John 7:40

Joh 7:40-44. Many of the people therefore — Even the officers sent to apprehend Christ, (see Joh 7:46,) as welt as many others of our Lord’s hearers; when they heard this saying — Namely, the gracious invitation above mentioned, which indeed was a more free declaration and promise than he commonly made, were so affected thereby, that they exclaimed, Of a truth this is the Prophet — Namely, the prophet like unto Moses, mentioned Deu 18:15. For, as the article is prefixed, it is most natural to render the expression, the prophet. And yet, as in the next verse this prophet is distinguished from the Christ; perhaps they only intended to signify that they thought one of the ancient prophets was revived. For many of the Jews supposed, that not only Elias, but also another of the prophets, would appear again among them, before the coming of the Messiah: to which opinion the question put to John, (Joh 1:21,) Art thou that prophet, may be considered as referring. See the note there. Others said, This is the Christ — The Messiah himself. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee? — This they spoke because they were led away with a common mistake, that Jesus was born in Nazareth. Hath not the Scripture said, &c. — Is not your acknowledging a Galilean for the Messiah contrary to the Scriptures, which have determined his nativity to Bethlehem, the town of his ancestor David? But how could they forget that Jesus was born there? Had not Herod the Great given them terrible reason to remember it, by the general massacre made of all the infants in that town and neighbourhood. So there was a division among the people because of him — They were divided in their sentiments, and a warm dissension took place among them on his account. And some would have taken him — The contention was carried to such a height, that his enemies, considering him as the cause of it, and knowing on what errand the officers were come, threatened to apprehend him, and would have done it, had they not been restrained by the providence of God.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

EXPLANATORY AND CRITICAL NOTES

Joh_7:41-42. The Christ.—Hearts open to the truth were convinced and confessed Him. But some said, etc.—These were unlike the guileless Nathanael (Joh_1:46-49). He asked when first told of Jesus, “Can any good thing (above all the Messiah, he meant) come out of Nazareth.” But he soon learned to think otherwise. These objectors could have inquired into the truth regarding Christ’s earthly lineage, and the place of His birth (Mic_5:2); but, unlike Nathanael, they did not care to do so. The prophetic promise concerning Galilee (Isa_9:1) would have given the light had they desired to have it. Baur, De Wette, and others seek to prove that John was ignorant that Jesus was born at Bethlehem. But had ‘John not known this fact, he would in some way have endeavoured to meet the objection. He assumes the fact, which the Synoptic Gospels had already made known.

Joh_7:44.—The opposing party were divided in their counsels. Some would have let matters rest; others were for immediate hostile action. They were again, however, restrained (Joh_7:30).

Joh_7:45-46. The officers, etc. (Joh_7:32).—They had been sent with a strict injunction to lay bold of Jesus. An opportunity did not at once present itself, and while they waited they came under the spell of Christ’s teaching, and to the chagrin of their superiors had to confess, “Never man spake like this man.”

Joh_7:47-49. Then answered, etc.—In those short, sharp sentences the chagrin and anger of the rulers come vividly before us. Have any of the rulers? etc.—In their wrath they made too sweeping a statement. Rulers, etc., had believed, as they would soon learn (Joh_7:50 : see also Joh_12:42). This people … accursed.—Unlearned and simple men were treated with great scorn by the Rabbis. The unlearned they called vermin, or am haaretz (people of the earth, עם הארצ). Notice the calm assumption of their own superiority, it might almost be said infallibility.

Joh_7:50. Nicodemus, … he that came to Him formerly (ὁ ἐλθὼν πρὸς αὐτὸν πρότερον, with R, L, T, etc.), being one of them.—Here their own question (Joh_7:48) is answered.

Joh_7:51. Doth our law judge? etc.—Nicodemus turns their charge in Joh_7:49 against themselves. If ever they knew the law, they were forgetting and breaking it in their blind anger (see Deu_1:16-17; Deu_19:15; Exo_23:1, etc). Hear him.—“Hear the causes between your brethren,” etc. (Deu_1:16).

Joh_7:52. They answered, etc.—They could not really answer, and flung a taunt at Nicodemus instead. Abuse, they hope, will serve for reasoning. Search, etc.—Did they forget Jonah, Nahum, Hosea, Elisha (2Ki_14:25; 1Ki_19:16)? And was it not foretold that in the latter times God would make glorious the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, etc. (Isa_9:1-2)? The New Testament “prophets” indeed were all Galileans (see Joh_6:71).

Joh_7:53. This verse is the beginning of the section Joh_8:1-12, which see.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Joh_7:40-53

Hath any of the rulers believed on Jesus?—When the company of the Pharisees asked such a question, they saw, in triumph, Christ and Christianity abolished in the name of science and culture. So, like the Pharisees, Celsus in a later age spoke to Origen, and sought to magnify heathenism as a rational faith, and to stigmatise Christianity as a plebeian religion. So spoke the Romish Church to Luther: Monk, miner’s son, who are you to reform what princes and councils hold to be good? And to-day? It is a common observance that Christianity and culture are irreconcilable, that the cross hinders the advance of light, that for advanced science, faith and hope, prayer and miracle, Jesus and eternity, are left far behind. In villages, hospitals for children, and for women, the knowledge of a Redeemer may have a meaning. But would any truly cultured man believe in the Son of God?

I. Does this objection prove anything against Jesus?—With God there is no respect of persons. Jesus had proved Himself to be the King of truth, those who were of the truth heard His voice, those willing to do the divine will would know of His doctrine. Unbelief bears on its brow the death-sign of trust in authority merely—in the numbers of its adherents, the brilliancy of their attainments, etc., in brief, on a series of outward, accessory circumstances. The officers refer to the impression made by the words of Jesus, the Pharisees to the authority of the unbelieving rulers, as if what the rulers believed must be true, and false what they rejected. This blind faith in authority was long before condemned. With God there is no respect of persons, as it is written in the Psalm, “It is better to trust in the Lord,” etc. (Psa_118:8).

II. Does this objection prove anything to the advantage of the rulers?—Did it show that they were elevated above human weaknesses in their faith? How near are the limits of pride and uncharitableness! “This people that knoweth not the law,” etc. (Joh_7:49); thus, because of their ignorance they followed Jesus! If the people are really so ignorant, what have you done for their elevation, ye leaders and shepherds? This, That you measure yourself, self-complacently, with this ignorance? that you use their ignorance to enforce a blind obedience? that you represent Jesus as a deceiver, His servants as foes to the light, the gospel as a barrier to progress? It is sad when defenders of the law must be reminded that the law judges no man before he has been heard—when educated men employ abuse in place of proof (saying, “Art thou a Galilean, a devotee, a pietist?”)—when those proud of their learning condemn and prejudicate the Scripture merely on what they know from hearsay. It is shameful when men who are slaves of their own lusts, of pride, lust of power, fear of men, etc., are more hardened to higher impressions than the lowest of the people. The rude myrmidons prove themselves to be more finely strung than their hypocritical and plotting masters. They do not say, “Whose bread I eat his song I sing,” and do not utter the false proverb, “Our master’s service first, God’s service next,” and say, “Therefore will we seize Jesus.” Their message becomes a witness against their own employers. Sent out as assassins, they returned as preachers of righteousness: “We have heard a mightier word than yours; never man spake like this man.” Wonderful! It is just the disciples’ confession: “Lord, to whom shall we go but unto Thee? Thou hast the words of eternal life.” Ye teachers of Israel, who were here the teachers? Ye men of education, who were here the most enlightened?

III. What reply does the knowledge of the fact make to such objections?—The audacious assertion contained in this question was in reality proved to be false. Did any of the rulers believe? Bad enough for themselves if they did not! But the gospel brings a forcible answer to their boastful objection. Many of the rulers did believe (Joh_12:42); and here was one, Nicodemus, a member of the Sanhedrin, a Pharisee, a disciple of Jesus. If a Herod will not listen, a Constantine will. If a Gamaliel will not come, a Paul will instead. Do those naturalists, who fall into the crudeness of mere assertion, declare that man has no undying soul, was not made after God’s image, but has developed merely as a higher animal? Still here a Newton, there a Gottfried Schubert, bows the knee before God and His Son. And do some astronomers speak scornfully of having searched the heavens and found no God? Then the star-gazers of the East come forward to announce that they have found the star of Jesus; a Kepler comes forward, and thus ends an astronomical writing: “Thou dost nourish in me through the light of nature the desire for the light of grace, in order that thereby I may attain to the light of glory”; Copernicus testifies, by the epitaph composed by himself, “Not grace as Peter and Paul received it do I seek, but as the dying thief received it.” Is this not to fall into the error of the Jewish rulers? No! It is but to utter the divine Yea to the question, “Has any one of the rulers?” etc. We extol simply the faithfulness of God, who can make possible what is impossible to men, viz. that a rich man should find salvation, rich whether in gold or intellectual gifts.—Abridged from Dr. R. Kögel.

Joh_7:40-53. The prejudices of literalism and authority.—There was a division of the people because of Christ, and “every man went to his own house” without having turned earnestly to Him whose divine wisdom and love should have drawn them all unto Himself. Shall we not reckon this as a part of the Redeemer’s sufferings—that the people to whom He was sent for salvation, to whom He had consecrated Himself, knew Him so little—that the glorious words just spoken influenced but a few, that this influence would soon pass, and that His presence at this great feast was again to be without effect for the great end of His mission? This was the first step toward His passion. In this history we see the victory of prejudice over truth. Many were moved by His words. Some said He was a true prophet, others that He was the Christ. Even those sent forth to take Him bore witness to Him. All light comes from above. All truth which can elevate our souls and bless our hearts comes to us either mediately or immediately through Him who said, “If any man thirst,” etc. These gifts of light and truth are richly shed abroad; and yet we have on earth still the same conflict, and too often prejudice still triumphs over truth.

I. The prejudice of literalism.—Prophecy foretold that Christ should come from Bethlehem; but men knew generally that Jesus came out of Galilee, and that He usually dwelt there. And their devotion to the letter was so great that, even though the divine power of His teaching and personal presence was so great, and might have convinced them, they thrust its testimony ever away from them. Christ we know did come from Bethlehem, and they had not been diligent to inquire into the earlier circumstances of Jesus. But even had they searched, would they have believed? There was another prophetic word which was interpreted to mean that no man would know whence Christ came. So that even had it been proved to them that Jesus was of the seed of David, etc., it would not have availed. But should these things have had power to hinder faith in Him who was evidently sent of God? Should not those Jews have considered how manifold the interpretation of such prophecies might be? Might they have not meant, e.g., that as David was the first who gloriously founded the kingdom of Israel, so in regard to Christ, the founder of the more glorious spiritual kingdom, there might well be ground for an inspired prophet to say that Christ must be of the seed of David, yes, and even his Son, as one of later times is often similar in power and thought to one of a former age, and thus may be called his son? How true is the apostle’s word, The letter killeth. All the proofs of Christ’s authority were set aside in the case of many through mistaken faith in the letter of prophecy, which they did not even honour by such a faith. For should they not have examined whether the manner in which the prophecy was expressed could not convey another meaning than what seemed at first glance the only meaning? And even if they had found it otherwise, should they not then have searched and seen whether Christ was really born in Galilee or not?

II. The prejudice of authority.—This reveals itself under two forms.

1. That faith should be turned away from Jesus because people designated Him by a name implying contempt, as they said to Nicodemus, Art thou also a Galilean?

2. That faith should be accorded to that side on which stand men of authority: “Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on Him?” Oh, let us think that those alone who are pure in heart can see the Lord and the light of His truth! Let us think what it means to crucify Christ anew, and to revive the spirit of those who, whilst they permitted themselves to be fooled by earthly considerations, brought on Him all that the world could do to Him of evil, but in doing so themselves forfeited the truth already known, and lost all the blessing Christ has won for us. “Who that hath ears to hear,” etc.—Translated and abridged from Fried. Schleiermacher.

Joh_7:40-42. Various opinions.—Religion may commend itself either by prodigies, or by showing that it is adapted to the wants of human nature, of the spiritual being of man. But by showing that it is adapted to meet those wants it brings forward a standing perpetual witness of its truth. When men feel their spiritual diseases, and are conscious of the healing power of the gospel, then they are convinced that Jesus is the Saviour. It was the hearing of our Lord’s invitation (Joh_7:37-38) and His teaching which led many to ask whether He were the Christ, as much as or more than the miracles He had wrought. There is a state of mind, a thirst for truth, which is more accessible to an appropriate doctrine than to any outward demonstration. Thirsty men feel the suitableness of the promise of water. And there were many in those crowds who were thirsting for truth, redemption, etc. But there were many also to whom those words brought no hope, etc. And as there were then various opinions regarding Christ and His message, so are there now.

I. Shall Christ come out of Galilee?—

1. That was the stumbling-block to many. No doubt Scripture said He should be born in Bethlehem. But the unbelief of those Jews arose from their ignorance and inattention. They could surely have ascertained the truth had they been anxious to do so. The secret wish of their hearts, however, was that Jesus should not prove to be Christ, He was in everything so opposed to their traditional conceptions and hopes.

2. We have among us the successors of those Jews. To what cause may much of present-day scepticism be attributed? Is it the result of deep reading, of careful thought and investigation? No. It exists in too many cases because the wish is father to the thought. No effort is made to clear up objections. There is rather a secret desire to get rid of the gospel. The case of those Jews is an example of what often occurs now.

II. Men shield themselves under one text of Scripture from the whole Bible. “Who has not heard ‘Be not righteous overmuch’ quoted as though it excused a man from being righteous at all? And ‘Charity covers a multitude of sins’ is a most convenient passage. There is needed only a little misrepresentation and a careful overlooking of all other Scripture, and a man may satisfy himself that by a little liberality to the poor he shall hide his misdoings or obtain their forgiveness. Every such fastening on any single text, without taking pains to examine and consider whether there be not some great and fundamental mistake, is but the repetition of what was done by the Jews,” etc. And thus it is also that doctrines and ordinances of the Church are depreciated and neglected.

III. The ordinance of baptism is sometimes thus depreciated.—If a man wishes to depreciate baptism or the fitness that he who administers so holy an ordinance should have a commission from God, he has his text. St. Paul said to the Corinthians, “I thank God that I baptised none of you but Crispus and Gaius. For Christ sent me not to baptise, but to preach the gospel.” Then St. Paul made but little of baptism, and thought that the administering it fell beneath his high office! Did he indeed? Why this is worse than the Jews; they had to travel perhaps as far as to Bethlehem to ascertain their mistake, but you need not go beyond the next verse to that which you quote—“Lest any should say that I had baptised in mine own name.” Paul was thankful that he had baptised but few; for he judged, from the temper of the Corinthian Church, that had he baptised many it would only have encouraged that party spirit which was so utterly at variance with vital Christianity. And this is making light of baptism, or entitling any one to administer it. Alas! it seems of very little worth that Jesus was actually born at Bethlehem, since His ordinary name is “Jesus of Nazareth.”—From Henry Melvill.

Joh_7:43. Causes of division regarding Christ.—How often during the course of His ministry might our Lord have cried out in the words of the prophet, “Who hath believed our report?” etc. (Isa_53:1)! How frequently was He confronted, after having wrought some mighty miracle or issued a gracious divine invitation, with the apparently hopeless unbelief of those whom He came to seek and save! How few were His followers among the official teachers of His people and the spiritual rulers of the nation! Indeed, it was the boast of the latter class that none of their number had believed on Him; for apparently those from among them who had given their adhesion to Christ as the Messiah had not obtruded their opinions on the notice of their fellows (Joh_12:42-43). As for the body of the people, knowing what we do of human nature, it is not surprising to find that like so many sheep they followed the leaders of the flock. And as those leaders were unbelieving the trend of their authority was ever prejudicial to our Lord. No matter how mighty were His miracles or how evidently divine was His teaching, it was enough for them that He did not conform to their ideas of the Messiah. He was to them as a “tender shoot,” and “a root sprout out of a dry ground, with no form and no comeliness,” from despised Galilee, with no adornment of rabbinical learning, and like the feeble shoot ready to die away, never likely to rise to the proportions of the stately cedar, or spread abroad with the luxurious fruitfulness of a vine. And thus scorning Him because of His lowly guise, because He required inward, spiritual conquest of themselves, and not an outward, temporal contest redounding to their own glory, they rejected the Redeemer of men, with all the true blessedness and glory of His spiritual kingdom. There are divisions to-day in the world on account of Christ and His religion as there were of old; there are those who reject and those who accept. Causes leading to division regarding Christ:—

I. The rationalistic spirit.—

1. The ruling class in the world to-day is becoming more and more the learned class. Men of learning and science have always had an influence among thinking people. But in this present age, through extended educational advantages and the diffusion of cheap literature, their influence now is more extensive than ever it has been. The democracy affects to despise wealth, glitter, show. And the danger is now that men of learning and science will inspire a kind of fetish worship, than which nothing could be more harmful.

2. Learning and science are not to be despised, but welcomed. Yet surely not blindly and unthinkingly, and the opinions of men of learning are not to be received, from a mere yielding to authority. To do this would be to imitate the Jewish people of old, and set up authority in the place of truth. But this is just what is done by too many. Certain leaders in the literary, philosophical, and scientific world, though professing to revere the gospel and the person or idea of its Founder, reject it as a heavenly message bringing salvation to men. In their pride of intellect they refuse to submit to enter the strait gate and narrow way. They stultify themselves by their declaration that the gospel is no divine revelation; for they thus arrogate to themselves universal knowledge and infinite comprehension. But there are in Christianity facts which cannot be accounted for by human insight or knowledge.

3. And too many accept the position of these leaders solely on account of their vast learning or high position in the scientific world. And so, too, in the Church the opinions of an extreme Higher Criticism, hostile in reality to revelation, are accepted by not a few simply on account of the learning, the apparent candour and ability of those who advance them. Many with a patronising air profess to admire the moral teaching of Christianity. But its supernatural origin, man’s need of salvation, and the message of the cross are set aside.

II. The ecclesiastical spirit.—

1. As long as the Church is in the bounds of time there will be probably separate sections or branches. Each land will have its own individual branch or section. There may also be more than one in a country. There will be predilections as to forms of government and worship.

2. But there is danger lest in following the voice of what seems authority, in this region also, men should be led to trust in some system, and in reality miss Christ and the blessedness of His gospel. The spirit of sect is antichristian (1Co_1:12). Adhesion to a certain branch of the Church, observance of certain rites and services, a merely formal religion, is often made to do duty for faith and spiritual worship. The special tenets or forms of a sect are made more conspicuous than the fundamental truths of the faith. And Scripture is impressed, is forced, to yield its testimony in favour of those special tenets, etc. (Joh_7:27; Joh_7:42; Joh_7:49).

3. But such a spirit has led and leads to endless divisions, to a misapprehension of the true spirit of Christ’s gospel, to a cold and formal adhesion on the part of not a few to the gospel, and hence to a retardation of the advance of truth. What is needed in order to remove many of the causes of division regarding Christ and His gospel is—

III. A clear, apprehension of the meaning and end of the gospel.—

1. The Jewish rulers and the mass of the people who followed them failed to understand Christ and His message. Nor did they make any effort to understand, being blinded with prejudice. They thought our Lord was inimical to them and their position, etc.

2. Now many of those leaders in science, etc., to-day are under the same misapprehension. They imagine that the gospel, and the facts and laws of nature, so far as they have been discovered, are inimical and mutually destructive. Moreover, they perhaps form their conceptions of the gospel from those who by over-rigid adherence to the letter fail to display its true spirit; or from “higher critics” who eliminate both letter and spirit. But they are not absolved from their error thereby. They should investigate for themselves before pronouncing so authoritatively. But like the Jewish rulers they refuse to do this, and continue in their error.

3. And it is a wilful ignorance with which they may be charged. The leaders of the Jewish people and those who followed them had seen the wonderful works of Jesus, or had heard of them. They had heard His teaching, so wonderful that even their own emissaries and spies were astonished at it, so suited did it seem to the needs of fallen sinful man; yet, blinded by prejudice and hate, they rejected Him. And is the gospel less wonderful to-day? Are its moral miracles less mighty than the physical miracles wrought by the Saviour while on earth? Is its teaching less lofty and sublime? Is it less suited now to meet the needs of men, to sate that soul-thirst which human learning or science cannot satisfy any more than the world’s pleasures? Are they not living among, and themselves rejoicing in, the moral and social triumphs effected by that very gospel which they reject?

4. And is it after all inimical to or destructive in any way of that science or philosophy they adore? Has it not been among peoples ruled by the genius and spirit of the pure gospel that this modern learning has risen and flourished? To what truth, firmly established, is the gospel opposed? To none! It is the rejecters of the gospel who are in reality most unscientific; for they neglect and ignore that part of human nature the wants of which the gospel was intended to meet, and which it does meet fully and gloriously. The feeling of responsibility in view of sin, the felt need of pardon and peace, the need of power to overcome evil, the yearning after immortality—these it meets and satisfies. And in doing so it builds up the whole man after the image of Christ, leading to the best and truest development of all His powers in the service of God and of humanity. Reject it—and what is there to put in its place as a spring of beneficent activity? what to stay the rise and progress of a cold materialism and secularism, which would freeze the current of human progress, and transform men into what would be merely a superior species of the beasts that perish?

5. And let formal religionists take heed lest they also not only retard the progress of the gospel, but help in the spread of unbelief. Pharisaism among the Jews crushed out the true spirit of religion by its formalism. The Pharisees and those who adhered to them helped to bring about the final rejection of Christ as much as the sceptical Sadduceeism of the entourage of the high priests.

6. Formal religion has still the same numbing, blighting effect. Spiritual life withers under it, spiritual progress is arrested; thus many who are outwardly friends to religion are in reality its enemies, for their lives belie their profession; and those who are only too glad of such an excuse will say, If this is your religion, we will have none of it.

Joh_7:44. The first measures against Jesus.—It was at this feast of tabernacles that the enmity against Christ came clearly to the light of day, and the first active severe measures were taken against Him. After the murderous thoughts and slanderous words, the train of hateful deeds began. In the chapter from which the text is taken we see how Jesus

(1) knew,

(2) judged,

(3) frustrated those measures, and thus showed forth His glory.

I. Jesus knew the plans of His enemies.—He knew their thoughts—that they hated Him, and why they hated Him and must do so. He would not shrink from the lot agreed on in the divine counsels, but He would not bring it upon Himself by His own act—it was not His duty to do so; and the hour of His death would be the hour of His greatest glory. Whatever happened could not surprise Him. He was prepared for all. But He must have experienced as much sorrow because His brethren did not believe and permitted themselves to be led by worldly considerations (Joh_7:3-8), as that the great mass of men, men of the world, opposed Him even to the death because He unveiled their sins and reproved them. This deep heart-pain belongs to His atoning sufferings which He bore on our account; so the prophetic word was fulfilled (Isa_43:24).

II. He brought the plans of His enemies to judgment.—They accused Him of being destitute of a rabbinical training; and He answered calmly that He had a right to teach, etc. (Joh_7:16-18), and then He turned upon them with the sword of judgment. How is it with you in spite of all your theologic lore and rabbinical honours? Ye call yourselves Moses’ disciples. How can ye be so when ye do not keep his law even, and seek to kill Me? Then He drew out of the darkness of concealment their concerted murderous plans (Joh_7:19). In reply they at once launched forth a second accusation: “Thou hast a devil,” etc. (Joh_7:20). If those from the provinces might be excused in part for this exclamation, as they did not know the designs of the Pharisees, those of Jerusalem could not be excused (see Joh_7:25). It was therefore to the Pharisees, and those privy to their designs, that He brought home the blame. He showed that He was no destroyer of true festive joy—did not bring simply imaginary charges against them. He charged them with harbouring murderous thoughts in their hearts against Him without good reason. Then He brought home to them the lawfulness of His action in healing the impotent man on the Sabbath, confuted them by referring to their observance of circumcision on the Sabbath, and finally called on them “not to judge by appearance,” etc. (Joh_7:24). And then, wonderful to relate! the Pharisees were punished by the lying inhabitants of Jerusalem (Joh_7:20), as the truth in spite of their lying was brought to light and was suddenly blurted out (Joh_7:25-27). And this led Jesus to the further declaration (Joh_7:28-29). It was too much for these men, who sent messengers to take Him. And Jesus, knowing that their plan, though not yet, would finally succeed, and in His desire to save some, uttered the words, “Yet a little while,” etc. (Joh_7:33-34).

III. He frustrates their evil designs.—Sometimes the judgment of the people hits the truth, and vox populi vox Dei. So was it with some of those people in their judgments regarding Jesus. “Many believed,” etc. (Joh_7:31); many also went further still (Joh_7:40-41). But more wonderful was the testimony of the officers sent to take Him (Joh_7:46). Those rough simple men, officers of justice, came under the power of Christ’s words, and all the evil designs against Jesus were in their case, as in the people’s, frustrated by His word. Yes, even in their own ranks the Pharisees found one who stood up for Christ (Joh_7:50). So each finally went to his own home. Christ’s hour had “not yet come.”—From Friedr. Arndt.

ILLUSTRATION

Joh_7:46. “Never man spake like this man.”—Marvellous indeed was Christ’s insight into human nature. With divine delicacy, yet with divine certainty, He lays His hand upon the heart of the moralist who, boastful of his prim propriety, asks, “What lack I yet?” and touches instantly the sensitive spot, “Go, sell that thou hast,” etc. The penetration of Christ’s words struck His most gifted foes dumb. Pharisees and Herodians forgot their hostility and conspired to catch Him in His talk: “Is it lawful to give tribute to Cæsar or not?” “Render unto Cæsar,” etc. Then the Sadducces sought to entangle Him in a question on the Resurrection; but again His wisdom put them to silence. Then the Pharisees returned to the assault, and cunningly tried to entrap Him into giving some one command of God undue prominence. And when again He read their hearts, and so majestically eluded their snare, from that day they “dared ask Him no more questions.” Fouqué has a fable of a magic mirror so wonderful, that he who looked in it might read his own character, history, and destiny. Goth and Moor, Frank and Hun, came from far to see their past and future unveiled. Here is the true magic mirror. This keenest sword is also a polished blade; it not only cuts deep, but it reflects character. Nothing is more plain, in Christ’s words, than an insight and a foresight far beyond man. Here, as in the brook, is the inverted image, which shows how deep is our degradation; but it tells of our possible elevation and salvation, even as the stars are no deeper down in the reflection than they are high in the heaven. Go, look in this mirror, see your own thoughts revealed.—Dr. Arthur T. Pierson.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

IGNORANCE OF THE JEWS

Joh 7:40-44. “Then some of the multitude, hearing these words, continued to say, Truly this One is the Prophet.” This is a phrase in O. T. often applied to the Messiah. “Others continued to say, He is the Christ.” I trow, the latter were Galileans, who had so frequently heard Him preach and witnessed His mighty works. “Others continued to say, Whether does Christ come out of Galilee?” Doubtless these were Jerusalemites, who looked with a degree of contempt on the Galileans, whose opportunities of light and culture had been quite inferior to those of Southern Palestine. “Does not the Scripture say that Christ cometh of the seed of David, and from Bethlehem, the village where David was?” Do you not see the gross and inexcusable ignorance here manifested? Bethlehem being only seven miles distant, and Jesus actually having been born there, according to the prophecies they now quote against Him, being shamefully ignorant of the fact that He was not born up in Galilee, as they claim, but in Bethlehem, and though constantly stigmatized as a Galilean, He was really a Bethlehemite. “Therefore there was a division in the crowd with reference to Him.” It seems that none there present knew the facts of His having been born in Bethlehem, all thinking that He was really a Galilean, some claiming His Christhood, notwithstanding the ostracism brought to bear against Galilee, and others rejecting him altogether on that account. Why did not He or some of His apostles speak out, and tell them that He was born in Bethlehem of Judea? It would have done no good, because they had a caviling spirit, and would have lighted on something else. “And some of them wished to arrest Him, but no one laid hands on Him.” They could not touch Him till His work was done.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh_7:40-43. Ἐκ τοῦ ὄχλου οὖν ἀκούσαντες τῶν λόγων τούτων (see the critical notes), κ.τ.λ. Now, at the close of all Christs discourses delivered at the feast (Joh_7:14-39), these verses set before us the various impressions which they produced upon the people with reference to their estimate of Christs person. From among the people, many, after they had heard these words, now said, etc. With ἐκ τοῦ ὄχλου we must supply τινές, as in Joh_16:17; Buttmann, N. T. Gr. p. 138 [E. T. p. 159]; Xen. Mem. iv. 5. 22; and Bornem. in loc. By ὁ προφήτης, as in Joh_1:21, is meant the prophet promised Deu_18:15, not as being himself the Messiah, but a prophet preceding Him, a more minute description of whom is not given.

μὴ γὰρ ἐκ τ. Γαλ., κ.τ.λ.] and yet surely the, Messiah does not come out of Galilee? Γάρ refers to the assertion of the ἄλλοι, and assigns the reason for the contradiction of it which οἱ δὲ ἔλεγον indicates. See Hartung, Partikell. I. 475; Baeumlein, Partik. p. 73. Christs birth at Bethlehem was unknown to the multitude. John, however, records all the various opinions in a purely objective manner; and we must not suppose, from the absence of any correction on his part, that the birth at Bethlehem was unknown to the evangelist himself (De Wette, Weisse, Keim; comp. Scholten). Baur (p. 169) employs this passage and Joh_7:52 in order to deny to the author any historical interest in the composition of his work. This would be to conclude too much, for every reader could ot himself and from his own knowledge supply the correction.

ἡ γραφή] Mic_5:1; Isa_11:1; Jer_23:5.

ὅπου ἦν Δ.] where David was. He was born at Bethlehem, and passed his youth there as a shepherd, 1 Samuel 16

A division therefore (ἑκάστου μέρους φιλονεικοῦντος, Euthymius Zigabenus) took place among the people concerning Him. Comp. Joh_9:16, Joh_10:19; 1Co_1:10; Act_14:4; Act_23:7; Herod. vii. 219: καὶ σφεῶν ἐσχίζοντο οἱ γνῶμαι. Xen. Sympos. iv. 59; Herod. vi. 109; Eur. Hec. 119; and Pflugk, in loc.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 7:40 . The immediate results of this declaration were twofold. In some faith was elicited: many of the crowd said: “This is of a truth the prophet”; others, going a step further, said: “This is the Christ”. On the relation of “the prophet” to “the Christ,” see on Joh 1:21 .

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

There is contention even in the Church itself about the chief point of religion: neither hath Christ any more cruel enemies than those that occupy the seat of truth: yet can they not do what they would.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Many . . . when they heard this . . . said, Of a truth, &c.--The only wonder is they did not all say it. "But their minds were blinded."

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 40. Of a truth this is the Prophet.] The great prophet, or teacher, spoken of by Moses, De 18:15, which they improperly distinguished from the Messiah, Joh 7:41. Some no doubt knew that by the prophet, the Messiah was meant; but others seem to have thought that one of the ancient prophets should be raised from the dead, and precede the appearing of the Messiah.

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

40. Many of the multitude. The Evangelist now relates what fruit followed from this last sermon of our Lord Jesus Christ; namely, that some thought one thing and some another, so that a difference of opinion arose among the people It ought to be observed that John does not speak of the open enemies of Christ, or of those who were already filled with deadly hatred against sound doctrine, but of the common people, among whom there ought to have been greater integrity. He enumerates three classes of them.

He is truly a Prophet. The first acknowledged that Jesus was truly a Prophet, from which we infer that they did not dislike his doctrine. But, on the other hand, how light and trifling this confession was, is evident from the fact, that, while they approve of the Teacher, they neither understand what he means, nor relish what he says; for they could not truly receive him as a Prophet, without, at the same time, acknowledging that he is the Son of God and the Author of their salvation. Yet this is good in them, that they perceive in Christ something Divine, which leads them to regard him with reverence; for this willingness to learn might afterwards give an easy opening to faith.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(40) Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying . . .—The reading of the best MSS. is, “Some of the people therefore, when they heard these sayings.”

Of a truth this is the prophet—i.e., the Prophet foretold by Moses in Deu_18:15. (Comp. Notes on Joh_1:21; Joh_6:14.)

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

40–52. Opposite Results of the Discourse

40. Many of the people, &c.] According to the best authorities; Of the multitude, therefore, some, when they heard these words, were saying, or, began to say.

Of a truth this is the Prophet] The Prophet of Deu_18:15, whom some identified with the Messiah, others supposed would be the fore-runner of the Messiah. Here he is plainly distinguished from the Messiah. See on Joh_1:21 and Joh_6:14.

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.

Others said, this is the Christ,.... The true Messiah, which they concluded, not only from the miracles, Joh 7:31, but from his speaking of rivers of living water flowing from him that believes in him; for the same prophecy that speaks of miracles to be performed in the times of the Messiah, speaks also of waters breaking out in the wilderness, and streams in the desert, of the parched ground becoming a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water, Isa 35:5.

But some said, shall Christ come out of Galilee? as they supposed Jesus did; and because he was educated at Nazareth, and Capernaum was his city, and he chiefly conversed, preached, and wrought his miracles in these parts, they concluded that he was born there; and therefore object this to his being the true Messiah. For if they did not mean this, according to their own accounts, the Messiah was to be in Galilee, and to be first revealed there; for they affirm (i) this in so many words, that , "the King Messiah shall be revealed in the land of Galilee"; accordingly Jesus, the true Messiah, as he was brought up in Galilee, though not born there, so he first preached there, and there wrought his first miracle; here he chiefly was, unless at the public feasts; and here he manifested himself to his disciples after his resurrection.

(i) Zohar in Gen. fol. 74. 3. & in Exod. fol. 3. 3. & 4. 1.

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

40 Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet.

Ver. 40. Of a truth this is the prophet] This was somewhat, but not enough; this was well, but not all. The buzzard’s wings serve him to get up a little from the earth, but not to bear him up far toward heaven.

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 Prophet - That is, the prophet whom they expected to precede the coming of the Messiah - either Elijah or Jeremiah. See Mat 16:14.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

The Prophet mentioned Deu 18:15. Some think that the Jews expected an eminent prophet, besides Elias, to come before the Messiah; and Joh 1:21 would incline us to think so. But others say, it cannot be proved from their writers, that they had any expectations of any but Elias and the Messiah. But the words may be read as well, this is a prophet, as this is the prophet; and I think that is the true sense of them. A prophet had now for more than four hundred years been a great rarity amongst them, they having had none but John the Baptist who had such a repute.

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

40. The people—The masses assembled from various regions to the feast.

The Prophet—Referring, doubtless, to the great prophet predicted by Moses, (Deu_18:15,) which the people here do not identify with the Messiah.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 40-53. (7) The conflict among the hearers, and divers results of this series of discourses. The Sanhedrin and its officers.

Either "some," or "certain," or "many" must be supposed to complete the text of the oldest manuscripts. Certain of the multitude therefore, when they heard these words (logwn , referring to vers. 37, 38), said, This is of a truth the Prophet. In all probability "the Prophet" predicted by Deu_18:15, whom the Lord God would raise up to them. (cf. Act_3:22; notes, Joh_1:21 and Joh_6:14) This was one of the grand features of the Old Testament conception of the Coming One. Whether even the wisest of them had learned to combine all these features of Prophet, Priest, and King, of Shiloh, of the Branch of the Lord, of the Lamb of God, and Prince of Peace, into one individual, is open to doubt.

They might believe that their eyes saw much, and yet wait for more (cf. John the Baptist"s message from the prison).

Vers. 40-44. Effect of this address upon the multitude.

It made a great impression.

I IT DEVELOPED DIFFERENCES OF OPINION. "Many then of the multitude, who had heard this discourse, said, Truly this is the Prophet. Others said, This is the Christ.

1. A section of the multitude was favorable to Christ"s Messianic claims

(1) one part holding that he was the prophet, (Deu_18:18) and therefore, practically, the Messiah, or either Elijah or Jeremiah, who was to be a precursor of the Messiah;

(2) another part holding that he was really the Messiah.

2. A section perhaps the larger part held that he could not be the Messiah, because he was born in Galilee. "Doth the Christ, then, come out of Galilee?

(1) They were ignorant of the true place of his birth;

(2) yet they were acquainted with the Scripture that spoke of Bethlehem as the scene of the Messiah"s birth. "Hath not the Scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was?" The whole incident shows

(a) that they did not take pains to inquire concerning the real birthplace of Jesus;

(b) that divisions of opinion concerning Christ began at a very early period, and still continue. "What think ye of Christ?" is still the question which tests the Christian attitude of men and Churches.

II THE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION PREVENTED THE IMMEDIATE ARREST OF JESUS, "And some of them desired to take him; but no man laid hands on him.

1. The unbelieving Jews would have gladly arrested Jesus, and brought him before the Sanhedrin on a charge of blasphemy.

2. Their hands were restrained by Divine Providence, mainly through the risks of a collision with those Jews who were inclined to favour Christ"s claims.

The prophet.

In the Jewish dispensation no unimportant place was filled by the order of men known as seers or prophets. From Samuel to Malachi, they were the spiritual teachers and guides of Israel. The Lord Christ gathered up in his own Person and ministry the significance and power of the prophetic office.

I CHRIST"S PROPHETIC DESIGNATION. He was known as a Prophet by those who saw in him more than a rabbi, while yet they knew him not as the Messiah. It had been foretold by Moses in the Pentateuch, and by the last of the prophets who contributed to the Old Testament canon, that a great Prophet should in after days be raised up by the Eternal. And this was fulfilled in the Prophet of Nazareth.

II CHRIST"S PROPHETIC QUALIFICATIONS. His Divine nature, his intimacy with his Father, in whose bosom, i.e. in whose counsels and secrets, he was, constituted his supreme fitness for this office. And his humanity, his oneness with the race whose nature he assumed, enabled him to communicate prophetic messages with inimitable effectiveness. A prophet is one who speaks for God; this Jesus did, as none else could or can.

III CHRIST"S PROPHETIC ACTS. His miracles were such, for they taught, with a power even words could not rival, great spiritual and eternal truths. His conduct in cleansing the temple with authority and holy indignation was an example of action becoming in a Prophet commissioned by God himself.

IV CHRIST"S PROPHETIC WORDS. To enumerate these would be to repeat a large portion of the Gospel records. He explained the Law; he preached the gospel; he foretold things to come; he spake as One having authority; yet he spake as One having winning attractiveness in all his words.

V CHRIST"S PROPHETIC PERPETUITY. His word was reiterated by the inspired apostles, to whose memory all his sayings were brought. It is continued in the New Testament, the Word of prophecy. As the Prophet of this spiritual dispensation, Jesus inspires his Church, convinces human minds, changes human hearts, hallows human society. As long as man needs teaching, Christ is, and will remain, the one great Divine and authoritative Prophet of humanity. T.

Vers. 40-44. An important division.

We have here:

1. A great feast. That of Tabernacles.

2. A great day. The last day of the feast.

3. A great preacher. The Christ, the Son of God.

4. A great sermon. "He cried;" and he had something worth crying the living water for a thirsty world.

5. A great division. "And there was a division among the people," etc. Notice

I SOME OF THE FEATURES OF THIS DIVISION.

1. Jesus was the Subject of this division. "Because of him." The question was Who was he? what was he? A good or a bad man, a true prophet or an impostor?

2. They were divided in their opinions. Some thought he was the Prophet; some thought he was the Christ; while others doubted, objected, and opposed.

3. They were divided while it was important that they should agree. If he was an impostor, it was important that they should agree to expose him and stem his influence; but if their Messiah, it was all-important that they should agree to accept and obey him.

4. They were divided while they ought to be unanimous. Jesus had told them who he was, and his person, character, ministry, and his mighty works, all were in perfect harmony with his claims. With perfect unity and Divine force they pointed to him as the Son of God.

5. In this division error dissents from truth. Some said, "He is the Christ." Error doubted and objected. Truth is older and firmer than error, right than wrong. Error and wrong are negatives of truth and right.

6. Amidst this division Christ remained the same, and shone on. The different opinions of men make no change in Jesus himself. Christ changes men"s opinions, but their opinions produce no change in him.

II THE UNDERLYLNG PRINCIPLES OF THIS DIVISION AND ITS CONSEQUENT VARIETY OF OPINIONS.

1. Some were prejudiced against him.

(1) Prejudice is unreasonable (ver. 41). It makes more of a place often than a person. The highest claims of a person are ignored through unreasonable objections to the place whence he hails.

(2) Prejudice makes what is really for the truth to appear against it. (Ver. 42) Christ was of the lineage of David, and a native of Bethlehem. They manifest here a culpable ignorance or a wilful suppression of knowledge. Prejudice is capable of both.

2. Some were filled with hatred against him. (Ver. 44) Through this passion even the Son of God appeared as an impostor and a demon. A Being of infinite love could not be accepted nor even recognized through hatred.

3. Some were well disposed to him. (Ver. 40) A favourable disposition will generally find the truth or an approximation to it. "The Prophet;" "the Christ." This was probably the verdict of the majority of that age. Their heads were right, their hearts were wrong.

4. All seemed sadly indifferent. The most earnest were his haters. Even those who rightly pronounced him to be the Christ seemed to lack earnestness of soul. The great "cry" of Jesus on the last day of the feast did not find an adequate response from the heart of the multitudes. There was a division, a stir, and that was apparently all.

CONCLUSIONS.

1. Christ has occasioned great divisions in the world. This was not She first nor the last. A variety of opinions, of sentiments and feelings, with regard to him. He is the occasion, not the cause. He is the Prince of peace and unity, and yet divisions with regard to him have stirred humanity into the highest pitch of passion, and have resulted in wars, persecutions, and martyrdoms.

2. The most important division of humanity is that on Christ. Nations divide on important questions, but upon none so important as this. Upon this hangs the eternal destiny of the world.

3. In this division all are divided into two parties, for or against him.

There is no neutrality.

1. Through divisions, after all, right views of Jesus are obtained. We must obtain peace through wars, calm through storms, and unanimity through divisions. Out of these stirring divisions Christ will come forth as the Son of God and the Saviour of man.

2. In all these divisions it is all-important to possess an earnest spirit anda well disposed heart, for through these alone can we see Jesus as he is.

3. In these divisions we may give Jesus a good name and nothing more.

We may call him the Christ, but "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord," etc. He demands the verdict of the heart.

In this division where do we stand for or against him? B.T.

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

The prophet - Whom we expect to be the forerunner of the Messiah.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

The effect of the sermon:

v. 40. Many of the people, therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet.

v. 41. Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee?

v. 42. Hath not the Scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David; and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was?

v. 43. So there was a division among the people because of Him.

v. 44. And some of them would have taken Him; but no man laid hands on Him.

Both the words and the manner of Jesus upon this occasion made a profound impression, but the people were impressed in various ways. Some of them were ready to believe that He was that great prophet of whom Moses had prophesied, Deu 18:15, whom they did not identify with the Messiah. Others had gained the conviction that He must be the Christ Himself. That was a fine confession of faith. But others were present that ridiculed His Galilean ancestry, as they believed that Jesus had been born in Galilee. They were familiar with the prophecy according to which the Messiah was to be born at Bethlehem, and their assumption as to His Galilean derivation clashed with this prophecy. So public opinion was divided on this occasion. Note: Whenever there is a difference of opinion in regard to the person and office of Christ, or in regard to any doctrine of the Gospel, the reason is not to be sought on the part of Jesus, but in the perverse understanding of man. A careful searching of Scriptures and a diligent comparison of the various parts of Scriptures will always result in absolute clearness with regard to all the doctrines which are necessary for salvation. Where this is not done, the judgment pronounced upon unbelievers will strike such people, and their understanding will be darkened all the more with the passing of time. Some of the Jews in the multitude were so hardened to the proclamation of the Gospel that they wanted to arrest Him, but the intention died in its inception, and the uplifted hands sank down powerlessly. God Himself tied their hands, for the hour of Jesus was not yet come.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

In these verses an account is given of the various effects which our Lord’s foregoing sermon had upon his hearers hearts: some were so affected with it, that they believed him to be the great prophet promised to Israel, Deu 18:18. Others apprehended him to be the Christ: others contradict both, supposing him to be born not at Bethlehem, but in Galilee. And upon this diversity of opinions, there arose a division amongst them: and some had a mind to have apprehended him, but, by an over-ruling providence, they were restrained from the doing of it at present.

Learn hence, That diversity of opinions in matters of religion, even concerning Christ himself, have been even from the beginning. Some accounted him a prophet, others the Messiah: some thought him neither; but a grand impostor and deceiver. Our dear Lord when here on earth, passed through evil report and good report; let his followers expect and prepare for the same: for innocence itself cannot protect him from slander and false accusation.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

This is indeed the prophet

By saying this, the people are indicating that they believe Jesus is the prophet like Moses that God had promised to send. AT: "This is indeed the prophet who is like Moses that we have been waiting for" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

Does the Christ come from Galilee?

This remark appears in the form of a question to add emphasis. AT: "The Christ cannot come from Galilee!" (See: Rhetorical Question)

Have the scriptures not said that the Christ will come from the descendants of David and from Bethlehem, the village where David was?

This remark appears in the form of a question to add emphasis. AT: "The scriptures teach that Christ will come from the line of David and from Bethlehem, the village where David was!" (See: Rhetorical Question)

Have the scriptures not said

The scriptures are referred to as if they were actually speaking as a person speaks. AT: "The prophets wrote in the scriptures" (See: Personification)

where David was

"where David lived"

translationWords

prophet

Christ

Galilee

descend

David

Bethlehem

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

40–52. OPPOSITE RESULTS OF THE DISCOURSES

40. ἐκ τ. ὄχλ. οὖν. Of the multitude, therefore, some, when they heard these words, kept saying, or, began to say. For ἐκ τῶν as a nominative comp. Joh 1:24, Joh 16:17, and as an accusative 2Jn 1:4; Rev 2:10. The λόγοι probably mean the discourses from Joh 7:14 onwards.

ὁ προφήτης. The Prophet of Deu 18:15, who is here distinguished from the Messiah. see on Joh 1:21 and Joh 6:14.

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.

40.] ὁ προφήτης is here clearly distinguished from ὁ χριστός: see note on ch. 1:21, and Deu 18:15.

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

40. That many of the multitude (ὄχλος) believed in Jesus’ claims has been told already (v. 31).

ἐκ τοῦ ὄχλου οὖν ἀκούσαντες τῶν λόγων τούτων κτλ. We must supply τινές (as at 16:17: “some of the crowd.” The rec. text inserts πολλοί (from v. 31), but om. אBDLNTWΘ. Again, the rec. text reads τὸν λόγον, but אBDLN have τῶν λόγων τούτων.

We are not to take vv. 40-43 as referring exclusively or particularly to the effect produced by the great pronouncement of vv. 37, 38. τῶν λόγων τούτων include the whole of the teaching which Jesus had given during the feast (vv. 25-38). This teaching was appreciated by some of His hearers, for ἀκούειν followed by a gen. implies (see on 3:8) an intelligent and obedient hearing (a point which is obscured by the acc. τὸν λόγον of the rec. text).

No doubt, the climax of the teaching was reached vv. 37, 38. The hearers of the words, “Out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water,” recognised that the claim involved was that He, of whose disciples such a thing could be asserted, was inspired in a peculiar degree by the Spirit of Yahweh. He must be the authorised exponent and missionary of the Law. Accordingly, some identified the speaker with “the prophet,” the predestined successor of Moses. (See on 1:21 and 6:14.)

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

Many. The best texts omit. Read as Rev., some.

This saying [τον λογον] . The best texts substitute tw logwn toutwn, these words. So Rev.

The prophet. See on 1 21.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vv. 40-44. “Some among the multitude, who had heard these words said, This man is of a truth the prophet. Others said, This is the Christ. 41. But others said, Does the Christ then come out of Galilee? 42. Has not the Scripture declared that the Christ comes of the seed of David and from the village of Bethlehem, where David was? 43. So there arose a division in the multitude because of him, 44 and some of them would have taken him; but no one laid hands on him.”

These brief descriptions of the impressions of the people, which follow each of the discourses of Jesus serve to mark the two- fold development which is effected and thus prepare the way for the understanding of the final crisis. These pictures are history taken in the act; how could they proceed from the pen of a later narrator? John has given us only the resume of the discourses delivered by Jesus on this occasion. This is what he gives us to understand by the plural τῶν λόγων, these discourses, which, according to the documents, is to be regarded as the true reading. We know already who this prophet was of whom a portion of the hearers are thinking. Comp. Joh 1:12; Joh 6:14. The transition from this supposition to the following one: This is the Messiah, is easily understood from the second of these passages.

As there were two shades of opinion among the well-disposed hearers, so there were also two in the hostile party: some limited themselves to making objections (Joh 7:41-42); this feature suffices to isolate them morally from those previously mentioned. Others (Joh 7:44) already wished to proceed to violent measures. De Wette, Weiss, Keimask why John does not refute the objection advanced in Joh 7:42, which it would have been easy for him to do, if he had known or admitted the birth of Jesus at Bethlehem. From this silence they infer that he was ignorant of or denied the whole legend of the Davidic descent of Jesus and His birth at Bethlehem. But the evangelist relates his story objectively (Weiss), and it is precisely in the case of his believing the objection to be well founded that he would be obliged to try to resolve it. John often takes pleasure in reporting objections which, for his readers who are acquainted with the Gospel history, turn immediately into proofs. At the same time he shows thereby how the critical spirit, to which the adversaries of Jesus had surrendered themselves had been a less sure guide than the moral instinct through which the disciples had attached themselves to Him. The γάρ, for (Joh 7:41), refers to an understood negative: “By no means, for ...” The present ἔρχεται, comes, is that of the idea, the expression of what must be, according to the prophecy. ῝Οπου ἦν “where he was (his home);” comp. 1 Sam. 16:44. The some, according to Weiss, formed a part of the officers sent to take Him. But, in that case, why not designate them, as in Joh 7:45? They were rather some violent persons in the crowd who were urging the officers to execute their commission. To take Him, in the sense of causing Him to be taken.

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.