John 7:28

(Tr. xxxi. s. 2) This notion did not arise without foundation. We find indeed that the Scriptures said of Christ, He shall be called a Nazarene, (Matt. 2:23) and thus predicted whence He would come. And the Jews again told Herod, when he enquired, that Christ would be born in Bethlehem of Judah, and adduced the testimony of the Prophet. How then did this notion of the Jews arise, that, when Christ came, no one would know whence He was? From this reason, viz. that the Scriptures asserted both. As man, they foretold whence Christ would be; as God, He was hid from the profane, but revealed Himself to the godly. This notion they had taken from Isaiah, Who shall declare His generation? (Isa. 53) Our Lord replies, that they both knew Him, and knew Him not: Then cried Jesus in the temple as He taught, saying, Ye both know Me, and know whence I am: that is to say, Ye both know whence I am, and do not know whence I am: ye know whence I am, that I am Jesus of Nazareth, whose parents ye know. The birth from the Virgin was the only part of the matter unknown to them: with this exception, they knew all that pertained to Jesus as man. So He well says, Ye both know Me, and know whence I am: i. e. according to the flesh, and the likeness of man. But in respect of His divinity, He says, I am not come of Myself, but He that sent Me is true.

Hear, therefore, the word of the Lord, brethren; see how He confirmed to them both what they said, "We know this man whence he is," and also what they said, "When Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence He is. Then cried Christ in the temple, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but He that sent me is true, whom ye know not." That is to say, ye both know me, and ye know me not; ye both know whence I am, and ye know not whence I am. Ye know whence I am: Jesus of Nazareth, whose parents also ye knew. For in this case, the birth of the Virgin alone was hidden, to whom, however, her husband was witness; for the same was able faithfully to declare this, who was also able as a husband to be jealous. Therefore, this birth of the Virgin excepted, they knew all that in Jesus pertains to man: His face was known, His country was known, His family was known; where He was born was to be known by inquiry. Rightly then did He say, "Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am," according to the flesh and form of man which He bore; but according to His divinity, "And I am not come of myself, but He that sent me is true, whom ye know not;" but yet that ye may know Him, believe on Him whom He has sent, and ye will know Him. For, "No man has seen God at any time, except the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him:" and, "None knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal Him."

And in like manner the Son Himself teaches us, in words of His own, that He was truly born and truly came;—Ye neither know Me, nor know ye whence I am, for I am not come of Myself, but He that sent Me is true, Whom ye know not, but I know Him, for I am from Him, and He hath sent Me. No man knows the Father; the Son often assures us of this. The reason why He says that none knows Him but Himself, is that He is from the Father. Is it, I ask, as the result of an act of creation, or of a genuine birth, that He is from Him? If it be an act of creation, then all created things are from God. How then is it that none of them know the Father, when the Son says that the reason why He has this knowledge is that He is from Him? If He be created, not born, we shall observe in Him a resemblance to other beings who are from God. Since all, on this supposition, are from God, why is He not as ignorant of the Father as are the others? But if this knowledge of the Father be peculiar to Him, Who is from the Father, must not this circumstance also, that He is from the Father, be peculiar to Him? That is, must He not be the true Son born from the nature of God? For the reason why He alone knows God is that He alone is from God. You observe, then, a knowledge, which is peculiar to Himself, resulting from a birth which also is peculiar to Himself. You recognise that it is not by an act of creative power, but through a true birth, that He is from the Father; and that this is why He alone knows the Father, Who is unknown to all other beings which are from Him.

(de Trin. ult. med.) Every man, ever born in the flesh, is in a certain sense from God. How then could He say that they were ignorant who He was, and whence He wasa? Because our Lord is here referring to His own peculiar birth from God, which they were ignorant of, because they did not know that He was the Son of God. His very saying then that they did not know whence He was, was telling them whence He was. If they did not know whence He was, He could not be from nothing; for then there would be no whence to be ignorant of. He must therefore be from God. And then not knowing whence He is, was the reason that they did not know who He is. He does not know the Son who does not know His birth from the Father.

"Ye both know Me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of Myself, but He that sent Me is true, whom ye know not." And again, "If ye had known Me, ye should have known My Father also." How then saith He, that they both "know Him," and "whence He is," and then, "that they neither know Him, nor the Father"? He doth not contradict, (away with the thought,) but is very consistent with Himself. For He speaketh of a different kind of knowledge, when He saith, "ye know not"; as when He saith, "The sons of Eli were wicked sons, they knew not the Lord"; and again, "Israel doth not know Me." So also Paul saith, "They profess that they know God, but in works they deny Him." It is therefore possible, "knowing," "not to know." This then is what He saith: "If ye know Me, ye know that I am the Son of God." For the "whence I am" doth not here denote place. As is clear from what followeth, "I am not come of Myself, but He that sent Me is true, whom ye know not," referring here to the ignorance shown by their works.