Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 18:34
Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?
34. answered him ] Omit ‘him:’ the introductions to Joh 18:34-36 are alike in form and are solemn in their brevity. The Synoptists give merely a portion of the reply in Joh 18:37.
tell it thee ] ‘It’ is not in the original and need not be supplied. Jesus claims a right to know the author of the charge. Moreover the meaning of the title, and therefore the truth of it, would depend on the person who used it. In Pilate’s sense He was not King; in another sense He was.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Of thyself – From any conviction of your own mind, or any apprehension of danger. During all the time in which you have been praetor, have you seen anything in me that has led you to apprehend sedition or danger to the Roman power? This evidently was intended to remind Pilate that nothing was proved against him, and to caution him against being influenced by the malicious accusations of others. Jesus demanded a just trial, and claimed that Pilate should not be influenced by any reports that he might have heard of him.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 34. Sayest thou this thing of thyself] That is, Is it because my enemies thus accuse me, or because thou hast any suspicion of me, that thou askest this question?
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Our Saviour neither affirms nor denies: though we are bound, whenever we speak, to speak the truth, yet we are not bound at all times to speak the whole truth. Our Saviour desireth to be satisfied from Pilate, whether he asked him as a private person for his own satisfaction, or as a judge, having received any such accusation against him? For if he asked him as a judge, he was bound to call them to the proof of what they had charged him with.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
34. Jesus answered . . . Sayest thouthis of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?an importantquestion for our Lord’s case, to bring out whether the word “King“were meant in a political sense, with which Pilate had a rightto deal, or whether he were merely put up to it by Hisaccusers, who had no claims to charge Him but such as were of apurely religious nature, with which Pilate had nothing to do.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Jesus answered him, sayest thou this thing of thyself,…. That he was the king of the Jews: Christ’s meaning is, whether he asserted this from the sentiments of his own mind; or moved the question from anything he himself had observed, which might give him just ground to suspect that he had, or intended to set up himself as the king of that nation:
or did others tell it thee of me? Whether the Jews had not intimated some such thing to him, out of malice and ill will? not but that Christ full well knew where the truth of this lay; but he was desirous of convincing Pilate of his weakness, if he so judged of himself, and of his imprudence and hastiness, if he took up this from others; and also to expose the baseness and wickedness of the Jews, to charge him with this, when they themselves would have made him a temporal king, and he refused; and when he had not only paid tribute himself to Caesar, but had exhorted them to do the like.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Of thyself ( ). Whether a sincere inquiry on Pilate’s part or a trap from the Sanhedrin.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “Jesus answered him,” (apekrithe lesous) “Jesus responded,” to him, respectfully.
2) “Sayest thou this thing of thyself,” (aph’ heauton su touto legeis) “Do you say this thing of yourself,” for the wise men had recognized His birth as that of a promised king, Mat 2:2-6; Gen 49:10. Is this idea of my being king of the Jews yours, or did someone plant this in your mind? is the idea. If he had been told that Jesus claimed to be a king, Pilate was to make inquiry only in a political sense, and the answer was “no.” He was not a political king, competing with the Roman governor.
3) “Or did others tell it of me?” (he alloi eipon soi peri emou) “Or have others told you (this) concerning me?” If the Jews had suggested it, His rely, in a sense they should have understood, was “yes,” of the seed of David, of the tribe of Judah; But He sought no anointing, no political following, and no throne or subjects, to then follow Him on earth, and they all knew it, Luk 1:31-33; 1Co 15:24.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(34) Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?The most probable interpretation of the question is that which regards it as establishing a distinction between the title King of the Jews as spoken by Pilate and the same title as spoken by Jesus. In the political sense in which Pilate would use it, and in this sense only the claim could be brought against Him in Roman law, He was not King of the Jews. In the theocratic sense in which a Jew would use that title, He was King of the Jews.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
34. Of thyself Does Pilate ask the question after the royalty of Jesus in a Roman, or a Hebrew sense? If the former, then Jesus claims not to be a king: that is, a political king. If in the Hebrew sense, then he asks, “Are you the Messiah?” the Anointed Prince of the realm of holiness? then truly he is a king; a king of whom all earthly kings are but a shadow.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Jesus answered, “Do you say this of yourself, or did others tell it to you about me?”.
Jesus’ replied with a question. His reply was not direct because a direct reply would not have been the truth, for while He was the Messianic king He was not a king in the way meant by Pilate. So He asked, Was it Pilate who was saying so, or someone else?
This set Pilate aback. He could see that this was no belligerent pretender but a calm, self-assured, rational person and he was a little disconcerted. He had been expecting an easy time from a belligerent brigand. Now he was faced with something else. He did not want to get involved with Jewish internal quarrels. He did not understand them. So he took the same approach, expressing his clear contempt for the Jews in his question.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Joh 18:34-36. Sayest thou this thing of thyself, “Dost thou ask this question of thine own accord, because thou thinkest I have affected regal power; or dost thou ask it according to the information of the priests, who affirm that I have acknowledged myself to be a king?” Of course the omniscient God-man knew what had happened; but he spake to the governor after this manner, because, being in the palace when the priests accused him without, he had not, as man, heard what they said. Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? “Dost thou think that I am acquainted, or that I concern myself with your religious opinions, expectations, and disputes? Your own rulers have delivered you up as a seditious person; one who assumes the title of king: what have you done to merit this charge of sedition?” Jesus answered,“Though I have acknowledged that I am a king, yet I am no raiser of sedition; for my kingdom is not of this world: had it been so, my servants would have fought. I should have endeavoured to establish myself on the throne by force of arms, and would have fought against the Jews when they came to apprehend me: but as I have done neither, it is evident that the kingdom which I claim is not of this world.” It may be objected, that the number of Christ’s disciples, had they all been assembled in arms, could have been no match for the Jewish and Roman power at Jerusalem: but it is to be remembered, that the populace appeared zealously on his side but a few days before; and the reason of their turning against him was, his not assuming a temporal kingdom, as they certainly expected he would have done. And we may further add, that a very small body of forces, under a leader endowed with such miraculous powers as Jesus had lately exercised, or rather under Omnipotence itself, might have been sufficient to vanquish all the Roman legions. See Joh 6:15.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?
Ver. 34. Sayest thou this of thyself ] As who should say, If thou dost this of thyself, what reason is it that thou shouldest be both judge and witness? if others have done it, why are not mine accusers brought face to face? If to be accused be enough to make a man guilty, none shall be innocent. Judges are to proceed secundum allegata et probata. acording to the chages and what can be proven.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
34. ] On this whole interview, see note on Luk 23:3-4 .
I regard this question . . . . as intended to distinguish the senses of the word King as applied to Jesus: and of course not (De Wette, Lcke) for the information of Him who asked it, but to bring out this distinction in Pilate’s mind. If he asked of himself , the word could certainly have but one meaning, and that one would be wrongly applied; if from information derived from the Jews, this very fact would open the way to the true meaning in which He was King of the Jews. Stier and Ebrard think there may be some reference in to a momentary earnestness in Pilate’s own mind, a suspicion that his prisoner was what he was charged with being (see ch. Joh 19:8 ; Joh 19:12 ), from the mention of which he immediately ( Joh 18:35 ) recoils, and implies the other side of the dilemma.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Joh 18:34 . Jesus answers by asking: ; Pilate’s reply, “Am I a Jew?” precludes all interpretations, however inviting (see especially Alford and Oscar Holtzmann), but the simple one: “Do you make this inquiry from any serious personal interest and with any keen apprehension of the blessings attached to the Kingdom of God, or are you merely echoing a formal charge brought against me by others?”
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
of = from. Greek. apo. App-104.
others. Greek. altos. App-124.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
34.] On this whole interview, see note on Luk 23:3-4.
I regard this question . … as intended to distinguish the senses of the word King as applied to Jesus: and of course not (De Wette, Lcke) for the information of Him who asked it, but to bring out this distinction in Pilates mind. If he asked of himself, the word could certainly have but one meaning, and that one would be wrongly applied;-if from information derived from the Jews, this very fact would open the way to the true meaning in which He was King of the Jews. Stier and Ebrard think there may be some reference in to a momentary earnestness in Pilates own mind,-a suspicion that his prisoner was what he was charged with being (see ch. Joh 19:8; Joh 19:12), from the mention of which he immediately (Joh 18:35) recoils, and implies the other side of the dilemma.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Joh 18:34. , others) This was calculated to rouse the conscience of Pilate, so as that he should not simply [without corroborative proof] believe the Jews. It was altogether the statement of others, namely, the Jews,-those outside namely, when Jesus had been already by this time introduced into the Pretorium or judgment-hall. Jesus was wishing Pilate to observe this part of His question: Pilate lays hold (fastens) on the former part of it, not without anger.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Joh 18:34
Joh 18:34
Jesus answered, Sayest thou this of thyself, or did others tell it thee concerning me?-Jesus asked him whether this charge was originated with himself, or was it made by others. [Jesus did not ask the question for information, but it strikes the heart of the charge. Who made it? Did you or any Roman citizen ever see me breaking the Roman law? If a Roman preferred the charge, it might be examined, but when did the Jews ever find fault with a man seeking to free them? Pilate knew how restive the Jews were under the Roman yoke, and how ready they were to rebel, and the very hate shown Christ by them was proof that Jesus was not aiming to be such a king as they desired. Pilate comprehends the point.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Sayest: Joh 18:36
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
4
Jesus never asked questions for his own information, for he knew all about men (chapter 2:24, 25). He took this method of introducing the important conversation to follow concerning the nature of his kingdom.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Joh 18:34. Jesus answered, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell thee concerning me? Many reasons have been suggested to account for this question of Jesus. The real reason seems to be, that the guilt of those now compassing His death may be fixed upon the proper parties. It is to appear that not Pilate before whose bar He stands, but others altogether are the guilty ones. The object is attained, for Pilates answer shows that he knew of no harm in Jesus.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
The Synoptics reported that Jesus replied, "It is as you say" (Gr. sy legeis, Mat 27:11; Mar 15:2; Luk 23:3). John also recorded that Jesus gave that answer (Joh 18:37), but he included additional conversation first. This added material included Jesus’ explanation of the nature of His kingship (Joh 18:36).
Jesus asked Pilate His question to determine how He would answer him. If his question had arisen from his own understanding and curiosity, Jesus presumably would have dealt with Him as a sincere inquirer. If he was merely trying to clarify the essence of the Sanhedrin’s charge, Jesus would need to answer differently. If Pilate meant, "Are you a political king conspiring against Caesar?" the answer would have been, "No." If he meant, "Are you the messianic king of Israel?" the answer would have been, "Yes." The object of interrogation, Jesus, became the interrogator temporarily. The fact that Jesus questioned Pilate at all was pure grace in that it allowed Pilate to explain his motivation and possibly reduce his culpability.