The Pulpit Commentary — John — Volume 2 — Section 82

culminating act or power, of hie supreme Somo writore, with Epiphe.niue, have said 11,nd Pclf-rev011,1ing work of transcendent they fe!lred, when their narr11,tivee were made tcnrlernees 11,nd beauty, w11,s a. deeper a.nd public, to call such marked attention to the wilder pa.seion of ha.tred. The en.ngelist fflmily of Dethflny, lest they might hnvo completes hie series of seven great mirBCles endangered their lives; but this is exceed- with one, th11,t in trne 11,nd believing minds, ingly improbable. Others hnve o.rgued th11,t evokes 11, new sense of the glory of God. this crowning miracle would not take such Thie gre11,t 111,et sign eorresponde with the a. conspicuous plaoe in their lees-carefully fil'l!t (oh. ii.) by heing enaoted amid the arranged records. It wo.s only one of" many domestic 11,nd f11,mily life of a. small a.nd signs" wrought by our Lord with which they iosigniflcnnt town, and also by express refer- were familiar. Matthew (ix. 18) nnd Mo.rk ence to the veritable manifestation involved (v. 22) had already described the mising of in it of the lid£,. e,oii, on which we have Je.irus's daughter from the bed of death, frequently commented. Baur treated the from what was believed by the onlookers to ne.rrative a.s an ideal composition, illus- have been verit11,ble dissolution; and Luke trating the groat meto.physical utterance, (vii. 11) had shown the Lord a.t the gates or "I am the Resurrection 11,nd the Life." Ne.in to have royally withstood the power Keim endeavoured to reduce the whole of death, even when the corpse of a. young narmtive to 11, fiction, not so well contrived man wo.s being carried out to the burial. s.s some of the evangelist's tours de foros. The narrative before us is not different in This is almost 88 arbitrary and offensive ne kind from these, though the prelude e.nd the l\L Rcnan'e endeavour (which held its place accompaniments of the miracle and its cons in numerous editions of hie' Vie de Jesus') sequences are e.11 wrought out with muoh to represent the miracle as a got-up scene, dmmnlio force, while numerous touches, by- into which Christ, by a kind of Divine soenes, and references a.re introduced which 'menllonge, allowed himself to be drawn. give consummate interest to the whole. Subsequently, Renan has suggested that Another suggestion of moment is the.t it Mary andMartha told J esue their persuasion was not the purpose of the synoptists to that such a miracle would convince his detail the incidents of our Lord's ministry enemies, and that he replied that his bitter in Jerusalem. Let it not be forgotten that foes would not believe him even if Lazarus MCh of the eve.ngelists records incident and were to rise from the grave; and that this discourse to which neither of the others had speech was expanded by tradition into au access. The peculiarities of Matthew and e.ctnal event. This corresponds with what Luke e.re nearly as numerous e.s those of Weisse had suggested, that the story is au the Fourth Gospel. Why should not John expansion of the Lord's convere&tion with the bring forth facts from his memory which si.st6rs at Bethany. Gfriirer (' Heiligthu.m they had left nntouched? (see Introd.uc- und Wahrheit,' p. Sll, Meyer) thought that tion, p. xcvi.). it is the story of No.in over again in 11, de- Vere. 1-16.-(l) The mystery and might veloped form, and that Ne.in is equivalent of sacrificial lor,e seen in the prelude of thB to Bethany ; and Schenkel has fancied thnt miracle. the pamble of Luke xvi. ho.s been expanded Ver. 1.-Now e. certain (me.n) wa.s siok, (named) Lamme, of Bethany, of the village into a narrative of genuine resurrection. of 1'4ary e.nd her aister Marthe.. 'l'he certain Thoma hw!, in like manner, regarded it as man who was sick, Lazarus (or Eleazar) by the poetic expansion of the idea of the ne.me, 1 was from Bethany, the village of Christ o.s the Prince of life and Conqueror 111e.ry nnd her sister Marthe.. The two pre- of death, and as be.eed on the synoptic positions lurb and ,,, generally denote pro- cession from, but the latter implies closer e.cconnt of two resurrections, and on the and more intimate original e.esocie.tion; they parable of Lazarus o.nd the rich man. These hero are put in apposition, though there hypotheses are o.11 incompatible with the are passages where they are discriminated simplicity of the account and with the 1 'fwo etymologies of the ne.!Jle ')),))~',, "no apostolicity of th6 Gospel. Many attempb! huve been me.de to acconnt for the silence hdp;" but better ,!)!?, contrecied fr9m of the eynoptil!ts concerning tµis nlU'l'&µve. 'l!V~~. "God is l,elp" (Gotthelf). im. xt. 1-67.) '111-IE GOSPEL ACCORDIN(J TO R'I'. ,JOHN. flfj