John 7:41 Ulasan

In this chapter we have, I. Christ's declining for some time to appear publicly in Judea (Joh 7:1). II. His design to go up to Jerusalem at the feast of tabernacles, and his discourse with his kindred in Galilee concerning his going up to this feast (Joh 7:2-13). III. His preaching publicly in the temple at that feast. 1. In the midst of the feast (Joh 7:14, Joh 7:15). We have his discourse with the Jews, (1.) Concerning his doctrine (Joh 7:16-18). (2.) Concerning the crime of sabbath-breaking laid to his charge (Joh 7:19-24). (3.) Concerning himself, both whence he came and whither he was going (Joh 7:25-36). 2. On the last day of he feast. (1.) His gracious invitation to poor souls to come to him (Joh 7:37-39). (2.) The reception that it met with. [1.] Many of the people disputed about it (Joh 7:40-44). [2.] The chief priests would have brought him into trouble for it, but were first disappointed by their officers (Joh 7:45-49) and then silenced by one of their own court (Joh 7:50-53).

After these things Jesus walked in Galilee,.... That is, after he had fed the five thousand with five loaves and two fishes, near Bethsaida; and had had that long discourse with the Jews at Capernaum, concerning himself, as the bread of life, and about eating his flesh, and drinking his blood; and had been up to the feast of the passover at Jerusalem, said to be nigh, when he went over the sea of Galilee, Joh 6:4; otherwise the above places were in Galilee: but the case seems to be this, that after he had been at Capernaum, he went to Jerusalem, to keep the passover; and finding that the Jews still sought to take away his life, he returned to Galilee, and "walked" there; he did not sit still, or lie at home, and live an inactive indolent life, but went about from place to place, preaching the Gospel, and healing diseases; he walked, and walked about; but not as the enemy of souls, seeking to do all mischief, but to do all good, to the bodies and souls of men: for he would not walk in Jewry; in the land of Judea, where he had been, and tarried, and made disciples; but being rejected and ill treated, he left them; which was a prelude of the Gospel being taken from them, and carried to another people; which afterwards took place, in the times of the apostles: his reason for it was, because the Jews sought to kill him; for healing a man on the sabbath day, and for asserting his equality with God: not that he was afraid to die, but his time was not come; and he had work to do for the glory of God, and the good of men; and therefore it was both just and prudent to withdraw and preserve his life; for like reasons he advised his disciples, when persecuted in one city, to flee to another: and very lawful and advisable it is for good men, when their lives are in danger, to make use of proper means to preserve them, for further usefulness in the cause of God, and for the benefit of men.

Hath not the Scripture said,.... These objectors were those who were accounted the more wise and knowing; who were conversant with the Scriptures, and pretended at least to a large knowledge of them: that Christ cometh out of the seed of David; that he should be a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch out of his roots; that he should be one out of David's loins, and of the fruit of his body, referring to Isa 11:1, which was very true, and what was commonly known, and expected among the Jews, that the Messiah should be David's son, as Jesus of Nazareth was, Act 13:23; and out of the town of Bethlehem where David was? where his parents lived, and he was born; and, according to Jerom (k), he was buried here. The account he gives of this city, where he himself for some time lived, "is Bethlehem, the city of David, in the lot of the tribe of Judah, in which our Lord and Saviour was born, is six miles from Aelia, (i.e. Jerusalem) to the south, by the way which leads to Hebron, where also is showed the sepulchre of Jesse and David.'' In which may be observed likewise the exact distance of this place from Jerusalem; which, according to Josephus (l), at least as he is generally understood, was but twenty furlongs: and, according to Justin (m), thirty five: but that this is the true distance, is clear from the old Jerusalem Itinerary (n), and which agrees with Jerom about the sepulchre of David; for not far from it is the monument of Ezekiel, Asaph, Job, Jesse, David, and Solomon: however, it is certain that David was born here, and therefore it is called his city; and from hence the Messiah was to come; and here Jesus, the true Messiah, was born, and which the Jews themselves own; See Gill on Mat 2:1, See Gill on Luk 2:4; and in vain it is for them to expect the Messiah from thence, where none of their nation live, nor have lived, for many hundreds of years; being particularly forbid by Adrian, after he had subdued them, living in or near Jerusalem, and also Bethlehem. Tertullian (o) refers to this when he thus argues with them, and very justly, and strongly; "if he is not yet born, who, it is said, shall come forth a ruler out of Bethlehem, of the tribe of Judah, he must come (says he) out of the tribe of Judah and from Bethlehem; but we now observe, that no one of the stock of Israel remains in Bethlehem, because it is forbidden that anyone of the Jews should continue on the border of that country--how shall the governor be born in Judea, come forth from Bethlehem, as the divine books of the Prophets declare, when there is none of Israel left there at this day, of whose lineage Christ can be born?--how shall he come out of Bethlehem, when there is none in Bethlehem of the stock of Israel?'' And the passage they had in view, is Mic 5:2. Now these very things they object to Jesus being the Messiah, were what were fulfilled in him, and proved him to be the person; for his supposed father, and real mother Mary, were of the house and lineage of David; and though he was conceived at Nazareth, and brought up there, yet by a remarkable providence, which brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem, he was born there, Luk 2:4. (k) De locis Hebraicis, fol. 89. E. (l) Antiqu. l. 7. c. 12. sect. 4. (m) Apolog. 2. p. 75. (n) In Reland. Palestina illustrata, l. 2. c. 4. p. 416. Vid. c. 9. p. 445. & l. 3. p. 645. (o) Adv. Judaeos, c. 13. p. 224, 225.

(Hom. li. 2.) But be it so, they knew not His birth-place: were they ignorant also of His extraction? that He was of the house and family of David? Why did they ask, Hath not the Scripture said, that Christ cometh of the seed of David? They wished to conceal His extraction, and therefore put forward where He had been educated. For this reason, they do not go to Christ and ask, How say the Scriptures that Christ must come from Bethlehem, whereas Thou comest from Galilee? purposely and of malice prepense they do not do this. And because they were thus inattentive, and indifferent about knowing the truth, Christ did not answer them: though He had lauded Nathanael, when he said, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? and called Him an Israelite indeed, as being a lover of truth, and well learned in the ancient Scriptures.

Others said, "When Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence He is" (ver. 27); and there was a difference of opinion, as might be expected in a confused multitude; for not attentively did they listen to His words, nor for the sake of learning. Wherefore He maketh them no answer; yet they said, "Doth Christ come out of Galilee?" And He had praised, as being "an Israelite indeed," Nathanael, who had said in a more forcible and striking manner, "Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?" (c. i. 46.) But then these men, and they who said to Nicodemus, "Search and look, for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet" (ver. 52), said it not seeking to learn, but merely to overturn the opinion concerning Christ. Nathanael said this, being a lover of the truth, and knowing exactly all the ancient histories; but they looked only to one thing, and that was to remove the opinion that He was the Christ, on which account He revealed nothing to them. For they who even contradicted themselves, and said at one time, "No man knoweth whence He cometh," at another, "From Bethlehem," would manifestly even if they had been informed have opposed Him. For be it that they knew not the place of His birth, that He was from Bethlehem, because of His dwelling in Nazareth, (yet this cannot be allowed, for He was not born there,) were they ignorant of His race also, that He was "of the house and lineage of David"? How then said they, "Doth not Christ come of the seed of David?" (Ver. 42.) Because they wished to conceal even this fact by that question, saying all that they said with malicious intent. Why did they not come to Him and say, "Since we admire thee in other respects, and thou biddest us believe thee according to the Scriptures, tell us how it is that the Scriptures say that Christ must come from Bethlehem, when thou art come from Galilee?" But they said nothing of the kind, but all in malice. And to show that they spoke not enquiringly, nor as desiring to learn, the Evangelist straightway hath added, that, "Some of them would have taken Him, but no man laid his hand upon Him."

They were so astonished at his divine confidence, seeing that his words could no longer be gauged in human terms, that they revert to their recollection of the law as having already declared beforehand concerning the Christ and saying that a prophet would be raised up similar to the all-wise Moses who should interpret to Israel the words from God. … From the quality therefore of his words and the superiority of his sayings they say that he is already shown to be the one who was heralded in the law.… They thought that the Christ would be someone other than the prophet of the law.… Whereas two were supposed to come, I mean, the prophet of the law, that is, Christ, and Elijah—they were looking for three, imagining that the prophet was other than Jesus.… But we must observe that they were already fully prepared to believe. They are persuaded by the Savior’s words to marvel at him. And yet, without guidance from their rulers, they are borne along a many-branching path of ideas. Some call him and now believe him to be the Christ, others that he is the prophet.

Astonishment-stricken are they at His confidence as being God-befitting, and seeing that His words no longer suit the measures of man, they betake themselves to memory of the Law, as having already fore-declared of Christ, and saying that a Prophet should be raised up like to the all-wise Moses who should interpret to Israel the words from God. For so says God concerning Him to the holy Moses, I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren like unto thee, and will put My words in His mouth and He shall speak unto them all that I shall command Him. From the quality therefore of His words, and the superiority of His sayings, do they say that He is already shewn to be Him who was fore-heralded through the Law. For to whom will it belong to say, If any man thirst, let him come unto Me and drink, and, He that believeth on Me, as the Scripture said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water, save only to God by Nature? and this is the Christ. And even though the Jews thinking meanly of Him, call Him merely a Prophet, not knowing the excellence above all of Emmanuel, but meting Him like one of the rest, in this too again will they be caught applying themselves very much without understanding to the thoughts contained in the Law: for they deem that the Christ is other than the Prophet of the Law. And no marvel if the people lack accuracy herein, where the God-opposing multitude of the haughty Pharisees is itself found sick with an equal ignorance with that of the people. For in astonishment at the blessed Baptist it once said, Why baptizest thou then, if THOU be not the Christ nor Elias neither the Prophet? For whereas two were looked for as to come, I mean the Prophet of the Law, i.e., Christ, and Elias, they were enquiring about three, imagining that the Prophet was other than Jesus. Seasonably therefore may one say of them what is spoken by the Prophet Ezekiel, As the mother, so her daughter; thy mother's daughter art THOU; for the people is sick with a sickness kin to that of their rulers. But we must observe that they were already full-prepared to believe, and are persuaded by the Saviour's words to marvel at Him, yet not having the leading of the rulers, they are borne along a many-branching path of ideas, some calling Him and now believing Him to be the Christ, others the Prophet, for the word of a truth annexed, has an emphasis of reasoning now fully confirmed and bringeth in the idea of faith accepted.

These had now begun to drink in that spiritual thirst, and had laid aside the unbelieving thirst. But others still remained dried up in their unbelief: But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee? Hath not the Scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was? They knew what were the predictions of the Prophets respecting Christ, but knew not that they all were fulfilled in Him. They knew that He had been brought up at Nazareth, but the place of His birth they did not know; and did not believe that it answered to the prophecies.

The one, that is, who was expected. Others, i. e. the people said, This is the Christ.

Others, from among the unlearned and undiscerning, said that He is the Christ, not understanding that Christ and that Prophet are one and the same person, and not different.

Another opinion was of those who said, This is the Christ. These people had drawn closer to that spiritual drink, and had slaked the thirst of unbelief to a greater extent. This is what Peter himself professed: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God" (Mt 16:16). The third opinion conflicts with the other two. First, those who hold this disagree with those who say that Jesus is the Christ; secondly, they support their opinion with an authority. So he says: But others said, those remaining in the dryness of unbelief, Would the Christ come from Galilee? For they knew that it was not predicted by the prophets that the Christ would come from Galilee. And they said what they did because they thought that Jesus had been born in Nazareth, not knowing that it was really in Bethlehem: for it was well known that he had been brought up in Nazareth, but only a few knew where he was born. Nevertheless, although the Scripture does not say that the Christ would be born in Galilee, it did foretell that he would first start out from there: "The people who walked in darkness saw a great light, and on those who lived in the region of the shadow of death, a light has risen" (Is 9:1). It even foretold that the Christ would come from Nazareth: "A flower will rise up from his roots" (Is 11:1), where the Hebrew version reads: "A Nazarene will rise up from his roots."

Jesus continues in Galilee, Joh 7:1. He is desired to go to the feast of tabernacles, Joh 7:2-5. His answer, Joh 7:6-9. He goes up, and the Jews seek him at the feast, Joh 7:10-13. He teaches in the temple, Joh 7:14-24. The Jews are confounded by his preaching, Joh 7:25-27. He continues to teach; they wish to slay him, Joh 7:28-30. Many of the people believe on him, Joh 7:31. The Pharisees murmur, and our Lord reasons with them, Joh 7:32-36. His preaching on the last day of the feast, Joh 7:37-39. The people are greatly divided in their opinions concerning him, Joh 7:40-44. The officers, who were sent by the Pharisees to take him, return, and because they did not bring him, their employers are offended, Joh 7:45-49. Nicodemus reasons with them, Joh 7:50-53.

Shalt Christ come out of Galilee? - As the prophets had declared that the Messiah was to come from the tribe of Judah, and from the family of David, and should be born in the city of Bethlehem, these Jews, imagining that Christ had been born in Galilee, concluded that he could not be the Messiah. Had they examined the matter a little farther, they would have found that he had his birth exactly as the prophets had foretold; but, for want of this necessary examination, they continued in unbelief, and rejected the Lord that bought them. Many still lose their souls nearly in the same way. They suffer themselves to be led away by common report, and become prejudiced against the truth, refuse to give it a fair hearing, or to examine for themselves. It is on this ground that deism and irreligion have established themselves, and still maintain their posts.

CHRIST AT THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES. (John 7:1-53) After these things--that is, all that is recorded after Joh 5:18. walked in Galilee--continuing His labors there, instead of going to Judea, as might have been expected. sought to kill him--referring back to Joh 5:18. Hence it appears that our Lord did not attend the Passover mentioned in Joh 6:4 --being the third since His ministry began, if the feast mentioned in Joh 5:1 was a Passover.

Others said, This is the Christ--(See on Joh 1:21). Shall Christ come out of Galilee?