About John

John presents Jesus as the divine Son of God, using seven signs and seven "I am" statements to demonstrate His deity and the promise of eternal life through belief in Him.

Author: John the ApostleWritten: c. AD 85-95Reading time: ~7 minVerses: 57
Deity of ChristEternal LifeBeliefSignsLoveHoly Spirit

King James Version

John 11

57 verses with commentary

The Death of Lazarus

Now a certain man was sick, named Lazarus, of Bethany, the town of Mary and her sister Martha.

View commentary
This verse introduces the greatest sign in John's Gospel, foreshadowing Christ's own resurrection. Lazarus's name means 'God has helped', prophetically fitting. His identification through his sisters (Mary and Martha) shows the family's prominence in the believing community. Bethany, meaning 'house of affliction', becomes the place where Christ's glory triumphs over death itself, demonstrating His power over humanity's greatest enemy.

(It was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick.)

View commentary
This verse identifies Mary as the one who anointed Jesus, an event not yet recorded in John's narrative but described in chapter 12. The Gospel writer assumes readers' familiarity with this story, suggesting the Gospel's later composition. The mention establishes the family's devotion to Christ and foreshadows Mary's act of worship. John's retrospective reference demonstrates divine sovereignty in narrative arrangement.

Therefore his sisters sent unto him, saying, Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick.

View commentary
The sisters' message demonstrates profound faith: they address Jesus as 'Lord,' express confidence in His care ('he whom thou lovest'), yet avoid presumption by not demanding His presence. Their request is implicit, trusting Christ's wisdom and timing. This balance of reverence, intimacy, and submission models proper prayer. The emphasis on Jesus' love for Lazarus reveals that suffering comes even to those whom Christ loves, challenging prosperity theology.

When Jesus heard that, he said, This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby .

View commentary
Jesus' response reveals divine omniscience—He knows Lazarus' condition and outcome before arrival. The phrase 'not unto death' is paradoxical, as Lazarus had died or would soon die. Christ means the ultimate purpose transcends physical death, pointing to resurrection and glorification. This illness would manifest God's glory and the Son's glory, demonstrating Christ's equality with the Father in glory. The 'for' indicates divine purpose in suffering, consistent with Romans 8:28.

Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus.

View commentary
John carefully documents Jesus' love for all three siblings, establishing the personal nature of His relationships. The Greek 'agapao' denotes divine, covenant love, not merely emotional affection. This love makes His delay (v. 6) more mysterious, teaching that divine love operates according to perfect wisdom, not human expectations. Christ's love does not guarantee immediate relief but ultimate good.

When he had heard therefore that he was sick, he abode two days still in the same place where he was.

View commentary
Jesus' deliberate delay appears contrary to love but demonstrates sovereign wisdom. The two additional days ensured Lazarus had been dead four days (v. 17), exceeding Jewish belief that the soul lingered three days. This timing maximized the miracle's evidential power. Christ's delay reveals that God's timing perfects His purposes; immediate answers might diminish greater demonstrations of grace. This tests and strengthens faith.

Then after that saith he to his disciples, Let us go into Judaea again.

View commentary
After the delay, Jesus proposes returning to Judea, the region of greatest danger. The verb 'let us go' includes the disciples in the mission, demonstrating Christ's inclusive leadership. The Greek construction indicates determined purpose despite known danger. This reveals Christ's courage and sovereignty—He walks into death by divine appointment, not human circumstance. His return to Judea begins the final journey to the cross.

His disciples say unto him, Master, the Jews of late sought to stone thee; and goest thou thither again?

View commentary
The disciples' response shows human wisdom opposing divine purpose, reminiscent of Peter's rebuke (Matt 16:22). They correctly recall the recent stoning attempt but incorrectly prioritize safety over mission. The Greek construction emphasizes their incredulity: 'Are you going back there now?' This reveals how fear can masquerade as prudence. Their concern, though natural, fails to account for Christ's sovereignty and timing.

Jesus answered, Are there not twelve hours in the day? If any man walk in the day, he stumbleth not, because he seeth the light of this world.

View commentary
Jesus responds with a metaphorical teaching about walking in daylight, alluding to His earlier discourse (9:4-5). The twelve hours represent the appointed time for work; stumbling comes from walking outside God's timing. Christ walks in His Father's will (the light) and therefore does not stumble, despite danger. This teaches divine sovereignty over life's duration and safety in obedience. Those who walk in God's will, whatever the apparent danger, walk in light.

But if a man walk in the night, he stumbleth, because there is no light in him.

View commentary
The contrast between day and night walking continues the metaphor. Night represents walking outside God's will or living in spiritual darkness. Without 'the light of this world' (Christ Himself, 8:12), one stumbles morally and spiritually. The physical imagery points to spiritual truth: those who reject Christ walk in darkness regardless of physical circumstances. This anticipates the disciples' later failure when they fled in Christ's arrest—walking in fear's darkness rather than faith's light.

These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.

View commentary
Jesus employs euphemism, calling death 'sleep,' common in Scripture (1 Thess 4:13-14). This metaphor affirms bodily resurrection—sleep implies awakening. Christ's statement 'I go, that I may awake him' reveals His power over death and His purpose in going. The Greek verb indicates decisive action. His confident assertion demonstrates foreknowledge and authority over life and death, previewing His own resurrection power.

Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well.

View commentary
The disciples misunderstand Jesus' metaphor, taking 'sleep' literally. Their response reveals natural hope: if Lazarus sleeps, recovery is likely. The Greek 'sothesetai' (shall do well/recover) indicates physical healing. This misunderstanding serves pedagogical purpose, forcing Jesus to speak plainly. The disciples' literalism demonstrates humanity's tendency to interpret divine truth through naturalistic lenses, requiring spiritual illumination.

Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep.

View commentary
John, writing retrospectively, clarifies the misunderstanding for readers. This editorial comment distinguishes between the disciples' understanding and reality. Jesus spoke of death's sleep (koimesis), but they thought natural sleep (hupnos). This hermeneutical note teaches proper biblical interpretation: understanding Jesus' words requires spiritual perception. John's clarification demonstrates the Gospel's catechetical purpose—teaching proper understanding of Christ's teaching.

Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.

View commentary
Jesus abandons metaphor and speaks plainly: 'Lazarus is dead.' His directness accommodates the disciples' understanding, demonstrating pastoral wisdom. Christ adjusts His communication to His audience's capacity without compromising truth. The blunt announcement prepares them for what they will witness, preventing the shock of discovering Lazarus' death upon arrival. This models clear communication in spiritual leadership.

And I am glad for your sakes that I was not there, to the intent ye may believe; nevertheless let us go unto him.

View commentary
Jesus expresses gladness 'for your sakes'—not about Lazarus' death but about the opportunity for strengthened faith. His absence from Bethany was providential, allowing death to occur and greater glory to result. The purpose clause 'that ye may believe' indicates the miracle's evidential design. This demonstrates God's sovereignty: even Jesus' geographical location serves divine purposes. The phrase anticipates growth in the disciples' faith through witnessing resurrection power.

Then said Thomas, which is called Didymus, unto his fellowdisciples, Let us also go, that we may die with him.

View commentary
Thomas, called Didymus (twin), speaks with resigned courage, urging fellow disciples to accompany Jesus to death. His statement reveals both devotion and misunderstanding—he expects Jesus' death but not resurrection. Thomas' words echo Job's fatalism ('let us die') yet demonstrate loyalty. His courage deserves commendation even while his understanding remains incomplete. This previews Thomas' later doubt (20:24-29), showing consistency in his need for tangible evidence.

I Am the Resurrection and the Life

Then when Jesus came, he found that he had lain in the grave four days already.

View commentary
Jesus arrives to find Lazarus four days dead, confirming He delayed purposefully. Jewish tradition held the soul lingered three days; the fourth day marked irreversible death and bodily decay. This timing eliminates any naturalistic explanation (coma, mistaken death). The specific detail authenticates the account and magnifies the miracle. Four days also suggests Jesus received the message, waited two days, then traveled two days—perfect divine timing.

Now Bethany was nigh unto Jerusalem, about fifteen furlongs off: about: that is, about two miles

View commentary
John notes Bethany's proximity to Jerusalem (about fifteen furlongs/two miles), explaining the many Jews present (v. 19). This geographical detail serves apologetic purpose: the miracle occurred near the religious capital with many witnesses. The nearness to Jerusalem also heightens narrative tension—Jesus performs His greatest sign within reach of those plotting His death. This proximity is providential, leading directly to the Sanhedrin's final decision (11:47-53).

And many of the Jews came to Martha and Mary , to comfort them concerning their brother.

View commentary
Many Jews came to comfort Martha and Mary, demonstrating the family's social standing and the Jewish custom of mourning. The Greek verb suggests continuous action—they kept coming. This gathering becomes an audience for the miracle, providing numerous witnesses from Jerusalem itself. Their presence fulfills divine purpose: they would testify to religious leaders about what they witnessed. Even mourning customs serve God's sovereign plan.

Then Martha, as soon as she heard that Jesus was coming, went and met him: but Mary sat still in the house.

View commentary
Martha's immediate response to Jesus' arrival demonstrates her active temperament, contrasting with Mary who 'sat still in the house.' Martha's action fulfills her character seen earlier (Luke 10:40). She goes to meet Jesus outside the village, perhaps for privacy or to intercept Him before the crowd. Her initiative demonstrates faith seeking Jesus, while Mary's stillness may indicate deeper grief or different temperament. Both responses are valid; Christ accepts diverse personalities.

Then said Martha unto Jesus, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.

View commentary
Martha's statement expresses both faith and gentle reproach. 'If thou hadst been here' implies Jesus' presence prevents death, showing confidence in His power. Yet the conditional reveals disappointment—she believes He could have prevented this had He come sooner. Her words wrestle with divine sovereignty and human suffering. Martha speaks honestly to Jesus, modeling authentic prayer that expresses both faith and questions. Her struggle is holy ground.

But I know, that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee.

View commentary
Martha's faith rises above disappointment. Despite what has happened, she affirms ongoing confidence: 'even now' God will grant Jesus' requests. She doesn't explicitly request Lazarus' resurrection—perhaps not daring to hope—but expresses open-ended faith. Her words demonstrate the Reformed doctrine of progressive faith: despite incomplete understanding, she trusts Christ's access to the Father and divine willingness to answer. This faith will be rewarded beyond her imagination.

Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise again.

View commentary
Jesus' promise 'Thy brother shall rise again' is deliberately ambiguous, capable of two interpretations: general resurrection at the last day, or immediate resurrection. This ambiguity tests Martha's faith and understanding. Christ's words are absolutely true either way, demonstrating how divine truth operates on multiple levels. The promise's openness draws out Martha's theology (v. 24) before revealing fuller truth. This pedagogical method develops faith through progressive revelation.

Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.

View commentary
Martha affirms orthodox Jewish belief in future resurrection at the last day, based on Daniel 12:2 and Pharisaic teaching. Her theology is sound but incomplete—she expects distant future fulfillment, not present reality. This reveals how correct doctrine can miss Christ's immediate power. Jesus doesn't correct her theology but transcends it. Her statement sets up Jesus' revolutionary self-identification (v. 25), showing how Old Testament hope finds fulfillment in His person.

Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

View commentary
Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live. This verse contains one of Jesus' seven "I AM" (ego eimi, ἐγώ εἰμι) declarations in John's Gospel, deliberately echoing God's self-revelation to Moses as "I AM WHO I AM" (Exodus 3:14). Jesus doesn't merely promise future resurrection or teach about life—He claims to BE resurrection and life incarnate. The Greek present tense eimi (εἰμί) asserts timeless, eternal identity: Jesus IS (not was or will be) resurrection and life.

The double claim—"the resurrection AND the life"—addresses both future eschatological hope and present spiritual reality. "Resurrection" (anastasis, ἀνάστασις) promises bodily raising of believers at the last day (John 6:40, 44, 54). "Life" (zoe, ζωή) refers not merely to biological existence but eternal, abundant life in relationship with God that begins now (John 10:10; 17:3). Jesus offers both immediate spiritual life and ultimate physical resurrection.

"He that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live" promises that physical death cannot sever believers from Christ or prevent their resurrection. The paradox—dead yet living—reveals that true life transcends biological function. This statement to Martha before raising Lazarus demonstrates that resurrection isn't merely about resuscitating corpses but about Jesus' power over death itself. Christ's identity as Life-Giver grounds Christian hope: because Jesus lives, we shall live also (John 14:19).

And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

View commentary
Jesus declares 'whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die' (pas ho zon kai pisteuon eis eme ou me apothane eis ton aiona). The participles 'living' and 'believing' describe continuous states, not momentary actions. The combination indicates that spiritual life and faith in Christ are inseparable - true life consists in believing in Jesus. The promise 'shall never die' employs the emphatic double negative ou me, indicating absolute impossibility. The phrase eis ton aiona (forever, unto the age) emphasizes the eternal dimension. Physical death is not denied - Lazarus had died and would die again. But Jesus promises that those who believe in Him shall never experience eternal death - separation from God. This verse distinguishes biological cessation from spiritual death. For believers, physical death becomes a passage rather than termination. Life in Christ transcends mortality.

She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.

View commentary
Martha's confession ranks among Scripture's greatest Christological affirmations, paralleling Peter's at Caesarea Philippi (Matt 16:16). She confesses Jesus as 'the Christ' (Messiah), 'the Son of God' (deity), and the one prophesied who 'should come into the world' (John 6:14). This threefold confession demonstrates full-orbed faith in Jesus' identity. Her confession comes before the miracle, showing faith precedes sight. This validates Jesus' teaching that spiritual birth precedes spiritual sight (3:3).

And when she had so said, she went her way, and called Mary her sister secretly, saying, The Master is come, and calleth for thee.

View commentary
Martha returns and calls Mary secretly, using the term 'Master' (Didaskalos/Teacher), showing Jesus' teaching role. The secrecy may reflect desire for private conversation or concern about the hostile Jews present. Martha's words 'he calleth for thee' suggest Jesus had made a request, though not recorded. Her role as messenger shows Martha's servant heart. The sisters' different approaches continue—Martha intercepts, then brings Mary. This demonstrates complementary gifts in Christ's service.

As soon as she heard that, she arose quickly, and came unto him.

View commentary
Mary rises 'quickly' upon hearing Jesus calls for her, demonstrating eager response to Christ's summons. The Greek verb suggests immediate, urgent action. Her swift obedience contrasts with her earlier sitting (v. 20), showing how Christ's call mobilizes the grieving soul. This models the Christian life: remaining in position until Christ calls, then immediate response. Her action demonstrates that true contemplation leads to quick obedience, not passivity.

Now Jesus was not yet come into the town, but was in that place where Martha met him.

View commentary
John clarifies that Jesus had not yet entered the village but remained where Martha met Him. This geographical detail explains the narrative sequence and maintains historical precision. Jesus' position outside the village may reflect deliberate choice—controlling the encounter's setting and timing. It also allows Martha and Mary private audience before the crowd arrives. This detail demonstrates John's eyewitness accuracy and Christ's intentional movement through these events.

The Jews then which were with her in the house, and comforted her, when they saw Mary, that she rose up hastily and went out, followed her, saying, She goeth unto the grave to weep there.

View commentary
The mourners misinterpret Mary's swift departure, assuming she goes to weep at the tomb, a common mourning practice. Their mistaken assumption leads them to follow, inadvertently becoming witnesses to the miracle. This demonstrates divine providence—even misunderstanding serves God's purposes. Their presence ensures multiple Jerusalem witnesses to Lazarus' resurrection. God's sovereignty orchestrates circumstances so that even unintended actions fulfill His design.

Then when Mary was come where Jesus was, and saw him, she fell down at his feet, saying unto him, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.

View commentary
Mary's words exactly echo Martha's (v. 21), suggesting the sisters discussed this repeatedly during Jesus' absence: 'If only He had been here.' Her falling at His feet demonstrates humility and worship, contrasting Martha's standing conversation. Mary's posture reflects her contemplative nature (Luke 10:39). Both sisters express identical faith and disappointment, showing how different personalities process identical grief. Jesus accepts both approaches—Martha's active dialogue and Mary's prostrate worship.

When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled , was troubled: Gr. he troubled himself

View commentary
Jesus' deep emotional response is profound. The Greek 'embrimaomai' (groaned in spirit) suggests intense indignation or strong emotion, possibly anger at sin and death. 'Troubled himself' indicates deliberate emotional engagement—Jesus chose to enter fully into human grief. His response shows both His humanity (genuine emotion) and deity (righteous anger at death's ravage). Christ doesn't merely sympathize; He shares our sorrow. This validates emotional expression in Christian faith.

And said, Where have ye laid him? They said unto him, Lord, come and see.

View commentary
Jesus asks where Lazarus was laid, demonstrating His human knowledge operating within incarnational limitations. Though omniscient as God, Jesus chose experiential knowledge as man. This question serves pedagogical purpose, drawing the crowd to the tomb and heightening anticipation. It also shows Jesus' respectful engagement with mourning customs. The invitation 'Come and see' brings witnesses to the miracle site, ensuring testimony's credibility.

Jesus wept.

View commentary
This verse, the shortest in Scripture, conveys profound theology through simplicity: 'Jesus wept' (edakrysen ho Iesous). The verb dakryo means to shed tears, indicating genuine emotional expression. This moment reveals Christ's full humanity - He experiences grief, sorrow, and compassion. The context shows Jesus approaching Lazarus' tomb, surrounded by mourning sisters and friends. Though Jesus knew He would raise Lazarus, He still wept. This demonstrates that foreknowledge of resurrection does not invalidate present sorrow. Jesus enters fully into human suffering rather than remaining emotionally distant. His tears reveal God's compassion for human pain. This verse also addresses potential misunderstandings of Jesus' divinity that might suggest impassibility - God suffers with His people. The tears authenticate Jesus' humanity against Docetic heresies that denied He truly experienced human emotions.

Then said the Jews, Behold how he loved him!

View commentary
The Jews correctly interpret Jesus' tears as evidence of His love for Lazarus. Their observation affirms Christ's genuine humanity and emotional depth. These witnesses testify to authentic love, not pretense. However, they see only surface truth—Jesus weeps not merely for Lazarus but for all death's devastation. His tears demonstrate the Incarnate Word's complete identification with human sorrow. The shortest verse in Scripture (v. 35) carries enormous theological weight about Christ's compassionate high priesthood (Heb 4:15).

And some of them said, Could not this man, which opened the eyes of the blind, have caused that even this man should not have died?

View commentary
Some observers question why Jesus, who opened blind eyes (chapter 9), didn't prevent Lazarus' death. Their logic is sound but limited—they assume prevention superior to resurrection. This reveals human tendency to prefer avoiding suffering over witnessing greater redemption through it. Their question anticipates Jesus' greater answer: not merely preventing death but conquering it. This parallels God's redemptive pattern—not preventing the Fall but redeeming through the Cross.

Jesus Raises Lazarus

Jesus therefore again groaning in himself cometh to the grave. It was a cave, and a stone lay upon it.

View commentary
Jesus again groans deeply (same term as v. 33), demonstrating sustained emotional engagement. He comes to the tomb, a cave with a stone barrier, typical of first-century Jewish burial. Christ's approach to the tomb symbolizes His confrontation with death itself. The scene previews His own tomb experience—cave sealed by stone, soon to be opened in resurrection. Jesus' groaning may reflect righteous anger at death's power and Satan's temporary victory through sin. He approaches as divine warrior about to plunder death's domain.

Jesus said, Take ye away the stone. Martha, the sister of him that was dead, saith unto him, Lord, by this time he stinketh: for he hath been dead four days.

View commentary
Jesus commands the stone's removal, requiring human cooperation in divine miracle. Martha's protest about decay (four days dead) reflects natural human concerns. Her 'Lord' address shows respect despite objection. The Greek 'ozei' (stinks) is blunt—she expects putrefaction's odor. Martha's practical concern contrasts her earlier faith confession (v. 27), revealing how confession and trust coexist with doubt. Jesus will work despite human weakness and natural decay. Nothing is too far gone for resurrection power.

Jesus saith unto her, Said I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God?

View commentary
Jesus gently rebukes Martha by recalling His earlier promise (v. 23-26). The conditional 'if thou wouldest believe' doesn't question her faith but calls for its actualization. Believing isn't passive assent but active trust that yields to God's word despite appearances. 'Thou shouldest see the glory of God' promises revelation contingent on faith. This order—believe, then see—reverses human preference. Glory manifests not to produce faith but to those exercising faith. This models the principle: faith precedes sight (2 Cor 5:7).

Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me.

View commentary
They remove the stone at Jesus' command. Jesus lifts His eyes upward, signifying prayer to the Father. His posture demonstrates dependence and communion, modeling prayer for disciples. The address 'Father' reflects intimate relationship, not formal religious distance. Thanksgiving precedes petition—'I thank thee that thou hast heard me'—expressed in past tense, showing confidence that prayer was already answered. This demonstrates perfect faith: Jesus thanks God before the visible result. His prayer life models the believer's confident access to God.

And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me.

View commentary
Jesus declares His confidence: the Father 'always' hears Him. This reveals perfect communion between Father and Son, grounded in their ontological unity. Yet Jesus prays aloud 'because of the people,' making this prayer pedagogical rather than necessary for divine transaction. The purpose clause 'that they may believe' shows Jesus' public prayer serves evangelistic and discipleship purposes. This demonstrates that Christ's ministry, even His prayer life, aimed at producing faith. Prayer becomes testimony to God's responsiveness and Christ's divine sonship.

And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth.

View commentary
The 'loud voice' demonstrates Christ's authority over death—He commands as Creator. Calling 'Lazarus' by name is significant: had He merely said 'Come forth', all the dead might have risen. This foreshadows John 5:28-29 where all in graves will hear His voice. The present tense urgency emphasizes immediate obedience even from death. This miracle provides irrefutable proof of Christ's claim: 'I am the resurrection and the life' (11:25).

And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.

View commentary
Lazarus emerges from the tomb still bound in burial wrappings, requiring human assistance for full liberation. Jesus commands 'Loose him, and let him go,' delegating final ministry to bystanders. This demonstrates partnership between divine power (resurrection) and human service (unwrapping). Lazarus' emergence while bound proves resurrection authenticity—no fraud could walk while wrapped. The image of bound resurrection previews our spiritual state: made alive but needing sanctification's progressive loosing from sin's grave clothes.

The Plot to Kill Jesus

Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him.

View commentary
Many Jews who witnessed the miracle believed in Jesus. The Greek 'episteusan eis' indicates genuine saving faith, not mere intellectual assent. This fulfills Jesus' stated purpose (v. 42)—the miracle produces faith. However, not all believe (v. 46), demonstrating that even resurrection evidence doesn't guarantee faith. Belief requires both witness and Spirit-wrought receptivity. This validates Reformed soteriology: external evidence alone doesn't produce saving faith without divine election and regeneration.

But some of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them what things Jesus had done.

View commentary
Some witnesses report the miracle to the Pharisees, either from duty or malice. Their action demonstrates that evidence doesn't automatically produce faith—same event, opposite responses. These reporters likely sought to oppose Jesus rather than honestly inquire. Their report triggers the Sanhedrin's final decision to kill Jesus (v. 47-53), making this miracle the proximate cause of the crucifixion. Ironically, the greatest sign of life precipitates the plot to kill the Life-Giver. This demonstrates God's sovereignty: even opposition serves redemptive purposes.

Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles.

View commentary
The chief priests and Pharisees convene the Sanhedrin, acknowledging Jesus performs 'many miracles' (literally 'signs'). Their question 'What do we?' reveals political calculation, not spiritual inquiry. They don't dispute the miracles' reality but debate the response. This demonstrates hardened hearts—even undeniable evidence doesn't penetrate willful unbelief. Their concern is pragmatic (maintaining power) not theological (seeking truth). This validates Jesus' teaching about those who wouldn't believe even if one rose from the dead (Luke 16:31).

If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.

View commentary
The council fears that universal belief in Jesus will provoke Roman intervention, destroying 'our place and nation.' 'Our place' likely means the Temple and their religious authority. Their concern is self-preservation disguised as patriotism. Ironically, rejecting Messiah brings the very judgment they fear—Rome destroyed Jerusalem in AD 70. This demonstrates that human schemes to prevent God's will accomplish it. Their statement also reveals spiritual blindness: they fear losing what they should surrender. Security comes through faith in Messiah, not political maneuvering.

And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all ,

View commentary
Caiaphas, that year's high priest, speaks with unconscious prophetic authority. His position gives weight to his pragmatic calculation despite his evil intent. The phrase 'that same year' emphasizes the providential timing—the year of Jesus' sacrifice. Caiaphas' insult 'ye know nothing at all' reveals arrogant certainty while he himself unknowingly speaks God's truth. This demonstrates how God uses even evil agents to accomplish His purposes, validating Joseph's words: 'ye thought evil...but God meant it unto good' (Gen 50:20).

Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.

View commentary
Caiaphas articulates expedient politics: one man's death saves the nation. His calculation is coldly pragmatic—better Jesus die than risk Roman retaliation. He speaks 'not of himself' but prophetically (v. 51), unknowingly declaring substitutionary atonement's core truth: one dies for many. His evil intent can't prevent his words from carrying divine truth. This demonstrates the doctrine of verbal inspiration—God can communicate truth even through unwilling or unknowing agents. The statement foreshadows the cross's purpose.

And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;

View commentary
John provides inspired commentary: Caiaphas prophesied 'not of himself.' Despite personal evil, his high priestly office carried prophetic function. The Old Testament pattern continues—God speaks through the office regardless of the officer's character (Num 22-24). Caiaphas unknowingly prophesied that Jesus would die 'for that nation'—substitutionary atonement in precise language. This demonstrates God's meticulous sovereignty: even the plot to kill Jesus fulfills redemptive prophecy. The high priest who condemns the sacrifice becomes the mouthpiece for sacrifice's meaning.

And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.

View commentary
John expands Caiaphas' prophecy beyond Israel to include gathering God's scattered children worldwide into one. This reveals the cross's cosmic scope—not merely national but universal salvation. The phrase 'children of God scattered abroad' refers to elect Gentiles destined for inclusion in Christ's church. 'Gather together in one' anticipates the one fold under one Shepherd (10:16) and fulfills Abrahamic covenant promises to bless all nations. This demonstrates Reformed doctrine of particular redemption: Christ died specifically for His elect people.

Then from that day forth they took counsel together for to put him to death.

View commentary
From this day forward, the Sanhedrin formally plotted Jesus' death. Lazarus' resurrection became the tipping point—the greatest sign producing the greatest opposition. The phrase 'took counsel together' indicates official action, moving from occasional hostility to systematic conspiracy. This demonstrates the hardness of human hearts: even resurrection evidence can harden rather than soften rejection. Their plot fulfills prophecy (Ps 2:2) and divine plan. What appears as human initiative serves God's redemptive purposes established before time.

Jesus therefore walked no more openly among the Jews; but went thence unto a country near to the wilderness, into a city called Ephraim, and there continued with his disciples.

View commentary
Jesus responds to the death plot by withdrawing from public ministry among hostile Jews. He goes to Ephraim, a small town near the wilderness, demonstrating wisdom in avoiding premature death. This strategic withdrawal shows divine sovereignty over timing: Jesus dies at the appointed hour, not before. His withdrawal also fulfills Scripture's pattern of the rejected prophet. The phrase 'no more openly' indicates continued but restricted ministry. Even Jesus' geographical movements serve redemptive timing.

And the Jews' passover was nigh at hand: and many went out of the country up to Jerusalem before the passover, to purify themselves.

View commentary
The Jews' Passover approaches, bringing pilgrims to Jerusalem for ritual purification. This chronological note builds tension—Jesus' death at Passover fulfills typology. The crowds' early arrival for purification rites demonstrates religious devotion to ceremonial law while missing the substance. They cleanse externally for lamb's sacrifice, unknowingly preparing for the Lamb of God's sacrifice. This irony demonstrates how ritualism can blind people to reality. Their purification rites preview the purification Christ's blood will accomplish.

Then sought they for Jesus, and spake among themselves, as they stood in the temple, What think ye, that he will not come to the feast?

View commentary
The crowds seek Jesus and question His Passover attendance. Their seeking is curiosity, not faith—they want spectacle, not salvation. The question 'What think ye? Will he come?' reveals speculation about whether danger will prevent Jesus' appearance. They underestimate His sovereignty and courage. Their doubt contrasts Jesus' certain knowledge of His appointed time. This demonstrates the difference between crowds' curiosity and disciples' commitment. Their question will be answered: Jesus comes not despite danger but because of divine appointment.

Now both the chief priests and the Pharisees had given a commandment, that, if any man knew where he were, he should shew it, that they might take him.

View commentary
The Sanhedrin issues official orders: anyone knowing Jesus' location must report it for arrest. This demonstrates escalating persecution—from debate to conspiracy to manhunt. The commandment corrupts justice, requiring citizens to betray a teacher. This totalitarian demand previews future Christian persecution. The order also demonstrates the council's fear and desperation—they recognize their inability to control Jesus without public cooperation. Their edict sets the stage for Judas' betrayal, showing how institutional corruption enables individual sin.

Test Your Knowledge

Continue Your Study