Page images

13—15); (4) the clear and unexpected fulfilment of two Messianic prophecies.

36. éyéveTO. Came to pass. Note that S. John uses the aorist, where S. Matthew, writing nearer to the events, uses yéyovev. 'Hath come to pass'implies that the event is not very remote; Matt. i. 22, xxi. 4, xxvi. 56. The yap, depends on mlTEVOnte. Belief is supported by Scripture; for the two surprising events, Christ's escaping the crurifragium and yet having His side pierced, were evidently preordained in the Divine counsels. The first ypaoń (ii. 22, xii. 38) is Exod. xii. 46. For outpißelv_comp. Matt. xii. 20; Mark v. 4, xiv. 3; Rev. ii. 27. Thus He who at the opening of this Gospel was proclaimed as the Lamb of God (i. 29, 36), at the close of it is declared to be the true Paschal Lamb. The Paschal Lamb, as dedicated to God, was protected by the Law from rough treatment and common uses. Its bones must not be broken; its remains must be burned. Once more we have evidence that S. John's consistent and precise view is, that the death of Christ coincided with the killing of the Paschal Lamb. And this seems also to have been S. Paul's view (see on 1 Cor. v. 7).

37. Öpovtal. All present, especially the Jews. The whole world was represented there. 'Ekkevtáv, to pierce deeply,' occurs nowhere else in N.T. excepting Rev. i. 7, and forms a connexion worth noting between the Gospel and the Apocalypse (see on i. 14, iv. 6, vii. 30, viii. 2, xi. 44, xiii. 8, xv. 20, xx. 16); all the more so because S. John here agrees with the present Masoretic Hebrew text and in every word differs from the LXX. The LXX. softens down ¢FEKévtno av (which seemed a strange expression to use of men's treatment of Jehovah) into katwpxÞoavto ('insulted'). See on vi. 45, xii. 13, 15, where there is further evidence of the Evangelist having independent knowledge of Hebrew. With the construction els öv comp. vi. 29, xvii. 9.

38. μετά δε ταύτα. . But after these things. The dé marks a contrast between the hostile petition of the Jews and the friendly, petition of Joseph. Taūta as distinct from ToùTO shews that no one event is singled out with which what follows is connected: the sequence is indefinite (iii. 22). Contrast v. 28: there the sequence is direct and definite (ii. 12, xi. 7, 11). For Joseph of Arimathaea see on Matt. xxvii. 57; Mark xv. 43; Luke xxiii. 50. The Synoptists tell us that he was rich, a member of the Sanhedrin, a good and just man who had not consented to the Sanhedrin's counsel and crime, one who (like Simeon and Anna) waited for the kingdom of God, and had become a disciple of Christ. Διά τ. φόβον forms a coincidence with S. Mark, who says of him (xv. 43) that having summoned courage (Toluñoas) he went in unto Pilate, implying that like Nicodemus he was naturally timid. Joseph probably went to Pilate as soon as he knew that Jesus was dead: the vague after these things' need not mean that he did not act till after the piercing of the side. With ripev t. owua comp. Matt. xiv. 12; Acts viii. 2.

39. Another coincidence. Nicodemus also was a member of the Sanhedrin (iii. 1), and his acquaintance with Joseph is thus explained. But it is S. Mark who tells us that Joseph was one of the Sanhedrin, S. John who brings him in contact with Nicodemus. It would seem as if Joseph's unusual courage had inspired Nicodemus also. Thus Jesus by being lifted up is already drawing men unto Him. These Jewish aristocrats first confess Him in the hour of His deepest degradation. Tò mpôrov is either at the beginning of Christ's ministry, or the first time He came to Jesus. The meaning of the Brazen Serpent, of which he heard then (iii. 14), is becoming plain to him now.

ulyua. This may be a correction of Elcyua (XB), a roll. Myrrhgum (Matt. ii. 11) and pounded aloe-wood (here only) are both aromatic: All thy garments are myrrh and aloes' (Ps. xlv. 8). The quantity is royal (2 Chron. xvi. 14), but not improbable, and reminds us of Mary's profusion (xii. 3). It is a rich man's proof of devotion, and possibly of remorse for a timidity which now seemed irremediable: his courage had come too late.

40. Snoav autò 00. Bound it in linen cloths. The 60bvla (see on Luke xxiv. 12) seem to be the bandages, whereas the olvoúv (Matt. xxvii. 59; Mark xv. 46; Luke xxiii. 53) is a large sheet (Mark xiv. 51) to envelope the whole. Kabws 90s . T. 'I. distinguishes Jewish from other modes of embalming. The Egyptians had three methods, but in all cases removed part of the intestines and steeped the body in nitre (Herod. 11. 86 ff.) 'Evrabláfelv occurs elsewhere only Matt. xxvi. 12: ¿vtapiaopós occurs xii. 7; Mark xiv. 8: in LXX. (Gen. 1. 2) it is used for the embalming of Jacob.

41. Kínos. S. John alone mentions it, as he alone mentions the other garden (xviii. 1). It probably belonged to Joseph, for the tomb was his (Matt. xxvii. 60). This shews that Joseph, though of Arimathaea, had settled in Jerusalem. For kalvóv see on xiii. 34. S. Matthew also says that it was new, S. Luke that never man had yet lain in it. S. John states the fact both ways with great emphasis. It is another royal honour Not even in its contact with ‘His flesh see corruption. Comp. the colt, whereon no man ever yet sat (Luke xix. 30).

42. The burial was hastily performed: after the great Sabbath 'they intended to make a more solemn and complete burial. The fact of his having a tomb of his own close to Golgotha had perhaps suggested to Joseph the thought of going to Pilate. For the addition Twv 'Iovdalwy see on ii. 13, xi. 55: it suggests a time when there was already a Christian ‘Preparation.' The order of the words, with the pathetic ending, should be preserved. There therefore, because of the Jews' Preparation (for the tomb was nigh at hand), laid they Jesus.

grave did CHAPTER XX.

11. το μνημείο for το μνημείον with AB against KUX. .

16. Before Ραββουνί insert Εβραϊστί with NBDLXΔ against A (omitted as unnecessary).

19. Before oaßßátwy omit tûv (from v. 1), and before &có omit ouvnyuévol (explanatory gloss).

20. After έδειξεν οmit αυτοίς: αυτούς for αυτού. 29. After


omit Owuâ with XABCD.

We enter now upon the third and last part of the second main division of the Gospel. The Evangelist having set before us the INNER GLORIFICATION OF CHRIST IN HIS LAST DISCOURSE (xiii.-xvii.), and HIS OUTER GLORIFICATION IN HIS PASSION AND DEATH (xviii., xix.), now gives us his record of THE RESURRECTION AND THREEFOLD MANIFESTATION OF CHRIST (xx.).

The chapter falls naturally into five sections. 1. The first Evidence of the Resurrection (1-10). 2. The Manifestation to Mary Magdalene (11—18). 3. The Manifestation to the Ten and others (19—23). 4. The Manifestation to S. Thomas and others (24—29). 5. The Conclusion and Purpose of the Gospel (30, 31).

S. John's Gospel preserves its character to the end. Like the rest of his narrative, the account of the Resurrection is not intended as a complete record;—it is avowedly the very reverse of complete (v. 30); -but a series of typical scenes selected as embodiments of spiritual truth. Here also, as in the rest of the narrative, we have individual characters marked with singular distinctness. The traits which distinguish S. Peter, S. John, S. Thomas, and the Magdalene in this chapter are clear and completely in harmony with what is told of the four elsewhere.

Of the incidents omitted by S. John many are given in the other Gospels or by S. Paul. S. Matthew and S. Mark; the angel's message to the two Marys and Salome. S. Matthew and [S. Mark]; the farewell charge and promise. S. Luke and [S. Mark]; the mani. festation to two disciples not Apostles. S. Matthew; the earthquake, angel's descent to remove the stone, soldiers' terror and report to the priests, device of the Sanhedrin, manifestation on the mountain in Galilee (comp. 1 Cor. xv. 6). [S. Mark]; the reproach for unbelief. S. Luke; the manifestation to S. Peter (comp. 1 Cor. xv. 5), conversation on the road to Emmaus, proof that He is not a spirit, manifestation before the Ascension (comp. Acts i. 6–9). S. Paul; manifestations to the Twelve, to S. James, and to S. Paul himself (1 Cor. xv. 6—8).



To these incidents S. John adds, besides the contents of chap. xxi., the gift of the power of absolution, and the manifestation on the second Lord's Day, when S. Thomas was present.

It may be freely admitted that the difficulty of harmonizing the different accounts of the Resurrection is very great. As so often in the Gospel narrative, we have not the knowledge required for piecing together the fragmentary accounts that have been granted to us. To this extent it may be allowed that the evidence for the Resurrection is not what we should antecedently have desired.

But it is no paradox to say that for this very reason, as well as for other reasons, the evidence is sufficient. Impostors would have made the evidence more harmonious. The difficulty arises from independent witnesses telling their own tale, not caring in their consciousness of its truth to make it clearly agree with what had been told elsewhere. The writer of the Fourth Gospel must have known of some, if not all, of the Synoptic accounts; but he writes freely and firmly from his own independent experience and information. All the Gospels agree in the following very important particulars;

1. The Resurrection itself is left undescribed. Like all beginnings, whether in history or nature, it is hidden from view.

2. The manifestations were granted to disciples only, but to disciples wholly unexpectant of a Resurrection. The theory that they were visions resulting from enthusiastic expectations, is against all the evidence.

3. They were received with doubt and hesitation at first. 4. Mere reports were rejected.

5. The manifestations were granted to all kinds of witnesses, both male and female, both individuals and companies.

6. The result was a conviction, which nothing ever shook, that (the Lord had risen indeed and been present with them.

All four accounts also agree in some of the details;

1. The evidence begins with the visit of women to the sepulchre in the early morning.

2. The first sign was the removal of the stone.
3. Angels were seen before the Lord was seen.
(See Westcott, Speaker's Commentary, IL pp. 287, 8.

1–10. THE FIRST EVIDENCE OF THE RESURRECTION. 1. T. Caßß. Tà oáßßara may mean either the Sabbath, on the analogy of names of festivals, τα εγκαίνια, τα παναθήναια, &c., or the week, as the interval between two Sabbaths: here literally, on day one of the week (Luke xxiv. 1). S. John has not mentioned the stone; but he speaks of it as known, tòv Nidov. S. Mark notes the placing of it, S. Matthew the sealing: all four note the displacement: “puévov ik, lifted out of.

2. Concluding that the body must be gone, she runneth therefore to S. Peter. He is still chief of the Apostles, and as such is consulted first, in spite of his fall. The repetition of após implies that he was not living with S. John, though (v. 3) near him. We are in doubt whether ởy élhe applies to him as well as to "the other disciple.' The special phrase for S. John is öv nyára (xiii. 22).

ipav. She makes no attempt to determine whether friends or foes have done it (comp. Luke xii. 20): ol'dajev agrees with the Synoptists' account, that other women came also. She left them to go to the Apostles.

3. The change from the single act, een oev, to that which lasted some time, nexovto, is marked by change of tense; see on xi. 29.

4. έτρεχον...προέδ. τάχ. τ. Π. Literally, began to run...ran on before, more quickly. than Peter : táx. T. II. being epexegetic. The more usual form oãooov does not occur in N. T. (xiii. 27; 1 Tim. iii. 14; Heb. xiii. 19, 23). S. John ran more quickly as being much younger. Would a second century writer have thought of this in inventing a story? And how simply does S. John give us the process of conviction through which his mind passed: the dull unbelief beforehand, the eager wonder in running, the timidity and awe on arriving, the birth of faith in the tomb. This is true psychology free from all self-consciousness.

5. Trapakúkas. The word occurs again v. 11 and Luke xxiv. in a literal sense, of bending down to look carefully at;' in a figurative sense 1 Pet. i. 12; James i. 25 (see notes). In Ecclus. xiv. 23 it is used of the earnest searcher after wisdom; in xxi. 23 of the rude prying of a fool. Βλέπει is seeth at a glance, as distinct from θεωρεί (v. 6).

6. Both Apostles act characteristically. S. John remains without in awe and meditation: S. Peter with his natural impulsiveness goes in at once. He takes a complete survey (Dewpel), and hence sees the govSáplov (xi. 44), which S. John in his short look had not observed. How natural is the attoll (v.7): the writer is absorbed in his subject and feels no need to mention the name. The details (so meagre in Luke xxiv. 12) here tell of the eyewitness: he even remembers that the napkin was folded.

8. kal é tlOTEVOEV. See on i. 7. More difficulty has perhaps been made about this than is necessary.

Believed what?' is asked. That Jesus was risen. The whole context implies it; and comp. v. 25. The careful arrangement of the grave-clothes proved that the body had not been taken away in haste as by a foe: and friends would scarcely have removed them at all. It is thoroughly natural that S. John speaks only of himself, saying nothing of S. Peter. He is full of the impression which the empty and orderly tomb made upon his own mind; and it is to this that vv. 1–7 lead up, just as the whole Gospel leads up to v. 29. S. Luke (xxiv. 12—of doubtful genuineness) speaks only of S. Peter's wonder, neither affirming nor denying his belief.

9. Qý8étrw. Not even yet. S.. John's belief in the Resurrection was as yet based only on what he had seen in the sepulchre. He had nothing derived from prophecy to help him. The candour of the

« PreviousContinue »