João 19
A.T. Robertson · Citado em PreceptAustin
João 19
Robertson - Pilate did not actually scourge Jesus. He simply ordered it done, perhaps to see if the mob would be satisfied with this penalty on the alleged pretender to royalty (Luke 23:22) whom Pilate had pronounced innocent (John 18:38+), an illegal act therefore. It was a preliminary to crucifixion, but Jesus was not yet condemned. (What is the history of crucifixion?) Marvin
João 19
Robertson has an interesting comment writing that Pilate's "exclamatory introduction of Jesus (Behold) in mock coronation robes to the mob was clearly intended to excite pity and to show how absurd the charge of the Sanhedrin was that such a pitiable figure should be guilty of treason. Pilate failed utterly in this effort and did not dream that he was calling attention to the greatest figure of history, the Man of the ages. Spurgeon's expository comments - note there may be some repetition as this is simply a collection of all his thoughts on a given passage or section. John 19:4-5. Pilate therefore went forth again, and saith unto them Behold, I bring him forth to you, that ye may know that I find no fault in him. Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man! Was there ever such a sight of majesty in misery before or since? Yet he needed not to endure all that ignominy, he was no vanquished monarch unable to maintain his own rights. He was still “over all, God blessed for ever,” and be could have smitten everyone there to death if he had pleased to do so. But he was the Lamb of God’s passover, so he meekly suffered. Guilt (156) aitia from aiteo = to ask or require because an accusation is that for which one is required to appear before a judge to be questioned) in Classical Greek was used to mean cause or reason (the reason or cause for an event or state Acts 28:20, Acts 19:40, Heb 5:9), but the most common nuance in the Greek was charge or accusation. The guilt or fault of the one accused is implied. Friberg - (1) cause, reason, grounds (Mt 19.3); as the grounds in a particular situation case (Mt 19.10); (2) as a legal technical term (formal) charge, ground for accusation (Acts 23.28); (BORROW Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament ) BDAG has (1) that which is responsible for a condition = cause, reason (2) the actual state of affairs, case, circumstance, relationship (Latinism=causa) (3) a basis for legal action, legal technical term meaning a charge or a ground for complaint (Acts 23:28 = find a basis for a charge; Jn 18:38; 19:4, 6 = Pilate states that he has no ‘case’. Ac 13:28; Acts 28:18 = reason/grounds for capital punishment . The charge specified Mt 27:37; Mk 15:26) or an accusation (Acts 25:18). (BORROW A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament) AITIA - 20V - charge(1), charge against(2), charges(2), ground(2), guilt(3), reason(9), relationship(1). Mt 19:3; Matt. 19:10; Matt. 27:37; Mk. 15:26; Lk. 8:47; Jn. 18:38; Jn. 19:4; Jn. 19:6; Acts 10:21; Acts 13:28; Acts 22:24; Acts 23:28; Acts 25:18; Acts 25:27; Acts 28:18; Acts 28:20; 2 Tim. 1:6; 2 Tim. 1:12; Tit. 1:13; Heb. 2:11 PILATE'S MOVEMENTS DURING JESUS' TRIAL One aspect of Jesus' trial before Pilate that can be confusing is that Pilate moved in and out of the Praetorium in various phases of the trial.. Here is a summary of Pilate's movements into the Praetorium (where Jesus was) and out of the Praetorium (where the Jewish accusers stood). You will notice that Pilate's movement are keyed to John's account, as John reports far more details of this trial before Pilate than do the three Synoptists combined. 1. Jesus led INSIDE the Praetorium or judgment hall (John 18:28). While all four Gospels record that Jesus is delivered to Pilate, only John includes the detail that Jesus is taken INSIDE the Praetorium while His accusers remained outside. This fact sets up multiple movements by Pilate as he addressed the two parties involved in the trial. D A Carson comments that the failure of the Jews to enter the Praetorium "sent Pilate scuttling back and forth, acting on two stages as it were, a front stage and a rear stage. This simultaneously enhances the drama of the narrative, ensures that the Jews do not hear Jesus’ self-disclosing claims before Pilate, and ‘portrays the human predicament in which one must choose between Jesus and the world’. (BORROW Pillar Commentary - John) 2. Movement 1: Pilate comes OUTSIDE of the Praetorium to Jesus' accusers to hear their charges. This begins the formal trial. (John 18:29-32). John records their more general charges against Jesus and tells them to take Jesus and judge Him themselves. This forces them to concoct three specific charges recorded only in Lk 23:2. 3. Movement 2: Pilate goes back INSIDE the Praetorium to Jesus to hear His defense (John 18:33-38). All four Gospels record that Pilate focuses on the third charge that Jesus is a King and asks Him "Are You the King of the Jews?" (Mt 27:11, Mk 15:2, Lk 23:3, Jn 18:33). Only John 18:34-38 records the details of this phase of Pilate's interrogation of Jesus. 4. Movement 3: Pilate goes back OUTSIDE to the people to declare Jesus' innocence (John 18:38). Only John 18:38 and Luke 23:5 record Pilate's FIRST of 3 not guilty verdicts (Jn 19:4, 6, cf Lk 23:22). Pilate's not guilty verdict incites the Jews to a barrage of accusations at Jesus. Only Mt 27:12-14 and Mk 15:3-5 record Jesus' refusal to answer the accusations by the chief priests and elders against Jesus. Only Luke 23:5 records the Jew's accusation that Jesus stirred up the people in Galilee, which prompts Pilate to send Jesus to the wicked ruler Herod (Antipas) who had jurisdiction over Galilee and was in Jerusalem at the time. Only Luke 23:6-12 records the transfer of Jesus from Pilate to Herod and the mistreatment Jesus received in the second phase of the civil trial. Only Luke 23:11 records that Herod sent Jesus back to Pilate. Only Luke 23:13 records that "Pilate summoned the chief priests and the rulers and the people." Apparently the gathering before the Praetorium had either broken up or decreased in size while Jesus was before Herod. And it is clear that the religious leaders followed Jesus and spoke out again when He appeared before Herod (Lk 23:10). Note that since Pilate summoned the religious leaders and began to sp Only Luke 23:14-15 record Pilate's statement before the Jews (who had been summoned) that he found no guilt in Jesus nor did Herod. Only Luke 23:16 records Pilate's conclusion "Therefore I will punish Him and release Him.” The Gospels do not record the reaction of the Jews to this announcement, but Pilate's subsequent mention of the custom of releasing a prisoner implies that their reaction prevented him from following through and forced him to try another ploy. John 18:39 records Pilate's attempt to release Jesus “But you have a custom that I release someone for you at the Passover; do you wish then that I release for you the King of the Jews?” The interchange regarding Barabbas is recorded in John 18:39-40, Matthew 27:15-18, 20-21, and Mk 15:6-11. 5. Movement 4: Pilate goes back INSIDE the Praetorium to scourge Jesus (John 19:1-3). 6. Movement 5: Pilate goes back OUTSIDE to the Jews to offer a compromise (John 19:4-7). 7. Movement 6:Pilate goes back INSIDE to Jesus to investigate the possibility of a supernatural being (John 19:8-11). 8. Movement 7: Pilate goes back OUTSIDE to the Jews to release Jesus (John 19:12). 9. Movement 8: Pilate brings Jesus OUTSIDE, sits on the Judgment Seat and gives his verdict of crucifixion (John 19:13-15). John 19:5 Jesus then came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate *said to them, “Behold, the Man!” Behold: John 1:29 Isa 7:14 40:9 43:1 La 1:12 Heb 12:2 Related Passages: Zechariah 6:12 ( “Then say to him, ‘Thus says the LORD of hosts, “Behold, a man whose name is Branch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the LORD. Jesus then came out (of the Praetorium), wearing the a crown (stephanos) of thorns (akantha) and the purple (porphura) robe (himation). Pilate *said to them, “Behold, the Man!” - Latin "Ecce homo!" probably conveys the idea "Look at this poor fellow." Does He look like someone who is a threat to Rome or to anyone else? Jesus' beaten condition would be Pilate's attempt to show that the Jewish charge of sedition was ludicrous. There is irony in Pilate's words for this Man was in fact the perfect representation of all mankind! NET NOTE - Look, here is the man! Pilate may have meant no more than something like “Here is the accused!” or in a contemptuous way, “Here is your king!” Others have taken Pilate’s statement as intended to evoke pity from Jesus’ accusers: “Look at this poor fellow!” (Jesus would certainly not have looked very impressive after the scourging). For the author, however, Pilate’s words constituted an unconscious allusion to Zech 6:12, “Look, here is the man whose name is the Branch.” In this case Pilate (unknowingly and ironically) presented Jesus to the nation under a messianic title.
João 19
Robertson observes that here Pilate "surrenders in a fret to the mob and gives as his reason ([gar = for ED: a term of explanation) for his surrender the innocence of Jesus (the strangest judicial decision ever rendered)." NET NOTE - Crucifixion was the cruelest form of punishment practiced by the Romans. Roman citizens could not normally undergo it. It was reserved for the worst crimes, like treason and evasion of due process in a capital case. The Roman statesman and orator Cicero (106–43 B.C.) called it “a cruel and disgusting penalty”; Josephus (J. W. 7.6.4 [7.203]) called it the worst of deaths. NET NOTE - How are Pilate’s words “You take him and crucify him” to be understood? Was he offering a serious alternative to the priests who wanted Jesus crucified? Was he offering them an exception to the statement in 18:31 that the Jewish authorities did not have the power to carry out a death penalty? Although a few scholars have suggested that the situation was at this point so far out of Pilate’s control that he really was telling the high priests they could go ahead and crucify a man he had found to be innocent, this seems unlikely. It is far more likely that Pilate’s statement should be understood as one of frustration and perhaps sarcasm. This seems to be supported by the context, for the Jewish authorities make no attempt at this point to seize Jesus and crucify him. Rather they continue to pester Pilate to order the crucifixion. Cried out (shouted)(2905) kraugazo from krauge - outcry from krazo = clamor or cry = a word like "croak" ~ suggests a rough and guttural sound = croaking of ravens = croak or cry out with a loud, raucous voice like donkey in Job 6:5, childbirth Is 26:17, war cry in Josh 6:16) means to cry out loud, to clamor, yell loudly, to shout with intensity, to make an outcry, in some contexts to scream or howl (one especially thinks of the demons screaming, croaking and howling! What a scene!) Term was used of a dog's barking, a raven's squawking and even a drunk's bawling. Kraugazo describes the cry of the demons (Lk 4:41), the cry of Jesus for Lazarus to "come forth" (Jn 11:43 - in utter irony for Jesus' cry to give life to Lazarus results in cries for His life!), as Jesus entered Jerusalem on Psalm Sunday the crowds cried out "Hosanna" (Jn 12:13), the Jewish mob crying to Pilate to release Barabbas (Jn 18:40, 19:12), and finally the Jewish mob escalating their cry to "Crucify! Crucify!" (Jn 19:6). Notice all of these are emotion filled, tense moments. KRAUGAZO - 10v - cried(5), cry(1), crying(2), shout(1), shouting(1). Matt. 12:19; Lk. 4:41; Lk. 18:39; Jn. 11:43; Jn. 12:13; Jn. 18:40; Jn. 19:6; Jn. 19:12; Jn. 19:15; Acts 22:23 Crucify (4717) stauroo from stauros = cross, in turn from histemi = to stand) means literally to nail or fasten to a cross and so to crucify -- literal death by nailing to and hanging from a cross (a stake). To impale on the cross; figurative to extinguish (subdue) passion or selfishness. In Galatians Paul uses stauroo in a metaphorical sense to refer to crucifixion of the flesh (as a result of the literal crucifixion) "Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires." (Gal 5:24+) STAUROO - 46X/42V - crucified(29), crucifixion(1), crucify(16). Matt. 20:19; Matt. 23:34; Matt. 26:2; Matt. 27:22; Matt. 27:23; Matt. 27:26; Matt. 27:31; Matt. 27:35; Matt. 27:38; Matt. 28:5; Mk. 15:13; Mk. 15:14; Mk. 15:15; Mk. 15:20; Mk. 15:24; Mk. 15:25; Mk. 15:27; Mk. 16:6; Lk. 23:21; Lk. 23:23; Lk. 23:33; Lk. 24:7; Lk. 24:20; Jn. 19:6; Jn. 19:10; Jn. 19:15; Jn. 19:16; Jn. 19:18; Jn. 19:20; Jn. 19:23; Jn. 19:41; Acts 2:36; Acts 4:10; 1 Co. 1:13; 1 Co. 1:23; 1 Co. 2:2; 1 Co. 2:8; 2 Co. 13:4; Gal. 3:1; Gal. 5:24; Gal. 6:14; Rev. 11:8. In the Septuagint only in Esther 7:9 and Esther 8:12. Classical Greek and Septuagint Usage - Stauroō is a common verb in Greek literature. The noun form stauros (4567) was used to denote a “cross” as an instrument of torture or crucifixion, and the verb form stauroō was used to mean “to crucify,” (ca. Second Century B.C.). In the Septuagint the noun is found once (Esther 7:9) where it refers to a pale (stake) on which an individual was impaled. That was a common means of torture and execution in the Persian Empire. (Complete Biblical Library) New Testament Usage - In the New Testament the verb is used in both literally and figuratively. Matthew 20:19 employs the term literally to mean “to crucify on a cross” or “to put to death on a cross.” The verb’s occurrence in the other Gospels is translated in the same way. In Galatians 5:24 and 6:14 Paul employed stauroō as a picture of his high standard of personal holiness: “My desire for the things of the world has been crucified,” or “The power of such has been destroyed, put to death” (author’s translations). In 6:14 Paul made an appeal to those who would futilely try to “glory” in the Law, to embrace “the cross of . . . Christ,” as he had done (verse 14), and to glory in the victory of the Cross by means of which the power of the world has been destroyed. (Complete Biblical Library) See the 14 page NIDNTT article on the Cross and Crucify beginning on page 390, - Excerpt - σταυρός G5089 (stauros), stake, cross; σταυρόω G5090 (stauroō), hang upon a cross, crucify; ἀνασταυρόω G416 (anastauroō), crucify; συσταυρόω G5365 (systauroō), crucify with; κρεμάννυμι G3203 (kremannymi), hang. Friberg says this metaphorical sense of stauroo in Gal 5:24 speaks of "of a believer's renouncing his old sinful way of living to be united to his Lord - crucify, put to death, i.e. be done with. (BORROW Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament) BDAG says that in Gal 5:24 stauroo means "to destroy through connection with the crucifixion of Christ, crucify, a transcendent sense (and in Gal 6:14 refers to) the believer who is inseparably united to the Lord has died on the cross to the kind of life that belongs to this world (BORROW A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament, and other early Christian literature) Related Resource: What is the history of crucifixion? David Black says "The historical present describes a past event as though it were actually taking place: λέγουσιν αὐτῷ περὶ αὐτῆς, they spoke to him about her (Mark 1:30). Here the present is a pictorial tense, displaying the action vividly before our eyes. In English we often use the historical present when recounting personal experiences ("then he says to me"). (BORROW It's Still Greek to Me page 106) Historical presents in John 18-19 - Jn 18:3 - came; Jn 18:4 - said; Jn 18:17 - said; Jn 18:26 - said; Jn 18:29 - said; Jn 18:38 - said; Jn 19:4 said; Jn 19:5 - said, Jn 19:6 - said; Jn 19:9 - said; Jn 19:10 - said; Jn 19:14 - said; Jn 19:15 - said; Jn 19:26 - said; Jn 19:27 - said. QUESTION - Why did the crowds shout, “Crucify Him!” when Pilate wanted to release Jesus?. ANSWER - When the Sanhedrin brought Jesus before the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, Pilate could not find any fault in Jesus, and he said so three times (Luke 23:4, 14–15, 22). Late in the trial, Pilate sought a way to free Jesus (John 19:12). It was a Passover festival custom that the governor release a prisoner to the people, so, in a ploy to appease the crowd of Jewish leaders who had gathered and to secure Jesus’ release, Pilate allowed them to choose between a convicted criminal named Barabbas and Jesus. Instead of choosing Jesus, as Pilate had hoped, the crowd chose Barabbas for release. Shocked that they would free a hardened criminal, Pilate asked, “What shall I do, then, with the one you call the king of the Jews?” (Mark 15:12). The crowd cried out, “Crucify him!” (Mark 15:13, Jn 19:6). It is well that Pilate was confused by the crowd’s reaction, for barely a week earlier the people of Jerusalem had welcomed Jesus into the city with the waving of palm branches and shouts of “Hosanna!” (Matthew 21:1–11). What Pilate may not have known was the extent to which the religious and political leaders hated and opposed Jesus. Over the course of Jesus’ ministry, His teachings had alienated and angered the Pharisees, the scribes, the Herodians, and the Sadducees. Not only did Jesus point out their extreme hypocrisy on many occasions (see Matthew 23; Mark 7:1–14; Luke 20:45–47), but He also claimed to be God, which was blasphemy to the unbelieving teachers of the law (see Mark 14:60–64). The religious leaders wanted to utterly destroy Jesus (Matthew 12:14; Mark 3:6). Only His death would satisfy them. In Jesus’ time, crucifixion was reserved for the worst of criminals. The torture a person endured on a cross would last for hours, and killing Jesus in this manner likely appealed to the religious leaders who hated Him so deeply. In an effort to hide their move against Jesus from His many supporters, the Jewish leaders arrested and tried Jesus in the middle of the night. When Jesus was brought before Pontius Pilate—the only one with authority to order a crucifixion—it was still early in the morning (Matthew 27:1–2). When Pilate presented Jesus and Barabbas to the people, the chief priests whipped the crowd into a frenzy, encouraging them to call for Barabbas’s release (Mark 15:11). When Pilate asked what they wanted done to Jesus, the crowd, again influenced by the chief priests, shouted, “Crucify Him!” Pilate, the people-pleaser, gave them what they demanded. He had Jesus flogged and then turned Him over for crucifixion. At the beginning of the week, there was a crowd in Jerusalem celebrating Jesus as the Messiah; by Friday, there was a crowd crying, “Crucify Him!” The striking change of the city’s heart naturally causes some perplexity. It’s good to remember that not everyone at the Triumphal Entry was celebrating the Lord. Most of the city was puzzled: “When Jesus entered Jerusalem, the whole city was stirred and asked, ‘Who is this?’” (Matthew 21:10), and the Jewish leaders were indignant (verse 15). Some of the same crowd who shouted, “Hosanna!” may also have been part of the crowd shouting “Crucify Him!” but we can’t be sure. If some people did join both crowds, it may be because they had grown disillusioned with Jesus when they discovered He was not going to set up the kingdom immediately—or perhaps they disliked Jesus’ insistence that they repent. Also, it’s quite possible that the crowd gathered before Pilate at that early hour had been assembled and suborned by the Jewish leaders. In the end, it wasn’t the crowd’s cries of “Crucify Him!” that put Jesus on the cross. Our sin did that. From the very beginning, when Adam and Eve disobeyed God, the Lord had promised to send a Savior who would crush the reign of sin and death (Genesis 3:15). Throughout the ages God wove His plan to send a Savior, and that plan culminated in the person of Jesus Christ: God’s own Son who became the perfect God-man so He could take upon Himself the punishment for sin. Although wicked men were involved in Jesus’ death on the cross, His sacrifice was ultimately the will of God (Isaiah 53:10; John 10:18). The shedding of Jesus’ blood fulfilled God’s promise to mankind to provide a Savior and sealed the New Covenant (Luke 22:20). Jesus would then defeat the power of death and the grave by rising again three days later and ascending to His Father’s right hand in heaven. John 19:7 The Jews answered him, “We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the Son of God.” We have: Lev 24:16 De 18:20 because: John 5:18 Jn 8:58-59 Jn 10:30-33,36-38 Mt 26:63-66 27:42,43 Mk 14:61-64 Mk 15:39 Ro 1:4 Related Passages: Leviticus 24:16+ ‘Moreover, the one who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death. Deuteronomy 18:20+ ‘But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.’ JEWS STATE JESUS' CRIME WAS BLASPHEMY The Jews (Ioudaios - Jewish leaders) answered him, “We have a law, and by that law He ought (opheilo) to die because He made (poieo) Himself out to be the Son of God - The point is that "Whatever your decision may be, we have a law!" They had failed to convince Pilate that Jesus was a threat to Rome so now they move into their area of expertise, religion! The Jewish leaders state the reason for their desire to crucify Jesus, a desire that has been festering in their corrupt, evil hearts for 3 years (cf Jn 5:18+). Spurgeon Study Bible - “ ‘We have a law,’ the Jews replied to him, ‘and according to that law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.’ ” They no doubt understood that he claimed to be divine and so he did. I have heard some say that Jesus was a good man but not God. If he was not God, he was certainly not a good man; for no good man, who was only a man, would claim to be God or lead others to believe he was divine. If he was not actually divine, he was a rank impostor.
João 19
Robertson points out that "Caiaphas has his authority from God also and has used Pilate for his own base end." NET NOTE on he who delivered Me - The one who handed me over to you appears to be a reference to Judas at first; yet Judas did not deliver Jesus up to Pilate, but to the Jewish authorities. The singular may be a reference to Caiaphas, who as high priest was representative of all the Jewish authorities, or it may be a generic singular referring to all the Jewish authorities directly. In either case the end result is more or less the same. Greek “has the greater sin” (an idiom). Because Pilate had no authority over Jesus except what had been given to him from God, the one who handed Jesus over to Pilate was guilty of greater sin. This does not absolve Pilate of guilt; it simply means his guilt was less than those who handed Jesus over to him, because he was not acting against Jesus out of deliberate hatred or calculated malice, like the Jewish religious authorities. These were thereby guilty of greater sin. Spurgeon's expository comments - note there may be some repetition as this is simply a collection of all his thoughts on a given passage or section. John 19:11. Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin. Christ referred to Judas, and through him to the Jews who had conspired to put him to death; but what tenderness it was, on the part of Jesus, to make an excuse as it were even for Pilate! He was notable for making excuses for the guilty. That was a remarkable excuse that he pleaded for his murderers, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” There was never another such a tender heart as his; he was so gentle and so kind that all their cruelty only moved him to pity them, and pray for them. Delivered (betray, commit, entrust, hand over) (3860) paradidomi from para = alongside, beside, to the side of, over to + didomi = to give) conveys the basic meaning of to give over from one's hand to someone or something, especially to give one over to the power of another. Paradidomi is used in legal parlance to describe handing someone into the custody of the police, authorities, etc. To deliver up one to custody, to be judged, condemned, punished, scourged, tormented, put to death. PARADIDOMI IN JOHN - Jn. 6:64; Jn. 6:71; Jn. 12:4; Jn. 13:2; Jn. 13:11; Jn. 13:21; Jn. 18:2; Jn. 18:5; Jn. 18:30; Jn. 18:35; Jn. 18:36; Jn. 19:11; Jn. 19:16; Jn. 19:30; Jn. 21:20; QUESTION - What did Jesus mean when He referred to the greater sin? ANSWER - In John 19, we find Jesus before Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea. In verse 10, Pilate boasted about his authority to release or crucify Jesus, prompting Jesus to say, “You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given to you from above. Therefore, he who delivered me over to you has the greater sin” (John 19:11, ESV). The expression from above is a reference to God. In other words, Jesus tells Pilate that he would have no authority over Him unless it had been granted to Pilate by God the Father. Such a statement, then, emphasizes the divine origin of human authority: “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God” (Romans 13:1, ESV). Jesus subjected Himself to Pilate’s authority, not because Pilate was superior to Him, but because He was obedient to the Father’s will (John 6:38). It is within this context that Jesus mentions a “greater sin.” Jesus’ statement to Pilate that “he who delivered me over to you has the greater sin” (John 19:11, ESV) probably alludes to Caiaphas, the Jewish high priest who coordinated the arrest and subsequent trial of Jesus. In both John 18:24 and John 18:28, Caiaphas, in conjunction with other religious authorities, delivered Jesus into Pilate’s custody. Now, let us turn our attention to the meaning of greater sin (John 19:11), a phrase that raises questions about the nature of sin, divine sovereignty, and human responsibility. First, we must acknowledge that the Bible distinguishes between varying degrees of sin. References to lesser sins or greater sins can be found in Old Testament passages such as Leviticus 4:2, Numbers 15:30, and Ezekiel 8:6. Jesus spoke of “more important matters of the law” (Matthew 23:23) and taught lesser and greater punishments for different offenses (Luke 12:47–48). Second, lesser sins implies that all sins are not equal in severity. Some sins, due to their nature or consequences, bear greater moral weight. In this regard, Jesus’ statement to Pilate is a powerful theological assertion, conveying the compatibility of divine sovereignty in orchestrating the arrest and trial of Jesus, while also holding Caiaphas and Pilate morally responsible for their evil deeds (cf. Acts 2:23). Nonetheless, Caiaphas is guilty of the greater sin since he is the one who, from a human viewpoint, initiated the chain of events. God, the supreme judge of the world, evaluates sin with an eye that extends beyond external human actions. Indeed, the all-knowing God sees into the “thoughts and intentions of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12, ESV). Pilate had a case brought to him to judge—a case he did not want to take (Luke 23:7; John 18:31). Pilate sinned in failing to execute justice, and an innocent Man was killed as a result. But the one who handed Jesus over to Pilate for trial was “guilty of a greater sin” because that man had plotted to murder Jesus (Mark 14:55) and freely and deliberately suppressed the truth in unrighteousness (see Romans 1:18). As high priest, Caiaphas possessed thorough knowledge of the Law and the Prophets. Despite his knowledge, he actively conspired to have Jesus crucified, denying the very Scriptures that testified about Christ (John 5:39). For this reason, Caiaphas is guilty of a greater sin than Pilate, having willfully suppressed the truth about the One of whom the Old Testament prophesied. (See also What is the greatest sin?) Horatius Bonar - THE GREATER SIN—JOHN 19:11. THESE words are directed against the Jews, though spoken to Pilate. They are a declaration of the great guilt of the Jewish nation and its rulers, in asking Pilate to exercise his God-given authority against the Son of God. Pilate has not yet committed the sin of condemning Christ; he was urged to it; he hesitated; he shrunk from it; and our Lord here utters the words of warning, to deter him from the consummation of his great crime. “Not the Roman emperor, but my Father; not the people, but my Father, gave you this power, and set you in that place where you have now to judge me, His Son; and these, His enemies and mine, are now asking you to exercise this power given you from above against me, the Son of God, who came from above.” As when speaking to Simon (Luke 7:44) he turned to the woman, so here, when speaking to Pilate, he turned to the Jews. The sin here spoken of is not so much Pilate’s as Israel’s. He did what he did “ignorantly and in unbelief”; they knew, he knew not; he thought he was only exercising his lawful power in the usual way, as a Roman governor. Israel knew the Scriptures concerning Messiah; Pilate did not; and the “greater sin” was committed by men who, with the Scriptures in their hand, called on him who had not these Scriptures to condemn their own Messiah. This power of Pilate was acknowledged by the Jews, by Judas, by Annas, by Caiaphas. They appealed to him as one who had the power to “crucify” and to “release.” Hence their sin, their special sin; their “greater sin,”—greater than in any ordinary case, greater than that of Pilate. It was “greater sin,” because they knew what they did; and because they were making use of the God-given power of another, as well as taking advantage of his ignorance, to perpetrate a crime, which, in its lowest aspect, was the condemnation of the innocent, in its highest, the condemnation of their own Messiah, the Son of the living God. Pilate’s power was “from above,” (1) as governor. There is no power but of God, the powers that be are ordained of God; the source of earthly power is heavenly; net in man or from man, but from the King of kings, the Prince of the kings of the earth. The recognition of this lies at the root of all true politics. Earthly crowns and thrones and sceptres are thus linked with that one heavenly crown and throne and sceptre. Kings and magistrates are, by reason of their office, responsible to God. Not personally, as other men merely; but officially, as rulers, they are directly responsible. It is just because of their office that they are so peculiarly accountable, and so solemnly bound to do everything to the glory of God. It is just because of their office, and not merely as other men, that they are bound to consecrate everything which their office gives them power over to the service of Him from whom they have received their power. (2.) As a Gentile governor. The Jews had, for their sins, been given over to Gentile dominion, till the times of the Gentiles should be fulfilled. So that in a double sense Pilate’s power was not his own, nor from Rome, nor from the people. In a double sense it came from God, and was therefore to be specially used for God. He might not know all this; but Israel knew it; for their prophets, Daniel especially, had taught them this; and therefore they had the “greater sin.” That God’s purpose embraced something more than this, and had reference to the crucifixion of Messiah, is true; but that the appeal here made by our Lord to Pilate, though having special reference to Himself, is founded on a broader and more general truth seems evident. (1.) Even a bad man’s power is from God. Our Lord affirms this of Pilate; and of Pilate when using that power for the perpetration of the greatest crime ever committed in our world. Let no one therefore point to the crimes of kings, or the sins of magistrates, and say, Can the power of these men be given them from above? Look at Pilate. Listen to our Lord’s words; or hear Paul when, in the days of Nero, he said (referring to the words of our Lord), “Let every soul be subject to the higher powers” (ἐουσίαις ὑηεζεχούσαις, authorities holding from above); and when he proclaims civil government to be “the ordinance of God”; nay, when he calls the monarch or magistrate “the minister of God.” (2.) His using his God-given power for a bad purpose is allowed of God. He is free to act; but he is responsible to God for his actings. God overrules his wickedness, and employs him as His instrument for carrying out his purposes. He ought to use his power for a good purpose; not for condemning the Son of God, but for honouring Him; and when he abuses his authority, he is doubly guilty; though that guilt is made use of by God for the development of His own purposes, as in the death of His own Son at the hands of Pilate. That the power which Pilate used was conferred by God only, made his act, as well as that of the Jews, the more criminal. What a reckoning is at hand with the kings of earth, for the abuse of their power! (See Psalm 82.) (3.) God makes him His instrument. He is free. He might use his power for a good purpose; yet even when he uses it for a bad one, he is overruled of God. It is God’s “determinate counsel” that comes out here (Acts 2:23). Like Pharaoh working out Israel’s deliverance, so is Pilate here working out the Church’s deliverance, according to the purpose of God. The following truths come out here,— (1.) The thing which Pilate was preparing to do would have been sin in any circumstances; even if his power was not given from above. It was the condemnation of an innocent man. It was might trampling on right. (2.) It was greater sin, because the power was from above. It was abusing, for unrighteousness, the power received from the God of righteousness. (3.) It was still greater sin to use this God-given power to crucify the Son of God. The moment man gets into power, he uses it against God and against his Christ. (4.) It was yet greater sin in Israel to deliver up their own Messiah to be crucified by him who had this power. It was as much as calling on God to crucify his own Son. It was daring sin, committed with their eyes open. Pilate’s sin was great; Israel’s was greater far. Pilate, beware of thy sin, for it is great; Israel, beware of thy sin, for it is far greater. Thus He warns both at once; and bids them beware of the sin of crucifying the Lord of glory. Streams in the Desert - “Thou couldst have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above.” (John 19:11.) NOTHING that is not God’s will can come into the life of one who trusts and obeys God. This fact is enough to make our life one of ceaseless thanksgiving and joy. For “God’s will is the one hopeful, glad, and glorious thing in the world”; and it is working in the omnipotence for us all the time, with nothing to prevent it if we are surrendered and believing. One who was passing through deep waters of affliction wrote to a friend: “Is it not a glorious thing to know that, no difference how unjust a thing may be, or how absolutely it may seem to be from Satan, by the time it reaches us it is God’s will for us, and will work for good to us? For all things work together for good to us who love God. And even of the betrayal, Christ said, “The cup which my Father gave me, shall I not drink it?” We live charmed lives if we are living in the center of God’s will. All the attacks that Satan, through others’ sin, can hurl against us are not only powerless to harm us, but are turned into blessings on the way.—H. W. S. In the center of the circle Of the Will of God I stand: There can come no second causes, All must come from His dear hand. All is well! for ’tis my Father Who my life hath planned. Shall I pass through waves of sorrow? Then I know it will be best; Though I cannot tell the reason, I can trust, and so am blest. God is Love, and God is faithful, So in perfect Peace I rest. With the shade and with the sunshine, With the joy and with the pain, Lord, I trust Thee! both are needed, Each Thy wayward child to train, Earthly loss, did we but know it, Often means our heavenly gain. John 19:12 As a result of this Pilate made efforts to release Him, but the Jews cried out saying, “If you release this Man, you are no friend of Caesar; everyone who makes himself out to be a king opposes Caesar.” from: Mk 6:16-26 Ac 24:24-27 thou art: John 18:33-36 Lu 23:2-5 Ac 17:6,7 Related Passages: Matthew 27:19 While he was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent him a message, saying, “Have nothing to do with that righteous Man; for last night I suffered greatly in a dream because of Him.” THE JEWISH MOB PLAYS THE POLITICAL CARD As a result of this Pilate (imperfect tense - repeatedly) made efforts to release (apoluo) Him (see Pilate's movements) Pilate seems to have a sense of justice or conscience after Jesus' words about authority and greater sin. And so he is motivated to make attempts to release Jesus. Henry Morris (compare Mt 27:19) - Pilate desperately wanted to release Jesus because of his superstitious fear of what the gods might do if he executed one of their own. His immediate fear of what Caesar would do to him in the present world, however, soon outweighed his fear of any future world. but - This is a strong contrast between Pilate's attempts to release Jesus and the resistance of the Jews. The Jews cried out saying, “If you release (apoluo) this Man, you are no friend of Caesar (kaisar) ; everyone who makes himself out to be a king opposes Caesar (kaisar) - Their contempt of Jesus is palpable here calling Him this Man and not by His given name. These Jewish serpents are wise and now play their trump card which is Pilate's fear of the wrath of Caesar. Clearly this was a threat and Pilate knew if he released Jesus, the Jews would report this to Rome.
João 19
Robertson says "This is after the shameful scourging between 6 A.M. and 9 A.M. when the soldiers insult Jesus ad libitum." Compare the accounts in Mark and Matthew: Mark 15:16-19 The soldiers took Him away into the palace (that is, the Praetorium), and they *called together the whole Roman cohort. 17 They *dressed Him up in purple, and after twisting a crown of thorns, they put it on Him; 18 and they began to acclaim Him, “Hail, King of the Jews!” 19 They kept beating His head with a reed, and spitting on Him, and kneeling and bowing before Him. Matthew 27:27-30 Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole Roman cohort around Him. 28 They stripped Him and put a scarlet robe on Him. 29 And after twisting together a crown of thorns, they put it on His head, and a reed in His right hand; and they knelt down before Him and mocked Him, saying, “Hail, King of the Jews!” 30 They spat on Him, and took the reed and began to beat Him on the head. And He went out (exerchomai), bearing (bastazo) His own cross (stauros) - Went out (exerchomai) means He moved out of or away from an area (BDAG) and in context means He moved out of the confines of the city to Golgotha. So just as carcass of the animal used for the sin offering (its blood having been offered as atonement) were to be burned outside of the camp of Israel (Lev 4:21+), so too the sin offering of the Lamb of God was to be killed outside of the Holy City (see above for Heb 13:11-12+ ). Bearing His own cross - This probably refers to the horizontal crossbeam, not to the entire cross because the upright portion was probably already in the ground. In any event, this was a heavy load for a healthy man, much less one scourged and suffering blood loss. At some point Simon from Cyrene was requisitioned to carry Jesus' cross, presumably because Jesus was simply too weak to continue carrying it. Matthew 27:32 As they were coming out, they found a man of Cyrene named Simon, whom they pressed into service to bear His cross. Mark 15:21 They *pressed into service a passer-by coming from the country, Simon of Cyrene (the father of Alexander and Rufus), to bear His cross. Luke 23:26 When they led Him away, they seized a man, Simon of Cyrene, coming in from the country, and placed on him the cross to carry behind Jesus. There is another OT shadow of Jesus' bearing His own cross when Abraham was told to sacrifice Isaac and Abraham laid the wood for the burnt offering on Isaac his son (Ge 22:6+). Brian Bell - Bearing His cross - The crossbeam where love and justice meet. Later Simon was drafted to carry it for Him (Mk 15:21). Not told why. Tradition says Jesus fell and couldn’t carry it. Criminals carried their own cross as a sign of guilt, and Jesus was not guilty! Bell's comment reminds me of Psalm 85:10+ which says "Lovingkindness and truth have met together; Righteousness and peace have kissed each other." NET NOTE - was customary practice in a Roman crucifixion, the prisoner was made to carry his own cross. In all probability this was only the crossbeam, called in Latin the patibulum, since the upright beam usually remained in the ground at the place of execution. According to Matt 27:32 and Mark 15:21, the soldiers forced Simon to take the cross; Luke 23:26 states that the cross was placed on Simon so that it might be carried behind Jesus. A reasonable explanation of all this is that Jesus started out carrying the cross until he was no longer able to do so, at which point Simon was forced to take over. To the place called the Place of a Skull (kranion), which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha - The origin of the name Place of a Skull is not absolutely certain but some say it comes from the hill having the appearance of a skull. Marvin
João 19
Robertson adds "This is Jewish time and would be nine A.M. The trial before Pilate was the sixth hour Roman time (John 19:14), six A.M." These actions were in precise fulfillment of an unlikely prophecy given a thousand years before (see Psalm 22:17-18). It is one of the few events in the life of Christ recorded in all four Gospels. (Henry Morris) Jesus was providing here for His mother, not for John as some have thought. John's own mother was also there at the crucifixion (Matthew 27:56+). (Henry Morris) This volitional death of Jesus before His legs could be broken (John 19:31-33) was in fulfillment of the prophecy in Psalm 34:19,20+. Also, Jesus was fulfilling the symbolism of the sacrificial Passover lamb (1 Corinthians 5:7+), the bones of which were not to be broken (Exodus 12:46+; Numbers 9:12+). Lk 23:36+ - "I COMMIT MY SPIRIT" - Commit is in middle voice indicating Jesus initiated this act and participated in the completion of it! He was in full control of His life up to His very last breath! Compare Mt 27:50+ where yielded is aphiemi in the active voice signifying volitional choice. Why keeping watch? After all He was fastened to the Cross? This was to prevent someone from rescuing Jesus from the cross. “Men were known to have lived after being taken down from a cross.” (Carson see The Expositor's Bible Commentary) Jn 19:22 - Why the title over Jesus on the Cross? "“The written charge (or titulus) was normally carried before a criminal on the way to execution, or hung around his neck, and would then be fixed to the cross, thus reinforcing the deterrent effect of the punishment.” (France - see The Gospel According to Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary) Lk 23:45+ - Was this a Solar Eclipse? - Since Passover occurred at full moon, this darkness could not have been a solar eclipse. It was clearly supernatural in its timing - (Wycliffe Bible Commentary) "Solar eclipses happen only at the new moon phase, when the Moon is between Earth and the Sun. During a solar eclipse, the Moon casts a shadow on Earth, and blocks or partially blocks our view of the Sun." (NASA Science) John 19:31+ Day of preparation...High Day - Day of preparation was the day before the Passover, during which all leaven was to be disposed of and all ceremonial cleansing was to be finished. "High day" means that the regular Sabbath and the Passover were the same day, making the one day especially important. The request to remove the corpses was based on Deut. 21:22-23, as dead bodies hanging on a tree would defile the land! What irony, for it was their entire life that was defiled by their rejection of the Messiah. These hypocrites are ever worried about the Law and about externals, never admitting they had a far more urgent internal/eternal need for cleansing (circumcision) of their hard hearts (cf Acts 7:51+)! The Jews had seem many crucifixions by the Romans (up to 30,000 some report) and knew the Romans would let the bodies decay on the crosses in some cases. Breaking a crucified victims legs preventing them from breathing (inspiring) and without adequate oxygen death would occur quickly. Luke 23:47+ Centurion...praising God...this Man was innocent." - The word innocent is dikaios which is used 74v in NT and almost always is translated righteous as do some of the translations (HCSB, NIV, KJV). Luke 23:48+ Beating their breasts is clearly a sign of grief and mourning and is the exact phrase (tupto stethos) used to describe the penitent tax collector in Lk 18:13+ who "was beating his breast (tupto tethos), saying "God, be merciful to me, the sinner." Luke's description does not go that far, but one cannot help but wonder whether some of these were also present at Peter's Pentecostal sermon, having had their hearts "tenderized" by witnessing the drama of Jesus' crucifixion. Mt 27:60+ Own new tomb - "his own new tomb. There is more here than meets the eye. Joseph was a rich man who lived in Arimathea, so why would he build a new tomb in Jerusalem, especially one in the rock on a hillside close to Golgotha within easy earshot of the cries of crucified criminals? It could hardly have been planned for himself; all indications point to his having prepared it ahead of time to receive the body of Jesus (Mark 15:42-47; Luke 23:50-56; John 19:38-42)." (Henry Morris) QUESTION - Why did Jesus say “Father, forgive them” on the cross? ANSWER - Jesus’ words “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing” are found in Luke 23:34. Jesus looked down from the cross upon a scene that must have been distressing to Him. The Roman soldiers were gambling for His clothing (John 19:23–24); the criminals on the crosses to either side of Him were reviling Him (Matthew 27:44); the religious leaders were mocking Him (Matthew 27:41–43); and the crowd was blaspheming Him (Matthew 27:39). Surrounded by this most unworthy lot, Jesus prayed for them. “Father, forgive them” is a prayer of unmatched mercy and love. Even in His agony, Jesus’ concern was for the forgiveness of those who counted themselves among His enemies. He asked the Father to forgive the thieves on the cross who jeered at Him. He asked the Father to forgive the Roman soldiers who had mocked Him, spit on Him, beat Him, yanked out His beard, whipped Him, put a crown of thorns on His head, and nailed Him to the cross. Jesus asked forgiveness for the angry mob that had mocked Him and called for His crucifixion (Mark 15:29–30). It is important to note that Jesus’ prayer, “Father, forgive them,” does not mean that everyone was forgiven, unilaterally, without repentance and faith. It does mean that Jesus was willing to forgive them—forgiveness was, in fact, the reason He was on the cross. The words “Father, forgive them” show the merciful heart of God. Jesus prayed, “Father, forgive them,” because He was fulfilling Old Testament prophecy: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Isaiah 53:12). From the cross, Jesus interceded for sinners. Today, risen and glorified, Jesus remains the “one mediator between God and mankind” (1 Timothy 2:5). Jesus prayed, “Father, forgive them,” because He was putting into practice the principle He had taught in the Sermon on the Mount: “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:43–44). Jesus, the persecuted, prayed for His persecutors. Coupled with the willingness of Jesus to forgive His tormentors is the fact that they did not know what they were doing (Luke 23:34). The sinners who put Jesus on the cross were ignorant of the true import of their actions. The soldiers personally held no ill will toward Him. They were simply following orders. This was how they normally treated condemned men, and they believed that He truly deserved it. They didn’t know that they were killing the Son of God (see 1 Corinthians 2:8). The mob didn’t really know whom they were trying to destroy. The Jewish leaders had deceived them into believing that Jesus was a fake and a troublemaker (Acts 3:17). In praying “Father, forgive them,” Jesus revealed His infinite mercy; He still loved them and would forgive them if only they would humble themselves and repent (Matthew 18:14; 2 Peter 3:9). Jesus’ prayer “Father, forgive them” was answered in the lives of many people. The Roman centurion at the foot of the cross, upon seeing how Jesus died, exclaimed, “Surely this man was the Son of God!” (Mark 15:39). One of the two thieves crucified with Jesus exercised faith in Christ, who promised him paradise (Luke 23:39–43). A member of the Sanhedrin publicly aligned himself with Jesus (John 19:39). And, a little over a month later, three thousand people in Jerusalem were saved in one day as the church began (Acts 2:41). On the cross Jesus provided forgiveness for all those who would ever believe in Him (Matthew 20:28). Jesus paid the penalty for the sins that we commit in our ignorance, and even the ones we’ve committed deliberately. When we are born again, we, too, become an answer to Jesus’ prayer “Father, forgive them.”GotQuestions.org QUESTION - What was the significance of the temple veil being torn in two when Jesus died? - SEE VIDEO ANSWER - During the lifetime of Jesus, the holy temple in Jerusalem was the center of Jewish religious life. The temple was the place where animal sacrifices were carried out and worship according to the Law of Moses was followed faithfully. Hebrews 9:1-9 tells us that in the temple a veil separated the Holy of Holies—the earthly dwelling place of God’s presence—from the rest of the temple where men dwelt. This signified that man was separated from God by sin (Isaiah 59:1-2). Only the high priest was permitted to pass beyond this veil once each year (Exodus 30:10; Hebrews 9:7) to enter into God’s presence for all of Israel and make atonement for their sins (Leviticus 16). Solomon’s temple was 30 cubits high (1 Kings 6:2), but Herod had increased the height to 40 cubits, according to the writings of Josephus, a first century Jewish historian. There is uncertainty as to the exact measurement of a cubit, but it is safe to assume that this veil was somewhere near 60 feet high. An early Jewish tradition says that the veil was about four inches thick, but the Bible does not confirm that measurement. The book of Exodus teaches that this thick veil was fashioned from blue, purple, and scarlet material and fine twisted linen. The size and thickness of the veil make the events occurring at the moment of Jesus’ death on the cross so much more momentous. “And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom” (Matthew 27:50-51a). So, what do we make of this? What significance does this torn veil have for us today? Above all, the tearing of the veil at the moment of Jesus’ death dramatically symbolized that His sacrifice, the shedding of His own blood, was a sufficient atonement for sins. It signified that now the way into the Holy of Holies was open for all people, for all time, both Jew and Gentile. When Jesus died, the veil was torn, and God moved out of that place never again to dwell in a temple made with human hands (Acts 17:24). God was through with that temple and its religious system, and the temple and Jerusalem were left “desolate” (destroyed by the Romans) in A.D. 70, just as Jesus prophesied in Luke 13:35. As long as the temple stood, it signified the continuation of the Old Covenant. Hebrews 9:8-9 refers to the age that was passing away as the new covenant was being established (Hebrews 8:13). In a sense, the veil was symbolic of Christ Himself as the only way to the Father (John 14:6). This is indicated by the fact that the high priest had to enter the Holy of Holies through the veil. Now Christ is our superior High Priest, and as believers in His finished work, we partake of His better priesthood. We can now enter the Holy of Holies through Him. Hebrews 10:19-20 says, “we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body.” Here we see the image of Jesus’ flesh being torn for us just as He was tearing the veil for us. The profound significance of the tearing of the veil is explained in glorious detail in Hebrews. The things of the temple were shadows of things to come, and they all ultimately point us to Jesus Christ. He was the veil to the Holy of Holies, and through His death the faithful now have free access to God. The veil in the temple was a constant reminder that sin renders humanity unfit for the presence of God. The fact that the sin offering was offered annually and countless other sacrifices repeated daily showed graphically that sin could not truly be atoned for or erased by mere animal sacrifices. Jesus Christ, through His death, has removed the barriers between God and man, and now we may approach Him with confidence and boldness (Hebrews 4:14-16).GotQuestions.org QUESTION - Why did Jesus say, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” ANSWER - “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46, KJV). This cry is a fulfillment of Psalm 22:1, one of many parallels between that psalm and the specific events of the crucifixion. It is difficult to understand in what sense Jesus was “forsaken” by God. It is certain that God approved His work. It is certain that Jesus was innocent. He had done nothing to forfeit the favor of God. As God’s own Son—holy, harmless, undefiled, and obedient—God still loved Him. In none of these senses could God have forsaken Him. The prophet Isaiah says this about the Messiah: “Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed” (Isaiah 53:4–5). Jesus redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us (Galatians 3:13). He was made a sin-offering, and He died in our place, on our account, that He might bring us near to God. It was this, doubtless, that intensified His sufferings and part of why Jesus said, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” It was the manifestation of God’s hatred of sin, in some unexplained way, that Jesus experienced in that terrible hour. The suffering He endured was due to us, and it is that suffering by which we can be saved from eternal death. In those awful moments, as evil men were allowed to do whatever they wanted to Jesus, our Lord expressed His feelings of abandonment. God placed the sins of the world on His Son, and Jesus for a time felt the desolation of being unconscious of His Father’s presence. It was at this time that “God made Him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21). There is another possible reason for Jesus to cry out, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” It could be that Jesus’ intent in quoting Psalm 22:1 was to point His hearers to that psalm. When they read Psalm 22, they would no doubt see the many fulfilled prophecies included in that song of David. Even while experiencing the agony of the cross, Jesus was teaching the crowds and proving yet again that He was the Messiah who fulfilled the Scriptures.GotQuestions.org John 19:18 There they crucified Him, and with Him two other men, one on either side, and Jesus in between. John 18:32 Ps 22:16 Isa 53:12 Mt 27:35-38,44 Mk 15:24-28 Lu 23:32-34 Ga 3:13 Heb 12:2 James Stalker's classic Trial and Arrest of Jesus Christ - 12. CALVARY Matt. 27:33–8; Mark 15:27, 28; Luke 23:32, 33; John 19:18–22. Related Passages: Psalm 22:16 For dogs have surrounded me; A band of evildoers has encompassed me; They pierced my hands and my feet. Note that Plato uses kraugazo of the howling of a dog! (See kraugazo for "cried out" Jn 19:6, 19:15).
João 19
Robertson - Only John tells us that Pilate himself wrote it and John alone uses the technical Latin word titlos (several times in inscriptions), for the board with the name of the criminal and the crime in which he is condemned; Mark 15:26 and Luke 23:28 use ἐπιγραφη [epigraphē] (superscription). Matthew 27:37 has simply αἰτιαν [aitian] (accusation). The inscription in John is the fullest of the four and has all in any of them save the words “this is” (οὑτος ἐστιν [houtos estin]) in Matt. 27:37. The name (Nazarene) stands for devotion and love, it is equally certain that on the other side it represented the bitter and undying hatred of His enemies. --- Henry E. Dosker It was written (grapho - perfect tense = stands written), “JESUS (Iesous) THE NAZARENE (Nazoraios), THE KING (basileus) OF THE JEWS (Ioudaios) - Note there are slight differences in the 4 gospel accounts (see above) but all include the phrase "King of the Jews." The phrase "The King of the Jews" had a double meaning for to Rome, it would be a warning to rebels and to the Jews it was a bitter insult so that Pilate could mock the Sanhedrin (cf John 19:20,21). What Pilate meant in sarcasm, God meant in truth. Jesus really was the promised King of the Jews -- Steven Cole John MacArthur on the phrase "The King of the Jews" adds it was "a means of vengeance aimed at the chief priests and scribes who had blackmailed him into condemning an innocent man (cf. Luke 23:4, 14, 15, 22)." (See Mark Commentary) Spurgeon Study Bible - “Pilate also had a sign made and put on the cross. It said: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS.” How wondrous was the condescension that he, whom all heaven adored as the ever-blessed Son of the Highest, should be hanged on a tree with his accusation written over his head just as if he had been a common malefactor! It was God’s purpose that his Son should not die on the cross without a public proclamation of his innocence and an official recognition that he was what he had said he was, namely, the King of the Jews. Who was to put up such a notice over his head as he hung there? Peter might have been bold enough to attempt to do it, but he would certainly not have succeeded, for the Roman legionaries jealously guarded every place of execution. Even John, daring as he might have been in such a crisis, could not have achieved the task. It was best that it should be done by authority, done by the Roman governor, done with an official pen and so secured that no envious chief priest dared to pluck it down, and no hand of a scoffer could be lifted up to blot out its testimony. It was privileged writing because it was written with the pen of a Roman official. And there it must stay, under the authority of the Roman law as long as the body of Jesus hung on the cross. See what God can do! Steven
João 19
Robertson adds that the Greek phrase ho gegrapha gegrapha places "emphasis on the permanence of the accusation on the board. Pilate has a sudden spirit of stubbornness in this detail to the surprise of the chief priests. Technically he was correct, for he had condemned Jesus on this charge made by the chief priests." Spurgeon's expository comments - note there may be some repetition as this is simply a collection of all his thoughts on a given passage or section. John 19:20. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin. So that everybody could read it, for some one or other of these languages would be known to everybody in the crowd; they were not dead languages then as they are now. QUESTION - Where was Jesus crucified? ANSWER - The precise location of where Jesus was crucified is a matter of debate. The location is declared to be “Golgotha,” the “place of the skull,” in Matthew 27:33, Mark 15:22, Luke 23:33, and John 19:17. The Gospels give a few other clues as to the location. John 19:20 says that it was “near the city,” which very likely indicates that it was outside of the city walls. Mark 15:40 states that the location of Jesus’ crucifixion could be seen from a distance, which likely indicates that it was elevated. Matthew 27:39 and Mark 15:29 describe the crucifixion site as being accessible to passers-by. The two most popular proposed sites of where Jesus was crucified are the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and Gordon’s Calvary. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre is the traditional site, dating back to the early fourth century AD in the writings of Eusebius. Gordon’s Calvary was first proposed in the mid-nineteenth century by Otto Thenius, Fisher Howe, and Claude Conder, and then popularized in the late nineteenth century by Charles Gordon. The problem with knowing exactly where Jesus was crucified is that Jerusalem has experienced a massive amount of change in the past two thousand years. Major sections of the city itself have been destroyed and rebuilt multiple times. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre is inside the current city walls, but would its location have been outside of the city walls in the early first century? Gordon’s Calvary is definitely outside of the city walls, but did it even exist in its current form in the early first century, or is it the result of quarrying work that has occurred sometime in the past 2,000 years? It is not the purpose of this article to settle the debate of where Jesus was crucified. There are strong opinions on both sides. Some favor the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and others favor Gordon’s Calvary. There are arguments for other locations as well. Ultimately, the exact location of where Jesus was crucified does not matter. Wherever the location is, there is no biblical reason to revere it. There is no spiritual power or promised blessing at the spot where Jesus was crucified or where He was buried. We are no closer to God in the tomb beneath the Church of the Holy Sepulchre or on the top of Gordon’s Calvary than we are in our homes. Jesus was crucified, buried, and resurrected (1 Corinthians 15:3–4). That is what is important. Related Resource: Where/what is Golgotha/Calvary? John 19:21 So the chief priests of the Jews were saying to Pilate, “Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews’; but that He said, ‘I am King of the Jews.’” JEWS PROTEST PILATE'S INSCRIPTION So (oun) - Term of conclusion. It is very likely that Pilate wrote the inscription to irritate the Jews who have gotten the best of him in arguing that Jesus must die. The chief priests of the Jews were saying to Pilate, “Do not write (present imperative with a negative), ‘The King of the Jews’; but that He said, ‘I am King of the Jews.’” - Pilate seems to have achieved his goal of irritating the Jewish leaders who had been such an irritation to him (cf Jn 19:12)! Spurgeon's expository comments - note there may be some repetition as this is simply a collection of all his thoughts on a given passage or section. John 19:21-22. Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews. Pilate answered, What I have written I have written. He could sometimes be firm; perhaps when there was least excuse for it but when there was need of firmness, this vacillating Governor was swayed by the will of cruel men. He could be stubborn about some things which shows that he had strength of mind if he had chosen to use it; yet he was beaten to and fro like a shuttlecock by these wicked men, and seemed to have no power to resist them. John 19:22 Pilate answered, “What I have written I have written.” What: John 19:12 Ps 65:7 Ps 76:10 Pr 8:29 PILATE IS FINALLY FIRM BUT TOO LATE! Pilate answered, “What I have written (grapho) I have written (grapho) - Pilate stands his ground against the Jewish protests. Both verbs written are in the perfect tense which speaks of the permanence of the inscription. Pilate says in effect it is complete and final! A T Robertson - With emphasis on the permanence of the accusation on the board. Pilate has a sudden spirit of stubbornness in this detail to the surprise of the chief priests. Technically he was correct, for he had condemned Jesus on this charge made by the chief priests. Adam
João 19
Robertson - But the brothers of Jesus are not present and disbelieved his claims. John is the only one of the apostles with courage enough to take his stand with the women by the Cross. There is no disrespect in the use of “Woman” (Γυναι [Gunai]) here as there was not in 2:4. NET NOTE - The term Woman is Jesus’ normal, polite way of addressing women (Matt 15:28, Luke 13:12; John 4:21; 8:10; 19:26; 20:15; see BDAG 208–9 s.v. γυνή 1). But it is unusual for a son to address his mother with this term. The custom in both Hebrew (or Aramaic) and Greek would be for a son to use a qualifying adjective or title. Is there significance in Jesus’ use here? Jesus probably used the term here to help establish Mary and the beloved disciple in a new “mother-son” relationship. Someone would soon need to provide for Mary since Jesus, her oldest son, would no longer be alive. By using this term Jesus distanced himself from Mary so the beloved disciple could take his place as her earthly son (cf. John 2:4). BORROW D. A. Carson, Gospel of John, PAGE 617–18, for discussion about symbolic interpretations of this relationship between Mary and the beloved disciple. NET NOTE - the disciple whom He (Jesus) loved,’ This individual also is mentioned in Jn 19:26, Jn 20:2, Jn 21:7, and Jn 21:20. Some have suggested that this disciple is to be identified with Lazarus, since the Fourth Gospel specifically states that Jesus loved him (Jn 11:3, 5, 36). From the terminology alone this is a possibility; the author is certainly capable of using language in this way to indicate connections. But there is nothing else to indicate that Lazarus was present at the last supper; Mark 14:17 seems to indicate it was only the twelve who were with Jesus at this time, and there is no indication in the Fourth Gospel to the contrary. Nor does it appear that Lazarus ever stood so close to Jesus as the later references in John 19, 20 and 21 seem to indicate. When this is coupled with the omission of all references to John son of Zebedee from the Fourth Gospel, it seems far more likely that the references to the beloved disciple should be understood as references to him. Spurgeon's expository comments - note there may be some repetition as this is simply a collection of all his thoughts on a given passage or section. John 19:26-27. And the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother. Woman, behold thy son! Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home. Here was another pang for him: he could not be spared anywhere. He must recollect in his death everything that would cause him grief: “When Jesus therefore saw his mother,” — Sad, sad spectacle! Now was fulfilled the word of Simeon, “Yes, a sword shall pierce through thine own soul also, that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.” Did the Saviour mean, as he gave a glance to John, “Woman, thou art losing one Son; but yonder stands another, who will be a son to thee in my absence”? “Woman, behold thy son!” QUESTION - Was Jesus being rude to Mary when He referred to her as “woman” in John 2:4 (AND JOHN 19:26)? (See also commentary on John 2:4) ANSWER - In John 2, Mary, Jesus, and some of the disciples are attending a wedding. In John 2:3, Mary tells Jesus that the host has run out of wine. Mary obviously wants Jesus to do something special to fix the situation; He had performed no miracles up to this point (John 2:11), and Mary undoubtedly thought it was time He showed who He was. Jesus’ response, read in modern English, strikes some people as abrupt, even impolite or rude. He responds, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come” (ESV). It’s Jesus’ addressing His mother as “Woman” that seems most rude to us. One of the problems with translating from one language to another is that certain phrases have meanings not easily transferred. Phrases that don’t mean exactly what they say are often called “idioms,” and they can cause confusion in translation. For example, exclamations such as “heads up!” or “look out!” actually mean the opposite of their literal words—if someone yells, “Heads up!” we usually duck our heads. A native English speaker understands such idioms instinctively, but in order to translate them, we’d have to pick words that aren’t synonyms—heads up! might translate into words that mean “get down!”—or end up with a confusing phrase. What Jesus says to His mother in John 2:4 sounds almost rude in English. However, in the original language, and in that culture, Mary would not have interpreted Jesus’ words that way. The term woman was used like we use the term ma’am. By addressing Mary this way, Jesus does distance Himself from His mother somewhat—He was exerting His independence from her wishes—but in no way was it a rude manner of speaking. Jesus lovingly uses the same word from the cross when He tells Mary that He is entrusting her to John’s care (John 19:26). The question Jesus asks His mother isn’t rude, either. It may sound rude in the KJV: “What have I to do with thee?” (John 2:4), but it was a common idiom. In the Greek, Jesus’ question is “Ti emoi kai soi?” The phrase was used to ask of the connection between two people. The question could be translated as “What business do we have with each other?” Or, in less formal terms, “What does this have to do with me?” (ESV) or “Why do you involve me?” (NIV). Again, Jesus is expressing the fact that He is independent of His mother; as eager as Mary was to see Jesus do a miracle, she had no right to determine the time or the manner in which Jesus publicly revealed His glory. Jesus makes His point gently and without being rude, however. Jesus concludes His statement to Mary with, “My hour has not yet come.” The reference to His “hour” or “time” (NET) means that Jesus was constantly working from a divine timetable. So, He wasn’t going to reveal His power sooner than God the Father intended (see John 5:30). One of the points Jesus made in His temptation in the desert was that there is such a thing as doing the right thing for the wrong reasons (Matthew 4:1–10). That is, it would be wrong to perform a miracle if the time and place are not according to God’s will. Jesus did act, performing His first miracle. He turned the water into wine, but He did so in a very subtle, subdued way. Only the servants, Mary, and a few disciples even knew what He had done. The miracle was to introduce the disciples to His ability, not to show off or to go public with His power (see John 2:11). So, Jesus isn’t being rude or dismissive in John 2:4. He’s politely pointing out that He follows God’s timing, not Mary’s; and that this is not His moment to be publicly revealed. Some of the respectful tone is lost in translation, perhaps, but Jesus was not being rude. John 19:17–27 BEHOLD THY MOTHER John Bennett Day by Day: Bible Commands A band of faithful women gathered under the shadow of the cross. Mary, the mother of Jesus, was prominent among them. The strong had fled. The weak, emboldened by love, were drawn to Calvary. At incredible emotional cost, they bravely identified themselves with the condemned Nazarene. What grief filled Mary’s heart. Simeon’s prophecy of more than thirty years before was fulfilled fully that day. The sword of sorrow pierced the utmost depths of her soul, Luke 2:35. Only one man stood with these courageous women, John the beloved disciple. With the rest of the eleven, he had forsaken his Master. He had run away in Gethsemane. Now on Golgotha, he takes his stand beneath the cross of Jesus. The Lord Jesus addressed both Mary and John. He commended her to his care. From now on Mary should rely on John for her defence and protection. Jesus ‘told John to look on her as his mother and told His mother to look on John as her son’, RYLE. Amidst His own sufferings, the Lord did not forget His mother. In His anguish, He thought of Mary with selfless love. Conscious of her distress and desolation, He graciously provided for her. What tender sympathy filled His heart and inspired these words to the disciple whom He loved. In heaven, He is still expressing His deep care for all His own. In committing Mary to John’s care, the Lord wholly fulfilled the letter and the spirit of the fifth commandment, Exod. 20:12. In His words to them, He honoured His mother. He ensured that all her needs were met. Mary was almost certainly already widowed. The death of Jesus would leave her bereft emotionally and possibly destitute financially. Perhaps there was, as yet, little sympathy among her other children for her faith in her Son as God’s Messiah. However, she could have full confidence in John. He may well have been her nephew. Much more importantly, he loved the Saviour with the same fervour as she did. He could support her materially and spiritually. John readily accepted his task. He took Mary to his own home and ‘received her into his heart’, KRUMMACHER. THE SEVEN SAYINGS OF THE SAVIOR SPOKEN ON THE CROSS MATTHEW MARK LUKE JOHN THE FOLLOWING WORDS WERE SPOKEN FROM 9 AM - 12 NOON Father forgive them Lk 23:34+ Today you shall be with Me in Paradise Lk 23:43+ Woman, behold, your son!...Behold, your mother! Jn 19:26-27+ THE FOLLOWING WORDS WERE SPOKEN ABOUT 3 PM ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI? MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME? Mt 27:46+ Mk 15:34+ I am thirsty Jn 19:28+ It is finished! Jn 19:30+ Father, INTO YOUR HANDS I COMMIT MY SPIRIT Lk 23:46+ James Stalker's devotional thoughts on the "Seven Sayings"...click chapter # to go to the article (e.g., 14) 14. THE FIRST WORD FROM THE CROSS Luke 23:34. 15. THE SECOND WORD FROM THE CROSS Luke 23:39–43. 16. THE THIRD WORD FROM THE CROSS John 19:25–27. 17. THE FOURTH WORD FROM THE CROSS Matt. 27:46–9; Mark 15:34–6. 18. THE FIFTH WORD FROM THE CROSS John 19:28. 19. THE SIXTH WORD FROM THE CROSS John 19:30. 20. THE SEVENTH WORD FROM THE CROSS Luke 23:46. SEE ALSO - What were the seven last words of Jesus Christ on the cross and what do they mean? | GotQuestions.org The order of events at the crucifixion: (1) Arrival at Golgotha (Mt 27:33; Mk 15:22; Lu 23:33; Jn 19:17). (2) Offer of the stupefying drink refused (Mt 27:34; Mk 15:23). (3) Crucified between 2 thieves (Mt 27:35-38; Mk 15:24-28; Lu 23:33-38; Jn 19:18). (4) Utters 1st cry fr the cross, "Father, forgive," (Lu 23:34). (5) Soldiers part His garments (Mt 27:35; Mk 15:24; Lu 23:34; Jn 19:23). (6) Jews mock Jesus (Mt 27:39-43; Mk 15:29-32; Lu 23:35). (7) Thieves rail Him, one repents (Mt 27:44; Mk 15:32; Lu 23:39-43). (8) Second cry from cross, "Today you will be with me," (Lu 23:43). (9) Third cry, "Dear woman, here is your son," etc. (Jn 19:26-27). (10) Darkness (Mt 27:45; Mk 15:33; Lu 23:44). (11) Fourth cry, "My God," etc. (Mt 27:46-47; Mk 15:34-36). (12) Fifth cry, "I am thirsty" (Jn 19:28). (13) Sixth cry, "It is finished" (Jn 19:30). (14) Seventh cry, "Father, into your hands," etc. (Lu 23:46). And (15) Lord dismisses His spirit (Mt 27:50; Mk 15:37; Lu 23:46; Jn 19:30). QUESTION - Who was the disciple whom Jesus loved? | ANSWER - The Gospel of John is the only Gospel which mentions “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” John 13:23 tells us, “One of them, the disciple whom Jesus loved, was reclining next to Him.” John 19:26 declares, “When Jesus saw His mother there, and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to His mother, 'Dear woman, here is your son.'“ John 21:7 says, “Then the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, ‘It is the Lord!’” This disciple is never specifically identified, but the identity of the disciple whom Jesus loved is clear. The disciple whom Jesus loved self-identifies as the author of the gospel (John 21:24), whom most scholars believe to be the apostle John, the son of Zebedee and brother of James. First, only the Gospel of John mentions the “disciple whom Jesus loved.” Second, John 21:2 lets us know who was fishing with Peter: “Simon Peter, Thomas (called Didymus), Nathanael from Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples were together...” The apostle John was a son of Zebedee (Matthew 4:21). Third, there were three disciples who were especially close to Jesus: Peter, James, and John (Matthew 17:1; Mark 5:37; 14:33; Luke 8:51). The “disciple whom Jesus loved” could not be Peter, as Peter asks Jesus a question in regards to this disciple (John 21:20-21). That leaves us with James or John. Jesus made a statement about the possible “longevity” of the life of the disciple whom He loved in John 21:22. James was the first of the apostles to die (Acts 12:2). While Jesus did not promise the disciple whom He loved long life, it would be highly unusual for Jesus to say, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?” if the disciple whom He loved was going to be the first disciple to die. Church history tells us that the apostle John lived into the A.D. 90s and was the last surviving apostle. Early church tradition was unanimous in identifying John as the disciple whom Jesus loved. It seems that John had a closer relationship with Jesus than any of the other disciples. Jesus and John were essentially “best friends.” Jesus entrusted John with the care of His mother, gave John the vision of the transfiguration, allowed John to witness His most amazing miracles, and later gave John the Book of Revelation.GotQuestions.org QUESTION - What did Jesus mean when He said, “Woman, behold your son” on the cross? ANSWER - As Jesus hung on the cross, the Bible records that He spoke seven final statements. The third saying, recorded in John 19:26–27, expresses the Lord’s care and concern for His mother: “When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to her, ‘Woman, here is your son,’ and to the disciple, ‘Here is your mother.’ From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.” The unnamed disciple whom Jesus addressed was the apostle John himself. Despite His excruciating physical agony, Jesus was concerned about the welfare of His mother and the pain she was experiencing. With His thoughts on Mary’s future security and protection, Jesus entrusted her into the care of John, His beloved disciple. Most scholars believe Joseph, Mary’s husband, was already dead by this time. Traditionally, the oldest son in a Jewish family was duty-bound to provide for his mother’s care if she became a widow. By entrusting Mary to John’s care, Jesus was fulfilling His family responsibility as a devoted son. Typically, a dying son would commit his mother into the care of another member of his immediate family. In the case of Jesus, that would have been James, Jude, or another male sibling. But Jesus knew that none of His half-brothers were disciples yet—they had not accepted Christ’s claims or committed to His mission. Thus, Jesus most likely chose John out of profound spiritual concern for His mother. Even in death, Christ was focused on spiritual matters. With the words, “Woman, behold your son,” Jesus invited His mother to look to John, His much-loved disciple and friend, to be her son now. Jesus was departing from her, but John would take the Lord’s place in her life as much as was possible. John was the only apostle brave enough to take a stand with the women who had accompanied Jesus to the cross (Luke 23:49; Mark 15:40; John 19:25). The rest of Christ’s disciples had scattered, abandoning the Lord in fear (John 16:32). There is no disrespect in the Lord’s use of the title woman instead of mother. He had addressed her as “Woman” before (John 2:4). The address may sound disrespectful in English, but not in Greek. Woman was, in fact, “a highly respectful and affectionate mode of address” (Marvin Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1887, entry for Jn. 2:4). The Amplified Bible translates it as “[Dear] Woman.” A symbolic meaning can be drawn from Jesus’s words “Woman, behold your son.” Establishing the family of God was at the heart of Christ’s mission and ministry. Through relationship with Jesus Christ, believers become members of a new family (John 1:12). As the Lord completed His earthly ministry, His words to Mary, “Woman, behold your son,” and to John, “Here is your mother,” were profoundly illustrative of God’s new family being born at the foot of the cross. QUESTION - Why did Jesus entrust Mary to the apostle John instead of to His brothers? (WATCH VIDEO) ANSWER - When Jesus was on the cross, both the apostle John and Mary the mother of Jesus stood nearby. In John 19:26–27 we read, “When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to her, ‘Woman, here is your son,’ and to the disciple, ‘Here is your mother.’ From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.” The clear understanding of the passage is that Jesus commanded John to care for Mary after His death. Mary was most certainly a widow at this point in her life and also an older woman. Though she had other sons, Jesus chose John to provide care for Mary after His death. Why? Jesus’ brothers did not become believers until after His resurrection (John 7:5). Further, Jesus’ brothers were not present at His crucifixion. Jesus was entrusting Mary to John, who was a believer and was present, rather than entrusting her to His brothers, who were not believers and who were not even present at His crucifixion. As the oldest son in His family, Jesus had a cultural obligation to care for His mother, and He passed that obligation on to one of His closest friends. John would have certainly obeyed this command. Mary was most likely one of the women in the upper room and was present when the church was established in Jerusalem (Acts 1:12–14). She probably continued to stay with John in Jerusalem until her death. It is only later in John’s life that his writings and church history reveal John left Jerusalem and ministered in other areas. This is also confirmed by Acts 8:1 that reads, “On that day a great persecution broke out against the church in Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria.” John was still in the city at this time (perhaps one or two years after the resurrection) and was still there three years after the conversion of Paul (Galatians 2:9). There is no contextual proof within Scripture itself that would point to Jesus broadening Mary’s role as “mother” of all Christians. In fact, Catholic teaching can only point to early church leaders as proof that Jesus meant to establish Mary’s “motherhood” to all believers in Christ or that Mary was a cooperative participant in salvation. John took Mary into his home to care for her. The Bible does not say “from that time on Mary became the mother of all believers.” The beauty of John 19:26–27 is reflected in the care Jesus had for His mother, as well as the care John provided for her. Scripture clearly teaches the importance of caring for widows and the elderly, something Jesus personally applied during His final hours of His earthly ministry. James, the half-brother of Jesus, would later call such care for widows “pure religion.” “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world” (James 1:27). Robert Hawker —John 19:26, 27. THIS was the second among the dying words of the Lord Jesus; and, no doubt, of high importance in their full sense and meaning: not simply to recommend Mary to the care of the beloved Apostle John, but probably of greater moment in reference to the church of Jesus at large. My soul; is it not very certain that the Lord Jesus knew all the events which would take place in all generations of his people? And, as such, did not Jesus perfectly well know also that the time would come when divine honours would be offered to Mary? These points cannot be disputed. Well, then, is it not worthy the closest observation, that Jesus, both in this place and upon all other occasions, when speaking of Mary, called her woman? Why so? if as Jesus knew that there would be some who would pray to her, and call her Mother of God, by which name the Holy Ghost never distinguished her, neither the Lord Jesus himself; could there have been a more decided method adopted than this to discountenance such idolatry, than when Jesus, in his dying moments, called Mary only woman? Besides, was it not on another account, that as Jesus was to be the seed of the woman which was promised to bruise the serpent’s head, such a dying testimony might serve instead of a thousand witnesses in proof of the confirmation of the fact: and Mary’s song might be the song of thousands—“My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.” But when we have thus attended to the second cry of Christ upon the cross in reference to those sweet points, do thou my soul remember also how tenderly those expressions of thy Lord recommend all the endearing affections of love and regard through all the members of Christ’s mystical body. To behold our mother, or to behold our sons, are only different expressions to intimate that all true believers in Jesus are members of one another and of his body, his flesh, and his bones? And as it was by our Lord himself in this life, so is it with all his redeemed, both in this life and in that which is to come; they who do the will of his Father, which is in heaven, the same are Christ’s brethren, and sisters, and mother. Tangible Love When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!” — John 19:26 Today's Scripture : John 19:25-30 The Chester Beatty Library in Dublin, Ireland, houses a wonderful collection of ancient Bible fragments. One very small fragment is a portion of John 19. This piece of John’s gospel describes the moment, as Jesus was being crucified, when He spoke to His mother in a display of love and concern for her. The words are from verse 26, where we read, “When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, ‘Woman, behold your son!’ ” As I stared at that ancient fragment, it struck me afresh how tangible Jesus’ love was for His mother and friend. With clear words He let the world know of His love and affection by showing His concern that Mary be cared for by His friend John when He was gone. Hanging on the cross, Jesus said to John, “‘Behold your mother!’ And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home” (v.27). Since this priceless gift God gave us Must from us one day depart, Lavish her with love and kindness, Real true love, with all your heart. —Stairs God bless my mother; all I am or hope to be I owe to her. —Abraham Lincoln John 19:27 Then He *said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” From that hour the disciple took her into his own household. Behold: Ge 45:8 47:12 Mt 12:48-50 25:40 Mk 3:34 1Ti 5:2-4 took: 1Jn 3:18,19 his: John 1:11 16:32 JESUS COMMIT HIS MOTHER TO CARE OF JOHN Then He *said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” From that hour the disciple took her into his own household - Jesus did not need to explain to John the task He had just given him to watch over his mother Mary the rest of her life. Merrill Tenney - The anguish and terror of Jesus’ mother at the Crucifixion must have been indescribable. His tender concern for her in the hour of his mortal agony illustrates his true humanity and compassion. (See The Expositor's Bible Commentary - Abridged Edition) Note that this is the third of seven sayings of Jesus from the cross (SEE TABLE). John records three of the seven sayings. Larry Richards - The closer we are to the Lord, the more likely He is to commit precious things and precious people to our care. Let’s love Him deeply, that we might be privileged to serve our Lord as John served Christ. (BORROW The 365 day devotional commentary PAGE 810) Spurgeon's expository comments - note there may be some repetition as this is simply a collection of all his thoughts on a given passage or section. John 19:27. Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! “John, take her home, and treat her as a mother should be treated.” “Take her as thy mother, stand thou in my place, care for her as I have cared for her.” Those who love Christ best shall have the honour of taking care of his church and of his poor. Never say of any poor relative or friend, the widow or the fatherless, “They are a great burden to me.” Oh, no! Say, “They are a great honour to me; my Lord has entrusted them to my care.” John thought so; let us think so. Jesus selected the disciple he loved best to take his mother under his care. He selects those whom he loves best today, and puts his poor people under their wing. Take them gladly, and treat them well. He was the disciple whom Jesus specially loved, so as a token of Christ’s great love to him, he left his mother to his charge. Have you any poor folk dependent upon you? Do you know any of God’s very poor people? Take care of them, and do not think the charge a burden; but do it for the sake of him who loves you so much that he entrusts his poor ones to There was no specific direction given to John to entertain Mary. It was quite enough for the Lord to call his attention to her by saying “Behold thy mother.” How I wish we were always in such a state of heart that we did not need specific precepts, a hint would suffice. Dear friends, do not need pressing or driving to holy duty; be not as bullocks that must be goaded, but rather have within you such a spring of love that it shall be a delight to do anything that may give joy to the heart of the Well-beloved. When you see him on the cross, is there anything you can deny him? Will you not think spontaneously of what you can do to please him? You expected him to do it, did you not? He loved his Lord so well. John 19:28 After this, Jesus, knowing that all things had already been accomplished, to fulfill the Scripture, *said, “I am thirsty.” Jesus: John 19:30 13:1 18:4 Lu 9:31 12:50 18:31 22:37 Ac 13:29 that the: Ps 22:15 Ps 69:21 James Stalker's classic Trial and Arrest of Jesus Christ - 18. THE FIFTH WORD FROM THE CROSS John 19:28. Related Passages: Matthew 27:46+ About the ninth hour (3 PM AFTER 3 HOURS OF DARKNESS) Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?” that is, “MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?”
João 19
Robertson - Not vinegar drugged with myrrh (Mark 15:23) and gall (Matt. 27:34) which Jesus had refused just before the crucifixion. So they put a sponge full of the sour wine upon a branch of hyssop and brought it up to His mouth - The use of hyssop reminds us of a couple of OT passages that somewhat parallel the use in the present passage. For example, hyssop was used in Ex 12:22 to apply the blood of the male lamb to the doorposts so that the death angel would pass over. And here after the Lamb of God had accomplished redemption that hyssopwould be used to quench His thirst. Secondly, hyssop was also used at the time of the inauguration of the first covenant, the Mosaic Covenant in Hebrews 9:19+ to sprinkle blood of the sacrificial animal on the book and the people. And now in the present context hyssop is used at time of the inauguration of the New Covenant in Christ's blood! NET NOTE - The cheap sour wine was called in Latin posca, and referred to a cheap vinegar wine diluted heavily with water. It was the drink of slaves and soldiers, and was probably there for the soldiers who had performed the crucifixion. Hyssop was a small aromatic bush; exact identification of the plant is uncertain. The hyssopused to lift the wet sponge may have been a form of reed (κάλαμος, kalamos, “reed,” is used in Matt 27:48 and Mark 15:36); the biblical name can refer to several different species of plant (at least eighteen different plants have been suggested). Spurgeon's expository comments - note there may be some repetition as this is simply a collection of all his thoughts on a given passage or section. John 19:29. Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. He did receive that; he had refused the drugged draught which they had first offered to him to lull his pain, but he accepted this, which was simply weak wine, no doubt a little sour, possibly bitter. When he “had received the vinegar,” — For he did receive it. It was a weak kind of wine, commonly drunk by the soldiery. This is not that mixed potion which he refused, wine mingled with myrrh, which was intended to stupefy the dying in their pains: “When he had tasted thereof, he would not drink;” for he would not be stupefied. He came to suffer to the bitter end the penalty of sin; and he would not have his sorrow mitigated; but when this slight refreshment was offered to him, he received it. Having just expressed his human weakness by saying, “I thirst,” he now manifests his all-sufficient strength by crying, with a loud voice as Matthew, Mark, and Luke all testify. Why is hyssop mentioned here? You remember that the hyssop was used in the cleansing of the leper, and that David prayed, “ Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.” The hyssop was also used in the sprinkling of blood under the law, so it is introduced here with a set purpose. The spunge is introduced here too; it always seems to me very remarkable that, in the death of Christ the circle of life was completed. The spunge is the very lowest form of animal life, and Christ is the very highest type of life of any kind. The spunge was lifted to the lip of the King of glory, and carried refreshment to him; and you and I, like the spunge, the very least of God’s living ones, may yet bring refreshment to our Saviour’s lips. ISBE ARTICLE ON HYSSOP - HYSSOP - his'-up ('ezobh; hussspos, Ex 12:22; Lev 14:4,6,4:9 ff; Nu 19:6,18; 1 Ki 4:33; Ps 51:7; Jn 19:29; Heb 9:19): A plant used for ritual cleansing purposes; a humble plant springing out of the wall (1 Ki 4:33), the extreme contrast to the cedar. The common hyssop (Hyssopus officinalis) of the Natural Order Labiatae, an aromatic plant with stomatic properties, cannot be the hyssop of the Bible as it is unknown in Palestine, but allied aromatic plants of the same Natural Order have by Maimonides (Neg. xiv.6) and other Jewish writers been identified with it. Probably hyssop is identical with the Arabic zat`ar, a name applied to a group of aromatic plants of the genus marjoram and thyme. They would any of them furnish a bunch suitable for sprinkling, and they have the important recommendation that they grow everywhere, being found even in the desert. Post thinks of all varieties the Origanum maru, a special variety of marjoram which favors terrace walls and rocks, is the most probable. The proposal (Royle, Jour. Royal Asiatic Soc., VII, 193-213) to identify the caper (Capparis spinosa) with hyssop, which has been popularized by the works of Tristram, has not much to recommend it. It is true that the caper is very commonly seen growing out of walls all over Palestine (1 Ki 4:33), but in no other respect is it suitable to the requirements of the Biblical references. The supposed similarity between the Arabic 'acaf ("caper") and the Hebrew 'ezobh is fanciful; the caper with its stiff, prickly stems and smooth, flat leaves would not furnish a bunch for sprinkling as serviceable as many species of zat`ar. It has been specially urged that the hyssop suits the conditions of Jn 19:29, it being maintained that a stem of caper would make a good object on which to raise the "sponge full of vinegar" to the Saviour's face, the equivalent of the "reed" of Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36. For such a purpose the flexible, prickly stems of the hyssop would be most unsuitable; indeed, it would be no easy matter to find one of sufficient length. It is necessary to suppose either that a bunch of hyssop accompanied the sponge with the vinegar upon the reed, or, as has been proposed by several writers (for references see article "Hyssop," EB), that hussopo is a corruption of husso, "javelin," and that the passage should read "They put a sponge full of vinegar upon a javelin." E. W. G. Masterman QUESTION - What is hyssop? ANSWER - Since people in the biblical era did not have access to the products we do today, they often relied on naturally occurring resources such as plants, animal byproducts, and minerals for cleaning, cooking, food, medicine, and more. Hyssop, an herb in the mint family with cleansing, medicinal, and flavoring properties, was prolific in the Middle East and was used in a variety of ways. The Bible mentions hyssop several times, mostly in the Old Testament. In Leviticus, God commanded His people to use hyssop in the ceremonial cleansing of people and houses. In one example, God tells the priests to use hyssop together with cedar wood, scarlet yarn, and the blood of a clean bird to sprinkle a person recently healed from a skin disease (likely leprosy). This act would ceremonially cleanse the formerly diseased person and allow him to reenter the camp (Leviticus 14:1–7). The same method was used to purify a house that had previously contained mold (Leviticus 14:33–53). Hyssop is also used symbolically in the Bible. When the Israelites marked their doorposts with lamb’s blood in order for the angel of death to pass over them, God instructed them to use a bunch of hyssop as a “paintbrush” (Exodus 12:22). This was probably because hyssop was sturdy and could withstand the brushing, but it also likely signified that God was marking His people as “pure” and not targets of the judgment God was about to deal out to the Egyptians. David also mentions hyssop in Psalm 51:7: “Cleanse me with hyssop, and I will be clean; wash me, and I will be whiter than snow.” David does not refer to physical cleansing—rather, he is asking God to cleanse him spiritually as he confesses his sin. Hyssop also appears at Jesus’ crucifixion, when the Roman soldiers offered Jesus a drink of wine vinegar on a sponge at the end of a stalk of hyssop (John 19:28–30). This was, in fact, Jesus’ last act before He declared His work on earth finished and gave up His spirit. While the hyssop stalk may have been used for purely practical purposes (i.e., it was long enough to reach to Jesus’ mouth as He hung on the cross), it is interesting that that particular plant was chosen. It is possible that God meant this as a picture of purification, as Jesus bought our forgiveness with His sacrifice. Just as in the Old Testament blood and hyssop purified a defiled person, so Jesus’ shed blood purifies us from the defilement of our sin. John 19:30 Therefore when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished!” And He bowed His head and gave up His spirit. It is finished: John 19:28 John 4:34 jN 17:4 Ge 3:15 Ps 22:15 Isa 53:10,12 Da 9:24,26 Zec 13:7 Mt 3:15 Ro 3:25 10:4 1Co 5:7 Col 2:14-17 Heb 9:11-14,22-28 Heb 10:1-14 12:2 And He bowed His head: John 10:11,18 Mt 20:28 27:50 Mk 15:37 Lu 23:46 Php 2:8 Heb 2:14,15 See devotional study on It is Finished See more detailed commentary on John 19:30 James Stalker's classic Trial and Arrest of Jesus Christ - 19. THE SIXTH WORD FROM THE CROSS John 19:30 Related Passages: Luke 23:46+ And Jesus, crying out with a loud voice, said, “Father, INTO YOUR HANDS I COMMIT MY SPIRIT.” Having said this, He breathed His last. Psalm 31:5+ (JESUS DIED WITH WORDS OF SCRIPTURE UPON HIS LIPS!) Into Your hand I commit my spirit; You have ransomed me, O LORD, God of truth. John 10:18+ “No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father.” TETELESTAI! IT IS FINISHED! NOTE: See in depth study of It is Finished, one word in the Greek text, Tetelestai. For an in depth discussion of John 19:30 see separate commentary notes. Therefore when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished (teleo in perfect tense = tetelestai)!” - This is the 6th of the sayings of Jesus from the cross. Jesus knew that He had borne the sins of the world on Himself and that the wrath of God had been propitiated and sin had been atoned for. And so He declares the greatest single word ever spoken tetelestai, which is translated into English with 3 words "It is finished!" One practical point about Jesus' word tetelestai is that we can add nothing to it! We can only refuse His full payment or accept it by faith (Eph 2:8-9+). We can do nothing to merit His full payment for our sin! Jesus' focus had always been on accomplishing this mission. In Samaria He explained to His disciples "“My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me and to accomplish (teleioo) His work." (Jn 4:34) And then in His high priestly prayer He spoke of this mission in the past tense, so certain He was that it would be consummated, praying "“I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished (teleioo) the work which You have given Me to do.." (Jn 17:4) He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. -- 2 Corinthians 5:21+ A T Robertson - A cry of victory in the hour of defeat like overcome [nenikēka] in John 16:33. Jesus knew the relation of his death to redemption for us (Mk 10:45; Mt 20:28; 26:28). Spurgeon Study Bible - “It is finished.” There is only one Greek word for this utterance of our Lord, although to translate it into English, we have to use three words—an ocean of meaning in a drop of language. Yet it would need all the other words ever spoken, or ever can be spoken, to explain this one word. It is altogether immeasurable. It is high—I cannot attain to it. It is deep—I cannot fathom it. The perfect satisfaction of the Father with Christ’s work for his people so that Christ could say, “It is finished,” is a ground of solid comfort to his church forevermore. Take comfort from this—the redemption of Christ’s church is perfected. Not another penny need be paid for her full release. Those whom he bought with blood are forever clear of all charges, paid for to the utmost. All those overwhelming debts that would have sunk us to the lowest hell have been discharged, and they who believe in Christ will appear with boldness before the throne of God itself. “Finished!” By that one word Jesus declared that he had broken the head of the old dragon. We have a stern battle yet to fight, but what does that matter? Our Lord has defeated the foe, and we have to fight with one who is already vanquished. Surely, “It is finished,” sounds like the trumpet of victory. Let us have faith to claim that victory through the blood of the Lamb. And let all Christians, as one mighty army, take comfort from this dying word of the now risen and ever-living Savior. His church may rest perfectly satisfied that his work for her is fully accomplished. And He bowed (klino) His head (kephale) and gave up (paradidomi) His spirit (pneuma) - Bowed His head is a vivid detail only in John an idiom for going to sleep, in this case the sleep of death. This pictures Jesus as calm in the last moments. Earlier Jesus had declared "I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep....18 “No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father.” (Jn 10:11,18+) And so here John says Jesus gave up His spirit, where gave up (paradidomi) in in the active voice which means Jesus made a choice of His will to give up His spirit. He was in full control of the drama of redemption even to His last breath (and of course also in control in the grave, resurrection, etc). Lk 23:46+ records the last words of Jesus on the cross as "Father, INTO YOUR HANDS I COMMIT MY SPIRIT."
João 19
Robertson - This crurifragium was done with a heavy mallet and ended the sufferings of the victim. Wikipedia - Frequently, the legs of the person executed were broken or shattered with an iron club, an act called crurifragium, which was also frequently applied without crucifixion to slaves.[78] This act hastened the death of the person but was also meant to deter those who observed the crucifixion from committing offenses.[78] NET NOTE - The Jewish authorities, because this was the day of preparation for the Sabbath and the Passover (cf. 19:14), requested Pilate to order the legs of the three who had been crucified to be broken. This would hasten their deaths, so that the bodies could be removed before the beginning of the Sabbath at 6 p.m. This was based on the law of Deut 21:22–23 and Josh 8:29 that specified the bodies of executed criminals who had been hanged on a tree should not remain there overnight. According to Josephus this law was interpreted in the 1st century to cover the bodies of those who had been crucified (J. W. 4.5.2 [4.317]). Philo of Alexandria also mentions that on occasion, especially at festivals, the bodies were taken down and given to relatives to bury (Flaccus 10 [83]). The normal Roman practice would have been to leave the bodies on the crosses, to serve as a warning to other would-be offenders. To have the legs … broken. Breaking the legs of a crucified person was a way of speeding up his death, since the victim could no longer use his legs to push upward in order to be able to draw a breath. This breaking of the legs was called in Latin crurifragium, and was done with a heavy mallet. Spurgeon's expository comments - note there may be some repetition as this is simply a collection of all his thoughts on a given passage or section. John 19:31. The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath day, for that Sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. The breaking of the legs was intended to hasten death, ¾a very cruel method, but a very effectual one. Passing by Christ hanging in the center it was a strange thing for them to do, yet it had to be done, although they were quite unconscious of the reason why they so acted. To prevent a ceremonial error, they are willing to commit brutal cruelty; indeed, they had already committed the more brutal cruelty of putting Christ to death. How particular some men are about some merely human rubric, yet the divine precepts of the law they violate with impunity. God save us from a conscience which will stick at home minute point which is of no consequence, but will allow us to commit great sin! We have heard of a Spanish bandit who confessed to his priest, after having murdered a great many persons, not his robberies and his murders, but the fact that a drop of blood had spurted on to his lips on a Friday, and thus he had defiled the feast day by taking animal food! Ah me! Conscience is a strange thing, yet some call it “the vicegerent of God.” I believe it is no such thing, but that it very soon becomes as depraved as any other power of the human mind: we have need of far more than conscience to keep us right. QUESTION - What is a high Sabbath? ANSWER - A “high Sabbath” is any one of the seven annual festivals commanded by God for the Israelites in the Old Testament books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Leviticus 23:1-44 explains the rules for the weekly Sabbath and then goes through the other days throughout the year that required a “sabbath rest” in which no customary work could be done. Beginning in the spring, the seven high Sabbaths were Passover, the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Firstfruits, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), the Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, and the Feast of Tabernacles. The Jewish feasts are closely related to Israel’s spring and fall harvests. They reminded the Israelites each year of God’s ongoing protection and provision, but, even more importantly, they foreshadowed the redemptive work of the Messiah. The high Sabbaths symbolize the complete story of salvation—that is, the work of Christ—beginning with His death on the cross as the Passover Lamb and ending with His second coming after which He will “tabernacle” or dwell with His people forever. The Gospel of John says the day following Christ’s death and burial was a high Sabbath, or, as the NIV puts it, “a special Sabbath” (John 19:31). In this case, the high Sabbath was a regular Sabbath day that coincided with the Passover festival. It was a “double Sabbath,” so to speak, and considered “doubly holy”: to the weekly Sabbath, as normally observed, was added the first day of the Passover feast, Nissan 15, which also carried the solemnity of a Sabbath (see Leviticus 23:7–15). Jesus was crucified on the day before a high Sabbath So Jesus was crucified on the day before a high Sabbath. Because the Jews did not want Jerusalem desecrated on such a holy day as a high Sabbath, they petitioned the governor that the bodies of Jesus and those crucified with Him be taken down before evening (see Deuteronomy 21:22–23). John 19:32 So the soldiers came, and broke the legs of the first man and of the other who was crucified with Him; of the first man and of the other: John 19:18 Lu 23:39-43 SOLDIERS BREAK THE TWO CRIMINALS LEGS Note that the Scriptures in John 19:31-37 are unique to the Gospel of John and are not found in the synoptic Gospels. So (oun - term of conclusion - to appease the Jews) the soldiers (stratiotes) came, and broke the legs of the first man and of the other who was crucified with (sustauroo) Him - In other words these two men were still breathing but the breaking of their legs would result in asphyxiation and death. Spurgeon's expository comments - note there may be some repetition as this is simply a collection of all his thoughts on a given passage or section. John 19:32. Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. With a huge iron bar smashing the great bones of their legs. To make sure that he should not survive, John 19:33 but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. Related Passage: Exodus 12:46+ “It is to be eaten in a single house; you are not to bring forth any of the flesh outside of the house, nor are you to break any bone of it. Numbers 9:12+ ‘They shall leave none of it until morning, nor break a bone of it; according to all the statute of the Passover they shall observe it. LAMB'S LEG NOT TO BE BROKEN but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead (thnesko), they did not break His legs - Jesus died before the robbers. In not breaking Jesus' legs the soldiers in essence fulfilled prophecy, for Moses recorded "“It (PASSOVER LAMB) is to be eaten in a single house; you are not to bring forth any of the flesh outside of the house, nor are you to break any bone of it." (Ex 12:46+, cf Nu 9:12+) As Paul said in 1Co 5:7+ "Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed," clearly identifying Jesus as the substance (Col 2:17+) Who would fulfill the shadow of the Passover lamb in Exodus 12. THOUGHT - It was necessary for the blood of the sacrificed lamb to be applied to the lintel and the two doorposts (Ex 12:7, 22+) so that the destroyer (Ex 12:23+) would see the blood and the LORD would pass over the door and would not allow the destroyer to come in to your houses to smite the Jews. Dear reader, have you "applied the blood of Christ" to your life by grace through faith (Eph 2:8-9+) so that you might experience eternal life and escape the death penalty and eternal punishment? Dear reader, if you have not yet accepted Christ's payment for your sins then "behold, now is "THE ACCEPTABLE TIME," behold, now is "THE DAY OF SALVATION." (2Co 6:2+). Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved forever (Acts 16:30-31+). John 19:34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. pierced His side with a spear: John 13:8-10 Ps 51:7 Eze 36:25 Zec 13:1 Mt 27:62 Ac 22:16 1Co 1:30 1Co 6:11 Eph 5:26 Tit 2:14 3:5-7 Heb 9:13,22 10:19-22 1Pe 3:21 1Jn 1:6-9 5:6,8 Rev 1:5 7:14 Related Passages: John 20:27+ Then He *said to Thomas, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing.” PIERCED SIDE BRINGS FORTH BLOOD AND WATER But one of the soldiers pierced His side (pleura) with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out - This fulfills Scripture according to John 19:37. And clearly this was not just a "pen prick" or minor puncture wound because it left a scar large enough to put your hand into (John 20:27)! It proves Jesus did not just "swoon" but was truly dead. As a pathologist I would deal with blood samples daily. One of the tubes of blood we used for testing was a "red top" which allowed the blood to coagulate fairly quickly so that there would be relatively clear serum on top (having appearance of murky water) and the heavier clotted red blood cells sedimented on the bottom. Assuming the spear went in the right side of Jesus' chest, it would have penetrated the pericardial sac and into the right ventricle. What would have come forth first from the ventricular cavity would have been the heavier clotted red blood cells followed by the lighter "watery" appearing serum. It follows that this small detail is absolutely in agreement with what one would expect medically in a person's body that had been dead long enough for the blood to begin to clot. Thus out came blood first and then "water" which as a pathologist I interpret as serum. The accuracy of the details of God's word are absolutely amazing! As an aside there are some absurd interpretations, the most common suggestion from Chrysostom being that the water represents baptism and the blood represents the Lord’s table. This is definitely reading into the text something that is not present! Others say the blood and water point to the eternal life and cleansing that flow from Jesus’ death. Others say the blood refers to the fact that Jesus’ blood cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:7). The water also pictures cleansing, as well as eternal life and the Holy Spirit. While some of these have a lesser degree of absurdity, the very fact that there are several interpretations should make us hesitate to give the blood and the water allegorical or spiritualized meanings. I think it is clear that a more literal interpretation of what came forth from Jesus' side was blood followed by serum. Some have penned hymns that seem to relate to the blood and water and I think Augustus Toplady is closer to the correct interpretation because we know that it is the blood of Jesus which cleanses us from all sin (1Jn 1:7): Rock of Ages “Let the water and the blood, From Thy riven side which flowed, Be of sin the double cure; Cleanse me from its guilt and power.” And I see no problem with the Biblical accuracy of William Cowper's hymn: There is a fountain filled with blood, Drawn from Immanuel’s veins; And sinners plunged beneath that flood, Lose all their guilty stains. Spurgeon's expository comments - note there may be some repetition as this is simply a collection of all his thoughts on a given passage or section. John 19:34-37. And forthwith came there out blood and water. And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true, and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe. For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken. And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.” So his side must be pierced, but his bones must not be broken. See how the hand of God carries out the Word of God, and value every line of Scripture. Our Lord Jesus Christ seemed to go out of his way so as to ensure that every single word in the Old Testament in reference to himself should be fulfilled, so mind that you do not think little of the Old Testament which he so highly prized. Side (4125)(pleura) refers to a part of the body, specifically the side. Herodotus says "mostly in pleura, the ribs, the side. Te side of things and places, PLEURA - 5X/5V IN NT ALL TRANSLATED "SIDE" - Jn. 19:34; Jn. 20:20; Jn. 20:25; Jn. 20:27; Acts 12:7 PLEURA - 23X IN THE SEPTUAGINT - Ge 2:21; Gen. 2:22; Ex 27:7; Nu 33:55 "thorns in your sides"; 2Sa 2:16 "in his opponent's side"; 2Sa 13:34 "side of the mountain"; 2Sa 16:13KJV "along on the hill's side"; 2Sa 21:14 "Zela" = rib or side ; 1Ki 6:5 "side chambers"; 1Ki 6:6; 1Ki 6:8; 1Ki 6:15; 1Ki 7:3; 1Ki. 7:20; 1Ki 8:19; Job 40:18; Pr 22:27; Isa 11:5; Ezek 34:21; Ezek 41:5; Ezek 41:7; Ezek 41:8; Ezek 41:9; Here the two uses that have some parallel with John 19: Genesis 2:21+ So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs (pleura) and closed up the flesh at that place. Genesis 2:22 The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib (pleura) which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. QUESTION - Why did blood and water come out of Jesus' side when He pierced? (See my medical interpretation of "blood and water.") ANSWER - The Roman flogging or scourging that Jesus endured prior to being crucified normally consisted of 39 lashes, but could have been more (Mark 15:15; John 19:1). The whip that was used, called a flagrum, consisted of braided leather thongs with metal balls and pieces of sharp bone woven into or intertwined with the braids. The balls added weight to the whip, causing deep bruising as the victim was struck. The pieces of bone served to cut into the flesh. As the beating continued, the resulting cuts were so severe that the skeletal muscles, underlying veins, sinews, and bowels of victims were exposed. This beating was so severe that at times victims would not survive it in order to go on to be crucified. Those who were flogged would often go into hypovolemic shock, a term that refers to low blood volume. In other words, the person would have lost so much blood he would go into shock. The results of this would be: 1) The heart would race to pump blood that was not there. 2) The victim would collapse or faint due to low blood pressure. 3) The kidneys would shut down to preserve body fluids. 4) The person would experience extreme thirst as the body desired to replenish lost fluids. There is evidence from Scripture that Jesus experienced hypovolemic shock as a result of being flogged. As Jesus carried His own cross to Golgotha (John 19:17), He collapsed, and a man named Simon was forced to either carry the cross or help Jesus carry the cross the rest of the way to the hill (Matthew 27:32–33; Mark 15:21–22; Luke 23:26). This collapse indicates Jesus had low blood pressure. Another indicator that Jesus suffered from hypovolemic shock was that He declared He was thirsty as He hung on the cross (John 19:28), indicating His body’s desire to replenish fluids. Prior to death, the sustained rapid heartbeat caused by hypovolemic shock also causes fluid to gather in the sack around the heart and around the lungs. This gathering of fluid in the membrane around the heart is called pericardial effusion, and the fluid gathering around the lungs is called pleural effusion. This explains why, after Jesus died and a Roman soldier thrust a spear through Jesus’ side, piercing both the lungs and the heart, blood and water came from His side just as John recorded in his Gospel (John 19:34). Related Resources: How did Jesus die? What was the precise cause of Jesus’ death? What is the meaning of the blood of Christ? John 19:35 And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you also may believe. he who has seen has testified John 19:26 21:24 Ac 10:39 Heb 2:3,4 1Pe 5:1 1Jn 1:1-3 so that you also may believe: John 11:15,42 14:29 17:20,21 20:31 Ro 15:4 1Jn 5:13 THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH! And he who has seen has testified (martureo - eye witness in this case) - Who had seen the scene? John was the sole disciple at the foot of the cross and thus was an eyewitness and here testifies twice to the truth. In context, what is it that John has seen? Clearly, he witnessed the spear puncture Jesus' side and the blood and water (serum) gush forth. The upshot is that John saw Jesus die! And he wants everyone to know this truth so that they might believe! And his testimony (martureo) is true (alethinos); and he knows (eido) that he is telling the truth (alethes) - The verb for means he knew beyond a shadow of a doubt! Note that has seen is in the perfect tense which indicates that he saw it at a point in time in the past and his memory of it continues. The point is that although John would have written this Gospel 40-50 years after the actual event, his memories of the events that occurred on this fateful night and next day are crystal clear. John is clearly referring to himself as still alive. He wrote these words, not some "final editor" as some writers (Bernard) have suggested.
João 19
Robertson - John the Apostle was there and saw this fact (still sees it, in fact). This personal witness disproves the theory of the Docetic Gnostics that Jesus did not have a real human body. So that (hina - purpose - What's purpose of eyewitness to truth?) you also may believe (pisteuo) - John's purpose for giving his eyewitness testimony is the same as he has for the entire Gospel! In John 20:31+ he said "these have been written so that (hina - purpose) you may believe (pisteuo) that Jesus is the Christ (THE MESSIAH), the Son of God; and that believing (pisteuo) you may have life in His Name." The only life worth having is life in Christ, for that life alone is truly abundant and truly eternal! John 19:36 For these things came to pass to fulfill the Scripture, “NOT A BONE OF HIM SHALL BE BROKEN.” that the: Ex 12:46 Nu 9:12 Ps 22:14 34:20 35:10 Related Passages: Exodus 12:46+ It is to be eaten in a single house; you are not to bring forth any of the flesh outside of the house, nor are you to break any bone of it. Numbers 9:12+ ‘They shall leave none of it until morning, nor break a bone of it; according to all the statute of the Passover they shall observe it. Psalm 34:20+ He keeps all his bones, Not one of them is broken.
João 19
Robertson - The Synoptics tell about Joseph of Arimathea, but only John adds the help that Nicodemus gave him in the burial of Jesus, these two timid disciples, Nicodemus now at last taking an open stand. NET NOTE - Aloes refers to an aromatic resin from a plant similar to a lily, used for embalming a corpse.The Roman pound (λίτρα, litra) weighed twelve ounces or 325 grams. Thus 100 Roman pounds would be about 32.5 kilograms or 75 pounds. Henry