by Chuka Okoye
The gospel of John 14:6 says: “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” [Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ὁδὸς καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια καὶ ἡ ζωή. οὐδεὶς ἔρχεται πρὸς τὸν Πατέρα, εἰ μὴ δι’ ἐμοῦ]. The passage is arguably a summary of the understanding of the person of Jesus as the Son of God and the Word of God in John’s gospel. The Gospel of John took up the task of discussing Jesus as the Son and Word of God, the Word who by being taught by the Father reveals what He learns from His Father to the world. The fourth evangelist begins the gospel with a correlative but poetic introduction of Jesus akin to the Genesis description in the creation history (see Gen. 1:1-3). John 1:1 in line with above passage opens thus: “In the beginning was the Word and Word was God, and the word was with God,” and in 1:14 the gospel continues: “… and the Word was made flesh and dwelled among us.” The above quotes capture the aspect of Jesus’ nature which the evangelist would develop throughout the gospel and which would build up to the self-identification of Christ in 14:6 as a response to Thomas’s question in 14:5.
As it is Jewish for a father or teacher to give parting speeches to his children or disciples respectively, Jesus carries out his sort of valedictory speech to his disciples more directly in Chapter 14 during his last supper with the disciples. During this speech He uses the opportunity to teach the Apostles to understand who He is and what exactly His mission is. He begins this valedictory teaching with a consolation. Jesus says: “Do not let your heart be troubled. You have faith in God; have faith in Me also… If I go and prepare a place for you I will come back and take you to Myself” (Jn 14: 1, 3). This consolation statement by Jesus sets the stage for the final teaching about His identity to His disciples.
By declaring that He is embarking on a journey which would eventually involve His disciples, Jesus opens up an avenue to inform His disciples that they, just like Himself, do not have their ultimate end in the world. He presumes deliberately that the disciples already knew His destination and thus asserted: “Where I am going you know the way” (14:4). This assertion by Jesus roused in the mind of Thomas self-skepticism which the author of John’s gospel believes that Jesus as the Word of God is not unaware of. Thomas responds: “Master we do not know where You are going; how can we know the way?” (14:5). This response of Thomas to the assertion of Jesus, according to Rick Davidson, “is a necessary question for the actual revelation of Jesus as the son of God to the disciples.”1 The necessity of this question lies more in the answer that Jesus gave, which encapsulates the response to Thomas’s perplexity at his assertion Jesus declared: “I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (14:6).
This mode of identification by Jesus of Himself is very pertinent to the understanding of the Gospel of John. J. T. A. Robinson, corroborating the above, argues that: “the task which the author of the Gospel of John tries to achieve with the gospel namely: to show Jesus as the Christ is achieved in this expression in Jn. 14:6… This is the key to the understanding of the gospel of John.” This important passage draws the attention of a careful reader to seek a deeper understanding of the person of Jesus as the Christ especially as the author of the Gospel of John presents it. In search of this deeper understanding of the person of Jesus as the Christ as depicted by John’s gospel, this paper studies the gospel of John 14:6 with a view to understanding meaning of the identity of Jesus as the way, the truth and the life.
The Ἐγώ εἰμι – “I, I am” in Jn. 14: 6
John 14:6 presents Jesus’s self-revelation. This self-revelation is introduced with a declarative “I am”, which sets a stage for subsequent ‘messianic’ predicates in the passage. It is not strange that Jesus seeks to make this self-revelation to His disciples as he prepares to enter Jerusalem for His Passion. The passage afterwards presents Jesus as being dismayed by the lack of knowledge of His disciples, typified in Philip, about him. Jesus here said to Philip: “Have I been with you for so long a time and you still did not know Me, Philip?” (14:9). The above expression by Jesus marks the “I am” as an unequivocal expression of His true identity as He sees Himself and as He supposes He ought to be understood in this act of self-revelation. According to Bruce Woll, Jesus’s “I am [statement] affirms his exclusive role and status, and therefore the basic continuity across the boundaries of past present and future.”2
Woll’s assertion leads to the vital point in the analysis of the “one revealed” in reading the Greek “I am” in the passage. This point lies in the emphasis of the phrase hence; Ἐγώ εἰμι – literally meaning “I, I am…” Although the emphasis, which is peculiar to this passage, might have some grammatical implications3, it creates a path to a deeper understanding of how the gospel of John understands the person of Jesus. The understanding of Jesus in the gospel of John as the Christ, quickly shades a light on the book of Exodus 3:15 where Yahweh reveals himself to Moses as אני ש אני – “I am who I am.” Jesus by this expression shows Himself immediately as the revealed one from the Father. Indeed, Jesus identifies Himself here as the “Son of God who conveys, just before His crucifixion, a message to His disciples. The subject is thus divine.”4
David Yarn furthers this argument interestingly. Having established the Divinity of the “I am” as frequently used by Jesus, contextually when referring to Himself, Yarn proceeded to an ontological reflection of the expression. As a build-up to Yarn’s argument, one must understand the centrality of the expression “I am” as used by Jesus and other functional usage of the same word. For instance, Jesus says “I am the true bread” (6:35), “I am the door of the Sheep” (8: 12), “I am the resurrection and the life” (10:7) “I am the good shepherd” (10:11), “I am the way the truth and the life” (14:6), “I am the true vine” (15:5), and so on. The phrase I am entails a state of existence in which one in existence is said to be. Therefore, Jesus by constantly using the identity asserts His existence.
Something spectacular springs up each time Jesus uses the phrase to address the Jews: the difference between contingent existence and necessary existence. Contrary to the contingent existence which the general use of the phrase “I am” refers to, the phrase when referring to Jesus in the Gospel of John contextually suggests a necessary existence. The preface to John’s gospel sets a stage for this ontological reference to Jesus thus: “In Him was life, and the life was the light of men” (Jn. 1:4). The above passage depicts Jesus one who exists necessarily, or rather one whose act of existence forms part of his being. Thus Jesus cannot but exist, existence defines Him. Another definition of Jesus’s necessity of existence comes in Jn. 14:6: “I am the life” and in John 10: 10: “I have come that they might have life and have it in abundance.” This understanding of Jesus as One who has existence necessary to His being provides sufficient grounds for the reconciliation of the person of Jesus as “I am” in the gospel of John with and the Exodus revelation of God to Moses as I am (see Ex. 3:15).
The Exodus story portrays God as the liberator of Israel. This time, through Moses, God reveals Himself to the Israelites as I am. After this liberation from the hand of the Egyptians, liberation is once again being anticipated by the Israelites from the hand of the Romans. This time Jesus reintroduces Himself in a similar mode. Yarn argues to this point that: “of Jesus to say He is, is not enough, for isness in Jesus implies so many things beyond mere existence. Jesus is not merely is, He is God. To be is one thing, to be God is another.”5 Thus Jesus says always when an inquiry about Him is made in relation to being the Christ: “I am He.” One must however be careful to separate the identity of Jesus for the person of the Father without utterly destroying the connection between both Persons by sharp dichotomization. To do this, one must keep in mind the metaphysical relation created by Jesus in the narratives of John’s gospel. The prologue to this gospel shades a useful light on this relation thus: “In the beginning was the word, and the word was God and the word was with God…” (Jn. 1:3). This shows that there is a participation in the Godhood between the Father and Jesus (the Son). But whether both are identical made clear in John 10:30 where Jesus declares: “I and the Father are one” and subsequently in 14: 9, “to see me is to have seen the Father.
The identicalness of Jesus and the Father, as the gospel suggests, is such that both the Father and Jesus are related in a certain way not chronologically explainable but understood in terms of their Persons. Jesus maintains a filial relationship with the Father Who sent Him. Thus the “I am of Jesus” is pictured always as being in relation to the Eternal Father whose will He cannot but do (Jn. 4:34, 6:44-45, 7:28-29), and the only one Who can bring people to Himself through Him (Jesus) (Jn 14:6b). The interdependent but positional relationship between the Father and Jesus presented in the gospel of John emphasizes the identity of Jesus as God more than the synoptic gospels. Thus Jesus as the “I am” presents a metaphysical identification of Jesus as one who in the necessity of His Being as divine reveals Himself to the human being who in his contingent nature keeps transcending himself towards the highest goal of his existence which culminates in God Himself. It is in this auto-transcendence of man towards his highest goal and life meaning and Jesus’s self-revelation as “I am” that the understanding of Jesus as the Way, the Truth, and the Life becomes intelligible.
“I am” the way
A cursory interpretation of the concept of Way in the passage suggests that Jesus is ‘a path’ that leads to the father. This cursory interpretation equally gains credence when read with the rider in 14:6b: “No one comes to the Father except through Me.” Being fair to this understanding, one might as well look at the discussion that precedes this self-identification by Jesus. Jesus’s speech about His destination was understood geographically and physically by the Apostles. The narrative in John 14 begins with Jesus consoling the apostles that His departure was not abandonment but a momentary exist aimed at preparing a better place for them in his Father’s house, as the passage narrates: “Do not let your hearts be troubled. You have faith in God, have faith also in Me. In my Father’s house there are many dwelling places. If there were not, would I have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place, I will come back again and take you to Myself, so that where I am you also may be. Where I am going you know the way.” It continues, “Thomas said to him, ‘Master, we do not know where You are going; how can we know the way?’” (Jn. 14: 1-5).
The reaction to the words of Jesus by Thomas shows that the Apostles understood Jesus’ statement about His journey and destination as something geographical and physical, hence the reaction from Thomas. Nevertheless, a diachronic analysis of the term ὁδὸς as used in passage depicts a religious connotation of the word. The Book of Psalms (138:2, 5), for instance, makes reference to “…the way of the Lord.” Isaiah 40:3 talks about preparing a way for the Lord and indicates in 55 8 that our ways are not God’s ways. The New Testament equally presents a religious connotation to the way of the God. In Matthew’s gospel (22:16), the Herodians said to Jesus: “we know that you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth.” Other passages in the New Testament (Acts 19:9; Acts 9:2; 1 Cor. 12:3; Heb. 10:20) make allusion to the non-physical way in relation to God.
John’s gospel does not derail from this religious connotation of way when referring to Jesus. In Jn. 1: 23, John the Baptist manifests his prefiguration in Is. 40:3. He identifies himself as the voice crying in the wilderness as he exhorts: “make straight the way of the Lord.” It follows therefore that the reference to the Way in Jn. 14:6 refers, not to “tropos” which refers to the physical road, but to a way of living as such. Fensham corroborates this point stating that when Jesus says: “I am the way” he implies: “I am the way which leads to God; I am not a human way, but a way which is not understood by mankind.”6 This understanding is a key to understanding the meaning behind the expressions of Jesus especially to his disciples. In John 13:1/ff Jesus washed the feet of his disciples and in v. 15 He explained that this act of humility was to be a way of life that they must imitate. Jesus says: “I have given you a model to follow, so that as I have done for you, you should do.” This understanding holds true also for Jn. 13:35 where Jesus gave the disciples the new commandment of love and thereof remarked that “By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Jesus presents Himself as “the way.” This way is love and only through this way the can the Father be reached (14:6b).
Understanding the way – ἡ ὁδὸς – as a way of living makes credible the Trinitarian presentation made in Jn. 14:15. Here Jesus says: “If you love Me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Advocate to be with you always, the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees it nor knows it. But you know it because it remains with and will be in you.” The disciples can only have the Divine presence in the advocate by following this way which entails keeping the commandments. The world is bereft of this Divine presence because they do not know the Way and have not seen it. The Spirit of truth can only come to dwell with the disciples once they follow the Way and once the spirit of truth is present and enduring life is assured.
“I am” the Truth
Jesus further identifies himself as ἡ ἀλήθεια in the passage. It is important to note apparently that the article ἡ makes the reference referent. The truth does not mean just an unqualified truth as in veritas as such but refers to the unveiling of being. This understanding of truth as the ‘unveiling of being’ is properly captured by Greek rendition “ἀλήθεια”. Even though the word Truth is mostly translated functionally as (intellectual truth) veritas – adaequatio rei et intellectus – the idea does not suffice to drive home the meaning of truth in the passage per se. Thomas Aquinas in De veritate defends the idea of truth as adaequatio rei et intellectus which views truth as correspondence. Nevertheless he equally develops the notion of ontological truth against the intellectual truth. Both of these are reduced or traced back to God as to their first principle since “God’s being is the cause of all other beings.”7 Thomas’ ontological truth is better developed by the existentialist thinkers, especially Heidegger, who created a deeper insight into the understanding of truth as ἀλήθεια – unconcealment – against the conventional scholastic understanding of truth as adaequatio rei et intellectus championed by Thomas Aquinas.
Heidegger understands ἀλήθεια as the originary phenomenon of truth which consists in making “clear the mode of being of the cognition itself”.8 This does not have the character of correspondence whatever. Far from being correspondent, ἀλήθεια (Entborgenheit) is the ground for veritas which is basically correspondent and propositional. When considering the concept of truth in Jn 14:6 in the light of the above hermeneutical conception of truth, one interprets Jesus not just as one who is true with His expressions rather a primordial ontological ground of true propositions or realities. This makes the prologue in the gospel of John once again more intelligible. Thus “in the beginning was the logos” (Jn. 1:1a). The logos which exists from the beginning forms the grounds for the true expression of the identity of this logos which is found in the subsequent statements in the prologue: “and the logos was God and the logos was with God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came to be through him and without him nothing came to be. What came to be through him life” (Jn. 1:1b-4a). Jesus as conceived as “The Truth” in this passage entails the notion that Jesus represents this originary phenomenon of truth which clarifies the “mode of being of cognition itself” which is not simply propositional and correspondent to anything (in terms of Veritas).
‘The Truth’ (ἡ ἀλήθεια) is “primarily a feature of reality – beings, being and world – not of thoughts and utterances. Beings, etc. are, of course, unhidden to us, and we disclose them.”9 “The Truth” (ἡ ἀλήθεια) therefore explicitly “presupposes concealment or hiddenness.” It is therefore the task of man5 as a being-in-truth to get through this Entborgenheit. The gospel of John brings out this task dynamically in several passages where human beings engage in this act of attempting to disclose or unconceal this hiddenness objectified as the Christ. After the baptism of Jesus in the river Jordan, John the Baptist unconcealed the identity of Jesus as this logos (cf. Jn. 1:1), following from the events which surrounded the baptism. John declared: “I saw the spirit come down like a dove from the sky and remain upon Hm. I did not know Him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘on whomever you see the Spirit come down and remain, He is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ Now, I have seen and testified that He is the son of God” (Jn. 1:32-34). The act of unconcealment occurs even more dramatically in Jn. 4:1/ff. The being of Jesus was equally revealed in stages here. First the Samaritan woman sees Jesus as master (4:1-25), then eventually as a Prophet (4:19) and eventually as the Christ (4:29). The other Samaritans immediately encountered this revelation themselves through the evidence of Jesus’s action and no longer through the testimony of the woman (4:42).
One pertinent fact in the understanding of ἡ ἀλήθεια in the gospel of John is the position that man “is in ‘untruth (Unwahrheit)’ as well as truth.” This means for Heidegger that man, as fallen, misinterprets things. For Heidegger, “Untruth is not plain ‘falsity’, nor is it ‘hiddenness’: it is ‘disguisedness (Verstelltheit)’ of the truth.”11 The Truth, Jesus, is not easily comprehensible or unconcealable by man as fallen. This is well understood in the various misinterpretations of both the teachings of Jesus and who exactly Jesus is by the people and even His disciples in His bid to unfold himself for the proper unconcealment. In John 6:1/ff, Jesus multiplies bread and fish to feed the five thousand. This sign performed by Jesus was to be a proper comportment for unconcealment of the truth which He Himself is. However man as fallen in this circumstance misinterprets this truth as belonging totally to another realm of being which does not depict the truth simpliciter. Hence they identified Him as “truly the prophet which is to come into this world” (6:14). Nevertheless they were disappointed when the light of truth12 shinned forth. Instead of understanding Jesus as the bread of life the rather saw him first as a worldly messiah and later as a blasphemer, a villain; the son of Joseph who insulted them by offering them his body and blood (Jn. 6:52).
Man’s misinterpretation of ‘The Truth’ in his falleness results in the rejection of the truth and ultimately of loss of the light of life. But the contrary brings light and life. John 1:10-11 expresses it thus: “He was in the world, and though the world was made through Him, the world did not recognize Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. But to all who did receive Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God.” The Truth in Jn. 14:6 entails that Jesus is the revelation of God to the human race. Thus Jesus told Philip: “To see me is to have seen the father … Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me?” (14:9-10). The Sacra Pagina occludes that the truth in this passage is a “statement on Jesus as the unique revelation of the Father…”12
Jesus as the truth as captured in Jn. 14:6 does not simply present the identity of Jesus as the revelation of God, it further harbors within itself a symbiotic functional response both from the individual who participates positively in the demands of these identities and the Jesus Himself who is revealed. Jesus makes this clear in Jn. 8:32: “If you remain in My word you will truly be My disciples, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” Therefore, Jesus as the truth sets man free from the darkness death and brings him into the light of life which shines through the darkness and yet darkness cannot overcome it (Cf. Jn.1: 5). This understanding of Jesus as the Truth in the passage naturally leads to the proper understanding of Jesus as the Life in this passage.
“I am” the Life
Jesus presents (eternal) life as the culmination of the creation. Thus “I am the Way, the Truth and Life” presents a subtle view that Jesus sees Himself as the culmination of the creation. Looking back to the prologue, John presents Jesus in the Light: “Through Him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made. In Him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it” (Jn. 1:3-5). This valid argument in the gospel of John has a deeper implication which must be understood in the holistic consideration of the person of Jesus presented in the gospel of John. The implication is that Jesus is the culmination of creation as long as He is one with the Father. Jesus expresses this in His teaching about Himself as the bread of life. Here Jesus teaches: “I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is My flesh… Whoever feeds on My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. Whoever feeds on My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on Me, he also will live because of Me” (6:51, 53-57).
Jesus is life to the extent that He receives His being from His Father and He gives Himself (life) to the people who the Father has brought to Him. The sort of relationship which Jesus portrays to have with the Father is very interesting. First of all, Jesus acknowledges that He is ‘life’ because of the Father. In relation to the human race, Jesus declared that “no one can come to the Father except through me” (14:6b); however no one can come to the Father through Jesus unless the Father draws him (6:44). The Father therefore is the actual giver of life which is Jesus as a token of love for all who He has drawn to Himself. John 3:16 paints a great picture of this: “For God so loved the world that He gave His Only-Begotten Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” This reveals the mission of Jesus as one who has come “that they may have life and have it in abundance.”
The giving of life here is the giving of Jesus which means death on the cross. Enda McDonagh argues, along this line, that “the life of Jesus is sacrificial; it is made valuable by His sacrificial death during which He gave life back to man.”14 This perfects the words of Jesus as the good shepherd: “I lay down my life for my sheep” (10:15b). John depicts Jesus often as a being whose historicity defines His identity whatever. John implicitly suggests that Jesus Who is life can only give this life to the elect by laying His life down for them. This laying down of life is not accidental but a gradually unfolding event from Jesus’s conception through all the activities of His life and finally to His death. The historicity of Jesus as depicted by John suggests that the existence of Jesus is “primordially in the present” but “is constituted by a notion of the living past.”15 The consciousness of Jesus of His own being is shaped by His past (though primordially present) Filial experience with the father, His present mission of disclosing Himself through His teaching to bring people to the Father and the future which is the point of His handing over of His life through his death to those who the father has drawn to him. The task of Jesus of offering Himself as life to those who believe is perfected through His death. This summarizes the idea of the Johannine gospel about Jesus as Life.
The evaluation of these three concepts that mark the identity of Jesus in Jn. 14:6 is profound and raises a lot of issues especially concerning how the unity of such concepts can be put together into a full definition of the person of Jesus in the passage and indeed John’s gospel per se. Zimmerly Walther argues that the self-introduction of Jesus presented in Jn. 14:6, though may not be said to have a logical sequence as such, “are so connected that each complex definition made of them about Jesus describes the subject which John tends to drive home.”16 The concepts (way, truth and life) appear as predicates but are connected as a unity. They are bound into a close unity by the ‘I am’ without sacrificing their sphere of meaning or giving up their unity. It is therefore not possible to fix the meaning of one concept, say way, without considering truth and life.
The passage, Jn. 14:6, deeply exposes the subject matter of the teaching of the gospel of John about Jesus Christ – His identity, His life and His mission. Jesus is not just the historical being Who teaches a way of life to follow. He indeed is the way and it is only through this way (of life) that one gets to the truth which Jesus Himself is. Through this way of life the Truth gradually unconceals itself becomingly to the believer who, once accepting this truth, is freed from the darkness of death and is led to the light of life, which Jesus again is in the Father.
This passage brings out concretely the idea of Jesus as a revelation of the salvation of God and the logos. Ashby Godfrey, while commenting on the intricacies of John 6:41-65, remarks that: “While Jesus asked the crowd to labor for the food which endures to eternal life… it is quite clear that Jesus speaks of himself as the revelation of Godhead… The Father has sealed (stamped with His seal, authenticated) Him. His hearers are told that they must believe in Him.”16 The call for belief in Jesus comes from the understanding of Jesus as the fulfilment of the Law and the prophets. He is therefore the revealed truth about the way that leads to life which the Law and the prophets have been pointing to. The depth of this theology presented in this passage (14:6) by the gospel of John gives a deeper insight into the person of Jesus as presented in entire gospel of John.
- Rick Davidson “Reflections on John,” in Studies in NT, 1999, 112-130.
- A. T. Robinson “Destination and Purpose of St. John’s Gospel,” in New Test. Studies 6, 1960, 117-131.
- C. Fensham refers to Eduard Schweizer’s grammatical consideration of the I am in the text. Explaining Schweizer, Fenshen explains that the ego-eimi expression seldom occurs in Classical Greek. Fenshen therefore recounts Sweizer’s conclusion thus: Dennoch ist gerade der entscheidende satz, der von der Einzigartigkeit der ego eimi- Aussagen im semitisch-orientalischen Kulturkreis, alles andere als gesichert (“Nevertheless, the crucial point is that the uniqueness of the ego-eimi statements in the semitic-oriental culture is anything but assured). Fensham, nevertheless, classifies the ego eimi expression as an averbal phrase with pronominal subject and nominal predicate…. The pronominal subject is accentuated. The predicate is determined in every case by the article to show that Christ is the way, the truth and the life. The expression ei me leaves no doubt about the absoluteness of this saying.”) See “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life,” in Neotestamentica, vol.2 (“The Christ of John: Essays on the Christology of the Fourth Gospel”) (1968), pg. 81-88.
- C. Fensham, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life,” in Neotestamentica, vol.2 (“The Christ of John: Essays on the Christology of the Fourth Gospel”) (1968), pg. 81-88
- David Yarn, Some Metaphysical Reflections on the Gospel of John, Brigham Young University Studies, Vol. 3, No. 1 (Autum 1960), pg. 3 – 10
- C. Fensham, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life,” Neotestamentica, vol.2 (“The Christ of John: Essays on the Christology of the Fourth Gospel”) (1968), pg. 81-88
- Thomas Aquinas, De Veritate 1, a. 1 c
- Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, John Macquarrie & Edward Robinson (trans.), (London: Blackwell Publishing, 2000), pg. 72
- Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, pg. 91
- One must understand my adoption of man in the passage in place of Dasein. Heidegger is very careful in his use of Dasein to completely translate to man even though he gives Dasein the essential human qualities which might not render it fallacious to interchange the nomenclature of Dasein to man simpliciter.
- Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, pg. 91
- In John 1:5 the light of shines through the darkness and the darkness cannot comprehend it.
- Francis J. Molony and Daniel J. Harrington, eds. Sacra Pagina, vol. 4 (“The Gospel of John”). The Liturgical Press (Collegeville: 1998), pg. 398
- “The Way, the Truth and the Life,” in The Furrow, vol. 62, No. 7/8 July/ August 2011, pg. 407-411
- Walther Zimmerly: “Ich bin Jahwe in Geschichte und Altes”, in Testament, 1953, pg. 179-209 183-4.
- Godfrey Ashby (2002) “Body and Blood in John 6:41-65”, in NeoTestamentica, vol 36, no.1/2, 289