Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 5:39 - 5:40
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_5:39-40 bring out to view the complete perversity of this unbelief. “The Scriptures testify of me, as the Mediator of eternal life; he, therefore, who searches the Scriptures, because in them he thinks he has eternal life, will by that witness be referred to me; ye search the Scriptures, because, etc., and yet refuse to follow me according to their guidance.” How inconsistent and self-contradictory is this! That ἐρευνᾶτε is Indicative (Cyril, Erasmus, Casaubon, Beza, Bengel, and many moderns, also Kuinoel, Lücke, Olshausen, Klee, De Wette, Maier, Hilgenfeld, Brückner, Godet), and not Imperative (Chrysostom, Augustine, Theophylact, Euthymius Zigabenus, Luther, Calvin, Aretius, Maldonatus, Cornelius a Lapide, Grotius, Calovius, Wolf, Wetstein, Paulus, B. Crusius, Tholuck, Hofmann, Luthardt, Baeumlein, Ewald, Hengstenberg, arguing from Isa_34:16), is thus clear from the context, in which the Imperative would introduce a foreign element, especially out of keeping with the correlative καὶ οὐ θέλετε . Comp. also Lechler in the Stud. u. Krit. 1854, p. 795. The searching of the Scriptures might certainly be attributed to the Jews, comp. Joh_7:52 (against B. Crusius and Tholuck); but a special significance is wrongly attached to ἐρευνᾶτε (a study which penetrates into the subject itself, and attains a truly inward possession of the word, Luthardt); and the contradiction of Joh_5:40, which forms such a difficulty, is really nothing but the inconsistency which Jesus wishes to bring out to view.
ὑμεῖς ] emphatic, for you, ye on your part, are the people who think this. Still there lies in δοκεῖτε neither blame,[222] nor (as Ewald maintains, though Joh_5:45 is different) a delicate sarcastic reference to their exaggerated and scholastic reverence for the letter of Scripture, but certainly a contrast to the actual ἔχειν , which Jesus could not affirm concerning them, because they did not believe in Him who was testified of in the Scriptures as the Mediator of eternal life. Comp. Hofmann, Schriftbeweis, I. 671. Theoretically considered, they were right in their δοκεῖν , but practically they were wrong, because Christ remained hidden from them in the Scriptures. Comp. as to the thing itself, 2Co_3:15-16; and on ἔχειν ζωὴν αἰ ., Joh_3:15.
ἐν αὐταῖς ] The possession of Messianic life is regarded as contained in the Scriptures, in so far as they contain that by which this possession is brought about, that which is not given outside the Scriptures, but only in them.
καὶ ἐκεῖναι , κ . τ . λ .] Prominence assigned to the identity of the subject, in order to bring out the contrast more fully: and they, those very Scriptures which ye search, are they which, etc.
καὶ οὐ θέλετε ] καὶ does not mean and yet, but simply and. This simplicity is all the more striking, more striking and tragic even than the interrogative interpretation (Ewald). On ἐλθεῖν πρός με , denoting a believing adherence to Christ, comp. Joh_6:35. They stood aloof from Him, and this depended on their will, Mat_23:37.
ἵνα ζωήν ἔχ .] “in order that that δοκεῖν of yours might become a reality.”
[222] According to Hilgenfeld, Lehrbegr. p. 213 (comp. his Evang. p. 272, and Zeitschr. 1863, p. 217), directed against the delusion of the Jews, that they possessed the perfect source of blessedness in the literal sense of the O. T. which proceeded from the Demiurge, and was intended by him. Even Rothe, in the Stud. u. Krit. 1860, p. 67, takes δοκεῖτε in the sense of a delusion, viz. that they possessed eternal life in a book. Such explanations are opposed to the high veneration manifested by Jesus towards the Holy Scriptures, especially apparent in John, though here even Weiss, p. 106, approves of the interpretation of an erroneous δοκεῖν .
Vers. 41–44. “I do not utter these reproaches against you from (disappointed) ambition, but because I have perceived what a want of all right feeling towards God lies at the root of your unbelief.”
δόξαν παρὰ ἀνθρ .] These words go together, and stand emphatically at the beginning of the sentence, because there is presupposed the possibility of an accusation on this very point. Comp. Plato, Phaedr. p. 232 A; see also 1Th_2:6.
οὐ λαμβ .] i.e. “I reject it,” as in Joh_5:34.
ἔγνωκα ὑμᾶς ] “cognitos vos habeo; hoc radio penetrat corda auditorum,” Bengel.
τ . ἀγάπ . τ . θεοῦ ] If they had love to God in their hearts (this being the summary of their law!), they would have felt sympathy towards the Son, whom the Father (Joh_5:43) sent, and would have received and recognised Him. The article is generic; what they lacked was love to God.
ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ] in your own hearts; it was an excellence foreign to them, of which they themselves were destitute—a mere theory, existing outside the range of their inner life.
Joh_5:43. Actual result of this deficiency with reference to their relation towards Jesus, who had come in His Father’s name, i.e. as His appointed representative, and consequently as the true Christ (comp. Joh_7:28, Joh_8:42), but who was unbelievingly despised by them, whereas, on the other hand, they would receive a false Messiah.
ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τῷ ἰδίῳ ] in his own name, i.e. in his own authority and self-representations, not as one commissioned of God (which He of course is alleged to be), consequently a false Messiah;[223] ψευδώνυμος ἀνὴρ ἀντίθεος , Nonnus. He will be received, because he satisfies the opposite of the love of God, viz. self-love (by promising earthly glory, indulgence towards sin, etc.). For a definite prophecy of false Messiahs, see Mat_24:24. To suppose a special reference to Barkochba (Hilgenfeld), is arbitrarily to take for granted the uncritical assumption of the post-apostolic origin of this Gospel. According to Schudt, Jüdische Merkwurdigkeit. vi. 27–30 (in Bengel), sixty-four such deceivers have been counted since the time of Christ.
Joh_5:44. The reproach of unbelief now rises to its highest point, for Jesus in a wrathful question denies to the Jews even the ability to believe.
ὑμεῖς ] has a deeply emotional emphasis: How is it possible for you people to believe? And the ground of this impossibility is: because ye receive honour one of another ( δόξαν παρὰ ἀλλ . are taken together), because ye reciprocally give and take honour of yourselves. This ungodly desire of honour (comp. Joh_12:43; Mat_23:5 sqq.), and the indifference, necessarily concomitant therewith, towards the true honour, which comes from God, must so utterly blight and estrange the heart from the divine element of life, that it is not even capable of faith. That divine δόξα is indeed the true glory of Israel (Luthardt), comp. Rom_2:29, but it is not here designated as such, as also the δόξαν παρὰ ἀλλ . λαμβ . does not appear as a designation of the “spurious-Judaism,” which latter is in general a wider conception (Rom_2:17 ff.).
τὴν παρὰ , κ . τ . λ .] for it consists in this, that one knows himself to be recognised and esteemed of God. Comp. as to the thing itself, Joh_12:43; Rom_2:29; Rom_3:23.
παρὰ τοῦ μόνου θεοῦ ] not “from God alone” (Grotius, De Wette, Godet, and most others, from an erroneous reference to Mat_4:4; Mat_4:10), but from, the alone (only) God. Cf. Joh_17:3; Rom_16:26; 1Ti_6:15. The adj. shows the exclusive value of this honour.
οὐ ζητεῖτε ] The transition from the participle to the finite tense gives greater independence and impressiveness to the second clause.
[223] This reference of the text to false Messiahs is not too narrow (Luthardt, Brückner), because ἔλθῃ corresponds to the ἐλήλυθα ; and this, as the entire context shows, indicates that the appearance of the Messiah had taken place. This also tells against Tholuck’s general reference to false prophets. Many of the Fathers have taken the words to refer to Antichrist.