Talm . p. 248; Lightfoot, p. 968), nor an imitation of Revelation 6:1 (Weisse), nor yet an allusion to Psalm 66:5 ; Psalm 66:9 , and a gentle reference on the part of Jesus to His Godhead (Hengstenberg), for which there was no occasion, and which He could not expect to be underst...
Show full excerpt
Talm . p. 248; Lightfoot, p. 968), nor an imitation of Revelation 6:1 (Weisse), nor yet an allusion to Psalm 66:5 ; Psalm 66:9 , and a gentle reference on the part of Jesus to His Godhead (Hengstenberg), for which there was no occasion, and which He could not expect to be understood. ἦλθον , κ . τ . λ .] shows the simplicity of the narrative. μένει ] instance of insertion of the direct address, common in dependent clauses. Kühner, II. 594; Winer, p. 251 [E. T. p. 335]. τὴν ἡμέρ . ἐκ .] i.e . the remaining part of that day, not at once from that day onwards (Credner, against whom is Ebrard). ΔΕΚΆΤΗ ] that is, at the beginning of their stay with Him. We have no reason to suppose in John, as Rettig does in the Stud. u. Krit. 1830, p. 106, as also Tholuck, Ebrard, Ewald, the Roman mode of counting the hours (from midnight to midnight, therefore ten o’clock in the morning) instead of the Jewish , which is followed elsewhere in the N. T. and by Josephus (even Vit . 54), i.e . four o’clock in the afternoon; because there is time enough from 4 P.M. till late in the evening to justify the popular expression τὴν ἡμέρ . ἐκ .; because, moreover, in John 11:9 it is plainly the Jewish method which is followed; and because even in John 4:6 the same method best suits the context, and is not excluded in John 4:52 , while in John 19:14 it is with a harmonistic view that the Roman method of reckoning is resorted to.