The Gospel according to Saint John, commented on verse by verse

CHAPTER 7

John 7.¹ After that, Jesus traveled through Galilee, not wanting to go to Judea because the Jews were seeking to kill him. Following the twofold crisis we have just examined (chapters 5 and 6), we will see the conflict intensify between Our Lord Jesus Christ and those who have sworn him unto death. Jesus continues his work and completes his divine revelations, thus attracting well-disposed souls, but also arousing the hostility of the "Jews," who are already taking active steps to rid themselves of him. The shadow of the cross looms large. The struggles take place in Jerusalem; St. John connects them to two visits of Our Lord to the Jewish capital, on the occasion of two successive feasts: the Solemnity of Tabernacles and the Feast of Dedication. All these details are specific to the Gospel of John. During the Feast of Tabernacles (7:1–10:21), we see the mass of the people, especially the pilgrims from Galilee, wavering now to one side, now to the other, scarcely knowing which side to take, fundamentally inclined to believe, but held back by the example of the inhabitants of the metropolis. These latter use the fragments of their rabbinic knowledge to test the actions of the new prophet. In the background, we glimpse the hierarchs themselves, spying, entrenched behind their prejudices, preparing for decisive action against Jesus. In particular, we should note the rapid changes in the most varied feelings in the crowd towards Jesus: curiosity (7, 11), fear (7, 13, 30, 44), astonishment (7, 15, 46), embarrassment (7, 25 ff.), lively faith (7, 31; 8, 30), open hostility (7, 32), etc. The individual characters are also wonderfully portrayed: Jesus' brothers (7:3 ff.), the multitude (7:12, 20, 31, 40, 43, 49), the inhabitants of Jerusalem (7:25), the "Jews" (7:1, 11, 13, 15, 35; 8:22, 48, 52, 57), the Pharisees (7:32, 47; 8:3, 13), the members of the Sanhedrin (7:32, 45), Nicodemus (7:50), and above all, Our Lord Jesus Christ. The divine Master is almost constantly interrupted when he speaks: he is no longer listened to with patience and the attentiveness that characterized his audience in chapter 5 and even chapter 6. – This verse and the following one tell us the occasion for the controversy; we will then find the discussion itself (vv. 3-8) and its final result (v. 9). After that, That is to say, after the serious incidents of chapter 6. This vague formula encompasses all the time elapsed between Passover, 6:4, and the Feast of Tabernacles, 7:2, therefore about six months (from the middle of Nisan, or the first month, to the middle of Tishrei, or the seventh month of the Jewish ecclesiastical year). Jesus traveled (cf. 6:67). Imperfect tense of continuity, of duration, which summarizes the life of Jesus during the six months whose story St. John does not recount: it was a life of traveling throughout Galilee, in order to continue the preaching of the Gospel and the training of the Twelve, cf. Matt. 15-18 and parallels. Galilee. This is the last time St. John mentions Galilee here, a place he speaks of so rarely. Not wanting to… The narrator explains why the Savior stayed so long away from the center of the theocracy. If Jesus had wanted to live in Judea, nothing would have prevented him, for he was more powerful than all his enemies; but precisely because he did not want to, his hour had not yet come, why expose himself to danger in a futile way? There was nothing in him of that human enthusiasm attributed to him by rationalist commentators. It is true that other writers of the same school are scandalized to see in Our Lord a "lack of courage." The rest of the narrative will refute them. Let us note a strange variant adopted by St. John Chrysostom and by some manuscripts of the Itala. As if the Holy Spirit himself had closed the road to Judea to Jesus Christ. But this reading deserves no credence. Go to Judea. It therefore follows that Jesus most likely did not attend the last Passover; see note 6:4. Because the Jews… The reason for this voluntary and extraordinary withdrawal is given in Matthew 5:18. The "Jews" had thus become increasingly entrenched in their murderous plan. Moreover, they did not lose sight of their enemy, for they had emissaries spying on his movements even in Galilee (see Matthew 15:1ff.; 16:1ff.). This did not refer to all Jews, but to the vast majority of the elite, particularly the members of the Sanhedrin.

John 7.² Now, the Jewish festival of Tabernacles was approaching. –The solemnity with its full octave, and not simply a single day. [Octave: a period of eight full days following each of the major Christian liturgical feasts, during which the feast continues to be solemnly celebrated] The Feast of Tabernacles or Tents, cf. Leviticus 23:33-36; Deuteronomy 16:13-15; Nehemiah 8:15; 2 Maccabees 10:6-7. Along with Passover and Pentecost, it was one of the great religious festivals of the Jews. It was celebrated in the seventh month, called Tishrei, for eight full days (from the 15th to the 22nd, around the beginning of October); for to the ordinary octave, an eighth day had been added, which was strictly a day of rest like the first, while the others were simply treated as a "half-festival". The primary purpose of this institution was to preserve the memory of the Israelites' long wanderings through the desert before their settlement in the Promised Land. This is why the entire festival was spent under leafy huts erected in the streets, public squares, courtyards, or on the flat roofs of houses, thus imitating the ancestors who had lived for nearly thirty-nine years in tents. Hence its main name. It was also the harvest festival, when the crops were finally brought into the cellar or attic. Hence its extremely joyous character, praised by the historian Josephus and the Talmudists. The latter proudly refer to it as "the festival" par excellence, adding that "whoever has not attended it does not know what a festival is." Those who took part gave themselves over to such displays of joy, waving their lulab (a bouquet composed of a palm frond, myrtle branches, etc.), singing loudly, etc., that Plutarch, in Symposium 4.6.2, an eyewitness to these ceremonies, believed they were for the worship of Bacchus. Even today, the Feast of Tabernacles is dear to those Jews who have preserved most of their ancient rites.

John 7.³ So his brothers said to him, «Leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples also may see the works that you are doing, – His brothers told him… Because of the proximity of the Feast of Tabernacles, which, unless there was a serious reason, one had to go and celebrate in Jerusalem, just like Passover and Pentecost. On Jesus' "brothers," see 2:12 and Matthew 13:55, with the commentaries. As close relatives, they believe they can address a severe warning to the divine Master and harshly criticize his conduct. Leave from here. This imperative is already "quite bold," according to Stier's apt observation. These men desire a more glorious stage than Galilee for their brother's ministry. Go to Judea. In the most central and important province of Judaism. To the council, or rather to the order, they add a reason to legitimize it: so that your disciples… They are obviously referring to the disciples whom Our Lord Jesus Christ had once won in Jerusalem and Judea (cf. 2:13, etc.); according to their thinking, these disciples too must have the opportunity to witness miracles similar to those that Jesus performed in Galilee. Indeed, the expression works, emphasized in Greek by the article, by the pronoun, and even more so by the words that you do, This refers to nothing other than the Savior's dazzling miracles, performed primarily up to that point in northern Palestine. The use of the present tense vividly brings them to life (see 6:40 and the note). These ignorant and vain relatives now believe they know better than Jesus the path he must follow to fulfill his divine mission. 

John 7.⁴ For no one does anything in secret if they want it to be seen. If you do these things, show yourselves to the world.» – They now explain their urgent request. "He who wills the end wills the means," they tell Jesus, applying to him a general principle of conduct, very true in itself, but which they apply so poorly. In secret This must be understood in a relative sense. According to the context (see the note on verses 1 and 3), acting in secret meant remaining in Galilee and not going to Jerusalem to reveal himself. Moreover, at this time in his life, the Savior usually avoided crowds and preferred to remain in the company of his apostles. When he desires…. He is very pronounced: that is to say, the one who carries out his works secretly and mysteriously. The person is thus contrasted with the works. What inconsistency to seek dazzling notoriety, to want to make a fuss about one's name, and to accomplish in secret, as if afraid to show oneself, the very acts of brilliance by which one desires to become famous. "There is no one who acts in secret among those who want to be known," Lücke. But Jesus' brothers were in the grossest error when they attributed to him a human intention of this kind. when he desires that she appear. Openly, boldly, cf. 16, 29. If you do these things. «"If" does not imply the slightest doubt regarding miracles of Jesus ; It is equivalent to "since." Therefore, when you undertake such works to validate your mission, do them not in some obscure corner, but in full view of the entire country. Make yourself known. This is their conclusion: that Jesus should finally emerge from the ambiguous situation in which he has placed himself, at least according to their judgment; that he should finally present himself as the Messiah. They would like a swift and decisive manifestation, the outcome of which, they believe, would be beyond doubt. World This refers to the Jewish world, which had Jerusalem as its center. It was therefore in this theocratic capital that the Savior was to appear, in order to have his role and mission officially confirmed by the hierarchy. Subsequent events would prove that, from their narrow perspective, Jesus' brothers were not wrong. Our Lord only had to allow it, and he would then have been acclaimed King-Messiah in Jerusalem, as would happen a few months later (12:12-18, cf. 6:15).

John 7.⁵ because even his brothers did not believe in him. Between this strange request and the divine Master's response, St. John inserts a short but significant reflection, which fits so well with his plan: Even his own brothers didn't believe it.. Not even they, although they should have been at the forefront of the believers. A painful and tragic allusion to the unbelief of so many other Jews. The imperfect tense still denotes custom, duration. However, it would be an exaggeration to take these words to mean an absolute lack of faith; verses 3 and 4 have refuted such an opinion in advance. Thus, it is difficult to understand how St. John Chrysostom, St. Augustine, Theophylact, Euthymius, and others came to think that the actions of the "brothers" were a trap to lure Jesus to Jerusalem and make him fall into the hands of his enemies. Their faith exists, but it is wavering and very imperfect; Struck by the miracles of Our Lord, they suspect him of being the Messiah; however, they share the prejudices of their contemporaries, and they dream of a Christ who is humanly glorious, whom they would like to see as soon as possible at the head of the nation. This is why they urge him to go and be enthroned in the capital. We will later encounter the brothers of Christ among the true believers., Act 1, 14; 1 Corinthians 9:5; Galatians 1:19. Their faith had been purified after the resurrection.

John 7.⁶ Jesus said to them, «My time has not yet come, but your time is always ready. – A response full of energy, but also of gentleness and kindness, as the ancient exegetes have noted with great interest. My time. Not the time of the Passion, as St. John Chrysostom would have it; but, in a general sense, the time to go and manifest himself in Jerusalem. Regardless of the context, which calls for this interpretation, we can add that our evangelist prefers to use the word hour to refer to the Passion of Christ. Has not arrived yet. Literally, "is not yet present." For them, they can go to Jerusalem whenever they want, and without the slightest inconvenience.

John 7.⁷ The world cannot hate you, but it hates me, because I bear witness about it that its works are evil. – In turn (cf. v. 4), Jesus develops and justifies his assertion. Born would know I hate you. The brothers had said: Make yourself known to the world. He takes up this last expression, but gives it a deeper meaning, in keeping with the sad reality of things. Moreover, it is almost always in a negative sense that the noun the world is used in the fourth Gospel. The impossibility indicated by Our Lord rests on the well-known principle (Plato, Lys. 214): all that is homogeneous attracts, heterogeneous things repel (Bisping), cf. 3, 3, 5; 5, 19; 6, 44, etc. I hate you. You who resemble him, who share his tastes and feelings, who belong to him as his members, cf. 15, 19. – He hates me. I, who am perpetually at war with him, I, who constantly criticize and condemn him. The facts were there to demonstrate the world's implacable hatred for Our Lord Jesus Christ. – And why was Jesus hated by the world? Because I bear this testimony about him… And this testimony consisted of clearly and unequivocally revealing (cf. 1 John 5:19) that his works are bad.

John 7.⁸ "You go up to that party, but I'm not going, because my time hasn't come yet."» – Jesus' response continues to mirror the request. Therefore, this is a conclusion, as in the second half of verse 4. Get in, you… The pronoun "you" is very emphatic. You, on the other hand, can go to Jerusalem without any danger; you are even sure of being well received there. At this celebration. The Savior's parents had not mentioned the feast, but it was indeed on the occasion of the Feast of Tabernacles that they had suggested he go to Judea. As for me, I'm not going… And yet, we will see Jesus almost immediately set out for Jerusalem (v. 10), and we will find him there (vv. 14, 36). How can this contradiction be explained? The pagan Porphyry claimed to be shocked by it, and he ironically pointed out the supposed inconstancy of Our Lord (cf. St. Jerome, Adv. Pelag. 2, 17), and more than one rationalist made the same accusation at the end of the 19th century. Several attempts have been made to sidestep the difficulty. 1. Others, but without sufficient reason, have given the verb "to go up" the meaning of leaving with the caravan of pilgrims. Jesus, according to verse 10, went to Jerusalem not publicly, but as if in secret. 2. The main idea was focused on "feast." "I am not going up to the feast," Jesus is said to have remarked; and indeed, he arrived only in the middle of the solemnity (vv. 11, 14). 3. It is the pronoun this which has sometimes been more particularly emphasized. I am not going to "this" feast with the intention you propose. 4. The best interpretation seems to us to be that adopted by St. John Chrysostom: I am not going to the feast now, I am not going with you. The use of the present tense and the reflection that follows prove indeed that Our Lord had already made up his mind to attend the solemnity; but he only wanted to set out when the precise hour of the providential plan had struck, cf. 2, 3 and the explanation.

John 7.⁹ After saying this, he remained in Galilee. He stayed for a while longer, while his brothers left.

John 7.¹⁰ But when his brothers had left, he himself also went up to the feast, not publicly, but secretly. Verses 10-13 serve as an introduction. His hour having come, Jesus in turn set out for Jerusalem. Jesus was not entirely alone: his closest disciples were undoubtedly with him.

John 7.¹¹ So the Jews were looking for him during the festival and saying, "Where is he?"« – However, there was a great deal of excitement in Jerusalem concerning Our Lord: people and officials, friends and enemies, all were concerned about him and talking about him. The evangelist paints a vivid picture of this, vv. 11-13. The Jews. By "Jews" we must understand the special leaders of the theocratic nation, almost universally hostile to the Savior, cf. v. 13. They were looking for him. (Due to Jesus' absence) Note this imperfect tense and all the following ones, which denote repeated actions. They were saying to each other, or else they were saying to the pilgrims when questioning them: Where is he? Jesus filled everyone's minds so completely that there was no need to even mention his name. Underlying the hierarchs' question, a twofold sentiment emerges: astonishment at his absence, since it was an obligatory feast day, and a worried, hostile desire to know the place of his retreat.

John 7.¹² And there was a great deal of talk about him among the crowd. Some were saying, "He's a good man." Others were saying, "No, he's deceiving the people."« – A big rumor… Rumors whispered in hushed tones, cf. 6, 41 and the commentary. In the crowd. It is the people as opposed to the hierarchs. Some… Among this agitated multitude, the narrator distinguishes two categories, one favorable, the other unfavorable to Our Lord Jesus Christ. He lets us witness the conversations taking place between the various groups. – Some were saying, therefore, a good man, equivalent to loyal, sincere, as opposed to seductive: "He is an upright man." A very modest praise; the Savior's enemies will not be so moderate in their assessment. No, they reply bluntly, he is cheating, He leads astray. Look Luke 23, 2.5, where an identical accusation will be brought before Pilate's tribunal. For this hostile party, Jesus was therefore a false teacher, who seduced the masses by his conduct and his speeches, making them believe that he was the Christ.

John 7.¹³ However, no one spoke freely about him, for fear of the Jews. – An interesting restriction, which allows us to judge the moral state of the Jews at that time. «No one,» regardless of the group they belonged to. He did not speak freely about himself. Therefore, no one dared to express any judgment about Jesus aloud. Note the constant, universal fear inspired by the hierarchs. These men truly terrorized the crowd on religious matters; yet, although their hostility towards Our Lord was quite old, they had nevertheless not yet spoken out openly against him (cf. v. 26): the people were therefore afraid to display in advance, on this delicate point, an opinion that might disagree with that of their leaders.

John 7.¹⁴ We were already in the middle of the festival when Jesus went up to the temple and began to teach. Verses 14-39 contain a summary of the discourses that the Savior suddenly began to deliver in the temple galleries, and the controversies they provoked. We will distinguish, with the narrator, the discussions that took place during the second half of the solemnity (vv. 14-36), and the preaching on the last day (vv. 37-39). The account is very condensed. – Part One, vv. 14-36: During the feast. Three main ideas are highlighted and dominate the core of the controversy: the doctrine of Jesus comes from God, vv. 14-24; the person of Jesus is himself divine, vv. 25-31; Jesus will soon return to his heavenly Father, vv. 32-36. – 1. The doctrine of Jesus comes from the Father, vv. 14-24. In the middle of the party. Therefore, around the third or fourth day. The Rabbis use the same expression. Jesus went up to the temple. Was he only just arriving in Jerusalem? Or had he come earlier and remained carefully hidden? It is impossible to determine this with certainty. And he taught. St. John does not specify the purpose of this prolonged preaching by the Savior; but it will easily be guessed from the words that will soon be quoted. Everything must have concerned the person, the work, and the doctrine of Our Lord Jesus Christ. And the large, mixed crowd described earlier could not help but listen in silence. 

John 7.¹⁵ The astonished Jews said, "How does he know the Scriptures, since he has not attended school?"« – The effect produced by this divine teaching (new imperfect tense). Long ago, in this very temple, Jesus, aged twelve, had astonished the teachers of the law with his questions and answers (Luke 2:46); today, admiration is at its peak, even reaching his proud enemies. They were saying. Unfortunately, what strikes them is not the intrinsic power of the truth, but a completely incidental circumstance. Jesus, though so eloquent and learned, did not attend their schools; he was not one of the disciples of the wise men, as they were called. Nothing is more characteristic than their disdainful reflection, as in 6:32. Did they not proudly say, «If anyone is well-versed in Scripture and the Mishnah, but does not serve the wise men devotedly, he is a commoner»? Scriptures It does not directly refer to the Holy Scriptures, but, according to the classical meaning, to literature and science in general, the result of a careful education (cf. Acts 26:24). See also verse 39 and 2 Timothy 3:15, where the Bible is called "the Holy Scriptures." Nevertheless, since all rabbinic education was based on the Holy Books, they are understood indirectly in the expression. Him who did not attend schools. « Without realizing it, the Jews were thus bearing valuable witness to Jesus Christ. Indeed, with this simple statement, they preemptively refuted all rationalist hypotheses that Our Lord had drawn his doctrine from some Jewish school.

John 7.¹⁶ Jesus answered them, «My teaching is not my own, but comes from him who sent me. – The answer goes directly to the objection and refutes it. Jesus first insists on the entirely heavenly origin of his knowledge and teaching (vv. 16-18); from this, he then justifies his conduct (vv. 19-24). My doctrine is not my own. Thought takes a paradoxical form. It is his doctrine, and yet it is not entirely his own. It is his because he preaches it and no one before him has given it; but insofar as he is a man, it does not belong to him as if he had acquired it through personal effort: he is not properly its inventor. The Jews were therefore wrong to suppose that he had received no instruction from outside. From this point of view, nothing could be less original than his teaching, since he derived it entirely from another. The one who sent me. God, that is his only Master, infinitely superior to the most learned Rabbis (see 5, 19, 30). The Jews, in the Talmud, cite their sources with a completely monotonous precision: So-and-so said this, so-and-so said that. Jesus cited his own source to them.

John 7.¹⁷ If anyone wants to do God's will, he will know whether my teaching is from God, or whether I am speaking of myself. – The preceding assertion (v. 16) is developed and demonstrated (vv. 17-18). Jesus Christ proves, successively through internal testimony (v. 17) and external testimony (v. 18), the divine origin of his preaching. – The internal, subjective criterion consists of the personal experience of the listeners: If someone (without exception) wants to… The main word of the sentence is wanna, which expresses a keen inner attraction, a generous acquiescence; indeed, Jesus asks here for much more than the mechanical and forced fulfillment of the Father's will; he stipulates that the human will willingly and lovingly align itself with divine desires: only then will one receive the graces of illumination that he subsequently promises. The will. Note the energetic association of wants to do the will. Sweet harmony. He will know. As soon as this holy harmony exists, man will be divinely endowed with a new sense, enabling him to judge intuitively the doctrine of Our Lord Jesus Christ; he will recognize it in the same way that a child recognizes the voice of his father. Blessed are those who possess this gift of spiritual perception! If it is from God. If it truly has God as its author. In the Greek text, the phrase corresponding to if… or if… It is not used elsewhere in the New Testament; it is frequently used by classical authors. Or if I'm talking about myself. Change of prepositions, as in verses 19, 30; 15, 4. Therefore, if my doctrine is simply that of a man. The Jews did not "want" to faithfully fulfill God's will; they therefore did not have at their disposal the light of which Jesus speaks. "Let them reject hatred, let them love the Father and do his will. It is not difficult. Once the darkness is dispelled, they will see clearly the truth of Christ's doctrine," Maldonat, 11. And the same goes for all other unbelievers. Ordinarily, matters of faith are demonstrated in a different way than mathematical truths. Prejudice and religious hatred cloud the mind and prevent it from understanding.

John 7.¹⁸ He who speaks of himself seeks his own glory, but he who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and there is no deceit in him. – There is another criterion, this one external and objective, for judging a doctrine and seeing if it is truly divine: it is the personal conduct of the preacher and the goal he sets for himself in preaching. Jesus uses almost a syllogistic form to present this new reasoning. He does not directly present himself, but it is easy to understand that he is speaking of himself in the third person. – Major premise of the argument: the one who talks about himself. Any man who speaks in his own name, who preaches without any higher mission a teaching originating from his own inner self, seeks his own glory. The characteristic of his teaching is ambition; not, no doubt, in a necessary and absolute way, but according to what very often happens among men, because of their selfishness and pride. Countless is the multitude of false prophets, false philosophers, false religious reformers, who spoke above all to make a fuss about their name, to win votes, to shine, as they say. And when it happens that these eloquent speakers are the ambassadors of another, their attitude is doubly odious, since they exalt themselves at the expense of the one from whom they received their mission. A tacit reproach addressed to the Jewish doctors who surrounded Our Lord at that time, cf. v. 44. – He who seeks the glory of the one who sent him. Minor point and conclusion. "The one who sent him" represents God, according to the entire context. It's true. The pronoun is strongly emphasized. When an envoy's sole concern is the glory of his master, he is infallibly truthful, for he forgets his own interests and effaces himself to highlight the one who endorses him: what interest would he have in lying? And there is no there was no imposture in him. Repetition of the idea in a negative form. At first glance, one is surprised to find the word here. imposture, instead of "lie", which the parallelism would seem to require; but St. John deliberately uses the most extensive expression, which is at the same time the most energetic and which brings to light the impure root of the lie, cf. Romans 1, 18; 2, 8; 1 Corinthians 13, 6.

John 7.¹⁹ Did not Moses give you the Law? Yet none of you keeps the Law. – The moral conduct of Jesus, vv. 19-24. The transition is rather abrupt; but there is no reason to conjecture, as various commentators have done, that an intermediate thought was omitted by the evangelist. After remaining on the defensive for a few moments, vv. 16-18, Jesus now presses his attack onto his adversaries' own ground. He goes straight to the point and reveals the true motive for their objections: they want his life. From this starting point, he offers a short but solid defense of his conduct, just as he defended his doctrine earlier. Moses… This great name carries the main idea. Moses, to whom you constantly commend yourselves, will be the first to condemn you. See, verse 45, a similar argument. The law has been given. The law par excellence, Mosaic law in general, and not just this or that particular precept (the law relating to the Sabbath, to homicide, etc.), as has been claimed without reason. And none of you… Among you who have received this law and are so proud of it (cf. Galatians 3:19, the same expression). A very serious accusation, but perfectly justified, for although the Jews at that time meticulously observed most of the details of the law, they remained strangers to its spirit, against which they constantly went (cf. Matthew 5:17-47 and the commentary). And it was these same men who wanted to put Jesus Christ to death, under the pretext that he was a despiser of the law. – We have adopted the opinion of the exegetes who place a question mark in the middle of the verse and a simple period at the end. The thought thus appears to us at once more fluid and more forceful.

John 7.²⁰ "Why are you trying to kill me?" The crowd replied, "You are possessed by a demon; who is trying to kill you?"» – Why are you looking for… For what reason? What crime have I committed? The «Jews» (cf. v. 15) targeted by Jesus’ last words remain significantly silent. What could they have replied? But the naive crowd retaliates: composed mainly of foreigners who have come to Jerusalem for the festival, they are unaware of the hierarchs’ intentions. Compare v. 25, where we see the inhabitants of the capital perfectly aware of the true state of affairs. Who is looking for… None of these good provincials harbored such a plan, and they all judge their fellow believers according to their own feelings. Therefore, according to them, there is only one way to explain Jesus's rebuke to the audience: he is in the grip of a fixed idea, a hallucination caused by the devil. you are possessed by a demon. By these words, they did not mean to indicate actual possession (compare 8:48 and the commentary), but a severe moral depression, brought about by the evil spirit, and analogous to what the Greeks called the evil spirit (cf. 10:20; and also Matthew 11:18; Luke 7:33, where the same expression is applied to John the Baptist, who was considered too somber and austere. Here Jesus dismisses this ignorant remark without responding; later he will address the accusation because it will be of a more serious nature.

John 7.²¹ Jesus said to them, «I have done one work, and are you all beside yourselves?” – An obvious allusion (see verse 23) to the miracle that Jesus performed at the pool of Bethesda, verses 1 ff. The time was quite distant; but Our Lord had not returned to Jerusalem since then, and this miracle had been so striking in all its circumstances that its memory still lived on in everyone's minds: this is why the Savior hyperbolically calls it his "only" miracle of Jerusalem, although he had performed several others in the Jewish capital, cf. 2:23. You are all beside yourselves (all (with emphasis). As St. John Chrysostom observes, this verb here denotes less genuine admiration than a malevolent astonishment. The miracle, in fact, had taken place on a Sabbath day, cf. v. 23, and 5, 9.

John 7.²² Moses gave you circumcision, not that it originated with Moses, but with the patriarchs., – But they are wrong to be scandalized. Jesus demonstrates this to them by vigorously defending his conduct, vv. 22-23. Moses gave you circumcision, cf. Leviticus 12:3. While Moses did not officially institute circumcision among you, it was a practice passed down from our ancestors. Yet you still practice circumcision on the Sabbath. This fact will serve as the basis for the Savior's argument. The perfect gave It expresses a gift granted once and for all, and which remains. Not that it comes from Moses… opens a parenthesis which ends after patriarchs, and which contains a historical restriction. Jesus had just said that circumcision had been given to the Jews by Moses; but in reality he was not its first author, and it did not date only from his time: it went back to the patriarchs so dear to Israel, more especially to Abraham, who had received it from God himself as a sign of the covenant, cf. Genesis 17:20; Acts 7:8; Romans 4, 11. This feature particularly highlights the importance of circumcision. And you practice it… With emphasis: on the Sabbath. According to the law, every male child was to be circumcised eight days after his birth, and it often happened that the eighth day coincided with the Sabbath. In this case, despite the rigor with which they observed the Sabbath rest (see the note under Matthew 12:2), the Jews quite rightly believed that this sacred sign of their covenant with God should take precedence over everything else. «Circumcision drives out the Sabbath,» says a rabbinic adage. Hillel’s disciples added that «the law concerning the Sabbath was negative, while the precept concerning circumcision was positive: and the positive destroys the negative.».

John 7.²³ and you practice it on the Sabbath day. If, in order not to violate the law of Moses, one circumcises on the Sabbath day, how is it that you are indignant with me, because on the Sabbath day I healed a man's whole body? – Jesus will conclude his argument with an unexpected comparison, which will conclusively demonstrate the legitimacy of his personal conduct. so as not to violate the law of Moses. Even on the Sabbath, circumcision was practiced without the slightest scruple, since the ordinance prescribing it would have been invalidated by a delay. According to the language of the Mishnah, tractate Shabb. 19, 1, 2, this ceremony had been "made dependent on the eighth day." See St. John Chrysostom and St. Augustine, hl – Why you indignant-you against me… notice the position of the pronoun Me Used only in this one place in the New Testament, it expresses a very bitter resentment. I cured a man throughout his body. «His whole body» is also emphatic, and the conclusion is one of those that are called «from minor to major.» The Rabbis said: removing the foreskin through circumcision was therefore considered to cure a supposedly diseased part of the human body. Now, Jesus had restored complete health, not just to an isolated organ, but to the entire body of the paralytic. If a partial and a complete cure were permitted on the Sabbath, all the more so a complete healing.

John 7.²⁴ Do not judge by appearances, but judge according to justice.» – A simple appeal to the common sense of the Jews, to put an end to this whole discussion. – To judge by appearances is to judge according to what is apparent at first glance, and therefore with bias. Viewed superficially, Jesus' act could be seen as a violation of the Sabbath, especially in the eyes of men so steeped in prejudice; but the divine Master specifically asks that it be judged according to a different standard: judge according to justice. The Greek has the article "the just judgment"; there is indeed only one of this kind, cf. Tobit 3:2; Zechariah 7:5. Judgments based on appearances alone are so frequently unjust and erroneous.

John 7.²⁵ Then some of the inhabitants of Jerusalem said, "Isn't this the one they are trying to kill? – 2. The true origin of Jesus, vv. 25-30 (see the note on v. 14). Because they saw Our Lord Jesus Christ speaking so freely, in the face of his well-known adversaries. Some inhabitants of Jerusalem, cf. Mark 1:5 is the only other passage where this expression is used. As we have seen (v. 20), the inhabitants of Jerusalem here contrast with the pilgrims from the provinces: the latter were unaware of the true feelings of the Pharisee party toward the Savior; the former, on the contrary, are fully informed. Hence their very clear reflection: Isn't that the one… (stressed pronoun).

John 7.²⁶ And there he is, speaking publicly without anyone saying a word to him. Would the leaders of the people really have recognized that he is the Christ? – Openly and freely, see verse 13. – Without anyone saying anything to him. They, who were so hostile to him, let him do as he pleased; they didn't even interrupt him. – On this tolerance, which astonished them, they built an even more astonishing hypothesis: Is it really… As in many other passages of the fourth gospel, the question implies a negative answer. Did the leaders of the people recognize that he is the Christ? cf. 1, 48 and the explanation; 4, 29, 33; 7, 31, etc. In verse 25, where the question suggested no doubt, we read Isn't that it… Earlier, in verse 15, the crowd did not dare speak openly about Jesus because their leaders had not yet officially declared their position on him; we find something similar here. Everyone was eager to know what the hierarchs thought. That he is the Christ. This timidly whispered supposition proves how great the impression made by Jesus' words. His name and that of the Messiah were immediately linked whenever he was mentioned.

John 7.²⁷ »This man, however, we know where he comes from, but when Christ comes, no one will know where he comes from.” The authors of the hypothesis hasten to refute it themselves. The objection they are about to formulate is perfectly in line with the entire rabbinic tradition. We know where he is from. «Where» here does not represent the place of birth, nor ancestors in general, but immediate and current kinship. This adverb has the same meaning in both halves of the verse; however, in the second half it is applied to the origin of the Messiah, and the prophecies had announced in the clearest terms that he would be born in Bethlehem and that he would belong to the family of David, cf. vv. 41 and 42. When Christ comes, no one will know… The Greek verb is no longer the same, because it is meant to indicate a different kind of knowledge. «We know» who Jesus« parents are: this is a complete and fully acquired knowledge; »no one knows” who Christ’s parents are: this is a knowledge that is supposed to come only slowly and gradually. Nothing is more interesting than these subtleties of Gospel language. See 8:55; 13:7; 14:7; 21:17, for other examples of the alternative use of the same two verbs. Where he is from. According to the Rabbis, after being secretly born in Bethlehem, The Messiah was to live in some unknown place and in the deepest mystery, until the day he would make a sudden and brilliant appearance. St. Justin Martyr also mentions this peculiar opinion in his Dialogue with Trypho, § 8. Where could it have come from? Probably from some of the following prophecies, which had been misinterpreted: Isaiah 538: "Who will tell of the eternal generation of the Messiah?" Daniel 713: “I saw one like a son of man coming with the clouds of heaven”; Micah 5:2: “He who is to reign in Israel, whose generation is from the beginning, from eternity”; Malachi 3:1: “Behold, I send my messenger to prepare the way before me; and suddenly the Lord whom you seek will come to his temple.”

John 7.²⁸ Jesus, teaching in the temple, therefore said aloud: «You know me and you know where I come from, yet I have not come on my own, but he who sent me is true, whom you do not know.– Jesus said aloud (On the occasion of their gross error)... the Greek verb (in the aorist) is quite expressive. Jesus cries out loudly to be heard by all, because he is about to bear a most important witness, cf. v. 37; 1, 45; 12, 44. "The acclamations that Jesus aroused had important causes," says Bengel, and St. John is faithful in pointing them out. Teacher in the temple, cf. v. 14. The instruction will be short, but significant. The style is rapid, interrupted, and reveals the emotion of the divine Master. You know me. You know me; ; You know where I'm from: You know my outward origin, my kinship according to the flesh. Up to this point, Jesus concedes everything; he admits that his interlocutors have an outward and superficial knowledge of him; but he then points out their profound ignorance regarding his true nature and his role. I did not come of my own accord.. Far from having come of his own accord, he is, as he is called elsewhere (Hebrews 3:1), "the great apostle," the great messenger of God. The one who sent me is true, cf. 8, 26. From this it follows that the mission of Jesus is itself "true," solid, and real. And you don't know him. Shameful ignorance, for men who imagined, on the contrary, that they had the most intimate relationship with God. But the reproach was all too well-founded. Not knowing the Father, they could not know his Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, whatever they may have wished to say on this point, cf. v. 27.

John 7.²⁹ I know him because I am his son and he is the one who sent me.» – Jesus emphasizes the pronoun. «I» is contrasted with «you» in verse 28. The particle because He announces a proof: and indeed, Our Lord will indicate two reasons for the perfect knowledge he has of God. The first reason lies in his divine generation and his unity of nature; the second in his divine mission. Does a son not know his father? Does an ambassador not know the one who accredits him?

John 7.³⁰ So they tried to seize him, but no one laid a hand on him, because his time had not yet come. – So they searched… (Because he so clearly affirmed his heavenly mission)... This is the third time we find this formula, cf. v. 1 and v. 18. Note the imperfect tense of duration: seizing Jesus to put him to death is now the constant desire of his enemies, cf. vv. 32, 44; 8, 20; 10, 39; 11, 55. Only his total ruin will satisfy their rage. In the Greek text, the verb's root is "to press, to oppress," one of St. John's favorite expressions. No one laid a hand on him. Picturesque expression, cf. Acts 12:1, etc. What then prevented the hierarchs from laying their powerful hands on Jesus? Perhaps they did not dare, impressed as they were by his majesty, by the growing number of his followers. But the evangelist gives a deeper reason for their failure: because his time had not yet come. The hour of Jesus is here the time of his Passion (cf. 8:20; 13:1, etc.); but this hour had not yet struck. Ultimately, therefore, it was God's own plan that thwarted the plan of the Pharisees; the Lord governed the destinies of his Christ down to the smallest detail.

John 7.³¹ But many among the people believed in him, and they said, «When the Christ comes, will he perform more miracles than this man has done?» – 3. Jesus's next departure (vv. 31-36) (see the note on v. 14). Many…believed in him. Hatred is growing, but so is love. The crowd is contrasted with its leaders who sought to seize Jesus. They believed in him is much stronger than They believed it. It was faith in the person himself, and not just in the word of Jesus. And they said. (The imperfect tense after the aorist; a continuing action, following an action that is complete in itself). The devout believers encouraged one another, sharing the main reason that had won them over to the Savior; or, their words can also be seen as a response addressed by them to those Jews who remained unbelieving and who raised objections against Jesus. Christ, when he comes… Above, v. 27, the present tense expressed the sudden nature of Christ's coming; here it is regarded as an accomplished fact. When he comes This language does not imply the slightest doubt regarding the messianic dignity of Jesus, since those who hold it believed in him. "They do not doubt that he came. But it is in the form of a question that they offer the reason for their conviction, expecting a negative answer," Corluy, hl – Will he work more miracles? Proof of the true religion by miracles is admirably summarized in this simple statement. That…this one. The pronoun is energetic and picturesque. Here we have a new indirect demonstration of the countless miracles performed by Jesus Christ: it is understandable that, in taking a retrospective look at so many miracles, upright souls would be deeply struck, and that they would draw the legitimate conclusion; This Jesus can only be the Messiah, cf. Isaiah 35:5, 6; 53:4; Matthew 11:2-6.

John 7.³² The Pharisees heard the crowd murmuring these things about Jesus, so the chief priests and the Pharisees sent guards to arrest him. But those blinded by hatred and pride were far from such reasoning. Murmuring these things… (These words were favorable to Jesus.) Held back by the fear universally inspired by the hierarchs, the Savior's friends had exchanged their sentiments in hushed tones (cf. v. 12 and the note); nevertheless, they were overheard, and some spy or informer immediately went to warn the authorities. THEs princes of priests (who make their first appearance here in the fourth gospel) and the Pharisees represent the Sanhedrin, or Great Council. As we have said elsewhere (Gospel according to St. Matthew, 2:4), this renowned assembly, which held the broadest jurisdiction in religious matters and which sat in Jerusalem, was composed of three categories of members: the chief priests, the elders or notables, and the doctors of the Law. The latter mostly belonged to the Pharisaic party; this is why St. John refers to them here by the general term of Pharisees, cf. v. 45; 11, 47, 57; 18, 3. The notables are passed over in silence, as in other places in the Gospels (Matt. 21:45; 27:62, etc.). For the first time, Jesus' enemies try to take active and external measures against him; from "seeking him" they will move to action. Their "guards" were the junior employees who formed their police force and executed their arrest warrants. To stop it. Not immediately, otherwise we would not understand the delay in carrying out the order (cf. v. 44 et seq.), but as soon as a suitable time presented itself.

John 7.³³ Jesus said, «I am with you a little while longer, and then I am going to the one who sent me.”. – Jesus' words were prompted by the actions of his enemies, which naturally stirred in him the thought of his impending death. These were solemn, profound words, laden with threats for those among the Jews who remained unbelieving. The evangelist does not say where or when they were spoken: it is likely a direct continuation of the preceding scene, verses 14-32. I have a little time with you. Only six months separated him from his Passion, since the Feast of Tabernacles was then being celebrated, and the following Passover, he read in the divine decrees, would bring about the final catastrophe. Then I leave. The present moment of certainty and swift fulfillment. Nothing is clearer now than these words: Jesus is going back to heaven, to his Father; but his listeners found them full of obscurity, cf. vv. 35-36. With what calm and in what magnificent aspect Our Lord contemplates his cruel torment. It is because in ignominious death he contemplates his noble triumph. Jesus uses three distinct verbs in the fourth Gospel to express the idea of departure. The first verb emphasizes the personal aspect of the departure, the separation that is its consequence (8, 14, 21 ff.; 13, 3, 33, 36; 14, 4 and 5, 28; 16, 5, 10, etc.); The second associates with the departure a goal, a mission, some work to be accomplished (7:35; 14:3, 12:28; 16:7, 28); the third indicates departure purely and simply (16:7). See chapter 10, verses 7-10, where they appear successively on the lips of Our Lord with these various nuances. To the one who sent me. In another conversation with the Jews, 5:18 ff., Jesus had often emphasized his divine nature; this time he speaks mainly of his mission, cf. vv. 16, 18, 28, 29, etc. "I am going away" and "the one who sent me" are correlative expressions: an ambassador is sent only for a time; his mission completed he returns to his master.

John 7.³⁴ You may seek me but you will not find me, and where I am you cannot come.» – The departure of Our Lord Jesus Christ will have terrible consequences for those who refused to believe in him. His enemies are currently seeking him to kill him (vv. 1 and 30); days are approaching when they will seek him in a completely different way, as their only Savior in the midst of the most dreadful distress; for example, at the destruction of Jerusalem, when divine judgments will be pronounced against them: but it will be too late. We believe, following St. John Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius, etc., that this is the true meaning of the verb "to seek" here. It does not mean "to seek in a hostile way" (Origen, etc.: after my death you will persecute me in my disciples), an interpretation that would be forced and unnatural. And you won't find me. Further on, in 8:21, Jesus will express himself even more forcefully: «And you will die in your sin.» – And why will they not find him? Because there will be an unbridgeable chasm between them and him: Where I am, you cannot come. «I» and «you» are brought close together in the Greek text and strongly emphasized. Note the present tense: Jesus already sees himself in heaven in anticipation, or rather, he has never ceased to dwell there. «He does not say: Where I will be; but «Where I am,» because Christ was always where he was to return; he had come from there, without thereby departing from it,» St. Augustine, Treatise on St. John 31, 9. And there is no doubt that the adverb «where» refers to heaven in this place. And Jesus’ enemies could not join him there, even though they earnestly implore him amidst their anguish, unless they first convert. Alas! Christ’s prophecy is still being fulfilled for Israel, which persists in refusing to recognize Jesus as Christ and Messiah; The Jews are searching in vain for their Messiah without finding him, because they refuse to see him in Our Lord Jesus Christ. 

John 7.³⁵ Then the Jews said to one another, «Where will he go that we will not find him? Will he go to the scattered nations and teach them?” – The Jews said Because of this statement that they had not understood, or had not wanted to understand. Between them. In each other's direction. They exchange vicious irony; but other, much more biting details have been blunted against the cornerstone, which is Christ. Where will he go?… Seeing that he has lost the battle here, will he go and play his part in some other country? that we will not find it Since, according to his assertion, it will now be impossible for us to find him. – On this point, they venture a hypothesis, but one so strange in their own eyes that they initially mask its implausibility by means of a question: He will not, however, go…? See the note to verse 31.to those who are scattered among the Gentiles : Was an expression then in use among the Jews to designate those of their people who, since the captivity, were "scattered" in such large numbers throughout the pagan world (the Greek world, according to the full force of the original text), cf. James 1, 1; 1 Peter 1:1, etc. This is the abstract for the concrete. It has sometimes been quite wrongly believed that the "dispersion of the pagans" represents the pagans themselves (Calmet, Allioli, etc.). Will he go and instruct them? The pagans. They assume that Jesus, using his fellow believers as a starting point, will then begin to teach the Gentiles. These last words highlight the irony: the abhorred Gentiles becoming, through Jesus' preaching, members of the theocracy. And yet, those who at that time only intended to hurl a gross insult at Jesus Christ were prophets unwittingly, like Caiaphas (cf. 11:50). In reality, as every page of St. Paul's life shows (Acts 14 ff.), the spread of the gospel took place in the manner ironically expressed in this passage: the apostles would soon go to "teach the Gentiles," and it was after passing through the Jewish synagogues that the Christian preaching would then reach the ears of the Gentiles. He also had a premonition of the truth, this Rabbi who wrote, Pesach, 87, 2: "R. Eliezer said that the Lord scattered the Israelites among the other nations, so that the pagans could cling to them.".

John 7.³⁶ What does this saying mean, 'You will seek me but you will not find me, and where I am you cannot come'?» – Jesus' mockers may try their best: his words (vv. 33-34) have penetrated so deeply into their souls, like a terrible threat, that they return to them again, anxious and vexed. They repeat them verbatim, exactly as they had been spoken.

John 7.³⁷ On the last day of the festival, which is its most solemn day, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, «If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink. – We now turn to the second part of the discourses that the Savior delivered in the temple on the occasion of the Feast of Tabernacles, verses 37-39: this is what we called earlier (note to verse 14) the sermon of the last day. St. John preserved only an extremely abridged summary of it, which is nevertheless remarkably rich. While the other major Jewish festivals lasted only a week or seven days, God himself had added to the Feast of Tabernacles an eighth day, called the conclusion (Leviticus 23:36; in the writings of Philo), which was considered one of the most solemn: hence the epithet big which he receives here (with the article, the particularly great day), cf. Leviticus 23:35 ff.; Numbers 29:35; Nehemiah 8:18. According to the Rabbis: «the eighth day is a feast in itself,» Succ. 48, 2. Jesus standing. A striking and majestic introduction. said aloud. A new, impetuous cry that came from the depths of his soul, cf. v. 28. If anyone is thirsty. Already, in his conversation with the Samaritan woman (4:14) and in his discourse at Capernaum (6:35), the divine Master had pointed out this mystical thirst, and he had offered himself as an exquisite beverage to quench it. Now he reiterates his generous offer with even greater insistence. Let him come to me. Let him come to me through faith and love (cf. v. 38), as to a refreshing spring. And let him drink «In one fell swoop,» for this source is no less inexhaustible than it is delightful. Scholars agree that this striking symbol was used by Jesus Christ because a special ceremony during the Feast of Tabernacles made its meaning clearer and deeper for his audience. Every day, around the time of the morning sacrifice, a procession left the temple to the sound of music. It accompanied a priest who went to fill a golden amphora containing three logs (approximately 0.87 liters) at the Well of Siloam. The procession returned just as the limbs of the sacrificial victim were placed on the altar of burnt offerings. Greeted by the sacred trumpets, the priest proceeded to the altar, where he was joined by one of his colleagues carrying the wine for the libations. They then simultaneously emptied their two amphorae into two silver conduits, which led to the base of the altar, to the enthusiastic acclamations of the people. Then the great Hallel (Psalms 113-118 in the Hebrew text; Vulgate 112-117) was devoutly sung. "He who has not felt joy in drawing from this water has never felt joy anywhere else," Talmud. This libation was intended to thank God for having caused water to flow from the rock to quench the thirst of his people in the desert. It is therefore likely to this rite that Jesus linked his figurative language.

John 7.³⁸ "Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them."» – He who believes in me is an absolute nominative, in the Hebrew manner. The Savior himself interprets the words in this way. come to me from the previous verse. The formula as Scripture says refers to the following lyrics: rivers of flowing water… (and not to the one who believes in me, (as St. John Chrysostom, Theophylact, etc., thought). But it seems to announce a biblical quotation, yet these words are nowhere found verbatim in the Old Testament. This does not, however, create any serious difficulty, since Isaiah (41:18; 44:3; 55:1; 58:11), Ezekiel (36:25; 39:29), Joel (2:28), and Zechariah (14:8) have passages that correspond sufficiently to Jesus' thinking for him to have had them in mind, either individually or all together. Rivers. Entire rivers, and not just a spring, as in chapter 4, verse 14. A powerful image of abundant, overflowing grace. From her breast. This other image is even more expressive. Jesus makes the noun breast or heart a usage analogous to the use of its equivalent among the Hebrews, to designate the inner self of man, cf. Proverbs 20:27; Ecclesiasticus 19:12; 51:21. They will sink. Bringing refreshment and life even outwards, cf. 4:14 and the commentary. On the’white water and its value in the East, see note 4, 10. "For lack of water, Jerusalem suffers from thirst. That is why it is accustomed to using rainwater, and it makes up for the scarcity of springs by the construction of cisterns," wrote St. Jerome, In Isaiam 49, 14.

John 7.³⁹ He was saying this about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive, because the Spirit had not yet been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified. – Exegetical note by St. John to comment on this mysterious saying, in which he shows us a sweet and comforting promise of the future. The Spirit. It is worth noting that the Rabbis also saw in the ceremony described above a symbol of the outpouring of the divine Spirit. The haphtharah, or reading from the prophets, which concluded the service on the first day of the Octave of Tabernacles contained these significant lines from Zechariah (14:8): «On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half of it toward the eastern sea and half toward the western sea. It will be so in summer and in winter.» What were those who believed in him to receive? : on the day of the first Christian Pentecost, and constantly since. L'’Spirit had not yet been given . St. John will explain why believers had not received the Holy Spirit sooner. It is because, he says, according to the most probable reading, "there was no Spirit yet." Obviously, the evangelist is not referring to the existence of the Holy Spirit, but to the special role that the third person of the Holy Trinity was to play in the Church after the death of Our Lord Jesus Christ, as expressed at the end of the verse. Jesus had not yet been glorified. By his resurrection and ascension, cf. Acts 19:2. Jesus himself will soon say that he will send his Spirit only after he has ascended to heaven, 17:5, cf. 16:7. 

John 7.⁴⁰ Among the crowd, some who had heard these words said, "This is truly the prophet."« – who had I heard these words. It would therefore seem that the narrator had in mind all the words that Our Lord Jesus Christ had spoken since his arrival in Jerusalem (vv. 14-35), and not only those of the last day (vv. 37-38). He really is the prophet. (with emphasis: him and no other), with the article, as in passages 1, 21, and 6, 14. Moses, Deuteronomy 18, 15, had once promised in the name of God this prophet who was to be the Messiah; but here he is made, although wrongly, a person distinct from Christ (cf. v. 41).

John 7.⁴¹ Others said: "It is the Christ. But," others said, "is it from Galilee that the Christ must come?" – This second category alone assigns Jesus his true role. – A third class of listeners remains undecided and doesn't quite know what to make of it. They nevertheless raise an objection to those who fully accepted Jesus' messianic character, because Christ does not come from Galilee (cf. vv. 31 and 35). These men knew that Our Lord Jesus Christ had lived in Galilee since his childhood and had spent most of his public life there; they therefore assumed that he was born there. But, they continue, the Messiah will certainly not be from Galilee (cf. 1:46).

John 7.⁴² Does not Scripture say that it is from the lineage of David and from the town of Bethlehem, "Where was David, that Christ was to come?"» – They cite two statements from the Bible relating to the birth of the Messiah. 1° He will have David as an ancestor, cf. Ps. 88, 4; ; Isaiah 11, 1; Jeremiah 23:5; etc. 2° It is to Bethlehem, In the homeland of David, which will be the cradle of Christ: from the village of Bethlehem (a simple village, cf. Flavius Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 5, 2, 8) Where was David?, cf. 1 Samuel 16; Micah 5:1.

John 7.⁴³ This is how the people were divided about him. – First result of these varied or contradictory opinions. was shared, The Greek text uses a word that always signifies a serious division; literally, "a rift." Each person, therefore, remained steadfast in their feelings toward Jesus, whether favorable or unfavorable. See further on, in verses 9:16 and 10:19, for similar references from the narrator.

John 7.⁴⁴ Some wanted to arrest him, but no one got their hands on him. – According to some exegetes, these some They were none other than the Sanhedrin guards sent specifically to arrest Jesus (vv. 32, 45). But it is more consistent with the overall narrative to see them as some zealots from among the people, particularly hostile to Jesus, more irritated by his speeches, and who wanted to arrest him on their own initiative. But nobody… Not a single one. Cf. verse 30 and the commentary. They did not dare to carry out their plan, seeing the crowd so deeply impressed; and above all, "his hour had not yet come".

John 7.⁴⁵ So when the guards returned to the Pontiffs and Pharisees, they said to them, "Why didn't you bring him in?"« Having failed to carry out the mission they had been assigned (v. 32), they returned to their superiors to report on their mission. Several days had passed since the events recounted in v. 32 (cf. vv. 14 and 37). THE Pontiffs  and the Pharisees. In Greek, the two nouns are linked by a single article because they represent the now-known members of a single body. Above, in line 32, each was preceded by its own article. They told them… Although named last, the Sanhedrinists are mentioned; but they were the furthest removed from the writer's thoughts, who immediately returned to the ministers. Why didn't you bring it? The question is addressed in a harsh and haughty tone, as if to humble subordinates; one can see in it all the bitterness of a sharp disappointment.

John 7.⁴⁶ The guards replied, "No man ever spoke like this man."« These honest souls respond with the utmost frankness and simplicity, seeking no other excuse than the profound impression by which they could not help but be dominated. During these last days, they stood at Jesus' side to take him prisoner at the opportune moment; they saw him up close, they heard his word: his holiness, his divine eloquence, tamed these coarse and uneducated minds, which were nevertheless not completely corrupted like their masters. No man has ever spoken… The strength of their conviction shines through in this redundant and emphatic phrase. It is one of the finest and truest praises ever received by Our Lord Jesus Christ.

John 7.⁴⁷ The Pharisees replied to them, «Have you also been deceived? – A simmering anger is palpable in this new question; only the Pharisees are mentioned (cf. v. 45), either because they were the spokespeople, or because of the leading role they played in the failed attempt at arrest (v. 32), or finally because of their jealous orthodoxy, which was deeply irritated by the influence exerted by Jesus. Were you seduced? Even you, the servants of the Sanhedrin, who should be the most loyal of all men. The hypothesis seems so strong to them that they introduce it in Greek, as in verse 35, with the particle Μή, cf. verse 52. – The adjective corresponding to seduced In Greek, it does not denote a simple error, but an essential and fundamental departure from the truth, cf. v. 12; 1 John 1, 7 ; 2, 26 ; 3, 7. 

John 7.⁴⁸ Is there anyone among the leaders of the people who has believed in him? Is there anyone among the Pharisees? That is to say, among the members of the Sanhedrin; for they were like the "archons" of the Jews. someone…who believed. The use of the singular is very telling. Did even one of the Sanhedrin believe in him? The members of the Sanhedrin have just been cited, as the leaders of the theocratic nation; now the Pharisees are cited as models of a perfect life and belief according to the Law. A strange method of intimidation. No one was permitted to think or act differently from these two categories of individuals, who claimed to be a living rule of faith and conduct.

John 7.⁴⁹ But this mob, which knows nothing of the Law, they are cursed.» – This populace… A picturesque expression of profound contempt. By thus lecturing their agents, the Pharisees abruptly swing from one extreme to the other. We, your leaders and role models, do not believe in this Jesus; now look at those who do. Who doesn't know the law. (The law par excellence). Another disdainful expression to characterize the people. The Greek text, which even more clearly highlights the custom, a prolonged state of ignorance. They are cursed. This is how far pride and hateful passion led the Pharisees: in their eyes, the uneducated masses were cursed. The Talmud contains several similar details, which attest to its complete veracity. Nowhere has scholarly pride been pushed as far as among the Jews, especially during this period. The scholars call themselves a "holy people" in contrast to the vile "people of the earth," who are, after all, they dare to say, nothing but abomination and "vermin.". 

John 7.⁵⁰ Nicodemus, one of them, the one who had come to Jesus by night, said to them: – See 3, 1 and the commentary. One of them. That is to say, he was both a member of the Sanhedrin and a member of the Pharisee party. The evangelist emphasizes this fact to show that, among the followers of Our Lord Jesus Christ, there were even influential and famous figures who, according to the Pharisees, must necessarily have been unbelievers. Nicodemus does not yet openly adopt the attitude of a disciple of Jesus; his calm, sober, simple, and straightforward language is that of an honest man calling colleagues led astray by passion back to justice. See Acts 5:32 ff., the similar conduct of Gamaliel.

John 7.⁵¹ «"Does our law condemn a man without first hearing him and without knowing what he has done?"» – This divine law, which the doctors had implicitly boasted of knowing and practicing thoroughly (v. 49), and which they were at that very moment violating in the most shameful manner. Does she condemn… Any man, whoever he may be, who finds himself in the situation in question. "To judge" here means to condemn. Without us had heard it first. The law, personified, is supposed to gather information itself and subject the accused to a serious interrogation. Without us knowing… (Said of sure and complete knowledge). Nicodemus was alluding to the formal prescriptions of Exodus 23:1 and Deuteronomy 1:16 ff. "Hearing the other side" has been everywhere and always an elementary principle of justice.

John 7.⁵² They answered him, «Are you also a Galilean? Examine the Scriptures carefully, and you will see that no prophet arises from Galilee.» – The blow struck home, as this violent outburst proves. Instead of responding to Nicodemus' argument and justifying their conduct, they immediately resorted to insults. Are you a Galilean? We again find the usual phrasing in questions of this kind. You are not, however…? Galilean, on the lips of the Sanhedrin, can only be a term of utter disdain. They too assumed (cf. v. 41) that Jesus was from Galilee; now, this province was the object of perpetual mockery from the inhabitants of Judea. The rabbis even went so far as to say that «every Galilean is a beam.» Since Galilee had thus far provided the greatest number of Our Lord’s disciples, the word Galilean had undoubtedly already become a term of contempt to designate them. Examine carefully the Scriptures. See verse 39 and the commentary. And You'll see. : a completely certain result, according to them, of "scrutinizing". This imperative is very forceful. He did not emerge from Galilee as a prophet. They will cite what they believe to be an absolute rule in the history of Israel: from Galilee (emphasized) no prophet will ever come (a picturesque expression). The use of the present tense here signifies perpetuity: never any Galilean prophets. These scholars were most grossly overlooking an important fact of Jewish history; for Jonah was certainly a Galilean, cf. 2 Kings 14:25. Perhaps El-Kosh, the homeland of Nahum, was also a town in Galilee, as St. Jerome believes. But what strange blindness passion is capable of producing! It is therefore wrong for various exegetes, finding such a gross error implausible on the part of the members of the Sanhedrin, to attribute to them the assertion that henceforth no prophet will come from the despised Galilee. This explanation is forced and contradicts the words "scrutinize and see": religious fanaticism is sufficient to explain everything. We will soon find, in 8.33, a similar error from the same source.

John 7.⁵³ And they each returned to their own home. – Conclusion of the narrative. Embarrassed despite their violent rage, the Sanhedrin members adjourned the meeting and each went home, without taking any action against Jesus. This final detail makes their defeat all the more striking. The phrase "and they returned" has sometimes been linked to the "crowd" of verse 43; but in that case, the verb would be clearly separated from the subject. We have followed the most natural and common interpretation.