were punished. Even if Abraham died, he lived and no longer saw death, since he rejoiced and was glad upon seeing Jesus’ day. I think this is why the Savior, in response to “Abraham died,” declared, teaching that Abraham lived, “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it and was glad.” But if anyone wishes not to accept this concerning Abraham, let them tell us whether he who saw the day of our Savior and rejoiced and was glad, still sees death, or if he who saw the Savior’s day and rejoiced and was glad, being deemed worthy of such a vision as worthy of it, later was deprived of what he had seen. For if either of these is absurd, having seen Jesus’ day, Abraham, upon seeing it, also heard His word and kept it and no longer sees death; and the Jews were not correctly saying that “Abraham died” as though he were still in death. Similarly, you will say the same about the prophets. For if God is not the God of the dead but of the living, and He is the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, so He is also the God of the rest of the prophets, and the prophets live. For they have kept the word of the Son of God, when the word of the Lord came to Hosea, or the word came to Jeremiah, or the word came to Isaiah; for no other word of God came to any of these, but the one who was in the beginning with God, His Son, God the Word. And this Word, if any other, the prophets have kept, and from whom they received the word, they no longer saw death. Likewise, it is false as the Jews said, "Now we know that you have a demon," when they said "Abraham died, and the prophets" because they did not recognize that the one who commanded demons had a demon (for no one recognizes what does not exist), nor were Abraham and the prophets still in death when the Jews said, "Abraham died, and the prophets." After these things, we seek why, when the Savior said about everyone who keeps His word that "he shall never see death forever," the Jews, after the discussions, ought properly to have said about "he shall never see death forever"; "And you say: If anyone keeps my word, he shall never see death forever"; but they did not say this, rather they said what was not said by the Savior; for He did not say, "If anyone keeps my word, he shall never taste death forever," which they bring forth as said by our Lord. Observe if it were not said with a difference between not seeing death and not tasting death by the rest of the evangelists about those standing near Jesus, until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom, by Matthew: "Truly I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom"; by Mark: "Truly I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death until they see the kingdom of God come with power"; and by Luke: "Truly there are some standing here who shall not taste death until they see the Son of Man in His glory." For just as in the body there are different sensations, taste and sight, so according to what is said by Solomon about divine sensations, there would be another seeing power and contemplation of the soul, and another tasting and perception of the quality of the intellectual foods. And since the Lord, on one hand, is the living bread from heaven and is tasted, being nourishment to the soul, and on the other hand, is wisdom and visible, whose beauty the lover confesses to be saying, "I became a lover of her beauty," and commands us saying, "Love her, and she will keep you," therefore in the Psalms it is said, "Taste and see that the Lord is good." Just as the Lord is tasted and seen, so also His enemy, death, is tasted and seen. And His tasting is demonstrated by the saying, "There are some standing here who will not taste death," and what follows; and His sight by the saying, "If anyone keeps My word, he will never see death forever." One tastes death, and not only tastes it but also bears it as food of death, who contradicts the words of eternal life. And there is a promise that some of those standing in the place shown by Jesus will not taste death; for note that the three sayings, "There are some standing here," or "There are some of those standing here," have been spoken of in connection with the statement, "They will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom," or "in His glory," or "until they see the kingdom of God coming with power." And since it is possible for the one standing to fall—it has been said, "Let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall"—therefore, it is written not concerning all who are standing but concerning some: "Amen, I say to you, there are some standing here." Therefore, someone standing does not taste death by maintaining their standing; and the one who receives and keeps the word will not see death. If indeed there is any difference between tasting death and seeing death, as the Jews, who were not wise listeners and confused the Lord's words, said, instead of "He will not see death," they said, "He will not taste death," falling upon the inferior sense of the word. You might inquire whether, just as there is seeing death and tasting death, so in the other senses there is either hearing death or smelling death or touching death; for if the hands of the apostles handled concerning the word of life, perhaps the hands of the false apostles and deceitful workers, transforming themselves into angels of righteousness, handle concerning the word of death; and if the sheep of Christ hear His voice, perhaps the sheep that are not His, to whom He might say, "You are not of My sheep," hear the voice of death. But see if the smell of death is not in the wounds from sin, about which it has been said: "My wounds stink and are corrupt," and the smell of death in Lazarus before he was raised from the dead, which the apostles did not desire to smell and said to the Savior, "Lord, by now he stinks, for he has been dead four days." Regarding the intellectual scent of death or the scent of life, the apostolic saying should be observed as follows: "We are the sweet aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and those who are perishing; to some, a scent from death to death, and to others, a scent from life to life." For those in Christ are a sweet aroma of Christ and in no way a stench in every place. But as physical fragrance is said to kill some animals, so also the fragrance of Christ, because of prior wickedness, could become for some a scent from death to death, but to others it results in life. These matters seemed relevant to our examination of tasting death and seeing or not seeing death. After these things, not seeing how much Christ surpasses the patriarchs and prophets, and not even believing that Christ, who teaches such great things, is greater, they question, saying: "Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died?" But they do not see that not only is he greater than Abraham but also greater than anyone born of women, being born of a virgin, and the greatest of all prophets, who was prophesied by them, and the one who gives life to the dead, not making himself such but receiving from the Father. "Just as the Father has life in himself, so also he has granted the Son to have life in himself," who can do nothing by himself and seeks not his own will but the will of the one who sent him. And the question, "Who do you make yourself out to be?" was voiced without understanding that Jesus did not make himself what he is. Therefore, it seems to me he replies to this by teaching who made him what he is, saying, "If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is the Father who glorifies me." And let this also be understood here, having received ample consideration in the twentieth volume of the commentary on the Gospel of John, so that by God's revelation to us we may contemplate the subsequent passages in what follows from Jesus' response, "If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing."