If I had not come and spoken unto them, they would not have sin: but now they have no cover for their sin.
All Commentaries on John 15:22 Go To John 15
Augustine of Hippo
AD 430
Christ spoke to the Jews only, not to any other nation. In them then was that world which hated Christ and His disciples; and not only in them, but in us also. Were the Jews then without sin before Christ came in the flesh, because Christ had not spoken to them? By sin here He means not every sin, but a certain great sin, which includes all, and which alone hinders the remission of other sins, viz. unbelief. They did not believe in Christ, who came that they might believe in Him. This then they would not have had, had not Christ come; for Christ's advent, as it was the salvation of the believing, so was it the perdition of the unbelieving. But now they have no cloak for their sin. If those to whom Christ had not come or spoken, had not an excuse for their sin, why is it said here that these had no excuse, because Christ had come and spoken to them? If the first had excuse, did it do away with their punishment altogether, or only mitigate it? I answer that this excuse covered, not all their sin, but only this one, viz. that they did not believe in Christ. But they are not of this number to whom Christ came by His disciples; they are not to be let off with a lighter punishment, who altogether refilled to receive Christ’s love, and, as far as concerned them, wished its destruction. This excuse they may have who died before they heard of Christ's Gospel; but this will not shield them from damnation. For whoever are not saved in the Savior, who came to seek what was lost, shall without doubt go to perdition: though some will have lighter, others severer punishments. He perishes to God, who is punished with an exclusion from that happiness which is given to the saints. But there is as great diversity of punishments, as there is of sins: though how this is settled is a matter known to the Divine Wisdom indeed, but too deep for human conjecture to examine or pronounce upon.
But He has just said, Because they know not Him that sent Me. How could they hate one whom they did not know? For if they hated God, believing Him to be something else; and not God, this was not hatred of God. In the case of men, it often happens that we hate or love persons whom we have never seen, simply in consequence of what hat we have heard of them. But if a man’s character is known to us, he cannot properly be said to be unknown. And a man’s character is not shown by his face, but by his habits and way of life: else we should not be able to know ourselves, for we cannot see our own face. But history and fame sometimes lie, and our faith is imposed upon. We cannot penetrate into men’s hearts; we only know that such things are right, and others wrong; and if we escape error here, to be mistaken in men is a venial matter. A good man may hate a good man ignorantly, or rather love him ignorantly, for he loves the good man, though he hates the man whom he supposes him to be. A bad man may love a good man supposing him to be a bad man like himself, and therefore not, properly speaking, loving him, but the person whom he takes him to be. And in the same way with respect to God. If the Jews were asked whether they loved God, they would reply that they did love Him, not intending to lie, but only being mistaken in so saying. For how could they who hated the Truth, love the Father of the Truth? They did not wish their actions to be judged, and this the Truth did. They hated the Truth then, because they hated the punishment which He would inflict upon such as they. But at the same time they did not know that He was the Truth, who came to condemn them. They did not know that the Truth was born of God the Father, and therefore they did not know God the Father Himself. Thus they both hated and also knew not, the Father.
The sin of not believing Him, notwithstanding His doctrine and His miracles. But why does He add, Which none other man did? Christ did no work greater than the raising of the dead, which we know the ancient Prophets did before Him. Is it that He did some things which no one else did? But others also did what neither He nor anyone else did. True; yet none of the ancient prophets that we read of healed so many bodily defects, sicknesses, infirmities. For to say nothing of single cases, Mark says, that wherever He entered, into villages, or cities, or country, they laid the sick in the streets, and besought Him that they might touch if it were but the border of His garment; and as many as touched Him were made whole (Mark 6:56). Such works as these no one else had done in them. In them, meaning, not amongst them, or before them, but within them. But even where particular works, like some of these, had been done before, whoever worked such did not really do them, for He did them through them, whereas He performs these miracles by His own power. For even if the Father or the Holy Spirit did them, yet it was none other than He, for the Three Persons are of one substance. For these benefits then they ought to have returned Him not hatred, but love. And this He reproaches them with, but now they have both seen and hated both Me and My Father.
Under the name of the Law, the whole of the Old Testament is included; and therefore our Lord says here, That is written in their law, the passage being in the Psalms.
Their law, He says, not as made by them, but as given to them. A man hates without a cause, who seeks no advantage from his hatred. Thus the ungodly hate God; the righteous love Him, i.e. looking for no other good but Him: He is their all in all.
