John 19:42

19:42 because it was the day of preparation for the Jewish Passover: See study note on 19:14. The Sabbath was approaching, so Joseph and Nicodemus (19:38-39) would return to complete the burial process later.

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

Joh 19:42 . “There, accordingly, on account of the preparation of the Jews, because the tomb was at hand, they laid Jesus.” The Friday was so nearly at an end that they had not time to go to any distance, and therefore availed themselves of the neighbouring tomb as a provisional, if not permanent, resting-place.

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

Verse 42. Because of the Jews' preparation] From this it may be conjectured that they had designed to have put him in a more magnificent tomb; or, that they intended to make one expressly for himself after the passover: or, that they had designed to have put him somewhere else, but could not do it for want of time; and that they put him here because the tomb was nigh. It appears plainly, from embalming, c., that none of these persons had any hope of the resurrection of Christ. They considered him as a great and eminent prophet, and treated him as such.

1. IN the burial of our Lord, a remarkable prophecy was fulfilled: His death was appointed with the wicked and with a rich man was his tomb. See Lowth on Isa 53:9. Every thing attending his mock trial, his passion, his death, his burial, c., afforded the fullest proof of his innocence. In still continuing to reject him, the Jews seem to have exceeded the ordinary bounds of incredulity and callousness of heart. One might imagine that a candid attention to the Gospel facts, collated with those passages in the law and in the prophets which they acknowledge to speak of the Messiah, would be sufficient to furnish them with the utmost evidence and fullest conviction that he is the Christ, and that they are to expect none other. But where people once make a covenant with unbelief, argument, reason, demonstration, and miracles themselves, fail to convince them. As their conviction, through this obstinacy, is rendered impossible, it belongs to God's justice to confound them. At present they have scarcely any correct knowledge of the true God and, while they continue to reject the genuine faith, they are capable of crediting the most degrading absurdities.

2. The holy sepulchre, or what has long passed for the burial place of our Lord, is now no more! On the following information the reader may depend: "On the night of October 11, 1808, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was discovered to be on fire; and between five and six in the morning the burning cupola, with all the melting and boiling lead upon it, fell in. The excessive heat which proceeded from this immense mass of liquid fire, caused not only the marble columns, which supported the gallery, to burst; but likewise the marble floor of the Church, together with the pilasters and images in bas relief that decorate the chapel, containing the holy sepulchre, situated in the centre of the church. Shortly after, the massive columns which supported the gallery, fell down, together with the whole of the walls." Thus has perished the famous church raised by the Empress Helena fourteen hundred years ago, over the place where the body of our blessed Lord was supposed to have been deposited, while he lay under the power of death. And thus has perished an engine of superstition, fraud, and imposture. To the most sinful purposes has this holy sepulchre been abused. The Greeks and Armenians have pretended that, on every Easter-eve, fire descends from heaven, and kindles all the lamps and candles in the place; and immense crowds of pilgrims frequent this place, on these occasions, in order to witness this ceremony, to light a taper at this sacred flame, and with these candles to singe and daub pieces of linen, which are afterwards to serve for winding sheets; for, says Mr. Maundrell, who was present, April 3rd, 1697, and witnessed the whole of this absurd and abominable ceremony, "it is the opinion of these poor people that, if they can but have the happiness to be buried in a shroud smutted with this celestial fire, it will certainly secure them from the flames of hell."

See the whole of his circumstantial account of this imposture, and the ridiculous and abominable ceremonies with which it is accompanied, in his Journey from Aleppo to Jerusalem, edit. 5th, pp. 94-97; and let the reader thank God that he is not degraded with a superstition that renders the grace of the Gospel of none effect.

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

(42) The Jews’ preparation day.—Comp. Joh_19:14; Joh_19:31, and Excursus F: The Day of the Crucifixion of our Lord, p. 559.

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

42. the Jews’ preparation day] Perhaps another slight indication that the Gospel was written outside Palestine. Or the addition ‘of the Jews’ may point to the time when there was already a Christian ‘preparation-day.’ See notes on ‘the Passover of the Jews’ (Joh_2:13; Joh_11:55).

It would seem as if the burial was hastily and temporarily performed. They probably intended after the Sabbath to make a more solemn and complete burial elsewhere.

was nigh at hand] Perhaps this fact suggested to Joseph the thought of going to Pilate. He had a sepulchre of his own close to Golgotha.

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.

There laid they Jesus therefore,.... Because it was a new sepulchre, and no man had been ever laid there before; and some other reasons are added:

because of the Jews' preparation day; either for the Chagigah, or the sabbath, which was just at hand; the Persic version reads, "the night of the sabbath": for this reason, they could not dig a grave purposely for him; for it was forbidden on feast days; and therefore they put him into a tomb ready made: the canon runs (i),

"they may not dig pits, "nor graves", on a solemn feast day.''

The former of these, the commentators say (k), are graves dug in the earth, and the latter edifices built over graves; and for the same reason, because it was such a day, they did not take his body to any of their houses, and embalm and anoint it, as they otherwise would have done; but this being a solemn day, and the sabbath drawing on apace, they hastened the interment, and took the most opportune place that offered:

for the sepulchre was nigh at hand; some say about an hundred and eight feet from the cross, and others an hundred and thirty feet, though some say but fifty or sixty, at furthest it was not far off.

(i) Misn. Moed Katon, c. 1. sect. 6. (k) Maimon. & Bartenora in ib.

Next: John Chapter 20

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

42 There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews’ preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.

Ver. 4:2. Because of the Jews] That they might not do servile work on the sabbath, though it were to inter Christ’s body. See Luk 23:56.

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.

There they immediately buried Christ, because the time strictly called the preparation (for the whole day was so called) was nigh at hand. See a fuller account of the history of our Saviour’s passion, death, and burial:

See Poole on "Mat 27:1", and following verse to Mat 27:66, where what is said by all the evangelists is compared together, and made one complete history.

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

There, therefore, by reason of the preparation of the Jews, for the sepulcher was nigh at hand, they laid Jesus. John assigns the rapidity with which the process could be completed as a reason for entombment in this particular garden sepulcher, and the ground of the urgency was the "preparation" solemnities. Once more the critics divide into two groups as to the significance of this reference to the date of the Lord"s death. It is obvious that both the synoptists and John imply that it was a "Friday," and that the next day was the sabbath. Why, for the third time in the space of a few lines, should this circumstance be noticed? On the first occasion, the morning of the day is said to be "the preparation of the Passover;" on the second it is called "preparation before the sabbath," and John adds that that particular sabbath was a "high day," which, as we have seen, is explained by remembering that its sanctity was doubled, seeing that on that particular year the weekly sabbath would coincide with the 15th of Nisan, which had a sabbatic value of its own. Now he says for the third time it was the "preparation of the Jews as we understand it, a day or a time when special preparations were being made by the Jews, and that before sunset, for the slaying of the Paschal lamb. Moreover, the sabbath was drawing on. (epefwsken , Luk_23:54) This threefold statement implies that there was something more in the paraskeuh than the Friday of the Passover week. It is curious to observe the precisely contradictory conclusions drawn from this statement by two classes of interpreters. Godet has given an interesting sketch (vol. 3. pp. 286, 287) of the extraordinary idea of M. Lutteroth, that the Lord was crucified on the 10th of Nisan! that he rose from the dead three full days and nights afterwards, on the morning of the 14th. But why should John three times over thus designate the day? and why should the synoptists lay such emphasis on its being the "preparation," if the day were really the first great day of the Passover Feast? It is remarkable that St. Paul, referring to the institution of the Eucharist, does not say "on the night of the Passover meal," but on "the night in which he was betrayed", (1Co_11:23) and he speaks of Jesus as the (aparch) "Firstfruits of the dead," as though the resurrection morning coincided with the presentation of the firstfruits, which, on the idea that Jesus suffered on the 15th, would have been presented on the morning of the Jewish sabbath, while the reference 1Co_5:7-9, written at the time of a Passover, is rather in favor of the slaying of the Paschal lamb coinciding with the death of Jesus than the institution of the Eucharist doing so. The most extraordinary reference to the Paraskeuh is that which St. Matthew Mat_28:6 introduces, when he actually refers to the sabbath when it had begun (on the evening of the 14th or 15th, whichever it was, i.e. after 6 p.m.) under the designation of "the day after the preparation." Generally the more important day would receive its own proper name, and not be designated by the less signal day. Why did not St. Matthew say, "On the morrow, which was the Sabbath"? The one group of interpreters answer that he wished to discriminate the veritable sabbath as distinct from the half-sabbath of the previous day, made so by being also the great day of the feast! But it is more natural to suppose that "the day of preparation," the death-day of the Lord, loomed so largely in the mind of the evangelist, that its morrow derived importance in this particular instance from itself. The only real difficulty in settling this wearisome controversy arises from one statement in the synoptists, which, if resolved in the rigid sense of limiting their expressions to the evening of the 14th and beginning of the 15th, involves us in grave difficulties when considering five or six distinct and independent statements of John"s Gospel. We have shown at each of these places the double method of exegetical treatment that has been attempted, and in each case honesty compels us to admit that John is here in apparent discord with the synoptists. If, however, our Lord anticipated by a few hours the celebration of the Paschal supper, seeing that his "hour was come," not indeed deviating from the legal day (though, as Lord of the sabbath and greater than the temple, he was amply justified in doing so), but hurrying on the process between the 13th and 14th, when the water-bearers would be seen fetching their pure water for the purpose; and if he celebrated the Passover at the beginning rather than the end of the 14th of Nisan, then the apparent discord between John and the synoptists vanishes, and the terrible events of the trials and crucifixion of Jesus really took place at the time when the Jews (not Christ himself) were preparing for the Passover proper. On this hypothesis the two narratives would be no longer in hopeless antagonism. With this conclusion we are more satisfied, since, as we have seen in Joh_13:1 and elsewhere, the synoptists themselves afford numerous corroboratory evidences (Introduction, pp. 92-95).

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Because of the preparation - That is, they chose the rather to lay him in that sepulchre which was nigh, because it was the day before the Sabbath, which also was drawing to an end, so that they had no time to carry him far.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

42. The burial was hastily performed: after the great Sabbath they intended to make a more solemn and complete burial. The fact of his having a tomb of his own close to Golgotha had perhaps suggested to Joseph the thought of going to Pilate. For the addition τῶν Ἰουδαίων see on Joh 2:13, Joh 11:55: it suggests a time when there was already a Christian ‘Preparation.’ The order of the words, with the pathetic ending, should be preserved. There therefore, because of the Jews’ Preparation (for the tomb was nigh at hand), laid they Jesus.

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.

42.] τὴν παρασκ. τ. Ἰουδ. seems to indicate clearly the παρασκ. of the Passover, as I have before maintained that the words mean; not the mere day of the week so called, which, as it was by the Christians also in the Apostles’ time named παρασκευή, would not be qualified by τῶν Ἰουδ.

The words ὅτι ἐγγ. ἦν τὸ μν. certainly at first sight appear as if John were not aware that the tomb belonged to Joseph; but it is more likely that the thought of asking for the body may have been originally suggested to Joseph by his possessing a tomb close to the place of crucifixion, and so ὅτι ἐγγ. ἦν τὸ μν. may have been the real original reason of the whole proceeding: and John, not anxious to record every particular, may have given it as such.

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

42. ἐκεῖ οὖν κτλ., “there then, because the tomb was near, they laid Him.”

διὰ τὴν Παρασκευὴν τῶν Ἰουδαίων. This was the reason that made delay impossible. The “Preparation” was at hand. This may mean either “the Preparation for the Sabbath,” i.e. Friday, or “the Preparation for the Passover.” It has been pointed out on 19:14 that elsewhere in the N.T. παρασκευή always means Friday; and this gives a good sense here. But inasmuch as in this passage the words τῶν Ἰουδαίων follow, an addition which Jn. always makes when speaking of the Passover festivals (see 2:13, 6:4, 11:55), it may be that we are to lay stress on τήν which precedes παρασκευήν (see on 19:14) and understand him here to say “the Preparation of the Passover.” The meaning of the passage is not altered in any case, for both on account of the impending Sabbath and of the impending Passover Feast, it was necessary that the burial should be hastened.

Field rightly calls attention to the solemn and stately cadences of the rendering of this verse in the R.V.: “There then because of the Jews’ Preparation (for the tomb was nigh at hand) they laid Jesus.”

20:1 ff. The narrative in Joh_20 of the appearances of Christ after His Resurrection, like the narrative in Luk_24 and the Marcan Appendix, tells only of appearances in Jerusalem or its immediate neighbourhood. On the other hand, the narrative of Mat 28:16f. tells of an appearance in Galilee, and in this it probably follows the Lost Conclusion of Mk. The Appendix to Jn. (c. 21) also lays the scene of a manifestation of Christ in Galilee. There are thus two traditions as to the appearances of the Risen Lord: one which places them in Jerusalem, and another which places them in Galilee. It may be impossible, from the evidence at our disposal, to construct a complete table which shall indicate the order in which they occurred; but there is no inherent difficulty in the circumstance that they were not all observed in the same locality. If it be accepted that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, it was as easy for Him to manifest Himself to His disciples in Jerusalem and in Galilee, as in Jerusalem only or in Galilee only. The Jerusalem tradition is followed in c. 20, with the addition of particulars which no other authority gives, and which may plausibly be referred to the eye-witness whose testimony is behind the narrative. In c. 21 we have a version of the Galilæan tradition (see p. 690 f.).

1 Cf. Introd., p. xcviii.

A Alexandrinus (δ 4). British Museum. v. Cc. 6:50-8:52 are missing.

D Bezæ (δ 5). Cambridge. v-vi. Græco-Latin. Cc. 18:14-20:13 are missing in the Greek text, and the gap has been filled by a ninth-century scribe (Dsupp).

Γ̠(ε 70) Oxford and Leningrad. ix-x. Contains Son 1:1-13 8:3-15:24 19:6 to end.

Δ̠Sangallensis (ε 76). St. Gall. ix-x. Græco-Latin.

אԠSinaiticus (δ 2). Leningrad. iv.

B Vaticanus (δ 1). Rome. Cent. iv.

L Regius (ε 56). Paris. viii. Cc. 15:2-20 21:15-25 are missing.

N Purpureus Petropolitanus (ε 19). Dispersed through the libraries of Leningrad, Patmos, Rome, Vienna, and British Museum. vi. Some pages are missing. Edited by H. S. Cronin in Cambridge Texts and Studies (1899).

W Freer (ε 014). Washington. iv-vi. Discovered in Egypt in 1906. The Gospels are in the order Mt., Jn., Lk., Mk. Collation in The Washington MS. of the Four Gospels, by H. A. Sanders (1912).

Θ̠Koridethi (ε 050). Tiflis. vii-ix. Discovered at Koridethi, in Russian territory, and edited by Beermann & Gregory (Leipzig, 1913). The text is akin to that of fam. 13, fam. 1, and the cursives 28, 565, 700 See Lake and Blake in Harvard Theol. Review (July 1923) and Streeter, The Four Gospels. Cf. also J.T.S. Oct. 1915, April and July 1925.

Diat. E. A. Abbott’s Diatessarica, including his Johannine Vocabulary and Johannine Grammar, Parts I.-X. (1900-1915).

1 Deissman, Bible Studies, Eng. Tr., 167.

1 Human Element in the Gospels, p. 512; cf. contra, Moffatt, D.C.G. ii. 754.

1 See Salmon, Introd. to N.T., p. 67 n.

2 See Zahn, Einleitung in N.T., § 69, and Abbott, Diat. 2537.

3 See Turner in J.T.S., Oct. 1924, p. 14.

1 See Nestle in Hastings’ D.B., s.v. “Gabbatha,” for the difficulties of the etymology.

1 See E.B., 1773.

2 See Introd., p. cvii f.

3 See D.B., Extr. v. 478.

Moulton-Milligan Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, illustrated from the papyri, by J. H. Moulton and G.Milligan (1914-). This is being completed by Dr. Milligan; it is indispensable.

1 Cf. Routh, Rel. Sacr. i. 122.

2 Respons. ad Iudaeos, x.

1 Le Blant argued that soldiers would not have been put to work of this kind, and that executions were entrusted not to the legionaries, but to civil police or apparitors attached to the court of the procurator. But his arguments are taken from the conditions of a later age. See the art. “Bourreau” in Cabrol’s Dict. d’archéologie chrétienne for a full discussion. Cf. Act 22:24, Act 22:25: the scourging of Paul was about to be entrusted to soldiers under the command of a centurion.

2 The Gospel of Peter gives it in the form οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ βασιλεὺς τοῦ Ισραήλ.

1 Cf. Sir C. W. Wilson, Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre (1907), the fullest and best discussion of the site of Calvary.

1 See art. “Bourreau” cited above.

2 Barnabas (§ 6) quotes from this verse, ἐπὶ τὸν ἱμ. μου ἔβ. κλῆρον, of the Crucifixion in like manner.

1 Cf. Introd., pp. 153 ff.

2 Philo (de Prof. 20) says that the high priest in Leviticus represents the Divine Word, and that he is forbidden to “rend his clothes” (Lev 21:10), because the Word is the bond of all things. But this has no bearing on the text here.

3 Ingenious computers have discovered that by applying Gematria, χίτων = 87 = Ἰησοῦς. Cyprian (de unit. 7) found in the seamless robe a symbol of the Unity of the Church.

1 See E.B., s.v. “Clopas,” and Deissmann,Bible Studies, p. 315 n.

2 As reported by Eusebius (H.E. iii. 11, iv. 22).

3 For the spelling, see Westcott-Hort, Appendix, 156.

1 Wetstein cites a parallel from Lucian (Toxaris, 22). The bequest of Eudamidas was, “I leave to Aretæus my mother, to cherish and support in her old age.”

1 Notes on Select Readings, p. 68.

1 Cf. Introd., pp. cliii ff.

1 Latham, The Risen Master, p. 216, suggests that John brought her to Bethany, and thinks that she could not have been in Jerusalem on the day of the Resurrection, or she would have been sent for when the tomb was found empty.

2 Cf. Introd., p. cviii.

1 Abbott (Diat. 2115) connects πάντα τετέλεσται with ἵνα τελειωθῇ ἡ γραφή.

1 Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. iii. 434, quotes this from Sanhedr. fol. 43. 1.

1 See Field (Notes on the Trans. of the N.T., p. 106), who accepted the emendation (which was a conjecture of Camerarius) while unaware of the actual reading of the cursive 476.

1 Diat. 1456. 2644.

2 Abbott (Paradosis, passim) has much to say about παραδιδόναι is Isa 53:12, but his treatment is very speculative and is not followed here.

1 See von Gebhardt’s Ausgewählte Märtyreracten (Berlin, 1902), p. 17.

2 Acta Petri et Pauli, § 83.

3 See C. H. Turner in Ch. Quarterly Review, July, 1912, p. 294.

C Ephræmi (δ 3). Paris. v. Palimpsest. Contains considerable fragments of Jn.

1 Cf. Westcott-Hort, Select Readings, p. 22; Nestle, Textual Criticism, p. 227; Salmon, Human Element in the Gospels, p. 524; Abbott, Diat. 1756; and esp. Tischendorf’s critical note on Mat 27:49.

2 Cf. Introd., p. xcvi.

1 That the readings of Codd. 56, 58, and 68 are respectively ἤνυξε, ἔνυξε, and ἔνοιξε, I have determined by personal inspection. See “The Vulgate of St. John,” in Hermathena, xxi. 188.

2 This is figured in Cabrol’s Dict. d’archéol. chrétienne, s.v. “Croix.”

3 See Brightman, Eastern Liturgies, p. 357; cf. also pp. 71, 97, 251.

1 Physical Cause of the Death of Christ (1847).

2 See E.B. 960.

3 c. Celsum, ii. 36.

1 Cf. Burkitt, Two Lectures on the Gospels, p. 64.

1 See Routh, Rel. Sacr. i. 161.

2

Cf. Toplady’s hymn, “Rock of Ages”:

“Let the water and the blood,

From Thy riven side which flowed,

Be of sin the double cure,

Cleanse me from its guilt and power.

3 Hor. Hebr. iii. 440.

4 The author of the curious treatise Pistis Sophia (circa 280 a.d.) brings into juxtaposition (c. 141) the Water of Joh 4:14, the Blood of the New Covenant (Mar 14:24), and the Water and Blood of Joh 19:34, but he does not say what the connexion is.

1 Theol. St. u. Kritiken (1902), p. 128; cf. also Philology of the Gospels, p. 227, and Blass, Euang. sec. Iohannem, p. liii.

2 Drummond, Character and Authorship, etc., p. 389 f., takes this view.

1 E.g. in our day by Zahn (Einheit. ii. 474), Sanday (Criticism of Fourth Gospel, 78), and Abbott (Diat. 2384, 2731).

1 Cf. Introd., p. clv.

1 Ch. Quarterly Review, July 1912, p. 297.

2 Cf. E.B. 3408, and D.B. iii. 543.

1 See Latham, The Risen Master, p. 36 f., for a suggestive study of what was done.

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