Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 6:5 - 6:6
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_6:5-6. According to the reading ἀγοράσωμεν , whence are we to buy? deliberative conjunctive. The fact that Jesus thus takes the initiative (as host, Ewald thinks, but this is not enough), and takes action without the prompting of any expressed need, however real, is not to be explained merely on the supposition that this is an abridgment (Lücke, Neander, Hengstenberg) of the synoptical account (Mat_14:15); it is a discrepancy, which, however, does not destroy the fact that John was an eye-witness. It is purely arbitrary on Baur’s part to assume the design to be that of directing attention more directly to the spiritual purpose of the miracle, or, with Hilgenfeld, to regard all here as composed out of synoptical materials to prove the omnipotence of the Logos. The most simple and obvious course is to explain the representation given as flowing from the preponderating idea of the Messiah’s autonomy.[225] See on Mat_14:15. It is an analogous case when Jesus Himself gave occasion to and introduced the miracle at Bethesda, Joh_5:6. It is a supplement to the narrative in the Synoptics, that Jesus discussed with Philip (Joh_1:44) the question of bread. Why with him? According to Bengel, because it fell to him to manage the res alimentaria, which is improbable, for Judas was treasurer, Joh_13:29. Judging from Joh_6:6, we might say it was because Philip had to be tested according to his intellectual idiosyncrasy (Joh_14:8 ff.), and convinced of his inability to advise. The πειράζειν does not signify the trial of faith (so usually, even Hengstenberg), but, as αὐτὸς γὰρ ᾔδει shows, was a test whether he could here suggest any expedient; and the answer of the disciple (Joh_6:7) conveys only the impression that he knew of none. This consciousness, howzever, was intended also to prepare the disciple, who so closely resembled Thomas, and for whom the question, therefore, had an educative purpose, the more readily to feel, by the new and coming miracle, how the power of faith in the divine agency of his Lord transcended all calculations of the intellect. This was too important a matter for Jesus with respect to that disciple, to allow us to suppose that πειράζων αὐτόν is a mere notion of John’s own, which had its origin among the transfiguring recollections of a later time (Ewald). ΗἼΔΕΙ ΤῶΝ ΜΑΘΗΤῶΝ ΤΟῪς ΜΆΛΙΣΤΑ ΔΕΟΜΈΝΟΥς ΠΛΕΊΟΝΟς ΔΙΔΑΣΚΑΛΊΑς , Theodore of Mopsuestia; in which there is nothing to suggest our attributing to Philip a “simplicité naïve,” Godet.
αὐτός ] Himself, without having any need to resort to the advice of another.
[225] Amid such minor circumstances, the idea might certainly supplant the more exact historical recollection even in a John. We have no right, however, on that account, to compare Jesus, according to John’s representation, to a housewife, who, when she sees the guests coming in the distance, thinks in the first place of what she can set before them, as Hase (Tübing. Schule, p. 4) very inappropriately has done.
Vers. 7–9. For 200 denarii (about 80 Rhenish Guldens, nearly £7) we cannot get bread enough for them, etc. This amount is not named as the contents of the purse, but generally as a large sum, which nevertheless was inadequate to meet the need. Different in Mar_6:37.
Joh_6:8-9. A special trait of originality.
εἷς ἐκ τ . μαθητ . αὐτοῦ ] may seem strange, for Philip was himself a disciple, and it is explained by Wassenbach as a gloss. It has, however, this significance; Philip had been specially asked, and after he had answered so helplessly, another from the circle of the disciples, viz. Andrew, directed a communication to the Lord, which, though made with a consciousness of helplessness, was made the instrument for the further procedure of Jesus.
παιδάριον ἕν ] who had these victuals for sale as a market boy, not a servant of the company, B. Crusius. It may be read one single lad (Mat_11:16), or even one single young slave (see Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 240; Schleusner, Thes. III. p. 160). Comp. the German ein Bürschchen (a lad), as also the manner in which παιδιόν is used (Aristoph. Ran. 37; Nub. 131). In which of the two senses it stands here we cannot decide. In neither case can ἕν stand for τί , but ἕν , as well as the diminutive παιδίον , helps to describe the meagre-ness of the resource, the emphasis, however, being on the latter; and hence ἕν follows, which is not to be taken as an argument against its genuineness (Gersd. p. 420; Lücke, and most others), though in all other places, when John uses εἷς with a substantive (Joh_7:21, Joh_8:41, Joh_10:16, Joh_11:50, Joh_18:14, Joh_20:7), the numeral has the emphasis, and therefore takes the lead. But here: “one single lad,” a mere boy, who can carry little enough!
ἄρτους κριθίνους ] comp. Xen. Anab. iv. 5. 31; Luc. Macrob. 5. Barley bread was eaten mainly by the poorer classes; Jdg_7:13, and Studer, in loc.; Liv. xxvii. 13; Sen. ep. xviii. 8; see also Wetstein and Kypke, I. p. 368.
ὀψάριον ] denotes generally a small relish, but in particular used, as here (comp. Joh_21:9; Joh_21:13), of fish. It belongs to later Greek. See Wetstein.
εἰς τοσούτους ] for so many. Comp. Xen. Anab. i. 1. 10 : εἰς δισχιλίους μισθόν .