João 11
Bob Utley · Citado em PreceptAustin
João 11
Utley on Bethany - This is a different location from the Bethany mentioned in John 1:28 and Jn 10:40, which was close to Jericho by the Jordan River. This Bethany is about two miles southeast of Jerusalem on the same ridge as the Mt. of Olives. This was Jesus' favorite lodging place while in Jerusalem. Lazarus was a son of God, and grace makes greater distinctions than earthly rank and worldly honours ever can make. -- C H Spurgeon
João 11
Utley - There is an obvious contrast between those who are following God's will (i.e., Jesus) and those who are not (John 11:10, the Jews). Jesus is not making a mistake in going where God leads Him, because He is the light of the world! If (3rd class condition = potential action) anyone walks (peripateo) in the night, he stumbles (proskopto) - Jesus uses the physical picture of working in day versus night, a picture His disciples understood, to speak figuratively of a spiritual truth His disciples (and everyone) needs to understand. He is not speaking of physically stubbing your big toe but of the stumbling in a moral/ethical sense. He is explaining to His dense disciples (which too often includes yours truly) that when one walks in the night, or figuratively lives in spiritual darkness out of the will of God, they will reap what the sow, which will be sore "spiritual toe" (so to speak). The upshot is that He was safe going to Bethany because He was walking in the light, walking in the will of His Father and nothing could happen to Him before the Hour appointed by His Father.
João 11
Utley - Jesus asserts that the raising of Lazarus was not because of His friendship with Lazarus or because of the grieving of Mary and Martha, but to (1) enhance the disciples' faith (Jn 11:14) and (2) encourage the faith of the Jewish crowd at Lazarus' funeral (John 11:42) Faith is a process in John. Sometimes it develops (i.e., disciples, cf. John 2:11), sometimes not (i.e., the bystanders, cf. John 8:31-59). I like what Rodney Whitacre says about faith - Faith must be exercised in the face of each new revelation, and each new revelation is taking the disciples nearer to the ultimate revelation in the most extremely scandalous event, the Cross—the ultimate revelation of God's light and life and love and thus the ultimate manifestation of God that faith must grasp hold of. As God reveals more of Himself and his ways to us we must likewise have a faith that both grasps firmly onto him as He is revealed in Jesus and also is able to be stretched and deepened (ED: cf Jn 7:17+). Faith enables us to rest in God, but God Himself also keeps us on the move as we continue to grow closer to Him forever. (Jesus Raises Lazarus 11:1-54) And beloved one day our faith will be instantly transformed into sight (1Cor 13:12,13+, cf 1Jn 3:2+! Hallelujah. THOUGHT - It is interesting that the disciples had already begun to believe in Him, but clearly their faith was not fully formed. One wonders exactly when they were born again, but the Scripture is not clear for most of the apostles (except for someone like the apostle Paul on the Damascus Road and possible Thomas in John 20:28). This is encouraging to me, because I can't give an exact date as to when I was born again and can see my faith growing over a period of time as I was reading the Scriptures. Perhaps you too don't know the exact day you were born again, but that should not disturb you. The real question has your (my) life demonstrated a radical change for pursuing darkness to pursuing light? If not read 2Co 13:5+. NET Note on so that you may believe - Why does Jesus make this statement? It seems necessary to understand the disciples' belief here in a developmental sense, because there are numerous references to the disciples' faith previous to this in John's Gospel, notably Jn 2:11+. Their concept of who Jesus really was is continually being expanded and challenged; they are undergoing spiritual growth; the climax is reached in the confession of Thomas in John 20:28. Jn 2:11+ This beginning of His signs Jesus did in Cana of Galilee, and manifested His glory, and His disciples believed in Him." So almost 3 years earlier they had believed in Jesus but Jesus' purpose that they may "believe" would seem to be so that their faith would grow and be strengthened. THOUGHT - As we spend time with Jesus in His Word, listening to and obeying His voice, we increase in our knowledge of Him and our faith becomes more founded on the truth of Who He is. Paul writes "So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ." (Ro 10:17+). Are you in His Word, so that His Word might get into your innermost being and stabilize your faith in Him? If your faith is shaky or a bit on the fickle side, could the problem be your paucity of pondering His voice? But let us go to him - Don't miss what Jesus is saying here. He knows Lazarus is dead, but so vital and real is His relationship, He is saying (in essence) tht death did not (and could not) break His personal relationship with His friend Lazarus. THOUGHT - This truth should infuse your heart with joy and hope and anticipation. We are His friend today (Jn 15:13-15+), but when we fall asleep it will not sever the cord of communion, but only solidify and strengthen it, for when we see Him face to face, we will be like Him and that change will last forever (1Jn 3:2+). Let this future hope fortify your faith in your present trials (cf Vertical Vision), which are "light," "momentary" and will yield "an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison!" (2Cor 4:17+). Believe (4100) pisteuo from pistis; pistos; related studies the faith, the obedience of faith) means to consider something to be true and therefore worthy of one’s trust. To accept as true, genuine, or real. To have a firm conviction as to the goodness, efficacy, or ability of something or someone. To consider to be true. To accept the word or evidence of.
João 11
Utley - "Mary stayed at the house" The usual position for Jewish mourning was sitting on the floor. SPECIAL TOPIC: GRIEVING RITES
João 11
Utley - "Martha said. . .if You had been here, my brother would not have died" This is a SECOND CLASS CONDITIONAL SENTENCE which is called "contrary to fact." It would therefore be understood as , "If you had been here with us, which you were not, my brother would not have died, which he did." Martha and Mary's statements (cf. John 11:32) to Jesus are exactly alike. They must have discussed this subject often during these four days of mourning. These two women felt comfortable enough with Jesus to express to Him their veiled disappointment that He had not come earlier. How often humans, even believing humans, do not understand the work of God! Lazarus' sufferings had a larger purpose William Hendriksen on Martha said... - This remark must not be viewed as an expression of reproach or resentment, as if Martha were saying, “Why did you have to dawdle for two whole days, remaining when you knew very well that we needed you so badly?” It is not the utterance of disappointment with Jesus. Martha knew very well that it would have been very difficult (if not actually impossible, except by means of a miracle) for Jesus to have reached the home at Bethany in time to heal Lazarus. Humanly speaking the message had arrived too late. Accordingly, we must look upon Martha’s words as the expression of poignant grief. (BORROW Exposition of Gospel According to John page 146) Brian Bell on if You had been here - We also learn to take our “if’s” to Jesus. How broad the blame we place on “if’s” little shoulders! “If only we hadn’t moved here!” “If only I hadn’t married him/her!” “If only I hadn’t listen to her/him!” “If only we had more money!” What are your “if onlys”? - Take them to Jesus, like Mary & Martha did. God is in control & He cares!!! THOUGHT - If we look back over our lives, we can all identify times when God could have intervened for us, but did not. He could have changed things. Yet for some reason we can’t understand, He did not. At such times it’s likely that we too mix a measure of faith with a measure of reproach. Let’s remember the rest of this story. Then let faith grow and reproach go. (Lawrence Richards) The little word "if" is in truth such a big word in John 11 (and the Bible - over 1600 uses!) - 9x/9v - Jn. 11:9; Jn. 11:10; Jn. 11:12; Jn. 11:21; Jn. 11:25; Jn. 11:32; Jn. 11:40; Jn. 11:48; Jn. 11:57. In the present context we see the futility of Martha's "if." Johann Bengel has a fascinating comment - "It accords beautifully with divine propriety that we read of no one having died while the Prince of life was present.
João 11
Utley - Martha had the same theological view of an afterlife as the Pharisees, who believed in a bodily resurrection on the last day. There is some limited OT Scriptural evidence for this view (cf. Dan. 12:2; possibly Job 14:14; 19:25-27). Jesus turns this pharisaic hope into a physical manifestation of His power and authority (cf. John 11:25; 14:6). C H
João 11
Utley - "Jesus wept" Death was not God's will for this planet. It is the result of human rebellion. Jesus feels the pain of the loss of a loved one. He feels the life experiences of all His followers! The weeping (dakruo) of Jesus was a quiet, personal kind, not the public wailing (klaio) mentioned in John 11:33. NET Note on Jesus wept. The Greek word used here for Jesus’ weeping (ἐδάκρυσεν, edakrusen) is different from the one used to describe the weeping of Mary and the Jews in v. 33 which indicated loud wailing and cries of lament. This word simply means “to shed tears” and has more the idea of quiet grief. But why did Jesus do this? Not out of grief for Lazarus, since he was about to be raised to life again. L. Morris (John [NICNT], 558) thinks it was grief over the misconception of those round about. But it seems that in the context the weeping is triggered by the thought of Lazarus in the tomb: This was not personal grief over the loss of a friend (since Lazarus was about to be restored to life) but grief over the effects of sin, death, and the realm of Satan. It was a natural complement to the previous emotional expression of anger (Jn 11:33). It is also possible that Jesus wept at the tomb of Lazarus because he knew there was also a tomb for himself ahead. John 11:35 is the shortest in the English Bible, but there is one verse shorter in the Greek, 1Th 5:16 (Rejoice always!) which reads "pantote chairete" (15 letters), compared to 16 letters in "edakrusen o iesous." Brian Bell - Twice Scripture wipes the eyes of Jesus’ tears! 1. On a hill looking over Jerusalem, as He weeps for the nation. And, On the way to a friend's grave, as He weeps with those who grieve. 2. What an incredible Savior. Weeping not just for us in our sin, but with us in our suffering. 3. So strange, One with absolute power would surrender to so small an army as tears? But He does! "And, for a beautifully tender moment, we are given the privilege to glimpse one of the most provocative embraces between deity and humanity in all the Scriptures" (Ken Gire page 96 BORROW Incredible moments with the Savior: learning to see). Thank you Jesus, for giving dignity to our grief & freedom to our emotions! Thank you Jesus, for the beautiful tribute that tears are to the dead, telling them they were loved & will be missed! Thank you Jesus, you know what it’s like to lose someone you love. Thank you Jesus, you know how I feel! Thank you Jesus, you’ve enabled me to weep with those who weep. Help me to feel the pain they feel, the uncertainty, the fear, the heaviness, the regret, the despondency. Help me to share with those who cry out, “Lord, if You had been there…” and help them to see that you were there, weeping with them!
João 11
Utley - Bodies were prepared for burial by washing with water, then wrapping with strips of linen cloth interspersed with spices that helped with the odor. Corpses had to be buried within twenty-four hours because the Jews did not embalm their dead. See SPECIAL TOPIC: BURIAL PRACTICES D A Carson - Many commentators cite Basil (c. AD 330–379), who, supposing that the graveclothes bound Lazarus so tightly he could not possibly, by himself, emerge from the tomb, speaks of ‘a miracle within a miracle’. John does not think in such terms, and in any case the grave clothes were not so restrictive. The corpse was customarily laid on a sheet of linen, wide enough to envelop the body completely and more than twice the length of the corpse. The body was so placed on the sheet that the feet were at one end, and then the sheet was drawn over the head and back down to the feet. The feet were bound at the ankles, and the arms were tied to the body with linen strips. The face (Greek opsis, which normally means ‘appearance’ as in Jn 7:24, but here means ‘face’, as often in the papyri cf. MM, p. 471) was bound with another cloth (soudarion, a loan-word from the Latin sudarium, ‘sweat-cloth’, often worn in life around the neck). Jesus’ body was apparently prepared for burial in the same way (cf. Jn 19:40; 20:5, 7). A person so bound could hop and shuffle, but scarcely walk. Therefore when Jesus commanded Lazarus to come forth, and the dead man came out, Jesus promptly gave the order, Take off the grave clothes and let him go. (BORROW The Gospel according to John - PAGE 418) Lazarus did not strictly speaking experience a resurrection like Jesus did, for Lazarus came back in the same body he died in and will die again in, while Jesus came back in an immutable supernatural resurrection body. It is interesting to note that Lazarus' returning to life at the word of Jesus is a foreshadowing of Jesus' prediction in Jn 5:28+ “Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice." Lazarus in the tomb "heard His voice." THOUGHT - We hear about so-called "Near Death Experiences," and yet here in John 11 we have something far more than a "Near Death Experience" for death was not just "near!" (His was an "After Death Experience!") It is worth noting that Lazarus spoke nothing of heavenly wonders even though he clearly had passed from life to death. And he did not write a book or make a documentary! Mark Hitchcock addresses so-called "Near Death Experiences" below. As he lay dying, D. L. Moody cried out “Earth is receding. Heaven is approaching. This is my crowning day.” While this was not His first resurrection miracle (two others = Jairus' daughter - Mt 9:18-26; Mk 5:42, 43; Lk 8:40-56, widow's son - Lk 7:11-15), but it was certainly the proverbial last straw and convinced the religious leaders they had to kill Him.
João 11
Utley - Therefore many of the Jews. . .believed in Him" This is the stated theme of the Gospel (cf. John 20:30-31). This phrase becomes a pattern (cf. John 2:23; 7:31; 8:30; 10:42; 11:45; 12:11,42). However, it must be restated that faith in John's Gospel has several levels and is not always saving faith (cf. John 2:23-25; 8:30ff). Brian Bell - A certain medieval monk announced he would be preaching next Sunday evening on “The Love of God.” As the shadows fell and the light ceased to come in through the cathedral windows, the congregation gathered. In the darkness of the altar, the monk lighted a candle and carried it to the crucifix. First of all, he illumined the crown of thorns, next, the two wounded hands, then the marks of the spear wound. In the hush that fell, he blew out the candle and left the chancel. There was nothing else to say. Oh, the extravagant love Jesus showed us! Is it possible for us to show Him extravagant love? What would it look like? Steven
João 11
Utley - SPECIAL TOPIC: THE SANHEDRIN Sources of Information The New Testament itself (i.e., Gospels and Acts) Flavius Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews The Mishnah section of the Talmud (i.e., Tractate "Sanhedrin") Unfortunately the NT and Josephus do not agree with the rabbinical writings, which seem to assert two Sanhedrins in Jerusalem one priestly (i.e., Sadducean, see SPECIAL TOPIC: SADDUCEES), controlled by the High Priest and dealing with civil and criminal justice a second controlled by the Pharisees (see SPECIAL TOPIC: PHARISEES) and scribes (see SPECIAL TOPIC: SCRIBES), concerned with religious and traditional issues However, the rabbinical writings date from A.D. 200 and reflect the cultural situation after the fall of Jerusalem to the Roman general, Titus, in A.D. 70. The Jews (i.e., Pharisee leadership) reestablished a headquarters for their religious life at a city called Jamnia and later (i.e., A.D. 118) moved to Galilee. Terminology The problem with identifying this judicial body involves the different names by which it is known. There are several words used to describe judicial bodies within the Jewish community of Jerusalem. Gerousia ‒ "senate" or "council." This is the oldest term which was used toward the end of the Persian period (cf. Josephus' Antiquities12.3.3 and II Maccabees 11:27). It is used by Luke in Acts 5:21 along with "Sanhedrin." It may have been a way of explaining the term to Greek speaking readers (cf. I Macc. 12:35). Synedrion ‒ "Sanhedrin." This is a compound from syn (together with) and hedra (seat). Surprisingly this term is used in Aramaic, but it reflects a Greek word. By the end of the Maccabean period this had become the accepted term to designate the supreme court of the Jews in Jerusalem (cf. Matt. 26:59; Mark 15:1; Luke 22:66; John 11:47; Acts 5:27). The problem comes when the same terminology is used of local judicial councils outside Jerusalem (cf. Matt. 5:22; 10:17; Mark 13:9). Presbyterion ‒ "council of elders" (cf. Luke 22:66). This is an OT designation for tribal leaders. However, it came to refer to the supreme court in Jerusalem (cf. Acts 22:5). Boulē ‒ This term "council" is used by Josephus (i.e., Wars 2.16.2; 5.4.2, but not the NT) to describe several judicial bodies: the Senate in Rome local Roman courts the Jewish supreme court in Jerusalem local Jewish court Joseph of Arimathea is described as a member of the Sanhedrin by a form of this term (i.e., bouleutēs, which means "councilor," cf. Mark 15:43; Luke 23:50). Historical Development Originally Ezra is said to have set up the Great Synagogue (cf. Targum on Song of Songs 6:1) in the post-exilic period, which seems to have become the Sanhedrin of Jesus' day. The Mishnah (i.e., Talmud) records that there were two major courts in Jerusalem (cf. Sanh. 7:1). One made up of 70 (or 71) members (Sand. 1:6 even states that Moses set up the first Sanhedrin in Numbers 11, cf. Num. 11:16-25). One made up of 23 members (but this may refer to local synagogue courts). Some Jewish scholars believe there were three 23-member Sanhedrins in Jerusalem. When the three got together, they constituted "the Great Sanhedrin" of 71 members (i.e., Nasi and Av Bet Din). one priestly (i.e., Sadducees) one legal (i.e., Pharisees) one aristocratic (i.e., elders) In the post-exilic period (see SPECIAL TOPIC: POST-EXILIC CHART, the returning Davidic seed was Zerubbabel and the returning Aaronic seed was Joshua (cf. Hag. 1:1). After Zerubbabel's death, no Davidic seed continued, so the judicial mantle passed exclusively to the priests (cf. I Macc. 12:6) and local elders (cf. Neh. 2:16; 5:7). This priestly role in judicial decisions is documented by Diodorus 40:3:4-5 during the Hellenistic period. This priestly role in government continued during the Selucid period. Josephus quotes Antiochus "the Great" III (223-187 B.C.) in Antiquities 12.138-142. This priestly power continued during the Maccabean period according to Josephus' Antiquities 13.10.5-6; 13.15.5. During the Roman period the governor of Syria (i.e., Gabinius from 57-55 B.C.) established five regional "Sanhedrins" (i.e., administrative districts, cf. Josephus' Antiquities 14.5.4; and Wars 1.8.5), but this was later annulled by Rome (i.e., 47 B.C.). The Sanhedrin had a political confrontation with Herod (i.e., Antiquities 14.9.3-5) who, in 37 B.C., retaliated and had most of the high court killed (cf. Josephus' Antiquities 14.9.4; 15.1.2). Under the Roman procurators (i.e., A.D. 6-66) Josephus tells us (cf. Antiquities 20.200,251) that the Sanhedrin again gained considerable power and influence (cf. Mark 14:55). There are three trials recorded in the NT where the Sanhedrin, under the leadership of the High Priest's family, executes justice. Jesus' trial (cf. Mark 14:53-15:1; John 18:12-23,28-32) Peter and John (cf. Acts 4:3-6) Paul (cf. Acts 22:25-30) When the Jews revolted in A.D. 66, the Romans subsequently destroyed Jewish society and Jerusalem in A.D. 70. The Sanhedrin was permanently dissolved, although the Pharisees at Jamnia tried to bring a supreme judicial court (i.e., Beth Din) back into Jewish religious (but not civil or political) life. Membership The first biblical mention of a high court in Jerusalem is 2 Chr. 19:8-11. It was made up of Levites priests the heads of families (i.e., elders, cf. I Macc. 14:20; II Macc. 4:44) During the Maccabean period it was made up of Sadducean priestly families local aristocracy (cf. I Macc. 7:33; 11:23; 14:28) Later in this period "scribes" (Mosaic lawyers, usually Pharisees) were added, apparently by Alexander Jannaeus' wife, Salome (76-67 B.C.) She is even said to have made the Pharisees the predominant group (cf. Josephus' Wars of the Jews 1.5.2). By Jesus' day the court was made up of the families of the High Priests local men of wealthy families scribes (cf. Luke 19:47) Sources Consulted BORROW Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, IVP, PAGE 730 PAGE 732 BORROW The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, vol. 5, pp. 268-273 (PAGE 268, PAGE 270, PAGE 272) The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, vol. 10, pp. 203-204 The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, vol. 4, pp. 214-218 Encyclopedia Judaica, vol. 14, pp. 836-839 John 11:48 "If we let Him go on like this, all men will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation." BGT John 11:48 ἐὰν ἀφῶμεν αὐτὸν οὕτως, πάντες πιστεύσουσιν εἰς αὐτόν, καὶ ἐλεύσονται οἱ Ῥωμαῖοι καὶ ἀροῦσιν ἡμῶν καὶ τὸν τόπον καὶ τὸ ἔθνος. KJV John 11:48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation. NET John 11:48 If we allow him to go on in this way, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away our sanctuary and our nation." CSB John 11:48 If we let Him continue in this way, everyone will believe in Him! Then the Romans will come and remove both our place and our nation." ESV John 11:48 If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation." NIV John 11:48 If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation." NLT John 11:48 If we allow him to go on like this, soon everyone will believe in him. Then the Roman army will come and destroy both our Temple and our nation." NRS John 11:48 If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and destroy both our holy place and our nation." NJB John 11:48 If we let him go on in this way everybody will believe in him, and the Romans will come and suppress the Holy Place and our nation.' NAB John 11:48 If we leave him alone, all will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our land and our nation." YLT John 11:48 if we may let him alone thus, all will believe in him; and the Romans will come, and will take away both our place and nation.' MIT John 11:48 If we let him go on this way, everyone will believe in him. Then the Romans will come and remove from us both our place and our national identity." we let: Ac 5:28,38-40 all: Jn 1:7 Lu 8:12 11:52 1Th 2:15,16 and the: De 28:50-68 Da 9:26,27 Zec 13:7,8 14:1,2 Mt 21:40-42 22:7 Mt 23:35-38 27:25 Lu 19:41-44 21:20-24 23:28-31 John 11 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries ALL MEN WILL BELIEVE If (3rd class condition = potential action) we let Him go on like this, all men will believe (pisteuo) in Him - Now these supposedly brilliant leaders have become "universalists" saying all will be saved! Brian Bell - They cared more about their political status & power on earth than they did about whether Jesus really was sent by God. [were simply trying to save their political skins!] They feared that Jesus might get such a following that even Rome would feel threatened. Bob Utley - "all men will believe in Him" Jealousy as well as theological disagreement was the source of their distrust and fear of Jesus. The "all" may have referred even to the Samaritans and Gentiles (cf. John 10:16). There was also a political aspect to their fear (i.e., Roman reprisals). And the Romans will come and take away (airo) both our place and our nation - This of course was their ultimate fear that they would lose their power and prestige. Same verb for take away (airo) used for remove (airo) the stone (Jn 11:39, 41)! Our place refers to the Holy Temple, which the Romans would in fact take away in 70AD (Why? see Lk 13:34+, Mt 23:37)!
João 11
Utley - This is one of those ironic prophecies of John's Gospel, for this was fulfilled literally in A.D. 70 when Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed by the Roman general (later Emperor) Titus. The political reality of Roman domination was an integral part of Jewish end-time (eschatological) hope. They believed that God would send a religious/military figure, like the Judges of the OT, to physically deliver them from Rome. Several Messianic pretenders started rebellions in Palestine to accomplish this very expectation. Jesus claimed that His kingdom was not a temporal/political reign (cf. John 18:36), but a spiritual reign that would be consummated globally in the future (i.e., the book of Revelation). He claimed to fulfill the OT prophecies (cf. Matt. 5:17-19), but not in a literal, Jewish, nationalistic sense. For this He was rejected by most Jews of His day. John 11:49 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, "You know nothing at all, BGT John 11:49 εἷς δέ τις ἐξ αὐτῶν Καϊάφας, ἀρχιερεὺς ὢν τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνου, εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἴδατε οὐδέν, KJV John 11:49 And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, NET John 11:49 Then one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said, "You know nothing at all! CSB John 11:49 One of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, "You know nothing at all! ESV John 11:49 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, "You know nothing at all. NIV John 11:49 Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, "You know nothing at all! NLT John 11:49 Caiaphas, who was high priest at that time, said, "You don't know what you're talking about! NRS John 11:49 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, "You know nothing at all! NJB John 11:49 One of them, Caiaphas, the high priest that year, said, 'You do not seem to have grasped the situation at all; NAB John 11:49 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, "You know nothing, YLT John 11:49 and a certain one of them, Caiaphas, being chief priest of that year, said to them, 'Ye have not known anything, MIT John 11:49 One of them, Caiaphas, the high priest that year, said to them, "You do not understand at all. Caiaphas: Jn 18:13-14 Lu 3:2 Ac 4:6 You know nothing: Jn 7:48,49 Pr 26:12 Isa 5:20-23 1Co 1:20 2:6 3:18,19 John 11 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: John 18:13-14 and led Him to Annas first; for he was father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year. 14 Now Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jews that it was expedient for one man to die on behalf of the people. Luke 3:2+ in the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John, the son of Zacharias, in the wilderness. Acts 4:6+ and Annas the high priest was there, and Caiaphas and John and Alexander, and all who were of high-priestly descent. AN AMAZING OPENING LINE: YOU ARE IGNORAMUSES! John 11:49-52 deals with prophecy. An ignoramus is an ignorant or stupid person, a dunce. Caiaphas' opening line was not designed to win friends and influence people! But One of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest (archiereus) that year, said to them, "You know nothing at all - NJB - 'You do not seem to have grasped the situation at all. Caiaphas first insults the Sanhedrin's intelligence! He was ruler over the Sanhedrin and could get away with an insult like this. R Kent Hughes paraphrases Caiaphas - Roughly translated he was saying, "You fools! If you had any intelligence at all, you would see that the answer is very simple. It is better that one die rather than a whole nation." He was a cold, calculating, capable, self-sufficient, shrewd, self-satisfied ecclesiastical climber. He had come to the top of his profession. (BORROW Preaching the Word – Behold the Man - PAGE 14) Bob Utley - "Caiaphas, who was the high priest that year" The high priesthood was meant to be a lifelong position passed on to one's children (cf. Exodus 28), but after the Romans became the occupiers, it was sold to the highest bidder because of the lucrative trade available on the Mount of Olives and in the temple area. Caiaphas was high priest from A.D. 18-36 (son-in-law of Annas, High Priest from A.D. 6-15). Josephus, himself a Pharisee (which might taint his commentary regarding Sadducees), characterized the Sadducees. "The behavior of the Sadducees one toward another is in some degree wild," he wrote, "and their conduct with those who are of their own party is as barbarous as if they were strangers to them" (The Wars of the Jews, 2. scroll to paragraph 166) High priest (749) archiereus from arche = first in a series, the leader or ruler, idea of rank or degree + hiereus = priest - hieros is that which is determined, filled or consecrated by divine power) refers to the priest that was chief over all the other priests in Israel. This office was established by God through Moses instructions in the Pentateuch. The high priest functioned as the mediator between Jehovah and Israel (cp new order under the New Covenant - 1Ti 2:5) performing sacrifices and rituals like other priests, but in addition acting to expiate the sins of the nation on the annual Day of Atonement (another source) (Read Lev 16:1-34) In the plural archiereus (AS IN John 11:47 = "chief priests") refers to all the ruling priests, the members of the high-priestly families as a group, the upper echelons of the priestly class, especially those who served on the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high court (Lk 9:22+, Mk 8:31+). In the singular archiereus refers to the acting high priest (Lk 3:2+, Mk 14:47, 53, 54, 60, 61, 63, 66+), who by Jesus' day was more of a role obtained by political connections than priestly lineage. The Biblical motif was God appointed the priest Archiereus in John - Jn. 7:32; Jn. 7:45; Jn. 11:47; Jn. 11:49; Jn. 11:51; Jn. 11:57; Jn. 12:10; Jn. 18:3; Jn. 18:10; Jn. 18:13; Jn. 18:15; Jn. 18:16; Jn. 18:19; Jn. 18:22; Jn. 18:24; Jn. 18:26; Jn. 18:35; Jn. 19:6; Jn. 19:15; Jn. 19:21 QUESTION - Who was Caiaphas in the Bible? (ED: Caiaphas - 9x/9v - Matt. 26:3; Matt. 26:57; Lk. 3:2; Jn. 11:49; Jn. 18:13; Jn. 18:14; Jn. 18:24; Jn. 18:28; Acts 4:6) ANSWER - Joseph Caiaphas was the Jewish high priest during the time of Jesus’ ministry and a few years afterwards (ED: APPOINTED HIGH PRIEST IN ABOUT A.D. 18 BY ROMAN PREFECT VALERIUS GRATUS [HIMSELF REPLACED BY PREFECT PONTIUS PILATE IN A.D. 26] AND DEPOSED IN A.D. 36) . He was a strong opponent of Jesus and His message. Caiaphas was the son-in-law of Annas, the former high priest (from A.D. 6-15), which may have accounted for his own rise to power. Caiaphas was also a member of one of the ruling Jewish sects, the Sadducees. Sadducees were often wealthy men of high position and, as they sought to appease their Roman rulers, were heavily involved in politics. They held the majority seat in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high court, over which Caiaphas ruled for the 18 years he served as high priest. In terms of theology, Sadducees denied the afterlife (ED: WHICH IS WHY THEY WERE "SAD YOU SEE!") and any existence of the spiritual world (angels, demons, etc.). Because of these things, they were often at odds with Jesus due to His teachings about humility, heaven, and His own deity. Caiaphas was unknowingly prophesying about God’s plan for Jesus’ death After Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, both the Pharisees and the Sadducees met at Caiaphas’s palace to express their concern that Jesus’ growing number of followers would incite the anger of the Roman Empire (Matthew 26:2; John 11:47). They were unsure how to proceed until Caiaphas spoke: “You know nothing at all! You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50). This statement calling for Jesus’ death was a cold, calculating move of political expediency; at the same time, Caiaphas was unknowingly prophesying about God’s plan for Jesus’ death. Through the Sanhedrin’s wicked actions, God would save both the Jewish nation and anyone else who would believe in Christ (Jn 11:51–52). When the Jewish leaders had Jesus arrested at Passover, they first brought Him before Annas (John 18:13). After he had questioned Jesus, Annas sent Jesus to his son-in-law Caiaphas, who as the high priest would be the one to rule on Jesus’ fate (See famous picture). When Jesus stood before Caiaphas and the entire Sanhedrin, many false witnesses were brought forward, but nothing was found to warrant a death sentence (Matthew 26:59–60). Finally, Caiaphas stood up and addressed Jesus directly, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mt 26:63). Jesus replied just as directly, “You have said so. . . . But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Mt 26:64). Caiaphas had what he was looking for; he tore his robe and cried, “Blasphemy!” (Mt 26:65). The result of the sham trial was that Jesus was pronounced “worthy of death” and beaten and mocked (Mt 26:66–67). However, since the Jews could not legally execute prisoners, Caiaphas sent Jesus to the Roman governor Pontius Pilate. Jesus endured another series of trials that night under Roman jurisdiction. Caiaphas and the other religious leaders stirred up the crowd against Jesus. When Pilate attempted to release Jesus by giving them a choice between Him and the convicted felon Barabbas, “the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas and to have Jesus executed” (Matthew 27:20). Pilate acquiesced, and Jesus was sentenced to die, beaten, led outside the city, and crucified (Mt 27:26–35). It’s what Caiaphas wanted all along. It’s important to note that these things did not happen at the whim of Caiaphas, the priests, or Pilate, for it was all part of God’s plan to save the world through the death of His Son (Acts 2:23-24+). As Jesus had said, “No one takes [my life] from me, but I lay it down of my own accord” (John 10:18). Three days later, Jesus rose again from the grave, fulfilling prophecy, defeating death, and emboldening His followers to share the good news of salvation with thousands throughout the known world. Caiaphas continued to persecute the followers of Christ, being present at the trial of Peter and John (Acts 4:1–22), but his opposition did nothing to stop the spread of the gospel. Caiaphas’s story is a tragic one. Caiaphas was faced with the reality of Who Jesus is and yet denied the Truth that literally stood before him. As high priest Caiaphas had wealth, an honorable position, and the respect of the people, but he was deficient in the one area that truly matters: saving faith in Jesus Christ (cf Mk 8:36-37+). GotQuestions.org Norman Geisler - JOHN 11:49–52—Does this text support the Catholic claim for papal infallibility? (See When Cultists Ask) MISINTERPRETATION: Some Catholic scholars claim that since the high priest in the Old Testament had an official revelatory function connected with his office, it is to be expected that there be an equivalent in the New Testament, the Pope. Catholics use this passage about the Jewish high priest exercising authority to substantiate their claim. Is this a correct interpretation? CORRECTING THE MISINTERPRETATION: Roman Catholics are making an argument from analogy that is not based on any New Testament affirmation. The Catholic view cannot be derived from any proper exegesis of the text. The New Testament explicitly says that the Old Testament priesthood has been abolished. The writer to the Hebrews declared that “there is a change of priesthood” from that of Aaron (Heb. 7:12). The Aaronic priesthood has been fulfilled in Christ, who is a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek (vv. 15–17). Even Catholics acknowledge that there is no new revelation after the time of the New Testament. So no one after the first century (Popes included) can have a revelatory function in the sense of giving new revelations. There is a New Testament revelatory function in the apostles and prophets (cf. Eph. 2:20; 3:5). But their revelation ceased when they died. To assume that a revelatory function was passed on after them and is resident in the Bishop of Rome is to beg the question. John 11:50 nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish." BGT John 11:50 οὐδὲ λογίζεσθε ὅτι συμφέρει ὑμῖν ἵνα εἷς ἄνθρωπος ἀποθάνῃ ὑπὲρ τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ μὴ ὅλον τὸ ἔθνος ἀπόληται. KJV John 11:50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. NET John 11:50 You do not realize that it is more to your advantage to have one man die for the people than for the whole nation to perish." CSB John 11:50 You're not considering that it is to your advantage that one man should die for the people rather than the whole nation perish." ESV John 11:50 Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish." NIV John 11:50 You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish." NLT John 11:50 You don't realize that it's better for you that one man should die for the people than for the whole nation to be destroyed." NRS John 11:50 You do not understand that it is better for you to have one man die for the people than to have the whole nation destroyed." NJB John 11:50 you fail to see that it is to your advantage that one man should die for the people, rather than that the whole nation should perish.' NAB John 11:50 nor do you consider that it is better for you that one man should die instead of the people, so that the whole nation may not perish." YLT John 11:50 nor reason that it is good for us that one man may die for the people, and not the whole nation perish.' MIT John 11:50 Do you not think it is to your advantage that one person should die on behalf of the people so that the whole nation not be ruined?" Jn 11:48 18:14 19:12 Lu 24:46 Ro 3:8 John 11 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passage: John 18:14 Now Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jews that it was expedient for one man to die on behalf of the people. Proverbs 17:15 (TRUE OF CAIAPHAS) He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous, Both of them alike are an abomination to the LORD. CAIAPHAS' PROPHECY OF JESUS' SUBSTITUTIONARY DEATH Expedient means convenient and practical and a means of attaining an end, an easy and quick way to solve a problem, thus a means that is convenient but which may be improper or immoral and in this case it was both! So much for the integrity of the high priest! Religious o nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that one man die (apothnesko) for (huper) the people, and that the whole nation not perish (apollumi) - Note the two alternatives - one man die or the entire nation perish! In a pinnacle of hypocrisy, Caiaphas' national patriotism veiled his perfidious intention - death to Christ. Caiaphas prophecy was partially correct for Jesus died, but the bitter irony is that nation also died in A.D. 70 when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem. John's Irony - Caiaphas preaches the Gospel! That one man die (apothnesko) for the people - It is fascinating that the preposition for is the Greek word huper which means instead of or in place of and clearly speaks of substitution. In this case it speaks of Jesus' substitutionary atonement on the Cross, but obviously Caiaphas did not intend it to convey that profound meaning. Caiaphas meant it for evil but to paraphrase Joseph in Genesis 50:20 "God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result (IN CONTEXT THE FUTURE RESULT), to preserve many people alive (JESUS WOULD BE THE SUBSTITUTIONARY SACRIFICE FOR MANY PEOPLE WHO BELIEVED IN HIM AND THUS THEY WOULD BE PRESERVED FOREVER!)." John
João 11
Utley - "one man should die for the people" The OT background for this is the Jewish view of "corporality." One person (good or bad) could affect the whole (i.e., Adam/Eve; Achan). This concept came to be an underpinning of the sacrificial system, especially the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16), where one innocent animal bore the sin of the nation. This becomes the Messianic concept behind Isaiah 53. In the NT the Adam/Christ typology of Rom. 5:12-21 and 1 Cor. 15:20-23 reflect this concept. Brian Bell - Caiaphas proposes, a simple lethal solution - “Why should the whole nation be destroyed? Let this one man die for the people.” [He didn’t realize how correct he was!] Admire the bee: It sees its hive being threatened, it will use its one defense...its stinger! They will die in their defense of their hive. They have one thought only - the safety of the others in the hive, & gladly will give their lives for the good of the many. Life Application Note - They were so hardened that they preferred to reject God's Son rather than admit that they were wrong. They preferred "closure" instead of being open to God's marvelous power. Beware of pride. If we allow it to grow, it can lead us into enormous sin. (BORROW Life Application Study Bible)
João 11
Utley - The NIDOTTE, vol. 1, p. 326 (BORROW), has a good comment about the theological use of the VERB mello ("must," "to have to," "to be certain") when used of God's will for Christ's redemptive work. (1) Mark 10:32 (2) Matthew 17:22 (3) Luke 9:31,44; 24:21; Acts 26:23 (4) John 7:39; 11:51; 12:33; 14:22; 18:32 It is also used of the necessity of Judas' betrayal - (1) Luke 22:23 (2) John 6:71; 12:4. Luke, in Acts, uses it for prophetic fulfillment (i.e., Acts 11:28; 24:15; 26:22). All of the redemptive events were in the hands of God (cf. Acts 2:23; 3:18; 4:28; 13:29)! History is not random! John 11:52 and not for the nation only, but in order that He might also gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. BGT John 11:52 καὶ οὐχ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἔθνους μόνον ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα καὶ τὰ τέκνα τοῦ θεοῦ τὰ διεσκορπισμένα συναγάγῃ εἰς ἕν. KJV John 11:52 And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad. NET John 11:52 and not for the Jewish nation only, but to gather together into one the children of God who are scattered.) CSB John 11:52 and not for the nation only, but also to unite the scattered children of God. ESV John 11:52 and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. NIV John 11:52 and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one. NLT John 11:52 And not only for that nation, but to bring together and unite all the children of God scattered around the world. NRS John 11:52 and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the dispersed children of God. NJB John 11:52 and not for the nation only, but also to gather together into one the scattered children of God. NAB John 11:52 and not only for the nation, but also to gather into one the dispersed children of God. YLT John 11:52 and not for the nation only, but that also the children of God, who have been scattered abroad, he may gather together into one. MIT John 11:52 Jesus' death would not be for the nation alone, but that he might bring together God's scattered children. not: Jn 1:29 Jn 12:32 Ps 22:15,27 72:19 Isa 49:6 Lu 2:32 Ro 3:29 1Jn 2:2 Rev 5:9 7:9,10 gather: Jn 10:16 Ge 49:10 Ps 102:22,23 Isa 11:10-12 49:18 55:5 56:8 60:4 Mt 25:31-34 Eph 1:9,10 2:14-22 Col 1:20-23 the children: Ho 1:10 Ac 18:10 Ro 4:17 8:29,30 9:25,26 Eph 1:5 3:11 2Th 2:13,14 who are scattered abroad: Eze 11:16,17 34:12 Eph 2:14-17 Jas 1:1 1Pe 1:1 John 11 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: John 1:29+ The next day he *saw Jesus coming to him and *said, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! John 12:32+ (GATHER TOGETHER INTO ONE) “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.” John 10:16+ “I have other sheep (AKA GENTILES), which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd. Ephesians 2:11-18+ - Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called “Uncircumcision” by the so-called “Circumcision,” (JEWS) which is performed in the flesh by human hands– 12 remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you (GENTILES) who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, 15 by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, 16 and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity. 17 AND HE CAME AND PREACHED PEACE TO YOU WHO WERE FAR AWAY, AND PEACE TO THOSE WHO WERE NEAR; 18 for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. JESUS' DEATH WOULD GATHER JEW AND GENTILE And not for the nation (ethnos) only (Israel), but (term of contrast) in order that (hina = purpose clause - always ask "What purpose or result?") He might also gather together (sunago) into one the children (teknon from tikto = bring forth thus "born ones") of God (theos) who are scattered abroad (diaskorpizo in perfect tense - past completed action, ongoing effect/result) - The truth of this amazing prophecy is mind boggling. Indeed, it would come to pass just as Caiaphas had prophesied, but doubtless not exactly in the way he thought it could come to pass. His prophecy would be fulfilled when all believers, both Jew and Gentile would come together in one body, the body of Christ which came into existence at Pentecost. Even the Samaritans had recognized that Jesus was "indeed the Savior of the world." (Jn 4:42+). John
João 11
Utley - "He might also gather together into one the children of God" This seems to be an editorial comment by John which could be parallel with John 10:16. It could refer to (1) Jews living outside Palestine (2) half-Jews like the Samaritans (3) Gentiles. Option #3 seems best (I AGREE BECAUSE CHILDREN OF GOD DESCRIBES BELIEVERS WHICH INCLUDES JEWS AND GENTILES - 1Jn 3:1+). Whichever it is, Jesus' death will bring a unity to "believing" humanity (cf. John 1:29; 3:16; 4:42; 10:16; Eph. 2:11-3:13). Scattered abroad (1287) diaskorpizo from dia = an intensifies or denotes separation + skorpízō = to dissipate) means to scatter abroad or disperse. It is used of chaff being scattered to the wind on the threshing floor, meaning to winnow (Mt 25:24, 26). Metaphorically it means to dissipate, squander (Luke 15:13; 16:1). Mattoon says "to winnow, like a person that separates the grain from the chaff by throwing it up high into the air and letting the wind blow away the chaff." This is the way the prodigal son handled his resources. He was throwing away his substance." (Treasures from Luke) Diaskorpizo - 9x in 9v - scattered(6), scattered abroad(1), squandered(1), squandering(1). Matt. 25:24; Matt. 25:26; Matt. 26:31; Mk. 14:27; Lk. 1:51; Lk. 15:13; Lk. 16:1; Jn. 11:52; Acts 5:37 Bob Utley - SPECIAL TOPIC: THE CHILDREN OF GOD The NT writers often use familial imagery to describe Christianity: Father Son children born again adoption Christianity is analogous to a family, not a product (ticket to heaven, fire insurance policy). This imagery comes from the intimacy of the faithful Jewish home. Believers in Christ have become the new eschatological "people of God" (cf. Rom. 2:28-29; Gal. 3:26-29; Eph. 2:11-3:13). As children we should reflect the Father's character, as did the "unique" (cf. John 1:14; 3:16) Son (cf. Eph. 5:1; 1 John 2:29; 3:3). "Child" is such a shocking title for sinners (cf. John 11:52; Rom. 8:14,16,21; 9:8; Phil. 2:15; 1 John 3:1,2,10; 5:2; Hos. 1:10 quoted in Rom. 9:26; and 2 Cor. 6:18). It is also interesting that of the two Greek terms for children, one is always used of Jesus (huios), while the other (teknon, tekna) is used for believers. Christians are children of God, but they are not in the same category as the unique, divine Son of God, Jesus. His relationship with the Father is unique, but analogous. . There are three more Special Topics that deal with different aspects of this subject. SPECIAL TOPIC: SON OF GOD SPECIAL TOPIC: "Sons of God. . ." SPECIAL TOPIC: Sons of God in Genesis 6 Related Resources: What does it mean to be a child of God? | GotQuestions.org What does it mean that we are children of God (1 John 3:1 ... How can I become a child of God? | GotQuestions.org Are we all God's children, or only Christians? | GotQuestions.org What does it mean to be a born again Christian? | GotQuestions.org John 11:53 So from that day on they planned together to kill Him. BGT John 11:53 ἀπ᾽ ἐκείνης οὖν τῆς ἡμέρας ἐβουλεύσαντο ἵνα ἀποκτείνωσιν αὐτόν. KJV John 11:53 Then from that day forth they took counsel together for to put him to death. NET John 11:53 So from that day they planned together to kill him. CSB John 11:53 So from that day on they plotted to kill Him. ESV John 11:53 So from that day on they made plans to put him to death. NIV John 11:53 So from that day on they plotted to take his life. NLT John 11:53 So from that time on, the Jewish leaders began to plot Jesus' death. NRS John 11:53 So from that day on they planned to put him to death. NJB John 11:53 From that day onwards they were determined to kill him. NAB John 11:53 So from that day on they planned to kill him. YLT John 11:53 From that day, therefore, they took counsel together that they may kill him; MIT John 11:53 From that day forward they were plotting to assassinate him. from: Ne 4:16 13:21 Ps 113:2 Mt 16:21 22:46 they: Jn 11:47 Ps 2:2 31:13 71:10 Mk 3:6 Ac 5:33 9:23 put: Jn 12:10 Ps 109:4,5 Jer 38:4,15 Mt 26:59 Mk 14:1 John 11 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Mark 14:1-2+ Now the Passover and Unleavened Bread were two days away; and the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how to seize Him by stealth and kill Him; 2 for they were saying, “Not during the festival, otherwise there might be a riot of the people.” John 5:18 For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God. John 7:19 “Did not Moses give you the Law, and yet none of you carries out the Law? Why do you seek to kill Me?” John 8:59 Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple. John 10:39 Therefore they were seeking again to seize Him, and He eluded their grasp. John 11:8 The disciples *said to Him, “Rabbi, the Jews were just now seeking to stone You, and are You going there again?” JESUS' HOUR HAD COME! So (oun) is a term of conclusion. The council heard and accepted the prophetic words of Caiaphas. From that day on they planned (bouleuo) together (hina - purpose = in order) to kill (apokteino) Him - Not just arrest Him and give Him a fair trial but to kill Him! Jesus had now been judged and condemned by the Sanhedrin and the arrest and trials were a formality (or better a mockery)! Jesus' fate was sealed and He would be killed and rise again, an event that ironically had been catalyzed or precipitated by the rising of another dead man name Lazarus! A resurrected/resuscitated Lazarus would lead to a crucified/resurrected Christ! These godless (so called) "religious" leaders thought they had reached an intelligent solution to their problem not realizing that Jesus would be "delivered over by the predetermined (horizo) plan and foreknowledge (prognosis) of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death." (Acts 2:23+) As so often in the Bible we see the mysterious interaction of God's sovereignty and man's responsibility. The bitter irony for these Jewish leaders is that they would be fully accountable to the very One they falsely judged at His Great White Throne judgment! The other irony is the very thing they were trying to preserve, their political power, they would lose in 70 AD when Rome was destroy the Temple and Jerusalem. Bob Utley - "So from that day on they planned together to kill Him" This is a recurrent theme in John (cf. John 5:18; 7:19; 8:59; 10:39; 11:8). Brian Bell - From now on Jesus & the Sanhedrin were on a collision course! From this time on Jesus alters His course: He changes His public outreach to a private in-reach. He shifts His emphasis from signs to quiet intimate conversation w/His disciples. He reduces His travels & returns to Jerusalem & stays there. He’s not out evangelizing; He’s preparing to leave & preparing the disciples for His departure. The Apologetics Study Bible Holman Christian Standard Bible - Does this contradict the claim in the other Gospels that Jesus’ cleansing of the temple was the reason the authorities finally decided to take His life (Mk 12:12)? No, because both John and the other Gospels recognize a series of events that eventually sealed Jesus’ fate (Mk 3:6; Jn 5:18; 7:32; 8:59; 10:31).
João 11
Utley - "Jesus therefore no longer continued to walk publically among the Jews" John 12 is Jesus' last attempt to deal with the religious leaders. The term translated in John "publicly" (cf. John 7:26; 11:54; 18:20) usually means "boldly." "a city called Ephraim" This town may have been located close to Bethel in Samaria (cf. 2 Chr. 13:19). Bob Utley - SPECIAL TOPIC: BOLDNESS (parrhēsia) This Greek term is a compound of "all" (pan) and "speech" (rhēsis). This freedom or boldness in speech often had the connotation of a boldness amidst opposition or rejection (cf. John 7:13; 1 Thess. 2:2). In John's writings (used 13 times) it often denotes a public proclamation (cf. John 18:20, also in Paul's writings, Col. 2:15). However, sometimes it simply means "plainly" (cf. John 10:24; 11:14; 16:25,29). In Acts the Apostles speak the message about Jesus in the same manner (with boldness) as Jesus spoke about the Father and His plans and promises (cf. Acts 2:29; 4:13,29,31; 9:27-28; 13:46; 14:3; 18:26; 19:8; 26:26; 28:31). Paul also asked for prayer that he might boldly preach the gospel (cf. Eph. 6:19; 1 Thess. 2:2) and live the gospel (cf. Phil. 1:20). Paul's eschatological hope in Christ gave him boldness and confidence to preach the gospel in this current evil age (cf. 2 Cor. 3:11-12). He also had confidence that Jesus' followers would act appropriately (cf. 2 Cor. 7:4). There is one more aspect to this term. The book of Hebrews uses it in a unique sense of the believer' boldness, in Christ, to approach God and speak to Him (cf. Heb. 3:6; 4:16; 10:19,35). Believers are fully accepted and welcomed into intimacy with the Father through the Son (cf. 2 Cor. 5:21)! It is used in several ways in the NT. 1. a confidence, boldness, or assurance related to a. men (cf. Acts 2:29; 4:13,31; 2 Cor. 3:12; Eph. 6:19) b. God (cf. 1 John 2:28; 3:21; 4:12; 5:14; Heb. 3:6; 4:16; 10:19) 2. to speak openly, plainly, or unambiguously (cf. Mark 8:32; John 7:4,13; 10:24; 11:14; 16:25; Acts 28:31) 3. to speak publically (cf. John 7:26; 11:54; 18:20) 4. the related form (parrhēsiazomai) is used to preach boldly amidst difficult circumstances (cf. Acts 18:26; 19:8; Eph. 6:20; 1 Thess. 2:2) John 11:55 Now the Passover of the Jews was near, and many went up to Jerusalem out of the country before the Passover to purify themselves. BGT John 11:55 Ἦν δὲ ἐγγὺς τὸ πάσχα τῶν Ἰουδαίων, καὶ ἀνέβησαν πολλοὶ εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ἐκ τῆς χώρας πρὸ τοῦ πάσχα ἵνα ἁγνίσωσιν ἑαυτούς. KJV John 11:55 And the Jews' passover was nigh at hand: and many went out of the country up to Jerusalem before the passover, to purify themselves. NET John 11:55 Now the Jewish feast of Passover was near, and many people went up to Jerusalem from the rural areas before the Passover to cleanse themselves ritually. CSB John 11:55 The Jewish Passover was near, and many went up to Jerusalem from the country to purify themselves before the Passover. ESV John 11:55 Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and many went up from the country to Jerusalem before the Passover to purify themselves. NIV John 11:55 When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, many went up from the country to Jerusalem for their ceremonial cleansing before the Passover. NLT John 11:55 It was now almost time for the Jewish Passover celebration, and many people from all over the country arrived in Jerusalem several days early so they could go through the purification ceremony before Passover began. NRS John 11:55 Now the Passover of the Jews was near, and many went up from the country to Jerusalem before the Passover to purify themselves. NJB John 11:55 The Jewish Passover was drawing near, and many of the country people who had gone up to Jerusalem before the Passover to purify themselves NAB John 11:55 Now the Passover of the Jews was near, and many went up from the country to Jerusalem before Passover to purify themselves. YLT John 11:55 And the passover of the Jews was nigh, and many went up to Jerusalem out of the country before the passover, that they might purify themselves; MIT John 11:55 The Jewish Passover was near, and many from the outlying areas went up to Jerusalem before the Passover to purify themselves. passover: Jn 2:13 Jn 5:1 Jn 6:4 Ex 12:11-14 before: Jn 7:8-10 12:1 Ezr 3:1-6 Ne 8:1-12 to purify: Jn 2:6 Ge 35:2 Ex 19:10,14,15 Nu 9:6 1Sa 16:5 2Ch 30:17-20 Job 1:5 Ps 26:6 Ac 24:18 1Co 11:28 Heb 9:13,14 Jas 4:8 John 11 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Exodus 12:11-14+ ‘Now you shall eat it in this manner: with your loins girded, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and you shall eat it in haste–it is the LORD’S Passover. 12 ‘For I will go through the land of Egypt on that night, and will strike down all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments–I am the LORD. 13 ‘The blood shall be a sign for you on the houses where you live; and when I see the blood I will pass over you, and no plague will befall you to destroy you when I strike the land of Egypt. 14 ‘Now this day will be a memorial to you, and you shall celebrate it as a feast to the LORD; throughout your generations you are to celebrate it as a permanent ordinance. John 2:13+ (TIME OF JESUS' FIRST MAJOR CONFRONTATION WITH JEWISH LEADERS - IN CLEANSING OF THE TEMPLE) The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. John 6:4+ (SECOND PASSOVER REFERRED TO IN JOHN) Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was near. THE PASSOVER DRAWS NEAR Note that John 11:55-57 links John 11 and 12 together. Now the Passover (pascha) of the Jews (Ioudaios) was near (eggus), and many went up (anabaino) to Jerusalem out of the country before the Passover (pascha) to purify (hagnizo) themselves - Note direction is always went up because Jerusalem was located at a higher elevation then surrounding land. This is the third Passover in the Gospel of John (Jn 2:13+, Jn 6:4+). The feast drew near prompting many Jews to carry out their ritualistic (ceremonial) purification procedures, cleansing the outside while their insides were full of dead men's bones. John latter alludes to this need for purification in order to participate in the Passover describing the hypocritical Jews who "led Jesus from Caiaphas into the Praetorium, and it was early; and they themselves did not enter into the Praetorium so that they would not be defiled, but might eat the Passover." (Jn 18:28) Bob Utley - "to purify themselves" This refers to ritual rites of cleansing in preparation for the Passover. There is still debate over how long Jesus taught, preached, and ministered in Palestine. The Synoptics are structured in such a way that one or two years is possible. However, John has several Passovers (an annual feast). There are certainly three mentioned ("the feast," cf. John 2:13; 6:4; and 11:55) with at least a fourth implied in "a feast" in John 5:1. Related Resources: What is Passover? | GotQuestions.org What is the Passover Lamb? How is Jesus our Passover Lamb? | GotQuestions.org John 11:56 So they were seeking for Jesus, and were saying to one another as they stood in the temple, "What do you think; that He will not come to the feast at all?" BGT John 11:56 ἐζήτουν οὖν τὸν Ἰησοῦν καὶ ἔλεγον μετ᾽ ἀλλήλων ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ ἑστηκότες· τί δοκεῖ ὑμῖν; ὅτι οὐ μὴ ἔλθῃ εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν; KJV John 11:56 Then sought they for Jesus, and spake among themselves, as they stood in the temple, What think ye, that he will not come to the feast? NET John 11:56 Thus they were looking for Jesus, and saying to one another as they stood in the temple courts, "What do you think? That he won't come to the feast?" CSB John 11:56 They were looking for Jesus and asking one another as they stood in the temple complex: "What do you think? He won't come to the festival, will He?" ESV John 11:56 They were looking for Jesus and saying to one another as they stood in the temple, "What do you think? That he will not come to the feast at all?" NIV John 11:56 They kept looking for Jesus, and as they stood in the temple area they asked one another, "What do you think? Isn't he coming to the Feast at all?" NLT John 11:56 They kept looking for Jesus, but as they stood around in the Temple, they said to each other, "What do you think? He won't come for Passover, will he?" NRS John 11:56 They were looking for Jesus and were asking one another as they stood in the temple, "What do you think? Surely he will not come to the festival, will he?" NJB John 11:56 were looking out for Jesus, saying to one another as they stood about in the Temple, 'What do you think? Will he come to the festival or not?' NAB John 11:56 They looked for Jesus and said to one another as they were in the temple area, "What do you think? That he will not come to the feast?" YLT John 11:56 they were seeking, therefore, Jesus, and said one with another, standing in the temple, 'What doth appear to you -- that he may not come to the feast?' MIT John 11:56 All the while, they were seeking Jesus and kept discussing the subject as they stood with one another in the temple. Conversations went like this: "What do you think? Surely he will not come to the festival?" Jn 11:8 Jn 7:11 Jn 11:7 John 11 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: John 7:11 So the Jews were seeking Him at the feast and were saying, “Where is He?” SEEKING JESUS BUT WHY? So they were seeking (zeteo) for Jesus (Iesous) - Here we have another editorial comment from John. Seeking (zeteo) is in the imperfect tense indicating over and over, here and there trying to find Him. These were not the "bad guys," the Jewish leaders, but the Jewish laity. And they were doing a good thing in seeking for Jesus. But as the Passion week would demonstrate, many of these "seekers" would prove fickle and turn against Jesus at Pilate's judgment crying "crucify Him!" (Jn 19:14-15). I am reminded of Jehovah's words through His prophet Jeremiah to the rebellious Jews in Judah declaring that "You will seek (Lxx = ekzeteo) Me and find Me when you search (Lxx = zeteo) for Me (THE QUALIFIER) with all your heart." (Jer 29:13). THOUGHT - Some today seek Jesus for what they get out of Him in a temporal sense. All of the name it/claim, prosperity preaching men and women are of this lurid ilk! If they never repent of their evil seeking, they will one day find Him as the Judge on the Great White Throne and then they will wish they had sought Him with all their heart. (cf Rev 20:11-15+). And were saying to one another as they stood in the temple (hieros), "What do you think (dokeo); that He will not come to the feast (heorte) at all - The structure of the Greek sentence expects the answer "No." While we cannot be too hard on these Jews, it is as if they are looking for a celebrity appearance, rather than a circumcision of their hearts!