John 18:34

34. answered him] Omit ‘him:’ the introductions to Joh_18:34-36 are alike in form and are solemn in their brevity. The Synoptists give merely a portion of the reply in Joh_18:37.

tell it thee] ‘It’ is not in the original and need not be supplied. Jesus claims a right to know the author of the charge. Moreover the meaning of the title, and therefore the truth of it, would depend on the person who used it. In Pilate’s sense He was not King; in another sense He was.

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.

18:34-35 Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his question. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Joh 18:34. Ἄλλοι, others) This was calculated to rouse the conscience of Pilate, so as that he should not simply [without corroborative proof] believe the Jews. It was altogether the statement of ‘others,’ namely, the Jews,—those outside namely, when Jesus had been already by this time introduced into the Pretorium or judgment-hall. Jesus was wishing Pilate to observe this part of His question: Pilate lays hold (fastens) on the former part of it, not without anger.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 18:34 . Jesus answers by asking: Ἀφʼ ἑαυτοῦ σὺ τοὺτο λέγεις …; Pilate’s reply, “Am I a Jew?” precludes all interpretations, however inviting (see especially Alford and Oscar Holtzmann), but the simple one: “Do you make this inquiry from any serious personal interest and with any keen apprehension of the blessings attached to the Kingdom of God, or are you merely echoing a formal charge brought against me by others?”

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

34. Note the solemn brevity of the introductions to Joh 18:34-36. Jesus demands that the responsibility of making this charge against Him be laid on the right persons. Moreover the meaning of the charge, and therefore the truth of it, would depend on the person making it. In Pilate’s sense He was not King; in another sense He was. Note that He asks for information; see on Joh 11:17; Joh 11:34.

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.

Jesus answered . . . Sayest thou this of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?--an important question for our Lord's case, to bring out whether the word "King" were meant in a political sense, with which Pilate had a right to deal, or whether he were merely put up to it by His accusers, who had no claims to charge Him but such as were of a purely religious nature, with which Pilate had nothing to do.

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

Verse 34. Sayest thou this thing of thyself] That is, Is it because my enemies thus accuse me, or because thou hast any suspicion of me, that thou askest this question?

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(34) Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?—The most probable interpretation of the question is that which regards it as establishing a distinction between the title “King of the Jews” as spoken by Pilate and the same title as spoken by Jesus. In the political sense in which Pilate would use it, and in this sense only the claim could be brought against Him in Roman law, He was not King of the Jews. In the theocratic sense in which a Jew would use that title, He was King of the Jews.

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

Jesus answered him, sayest thou this thing of thyself,.... That he was the king of the Jews: Christ's meaning is, whether he asserted this from the sentiments of his own mind; or moved the question from anything he himself had observed, which might give him just ground to suspect that he had, or intended to set up himself as the king of that nation:

or did others tell it thee of me? Whether the Jews had not intimated some such thing to him, out of malice and ill will? not but that Christ full well knew where the truth of this lay; but he was desirous of convincing Pilate of his weakness, if he so judged of himself, and of his imprudence and hastiness, if he took up this from others; and also to expose the baseness and wickedness of the Jews, to charge him with this, when they themselves would have made him a temporal king, and he refused; and when he had not only paid tribute himself to Caesar, but had exhorted them to do the like.

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

34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?

Ver. 34. Sayest thou this of thyself] As who should say, If thou dost this of thyself, what reason is it that thou shouldest be both judge and witness? if others have done it, why are not mine accusers brought face to face? If to be accused be enough to make a man guilty, none shall be innocent. Judges are to proceed secundum allegata et probata. acording to the chages and what can be proven.

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.

Of thyself - From any conviction of your own mind, or any apprehension of danger. During all the time in which you have been praetor, have you seen anything in me that has led you to apprehend sedition or danger to the Roman power? This evidently was intended to remind Pilate that nothing was proved against him, and to caution him against being influenced by the malicious accusations of others. Jesus demanded a just trial, and claimed that Pilate should not be influenced by any reports that he might have heard of him.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Our Saviour neither affirms nor denies: though we are bound, whenever we speak, to speak the truth, yet we are not bound at all times to speak the whole truth. Our Saviour desireth to be satisfied from Pilate, whether he asked him as a private person for his own satisfaction, or as a judge, having received any such accusation against him? For if he asked him as a judge, he was bound to call them to the proof of what they had charged him with.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

34. Of thyself—Does Pilate ask the question after the royalty of Jesus in a Roman, or a Hebrew sense? If the former, then Jesus claims not to be a king: that is, a political king. If in the Hebrew sense, then he asks, “Are you the Messiah?” the Anointed Prince of the realm of holiness? then truly he is a king; a king of whom all earthly kings are but a shadow.

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

34.] On this whole interview, see note on Luke vv. 3, 4.

I regard this question ἀπὸ σεαυτ. κ.τ.λ. as intended to distinguish the senses of the word King as applied to Jesus: and of course not (De Wette, Lücke) for the information of Him who asked it, but to bring out this distinction in Pilate’s mind. If he asked of himself, the word could certainly have but one meaning, and that one would be wrongly applied;—if from information derived from the Jews, this very fact would open the way to the true meaning in which He was King of the Jews. Stier and Ebrard think there may be some reference in ἀπὸ σεαυτοῦ to a momentary earnestness in Pilate’s own mind,—a suspicion that his prisoner was what he was charged with being (see ch. 19:8, 12), from the mention of which he immediately (ver. 35) recoils, and implies the other side of the dilemma.

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

34. ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς. The rec. has ἀπεκρ. αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰης., but αὐτῷ is om. by ABCDsuppL and ὁ by BL. ἀπεκρ. Ἰησοῦς is a frequent Johannine opening (see on 1:29, but cf. v. 37 and 19:11). WΘ have ἀπεκρίνατο (see on 5:17).

Ἀπὸ σεαυτοῦ is the better reading (אBC*LN) as against the rec. Ἀφʼ ἑαυτοῦ (Θ).

The answer of Jesus is to put another question, viz. whether Pilate has any reason of his own, apart from the accusation just now made by the Jewish leaders (ἤ ἄλλοι εἶπον σοι περὶ ἐμοῦ;), for supposing that Jesus had claimed to be “King of the Jews.”

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