Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 12:17 - 12:18
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_12:17-18. Οὖν ] Leading back again after the intermediate observation of Joh_12:16 to the story, and that in such a way that it is now stated how it was the raising of Lazarus which so greatly excited both the people who thronged with Jesus from Bethany to Jerusalem (the Ἰουδαῖοι who had become believers, Joh_12:9; Joh_12:11, and others, certainly including many inhabitants of Bethany itself), and the multitude which came to meet them from Jerusalem (Joh_12:12).
ἐμαρτ . κ . τ . λ . ὅτι ]
[107] for they had, in truth, themselves seen the reanimated man; had also, perhaps, themselves witnessed in part the process of the miracle, or at least heard of it from eye-witnesses, and could accordingly testify to His resurrection.
ἐφώνησεν … νεκρῶν ] The echo of their triumphant words.
διὰ τοῦτο … ὅτι ] On this account (on account of this raising from the dead), namely, because; see on Joh_10:17.
ὑπήντησεν ] not pluperfect in sense, but: they went to meet (as already stated above, Joh_12:12-13).
ὁ ὄχλος ] The article points to Joh_12:12.
ἤκουσαν ] namely, previously, in Jerusalem.
τοῦτο ] with emphasis; hence also the separation in the order of the words.
[107] With the reading ὅτε (see critical notes), ἐμαρτ would have to be taken absolutely the people bore witness, who, viz. were with Him at the raising of Lazarus. Comp. Luther, Erasmus, and many others. Thus the ὄχλος would be the same as in Joh_11:42, which, however, is not appropriate to ver. 12 and ver. 18, and would only tend to confuse.
NOTE.
While we necessarily recognise the main difference between the Synoptics and John, namely, that according to the former, the journey of Christ to Jerusalem is made from Jericho, where He had remained for the night at the house of Zacchaeus, and the stay in Bethany is excluded (see on Mat_21:1, note), the Messianic entry is yet one and the same event in all four evangelists. Against the assumption of an entry on two occasions (Paulus, Schleiermacher, üb. d. Schriften des Luk. p. 243 ff., and L. J. p. 407 ff.), according to which He is said first to have made an entry from Jericho, and, one or two days later, again from Bethany, the very nature of the transaction is decisive, to which a repetition, and one moreover so early, was not appropriate, without degenerating into an organized procession. Only in the view of its occurring once, and of its being brought about accidentally, as it were, by the circumstances, does it retain a moral agreement with the mind of Jesus. With this view, too, all four accounts conform, and they all show not merely by their silence respecting a second procession, but also by the manner in which they represent the one, that they are entirely ignorant of any repetition. Such a repetition, especially one so uniform in character, would be as improbable in itself, as it must be opposed to the course of development of the history of Jesus, which here especially, when the last bloody crisis is prepared for by the entry of the Messianic King, must preserve its divine decorum, and finds its just measure in the simple fulfilment of the prophetic prediction.