John 6:8

Joh 6:8. Ὁ ἀδελφός, brother) Peter, therefore, at that time and place in which John wrote, had been better known than Andrew, either because he was older, or because he survived Andrew.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 6:8 . With the same matter-of-factness as Philip εἷς … Πέτρου , “one of His disciples, Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter,” a description apparently inserted in forget fulness that it has already been given, Joh 1:41 , supplementing Philip’s judgment, cf. Joh 12:22 , λέγει αὐτῳ , “says to Him” [the dative still holds its place after λέγει , and has not quite given way, as in modern Greek, to πρός with accusative, cf. Joh 6:5 ]. Ἔστι παιδάριον ἓν ὧδε . “There is here one little boy.” [ ἓν is rejected by modern editors. May it not have been rejected because unnecessary? At the same time it must be borne in mind that although in Mt. (Mat 8:19 ; Mat 26:69 ) εἷς is used as an indefinite article as in German, French, etc. it is not so used in John. The Vulgate has “est puer unus hic”. Meyer thinks it is inserted to bring out the meagreness of the resources, “but one small boy”.]

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

Verse 8. Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, saith] The other evangelists attribute this answer to the apostles in general. See the passages referred to above.

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

(8) One of his disciples.—Within the inner circle around Him—and this, too, is told us only by St. John—is another of the early disciples. He was one of the two disciples of the Baptist who first followed Jesus, and John’s own companion (Joh_1:40). He is always named as one of the first group of the Twelve (comp. Note on Mat_10:2), and in some way was specially connected with Philip (Joh_1:44). Here, and in Joh_12:22 (see Note), they are named together, and also in the lists in Mar_3:18 and Act_1:13.

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

8. One of his disciples] Of course this does not imply that Philip was not a disciple; the meaning rather is, that a disciple had been appealed to without results, and now a disciple makes a communication out of which good results flow. There seems to have been some connexion between S. Andrew and S. Philip (Joh_1:44, Joh_12:22). In the lists of the Apostles in Mark 3 and Acts 1 S. Philip’s name immediately follows Andrew’s. On S. Andrew see notes on Joh_1:40-41. The particulars about Philip and Andrew here are not found in the Synoptists’ account.

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.

One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother,.... Who also, and his brother Peter, were of Bethsaida, as well as Philip, and was a disciple of Christ's; he hearing what Christ said to Philip, and what answer he returned,

saith unto him; to Christ, with but little more faith than Philip, if any.

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

8 One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, saith unto him,

Ver. 8. One of his disciples] He uttered the sense of all the twelve, Mar 6:37, being no whit wiser than the rest, though the eldest disciple of them all, Joh 1:41.

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.

The story is the same, in all substantial parts, with the relations of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, in the before mentioned places. See the annotations on those chapters.

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

Vers. 8, 9. Then saith one of his disciples to him, viz. Andrew, Simon Peter"s brother. The spokesman is here specially indicated. On other occasions Andrew is singled out as the brother of Simon and friend of Philip. (Joh_1:44 Joh_12:22) This repeated reference to the illustrious brother of Simon is a refutation of the ill-natured charge against the author of the Gospel, that he aimed at the depreciation of the character of the great apostle. Moreover, it is interesting to remember that in the Muratorian fragment on the Canon, "Andrew" is specially mentioned as being one of those present with John in Ephesus, who urged him to write his Gospel (see Introduction, IV 2 (3)). There is alad here (possibly a lad who was brought with themselves, or who had attached himself to the twelve) who has five barley loaves, the bread of the poorest classes. Of this there is ample proof ("Sotah," 2:1, quoted by Edersheim, vol. 1:681): "While all other meat offerings were of wheat, that brought by the woman accused of adultery was to be of barley, because, as her deed is that of the animals, so her offering is of the food of animals." If this lad was conveying the food stock of the Lord and his apostles, it is an impressive but accidental hint that "for our sakes he became poor," and classed himself socially with the humblest. And two fishes. The use of this word is peculiar to our Gospel (Luke, icyuev ; Mark, icyuav , the ordinary word for "fish; "but John uses the word oqaria , the diminutive of the Greek word oqon , which means "savoury," eaten with bread). This opsarion mostly consisted of small fishes caught in the lake, which were dried, salted as "sardines" or "anchovies" are with ourselves for a similar purpose. This habit belonged locally to the neighbourhood of the lake, and reveals the Galilman origin or associations of the writer. The Aramaic word, ophsonim, is derived from the Greek opson, and that of aphjain, or aphiz, is the name for a small fish caught in the lake, the drying of which was a lucrative source of industry. Edersheim reminds us that the fish laid on the charcoal fire (Joh_21:9, Joh_21:10, Joh_21:13) was opsarion," and that of this the risen Lord, on the shore of this very lake, gave to his disciples to eat, though he guided them at that time to a shoal of great fishes, icquwn megalwn , and bade them add some of these to the oqaria , which he was content to use still. The use of this word on these two occasions shows that, at the last, our Lord reminds his disciples of the miraculous feeding by the shore of the lake; and both narratives breathe the air of the northern parts of Galilee. But what are these among so many? The same lesson of the insufficiency of human resources to meet great human needs is suggested by Num_11:21-23. Our resources at the very best are quite exhausted. Our best, our all, avails little an expression which would apply to the numberless offers of our poor humanity and of our limited faculties to meet the moral starvation of the world. Take the Old Testament: how can the dispensation of all its provision satisfy per se the need of mankind as a whole? Greek philosophy, even if it satisfy the few, the leisurely, the cynical, the learned, the wise men of the West, what will it do for the poor, the broken hearted, the consciously guilty? The good things of this life are equally powerless, and the proposals of even truth itself, apart from the gracious operations of the Spirit, would fail to meet the wants or necessities of the unbelieving.

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

8. εἷς ἐκ τ. μαθ. Of course this does not imply that Philip was not a disciple; the meaning rather is, that a disciple had been appealed to without results, and now a disciple makes a communication out of which good results flow. The name of this second disciple comes in as a sort of afterthought. There seems to have been some connexion between S. Andrew and S. Philip (Joh 1:44, Joh 12:22). In the lists of the Apostles in Mark 3 and Acts 1. S. Philip’s name immediately follows S. Andrew’s. On S. Andrew see notes on Joh 1:40-41. The particulars about Philip and Andrew here are not found in the Synoptists’ account.

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.

8.] Meyer remarks, that εἷς ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ may seem strange, seeing that Philip also was this: but that it has its pragmatic value, seeing that, Philip having been asked in vain, one from among the circle of the disciples answers, and is afterwards specified as having been Andrew.

In the three other Gospels, the loaves and fishes appear as the disciples’ own;—and we have thus a very simple but very instructive instance of the way in which differences in detail arose. They were their own,—but not till they had bought them.

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

8. εἷς ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ. This description of an apostle is not found in the Synoptists (except at Mar 13:1, without ἐκ); but Jn. has it again at 12:4, 13:23; cf. 18:17, 25. For the constr. εἷς ἐκ followed by a gen. plur., see on 1:40.

For the designation of Andrew as “Simon Peter’s brother,” see on 1:40. His first impulse of discipleship was to find Peter and bring him to Jesus (1:41). He appears here as a resourceful person who tries to find a practical answer to the question put to Philip by Jesus, although he does not think that he has been successful in gathering a sufficient supply of food. In 12:20-22 Philip and Andrew are again associated in somewhat similar fashion, Philip not knowing what to do until he has consulted Andrew. These notices in Jn. supply the only indications of Andrew’s character that we have, and it is interesting to observe their consistency with each other. The only distinctive mention of Andrew in the Synoptists is at Mar 13:3, where he appears as associated with the inner circle of the Twelve—Peter, James, and John.

A second-century notice of Andrew and Philip shows that they were held to be among the leaders of the Twelve. When Papias collected traditions from the elders of his day, he used to ask them, “What did Andrew and what did Peter say? Or what did Philip? Or what Thomas or James or John or Matthew?” (Eus. H.E. iii. 39. 4), placing them respectively first and third of the apostles whom he names.

In the Muratorian Fragment on the Canon, Andrew is specially associated with the writing of the Fourth Gospel: “eadem nocte revelatum Andreae ex apostolis ut, recognoscentibus cunctis, Johannes suo nomine cuncta describeret”; and it is possible that his intimacy with John the son of Zebedee was handed down by tradition, although it cannot be held that he lived until the Gospel was published (see Introd., p. lvi).

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

Vv. 8, 9. “One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, says to him: 9. There is a lad here, who has five barley loaves and two fishes: but what are these for so many?”

John mentions, first, in an indefinite way, one disciple; then he makes a precise statement: “It was Andrew.” We can believe that we hear him telling the story. And how can we fail to remember here, that Andrew was precisely the one, who, according to the tradition in the Muratorian Fragment, was present at the time of the composition of the Gospel? His character as brother of Simon Peter had already been pointed out in Joh 1:41. Was not this sufficient? Certainly; but the person of Andrew cannot present itself to the mind of John, without his recalling to mind how nearly connected he was with Simon Peter, the principal one among the apostles. And yet it is claimed that one of the tendencies of the Johannean narrative is to disparage Peter! Andrew, thus, falls into the trap laid for his fellow-disciple, and it is, no doubt, with a sort of malicious humor that the evangelist is pleased to report in extenso their words, which form so strong a contrast to the magnificent display of power which is in preparation. The word ἕν, one only, which was restored by Tischendorf in 1859, is suppressed by him in his 8th ed., according to the Alexandrian authorities and Origen; but certainly wrongly. We can more easily understand how it may have been omitted than added. It brings out the scantiness of the resources which are at hand: “One only who has anything, and he how little!” It was some petty trader whom Andrew had just noticed in the crowd. Barley-bread was that used by the poorer classes.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.