04_Parker_222_244_cop_222-244 29/07/15 11:03 Pagina 230 230 FLOYD O. PARKER JR. 230 of “it” or “all things” demonstrates the lack of a suitable method- ology for determining the most likely candidate. Therefore, the fol- lowing section will seek to cull out the least probable of the interpretations listed above. Proponents of the view that “it” refers to the work the Father sent Jesus to complete often base their argument on the evidence that tele,w and teleio,w are from the same word group, that the latter verb appears in passages related to the “work” of the Father (John 4,34; 5,36; 17,4) 31, and that, by extension, tele,w itself is re- lated to the Father’s work. Although this interpretation is frequently cited, it can be challenged because tele,w is used only twice in John (19,28.30), which suggests that this verb has a specialized usage that distinguishes it somewhat from that of teleio,w 32. Thus, it may not follow that a connection between the Father’s work and teleio,w entails a relationship between the Father’s work and tele,w. Moreover, the words tele,w and “work” (or “works”) never appear together in John. Furthermore, the “work” of the Father, which is often connected to teleio,w (John 4,34; 5,36; 17,4), may not always refer to Jesus’ overall mission, thereby calling into ques- tion the proposal that “it is finished” refers to the whole work of Christ, even if a connection between teleio,w and tele,w were es- tablished. The “works” of the Father mentioned in John 5,36 appear to refer to Jesus’ miracles alone and not to the overall agenda of the Father. Although many believe that the “works” in 17,4 refer to Jesus’ whole mission, including his sacrificial death 33, the more 31 LANGE, Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, III, 587; M.-J. LAGRANGE, Évangile selon saint Jean (EB; Paris, 1925) 497; F.J. MOLONEY, The Gospel of John (Sacra Pagina 4; Collegeville, MN 1998) 504; R. SCHIPPERS, “Te,loj”, The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Grand Rapids, MI 1976) II, 64; A.J. KÖSTENBERGER, John (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids, MI 2004) 551, lists 4,34 and 17,4; TASKER, The Gospel According to John, 211; F. PACK, The Gospel According to John (LWC; Austin, TX 1977) II, 141; D.W. BAUR, Das Johannesevan- gelium (HNT 6; Tübingen 1925) 218; R. SCHNACKENBURG, The Gospel Ac- cording to St. John (HTCNT; New York 1982) III, 282-285; HUBBARD, “John 19:17-30”, 401; GNILKA, Johannesevangelium, 145. 32 BAMPFYLDE, “John XIX 28”, 249-250. 33 BROWN, John, II, 742; L. MORRIS, The Gospel According to John (NICNT; Grand Rapids, MI 1984) 721, n. 19; BRUCE, The Gospel of John, 330; D.A. CARSON, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids, MI 1991) 557; BURGE, John, 463-464.