《Lange’s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures – John (Ch. 4~Ch. 8》(Johann P. Lange) 04 Chapter 4

Footnotes:

FN#13 - John 7:10.—[The text. rec. transfers εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν after ἀνέβη. But the position indicated in brackets is maintained by א. B. K. L, etc., and the best critics.—P. S.]

FN#14 - John 7:12.—Δέ after ἅλλοι is wanting in [א] D. G. F, etc., and in Tischendorf. [Inserted in B. L, Alf, W. and H.—P. S.]

FN#15 - John 7:15.—Lachmann and Tischendorf: οὖν instead of καί, after many authorities. Also after ἀπεκρ., John 7:16.

FN#16 - John 7:16.—[The οὖν which is wanting in the text. rec. and ignored by Lange, is well supported by א. B. T, etc. Alf, W. and H, etc.—P. S.]

FN#17 - John 7:17.—[The E. V. disregards the θέλῃ and the implied harmony of man’s will with God’s will, and might convey the idea that the mere performance of God’s commandments will lead men to a knowledge of Christ, which is not necessarily the case. Comp. Alf. in loc.—P. S.]

FN#18 - John 7:19.—[The interrogation mark should be put after the first τὸν νόμον. The question is followed by a categorical charge. So Lachm, Tischend, Meyer, Lange.—P. S.]

FN#19 - Vera21,22.—[Dr. Lange not only connects the διὰ τοῦτο with θαυμάζετε instead of δὲδωκεν, but divides the verses between τοῦτο and Μωϋσ. The latter is not done even by some editors who connect the διὰ τοῦτο grammatically with the preceding verse; but of course it should be done. The Cod. Sin. lacks the δ.τ. altogether, and reads: θαυμάζετε Ὁ Μωϋσ—E. D. Y.]

FN#20 - John 7:26.—Ἀληθῶς in most MSS, B. D. K. L, etc., occurs only once, and that before ἕγνωσαν Tischendorf. Yet it is probable that the second ἀληθ has been dropped on account of the striking repetition, which, however, is very expressive and significant.

FN#21 - John 7:29.—[Text. rec. with א. D. insert δέ after ἐγώ, B. T, Vulg, Tert, Orig, Alf, W. and H. omit it.—P. S.]

FN#22 - John 7:30.—[Καί here, as in John 7:13; John 7:28 and often in John, adds an opposite thought=atque, und doch, and yet. Comp. Hartung, Partikellehre, I. p147 f. Meyer on John 7:28 : “Pronounce and emphatically, and imagine a dash after it.”—P. S.]

FN#23 - John 7:31—Ἐκ τοῦ ὅχλου δέ πολλοί Lachmann, Tischendorf, [Alf, W. and H, with B. K. L, etc. This position puts the ὅχλος in stronger contrast to the subject of ἐζήτουν, John 7:30, and is preferable to the πολ. δ. ἐκ. τ. ὅχλ. of the Rec, which is backed here by א. D.—P. S.]

FN#24 - Ibid.—Ὄτι [after ἔλέγον] before ὁ Χρ.ὅταν, is lacking in B. D. L. etc., and Lachmann [and Cod. Sin.]

FN#25 - Ibid—Instead of μήτι [text. rec.] Lachmann and Tischendorf [Alf, W. and H.] read μή [doch nicht].

FN#26 - Ibid.—The τούτων must be considered an explanatory addition. [Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford, etc, omit it on the authority of the uncial MSS.—P. S.]

FN#27 - John 7:32.—[Οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καί οί φαρισαῖοι is sustained by the uncial MSS. against the reverse order of the text. rec.—P. S.]

FN#28 - John 7:34.—[The second με here and John 7:36 is omitted by the text. rec. and hence italicised in the E. V, but sustained by B. T. X.—P. S.]

FN#29 - As in the English phrase: A man of letters. Yet here it means chiefly Scripture-learning, almost the only kind of learning known among the Jews.—P. S.]

FN#30 - Just the position denoted by the covenant. The historical covenant, the field of the gratia præveniens.—E. D. Y.]

FN#31 - Cod. Sin.* omits διὰ τοῦτο altogether, and so does Tischendorf in the 8 th ed. He reads ὁ Μωϋστῆς with the article. The phrase διὰ τοῦτο in John usually stands at the beginning, not at the close of a sentence, comp. John 5:16; John 5:18; John 6:65; John 8:47; John 10:17; Revelation 17:7.—P. S.]

FN#32 - In ed5 (p301) Meyer connects διὰ τοῦτο with the following οὐχ ὅτι (as Bengel), and explains: Moses on this account gave yon circumcision, not because it is from Moses but because it is from the father’s (the patriarchs). Similarly Alford in the 6 th ed.—P. S.]

FN#33 - Similarly Alford: The distinction is between circumcision which purified only part of a Prayer of Manasseh, and that perfect and entire healing which the Lord bestowed on the cripple.—P. S.]

FN#34 - According to Meyer (5th ed. p303] the antithesis is between the healing of a single member of the body, and the whole body (but not body and soul).—P. S.]

FN#35 - Alford: “It has been questioned whether these words are to be taken ironically, interrogatively, or affirmatively. I incline to the last view for this reason: obviously no very high degree of knowledge whence He was, is implied, for they knew not Him that sent Him; see also John 8:14; John 8:19, and therefore could not know whence He was, in this sense. The answer is made in their own sense:—they knew that He was from Nazareth in Galilee, see John 7:41,—and probably that lie was called the son of Joseph. In this sense they knew whence He was, but further than this they knew not.”—P. S.]

FN#36 - Alford: “The matter here impressed on them is the genuineness, the reality of the fact: that Jesus was sent, and there was one who sent Him, though they know Him not, and consequently knew not πόθεν ἐστίν. The nearest English word would be real: but this would not convey the meaning perspicuously to the ordinary mind;—perhaps the E. V. true is better, provided it be explained to mean objectively, not subjectively, true: really existent, not ‘truthful’ which it may be questioned whether the word ἀληθίνος will bear, although it is so maintained by Euthym, Cyril, Chrys, Theophylact, Lampe, Baumgarten-Crusius, Tholuck, and many others.”—P. S.]

FN#37 - Still others: My bodily presence will be withdrawn from you; I shall be personally in a place inaccessible to you. So Alford.—P. S.]

FN#38 - A recent example: Napoleon III. and Pope Pius IX.—P. S.]

Verses 37-44

(b) Christ as the dispenser of the spirit, the real, siloam with its water of life. increasing ferment in the people

John 7:37-44

37[Now]^[FN39] In the last day, that [the] great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man [any one] thirst, let him come unto me, and drink 38 He that believeth on [in] me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly [body]^[FN40] shall flow rivers of living water39(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe^[FN41] on [in] him should [were about to] receive, for the Holy Ghost [the Spirit] was 40 not yet given, [omit given]^[FN42] because that [omit that] Jesus was not yet glorified.)

Many^[FN43] [some] of the people [multitude] therefore, when they heard this saying41[these words],^[FN44] said, Of a truth this is the Prophet [This is truly the Prophet.] Others said, This is the Christ. But [omit But] some [Others]^[FN45] said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee [Doth the Christ then come from Galilee]? 42Hath not the Scripture said, That [the] Christ cometh of [from] the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem [from Bethlehem, the town]^[FN46] where David was?

43So there was a division among the people [the multitude] because of him. And 44 some of them would have taken him [wished to seize him]; but no man [one] laid hands on him.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

John 7:37. In the last day.—Meyer: “As the eighth day (the 22 d Tisri according to Leviticus 23:34; Numbers 29:35; Nehemiah 8:18) was reckoned in with the seven days of the feast proper, and as, Succah, fol48, 1, the last day (אַחֲרוֹן) of the feast is the eighth, John certainly meant this day and not the seventh (Theoph, Buxtorf, Bengel, Roland, Paulus, Amnion); especially as it was customary at a later period to speak of an eight days’ celebration of the feast of tabernacles ( 2 Maccabees 10:6; Joseph. Ant. III:10, 4; Gem. Eruvin. 40, 2; Midr. Kohel. 118, 3). To this corresponds, too, the translation ἐξόδιον (finale of the feast), by which the Septuagint expresses the designation of the eighth day, עֲצֶרֶת [solemn assembly] in Leviticus 23:36; Numbers 29:35; Nehemiah 8:18. Comp. Ewald, Alterthümer, p481.” Tholuck: “A general jubilee (Plutarch calls it a Bacchanal) and splendid ceremonies of many kinds took place at this feast, so that the Rabbis were accustomed to say: He who has not seen these festivities, knows not what jubilee is. See H. Majus: Diss. de haustu aquarum.”

[Alford takes the same view as to the day, and then tries to solve the difficulty which attaches to it. “The eighth day seems here to be meant, and the last of the feast to be popularly used. But a difficulty attends this view. Our Lord certainly seems to allude here to the custom which prevailed during the seven days of the feast, of a priest bringing water in a golden vessel from the pool of Siloam with a jubilant procession to the temple, standing on the altar and pouring it. out there, together with wine, while meantime the Hallel ( Psalm 113-118) was sung. This practice was by some supposed—as the dwelling in tabernacles represented their life in the desert of old—to refer to the striking of the rock by Moses:—by others, to the rain, for which they then prayed, for the seed of the ensuing year:—by the elder Rabbis (Maimonides, cited by Stier, iv331, ed2), to Isaiah 12:3, and the effusion of the Holy Spirit in the days of the Messiah. But it was universally agreed (with the single exception of the testimony of R. Juda Hakkadosh, quoted in the tract Succa, which itself distinctly asserts the contrary), that on the eighth day this ceremony did not take place. Now, out of this difficulty I would extract what I believe to be the right interpretation. It was the eighth day, and the pouring of water did not take place. But is therefore (as Lücke will have it) all allusion to the ceremony excluded? I think not: nay, I believe it is the more natural. For seven days the ceremony had been performed, and the Hallel sung. On the eighth day the Hallel was sung, but the outpouring of the water did not take place: ‘desidcraverunt aliquid.’ ‘Then Jesus stood and cried,’ etc. Was not this the most natural time? Was it not probable that He would have said it at a time, rather even than while the ceremony itself was going on?” This accords with the view taken by Lange (see below and Doctr. and Ethical No1), but Wordsworth, Owen and others defend the usual opinion that on the eighth day as well as on those preceding, and with louder and more general expressions of joy, the priest brought forth, in a golden vessel, water from the spring of Siloam, and poured it upon the altar, and that Jesus at that very time proffered the water of life to all who would come unto Him and drink.—P. S.]

The last day of the feast of tabernacles was an especially high day, being the close of the feast (as well as of the festal season of the year), and being a Sabbath, a day on which the congregation assembled according to the law ( Leviticus 23:36), and which was therefore distinguished by a special sacrificial ritual. But one thing the day lacked, which distinguished the other days. On each of the seven preceding days, in the morning, occurred the festal water-drawing. A priest drew water daily with a large golden pitcher (holding about two pints and a half) from the spring of Siloam on the temple hill, brought it into the temple, and poured it out mingled with sacrificial wine, into two perforated dishes at the altar. The ceremony was accompanied with the sound of cymbals and trumpets, and the singing of the words of Isaiah 12:3, which Rabbi Jonathan paraphrased: “With joy shall ye receive the new doctrine from the chosen righteous.” This was the celebration of the miraculous springs which God opened for the people on their pilgrimage through the wilderness. But because the eighth day marked the entrance into Canaan, the water-drawing ceased. On this day the springs of the promised land gave their waters to the people; an emblem of the streams of spiritual blessing which Jehovah had promised to His people. To this symbolical performance the words of Jesus on the last day of the feast evidently refer (Leben Jesu, III. p619). It is of no account that, according to Rabbi Juda, the pouring out of the water took place on the eighth day also. This was probably a later supplement, if the statement is not an error.

The great day [τῇ μεγάλῃ].—That Isaiah, especially great in comparison with the other days.^[FN47] See the preceding remarks. Philo also [De Septenaris II:298] observes that it was the close of the yearly feasts; i.e. of the three great feasts, not of all.

Cried, saying.—Jesus had not hitherto so openly presented Himself as the personal object of a saving faith.

If any one thirst [i.e. whosoever thirsts] let him come to me and drink.—See the observations on John 7:37. The reference of this preaching of salvation under the promise of a miraculous draught and fountain of water to the water-drawing is groundlessly considered by Meyer to be dubious. It agrees entirely with the character of the fourth Gospel, in which Jesus presents Himself in the most varied ways as the fulfilment of the Old Testament symbols. The spiritual import of the water-drawing appears in Isaiah 12:3 [“with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation”]. This water-drawing must be distinguished from the devotional water-drawing on days of humiliation and fasting, 1 Samuel 7:6.

[The invitation first given to the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well, is here extended to all the people on the great feast in Jerusalem. The N. T. closes with a similar offer of the water of life ( Revelation 22:17). There is an inner thirst as there is an inner Prayer of Manasseh, and the former is deeper and stronger than the thirst of the body, and can only be satisfied from the fountain of life in Christ. “Under the imagery of one thirsting for water, which everywhere, and especially in countries like Palestine where the want of water is so frequently experienced, would be well understood, our Lord proffers to all such persons that which will forever satisfy the longings of the soul and give it permanent rest.” Owen. “An allusion to the water drawn in a golden vase from the pool of Siloam and poured on the altar in the temple… as a memorial of the water from the rock smitten in the wilderness, and typical of the living water of the Spirit from the true Rock ( 1 Corinthians 10:4).” Wordsworth.—P. S.]

John 7:38. He that believeth^[FN48] in me, etc.—Explaining the expression: “Come unto me and drink.”—As the scripture hath said.—These words are not to be connected with ὁ πιστεύων, as if the meaning were: “He who according to the scripture believeth in Me” (Chrysostom, Calovius, and others). An ἔστι may be understood. Meyer: Ὁ πιστεύων is nominat. absol. The question then Isaiah, what words of Scripture the Lord means. The expression [which follows: “out of his body shall flow rivers of living water”] does not occur literally in the Old Testament; so that Whiston and others took up the idea that it was from some canonical or apocryphal sources now lost. Against this are (1) the usage of the New Testament, (2) the general reference to “the scripture,” which, as such, seems to be intended to point rather to a promise running through the Old Testament than to any particular passage (see Isaiah 44:3; Isaiah 55:1; especially Isaiah 58:11; Ezekiel 47:1 ff.; Joel 2:23; Zechariah 13:1; Zechariah 14:8). Olshausen fixes particularly on those passages which promise a flowing forth of living water from the temple, the believer being considered as a living temple.^[FN49] And undoubtedly Christ at least would as surely have Himself considered the true temple-fountain, as He in John 2presented Himself as the true temple. The notions of the temple ( John 2) and the fountain ( John 4) here run together. The question is whether the believer also will himself be a temple-spring. See the next paragraph.

Out of his belly (body)—Ἐκ τῆς κοιλίας αὐτοῦ. That κοιλία (בֶּטֶן) may denote in Hebrew usage the inward part, the heart, is proved by [Augustine: the inner Prayer of Manasseh, the heart’s conscience.—P. S.] The only question Isaiah, why the Lord chose the strong term. Meyer [p312] thinks it should be strictly understood of the abdomen [Bauchhöhle, as the receptacle of water taken into a man], and then this should be taken figuratively. His body shall give forth living water as a stream of a fountain (through the mouth!); without the figure, the divine grace and truth which the believer has taken from the fulness of Christ into his inner life, remains not shut up within himself, but imparts itself in overflowing abundance to others. This rendering accounts for the striking expression κοιλία no better than that of Chrysostom. Κοιλία, in the wider sense denotes any belly-like cavity [the belly of the sea, of a mountain, of a large vessel, etc.]. If we keep in view the symbolical reference to the “water-feast,” we may refer the expression to the belly of the temple hill (Gieseler [in the Studien und Kritiken, 1829, p138 f.]; see Lücke, II. p229), and also to the body of the great golden pitcher with which the priest drew the water (Bengel). We have previously (Leben Jesu, II, p945) given the former interpretation.^[FN50] But as Christ Himself is the parallel of the temple hill with the spring of Siloam, so the believing Christian is well represented by the golden pitcher with which the priest drew the water; at least this enters into the choice of the expression.^[FN51] The meaning is: The whole Christian is a vessel of grace emptied of vanity, filled with the Spirit. Of course the pitcher of itself yields no stream of living water; but this is just the miracle of the true life, that, being drunk ( John 4:10) or drawn in faith (as in our passage), it becomes a flowing fountain of living water. To refer the ἐκ τῆς κοιλίας αὐτοῦ to Christ (Hahn: Theologie des Neuen Testaments, I. p229 [and Gess: Person Christi, p166]), jars with the context, especially John 7:39. The living water is explained below.

[Shall flow rivers of living water.—Ποταμοί is put first in the original to emphasize the abundance. Chrysostom comments on the plural: “Rivers, not river, to show the copious and overflowing power of grace: and living water, i.e. always moving; for when the grace of the Spirit has entered into and settled in the mind, it flows freer than any fountain, and neither fails, nor empties, nor stagnates. The wisdom of Stephen, the tongue of Peter, the strength of Paul, are evidences of this. Nothing hindered them; but, like impetuous torrents, they went on, carrying everything along with them.”—P. S.]

John 7:39. But this spoke he of the Spirit which they that believe in him were about to receive.—[An explanatory remark of the Evangelist similar to the one in John 2:21. Important for apostolic exegesis. Otherwise the Evangelists never insert their own views or feelings to interrupt the flow of the objective narration which speaks best for itself.—P. S.].—According to Lightfoot the Rabbins also considered the water-pouring or libation of the feast of tabernacles as the outpouring of the divine Spirit (haustio Spiritus Sancti). [Comp. the prophetic predictions of the Messianic outpouring of the Spirit, Joel 3:1; Isaiah 32:15; Isaiah 44:3; Ezekiel 36:25; Ezekiel 39:29].

According to Lücke (II. p230) the “living water” is intended to mean as much as “eternal life” [ John 4:10; John 4:14], but not the Holy Spirit; and John’s exposition may be indeed “epexegetically correct, but is not exegetically accurate.”^[FN52] His arguments are: (1) “The outflowing, ῥεύσουσιν ἐκ, is not a receiving (λαμβάνειν).” But the receiving is everywhere identical with faith, and the Spirit, which the believers received, also in fact flowed forth. (2) “The ῥεύσουσιν cannot be an absolute future, excluding the present.” But neither has the gospel history made the outpouring of the Holy Ghost so; for before this, in fact, a certain miraculous power already flowed forth from the apostles [comp. also John 20:22]. (3) “Olshausen, it is true, observes that even in the New Testament the Spirit is conceived under the figure of water, as the description of the Spirit as ‘poured out,’ Acts 10:45, Titus 3:6, clearly shows. But how comes it, that the corresponding emblem of water is never expressly used in the New Testament for the Holy Ghost. We have ὕδωρ τῆς ζωῆς, but never ὕδωρ τοῦ πνεύματος.” This is accounted for by the fact that the symbol arose from the contrast, so vivid to Palestinians, between the stagnant water of cisterns and the living water of springs. The legal system gave a certain measure of life, like cistern water, which did not propagate itself, and easily corrupted. The gospel dispensation of faith gave the water of life, which like a fountain replenished itself, increased, and was always fresh. And this was the Spirit. Lücke says: “The essential affinity of the expressions ζωὴ αἰώνιος and πνεῦμα is undeniable.” Here, however, is more than affinity; the two expressions denote the same life of the Spirit, only under different aspects.

Meyer rightly adduces for the correctness of the Evangelist’s explanation the strength of the term ποταμοί (to which ῥεύσουσι may be added). But when he goes on to remark, that John does not consider the Holy Ghost Himself to be meant by the living water, but only says of the whole declaration, that Jesus meant it of the Holy Ghost, leaving the Christian mind to conceive the Spirit as the Agens, as the impelling power of the stream of living water,—he runs substantially into Lücke’s interpretation.

We have only to distinguish between the Spirit of the life, as the cause, and the life of the Spirit, as the effect; carefully remembering that the cause and the effect are here not physically separate, but penetrate each other. Assuredly the words of Jesus speak directly of the operation of the Holy Ghost. The Spirit is a self-supplying spring.

On the doctrine of the Spirit of God in the Old Testament and of the Holy Ghost in the New, comp. the biblical and dogmatic theologies; Spirit is the uniting formative principle of visible life. So the air, the symbolical spirit of the earth; so the spirit in man. And the Spirit of God Isaiah, in the first place, the uniting life and formative principle of the creation ( Genesis 1:2; Psalm 33:6); then, of the life of the creature, and in particular of man ( Genesis 6:3; Psalm 104:29-30); then, of the theocracy ( Numbers 11:25, etc.). Subsequently the promise of a new kingdom (see the Prophets). So in the New Testament, the one life and formative principle of the life of Jesus, of the body of disciples, of the New Testament Church, of the new world.