Works
Also they acquaint him with the penalties of the Law, saying thus to him: Know that before thou comest into this Law, if thou eatest fat, thou wast not punished with cutting off, and if thou didst profane the Sabbath, thou wast not punished with stoning: but now after thou art proselyted, if thou eatest fat, thou must be punished with cutting off, and if thou profanest the Sabbath, thou must be stoned. And they add no more, for they are not too punctual with him, left cause him to start and decline from the good way to the bad: For at the first, they draw not a man but with gentle words, as it is said, With the cords of a man will I draw them. Therefore as they acquaint him with the penalties of the commandment, so they acquaint him with the reward thereof, and show him that by keeping of these commandments he shall obtain the life of the world to come: and that there is no perfect righteous man, but he that knoweth these commandments and doth them.
Moreover they say unto him, Know thou that the world to come, is not reserved but for the righteous, that is, for Israel: And therefore though thou see Israel in affliction in this world, yet there is good laid up for them: for they cannot receive much in this world among the Nations, lest their heart should be lifted up, and so they err and spoil their reward in the world to come, as it is said, Jesurum waxed fat and kicked. Nor doth the blessed God bring upon them much vengeance lest they should perish: for all Nations shall fail, but they shall remain. And upon this matter they discourse largely to make him to love the Commandments. If he turn back and will not embrace them, he goes his way: but if he embrace them they delay him not but circumcise him out right. And if he were circumcised before, (as Ishmaelites and Midianites and other children of Abraham were) they fetch from him a drop of the blood of the Covenant, and they stayed for him till he was perfectly whole, and then they baptized him. And the Triumviri (or the three) stand by him, and tell him of some of the great and small Commandments a second time over, as he standeth in the water. And if it be a woman, women set her in the water up to the neck, and the Judges (the Triumviri) stand at distance, and tell her of some of the small and great Commandments, while she standeth in the water, and there she dippeth herself forward: Then they turn their faces and go away lest they should see her as she cometh forth of the water. So the Babylon Talmud in Jebamoth per. 4. & Maym. in Issure Biah, per. 14.
Thus was the use and manner of baptizing among the Jews, before the Gospel, with which if we come to compare the Baptism of John, we shall find them agreeing in these particulars.
1. The Jews baptized only those that turned to them from Heathenism and became proselytes: they baptized not Jews who were born and brought up in the Jewish Religion, but only those who were and had been always strangers from it, and were now come unto it: And herein the Baptism of John and of the Apostles in the New Testament did agree with them: for those that they baptized, were such as had been born and brought up either in Judaism or Heathenism, and they did induct them by Baptism into a new Religion. For though Judaism was not so vastly different from the tenor of the Gospel as Heathenism was, yet was it so far different, both in regard of the Ceremoniousness as also of the Legal righteousness and traditions that the Nation stood upon, that the Gospel and it were two several Religions and Professions.
2. Those of age that the Jews baptized were taught and instructed before their Baptism, in the grounds of their Religion, and in the concernment and import of the thing that they went about: And herein did John the Baptist and the Apostles agree with their custom: for they first taught, and then baptized, as dealing with persons of years and understanding, and which had been brought up in another Religion: But the Jews also baptized children and infants, that were not capable of instruction, namely a Proselytes little children as well as himself; and what reason can be shown why John and the Apostles did not the like? Especially when it is expressly said, that such and such were baptized and their whole house: I am sure the Hebrews would construe little children to be in the number; and why we should not do so too, there is no reason nor ground that can be given.
3. Baptism was not administered among the Jews, by any whomsoever, but only by men of some authority, and in orders, and appointed thereunto: A Beth din or Consistory or triumvirate, was orderly and properly to administer it, and not everyone that would take it upon him: So also was the administration of this Ordinance in the New Testament, by ministerial men, and men appointed and impowered for such a work. For Mechanics, and private men to baptize, wanteth the warrant and example, both of Scripture and Antiquity.
4. The Baptism of the Jews was, by dipping, as is apparent by the Records alleged: and herein, how far the manner of baptizing in the New Testament went along with them, may be some question. There are some passages that seem to carry a color of conformity of the one to the other: as Matth. 3. 5. They were baptized of John in Jordan, Matth. 3. 16. Jesus came straight out of the water: Act. 8. 38. The Eunuch went down into the water: And the words in hand, John baptized in Aenon, because there was much water: But there are some passages and circumstances again that seem to leave it at more indifferency, then such conformity in its strictness, and that argue that this manner of baptizing in its preciseness was not to be imposed upon the Church for all succession. As 1. If Paul were baptized within the house, as the story seemeth plainly to carry it, Act. 9. 17, 18. or if any other in the New Testament were either baptized in houses or Synagogues, as see Act. 10. 47, 48. they could not be baptized after this manner of the Jews baptism, for they had an express Maxim against dipping in any vessel: Unless it were the Priests bathing themselves in the brazen Sea. But was not that a vessel? (say the Gemarists in the Jerusalem Talmud) Yes, but R. Joshua the son of Levi saith, A pipe of water ran into it out of the well Etam: and so it was as a spring of water, because fresh water was running into it continually. In Joma per. 3. Aruch in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Maym. in biath Mikdash. 2. Dipping among the Jews was a National custom, and if baptizing were used in the same manner among them by the Apostles and Disciples, it was because among the Jews they became Jews, as Paul saith of himself, that they might gain the Jews: But bathing for purification was a mere stranger among the Gentiles, and used by none but by the Idolatrous Priests, and it is very questionable whether the Apostle in Baptism would put the Gentiles upon it, especially since baptism was not for the purifying of the flesh, 1 Pet. 3. 21. as the Jews held their dippings and purifyings to be. 3. Though men of age among the Jews were baptized by dipping, as their Records do evidence, yet it is hard to find that infants among them were so dipped, and yet they speak it out plainly that infants were baptized. 4. Were it our undertaking to dispute this point, but our task is of another nature) it might be shown how some things were in common and honorable use among the Jews, and so were continued and used by the converts to the Gospel in Judea, which yet afterward, and in other places were laid aside, or changed. And it were easy to show, that sprinkling or pouring of water upon a person is called Baptism as well as dipping, and that the change of such a circumstance is no change or violation of the Original institution.
Vers. 25. Then there arose a Question.
1. The subjectum quaestionis was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , concerning purification: a word of the same latitude with the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Hebrew Authors, namely comprehending all kinds of Religious washings and purifyings that were amongst them. Now there were four sorts of purifyings gotten a foot, and in use at this time in the Nation. 1. The purifyings, washings, and sprinklings, appointed by Moses. 2. The Pharisaical washings brought in upon tradition. 3. The Baptism of John. 4. The Baptism of Christ: for these two though they were not different in themselves, yet were looked upon as different, by the people.
2. About the disputants upon the question, the language of the Text is somewhat curt and hard, It saith there was a Question, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of or by the Disciples of John with the Jews, and it seems to intimate a subdivided controversy: For 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doth argue a doubt amongst Johns Disciples themselves (and so the vulgar, French, and Italian carry it) as if they were the men that began the dispute: and the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doth set them both in an opposition, and conjunction with the Jews in this questioning.
3. Their divided controversy was partly about the preeminence of the Judaical washings and the Evangelical Baptism, and here the Jews and they were at opposition; and partly about the preeminence of Johns Baptism and Christ's, and here the Jews would hiss them on in the contestation.
4. This questioning arose upon the occasions, related immediately before; Christ began to baptize, and John also was still baptizing, Therefore there arose a Question. Johns Disciples started at it, that another Baptizer should appear, besides their Master, and he more followed than their Master was, as verse. 26. And the Jews would fly upon them with indignation, as causers and abettors of innovation; You see what you have done to forsake the stated and ancient Washings and Rites of Moses, and the traditions: for there is now another risen up that sets up a new Baptism, and so will there be novellizing still in infinitum.
Vers. 27. A man can receive nothing except, &c.
John gives an answer to his Disciples, that took it ill that Christ was so followed (and as they thought, to their Masters prejudice) to satisfy them, both on the one hand and on the other. Is he so much followed? Why, it is given him from Heaven. Do I decrease? Why, a man can receive nothing unless it be given him from thence.
Vers. 29. He that hath the bride is the Bridegroom, &c.
The Baptist in this borrowed speech, 1. Asserteth Christ, to be that Lord of Hosts, who was the husband of the Church, Esa. 54. 5. Jer. 3. 14. Hos. 2. 19, 20. And 2. that he himself in his ministry was but an attendant upon the Bridegroom and Bride as the Bridegrooms friend.
The words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , do translate the Hebrew word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shoshebin, which is a word exceeding common in their use and Authors. In a general sense, it signifies any special or singular friend whatsoever: and so, whereas it is said in 2 Sam. 13. 3. that Amnon had a friend, the Chaldee hath rendered it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Amnon had a Shoshebin, but more peculiarly and properly it signifies the special friend and attendant of a Bridegroom at the time of his marriage 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 we use (saith Elias Levita) to call the friends of a Bridegroom Shoshebenin, so whereas it is said in Judge. 14. 20. Samsons wife was given to his companion, whom he had used as his friend, the Chaldee expresseth it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 To his companion who had been his Shoshebin: that is, his Paranymphus or his special friend and attendant at his marriage.
With the Bride, and Bridegroom at a marriage, there were also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the friends of the Bridegroom, or Paranymphi, and the children of the Bride-chamber or wedding guests, as Matth. 9. 15. And so they are mentioned all together in that tradition: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A Bridegroom, and the Bride, the Paranymphi, and the children of the Bridechamber, are freed from keeping the Feast of Tabernacles. Maym. in Succah per. 6.
These 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shoshebinin were commonly two, one of the kindred of the Bridegroom, and one of the kindred of the Bride: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tosaph. ad cetuboth, per. 1. They appointed two Paranymphi one of the Bridegrooms kindred, and the other of the Brides: These two are now resembled amongst us by those that we call the Bridegrooms men.
Now by this expression and comparison, John showeth how far he was from that jealousy and indignation, that his Disciples had, and which they would have kindled in him, at Jesus his honor, and the resort that was made of all sorts unto him: No, saith John, I envy not his honor and growth: but as a near and true friend of a Bridegroom envieth not, but rejoiceth at the Bridegrooms happiness and honor, and that all observe and serve him at his Marriage, and is well pleased to hear his voice and pleasantness, even so is it my rejoicing to hear of the honor, growth, splendor, and advancement of Christ, For he is the Bridegroom, &c.
Vers. 30. He must increase, but I must decrease.
It is easy to see the meaning of the Baptist in these words, that he intendeth them concerning his ministry and glory compared with the ministry and glory of Christ: that his should be as the Stars, and Moon are, when the Sun appeareth, swallowed up and eclipsed by that light: The latter part of the verse, if it be also taken, as a prediction of John, of his own imprisonment and death, we shall see it made good and accomplished in that next Section. But that exposition that applies this, to the days increasing from Christmas when Christ was born, and decreasing from Midsummer when John the Baptist was born, seems to have looked more on an Almanac than on the Scripture.
Vers. 31. He that cometh from above is above all.
Here is another argument whereby the Baptist would convince his Disciples against those thoughts of emulation that they had of John, compared with Christ: when they thought not well of it, that Christ should Baptize and that so many should come to him, which did or would eclips the honor of John: why, saith John, he comes from above, and therefore he deserves to be preferred before me and before all others. The Baptist doth herein assert the Divinity of Christ, and that he was more than he appeared to the eyes of these Disciples that were speaking of him.
§. He that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth.
In the Greek it is He that is of the earth, is of the earth: which the vulgar Latin hath rendered so verbatim, and so the Syriac, but the Arabic, Erasmus, Beza, the Italian, &c. read it as our English doth, He that is of the earth is earthly: The French enlargeth it thus, He that proceeds from the earth is of the earth, and speaks as one proceeding from the earth: The intention of the Baptist in the words is to character himself, and all other men, as he had charactered Christ in the words preceding, and doth so forward in the words following: He speaketh especially three things of Christ, and three things of himself and other men. 1. That Christ came from Heaven: but he and others are but earthly men. 2. That Christ was above all men and all things, (for so the Greek word may indifferently be rendered) but himself and others were but of earthly, and low esteem and glory. And 3. that Christ spake the words of God, the things which he had heard and seen, but himself and others spake of the earth, and could not reach to Divine things: So that the first clause 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . He that is of the earth is of the earth, may be understood, He that is of an earthly original is of an earthly temper and glory, as verse. 6. He that is born of the flesh is flesh: And the latter clause, He speaketh of the earth, may be understood two ways, and the better understood by laying it in opposition to Christ. 1. Christ speaketh the words of God, for he could do no other, the purity of his nature could not utter a vain, idle or earthly word, but all Divine: But he that is a mere earthly man cannot speak but earthly things altogether, and not heavenly things at all, as 1 Cor. 2. 14. & 2 Cor. 3. 5. And herein it seemeth the strength and sense of this Antithesis betwixt Christ and mere mortals lieth, and that this is the proper meaning of the Baptist: for as he holds out this clear difference betwixt Christ and mortals in regard of their Original, that Christ is from Heaven, they from earth; so doth he as clear a difference in regard of their constitution, that Christ could not naturally but speak the words of God, but they cannot naturally speak any such words, but of the earth. And 2. If the men here spoken of, be of the Prophetick rank, as John the Baptist himself was, then the Antithesis lies in this, that what Revelation they have of Divine things, is but obscure in comparison of what Christ hath, for he witnesseth what he hath seen and heard: and he hath not the Spirit by measure, and what they speak of Divine things is but low and slender and by earthly expressions, in comparison of the high and sublime Doctrines that he uttereth. But I take the former interpretation to be the more genuine.
Vers. 33. Hath set to his Seal that God is true.
Christ spake and testified nothing, but what he had seen and heard of the Father, as Chap. 1. 18. & 5. 20. (as Moses saw and heard from God what he delivered to Israel:) And no man receiveth his testimony, that is, very few, (as, All seek their own and none the things of Christ ) when neither the Jews, no nor Johns Disciples would entertain it: But those few that did or do, they seal to the truth of God, for whosoever believeth the Word of God doth as it were subscribe and set to his seal that the Word is true, and God true that gave it: And so they that received the testimony of Christ did both seal to the truth of his Words, and also to the truth of all the promises that God had made concerning Christ, see 1 Joh. 5. 10. and thus is there a mutual sealing to the covenant of Grace betwixt God and man, God sealeth the truth of it by the Sacraments and man by believing.
Vers. 34. For God giveth not the Spirit by measure.
Those translations that add the words, To him, as divers do, do readily fix the sense of it upon Christ, that God poured the Spirit upon him above measure: but that expression To him is not in the Original, and therefore some do understand it generally of all the Prophets whom the Lord sent, that they spake the words of God everyone of them, for God had abundance of Spirit to pour upon them, had they been never so many: and he measured not out the same stint of the Spirit to everyone of them, but what measure seemed good to his good pleasure: And to bring it up to the drift and scope of Johns speech in this place, they apply it thus, Think not much of the honor of Christ, which troubles you because it seems to eclipse mine: Although I have much of God's Spirit, why may not he have more? For God giveth not the Spirit by measure. But the Baptist seemeth to aim the speech concerning Christ alone.
SECTION XV.
St. LUKE Chap. III. Vers. 18.
Reason of the Order.
NOW that John is no more to appear in public being committed close prisoner by Herod, as this Section relateth, the very looking back to the preceding Section which concludeth with a solemn speech of Johns; and the casting forward that there is not one speech more of his to be found henceforth in all the Evangelists, this doth sufficiently prove and assert the proper order and subsequence of this Section to the former: especially this being added and observed, that all the Evangelists do unanimously relate that our Savior's journey into Galilee, which is the very next thing that any of them do mention, was not till after John was shut up in prison. John speaks it the least plain, and yet he speaks it plain enough, as shall be observed at the next Section. Now if it be scrupled or wondered at, why Luke should mention Johns imprisonment before the mention of Christ's being baptized by him; the considerate observing of Luke's method will give an answer to that doubt, for there the Evangelist in one story comprehendeth the whole Ministry of John, having no more to speak of it, in all his Gospel: He relateth what John preached to all that came to be baptized by him, and what particularly to the Pharisees, what to the Publicans, and what to the Soldiers: and divers other things saith he (besides those particulars mentioned) He preached to the people: And he was also as plain and round with Herod, as he had been with the rest of the people, so that Herod at last shut him up in prison. And so he compileth and wrappeth up the story of the tenor and success of Johns Ministry in general, to all sorts of people in that brief relation, and then he cometh to the particular relation of his baptizing Christ.
And if it be scrupled again why I take not in the very fame story with this of this Section, which is related in Matth. 14. 3, 4, 5. and Mark 6. 17, 18, 19, 20. as most Harmonists of the Evangelists do, it is because that relation will fall and come in very pertinently and methodically, as the story of a thing past in the place where it lies: and seeing that this Section tells the story very full, the bringing of those Texts of Matthew and Mark hither, would inevitably cause a chasma or hiatus in the story there, when we come to it, through the want of them, which would be very improper, or would cause a repetition of them there, which would not be very proper.
Harmony and Explanation.
Vers. 18. And many other things he Preached, &c.
WHosoever shall read the latter part of the former Section, and this verse together as a continued Narration, he will see how fitly and closely they join together, and he is to take this as an Epiphonema to the whole story of Johns Ministry; that besides those particular speeches of his, mentioned by the Evangelists, he preached many other things, and used divers exhortations to the people, whilst: he was abroad and at liberty, which he was not very long after that occurrence mentioned in the former Section.
Vers. 19. But Herod the Tetrarch being reproved for Herodias, &c.
Because we are fallen upon a strange and most unlawful match in Herod the greats family, will the reader have the patience, before he come to look on this particular act of Herod the Tetrarch (his marrying his brothers wife) to take a view a little, of old Herod's whole family, and divers strange marriages in it, as they may be picked up in several places in Josephus, and to acquaint himself in brief with the pedigree of that stock, which may be some light for the understanding both of this and of some other places in the New Testament, which relate to the story of that house.
We will begin with Antipater Herod's Father, the first of the Family that came to honor.
This Antipater being an Edomite, had by his wife Cyprus an Arabian, these four sons, Phasaelus, Herod, Joseph, Pheroras, and one daughter named Salome, Joseph. Antiq. lib. 14. cap. 12.
Herod, the second son of Antipater, commonly called Herod the Great (the King of the Jews, Luke 1. 5. the murderer of the Sanhedrin at Jerusalem, Joseph. Antiq. l. 14. cap. 17. Juchasin fol. 19. and murderer of the children at Bethlehem, Matth. 2. and of his own children, as we shall see anon) had nine wives, and by seven of them he had children, Joseph. de bell. lib. 1. cap. 18.
1. He married Doris a woman of Jerusalem before he was King, and by her he had a son called Antipater: but this wife he put away, after he came to the Kingdom, that he might marry another, Ibid. cap. 17. and this his first born son Antipater, he caused to be slain, but five days before his own death, Id. Antiq. lib. 17. cap. 10.
2. His second wife was Mariam or Mary the beautiful: the daughter of Alexander, the son of Aristobulus, and of Alexandra the daughter of Hyrcanus, Antiq. 15. cap. 2. by her he had three sons Alexander and Aristobulus, Antiq. 16. cap. 8. and Herod, de bell. 1. 18. which Herod died young at Rome, whither he was set forth for his education.
And he had also by her two daughters, Salampsio, and Cyprus, Antiq. lib. 18. cap. 7.
His wife Mariam he slew upon the accusation of his sister Salome, and some suspicion and discontent, Antiq. 15. cap. 11.
Her two sons that lived, he married thus; Aristobulus to Bernice the daughter of Salome his own Sister, by whom he had three sons, Herod, Agrippa (he that is called Herod, Act. 12.) and Aristobulus: and two daughters Herodias and Mariam: this Herodias is she that we have here in hand. Alexander he married to Glaphyra the daughter of Archelaus a foreign King, and by her he had two sons Tigranes and Alexander, De bell. 1. cap. 18.
These two sons of Mariam, Aristobulus and Alexander, their Father caused to be slain as well as he had slain their Mother. Antiq. 16. cap. 17. But his two daughters he married to their near kinsman Salampsio to Phasaelus her nephew, and Cyprus to Antipater, her cozen german the son of Salome Herod's sister, Antiq. lib. 18. cap. 7.
3. A third wife he had which was called Malthace a Samaritan, and by her he had two sons Antipas and Archelaus, and one daughter called Olympias, De Bell. lib. 1. cap. 18. Archelaus is he of whom there is mention, Matth. 2. Antipas is that Herod, that we have in hand: Archelaus married Glaphyra his brother Alexanders widow, Ant. lib. 17. c. 15. Olympias was married to her Fathers own Nephew, Joseph. De bell. lib. 1. cap. 18.
4. His fourth wife Cleopatra of Jerusalem bare him Herod and Philip. Ibid. & Antiq. 17. cap. 1. this Philip was Herodias her husband till Herod his brother took her from him: not this Herod born of the same mother, but Antipas the son of Malthace, who was also called Herod as was said before.
5. He had another wife called Pallas, by whom he had a son called Phasaelus. Ibid. and this Phasaelus had a son of his own name to whom Salampsio was married, mentioned before.
6. A sixth wife Phaedra bare him a daughter called Roxana, Ibid.
7. And a seventh called Helpis bare him a daughter named Salome. Ibid.
And two wives besides these he had, which bare him no children, whose names Josephus hath not mentioned, but hath left this mark upon the matches, that the one of those wives was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the other 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 both his neeces or his very near kindred. Ibid.
And to look a little further into the stock: Salampsio his daughter, had by Phasaelus his Grandchild three sons and two daughters, Antipater, Herod, Alexander, Alexandra, and Cyprus. Alexandra married to a Cypriot, but died childless. Cyprus was married to Agrippa the son of Aristobulus the son of Mariam, (this was that Herod in Act. 12.) by whom she had two sons, Agrippa and Drusus, and three daughters, Bernice, Mariam, and Drusilla, Act. 18. cap. 7. Such marriages as these were in old Herod's family, the father of this Herod, that we have in discourse. And now let us look upon the marriage that we have before us, between Herod and Herodias:
1. Herodias was niece both to Philip and Herod, both to her former husband and her latter, for she was daughter to their brother Aristobulus, whom their father had slain, as was said before. Josephus must here be corrected by the Evangelist, for he saith, Herodias was the wife of Herod, Herod the Tetrarchs brother, but not by the same mother, Antiq. lib. 18. cap. 7. There was indeed a Herod which was Philip's brother of the same mother, Cleopatra, but this Herod the Tetrarch (called also Antipas ) was the son of Malthace.
2. He might not have married his brothers wife (though he had been dead) he having had seed by her, for so is it very generally held that Herodias daughter that daunced off John Baptists head was the daughter of Philip. If brethren dwell together (as heirs to one possession) and one of them die and have no child, then her husbands brother shall go in unto her, &c. Deut. 25. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But if her husband leave either son or daughter, or sons son, or sons daughter, or daughters daughter, behind him, (as R. Sol. explains it) then might not he marry his brothers wife. Lev. 18. 16. Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brothers wife: it is thy brothers nakedness. Lev. 20. 21. If a man shall take his brothers wife, it is an unclean thing: he hath uncovered his brothers nakedness, they shall be childless. Whereupon Ibn Ezra giveth this note, That none of the unlawful marriages mentioned are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or an unclean thing, but only the marrying of a brothers wife: And the Jews do make this one of the thirty six offenders that deserve cutting off, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He that goeth in to his brothers wife: Kerithuth per. 1.
3. It was still worse to marry her, as he did, whilst his brother Philip was alive: for Philip died not till the twentieth year of Tiberius Caesar, and John was imprisoned in the sixteenth or thereabout. Joseph. Ant. l. 18. c. 6.
4. And which was yet worse, he divorced his lawful wife the daughter of Aretas King of Arabia, that he might marry Herodias: and he had basely violated the laws of Hospitality in coming to lodge with his brother Philip, as a friend and guest, and tempting and winning his wife from him. Josephus giveth us the story thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. Herod the Tetrarch married the daughter of Aretas, and lived a good while with her: But being sent for to Rome, he lodged in his brother Herod's house, (here Josephus mistaketh Herod for Phi •• p) And falling in love with Herodias his wife (now she was the daughter of Aristobulus their brother and sister of Herod) Agrippa the great (Act. 12. 1.) he dared to make the motion of a marriage, which she embracing, they agreed that he should take her home to himself when he returned from Rome: and it was also contained in the Articles of agreement that he should put away the daughter of Aretas: And so he did, which caused a war betwixt him and Aretas. Idem, ibid. cap. 7.
What other evils Herod committed, we cannot give so particular account of, because they are rarely if at all recorded: but by these two desperate facts of his, in his wretched marriage, and in his bloody murder of the Baptist, we may well guess the temper and conversation of the tyrant: a wretch strong in wickedness and strong in power, and yet not spared by the Baptist, but reproved and told home by him of his villainies, as he deserved. And here we may fitly parallel this second Elias reproving Herod and Herodias, and suffering for it, with the first Elias doing the like by Ahab and Jezebel.
Vers. 20. He shut up John in prison.
As desperate as he was in wickedness, yet the Evangelist tells us, that he reverenced John, and heard him gladly, and did many things after his admonition, Mark 6. 20. but when John comes so home to him about his abominable marriage, then Herodias another Jezebel strikes in and strikes the stroke for Johns silencing: for she had had a quarrel against him, Mark 6. 19. seeing this his doctrine tended to her divorce: Yet durst not the cruel couple for shame imprison John upon the plain terms of the proper cause of his imprisonment, which was because he spake against their cursed marriage, but they use another color as Josephus relateth, namely, because Johns popularity was dangerous towards some insurrection or innovation. He relates the story thus, Herod slew John called the Baptist, being a good man and one that enjoined the Jews, to follow virtue, and to use uprightness one towards another, and devotion towards God, and to knit together by Baptism, &c. And divers being converted to him, (for they were well pleased with the hearing of his words) Herod fearing that this his perswasiveness with the people, might tend to a revolt, (for they were ready to do anything upon his counsel) he thought it best to lay hold upon him and kill him, before any insurrection were: rather than repent too late when a change came: And so was John upon this suspicion of Herod sent prisoner to Machaerus castle and there killed, Antiq. lib. 18. cap. 7. where he also relateth, that Aretas (the Father of her whom Herod had put away that he might take Herodias) and Herod (upon this and other quarrels) having pitched a set field and battle, all Herod's army was cut off, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And some of the Jews thought that Herod's Army was destroyed by God, and he most justly punished for the murder of John the Baptist.
And thus hath this bright and burning lamp shone abroad, till the Sun of righteousness appeared and began to eclipse him: The time that he had preached and baptized had been some twenty months or thereabouts: from about Easter, to about November, twelvemonth after: The time of his imprisonment, was some months also above a twelvemonth, namely from November or thereabout, very near unto Easter twelvemonth after, as will be conspicuous in the ensuing progress of the story.
Reason of the Order.
NOW that John is no more to appear in public being committed close prisoner by Herod, as this Section relateth, the very looking back to the preceding Section which concludeth with a solemn speech of Johns; and the casting forward that there is not one speech more of his to be found henceforth in all the Evangelists, this doth sufficiently prove and assert the proper order and subsequence of this Section to the former: especially this being added and observed, that all the Evangelists do unanimously relate that our Savior's journey into Galilee, which is the very next thing that any of them do mention, was not till after John was shut up in prison. John speaks it the least plain, and yet he speaks it plain enough, as shall be observed at the next Section. Now if it be scrupled or wondered at, why Luke should mention Johns imprisonment before the mention of Christ's being baptized by him; the considerate observing of Luke's method will give an answer to that doubt, for there the Evangelist in one story comprehendeth the whole Ministry of John, having no more to speak of it, in all his Gospel: He relateth what John preached to all that came to be baptized by him, and what particularly to the Pharisees, what to the Publicans, and what to the Soldiers: and divers other things saith he (besides those particulars mentioned) He preached to the people: And he was also as plain and round with Herod, as he had been with the rest of the people, so that Herod at last shut him up in prison. And so he compileth and wrappeth up the story of the tenor and success of Johns Ministry in general, to all sorts of people in that brief relation, and then he cometh to the particular relation of his baptizing Christ.
And if it be scrupled again why I take not in the very fame story with this of this Section, which is related in Matth. 14. 3, 4, 5. and Mark 6. 17, 18, 19, 20. as most Harmonists of the Evangelists do, it is because that relation will fall and come in very pertinently and methodically, as the story of a thing past in the place where it lies: and seeing that this Section tells the story very full, the bringing of those Texts of Matthew and Mark hither, would inevitably cause a chasma or hiatus in the story there, when we come to it, through the want of them, which would be very improper, or would cause a repetition of them there, which would not be very proper.
Harmony and Explanation.
Vers. 18. And many other things he Preached, &c.
WHosoever shall read the latter part of the former Section, and this verse together as a continued Narration, he will see how fitly and closely they join together, and he is to take this as an Epiphonema to the whole story of Johns Ministry; that besides those particular speeches of his, mentioned by the Evangelists, he preached many other things, and used divers exhortations to the people, whilst: he was abroad and at liberty, which he was not very long after that occurrence mentioned in the former Section.
Vers. 19. But Herod the Tetrarch being reproved for Herodias, &c.
Because we are fallen upon a strange and most unlawful match in Herod the greats family, will the reader have the patience, before he come to look on this particular act of Herod the Tetrarch (his marrying his brothers wife) to take a view a little, of old Herod's whole family, and divers strange marriages in it, as they may be picked up in several places in Josephus, and to acquaint himself in brief with the pedigree of that stock, which may be some light for the understanding both of this and of some other places in the New Testament, which relate to the story of that house.
We will begin with Antipater Herod's Father, the first of the Family that came to honor.
This Antipater being an Edomite, had by his wife Cyprus an Arabian, these four sons, Phasaelus, Herod, Joseph, Pheroras, and one daughter named Salome, Joseph. Antiq. lib. 14. cap. 12.
Herod, the second son of Antipater, commonly called Herod the Great (the King of the Jews, Luke 1. 5. the murderer of the Sanhedrin at Jerusalem, Joseph. Antiq. l. 14. cap. 17. Juchasin fol. 19. and murderer of the children at Bethlehem, Matth. 2. and of his own children, as we shall see anon) had nine wives, and by seven of them he had children, Joseph. de bell. lib. 1. cap. 18.
1. He married Doris a woman of Jerusalem before he was King, and by her he had a son called Antipater: but this wife he put away, after he came to the Kingdom, that he might marry another, Ibid. cap. 17. and this his first born son Antipater, he caused to be slain, but five days before his own death, Id. Antiq. lib. 17. cap. 10.
2. His second wife was Mariam or Mary the beautiful: the daughter of Alexander, the son of Aristobulus, and of Alexandra the daughter of Hyrcanus, Antiq. 15. cap. 2. by her he had three sons Alexander and Aristobulus, Antiq. 16. cap. 8. and Herod, de bell. 1. 18. which Herod died young at Rome, whither he was set forth for his education.
And he had also by her two daughters, Salampsio, and Cyprus, Antiq. lib. 18. cap. 7.
His wife Mariam he slew upon the accusation of his sister Salome, and some suspicion and discontent, Antiq. 15. cap. 11.
Her two sons that lived, he married thus; Aristobulus to Bernice the daughter of Salome his own Sister, by whom he had three sons, Herod, Agrippa (he that is called Herod, Act. 12.) and Aristobulus: and two daughters Herodias and Mariam: this Herodias is she that we have here in hand. Alexander he married to Glaphyra the daughter of Archelaus a foreign King, and by her he had two sons Tigranes and Alexander, De bell. 1. cap. 18.
These two sons of Mariam, Aristobulus and Alexander, their Father caused to be slain as well as he had slain their Mother. Antiq. 16. cap. 17. But his two daughters he married to their near kinsman Salampsio to Phasaelus her nephew, and Cyprus to Antipater, her cozen german the son of Salome Herod's sister, Antiq. lib. 18. cap. 7.
3. A third wife he had which was called Malthace a Samaritan, and by her he had two sons Antipas and Archelaus, and one daughter called Olympias, De Bell. lib. 1. cap. 18. Archelaus is he of whom there is mention, Matth. 2. Antipas is that Herod, that we have in hand: Archelaus married Glaphyra his brother Alexanders widow, Ant. lib. 17. c. 15. Olympias was married to her Fathers own Nephew, Joseph. De bell. lib. 1. cap. 18.
4. His fourth wife Cleopatra of Jerusalem bare him Herod and Philip. Ibid. & Antiq. 17. cap. 1. this Philip was Herodias her husband till Herod his brother took her from him: not this Herod born of the same mother, but Antipas the son of Malthace, who was also called Herod as was said before.
5. He had another wife called Pallas, by whom he had a son called Phasaelus. Ibid. and this Phasaelus had a son of his own name to whom Salampsio was married, mentioned before.
6. A sixth wife Phaedra bare him a daughter called Roxana, Ibid.
7. And a seventh called Helpis bare him a daughter named Salome. Ibid.
And two wives besides these he had, which bare him no children, whose names Josephus hath not mentioned, but hath left this mark upon the matches, that the one of those wives was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the other 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 both his neeces or his very near kindred. Ibid.
And to look a little further into the stock: Salampsio his daughter, had by Phasaelus his Grandchild three sons and two daughters, Antipater, Herod, Alexander, Alexandra, and Cyprus. Alexandra married to a Cypriot, but died childless. Cyprus was married to Agrippa the son of Aristobulus the son of Mariam, (this was that Herod in Act. 12.) by whom she had two sons, Agrippa and Drusus, and three daughters, Bernice, Mariam, and Drusilla, Act. 18. cap. 7. Such marriages as these were in old Herod's family, the father of this Herod, that we have in discourse. And now let us look upon the marriage that we have before us, between Herod and Herodias:
1. Herodias was niece both to Philip and Herod, both to her former husband and her latter, for she was daughter to their brother Aristobulus, whom their father had slain, as was said before. Josephus must here be corrected by the Evangelist, for he saith, Herodias was the wife of Herod, Herod the Tetrarchs brother, but not by the same mother, Antiq. lib. 18. cap. 7. There was indeed a Herod which was Philip's brother of the same mother, Cleopatra, but this Herod the Tetrarch (called also Antipas ) was the son of Malthace.
2. He might not have married his brothers wife (though he had been dead) he having had seed by her, for so is it very generally held that Herodias daughter that daunced off John Baptists head was the daughter of Philip. If brethren dwell together (as heirs to one possession) and one of them die and have no child, then her husbands brother shall go in unto her, &c. Deut. 25. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But if her husband leave either son or daughter, or sons son, or sons daughter, or daughters daughter, behind him, (as R. Sol. explains it) then might not he marry his brothers wife. Lev. 18. 16. Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brothers wife: it is thy brothers nakedness. Lev. 20. 21. If a man shall take his brothers wife, it is an unclean thing: he hath uncovered his brothers nakedness, they shall be childless. Whereupon Ibn Ezra giveth this note, That none of the unlawful marriages mentioned are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or an unclean thing, but only the marrying of a brothers wife: And the Jews do make this one of the thirty six offenders that deserve cutting off, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He that goeth in to his brothers wife: Kerithuth per. 1.
3. It was still worse to marry her, as he did, whilst his brother Philip was alive: for Philip died not till the twentieth year of Tiberius Caesar, and John was imprisoned in the sixteenth or thereabout. Joseph. Ant. l. 18. c. 6.
4. And which was yet worse, he divorced his lawful wife the daughter of Aretas King of Arabia, that he might marry Herodias: and he had basely violated the laws of Hospitality in coming to lodge with his brother Philip, as a friend and guest, and tempting and winning his wife from him. Josephus giveth us the story thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. Herod the Tetrarch married the daughter of Aretas, and lived a good while with her: But being sent for to Rome, he lodged in his brother Herod's house, (here Josephus mistaketh Herod for Phi •• p) And falling in love with Herodias his wife (now she was the daughter of Aristobulus their brother and sister of Herod) Agrippa the great (Act. 12. 1.) he dared to make the motion of a marriage, which she embracing, they agreed that he should take her home to himself when he returned from Rome: and it was also contained in the Articles of agreement that he should put away the daughter of Aretas: And so he did, which caused a war betwixt him and Aretas. Idem, ibid. cap. 7.
What other evils Herod committed, we cannot give so particular account of, because they are rarely if at all recorded: but by these two desperate facts of his, in his wretched marriage, and in his bloody murder of the Baptist, we may well guess the temper and conversation of the tyrant: a wretch strong in wickedness and strong in power, and yet not spared by the Baptist, but reproved and told home by him of his villainies, as he deserved. And here we may fitly parallel this second Elias reproving Herod and Herodias, and suffering for it, with the first Elias doing the like by Ahab and Jezebel.
Vers. 20. He shut up John in prison.
As desperate as he was in wickedness, yet the Evangelist tells us, that he reverenced John, and heard him gladly, and did many things after his admonition, Mark 6. 20. but when John comes so home to him about his abominable marriage, then Herodias another Jezebel strikes in and strikes the stroke for Johns silencing: for she had had a quarrel against him, Mark 6. 19. seeing this his doctrine tended to her divorce: Yet durst not the cruel couple for shame imprison John upon the plain terms of the proper cause of his imprisonment, which was because he spake against their cursed marriage, but they use another color as Josephus relateth, namely, because Johns popularity was dangerous towards some insurrection or innovation. He relates the story thus, Herod slew John called the Baptist, being a good man and one that enjoined the Jews, to follow virtue, and to use uprightness one towards another, and devotion towards God, and to knit together by Baptism, &c. And divers being converted to him, (for they were well pleased with the hearing of his words) Herod fearing that this his perswasiveness with the people, might tend to a revolt, (for they were ready to do anything upon his counsel) he thought it best to lay hold upon him and kill him, before any insurrection were: rather than repent too late when a change came: And so was John upon this suspicion of Herod sent prisoner to Machaerus castle and there killed, Antiq. lib. 18. cap. 7. where he also relateth, that Aretas (the Father of her whom Herod had put away that he might take Herodias) and Herod (upon this and other quarrels) having pitched a set field and battle, all Herod's army was cut off, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And some of the Jews thought that Herod's Army was destroyed by God, and he most justly punished for the murder of John the Baptist.
And thus hath this bright and burning lamp shone abroad, till the Sun of righteousness appeared and began to eclipse him: The time that he had preached and baptized had been some twenty months or thereabouts: from about Easter, to about November, twelvemonth after: The time of his imprisonment, was some months also above a twelvemonth, namely from November or thereabout, very near unto Easter twelvemonth after, as will be conspicuous in the ensuing progress of the story.
SECTION XVI.
St. JOHN Chap. IV.
Reason of the Order.
ABOUT the proper time, place, and order of this story of Christ and the Samaritan woman, there is some difficulty and diversity of opinion: None questioning whether it do naturally follow the story of the third Chapter: but some doubting whether this journey of our Savior into Galilee was after Johns imprisonment, yea or no: but conceiving it rather to have been before, and supposing that this voyage is not the same with that in Matth. 4. 12. Mark 1. 14. (where it is said that when Jesus heard that John was cast into prison he departed into Galilee ) but it was before that, and before John was committed unto prison. Ammonius among the Ancients appeareth to be of this opinion, and Grotius among the modern, to mention no more. But Augustine, Jansen, Alapide, Chemnitz, and divers others do rank this story and voyage after Johns shutting up, and that immediately after (old Tatianus only hath placed it a good while after,) and so have undoubtingly made this journey into Galilee, and that in Mat. 4. 12. but one and the same. And indeed if the story, and time of it be precisely weighed, it will not only be clear, that this journey into Galilee is the very same mentioned by Matthew and Mark in the places cited, but it will also give some illustration to that story in them, and show the occasion and proceeding of that his journey.
For, 1. Whereas those two Evangelists have laid Christ's journey into Galilee upon Johns imprisonment the very next thing to the story of his Temptation, John hath told us of a journey thither, betwixt the temptation and Johns commitment, and that Christ continued there in Galilee some space: Now to imagine another journey thither again, and that a twelvemonth after the former, and this also before John be imprisoned, will make that place in Matthew and Mark exceeding hard, if not impossible, to be understood. 2. If this voyage in John and that in them be not the same, and both after Johns imprisonment, in what time and place will it be possible to bring that story in those two Evangelists into being? Let it be supposed, as some will have it, that John was yet abroad and not yet imprisoned when Jesus undertaketh this journey into Galilee: well: this Chapter bringeth him to Galilee and the next, to Jerusalem again: and then when, and where, and how shall we take in Johns imprisonment after? It is true that there are, that have found a place to thrust it in, but we will not spend time in that dispute, let but the present section and the subsequent till the next Passover be seriously observed, and I suppose there will be evidence sufficient by their very contexture to clear this order.
2. The words of John that relate the occasion of Christ's journey into Galilee, compared with the words of Matthew and Mark, speak but the very same thing, though the terms and expressions do somewhat differ. Those two Evangelists say, the one of them, That when John was put in prison, the other, That when Jesus heard he was put in prison, he departed into Galilee: And what can the words of John (when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard, &c. he departed into Galilee ) mean else but the same occasion? For what matter was it, though the Pharisees heard of the multitude of Christ's Disciples never so much? Why surely because he had heard, that John had suffered because of the multitude of his Disciples, and was shut up in prison: and so might he himself be in danger, if he stayed in Judea, to be quarrelled by the Pharisees for the same business. And let it be but considered why John and the numerousness of his Disciples should be mentioned here, but that they are of concernment, and have some relation to this story.
So that these things being well weighed together, the order and texture of the story appeareth to be natural and genuine as we have laid it.
Only one scruple and objection may lie in the way about it, and that is this: why Christ should go into Galilee even into Herod's mouth, for there he resided, if Herod had but newly imprisoned John, this was to flee from one danger into another, from an uncertain danger from the Pharisees who had never wronged John, to a certain danger by Herod who had newly imprisoned him: Answer, Herod's quarrel against the Baptist was not so much in regard of his doctrine, as merely a personal quarrel about Herodias, and as was mentioned before, for fear of innovation. It is said that Herod heard John gladly, and did many things according to his doctrine, Mark 6. 20. and therefore there was no danger of preaching the Gospel never so near Herod, if the matter of Herodias be not meddled withal, and many Disciples be not gathered; and what our Savior should do in those particulars, his Divine Wisdom needed no instructor to inform him: And as for the danger of being suspected of innovation by gathering Disciples as John was, his dispersing his Disciples and his flitting from place to place, would make their number the less sensible, whereas Johns abode in one place, caused all his Disciples to resort unto him, and so their multitude was the more visible. When our Savior sees his time, he collects his Disciples and is followed by the multitudes, and let Herod the Fox frown and fret and plot and spare not.
Harmony and Explanation.
THE subject of the story in the first part of this Section, is the first conversion of any, that were aliens to the Congregation of Israel, by the preaching of Christ, unto the Gospel. And in this story, that of the Prophet Hosea, seemeth to be fulfilled to the very letter, Chap. 2. 15. I will give the valley of Achor for a door of hope. For howsoever the maps of Canaan do most of them lay the valley of Achor and Shechem at a very great distance, yet if it be observed in Josh. 7. & 8. how near to the hills of blessing and cursing (whereof Gerizim that lay over Shechem was one) the stoning of Achan was, as the current of the Text there doth carry it, and how Josephus speaketh of the great valley by Samaria, Ant. lib. 20. cap. 5. it will not seem improbable that the valley of Achor ran along between Gerizim and Ebal, and by the City of Shechem. And when our Savior first beginneth to preach to strangers and to convert them, it is in this very valley, and so he makes it a door of hope of conversion of the Gentiles, whereas it had been a door of despair and offense to Israel at their first entrance into the land.
The Style and tenor of this Section, so far as it relates the story of Christ's being among the Samaritans, is so very agreeable to the tenor of the Prophecy of Hosea, that it seemeth to speak to that all along: and our Savior to an adulterous woman here, openeth many things, that that parabolical husband of an adulterous wife had spoken there. Compare but these places amongst others.
| Hos • a | John Chap. 4. |
| Chap. 1. ver. 2. | Vers. 18. |
| Chap. 3. ver. 1 | |
| Chap. 2. ver. 21, 22, 23. | Vers. 35, 36, 37. |
| Chap. 3. ver. 4. | Vers. 21. |
| Chap. 3. ver. 5. | Vers. 10. |
| Chap. 13. v. 15. | Vers. 14. |
This very place of Shechem, was the place where the very first Proselytes came in, that ever came into the Church of Israel, Gen. 34. 29. & 35. 2, and in this story it is the first place proselyted under the Gospel.
Vers. 4. And he must needs go through Samaria.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (saith Josephus ) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . It was the custom of the Galileans as they went to Jerusalem to the Festivals, to go through the country of the Samaritans. Antiq. lib. 20. cap. 5. And he that would go soonest thither must go that way, and it is three days journey that way from Galilee to Jerusalem. Idem, in vita sua. Josephus helpeth us here how to understand the word Samaria in this story in hand, namely for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Country of the Samaritans, and not any City of that name, for there was no City called Samaria at this time: for Shechem was now the chief City of the Samaritans, as the same Josephus witnesseth, Antiq. lib. 11. cap. 8. This Country of Samaritans lay between Judea and Galilee, and he that would go from the one to the other must pass through that, see Luke 9. 51, 52. although there was so great a fewd between the Jews and Samaritans, as we shall see by and by. This way it seems grew dangerous at the last and near unpassable either because of the enmity mentioned, or by reason of the many thieves and robbers wherewithal the land of Canaan abounded towards the time of the destruction of Jerusalem: and by reason of the Roman Soldiers that were straggling abroad: For so Maimonides in Kiddush hodesh, witnesseth where speaking of the messengers that used to be sent abroad through the Country, to give notice of the fixing of the new Moons he tells how soon they might get to such a distance, unless there was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 war and rapine in the way 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as there was in the way between Judea and Galilee in the days of the wise men of the Mishneh, perch. 5.
Vers. 5. A City of Samaria called Sichar near the parcel of ground, &c.
The story, concerning the parcel of ground which Jacob gave to his son Joseph, is in Gen. 33. 19. & 48. 22. but there is difference betwixt this name used here and that mentioned there, and there is difference in the relation there between one place and another: There the place is called Shechem, here Sychar, there in one place, it is said that Jacob bought it, and in another, that he got it with the sword and bow. Shechem is a word of much like construction as Netser is in Esa. 11. 1. & Matth. 2. 23. for as that signifieth both the branch Christ, and the Town Nazareth where he should arise, so doth this, both a portion of ground, and the place, or situation, where it lay. I have given thee (saith Jacob to Joseph ) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shechem echad, above thy brethren, that is one portion, (as the Chaldee Paraphrast and other Jews render it) and that portion, the place or portion of Shechem, (as the Septuagint translate it,) of that City there is mention in Gen. 34. and in divers other places of the Scripture: and whether it took that name from Shechem the son of Hamor, that ravished Dinah, it is not much useful or material to look after, certainly it keepeth that name all along the Scripture but only in this place: for that Sychar here is the same place with Shechem, the circumstance added, that it was near the parcel of ground that Jacob gave his son Joseph, makes the matter past denial: It is a very general censure upon this word both by expositors that write upon this Chapter, and others that mention the word occasionally, that it is written wrong and corruptly, for it should be written and read Sychem: But 1. their very so saying doth show and argue that it is generally read Sychar in all copies, and are all corrupt? 2. It is hard to imagine, how any Scribe should so miswrite or misread, as to write 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 seeing there is so little affinity between the letters in the Greek: And 3. any scribe that was a Scripture man, could not easily so mistake, seeing there is so frequent mention of Shechem in the Bible, but of Sichar never. Therefore to me it is past all doubting, that the word is written and read in our copies exactly and to a letter, as it was written by the Evangelist himself: And it may be conceived that he wrote it, as it was sometimes (and it may be commonly) called among the Jews. The hatred and dissention between the Jews and Samaritans was exceeding bitter, as shall be shown anon, and it is no strange thing if the Jews used this as a nickname for the Samaritans chief City, to call it Sychar instead of Shechem. The people of the Kingdom of Samaria are called the Drunkards of Ephraim, Isaiah 28. 1. Woe to the Crown of pride, the drunkards of Ephraim: &c. Now the word Sychar importeth and signifieth Drunkenness, and it may very well be conceived, that seeing the Jews abhorred the Samaritans so much as they did, that they framed the name Sychem, into the drunken name Sychar, and in scorn called the metropolis of the Samaritans so, in the disdain and scorn that they had against them. So they called Beelzebub Beelzebul or the God of a dunghill for the greater detestation, and so the Holy Ghost calleth Achan, Acha • , 1 Chron. 2. 7. to hit him home for his troubling of Israel, Josh. 7. compare the changing of Sychem unto Sychar, with the changing of Achan into Achar, and why may we not apprehend this to be done purposely, and without mistakes of transcribers as well as that?
Now, as for the difference between the two Texts of Moses that spake of this portion, of Jacob's ground, the one saying that it was bought of the Hivite with money or lambs, and the other that it was won from the Amorite with his sword and bow, it is best reconciled by taking both places literally and in their proper sense, but to understand them of several times: At Jacob's first coming unto Shechem out of Padan Aram, he bought this piece of ground of the Hivite as it is storied Gen. 33. 19. whether for money or for lambs we shall not need to dispute in this place: But after the slaughter of the Shechemites, he was long and far distant from that place and made no use of it, it not being safe for him to reside there, his sons having caused him to stink to the Inhabitants of the lands, and God calling him away unto other places: Now what became of his land, and of the City Shechem which had been emptied of its Inhabitants, all this while of Jacob's absence? Certainly it is more proper and probable to hold, that the Inhabitants of the land would some of them usurp and seize upon those places, and that Jacob was put to recover them again by force of arms, than either to think that Jacob owneth the slaughter of Shechem by his sons, as his own act, or to understand, this portion of ground and Jacob's sword and bow allegorically as many do: Vid. Targ. Onkel. & Jerusalami, &c.
Vers. 6. Now Jacob's well was there, &c.
There is mention of this well in Gen. 49. 22. where Jacob foretells that Joseph should grow exceeding fruitful by this well, or at this place of Shechem. As it came to pass, Josh. 24. 1. 1 King. 12. 1. &c. Joseph is a fruitful bough, or a son of fruitfulness, beside the well: which words are not only to be taken figuratively, as resembling Joseph for fruitfulness, to a tree planted besides a well, which was near moisture and watering, but they are to be understood even properly and literally, for the very place of this well, where Joseph should be chiefly seated, and grow even to the dignity of a Kingdom. It was not only the tradition of the Samaritans, that this well was extant in Jacob's time, and that his family drank of it, but it was a real truth, as is asserted by the Evangelist, and both affirm it upon the warrant of that Text: Compare this story of Christ, with the woman of Samaria at the well of Sichar, with the story of Abraham's servant at the well of Haran, Gen. 24. Jacob at the same well, Gen. 29. and Moses at a well in Midian, Exod. 2.
§. For the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.
This is the speech of the Evangelist, not of the woman of Samaria, for it was needless for her to tell our Savior of the distance that the Jews and Samaritans kept one from another, which both the Nations knew well enough: but it was necessary that the Evangelist should relate so much to us, both that the woman's question, How is it that thou being a Jew askest water of me, might be the better understood, and also that the great work done by our Savior in the conversion of so many Samaritans, might be set out the more glorious, by how much the hatred between the two Nations was the greater; This dissention and fewd betwixt them did proceed from several causes and occasions.
1. There had been a continual enmity between the Inhabitants of the two Countries Judea and Samaria even while they were both of the seed of Israel, from the time of the ten Tribes revolt under Jeroboam, to their captivity by Shalmanezer, as is copiously set out in the book of Kings and Chronicles.
2. When the ten Tribes were captived out of their land, the King of Assyria planted Samaria with men of divers Nations and divers Idolatries, 1 King. 17. 24. &c. And sent among them some of the Priests of the ten Tribes to instruct them in Religion, 1 King. 17. 28. Jos. Ant. lib. 9. cap. 14. And so the Country fell into an hotch-potch of Religion, in some things like the Jewish, in many things exceeding Heathenish. And the people sometime shown friendship to the Jews, sometimes enmity, sometimes claiming kindred of them when they saw them in prosperity, pretending to have been descended from Joseph but sometimes again scorning and despising them when they saw them brought to any ebb or in calamity. Jos. Ant. l. 9. c. 14. & lib. 12. cap. 7.
3. When the Tribes of Judah and Benjamin were brought to the lowest ebb, and captived out of their own land into Babel, then did these Samaritans get elbow-room and insolency against them, against their coming to their own land again. These were the main opposers and hinderers of the building of the Temple, Ezra 4. called the Adversaries of Judah and Benjamin, verse. 1. and the people of the land, verse. 4. yet pretending to seek God, and to sacrifice as well as the Jews, verse. 2. &c.
Here the fewd and hatred began to be more apparent, and as the Samaritans were thus bitter to the Jews, so the Jews to their power were not behind hand with the Samaritans. For (if we may believe their own Authors) Ezra, Zerubbabel and Joshua gathered all the Congregation into the Temple, and brought in three hundred Priests, and three hundred books of the Law, and three hundred Infants, and they blew Trumpets, and the Levites sung and chanted, and cursed, excommunicated, and separated the Samaritans by the secret Name of God, and by the glorious writing of the Tables, and by the curse of the upper and lower house of Judgment; that no Israelite eat of anything that is a Samaritans: for he that doth, doth as if he eat swine's flesh: Nor that any Samaritan be proselyted to Israel, nor have any part in the Resurrection, as it is said, what have you to do with us to build the house of the Lord our God? Nor have you any part or right or memorial in Jerusalem. And they wrote out and sent this curse to all Israel in Babel, and they added thereto curse upon curse, and the King fixed a curse everlasting to them as it is said, And God that hath caused his name to dwell there, destroy all Kings and people that shall put to their hands to alter it. Haec R. Tanchuma. fol. 17.
4. Hitherto the Samaritans, after the captivity of the ten Tribes, were Heathenish and no Jews among them save one or a few Priests to teach them the Law according to the ten Tribes usage of it, and as it seemeth by Ibn Ezra on Esth. 1. they had the book of Moses law among them, but in so wild a translation, that the first verse of it was read thus, In the beginning Ashima created heaven and earth. (What Ashima meaneth, see 2 King. 17. 30.) but from the times of Ezra and Nehemiah, exceeding many Jews began to be mingled among them, and became Samaritans: The main occasion was this: One of the sons of Jojada the son of Eliashib the High Priest, married the daughter of Sanballat the Horonite a chief man among the Samaritans: for which cause he was driven from the Priesthood by Nehemiah, Neh. 13. 28. Josephus nameth both the man and the woman, and relateth the full story to this purpose. Manasseh (saith he) the brother of Jaddua the High Priest had married Nicasso the daughter of Sanballat. Which thing the Elders of the Jews taking exceeding ill, as a violation of their Laws, and as an introduction to strange marriages, they urged that either he should put away his wife, or that he should be put away from the Priesthood: Yea and Jaddua his brother drave him away from the Altar that he should not Sacrifice. Whereupon Manasseh addressing himself to his Father in Law Sanballat, tells him, that it was true indeed that he loved his daughter Nicasso most dearly, but yet would not lose his function for her sake, it being hereditary to him by descent, and honorable among his Nation. To this Sanballat replied, that he could devise such a course, as that he should not only enjoy his Priesthood still, but also obtain an High Priesthood and be made a primate and metropolitan of a whole Country: on condition that he would keep his daughter still and not put her away: For he would build a Temple on mount Gerizim over Shechem, like the Temple at Jerusalem, and this by the consent of Darius who was now Monarch of the Persian Empire. Manasseh embraced such hopes and promises, and abode with his Father in Law, thinking to obtain an High Priesthood from the King. And whereas many of the Priests and people at Jerusalem were intricated in the like marriages, they fell away to Manasseh, and Sanballat, provided them lands, houses and subsistence. But Darius the King being overthrown by Alexander the Great, Sanballat revolted to Alexander and did him homage, and submitted both himself and his Dominion unto him: and having now gotten an opportunity, he made his Petition to him and obtained it of building this his Temple. And that that helped him in this his request was, that Jaddua the High Priest at Jerusalem had incurred Alexanders displeasure for denying him help and assistance at the siege of Tyrus. Sanballat pleaded that he had a son in Law named Manasseh brother to Jaddua, to whom many of the Jews were very well affected and followed after him, and might he but have liberty to build a Temple on mount Gerizim, it would be a great weakening of Jaddua, for by that means the people would have a fair invitation to revolt from him: Alexander easily condescended to his request: and so he fell on to build his Temple with might and main. When it was finished it caused a great Apostasy at Jerusalem, for very many that were accused and indicted for eating of forbidden meats, for violating the Sabbath or for other crimes, fled away from Jerusalem to Shechem and to mount Gerizim, and that became as a common Sanctuary for offenders. To this purpose Josephus: To which it may not be impertinent to add the relation of R. Abrah Zaccuth about this matter. When Alexander the Great, saith he, went from Jerusalem, Sanballat the Horonite went forth to him (with some Israelites and some of the sons of Joshua the High Priest, who had made marriages with the Samaritans, and whom Ezra and Nehemiah had driven from the house of the Lord) and he desired of Alexander that the Priests his sons in law might build a Temple in mount Gerizim: and the King commanded that it should be done, and so they built a Temple. Thus was Israel divided, half the people after Simeon the Just and Antigonus his scholar, and their society, following what they had received from the mouth of Ezra and the Prophets. And the other half after Sanballat and his sons in Law, and they offered burnt offerings and sacrificed out from the house of the Lord, and made ordinances of their own invention: And Manasseh the son in Law of Sanballat, the son of Joshua the son of Jozedek the High Priest, was Priest in this Temple. And then Sadoc and Baithus also became famous, being the Scholars of Antigonus, and this was the beginning of Heresy: for they went in the time of Antigonus their Master to the Temple of mount Gerizim, and became chief men there. And that Temple stood about two hundred years. It was built forty years after the building of the second Temple, Juchasin. fol. 14. col. 2.
And thus was Temple set up against Temple, High Priest against High Priest, and Worship against Worship, and now are the two Nations grown into a greater detestation one of another than ever they were before. And many of the Jewish Nation became Samaritans, enemies to their own Country, kindred and Religion: And it became a common quaere and quarrel among them, whether was the truer Religion, and whether the truer Temple, that at Jerusalem, or that one Gerizim, as the woman questioneth in this Chapter, verse. 20. and Josephus saith, the Jews and Samaritans mutined upon this dispute in Egypt, Antiq. lib. 12. cap. 1. & lib. 13. cap. 6. And this difference and heart-burning of the Nations in regard of Religion brake out often into open hostility and acts of violence, as the same Josephus giveth examples, Antiq. l. 12. c. 3. & l. 18. c. 3. & l. 20. c. 5. &c.
The Jews in their writings do commonly call the Samaritans 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cutheans: from Cutha a Country and River of Persia, 2 King. 17. 24. Joseph. Ant. l. 11. c. 4. & l. 9. c. 14. but since Christianity came into glory, their hatred to Christians being equal to what it was towards the Samaritans, they so commonly call Christians by the same name, that it is hard in many places to judge when they speak of Samaritans and when of Christians. Three things (saith the Talmud) make a man transgress against the mind of himself and against the mind of his Creator, and those are an evil spirit, the Cutheans, and the rules of poverty. Erulhin cap. 4. And again, They say not Amen after a Cuthean that giveth thanks. Beracoth. c. 8. &c. From these Samaritans Elias Levita conceiveth that the wandering generation of Gipses came. Vid. Tishbi. in voice. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
Vers. 10. If thou knowest the gift of God.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The article prefixed (saith Beza) showeth that he speaketh of some excellent gift, and that is of himself whom the Father offered now unto the woman. And indeed the latter clause expoundeth the former unto this sense, and showeth that by this gift of God, Christ is to be understood not only as given to the world, Joh. 3. 16. (for this the Samaritan woman knew well enough that the Messias was to come a Redeemer, verse. 25.) but as now come and offering himself unto her: and this our Savior calleth the gift of God in such a sense as he saith to his Disciples, To you it is given, but to others it is not given, Mar. 13. 11. For though Christ were the goodness of God to all his people, as Hos. 3. 5. yet was it a peculiar gift of God to some particular ones to see and hear Christ work miracles, and preach for their conversion, as Luke 10. 23, 24.
§. Thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.
The Vulgar Latin puts a forsitan to it, Perhaps thou wouldest have asked: leaving it as doubtful whether the woman would have begged grace from Christ if she had known him for the Messiah: Whereas Christ knew well enough what she would have done, and none that knoweth Christ can do less than beg this living water of him. Were it not that I observe the Author of the vulgar translation to render the particle Av by forsitan in other places, as Chap. 5. 46. & 8. 19. I should have thought that he put a perhaps upon it because of the carnal apprehensions that the Nations, both Jews and Samaritans, had about the coming and Kingdom of the Messias, but I shall not trouble myself and the Reader about the searching of his thoughts. Christ knew the woman's, and if she had but known him (how ever it might be a pertinent inquiry how the generality of the Nation would have entertained Christ if they had known him, and what they would have asked of him, because of their earthly thoughts of his Kingdom, and because of their high thoughts of their own legal performances) he himself saw, that she would have asked grace from him. I ask of thee, if thou knewest thou wouldest ask of me: as John the Baptist that knew him came on in such a kind of tenor, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? Thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee, as Mark 7. 7, 8.
That by the living water here spoken of, is meant the Spirit of Grace, is apparent in verse. 14. and past denial, and therefore I cannot think that Cyprian did give it as the very meaning of this place, but that he meant it allusively only, when he saith that this living water is baptism, and that because baptism once received is not to be reiterated, therefore it is said, that whosoever drinketh of this water shall never thirst. Lib. 1. Epist. 3.
The Spirit in Scripture is compared to fire and water, two the greatest purifiers, and refreshers: for water purifieth from filth, fire from dross, water refresheth against heat, fire against cold, and how the work of the spirit of Grace is suitable to these, needeth not to spend time to demonstrate.
Vers. 14. But whosoever shall drink of this water that I shall give him shall never thirst.
It is made a great scruple by Expositors and that deservedly, how he that hath received grace may be said never to thirst for it more: Since the more grace, the more desire of grace still: and various answers are given to the doubt, which I shall omit: To me it seemeth needful, that by thirsting here is not to be understood barely desirousness of drink, but fainting and failing for thirst: and so the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is used by the Syriac here for thirsting, is used by the Chaldee Paraphrast, Lam. 2. 19. for fainting: for whereas the Hebrew text hath it, lift up thy hands toward him for the life of thy young children, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that faint for hunger, the Chaldee hath rendered it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that thirst for hunger: And so Isaiah 48. 21. They thirsted not when he led them through the deserts (which the Chaldee rendereth, He suffered them not to thirst ) is so to be understood, of not perishing for thirst: or not languishing for it: for that they thirsted in the wilderness and cried out for water, it is related more than once.
In the verse before, our Savior said, He that drinketh of this water, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may thirst again: but in this verse he useth not the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Again, (for he that is watered with grace doth thirst for the same water of grace again and again) but he saith whosoever shall drink of this water which I shall give him, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , he shall never so thirst, as to fail or perish by it, but this water shall preserve him to eternal life. Compare Isaiah 41. 17.
Vers. 15. The woman saith, Sir give me of this water, &c.
The woman doth now fall from questioning, as verse. 11, 12. to plain mocking and derision, for this can be construed no other in her; I know these words of hers, are taken by divers to intimate her inclining to, and embracing this doctrine of Christ though she knew not well how to understand it: and they show, say some, Simplicitatem credendi, her simplicity or sincerity of believing, who so soon doubted not to ask for this so excellent water. But be it considered, 1. That as yet she took Christ but for an ordinary man, until he hath told her of her secret villainies, and then she takes him for a Prophet, verse. 19. And 2. that taking him for an ordinary man, she talks with him as a Samaritan housewife would do with a common Jew, between whom there was so deadly a scorn and fewd. 3. The thing that Christ spake of, of giving water, after which the party that had it should never thirst, were things so strange, and would seem so ridiculous to any Samaritan, nay to any flesh and blood that knew no more of him than as yet she did, (those words proceeding from so mean a man as he seemed to be) that her words in reply thereunto, Sir give me of this water, &c. can be no other but a jeer and scorn of what he had spoken. And her calling him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or Sir, doth no whit take off this construction, since that was but a word of ordinary compellation: or if she used it in a higher sense, she used it but in the higher scorn.
Vers. 17. I have no husband.
The reason why Christ bids her call her husband, may be supposed to be, partly that he might check and stop her jeering, by minding her of her own faults, and chiefly that he might show her that he was another kind of person, then she judged of him, by telling her of such things as she knew he could not tell her but divinely.
Now her denial that she had any husband, is ascribed by some to her modesty, to conceal her adultery: by others to this, because she knew not what Christ would do with her husband: but till it can be shown, why a Samaritan quean should talk with any reverence or civility, with an ordinary Jew (for she took Christ for no other as yet) especially when he spake to her of such unlikely things as he did, it is the most proper and undisputable interpretation of her words, I have no husband, to take them for a scoffing and regardless answer to a question and to a person that she was careless whether she gave any any answer to or no.
Vers. 18. He whom thou now hast is not thine husband.
It seemeth by the numerousness of her former husbands, and by the same expression used concerning them and this (thou hast had five and this that thou hast ) that she was a divorced woman, and now lived in an adulterous marriage: and it may be, married to him, who had adulterated her in her former husbands days: But be it either thus, or that she lived in adultery out of wedlock, her conscience is convinced of the truth of the thing that Christ speaketh, and withal she findeth that he had told her that which a mere stranger could not tell her but by the spirit of Prophecy, and therefore she owns him for a Prophet.
Vers. 20. Our Fathers worshipped in this Mount.
Conceiving him to be a Prophet, she suddenly desireth to hear what he will determine upon that great dispute, that was between the Jews and the Samaritans continually, namely whether was the truer and righter place of worship, Jerusalem or Mount Gerizim.
She called Jacob, Our Father Jacob, ver. 12. for so the Samaritans would be a kin to the Jews when they thought good; but the Fathers she speaks of here, were as far from the Religion and Worship that Jacob used, as Jacob was from the Religion of Hamor and Shechem. Josephus tells one story, that gives this woman but little cause to boast of her Fathers worshipping in that Mount, and that is this, That when Antiochus Epiphanes did so heavily oppress the Jews and persecute their Religion, these Samaritans thinking that their Religion also looked somewhat like that of the Jews, and that Antiochus might happily suspect that they and the Jews, and both their Religions were something a kin, and so they suffer as well as the other: they fairly send to Antiochus, and betime disclaim any such kindred: And whereas indeed they could not deny, but they had a Temple, they besought him that it might be dedicated to the Grecian Jupiter and called by his name, and so by the Kings command it was, Antiq. lib. 12. cap. 7. Here was worshipping in that Mount with a witness and much to be bragd of: but see the impudence of Heretics, when such a Temple shall compare with the Temple at Jerusalem.
Abraham Zaccuth saith, This Temple of Gerizim was destroyed by Jochanan the son of Simeon the son of Mattathias, and the Heretics slain. Juchas. fol. 14.
Vers. 21. Woman believe me, The Hour cometh, &c.
As she owned him for a Prophet, so he challengeth to be believed of her as a Prophet, and as a Prophet he foretells her of what was now ready to come to pass: namely, that Ceremonious Worship should cease, and be no more confined to particular place or Nation. That there should be no Sacrifice at Jerusalem, no Image at Samaria, no Ephod at Jerusalem, no Teraphim at Samaria, as Hos. 3. 4. but that those places and that manner of worship should fail and be abolished. And so he answers her question in the first place, to this purpose that it was needless for her or any other to trouble themselves about that dispute whether Jerusalem or Gerizim were the more eminent place of Worship, for the time was just now in coming, when neither the one, nor the other should be the place of worship at all. And then he determines the question indeed, that Jerusalem had ever been and was at that present the right place of worship, but Gerizim a Temple of error and usurpation: and he proves his determination by this reason, We know what we worship, &c.
Vers. 23. The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth.
In the term, The true worshippers, he looketh at the woman's question, and the two Nations controversy. They tugged for it, and she inquires about it, whether of the people had the true worship amongst them: why, saith Christ, ere long there shall be no worship at all either among the one or the other: And the time is now come that he that will be taken for a true worshipper, must neither worship as the Jews do, ceremoneously, but in spirit, nor as the Samaritans do, erroneously, but in truth. Thus may we very well divide the two words Spirit and truth, to serve these two purposes, as thus to answer about the worship of either Nation: the one whereof worshipped God altogether in external Rites and Ceremonies, and the other worshipped they knew not what and they knew not how. But generally the word Spirit and truth, are taken by Expositors to signify but one and the same thing, and stand in opposition only to the carnal Rites and shadowy types in which their whole Worship in a manner did consist.
His using of the term Father for God, is not so much in reference to the other persons in the Trinity, or because the woman was acquainted with that mystery, but because the Jews, and it is like the Samaritans also used the word very commonly in their prayers and speeches, as, Our Father which art in Heaven do to us as thou hast promised by the Prophet. And, Let the prayers and requests of all the House of Israel be accepted before their Father which is in Heaven, &c. Maym. in Tephilloth.
Vers. 24. God is a Spirit, and they that worship him, &c.
Here ariseth a question upon the very first reading of the verse, (the words Spirit and truth being interpreted, as is mentioned immediately before) and that is, why did God so punctually ordain, and so long continue a Typical and Ceremonious Worship, if those that worship him must worship in spirit and truth? Answer, That very worship was for this end and purpose, that men should learn to worship God in spirit and truth. For all these rites and types were but doctrines of the way of Salvation through Christ till Christ came: and the very use of them was to this end, that out of them men should spel this spiritual and true worship, namely to worship God in Christ, and to look after his benefits for their salvation which those rites doctrinally held unto them: and which lesson the true worshippers or believers did attain unto.
Vers. 25. I know that Messiah cometh, &c. he will teach us all things.
The Samaritans had learned from the Jews to expect Messias; and how the Jews expected this to be the time of his coming, we have shown before, and it may be the woman speaketh this as meaning, that she looked for Messias to come shortly, which occasioned Christ's answer, I am he, as taking at her words in that sense, Thou sayest Messias will come shortly and resolve all things, I tell thee Messias is come already, and I am he. Now her referring the resolution of this doubt to Messias his coming, it showeth she did not thoroughly digest and entertain Christ's answer to her question, although she took upon her to acknowledge him for a Prophet. She had no mind the thing should be so as he had resolved, and therefore she had no mind to believe it. How Christ was expected as the great teacher, we shall observe afterward.
Vers. 29. A man which hath told me all things that ever I did.
The Disciples having now bought all things that they would have for dinner, (for it was now dinner time,) return to the well to their Master, and upon their return, Christ's discourse and the woman's is broken off, and she slips a way into the City, and bids come see a man that hath told me all things that ever I did: But Christ did not so, for he told her only of one particular or two, about her husbands: but besides that the word All in Scripture is not always stretched to the utmost extent of its signification, he had told her so much that she concludes that he that could tell her that, could have told her also all things else: such expressions as these in earnest and pathetical narrations are not strange.
Vers. 35. Say ye not there are yet four months, &c.
The coherence and connection of this verse with those before, which is the first thing to be looked after in it, lieth thus: The Disciples had been in the City and bought some meat, and when they had set it ready they invite him to dine: He answers, No; he hath other meat to feed upon than they are aware of, and that was to do the will of him that sent him, and to finish his work: And what work was that? Why, the very work that he had been just now about, preaching the Gospel and converting a soul, and which work he knew was increasing upon him by the coming of the Samaritans to hear him, whom either he now saw coming in flocks towards him, or knew they would come: In these words therefore he answers his Disciples to this purpose: You would have me to eat, but I have somewhat else to do which is meat to me, which is to finish my Fathers work in preaching the Gospel: for look you yonder: whereas ye say it is four months to harvest, see what a Gospel harvest is coming yonder, what a multitude of people is yonder coming to hear me, ready for the harvest: therefore it is not a time to talk of eating of meat that perisheth, but to fall to this harvest work, which is my meat in doing the will of him that sent me.
The harvest of the Jews began at the Passover: for on the second day of the Passover the Law enjoined them to bring a sheaf of the first fruits of their harvest and wave it before the Lord: and from that day they counted seven weeks to Pentecost: See Levite. 23. 10. 15. Four months therefore before the Passover (which was the fourteenth day of the first month) falls to be towards the latter end of our November, or thereabout; as is easily cast by any. This therefore helps to set the clock of the time reasonable well, both for the reckoning of what times are past, and for the better fixing of the next Passover that is to come. As, 1. It shows about what time Johns imprisonment befell, and how long he preached: namely, from Passover was twelvemonth to this November, a year and a half and a month and some days above: for it is like that Christ stayed not long in Judea after Johns imprisoning. 2. It shows that Christ had spent some eight months in Judea from the Passover hitherto and had in this time converted abundance of people to his doctrine. 3. It will help to clear that the feast of the Jews spoken of in the next Chapter, is the next Passover that was to come, as we shall observe when we come there.
In the former part of the words, Say ye not, There are four months and then cometh harvest? He speaketh literally of their harvest of corn: but in the latter the fields are already white to harvest, he speaketh parabolically or spiritually, of the multitudes of people both among Jews and Gentiles, that were ready to be reaped and gathered by the Gospel: And when he saith, lift up your eyes and look on the fields, he seemeth to point them to the multitude of Samaritans that were now in sight coming toward him. That passage in the Prophet Hosea Chap. 2. 20, 21, 22, 23. speaketh to such another divine and spiritual sense and purpose. I will hear the heavens, and they shall hear the earth, And the earth shall hear the corn and the wine and the oil, and they shall hear Jezreel (the Lord's seedness) And I will sow her to me in the earth, &c. And the like in Amos 9. 13, 14. Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, &c.
Vers. 36. And he that reapeth, &c.
The Prophets and the holy Teachers under the Old Testament sowed the Word and Doctrine of Salvation which ripened to the harvest of the Gospel. Not but that they like good laborers reaped the fruits of their labors in gathering a harvest of souls in their several generations by the power of their Ministry, but in this passage our Savior aimeth not only at the Disciples converting of souls as they had done, but also at some transcendency of theirs in this ministration above those that had gone before them, which may be observed in these particulars of advantage.
1. The Prophets and the teachers of the way of Salvation under the Law, may be considered in a twofold relation: either in reference to the great pains they took in their ministry and the fruit they had of it in conversion of souls, or in reference to the doctrine of Salvation which they left behind them, planted in the Nation by their pains and ministry, to succeeding generations. To this latter it is that our Savior referreth when he saith, that they were to enter into other men's labors: meaning that whereas the clearness of the doctrine of Salvation had been growing in the Nation, from time to time, by the pains and sowing of the holy Prophets in their several ages, they now came to preach upon this advantage, that they had all these, holy men's foundations to build upon, and to top up the clearness of that doctrine which they had been building up through all the time of the Old Testament. Nay we may also take John Baptist and Christ himself in the number of these seedsmen, that sowed the seed of that doctrine in more plentifulness and clearness than all had done before, and even into their labors must the Disciples in their ministry enter, having so great a preparation made, and so great a foundation laid as they two had made, for them to enter upon and to begin their work.
2. The Prophets and Teachers under the Law had raised the thoughts of the people to an expectation of Messias his coming about this very time, as hath been observed before, and so had even ripened them to the full, for the ministry of the Apostles, when they should come to teach that Christ was come, and that he had done and suffered whatsoever was written of him: And this very thing among others was a singular and eminent whiteness of this field of the Jewish Nation to harvest, that they looked every day when the Messias should appear: And observe how soon the woman's words take in Samaria, Is not this the Christ, so as not only the Samaritans flock out to him, but that upon her very words they believe and upon a little converse they confess, We know that this is indeed the Christ the Savior of the world, verse. 42. And this, because their expectation was full ripe, of the Messias his present coming.
3. Now as for the ripeness of the Gentiles field, for the Gospel harvest, it consisted not so much in any such doctrine of Salvation as had been sowed among them, or in such expectation of Christ's coming (though the Jews now dispersed through all the world, might have a little acquainted them with such matters more than had been published among them in ancient times) as it did in the ripening of the love of the Lord, and his turning towards the Nations in mercy whom he had for so many years cast off and despised. And according to the ripening of that love the Lord had disposed certain providences which did somewhat help toward the ripening of the world unto such a purpose: as in that the Scriptures were now turned into the Greek Tongue and were among the Heathens, that the Greek Tongue in which the New Testament was to be written, was now the most commonly spoken language of all other, and that the Jews of those Tribes that had retained the true Religion when the ten fell away, namely Judah and Benjamin, were by several means planted and sowed abroad in all Countries of the world, and with them the Scriptures.
Our Savior therefore upon the Samaritans coming out unanimously to him through the woman's relation concerning him, (to whom he had imparted that he was the Messias for that very purpose) taketh occasion to discourse of the ripeness of the world for the harvest of the Gospel, and animateth his Disciples to that work by several arguments: as
- 1. That they shall receive the reward and fruit of their labors to eternal life.
- 2. That they shall not only receive this fruit, but they shall receive it in the eminentest and highest degree, with the glorious Patriarchs and Prophets who had labored in sowing, they and these reapers should rejoice together.
- 3. That they should enter into other men's labors, (as Israel did at their entrance into the land of Canaan; into houses they built not, and vineyards they planted not, &c.) And that that common Proverb, which proveth to be true upon various occurrences, one soweth and another reapeth, should prove true to them to their much comfort and encouragement.
Vers. 42. This is indeed Christ the Savior of the world.
Here is a confession of Faith higher by some degree than the Jews common Creed and belief concerning the Messias: for they held him only for a Savior of the Jewish Nation and Redeemer of that people, but the rest of the world they looked not after nor regarded: and so we may see how deeply and cordially these Samaritans had drunk in and digested the water of life which Christ had administered unto them, as to acknowledge him in his proper character: The Samaritans indeed were Gentiles, however they pretended to Joseph for their Father, and so in their conversion may we look upon a beginning of the conversion of the Gentiles, the great field now white for the Gospel Harvest. In less than four years after this, this field of Samaria where Christ had now sowed such seed, the Enemy came and sowed damnable tears by Simon Magus, Acts 8. It may be that wretch took opportunity for the venting and speeding of his delusions there, by this, that he found the City acknowledging it for certain that the Messias had been among them: and he creeps in among them either as one of his Disciples, or else in affront and contradiction to Christ, as doing wonders by magic whereas we read not that Christ had done any miracles there at all.
Vers. 44. For Jesus himself testified, that a Prophet had no honor in his own Country.
The reason alleged seemeth somewhat strange at the first sight: that Jesus should go into Galilee his own Country, because he testified that a Prophet hath no honor in his own Country. But by the words his own Country is not to be understood Galilee at large, but his own Town Nazareth the place of his education. And so is the expression plainly construed, Luke 4. 23. His voyage therefore was into the other parts of Galilee, avoiding his own home Nazareth, because he foresaw his entertainment would not be honorable and respective there.
Vers. 45. For they also went unto the Feast.
It was very pertinent for the Evangelist, to clear this matter about the Galileans going up to Jerusalem to the Festivals, because there were several things that might give occasion to think that they came not there. As 1. the distance of place, Galilee being so far from Jerusalem, as that the whole Kingdom of Samaria lay between, and the way exceeding full of danger. 2. Their difference in manners and customs in exceeding many things from the Jews that dwelt in Judea: of which the Talmudists do give exceeding many instances. In Judea they did work on the Passover Eve: in Galilee they did not. Pesachin per. 4. In Judea they searched the Bridegroom and the Bride three days before their bedding: in Galilee they did not. In Judea they had two Paranimphi, one of the Bridegrooms friends, and another of the Brides: in Galilee they had not so. In Judea the Paranymphi lay in the same room where the Bridegroom and Bride lay, in Galilee they did not, &c. Tosaphta ad Cetuboth per, 1. 3. Their difference in language, as Mark 26. 73. Mark 14. 70. For 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Jews of Judea spake a pure language in comparison of the Jews of Galilee. Erubhin. fol. 53.
Vers. 46. A certain Nobleman.
It is hard in the variety of constructions, that are given of the Greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to tell what this man was that was so titled: The Vulgar Latin and Erasmus render it Regulus, A little King: The Syriac 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 one of the Kings servants: Which the Arabic followed in sense, though not in words. The Italian hath it Signore, A great man or of high degree: Nonnus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , A man of the Kings, which is the very epithet that is used by the Arabic, and several other expositions of it are given, upon which I shall not insist.
Now for conjecturing who this man was, and what this title of his doth import I shall first produce a passage out of Juchasin fol. 19. which is to this purpose, Hillel and Shammai, received the traditional Law from Shamajah and Abtalion. At first it was Hillel and Menahem, but Menahem went away to the service of the King (Herod) with fours • ore men gallantly clothed, as it is related in Hagigah. And this matter is also mentioned by Josephus ben Gorion: that Menahem was a great wise man like a Prophet, that he uttered divers predictions and foretold Herod (the great) when he was young that he should be King. Herod also did much honor old Hillel, for these men were well contented that he was King. Old Shammai also foretold that Herod should reign: for when Herod came upon a trial before the Sanhedrin for killing of a man, they respected his person: but Shammai told that he should be King and should kill them. Yet Herod laid no hands on Hillel, Shammai, Menahem, and their associates, but honored them.
These men that sided with Herod, and helped to promote and support his reign, though he were a stranger and of the seed of Edom, I conceive to be those that are called Herodians in the Gospel, Mark 3. 6. Matth. 22. 16. men of as eminent learning and authority as any other in the Nation, but swayed by Courtship to this compliance. Of this number I cannot but conceive this man to have been, that we have in hand, who came to Christ for the healing of his Son: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , A Royalist, who had sided and been assistant to old Herod, the Father of him which was now Tetrarch, and one of that Herodian faction, to raise and establish him in the Kingdom; and now a follower of the son as he had been of the Father. Shall I guess at his name? I should as soon think this man was Chuza, Herod's Steward, mentioned in Luke 8. 3. as any other that can be named: unless it be Manaen or Manahem, Acts 13. 1. who was educated together with Herod the Tetrarch, being it may be, the son of that Menahem spoken of before, who first departed to Herod's party. But be the man by name whosoever he will, we cannot but observe this thing about the occurrence that doth here concern him, That though Herod himself, had been so harsh and cruel to John the Baptist but a little before as to put him in prison; yet had the Lord so provided for the cherishing of the Gospel in Christ's ministry, that even of Herod's household and retinue, there are some that hearken and are converted to it: The ministry of John did not want its fruits even in the Court: Though Herod himself was a dallying auditor, and did some things after the preaching of John, which he thought might ingratiate him the more with the people, but left other things undone, yet were there belonging to his Court that did really and sincerely receive the Gospel and obey it.
Reason of the Order.
ABOUT the proper time, place, and order of this story of Christ and the Samaritan woman, there is some difficulty and diversity of opinion: None questioning whether it do naturally follow the story of the third Chapter: but some doubting whether this journey of our Savior into Galilee was after Johns imprisonment, yea or no: but conceiving it rather to have been before, and supposing that this voyage is not the same with that in Matth. 4. 12. Mark 1. 14. (where it is said that when Jesus heard that John was cast into prison he departed into Galilee ) but it was before that, and before John was committed unto prison. Ammonius among the Ancients appeareth to be of this opinion, and Grotius among the modern, to mention no more. But Augustine, Jansen, Alapide, Chemnitz, and divers others do rank this story and voyage after Johns shutting up, and that immediately after (old Tatianus only hath placed it a good while after,) and so have undoubtingly made this journey into Galilee, and that in Mat. 4. 12. but one and the same. And indeed if the story, and time of it be precisely weighed, it will not only be clear, that this journey into Galilee is the very same mentioned by Matthew and Mark in the places cited, but it will also give some illustration to that story in them, and show the occasion and proceeding of that his journey.
For, 1. Whereas those two Evangelists have laid Christ's journey into Galilee upon Johns imprisonment the very next thing to the story of his Temptation, John hath told us of a journey thither, betwixt the temptation and Johns commitment, and that Christ continued there in Galilee some space: Now to imagine another journey thither again, and that a twelvemonth after the former, and this also before John be imprisoned, will make that place in Matthew and Mark exceeding hard, if not impossible, to be understood. 2. If this voyage in John and that in them be not the same, and both after Johns imprisonment, in what time and place will it be possible to bring that story in those two Evangelists into being? Let it be supposed, as some will have it, that John was yet abroad and not yet imprisoned when Jesus undertaketh this journey into Galilee: well: this Chapter bringeth him to Galilee and the next, to Jerusalem again: and then when, and where, and how shall we take in Johns imprisonment after? It is true that there are, that have found a place to thrust it in, but we will not spend time in that dispute, let but the present section and the subsequent till the next Passover be seriously observed, and I suppose there will be evidence sufficient by their very contexture to clear this order.
2. The words of John that relate the occasion of Christ's journey into Galilee, compared with the words of Matthew and Mark, speak but the very same thing, though the terms and expressions do somewhat differ. Those two Evangelists say, the one of them, That when John was put in prison, the other, That when Jesus heard he was put in prison, he departed into Galilee: And what can the words of John (when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard, &c. he departed into Galilee ) mean else but the same occasion? For what matter was it, though the Pharisees heard of the multitude of Christ's Disciples never so much? Why surely because he had heard, that John had suffered because of the multitude of his Disciples, and was shut up in prison: and so might he himself be in danger, if he stayed in Judea, to be quarrelled by the Pharisees for the same business. And let it be but considered why John and the numerousness of his Disciples should be mentioned here, but that they are of concernment, and have some relation to this story.
So that these things being well weighed together, the order and texture of the story appeareth to be natural and genuine as we have laid it.
Only one scruple and objection may lie in the way about it, and that is this: why Christ should go into Galilee even into Herod's mouth, for there he resided, if Herod had but newly imprisoned John, this was to flee from one danger into another, from an uncertain danger from the Pharisees who had never wronged John, to a certain danger by Herod who had newly imprisoned him: Answer, Herod's quarrel against the Baptist was not so much in regard of his doctrine, as merely a personal quarrel about Herodias, and as was mentioned before, for fear of innovation. It is said that Herod heard John gladly, and did many things according to his doctrine, Mark 6. 20. and therefore there was no danger of preaching the Gospel never so near Herod, if the matter of Herodias be not meddled withal, and many Disciples be not gathered; and what our Savior should do in those particulars, his Divine Wisdom needed no instructor to inform him: And as for the danger of being suspected of innovation by gathering Disciples as John was, his dispersing his Disciples and his flitting from place to place, would make their number the less sensible, whereas Johns abode in one place, caused all his Disciples to resort unto him, and so their multitude was the more visible. When our Savior sees his time, he collects his Disciples and is followed by the multitudes, and let Herod the Fox frown and fret and plot and spare not.
Harmony and Explanation.
THE subject of the story in the first part of this Section, is the first conversion of any, that were aliens to the Congregation of Israel, by the preaching of Christ, unto the Gospel. And in this story, that of the Prophet Hosea, seemeth to be fulfilled to the very letter, Chap. 2. 15. I will give the valley of Achor for a door of hope. For howsoever the maps of Canaan do most of them lay the valley of Achor and Shechem at a very great distance, yet if it be observed in Josh. 7. & 8. how near to the hills of blessing and cursing (whereof Gerizim that lay over Shechem was one) the stoning of Achan was, as the current of the Text there doth carry it, and how Josephus speaketh of the great valley by Samaria, Ant. lib. 20. cap. 5. it will not seem improbable that the valley of Achor ran along between Gerizim and Ebal, and by the City of Shechem. And when our Savior first beginneth to preach to strangers and to convert them, it is in this very valley, and so he makes it a door of hope of conversion of the Gentiles, whereas it had been a door of despair and offense to Israel at their first entrance into the land.
The Style and tenor of this Section, so far as it relates the story of Christ's being among the Samaritans, is so very agreeable to the tenor of the Prophecy of Hosea, that it seemeth to speak to that all along: and our Savior to an adulterous woman here, openeth many things, that that parabolical husband of an adulterous wife had spoken there. Compare but these places amongst others.
| Hos • a | John Chap. 4. |
| Chap. 1. ver. 2. | Vers. 18. |
| Chap. 3. ver. 1 | |
| Chap. 2. ver. 21, 22, 23. | Vers. 35, 36, 37. |
| Chap. 3. ver. 4. | Vers. 21. |
| Chap. 3. ver. 5. | Vers. 10. |
| Chap. 13. v. 15. | Vers. 14. |
This very place of Shechem, was the place where the very first Proselytes came in, that ever came into the Church of Israel, Gen. 34. 29. & 35. 2, and in this story it is the first place proselyted under the Gospel.
Vers. 4. And he must needs go through Samaria.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (saith Josephus ) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . It was the custom of the Galileans as they went to Jerusalem to the Festivals, to go through the country of the Samaritans. Antiq. lib. 20. cap. 5. And he that would go soonest thither must go that way, and it is three days journey that way from Galilee to Jerusalem. Idem, in vita sua. Josephus helpeth us here how to understand the word Samaria in this story in hand, namely for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Country of the Samaritans, and not any City of that name, for there was no City called Samaria at this time: for Shechem was now the chief City of the Samaritans, as the same Josephus witnesseth, Antiq. lib. 11. cap. 8. This Country of Samaritans lay between Judea and Galilee, and he that would go from the one to the other must pass through that, see Luke 9. 51, 52. although there was so great a fewd between the Jews and Samaritans, as we shall see by and by. This way it seems grew dangerous at the last and near unpassable either because of the enmity mentioned, or by reason of the many thieves and robbers wherewithal the land of Canaan abounded towards the time of the destruction of Jerusalem: and by reason of the Roman Soldiers that were straggling abroad: For so Maimonides in Kiddush hodesh, witnesseth where speaking of the messengers that used to be sent abroad through the Country, to give notice of the fixing of the new Moons he tells how soon they might get to such a distance, unless there was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 war and rapine in the way 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as there was in the way between Judea and Galilee in the days of the wise men of the Mishneh, perch. 5.
Vers. 5. A City of Samaria called Sichar near the parcel of ground, &c.
The story, concerning the parcel of ground which Jacob gave to his son Joseph, is in Gen. 33. 19. & 48. 22. but there is difference betwixt this name used here and that mentioned there, and there is difference in the relation there between one place and another: There the place is called Shechem, here Sychar, there in one place, it is said that Jacob bought it, and in another, that he got it with the sword and bow. Shechem is a word of much like construction as Netser is in Esa. 11. 1. & Matth. 2. 23. for as that signifieth both the branch Christ, and the Town Nazareth where he should arise, so doth this, both a portion of ground, and the place, or situation, where it lay. I have given thee (saith Jacob to Joseph ) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shechem echad, above thy brethren, that is one portion, (as the Chaldee Paraphrast and other Jews render it) and that portion, the place or portion of Shechem, (as the Septuagint translate it,) of that City there is mention in Gen. 34. and in divers other places of the Scripture: and whether it took that name from Shechem the son of Hamor, that ravished Dinah, it is not much useful or material to look after, certainly it keepeth that name all along the Scripture but only in this place: for that Sychar here is the same place with Shechem, the circumstance added, that it was near the parcel of ground that Jacob gave his son Joseph, makes the matter past denial: It is a very general censure upon this word both by expositors that write upon this Chapter, and others that mention the word occasionally, that it is written wrong and corruptly, for it should be written and read Sychem: But 1. their very so saying doth show and argue that it is generally read Sychar in all copies, and are all corrupt? 2. It is hard to imagine, how any Scribe should so miswrite or misread, as to write 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 seeing there is so little affinity between the letters in the Greek: And 3. any scribe that was a Scripture man, could not easily so mistake, seeing there is so frequent mention of Shechem in the Bible, but of Sichar never. Therefore to me it is past all doubting, that the word is written and read in our copies exactly and to a letter, as it was written by the Evangelist himself: And it may be conceived that he wrote it, as it was sometimes (and it may be commonly) called among the Jews. The hatred and dissention between the Jews and Samaritans was exceeding bitter, as shall be shown anon, and it is no strange thing if the Jews used this as a nickname for the Samaritans chief City, to call it Sychar instead of Shechem. The people of the Kingdom of Samaria are called the Drunkards of Ephraim, Isaiah 28. 1. Woe to the Crown of pride, the drunkards of Ephraim: &c. Now the word Sychar importeth and signifieth Drunkenness, and it may very well be conceived, that seeing the Jews abhorred the Samaritans so much as they did, that they framed the name Sychem, into the drunken name Sychar, and in scorn called the metropolis of the Samaritans so, in the disdain and scorn that they had against them. So they called Beelzebub Beelzebul or the God of a dunghill for the greater detestation, and so the Holy Ghost calleth Achan, Acha • , 1 Chron. 2. 7. to hit him home for his troubling of Israel, Josh. 7. compare the changing of Sychem unto Sychar, with the changing of Achan into Achar, and why may we not apprehend this to be done purposely, and without mistakes of transcribers as well as that?
Now, as for the difference between the two Texts of Moses that spake of this portion, of Jacob's ground, the one saying that it was bought of the Hivite with money or lambs, and the other that it was won from the Amorite with his sword and bow, it is best reconciled by taking both places literally and in their proper sense, but to understand them of several times: At Jacob's first coming unto Shechem out of Padan Aram, he bought this piece of ground of the Hivite as it is storied Gen. 33. 19. whether for money or for lambs we shall not need to dispute in this place: But after the slaughter of the Shechemites, he was long and far distant from that place and made no use of it, it not being safe for him to reside there, his sons having caused him to stink to the Inhabitants of the lands, and God calling him away unto other places: Now what became of his land, and of the City Shechem which had been emptied of its Inhabitants, all this while of Jacob's absence? Certainly it is more proper and probable to hold, that the Inhabitants of the land would some of them usurp and seize upon those places, and that Jacob was put to recover them again by force of arms, than either to think that Jacob owneth the slaughter of Shechem by his sons, as his own act, or to understand, this portion of ground and Jacob's sword and bow allegorically as many do: Vid. Targ. Onkel. & Jerusalami, &c.
Vers. 6. Now Jacob's well was there, &c.
There is mention of this well in Gen. 49. 22. where Jacob foretells that Joseph should grow exceeding fruitful by this well, or at this place of Shechem. As it came to pass, Josh. 24. 1. 1 King. 12. 1. &c. Joseph is a fruitful bough, or a son of fruitfulness, beside the well: which words are not only to be taken figuratively, as resembling Joseph for fruitfulness, to a tree planted besides a well, which was near moisture and watering, but they are to be understood even properly and literally, for the very place of this well, where Joseph should be chiefly seated, and grow even to the dignity of a Kingdom. It was not only the tradition of the Samaritans, that this well was extant in Jacob's time, and that his family drank of it, but it was a real truth, as is asserted by the Evangelist, and both affirm it upon the warrant of that Text: Compare this story of Christ, with the woman of Samaria at the well of Sichar, with the story of Abraham's servant at the well of Haran, Gen. 24. Jacob at the same well, Gen. 29. and Moses at a well in Midian, Exod. 2.
§. For the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.
This is the speech of the Evangelist, not of the woman of Samaria, for it was needless for her to tell our Savior of the distance that the Jews and Samaritans kept one from another, which both the Nations knew well enough: but it was necessary that the Evangelist should relate so much to us, both that the woman's question, How is it that thou being a Jew askest water of me, might be the better understood, and also that the great work done by our Savior in the conversion of so many Samaritans, might be set out the more glorious, by how much the hatred between the two Nations was the greater; This dissention and fewd betwixt them did proceed from several causes and occasions.
1. There had been a continual enmity between the Inhabitants of the two Countries Judea and Samaria even while they were both of the seed of Israel, from the time of the ten Tribes revolt under Jeroboam, to their captivity by Shalmanezer, as is copiously set out in the book of Kings and Chronicles.
2. When the ten Tribes were captived out of their land, the King of Assyria planted Samaria with men of divers Nations and divers Idolatries, 1 King. 17. 24. &c. And sent among them some of the Priests of the ten Tribes to instruct them in Religion, 1 King. 17. 28. Jos. Ant. lib. 9. cap. 14. And so the Country fell into an hotch-potch of Religion, in some things like the Jewish, in many things exceeding Heathenish. And the people sometime shown friendship to the Jews, sometimes enmity, sometimes claiming kindred of them when they saw them in prosperity, pretending to have been descended from Joseph but sometimes again scorning and despising them when they saw them brought to any ebb or in calamity. Jos. Ant. l. 9. c. 14. & lib. 12. cap. 7.
3. When the Tribes of Judah and Benjamin were brought to the lowest ebb, and captived out of their own land into Babel, then did these Samaritans get elbow-room and insolency against them, against their coming to their own land again. These were the main opposers and hinderers of the building of the Temple, Ezra 4. called the Adversaries of Judah and Benjamin, verse. 1. and the people of the land, verse. 4. yet pretending to seek God, and to sacrifice as well as the Jews, verse. 2. &c.
Here the fewd and hatred began to be more apparent, and as the Samaritans were thus bitter to the Jews, so the Jews to their power were not behind hand with the Samaritans. For (if we may believe their own Authors) Ezra, Zerubbabel and Joshua gathered all the Congregation into the Temple, and brought in three hundred Priests, and three hundred books of the Law, and three hundred Infants, and they blew Trumpets, and the Levites sung and chanted, and cursed, excommunicated, and separated the Samaritans by the secret Name of God, and by the glorious writing of the Tables, and by the curse of the upper and lower house of Judgment; that no Israelite eat of anything that is a Samaritans: for he that doth, doth as if he eat swine's flesh: Nor that any Samaritan be proselyted to Israel, nor have any part in the Resurrection, as it is said, what have you to do with us to build the house of the Lord our God? Nor have you any part or right or memorial in Jerusalem. And they wrote out and sent this curse to all Israel in Babel, and they added thereto curse upon curse, and the King fixed a curse everlasting to them as it is said, And God that hath caused his name to dwell there, destroy all Kings and people that shall put to their hands to alter it. Haec R. Tanchuma. fol. 17.
4. Hitherto the Samaritans, after the captivity of the ten Tribes, were Heathenish and no Jews among them save one or a few Priests to teach them the Law according to the ten Tribes usage of it, and as it seemeth by Ibn Ezra on Esth. 1. they had the book of Moses law among them, but in so wild a translation, that the first verse of it was read thus, In the beginning Ashima created heaven and earth. (What Ashima meaneth, see 2 King. 17. 30.) but from the times of Ezra and Nehemiah, exceeding many Jews began to be mingled among them, and became Samaritans: The main occasion was this: One of the sons of Jojada the son of Eliashib the High Priest, married the daughter of Sanballat the Horonite a chief man among the Samaritans: for which cause he was driven from the Priesthood by Nehemiah, Neh. 13. 28. Josephus nameth both the man and the woman, and relateth the full story to this purpose. Manasseh (saith he) the brother of Jaddua the High Priest had married Nicasso the daughter of Sanballat. Which thing the Elders of the Jews taking exceeding ill, as a violation of their Laws, and as an introduction to strange marriages, they urged that either he should put away his wife, or that he should be put away from the Priesthood: Yea and Jaddua his brother drave him away from the Altar that he should not Sacrifice. Whereupon Manasseh addressing himself to his Father in Law Sanballat, tells him, that it was true indeed that he loved his daughter Nicasso most dearly, but yet would not lose his function for her sake, it being hereditary to him by descent, and honorable among his Nation. To this Sanballat replied, that he could devise such a course, as that he should not only enjoy his Priesthood still, but also obtain an High Priesthood and be made a primate and metropolitan of a whole Country: on condition that he would keep his daughter still and not put her away: For he would build a Temple on mount Gerizim over Shechem, like the Temple at Jerusalem, and this by the consent of Darius who was now Monarch of the Persian Empire. Manasseh embraced such hopes and promises, and abode with his Father in Law, thinking to obtain an High Priesthood from the King. And whereas many of the Priests and people at Jerusalem were intricated in the like marriages, they fell away to Manasseh, and Sanballat, provided them lands, houses and subsistence. But Darius the King being overthrown by Alexander the Great, Sanballat revolted to Alexander and did him homage, and submitted both himself and his Dominion unto him: and having now gotten an opportunity, he made his Petition to him and obtained it of building this his Temple. And that that helped him in this his request was, that Jaddua the High Priest at Jerusalem had incurred Alexanders displeasure for denying him help and assistance at the siege of Tyrus. Sanballat pleaded that he had a son in Law named Manasseh brother to Jaddua, to whom many of the Jews were very well affected and followed after him, and might he but have liberty to build a Temple on mount Gerizim, it would be a great weakening of Jaddua, for by that means the people would have a fair invitation to revolt from him: Alexander easily condescended to his request: and so he fell on to build his Temple with might and main. When it was finished it caused a great Apostasy at Jerusalem, for very many that were accused and indicted for eating of forbidden meats, for violating the Sabbath or for other crimes, fled away from Jerusalem to Shechem and to mount Gerizim, and that became as a common Sanctuary for offenders. To this purpose Josephus: To which it may not be impertinent to add the relation of R. Abrah Zaccuth about this matter. When Alexander the Great, saith he, went from Jerusalem, Sanballat the Horonite went forth to him (with some Israelites and some of the sons of Joshua the High Priest, who had made marriages with the Samaritans, and whom Ezra and Nehemiah had driven from the house of the Lord) and he desired of Alexander that the Priests his sons in law might build a Temple in mount Gerizim: and the King commanded that it should be done, and so they built a Temple. Thus was Israel divided, half the people after Simeon the Just and Antigonus his scholar, and their society, following what they had received from the mouth of Ezra and the Prophets. And the other half after Sanballat and his sons in Law, and they offered burnt offerings and sacrificed out from the house of the Lord, and made ordinances of their own invention: And Manasseh the son in Law of Sanballat, the son of Joshua the son of Jozedek the High Priest, was Priest in this Temple. And then Sadoc and Baithus also became famous, being the Scholars of Antigonus, and this was the beginning of Heresy: for they went in the time of Antigonus their Master to the Temple of mount Gerizim, and became chief men there. And that Temple stood about two hundred years. It was built forty years after the building of the second Temple, Juchasin. fol. 14. col. 2.
And thus was Temple set up against Temple, High Priest against High Priest, and Worship against Worship, and now are the two Nations grown into a greater detestation one of another than ever they were before. And many of the Jewish Nation became Samaritans, enemies to their own Country, kindred and Religion: And it became a common quaere and quarrel among them, whether was the truer Religion, and whether the truer Temple, that at Jerusalem, or that one Gerizim, as the woman questioneth in this Chapter, verse. 20. and Josephus saith, the Jews and Samaritans mutined upon this dispute in Egypt, Antiq. lib. 12. cap. 1. & lib. 13. cap. 6. And this difference and heart-burning of the Nations in regard of Religion brake out often into open hostility and acts of violence, as the same Josephus giveth examples, Antiq. l. 12. c. 3. & l. 18. c. 3. & l. 20. c. 5. &c.
The Jews in their writings do commonly call the Samaritans 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cutheans: from Cutha a Country and River of Persia, 2 King. 17. 24. Joseph. Ant. l. 11. c. 4. & l. 9. c. 14. but since Christianity came into glory, their hatred to Christians being equal to what it was towards the Samaritans, they so commonly call Christians by the same name, that it is hard in many places to judge when they speak of Samaritans and when of Christians. Three things (saith the Talmud) make a man transgress against the mind of himself and against the mind of his Creator, and those are an evil spirit, the Cutheans, and the rules of poverty. Erulhin cap. 4. And again, They say not Amen after a Cuthean that giveth thanks. Beracoth. c. 8. &c. From these Samaritans Elias Levita conceiveth that the wandering generation of Gipses came. Vid. Tishbi. in voice. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
Vers. 10. If thou knowest the gift of God.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The article prefixed (saith Beza) showeth that he speaketh of some excellent gift, and that is of himself whom the Father offered now unto the woman. And indeed the latter clause expoundeth the former unto this sense, and showeth that by this gift of God, Christ is to be understood not only as given to the world, Joh. 3. 16. (for this the Samaritan woman knew well enough that the Messias was to come a Redeemer, verse. 25.) but as now come and offering himself unto her: and this our Savior calleth the gift of God in such a sense as he saith to his Disciples, To you it is given, but to others it is not given, Mar. 13. 11. For though Christ were the goodness of God to all his people, as Hos. 3. 5. yet was it a peculiar gift of God to some particular ones to see and hear Christ work miracles, and preach for their conversion, as Luke 10. 23, 24.
§. Thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.
The Vulgar Latin puts a forsitan to it, Perhaps thou wouldest have asked: leaving it as doubtful whether the woman would have begged grace from Christ if she had known him for the Messiah: Whereas Christ knew well enough what she would have done, and none that knoweth Christ can do less than beg this living water of him. Were it not that I observe the Author of the vulgar translation to render the particle Av by forsitan in other places, as Chap. 5. 46. & 8. 19. I should have thought that he put a perhaps upon it because of the carnal apprehensions that the Nations, both Jews and Samaritans, had about the coming and Kingdom of the Messias, but I shall not trouble myself and the Reader about the searching of his thoughts. Christ knew the woman's, and if she had but known him (how ever it might be a pertinent inquiry how the generality of the Nation would have entertained Christ if they had known him, and what they would have asked of him, because of their earthly thoughts of his Kingdom, and because of their high thoughts of their own legal performances) he himself saw, that she would have asked grace from him. I ask of thee, if thou knewest thou wouldest ask of me: as John the Baptist that knew him came on in such a kind of tenor, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? Thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee, as Mark 7. 7, 8.
That by the living water here spoken of, is meant the Spirit of Grace, is apparent in verse. 14. and past denial, and therefore I cannot think that Cyprian did give it as the very meaning of this place, but that he meant it allusively only, when he saith that this living water is baptism, and that because baptism once received is not to be reiterated, therefore it is said, that whosoever drinketh of this water shall never thirst. Lib. 1. Epist. 3.
The Spirit in Scripture is compared to fire and water, two the greatest purifiers, and refreshers: for water purifieth from filth, fire from dross, water refresheth against heat, fire against cold, and how the work of the spirit of Grace is suitable to these, needeth not to spend time to demonstrate.
Vers. 14. But whosoever shall drink of this water that I shall give him shall never thirst.
It is made a great scruple by Expositors and that deservedly, how he that hath received grace may be said never to thirst for it more: Since the more grace, the more desire of grace still: and various answers are given to the doubt, which I shall omit: To me it seemeth needful, that by thirsting here is not to be understood barely desirousness of drink, but fainting and failing for thirst: and so the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is used by the Syriac here for thirsting, is used by the Chaldee Paraphrast, Lam. 2. 19. for fainting: for whereas the Hebrew text hath it, lift up thy hands toward him for the life of thy young children, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that faint for hunger, the Chaldee hath rendered it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that thirst for hunger: And so Isaiah 48. 21. They thirsted not when he led them through the deserts (which the Chaldee rendereth, He suffered them not to thirst ) is so to be understood, of not perishing for thirst: or not languishing for it: for that they thirsted in the wilderness and cried out for water, it is related more than once.
In the verse before, our Savior said, He that drinketh of this water, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may thirst again: but in this verse he useth not the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Again, (for he that is watered with grace doth thirst for the same water of grace again and again) but he saith whosoever shall drink of this water which I shall give him, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , he shall never so thirst, as to fail or perish by it, but this water shall preserve him to eternal life. Compare Isaiah 41. 17.
Vers. 15. The woman saith, Sir give me of this water, &c.
The woman doth now fall from questioning, as verse. 11, 12. to plain mocking and derision, for this can be construed no other in her; I know these words of hers, are taken by divers to intimate her inclining to, and embracing this doctrine of Christ though she knew not well how to understand it: and they show, say some, Simplicitatem credendi, her simplicity or sincerity of believing, who so soon doubted not to ask for this so excellent water. But be it considered, 1. That as yet she took Christ but for an ordinary man, until he hath told her of her secret villainies, and then she takes him for a Prophet, verse. 19. And 2. that taking him for an ordinary man, she talks with him as a Samaritan housewife would do with a common Jew, between whom there was so deadly a scorn and fewd. 3. The thing that Christ spake of, of giving water, after which the party that had it should never thirst, were things so strange, and would seem so ridiculous to any Samaritan, nay to any flesh and blood that knew no more of him than as yet she did, (those words proceeding from so mean a man as he seemed to be) that her words in reply thereunto, Sir give me of this water, &c. can be no other but a jeer and scorn of what he had spoken. And her calling him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or Sir, doth no whit take off this construction, since that was but a word of ordinary compellation: or if she used it in a higher sense, she used it but in the higher scorn.
Vers. 17. I have no husband.
The reason why Christ bids her call her husband, may be supposed to be, partly that he might check and stop her jeering, by minding her of her own faults, and chiefly that he might show her that he was another kind of person, then she judged of him, by telling her of such things as she knew he could not tell her but divinely.
Now her denial that she had any husband, is ascribed by some to her modesty, to conceal her adultery: by others to this, because she knew not what Christ would do with her husband: but till it can be shown, why a Samaritan quean should talk with any reverence or civility, with an ordinary Jew (for she took Christ for no other as yet) especially when he spake to her of such unlikely things as he did, it is the most proper and undisputable interpretation of her words, I have no husband, to take them for a scoffing and regardless answer to a question and to a person that she was careless whether she gave any any answer to or no.
Vers. 18. He whom thou now hast is not thine husband.
It seemeth by the numerousness of her former husbands, and by the same expression used concerning them and this (thou hast had five and this that thou hast ) that she was a divorced woman, and now lived in an adulterous marriage: and it may be, married to him, who had adulterated her in her former husbands days: But be it either thus, or that she lived in adultery out of wedlock, her conscience is convinced of the truth of the thing that Christ speaketh, and withal she findeth that he had told her that which a mere stranger could not tell her but by the spirit of Prophecy, and therefore she owns him for a Prophet.
Vers. 20. Our Fathers worshipped in this Mount.
Conceiving him to be a Prophet, she suddenly desireth to hear what he will determine upon that great dispute, that was between the Jews and the Samaritans continually, namely whether was the truer and righter place of worship, Jerusalem or Mount Gerizim.
She called Jacob, Our Father Jacob, ver. 12. for so the Samaritans would be a kin to the Jews when they thought good; but the Fathers she speaks of here, were as far from the Religion and Worship that Jacob used, as Jacob was from the Religion of Hamor and Shechem. Josephus tells one story, that gives this woman but little cause to boast of her Fathers worshipping in that Mount, and that is this, That when Antiochus Epiphanes did so heavily oppress the Jews and persecute their Religion, these Samaritans thinking that their Religion also looked somewhat like that of the Jews, and that Antiochus might happily suspect that they and the Jews, and both their Religions were something a kin, and so they suffer as well as the other: they fairly send to Antiochus, and betime disclaim any such kindred: And whereas indeed they could not deny, but they had a Temple, they besought him that it might be dedicated to the Grecian Jupiter and called by his name, and so by the Kings command it was, Antiq. lib. 12. cap. 7. Here was worshipping in that Mount with a witness and much to be bragd of: but see the impudence of Heretics, when such a Temple shall compare with the Temple at Jerusalem.
Abraham Zaccuth saith, This Temple of Gerizim was destroyed by Jochanan the son of Simeon the son of Mattathias, and the Heretics slain. Juchas. fol. 14.
Vers. 21. Woman believe me, The Hour cometh, &c.
As she owned him for a Prophet, so he challengeth to be believed of her as a Prophet, and as a Prophet he foretells her of what was now ready to come to pass: namely, that Ceremonious Worship should cease, and be no more confined to particular place or Nation. That there should be no Sacrifice at Jerusalem, no Image at Samaria, no Ephod at Jerusalem, no Teraphim at Samaria, as Hos. 3. 4. but that those places and that manner of worship should fail and be abolished. And so he answers her question in the first place, to this purpose that it was needless for her or any other to trouble themselves about that dispute whether Jerusalem or Gerizim were the more eminent place of Worship, for the time was just now in coming, when neither the one, nor the other should be the place of worship at all. And then he determines the question indeed, that Jerusalem had ever been and was at that present the right place of worship, but Gerizim a Temple of error and usurpation: and he proves his determination by this reason, We know what we worship, &c.
Vers. 23. The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth.
In the term, The true worshippers, he looketh at the woman's question, and the two Nations controversy. They tugged for it, and she inquires about it, whether of the people had the true worship amongst them: why, saith Christ, ere long there shall be no worship at all either among the one or the other: And the time is now come that he that will be taken for a true worshipper, must neither worship as the Jews do, ceremoneously, but in spirit, nor as the Samaritans do, erroneously, but in truth. Thus may we very well divide the two words Spirit and truth, to serve these two purposes, as thus to answer about the worship of either Nation: the one whereof worshipped God altogether in external Rites and Ceremonies, and the other worshipped they knew not what and they knew not how. But generally the word Spirit and truth, are taken by Expositors to signify but one and the same thing, and stand in opposition only to the carnal Rites and shadowy types in which their whole Worship in a manner did consist.
His using of the term Father for God, is not so much in reference to the other persons in the Trinity, or because the woman was acquainted with that mystery, but because the Jews, and it is like the Samaritans also used the word very commonly in their prayers and speeches, as, Our Father which art in Heaven do to us as thou hast promised by the Prophet. And, Let the prayers and requests of all the House of Israel be accepted before their Father which is in Heaven, &c. Maym. in Tephilloth.
Vers. 24. God is a Spirit, and they that worship him, &c.
Here ariseth a question upon the very first reading of the verse, (the words Spirit and truth being interpreted, as is mentioned immediately before) and that is, why did God so punctually ordain, and so long continue a Typical and Ceremonious Worship, if those that worship him must worship in spirit and truth? Answer, That very worship was for this end and purpose, that men should learn to worship God in spirit and truth. For all these rites and types were but doctrines of the way of Salvation through Christ till Christ came: and the very use of them was to this end, that out of them men should spel this spiritual and true worship, namely to worship God in Christ, and to look after his benefits for their salvation which those rites doctrinally held unto them: and which lesson the true worshippers or believers did attain unto.
Vers. 25. I know that Messiah cometh, &c. he will teach us all things.
The Samaritans had learned from the Jews to expect Messias; and how the Jews expected this to be the time of his coming, we have shown before, and it may be the woman speaketh this as meaning, that she looked for Messias to come shortly, which occasioned Christ's answer, I am he, as taking at her words in that sense, Thou sayest Messias will come shortly and resolve all things, I tell thee Messias is come already, and I am he. Now her referring the resolution of this doubt to Messias his coming, it showeth she did not thoroughly digest and entertain Christ's answer to her question, although she took upon her to acknowledge him for a Prophet. She had no mind the thing should be so as he had resolved, and therefore she had no mind to believe it. How Christ was expected as the great teacher, we shall observe afterward.
Vers. 29. A man which hath told me all things that ever I did.
The Disciples having now bought all things that they would have for dinner, (for it was now dinner time,) return to the well to their Master, and upon their return, Christ's discourse and the woman's is broken off, and she slips a way into the City, and bids come see a man that hath told me all things that ever I did: But Christ did not so, for he told her only of one particular or two, about her husbands: but besides that the word All in Scripture is not always stretched to the utmost extent of its signification, he had told her so much that she concludes that he that could tell her that, could have told her also all things else: such expressions as these in earnest and pathetical narrations are not strange.
Vers. 35. Say ye not there are yet four months, &c.
The coherence and connection of this verse with those before, which is the first thing to be looked after in it, lieth thus: The Disciples had been in the City and bought some meat, and when they had set it ready they invite him to dine: He answers, No; he hath other meat to feed upon than they are aware of, and that was to do the will of him that sent him, and to finish his work: And what work was that? Why, the very work that he had been just now about, preaching the Gospel and converting a soul, and which work he knew was increasing upon him by the coming of the Samaritans to hear him, whom either he now saw coming in flocks towards him, or knew they would come: In these words therefore he answers his Disciples to this purpose: You would have me to eat, but I have somewhat else to do which is meat to me, which is to finish my Fathers work in preaching the Gospel: for look you yonder: whereas ye say it is four months to harvest, see what a Gospel harvest is coming yonder, what a multitude of people is yonder coming to hear me, ready for the harvest: therefore it is not a time to talk of eating of meat that perisheth, but to fall to this harvest work, which is my meat in doing the will of him that sent me.
The harvest of the Jews began at the Passover: for on the second day of the Passover the Law enjoined them to bring a sheaf of the first fruits of their harvest and wave it before the Lord: and from that day they counted seven weeks to Pentecost: See Levite. 23. 10. 15. Four months therefore before the Passover (which was the fourteenth day of the first month) falls to be towards the latter end of our November, or thereabout; as is easily cast by any. This therefore helps to set the clock of the time reasonable well, both for the reckoning of what times are past, and for the better fixing of the next Passover that is to come. As, 1. It shows about what time Johns imprisonment befell, and how long he preached: namely, from Passover was twelvemonth to this November, a year and a half and a month and some days above: for it is like that Christ stayed not long in Judea after Johns imprisoning. 2. It shows that Christ had spent some eight months in Judea from the Passover hitherto and had in this time converted abundance of people to his doctrine. 3. It will help to clear that the feast of the Jews spoken of in the next Chapter, is the next Passover that was to come, as we shall observe when we come there.
In the former part of the words, Say ye not, There are four months and then cometh harvest? He speaketh literally of their harvest of corn: but in the latter the fields are already white to harvest, he speaketh parabolically or spiritually, of the multitudes of people both among Jews and Gentiles, that were ready to be reaped and gathered by the Gospel: And when he saith, lift up your eyes and look on the fields, he seemeth to point them to the multitude of Samaritans that were now in sight coming toward him. That passage in the Prophet Hosea Chap. 2. 20, 21, 22, 23. speaketh to such another divine and spiritual sense and purpose. I will hear the heavens, and they shall hear the earth, And the earth shall hear the corn and the wine and the oil, and they shall hear Jezreel (the Lord's seedness) And I will sow her to me in the earth, &c. And the like in Amos 9. 13, 14. Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, &c.
Vers. 36. And he that reapeth, &c.
The Prophets and the holy Teachers under the Old Testament sowed the Word and Doctrine of Salvation which ripened to the harvest of the Gospel. Not but that they like good laborers reaped the fruits of their labors in gathering a harvest of souls in their several generations by the power of their Ministry, but in this passage our Savior aimeth not only at the Disciples converting of souls as they had done, but also at some transcendency of theirs in this ministration above those that had gone before them, which may be observed in these particulars of advantage.
1. The Prophets and the teachers of the way of Salvation under the Law, may be considered in a twofold relation: either in reference to the great pains they took in their ministry and the fruit they had of it in conversion of souls, or in reference to the doctrine of Salvation which they left behind them, planted in the Nation by their pains and ministry, to succeeding generations. To this latter it is that our Savior referreth when he saith, that they were to enter into other men's labors: meaning that whereas the clearness of the doctrine of Salvation had been growing in the Nation, from time to time, by the pains and sowing of the holy Prophets in their several ages, they now came to preach upon this advantage, that they had all these, holy men's foundations to build upon, and to top up the clearness of that doctrine which they had been building up through all the time of the Old Testament. Nay we may also take John Baptist and Christ himself in the number of these seedsmen, that sowed the seed of that doctrine in more plentifulness and clearness than all had done before, and even into their labors must the Disciples in their ministry enter, having so great a preparation made, and so great a foundation laid as they two had made, for them to enter upon and to begin their work.
2. The Prophets and Teachers under the Law had raised the thoughts of the people to an expectation of Messias his coming about this very time, as hath been observed before, and so had even ripened them to the full, for the ministry of the Apostles, when they should come to teach that Christ was come, and that he had done and suffered whatsoever was written of him: And this very thing among others was a singular and eminent whiteness of this field of the Jewish Nation to harvest, that they looked every day when the Messias should appear: And observe how soon the woman's words take in Samaria, Is not this the Christ, so as not only the Samaritans flock out to him, but that upon her very words they believe and upon a little converse they confess, We know that this is indeed the Christ the Savior of the world, verse. 42. And this, because their expectation was full ripe, of the Messias his present coming.
3. Now as for the ripeness of the Gentiles field, for the Gospel harvest, it consisted not so much in any such doctrine of Salvation as had been sowed among them, or in such expectation of Christ's coming (though the Jews now dispersed through all the world, might have a little acquainted them with such matters more than had been published among them in ancient times) as it did in the ripening of the love of the Lord, and his turning towards the Nations in mercy whom he had for so many years cast off and despised. And according to the ripening of that love the Lord had disposed certain providences which did somewhat help toward the ripening of the world unto such a purpose: as in that the Scriptures were now turned into the Greek Tongue and were among the Heathens, that the Greek Tongue in which the New Testament was to be written, was now the most commonly spoken language of all other, and that the Jews of those Tribes that had retained the true Religion when the ten fell away, namely Judah and Benjamin, were by several means planted and sowed abroad in all Countries of the world, and with them the Scriptures.
Our Savior therefore upon the Samaritans coming out unanimously to him through the woman's relation concerning him, (to whom he had imparted that he was the Messias for that very purpose) taketh occasion to discourse of the ripeness of the world for the harvest of the Gospel, and animateth his Disciples to that work by several arguments: as
- 1. That they shall receive the reward and fruit of their labors to eternal life.
- 2. That they shall not only receive this fruit, but they shall receive it in the eminentest and highest degree, with the glorious Patriarchs and Prophets who had labored in sowing, they and these reapers should rejoice together.
- 3. That they should enter into other men's labors, (as Israel did at their entrance into the land of Canaan; into houses they built not, and vineyards they planted not, &c.) And that that common Proverb, which proveth to be true upon various occurrences, one soweth and another reapeth, should prove true to them to their much comfort and encouragement.
Vers. 42. This is indeed Christ the Savior of the world.
Here is a confession of Faith higher by some degree than the Jews common Creed and belief concerning the Messias: for they held him only for a Savior of the Jewish Nation and Redeemer of that people, but the rest of the world they looked not after nor regarded: and so we may see how deeply and cordially these Samaritans had drunk in and digested the water of life which Christ had administered unto them, as to acknowledge him in his proper character: The Samaritans indeed were Gentiles, however they pretended to Joseph for their Father, and so in their conversion may we look upon a beginning of the conversion of the Gentiles, the great field now white for the Gospel Harvest. In less than four years after this, this field of Samaria where Christ had now sowed such seed, the Enemy came and sowed damnable tears by Simon Magus, Acts 8. It may be that wretch took opportunity for the venting and speeding of his delusions there, by this, that he found the City acknowledging it for certain that the Messias had been among them: and he creeps in among them either as one of his Disciples, or else in affront and contradiction to Christ, as doing wonders by magic whereas we read not that Christ had done any miracles there at all.
Vers. 44. For Jesus himself testified, that a Prophet had no honor in his own Country.
The reason alleged seemeth somewhat strange at the first sight: that Jesus should go into Galilee his own Country, because he testified that a Prophet hath no honor in his own Country. But by the words his own Country is not to be understood Galilee at large, but his own Town Nazareth the place of his education. And so is the expression plainly construed, Luke 4. 23. His voyage therefore was into the other parts of Galilee, avoiding his own home Nazareth, because he foresaw his entertainment would not be honorable and respective there.
Vers. 45. For they also went unto the Feast.
It was very pertinent for the Evangelist, to clear this matter about the Galileans going up to Jerusalem to the Festivals, because there were several things that might give occasion to think that they came not there. As 1. the distance of place, Galilee being so far from Jerusalem, as that the whole Kingdom of Samaria lay between, and the way exceeding full of danger. 2. Their difference in manners and customs in exceeding many things from the Jews that dwelt in Judea: of which the Talmudists do give exceeding many instances. In Judea they did work on the Passover Eve: in Galilee they did not. Pesachin per. 4. In Judea they searched the Bridegroom and the Bride three days before their bedding: in Galilee they did not. In Judea they had two Paranimphi, one of the Bridegrooms friends, and another of the Brides: in Galilee they had not so. In Judea the Paranymphi lay in the same room where the Bridegroom and Bride lay, in Galilee they did not, &c. Tosaphta ad Cetuboth per, 1. 3. Their difference in language, as Mark 26. 73. Mark 14. 70. For 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Jews of Judea spake a pure language in comparison of the Jews of Galilee. Erubhin. fol. 53.
Vers. 46. A certain Nobleman.
It is hard in the variety of constructions, that are given of the Greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to tell what this man was that was so titled: The Vulgar Latin and Erasmus render it Regulus, A little King: The Syriac 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 one of the Kings servants: Which the Arabic followed in sense, though not in words. The Italian hath it Signore, A great man or of high degree: Nonnus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , A man of the Kings, which is the very epithet that is used by the Arabic, and several other expositions of it are given, upon which I shall not insist.
Now for conjecturing who this man was, and what this title of his doth import I shall first produce a passage out of Juchasin fol. 19. which is to this purpose, Hillel and Shammai, received the traditional Law from Shamajah and Abtalion. At first it was Hillel and Menahem, but Menahem went away to the service of the King (Herod) with fours • ore men gallantly clothed, as it is related in Hagigah. And this matter is also mentioned by Josephus ben Gorion: that Menahem was a great wise man like a Prophet, that he uttered divers predictions and foretold Herod (the great) when he was young that he should be King. Herod also did much honor old Hillel, for these men were well contented that he was King. Old Shammai also foretold that Herod should reign: for when Herod came upon a trial before the Sanhedrin for killing of a man, they respected his person: but Shammai told that he should be King and should kill them. Yet Herod laid no hands on Hillel, Shammai, Menahem, and their associates, but honored them.
These men that sided with Herod, and helped to promote and support his reign, though he were a stranger and of the seed of Edom, I conceive to be those that are called Herodians in the Gospel, Mark 3. 6. Matth. 22. 16. men of as eminent learning and authority as any other in the Nation, but swayed by Courtship to this compliance. Of this number I cannot but conceive this man to have been, that we have in hand, who came to Christ for the healing of his Son: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , A Royalist, who had sided and been assistant to old Herod, the Father of him which was now Tetrarch, and one of that Herodian faction, to raise and establish him in the Kingdom; and now a follower of the son as he had been of the Father. Shall I guess at his name? I should as soon think this man was Chuza, Herod's Steward, mentioned in Luke 8. 3. as any other that can be named: unless it be Manaen or Manahem, Acts 13. 1. who was educated together with Herod the Tetrarch, being it may be, the son of that Menahem spoken of before, who first departed to Herod's party. But be the man by name whosoever he will, we cannot but observe this thing about the occurrence that doth here concern him, That though Herod himself, had been so harsh and cruel to John the Baptist but a little before as to put him in prison; yet had the Lord so provided for the cherishing of the Gospel in Christ's ministry, that even of Herod's household and retinue, there are some that hearken and are converted to it: The ministry of John did not want its fruits even in the Court: Though Herod himself was a dallying auditor, and did some things after the preaching of John, which he thought might ingratiate him the more with the people, but left other things undone, yet were there belonging to his Court that did really and sincerely receive the Gospel and obey it.