eye itself. It seems highly improbable that the evangelist here deliberately opposes the Platonic-Stoic anthropology concerning the lumen internum (as Betz contends). What interests the evangelist is the eye/light metaphor as a vehicle for his argument concerning the disciple and material wealth. The point is that the eye is what brings light to the body; if instead the eye itself becomes only a source of darkness, how great one’s personal darkness is. The nature of the eye problem is specified in
Page 159