Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 11:44
And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.
44. came forth ] It is safest not to regard this as an additional miracle. The winding-sheet may have been loosely tied round him, or each limb may have been swathed separately: in Egyptian mummies sometimes every finger is kept distinct.
graveclothes ] The Greek word occurs here only in N.T. Comp. Pro 7:16. It means the bandages which kept the sheet and the spices round the body. Nothing is said about the usual spices (Joh 19:40) here; and Martha’s remark ( Joh 11:39) rather implies that there had been no embalming. If Lazarus died of a malignant disease he would be buried as quickly as possible.
face ] The Greek word occurs in N.T. only here, Joh 7:24, and Rev 1:16: one of the small indications of a common authorship (see on Joh 15:20 and Joh 19:37).
napkin ] A Latin word is used meaning literally ‘a sweat-cloth.’ It occurs Joh 20:7; Luk 19:20; Act 19:12. Here the cloth bound under the chin to keep the lower jaw from falling is probably meant. These details shew the eyewitness.
let him go ] The expression is identical with ‘let these go their way’ (Joh 18:8); and perhaps ‘let him go his way’ would be better here. Lazarus is to be allowed to retire out of the way of harmful excitement and idle curiosity.
The reserve of the Gospel narrative here is evidence of its truth, and is in marked contrast to the myths about others who are said to have returned from the grave. Lazarus makes no revelations as to the unseen world. The traditions about him have no historic value: but one mentioned by Trench ( Miracles, p. 425) is worth remembering. It is said that the first question which he asked Christ after being restored to life was whether he must die again; and being told that he must, he was never more seen to smile.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
He that was dead – The same man, body and soul.
Bound hand and foot – It is not certain whether the whole body and limbs were bound together, or each limb separately. When they embalmed a person, the whole body and limbs were swathed or bound together by strips of linen, involved around it to keep together the aromatics with which the body was embalmed. This is the condition of Egyptian mummies. See Act 5:6. But it is not certain that this was always the mode. Perhaps the body was simply involved in a winding-sheet. The custom still exists in western Asia. No coffins being used, the body itself is more carefully and elaborately wrapped and swathed than is common or desirable where coffins are used. In this method the body is stretched out and the arms laid straight by the sides, after which the whole body, from head to foot, is wrapped round tightly in many folds of linen or cotton cloth; or, to be more precise, a great length of cloth is taken and rolled around the body until the whole is enveloped, and every part is covered with several folds of the cloth. The ends are then sewed, to keep the whole firm and compact; or else a narrow bandage is wound over the whole, forming, ultimately, the exterior surface. The body, when thus enfolded and swathed, retains the profile of the human form; but, as in the Egyptian mummies, the legs are not folded separately, but together; and the arms also are not distinguished, but confined to the sides in the general envelope. Hence, it would be clearly impossible for a person thus treated to move his arms or legs, if restored to existence.
The word rendered grave-clothes denotes also the bands or clothes in which new-born infants are involved. He went forth, but his walking was impeded by the bands or clothes in which he was involved.
And his face … – This was a common thing when they buried their dead. See Joh 20:7. It is not known whether the whole face was covered in this manner, or only the forehead. In the Egyptian mummies it is only the forehead that is thus bound.
Loose him – Remove the bandages, so that he may walk freely. The effect of this miracle is said to have been that many believed on him. It may be remarked in regard to it that there could not be a more striking proof of the divine mission and power of Jesus. There could be here no possibility of deception:
- The friends of Lazarus believed him to be dead. In this they could not be deceived. There could have been among them no design to deceive.
- He was four days dead. It could not be a case, therefore, of suspended animation.
- Jesus was at a distance at the time of his death. There was, therefore, no agreement to attempt to impose on others.
- No higher power can be conceived than that of raising the dead.
- It was not possible to impose on his sisters, and to convince them that he was restored to life, if it was not really so.
- There were many present who were convinced also. God had so ordered it in his providence that to this miracle there should be many witnesses. There was no concealment, no jugglery, no secrecy. It was done publicly, in open day, and was witnessed by many who followed them to the grave, Joh 11:31.
- Others, who saw it, and did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah, went and told it to the Pharisees. But they did not deny that Jesus had raised up Lazarus. They could not deny it. The very ground of their alarm – the very reason why they went – was that he had actually done it. Nor did the Pharisees dare to call the fact in question. If they could have done it, they would. But it was not possible; for,
- Lazarus was yet alive Joh 12:10, and the fact of his resurrection could not be denied. Every circumstance in this account is plain, simple, consistent, bearing all the marks of truth. But if Jesus performed this miracle his religion is true. God would not give such power to an impostor; and unless it can be proved that this account is false, the Christian religion must be from God.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 44. Bound hand and foot with grave – clothes] Swathed about with rollers – , from , I cut. These were long slips of linen a few inches in breadth, with which the body and limbs of the dead were swathed, and especially those who were embalmed, that the aromatics might be kept in contact with the flesh. But as it is evident that Lazarus had not been embalmed, it is probable that his limbs were not swathed together, as is the constant case with those who are embalmed, but separately, so that he could come out of the tomb at the command of Christ, though he could not walk freely till the rollers were taken away. But some will have it that he was swathed exactly like a mummy, and that his coming out in that state was another miracle. But there is no need of multiplying miracles in this case: there was one wrought which was a most sovereign proof of the unlimited power and goodness of God. Several of the primitive fathers have adduced this resurrection of Lazarus as the model, type, proof, and pledge of the general resurrection of the dead.
Loose him, and let him go.] He would have the disciples and those who were at hand take part in this business, that the fullest conviction might rest on every person’s mind concerning the reality of what was wrought. He whom the grace of Christ converts and restores to life comes forth, at his call, from the dark, dismal grave of sin, in which his soul has long been buried: he walks, according to the command of Christ, in newness of life; and gives, by the holiness of his conduct, the fullest proof to all his acquaintance that he is alive from the dead.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The fashion of their dressing up the dead differeth, according to the fashion of several countries; among the Jews, we understand by this text, they tied a napkin about their head, and some clothes about their hands and feet. They wound the whole body in linen clothes with spices, Joh 19:40; this was (as is there said) their manner to bury. So, Act 5:6, the young men are said to have wound Ananias, and carried him out, and buried him. And this is that which certainly is meant here by these words,
bound hand and foot: and here is a second miracle, that one so wrapped and bound up should be able to move and come forth. Christ bids,
Loose him, and let him go, to evidence him truly recovered to life again, and that the miracle was perfectly wrought. About this miracle there are two curious questions started:
1. Whether the raising of Lazarus to life was done by the mere Divine power of Christ, or by the person of Christ; so as the human nature, being personally united to the Divine nature, had also a share in it; the Divine nature communicating its property of quickening the dead to the human nature? That it was the person of Christ that raised Lazarus, and he who did it was truly man and truly God, is out of doubt. But that there was any such communication of the properties of the Divine nature to the human nature, that it also had a share in this effect, is justly denied, and doubted by many great divines: but it is a question tending to no great profit for us to know.
2. Where Lazaruss soul was these four days wherein it was separated from the body? The Scripture hath not told us this, and it speaks too great curiosity to inquire too strictly. Though we are taught from the parable of Dives and Lazarus, that the souls of departed saints do ordinarily and immediately pass into heaven, or Abrahams bosom; yet what should hinder, but that in these cases, where it appears to have been the Divine will that the souls of persons departed should again be returned into their bodies in a short time, they might by a Divine power be kept under the custody of angels, until the time of such restoration of them.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
44. Jesus saith unto them, Loose himand let him goJesus will no more do this Himself than rollaway the stone. The one was the necessary preparation forresurrection, the other the necessary sequel to it. THELIFE-GIVING ACT ALONE HERESERVES TO HIMSELF.So in the quickening of the dead to spiritual life, humaninstrumentality is employed first to prepare the way, and then toturn it to account.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And he that was dead came forth,…. That is, he who had been dead, being now made alive, and raised up, and set on his feet, came out of the cave:
bound hand and foot with grave clothes; not that his hands were bound together, and much less his hands and feet together, with any bands or lists of cloth; but his whole body, as Nonnus expresses it, was bound with grave clothes from head to foot, according to the manner of the eastern countries, Jews, Egyptians, and others, who used to wrap up their dead in many folds of linen cloth, as infants are wrapped in swaddling bands: and their manner was to let down their arms and hands close by their sides, and wind up altogether from head to foot: so that there was another miracle besides that of raising him from the dead; that in such a situation, in which he could have no natural use of his hands and feet, he should rise up, stand on his feet, walk, and come forth thus bound, out of the cave:
and his face was bound about with a napkin; the use of which was not only to tie up the chin and jaws, but to hide the grim and ghastly looks of a dead corpse; and one of the same price and value was used by rich and poor: for it is said m,
“the wise men introduced a custom of using , “a napkin”, (the very word here used, which Nonnus says is Syriac,) of the same value, not exceeding a penny, that he might not be ashamed who had not one so good as another; and they cover the faces of the dead, that they might not shame the poor, whose faces were black with famine.”
For it seems n,
“formerly they used to uncover the faces of the rich, and cover the faces of the poor, because their faces were black through want, and the poor were ashamed; wherefore they ordered, that they should cover the faces of all, for the honour of the poor.”
Jesus saith unto them; to the servants that stood by:
loose him, and let him go; unwind the linen rolls about him, and set his hands and feet at liberty, and let him go to his own house.
m Maimon. Hilchot Ebel, c. 4. sect. 1, n T. Bab. Moed Katon, fol. 27. 1.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
He that was dead came forth ( ). Literally, “Came out the dead man,” (effective aorist active indicative and perfect active articular participle of ). Just as he was and at once.
Bound hand and foot ( ). Perfect passive participle of with the accusative loosely retained according to the common Greek idiom (Robertson, Grammar, p. 486), but literally “as to the feet and hands” (opposite order from the English). Probably the legs were bound separately.
With grave-clothes (). Or “with bands.” Instrumental case of this late and rare word (in Plutarch, medical papyrus in the form , and Pr 7:16). Only here in N.T.
His face ( ). Old word, but is usual in N.T. See Re 1:16 for another instance.
Was bound about (). Past perfect passive of , old verb to bind around, only here in N.T.
With a napkin (). Instrumental case of (Latin word sudarium from sudor, sweat). In N.T. here, John 20:7; Luke 19:20; Acts 19:12. Our handkerchief.
Loose him ( ). First aorist active imperative of . From the various bands.
Let him go ( ). Second aorist active imperative of and present active infinitive.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Grave – clothes [] . Literally, swathing – bands. Only here in the New Testament. In Joh 19:40; Joh 20:5, 7, ojqonia, linen bands, is used. A napkin [. ] . See on Luk 19:20.
It is interesting to compare this Gospel picture of sisterly affection under the shadow of death, with the same sentiment as exhibited in Greek tragedy, especially in Sophocles, by whom it is developed with wonderful power, both in the “Antigone” and in the “Electra.”
In the former, Antigone, the consummate female figure of the Greek drama, falls a victim to her love for her dead brother. Both here, and in the “Electra,” sisterly love is complicated with another and sterner sentiment : in the “Antigone” with indignant defiance of the edict which refuses burial to her brother; in the “Electra” with the long – cherished craving for vengeance. Electra longs for her absent brother Orestes, as the minister of retribution rather than as the solace of loneliness and sorrow. His supposed death is to her, therefore, chiefly the defeat of the passionate, deadly purpose of her whole life. Antigone lives for her kindred, and is sustained under her own sad fate by the hope of rejoining them in the next world. She believes in the permanence of personal existence.
“And yet I go and feed myself with hopes That I shall meet them, by my father loved, Dear to my mother, well – beloved of thee, Thou darling brother” (897 – 900).
And again, “Loved, I shall be with him whom I have loved Guilty of holiest crime. More time is mine In which to share the favor of the dead, Than that of those who live; for I shall rest Forever there” (73 – 76).
No such hope illuminates the grief of Electra.
“Ah, Orestes! Dear brother, in thy death thou slayest me; For thou art gone, bereaving my poor heart Of all the little hope that yet remained That thou wouldst come, a living minister Of vengeance for thy father and for me” (807 – 812).
And again, “If thou suggestest any hope from those So clearly gone to Hades, then on me, Wasting with sorrow, thou wilt trample more” (832 – 834).
When she is asked, “What! shall I ever bring the dead to life ?” she replies, “I meant not that : I am not quite so mad.”
In the household of Bethany, the grief of the two sisters, unlike that of the Greek maidens, is unmixed with any other sentiment, save perhaps a tinge of a feeling bordering on reproach that Jesus had not been there to avert their calamity. Comfort from the hope of reunion with the dead is not expressed by them, and is hardly implied in their assertion of the doctrine of a future resurrection, which to them, is a general matter having little or no bearing on their personal grief. In this particular, so far as expression indicates, the advantage is on the side of the Theban maiden. Though her hope is the outgrowth of her affection rather than of her religious training – a thought which is the child of a wish – she never loses her grasp upon the expectation of rejoining her beloved dead.
But the gospel story is thrown into strongest contrast with the classical by the truth of resurrection which dominates it in the person and energy of the Lord of life. Jesus enters at once as the consolation of bereaved love, and the eternal solution of the problem of life and death. The idea which Electra sneered at as madness, is here a realized fact. Beautiful, wonderful as is the action which the drama evolves out of the conflict of sisterly love with death, the curtain falls on death as victor. Into the gospel story Jesus brings a benefaction, a lesson, and a triumph. His warm sympathy, His comforting words, His tears at His friend ‘s tomb, are in significant contrast with the politic, timid, at times reproachful attitude of the chorus of Theban elders towards Antigone. The consummation of both dramas is unmitigated horror. Suicide solves the problem for Antigone, and Electra receives back her brother as from the dead, only to incite him to murder, and to gloat with him over the victims. It is a beautiful feature of the Gospel narrative that it seems, if we may so speak, to retire with an instinctive delicacy from the joy of that reunited household. It breaks off abruptly with the words, “Loose him, and let him go.” The imagination alone follows the sisters with their brother, perchance with Christ, behind the closed door, and hears the sacred interchanges of that wonderful communing. Tennyson, with a deep and truly Christian perception, has struck its key – note.
“Her eyes are homes of silent prayer, Nor other thought her mind admits But, he was dead, and there he sits! And He that brought him back is there. Then one deep love doth supersede All other, when her ardent gaze Roves from the living brother ‘s face And rests upon the Life indeed.” ” In Memoriam. “
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1 ) “And he that was dead came forth,” (ekselthen ho tethnekos) “The one who had died (the Lazarus) came out,” immediately out from the cave-grave where he had been laid, Joh 11:34; He came forth in obedience to his Lord’s bidding, alive, Joh 11:23-26.
2) “Bound hand and foot with graveclothes:(dedemenos tous poclas kai tas cheiras keiriais) “His hands and feet had been bound with bandages,” wrapped with and in graveclothes, with each limb separately wrapped with strips of linen, but limiting movement of a living body. He was loosed from the winding linen clothes, much like those wound about the body of Jesus at His burial, Joh 19:38-42; Mat 27:59; Mar 15:46; Luk 23:53.
3) “And his face was bound about with a napkin.” (kai he opsis autou soudario periededeto) “And his face had been covered and bound with a napkin,” much as that Jesus had when He was wrapped for burial and which was left at the grave after His resurrection, Joh 20:5-7. This detail indicates an eye-witness and John, this Gospel writer, was an eye-witness of the event, Joh 21:20; Joh 21:24; 1Jn 1:1.
4) “Jesus said unto them,” (legei autois ho lesous) “Jesus said directly to them,” to those who had removed the stone entrance at His command, Joh 11:39; Joh 11:41.
5) “Loose him, and let him go.” (lusate auton kai aphete auton hupagein) “You all loose him or release him, and allow (permit) him to go,” to go free from death’s bondage and bandages, that those at hand might both see and touch him, the better to confirm the miracle. Jesus had come to set the captives free, those seized by death, to demonstrate that He was the Son of God, that those believing in Him might be saved, Luk 4:18; Heb 2:9; Heb 2:15; Rev 1:18.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
44. Bound hand and foot with bandages. The Evangelist is careful to mention the napkin and bandages, in order to inform us that Lazarus went out of the tomb, in the same manner that he was laid in it. This mode of burying is retained to the present day by the Jews, who cover the body with a shroud, and wrap the head separately in a handkerchief.
Loose him, and let him go. To magnify the glory of the miracle, it only remained that the Jews should even touch with their hands that Divine work which they had beheld with their eyes. For Christ might have removed the bandages with which Lazarus was bound, or made them to give way of themselves; but Christ intended to employ the hands of the spectators as his witnesses.
The Papists act an excessively ridiculous part, by endeavoring to draw auricular confession from this passage. They say, “Christ, after having restored Lazarus to life, commanded his disciples to loose him; and therefore it is not enough for us to be reconciled to God, unless the Church also pardon our sins.” But whence do they conjecture that the disciples were enjoined to loose Lazarus? On the contrary, we may infer that the order was given to the Jews, in order to take from them every ground of doubt or hesitation.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(44) And he that was dead came forth.Wonder at a wonder within a wonder! is Basils comment on these words; and many of the older expositors regard the power to move, when bound hand and foot, as itself a miracle. But this seems not to be necessary, and if not necessary, is not to be resorted to. (Comp. Note on Joh. 6:21.) The grave-clothes may have been bound round the limbs separately, as in the Egyptian mummies, and this would not prevent motion; or (and this is more probable) the body may have been wrapped in a linen cloth, which encompassed the whole, except the head (Mat. 27:59), but still left motion possible. The word rendered grave-clothes is used nowhere in the New Testament except in this passage. It means properly the bands or straps by which the linen sheet was fastened to the body, and which kept the spice from falling out. (Comp. Joh. 19:40.) We find it used elsewhere for straps and thongs generally. They were made of rushes, linen,, and other materials. The word is used once in the Greek of the Old Testament, where it means the belts by which beds are girded (Pro. 7:16).
And his face was bound about with a napkin.For the word napkin, comp. Note on Luk. 19:20. It means here the cloth placed round the forehead and under the chin, but probably not covering the face.
Loose him, and let him go.This command is in itself strong proof that the earlier part of the verse is not to be interpreted as a narrative of miraculous incidents.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
44. Bound hand and foot Literally, bound as to his hands and as to his feet. So that his feet and hands were bandaged separately, as is the case with Egyptian mummies. Yet his hands were so bound that he could not unbind himself. There is no need of supposing, with some ancient commentators, a miracle in his being able to walk bound.
Whether this man, who had seen the spirit-world related, or not any of the secrets of that abode; whether all who inquired of him, or all save a chosen few or one, found in him a mysterious repugnance to utter a syllable upon the subject; whether he felt silenced by the consciousness that he had seen things not lawful for man to utter; or whether on his return to the light of the sun all traces of the other world were erased from his mind, we know not. To reveal our future was not the purpose of his return. Yet we can hardly doubt that the very choice of the name Lazarus, for the parable of the rich man and the beggar, is significant that one might rise from the dead without convincing the sceptic, as the conduct of some of the Jews on this occasion showed. It is an early legend of the Church, that Lazarus was now thirty years of age, and survived this event another thirty.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Joh 11:44. And he that was dead came forth, It would have been the least part of the miracle, had Jesus made the rollers, with which Lazarus was bound, to unloose themselves from around his body, before he came forth: but he brought him out just as he was lying, and ordered the spectators to loose him, that they might be the better convinced of the miracle. Accordingly, in taking off the grave-clothes, they had the fullest evidence, both of his death and resurrection; for on the one hand the manner in which it is supposed he was swathed, (see ch. Joh 19:40.) must of itself have killed him in a little time, had he been alive when buried, and consequently have demonstrated beyond all exception, that Lazarus was several days dead, before Jesus called him forth. Some, however, suppose, that the body was not bound over with bandages, but only wrapped up in a large linen cloth, tied at the hands and feet, [, a word which Phavorinus explains by , sepulchral bands,] not altogether, perhaps, unlike what is customarywith us; and this is the more probable, as we may reasonably conclude, both from the words of Martha, Joh 11:39 and from this verse, that Lazarus was not embalmed, when it was usual to make use of such bandages. However, be this as it may, in taking off the grave-clothes, the linen might offer both to their eyes and smell abundant proofs of his putrefaction, and by that means convince them, that he had not been in a deliquium, or swoon, but was really departed. On the other hand, by his lively countenance appearing when the napkin was removed, his fresh colour, his active vigour, and his brisk walking, they who camenear him and handled him, were made sensible that he was in perfect health, and had an opportunity to try the truth of the miracle by the closest examination. It may be proper just to reply here to a difficulty suggested upon this history of Lazarus’s resurrection. It is said that, when Jesus called upon Lazarus to come forth, he came out bound hand and foot; but deists, talking of this miracle, commonly ask with a sneer, how could he come out of a grave, who was bound in that manner? The answer however, is obvious. The reader is first desired to consider the form of the Jewish sepulchres, as described in the note on Luk 24:4 and then to reflect that the evangelist means not that Lazarus walked out of the sepulchre; but that, lying on his back, he raised himself into a sitting posture, then, putting his legs out of his niche or cell, slid down and stood upright on the floor; all which he might easily do, notwithstanding his arms were bound close to his body, and his legs were tied strait together by means of the shroud and rollers, or bandages, or whatever they were with which he was confined. Accordingly, when he was come forth, it is said, that Jesus ordered them to loose him, and let him go; a circumstance plainly importing, that the historian knew that Lazarus could not walk till he was unbound. If the Jews buried as the Egyptians did, the napkin did not cover the face of Lazarus, but only went round his forehead, and under his chin; so that he could easily see; but even on supposition that it was wound about his face, he could easily have raised himself out of his niche without seeing, in the manner above described.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
44 And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.
Ver. 44. And he that was dead ] But where was his soul therewhile? In manu Dei, In the hand of God, not in purgatory, as Papists say, for that is against their own principles. They send none to purgatory but men of a middle make, between just and unjust. Now Lazarus was surely a very good man, else had he not been so dear to Christ. But that purgatory is the pope’s invention, as Tyndale hath it: hear St Augustine, Nemo se decipiat, fratres: duo enim loca sunt, et tertius non est visus. Qui cum Christo regnare non meruit, cum diabolo, absque dubitatione, peribit.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
44. ] , , (see ref.), Suidas. , (fascia), , Moschopulus (in Kuinoel). It does not appear whether the bands were wound about each limb, as in the Egyptian mummies, so as merely to impede motion, or were loosely wrapped round both feet and both hands, so as to hinder any free movement altogether. The latter seems most probable, and has been supposed by many, e.g. Basil, Homil. de gratiar. actione, c. 5, vol. iii. p. 29, , , . Ancient pictures represent Lazarus gliding forth from the tomb, not stepping: and that apparently is right. The appears to have tied up his chin.
, probably, to his home.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Joh 11:44 . , “And out came the dead man,” , “bound feet and hands with grave-bands,” , apparently the linen bandages with which the corpse was swathed. Opinions are fully given in Lampe. “And his face was bound about with a napkin.” Cf. Joh 20:7 . “The trait marks an eye-witness,” Westcott. . “Jesus says to them, ‘Loose him and let him go away’.” He did not require support, and he could not relish the gaze of the throng in his present condition.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
he that was dead. Greek. ho tethnekos, the dead man. Compare Luk 7:12.
graveclothes. Greek. keiriai. Only used here in N.T. In the Septuagint it is used in Pro 7:16, as the rendering of the Hebrew marebaddim. Originally it meant a bed-girth, and so any kind of wrapping. Here, = swathings.
napkin. Greek soudarion. A Latin word, sudarium, or sweat-cloth. Used only here, Joh 20:7. Luk 19:20, and Act 19:12.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
44.] , , (see ref.), Suidas. , (fascia), , Moschopulus (in Kuinoel). It does not appear whether the bands were wound about each limb, as in the Egyptian mummies, so as merely to impede motion,-or were loosely wrapped round both feet and both hands, so as to hinder any free movement altogether. The latter seems most probable, and has been supposed by many, e.g. Basil, Homil. de gratiar. actione, c. 5, vol. iii. p. 29, , , . Ancient pictures represent Lazarus gliding forth from the tomb, not stepping: and that apparently is right. The appears to have tied up his chin.
, probably, to his home.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Joh 11:44. , feet) The two feet had been swathed up together, or else each separately.-) The same word occurs in LXX. Pro 7:16, I have decked my bed with coverings [-].
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Joh 11:44
Joh 11:44
He that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with grave-clothes; and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.-His body had been prepared for the grave as bodies usually were, so he came forth so clothed. Adam Clarke says: This binding was with long strips of linen, in which the body was wrapped from head to foot, binding the arms close to the body and the legs and feet together. The mummies found in the ancient tombs are so swathed, leaving only the head and face exposed. One could rise and walk with difficulty thus wrapped up. So he walked but little until Jesus said to them, Loose him, and let him go. This shows that he could walk but little, and with difficulty, while bound; and he could not well unloose himself, as his hands were bound to his body. Who unloosed him we do not know, but any would have gladly obeyed such directions. Probably it was the disciples. Those who thus handled him were made to realize more fully his resurrection, and could bear testimony that they handled him and took his grave-clothes off him. Jesus used human agencies where they could do the work. [Jesus just before his own death and burial and in the face of his enemies works a crowning miracle. He demonstrates that he is the resurrection and the life. It is worked under such circumstances that the most captious cannot question the reality of either the death or the resurrection.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
he that: Joh 11:25, Joh 11:26, Joh 5:21, Joh 5:25, Joh 10:30, Gen 1:3, 1Sa 2:6, Psa 33:9, Eze 37:3-10, Hos 13:14, Act 20:9-12, Phi 3:21, Rev 1:18
bound: “Swathed about with rollers” or bandages, [Strong’s G2750], long strips of linen, a few inches in breadth, brought round the [Strong’s G4616], or sheet of linen in which the corpse was involved, and by which the , or spices, were kept in contact with the flesh. In reply to sceptical objections, it is sufficient to observe, that he who could raise Lazarus from the dead, could, with a much less exertion of power, have so loosened or removed the bandages of his feet and legs as to have rendered it practicable for him to come forth. Tittman well observes, that Lazarus was restored not only to life but also to health, as appears from the alacrity of his motion; and this would constitute a new miracle. Joh 20:5, Joh 20:7
Loose: Joh 11:39, Mar 5:43, Luk 7:15
Reciprocal: 2Ki 4:31 – not awaked 2Ki 4:35 – and the child opened 2Ki 13:21 – touched Job 40:13 – bind Mat 11:5 – the dead Mar 5:41 – Damsel Luk 7:14 – Young Luk 8:55 – her spirit Joh 11:11 – awake Joh 11:23 – Thy Joh 12:1 – Bethany Joh 12:2 – Lazarus Joh 19:40 – wound Act 9:40 – she opened Eph 5:14 – arise
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
4
Even after reviving *Lazarus from death, it required miraculous power to enable him to come out of the tomb, for he had been bound hand and foot. That is why Jesus instructed them to loose him., and let him go.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.
[With graveclothes, etc.] the evangelist seems so particular in mentioning the graveclothes; wherewith Lazarus was bound hand and foot, and also the napkin that had covered his face, on purpose to hint us a second miracle in this great miracle. The dead man came forth, though bound hand and foot with his graveclothes, and blinded with the napkin.
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels
Joh 11:44. And he that was dead Greek, , he that had been dead; came forth The dead man heard the voice of the Son of God, and came forth immediately. For he did not revive slowly, and by degrees, as the dead child did which was raised by the Prophet Elisha; but the effect instantly following the command, plainly showed whose the power was that reanimated the breathless clay. As the people present were not so much as thinking of a resurrection, they must have been greatly surprised when they heard our Lord pray for it. The cry, Lazarus, come forth, must have astonished them still more, and raised their curiosity to a prodigious pitch. But when they saw him spring out alive and in perfect health, that had been rotting in the grave four days, they could not but be agitated with many different passions, and overwhelmed with inexpressible amazement. Bound hand and foot with grave-clothes Which were wrapped round each hand and each foot. And his face was bound about with a napkin
If the Jews buried as the Egyptians did, the face was not covered with it, but it only went round the forehead, and under the chin, so that he might easily see his way. It would have been the least part of the miracle, had Jesus made the rollers, wherewith Lazarus was bound, unloose themselves from around his body before he came forth. But he brought him out just as he was lying, and ordered the spectators to loose him, that they might be the better convinced of the miracle. Accordingly, in taking off the grave- clothes, they had the fullest evidence, both of his death and resurrection. For, on the one hand, in stripping him, the linen would offer both to their eyes and smell abundant proofs of his putrefaction, (Joh 11:39,) and by that means convince them that he had not been in a deliquium, but was really departed: and on the other, by his lively countenance appearing when the napkin was removed, his fresh colour, his active vigour, and his brisk walking, they who came near him and handled him, were made sensible that he was in perfect health, and had an opportunity to try the truth of the miracle, by the closest examination.
Every reader must be sensible, that there is something incomparably beautiful in the whole of our Lords behaviour on this occasion. After having given such an astonishing instance of his power, he did not speak one word in his own praise, either directly or indirectly. He did not chide the disciples for their unwillingness to accompany him into Judea. He did not rebuke the Jews for having, in former instances, maliciously detracted from the lustre of his miracles, every one of which derived additional credit from this incontestable wonder. He did not say how much they were to blame for persisting in their infidelity, though he well knew what they would do. He did not intimate, even in the most distant manner, the obligations which Lazarus and his sisters were laid under by this signal favour. He did not upbraid Martha and Mary with the discontent they had expressed, at his having delayed to come to the relief of their brother. Nay, he did not so much as put them in mind of the mean notion they had entertained of his power; but, always consistent with himself, he was on this, as on every other occasion, a pattern of perfect humility and absolute self-denial. Macknight.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Verse 44
Bound hand and foot; entirely enveloped in grave clothes.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
Ver. 44.-And he that was dead came forth, &c. The power of the voice of Christ is made manifest, which instantly raised up the dead man, so that the things spoken might be done.
Grave-clothes, bindings for the sepulchre, with which the hands and feet of the dead man are bound, so that they may be inserted and decently composed in a narrow receptacle. The Arabic translates linen cloths; Nonnus, “he had his whole body from foot to head bound with manifold wrappings for the grave.”
And his face was bound about with a napkin: in the manner of the Jews, that the fact of death might be signified, and the pale and fearful visage of the dead might strike no one with horror.
You will ask, Why did Christ, in raising the dead man, not at the same time unloose his bonds?
SS. Augustine, Chrysostom, Cyril, Leontius, and others reply that the Jews might see that the same Lazarus was raised up, who a little before had been swathed as dead, by themselves, with those bands and napkin, and was not a phantom, or some other man hidden in the sepulchre, to make a feigned appearance.
Secondly, that the miracle was twofold: that the first was the raising up the dead man; the second that he when raised up should immediately walk with his feet bound and his face covered, and come forth from his sepulchre straight to Jesus.
Typically, S. Gregory: Our Redeemer raised up a maiden in the house, a young man outside the gate [of the city], but Lazarus in the sepulchre. So he lies as it were still dead in the house, who is secretly sunk in sin. He is, as it were, brought outside the gate, whose iniquity reveals itself even to the shamelessness of public commission. But he is weighed down with the mound of the grave, who in the committing of wickedness is loaded with the weight of habit. But these He pities and recalls to life, in that very often by Divine grace He enlightens with the brightness of His countenance those dead not only in secret but even in open sins, and oppressed by the weight of evil custom.
S. Augustine says: Lazarus going forth from the sepulchre is the soul drawing back from carnal vices, but bound, that is, not yet freed from pains and troubles of the flesh, while it dwells in the body; the face is covered with a napkin, for we cannot have full understanding of things in this life; but it is said, “Loose him,” for after this life the veilings are taken away, that we may see face to face.
Jesus saith unto them, Loose him and let him go. To his home. Jesus addressed this command to the Jews, that they, handling Lazarus, might as it were touch and handle with their hands the miracle that was wrought by Him, and [see] that he was raised up.
Symbolically, Christ sends sinners bound with the bands of their sins to bishops and priests, that they may be released and absolved, saying, Whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven (Mat 18:18). So also S. Augustine. “What is it,” he says, “to loose and let him go? What ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.”
Finally, there is no doubt (though John is silent upon it) that Lazarus rendered great thanks to Christ; and that he dedicated his life to Him from whom he had received it. He became a disciple, a preacher, and the Bishop of Marseilles.
Ver. 45.-Then many of the Jews . . . believed on Him. For they were convinced by the evidence of the miraculous raising of Lazarus, so great and wonderful, that Jesus was a prophet, yea, more, the Messiah, as He professed.
Ver. 46.-But some of them went their ways, &c. S. Augustine doubts whether they did this with good or evil intention; whether to announce to them that they might believe, or to betray Him that they might use severity, as says the Gloss. For they might do this with a good intention, namely, in order that the Pharisees, if they could not bring themselves to believe in Christ, should at least have a milder disposition towards Him, as Origen is of opinion. But all others think that they did it with an evil intention. Theophilus and Leontius add that they intended to accuse Christ as being sacrilegious, and even so far as that He had dug up the body of a dead person. Great then was their malice and malignity, with which they repaid Christ for so great a benefit, [inflicting on Him] so great an outrage-for a miracle blasphemy, for life death; since they denounced Him to the Pharisees to be condemned to the cross.
Ver. 47.-Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, &c.
What do we? (What does it behove us to do? Syriac, What shall we do?)
For this man doeth many miracles. It behoved them to be convinced by so many signs and miracles of Jesus, and to believe Him to be Messiah, the Son of God; but blinded by hate and envy, they say and do the contrary, and studiously avoid condescending even to name Him, but say, This man, as if He were a common and worthless person (“They still call Him man,” says Chrysostom, “who had received so great a proof of His Godhead”), and consult concerning His murder, and propose to bereave of life Him who had restored life to Lazarus, and from whom they ought to seek and hope for life eternal. They did not say “Let us believe,” says S. Augustine, “but, lost men as they were, thought more of how they might injure Him, and destroy Him, than of how they might consult for their own safety, that they perish not. Their foolish heart was darkened, so that they forced on the destruction, present and lasting, of themselves and their whole nation.” “What foolishness and blindness,” says Origen, “that they should think themselves able to effect anything against Him whom they testify to have done many miracles, as if He were not able to deliver Himself out of their snares!”
Ver. 48.–If we let Him thus alone, &c. i.e., the Romans will destroy Judea and the whole Jewish race. S. Chrysostom and Theophylact by place understand Jerusalem, the metropolis of Judea, and thence the whole realm. But Maldonatus understands the Temple; for the chief priests feared that this with its victims and temporal gains should be taken from them by the Romans.
All will believe on Him. See here the genius of envy, and an effect worthy of it: the chief priests wishing to obscure the glory of Christ, display it the more, in saying that all men will believe on Him.
And the Romans shall come and take away our place and nation. Some are of opinion that they thought this, viz., If all believe on Jesus, all will depart from us, our Judaism, synagogue, and state, to Him; and so there will be none to contend for us against the Roman attempts to subjugate us.
But others more probably, If all believe Jesus to be the King and Messiah of the Jews, they will irritate against us the Romans, the lords of Judea, because we have made for ourselves a new King and Messiah, and fallen away from Tiberius Csar to Him; wherefore armed men will come and take away, that is, capture, ravage, and destroy Jerusalem and Judea and the entire Jewish race and nation. So Chrysostom. “They wished,” he says, “to excite the people, so as to bring Him under the risk of being suspected to be a pretender to royalty; i.e., if the Romans shall see Jesus heading throngs of people, they will suspect a pretender, and destroy the state. But what armed men and horsemen did Christ ever take about with Him? Only envy and hate blinded them, so that they plainly erred, and reasoned wrongly.”
Ver. 49.-And one of them named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them. While the rest were consulting and not grasping the case nor finding what it was needful to do, Caiaphas as high priest proffers advice, and clearly defines the matter. It is said, high priest that year, because, although according to the law in Exodus (Exo 29:29) the high priesthood ought to last for life, and after that to devolve upon the eldest son, according to the law of birth, the Roman rulers used to change the high priests frequently, either according to their own will, or for a price received from those who sought the office (Josephus, Antiq., lib. xviii. cap. 2), When Tiberius succeeded Augustus Csar in the empire, “by him,” he says, “Valerius Gratus was sent to succeed Annius Rufus as procurator of Judea. This man deprived Ananus of the high priesthood, and appointed Ismael the son of Tabus to be high priest. He also deposed him in a little time, and transferred the honour to Eleazar the son of Ananus, the former high priest, and when he had held it for a year, Gratus deprived him of it, and assigned it to Simon the son of Camithus; and he also having completed a year in the dignity, was made to yield it to Joseph, who was surnamed Caiaphas.”
The high priesthood was not therefore an annual office among the Jews, as S. Augustine infers from this place; but was changed sometimes in fewer years, sometimes in more, and sometimes in the course of the same year.
Ye know nothing at all, &c. Ye, as if you were common and humble people, are foolish, ye do not understand the matter at all, ye do not grasp what it is needful to do, ye forward nothing, ye explain nothing, ye suggest no pertinent counsel; but I as high priest am enlightened by God, I set right the matter with a word, I give the best advice, and clear up the whole by saying: “It is expedient that one man, that is, Jesus, although He is accused of no crime, although He is innocent and a Prophet, and the doer of so great a miracle, should die (that is, be put to death by you) for the people, that is, so that the people because of Him should not be brought into suspicion with the Romans, nor that the Romans, because of Jesus regarded as Messiah and King of the Jews, should take away their place and nation; and thus the entire race will not perish, but when He is taken away, will remain safe and entire.” This was therefore the impious, false, and unjust judgment of Caiaphas, that it was expedient for the safety of the people, that, though innocent, Christ should be put to death, so that the Romans might not use severity to Judea and the Jews on His account. His reasoning was, that it was better for one Jesus to die than many; it is better that one should perish, than the whole community; i.e., why then do ye delay? why deliberate? It is not doubtful to me that it is expedient for one to die, Jesus, in place of all the Jews.
Origen says, “They had learned nothing who had not learned Jesus; as it is said, If thou knowest Jesus, it suffices, though thou knowest not other things. If thou knowest not Jesus, it is nought, though thou knowest all things besides.”
Ver. 51.–And this spake he . . . that Jesus should die for that nation: i.e., of the Jews.
Note, that Caiaphas, with the other chief priests being most hostile to Christ, wished out of private hate towards Him to speak out distinctly the same thing which the others secretly hinted at, but did not expressly state; namely, that Christ must be taken out of the way for the safety of the people, that they might not be attacked by the Romans, as I have said. But the Spirit turned the force of his words, when he wished to speak in this sense, as high priest and head of the Church, to others in which he should express the contrary meaning, and should describe and strengthen a very true faith in Christ; namely, that it was expedient that Christ should die for the people, i.e., for the salvation of the people; and by His death, as if by the payment of a price, should redeem them from sin, from the devil, from death, and from hell, those, I say, who would otherwise perish eternally. For the words of Caiaphas properly and precisely signify this. For otherwise, according to the wicked intention towards Christ in the mind of Caiaphas, he ought rather to have said thus: “It is expedient that one man, Jesus, should die, rather than the whole people:” but now he does not say rather than but for (in behalf of) the people; which properly signifies for the salvation of the people, that He may save the people: and although Caiaphas did not understand this, much less intend it, yet it being wonderfully suggested by the Holy Spirit, S. John here takes notice of it; and as he takes notice of it, so other sincere and honest men who were listening to Caiaphas might have noticed the same thing; and just so may we.
Learn from this the great care which God has of His Church, and how He assists the Pontiff who is her head, especially under the new Law, which Christ her Head and Spouse instituted, sanctioned, and rules, lest at any time the Church which is His bride should go astray from the true faith.
Further, because Caiaphas did not understand this mystery he was not properly a prophet; and Origen observes that the Holy Ghost spoke through his mouth as the angel spoke to the disobedient Balaam by the mouth of the ass (Numb. xxii.). Caiaphas, then, most wickedly twisted the words of the Holy Spirit to the death of Christ. Wherefore S. Chrysostom says that the Holy Spirit moved the tongue of Caiaphas, not his heart.
You will say, Then Caiaphas here erred in the faith. I reply by denying the consequence. Yea he formally declared the true faith, namely, that it was expedient that Christ should die for the salvation of the world, as I have said. And though it be that he himself did not understand this, nor mean to say it-for he intended that Christ should be cut off lest, because of Him, the people (of the Jews) should be destroyed by the Romans-yet herein was his error contrary to justice and piety, and not in a matter pertaining to the faith. His error had to do with a political question, whether, namely, Christ should be put to death for the State, or not. Besides, the Jewish High Priest had not that infallible assistance of the Holy Ghost which the Christian High Priests have from Christ and after Christ. It is, moreover, especially to be borne in mind that at that time, Christ being come, the Jewish Synagogue was beginning to fall, and Christ’s Church to rise up in its place. For shortly after this Caiaphas with the whole council of the Sanhedrin proclaimed Jesus to be guilty of death as a false Messiah. This was an error in the Faith. Wherefore their Synagogue then ceased to be the Church of God, and began to be the synagogue of Satan which denied and slew the Christ which was sent by God.
Ver. 52.–And not for that nation only, &c. It is expedient that Christ should die; not only for His and our nation, that is, for the Jews, but also for all the nations dispersed throughout the whole world, and who should believe in Him. For these are called children of God, not in actual fact, but in the foreknowledge and predestination of God; because, that is to say, they were hereafter to be, by the grace of God, faithful men and saints, and therefore sons of God. So SS. Augustine and Chrysostom. This is what Christ predicted in chap. x. ver. 16: Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold (not of the Jewish synagogue) them also I must bring, and there shall be one fold, and one Shepherd.
Ver. 53.-Then from that day forth, &c. See here plainly appears the unrighteous disposition and meaning of Caiaphas and his associates.
Ver. 54.-Jesus therefore walked no more openly among the Jews, i.e., freely, openly, publicly. S. Cyril says: “As God He knew what the Jews had determined on, though none of them declared it; as man He withdrew Himself, because the hour of His death, decreed by His Father, had not yet come.” He did this to give an example to us, of avoiding peril to life by flight.
But went thence, &c. Leontius thinks Ephraim was Bethlehem, in which Christ had been born; but this seems unlikely, because Bethlehem was near to Jerusalem, and Jesus knew that He would be specially sought there by the chief priests. S. Jerome, and after him Jansenius, think it was Ephron (2Ch 13:19). Others think that Ephraim was situated above Jericho, and beside the desert there; but Adrichomius places it about five miles towards the east from Bethel, about seven hours’ [journey] distant from Jerusalem, beside the desert of Hai, not far from the brook Cherith, to which Elijah, flying from Jezebel, withdrew, and was fed there by ravens (1 Kings xvii. 5). Jesus withdrew thither, as well that He might avoid the rage of the chief priests for the time, as that He might have leisure in that retirement for prayer and contemplation, and thus strengthen and arm Himself for His approaching death, for the arduous contest with the chief priests-yea, more, with Lucifer-when He was upon the Cross.
Ephraim is symbolically the type of the Gentile Church. So Origen says: “Jesus was lately dwelling among the Jews, the Divine Word, that is to say, through the prophets; but He departed, He is not among them, for He has entered a hamlet which is almost deserted, of which it is said, ‘Many are the sons of the deserted one more than of the married:’ for Ephraim is interpreted fertility. But Ephraim was the brother of Manasseh, of an elder people given over to forgetfulness; for after a people devoted to forgetfulness had been passed over, abundance has come forth from the Gentiles. The Lord then, departing from the Jews, came to a land nigh to the desert, a city called fruitful, the Church of the whole earth, and there He tarries with His disciples even until now.”
Typically, Ephraim, as situated beside the desert, is the symbol of a holy soul which has leisure for solitude and prayer; for this becomes Ephraim-that is, fruitful in good works: wherefore Jesus tarries in it by His abundant grace.
Ver. 55.-And the Jews’ Passover was nigh at hand: viz., the last Passover to Christ, at which He Himself, as the Paschal Lamb, was sacrificed for the salvation of the world; and therefore He eagerly waited for it. The Syrians for Pascha say Pezcho, which is interpreted gladness; because this feast was more joyful than the others, even as to Christians it is so in the highest degree, because of our redemption made upon the Cross, and because of the resurrection.
And many went out of the country up to Jerusalem before the Passover, to purify themselves; i.e., to cleanse themselves by sacrifices and ceremonies from all actual uncleanness, and to prepare themselves by prayers and sacrifices to celebrate and eat the Passover rightly, as says S. Thomas and Jansen.
Ver. 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? Wherefore did Jesus not come, according to His custom, to this common feast of the Passover? Certainly because as God He knew beforehand the snares prepared for Him there by the scribes. S. Augustine, Chrysostom, &c., think that this was the question of the chief priests, Pharisees, and of their adherents and assistants, who had determined to apprehend Jesus, and therefore began indignantly to demand: Why has Jesus not come to the feast of the Passover? Is this the way ye neglect the Passover? Will He be thus a contemner and violator of the law, the very charge which we bring against Him? Then why does He not present Himself on these days before the Passover, and purify Himself as all others do, and so prepare Himself for so great a feast?
END OF VOL. V.