That which my Father hath given me, is greater than all: and no one can snatch them out of the hand of my Father.

“(de Trin. vii. c. 22) This is the speech of conscious power. Yet to shew, that though of the Divine nature He hath His nativity from God, He adds, My Father which gave Me them is greater than all. He does not conceal His birth from the Father, but proclaims it. For that which He received from the Father, He received in that He was born from Him. He received it in the birth itself, not after it; though He was born when He received it.”

“After the Lord showed that he has life-giving power, and hinted at the manner of giving life, here he shows in respect of what the life-giving power belongs to him; and first the Evangelist sets forth the dissension that arose over this among the crowds toward one another; second he sets forth the dispute of the leaders of the Jews with Christ, at "the feast of the dedication was made," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth the very dissension of the crowds; second he adds the opinion of one dissenting party; third he brings in the sound assertion of the other party. Now the dissension arose among the crowds who had heard Christ, from his words: and this is what he says, "a dissension therefore arose among the Jews because of these words." For while some of them understood these words rightly, and some not rightly, they dissented from one another; Matthew 10:34: "I have not come to send peace, but the sword," namely of evangelical teaching, which some believe and others contradict; Psalm 106:40: "contention was poured out upon princes." But the opinion of the other dissenting party is false: and as to this he says, "but many of them said." He says "many," because, as is said in Ecclesiastes 1:15, "the number of fools is infinite." They said, I say, "he has a demon, and he raves." For it is the custom of fools always to interpret doubtful matters for the worse, though the contrary ought to be done. Hence it happens that whatever they do not understand, they blaspheme, as is said in the canonical letter of Jude. Therefore, because they were not able to understand the words of the Lord — since "the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it" — they therefore blaspheme, saying, "he has a demon, and he raves." And they strive to turn others away from him, saying, "why do you listen to him?" But in blaspheming, they impute two things to Christ. First, that he has a demon; as if they were to say: he speaks not from the Holy Spirit, but from an evil spirit. A similar thing is said in Acts 17:18, of Paul: "he is a proclaimer of new demons." Now it happens that someone may have a demon as a private and familiar companion; and such a one, although he always raves spiritually, does not, however, always rave bodily; but another may be seized by a demon, and such a one always raves bodily as well. Hence in Mark 3:21 they said, "because he has gone out of his mind." Second, in order to show that Christ has a demon in this way, they say "and he raves." Acts 26:24: "much learning brings you to madness." Nor is it a wonder if they blaspheme, since they are animal men, and, as is said in 1 Corinthians 2:14, "the animal man does not perceive the things that are of the Spirit of God." But the judgment and assertion of the other party disproves the aforesaid opinion in two ways. First, from the weight of the words; hence he says, "others" — namely, those who were rightly wise — "said: these are not the words of one who has a demon"; as if they were to say: from these it appears that he does not rave, since they are ordered and weighty; above, John 6:69: "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life." Hence Paul says in Acts 26:25: "I am not mad, most excellent Festus, but I speak words of truth and soberness." Second, from the greatness of the miracle; hence he says, "can a demon open the eyes of the blind?" As if to say: was not this a very great miracle? And therefore they rightly believed that it could not be done except by the power of God; above, John 9:33: "if this man were not from God, he could do nothing." Now it must be known that there are certain miracles which can be done by the power of demons and angels; but there are others which can in no way be done by their power. For those things which are above the order of nature, no creature whatsoever, by its own power, can do, since it too is subject to the laws of nature. But God alone, who is above nature, can operate above the order of nature. Whatever, then, any creature works, it must remain within the order of nature. From this it is clear that whatever can be done according to the order of nature, both the good angel and the evil angel can do, when it is permitted to him. Just as, according to the seeds which are present in natural things and ordered to the generation of certain animals, they can bring about the generation of those animals; as the magicians of Pharaoh did, Exodus 7:11. And likewise they can alter the nature of something: hence they could heal the sick, to whom help could come by the benefit of nature. But those things which simply transcend the order of nature cannot be done except by God, or by good angels and holy men through the power of God, which they obtain by praying. Such is the giving of light to the blind and the raising of the dead: for the power of nature cannot extend itself to the restoration of eyes and the raising of the dead. And therefore a demon cannot open the eyes of the blind, and raise the dead: because this belongs to God alone, and to the saints through the power of God. Here is set forth the dissension which was raised by the leaders of the Jews against Christ; and first the Evangelist proposes the question of the Jews; second he adds Christ's response, at "Jesus answered them: I speak to you"; third he brings in the effect of the response, at "the Jews took up stones." Concerning the first he does two things. First he describes the circumstances of the question; second he sets forth the question itself, at "they said to him: how long do you hold our soul in suspense?" Now he describes the circumstances of the question as to three things: namely as to time, as to place, and as to the persons questioning. As to time indeed, first in particular, saying, "the feast of the dedication was made at Jerusalem." For the understanding of this it must be known that, as Augustine says, the encaenia was the feast of dedication in the churches. For "kainos" in Greek is the same as "new" in Latin. Hence "encaenia" is the same as "renewal": from which it happens that even in common usage of speech, when something is dedicated to some use, it is said to be "encaeniated," which is the same as "renewed." "The feast of the dedication was made, therefore, at Jerusalem," that is, the feast and memorial of the dedication of the temple. For when we newly dedicate some church to divine worship, the feast of its consecration is held, and on the same day each year, in memory of it. In this way the Jews held the encaenia each year, that is, the memorial of the dedication of the temple. Now to know the reason and cause of the feast of consecration, it must be noted that all feasts are celebrated in the Church in commemoration of divine benefits; Isaiah 63:7: "I will remember the mercies of the Lord," etc. And in Psalm 117:1, after David had commemorated the many benefits of God, saying, "give praise to the Lord, for he is good," etc., he adds: "appoint a solemn day, with thick boughs, even to the horn of the altar." Now we recall the divine benefits shown to us in three ways. Sometimes indeed as shown to us in our Head, the Lord Jesus Christ; and thus we celebrate the feast of the Nativity, and of the Resurrection, and the like. Sometimes as shown to us in our fellow members, namely in the saints, who are members of the Church. And this fittingly: because, as the Apostle says, 1 Corinthians 12:26: "if one member glories, all the members rejoice together." And thus we celebrate the feasts of the saints Peter and Paul and other saints. And sometimes as they are shown to the whole Church; for instance in the ministry of the sacraments, and in other things commonly conferred on the Church. And because the material house is, as it were, a sign of the gathering of the Church of the faithful, and also in it all the sacraments of grace are dispensed; therefore in memory of these benefits, we celebrate the feast of the dedication of the church. This feast indeed is greater than the feast of any saint; just as the benefits conferred on the whole Church, whose memory we keep, exceed the benefit conferred on any one saint, which is recalled in his feast. It must be known, however, that the temple at Jerusalem was consecrated three times. First indeed by Solomon, as is found in 3 Kings 8; second, in the time of Ezra, by Zerubbabel and Jesus the high priest, as is found in 1 Esdras 6:13-22; third by the Maccabees, as is found in 1 Maccabees 4:42-58, that they went up to Jerusalem to renew the holy things. Now this encaenia was not made in memory of the dedication which was made by Solomon, because that was in autumn, namely in the seventh month; nor in memory of the dedication which was made in the time of Ezra, because that was in spring, namely on the ninth day of March; but in memory of the dedication which was made by the Maccabees in wintertime. And therefore, to signify this, he describes the time in particular, saying "and it was winter": which also has a mystical cause. As Gregory says, in Moralia II, the Evangelist took care to express the time of winter for this reason, that he might indicate the cold present in the hearts of the hearers, namely the malice of the Jews; Jeremiah 6:7: "as a cistern makes its water cold, so has she made her malice cold." Of this winter it is said, Song of Songs 2:11: "for now the winter is past, the rain is over and gone." Now he describes the place when he says "and Jesus walked in the temple, in Solomon's porch." And first indeed in general, when he says "in the temple": Psalm 10:5: "the Lord is in his holy temple," etc.; second in particular, saying "in Solomon's porch." For it must be known that "temple" is said not only of its body, but also of the surrounding porticoes, in which the people stood to pray: for in the temple only the priests prayed. Now "Solomon's porch" is the name given to that place in which Solomon stood when, the dedication of the temple having been completed, he prayed: 3 Kings 8:22: "Solomon therefore stood in the sight of the assembly of Israel." But against this: the temple which Solomon had built was destroyed, and likewise Solomon's porch. Response: it must be said that the temple was rebuilt in the likeness of the former one; and therefore, just as before that porch was called Solomon's, so also afterward, out of reverence for him. Now he describes the persons questioning as to their malice. Hence he says, "the Jews therefore surrounded him" — cold in the charity of loving, but burning with the eagerness of harming — so that they approached with a mind to circumvent, and surrounded him pressing in, with a mind to persecute; Psalm 21:13: "many calves have surrounded me, fat bulls have besieged me"; Hosea 11:12: "Ephraim has surrounded me." Consequently, when he says "and they said to him," etc., the question of the Jews is set forth. And first he sets forth the feigned cause of the question, when he says, "how long do you hold our soul in suspense?" They speak flatteringly, wishing thereby to show that they desire to know the truth about him. As if to say: our soul is in the suspense of desire — how long do you leave us sorrowful? Proverbs 13:12: "hope that is deferred afflicts the soul." And therefore, second, they add the question, saying, "if you are the Christ, tell us plainly." Here first note their perversity. For because they are indignant against Christ, that he called himself the Son of God, above, John 5:18, they do not ask him whether he is the Son of God, but say, "if you are the Christ, tell us plainly": so that through this they might have material for accusing him before Pilate, as one seditious and seeking a kingdom, which was against Caesar, and hateful to the Romans. Hence also Pilate, when the Jews accused Christ of making himself the Son of God, cared little. But when they said, "everyone who makes himself a king contradicts Caesar," he began to be more troubled against him. And therefore they say, "if you are the Christ" — that is, either king, or anointed one — "tell us plainly." Second, consider their wickedness, in that they say "plainly"; as if to say: up till now he has not taught publicly, but as it were in secret — although in fact he said everything plainly, always being present at the festivals, and spoke nothing in secret; below, John 18:20: "I have spoken openly to the world; I have said nothing in secret." Here is set forth Christ's response: in which he shows their unfaithfulness, showing that what they had said was false, namely that they desired to know the truth, saying, "how long do you hold our soul in suspense?" etc. And this as to two things. First, because they did not believe his words; and as to this he says, "I speak to you, and you do not believe." As if to say: you say to me, "if you are the king, the Christ, tell us"; but I do speak — that is, I tell you the truth — and you do not believe; Luke 22:67: "if I tell you, you will not believe," etc. Second, that they do not believe his works; and as to this he says, "the works that I do in my Father's name, these bear witness of me." Here first he shows their unbelief with respect to the works themselves; second, the reason for their unbelief, at "because you are not of my sheep." As to the first he says "the works that I do"; as if to say: you cannot be persuaded even by the word alone to be silent; but neither even by so many works that I do in my Father's name — that is, to his glory — "these bear witness of me," because, namely, they cannot be done except by God: hence from them it plainly appears that I have come from God. Matthew 18:33: "each tree is known by its fruit"; above, John 5:36: "the works that I do bear witness of me. But you do not believe"; below, John 12:37: "although he had done so many signs, they did not believe in him." And therefore they are inexcusable; below, John 15: "if I had not done among them the works that no other has done, they would not have sin. But now they have both seen, and have hated both me and my Father." Now the reason for their unbelief is their separation from the sheep of Christ; hence he says, "therefore you do not believe, because you are not of my sheep." Concerning this he does three things. First he sets forth their exclusion from the fellowship of the sheep of Christ; second he shows the dignity of the sheep, at "my sheep hear my voice," etc.; third he proves something he had said, namely that no one will snatch his sheep out of his hand, at "my Father, what he has given me, is greater than all." He sets forth their separation from his sheep, saying, "you are not of my sheep" — that is, predestined to believe, but foreknown for eternal ruin. For this very thing, that we believe, is from God to us; Philippians 1:29: "to you it has been given, not only that you should believe in him, but also that you should suffer for him"; Ephesians 2:8: "by grace you are saved, and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God." This indeed is given to no one, except to him for whom it has been prepared from eternity; and therefore only those will believe in him who have been ordained to this by God through eternal predestination; Acts 13:48: "as many as were preordained to eternal life believed." And the same book, 15:11: "we believe to be saved through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ." But ought it to be said to anyone that he is not predestined? It seems not; for since no one can be saved unless predestined, if it is said to someone that he is not predestined, he seems to be forced into despair. Therefore the Lord, saying to the Jews, "you do not believe, because you are not of my sheep," was forcing them to despair. Response: it must be said that in that crowd there was something common to all, namely that they were not preordained by God to believe at that time; and something particular, namely that some of them were preordained to believe afterward — hence they also believed afterward, as is found in Acts 2:41, that three thousand of them believed in one day; but there were others who were not preordained to this. It was not, therefore, contrary to hope, to say, to a crowd in which some were preordained to believe afterward, that they were not of the sheep: because no one could definitely suspect this of himself. But it would have been contrary to hope, if he had said this definitely to some particular person. Now he sets forth the dignity of his sheep, saying "my sheep hear my voice," etc., where he sets forth four things. Two on our part, which we do with respect to Christ; and two on Christ's part, which he himself does in us, corresponding to one another in turn. The first, then, which we do, is obedience to Christ; and as to this he says, "my sheep" — namely through predestination — "hear my voice," believing, and obeying my precepts; Psalm 94:8: "today if you shall hear his voice, harden not your hearts." The second, corresponding first, which Christ does, is his love and approval; and as to this he says, "and I know them," that is, I love and approve; 2 Timothy 2:19: "the Lord knows who are his." As if to say: this very fact that they hear me, is this — that I know them, choosing them from eternity. But if no one can believe otherwise unless it is given to him by God, it seems that unbelief ought not be imputed to anyone. To this it must be said that it is imputed to them for this reason: that in them is the cause why it is not given to them — just as I cannot see light unless I am illumined by the sun; but if I were to close my eyes I would not see the light, and this would not be on the part of the sun but on my part, who, by closing my eyes, furnish the cause that I am not illumined. Now sin is the cause why we are not illumined by God through faith — for instance original sin, or, in some, actual sin. And this cause indeed is present in all. Hence all those who are abandoned, are abandoned by the just judgment of God, and those who are chosen, are taken up by the mercy of God. The third, which is on our part, is imitation of Christ; and as to this he says, "and they follow me"; Job 23:11: "my foot has followed his steps"; 1 Peter 2:21: "Christ suffered for us, leaving you an example, that you should follow his steps." The fourth, corresponding on Christ's part, is the repayment of a reward; and as to this he says, "and I give them eternal life," as if to say: they follow me, walking here the way of gentleness and innocence; and I will bring it about that afterward they will follow me, entering into the joys of eternal life. Now the Lord shows this reward to be unfailing, in three ways. For a thing can fail in three ways. First indeed from its own nature, for instance if it is corruptible; but this reward, as to its own nature, is incorruptible; hence he says, "I give them eternal life," which is the enjoyment of the incorruptible and immortal God; below, John 17:3: "this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." And, as Augustine says, these are the pastures of which he had spoken above. And eternal life is called good pasture because there no grass withers, all is green. Second, it can fail from a defect of the recipient, when the recipient fails and when he guards badly; but this will not happen in that reward, hence he says, "and they shall not perish forever," namely the sheep. This is against Origen, who said that at some time the saints who are in glory will be able to sin. But the Lord said "they shall not perish," because they will be preserved forever; Revelation 3:12: "he who shall overcome, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out no more." Third, it can fail from the violence of one who snatches away: for perhaps not even Adam would have been shut out, had not the seducer been present. But in eternal life this will not be, hence he says, "and no one shall snatch them" — namely the sheep — "out of my hand," that is, out of my protection and loving care; Wisdom 3:1: "the souls of the just are in the hand of God." For, as Augustine says, there neither does the wolf snatch, nor the thief carry off, nor the robber kill. Here he proves what he had said above about the dignity of the sheep, namely that no one will snatch them out of his hand, by the following reasoning: that which is in my Father's hand, no one can snatch; but the hand of the Father and mine is the same; therefore that which is in my hand, likewise no one can snatch. Concerning this he does three things. First he sets forth the minor premise, manifesting the communication of the divinity handed down to him from the Father, when he says, "my Father, what he has given me" — namely through eternal generation — "is greater than all." For above, John 5:26: "as the Father has life in himself, so has he given to the Son also to have life in himself." Likewise it is greater in power; above, John 5:27: "he has given him power to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man." Likewise it is greater in reverence and honor; Philippians 2:9: "he has given him a name which is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow." It is greater, then, than all, what the Father has given me — namely, that I should be his Word, that I should be his only-begotten, that I should be the splendor of his light. Second, he sets forth the excellence of the paternal power, which pertains to the major premise, when he says, "and no one can snatch" — that is, take away by violence, or steal away by stealth — "out of the hand" — that is, out of the power — "of my Father," or from me, who am the power of the Father; although it is better said of the power of the Father than "from me," as Augustine says. Now no one can snatch out of the Father's hand for this reason: that he is most strong, to whom violence cannot be done, and most wise, into whom ignorance cannot fall; Job 9:4: "he is wise in heart, and mighty in strength," etc. Third, he sets forth his unity with the Father, from which the conclusion follows. Hence he says, "I and the Father are one"; as if to say: therefore no one will snatch them out of my hand, because I and the Father are one, namely in unity of essence. For the nature of the Father and of the Son is the same. By this, moreover, a twofold error is excluded: namely that of Arius, who divided the essence, and that of Sabellius, who confounded the persons — so that we might thus be freed both from Charybdis and from Scylla. For by his saying "one," he frees you from Arius; for if one, then not diverse. But by his saying "we are," he frees you from Sabellius; for if "we are," then the Father and the Son are one and another. But the Arians, by the lie of their impiety, strive to deny this, saying that a creature is in some way one with God: hence in this way too the Son can be one with the Father. But this is clearly false, on three counts. First, from the very manner of speaking. For it is clear that "one" is said in the way that "being" is said; hence just as something is not called "being" simply except according to substance, so too it is not called "one" except according to substance or nature. Now a thing is said "simply" when it is said with nothing added. Because, then, it is said simply, "I and the Father are one," with nothing else added, it is clear that they are one according to substance and nature. But it is never found that God and a creature are one without something added, as in that text, 1 Corinthians 6:17: "he who cleaves to God is one spirit." Therefore it is clear that the Son of God is not one with the Father as a creature is. Second, from what he had said above, namely, "what the Father has given me is greater than all," and afterward he concludes, "I and the Father are one," as if to say: we are one to this extent, inasmuch as he has given me that which is greater than all. Third, it is clear from his intention: for the Lord proves that no one will snatch them out of his hand, by this — that no one can snatch out of the hand of his Father. This would not follow, if his power were less than the power of the Father. The Father and the Son, therefore, are one in nature, in honor, and in power.”

“My Father which gave them me,.... So the sheep came to be Christ's, and to be in his hand; the Father gave them to him, put them into his hands, and made them his care and charge: is greater than all; than all gods, than all beings, than all creatures, angels and men, and than all the enemies of his people; this must be allowed: the Vulgate Latin version, and so some of the ancients read, "what my Father gave to me, is greater than all"; meaning, that the church given to him, and built on him, is stronger than all its enemies: and none is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand; so that these sheep have a double security; they are in the hands of Christ, and they are in the hands of the Father of Christ; wherefore could it be thought, which ought not to be, that they could be plucked out of Christ's hands, yet it can never be imagined, that any can pluck them out of the hands of God the Father; and there is no more reason to think that they can be plucked out of the hands of the one, than there is that they can be plucked out of the hands of the other, as is clear from what follows in Joh 10:30; see the Apocrypha: "But the souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and there shall no torment touch them.'' (Wisdom 3:1).”

“That which my Father hath given [1] me, is greater than all. We may look upon this as the true reading by Tertullian, St. Hilary, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, &c. The ancient Fathers make use of these words, to shew the eternal procession of the Son from the Father; and that they are one in nature, substance, power, &c. The reading in the ordinary Greek copies is now different. My Father, who gave me them, (the sheep) is greater than all. No one can snatch, or pull them by force, out of the hand of the Father. He had said just before, no one shall, or can snatch them, out of my hand. And this shews that the hand, that is, the power of the Father and the Son, is equal, is one and the same. See St. Augustine, St. Chrysostom, &c. (Witham)”

“G. P. "My Father, which gave them Me, is greater than all," The Vulgate reading is extremely ancient, since Tertullian quotes the text in the same way. L. adv. Praxeam c. xxii. The Coptic and Saxon versions agree. " Two or three manuscripts have 6 for oj. The Alexandrian reads iaso^ov for ju-h'^Twi'." Campbell. As the Vulgate reading is the more difficult, it should not be easily abandoned. St. Augustin explains it of the communication of the Divine Nature by the ineffable genera- tion : " The Father is God, not from the Son : the Son is God from the Father : therefore the Father by the generation of the Son gave to Him to be God, by generation He gave to Him to be coeternal : by generation He gave to Him to be equal. This is what is greater than all things."”

“My Father, which gave them me--(See on Joh 6:37-39). is greater than all--with whom no adverse power can contend. It is a general expression of an admitted truth, and what follows shows for what purpose it was uttered, "and none is able to pluck them out of My Father's hand." The impossibility of true believers being lost, in the midst of all the temptations which they may encounter, does not consist in their fidelity and decision, but is founded upon the power of God. Here the doctrine of predestination is presented in its sublime and sacred aspect; there is a predestination of the holy, which is taught from one end of the Scriptures to the other; not, indeed, of such a nature that an "irresistible grace" compels the opposing will of man (of course not), but so that that will of man which receives and loves the commands of God is produced only by God's grace (OLSHAUSEN--a testimony all the more valuable, being given in spite of Lutheran prejudice).”