Euthymius Zigaben

Euthymius Zigaben's commentaries on the Gospel of John, as well as on the first three Gospels, were compiled by him primarily on the basis of the interpretations of St. John Chrysostom, and partly of many other Fathers and teachers of the Church. This work of Zigaben, in which "the best of the ancient interpreters is collected and expounded", will never lose its significance. Not everyone who needs to use the guidance and manual of patristic interpretations has the opportunity to acquire all these interpretations and does not always have time to choose from extensive interpretations what he needs. Hence the usefulness of translating into Russian the short, simple and easily understandable interpretation of Zigaben, compiled on the basis of ancient patristic interpretations. Since Zigaben's interpretation of the Gospel of Matthew is written with special thoroughness and completeness, with the citation of parallel passages from other Evangelists, a comparison and explanation of their narratives about one and the same event, therefore, in the interpretation of the Gospel of John, Zigaben often makes only references to a parallel passage in the Gospel of Matthew, leaving the reader to find the necessary explanation there. Therefore, those who use the second volume of the Commentary should have the first one at hand.

Zigaben interprets not from his own behalf, but according to the understanding of the Fathers and teachers of the Church. "If the word of Scripture is examined," says the 19th canon of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, "let them explain it in no other way, except as the luminaries and teachers of the Church have laid down in their writings: and let them be satisfied with them rather than with the composition of their own words." Zigaben's interpretations are dear in that they satisfy this conciliar canon.

1887

The Gospel of John

Who John was, we learned from the previous Evangelists, namely: he was the brother of James, the son of Zebedee, from the village of Bethsaida, the land of Galilee, a fisherman by occupation. Neither before nor after did he learn from anyone and was completely unlearned (Acts 4:13); but we know what he became when he was taught by Jesus Christ. Reclining on the breast of Wisdom itself during the Last Supper, he gained such knowledge as no one else had received. And verily he thundered from heaven and cried out from the treasuries of the Holy Spirit, not because he spoke loudly, but because he spoke of the sublime, and that his tongue was guided by the Holy Spirit.

When John received other evangelists from some Gospel believers and saw that they all spoke primarily about the incarnation of the Saviour and omitted the teaching about His Divinity, he approved and permitted these Gospels and testified to their truth and authenticity. Then, under the inspiration of Jesus Christ Himself, he proceeded to his Gospel; in it he tells something of what has already been told by others, so that they do not think that his Gospel has no connection with the Gospels of others, but he pays special attention to what they have omitted, and most of all to the theological teaching about the Saviour, as the most necessary in view of the appearance of heresies.

The other Evangelists omitted this because of the imperfection of the hearers, since the preaching had not yet been established, but John cites this teaching as well, since the faith was already growing and the believers were becoming more understanding, adding other chapters omitted by the previous Evangelists. The present Gospel was written many years after the destruction of Jerusalem.

CHAPTER I

Verse 1. In the beginning was the Word... [1] The expression at the beginning has many meanings, but here it actually means always. The word be (ην) attached to this expression made it incomprehensible. Wherever you direct your mind, it will be preceded by it, and, preceding it everywhere, it does not allow your thought to find any limit to itself. In relation to creatures, the word be means the past tense, and in relation to the uncreated Trinity, this is denoted by the word always (αει). In relation to the sensible and rational creature, the expression "in the beginning be" is not used at all, because everything began to exist later, and it applies only to the blessed Trinity, because only She is not begotten or created. In the same way, the word Λογος (Word) has many meanings, but here it means the Son of God proper. The Son, as St. Gregory the Theologian says, is called the Word because He relates to the Father as the Word relates to the mind, not only because of His passionless birth, but also because He is united with the Father and because He reveals Him. All things, he says, which I have heard from My Father, I have spoken unto you (John 15:15)[2]. Someone may also say that this is a kind of definition in relation to the defined, because the word Λογος has such a meaning. He who knows (this means the word "saw") the Son, it is said, also knows the Father (John 14:9). The Son is an expressive and convenient testimony to the nature of the Father, since every birth is the silent word of the one who begat him. Having said: in the beginning was the Word, the Evangelist showed that the Son was always there and that there was no time or age when He did not exist, because He Himself is the Creator of all times and ages. But why didn't he say, "In the beginning was the Son"? So that someone does not think of a temporary and passionate birth. For this reason, having called Him the Word, having shown that His supernatural birth was pre-eternal and impassible, and thus having destroyed in advance the obscene notions of this birth, the Evangelist further directly calls Him also the Son. And in order to show that this Word has not only always been, i.e. eternally, but also that He is inseparable and co-eternal with the Father, the Evangelist says:

Verse 1... And the Word was to God... [3] He did not say that He was in a certain place, because the Immensity is not limited to any place; nor did he say that He was in God, because on the basis of the preceding there could be a confusion of persons, but he said to God (ηρος τονΘεον), i.e. to God, that both the particularity of the Hypostases and the indivisibility of the Father and the Son, as well as of the Holy Spirit, would be clear, because in the beginning there was a Trinity, and this Trinity was together.

Verse 1... And God is the Word. [4] Using the name of the Word, in order to show that His supernatural birth was pre-eternal and passionless, He further prevents the harm that may arise from such a name, that is, lest anyone should utter blasphemy, thinking that this Word is the same as ours that is thought or spoken; but He is not such, but hypostatic, of one nature and dignity with the Father.