sch. ix. 6.

8

arrival of the Jews: cf. ver. 33. 33.] In explaining this difficult verse, two things must be borne in mind: (1) that the word rendered by the A. V. "groaned" can bear but one meaning,-the expression of indignation and rebuke, not of sorrow. This has been here acknowledged by all the expositors who have paid any attention to the usage of the word. (2) That both from the words, When Jesus saw her weeping," &c.,-from the expression "he troubled himself," and from ver. 35,-the feeling in the Lord was clearly one of rising sympathy, which vented itself at last in tears. These two things being premised, I think the meaning to be, that Jesus, with the tears of sympathy already rising and overcoming His speech, checked them, so as to be able to speak the words following. I would understand the words as expressing the temporary check given to the flow of His tears,-the effort used to utter the following question. And I would thus divest the self-restraint of all stoical and unworthy character, and consider it as merely physical, requiring indeed an act of the will, and a self-troubling,-a complication of feeling,-but implying no deliberate disapproval of the rising emotion, which indeed immediately after is suffered to prevail. What minister has not, when burying the dead in the midst of a weeping family, felt the emotion and made the effort here described? And surely this was one of the things in which He was made like unto His brethren. Thus Bengel: “Jesus for the present austerely repressed his tears, and presently, ver. 38, they broke forth. So much the greater was their power, when they were shed." Meyer's explanation deserves mention; that our Lord was indignant at seeing the Jews, His bitter enemies, mingling their

hypocritical tears with the true ones of the bereaved sister. But, not to say how unworthy this seems of the Person and occasion, the explanation will find no place in ver. 38: for surely the question of the Jews in ver. 37 is not enough to justify it. Still perhaps, any contribution to the solution of this difficult word is not to be summarily rejected. in spirit, here, corresponds to "within himself," ver. 38. Indignation over unbelief, and sin, and death the fruit of sin, doubtless lay in the background; but to see it in the words (with Olsh., Stier, and Trench) seems unnatural. troubled himself is understood by Meyer, and perhaps rightly, as describing an outward motion of the body,-He shuddered: and so Euthymius, "He trembled, as is usual with those who are thus affected." Cyril's comment is to the same effect: that it was His divinity, rebuking, and in conflict with, His human feelings, which caused His frame to shudder. 35-38.] It is probable that the second set of Jews (ver. 37) spoke with a scoffing and hostile purport for St. John seldom uses but as a mere copula, but generally as expressing a contrast: see vv. 46, 49, 51. It is (as Trench remarks) a point of accuracy in the narrative, that these dwellers in Jerusalem should refer to a miracle so well known among themselves, rather than to the former raisings of the dead in Galilee, of which they probably may have heard, but naturally would not thoroughly believe on rumour only. Again, of raising Lazarus none of them seem to have thought, only of preventing his death. This second being greatly moved of our Lord I would refer to the same reason as the first. "He wept, as allowing nature to manifest herself: there again he re

....

a render, against.

Y not expressed in the original. a omit.

bukes the affections." Euthymius. Only he assigns a didactic purpose, to teach us moderation in our tears; I should rather believe the self-restraint to have been exercised as a preparation for what followed.

The caves were generally horizontal, natural or artificial, with recesses in the sides, where the bodies were laid. There is no necessity here for supposing the entrance to have been otherwise than horizontal, as the word cave would lead us to believe. Graves were of both kinds : we have the vertically sunk mentioned Luke xi. 44. Compare Isa. xxii. 16; 2 Chron. xvi. 14; 2 Kings xxiii. 16. Probably, from this circumstance, as from 'the Jews' coming to condole,—and the costly ointment (ch. xii. 3),—the family was wealthy. 39.] The corpse had not been embalmed, but merely wrapped in linen clothes with spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury,'-see ch. xix. 40, and ver. 44 below. The expression, the sister of him that was dead, as Meyer remarks, notes the natural horror of the sister's heart at what was about to be done. There is no reason to avoid the assumption of the plain fact (see below) stated in by this time he stinketh. I cannot see that any monstrous character (as asserted by Olshausen and Trench) is given to the miracle by it; any more than such a character can be predicated of restoring the withered hand. In fact, the very act of death is the beginning of decomposition. I have no hesitation, with almost all the ancient, and many of the best modern Commentators, in assuming her words as expressing a fact, and indeed with Stier, believing them to be spoken not as a supposition, but as a (sensible) fact. The

VOL. I.

because of the people tch. xii. 30.

entrances to these vaults were not built up,-merely defended, by a stone being rolled to them, from the jackals and beasts of prey. 40.] I can hardly think she supposed merely that Jesus desired to look on the face of the dead;-she expected something was about to be done, but in her anxiety for decorum (Luke x. 40) she was willing to avoid the consequence of opening the cave. This feeling Jesus here rebukes, by referring her to the plain duty of simple faith, insisted on by Him before (in verses 25, 26? or in some other teaching ?) as the condition of beholding the glory of God (not merely in the event about to follow,-for that was seen by many who did not believe,-but in a deeper sense,-that of the unfolding of the Resurrection and the Life in the personal being). 41, 42.] In the filial relation of the Lord Jesus to the Father, all power is given to Him: the Son can do nothing of Himself:-and during His humiliation on earth, these acts of power were done by Him, not by that glory of His own which He had laid aside, but by the mighty working of the Father in Him, and in answer to His prayer: the difference between Him and us in this respect being, that His prayer was always heard, -even (Heb. v. 7) that in Gethsemane. And this, Thou hast heard me, He states here for the benefit of the standers-by, that they might know the truth of His repeated assertions of His mission from the Father. At the same time He guards this, ver. 42, from future misconstruction, as though He had no more power than men who pray, by I knew that Thou hearest me always; - because Thou and I are One.' When He prayed, does not P P

it differently that, all men being persuaded by Him to peaceful lives, they would have no one to join them in revolt against the Romans; but this seems forced : for no coming of the Romans would in that case be provoked. our place] not, the temple (the holy place, Acts vi. 13), but our place, as in reff.: i. e. our local habitation, and our national existence. Both these literally came to pass. Whether this fear was earnestly expressed, or only as a covert for their enmity, does not appear. The word our is emphatic, detecting the real cause of their anxiety. Respecting this man's pretensions, they do not pretend to decide: all they know is that if he is to go on thus, THEIR standing is gone. 49-52.] The counsel is given in subtilty, and was intended by Caiaphas in the sense of political expediency only. But it pleased God to make him, as High Priest, the special though involuntary organ of the Holy Spirit, and thus to utter by him a prophecy of the death of Christ and its effects. That this is the only sense to be given, appears from the consideration that the whole of verses 51, 52 cannot for a moment be supposed to have been in the mind of Caiaphas; and to divide it, and suppose the latter part to be the addition of the Evangelist, is quite unjustifiable. high priest that year] repeated again, ch. xviii. 13. He was High Priest during the whole Procuratorship of Pontius Pilate, eleven years. In the words that year, there is no intimation conveyed that the High Priesthood was changed every year, which it was not: but we must understand the words as directing atten

c Isa. xlix. 6. 1 John ii. 2. Eph. ii. 14,

deh. x. 16. 15, 16, 17.

P render, the.

8 render, Therefore.

are.

tion to that (remarkable) year,' without any reference to time past or to come. THAT YEAR of great events had Caiaphas as its High Priest. See on ver. 57. Ye know nothing at all] Probably various methods of action had been suggested. Observe people here, the usual term for the chosen people, and then nation, when it is regarded as a nation among the nations: compare also ver. 52. not of himself] i. e. not merely of himself, but under the influence of the Spirit, who caused him to utter words, of the full meaning of which he had no conception.

being high priest... he prophesied] There certainly was a belief, probably arising originally from the use of the Urim and Thummim, that the High Priest, and indeed every priest, had some knowledge of dreams and utterance of prophecy. Philo the Jew says, "A true priest is ipso facto a prophet." That this belief existed, may account for the expression here; which however does not confirm it in all cases, but asserts the fact that the Spirit in this case made use of him as High Priest, for this purpose. This confirms the above view of the words that year, here again repeated. See on ver. 49. that Jesus was about to die...] the purport (unknown to himself) of his prophecy. And the term the nation, is guarded from misunderstanding by what follows. the children of God] are those who are called by the same name in ch. i. 12, the "ordained to eternal life" of Acts xiii. 48 (where see note), among all nations; compare ch. x. 16. 53.] The decision, to put Him to death, is understood: and from that day they