Bible Study series: John 19:17-37. The crucifixion changed the world.
Friendly greetings and a warm welcome to this Bible study! I write to learn, so let’s learn together how to apply these truths to our lives.
I also translate to learn. The translations are mine, unless otherwise noted. If you would like to see many others, please click here:
For the Greek text, click here:
At that link, I provide a lot more commentary.
In this post, links are provided for further study.
Let’s begin.
Scripture: John 19:17-37
17 And as he was carrying the cross by himself, he went out to the Place of the Skull, which in Aramaic is called Golgotha. 18 There they crucified him, with him two others on either side, and Jesus in the middle. 19 Pilate had an inscription written and placed on the cross, which was written: “Jesus the Nazarene, King of the Jews.” 20 Then many Jews read this inscription because it was near the place of the city where Jesus was crucified, and it was written in Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. 21 So the chief priests of the Jews were saying to Pilate, “Do not write ‘King of the Jews,’ but instead, ‘He claimed, “I am King of the Jews.”’” 22 Pilate replied, “I have written what I have written.”
23 Then the soldiers, when they crucified Jesus, took his garments and divided them in four parts, for each soldier, and also the shirt, which was seamless, woven throughout from the top. 24 So they said to each other, “Let’s not tear it, but let’s cast lots for it, for whose it will be.” So that this Scripture was fulfilled, saying:
They divided my garments for themselves,
And they took lots for my shirt. [Ps. 22:18]
Then the soldiers did these things.
25 His mother and the sister of his mother, and Mary, wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene were standing at the cross. 26 Jesus, seeing his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, said to his mother, “Woman, here is your son!” 27 Then he said to the disciple, “Here is your mother!” And from that moment on, the disciple took her into his household.”
28 After this, Jesus, knowing that everything had been completed, in order that the Scripture may be completed, said, “I am thirsty.” 29 A jar of sour wine was standing in the middle. So they wrapped a sponge full of the sour wine on a hyssop branch and brought it to his mouth. 30 Then when Jesus received the sour wine, he said, “It is accomplished!” And bowing his head, he handed over his spirit.
31 Then the Jews, since it was the preparation day, and in order that bodies not remain on the cross, for it was the great day of the Sabbath, requested Herod that their legs would be broken and they would be taken away. 32 So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first man and then of the other one crucified with him. 33 But upon coming towards Jesus, when they saw him already dead, did not break his legs, 34 but instead one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and instantly blood and water came out. 35 And the one who saw has testified, and his testimony is true, and he knows that he speaks truly, so that you also may believe. 36 For these things took place so that the Scriptures may be fulfilled, “His bone shall not be broken.” [Exod. 12:46; Num. 9:12; Ps. 34:20] 37 And again another Scripture says, “They shall look on the one whom they pierced” [Zech. 12:10] (John 19:18-37)
Comments:
17:
The familiar English word Calvary is from the Latin word calvaria, which also means skull. Where was the Skull-Place? Probably outside the second north wall—the third north wall was not begun until later. Since the praetorium is probably the Antonia fortress, the Via Dolorosa is the correct route (Bruce, comment on vv. 16b-17).
The Synoptics say that Simon of Cyrene was compelled to help Jesus carry the horizontal crossbeam. Bruce: “John is not deliberately contradicting the Synoptic account of Simon the Cyrene, whose services were commandeered by the military to carry Jesus’ cross after him; he is rather emphasizing that, as at his arrest in the garden, Jesus is still in command of the situation” (comment on 16b-17). The Greek “by himself” could be translated “for himself” (without a theological interpretation!), or Bruce simply translates it “his cross.” Also, Carson is right. Jesus carried the cross as far as the gate of the city. He collapsed there in the weakness from the flogging, and then the soldiers ordered Simon to carry it. On the Via Dolorosa, Simon took over at the fifth station (comment on vv. 16b-17).
John omits Simon because he is focusing on Jesus’s resolution and to endure the pain and suffering. Beasley-Murray says that Jesus sets an example of discipleship by carrying his own cross, as we are called to do (comment on vv. 16b-1, p. 345). Also, Simon may have been known in certain communities, say, in Rome, and Mark names him, and Matthew follows Mark, and Luke may have arrived in Rome and picked up this tradition. For John, Simon was unknown. Remember, the Gospel writers are free to omit and include data points as they have slightly different purposes. Our faith should not be so brittle that it snaps in two when these differences emerge. See v. 14 for more information about not having brittle faith.
18:
The first half of this verse is stated clearly and forcefully. “They crucified him.” They fastened his arms on the crossbeam, attached it to the vertical pole or stake, and hoisted the upright post up in the air, as it thudded into the hole that was dug. A piece of wood may have been attached to the upright beam, which formed a little seat, but not to relieve the victim, but to prolong the agony. Nails were used for Jesus’s crucifixion (20:25).
Google an image of one nail piercing each forearm and one nail through both heels together.
Two brigands or insurrectionists were crucified on either side of him. Here is Luke’s fuller version:
39 One of the criminals who had been hung there was slandering him, saying, “Aren’t you the Christ? Save yourself and us!” 40 The other one responded, rebuking him, and said, “Don’t you fear God, because you are under the same condemnation? 41 We are getting paid back justly, getting what we deserve for the things we’ve done. But this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 And he began to say, “Remember me when you come into your kingdom.” 43 And Jesus said to him, “I tell you the truth: Today you shall be with me in paradise!” (Luke 23:39-43)
They were also freedom fighters, as Barabbas was. All this is to fulfill the prophecy: Jesus was numbered with the transgressors (Is. 52:12).
19-22:
The Greek literally says that Pilate wrote the inscription, but we should not take it literally. Pilate ordered it to be written on a placard. However, Morris and Mounce say Pilate did write it, just to tweak the Jewish establishment, in a kind of grim revenge. (comment on v. 19). The Latin word for the inscription is titulus, and in Greek is it titulus, so Greek borrowed from Latin in this case (usually it is the other way around: Latin borrows very heavily from Greek). It was written in Hebrew or Aramaic (Aramaic was the language of the people and is very closely related to Hebrew). Latin was the official language of the Roman army, and Greek was the common language of the eastern provinces of the Roman empire.
We often see the four letters on a modern depiction of the titulus INRI, which stands for Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudeaorum, which literally reads: Jesus (the) Nazarene, King of (the) Jews).
The purpose of the titulus was to warn future criminals. He was being charged with sedition. The place of crucifixion was outside the city by a roadside. Matt. 27:39 and Mark 15:29 say that people “passing” by insulted him, indicating on a roadside. Plus, it was the custom of the Romans to place crosses on the roadside to warn people. It was a public execution.
23-24:
Jesus wore a tunic or shirt worn against the body (chitōn, pronounced khee-tone) and the outer garment (or cloak), which is plural in vv. 23 and 24 (himation, pronounced hee-mah-tee-on). Carson says it is in the plural because the clothing includes a belt, sandals and head covering (comment on vv. 23-24). The tunic was seamless, while the cloak could be divided into four parts, probably by the seams.
It was an historical fact that the soldiers who crucified a man could claim a few perquisites (perks) of their grim job, and one of the perks was the clothing. So John was not making it up just to fulfill Ps. 22:18. The soldiers were fulfilling this verse without their knowledge, but such is the way God works. He orchestrates events in ways that we cannot figure out.
That link has a table of OT and NT verses. However, fulfillment of OT verses is also done through the pattern and themes and concepts and overarching narrative of Scripture, beyond quoted verses. Examples: he fulfills the sacrificial system, the Passover, and even Israel itself, which failed historically in its mission, while Jesus is currently succeeding in his.
A little sidebar observation: the soldiers divided the clothes up four ways, so we can conclude that there was four men there, overseeing the whole process (see Acts 12:4).
25:
The mother of the sons of Zebedee:
Here are the two sons and their father.
21 Then he went ahead from there and saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, repairing their net, and he called them. 22 And instantly they left the boat and their father and followed him. (Matt. 4:21-22)
And here she is demanding or requesting (you choose) that her two sons get special privileges and status in the Messiah’s kingdom:
20 At that time the mother of the sons of Zebedee approached him with her sons, bowing before him and asking something from him. 21 And he said to her, “What do you wish for?” She said to him, “Say that these two sons of mine would sit, one on your right and one on your left, in your kingdom. (Matt. 20:20-21)
James and John (and Peter) formed the inner circle of Jesus. He must have seen something stable in them, in the end.
Let’s look at an interesting possible family connection. Are Jesus, James, and John first cousins by their two mothers (Mary and Salome)?
The discussion has been moved to this post:
Were Jesus, James and John First Cousins? Was Clopas Jesus’ Uncle?
“Clopas”: Sometimes his name is spelled Cleopas, which is the Greek form, while Clopas is the rare Semitic form. This is just a variation in spelling. Trust me. If anyone has researched names in America, these variations do exist, sometimes in the same document!
Who was Clopas?
The discussion has been moved to this link:
Were Jesus, James and John First Cousins? Was Clopas Jesus’ Uncle?
Mary Magdalene was named for the village Magdala on the western shore of the Lake of Galilee, near Tiberias.
26-27:
The beloved disciple (or literally “the disciple whom Jesus loved”) is the same one mentioned in John 13:23. Jesus ordered the beloved disciple to take care of his mother, apparently because his brothers were still too unsympathetic to his cause. His mother must have come around to it, as time went on because in Mark 3:20-21 and 31-35, his mother and brothers were about to take in custody.
“Woman”: the experts tell us that two thousand years ago, and in that culture, “woman” was not rude. It was equivalent to “madam” or “ma’am” (Mounce, comment on v. 26). Maybe so, but Jesus does seem to distance himself from her. Jesus would no longer be just the son of Mary, but the King of kings and Lord of lords. Honoring one’s parents, the fifth commandment (Exod. 20:12), does not mean obeying them and remaining a child. They can offer advice when you are of age, but they cannot boss you around. Yet, Jesus, even while dying on the cross, was concerned enough to care for her.
“his household”: it could be translated as “his own home.” It is the same phrasing as in John 1:11, which says: “He came to his own people, but his own people did not receive him.” (The word “people” was added for clarity.)
28:
Jesus was accomplishing everything by being on the cross. But he had one tiny detail to complete, which is about the sour wine. The four soldiers may not have known they were fulfilling Scripture, but Jesus did. Which Scripture? Ps. 69:21 says that for the Psalmist’s thirst they gave him vinegar or sour wine to drink. And Ps. 22:15 says that the Psalmist’s tongue cleaves to his jaws. Jesus really was thirsty, since his body was suffering and dehydrated in the heat of the day.
29:
In Mark 15:23 Jesus refused wine mixed with myrrh, which was a sedative, when he arrived at the place of execution. Its purpose was to dull the pain. “Jesus resolved to die with an unclouded mind” (Bruce, comment on vv. 29-30). Here in vv. 28-29, the soldiers offered him oxos, sour wine or vinegar, which is used to revive the senses and full consciousness (Mark 15:36). So let’s not confuse the two liquids.
Now what about the hyssop here in v. 29 and the reed to stick (Mark 15:36)? John may be using symbolism, in reference to he Passover ceremony where hyssop is used (Exod. 12:22 and in a purification ritual (Num. 19:6, 18; Ps. 51:7). Another more historical possibility is that the sponge was soaked with sour wine with hyssop put into it and was brought to Jesus’s mouth on a stick with the hyssop at the end of the stick.
But once again, I caution the reader against having a brittle faith when these differences emerge. Answers are available, and I believe Bruce has provided it. See v. 14 for more comments about not having a brittle faith.
30:
Now we reach the accomplishment of the main mission beyond the tiny details. Jesus says, “It is accomplished!” The verb is teleō (pronounced teh-leh-oh), and it is in the perfect tense and passive voice (tetelesthai, pronounced teh-teh-less-thy). Many scholars say that the passive voice in some contexts reflects the “divine passive”: that is, God is working behind the scenes orchestrating the event in question, even though he is not the explicit subject of the verb. This brilliant idea works in v. 30, too. God is helping Jesus to accomplish the mission of dying for the sins of the whole world.
Further, Jesus had said, “I have glorified you on earth by completing the work which you had given me to do” (John 17:4). The verb for “completing” is the same here. Back in 17:4, Jesus was praying to his Father, and Jesus was confident that he was about to fulfill his mission.
Now it is up to the Father to vindicate his Son by resurrecting him.
Mounce: “That by his voluntary death on the cross he brought to completion the redemptive purpose of the incarnation is a theological utterance of profound significance” (comment on v. 30).
“handed over”: this is the same verb which John has used for Judas handing over Jesus to the Jewish authorities (6:64, 71; 13:2, 11, 21; 18:2, 5) and the Jewish establishment handing him over to Pilate (18:30, 35, 36; 19:11), and Pilate handing him over to be crucified (19:16). Now, however, in this context, Jesus is in charge, and he handed over his spirit to his Father. John 10:18 says that no one takes Jesus’s life from him, but he lays it down on his own accord. He received this authority from his Father. So Jesus used this authority and literally handed his life-spirit to his Father. (I am gratified to see that Beasley-Murray has the same insight, comment on v. 30, p. 353).
Further recall that John used the verb in v. 16a to indicate a judicial sentence. I would like to believe that Jesus is handing over his spirit to the Father in the Great Exchange, the judicial switching of our guilt transferred over to him vicariously (representatively) or judicially, and his righteousness or innocence transferred over to us vicariously or judicially. Our guilt is imputed (reckoned or accounted) to him, and his innocence or righteousness is imputed to us.
However, you can translate the verb “handed over” as “committed” if you wish, without the deeper theology.
“Spirit” here does not mean the Holy Spirit, but Jesus’s human spirit.
We can be sure that at this moment many lambs were being slaughtered, which took a long time, perhaps from yesterday to right then and even later, in order to feed all the pilgrims in Jerusalem.
So let’s explore the theology of the death on the cross.
Now a little more theology. If Jesus dies on the cross, did his divine nature die? No. His divine nature lived on, but his body and humanity died. We can understand this if we look at our lives. When we die, our spirits live on, but our bodies die. So only a part of us dies. When Jesus died his divine nature lived on, and incidentally, so did his own spirit.
Let’s look more deeply at the atonement, which is connected with Jesus’s death on the cross.
Atonement literally means in English at-one-ment or being one with God or being reconciled to him (the -ment suffix means “the result of”).
It is the extensive and costly process of reconciling sinners to God.
The Hebrew verb is kapar (used 102 times) and is generally translated as “to atone,” “to wipe clean,” and “to appease.” In Gen. 32:20, Jacob sent gifts ahead of him to “wipe” (atone) the anger off his brother Esau’s face. As it turned out, Esau was not angry because time healed his wounds, and he was prosperous. The main point, however, is that sacrifice and gifts atone for or wipe away just wrath. The sacrifice of an animal during the sin offering (Lev. 4:1-5:13), for example, was to atone for the worshiper’s own sins, by blood manipulation primarily. Then God’s judicial wrath would be lifted and he would smile on his people again. Jacob and Esau were reconciled, and God and his people were reconciled.
The NT Greek nouns are hilasmos (used twice and pronounced hih-lahs-moss) and hilastērion (also used twice and pronounced he-lah-stay-ree-own). The first noun appears in 1 John 2:2 and 4:10 and means “an atoning sacrifice, propitiation.” Propitiation means “satisfaction” or “appeasement.” Jesus is the sacrifice that atones for sins. Our sins destroyed and separated us from God, but the sacrifice of Jesus reconciles us to God (1 John 1:6-7).
For more information, please click on this post:
Once again, to forestall objections that falsely accuse God of being primitive or petty, please see this post:
Christ’s Death on Cross = Cosmic Child Abuse?
Is. 6 is a wonderful passage that describes a holy man—Isaiah—in the very presence of God, and he saw himself as undone and ruined, because he was an unclean man living among an unclean people. God reached out to him and put a coal on his lips to speak with power and anointing. God cleansed him.
Is. 27:9 talks about the extreme need of Israel’s sins to be removed, and one way to do this was to cut down fertility poles and crush altars to false gods. But this would not bring about reconciliation for all of humanity, forever, but the need for it is clear.
Dan. 9:24 speaks of Israel living in exile seventy years to finish transgression and atone for their wickedness. The verb “atone” means to “wipe away” or appease or placate God’s righteous demands.
John 1:29 shows John the Baptist proclaiming to the people about Jesus, “Behold the lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world!”
Source Atonement: Bible Basics
Why was the blood of Jesus necessary, and what does it accomplish?
Personally, I like how the blood of Jesus cleanses, by faith, our guilty consciences from past sins. And I like that last point about the blood of the Lamb tramples underfoot the accusation of Satan. The thing is—when he accuses us, he knows which sins we have committed. But in Christ we realize that Satan’s accusations are lies, because God already wiped clean and forgave and released our sins. They no longer apply.
Source: Why the Blood of Jesus?
What did the cross accomplish for us?
First, the cross put to death the curse of the old law. Paul wrote to the Galatians that according to the old law, everyone who hanged on a pole was cursed (Deut. 21:23), so Christ became that curse in our place (Gal. 3:13). Now the curse of the law is broken over us, so God does not judge us in his justice-wrath-judgment. We are in Christ and are spared his wrath.
Second, the cross took away our sins. The power that the law and regulations was broken and canceled over our lives, by the cross. Those things used to condemn us but now through the cross we have forgiveness of sins (Col. 2:13-14). 1 Peter 2:24 says that Christ himself bore our sins in his body, which happened at the cross (Is. 53:5).
Third, the cross reconciled us to God. Paul writes that humanity used to be divided by ethnic and cultural differences, but through the cross, all humans are made into one new human, united in Christ (Eph. 2:16). The fullness of deity lived in bodily form in Christ, and now God reconciled all things to himself by his cross and the blood that was shed there.
Fourth, the cross brought us eternal life. Jesus taught that when he was lifted up on the cross, so that everyone who sees him and believes can have eternal life.
Fifth, the cross triumphed over our enemies. As noted, Col. 2:15 says all the decrees issued against us were canceled, and Christ dragged behind him all of his enemies like a roman emperor led captive people in his victory parade.
Source: Why the Cross?
What is reconciliation, and how does Christ’s death on the cross accomplish it? Reconciliation is when God calls us to surrender fighting him and become his friend. He doesn’t have to move, but we do. He did act, however, by sending his Son to die.
But why?
First, God’s law and holiness required payment for human degradation and sin, if redemption is to be done. God cannot ignore or overlook sin. So how can humankind be reconciled or brought near to God, with such a wide gulf? Christ willingly became a sin offering in our place (substitute) and paid the penalty of sin that engulfed humankind. Now reconciliation between God and humans can take place because Christ is the mediator between the two. God can be just and the justifier of humanity (Rom. 3:26).
Then, second, there is another point of view. Redemption is a gift. Out of his love God gave his all through his Son and his Spirit. Humanity that was plunged into sin and darkness and the devil’s kingdom overcomes by Jesus atoning life and work. God maintains his justice, expresses his love and triumphs over darkness and Satan.
Source: What Is Redemption in the Bible?
Also see:
9. Do I Really Know Jesus? He Died for You
That last link has tables, comparing the different accounts of Jesus’s death.
31:
The Sabbath begins on (our) Friday evening (about 6:00 p.m. or 18:00) and continues all day on (our) Saturday and ends at sundown (about 6:00 p.m. or 18:00). Therefore, the first day of the week begins on Saturday evening (about 6:00 p.m. or 18:00) after sundown and continues throughout (our) Sunday until sundown (about 6:00 p.m. or 18:00). The preparation day means that they got things ready for the day of rest before sundown on Friday. Jesus died on Friday afternoon. Therefore, the two kind-hearted, high level followers of Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, had to hurry to depose the body from the cross and put it in a new, never-used tomb.
It seems that the Passover and the afternoon before the Sabbath coincided. Preparation day was for both the Passover and the Sabbath. The convergence of the two days was a double blessing. This is why John calls preparation day, literally, the “great day.”
Deut. 21:22 says that a hanged man should not be left on the tree after sundown. The Romans could ignore Jewish religious law, but the Jewish establishment sent representatives to Pilate because exposing the dead bodies would be offensive when Passover and the Sabbath coincided.
Breaking the legs was an established Roman habit to hasten the death because the crucified man would not be able to lift himself up to breathe, so asphyxiation or suffocation took place, and the dying man died more quickly.
Or more precisely: “The weight of the body fixed the thoracic cage so that the lungs could not expel the air which was breathed in, but breathing by diaphragmic action could continue for a long time so long as the legs, fastened to the cross, provided a point of leverage. When the legs were broken, this leverage was no longer available and total asphyxia followed rapidly” (Bruce, comment on v. 31).
It was a gruesome task to break the legs. Perhaps a sort of sledgehammer was used.
32-34:
Jesus was crucified with two criminals (Jesus was not a criminal but was treated as one). One or two soldiers worked on either side of Jesus and broke the legs. But when they came to Jesus, they saw his lifeless body. They must have wondered why he had died so quickly (see Mark 15:44). In any case, one of the soldiers took his spear and pierced his side, and at once blood and water flowed out. He wanted to make sure Jesus was dead, to see if the body would jerk. The stab must have gone deep. A dead body does not bleed, so evidently the spear tip punctured the pericardium (the sac around the heart) and the blood and “water” leaked out (Mounce, comment on v. 34). However, the pericardium sac may be too far up to have been punctured. So a seco0nd option is possible. When the chest cavity has been severely injured, liquid could gather between the pleura lining the rib cage and the lining of the lung, the clearer liquid at the top and deep red layer at the bottom. If the chest cavity was pierced toward the bottom, both kinds of liquid would flow out (Carson, comment on v. 34).
Why did he pierce the side? John does not say, but an early tradition says the right side (Bruce, comment on vv. 32-34). During one of the appearances after the resurrection, Jesus will allow Thomas to touch his side, to see where the spear pierced him (20:27), but from this verse we still don’t know which side. Does it matter that much? Not to me.
Why does John mention the blood and water, which probably came from the pericardial sac? Bruce takes the angle that John wanted to refute forms of Docetism, which says that Jesus appeared to be in the flesh and did not really die. (The Quran, supposedly “revealed” in the seventh century, erroneously picks up Docetism and says that Jesus did not really die, but only appeared to do so, in 4:156). John refutes this false belief in his epistle, though Bruce doubts that there is a connection between the water and blood here and the water and blood in 1 John 5:6-8. But upon reading those three verses in 1 John, I see that John writes that Jesus came by water and blood—in other words, fully human. So there must be a connection. I do not take a symbolic reading here.
However, Klink is adamant about the symbolism, calling any austere Bible interpreters “canonically tone-deaf.” He sees the blood as real, yes, but it also symbolizes the sacrificial blood of the Passover lamb (John 1:29, 34). The water is, of course, also real, yet it further symbolizes the Spirit (John 7:37-38), who was poured out from Jesus.
Morris agrees that the blood and water were real, of course, yet the blood symbolizes the Passover sacrifice and the water symbolizes the Spirit (comment on v. 34).
You can run with this interpretation if you want. They may be right.
35:
John’s purpose is for this testimony to build up the readers’ faith. This agrees with 20:31, which says that these things have been written so that the readers may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. And 21:24 says that the Beloved Disciple of 21:20 (see 19:26) testifies and wrote these things. And we know his testimony is true. Who is the we? Probably the ones who published the Gospel. And here in 19:35, somebody is writing that the one who saw the blood and water flow out is telling the truth and is a reliable witness. It seems this disciple was alive at the time the Gospel was published. So we have a mystery. But this puzzle is secondary to the main purpose, which is, as noted, to believe in Jesus.
36-37:
John freely references four verses in the OT. Let’s take a look at them.
Ps. 34:20 says that God delivers a righteous man and guards all the bones of this righteous one. This agrees with Luke 23:47 where a centurion proclaims that Jesus was righteous (or innocent).
Exod. 12:46 and Num. 9:12 say that the Passover lamb must not have his bones broken. John has been coinciding the Passover and the crucifixion of Jesus. John the Baptist proclaimed that Jesus was the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world early in his Gospel (1:29, 36), thus establishing a major theme, finally fulfilled in Chapter 19.
In Zech. 12:10, God promises that when he defeats the nations who attacked Jerusalem, he will pour out on the house of David and on the people of Jerusalem a spirit of compassion and supplications, so that they will look on him whom they have pierced. They shall mourn for him as one mourns for an only child. This verse can easily be interpreted by Christians who knew the OT, specifically Jewish converts to the Jesus Movement, as referring to God’s Messiah. Piercing him means piercing God (so to speak). Then God will pour out his Spirit on the people of Jerusalem, which happened in Acts 2 with Pentecost.
Once again, please see this table of quoted verses from the OT and NT:
The four Gospels writers believe that Jesus not only quoted verses from the OT, but also major themes and patterns and concepts. See vv. 23-24 for more comments.
GrowApp for John 19:17-37
1. While Jesus was dying for the sins of the whole world, he was surrounded by the mundane: soldiers and criminals. How does this speak to you calling out in the world? Are you surrounded by the oblivious world? How should you minister to them?
2. Jesus said, “It is accomplished” or “it is finished.” He finished his mission and accomplished your salvation, by dying on the cross, for you. What does this mean for your entire life?
RELATED
14. Similarities among John’s Gospel and the Synoptic Gospels
12. Eyewitness Testimony in John’s Gospel
4. Church Fathers and John’s Gospel
3. Archaeology and John’s Gospel
SOURCES
For the bibliography, click on this link and scroll down to the very bottom:
Dr. Jim's Essential Bible Teaching 