Vv. 45-54. The consequences of the miracle.—Ver. 45. Πολλοὶ οὖν... αὐτόν. ‘‘Many therefore of the Jews,
viz., those who had come to Mary and seen what Jesus did, believed on Him.” That is to say, all the Jews who thus
40—50.
ἐποίησεν ὁ Ιησοῦς.
803
47. συνήγαγον οὖν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ of Φαρισαῖοι
"συνέδριον, καὶ ἔλεγον. “Ti τοιοῦμεν; ὅτι οὗτος 6 ἄνθρωπος πολλὰ ο το ες
σημεῖα ποιεῖ.
48. ἐὰν 5 ἀφῶμεν αὐτὸν οὕτω, πάντες πιστεύσουσιν Thayer.
Mt. xv. 14,
εἷς αὐτόν: Kal ἐλεύσονται ot Ῥωμαῖοι καὶ ἀροῦσιν ἡμῶν καὶ τὸν xxvii. 49.
τόπον καὶ τὸ ἔθνος.
ὢν τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνου, εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, '΄ Ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἴδατε οὐδέν : 5ο. οὐδὲ διαλογίζεσθε,ὶ ὅτι συμφέρει ἡμῖν, “iva eis ἄνθρωπος
1 λογιζεσθε in NABDL 1, 22. Άγμιν ἵπ BDLM. ηµιν in AEGHM.
wame and saw believed.—Ver. 46. But of this number [it may be “‘ of the Jews” generally, and not of those who had been at Bethany] some went away to the Pharisees and told them, His recognised enemies, what He had done. Whether they did this in good faith or not does not appear.—Ver. 47. The Pharisees at once acted on the information, svvyyayov.. . συνέδριον. The chief priests, who were Sadducees, and the Pharisees, their natural foes, but who together composed the supreme authority, ‘‘called together a meeting of the Sanhedrim”’. The key- note of the meeting was struck in the words τί ποιοῦμεν; ‘“‘ What are we doing 2”) 4.ε., why are we doing nothing ? The indicative, not the deliberative sub- junctive. The reason for shaking off this inertia is ὅτι . . . ποιε. The mir- acles are not denied, but their probable consequence is indicated.—Ver. 48. ἐὰν ἀφῶμεν . . . ἔθνο. “If we let Him thus alone,” 1.6., if we do no more to put an end to His miracles than we are doing, “all will believe on Him; and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation”’. ἡμῶν emphatic. The raising of Lazarus and the consequent accession of adherents to Jesus made it probable that the people as a whole would attach themselves to Him as Messiah; and the consequence of the Jews choosing a king of their own would certainly be that the Romans ‘would come and exterminate them.— τὸν τόπον One would naturally render ‘“‘ our land” as co-ordinate with τὸ ἔθνος [ή Land und Leute,’”’ Luther], and pro- bably this is the meaning; although in 2 Macc. v. Ig in a very similar connection ὃ τόπος means the Temple: οὐ διὰ τὸν τόπον τὸ ἔθνος, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸ ἔθνος τὸν τόπον ὃ Κύριος ἐξελέξατο. Others, with less warrant, think the holy city is meant. —Ver.49. Els δέ Tus ἐξ αὐτῶν Καϊάφας. ‘But a certain one of them, Caiaphas.”’
49. Eis δέ τις ἐξ αὐτῶν Καϊάφας, ἀρχιερεὺς q xvi. 7.
Μι. ν. 20. Lk. xvii.
2. 1 Cor. iv. 3.
T.R. poorly authenticated.
Winer (p. 146) says that τὶς does not destroy the arithmetical force of eis. This may be so: but the use of εἷς in similar forms is a peculiarity of later Greek. Caiaphas (Mt. xxvi. 3) is a sur- name = Kephas, added to the original name of this High Priest, Joseph. He held office from Α.Ρ. 18 to 36, when he was deposed by Vitellius.—apytepets dv τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνον, ‘ being High Priest that year,” not as if the writer supposed the high priesthood was an office held for a year only, but desiring to emphasise that during that marked and fatal year of our Lord’s crucifixion Caiaphas held the position of highest authority: as if he said ‘‘ during the year of which we speak Caiaphas was High Priest”’. ‘‘ Non vocat anni illius pontificem, quod annuum duntaxat esset munus, sed quum venale esiiet transferretur ad varios homines fraeter Legis praescriptum.” Calvin. And Josephus (Ant., xx. 10) re- minds us that there were twenty-eight high priests in 107 years.—Ypets οὐκ οἴδατε οὐδέν. ‘“* Ye [contemptuous] know nothing at all,’”’ οὐδὲ λογίζεσθε, ‘‘ nor do ye take account that it is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and the whole nation perish not”. The ἵνα clause is the subject of the sentence, ‘‘that one man die for the people is expedient’; as frequently, cf. Mt. x. 25, XVlii. 6, John xvi. 7, Ι Cor. iv. 3. On the use of ἵνα in this Gospel see Burton’s Moods and Tenses, 211-219. Caiaphas enounced an _ unquestionably sound principle (see Wetstein’s examples) ; but nothing could surpass the cold-blooded craft of his application of it. He saw that an opportunity was given them of at once getting rid of an awkward factor in their community, a person dangerous to their influence, and of currying favour with Rome, by putting to death one who was claiming to be king of the Jews. “Why!” he says, “' ἆο you not see that