Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 5:1 - 5:1
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_5:1. Μετὰ ταῦτα ] after this stay of Jesus in Galilee; an approximate statement of time, within the range of which the harmonist has to bring much that is contained in the Synoptics. The distinction made by Lücke between this and μετὰ τοῦτο , according to which the former denotes indirect, and the latter immediate sequence, is quite incapable of proof: μετὰ ταῦτα is the more usual in John; comp. Joh_5:14; Joh_3:22; Joh_6:1; Joh_7:1.
ἑορτὴ τῶν Ἰουδαίων ] a feast of the Jews; John does not describe it more definitely. But what feast is meant appears with certainty from Joh_4:35; comp. Joh_6:4. For in Joh_4:35 Jesus spoke in December, and it is clear from Joh_4:4 that the Passover was still approaching; it must therefore[203] be a feast occurring in the interval between December and the Passover, and this is no other than the feast of Purim ( éÀîÅé äÇôÌåÌøÄéí , Est_9:24 ff; Est_3:7), the feast of lots, celebrated on the 14th and 15th of Adar (Est_9:21), consequently in March, in commemoration of the nation’s deliverance from the bloody designs of Haman. So Keppler, d’Outrein, Hug, Olshausen, Wieseler, Krabbe, Anger, Lange, Maier, Baeumlein, Godet, and most others. So also Holtzmann (Judenth. u. Christenth. p. 374) and Märcker (Uebereinst. d. Matth. u. Joh. 1868, p. 11). In favour of this interpretation is the fact that, as this feast was by no means a great one, but of less importance and less known to Hellenistic readers, the indefinite mention of it on John’s part is thoroughly appropriate; while he names the greater and well-known feasts,—not only the Passover, but the σκηνοπηγία in Joh_7:2, and the ἐγκαίνια in Joh_10:22. To suppose, in explanation of the fact that he does not give the name, that he had forgotten what feast it was (Schweizer), is compatible neither with the accuracy of his recollection in other things, nor with the importance of the miracle wrought at this feast. It is arbitrary, however, to suppose that John did not wish to lay stress upon the name of the ἙΟΡΤΉ , but upon the fact that Jesus did not go up to Jerusalem save on occasion of a feast (Luthardt, Lichtenstein); indeed, the giving of the name after ἸΟΥΔΑΊΩΝ (comp. Joh_7:2) would in no way have interfered with that imaginary design. It is objected that the feast of Purim, which was not a temple feast, required no journey to Jerusalem (see especially Hengstenberg, Christol. III. p. 187 f., Lücke, de Wette, Brückner); and the high esteem in which it is held in Gem. Hier. Megill. i. 8 cannot be shown to refer to the time of Jesus. But might not Jesus, even without any legal obligation, have availed Himself of this feast as an occasion for His further labours in Jerusalem? And are we to suppose that the character of the feast—a feast for eating and drinking merely—should hinder Him from going to Jerusalem? The Sabbath (Joh_5:9), on which apparently (but see Wieseler, p. 219) the feast could never occur, may have been before or after it; and, lastly, what is related of Jesus (Joh_6:1 ff.) between this festival and the Passover, only a month afterwards, may easily have occurred within the space of that month. In fine, it can neither have been the Passover (Cod. Λ ., Irenaeus, Eusebius’ Chron., Rupertus, Luther, Calovius, Grotius, Jansen, Scaliger, Cornelius a Lapide, Lightfoot, Lampe, Paulus, Kuinoel, Süsskind, Klee, Neander, Ammon, Hengstenberg), nor Pentecost (Cyril, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius Zigabenus, Erasmus, Melancthon, Beza, Calvin, Maldonatus, Bengel), nor the feast of Tabernacles (Cod. 131, Cocceius, Ebrard, Ewald, Hilgenfeld, Lichtenstein, Krafft, Riggenbach), nor the feast of the Dedication (a possible surmise of Keppler and Petavius); nor can we acquiesce in leaving the feast undeterminable (Lücke, de Wette, Luthardt, Tholuck, Brückner. Baumgarten Crusius hesitates between Purim and the Passover, yet inclines rather to the latter).
[203] If this feast itself is taken to be the Passover, we are obliged, with the most glaring arbitrariness, to put a spatium vacuum of a year between it and the Passover of Joh_6:4, of which, however, John (Joh_6:1-4) has not given the slightest hint. On the contrary, he lets his narrative present the most uninterrupted sequence. Hengstenberg judges, indeed, that the gap can appear strange only to those who do not rightly discern the relation in which John stands to the Synoptics. But this is nothing more than the dictum of harmonistic presuppositions.