Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadInternational Critical Commentary NT - John 11:1 - 11:99
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
The Sickness of Lazarus, and the Discussion of It by Jesus and His Disciples (11:1-16)
11:1. ἦ δ τςἀθνν For the constr. of ἦ with a participle, cf. 3:23, 18:25, and see note on 1:28.
The name Lazarus, לז, is a shortened form of Eleazar, אער and is found again in the N.T. only in the parable of Luk_16. Bethany, which is about 2 miles from Jerusalem, is now called El˒ from the tradition of the miracle narrated here.
Lazarus is described as ἀὸβθνα, ἐ τςκμςΜρα (א have τςΜρα) κὶΜρα. So Philip is described as ἀὸβθαδ, ἐ τςπλω ἈδεῦκὶΠτο (1:44, where see note). It has been suggested that we ought to distinguish “Bethany” from “the village of Mary and Martha,” and place the latter (see Luk_10:38) in Galilee. But Lk. does not always arrange the incidents he narrates in such strict order that we can be sure either of the locality or the time at which a given incident is to be placed. It can hardly be doubted (cf. 12:1) that Lazarus, Mary, and Martha lived at Bethany together. The attempt to distinguish between ἀόand ἐ, so as to regard ἀὸΒθνα as indicating domicile, while ἐ τςκμςκλ would indicate place of origin (see Abbott, Diat. 2289 f.), is not only without corroborative evidence as to such a use of the two prepositions, but would make the opening sentence of this chapter very clumsy. See on 1:44.
Mary is mentioned before Martha, while elsewhere (Joh_11:19, Luk_10:38) Martha, as the mistress of their house, is named before Mary. At the time the Fourth Gospel was written, Mary was the more prominent of the two in Christian tradition, as is recorded in Mk. (14:9): “Wheresoever the gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, that also which this woman hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her.”
2. This verse seems to be an explanatory gloss added by an editor. There are two non-Johannine touches of style. The phrase τνκρο (see on 4:1) appears instead of Jn.’s usual τνἸσῦ. And, secondly, the characteristically Johannine ἦ ἀθνν(v. 1) is altered to the more classical ἠθνι
The story by which Mary is identified is that of her anointing Jesus, and wiping His feet with her hair, which Jn. tells in the next chapter. But this story is also told of the sinful woman of Luk_7:38. Christian readers of the next generation would not be helped by an explanatory note which might equally be applied to two distinct women; and the conclusion is inevitable that Jn. (or his editor) regarded Mary of Bethany as the same person who is described by Lk. as ἁατλς The easiest way to identify her for the reader is to recall the singular gesture by which she was best known, and which she had enacted not once only, but twice. She was the best-known member of her family, and the note recalls that it was her brother, Lazarus, who was sick.
It is worth observing, in view of the discrepancy between Mar_14:3 and Joh_12:3, as to whether it was the head or the feet of Jesus that Mary anointed, that this note evades the difficulty by saying simply “anointed the Lord.” ἀεφι, μρν ἐμσεν θί, are words common to this passage with both Luk_7:38 and Joh_12:3; and the reference is probably to both incidents. ἐμσενis only found again in N.T. at 13:5, and there, as in Luk_7, Joh_12, of wiping feet.
Μρά, rather than Μρα seems to be the best-attested spelling of Mary’s name throughout Jn., although here אΘhave Μρα B 33 alone supporting Μρά.2 This provides another reason for suspecting v. 2 to be non- Johannine. Cf., however, v. 20, 12:3; and see 19:25.
3. ἀέτια ονα ἀεφὶπὸ ατν “So the sisters sent to Him,” i.e. to Jesus; D b c e support πὸ τνἸσῦ.
κρε It is thus that the sisters address Jesus throughout (vv. 21, 27, 32, 34, 39), although Martha speaks to Mary of Jesus as ὁδδσαο (v. 28), and the disciples address Him as Rabbi (v. 8). See the note on 1:38; and cf. 4:1, 13:13.
ἴε a favourite word with Jn. (see on 1:29).
ὃ φλῖ ἀθνῖ “he whom thou lovest is sick.” They feel it unnecessary to send any explicit invitation to Jesus to come and heal their brother: “Sufficit ut noueris. Non enim amas et deseris” (Augustine).
ὃ φλῖ. So v. 36 ἴε πςἐίε ατν(cf. 20:2). But at v. 5 we have ἠάαὁἸσῦ …τνΛζρν There is no real distinction in meaning between the two verbs. Cf. 3:35, 5:20, and note on 21:17. See Introd., p. xxxvii n.
4. ατ ἡἀθνι οκἔτνπὸ θντν This was the comment of Jesus when the tidings of Lazarus’ illness reached Him. It was not a direct reply to the sisters’ message, and we do not know if it was reported to them (v. 40).
The constr. πὸ θντνis unusual, occurring again in the N.T. only at 1Jn_5:16 ἁαταπὸ θντν and in the LXX at 4 Macc. 14:4, 17:1, while εςθντνis common (cf. 2Ki_20:1, where it is said of Hezekiah that he was sick εςθντν If a distinction is to be drawn between the two constructions, perhaps “this sickness is not πὸ θντν is more reassuring than “this sickness is not εςθντν” The latter would mean that the sickness would not have death as its final issue; the former ought to mean that the sick person is not in danger at all, that his sickness is not “dangerous,” as we would put it. Consequently the meaning that the disciples inevitably took from the words of Jesus was that Lazarus was not dead at the time of speaking, and further that Jesus was convinced he would recover. No doubt, the evangelist means his readers to understand that this was not the real meaning of Jesus’ words (see v. 11). But it is strange that he should translate them by using πό instead of ες for, in fact, Lazarus’ sickness was πὸ θντν although it might plausibly be argued that it was not εςθντν as death was not the final issue.
Jesus adds that this illness had come upon Lazarus ὑὲ τςδξςτῦθο, “on behalf of God’s glory,” i.e. in order that the glory and power of God might be revealed. The attempt to give ὑέ a semi-sacrificial sense here, as if the sickness were a voluntary offering by Lazarus, is fanciful ὑέ is used exactly as in 1:30, 10:11, “on behalf of.” The issue of the sickness and death of Lazarus was the revelation of the glory of God, as exhibited in his miraculous resuscitation. The miracle was more than a “wonder”; it was a “sign” of ἡδξ τῦθο. And so Martha was reminded, when it was over, that she had been told that she would see this glory (v. 40).
The glory of God was exhibited through the person and works of Jesus; this sickness, with its issue, had for its purpose ἵαδξσῇὁυὸ τῦθο, that He might be honoured by this revelation of His Father (cf. 8:54 ἔτνὁπτρμυὁδξζνμ). We have seen (on 7:39) that the supreme “glorification” of Jesus is identified by Jn. with the Passion and its sequel, and it has been thought by some that this too is the reference in the present passage. If so, ἵαδξσῇὁυὸ τῦθο would mean here that the final cause of Lazarus’ sickness was that it might lead up to the Passion by making public the power of Jesus and thereby bringing the hostility of his enemies to a crisis (Westcott). But this is over subtle. The true parallel to 11:4b is 8:54. This revelation of “the glory of God” was that the Son might be honoured or “glorified” by so signal a mark of His Father’s favour as the power to raise a dead man would exhibit. As in the O.T., “the glory of God” is the visible manifestation of His presence. See also on 9:3, 10:25, 14:13; and cf. 17:1.
For the title “the Son of God,” see on 1:34 and 5:25. Only here and at 5:25, 10:36 is Jesus said to have used this title as descriptive of Himself.
5. Moffatt transposes this verse, placing it after the parenthetical v. 2; and this is the most natural position for it, as it then explains in proper sequence why it was that the sisters sent to Jesus the news that Lazarus was ill. Jesus was their friend, and they hoped that He would come and heal their sick brother. In the traditional position of v. 5, it seems to suggest as the reason why Jesus did not immediately leave Peræ and start for the sick man’s house, that because He loved the household at Bethany, He stayed for two days longer where He was. That is, no doubt, a possible explanation of His action or delay, sc. that because He loved them, He wished to exhibit in their case the greatness of His power and the reach of His compassion. But, if that were so, He was content to leave the sisters in the agony of grief for three or four days, in order that the “glory of God” might be more signally vindicated in the end.
There is no textual authority for Moffatt’s transposition of the text, and I have left v. 5 in its traditional position. It is possible, however, that v. 5 is an explanatory gloss added by an editor which has got into the wrong place (see 4:44 for a like case of displacement). Two small points suggest that v. 5 is not from the pen of the author of vv. 1, 3. In v. 1 we have Mary and her sister Martha, while in v. 5 we have the more usual order, Martha and her sister,1 a sudden change (but cf. v. 19). Again, the verb twice used in this chapter for the affection which Jesus had for Lazarus is φλῖ (vv. 3, 36), while in v. 5 it is ἀαᾶ. We must not, indeed, sharply distinguish these verbs (see on 21:17); but we should expect the same verb to be used in v. 3 and v. 5. It is possible that v. 5 is a non-Johannine gloss, which ought to be placed where Moffatt places it, after v. 2.
6. ὡ ονἤοσνκλ ονis resumptive, and looks back to v. 4, “And so, when He heard, etc.” It was because of His confidence that the sickness was not πὸ θντν and that the issue of it would be for the glory of God, that He did not hasten to the bedside of His friend. For ὡ ον see on 4:40.
ὅιis recitantis: what the messenger from Bethany had said was ἀθνῖ
ττ μνἔεννκλ He remained where He was for two days. Jn. consistently represents Jesus as never being in haste. He always knew when the time to move had come (cf. 2:4, 7:6, 8).
Jn.’s tendency to indicate the time between one event and another has been already mentioned (see Introd., p. cii). He notes here that Jesus remained in His Peræ retreat for two days (cf. 4:40) after the condition of Lazarus had been reported. From Bethany or Bethabara beyond Jordan (see on 1:28), whatever its exact situation, it would be a long and rough day’s walk to Bethany near Jerusalem, and the journey may well have occupied part of a second day. When Jesus reached the tomb, Lazarus had been dead more than three days (v. 39). Jn. may intend to convey that the patient was dead at the time that the message reached Jesus; but, on the other hand, Martha’s words in v. 21 suggest that she thought that if Jesus had started at once, He would have arrived while Lazarus was yet alive.
7. ἔετ (only here in Jn.) μτ τῦο i.e. deinde postea. μτ τῦοimplies a short interval: cf. v. 11 and 2:12, 19:28. See Introd., p. cviii.
After μθτῖ, ADΓ add ατῦ but אΘomit. For ο μθτίused absolutely, see on 2:2; and cf. vv. 8, 12, 54.
ἄωε. This intransitive form occurs again 11:15, 16 and 14:31 (so Mar_14:42, Mat_26:46): “let us go.” So in Homer we have ἄεused intransitively “go.”
εςτνἸυαα πλν “back to Judæ” whence they had come to avoid the danger caused by the hostility of the Jews (10:39, 40).
8. Ῥβε. So the disciples called Him. See on 1:38 for the use of this title in Jn.
ννκλ sc. “quite recently (10:31, 39), the Jews (see on 1:19) were seeking to stone Thee”: cf. 7:1, 8:59.
κὶπλνὑάεςἐε; “and are you going back there?” For the Johannine use of ὑάεν see on 7:33. Probably their apprehension of danger was on their own account, as well as on that of their Master.
9. ἀερθ Ἰσῦ. See on 1:29 for the omission of the article before Ἰσῦ in this phrase.
οχ δδκ ὧα εσντςἡέα; “Are there not twelve hours in the day?” That is, Jesus tells them that their anxiety is premature. The hour of danger had not yet come. Jesus never acted before the appropriate time (see on v. 6).
This saying is the counterpart of 9:4. There Jesus had said that work must be done during the day, and that it could not be postponed until night without failure, and that this law applied to Him as well as to mankind at large. He implied that but a short time remained to Him. But in this passage the thought is different. The hour of His Passion was near, but it had not yet arrived. There was no need for undue haste. The “twelve hours” of His day were not yet exhausted.
For the twelve hours of the Jewish day, see on 1:39.
ἐντςπρπτ ἐ τ ἡέᾳκλ We have already had the contrast between walking in the light and walking in darkness (see note on 8:12 for its significance). Here this solemn aphorism is put in connexion with what goes before. The disciples were apprehensive. But Jesus assured them that the night had not yet come. So long as men walk in the light of day they are safe, but it is the night that is the time of hazard.
Here, however, a mystical meaning lurks behind the literal meaning of the words employed. It is literally true that a man walking in the daytime does not stumble, because he sees τ φςτῦκσο τύο, that is, the sun (see for the expression ὁκσο οτςon 9:39). But Jesus had already spoken of Himself as the Light of the World (see on 8:12), and the suggestion is the same as in the former passage, sc. that he who walks by the light that Jesus gives does not walk in darkness.
The answer of Jesus to the disciples, then, in these verses implies first that there is no danger yet, for the day—His day—is not yet over; and suggests also that danger need not be dreaded by those who follow Him on His appointed way.
10. ἐνδ τςπρπτ ἐ τ νκίκλ In this second clause it is the mystical and not the literal sense which is most clearly expressed. For we should expect v. 10 to run, “If any one walk in the night, he stumbles because he has no light,” or, as it is expressed at 12:35 (a parallel passage), “He that walketh in the darkness knoweth not whither he goeth” (cf. 1Jn_2:11). But instead we have ὅιτ φςοκἔτνἐ ατ (not ἐ ατ, which D reads in an attempt to simplify the passage). This departs from the literal application of the illustration of a guiding light, and directs the thought of the reader to the idea of spiritual enlightenment. Cf. 8:12 and Mat_6:23. With the picture of one stumbling in the darkness, cf. Jer_13:16.
11. τῦαεπν i.e. vv. 9, 10, which but for this explicit statement might be treated as a comment of the evangelist (see on 3:16) rather than as words spoken by Jesus on this occasion.
κὶμτ τῦο Some interval between vv. 8-10 and v. 11 is implied; see on v. 7 above.
Λζρςὁφλςἡῶ. Lazarus was the friend of the disciples, as well as of the Master; and it is implied that if Jesus ventured into Judæ to visit him, they also ought to be ready to do so. Lazarus was within the circle of those whom Jesus called His “friends” (see 15:14, Luk_12:4; and cf. v. 3 above).
κκίηα, “has fallen asleep.” The natural interpretation of this verb would be that put upon it by the disciples, sc. that the sick man had fallen into a refreshing slumber. In ordinary Greek, as throughout the LXX, κιᾶθιis generally used in this, its primary, meaning. But in poetry it is sometimes used of the sleep of death, e.g. in Homer, Il. xi. 241; in Job_3:13, Job_3:14:12, Job_3:21:13, Job_3:26, Eze_32:19, Eze_32:20, Eze_32:27, as well as in the oft-repeated phrase, “he slept with his fathers.” Cf. also 2 Macc. 12:45. In the N.T. this euphemistic use is found 13 times, as against 3 occurrences of the verb in the sense of ordinary sleep (Mat_28:13, Luk_22:45, Act_12:6). Although this use was not original to Christianity, or even to Judaism, κιᾶθι(and κιηήιν see Moulton-Milligan, s.v.) came to be more frequently applied to the sleep of death after the Christian era than before.
The verb does not occur again in Jn.; but its interpretation by the disciples here as indicating physical sleep was no stupid misunderstanding but natural, and almost inevitable, having regard to the circumstances.
ἀλ πρύμιἵαἐυνσ ατν “but I am going to wake him up.” ἐυνζ is a Hellenistic word, not occurring again in the N.T. We find it in the LXX (1Ki_3:15), and may especially note Job_14:12, where, as here, it is associated with κίᾶθι used of the sleep of death: ἄθωο δ κιηες…οκἐυνσήοτιἐ ὕνυατν
12. επνονο μθτὶατ. So BC*Θagainst the rec. ο μθτὶατῦ א have ατ ο μθτί
κρε For this mode of address, see on 1:28 and 13:13.
ε κκίηα, σθστι “if he has fallen asleep, he will recover.” They understood Jesus to mean that the sick man had fallen into a natural sleep—not the sleep of death. This was a favourable symptom, and suggested that Lazarus would get well. It puzzled them to think that Jesus would wish to wake him from health-giving sleep. No doubt, they were glad of another argument by which they might dissuade their Master from facing the dangers of Judæ The journey would be to no good purpose.
σθστι “he will get well.” For this use of σζι, see on 3:17.
13. ερκιδ ὁἸσῦ κλ “But Jesus had been speaking about his death.” This is one of those parenthetical comments which are so frequent in the Fourth Gospel (see Introd., p. xxxiv), the writer calling attention to a misunderstanding by the disciples of the words of Jesus. They thought that Jesus was using the word κιᾶθιof natural sleep, whereas he was really using it of death.
ἐενιδ ἔοα κλ “but they thought, etc.,” ἐενςbeing employed to mark distinctly the subject of the verb. It is often used by Jn. to make his point, just as an English writer may resort to italics for the sake of clearness (see on 1:8).
κίηι does not occur again in the N.T. It is used euphemistically at Ecclus. 46:19, 48:13 of the sleep of death, but not elsewhere in the LXX in any sense.
14. ττ ονκλ “At this point, Jesus said plainly, Lazarus died”; He no longer spoke enigmatically to the disciples. For πρηί, see on 7:4.
15. κὶχίωδʼὑᾶ, ἵαπσεστ, ὅιοκἤη ἐε, “And I rejoice for your sakes that I was not there, so that you may believe.” The implication is that the recovery of Lazarus from death would be a more remarkable “sign” than his recovery from a sick-bed would have been. The disciples were already “believers,” or they would not have been “disciples”; but faith is always growing, if it be alive, and the Twelve knew that theirs was susceptible of increase (cf. Luk_17:5). Although His friend has died and the sisters are in grief, Jesus rejoices because of His confidence not only that Lazarus will be called back to life, but because this sign of power will increase the faith of His disciples, and promote the glory of God (v. 4).
Abbott (Diat. 2099) translates, “I am glad on account of you, that ye may believe, because I was not there,” which is, indeed, a possible rendering, but unnecessarily subtle.
ἵαπσεστ is, as it were, in parenthesis, explaining why Jesus was glad that He was not present when Lazarus was still alive. For πσεενused absolutely, as here, the object of belief being left unexpressed, see on 1:7.
Bengel notes that no one is said to have died in the presence of Jesus, and suggests that perhaps death was impossible where He was: “Cum decoro divino pulchre congruit, quod praesente uitae duce nemo unquam legitur mortuus.” But we cannot infer from the narrative that Jn. means to hint at this.
χίωis not elsewhere placed in the lips of Jesus, but He speaks of His joy (ἡχρ ἡἐή at 15:11, 17:13; and at 4:36 we have ἵαὁσερνὁο χίῃκὶὁθρζν where He refers to Himself as the Sower. In all these passages, it will be noticed that His rejoicing is connected with the fulfilment of His mission. So also at Luk_10:21 it is said of Him ἠαλάαοτ Πεμτ τ Ἁί, because of the acceptance of His message by the Seventy, and of their success. And the rejoicing of the shepherd, when the lost sheep is found (Mat_18:13, Luk_15:6), is, in like manner, drawn out by the happy issue of his labours.
ἀλ ἄωε πὸ ατν “but, anyway, let us go to him,” as He had said before ἄωε εςτνἸυαα (v. 7, where see note on ἄωε). The repetition of this invitation, even though Lazarus was now dead and a visit to his bedside for the purpose of healing him was now impossible, seems to have convinced the hesitating disciples that Jesus had some great purpose in view when He proposed to return to a place where He and they would be in danger. At all events, no further objection is raised, and the loyal outburst of Thomas, “Let us also go, that we may die with Him,” is acted on by all.
16. ΘμςὁλγμνςΔδμς תְֹ is a “twin” (found only in Gen_25:24, Gen_38:27, Son_4:5, Son_7:3, always in the plural, and always rendered by δδμ or δδμι and of this Θμςis a transliteration. Three times in Jn. (cf. 20:24, 21:2) to this name the note is added ὁλγμνςΔδμς an appellation which is not found in the Synoptists. This suggests (see on 4:25) that the apostle was called “Didymus” in Greek circles; if Jn. only meant to interpret Thomas, he would probably have written ὃἑμνύτιΔδμς(as at 1:42).1
The personal name of the apostle is given as Judas in the Acta Thomœand elsewhere; and the attribution of this name to him led afterwards to the attempted identification of Thomas with “Judas of James” and “Judas the Lord’s brother.”
The character of Thomas comes out as clearly in the Fourth Gospel as does that of Nicodemus (see on 3:1). The notices of him here, at 14:5 and 20:24f., are remarkably consistent, one with the other, and reveal a man whose temper of mind we can thoroughly understand. Thomas always looks at the dark side of things, and is a pessimist by disposition, while entirely loyal to his convictions and ready to act on them at all cost. He is a man of independent mind who says what he thinks, and does not wait for the promptings of others. Here Thomas foresaw only too clearly that Jesus was going to His death, and he realised that to enter Judæ as His disciple was to risk the same fate. But Jesus was his Master, and he would not draw back when he found that Jesus was resolved to go back to Judæ επνονΘμςκλ “Thomas thereupon said, Let us also go (for ἄωε, see on v. 7) that we may die with Him.”
This challenge was addressed to his “fellow-disciples.” σναηα does not occur again in the N.T., but as used here it suggests the Twelve, of whom Thomas was one, rather than any outer circle of μθτί(see on 2:2). It is not implied that all of the Twelve were present during the retreat to Peræ or at Bethany when Lazarus was recovered from the tomb; but σναηαςsuggests that the disciples who were with Jesus on this occasion were of the inner circle.
It is probable that Peter was not among them. He is not mentioned once in Part II. of the Gospel, and there is no indication in Mk. (which is thought to depend on Peter’s information) that Peter knew anything about this Jerusalem ministry. Probably the Galilæ disciples were often at their homes when Jesus was in Judæ or in Peræ If Peter had been present, we might have expected that he would take the lead2 in assuring Jesus that His disciples would not abandon Him, just as he was foremost when the danger was even nearer (13:37). From the Synoptists we should not have gathered that Thomas was one of the leaders of the apostolic company; but the notices of him in Jn. (see above; and also 21:2, where he is named immediately after Peter) indicate that he was prominent among them, so that the statement that he acted as spokesman for the rest on this occasion is not surprising.
Jesus Goes to Bethany: His Conversation with Martha (vv. 17-27)
17. ἐθνονκλ “Jesus, then, having come, etc.” ονis resumptive, not causal.
ερνατντσαα ἤηἡέα ἔοτ κλ He found Lazarus had been already four days in the tomb. For the constr. ἡέα ἔεν see on 5:5. ἤηis om. by A*D, and its position varies in other MSS., but the weight of authority is in favour of its retention.
For the “four days,” see on v. 6 above; and cf. v. 39. The burial would have taken place as soon as possible after death (cf. Act_5:6).
Augustine (in loc.) finds allegory in the “four days”: one day of death for original sin, one for violation of natural law, one for breaking the law of Moses, and one for transgressing the Gospel. This is no more, and no less, fantastic than the efforts of modern expositors to find allegory in Jn.’s narrative.
18. Moffatt places vv. 18, 19, between v. 30 and v. 31, where they would fit very well. But there is no insuperable difficulty in their traditional position, and I do not venture to alter it.
ἦ δ Βθνακλ Jn. alone of the evangelists uses ἦ in this way (cf. 18:1, 19:41, and perhaps 6:10); Meyer suggested that it is employed by him thus instead of the present ἐτ because he is writing after the devastation of Jerusalem and its suburbs. But if (as we hold) his narrative reproduces the reminiscences of the aged apostle John, looking back on many years, ἦ is more natural than ἐτ, without assuming any allusion to the fall of Jerusalem. See on 5:2.
The rec. inserts ἡbefore Βθνα with אΘ but א om. ἡ as in v. 1.
For the form τνἹρσλμν see on 1:19.
ὡ ἀὸσαίνδκπνε “about fifteen furlongs.” Bethany is a little less than 2 miles from the city. The constr. of ἀόwith the genitive to indicate distance is not necessarily a Latinism, as, e.g., a millibus passuum duobus (Cæ Bell. Gall. ii. 7). It occurs again at 21:8; cf. Rev_14:20, and see Hermas, Vis. iv. 1, οτ γρἦ ἀʼἐο ὡ ἀὸσαίυ
19. πλο δ. So אΘ as against the rec. κὶπλο (AΓ)
ἐ τνἸυαω, i.e. of the citizens of Jerusalem. ο Ἰυαο often represents in Jn. the Jews who were hostile to Jesus (see on 1:19, 5:10); but here that suggestion is not present.
Jerusalem being so near (v. 18), it was natural that many friends from the city should come to condole with Martha and Mary on the death of their brother. Lightfoot gives (Hor. Hebr., in loc.) curious details about the ceremonial which was customary at these mournful gatherings. The first three days after death were kept with severity, the next four days with less strictness, the period of observance lasting for thirty days altogether. Cf. for the “seven days of mourning for the dead” (Ecclus. 22:12). 1Sa_31:13, Job_2:13, Judith 16:24; and for the visits of neighbours to console, 2 Ezr_10:2.
πρμθῖθι “to comfort,” is found in the Greek Bible only here, v. 31, 1Th_2:11, 1Th_5:14, and 2 Macc. 15:9.
πὸ τνΜρα κὶΜρά is the best-attested reading (א but the article should be prefixed to both or to neither of the names. D has πὸ Μρα κὶΜρά. Syr. sin. seems, on the other hand, to presuppose the article in both places, and reads “went forth to Bethany that they might comfort Martha and Mary,” omitting “concerning their brother.” See on v. 24 for Jn.’s consistent use of ἡΜρα ἡΜρά.
The rec. text, with AC3ΓΘ has ἐηύεσνπὸ τςπρ Μρα κὶΜρά, which ought to mean “came to the women of the household of Martha and Mary”; but it can hardly be genuine. Perhaps τςπρ came in from [α]τςπρ in the next line. After ἀεφῦACΓ add ατν but om. אΘ
20. The congruity of the characters of Martha and Mary, as suggested by what we read of them in Luk_10:38f., with what Jn. tells in this chapter about their demeanour is remarkable.1 Martha is the busy housewife who, as the mistress of the house, is the first to be told of the approach of Jesus (v. 20). She goes to meet Him, and expresses at once her own conviction and that of Mary (vv. 21, 32), that if He had been present, Lazarus would not have died. She is puzzled by the enigmatical words of hope which Jesus addresses to her (v. 23), and supposes that He is giving the usual orthodox consolation (v. 24). She does not understand what He then says (vv. 25, 26); but her faith in Him as the Messiah is strong, and of this she assures Him (v. 27), although she does not expect that He can do anything now to restore her brother. Then she goes to tell her sister that Jesus has arrived and is asking for her.
Before Martha told her, Mary had not heard of the arrival of Jesus (v. 29): she was seated inside the house (v. 20) as a mourner, and it had been to her that the condolences of the friends who had come from Jerusalem were specially addressed (v. 45). But as soon as she learnt that Jesus had come, she got up hastily and left the house without acquainting the mourners of her purpose in going out (v. 29). Her friends thought that she was going to wail at the tomb (v. 30). When she met Jesus, she fell at His feet (unlike her more staid sister), greeting him with the same assurance that Martha had given (v. 32), but wailing unrestrainedly (v. 33). Her cries of grief seem to have affected the human heart of Jesus as the grave sorrow of Martha did not do (v. 33). But, as they proceed to the tomb, Martha is with them, and, practical woman as she is, demurs to its being opened (v. 39). Throughout, her figure is in sharp contrast with that of her more emotional sister. See further, Introd., p. clxxxv.
ἡονΜραὡ ἤοσνὅικλ She is the first to be told, as the mistress of the house. ὅιis recitantis: what was said to her was Ἰσῦ ἔχτι
The rec. has ὁἸς but om. ὁא See on 1:29.
ὑήτσνατ, “met Him,” but without any display of emotion such as Mary exhibited. She met Jesus before He entered the village (see v. 30).
ἐ τ οκ ἐαέεο “she was seated in the house”; see on 4:6 for ἐαέεο It was customary for mourners to be seated when receiving the condolences of their friends; see Job_2:8, Job_2:13, and cf. Eze_8:14. Sitting down was also a common posture for mourners among the Romans. It was adopted, e.g., by Cato after Pharsalia, and Varro after Cannæ(Plutarch, Cato, 56).
Μραis attested by most authorities, but Θ33 give Μρά (see also 12:3), in accordance with the general usage of Jn. (see on v. 2).
21. επνον(ονbeing resumptive) ἡΜραπὸ Ἰσῦ. Cf. 2:3 for the constr. λγι πό τν. The rec., with AC2DLWΘ inserts τνbefore Ἰσῦ, but om. א See on 1:29.
κρε See on v. 3.
ε ἦ ὧεκλ “if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.” Mary greets Jesus with the same words (v. 32). No doubt, Martha and Mary had said this to each other many times during the last four days. The greeting may imply a reproach, suggesting that if Jesus had started immediately after He heard of Lazarus’ illness, He would have kept him from death (see on v. 6). On the other hand, the sisters do not say “if thou hadst come here,” but “if thou hadst been here,” which may only imply wistful regret.
ἀέαε. So א but AC3Γ have ἐενκιΘhas τθήε.
22. The rec. inserts ἀλ before κὶνν om. א Jn. often uses κίadversatively (see on 1:10), and ἀλ is not needed here.1 “Even now (although my brother is dead) I know that whatsoever thou shalt ask of God, God will give it thee.” This is a deeper confidence than that which recognises the efficacy of the prayers of any good man (see 9:31). Martha wistfully expresses faith in Jesus not only as her friend, but as the Son of God (v. 27). She understands, though dimly, that He stands in a special relation to God; and the repetition of ὁθό at the end of the sentence is emphatic. Perhaps His remark in v. 4 had been reported to her.
ὅαἂ ατσ τνθό. Martha used, however, a verb to describe the prayers of Jesus which (according to Jn.) Jesus never used of them. ατῖ is often used in the Gospels of men’s prayers to God, and Jesus uses it thus at Joh_14:13, Joh_15:16, Joh_16:23, but the word that He uses of His own prayers is ἐωᾶ. In Jn. (and in Jn. only) ἐωᾶ is used of prayer to God; and in the Gospel it is not generally used of the prayers of men, but of the prayers of Jesus (14:16, 16:26, 17:9, 15, 20). Too much, however, must not be made of this usage, for the distinction between ατῖ and ἐωᾶ had almost disappeared in later Greek (cf. Act_3:2, Act_3:3), and at 1Jn_5:16 ἐωᾶ is used of the prayer of Christians. See further on 16:23. It is remarkable that the words ποεχσα, πρκλῖ, and δῖθι which are all used elsewhere of prayer, do not occur in Jn.
But Martha, although she uses a word about the prayers of Jesus which He never applies to them, is right in substance; and her confession is a true, if imperfect, statement of what Jesus says Himself at v. 41.
23. ἀατστιὁἀεφςσυ This must often have been said both to Martha and Mary during the past four days; it was (and is) a commonplace of consolation in bereavement offered by friends. By the first century, belief in the resurrection, at any rate of good men, was widely spread among the Jews (see on 5:28). The doctrine is plainly expressed in the Psalms of Solomon (about 80 b.c.): ο δ φβύεο κρο ἀατσνα εςζὴ αώιν(3:16). And Jesus commends this assurance to Martha as a truth which should assuage her grief. A doctrine which is trite may, nevertheless, be both true and important.
24. Martha’s reply is not sceptical or querulous. She does not deny the tremendous doctrine of resurrection at the Last Day. She replies, wistfully enough, that she knows it and accepts it. But, like many another mourner, she fails to derive much immediate consolation from it. The Last Day seems very far off. Meanwhile, where is her brother? And what are the conditions of this Resurrection? What is the Resurrection?
The answer of Jesus is unexpected indeed. “I am the Resurrection”: the soul that has touched me has touched life; and the life of God is eternal. That is the whole answer. And Martha, not fully understanding it, recognises that He who spoke to her, spoke with an awful prescience, as befitted Him in whom she saw the Messiah.
λγιατ ἡΜρα The article, which is omitted by אΓW, must be retained with BC*DLΘ Throughout the chapter (except at vv. 1, 39, which are not true exceptions), Jn. writes ἡΜρα See on vv. 2, 20.
For the doctrine of the Last Things in Jn., see Introd., p. clviii; and for the phrase ἡἐχτ ἡέα which is peculiar to Jn., see on 6:39. For the word ἀάτσς used of a resurrection from death, see on 5:28.
25. ἐώεμ ἡἀάτσςκὶἡζή For the form of this solemn pronouncement, ἐώεμ … and for the claim to an equality with God which is involved in such a way of speaking, see Introd., p. cxix.
For the Divine prerogative of Jesus as a “quickener” of the dead, see 5:21 and the note there. It is asserted again in the proclamation, four times repeated, ἀατσ ατ [ἐ] τ ἐχτ ἡέᾳ(see note on 6:39). Here, what is said goes beyond even that great assurance.
All the great similitudes by which Jesus describes Himself in the Fourth Gospel are introduced by the opening phrase ἐώεμ, which marks the style of Deity (see Introd., p. cxviii). But ἐώεμ ἡἀάτσςdiffers from the other pronouncements in this respect, that it is not a similitude. When Jesus is represented as saying that He is the Bread of Life, or the Light of the World, or the Door, or the Way, or the True Vine, or the Good Shepherd, every one understands that these are only figures of speech, used to illustrate and explain that He strengthens and guides mankind. Here, however, in reply to Martha’s allusion to the Resurrection at the Last Day, Jesus uses no explanatory figure of speech. “I am the Resurrection” is not a similitude; it is the reference to Himself of what Martha had said about the final resurrection. The sentence is comparable to ἐώεμ ὁμρυῶ πρ ἐατῦ(8:18), rather than to any of the so-called similitudes; but it is more difficult to interpret. For how can a person represent an event in the future? Yet this is what is asserted. ἡἀάτσςin v. 25 must refer back to ἡἀάτσςin v. 24. Jesus does not say ἐώεμ ἀάτσς(without the article), or identify Himself with the act or process of “rising again”; but He diverts the thought of Martha, as it were, from the Resurrection at the Last Day, which she feels is very far distant, to the Resurrection of which He is potentially the Source as well as the Agent.
“I will raise him up at the Last Day.” That is a frequent theme of the Fourth Gospel (see on 6:39). But, if Jesus had said no more on the subject, it would have postponed the possibility of resurrection to the new and heavenly life until the day of the Final Assize. And it is equally, and more particularly, a doctrine of the Fourth Gospel, that as men are judged now, so the entrance on the ζὴαώιςis a present possibility (see Introd., p. clx). Jesus is the Door to the Kingdom, i.e. to the enjoyment of “eternal life”; and it is through Him that man enters into its possession here and now.
Thus, in vv. 24, 25, the old Jewish and the new Christian eschatology are explicitly confronted with each other. Jn. never represents Jesus as denying the Jewish doctrine of a Last Judgment; but he perpetually represents Him as insisting upon the judgment of the present hour, not pronounced by a fiat of external authority, but determined by the man’s own self and his relation to God in Christ (see on 3:18).
So ἐώεμ ἡἀάτσςis meant to convey to Martha, not indeed a rebuke for her belief in the General Resurrection at last, but an assurance that the “rising again” of believers in Him is not to be postponed until then. If a man believe in Him, although his body dies yet his true self shall live (v. 25). Or, as it may be put in other words, no believer in Jesus shall ever die, so far as his spirit is concerned (v. 26). The consolation which Jesus offers to those mourning the death of a Christian believer is not that their friend will rise again at some distant day when the dead shall be raised by a catastrophic act of God (however true that may be), but that the Christian believer never dies, his true life is never extinguished. “Your friend is alive now; for in me he touched the life of God which is eternal; in me he had already risen, before his body perished.” This is the Johannine doctrine of life (see Introd., p. clxi); it is also the doctrine of Paul (cf. Col_3:1).
Neither Jn. nor Paul discuss or contemplate the future life of those who are not “in Christ.” The assurance of life, here and hereafter, in the Fourth Gospel, is for all “believers”; and in this passage no others are in view.
κὶἡζή This second clause in the great pronouncement of Jesus is omitted by Syr. sin., and also by Cyprian (de Mortal. 21), who quotes these verses in the form: “Ego sum Resurrectio. Qui credit in me, licet moriatur, uiuet; et omnis qui uiuit et credit in me non morietur in aeternum.” Cyprian appears to have missed the distinction between the two clauses 25b and 26, and he may have omitted et uita, not perceiving that the words are essential, if what follows is to be understood. But this does not explain the omission in Syr. sin. All other authorities have the words κὶἡζή which are indispensable for the argument.
Jesus is not only the Resurrection, and thus the pledge and the source of the believer’s revival after death; but He is the Life, for this revival is unending. In the two sentences which follow, the twofold presentation of Jesus as the Resurrection and as the Life is expanded and explained. He is the Resurrection, and therefore the believer in Him, though he die, yet shall live again. He is the Life, and therefore the believer in Him, who has been “raised from the dead” and is spiritually alive, shall never die. See further on v. 26.
That Jesus is the Life is, in one sense, the main theme of the Fourth Gospel. Cf. 1:4, 6:57, 14:6, 20:31; and see Introd., p. clxi.
ὁπσεω εςἐέκλ “he who believes in me” (see on 1:12 for the constr. πσεενες and cf. 9:35) “even if he die (sc. physically), yet shall he live” (sc. spiritually, in the spiritual body, as Paul has it). So it has been said already (3:36).
Westcott compares Philo’s saying that “the wise man who appears to have died in respect of this corruptible life, lives in respect of the incorruptible life” (quod det. pot. 15). But the distinctive feature of the Johannine teaching is that the privilege of the immortal, spiritual life is for him who “believes in Christ,” and so has touched the life of God.
26. κὶπςὁζνκλ The verse is susceptible of two meanings. (1) If πςὁζνis understood as meaning “every living man,” sc. living in this earthly life (cf. ἐώινπνὸ ζνο, Tob. 13:4), then v. 26 is but the repetition in other words of what has already been said in v. 25, “no living man who believes in me shall ever die.” Such repetition is quite in the Johannine style (see 3:3, 5), and it gives a good sense here. (2) But inasmuch as ζστιin v. 25 refers to spiritual life, the life of the believer after the death of the body, it is preferable to take ζνin v. 26 as having the same reference, and to treat v. 26 as continuing the topic of v. 25, but not repeating it. “Every one who is living (sc. in the heavenly life) and a believer in me shall never die.” Verse 25 gives only the promise of life after physical death; v. 26 gives the assurance of that future life being immortal. For this use of ζνas indicating one who is living, not on earth, but in the spiritual world, cf. the saying of Jesus to the Sadducees, that God is not the God of the dead, but of the living (ζνω, Mar_12:27 and parallels).
For this use of εςτναῶα “shall never die,” cf. 4:14, and esp. 8:51.
It should be observed that vv. 25, 26, do not suggest to Martha that Lazarus will live again on earth. They are general pronouncements applying to every believer in Jesus, and the emphasis is laid on the words ὁπσεω εςἐέ It is this essential condition of life in its deepest sense that is proclaimed to Martha. She is asked if she believes it, and she says “Yes”; but her answer does not indicate that she understood what was involved.
27. Martha’s reply is a confession of Jesus as the Messiah. It hardly goes farther; although, in terms, it embraces all that Jn. hopes his readers will reach, sc. that full faith which leads to life (20:31). She hastens to summon Mary, who may be expected to understand the mysterious sayings of Jesus better than she (cf. Luk_10:39).
Νί Cf. 21:15, 16 and Mar_7:28. She acquiesces in the truth of what Jesus had said, because she believed Him to be the Christ.
κρε See on v. 3.
ἐὼππσεκ. With the perfect tense cf. 6:69 and 1Jn_4:16; ἐώis emphatic. Certainly Martha accepts the word of Jesus as true, for she has believed for some time past in His Messiahship. ὃισ ε ὁχιτςFor the form of the confession σ ε, cf. 1:49, 6:69, Mar_8:29, Mat_16:16.
ὁυὸ τῦθο—a recognised title of Messiah. See on 1:34 for its usage and significance. Cf. the note on 6:69 for the confession of Jesus as the Christ by Peter; and see further on v. 40. Note that the exact terms, ὁχιτς ὁυὸ τῦθο, appear together again at 20:31, where Jn. defines the faith which he aims to inspire in his readers.
ὁεςτνκσο ἐχμνς This is the way in which the coming Prophet was described in popular discourse (see 6:14, Mat_11:3). Jesus used the expression of Himself more than once (9:39, 16:28, 18:37).
Mary, Being Informed of Jesus’ Presence, Hastens to Speak to Him (vv. 28-32)
28. τῦοεπῦα This is the true reading, with א rather than τῦαof ADΓΘ Martha said one thing only in response to Jesus’ words of mystery; she did not make a speech.
She called (ἐώηε) “Mary.” Μρά does not take the article here, suggesting that the actual name was called out by Martha.
λθᾳ “secretly,” presumably because she wished Mary to see Jesus privately, without the crowd of mourning friends being present. However, this did not succeed, for they followed Mary out of the house (v. 31). λθᾳoccurs elsewhere in N.T. at Mat_1:19, Mat_2:7, Act_16:37. D reads σωῇ which gives the same sense.
ὁδδσαο. So they called Jesus among themselves, although they addressed Him as κρε See on 1:38, 13:13; and cf. 20:16.
κὶφνῖσ. No mention has been made hitherto of the desire of Jesus to see Mary.
29. ἐεν δ. δ should be retained with א ἐεν designates the person who has just been mentioned (see on 1:8).
ἠέθ τχ κὶἤχτ πὸ ατν With her natural impulsiveness (see Introductory Note on 12:1-8), Mary rose up quickly from the seat of mourning (see on v. 20), and went to meet Jesus, as she had been bidden to do. The rec. (with AΘ has ἐερτι…ἔχτι but the aorist and imperfect tenses are significant.
30. οπ δ κλ It is useless to make guesses as to why Jesus had not yet come into the village. He may have been resting at the spot where Martha met Him first.
ἔιis om. by ADLΓ, but ins. א Θhas ἐὶτ τπ.
At this point Moffatt places vv. 18, 19. See on v. 18 above.
31. The friends who had come out from Jerusalem to mourn with the sisters (see v. 19), when they saw Mary rise up (see on v. 20) and leave the house suddenly without giving any explanation, supposed that she had gone to wail at the tomb, a common habit of mourners.
καενdoes not indicate silent weeping (cf. v. 35), but the unrestrained wailing of Orientals. It is used elsewhere, as here, of wailing for the dead; cf. Mar_5:38 (of the wailing for Jairus’ daughter),