John 11:51
And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;
I have been trying to study this verse deeper as someone brought it up.
I have tried to look up commentaries and early church fathers, dead sea scrolls
pray that God can help me with this passage
Dominic-
Is something specifically about the passage giving you difficulty?
Hey brother,
Some practical application:
Dead Sea Scrolls won't be helpful for NT passages, really, unless a passage from the OT is being quoted.
As far as commentaries goes, John Gill is always my starting place when I look at commentary. He offers the most straight forward understanding of the scriptures, in my opinion. I don't always agree with what he says, but if I am over-spiritualizing a text, he is the first to point it out.
I also use David Guzik (who is modern), Albert Barnes, and Adam Clarke. They all bring something to the table during my studies: differing opinions on controversial texts. That way I am not being fed strictly one set of opinions from one camp. I believe you can google all of these commentaries for free.
I was going to type what I thought would be a good answer to your inquiry, but I believe John Gill says it better than I could. So here is his commentary below:
"And this spake he not of himself"
Not of his own devising and dictating, but by the Spirit of God; as a wicked man sometimes may, and as Balaam did; the Spirit of God dictated the words unto him, and put them into his mouth; nor did he use them in the sense, in which the Holy Ghost designed them:
"but being high priest that year;"
by his office he was the oracle of God, and was so esteemed by the people, and therefore a proper person to be made use of in this way; and especially being high priest that year, in which the priesthood was to be changed, and vision and prophecy to be sealed up:
"he prophesied;"
though he did not know he did, as did Pharaoh, ( Exodus 10:28 ) , and the people of the Jews, ( Matthew 27:25 ) .
"That Jesus should die for that nation;"
these words, with what follows in the next verse, are the words of the evangelist, interpreting the prophecy of Caiaphas, according to the sense of the Holy Ghost that Jesus should die, which was contrary to a notion the Jews had imbibed, concerning the Messiah; see ( John 12:34 ) . But Jesus the true Messiah must die; this was determined in the counsel of God, agreed to by Christ in the covenant of grace, foretold by the prophets from the beginning of the world, typified by sacrifices and other things, under the former dispensation, predicted by Christ himself, and accordingly came to pass; and upon the above accounts was necessary, as well as for the salvation of his people, who otherwise must have perished; and yet was free and voluntary in him, and a strong expression, and a demonstrative proof of his love to them: and not only this prophecy declared, that Jesus should die, but that he should die for that nation, for the nation of the Jews; not for every individual in it, for all of them were not saved by him; some received him not; they rejected him as the Messiah, Saviour, and Redeemer, and died in their sins; but for all the elect of God among them, the sheep of the house of Israel, to whom he was sent, and whom he came to seek and save; and whom he blessed, by turning them away from their iniquities, and by taking away their iniquities from them: and moreover, this prophecy suggests, that Jesus was to die, not merely as a martyr, to confirm with his blood the doctrine he preached, nor only as an example of courage, meekness, patience, and love, but for, or in the room and stead of his people, as their surety; giving his life a ransom and himself a sacrifice to the justice of God, for them; there by fulfilling the law and satisfying it, and appeasing the wrath of God on their account.
Have all of those commentaries on my ipad allready looked up them what more I was looking for was 1st century sources
I know David Guzik but his commentaries are quite small compared to something like the Tyndale Commentaries or other.
I tend to use the Adam Clark in standard Bible study as I have quite a few commentaries on this verse does anybody have access to Logos or any greek or hebrew scholars.
Just a thought, but there is an anointing from the Holy Spirit that accompanies a calling. Caiaphas, being high priest, would have had, whether he was totally aware of it or not, an anointing from God to prophesy over the nation of Israel. So when this situation came up, Caiaphas spoke prophetically of who Christ was, although the Pharisees rejected Christ and His place as the atoning sacrifice.
Think about what Paul says in Romans about the blindness that is upon Israel. How great blindness that God even used the high priest to prophesy to the religious leaders about who Christ was and still they were blinded and did not see.
Travis,
My sentiments exactly. Definitely like the way you put it.
Dominic,
Is there something you are trying to get at specifically?
This discussion is locked.
