166 Karl Olav Sandnes controversy. The mention of him works as a flashback; we are reminded of Nicodemus’ incipient faith, but also of his failure to comprehend. John 7,25-29 is thus a Christological controversy focusing on the whence and whither of Jesus. This is centred on Jesus’ relationship with his heavenly Father, his coming from Him and returning to Him. This controversy has a structure which brings to mind the epistemological character of the dialogue with Nicodemus in John 3,5-8. Only the Spirit can know who Jesus is. b) John 8 John 8 progressively repeats the argument of chap.7. Jesus claims to be “the light of the world” (v. 12). His followers do not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life. “Walking” brings to mind ethics and lifestyle, but the controversy gives emphasis to knowing Jesus. This epistemological aspect is implicit in v. 12b about “having the light of life”, which describes the result of the illumination mentioned in 1,9. The believers have faith as a source of light in themselves; i.e. the movement from christology to anthropological implications noted above in 7,37-39. Once again, understanding Jesus is a question of knowing whence he comes and whither he goes. Jesus’ confidence in being sent by his Father is expressed in this terminology: oi\da povqen h\lqon kai; pou' uJpavgw (v. 14). The whence and whither strongly emphasize his dependence on the Father. Jesus has not taken this ministry upon himself, it has been given him from above (cf. v. 28). The unbelief of the Pharisees is presented as a marked contrast: uJmei'" oujk oi[date povqen e[rcomai h] pou' uJpavgw. They are unable to know Jesus or to follow him whither he departs (vv. 21-23). This is due to their judging by human standards (v. 15). Their failure to know whence and whither, due to savrx, brings to mind the Nicodemus dialogue. So too does Jesus’ pointed remark in v. 23 about human inability to gain access to the place of his origin and destination: “You are from below (ejk tw'n katw I am from,) above (ejk tw'n a[nw)” (cf. v. 44). Knowledge depends v on being from below or from above (cf. 3,31). This is an implicit claim to the principle of likeness: “like is known by like”. An epistemological contrast marks the whole controversy. The “seeing” and “speaking” of Jesus is contrasted with that of the Jews (v. 38), while He is from above and they from below. This is exactly the contrast made in the dialogue with Nicodemus (36). The principle of (36) Thus also NICHOLSON, Death as Departure, 81.