Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 11:1 - 11:1
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_11:1 f.[68] This stay of Jesus in retirement, however, is terminated by the sickness of Lazarus ( δέ ).
Simplicity of the style of the narrative: But there was a certain one sick, (namely) Lazarus of Bethany, of the town, etc: ἀπὸ (Joh_7:42; Mat_2:1; Mat_27:57) and ἘΚ both denote the same relation (Joh_1:46 f.), that of derivation; hence it is the less allowable to regard the two sisters and the brother as Galileans, and Mary as the Magdalene (Hengstenberg).[69] That Lazarus lived also in Bethany, and was lying ill there, is plain from the course of the narrative. For change of preposition, without any change of relation, comp. Joh_1:45; Rom_3:30; 2Co_3:11; Gal_2:16; Eph_1:7; Phm_1:5; Kühner, II. p. 219.
This Bethany, situated on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives, and, according to Joh_11:18, about three-quarters of an hour’s walk from Jerusalem (see on Mat_21:17), was characteristically and specially known in evangelistic tradition owing to the two sisters who lived there; hence its more exact description by the words ἐκ τῆς κώμης Μαρίας , etc.,[70] for the sake of distinguishing it from the Bethany mentioned in Joh_1:28 (see critical note on Joh_1:28).
For the legends about Lazarus, see especially Thilo, Cod. Apocry. p. 711; Fabric. Cod. Apocr. III. pp. 475, 509.
ἦν δὲ Μαρία , etc.] Not to be put in a parenthesis. A more exact description of this Mary,[71]—who, however, must not be identified with the woman who was a sinner, mentioned in Luke 7, as is done still by Hengstenberg (see on Luk_7:36-37 f.)—from the account of the anointing (Mat_26:6 ff.; Mar_14:3 ff.), which John presupposes, in a general way, as already known, although he himself afterwards takes occasion to narrate it in Joh_12:1 ff. So important and significant did it appear to him, while tradition, besides, had not preserved it in its pure original form (not even in Matthew and Mark).
ἧς ὁ ἀδελφὸς , etc.] Thus, to refer to Lazarus as the brother of Mary, was perfectly natural to the narrative, and after Joh_11:1 is clear in itself. Entirely baseless is Hengstenberg’s remark: the relation of Lazarus to the unmarried Mary was more intimate than to the married Martha, who had been the wife of Simon the leper, Mat_26:6 (which is a pure invention). See in general, against the erroneous combinations of Hengstenberg regarding the personal relations of the two sisters and Lazarus, Strauss, Die Halben und die Ganzen, p. 79 ff.
[68] On the whole section relating to the raising of Lazarus, see Gumlich in the Stud. u. Kritiken, 1862, pp. 65 ff., 248 ff.
[69] In the Constitt. Apost. 3. 6. 2, also, Mary Magdalene is expressly distinguished from the sister of Lazarus.
[70] This genitive, presupposing, as it does, the nominative form Μαρία , is opposed to the adoption in John of the Hebrew form Μαριάμ , which, in the various passages where the name occurs, is supported by very varying testimony, in some cases by very strong, in other passages, however, by no evidence at all.
[71] On account of her predominant importance, and from being so well known, Mary is mentioned first in ver. 1. Had she been the elder sister (Ewald), there would be no apparent reason why Martha should be mentioned first in vv. 5, 19, and 20. Comp. also Luk_10:38, where Martha appears as mistress of the house.—Lazarus seems to have been younger than the sisters, and to have held a subordinate place in the household, Joh_12:2.