John 8:28

8:28 Then Jesus said, ¹  “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, ²  and I do nothing on my own initiative, ³  but I speak just what the Father taught me. ⁴ 

John 8:38

8:38 I am telling you the things I have seen while with the ⁵  Father; ⁶  as for you, ⁷  practice the things you have heard from the ⁸  Father!”

[8:28]  ¹ tn Grk “Then Jesus said to them” (the words “to them” are not found in all mss).

[8:28]  ² tn Grk “that I am.” See the note on this phrase in v. 24.

[8:28]  ³ tn Grk “I do nothing from myself.”

[8:28]  ⁴ tn Grk “but just as the Father taught me, these things I speak.”

[8:38]  ⁵ tc The first person pronoun μου (mou, “my”) may be implied, especially if ὑμῶν (Jumwn, “your”) follows the second mention of “father” in this verse (as it does in the majority of mss); no doubt this implication gave rise to the reading μου found in most witnesses (א D Θ Ψ 0250 Ë^1,13 33 Ï it sy). No pronoun here is read by Ì^66,75 B C L 070 pc. This problem cannot be isolated from the second in the verse, however. See that discussion below.

[8:38]  ⁶ tn Grk “The things which I have seen with the Father I speak about.”

[8:38]  ⁷ tn Grk “and you.”

[8:38]  ⁸ tc A few significant witnesses lack ὑμῶν (Jumwn, “your”) here (Ì^66,75 B L W 070 pc), while the majority have the pronoun (א C D Θ Ψ 0250 Ë^1,13 33 565 892 Ï al lat sy). However, these mss do not agree on the placement of the pronoun: τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν ποιεῖτε (tou patro" Jumwn poieite), τῷ πατρὶ ὑμῶν (tw patri Jumwn), and τῷ πατρὶ ὑμῶν ταῦτα (tw patri Jumwn tauta) all occur. If the pronoun is read, then the devil is in view and the text should be translated as “you are practicing the things you have heard from your father.” If it is not read, then the same Father mentioned in the first part of the verse is in view. In this case, ποιεῖτε should be taken as an imperative: “you [must] practice the things you have heard from the Father.” The omission is decidedly the harder reading, both because the contrast between God and the devil is now delayed until v. 41, and because ποιεῖτε could be read as an indicative, especially since the two clauses are joined by καί (kai, “and”). Thus, the pronoun looks to be a motivated reading. In light of the better external and internal evidence the omission is preferred.