John 12:33

This he said, signifying what death he should die--that is, "by being lifted up from the earth" on "the accursed tree" (Joh 3:14; Joh 8:28).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

(33) By what death he should die.—Better, by what manner of death . . . (Comp. Joh_18:32.) The words are the Apostle’s interpretation of the saying of our Lord. He remembers it as he has recorded it twice before (Joh_3:14; Joh_8:28), but he adds here words (“from the earth”) which supply another thought, though the two thoughts are not inconsistent. The words bear the double sense, and looking back upon the fact of the Crucifixion, he sees in that a lifting up which was part of the great moral victory over the world, and in the very cross of shame he sees the throne of glory.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

33. what death] Literally, by what manner of death: comp. Joh_10:32, Joh_18:32, Joh_21:9.

should die] The word translated ‘should’ is the same as that used of the traitor, Joh_12:4 and Joh_6:71. It is used (1) of what is about to happen, (2) of what (seeing that it has happened) may be regarded as necessary and fore-ordained.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The people answered him,.... Not the Greeks, but the Jews, and these not such as were friends to Christ, but cavillers at him:

we have heard out of the law; not the five books of Moses, but the Prophets, and Hagiographa; even all the books of the Old Testament are called the law; See Gill on Joh 10:34;

that Christ abideth for ever; referring to those places which speak of the perpetuity of his priesthood and the everlasting duration of his kingdom, Psa 110:4, in which last text express mention is made of the son of man, and that and the first may be more especially respected; from whence it appears, that these passages were understood of the Messiah by the ancient Jews: they knew he was designed in Psa 110:4. He is David's Lord that was bid to sit at the right hand of Jehovah, after he was raised from the dead, and had ascended on high; whose Gospel went forth with power, and whose people, by it, were made willing to submit to him, to his righteousness, and the sceptre of his kingdom; and who also is a priest for ever; and which is appealed to as a proof of the nature, kind, and duration of Christ's priesthood, Heb 5:6; and so it may be observed it is expressly applied to him by Jewish writers: in Zac 4:14 it is said "these are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth"; of which this interpretation is given (f).

"These are Aaron and the Messiah; and it would not be known which of them is (most) beloved, but that he says, Psa 110:4, "the Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, thou art a priest for ever"; from whence it is manifest that the Messiah is more beloved than Aaron the righteous priest.''

And so another of them (g), speaking of Melchizedek, says,

"this is that which is written Psa 110:4, "the Lord hath sworn", &c. who is this? this is he that is just, and having salvation, the King Messiah, as it is said, Zac 9:9.''

So the 45th Psalm is understood by them of the Messiah; the King, in Psa 45:1, is by Ben Melech, said to be the King Messiah; Psa 45:2 is thus paraphrased by the Targum,

"thy beauty, O King Messiah, is more excellent than the children of men.''

And Aben Ezra observes, that this Psalm is either concerning David, or the Messiah his son, whose name is David, Eze 37:25 (h); and the passage in Psa 72:17 is frequently interpreted of the Messiah and his name, and is brought as a proof of the antiquity of it (i); and Psa 89:36 is also applied to him; and as for Dan 7:13, that is by many, both ancient and modern Jews, explained of the Messiah (k) and since then they understood these passages of him, it is easy to observe from whence they took this notion that the Messiah should abide for ever; but then they should have observed out of the same law, or Holy Scriptures, that the Messiah was to be stricken and cut off, was to be brought to the dust of death, and to pour out his soul unto death; all which is consistent with his abiding for ever, in his person and office; for though according to the said writings, he was to die and be buried, yet he was not to see corruption; he was to rise again, ascend on high, sit at the right hand of God, and rule till all his enemies became his footstool; his sufferings were to be in the way, and in order to his entrance into the glory that should always abide. The Jews have entertained a notion that Messiah the son of David shall not die, and they lay down this as a rule, that if anyone sets up for a Messiah, and does not prosper, but is slain, it is a plain case he is not the Messiah; so all the wise men at first thought that Ben Coziba was the Messiah, but when he was slain it was known to them that he was not (l). And upon this principle these Jews confront the Messiahship of Jesus, saying,

and how sayest thou, the son of man must be lifted up? for it seems Christ used the phrase the son of man in his discourse, though John has not recorded it; he attending to his sense, and not to his express words. The Jews rightly understood him, that by the son of man he meant the Messiah, and by his being lifted up, his death; but they did not understand, how the Messiah could die, and yet abide for ever; and therefore since he intended himself by the son of man, they concluded he talked very inconsistent with the Scriptures, and with the character he assumed, and ask very pertly,

who is this son of man? is there any other son of man besides the Messiah? and can the son of man, that is the Messiah, be lifted up, or die, who is to abide for ever? and if thou art to be lifted up, or die, thou art not the Messiah or Daniel's son of man, whose kingdom is everlasting: but how come the Jews themselves to say, that the days of the Messiah, according to some, are but forty years, according to others seventy, according to others, three hundred and sixty five (m)? yea, they say, he shall be as other men, marry, have children, and then die (n). And how comes it to pass that Messiah ben Joseph shall be slain (o)? the truth of the matter is this, they having lost the true sense of the prophecies concerning the Messiah, and observing some that seem to differ, and which they know not how to reconcile, have fancied two Messiahs, the one that will be much distressed and be overcome and be slain; the other, who will be potent and victorious.

(f) Abot R. Nathan, c. 34. (g) R. Moses Hadarsan in Galatin. de cath. ver. l. 10. c. 6. (h) Vid. Tzeror Hammor, fol. 49. 2. (i) T. Bab. Pesachim, fol. 54. 1. Nedarim, fol. 39. 2. Bereshit Rabba, fol. 1, 2. Echa Rabbati, fol. 50. 2. Pirke Eliezer, c. 32. (k) Zohar in Gen. fol. 85. 4. Bemidbar Rabba, sect. 13. fol. 209. 4. Jarchi & Sandiah Gaon in Dan. vii. 13. & R. Jeshua in Aben Ezra in ib. (l) Maimon Hilchot Melacim, c. 11. sect. 3, 4. Vid. Bereshit Rabba, sect. 98. fol. 86. 2. (m) T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 99. 1. (n) Maimon. in Misn. Sanhedrin, c. 11. sect. 1. (o) T. Bab. Succa, fol. 52. 1.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

33 This he said, signifying what death he should die.

Ver. 33. Signifying what death, &c.] Be lifted up between heaven and earth, as Absalom was, Absolon Marte furens pensilis arbore obit, who therein, saith Gretser the Jesuit, became a lively figure of Christ crucified. Sed o mirum et delirum figurativae crucis fabrum!

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

33. What death he should die—The words lifted up signified the exaltation upon the cross. But the Evangelist also means that our Lord’s wonderful words signify the stupendous import contained in the very nature of his death.

Here clearly terminates the address of our Lord before the Greeks. At its beginning they are evidently included in the them of Joh_12:23, with the disciples; in Joh_12:29, when the people speak, they fall into the background; and at the present verse all reference to them in the topic disappears, and the people are all. What impression was made upon these Greeks by the solemn language and manner of the mysterious being before them, we are vainly curious to know. But it is a remarkable point of contact between the Jew and the Greek, being the offer of salvation from one to the other. Japhet is here invited into the tents of Shem. Perhaps he comes not now, but our Lord’s very discourse predicts that he yet will come, in fulfilment of ancient prophecy, when the fulness of the Gentiles shall come in.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

33. ποἱῳ θ. By what manner of death (Joh 10:32, Joh 18:32, Joh 21:9). For ἤμελλεν see on Joh 6:71.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

33.] ποίῳ θαν. can hardly mean more than by what manner of death. Lampe (“non nude significat quo genere mortis, sed in sensu latiori qualitatem mortis, etiam internam involvit, adeoque ad fructus etiam hujus mortis respicit”) and Stier find in the word the whole consequences and character of His Death: but see ch. 18:32.

John does not say that this was all that ὑψωθῶ meant, but that it was its first and obvious reference.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

33. τοῦτο δὲ ἔλεγεν, introducing a comment of the evangelist, as at 2:21, 6:6, “this He was saying, etc.” (For the impft. ἔλεγεν, cf. 5:18, 6:71, 8:31.) This explanatory comment is repeated 18:32, and it shows the interpretation which Jn. gives to ὑψωθῶ. In the Fourth Gospel ὑψοῦν always has reference to the lifting up of the Son of Man on the Cross. See note on 3:14.

σημαίνων ποίῳ θανάτῳ κτλ. Cf. 21:19.

ἤμελλεν. So ABDW. א has ἔμελλεν. Perhaps ἤμελλεν ἀποθνήσκειν, as also at 11:51, 18:32, carries the idea of the inevitableness of the Death of Jesus, as foreordained by God. See on 6:71.

The People Ask Who the “Son of Man” Is (V. 34), and Jesus Warns Them to Use the Light While They Can (vv. 35, 36)

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Ver. 33. “Now this he said, signifying by what death he should die.”

This explanation of John is declared to be false by some modern interpreters (Meyer, Reuss, etc.), Jesus having spoken, according to them, of the Ascension, not of the cross. But we have seen that the idea of the cross was necessarily implied in the preceding words, and it must, indeed, be remarked that the apostle does not say δηλῶν, declaring, plainly, but only σημαίνων, indicating, giving to understand. John means simply to say that in giving this form to His thought, Jesus gives an anticipatory hint of the kind of death which He must undergo. Reuss would indeed draw from this false explanation of the Evangelist a proof in favor of the authenticity of the words of Joh 12:32. We think we have better reasons for holding the authenticity. This striking passage in which Jesus, after having shuddered in view of the cross, strengthened Himself by tracing in broad outlines the picture of the immense revolution which it will effect, may be compared with that of St. Paul, Col 2:14-15, where that apostle represents Jesus as making a spectacle of the infernal powers, despoiling them of their power and triumphing over them on the cross. Comp. also the passage, 2Co 5:14-17, according to which the death of Christ is virtually a principle of death for the whole human race, but thereby the means of universal renewal. According to the Jewish programme, the Messianic kingdom was to be the glorification of the earth, and the Messiah the visible sovereign of this new Eden; how could the Messianic character of Jesus, therefore, accord with the idea of leaving the earth? Hence the following question of the Jews, Joh 12:34.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.