John 14:8Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

"Have I been with you so long," He says, "and yet you have not known Me, Philip?" What then? Are You the Father whom I seek? No, He says.

For this reason He did not say, "You have not known Him," but, "You have not known Me." By this He shows precisely that the Son is not something other than the Father, though He remains Son.

What led Philip to say this? Christ had said, "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also" (Jn 14:7), as He had often said this to the Jews.

Peter had already questioned Him often, and the Jews had asked, "Who is the Father?" Thomas also had asked, and still no one had learned anything clear. Everything remained unknown.

Therefore Philip, so as not to appear troublesome and burdensome to Him like the Jews, said, "Show us Your Father," and added, "and it is enough for us." That is, we have nothing more to ask.

Christ had said, "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also," and through Himself He showed the Father. But Philip changes this order and says, "Show us the Father."

He speaks as though he had already known Christ Himself exactly. But Christ does not satisfy his desire. He sets him on the way and persuades him to know the Father through Himself.

Philip wished to see the Father with these bodily eyes, perhaps because he had heard that the prophets saw God. But that, Philip, was said in accommodation to our weakness.

Therefore Christ said, "No one has ever seen God" (Jn 1:18). Again He said, "Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me" (Jn 6:45).

Again, "You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His form" (Jn 5:37). In the Old Testament it is said, "Man shall not see My face and live" (Ex 33:20).

What then does Christ do? He rebukes him strongly: "So long a time I have been with you, and you do not know Me, Philip." He did not say, "You have not seen Me," but "You do not know Me."

Philip might have said, "I do not wish to know You. I now desire to see Your Father, and You say to me, 'You do not know Me'?" What connection is there here?

A very close one. Since, while remaining Son, He is the same as the Father, He rightly shows the Father in Himself. Then He distinguishes the hypostases by saying, "He who has seen Me has seen the Father."

He does this so that no one may say that He is both Father and Son. If He were the Father, He would not have said, "He who has seen Me has seen Him."

Why did He not say to Philip, "You ask what is impossible, what is unsuitable to human nature, what is possible to Me alone"?

Because Philip said, "It is enough for us," as though he already knew Christ, Christ shows that he had not seen Him either. Otherwise, if he could see Him, he would also see the Father.

Therefore He said, "He who has seen Me has seen the Father." Whoever has seen Me will see Him also. This means that it is impossible to see either Me or Him in this manner.

Philip wished to know by sight. Since he thought he had already seen Christ and wished to see the Father in the same way, Christ shows that he had not seen Him either.

If anyone understands seeing as knowledge, I will not oppose him. For Christ says, "Whoever has known Me has known the Father." But He did not say it in that way.

Wishing to present the consubstantiality, He said, "Whoever has known My essence knows the essence of the Father." How can this be, you say? Does not one who knows a creature already know God?

No. All know and see creatures, but not all know God. Consider what Philip wants to see. Does he want to see the wisdom of the Father, or His goodness?

No. He wants to see what God is, the very essence. To this Christ answers, "He who has seen Me." Whoever sees a creature does not yet see the essence of God.

"If anyone has seen Me," Christ says, "he has seen My Father also." If He were of another essence, He would not have said this.

I will use a simpler expression. If someone does not know gold, he cannot see the essence of gold in silver, since the nature of one is not manifested through the nature of the other.

Therefore Christ rightly rebuked Philip, saying, "So long a time I have been with you." You enjoyed My teaching for so long. You saw miracles performed with authority.

You saw what belongs to the Godhead and what the Father alone does: the forgiveness of sins, the disclosure of hidden mysteries, the expulsion of death, and creation from earth. "And you do not know Me?"

Because He was clothed in flesh, He said, "You do not know Me." If you have seen the Father, do not seek to see anything more, because in Him you have seen Me also.

If you have seen Me, do not inquire about anything further, because in Me you have known Him also.

It was also not very sensible, when the Image and exact impress of God the Father stood before him, to try to go to the Archetype Himself, as though He were not yet present and not properly expressed.

For the contemplation of Christ is wholly sufficient for representing the essence of God the Father. Christ reveals with perfect exactness the longed-for beauty of the royal Essence from which He was begotten.

For "the tree is known by its fruit," according to the Savior's own word (Mt 12:33). Therefore, since contemplation of the Son is fully sufficient for a prudent man to imagine and precisely know who His Begetter is by nature, the disciple's speech may perhaps be superfluous.

Yet it should not be deprived of the highest praise. We must, I think, greatly admire his words: "Show us the Father, and it is enough for us."

It is as though he said, "We would regard it as the greatest joy for ourselves and would seek nothing else for blessedness, if we too were counted worthy of the most desired vision of God the Father."

Should he not be deemed worthy of every admiration, since he preferred the vision of the Father to every good and to everything considered the summit of blessedness?

In my opinion, this is how we should understand the saying being interpreted, in the simplest meaning accessible to all. But if Scripture must also be examined more carefully, and perhaps something hidden expressed, then we should think that Philip also means and expresses something like this.

The Jewish leaders, together with the scribes and Pharisees, were indignant at the Savior's miracles. Struck in the heart by the divine signs as by stones, they were torn by envy.

They did not know what to do against this, and could in no way hinder the Wonderworker. They censured such wondrous events and diminished His glory with lying words.

They went throughout the land of Judea and Jerusalem itself. At one time they said that He performed signs by Beelzebul (Lk 11:15). At another, driven to uncontrollable madness, they claimed that He had a demon and did not know what He was saying.

Thus on one occasion they gave the people this prohibition: "He has a demon and is mad. Why do you listen to Him?" (Jn 10:20). But [...] I think it necessary to say more fully what caused their unbearable opposition to His glory.

They persuaded the people, as we have just indicated, not to receive our Savior's words. They urged them to withdraw from Him as one who taught contrary to the law.

They told them to flee as far from Him as possible and, instead, to cling to the ordinances of Moses. For what reason?

They said that the great Moses led the ancient people "to meet God," as it is written (Ex 19:17). He placed them at Mount Sinai, showed them God on the mountain, and enabled them to hear His words.

He gave them very clear assurance that God was the One who uttered the laws. But this Man, Christ, had shown nothing of the sort.

You can learn that they spoke much about this from what you see them saying to the man born blind, whom the Savior healed by ineffable power.

"You are His disciple, but we are disciples of Moses. For we know that God spoke to Moses, but as for this Man, we do not know where He is from" (Jn 9:28-29).

Thus the adherents of Jewish doctrines thought that they presented an irrefutable argument for them, one hard for many to avoid. As was natural, they troubled the little ones and led them astray.

Philip, thinking within himself that this whole objection of the Jews would be destroyed if Christ Himself would show the Father to those who believed in Him, says, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us."

Understand the words in this way: Master, he says, everything that leads to faith is accomplished by Your authority. By many miracles the unrestrained slander of the Jews could be curbed.

Nothing will remain for us to desire if You Yourself also show us God the Father. This will be sufficient for Your disciples, so that they may be fully able to refute the words of those who defend those Mosaic ordinances.

If we add such a contemplation to the saying being interpreted, I think we will not err from the proper meaning.

Philip himself calls us to this understanding when he says that seeing God the Father is "enough for us," as though this alone remains for believers.

The Savior Himself partly suggests this in His following words: "The words that I speak to you I do not speak from Myself, but the Father who dwells in Me does the works Himself" (Jn 14:10).

How this too should be understood must be said not here, but in its proper and following place.

Thus He is in Himself, and therefore they are where He is, that is, in Him. He Himself is that eternal life in which we shall be when He receives us to Himself. And this eternal life, since it is He Himself, is in Him. Therefore where He is, there we also shall be, that is, in Him. For just as the Father has life in Himself, and the life He has is certainly nothing other than He Himself who has it, so also He has given to the Son to have life in Himself (Jn 5:26). For He Himself is the very life that He has in Himself. But shall we become what He is, that is, life, when we begin our being in that life, namely in Him Himself? Certainly not. For He has life as the fountain of life. By this He is what He has, and since life is in Him, He is Himself in Himself. We, however, are not life. We partake of life, and we shall be there in such a way that we cannot be in ourselves what He is. Yet, though we are not life, we shall possess Him as our life, who has life in Himself, because He Himself is life. In short, He is unchangeable in Himself and inseparable from the Father. But when we wished to be in ourselves, we cast ourselves into disturbance. Hence it is said: “My soul is troubled within me” (cf. Ps 41:7). Changing for the worse, we could not remain what we were. But when we come to the Father through Him, since it is said that no one comes to the Father except through Me (Jn 14:6), then no one will be able to separate us from either the Father or Him, while we abide in Him. Joining what follows to what precedes, He said: “If you have known Me, you have known My Father also” (cf. Jn 14:7). This is connected with His saying: “No one comes to the Father except through Me.” Then He added: “And from henceforth you know Him and have seen Him” (Jn 14:6-7). But Philip, one of the apostles, not understanding what he heard, said: “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us” (Jn 14:8). The Lord answered him: “Have I been so long with you, and you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (Jn 14:9). See how He reproves him because He had been with them so long and yet remained unknown to them. Had He not said to them: “And where I go you know, and the way you know” (Jn 14:4)? And when they said they did not know, did He not convince them that they did know by adding: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6)? How then does He now say: “Have I been so long with you, and you have not known Me?” For surely they knew where He was going and what the way was. They knew this for no other reason than because, of course, they knew Him. The answer to this question is not difficult, if we say that some of them knew and others did not. Among those who did not know was Philip. Therefore, when He said, “And where I go you know, and the way you know,” we should understand that He was speaking to those who knew. He was not speaking to Philip, to whom it was said: “Have I been so long with you, and you have not known Me, Philip?” And to those who already knew the Son. It was also said concerning the Father: “And from henceforth you know Him and have seen Him.” This was said because of the complete likeness, propter omnimodam similitudinem, which He has with the Father. Thus it was said that from henceforth they knew the Father, because they knew the like, similem, Son. Therefore they already knew the Son, if not all of them, at least some of them. To these it was said: “And where I go you know, and the way you know” (Jn 14:4), for He Himself is the way. But they did not know the Father. For this reason they heard: “If you have known Me, you have known My Father also,” that is, through Me you have also known Him. For I am one person, He another. But lest they think there was no likeness, He said: “And from henceforth you know Him and have seen Him” (Jn 14:7). They had indeed seen the Son, who is like Him. Yet they needed to know that the Father, whom they had not yet seen, was such as the Son whom they could see. To this belongs what was later said to Philip: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father.” This does not mean that He Himself is both Father and Son. The catholic faith condemns this in the Sabellians, who are also called Patripassians. Rather, it means that the Father and the Son are so like one another that whoever knows one knows both. For we usually speak this way about two similar men to those who see one of them and wish to know what the other is like: “You have seen this one. Therefore you have seen that one.” So also it was said: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father.” Certainly this does not mean that the Father is the Son. It means that the Son differs in absolutely nothing from the Father who is like Him. For if the Father and the Son were not two persons, it would not have been said: “If you have known Me, you have known My Father also.” Indeed, He says: “Since no one comes to the Father except through Me (Jn 14:6), if you have known Me, you have known My Father also. And I, through whom men come to the Father, will bring you to Him, that you may also know Him. But because I am like Him in all things, from henceforth you know Him, because you know Me. And you have seen Him, if with the eyes of the heart you have seen Me.” “Why then, Philip, did you say: ‘Show us the Father, and it is enough for us’ (Jn 14:8)? Have I been so long with you, and you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father. If it is hard for you to see this, then at least believe what you do not see. How do you say, ‘Show us the Father’ (Jn 14:9)? If you have seen Me, who am like Him in all things, then you have also seen Him to whom I am like. But if you cannot see, do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me?” (Jn 14:10). Here Philip could have said: “I do indeed see You and believe that You are like the Father. But should I be accused and reproved because, although I see the one who is like, I also wish to see Him to whom He is like? I have indeed known the one who is like, but so far I have known one without the other. It is not enough for me if I do not know Him to whom You are like. Therefore show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” But the Teacher reproved the disciple because He saw the heart of the questioner. Philip desired to know the Father as though the Father were better than the Son. Therefore he did not know the Son either, since he thought Him inferior to the Father. To correct this judgment it was said to him: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father. How do you say, ‘Show us the Father’? I see why you speak. You seek to see not one who is like, but Him whom you consider better. Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me?” (Jn 14:9-10). Why do you desire to see a difference between those who are alike? Why do you seek to know separately those who are inseparable? After this He speaks not only to Philip, but to them all together. These words should not now be confined within the narrow limits of the present sermon. With His help they must be opened later with greater care.

He says that if the Father were shown, this would be enough for His disciples, so enough that they would have nothing more to desire.

In the knowledge of the Heavenly Father he finds rest for the immortal soul (Ps 72:25-26).

When the Lord Jesus said to the disciples, "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also," Philip took it upon himself to defend the dignity of the disciples.

"They believe and know," he says, "that their Teacher and Lord is close to the Heavenly Father.

"But they think that one who sees the equal does not deserve blame if he also wishes to see Him to whom that equal is equal.

"Therefore they ask Him to show them the Father, as He appeared to His servant Moses (Ex 33:8).

"Then the scribes and Pharisees would not dare say, in humiliation of His dignity, 'Our fathers saw God, but what is He?'"