Беседа 40

John 5:31–32. If I testify about Myself, then My testimony is not true. There is another who testifies of Me; and I know that the testimony with which he testifies about Me is true. 1. A simple and satisfactory explanation of a text that at first seemed difficult. – 2. The testimony of John in favor of Jesus Christ and the testimony of the work of Jesus Christ. – 3. Testimony of God the Father. – We must fight heretics with the help of Holy Scripture. Covetousness is the root of all evil. – You cannot serve two masters – God and mammon. - How to give alms. – The severity of the future judgment on those who were inhumane and cruel to the poor. 1. If someone who is not knowledgeable begins to dig earth that contains metals, he will not extract gold, but only, having mixed everything indiscriminately, will incur useless labor, and even to his own detriment. So those who do not know the order of thoughts in the Divine Scripture, those who do not delve into its features and laws, and those who run carelessly and indifferently, mixing gold with earth, will never find the treasure hidden in it. I say this now because the upcoming passage (of Scripture) contains a lot of gold, but it is unnoticeable, and is covered from the outside by great obscurity. Therefore, it is necessary to excavate and clear this place in order to reach its true meaning. Who will not be embarrassed the first time, hearing the words of Christ: “If I testify about Myself, then My testimony is not true”? We see that He testified to Himself many times; So, talking with the Samaritan woman, He said: “It is I who speak to you” (John 4:26); and he also said to the blind man: “He speaks to you” (John 9:37); and he denounced the Jews: “You say, You are blaspheming, because I said, I am the Son of God” (John 10:36); and in many other places He does so. If all this is not true, then what hope of salvation remains for us? Where will we find the truth if the Truth itself says: “My testimony is not true”? And it is not only this contradiction that appears here, but also another no less. He says further: “If I testify of Myself, My testimony is true” (John 8:14). What do you say we should accept? Which of these two sayings is considered untrue? If we accept these words simply as they are spoken, without paying attention to the face, or the reason, or anything else, then both will be false. If His testimony is not true in general, then these very words are not true - not only the last, but also the first. What do these sayings mean? We need a lot of attentiveness, or better yet, the grace of God, so as not to stop at just words; This is why heretics are mistaken because they pay no attention either to the purpose of the speaker or to the characteristics of the listeners. So, if we do not delve into this, as well as other circumstances, such as time, place, spirit of the listener, then many absurdities can happen. What do the words of Christ mean? The Jews intended to object to Him: “You testify about Yourself, Your testimony is not true” (John 8:13); and He, warning them, said this, as if saying: Of course you will tell Me: we do not believe You because among people no one who testifies about himself ever deserves faith. Therefore, the expression: “My testimony is not true” must be understood not simply, but adaptively to the concept of the Jews, that is: for you it is not true. Thus, He spoke these words not contrary to His dignity, but in accordance with their opinion. So, when He said: “My testimony is not true,” this exposes their thoughts and their deliberate objection to Him; and when he says: “If I testify about Myself, My testimony is true,” this shows the very essence of the matter, i.e., that He, as God, should be considered worthy of faith even when He speaks about Himself. Before this, He spoke about the resurrection of the dead and judgment - that whoever believes in Him is not subject to judgment, but will pass into the stomach, that He will one day sit in judgment to demand an account from everyone, and that He has the same authority and power with the Father; now, intending to confirm all this again and in another way, He, of necessity, first exposes their objection. I said, he says, that “just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so the Son gives life to whomever He will” (John 5:21); I said that “The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son” (John 5:22); said: “So that everyone honors the Son as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father either” (John 5:23); said that “he who hears My word and believes... has passed from death to life” (John 5:24); I said that “the voice of the Son of God” (John 5:25) will raise the dead, some now, and others at a later time; He said that I will demand an account of sins from everyone, that I will judge righteously and reward those who do good. Since all this has been expressed, and all this is very important, but clear evidence has not yet been given to the Jews, but was only said in secret, then He, intending to hasten to explain what was said, presents their objection in advance, and speaks as it were, although not in those exact words: perhaps you will say: You are saying all this; but You are a witness who does not deserve faith when you testify about yourself. Thus, from the first time He defeats their arrogance, exposing what they intended to say, and thereby showing that He knows their secret thoughts; and having through this the first proof of His power, He, after the objection, presents other clear and indisputable evidence, namely, He brings three witnesses to the truth of His words: the works He accomplished, the testimony of the Father and the preaching of John. At the same time, he puts forward something less, namely the testimony of John. Having said: “There is another who testifies about Me; and I know that this testimony is true” (John 5:32), adding: “you sent to John, and he testified to the truth” (John 5:33). But if the testimony is not true, how do you say that John’s testimony is true, and that He testified to the truth? Do you see how it becomes clear from here that the words: “My testimony is not true” were said in an adaptation to the thoughts of the Jews? 2. But what if John testified this way to please Christ, you say? So that the Jews do not say this, look how Christ eliminates such suspicion; he doesn’t just say: John testified about Me, but noted in advance: “you sent to John”; and you, of course, would not have sent it if you had not considered his testimony reliable. And what is even more important, they sent him to ask him not about Christ, but about himself (John 1:19); so, if they considered him worthy of faith in his testimony about himself, much less about another. We are all human beings, accustomed not so much to believing those who speak about ourselves, but rather those who speak about others. And John was recognized as so worthy of faith that even regarding himself he had no need for outside testimony. Thus, the messengers did not ask: what do you say about Christ? - but only: “Who are you” (John 1:19)? What do you say about yourself? They had such great reverence for this husband. Christ pointed to all this when he said: “you sent to John.” That is why the Evangelist not only said that they sent, but also noted with precision about those sent that they were priests and Pharisees, and not ordinary people, not outcasts and not those who could be carried away and deceived, but who were able to accurately understand what John said. “However, I do not receive testimony from man” (John 5:34). Why did You bring the testimony of John? Because it was not human evidence either; John said: “He who sent me to baptize in water told me” (John 1:33). Thus, John’s testimony was the testimony of God, because by God’s inspiration he said what he said. But so that they do not say: how is it known that John spoke at the inspiration of God, and so that they do not contradict this, Christ decisively stops their lips, again directing His conversation against their thoughts. Many probably did not know this, but listened to John as if he were speaking from himself. Therefore Christ says: “I do not receive testimony from man.” But if You do not intend to accept testimony from man and build on it, then why do you bring the testimony of John? So that they do not say this, listen to how He refutes such an objection by adding subsequent words, saying: “I do not receive testimony from man,” He adds: “but I say this so that you may be saved,” that is: I, as God, would not need human testimony; but since you listen to him more, consider him more reliable than all the others, and flock to him as to a prophet (and the whole city flocked to the Jordan), but you do not believe in Me even when I work miracles, that is why I remind you of his testimony. “He was a lamp, burning and shining; but you wanted to rejoice in its light for a little while” (John 5:35). So that they do not say: well, although John spoke, we did not accept his testimony, He shows that they accepted what was said, and that is why they did not send ordinary people, but priests and Pharisees. So they respected this husband and did not dare to contradict his words then. But with the expression: “a little time,” He shows their frivolity in how quickly they departed from John. “I have a greater testimony than John” (John 5:36). If you wanted to accept faith as you should, then I would lead you to it best of all by My works; but since you do not want this, I am sending you to John, not because I need his testimony, but I am doing everything so that you can be saved. “I have a testimony greater than John,” namely, the testimony of My works; but I don’t just mean to be accepted by you according to the testimony of people known to you and respected by you. Thus, with the words: “you wanted to rejoice in his light for a little while,” reproaching them for showing zeal for John, only temporary and unsteady, He calls him “a lamp” and thereby shows that John had light not from himself, but from the grace of the Spirit. However, in contrast to this light, Christ does not yet express that He himself is the sun of truth; but only hints at this, and thereby greatly amazes them, and makes them see that they could not believe in Christ due to the same properties of the heart by which they neglected John. And they respected the person they respected only “for a short time”; and if they had done wrong, he would soon have brought them to Jesus. So, having proven that in every respect they do not deserve any excuse, He adds: “I have a testimony greater than John.” Which one? Evidence from cases. “For the works,” he says, “which the Father has given Me to do, these very works that I have done, testify of Me that the Father has sent Me” (John 5:36). Here He reminds them of the paralytic, of the withered man who was healed, and of many others. About John’s testimony, perhaps one of them would say that it was exaggerated and said out of friendliness, although, however, they could not say this about John, a man full of strict philosophy and so much respected by them themselves; but even the most insane could not have such a suspicion about the works of Christ. Therefore, Christ brought this second testimony, saying: “The works that the Father gave Me to do, these very works that I have done, testify of Me that the Father has sent Me.” Here He also refutes the accusation of violating the Sabbath. They said: How can one be of God who does not keep the Sabbath? To this He said: “which the Father gave Me.” Although He acted according to His own authority, yet, wanting to fully demonstrate that He was not doing anything contrary to the Father, He used the most humble expression. 3. But why did He not say: the works which the Father has given Me to do testify that I am equal with the Father? After all, both could be seen from His works - and that He does nothing contrary, and that He is equal to Him who begat Him, just as in another place, affirming this, He said: “When you do not believe Me, believe My works, so that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me and I in Him” (John 10:38). Both his deeds testified about Him - that He was equal to the Father, and that He did nothing contrary to Him. Why didn’t He say that, but, leaving the most important thing, said only the above words? Because this was the question in the first place. Although to assure that He came from God meant much less than to assure that He is God, equal to the Father (since the former and the prophets spoke, but could not say the latter), nevertheless, He carefully affirms the lesser, knowing that when the lesser is accepted, then the greater will be easily accepted. That is why, without mentioning the higher evidence at all, He gives the lesser, so that through the latter they would also receive the first. Having done this, He continues: “And the Father who sent Me has Himself testified of Me” (John 5:37). Where did the Father testify about Him? On the Jordan, when he said: “This is My Beloved Son; Listen to Him” (Matthew 17:5). But this evidence still required explanation. John's testimony was clear to them, because they themselves sent to him, and could not refuse it; The evidence of miracles was also obvious: they saw the miracles performed by Christ, heard about them from those healed and believed, and therefore they accused Christ. It remained, finally, to prove the truth of the testimony from the Father. So, intending to explain this, He adds: “You have never heard His voice” (John 5:37). But how does Moses say: “Moses spoke, and God answered him with a voice” (Ex. 19:19)? How did David: “hear the sound of a tongue which he did not know” (Ps. 81:6)? And as Moses says again: “Have any people heard the voice of God” (Deut. 4:33)? “They did not see His face” (John 5:37). However, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, and many others, are said to have seen God. What do the words of Christ mean? He raises them to a wise teaching, showing little by little that God has neither a voice nor a form, but that He is above such images and sounds. Just as with the words: “they have not heard His voice,” He does not express that God makes a voice, but not an audible one, so with the words: “They have not seen His face,” he expresses not that God has a face, only invisible, but that there is nothing like that in God. Precisely, so that the Jews would not say: in vain do You boast, God spoke to Moses alone (as they actually said: “We know that God spoke to Moses; but we do not know where He comes from” (John 9:29)), so He said so, showing them that God has neither a human voice nor appearance. But what am I saying, He continues: You have not only never heard His voice or seen His sight, but also what you boast most about and in which you are all confident, that you accept and keep His commandments, - and this you cannot say about yourself. This is what He gave them to understand, adding: “And you do not have His word abiding in you” (John 5:38), i.e., commandments, commandments, law, prophets. Although God gave these commandments, you do not have them, because you do not believe Me. If the Scriptures teach here and there that you must believe Me, but you do not believe, it is clear that His word does not abide in you. Thus, He further adds: “because you do not believe Him whom He sent” (John 5:38). Then, so that they do not say: how did God testify about You when we did not hear His voice? - says: “search the Scriptures, for... they testify of Me” (John 5:39), and this shows that the Father testified through the Scriptures. He testified both on the Jordan and on the mountain; however, Christ does not point to this voice. It may happen that they would not have believed it, because in one case they did not hear the voice, precisely on the mountain, and in the other, they heard it, but did not pay attention. Therefore, Christ refers them to the Scriptures, showing that in them there is the testimony of the Father. But first He destroys their old self-conceit, as if they had seen God or heard His voice. Since it could be expected that they would not believe His words about the voice of the Father, imagining what happened on Mount Sinai, Christ, having first corrected their thoughts about this subject, showing that everything was done out of condescension, then refers them to the testimony of the Scriptures. 4. Let us also, in our competition and struggle with heretics, borrow for ourselves reinforcement from the Scriptures. “All Scripture,” says the apostle, “is inspired by God and useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16-17) - and not so that he has one thing and does not have another: such a one is not yet perfect. For example, what is the benefit, tell me, if someone prays diligently but does not give alms generously? Or does he generously give alms, but is covetous and oppresses others, or does he give only for show to people and for the sake of praise from the viewer? Or, although he gives alms with full zeal and to please God, does he thereby exalt himself and become arrogant about himself? Or does he humble himself and observe fasts, but at the same time he is money-loving, covetous and, being tied to the earth, introduces the mother of all evils into his soul? After all, the root of all evil is the love of money. Let us fear it, let us flee this sin. The love of money outraged the whole universe; everything was in disarray; it removes us from the most blessed service of Christ: “you cannot,” it is said, “serve God and mammon” (Matthew 6:24), because mammon demands something completely contrary to Christ. Christ says: give to those in need, and mammon: take away from those in need; Christ says: forgive those who plot against you and those who offend you, but Mammon, on the contrary: build intrigues against people who do not offend you at all; Christ says: be philanthropic and meek, but mammon is the opposite: be cruel and inhuman, count the tears of the poor for nothing - and thus on the day of judgment he will make the Judge terrible for us. Then all our deeds will appear before our eyes: those offended and naked by us will deprive us of all justification. If Lazarus, who was not at all offended by the rich man, but only did not receive help from him, became his strict accuser, and did not allow the rich man to receive any leniency (Luke 16:20-25), then tell me, what justification will those have who not only do not give alms from their property, but also appropriate the property of others and ruin the homes of orphans? If those who did not feed the hungry Christ brought such a great fire onto their head, then those who steal other people’s property, wage countless lawsuits, unjustly appropriate property from everyone, what kind of consolation will they receive? So, let’s get rid of this passion from ourselves, and we’ll get rid of it if we think about those who before us did injustice to others, extorted and died. Do not others take advantage of their wealth and labors, while they themselves are subject to execution, torment and unbearable suffering? Isn’t it extreme madness to work and care in order to be exhausted from labor during life, and to endure unbearable punishments and torments in death, when one should enjoy prosperity here too (and nothing gives so much pleasure as alms with a clear conscience), and after retiring to another life, get rid of all evils there and achieve countless benefits. Just as vice here, even before Gehenna, usually torments those devoted to it, so virtue, even before the kingdom, here brings pleasure to those who strive in it, delighting their life with pleasant hopes and constant pleasure. So, in order for us to receive this pleasure both here and in the future life, let us turn to good deeds; in this way we will also be worthy of future crowns, which we will all be worthy of through the grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom and with whom to the Father, with the Holy Spirit, be glory now and ever, and to the ages of ages. Amen. The paragraphs in the text were arranged by us – Editorial staff of “ABC of Faith” You might be interested in: