Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 19:36 - 19:37
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_19:36-37. Not without scriptural ground do I say: ἵνα κ . ὑμεῖς πιστεύσητε ; for that is accomplished, which I have just testified, Joh_19:33-34, concerning the lance-thrust, which took the place of the omitted leg-breaking, in the connection of the divine determination for the fulfilment of the scriptural saying ( γραφή as in Joh_13:18): a bone of Him shall not be broken (Exo_12:46; Num_9:12).[256] To John as to Paul (1Co_5:7) Christ is the antitype of the paschal lamb intended in the historical sense of that passage, in which Baur and Hilgenfeld of course find the formative factor of the history. Psa_34:21 (Grotius, Brückner), because the passage speaks of the protection of life, cannot here be thought of.
The second passage of Scripture, to which, moreover, the reader himself is left to supply the same telic connection, which was previously expressed by ἵνα γρ . πληρ ., contains the O. T. prediction of the lance-thrust which has been narrated, so far as it concerned precisely the Messiah: they will look on Him whom they have pierced,—an expression of the future, repentant, believing recognition of and longing for Him who previously was so hostilely murdered. The subject of both verbs is the Jews (not the Gentiles), whose work the entire crucifixion generally (comp. Act_2:23; Act_2:36), and consequently mediately, the ἐκκέντησις also is. The passage is Zec_12:10, where the language is used of a martyr, who at a later time is repentantly mourned for. The citation is freely made from the original (so also Rev_1:7), not from the LXX., who take ãÈÍ÷ÀøåÌ improperly: κατωρχήσαντο , have insulted (Aquinas, Theodotus, and Symmachus have also ἘΞΕΚΈΝΤΗΣΑΝ , and rightly). John also follows the reading àìéå ,[257] which Ewald also prefers.
ΕἸς ὍΝ ] Attraction = ΕἸς ἙΚΕῖΝΟΝ ὍΝ , comp. Joh_6:29. To make ΕἸς ὍΝ dependent on ἘΞΕΚΈΝΤ . (Luther, after the Vulgate: “they will see into whom they have pierced;” Baur: “that they have, namely, pierced into Him from whose side blood and water flowed”) corresponds neither to the original, nor to the Greek construction, according to which not ʼΚΚΕΝΤΕῖΝ ΕἼς ΤΙΝΑ , but ἘΚΚ . ΤΙΝΑ is said (Rev_1:7; Jdg_9:54; 1Ch_10:4; Isa_14:19; 2Ma_12:6; Polyb. v. 56. 12, xv. 33. 4, xxv. 8. 6). It always denotes pierce, stab. So also here Jesus was not indeed first killed by the lance-thrust, but this thrust formed, as its conclusion, a part of the whole act of putting to death, and formed, therefore, the Messianic fulfilment of the prophetic word. On ὉΡΆΩ ΕἸς , look upon, in the sense of regard, desire, hope, etc., comp. Xen. Cyr. iv. 1. 20; Soph. El. 913; Stanley, ad. Aesch. Sept. 109. Just so ἈΠΟΒΛΈΠΕΙΝ ΕἸς or ΠΡΌς : Kühner, ad Xen. Mem. iv. 2. 2. The LXX. have ἐπιβλέψονται πρός . The time of the fulfilment of this prophetic ὌΨΟΝΤΑΙ , Κ . Τ . Λ ., is, as also in the original, that of the beginning of repentance and conversion; comp. Joh_8:28, Joh_12:32; not the day of judgment (Euth. Zigabenus, Grotius, and several others, comp. already Barnab. 7), to which ὌΨΟΝΤΑΙ , with the mere accus., as in Rev_1:7, not with εἰς , would be appropriate.
A word of Scripture, speaking specially of the outflow of blood and water, does not, indeed, stand at the command of John; but if the facts themselves, with which this outflow was connected, namely, the negative one of the non-breaking of the legs (Joh_19:36), and the positive one of the lance-thrust (Joh_19:37), are predicted, so also in the miraculous ΣΗΜΕῖΟΝ , by which the thrust was accompanied, is justly, and on the ground of Scripture ( ΓΆΡ , Joh_19:36), a special awakening of faith (Joh_19:35) to be found.
Schweizer, without reason, considers Joh_19:35-37 as spurious.
[256] As regards its essential substance quite undestroyed, not like a profane dish of roast meat with bones broken in pieces, was the paschal lamb to be prepared as a sacrifice to God (Ewald, Alterth. p. 467 f.; Knobel on Lev_1:7). Any peculiar symbolical destination in this prescription (Bähr and Keil: to set forth the unity of those who eat) cannot be established, not even by a retrospective conclusion from 1Co_10:17.
[257] Not àìé ; Umbreit’s observation in the Stud. u. Krit. 1849, p. 104, that the passage of Zech. has a Johannean element for the idea of the Messiah, because God identifies Himself with the Messiah, applies only to the reading àìé , which, further Hofmann, Weissag. u. Erf. II. p. 152 f., has sought, in a very tortuous way, to unite with the following accus. àú àÂùÑÄø ; he is followed by Luthardt: “They will longingly look up to me, after Him (i.e. expect, entreat of me Him) whom they,” etc.