ACC ~ John 1 v29 - 34

OVERVIEW:

John the Evangelist spends more time on this portion of the Gospel narrative than does any other Evangelist. This second appearance of Jesus to John the Baptist is recorded by the Evangelist in order to establish that Jesus was not baptized because of his own sin but to take away the sin of the world (CHRYSOSTOM). Now that the Lamb, the spotless sacrifice whose way John was preparing, had arrived, John’s work was finished (CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA). The lamb, as opposed to a ram, sheep or any other kind of animal spoken of in the Old Testament sacrificial system, was an animal in its prime that was offered in the perpetual holocausts offered on behalf of the people (ORIGEN). It was the lamb spoken of in Isaiah (EUSEBIUS) who slays the lion of sin and death (BEDE). It brings to mind the ram caught in the thicket of thorns that was sacrificed in place of Isaac, complete with a crown of thorns (AUGUSTINE). He is the paschal lamb prefigured in the leading of his people out of the bondage of Egypt through the shedding of his own blood (MELITO), also prefigured in Abel’s acceptable sacrifice of the first lamb in Genesis (AMBROSE) and the lamb that takes the place of the scapegoat (ROMANUS). We see, then, how the Evangelist moves swiftly from the sublime and divinely exalted prologue to the humility of the suffering lamb who defeats sin with the gift of immortality (THEODORE).

John introduces the bride to the bridegroom as Christ is betrothed to his church through John’s baptism in keeping with the custom of the Old Testament concerning betrothals (EPHREM). The crowds came primarily to be baptized by John but in the process also hear his preaching about the one greater than he (CHRYSOSTOM). Indeed, John’s baptism did not endure past his own ministry, and Jesus’ submission to it was a servant’s example for fellow servants. John’s testimony speaks of the descent of the Spirit onto Jesus as a dove, although we should not think that Christ lacked the Spirit when it descended on him, since he had already received it in the womb (AUGUSTINE). It resided differently in Christ than in the disciples (GREGORY THE GREAT). Theodore believes that only John was granted this vision, just as the prophets of old, but that no one else saw the descent of the Spirit (THEODORE). Perhaps others also saw the Spirit’s descent, however, although they did not understand it or believe what they saw, as was also often the case with Jesus’ miracles. The purpose of the Spirit’s descent was to make Christ known (CHRYSOSTOM). The Holy Spirit appears as a dove because, just as a dove moans, so the Spirit groans in our hearts and causes us to groan as we seek its help under the burden of sin. Using the imagery of the ark, the dove symbolizes the peace and unity that the Spirit brings to the church, as opposed to the ravens who tear the church apart. We should not spiritualize or make the Spirit’s appearance only symbolic, since the Spirit’s appearance here, enfleshed in the body of a dove, was as real as our Lord’s incarnation (AUGUSTINE).

John the Baptist testifies that he did not know Jesus, which is supported by the fact that he was isolated in the wilderness and could not have collaborated with Jesus. In the wilderness, John had a prophetic vision of what later came to fruition in the descent of the Spirit on Jesus (THEODORE). John must have known Jesus somewhat, however, since he recognizes Jesus before he baptizes him, even though the unbelieving Jews did not (CHRYSOSTOM). He gains a fuller understanding, once the dove rests upon Jesus, that authority to baptize would rest in Christ alone. While the text does not explicitly say who sent John, ultimately both the Father and the Son sent him (AUGUSTINE). The one who sent him told him that the Spirit would remain on the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit. The Spirit, which had departed from humankind at the fall, is now restored through Christ in whose perfect nature the Spirit can abide (CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA) as it descends on the true Noah, the author of the second birth (CYRIL OF JERUSALEM). John testifies that this is no adopted son (CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA) who will baptize with the Holy Spirit, but rather the Son of God himself (AUGUSTINE).

1:29 | Behold, the Lamb of God

THE COMPLEMENTARY NARRATIVES OF JOHN AND MATTHEW

CHRYSOSTOM: The Evangelists distributed the periods among themselves. Matthew, having cut short his notice of the time before John the Baptist was bound, hurries to that which follows, while the Evangelist John not only does not cut short this period but dwells on it the most. Matthew, after the return of Jesus from the wilderness, says nothing about the intervening period as John does. He says nothing about what the Jews send and said. He skips over all of this and passes immediately to John’s imprisonment. “For,” he says, “Jesus having heard” that John was betrayed, “withdrew from there.” [1] But John does not [say this]. He is silent about the journey into the wilderness described by Matthew. Instead, he relates what followed the descent form the mountain, and after having gone through many circumstances, he then adds, “For John was not yet cast into prison.” [2] HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 17.1. [3]

[1] Mt 14:13.

[2] Jn 3:24.

[3] NPNF 1 14:58-59*.

THE SECOND APPEARANCE DISPELS ANY MISUNDERSTANDING

CHRYSOSTOM: Why does Jesus come to him now? Why does he come not merely once, but this second time also? Matthew says that his coming was necessary because of baptism since Jesus adds that he did this “to fulfill all righteousness.” [1] But John says that he came again after his baptism when he says, “I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it rested upon him.” Why then did he come to John, since he did not come casually but went expressly to him?… Since John had baptized him with many [others], he came so that no one might think that he had hurried to John for the same reason as the rest, that is, to confess his sins and wash in the river for repentance. He comes, in other words, to give John an opportunity of setting this opinion right again. For by saying, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world,” he removes the whole suspicion. For it is obvious that one pure enough to be able to wash away the sins of others does not come to confess sins but to give an opportunity to that marvelous herald to impress what he had said more definitely on those who had heard his former words. HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 17.1. [2]

[1] Mt 3:15.

[2] NPNF 1 14:59**.

JOHN’S PREPARATORY TASK

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA: No longer does John need to “prepare the way,” since the one for whom the preparation was being made is right there before his eyes…. But now he who of old was dimly pictured, the very Lamb, the spotless Sacrifice, is led to the slaughter for all, that he might drive away the sin of the world, that he might overturn the destroyer of the earth, that dying for all he might annihilate death, that he might undo the curse that is upon us…. For one Lamb died for all, [1] saving the whole flock on earth to God the Father, one for all, that he might subject all to God. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 2.1. [2]

[1] 2 Cor 5:14.

[2] LF 43:131-32**.

WHY A LAMB?

ORIGEN: There are five animals that are offered on the altar, three being land animals and two winged. [1] It seems worthwhile to me to ask why the Savior is said to be a “lamb” by John and none of the rest. But also, in the case of the land animals, since three types of animal are offered according to each species, why did he name the lamb from the species of sheep? Now these are the five animals: a young bull, a sheep, a goat, a turtledove, a pigeon.

And the three types of sheep are a ram, the ewe and the lamb…. It is the lamb, however, that we find offered in the perpetual sacrifices. [2] … What other perpetual sacrifice can be spiritual to a spiritual being than the Word in his prime, the Word symbolically called “lamb”?… But if we examine the declaration about Jesus, who is pointed out by John in the words “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world,” from the standpoint of the plan of salvation when the Son of God bodily lived among the human race, we will assume that the lamb is none other than his humanity. For he “was led as a sheep to the slaughter and was dumb as a lamb before its shearer,” [3] saying, “I was an innocent lamb being led to be sacrificed.” [4]

This is why in the Apocalypse, too, a little lamb is seen “standing as though slain.” [5] This lamb, indeed, which was slain according to certain secret reasons, has become the expiation of the whole world. [6] According to the Father’s love for humanity, he also submitted to slaughter on behalf of the world, purchasing us with his own blood from him who bought us when we had sold ourselves into sin. He, however, who led this lamb to the sacrifice was God in man, the great high priest, [7] who reveals this through the saying, “No one takes my life from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again.” COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 6.264-65, 268, 270, 273-75. [8]

[1] Lev 5:6-7, 18.

[2] HE WORD IN THE BEGINNING | JOHN 1:1

[3] Is 53:7.

[4] Jer 11:19.

[5] Rev 5:6.

[6] See Rev 5:9.

[7] See Heb 8:1. Origen is making a contrast here between Christ’s divine nature, which functioned as the high priest who made the offering, and his human nature, which was the lamb that was offered. See Origen Homilies on Genesis 8.9 (FC 71:149). Eusebius makes a similar point in his Proof of the Gospels 10, Intro (POG 2:190).

[8] FC 80:240-43**; SC 157:330-38.

SETTING THE SEAL ON THE PREDICTIONS

EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA: The sacrifice was the Christ of God, foretold in ancient times as coming to human beings, to be sacrificed like a sheep for the whole human race. As Isaiah the prophet says of him: “As a sheep he was led to slaughter, and as a lamb before her shearers he did not open his mouth.” [1] And he adds, “He bears our sins and is pained for us; yet we accounted him to be in trouble, and in suffering, and our sins, and he was made sick on account of our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed…. And the Lord has given him up for our iniquities…. For he himself did not sin, nor was guile found in his mouth.” [2] Jeremiah, another Hebrew prophet, speaks similarly in the person of Christ: “I was led as a lamb to the slaughter.” [3]

John the Baptist sets the seal on their predictions at the appearance of our Savior. For beholding him, and pointing him out to those present as the one foretold by the prophets, he cried, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.” PROOF OF THE GOSPELS 1.10.15-17. [4]

[1] Is 53:7.

[2] Is 53:4-9 LXX.

[3] Jer 11:19.

[4] POG 1:57*.

THE LAMB SLAYS THE LION

BEDE: [Jesus] gave his blood as the price for our salvation, and by undergoing death for a time he condemned the sovereignty of death forever. The Lamb that was innocent was killed. But by a wonderful and longed-for display [of his power] he efficaciously weakened the strength of the lion that had killed him. The Lamb that took away the sins of the world brought to naught the lion that had brought sins into the world. It was the Lamb that restored us by the offering of his flesh and blood, so that we would not perish. HOMILIES ON THE GOSPELS 2.7. [1]

[1] CS 111:66.

CHRIST BOTH LAMB AND RAM

AUGUSTINE: It was Christ that was represented by a ram, Christ by a lamb, Christ by a calf, Christ by a goat—everything was Christ. He was represented by the ram because it leads the flock. It was found in the thorns when our father Abraham was ordered to spare his son but not to depart without offering any sacrifice. Isaac was Christ, and the ram was Christ. Isaac carried the wood for sacrificing himself; Christ was burdened with his own cross. The ram was substituted for Isaac; but not of course Christ for Christ. But Christ was in both Isaac and the ram. The ram was caught by its horns in the thorn bush; ask the Jews what they crowned the Lord with that time. He is the lamb: “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world.” SERMON 19.3. [1]

THE PASCHAL LAMB WHO LEADS ISRAEL OUT OF BONDAGE

MELITO OF SARDIS:

The Scripture of the exodus of the Hebrews has been read,

and the words of the mystery have been declared;

how the sheep was sacrificed,

and how the people was saved,

and how Pharaoh was flogged by the mystery.

Therefore, well-beloved, understand,

how the mystery of the Pascha

is both new and old,

eternal and provisional,

perishable and imperishable,

mortal and immortal….

The sheep is perishable,

but the Lord,

not broken as a lamb but raised up as God,

is imperishable.

For though led to the slaughter like a sheep,

he was no sheep.

Though speechless as a lamb,

neither yet was he a lamb.

For there was once a type, but now the reality has appeared.

For instead of the lamb there was a son,

and instead of the sheep a man;

in the man was Christ encompassing all things….

For he was born a son,

and led as a lamb,

and slaughtered as a sheep,

and buried as a man,

and rose from the dead as God,

being God by his nature and a man.

He is all things….

He is son, in that he is begotten.

He is sheep, in that he suffers.

He is human, in that he is buried.

He is God, in that he is raised up.

This is Jesus the Christ,

to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen.

ON PASCHA 1-2, 4-10. [2]

[1] WSA 3 1:379-80.

[2] MOP 37-39.

ABEL’S SACRIFICE PREFIGURES CHRIST’S

AMBROSE: Abel knew how to divide when he offered a sacrifice from “the firstlings of his flock,” [1] teaching that the gifts of the earth, which had degenerated in the sinner, will not please God. But those in which the grace of the divine mystery shone forth will please him. And so he prophesied that we were to be redeemed from fault through the passion of the Lord, of whom it is written: “Here is the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.” Thus, too, he made an offering from the firstlings, that he might signify the firstborn. Therefore, he shows that God’s true sacrifice would be us, of whom the prophet says, “Bring to the Lord the offspring of rams.” [2] And worthily is he confirmed by the judgment of God. ON THE SACRAMENT OF THE INCARNATION OF OUR LORD 1.4. [3]

THE LAMB REPLACES THE SCAPEGOAT

ROMANUS MELODUS:

Now the garment of mourning is rent; we have put on the white robe [4]

Which the spirit has woven for us from the lamb’s fleece of our Lamb and our God;

Sin is taken away, and immortality is given us, [5] our restoration is clear.

The Forerunner has proclaimed it….

O, the message of the Baptist, and the mystery in it!

He calls the shepherd lamb, and not only a lamb, but one to free from mistakes.

He showed the lawless that the goat which they sent into the desert was ineffective. [6]

“Lo,” he said, “the lamb; there is no longer need of the goat; [7]

Put your hands on Him, [8]

All of you who confess your sins,

For He has come to take them away, those of the people, and of the whole world.

For lo, the One whom the Father has sent to us is the One who carries away evil,

Who appeared and illumined all things.”

KONTAKION ON THE EPIPHANY 6.12-13. [9]

[1] Gen 4:4.

[2] Ps 28:1 LXX.

[3] FC 44:220*.

[4] Baptismal rite.

[5] 1 Cor 15:53.

[6] Lev 16:8.

[7] Cf. Aaron in Lev 16:21.

[8] The Lamb.

[9] KRBM 1:63-64*.

JOHN MOVES FROM DIVINE PROLOGUE TO SUFFERING LAMB

THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA: As appears from the narrative of the Evangelist, John the Baptist said his previous words as if the Lord had come already and walked among crowds who still ignored him. Now, since he is coming to be baptized, he is described with the words “this is the Lamb of God.” Let us consider how Scripture likes to place words in the appropriate context of facts. By saying in this passage, “This is the one who takes away the sin of the world,” he did not say “the only begotten Son,” or the “Son of God” or “the one who is close to the father’s bosom,” which appear in what he said above. Although now it would have seemed right to express the greatness of his nature, in order to confirm the promise of the things he was going to give. But this is not what he said. Instead, he called him “lamb,” and with this name he signifies his passion. In fact, he was called lamb and sheep to signify his death when he washed away sin. Since the sin reigned in our mortality, and death was gaining strength in us because of sin, Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior came and remitted all these things to us. And after destroying death through his death, he also destroyed the sin rooted in our nature because of mortality. Through his promise he made us immortal, and he will render us so in reality when he defeats sin with the gift of immortality. COMMENTARY ON JOHN 1.1.29. [1]

[1] CSCO 4 3:41-42.

1:30-31 | John’s Baptism Makes Christ Known to Israel

BETROTHAL THROUGH BAPTISM

EPHREM THE SYRIAN: Eliezar sought Rebekah as a bride at a well of water. [1] Jacob sought Rachel at a well of water, [2] as Moses did so with Zipporah. [3] Thus, all of these were types of the Lord, who sought his church as a bride by the baptism at the Jordan River. [4] And just as Eliezar made Rebekah known to his master when he came to meet her in the field, so also John made our Savior known at the Jordan: “See, the Lamb of God, for he takes away the sin of the world.” COMMENTARY ON TATIAN’S DIATESSARON 3.17. [5]

[1] See Gen 24:1-67.

[2] See Gen 29:1-20.

[3] See Ex 2:16-21.

[4] See Eph 5:22-23.

[5] CB709 add:20.

WHY JESUS WAS BAPTIZED

CHRYSOSTOM: Jesus then did not need baptism, nor did that washing have any other object than to prepare for all others a way to faith in Christ. For [the Baptist] did not say, “that I might cleanse those who are baptized” or “that I might deliver them from their sins” but “that he should be made known to Israel.” And why, tell me, could he not have preached without baptism and still brought the multitudes to him? But this would not have made it any easier. For they would not have all run together like they did, if the preaching had been without baptism. They would not by the comparison have learned his superiority. The multitude came together not to hear his words, but for what? They came to be “baptized, confessing their sins.” But when they came, they were taught the matters pertaining to Christ and the difference of his baptism. Yet even this baptism of John was of greater dignity than the Jewish one, and therefore all ran to it; yet even so it was imperfect. HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 17.2. [1]

[1] NPNF 1 14:59** (italics added).

JOHN’S BAPTISM DID NOT ENDURE

AUGUSTINE: John received the ministry of baptism so that by the water of repentance he might prepare the way for the Lord, not being himself the Lord. But where the Lord was known, it was superfluous to prepare for him the way, for to those who knew him he himself became the way. Therefore the baptism of John did not last long, but [it lasted long enough] to show our Lord’s humility…. And did the Lord need to be baptized? I instantly reply to any one who asks this question: Was it needful for the Lord to be born? Was it needful for the Lord to be crucified? Was it needful for the Lord to die? Was it needful for the Lord to be buried? If he undertook for us so great a humiliation, might he not also receive baptism?…

When the Lord was baptized with the baptism of John, the baptism of John ceased. John was then cast into prison. Afterwards we do not find that anyone is baptized with that baptism…. But if John had baptized the Lord alone, some would have thought that the baptism of John was more holy than that of Christ, as if Christ alone had been found worthy to be baptized with the baptism of John, but the human race with that of Christ…. And thus the baptism of the servant would appear greater than the baptism of the Lord. Others were also baptized with the baptism of John, [however,] so that the baptism of John might not appear better than the baptism of Christ. But the Lord also was baptized so that, through the Lord receiving the baptism of the servant, other servants might not disdain to receive the baptism of the Lord. This then is why John was sent. TRACTATES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 4.12-14. [1]

[1] NPNF 1 7:29-30**.

1:32 | The Spirit Descending from Heaven like a Dove

NOT THE FIRST TIME CHRIST RECEIVED THE SPIRIT

AUGUSTINE: Christ was certainly not then anointed with the Holy Spirit when the Spirit as a dove descended upon him at his baptism. For here he condescends to prefigure his body, that is, his church, in which preeminently the baptized receive the Holy Spirit…. For it would be most absurd to believe that he received the Holy Spirit when he was near thirty years of age. For that was the age at which he was baptized by John. [1] But although he came to baptism without any sin at all, he did not come without the Holy Spirit. For it was written of his servant and forerunner John himself, “He shall be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb.” [2] If [John], though generated by his father, still received the Holy Spirit when formed in the womb, what must be understood and believed of the man Christ whose flesh had not a carnal but spiritual conception? ON THE TRINITY 15.26.46. [3]

[1] Lk 3:21-23.

[2] Lk 1:15.

[3] NPNF 1 3:224**.

SPIRIT REMAINS IN CHRIST DIFFERENTLY THAN IN DISCIPLES

GREGORY THE GREAT: It is written in the Gospel that the one on whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining on, this is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit. For the Spirit descends on all the faithful. But he only remains on the mediator—and does so in a special way. For he has never left the Son’s human nature even as he proceeds from his divine nature…. But when the voice of truth tells the disciples that this same Spirit, “will dwell with you and shall be in you,” how is this abiding of the Spirit declared by the voice of God supposed to be a peculiar sign of the mediator?… This will appear if we distinguish between the different gifts of the Spirit. There are some gifts which are necessary for attaining life and there are others through which holiness of life becomes evident for the good of others. Gentleness, humility, faith, hope and charity are all gifts that come from the Spirit and are gifts a person needs in order to attain life…. In the case of these gifts … the Holy Spirit always remains…. But with respect to those which have for their object, not our own salvation, but that of others, he does not always abide…. Instead, sometimes he withdraws and ceases to exhibit them so that people should be more humble in the possession of his gifts…. But the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, always had all the gifts of the Spirit without interruption. MORALS ON THE BOOK OF JOB 2.56.90-92. [1]

[1] LF 18:127-28**.

JOHN HAS A PROPHETIC VISION

THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA: Here it is evident that the Spirit descending like a dove on the baptized Lord was not seen by all those present, but by John only in a sort of spiritual vision. Similarly, the prophets amid many people were used to seeing those things that were invisible to all the others. It would have been useless to say that John testified and said, “I saw the Spirit,” if all those present had been participants in that vision as well. COMMENTARY ON JOHN 1.1.32. [1]

[1] CSCO 4 3:45-46.

WHY DIDN’T THE APPEARANCE OF THE SPIRIT CURB THEIR UNBELIEF?

CHRYSOSTOM: The Father sent forth his voice proclaiming the Son, the Holy Spirit came upon him as well, focusing the voice upon the head of Christ… in order that no one present might think that what was said of Christ was said of John…. But someone might ask: How was it that the Jews did not believe, if they saw the Spirit? Such sights, however, require the mental vision rather than the bodily. If those who saw Christ working miracles were so drunk with malice that they denied what their own eyes had seen, how could the appearance of the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove overcome their unbelief? Some say, however, that the sight was not visible to all, but only to John and those more disposed toward devotion. [1] But even if the descent of the Spirit, as a dove, was visible to the outward eye, it does not follow that because all saw it, all understood it. HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 17.3. [2]

[1] See Theodore above.

[2] NPNF 1 14:60-61**.

CHRIST DID NOT LACK THE HOLY SPIRIT

CHRYSOSTOM: To prevent any, however, from thinking that Christ really lacked the Holy Spirit in the way that we do, [the Baptist] corrects this notion also by informing us that the descent of the Holy Spirit took place only for the purpose of making Christ known. HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 17.2. [1]

[1] NPNF 1 14:59-60**.

THE HOLY SPIRIT ENFLESHED AS A DOVE

AUGUSTINE: We do not attribute only to Christ the possession of a real body and say that the Holy Spirit assumed a false appearance to people’s eyes. For the Holy Spirit could no more, in consistency with his nature, deceive people than could the Son of God. The almighty God, who made every creature out of nothing, could as easily form a real body of a dove, without the instrumentality of other doves, as he made a real body in the womb of the Virgin without the seed of the male. CHRISTIAN COMBAT 22.24. [1]

[1] CSEL 41:125.

THE SPIRIT MOANS IN US LIKE A DOVE. AUGUSTINE: Because we love you in Christ, love us in return in Christ; and let our love for one another [voice its] moaning to God, for moaning is itself a characteristic of the dove. If, then, moaning is characteristic of a dove, as we all know, but doves moan in love, hear what the apostle says, and do not wonder that the Holy Spirit wished to be shown in the form of a dove. He says, “For we know not what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with unspeakable groanings.” [1] Well now, my brothers, are we to say that the Spirit groans when he has perfect and eternal happiness with the Father and the Son? For the Holy Spirit is God, as the Son of God is God and the Father God…. Therefore the Holy Spirit does not moan in himself with himself in that Trinity, in that beatitude, in that eternity of his substance; but he moans in us because he makes us moan…. One who knows that he lives in the midst of affliction in this mortal life and that he is exiled from the Lord, [2] … moans well. It is the Spirit that has taught him to moan. He learned it from the dove. TRACTATES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 6.1.2-2.3. [3]

[1] Cf. Rom 8:26.

[2] Cf. 2 Cor 5:6.

[3] FC 78:129-30**.

THE SPIRIT OF PEACE IN THE CHURCH

AUGUSTINE: The Holy Spirit was made to appear visibly in two ways: as a dove, on our Lord at his baptism, and as a flame upon his disciples when they were gathered together…. The former shape denoted simplicity, the latter fervency…. The dove intimates that those who are sanctified by the Spirit should have no guile; the fire indicates that in that simplicity there should not be coldness. Nor let it disturb you that the tongues are divided, for tongues are diverse; therefore the appearance was that of cloven tongues…. Do not fear division; recognize unity in the dove….

It was appropriate then that the Holy Spirit should be manifested in this way descending on our Lord so that every one who had the Spirit might know that he ought to be simple as a dove and be in sincere peace with his brothers and sisters. The kisses of doves represent this peace…. Ravens kiss, but they also tear; but the nature of doves is innocent of tearing…. Ravens feed on the dead, but the dove eats nothing but the fruits of the earth. Its food is innocent….

That is why on this occasion the most holy Trinity appeared, the Father in the voice that said, “You are my beloved Son” and the Holy Spirit in the likeness of the dove. In that Trinity … the apostles were sent [to baptize], that is, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit…. What then could more appropriately represent the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of unity, than the dove? As he said himself to his reconciled church, “My dove is one.” [1] What could better express humility than the simplicity and moaning of a dove? TRACTATES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 6.3-5, 10. [2]

[1] Song 6:9 LXX.

[2] NPNF 1 7:40-41**. See also Ambrose On the Holy Spirit 1.8.93 concerning the unifying Spirit.

1:33 | I Myself Did Not Know Him

WHY JOHN LIVED IN THE WILDERNESS

THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA: He revealed why he lived in the wilderness. This certainly happened through a special providence of God, in order that he might not have any relationship with the Messiah. And John certainly would have had such a relationship if he had lived in town, since they were of the same age and they were related. The suspicion would have easily arisen that he had testified those words because of that previous relationship and because of their friendship and the fact that they were related. In order to remove this suspicion, John was segregated from adolescence onward and grew up in the wilderness. Therefore, with good reason he said, “I myself did not know him.” I had no familiarity or friendship with him, but I was sent to baptize with water for him so that I might reveal him whom I did not know. He clearly showed that he baptized so that all the Jews who came because of the baptism might have an occasion to hear his doctrine and to see him to whom he testified. COMMENTARY ON JOHN 1.1.33. [1]

[1] CSCO 4 3:44-45.

JOHN’S PROPHETIC VISION COMES TO FRUITION

THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA: He who sent me so that I might reveal before everybody that he had come—and therefore he gave me the power to baptize with water—predicted to me that the Spirit would descend on him. These words were said to the Baptist while he was in the wilderness, and immediately he who indeed did [preach and baptize] came. As the Lord then came to John, he immediately received the vision so that he might recognize the Lord. This is why he preached so publicly about his greatness. When he, while administering the baptism, saw in a spiritual vision the Spirit descending, as had been predicted to him, then he was sure that he was seeing the expected result of the prophecy. COMMENTARY ON JOHN 1.1.33. [1]

[1] CSCO 4 3:46.

WHO SENT JOHN, AND HOW WELL DID JOHN KNOW JESUS?

AUGUSTINE: Who then sent John? If we say the Father, we speak truly. If we say the Son, we speak truly. But to speak more plainly, we say both the Father and the Son sent him…. How, then, didn’t he know him by whom he is sent?… If, then, the Son sent you with the Father, how did you not know who sent you? The one who sent you said, “Upon whom you shall see the Spirit descending as a dove and abiding on him, the same is he that baptizes with the Holy Spirit.” Did John hear this so that he might know him whom he had not known, or so that he might more fully know him whom he had already known? If he had been entirely ignorant of him, he would not have said what he did to him when he came to the river to be baptized…. This would have implied that he didn’t know him, but that when the dove descended, he learned to know him…. It is made plain to us therefore that John after a manner knew and after a manner did not initially know the Lord. TRACTATES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 5.1-2. [1]

[1] NPNF 1 7:32**.

JOHN DID KNOW JESUS, BUT NOT FOR THAT LONG

CHRYSOSTOM: How then, if he did not know him before the descent of the Spirit, and if he then for the first time recognized him—how then did he forbid him before baptism, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and you come to me?” [1] Actually, this proved that he knew him very well. Yet he did not know him before, or at least for that long—and with good cause, for the amazing things that took place when he was a child, such as the visit of the magi, had happened long before when John himself was very young. And since a lot of time had elapsed in the interval, Jesus was naturally unknown to all. For had he been known, John would not have said, “I come baptizing so that he should be made known to Israel.” HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 17.2. [2]

[1] Mt 3:14.

[2] NPNF 1 14:60**.

JOHN LEARNS MORE ABOUT JESUS AFTER THE APPEARANCE OF THE DOVE. AUGUSTINE: But did he know Christ, or did he not know him? If he did not know him, then why, when Christ came to the river, did he say, “I need to be baptized by you”? In other words, he’s saying: I know who you are. If, then, he already knew him, assuredly he knew him when he saw the dove descending. It is evident that the dove did not descend upon the Lord until after he went up out of the water of baptism…. But if this is not the first time he recognizes him, because he already knew, then why did he say, “I didn’t know him”? TRACTATES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 4.15. [1]

[1] NPNF 1 7:30-31**.

JESUS RESERVES THE POWER OF BAPTISM TO HIMSELF

AUGUSTINE: It was not that he did not know him to be the Son of God, or did not know him to be the Lord, or did not know him to be the Christ, or did not, also, in fact, know that he himself would baptize with water and the Holy Spirit; for he knew this too. But that he would baptize in this way, namely, that he would keep for himself the power and would transfer it to no one of his ministers, this is what he learned in the dove. For through this power, which Christ kept for himself alone and transmitted to none of his ministers, although he deigned to baptize through his ministers, through this abides the unity of the Church which is signified in the dove, about which it is said, “One is my dove, the only one her mother has.” [1] TRACTATES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 6.6. [2]

[1] Song 6:9 (6:8 Vg). See J. Robert Wright, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, ACCS OT 9, 354-55 on this passage. The unity of the church, brought about by the Holy Spirit, was often depicted by a dove; thus the connection here Augustine identifies between the dove, the Spirit and the church.

[2] FC 78:134.

CHRIST RECEIVES THE SPIRIT SO WE CAN RECEIVE THE SPIRIT

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA: The divine Scripture testifies that human beings were made in the image and likeness of God who is over all. [1] … For the Spirit at once began to put life into what he had formed and to impress his own divine image on it there. [2] … Subsequently, however, the likeness to God was defaced through the inroad of sin and the impress was no longer bright as it was. It had grown fainter and darkened because of sin. And when sin became so great… that human nature was stripped of its ancient grace, the Spirit departed altogether. Then this creature endowed with reason fell into the most extreme kind of foolishness, ignorant even of its Creator. But then the maker of all, after enduring a lengthy amount of time, finally pities the corrupted world. Because he is good, he hurried to gather together his runaway flock upon earth in order to bring it to those who dwell above. He agreed to transform [3] human nature anew to its pristine image through the Spirit. For in no other way was it possible for the divine impress to again shine forth in men and women as it once had. Let us now look at this plan and how he implanted in us the inviolate grace. Let us see how the Spirit again took root in humanity and in what way nature was reformed into its prior condition….

Since the first Adam did not preserve the grace given him by God, God the Father intended to send us from heaven the second Adam. For he sends in our likeness his own Son who is by nature without variableness or change, and who in no way knew any sins. [4] He did this so that even as through the disobedience of the first Adam we became subject to divine wrath, so through the obedience of the Second Adam, we might both escape the curse, and its evils might come to nothing. [5] But when the Word of God became man, he received the Spirit from the Father as one of us. He did not receive anything for himself individually since he himself was the Giver of the Spirit. And so, he who knew no sin might, by receiving it as man, preserve it for our nature, and might again in-root in us the grace which had left us. This is the reason I think it was that the holy Baptist profitably added, “I saw the Spirit descending from heaven, and it rested upon him.” For it had fled from us because of sin, but he who knew no sin became as one of us so that the Spirit might be accustomed to abide in us, having no occasion of departure or withdrawal in him. Therefore through himself he receives the Spirit for us, and renews to our nature, the ancient good. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 2.1. [6]

[1] Gen 1:27.

[2] Gen 2:7.

[3] Or “transelement.”

[4] 2 Cor 5:21.

[5] Rom 5:19.

[6] LF 43:141-43**.

THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE DOVE OF NOAH

CYRIL OF JERUSALEM: This Holy Spirit came down when the Lord was baptized so that the dignity of him who was baptized might not be hidden…. The heavens too were opened because of the dignity of him who descended. For see, he says, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and lighting upon him. [1] The Spirit descended voluntarily. For it was appropriate, as some have interpreted, that the primacy and firstfruits of the Holy Spirit promised to the baptized should be conferred upon the humanity of the Savior first since the Spirit is the giver of such grace. But perhaps he came down in the form of a dove, as some say, to exhibit a figure of that dove who is pure and innocent and undefiled—who also helps the prayers of the children she has begotten and who brings forgiveness of sins. It was emblematically foretold that Christ should be made known in this way in the appearance of his eyes. For in the Song of Songs she cries concerning the Bridegroom, and says, “Your eyes are as doves by the rivers of water.” [2]

The dove of Noah, according to some, was in part a figure of this dove. [3] In the time of Noah, salvation came to them by means of wood and water along with the beginning of a whole new generation. And, the dove returned to him towards evening with an olive branch. Just as this happened, they say, so the Holy Spirit also descended upon the true Noah, the author of the second birth, who draws together into one the wills of all nations. The various dispositions of the animals in the ark were in fact a figure of him too—him at whose coming the spiritual wolves feed with the lambs, in whose church the calf, and the lion, and the ox, feed in the same pasture, as we behold to this day the rulers of the world guided and taught by churchmen. The spiritual dove therefore, as some interpret, came down at the season of his baptism so that he might show that it is he who by the wood of the cross saves those who believe, he who when evening comes grants salvation through his death. CATECHETICAL LECTURES 17.9-10. [4]

[1] Mt 3:16.

[2] Song 5:12.

[3] Tertullian On Baptism 8:“Just as after the waters of the deluge, by which the old iniquity was purged—after the baptism, so to say, of the world—a dove was the herald which announced to the earth the assuagement of celestial wrath … so to our flesh, as it emerges from the font after its old sins, flies the dove of the Holy Spirit, bringing us the peace of God, sent out from heaven where the church is, the typified ark” (ANF 3:673). Compare also Hippolytus The Holy Theophany, §§ 8, 9, a treatise with which Cyril has much in common.

[4] NPNF 2 7:126*.

1:34 | John Saw and Witnessed to the Son of God

JOHN UNDERSTOOD AND TESTIFIED TO JESUS’ DIVINITY

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA: A confident witness is one who not only sees but actually speaks about what he has seen. [John] surely was not ignorant of what was written, “Tell what your eyes have seen.” [1] “I saw” then, he says, the sign, and I understood what was signified by it. I bear witness “that this is the Son of God,” who was proclaimed by the law through Moses and heralded by the voice of the holy prophets. The blessed Evangelist seems to me again to say with supreme confidence, “This is the Son of God,” that is, the one and only one who is by nature the unique [2] heir of the Father to whom we too, sons by adoption, are conformed and through whom we are called by grace to the dignity of sonship. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 2.1. [3]

[1] Prov 25:7 LXX.

[2] Gk idiōtēs.

[3] LF 43:147**.

IT IS THE ONLY SON WHO BAPTIZES

AUGUSTINE: “John testified… that he was the Son of God.” Therefore, it was necessary that he [Jesus] baptize, who was the only Son of God, not an adopted [son]. The adopted sons are the ministers of the only Son. The only Son has power, the adopted sons have the ministry. TRACTATES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 7.4. [1]

[1] FC 78:157.