My Notes on John 10:30
“Hence, with respect to this protecting care, Son (verse 28) and Father (verse 29) are one. Therefore Jesus says, I and the Father, we are one.” (1) Emphasis Added,
Mr. Hendriksen goes on to point out on page 126 that the Father and the Son cannot be the same person because of the Greek word “we”.
Strong’s reference 2070 can be found in several reference works regarding John 10:30.(2) 2070 has to do with “we are.” Below are some Bibles that use “we are” or Strong’s 2070 reference in John 10:30. The Englishman’s Greek Concordance of the NT lists a lot of “we” and “we are” passages in reference to 2070. For example, it lists the following passages from John 8:3; 9:28, 40; 17:32 .(3) In a work edited by Spiros Zodhiates, 2070 is associated with “we are.”(4)
“I and the Father one we are.”(5)
“I and the Father one we are.”(6)
“I and the Father one we are.”(7)
John 10:30 I <1473> and <2532> [my] Father <3962> are <2070> one <1520> KJV (8)
The following is Strong’s comment on 2070. “(2070) esmen, — es-men’; first person plural indicative of (1510) (eimi>); we are: — are, be, have our being, x have hope, + [the gospel] was [preached unto] us.”(8)
In the same work edited by Spiros Zodhiates, the following comment was made, “Also in the phrase, heis (1520), one (masc.) Or hen (neut.), followed by the inf. einai, spoken of two or more, meaning to be one in mind and purpose (John10:30; 17:11, 220.”(9)
Again, I do not know Greek grammar; however, Marshal uses the word “we” in John 10:30. Nowhere does Marshall say that Jesus is the Father. Nowhere does Jesus literally say “I am the Father.” The quotations below deal with the word “one.”
A.T. Robertson says the following about the word “one” in John 10:30, “{one} This is the Greek neuter, so meaning one essence or nature (not person). This crisp statement is the climax of Christ's claims concerning the relation between the Father and himself (the Son)."(10)
“The first matter to note is that the word ‘one’ here is neuter (hen) and not Masculine (heis), so the text is not arguing for oneness of personality or presence (to use the Latin concept) but rather something akin to a oneness of purpose and will. The point being made then is that protecting the sheep (Christian) here is a joint task of the Father and the Son. Having made this point, however, it must be stated immediately that there is no intention here of speaking about two separate gods or of asserting the Arian denial of Jesus as God. Such ideas find no support in Johannine Christology. The clear thesis throughout the Gospel from the Prologue (in which the Word is declared to be God, 1:1) to Thomas’s climactic confession (‘My Lord and My God!’ 20:28) is that Jesus is God. 283 No other affirmation would be adequate for John. Moreover, John always presents Jesus as responsible to the Father, as God’s agent on earth. No other perspective on Jesus would be acceptable to the evangelist.” (11)
“Jesus did not mean that he and the Father are and the same person, because the word for ‘one’ in Greek is neuter. The Father and Son are two persons in the Trinity, but they are one essence. Given this essential oneness, the Father and the Son act as one-what the Father does, the Son does, and vice versa. This is one of the clearest affirmation of Jesus’ divinity in the whole Bible. Thus Jesus is not merely a good teacher-he is God. His claim to be God was unmistakable. The religious leaders wanted to kill him because their laws said that anyone claiming to be God should die for blasphemy. Nothing could persuade them that Jesus’ claim was true.” (12)
“He was not affirming that He and the Father are the same Person. The Son and the Father are two Persons in the Trinity. This is confirmed here by the fact that the word ‘One’ is neuter. ... Jesus and the Father are One in will (and also in nature for both are God cf. 20:28; Phil. 2:6; Col. 2:9).”(13)
“30 ‘I and the Father’ preserves the separate individuality of the two persons in the Godhead: the neuter pronoun ‘one’ (hen) asserts unity of nature or equality (cf. 1 Cor. 3:8). The Jews were quick to apprehend this statement and rejected by preparing to stone Jesus for blasphemy be he, a man, had asserted that he was one with God. For them Jesus’ language did not mean simply agreement of thought or purpose but carried a metaphysical implication of deity. The Father and the Son functioned as one.”(14)
Jesus and the Father are not the same person. They are two different persons. The word “we” alone should be sufficient to make that point.
1. New Testament Commentary, John, By William Hendriksen, Copyright 1953, Baker Book House, Page 126
2. Interlinear Greek-English NT, 3rd Edition 1996 5th Printing 8/02, Editor Jay P Green, Sr
3. The Englishman’s Greek Concordance of the NT, By George V. Wigram, Page 307, Hendrickson Publishers, 4th Printing 11/02
4. Word Study Series; The Complete Word Study Dictionary New Testament: For a Proper Understanding of the Word, Edited By Spiros Zodhiates Th.D. 1992 and revised in 1993 By AMG International, Inc., Page 660
5. The Interlinear NRSV and NIV Parallel New Testament in Greek and in English Interlinear Translation, By Alfred Marshal, Page 299, Zondervan Publishing House, Copyright 1993
6. The Interlinear NASB and NIV Parallel New Testament in Greek and in English Interlinear Translation, By Alfred Marshal, Page 299, Zondervan Publishing House, Copyright 1993
7. The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, Second Edition, By Nestle and Marshall, Page 409, Zondervan Publishing House, Literal English Translation and Editorial Interlinear Samuel Bagster and Sons Ltd. 1958, First Zondervan printing 1975 and the Second printing 1976
8. The Master Christian Library Volume 8 on CD Roms
9. Word Study Series; The Complete Word Study Dictionary New Testament: For a Proper Understanding of the Word, Edited By Spiros Zodhiates Th.D. 1992 and revised in 1993 By AMG International, Inc., Page 515
10. Word Pictures in the New Testament, By A.T. Robertson, Concise Edition,
Copyright 2000, Edited By James A. Swanson, Page 227
11. The New American Commentary: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture, Vol. 25A, John 1-11, Page 341, By Gerald L. Borchert, Copyright 1996, Broadman & Holman Publishers
12. Life Application Bible Commentary, John, Page 217, Series Editor Grant Osborne, Tyndale House Publisher, Inc., copyright 1993 by Livingstone Corporation.
13. The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty, New Testament Edition, Editors John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, Victor Books a divisions of SP Publications, Inc. 1983, Pages 311-312
14. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: with The New International Version, Volume 9, General Editor Frank Gaebeleim, John: Merrill C. Tienney, Acts: Richard N. Longenecker, Regency Reference Library,1981, Zondervan Corporation, Page 112
Mr. Hendriksen goes on to point out on page 126 that the Father and the Son cannot be the same person because of the Greek word “we”.
Strong’s reference 2070 can be found in several reference works regarding John 10:30.(2) 2070 has to do with “we are.” Below are some Bibles that use “we are” or Strong’s 2070 reference in John 10:30. The Englishman’s Greek Concordance of the NT lists a lot of “we” and “we are” passages in reference to 2070. For example, it lists the following passages from John 8:3; 9:28, 40; 17:32 .(3) In a work edited by Spiros Zodhiates, 2070 is associated with “we are.”(4)
“I and the Father one we are.”(5)
“I and the Father one we are.”(6)
“I and the Father one we are.”(7)
John 10:30 I <1473> and <2532> [my] Father <3962> are <2070> one <1520> KJV (8)
The following is Strong’s comment on 2070. “(2070) esmen, — es-men’; first person plural indicative of (1510) (eimi>); we are: — are, be, have our being, x have hope, + [the gospel] was [preached unto] us.”(8)
In the same work edited by Spiros Zodhiates, the following comment was made, “Also in the phrase, heis (1520), one (masc.) Or hen (neut.), followed by the inf. einai, spoken of two or more, meaning to be one in mind and purpose (John10:30; 17:11, 220.”(9)
Again, I do not know Greek grammar; however, Marshal uses the word “we” in John 10:30. Nowhere does Marshall say that Jesus is the Father. Nowhere does Jesus literally say “I am the Father.” The quotations below deal with the word “one.”
A.T. Robertson says the following about the word “one” in John 10:30, “{one} This is the Greek neuter, so meaning one essence or nature (not person). This crisp statement is the climax of Christ's claims concerning the relation between the Father and himself (the Son)."(10)
“The first matter to note is that the word ‘one’ here is neuter (hen) and not Masculine (heis), so the text is not arguing for oneness of personality or presence (to use the Latin concept) but rather something akin to a oneness of purpose and will. The point being made then is that protecting the sheep (Christian) here is a joint task of the Father and the Son. Having made this point, however, it must be stated immediately that there is no intention here of speaking about two separate gods or of asserting the Arian denial of Jesus as God. Such ideas find no support in Johannine Christology. The clear thesis throughout the Gospel from the Prologue (in which the Word is declared to be God, 1:1) to Thomas’s climactic confession (‘My Lord and My God!’ 20:28) is that Jesus is God. 283 No other affirmation would be adequate for John. Moreover, John always presents Jesus as responsible to the Father, as God’s agent on earth. No other perspective on Jesus would be acceptable to the evangelist.” (11)
“Jesus did not mean that he and the Father are and the same person, because the word for ‘one’ in Greek is neuter. The Father and Son are two persons in the Trinity, but they are one essence. Given this essential oneness, the Father and the Son act as one-what the Father does, the Son does, and vice versa. This is one of the clearest affirmation of Jesus’ divinity in the whole Bible. Thus Jesus is not merely a good teacher-he is God. His claim to be God was unmistakable. The religious leaders wanted to kill him because their laws said that anyone claiming to be God should die for blasphemy. Nothing could persuade them that Jesus’ claim was true.” (12)
“He was not affirming that He and the Father are the same Person. The Son and the Father are two Persons in the Trinity. This is confirmed here by the fact that the word ‘One’ is neuter. ... Jesus and the Father are One in will (and also in nature for both are God cf. 20:28; Phil. 2:6; Col. 2:9).”(13)
“30 ‘I and the Father’ preserves the separate individuality of the two persons in the Godhead: the neuter pronoun ‘one’ (hen) asserts unity of nature or equality (cf. 1 Cor. 3:8). The Jews were quick to apprehend this statement and rejected by preparing to stone Jesus for blasphemy be he, a man, had asserted that he was one with God. For them Jesus’ language did not mean simply agreement of thought or purpose but carried a metaphysical implication of deity. The Father and the Son functioned as one.”(14)
Jesus and the Father are not the same person. They are two different persons. The word “we” alone should be sufficient to make that point.
1. New Testament Commentary, John, By William Hendriksen, Copyright 1953, Baker Book House, Page 126
2. Interlinear Greek-English NT, 3rd Edition 1996 5th Printing 8/02, Editor Jay P Green, Sr
3. The Englishman’s Greek Concordance of the NT, By George V. Wigram, Page 307, Hendrickson Publishers, 4th Printing 11/02
4. Word Study Series; The Complete Word Study Dictionary New Testament: For a Proper Understanding of the Word, Edited By Spiros Zodhiates Th.D. 1992 and revised in 1993 By AMG International, Inc., Page 660
5. The Interlinear NRSV and NIV Parallel New Testament in Greek and in English Interlinear Translation, By Alfred Marshal, Page 299, Zondervan Publishing House, Copyright 1993
6. The Interlinear NASB and NIV Parallel New Testament in Greek and in English Interlinear Translation, By Alfred Marshal, Page 299, Zondervan Publishing House, Copyright 1993
7. The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, Second Edition, By Nestle and Marshall, Page 409, Zondervan Publishing House, Literal English Translation and Editorial Interlinear Samuel Bagster and Sons Ltd. 1958, First Zondervan printing 1975 and the Second printing 1976
8. The Master Christian Library Volume 8 on CD Roms
9. Word Study Series; The Complete Word Study Dictionary New Testament: For a Proper Understanding of the Word, Edited By Spiros Zodhiates Th.D. 1992 and revised in 1993 By AMG International, Inc., Page 515
10. Word Pictures in the New Testament, By A.T. Robertson, Concise Edition,
Copyright 2000, Edited By James A. Swanson, Page 227
11. The New American Commentary: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture, Vol. 25A, John 1-11, Page 341, By Gerald L. Borchert, Copyright 1996, Broadman & Holman Publishers
12. Life Application Bible Commentary, John, Page 217, Series Editor Grant Osborne, Tyndale House Publisher, Inc., copyright 1993 by Livingstone Corporation.
13. The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty, New Testament Edition, Editors John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, Victor Books a divisions of SP Publications, Inc. 1983, Pages 311-312
14. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: with The New International Version, Volume 9, General Editor Frank Gaebeleim, John: Merrill C. Tienney, Acts: Richard N. Longenecker, Regency Reference Library,1981, Zondervan Corporation, Page 112