Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 12:30 - 12:31
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_12:30-31. Ἀπεκρίθη ] not to the disciples (Tholuck), but, according to Joh_12:29, with reference to these two expressions of opinion from the people. He lets their opinions, as to what and whose the voice was, alone, but recognises in their hearts the more dangerous error, that they do not put the voice (this thunder or this angelic speech, according to their supposition) in any relation to themselves.
διʼ ἐμέ ] to assure me that my prayer has been heard; “novi patris animum in me,” Erasmus.
διʼ ὑμᾶς ] in relation to you to overcome unbelief, and to strengthen faith. Comp. Joh_11:42.
νῦν κρίσις , κ . τ . λ .] Not an interpretation of the voice (Hengstenberg), but also not without reference to διʼ ὑμᾶς (Engelhardt), which is too weighty an element. Rather: how the crisis of this time presses for the use of that διʼ ὑμᾶς !
νῦν … νῦν ] with triumphant certainty of victory, treating the near future as present; now, now, is it gone so far! He speaks “quasi certamine defunctus,” Calvin.
κρίσις ] Now is judgment, i.e. judicial (according to the context: condemnatory) decision passed upon this world, i.e. on the men of the αἰὼν οὗτος who reject faith. This judgment is an actual one; for in the victory of the Messianic work of salvation, which was to be brought about by the death of Jesus, and His exaltation to the heavenly glory connected therewith,[112] the κόσμος was to be set forth in the entire sinfulness and weakness of its hostility towards Christ, and thereby in fact judged.[113] Comp. Joh_16:9-10; Joh_16:33. This victory the ruler of this world in particular ( τ . κόσμ . τ . solemnly repeated), the devil, was to submit to;[114] his dominion must have an end, because the death of Jesus effected the reconciliation of humanity, by which reconciliation all were to be drawn away from the devil by becoming believers, and were to be placed under the spiritual power of the Christ exalted to glory, Joh_12:32, Rom_5:12 ff.; Php_2:9-11. He is called the ἄρχων τοῦ κόσμου τούτου , as the ruler of the unbelieving, Christ- opposing humanity (comp. 2Co_4:4; Eph_2:2; Eph_6:12), as in the writings of Rabbins, he, as ruler of the Gentiles, in opposition to God and His people, bears this as a standing name ( ùø äòåìí ). See Lightfoot and Schoettgen, also in Eisenmenger, Entdeckt. Judenthum, I. p. 647 ff. Here he is so called, because the very ΚΡΊΣΙς of his dominium, the κόσμος , was declared.
ἐκβληθήσεται ἔξω ] The necessarily approaching removal of the power of the devil through the death and the exaltation of Jesus is vividly represented as a casting out from his empire, namely from the ΚΌΣΜΟς ΟὟΤΟς . Only this supplement is yielded by the context, not Τῆς ἈΡΧῆς (Euth. Zigabenus, Beza), nor ΤΟῦ ΔΙΚΑΣΤΗΡΊΟΥ (Theophylact), nor out of the kingdom of God (Ewald), and least of all ΤΟῦ ΟὐΡΑΝΟῦ (Luk_10:18; Rev_12:8, so Olshausen; hence the reading ΚΆΤΩ ). The indefinite rendering: he is repulsed (De Wette; comp. Plat. Menex. p. 243 B; Soph. Oed. R. 386), or to be removed from the presence of the judge (Hofmann, Schriftbew. I. p. 449), is not sufficient, on account of the appended ἔξω .
Note further, that the victory here announced over this world and over the reign of the devil was indeed decided, and commenced with the death and the exaltation of Christ, but is in a state of continuous development onwards to its consummation at the last day (comp. Rev_20:10); hence the passages of the N. T. on the continuing power and influence of the devil (2Co_4:4; Eph_2:2; Eph_6:12; Rom_16:20; 1Pe_5:8, and many others) do not stand in contradiction to the present passage. Comp. Col_2:15.
[112] There lies in it, accordingly, no opposition to the belief in the last judgment (against Hilgenfeld, Lehrbegr. p. 274), as has been supposed from a misinterpretation also of Joh_3:19-20, in spite of the repeated mention of the last day, and in spite of v. 27, against which here the very absence of the article should have been a warning. Again, what is subsequently said of the devil (as also the passages Joh_14:30-31, Joh_16:11) is not to be explained from the Gnostic idea, that the devil, through his having contrived the death of Christ, but having after His death recognised Him as the Son of God, had been cheated, and so forfeited his right (Hilgenfeld). Of such Gnostic fancies the N. T. knows nothing. The conquest of the devil is necessarily granted along with the atoning effect of the death of Jesus, and through the operation of the Spirit of the exalted one it is in process of completion until the Parousia.
[113] As hereafter the devil is the subject which is cast out, so here the κόσμος is the subject which is judged. This in answer to Bengel: “judicium de mundo, quis posthac jure sit obtenturus mundum.” Grotius explains κρίσις simply of the vindicatio in libertatem; humanity is to be freed from its unjust possessor; consequently as regards the material contents, substantially as Bengel, comp. also Beza.
[114] Schleiermacher, indeed (L. J. p. 343), interprets the ἄρχ . τ . κ . τ . of “open force” in its conflict against the activity of Jesus. In reference to the declarations of Jesus regarding the devil, it is most markedly apparent with what difficulty Schleiermacher subordinated himself to exegetical tests.