Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 19:23

Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also [his] coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.

23 27. The four Enemies and the four Friends

23. Then the soldiers ] Better, The soldiers therefore. The ‘therefore’ looks back to Joh 19:18.

his garments ] The loose, outer garment, or toga, with the girdle and fastenings. This was large enough to be worth dividing, and in some cases was the only garment worn.

four parts ] A mark of accurate knowledge; a quaternion of soldiers has charge of the prisoner, as in Act 12:4; but there the prisoner has to be guarded and kept alive, so four quaternions mount guard in turn, one for each watch. The clothes of executed criminals were the perquisite of the soldiers on duty.

his coat ] Better, the coat or shirt: it fitted somewhat close to the body, reaching from the neck to the knees or ancles.

without seam ] Josephus tells us that that of the high-priest was seamless, whereas in other cases this garment was commonly made of two pieces ( Ant. iii. vii. 4).

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

His garments – The plural here is used to denote the outer garment. It was made, commonly, so as to be easily thrown on or off, and when they labored or walked it was girded about the loins. See the notes at Mat 5:40.

Four parts – It seems, from this, that there were four soldiers employed as his executioners.

His coat – His under garment, called the tunic.

Was without seam – Josephus (Antiq., b. 3 chapter 8, Section 4) says of the garment or coat of the high priest that this vesture was not composed of two pieces, nor was it sewed together upon the shoulders and the sides; but it was one long vestment, so woven as to have an aperture for the neck. It was also parted where the hands were to come out. It seems that the Lord Jesus, the great High Priest of his people, had also a coat made in a similar manner. Compare Exo 39:22.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Joh 19:23-24

Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took His garments

One event with many revelations

I.

The SPOLIATION OF DEATH. Christ is crucified. Death has completed its work. What had it done?

1. It had not destroyed His existence. He had gone in His full personality, and in the plenitude of His powers to His God and ours.

2. It had not destroyed His character. Death cannot rob us of this. It is the only property we can carry out of this world. What then does it take from us?

(1) Our material frames. Here was Christs body torn from Him–the body through which He looked out at the universe, through which He received His sensations, by which He delivered His sublime doctrines and wrought His marvellous deeds. A precious thing is the body, and yet death takes it from every man, however much he may appreciate it.

(2) Our material property. The garments of Christ were His only earthly property, but of them He was stripped. No doubt He valued them, not merely on account of their utility, but on account of those hands of love that had woven and presented them. Such is the spoliation of death. We brought nothing into the world, &c.; Naked came we, &c. All of the earth which men struggle for and gain they must lose.

II. THE DESECRATIONS OF AVARICE–gambling over the garments of the Son of God. If aught of this earth were sacred, these were; yet avarice seizes them, gambles over them, and turns them to its sordid ends. Avarice has ever traded in the sacred, and now more than ever. It not only trades in corn, manufactures, &c., but in philanthropic and religious institutions. Preaching has become a trade; temples, houses of merchandise; charitable societies, organs of worldly greed.

III. THE CULMINATION OF WICKEDNESS. Where can you see

1. Baser ingratitude than in putting to death One who went about doing good?

2. More outrageous injustice than in torturing One who was exquisitely tender and overflowing with mercy? Truly the Crucifixion is the culmination of sin! And yet it is marvellous that the most consummate production of human wickedness should be made by God the instrument by which to banish it from the world. Thus sin frustrates its own purpose. (D. Thomas, D. D.)

Now the coat was without seam.

More exactly the tunic, or undergarment. It reached from the neck to the feet, while the outer garment was a square rug thrown round the body. Ordinarily the tunic consisted of two pieces connected at the shoulder by clasps; but that worn by Jesus was made in one piece. This seems to have been the rule with the priestly tunic. (Archdn. Watkins.)

Legend of the Holy Coat

This relic is alleged to have been discovered in the fourth century by Helena, the mother of Constantine, and by her deposited at Treves, at that time the capital of Belgie Gaul and residence of the later Roman emperors. Concealed in a crypt from the Normans in the ninth century, it was rediscovered in 1196, and then exhibited, and, not exhibited again till 1512, when Leo X. appointed it to be shown once every seven years. The Reformation and wars prevented the observance for some time, but the celebration was attended in 1810 by a concourse of 227,000 persons, and by a larger number in 1844, when Archbishop Arnoldi announced a centenary. Net only were miraculous cures asserted to have been wrought by this relic, but this celebration is memorable for the reaction which it produced, leading to the secession of Johann Rouge and the German Catholics from the Church of Rome. The dimensions given on an engraving, published at Treves in 1844, are, from the extremity of each sleeve, 5 feet 5 inches; length from collar to lowermost edge, 5 feet 2 inches. In parts it is tender or threadbare; and some stains upon it are reported to be those of the Redeemers blood. It is a loose garment of coarse material, dark brown in colour, probably the result of age, and entirely without seam or decoration. (Biblical Museum.)

Let us not rend it.–Bengel observes that we never read of our Lord rending His own garments in desperate sorrow, like Job, Jacob, Joshua, Caleb, Jepthah, Hezekiah, Mordecai, Ezra, Paul, and Barnabas (see Gen 37:29; Num 14:6; Jdg 11:35; 2Ki 19:1; Est 4:1; Job 1:20; Act 14:14). (Bp. Ryle.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 23. To every soldier a part] So it appears there were four soldiers employed in nailing him to and rearing up the cross.

The coat was without seam] Several have seriously doubted whether this can be literally understood, as they imagine that nothing with sleeves, c. can be woven without a seam. But Baun, de Vest. Sacer. Heb. l. 1, c. 16, has proved, not only that such things were done by the ancients, and are still done in the east, but himself got a loom made, on which these kinds of tunics, vents, sleeves, and all, were woven in one piece. See much on this subject in Calmet. The clothes of a Hindoo are always without a seam and the Brahmins would not wear clothes that were otherwise made. Besides, the Hindoos have no regular tailors.

Our Lord was now in the grand office of high priest, and was about to offer the expiatory victim for the sin of the world. And it is worthy of remark that the very dress he was in was similar to that of the Jewish high priest. The following is the description given of his dress by Josephus, Ant. b. iii. c. 7, s. 4: “Now this coat () was not composed of two pieces, nor was it sewed together upon the shoulders and sides, but it was one long vestment, so woven as to have an opening for the neck; not an oblique one, but parted all along the back and breast; it was also parted where the hands were to come out.” A little before, the same author says, that “the high priest had a long robe of a blue colour, which hung down to the feet, and was put over all the rest.” It is likely that this was the same with that upper garment which the soldiers divided among them, it being probably of a costly stuff. I may just add here, that I knew a woman who knit all kinds of clothes, even to the sleeves and button holes, without a seam; and have seen some of the garments which she made; that the thing is possible I have the fullest proof. For an explanation of and which we translate cloak, and coat, See Clarke on Lu 6:29.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Both Matthew, Mat 27:35, and Mark, Mar 15:24, mention this parting of Christs garments amongst them, which must be understood of his inward garments; which some tell us might easily be done, because their garments were made up of four parts. But his outward garment, which is called his coat, was all of a piece.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

23, 24. Then the soldiers, when theyhad crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts; to everysoldierthe four who nailed Him to the cross, and whoseperquisite they were.

a part, and also his coattheRoman tunic, or close-fitting vest.

without seam, woven from thetop throughout“perhaps denoting considerable skill andlabor as necessary to produce such a garment, the work probably ofone or more of the women who ministered in such things unto Him, Lu8:3” [WEBSTER andWILKINSON].

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus,…. The crucifixion of Christ was at the request and solicitation of the Jews, was ordered by the Roman governor, and performed by the Roman soldiers; the sinful men into whose hands Christ was to be delivered:

took his garments; which they had stripped his body of, crucifying him naked; as what properly belonged to them, it being usual then, as now, for executioners to have the clothes of the persons they put to death; these were his inner garments:

and made four parts, to every soldier a part; for it seems there were four of them concerned in his execution, and who were set to watch him:

and also his coat; or upper garment;

now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout: in such an one the Jews say b Moses ministered: and of this sort and make was the robe of the high priest, said to be of “woven work”,

Ex 28:32 upon which Jarchi remarks, , “and not with a needle”; it was all woven, and without any seam: and so the Jews say c in general of the garments of the priests:

“the garments of the priests are not made of needlework, but of woven work; as it is said, Ex 28:32. Abai says, it is not necessary (i.e. the use of the needle) but for their sleeves; according to the tradition, the sleeve of the garments of the priests is woven by itself, and is joined to the garment, and reaches to the palm of the hand.”

So that this was an entire woven garment from top to bottom, excepting the sleeves, which were wove separately and sewed to it; of this kind also was his coat, which Jacob Iehudah Leon says d,

“was a stately woollen coat of a sky colour, wholly woven, all of one piece, without seam, without sleeves;”

such a garment Christ our great High Priest wore, which had no seam in it, but was a curious piece of texture from top to bottom. The very learned Braunius e says, he has seen such garments in Holland, and has given fine cuts of them, and also of the frame in which they are wrought. What authority Nonnus had to call this coat a black one, or others for saying it was the work of the Virgin Mary, I know not.

b T. Bab. Taanith, fol. 11. 2. Gloss in ib. c T. Bab. Yoma, c. 7. foi. 72. 2. Maimon. Hilch. Cele Hamikdash, c. 8. sect. 16. d Relation of Memorable Things in the Tabernacle, &c. c. 5. p. 23. e De vestitu Sacerdot. Heb. l. 1. c. 16. p. 346, 360, 361.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Four parts ( ). There were four soldiers, the usual quaternion (, Ac 12:9) besides the centurion (Mark 15:39; Matt 27:54; Luke 23:47). The clothes (, outer clothes) of the criminal were removed before the crucifixion and belonged to the soldiers. Luke (Lu 23:34) mentions the division of the garments, but not the number four. The four pieces would be the head gear, the sandals, the girdle, the (outer garment with fringes).

The coat was without seam ( ). For (the inner garment) see Mt 5:40. is compound of privative and , to sew together, and so seamless (unsewed together), only here in N.T. It occurs elsewhere in Josephus, Ant. III. 6, 4.

Woven (). Verbal (old word) from (some MSS. in Lu 12:27), only here in N.T.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Four parts. All the Synoptists relate the parting of the garments. The four pieces to be divided would be, the head – gear, the sandals, the girdle, and the tallith or square outer garment with fringes. Delitzsch thus describes the dress of our Lord : “On His head He wore a white sudar, fastened under the chin and hanging down from the shoulders behind. Over the tunic which covered the body to the hands and feet, a blue tallith with the blue and white fringes on the four ends, so thrown over and gathered together that the gray, red – striped undergarment was scarcely noticeable, except when the sandal – shod feet came into view” (” A Day in Capernaum “).

Coat [] . Or tunic. See on Mt 5:40.

Without seam [, ] . Only here in the New Testament. From aj, not, and rJaptw, to sew together. Like the tunic of the High – Priest. Only John records this detail.

Woven [] . Only here in the New Testament.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “Then the soldiers,” (hoi oun stratiotai) “Then the (Roman) soldiers,” the legal executors of the Roman government, who served as protectors for Pilate’s territory, of the band that had arrested Jesus, Joh 18:3; Joh 18:12; Joh 19:2. There were four in an execution band (Gk. tetradion) Act 12:4.

2) “When they had crucified Jesus,” (hote estaurosan ton lousun) “When they crucified Jesus;” It was they who did crown Him, drive the nails, and pierce His side with the sword, but it was the Jews who were the real cause of His death, who were charged by inspiration as the real conspirators, killers, and crucifiers of Him, Act 2:23; Act 2:36; Act 3:13-15; Act 3:17; Act 4:10; Act 4:27; Act 5:28; Act 7:52; Act 13:26-29; 1Th 2:14-15.

3) “Took his garments, and made four parts,” (elabon ta himati autou kai epoiesan tessera mere) “They took his garments and made four parts,” or made four stacks or piles, that each of the four soldiers might share His regular garments as personal loot, partial benefit allowed them for their work.

4) “To every soldier a part; and also his coat,” (hekatso stratrote meros kai ton chitona) “To each soldier a part (of the loot), and the tunic, coat, or outer garment,” as prophesied Psa 22:18, and as recounted by this and each of the three other Gospel writers, Mat 27:35; Mar 15:24.

5) “Now the coat was without seam,” (hen de ho chiton arraphos) “Now the tunic or outer garment of Jesus was seamless,” a very excellent outer garment, less subject to tear and ruin than a seamed garment, and more valuable, Josephus antiq. III, 7:3 says it was a description of Aaron’s vest, made of linen (cotton) woven throughout.

6) “Woven from the top throughout.” (ek ton anothen huphantos di’ holou) “It was woven from the top throughout,” as one garment without any seam, less likely to hang on a rock, brushes, thorns, etc., than a garment with sewn seams. It was known as a toga, a priest’s garment, woven usually from linen or wool, as described, Exo 28:32; Exo 29:5.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

23. Then the soldiers. The other Evangelists also mention the parting of Christ’s garments among the soldiers, (Mat 27:35; Mar 15:24; Luk 23:34.) There were four soldiers who parted among themselves all his garments, except the coat, which, being without seam could not be divided, and therefore they cast lots on it. To fix our minds on the contemplation of the purpose of God, the Evangelists remind us that, in this occurrence also, there was a fulfillment of Scripture. It may be thought, however, that the passage, which they quote from Psa 22:19, is inappropriately applied to the subject in hand; for, though David complains in it that he was exposed as a prey to his enemies, he makes use of the word garments to denote metaphorically all his property; as if he had said, in a single word, that “he had been stripped naked and bare by wicked men;” and, when the Evangelists disregard the figure, they depart from the natural meaning of the passage. But we ought to remember, in the first place, that the psalm ought not to be restricted to David, as is evident from many parts of it, and especially from a clause in which it is written, I will proclaim thy name among the Gentiles, (Psa 22:22) which must be explained as referring to Christ. We need not wonder, therefore, if that which was faintly shadowed out in David is beheld in Christ with all that superior clearness which the truth ought to have, as compared with the figurative representation of it.

Let us also learn that. Christ was stripped of his garments, that he might clothe us with righteousness; that his naked body was exposed to the insults of men, that we may appear in glory before the judgment-seat of God. As to the allegorical meaning to which some men have tortured this passage, by making it mean, that heretics tear Scripture in pieces, it is too far-fetched; though I would not object to such a comparison as this, —that, as the garments of Christ were once divided by ungodly soldiers, so, in the present day, there are perverse men who, by foreign inventions, tear the whole of the Scripture, with which Christ is clothed, in order that he may be manifested to us. But the wickedness of the Papists, accompanied by shocking blasphemy against God, is intolerable. They tell us, that Scripture is torn to pieces by heretics, but that the coat — that is, the Church — remains entire; and thus they endeavor to prove that, without paying any attention to the authority of Scripture, the unity of faith consists in the mere title of the Church; as if the unity of the Church were itself founded on any thing else than the authority of Scripture. When, therefore, they separate faith from Scripture, so that it may continue to be attached to the Church alone, by such a divorce they not only strip Christ of his garments, but tear in pieces his body by shocking sacrilege. And though we should admit what they maintain, that the coat without seam is a figure of the Church, they will be very far from gaining their point: for it will still remain to be proved, that the Church is placed under their authority, of which they show no sign whatever.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

THOSE AROUND THE CROSS

Text: Joh. 19:23-27

23

The soldiers therefore, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also the coat: now the coat was made without seam, woven from the top throughout.

24

They said therefore one to another, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.

25

These things therefore the soldiers did. But there were standing by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mothers sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.

26

When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!

27

Then saith he to the disciple, Behold, thy mother! And from that hour the disciple took her unto his own home.

Queries

a.

What is the significance of the seamless coat?

b.

Why were the women there at the cross?

c.

What is the meaning of Jesus words to his mother and to John (Joh. 19:26-27)?

Paraphrase (Harmony)

The soldiers therefore, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also the coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. They said therefore one to another, let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be; that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.
These things therefore the soldiers did. And they sat and watched him there. And the people stood beholding. And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and the rulers also scoffed at him, saying, Ha, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself: if thou art the Son of God, come down from the cross. In like manner also the chief priests mocking him among themselves with the scribes and the elders, said, He saved others; himself he cannot save. Let him save himself, if this is the Christ of God, his chosen. He is the King of Israel; let him now come down from the cross, that we may see and believe on him. He trusteth on God; let him deliver him now, if he desireth him: for he said, I am the Son of God.
And the soldiers also mocked him, coming to him, offering him vinegar, and saying, If thou art the King of the Jews, save thyself. And one of the malefactors that was crucified with him railed on him, saying, Art not thou the Christ? save thyself and us. But the other answered, and rebuking him said, Dost thou not even fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. And he said, Jesus, remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom. And he said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise. But there were standing by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mothers sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son. Then saith he to the disciple, Behold, thy mother. And from that hour the disciple took her unto his own home.

Summary

There were many different attitudes expressed by those gathered around the cross of Christ. Indifference of the soldiers; the hate of the Jews; the love of the women and John.

Comment

It was evidently a common practice then for the Roman soldiers to take the immediate belongings of executed persons for themselves. These the soldiers either kept or sold. Just what the four garments (besides the seamless coat) were we are not sure. Some have suggested headgear, sandals, belt and cloak (outer garment), as the four items. We quote here from Daily Life In The Time of Jesus, by Henri Daniel-Rops, pub. Mentor-Omega Books, pp. 211212, The coat or tunic or chalouk must have been very like the chiton of the Greeks, but longer; it came down well below the knees, and the rabbis coat had necessarily to appear for a good hands-breadth below the cloak. The ritual tassels, which were usually a very deep blue, hung from the bottom. For ceremonies, the coat was made of embroidered silk or decorated with colored stripes. Most coats were cut out and then sewn together, but there were some made of woven wool that were all in one piece, and these were very much esteemedit was such a coat the soldiers took from Christ, the coat for which they drew lots, so that it should not be torn. The coat was kept on for work, but at night, in going to bed, it was taken off.

The cloak, the talith, took the place both of our suit and of our overcoat. It was so necessary a garment that the Law required a creditor who had seized his debtors cloak as a pledge to give it up at nightfall. It was also a dignifying garment, without which it would have been improper to appear at the Temple or before a superior. Nevertheless, it was used for all kinds of purposesa blanket, even a bed if one had to sleep in the open, a saddle-cloth and even as a carpet to welcome great men, as we see in the account of Christs entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday. It is by no means sure how these cloaks were made. Perhaps some were a simple piece of cloth with a hole for the head and others two blankets sewn together; but there must also have been some of a better cut, with separate sleeves, probably not unlike our barristers and graduates robes.

Archologists have found dice which date from the Roman period and they are exactly the same as are used today. One was found to be so irregular that it might even be called loaded. Plutarch says that when soldiers were not on duty they often played at dice. Those who drew lots for the coat of Jesus must have carried their dice with them.

The prophecy referred to by John here is Psa. 22:18, Psa. 22:1-31 is a Messianic psalm. Many of the very words which the crucified Messiah would utter from the cross are there prophecied. See our comments on Joh. 13:18 for notes on the fulfillment of prophecy.

There were a number of differently motivated groups of people who stood beholding this particular crucifixion. See the Paraphrase (Harmony) for this section and the Sermon at the end of chapter nineteen.

Lenski thinks only three women were present. Both Hendriksen and R. C. Foster have harmonized the three gospel accounts of the women present (Mat. 27:56; Mar. 15:40; Joh. 19:25) and believe four women were present. Mary, the mother of Jesus; Mary, the mother of James the Less and of Joses and wife of Clopas; Salome, the sister of Jesus mother; and Mary Magdalene. These were some of the women who had followed with Jesus from Galilee (cf. Luk. 23:49; Mat. 27:56). It is very doubtful that Mary, wife of Clopas, was the sister of Mary, mother of Jesus, since that would make two women in the same family with the name, Mary, Mary Magdalene was definitely not the sister of Mary, Jesus mother, therefore it would seem that Salome, mother of James and John, was the sister referred to in Joh. 19:25.

Joh. 19:26-27 constitute, together, one of the seven sayings from the cross. These seven sayings are here given in their chronological order:

(1)

Father, forgive them for they know not what they do (Luk. 23:34)

(2)

Verily I say unto thee, Today thou shalt be with me in Paradise (Luk. 23:43)

(3)

Woman, behold thy son. Behold, thy mother. (Joh. 19:26-27)

(4)

My God, My God, Why hast thou forsaken me? (Mat. 27:46; Mar. 15:34)

(5)

I Thirst (Joh. 19:28)

(6)

It is finished (Joh. 19:30)

(7)

Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit (Luk. 23:46)

But why did Jesus, in His extreme agony and with the weight of all the problems of eternity upon His soul, take time to speak to His mother and the beloved disciple? Why does Jesus say, Woman instead of mother? The answer to the first question is obvious. Jesus is providing someone to care for His bereaved mother. She is probably a widow nowwe do not hear anything of Joseph, her husband, since Jesus was twelve years of age. The other children were unsympathetic with Jesus way of life and would give her little consolation. John, probably Jesus, cousin, a disciple whom He loved and trusted, is chosen to care for her. And from that hour the disciple took her unto his own home. There may be a number of reasons Jesus used the term woman when He spoke to her. Perhaps He did not use mother in order to spare her an increased awareness of her maternal relationship to the One in extreme agony. But ever since He reminded her in the Temple, when He was twelve, of His unique relationship with God, He has taught her that He is much more than her son. He taught her that He was her Lord and Saviour (cf. Joh. 2:4; Mat. 12:46-50). The use of woman here from the cross follows His other teaching on the subject. And what of the reaction of this mother to whom He spoke? The gospel writers did not deem it of importance to record for us these details. We know she wept, as any mother would. We can only imagine the agony of her soul as she beheld the spectacle. As Lenski says, it is probably that she who had all along understood understands now.

The Roman Catholic Church has wrested these words from Jesus to His mother and John and by decree of Pius IX has made Mary the patroness of all Christians who are here represented by the disciple John. Another of the same church says, in the person of John Mary receives all Christians as her children. And this capacity of Mary entitles us to the right and the trust, that we place all our interest in her hands. But it is not John nor Jesus who needs the help hereit is Mary. Mary is not receiving JohnJohn is the patron.

Quiz

1.

What part of Jesus clothing was the seamless coat?

2.

How did the soldiers decide who was to get this coat?

3.

What prophecy did their actions fulfill?

4.

Why did Jesus commend His mother to Johns keeping?

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(23) On Joh. 19:23-24, comp. Notes on Mat. 27:35-36; Luk. 23:34. St. Johns account is again more full than any of the others.

And made four parts, to every soldier a part.The soldiers there who carried the sentence into execution were one of the usual quarternions (Act. 12:4), under the command of a centurion.

Also his coat: now the coat was without seam.More exactly, the tunic, or under-garment. It reached from the neck to the feet, while the outer garment was a square rug thrown round the body. Ordinarily the tunic consisted of two pieces connected at the shoulder by clasps; but that worn by Jesus was made in one piece. This seems to have been the rule with the priestly tunics. (Comp. the account of Aarons tunic in Jos. Ant. iii. 7, 4.)

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

23. Of the parting of garments John, as an eye-witness and as an expositor of the prophetic fulfilment, gives the fullest statement. By the Roman law the garments of the executed malefactor went as perquisites to the executioner. And thus here a Roman custom strangely comes in to fulfil an ancient Hebrew prediction.

Between this full statement of John and the briefer one of Mark there is variation, but no contradiction. Mark says: “They parted his garments, casting lots upon them, what every man should take.” Here the garments are viewed in mass as being “parted,” and a “casting lots upon them” is affirmed; whether the cast lots affected the whole, or only a part, is not said. Still less is there a contradiction of Matthew, who says they “parted his garments, casting lots.” This only affirms that there was a casting lots, more or less, in the process of the division. These two statements are indefinite, but John’s precise.

Four parts Hence, but four soldiers (commanded, perhaps, by a centurion) were required to crucify, numerous as was the band that first apprehended him.

Coat At this they arrived last, as being the under tunic or shirt. It was commonly worn by the priests, and consisted of two oblong pieces of cloth, fastened at the upper ends upon the shoulder with a clasp or buckle, and hanging down, before and behind to the feet.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘The soldiers therefore, when they had crucified Jesus, took his clothes and made four parts, to every soldier a part, and they also took the coat. Now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. They said therefore one to another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it, who shall have it”, that the Scripture might be fulfilled which says, ‘they parted my clothes among them and on my raiment did they cast lots’ (Psa 22:18). These things therefore the soldiers did.’

His degradation was emphasised by the fact that having been stripped naked, His bloodstained clothes were divided up among themselves by the members of the escort. It was in fact normal for those who carried out a crucifixion to share the possessions of the victim. Jesus would have had an escort of four and these four divided up His clothes.

‘The coat was seamless.’ This was similar to the robe of the High Priest (Exo 28:31-32) and the connection may have been in John’s mind. The thought is that it was unmarred and complete in itself. Far more important to him, however, was that it ensured the exact fulfilment of Psa 22:18. For it made the soldiers cast lots for it, so that just as the Psalmist had prophesied, the soldiers ‘did it’.

‘Also the coat’. A difficult phrase possibly put in later as an explanatory note to make the situation clear. It is not found in the Bodmer papyrus. But it does not matter whether we include it or not. The meaning is clear enough with it or without it.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Fifth Scripture Fulfilled: Cast Lots for Garment – In Joh 19:23-24 John the apostle records the fifth Old Testament prophecy fulfilled during Jesus’ Passion, which tells of the casting of lots for His garments.

Joh 19:23  Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.

Joh 19:23 Comments The ancient practice of casting lots was not restricted to the Jewish culture under the Mosaic Law. The books Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, and Nahum provide us with references in the Old Testament Scriptures to the custom of casting of lots by someone other than the people of Israel, being practiced among the Babylonians (Oba 1:11), the Ninevites (Nah 3:10), and among the sailors (Jon 1:7), which Adam Clarke suggests to be Phoenicians based on Eze 27:12. [281]

[281] Adam Clarke, The Book of the Prophet Jonah, in Adam Clarke’s Commentary, Electronic Database (Seattle, WA: Hendrickson Publishers Inc., 1996), in P.C. Study Bible, v. 3.1 [CD-ROM] (Seattle, WA: Biblesoft Inc., 1993-2000), notes on Jonah 1:3.

Joe 3:3, “And they have cast lots for my people; and have given a boy for an harlot, and sold a girl for wine, that they might drink.”

Oba 1:11, “In the day that thou stoodest on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried away captive his forces, and foreigners entered into his gates, and cast lots upon Jerusalem, even thou wast as one of them.”

Nah 3:10, “Yet was she carried away, she went into captivity: her young children also were dashed in pieces at the top of all the streets: and they cast lots for her honourable men, and all her great men were bound in chains.”

Jon 1:7, “And they said every one to his fellow, Come, and let us cast lots, that we may know for whose cause this evil is upon us. So they cast lots, and the lot fell upon Jonah.”

Eze 27:12, “Tarshish was thy merchant by reason of the multitude of all kind of riches; with silver, iron, tin, and lead, they traded in thy fairs.”

The Roman soldiers who crucified Jesus Christ cast lots at the foot of the Cross (Mat 27:35, Mar 15:24, Luk 23:34, Joh 19:24). The Roman statesman Cicero (106-43 B.C.) makes numerous references to the widespread practice of casting lots among the ancient cultures in his work de divination. [282] The Jewish historian Josephus (A.D. 37-100) mentions the practice of casting lots among the Roman soldiers who had encompassed the city of Jerusalem under Titus. [283] The Roman historian Suetonius (A.D. 70-130) mentions this ancient practice among Roman leaders by appointing men to tasks by casting lots, as well as casting lots as a form of divination. [284]

[282] For example, Cicero writes, “But what nation is there, or what state, which is not influenced by the omens derived from the entrails of victims, or by the predictions of those who interpret prodigies, or strange lights, or of augurs, or astrologers, or by those who expound lots (for these are about what come under the head of art); or, again, by the prophecies derived from dreams, or soothsayers (for these two are considered natural kinds of divination)?” ( de divination 1.6) Cicero also writes, “What, now, is a lot? Much the same as the game of mora, or dice, l and other games of chance, in which luck and fortune are all in all, and reason and skill avail nothing. These games are full of trick and deceit, invented for the object of gain, superstition, or error.” ( de divination 2.41) See Cicero, The Treatises of M. T. Cicero on the Nature of the Gods; on Divination; on Fate; on the Republic; on the Laws; and on Standing for the Consulship, trans. C. D. Yonge (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1853), 146-147, 235.

[283] Josephus writes, “They also cast lots among themselves who should be upon the watch in the nighttime, and who should go all night long round the spaces that were interposed between the garrisons.” ( Wars 5.12.2)

[284] For example, Suetonius writes, “When later, on his way to Illyricum, he [Tiberius] visited the oracle of Geryon near Patavium, and drew a lot which advised him to seek an answer to his inquiries by throwing golden dice into the fount of Aponus, it came to pass that the dice which he threw showed the highest possible number and even to-day those very dice may be seen under the water.” ( Lives of the Twelve Caesars: Tiberius) Suetonius, The Lives of the Twelve Caesars by Suetonius, trans. Joseph Gavorse (New York: Modern Library, 1931), 130-131.

Joh 19:24 “that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did cast lots” Old Testament Quotes in the New Testament – This verse is quoted from Psa 22:18.

Psa 22:18, “They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The soldiers cast lots:

v. 23. Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took His garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also His coat Now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.

v. 24. They said, therefore, among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it whose it shall be, that the scripture might be fulfilled which saith, They parted My raiment among them, and for My vesture they did cast lots. These things, therefore, the soldiers did.

The happenings that transpired under the cross are here recorded by John; first of all what the soldiers did. These men had no personal interest in their victim; their crucifying Him was merely a part of the day’s work. And they now proceeded to make use of the privilege accorded them by ancient custom. It seems that the criminals condemned to death by crucifixion were nailed to the cross entirely naked or nearly so, with a loin cloth at the most. So the soldiers took the clothes of Jesus, the upper garment, the girdle, the sandals, perhaps the linen shirt, and divided them into four parts, according to the number of men that had been detailed to tend to this work. But the inner garment, the tunic, remained after all the other articles of wearing apparel had been distributed. This they could not cut up without spoiling it, since it was seamless, unsewed, and woven in one piece from top to bottom, probably the work of loving hands. So the soldiers decided to dispose of it by casting lots; it was made the prize in a game of chance. And here again, as in so many items connected with the Passion-story, the game of chance was not the result of chance, but happened in accordance with the prophecy of the Psalmist, Psa 22:18. Of this very incident the Messiah, speaking through the mouth of David, a thousand years before, had said: They divided My garments among themselves, and for My tunic did they cast lots. Here it was plainly indicated, as Luther writes, that Christ had paid the penalty to the full. Everything that He had, His body, His life, His very clothes, He gave up for love of the sinners, in order to earn salvation for them. But the soldiers, gambling as they were under the very cross of their Savior, are a fitting picture of the frivolous world, frittering away its chances of salvation almost in the shadow of the cross which points upward.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Joh 19:23-24. And made four parts, Because four soldiers are mentioned in the division of the clothes, it does not follow that there were but four present at the crucifixion. Since soldiers were necessary at all, a great number must have been present to keep off the crowds which usually press to see such spectacles. From Mat 27:54 it appears, that the soldiers who assisted at the crucifixion were commanded bya centurion; wherefore it is more than probable that the whole band, which St. Matthew tells us expressly was gathered together to scourge Jesus, (Mat 27:27.) was present at his crucifixion; especially as two others were crucified with him. The four soldiers who parted his garments, and cast lots for his vesture, were the four who nailed him tothe cross; each of them fixing a limb, and having, it seems, for this service, had a right to the crucified person’s clothes. See Psa 22:18.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Joh 19:23-24 . ] again connects the history, after the intermediate narrative respecting the superscription, with Joh 19:18 .

] For they were the executioners of the crucifixion.

. ] His garments , with the exception, however, of the , which is afterwards specially mentioned, the shirt-like under-garment. The account of John is more exact and complete than that of the Synoptics (Mat 27:35 ; Mar 15:24 ; Luk 23:34 ).

] There were accordingly four soldiers, the ordinary (Act 12:4 ).

] From the top (where the button-hole was, , Nonnus) woven quite through, throughout , so that thus the garment was a single texture, woven from above entirely throughout, without seam, similar to the priestly vestment in Joseph. Antt . iii. 7. 4. See Braun, de vestitu Hebr . p. 342 ff.; Rosenmller, Morgenl . V. p. 273 f. On the adverbial , comp. Asclep. 16; Nicand. 1; Plut. Mor. p. 695 f.; Bernhardy, p. 235, also , Plat. Soph . p. 253 C.

, . . .] This casting of lots for the , after the division of the , was not an accidental occurrence, but was in connection with the divine determination for the fulfilment of Scripture, which says, etc. The passage is Psa 22:19 , closely following the LXX. The suffering of the theocratic sufferer, in this psalm, is the prophetic type of the suffering of the Messiah. “ They have divided my garments amongst one another ( . = , comp. Luk 22:17 ), and cast lots over my raiment ,” this complaint of the Psalmist, who sees himself as being already subjected to the death of a criminal, and the division of his garments among his executioners therewith connected, has found its Messianic fulfilment in the corresponding treatment of Christ, in so far as lots have also been cast over His raiment (in reality, over His under-garment). In this fulfilment the was that portion of His clothing on which the was historically carried out; but we are not, for this reason, to say that John took as equivalent to . (Lcke, De Wette.

. . ] Simple (reminding one of Herod., Xen., and others) concluding formula for this scene of the soldiers ’ proceedings. On , see on Luk 3:18 .

] That related in Joh 19:23-24 . A secret allusion, [244] in these closing words (Hengstenberg, Godet), is arbitrarily forced upon them.

[244] Hengstenberg: “But the occupation itself stands under a secret direction, and sacred irony passes over irony to the side of profane irony .” Here Scholten coincides with Hengstenberg, supplying: “who knew nothing of the O. T., etc.”

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

DISCOURSE: 1723
CASTING LOTS FOR OUR LORDS VESTURE

Joh 19:23-24. Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat teas without seam, woven from the top throughout. They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the Scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did.

ON reading the history of our blessed Lord, we cannot but be struck with the extreme simplicity with which the most important circumstances of it are related. The historians never go out of their way to impress things on our minds; but leave truth to speak for itself. Even when they come to the last scene of his life, where we might have expected them to dilate upon his sufferings in order to affect our hearts, they pass over the whole transaction without a comment, and content themselves with barely mentioning the fact, that he was crucified. But, while they seem almost unfeeling towards their Divine Master, they specify very minutely those occurrences which marked the accomplishment of prophecy: and, as if indifferent about the agonies which he was enduring, they descend to tell us, how the soldiers who had nailed him to the cross occupied themselves in the disposal of his garments. We should be ready to disregard this record as uninteresting and uninstructive: but no circumstance that took place at that time should be uninteresting to us; nor will this, if duly considered, be uninstructive. On the contrary, this very record will give us an insight into some of the deepest points that can be offered to our consideration.
It will give us an insight into,

I.

The nature of prophecy

[Prophecy springs not from mans conjectures, but from a Divine revelation [Note: 2Pe 1:21.]. The prophets, so far from being the source and authors of their own predictions, could not even understand them, any farther than they were illuminated by that very Spirit by whose immediate agency they were inspired [Note: 1Pe 1:10-11.]. In some cases they were not even conscious that they foretold any thing [Note: Joh 11:49-52.]. Perhaps this was the case much more frequently than is generally supposed. Through the greatest part of the psalm quoted in our text, David spake primarily respecting himself, though in some parts he was moved by the Holy Ghost to speak what had no reference at all but to the Messiah, whom he typified. That he did not understand his own expressions, we can have no doubt. He might perhaps be conscious that he was uttering that which should, in some way or other, have its accomplishment in the Messiah: but he had no clew in his own experience to lead him to the interpretation of his own words: he never had his hands and feet pierced; much less had he ever his garments disposed of in the way he mentions [Note: Psa 22:16; Psa 22:18.]. Why then, it may be said, did he so express himself, that nobody could understand him, till the event had actually taken place? We answer, it is of the very nature of prophecy to be obscure; yea, it is altogether essential to the designs of prophecy: for suppose a prophecy to be perfectly clear, the friends of religion would be ready to exert themselves to fulfil it, as the enemies of religion would be to counteract it. Thus, if it were not accomplished, the religion which it was to support would be called an imposture; and, if accomplished, its accomplishment would be considered as the effect only of human prudence. This is evident, from what actually took place in relation to the prophecies respecting the kingly office of Christ, and his resurrection. The people who saw that he could feed multitudes with very small provision, and heal the sick of whatever malady they had, and even raise the dead, concluded, that he was the king whom they expected to reign over the whole world; and therefore sought to make him a king by force: nor could he prevent it, but by withdrawing miraculously from their presence. On the other hand, his enemies, who had heard him say that he would rise again the third day, set a guard around his grave on purpose to prevent it. In this manner persons would have acted in reference to all the prophecies, if all had been equally clear: and thus prophecy, as a mean of establishing the true religion, would be superseded by a continued series of miracles; and Christianity would lose its strongest evidence and support.

The true nature of prophecy is not anywhere more clearly seen than in the passage before us:. for, till it was accomplished, no human being could understand its import; nor after its accomplishment could any one mistake it.]

II.

The origin of Christianity

[Let any one who imagines Christianity to be a mere human contrivance, ask himself, whether any person, or set of persons, wishing to impose a religion upon the world, would be foolish enough to predict, that its founders clothes should be disposed of in so strange a way? The event must he so entirely out of their own power, that they would never subject their imposture to such a test as this. But this event was predicted a thousand years before it came to pass; and the psalm in which it was contained was universally acknowledged by the Jews to refer to their Messiah.
How then can we account for its accomplishment? Is there any appearance of contrivance in the matter? None at all. The Jews put Christ to death for pretending to be their Messiah; and therefore would not at the same time contrive a plan that should prove him the Messiah. Besides, the thing was not done by Jews, but heathens; who were perfectly unconscious of doing any thing worthy of attention. If Jesus had not happened to have a particular kind of garment, which was woven without a seam, and had probably been made a present to him by some of those women who ministered unto him, they would have had no more reason for casting lots for that, than for the other which they divided among them. And, after all, he had but just before been stript of his clothing, not only to be scourged, but that, being arrayed in mock majesty, he might be made an object of universal derision; and in that dress had sentence of condemnation been passed upon him: so that, if God had not signally interposed to incline them to put his own garment upon him again, this prophecy had never been fulfilled. See then how minute was the prophecy, and how exact its accomplishment! If they had cast lots at all, the probability was that the whole would have formed but two lots, and that none would be torn in pieces: but as God ordained it to be, so it was; and from thence arises an indisputable evidence, that the religion which was to be confirmed by it, was from God. Indeed, the more insignificant the transaction itself was, the more decisive is the proof arising from it.
In confirmation of this statement we would call your attention to the very words of our text; where the fulfilling of the Scripture is said to be the primary object of that arrangement: and again it is added, These things therefore the soldiers did. We are not to understand from this, that the soldiers had this object in view; (for there was not any thing further from their minds:) but God inclined their minds to it for that end. Every thing which the Scriptures had spoken respecting the Messiah, must needs be fulfilled; and therefore this, as well as every other point, must be accomplished in him [Note: Luk 22:37. Joh 10:35.].]

III.

The government of the universe

[Known unto God are all his works from the foundation of the world [Note: Act 15:18.]. Nothing was left to chance: but every thing was both foreseen and foreordained.

It may be asked then, are we mere machines? I answer, no. God leaves us free agents; but makes use of our free agency for the accomplishment of his own purposes. This he did in reference to his Son. There was not any thing done to him, which Gods hand, and Gods counsel, had not determined before to be done [Note: Act 4:28; Act 13:27; Act 13:29.]. Nevertheless, all who bore any part in those transactions, were perfectly free in every thing they did. None were compelled by any overbearing power; but all followed the bent of their own minds. Judas was actuated by covetousness; the priests by envy; Pilate by fear; and the soldiers, who cast lots for one garment, whilst they divided the other in four parts, acted from a regard to their own personal interests. But God made use of their respective weaknesses for the accomplishment of his own designs.

It is in this manner that God is carrying on his plans on the great theatre of the world. Ambition stimulates one; jealousy restrains another; fear paralyzes, or divisions distract, others: but by all, God works his sovereign will, and renders all the dispositions and pursuits of men subservient to his own eternal purpose. He uses the great conquerors now, precisely as he did Sennacherib of old, for the effecting of his own unerring counsels. Howbeit, they mean not so, neither doth their heart think so; but it is in their heart to destroy, and to cut off nations not a few [Note: Isa 10:7.]: but they are only his rod, and the staff of his indignation, which he will break and cast into the fire, as soon as they have executed their appointed task [Note: Isa 10:5-6; Isa 10:15-16.].

It is thus also that God governs his Church. The very people who most labour to destroy it, are sometimes made unwilling instruments of its enlargement. This was particularly the case in the persecution that took place after the death of Stephen; when God rendered the scattering of the Christians the means of diffusing the knowledge of the Gospel throughout the world [Note: Act 8:3-4.]. And every individual, if he could truce back all the events of his former life, would find, that many circumstances, as little connected with religion as the curiosity of Zaccheus [Note: Luk 19:2-9.], or the dishonesty of Onesimus [Note: Phil. ver. 1018.], have been overruled by a gracious Providence for good.

How little did these soldiers think of being witnesses for Christ! As little do we think that every thing, however small or casual, is ordered of God, and made a necessary link in the chain of his eternal counsels. To every thing he assigns its proper limit; Hitherto shall thou come, but no further. Men devise their way, but the Lord directeth their steps: he draws them imperceptibly, but effectually; yet not as stocks and stones, but by means of their own understanding and will: He draws them with the cords of a man, and with the bands of love [Note: Hos 11:4.].]

It is not however for the formation of theories only that this subject is useful: it is equally beneficial in a practical view.

We may Learn from it,
1.

To adore God for his mercies to us in times past

[Who is it that has made us to differ from the most abandoned on earth, or the most miserable in hell? Is it not the Lord? and have not many of the occasions on which he has extended mercy to us been as much unsought for, and at the time unnoticed, as if we had been utterly independent of him? Let us remember then to whom we are indebted for all the temporal and spiritual blessings we enjoy: and let every thing be improved by us for the praise of the glory of his grace ]

2.

To seek his guidance and protection in future

[Who can tell what consequences may ensue from one single step? perhaps the eternal preservation or ruin of our souls. Assuredly, if left to ourselves one moment, we shall fall and perish. But God sees effects in their causes; and in his eyes eternity itself is but a single point. In his hands then we shall be safe. Whatever enemies may menace our destruction, he will ride in the whirlwind and direct the storm. Only let us not lean to our own understanding, but in all our ways acknowledge him, and he will never leave us till he has fulfilled all the good things that he has spoken concerning us ]

3.

To submit with cheerfulness to any dispensations, however adverse they may appear

[Who that recollects the testimony of Joseph after all his multiplied afflictions, will not be ashamed of giving way to impatience under trials? God sent me here before you, says he to his brethren, to preserve life. Above all, who that reflects on the issue of our Saviours sufferings, will repine at being made a partaker of them? We have the promises of God on our side, and the Scripture cannot be broken. We have our appointed measure to fill up, as well as he: and the termination of our trials will resemble his. Let us wait then the Lords leisure. If we see not distinctly what his design is in this or that affliction, let it suffice, that what we know not now, we shall know hereafter. We have already seen abundant reason in past times to say, It is good for me that I have been afflicted: and the time is coming when we shall say the same in reference to our present trials. We shall see, that they were a necessary link in the chain of Providence, for the advancing of his glory in our salvation.]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat; now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. (24) They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did.

We cannot but be led to make similar observations of the overruling power of God, in respect to the soldiers casting lots for one of Christ’s garments, and dividing the other into four parts, for each soldier a part. How should such an exact fulfilment of prophecy have taken place, and which was delivered at least a thousand years before, had not the Lord who gave the prediction, watched over the accomplishment, and predisposed and gave a direction to everything leading to the end of it? The very words were minutely fulfilled; They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did!

Just let me add, that there seemeth somewhat very emblematical in these garments of Jesus. Infidels, like these soldiers, may, and will take a part of Christ, some that are infidels respecting his divine nature, and some that call in question his atonement. They are willing to call him a Prophet and a teacher of morality, and one who died as a martyr to confirm these characters. But they desire but a part in Christ, and therefore rend the scriptures to this purpose. Truth, however, like the seamless coat of Jesus, in the lot of everyone where Christ is given, is a complete whole. It admits nothing to be taken from it, neither admits anything to be added to it. A whole sinner needs a whole Savior. Christ must be all, or nothing. And blessed are they who thus have the Lord for their God. So sung the Church, and such will be the song of every individual of Christ’s body. Isa 61:10 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

23 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.

Ver. 23. Took his garments ] Christ, as Elias, being now to ascend into heaven, did willingly let go his garments; and the rather that he might clothe us with his righteousness. Let us suffer with joy by the spoiling of our goods, as knowing in ourselves (not only by books or relation of others) that we have in heaven a better and more enduring substance, Heb 10:32 . But what a wise fool was Sir Thomas Moore, who being brought to the Tower, a malefactor, and one of the officers demanding his upper garment for a fee, meaning his gown, he said he should have it; and took him his cap, saying, it was the uppermost garment that he had. So, when he was to be beheaded, he said to the hangman, I pray you let me lay my beard over the block, lest you should cut it. He thought it no glory, unless he might die with a mock in his mouth. These be the world’s wizards.

Now the coat was without seam ] Christi tunica est unica: they that rent it by schisms, are worse than the rude soldiers. There can be no greater sin committed, saith Cyprian, than to break the unity of the Church: yea, though one should suffer martyrdom, yet cannot he expiate his thereby sin of discord. This, saith Chrysostom, is a bold, but a true speech of Cyprian. a And like to this, is that of Oecolampadius to the Lutherans in Switzerland; Our error may be pardoned, so that Christ by faith be apprehended, Discordiam, neque si sanguinem fundamus, expiabimus, but the blot of our discord we cannot wash off with our heart blood. (Oecol. ad fratres in Suevia.)

a Inexpiabilis discordiae macula martyrii sanguine ablui et passione purgari non potest. Cypr. de Unit. Eccles. Chrysost. Hom. xi. ad Ephes.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

23 30. ] His death .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

23, 24. ] goes back to Joh 19:18 . There were four soldiers, a , Act 12:4 , and a centurion? “centurio supplicio prpositus,” Seneca de Ira, 16 (Friedlieb).

The garments of the executed were by law the perquisite of the soldiers on duty. Dig. xlviii. 20. 6 (Friedlieb).

The tunic was the so-called ‘toga ocellata,’ or ‘byssina.’ It reached from the neck to the feet, and was fastened round the throat with a clasp. It was properly a priest’s garment (see Jos. Antt. iii. 7. 4), and was woven of linen, or perhaps of wool (Friedlieb).

The citation is verbatim from the LXX. In it, = the upper garments, the tunic. Again, beware of any evasion of .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Joh 19:23 . “The soldiers, then, when they had crucified Jesus, took His garments” the executioner’s perquisite (Apuleius has the comparison “naked as a new-born babe or as the crucified”) and as there were four soldiers, , Act 12:4 , they divided the clothes into four parts. This was the more easily done because the usual dress of a Jew consisted of five parts, the headdress, the shoes, the chiton, the outer garment, and the girdle. The remained after the four other articles were distributed. They could not divide it into four without spoiling it, and so they cast lots for it. It was seamless, , unsewed, and woven in one piece from top to bottom.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

John

AN EYE-WITNESS’S ACCOUNT OF THE CRUCIFIXION

Joh 19:17 – Joh 19:30 .

In great and small matters John’s account adds much to the narrative of the crucifixion. He alone tells of the attempt to have the title on the Cross altered, of the tender entrusting of the Virgin to his care, and of the two ‘words’ ‘I thirst’ and ‘It is finished.’ He gives details which had been burned into his memory, such as Christ’s position ‘in the midst’ of the two robbers, and the jar of ‘vinegar’ standing by the crosses. He says little about the act of fixing Jesus to the Cross, but enlarges what the other Evangelists tell as to the soldiers ‘casting lots.’ He had heard what they said to one another. He alone distinctly tells that when He went forth, Jesus was bearing the Cross which afterwards Simon of Cyrene had to carry, probably because our Lord’s strength failed.

Who appointed the two robbers to be crucified at the same time? Not the rulers, who had no such power but probably Pilate, as one more shaft of sarcasm which was all the sharper both because it seemed to put Jesus in the same class as they, and because they were of the same class as the man of the Jews’ choice, Barabbas, and possibly were two of his gang. Jesus was ‘in the midst,’ where He always is, completely identified with the transgressors, but central to all things and all men. As He was in the midst on the Cross, with a penitent on one hand and a rejecter on the other, He is still in the midst of humanity, and His judgment-seat will be as central as His Cross was.

All the Evangelists give the title written over the Cross, but John alone tells that it was Pilate’s malicious invention. He thought that he was having a final fling at the priests, and little knew how truly his title, which was meant as a bitter jest, was a fact. He had it put into the three tongues in use-’Hebrew,’ the national tongue; ‘Greek,’ the common medium of intercourse between varying nationalities; and ‘Latin’ the official language. He did not know that he was proclaiming the universal dominion of Jesus, and prophesying that wisdom as represented by Greece, law and imperial power as represented by Rome, and all previous revelation as represented by Israel, would yet bow before the Crucified, and recognise that His Cross was His throne.

The ‘high-priests’ winced, and would fain have had the title altered. Their wish once more denied Jesus, and added to their condemnation, but it did not move Pilate. It would have been well for him if he had been as firm in carrying out his convictions of justice as in abiding by his bitter jest. He was obstinate in the wrong place, partly because he was angry with the rulers, and partly to recover his self-respect, which had been damaged by his vacillation. But his stiff-necked speech had a more tragic meaning than he knew, for ‘what he had written’ on his own life-page on that day could never be erased, and will confront him. We are all writing an imperishable record, and we shall have to read it out hereafter, and acknowledge our handwriting.

John next sets in strong contrast the two groups round the Cross-the stolid soldiers and the sad friends. The four legionaries went through their work as a very ordinary piece of military duty. They were well accustomed to crucify rebel Jews, and saw no difference between these three and former prisoners. They watched the pangs without a touch of pity, and only wished that death might come soon, and let them get back to their barracks. How blind men may be to what they are gazing at! If knowledge measures guilt, how slight the culpability of the soldiers! They were scarcely more guilty than the mallet and nails which they used. The Sufferer’s clothes were their perquisite, and their division was conducted on cool business principles, and with utter disregard of the solemn nearness of death. Could callous indifference go further than to cast lots for the robe at the very foot of the Cross?

But the thing that most concerns us here is that Jesus submitted to that extremity of shame and humiliation, and hung there naked for all these hours, gazed on, while the light lasted, by a mocking crowd. He had set the perfect Pattern of lowly self-abnegation when, amid the disciples in the upper room, He had ‘laid aside His garments,’ but now He humbles Himself yet more, being clothed only ‘with shame.’ Therefore should we clothe Him with hearts’ love. Therefore God has clothed Him with the robes of imperial majesty.

Another point emphasised by John is the fulfilment of prophecy in this act. The seamless robe, probably woven by loving hands, perhaps by some of the weeping women who stood there, was too valuable to divide, and it would be a moment’s pastime to cast lots for it. John saw, in the expedient naturally suggested to four rough men, who all wanted the robe but did not want to quarrel over it, a fulfilment of the cry of the ancient sufferer, who had lamented that his enemies made so sure of his death that they divided his garments and cast lots for his vesture. But he was ‘wiser than he knew,’ and, while his words were to his own apprehension but a vivid metaphor expressing his desperate condition, ‘the Spirit which was in’ him ‘did signify’ by them ‘the sufferings of Christ.’ Theories of prophecy or sacrifice which deny the correctness of John’s interpretation have the New Testament against them, and assume to know more about the workings of inspiration than is either modest or scientific.

What a contrast the other group presents! John’s enumeration of the women may be read so as to mention four or three, according as ‘His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas,’ is taken to mean one woman or two. The latter is the more probable supposition, and it is also probable that the unnamed sister of our Lord’s mother was no other than Salome, John’s own mother. If so, entrusting Mary to John’s care would be the more natural. Tender care, joined with consciousness that henceforth the relation of son and mother was to be supplanted, not merely by Death’s separating fingers, but by faith’s uniting bond, breathed through the word, so loving yet so removing, ‘Woman, behold thy son!’ Dying trust in the humble friend, which would go far to make the friend worthy of it, breathed in the charge, to which no form of address corresponding to ‘Woman’ is prefixed. Jesus had nothing else to give as a parting gift, but He gave these two to each other, and enriched both. He showed His own loving heart, and implied His faithful discharge of all filial duties hitherto. And He taught us the lesson, which many of us have proved to be true, that losses are best made up when we hear Him pointing us by them to new offices of help to others, and that, if we will let Him, He will point us too to what will fill empty places in our hearts and homes.

The second of the words on the Cross which we owe to John is that pathetic expression, ‘I thirst.’ Most significant is the insight into our Lord’s consciousness which John, here as elsewhere, ventures to give. Not till He knew ‘that all things were accomplished’ did He give heed to the pangs of thirst, which made so terrible a part of the torture of crucifixion. The strong will kept back the bodily cravings so long as any unfulfilled duty remained. Now Jesus had nothing to do but to die, and before He died He let flesh have one little alleviation. He had refused the stupefying draught which would have lessened suffering by dulling consciousness, but He asked for the draught which would momentarily slake the agony of parched lips and burning throat.

The words of Joh 19:28 are not to be taken as meaning that Jesus said ‘I thirst’ with the mere intention of fulfilling the Scripture. His utterance was the plaint of a real need, not a performance to fill a part. But it is John who sees in that wholly natural cry the fulfilment of the psalm Psa 69:21. All Christ’s bodily sufferings may be said to be summed up in this one word, the only one in which they found utterance. The same lips that said, ‘If any man thirst, let him come unto Me, and drink,’ said this. Infinitely pathetic in itself, that cry becomes almost awful in its appeal to us when we remember who uttered it, and why He bore these pangs. The very ‘Fountain of living water’ knew the pang of thirst that every one that thirsteth might come to the waters, and might drink, not water only, but ‘wine and milk, without money or price.’

John’s last contribution to our knowledge of our Lord’s words on the Cross is that triumphant ‘It is finished,’ wherein there spoke, not only the common dying consciousness of life being ended, but the certitude, which He alone of all who have died, or will die, had the right to feel and utter, that every task was completed, that all God’s will was accomplished, all Messiah’s work done, all prophecy fulfilled, redemption secured, God and man reconciled. He looked back over all His life and saw no failure, no falling below the demands of the occasion, nothing that could have been bettered, nothing that should not have been there. He looked upwards, and even at that moment He heard in His soul the voice of the Father saying, ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased!’

Christ’s work is finished. It needs no supplement. It can never be repeated or imitated while the world lasts, and will not lose its power through the ages. Let us trust to it as complete for all our needs, and not seek to strengthen ‘the sure foundation’ which it has laid by any shifting, uncertain additions of our own. But we may remember, too, that while Christ’s work is, in one aspect, finished, when He bowed His head, and by His own will ‘gave up the ghost,’ in another aspect His work is not finished, nor will be, until the whole benefits of His incarnation and death are diffused through, and appropriated by, the world. He is working to-day, and long ages have yet to pass, in all probability, before the voice of Him that sitteth on the throne shall say ‘It is done!’

Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Joh 19:23-25 a

23Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took His outer garments and made four parts, a part to every soldier and also the tunic; now the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece. 24So they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it, to decide whose it shall be”; this was to fulfill the Scripture:, “They divided My outer garments among them, and for My clothing they cast lots.” 25Therefore the soldiers did these things.

Joh 19:23 “made four parts, a part to every soldier” The soldiers gambled for Jesus’ clothes. This refers to His outer garments only. It is uncertain how Jesus’ clothes could be divided in four ways. This must refer to His shoes, prayer shawl (tallith), waist band, and outer garment(s). It is uncertain whether Jesus wore a turban. The Jews would have been offended by total nakedness. This is another fulfilled prophecy quoted in Joh 19:24 (cf. Psa 22:18).

“the tunic” Jesus’ outer garment is referred to by the plural term himatia. His long undergarment, worn next to the skin, was the tunic (chitn). The distinction between these can be seen in Mat 5:40 and Luk 6:29. Dorcas made both of these items of clothing (cf. Act 9:39). First-century Jews apparently wore an additional piece of underwear called a loin cloth. Jesus was not completely disrobed.

The last phrase of Joh 19:23 is another editorial comment from one who lived with Jesus.

“now the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece” This may have theological significance. A tunic like this was unusual and may have been expensive. It seems out of character for Jesus to have an unusually expensive piece of clothing. From Josephus (Antiq. 3.7.4), we know that the High Priest wore a robe like this ,as rabbinical tradition asserts that Moses did. Could this be a reference to Jesus as

1. the High Priest (cf. Hebrews)

2. the new law giver

Double meanings are always possible in John’s Gospel, but interpreters must be diligent not to allegorize all the details!

Joh 19:24 “this was fulfilled Scripture” Psalms 22 formed the OT background to the crucifixion.

1. Psa 22:1-2 – Mat 27:46; Mar 15:34

2. Psa 22:7-8 – Mat 27:39; Mat 27:43; Mar 15:29; Luk 23:35

3. Psa 22:15 – Mat 27:48; Mar 15:36; Luk 23:36; Joh 19:28-29

4. Psa 22:16 – Mat 27:35; Mar 15:24; Joh 20:25

5. Psa 22:18 – Mat 27:35; Mar 15:24; Luk 23:34; Joh 19:24

6. Psa 22:27-28 – Mat 27:54; Mar 15:39; Luk 23:47; (Joh 20:31; Mat 28:18-20; Luk 24:46-47; Act 1:8)

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

the soldiers. These were probably slaves attached to the legion who were employed as executioners.

took = received. The garments were their perquisite.

coat. Greek. chiton. A tunic worn next the body, and reaching to the knees.

without seam. Greek. arraphos. Occurs only here. Josephus says one of the high priest’s garments was without seam.

the top = the parts above (Greek. ta anothen). Compare Mat 27:51. Mar 15:38.

throughout = through (Greek. dia. App-104. Joh 19:1) the whole.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

23-30.] His death.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Joh 19:23. There the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments,

They had already stripped him, no element of shame was wanting in his substitution for us. He stooped as low as our sins could have thrust us, that he might bring us up from the very depths of degradation and shame.

Joh 19:23-24. And made four parts, to every soldier a part, and also his coat: now the coat was without seven woven from the top throughout. They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the scripture might he fulfilled, which saith, They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did.

Quite unaware of the ancient prophecy, yet in complete accord with divine predestination these soldiers did exactly according to the eternal purposes of God. It is very wonderful how, in practice, the free agency of man tallies exactly with the predestination of God. We need not enquire how it is, but we may admire that so it is. These things therefore the soldiers did, yet the motive which swayed them was not the fulfillment of the divine will, but simply the commonsense thought that it would be a pity to spoil such a garment by rending it apart also by that innate love of gambling which is found everywhere, in every age, so that often men would sooner run the hazard of winning all than take the safe one fourth which might fall to their lot. Let us reverently adore the whole scheme of providence by which Gods determinate purpose is carried out in every jot and little, while the free agency of man is left unfettered.

Joh 19:25. Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mothers sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.

These gracious women stood by the cross: we call them the feebler sex; but we must grant that they are the stronger of the two in anything which has to do with pure disinterested love. Yield the first place to them.

Joh 19:26. When Jesus therefore saw his mother,

Here was another pang for him: he could not be spared anywhere. He must recollect in his death everything that would cause him grief: When Jesus therefore saw his mother,

Joh 19:26-27. And the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother. Woman, behold thy son! Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.

There was no specific direction given to John to entertain Mary. It was quite enough for the Lord to call his attention to her by saying Behold thy mother. How I wish we were always in such a state of heart that we did not need specific precepts, a hint would suffice. Dear friends, do not need pressing or driving to holy duty; be not as bullocks that must be goaded, but rather have within you such a spring of love that it shall be a delight to do anything that may give joy to the heart of the Well-beloved. When you see him on the cross, is there anything you can deny him? Will you not think spontaneously of what you can do to please him?

Joh 19:28. After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst.

There was yet a little more to be done; all the great things were accomplished, but he would keep even the least particles of prophecy, so he cried, I thirst.

Joh 19:29-30. Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar,

He did receive that; he had refused the drugged draught which they had first offered to him to lull his pain, but he accepted this, which was simply weak wine, no doubt a little sour, possibly bitter. When he had received the vinegar,

Joh 19:30. He said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

Incarnate love has fulfilled its self-imposed task. Jesus, as the substitute for sinners, was condemned to die, and he died that he might finish the work of our redemption.

It is Finished.

Hear the dying Saviour cry.

Joh 19:31. The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day, (for that Sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

To prevent a ceremonial error, they are willing to commit brutal cruelty; indeed, they had already committed the more brutal cruelty of putting Christ to death. How particular some men are about some merely human rubric, yet the divine precepts of the law they violate with impunity. God save us from a conscience which will stick at home minute point which is of no consequence, but will allow us to commit great sin! We have heard of a Spanish bandit who confessed to his priest, after having murdered a great many persons, not his robberies and his murders, but the fact that a drop of blood had spurted on to his lips on a Friday, and thus he had defiled the feast day by taking animal food! Ah me! Conscience is a strange thing, yet some call it the vicegerent of God. I believe it is no such thing, but that it very soon becomes as depraved as any other power of the human mind: we have need of far more than conscience to keep us right.

Joh 19:32. Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.

With a huge iron bar smashing the great bones of their legs.

Joh 19:33-34. But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they broke not his legs: but one of the soldiers with a spear pierced him twice, and forthwith there came out blood and water. See how, even after death, his heart it tribute poured out for us. We have not only the love of Christs heart blessing us while he lives, but after he died there was the stream of blood and water to cleanse us from sins guilt and power.

Joh 19:35-37. And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe. For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, a bone of him shall not be broken. And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.

Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible

Joh 19:23. , the soldiers) viz. four.- , and the tunic) [the inner vest] they took.-, without seam, not sewed together) appropriate to the holy body of the Saviour. Weigh well what Fabricius, in the Centifolium, p. 407, has collected concerning the mode of living of the Saviour. Nor did He ever rend His garments in sunder.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Joh 19:23

Joh 19:23

The soldiers therefore, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also the coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.-The garments of the victim were the prerequisites of the soldiers who executed him. There were four of these soldiers. They stripped Jesus of his clothing. There were four pieces of his inner garments. Each soldier took a piece. His coat or outer garment was seamless, woven throughout. To divide it would destroy its value so they cast lots for it.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Jesus Last Thought for Others

Joh 19:23-30

Love made Mary brave to encounter the tragedy of that scene. The sword, as Simeon had foretold, was piercing her soul, Luk 2:35. Jesus knew how lonely she would be. He had neither silver nor gold, but could at least secure her a home and tender care. As the cross was elevated but slightly from the ground, His words could easily reach the little group. He chose the title, Woman, rather than Mother, lest identification with Himself should bring her insult.

It is to this paragraph that the soul turns when oppressed with the consciousness of guilt. The light-hearted, gay world, which has never known the terror of a sinful conscience, turns from it as from a tragedy of woe and blood, but the repentant sinner presses from this vintage the wine of life. We stand beside thy Cross, O Son of God, and worship in adoring love, as we behold thy tenderness to thy mother, thy devotion to Holy Scripture, and the majesty of thy last cry of victory. It is finished-the Saviors work of redemption and the ground of our salvation. What is there left for us, but to hide in the cleft of His pierced side, and to seek the cleansing of the water and the blood?

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

the soldiers: Mat 27:35, Mar 15:24, Luk 23:34

now: Such was the [Strong’s G5509], or coat, of the Jewish high-priest, as described by Josephus.

woven: or, wrought, Exo 39:22, Exo 39:23

Reciprocal: Exo 28:32 – that it be not rent 1Ki 12:15 – that he might Psa 22:16 – they pierced Psa 22:18 – General

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

3

We may learn from Smith’s Bible Dictionary (article–“crucifixion”), that the victim to be crucified was stripped of his clothing before crucifixion. It was a custom that the soldiers performing the execution should have the victim’s raiment as an extra pay in addition to their wages as soldiers. According to the present verse there were four of the soldiers, corresponding to the four parts of the body to be nailed; the two hands and two feet. This would call for four divisions to be made of the garments so each soldier could have a share But the coat was woven in one piece in such a way that it could not be divided without ruining it.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.

[They took his garments — and coat, etc.] by the word garments; we are to understand all his clothes, excepting his coat, or upper garment; for which, because it was without seam, they cast lots.

Targumist upon Psa 22:18. They cast lots upon my sindon; or linen. Pro 31:24; that is, sindon; as it is the same with talith; the upper coat.

Mat 5:40; “If any man will take away thy coat;” or outward garment, “let him have thy inward garment also.”

Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels

Joh 19:23. The soldiers therefore, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his tunic: now the tunic was without seam, woven from the top throughout. The soldiers are no longer a band. They are only four in number, the usual number of a Roman guard (comp. Act 12:4). When they went out against Jesus to the garden of Gethsemane it was in force, because they knew not how far He might really be the leader in a popular insurrection against the government. There was evidently no occasion for such a fear now, and their number therefore could with perfect safety be reduced. By the garments here spoken of we are to understand all the articles of clothing belonging to Jesus with the exception of His vesture or tunic,viz. His sandals, girdle, outer robe, head-dress, etc. These they divided into four parts, giving to each of the four soldiers a part. Another course had to be taken with the tunic or under-garment. By it we are without doubt to understand the long garment reaching to the feet, woven so as to fit closely to the body (not pieced or sewed together), which was worn by the high priest,the garment of Rev 1:13. It is hardly possible not to feel that this vestment is to John the symbol of the fact that He who now hangs upon the cross as King is also Priest of His people. We are next told what was done with the vestment.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Here we have recorded our Saviour’s sufferings from the soldiers; they stript him of his garments, before they fastened him to his cross, and divided those garments which could be parted amongst them, and cast lots on his woven coat which could not be divided. Little did these vile soldiers think that they were now fulfilling a scripture prophecy; yet so it was, this action of theirs being foretold, Psa 22:18 They part my garments, among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. Not that the prophecy made them do it, but was fulfilled by their doing of it.

From hence we may gather, that Christ suffered naked upon the cross, as naked, some say, as he came into the world. We had made ourselves naked to our shame, and Christ bacame naked to cover our shame. If, sensible of our own nakedness and shame, we flee unto him by faith, we shall be clothed with robes of righteousness, and garments of everlasting praise.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Joh 19:23-24. Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus That is, erected the cross with him upon it; they took his garments, and made four parts, &c. Because four soldiers only are mentioned in the division of the clothes, it does not follow that only four were present at the crucifixion. Since, if soldiers were necessary at all, a great number must have been present to keep off the crowds which usually press to see such spectacles as near as they can. From Mat 27:54, it appears that the soldiers who assisted at the crucifixion were commanded by a centurion. It is therefore more than probable that the whole band, which Matthew tells us expressly was gathered together to scourge Jesus, (Joh 19:27,) was present at his execution, especially as two others suffered at the same time. The four soldiers who parted his garments, and cast lots for his vesture, were the four who nailed him to the cross, (each of them fixing a limb,) and who, it seems, for this service had a right to the crucified persons clothes. That the scripture might be fulfilled, &c. That is, all this was done agreeably to an ancient prophecy, wherein these circumstances of the Messiahs sufferings were mentioned, to show that he was to be crucified naked; and consequently, that he was to suffer a most ignominious, as well as a most painful death. The reader will observe that the words here referred to, they parted my garments among them, &c., are quoted from the 22d Psalm, where they seem to be spoken of David. But the fact is, that no circumstance of Davids life bore any resemblance to this prediction, or to several other passages in this Psalm. So that, in this portion of Scripture, as also in some others, the prophet seems to have been thrown into a preternatural ecstasy, wherein, personating the Messiah, he spoke barely what the Spirit dictated, without any regard to himself. These things therefore the soldiers did Though with the utmost freedom as to themselves, yet by the secret disposal of Providence, which led them to act in a remarkable correspondence to the divine oracle.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Vv. 23, 24. The soldiers therefore, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments and made four parts, one for every soldier, and then the tunic;now the tunic was without seam, woven from the top throughout. 24. They said therefore one to another:Let us not rend it, but let us cast lots for it whose it shall be. That the Scripture might be fulfilled which says:They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture they cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did.

Here, also, John completes his predecessors, so far as the description of the tunic and the accomplishment of the prophecy are concerned. The Roman law De bonis damnatorum adjudged to the executioners the garments of the condemned. It is generally held that the entire detachment was composed of four men. Keim thinks that each cross had its particular detachment. The soldiers performed two operations. They divided among themselves either the different pieces of clothing, such as the caps, girdles, under-garments, sandals and tunics of the two malefactors, or the garments of Jesus alone (, of him, Joh 19:23), if the question is only of the particular detachment which had to do with Him.

Then, as the tunic of Jesus could not be divided, and was too precious to be placed in one of the parts, they cast lots for it. This tunic was undoubtedly a gift of the women who ministered to Jesus (Luk 8:2-3, Mat 27:55). It was woven throughout its whole length, as, according to Josephus, the garment of the priests was. Hence the use of the lot (therefore, Joh 19:24). Thus was realized to the very letter the description of the Psalmist, as he drew the picture of the King of Israel at the height of His sufferings. Criticism claims, it is true, that the two members of the verse quoted by the evangelist (Psa 22:19) are entirely synonymous, and that John is the sport of his own imagination in wishing to distinguish either between the verbs to divide and to cast lots, or between the substantives , garments, and , robe (LXX). But a more profound study of the parallelism in Hebrew poetry shows that the second member always adds a shade or a new idea to the idea of the first. Otherwise the second would be merely an idle tautology. It is not repetition, but progression. Thus, in this verse, the gradation from the plural , garments, to the singular , H4230, tunic, is manifest.

The first term designates the different pieces making up the outer clothing and the second the vestment, properly so called, after the removal of which one is entirely naked, the tunic. The passage in Job 24:7-10 confirms this natural distinction. The advance from one verb to the other is no less perceptible. It is already a great humiliation to the condemned person to see his garments divided. After this he must say to himself that there is nothing left for him except to die. But what greater humiliation than to see lots drawn for his garments, and thus see them treated like a worthless plaything! David meant to describe the two degrees, and John calls to the reader’s notice the fact that in the crucifixion of Jesus they are, both of them, literally reproduced; not that the fulfilment of the prophecy was dependent on this detail, but it appeared more distinctly by reason of this coincidence; and this the more because everything was carried out by the instrumentality of rude and blind agents, the Roman soldiers; comp. the remarks on Joh 12:15-16.

It is on this last idea that John wishes to lay stress when he concludes the narrative of this scene with the words: These things therefore the soldiers did. The Roman governor had proclaimed Jesus the King of the Jews; the Roman soldiers, without meaning it, pointed Him out as the true David promised in Psalms 22.

Strauss thinks (new Vie de Jesus, p. 569ff.) that, when the Messianic pretensions of Jesus had been proved false by the cross, the Church sought in the Old Testament the idea of the suffering Messiah, and found it there, especially in Psalms 22, 69. Thenceforward there was imagined in this programme a whole fictitious picture of the Passion. Thus the facts, in the first place, created the exegesis; then the exegesis created the facts. But 1. The idea of the suffering Messiah existed in Jewish theology before and independently of the cross (Vol. I., pp. 311f. 324). 2. It will always be difficult to prove that some righteous person, whoever he may have been, under the Old Covenant could have hoped, as the author of Psalms 22 does, that the effect of his deliverance would be the conversion of the Gentile nations and the establishment of the kingdom of God even to the ends of the earth (Joh 19:26-32).

The filial legacy:

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

Verse 23

The coat was without seam. The coat, as it is here called,–a garment very different from any now worn,–was of such a form as to admit of its being manufactured as here described.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

19:23 {7} Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also [his] coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.

(7) Christ signifies by the division of his garments amongst the bloody butchers (except for his coat which had no seam) that it will come to pass, that he will shortly divide his benefits, and enrich his very enemies throughout the world: but in such a way that the treasure of his Church will remain whole.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

4. The distribution of Jesus’ garments 19:23-24 (Matthew 27:35-36; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34)

Normally the executioners of a criminal received his clothes following his death. [Note: Tenney, "John," p. 181; Beasley-Murray, p. 347.] John spoke of the soldiers dividing Jesus’ garments (plural). The Greek word translated "garments" is himatia. Usually when this word occurs in the singular it refers to the outer robe that most Jews wore. Here, because he used the plural, John evidently had in mind all of Jesus’ outer garments including His robe, sandals, belt, and head covering. [Note: See Edersheim, 1:625.] This would have resulted in each of the four soldiers receiving one piece of clothing. The tunic (Gr. chiton) that remained was a garment worn next to the skin, but it was not what we would think of as underwear. It was more like a long shirt. Since Jesus’ tunic had been woven as one piece, the soldiers decided to cast lots to determine who would get it.

John alone among the evangelists noted that this procedure was another fulfillment of prophecy (Psa 22:18). The poetic parallelism in the prophecy found literal fulfillment in this event. Men continued to carry out God’s foreordained plan of salvation though unconsciously. This is another tribute to God’s sovereignty. Even as Jesus’ humiliation reached its depths, as enemies took even His clothes from Him, the Father controlled His destiny.

"That Jesus died naked was part of the shame which He bore for our sins. At the same time He is the last Adam who provides clothes of righteousness for sinners." [Note: Blum, p. 339.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

XXI. THE CRUCIFIXION.

“The soldiers therefore, when they had crucified Jesus, took His garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also the coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. They said therefore one to another, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted My garments among them, And upon My vesture did they cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did…. After this Jesus, knowing that all things are now finished, that the scripture might be accomplished, saith, I thirst. There was set there a vessel full of vinegar: so they put a sponge full of the vinegar upon hyssop, and brought it to His mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, He said, It is finished: and He bowed His head, and gave up His spirit. The Jews therefore, because it was the Preparation, that the bodies should not remain on the cross upon the Sabbath (for the day of that Sabbath was a high day), asked of Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. The soldiers therefore came, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with Him: but when they came to Jesus, and saw that He was dead already, they brake not His legs: howbeit one of the soldiers with a spear pierced His side, and straightway there came out blood and water. And he that hath seen hath borne witness, and his witness is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye also may believe. For these things came to pass, that the scripture might be fulfilled, A bone of Him shall not be broken. And again another scripture saith, They shall look on Him whom they pierced.”– Joh 19:23-24, Joh 19:28-37.

Possibly the account which John gives of the Crucifixion is somewhat spoiled to some readers by his frequent reference to apparently insignificant coincidences with Old Testament prophecy. It is, however, to be remembered that John was himself a Jew, and was writing for a public which laid great stress on such literal fulfillments of prophecy. The wording of the narrative might lead us to suppose that John believed Jesus to be intentionally fulfilling prophecy. Where he says, “After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst,” it might be fancied that John supposed that Jesus said “I thirst” in order that Scripture might be fulfilled. This is, of course, to misconceive the Evangelist’s meaning. Such a fulfilment would have been fictitious, not real. But John believes that in each smallest act and word of our Lord the will of God was finding expression, a will which had long since been uttered in the form of Old Testament prophecy. In these hours of dismay, when Jesus was arrested, tried, and crucified before the eyes of His disciples, they tried to believe that this was God’s will; and long afterwards, when they had found time to think, and when they had to deal with men who felt the difficulty of believing in a crucified Saviour, they pointed to the fact that even in small particulars the sufferings of the Messiah had been anticipated and were to be expected.

The first instance of this which John cites is the manner in which the soldiers dealt with His clothes. After fixing Jesus to the cross and raising it, the four men who were detailed to this service sat down to watch. Such was the custom, lest friends should remove the crucified before death supervened. Having settled themselves for this watch, they proceeded to divide the clothes of Jesus among them. This also was customary among the Romans, as it has been everywhere usual that the executioners should have as their perquisite some of the articles worn by the condemned. The soldiers parted the garments of Jesus among them, each of the four taking what he needed or fancied–turban, shoes, girdle, or under-coat; while for the large seamless plaid that was worn over all they cast lots, being unwilling to tear it. All this fulfilled an old prediction to the letter. The reason why it had been spoken of was that it formed a weighty element in the suffering of the crucified. Few things can make a dying man feel more desolate than to overhear those who sit round his bed already disposing of his effects, counting him a dead man who can no longer use the apparatus of the living, and congratulating themselves on the profit they make by his death. How furious have old men sometimes been made by any betrayal of eagerness on the part of their heirs! Even to calculate on a man’s death and make arrangements for filling his place is justly esteemed indecorous and unfeeling. To ask a sick man for anything he has been accustomed to use, and must use again if he recovers health, is an act which only an indelicate nature could be guilty of. It was a cruel addition, then, to our Lord’s suffering to see these men heartlessly dividing among them all He had to leave. It forced on His mind the consciousness of their utter indifference to His feelings. His clothes were of some little value to them: He Himself of no value. Nothing could have made Him feel more separated from the world of the living–from their hopes, their ways, their life–as if already He were dead and buried.

This distribution of His clothes was also calculated to make Him intensely sensible of the reality and finality of death. Jesus knew He was to rise again; but let us not forget that Jesus was human, liable to the same natural fears, and moved by the same circumstances as ourselves. He knew He was to rise again; but how much easier had it been to believe in that future life had all the world been expecting Him to rise! But here were men showing that they very well knew He would never again need these clothes of His.

A comparison of this narrative with the other Gospels brings out that the words “I thirst” must have been uttered immediately after the fearful cry “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?” For when the soldier was mercifully pressing the sponge steeped in vinegar to His parched lips, some of the bystanders called out, “Let be: let us see whether Elias will come to save Him,” referring to the words of Jesus, which they had not rightly understood. And this expression of bodily suffering is proof that the severity of the spiritual struggle was over. So long as that deep darkness covered His spirit He was unconscious of His body; but with the agonised cry to His Father the darkness had passed away; the very uttering of His desolation had disburdened His spirit, and at once the body asserts itself. As in the wilderness at the opening of His career He had been for many days so agitated and absorbed in mind that He did not once think of food, but no sooner was the spiritual strife ended than the keen sensation of hunger was the first thing to demand His attention, so here His sense of thirst is the sign that His spirit was now at rest.

The last act of the Crucifixion, in which John sees the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy, is the omission in the case of Jesus of the common mode of terminating the life of the crucified by breaking the legs with an iron bar. Jesus being already dead, this was considered unnecessary; but as possibly He might only have swooned, and as the bodies were immediately taken down, one of the soldiers makes sure of His death by a lance thrust. Medical men and scholars have largely discussed the causes which might produce the outflow of blood and water which John affirms followed this spear thrust, and various causes have been assigned. But it is a point which has apparently only physiological interest. John indeed follows up his statement of what he saw with an unusually strong asseveration that what he says is true. “He that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.” But this strong asseveration is introduced, not for the sake of persuading us to believe that water as well as blood flowed from the lance wound, but for the sake of certifying the actual death of Jesus. The soldiers who had charge of the execution discharged their duty. They made sure that the Crucified was actually dead. And John’s reason for insisting on this and appending to his statement so unusual a confirmation is sufficiently obvious. He was about to relate the Resurrection, and he knows that a true resurrection must be preceded by a real death. If he has no means of establishing the actual death, he has no means of establishing the Resurrection. And therefore for the first and only time in his narrative he departs from simple narration, and most solemnly asseverates that he is speaking the truth and was an eyewitness of the things he relates.

The emphatic language John uses regarding the certainty of Christ’s death is, then, only an index to the importance he attached to the Resurrection. He was aware that whatever virtue lay in the life and death of Christ, this virtue became available for men through the Resurrection. Had Jesus not risen again all the hopes His friends had cherished regarding Him would have been buried in His tomb. Had He not risen His words would have been falsified and doubt thrown upon all His teaching. Had He not risen His claims would have been unintelligible and His whole appearance and life a mystery, suggesting a greatness not borne out–different from other men, yet subject to the same defeat. Had He not risen the very significance of His life would have been obscured; and if for a time a few friends cherished His memory in private, His name would have fallen back to an obscure, possibly a dishonoured, place.

It is not at once obvious what we are to make of the physical sufferings of Christ. Certainly it is very easy to make too much of them. For, in the first place, they were very brief and confined to one part of His life. He was exempt from the prolonged weakness and misery which many persons endure throughout life. Born, as we may reasonably suppose, with a healthy and vigorous constitution, carefully reared by the best of mothers, finding a livelihood in His native village and in His father’s business, His lot was very different from the frightful doom of thousands who are born with diseased and distorted body, in squalid and wicked surroundings, and who never see through the misery that encompasses them to any happy or hopeful life. And even after He left the shelter and modest comforts of the Nazareth home His life was spent in healthy conditions, and often in scenes of much beauty and interest. Free to move about through the country as He pleased, passing through vineyards and olive-groves and cornfields, talking pleasantly with His little company of attached friends or addressing large audiences, He lived an open-air life of a kind in which of necessity there must have been a great deal of physical pleasure and healthful enjoyment. At times He had not where to lay His head; but this is mentioned rather as a symptom of His want of friends than as implying any serious physical suffering in a climate like that of Palestine. And the suffering at the close of His life, though extreme, was brief, and was not to be compared in its cruelty to what many of His followers have endured for His sake.

Two things, however, the physical sufferings of Christ do secure: they call attention to His devotedness, and they illustrate His willing sacrifice of self. They call attention to His devotedness and provoke a natural sympathy and tenderness of spirit in the beholder, qualities which are much needed in our consideration of Christ. Had He passed through life entirely exempt from suffering, in high position, with every want eagerly ministered to, untouched by any woe, and at last passing away by a painless decease, we should find it much harder to respond to His appeal or even to understand His work. Nothing so quickly rivets our attention and stirs our sympathy as physical pain. We feel disposed to listen to the demands of one who is suffering, and if we have a lurking suspicion that we are somehow responsible for that suffering and are benefited by it, then we are softened by a mingled pity, admiration, and shame, which is one of the fittest attitudes a human spirit can assume.

Besides, it is through the visible suffering we can read the willingness of Christ’s self-surrender. It was always more difficult for Him to suffer than for us. We have no option: He might have rescued Himself at any moment. We, in suffering, have but to subdue our disposition to murmur and our sense of pain: He had to subdue what was much more obstinate–His consciousness that He might if He pleased abjure the life that involved pain. The strain upon His love for us was not once for all over when He became man. He Himself intimates, and His power of working miracles proves, that at each point of His career He might have saved Himself from suffering, but would not.

When we ask ourselves what we are to make of these sufferings of Christ, we naturally seek aid from the Evangelist and ask what he made of them. But on reading his narrative we are surprised to find so little comment or reflection interrupting the simple relation of facts. At first sight the narrative seems to flow uninterruptedly on, and to resemble the story which might be told of the closing scenes of an ordinary life terminating tragically. The references to Old Testament prophecy alone give us the clue to John’s thoughts about the significance of this death. These references show us that he considered that in this public execution, conducted wholly by Roman soldiers, who could not read a word of Hebrew and did not know the name of the God of the Jews, there was being fulfilled the purpose of God towards which all previous history had been tending. That purpose of God in the history of man was accomplished when Jesus breathed His last upon the cross. The cry “It is finished” was not the mere gasp of a worn-out life; it was not the cry of satisfaction with which a career of pain and sorrow is terminated: it was the deliberate utterance of a clear consciousness on the part of God’s appointed Revealer that now all had been done that could be done to make God known to men and to identify Him with men. God’s purpose had ever been one and indivisible. Declared to men in various ways, a hint here, a broad light there, now by a gleam of insight in the mind of a prophet, now by a deed of heroism in king or leader, through rude symbolic contrivances and through the tenderest of human affections and the highest human thoughts God had been making men ever more and more sensible that His one purpose was to come closer and closer into fellowship with them and to draw them into a perfect harmony with Him. Forgiveness and deliverance from sin were provided for them, knowledge of God’s law and will that they might learn to know and to serve Him–all these were secured when Jesus cried, “It is finished.”

Why, then, does John just at this point of the life of Jesus see so many evidences of the fulfilment of all prophecy? Need we ask? Is not suffering that which is the standing problem of life? Is it not grief and trouble and sorrow which press home upon our minds most convincingly the reality of sin? Is it not death which is common to all men of every age, race, station, or experience? And must not One who identifies Himself with men identify Himself in this if in anything? It is the cross of Jesus that stands before the mind of John as the completion of that process of incarnation, of entrance into human experience, which fills his Gospel; it is here he sees the completion and finishing of that identification of God with man he has been exhibiting throughout. The union of God with man is perfected when God submits Himself to the last darkest experience of man. To some it seems impossible such a thing should be; it seems either unreal, unthought-out verbiage, or blasphemy. To John, after he had seen and pondered the words and the life of Jesus, all his ideas of the Father were altered. He learned that God is love, and that to infinite love, while there remains one thing to give, one step of nearness to the loved to be taken, love has not its perfect expression. It came upon him as a revelation that God was really in the world. Are we to refuse to God any true participation in the strife between good and evil? Is God to be kept out of all reality? Is He merely to look on, to see how His creatures will manage, how this and that man will bear himself heroically, but Himself a mere name, a lay figure crowned but otiose, doing nothing to merit His crown, doing nothing to warrant the worship of untold worlds, commanding others to peril themselves and put all to the proof, but Himself well out of range of all risk, of all conflict, of all tragedy? How can we hope to love a God we remove to a throne remote and exalted, from which He looks down on human life, and cannot look on it as we do from the inside! Is God to be only a dramatist, who arranges thrilling situations for others to pass through, and assigns to each the part he is to play, but Himself has no real interests at stake and no actual entrance into the world of feeling, of hope, of trial?

And if a Divine Person were in the course of things to come into this human world, to enter into our actual experiences, and feel and bear the actual strain that we bear, it is obvious He must come incognito–not distinguished by such marks as would bring the world to His feet, and make an ordinary human life and ordinary human trials impossible to Him. When sovereigns wish to ascertain for themselves how their subjects live, they do not proclaim their approach and send in advance an army of protection, provision, and display; they do not demand to be met by the authorities of each town, and to be received by artificial, stereotyped addresses, and to be led from one striking sight to another and from one comfortable palace to another: but they leave their robes of state behind them, they send no messenger in advance, and they mix as one of the crowd with the crowd, exposed to whatever abuse may be going, and living for the time on the same terms as the rank and file. This has been done often in sport, sometimes as matter of policy or of interest, but never as the serious method of understanding and lifting the general habits and life of the people. Christ came among us, not as a kind of Divine adventure to break the tedium of eternal glory, nor merely to make personal observations on His own account, but as the requisite and only means available for bringing the fulness of Divine help into practical contact with mankind. But as all filth and squalor are hidden away in the slums from the senses of the king, so that if he is to penetrate into the burrows of the criminal classes and see the wretchedness of the poor, he must do it incognito, so if Christ sought to bring Divine mercy and might within reach of the vilest, He must visit their haunts and make Himself acquainted with their habits.

It is also obvious that such a Person would concern Himself not with art or literature, not with inventions and discoveries, not even with politics and government and social problems, but with that which underlies all these and for which all these exist–with human character and human conduct, with man’s relation to God. It is with the very root of human life He concerns Himself.

The sufferings of Christ, then, were mainly inward, and were the necessary result of His perfect sympathy with men. That which has made the cross the most significant of earthly symbols, and which has invested it with so wonderful a power to subdue and purify the heart, is not the fact that it involved the keenest physical pain, but that it exhibits Christ’s perfect and complete identification with sinful men. It is this that humbles us and brings us to a right mind towards God and towards sin, that here we see the innocent Son of God involved in suffering and undergoing a shameful death through our sin. It was His sympathy with men which brought Him into this world, and it was the same sympathy which laid Him open to suffering throughout His life. The mother suffers more in the illness of a child than in her own; the shame of wrong-doing is often more keenly felt by a parent or friend than by the perpetrator himself. If Paul’s enthusiasm and devoted life for men made him truly say, “Who is weak, and I am not weak?” who shall measure the burden Christ bore from day to day in the midst of a sinning and suffering world? With a burning zeal for God, He was plunged into an arctic region where thick-ribbed ice of indifference met His warmth; consumed with devotion to God’s purposes, He saw everywhere around Him ignorance, carelessness, self-seeking, total misunderstanding of what the world is for; linked to men with a love which irrepressibly urged Him to seek the highest good for all, He was on all hands thwarted; dying to see men holy and pure and godly, He everywhere found them weak, sinful, gross. It was this which made Him a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief–loving God and man with a love which was the chief element in His being, He could not get man reconciled to God. The mere sorrows of men doubtless affected Him more than they affect the most tender-hearted of men; but these sorrows–poverty, failure, sickness–would pass away and would even work for good, and so might well be borne. But when He saw men disregarding that which would save them from lasting sorrow; when He saw them giving themselves to trivialities with all their might, and doing nothing to recover their right relation to God, the spring of all good; when He saw them day by day defeating the purpose He lived to accomplish, and undoing the one only work He thought worth doing,–who can measure the burden of shame and grief He had to bear?

But it is not the suffering that does us good and brings us to God, but the love which underlies the suffering. The suffering convinces us that it is love which prompts Christ in all His life and death,–a love we may confidently trust to, since it is staggered at no difficulty or sacrifice; a love which aims at lifting and helping us; a love that embraces us, not seeking to accomplish only one thing for us, but necessarily, because it is love for us, seeking our good in all things. The power of earthly love, of the devotedness of mother, wife, or friend, we know;–we know what length such love will go: shall we then deny to God the happiness of sacrifice, the joy of love? Let it not enter our thoughts that He who is more closely related to us than any, and who will far less disclaim this relationship than any, does not love us in practical ways, and cannot fit us by His loving care for all that His holiness requires.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary