Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 19:31 - 19:31
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_19:31. Οὖν ] Therefore, since Jesus was already dead. Their object was already attained; so now the Sabbath also should still have its rights. “Magnifici honoratores Dei, cum in conscientia mala reposuissent sanguinem justi,” Ruperti.
ἵνα μὴ μείνῃ , κ . τ . λ .] Contrary to the Roman custom, of leaving the corpse to putrefy on the cross (comp. on Mat_27:58), on the part of the Jews, the injunction has to be applied respecting the removal of the hanged person, Deu_21:22-23 (comp. Joseph. Bell. iv. 5. 2), especially in the present case where with sunset the Sabbath began, and this a great Sabbath, and therewith a wish was expressed to see the crucified ones removed and interred in the interval before the beginning of the holy day.
παρασκευή ] Because it was the day of preparation, namely, τοῦ σαββάτου , for the Sabbath. This reference of παρασκ . necessarily follows from ἐν τῷ σαββάτῳ . But the parenthesis ἦν γὰρ μεγάλη , κ . τ . λ . indicates why they wished not to have the Sabbath, especially on that occasion, desecrated by the bodies remaining on the cross; because great, i.e. pre-eminently holy (comp. Joh_7:37; Isa_1:13), was the day of that Sabbath, because, that is, it was (not merely generally a Sabbath in the Passover feast time, but) at the same time the first day of Passover, the 15th Nisan. It was thus a Sabbath with twofold authority, since the first feast-day also had the character of a Sabbath (Lev_23:7-15). With a Quartodeciman usage of speech (Hilgenfeld) the designation of the Sabbath in the present passage has nothing to do. See Steitz in the Jahrb. f. Deutsche Theol. 1861, p. 113 ff. As the second feast-day, however, which is the day that results from the attempts at harmonizing (see on Joh_18:28), it could only be termed μεγάλη , for the reason that on this day, i.e. the 16th Nisan, the feast of Sheaves took place, Lev_23:10 ff. (see especially Wieseler, p. 385 f., 344). But how could John have presupposed, in his readers, without any indication, a reference to this? These could explain to themselves the μεγαλότης of that Sabbath only from Joh_19:14, from the fact, namely, that the παρασκευὴ τοῦ σαββάτου of which John speaks was at the same time, according to Joh_19:14, παρασκευὴ τοῦ πάσχα .
ἵνα κατεαγῶσιν κ . τ . λ .] For two were, indeed, still living, and also with respect to Jesus they had at least no certainty that He was actually dead. On the apparent contradiction with Mar_15:44, see on Joh_19:38. The crushing of the legs with clubs (crucifragium, σκελοκοπία ) was to accelerate death (as John also manifestly views it, comp. Joh_19:33), and that in a barbarous manner, in order to take nothing from the severity of the punishment. See Lactantius, Instit. div. iv. 26; Lipsius, de cruce, ii. 14. It also appears as a punishment by itself, Suetonius, Aug. 67; Seneca, de ira, iii. 32; and see generally Wetstein, also Lipsius, ad Plaut. Asin. ii. 4. 68. The addition of a finishing blow, by which (therefore not by the crucifragium in itself) death was brought about, cannot be shown, least of all, from Joh_19:34, against Michaelis, Sender, Kuinoel, Hug. On the aorist form with syllabic augment from κατάγνυμι , see Winer, p. 68 [E. T. p. 85].