40—46.
ἐν τῇ ἰδίᾳ πατρίδι τιμὴν οὐκ έχει.
Γαλιλαίαν, ἳ ἐδέξαντο αὐτὸν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι, πάντα ἑωρακότες ἃ
733
45. ?"Ore οὖν ἦλθεν εἲς τὴν P LK. iv. 24.
a 3 / ο ἐποί- α i. τι.
ησεν ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ' καὶ αὐτοὶ γὰρ ἦλθον εἰς τὴν
ἑορτήν. \
46. "HNOev οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς * πάλιν εἰς τὴν Kava τῆς Γαλιλαίας, καὶ ἦν τις " βασιλικὸς, οὗ ὁ υἱὸς ἠσθένει ἐν 45 subst.
ἐποίησε τὸ ὕδωρ οἶνον.
in his own country he had to purchase publishers: while elsewhere publishers purchased him. ‘The difficulty lies in the present application of the saying. If Galilee was His ‘‘ fatherland,” how can He use this proverb as a reason for His going there? To escape the difficulty Cyril, followed by Calvin, Grotius, and many more, says Nazareth was His πατρίς, and here [ἀναγκαίαν ποιεῖται τὴν ἀπολογίαν τῆς παραδρομῆς] he assigns the reason for His passing by Nazareth. πατρίς can be used of a town as in Philo’s Leg. ad Caium, Agrippa says tort δέ por Ἱεροσόλυμα πατρίς (Kypke). See also Achilles Tat., 22; Lk. iv. 23. But the objection is that Lk. tells us He did go to Nazareth. Origen says Judaea was the πατρίς τῶν προφητῶν ; and Licke, Westcott, Reith, and others believe that Judaea is here meant; and that Jesus, by citing the proverb, gives the reason for His rejec- tion in Jerusalem. But this is out of place, as He had long since left Jeru- salem. Meyer thinks the meaning is that Jesus left Galilee in order to sub- stantiate His Messianic claim in Jeru- salem, and this having been accom- plished, He returns with His credentials to His own country. This agrees with ver. 45, “ having seen the miracles which He had done in Jerusalem”. Weiss interprets the words as meaning that Jesus leaves Samaria, where honour had come unbidden, in order to evoke faith and honour where as yet He had none: thus continuing the hard work of sowing and leaving to the disciples the glad harvest- ing. This is ingenious; but the obvious interpretation is that which finds in the statement (vv. 43, 44) a resumption of the narrative of vv. 1-3, which had been interrupted by the account of the Lord’s experience in Samaria. That narrative had assigned as the reason for our Lord’s leaving Judaea and making for Galilee, His own over-popularity, which threatenedia collision with the Pharisees. To avoid this He goes to Galilee, where, as He Himself said, there was little risk of His being too highly honoured.—Ver. 45. Neither is οὖν of ver. 45 inconsistent
ὅπου ΣΠ. 1. s Here only
with this interpretation. It merely con- tinues the narration; ‘‘when, then, He came into Galilee’. The immediate result of His coming was not what He anticipated, and therefore ἐδέξαντο is thrust into the emphatic place, ‘‘a wel- come was accorded to Him by the Galileans”. And this unexpected result is accounted for by the fact stated, πάντα ἑωρακότες . . . εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν; they had ΄ been at the Passover at Jerusalem, and had seen all He haddone there. “ They received Him... on account of His fame in Jerusalem, the metropolis, which set them the fashion in their estimate of men and things” (Alford). According to John’s usual method of distinguishing various kinds of faith, this note is inserted to warn the reader that the reception was after all not deeply grounded, and to prepare for the statement of ver. 48. [ᾖλθον, and even ἐποίησεν, may be ren- dered by pluperfects.]—Ver. 46. 7A@ev οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς. May we conclude from the circumstance that no mention is made of the disciples until vi. 3, “that they had remained in Samaria, and had gone home”? πάλιν ἐλθεῖν means ‘‘to re- turn’’; here with a reference to ii. 1. The further definition of Kava, ὅπου ἐποίησε τὸ ὕδωρ οἶνον, is to identify the place, to prepare for ver. 54, and to re- mind us He had friends there. Weiss and Holtzmann suppose the family of Jesus was now resident at Cana, That we have no reason to suppose. From the period of the nanistry in Galilee now beginning, the Synoptists give many details: John gives but one. ἡν τις βασιλικὸς. Euthymius gives the mean- ings of βασιλικός thus: βασιλικὸς ἐλέ- γετο, ἢ ὧς ἐκ γένους βασιλικοῦ, ἢ ὡς ἀξίωμά τι κεκτηµένος, ἀφ᾽ οὗπερ ἐκαλεῖτο βασιλικὸς, ἢ ὡς ὑπηρέτης βασιλικός. Kypke gives examples of its use by writers of the period to denote soldiers or servants of a king, or persons of royal blood, or of rank and dignity, and thinks it here means ‘‘vir nobilis, clarus, in dignitate quadam constitutus”. Lampe thinks it may imply that this man was both in the royal service and of royal blood. Lightfoot suggests that this may