rwp - John:7:45-8

rwp@John:7:45 @{Why did ye not bring him?} (\Dia ti ouk gagete auton;\). Second aorist active indicative of \ag\. Indignant outburst of the Sanhedrin (both Sadducees and Pharisees) at the failure of the (\tous\, note article here referring to verse 32|) temple police to arrest Jesus. "Apparently they were sitting in expectation of immediately questioning him" (Dods). They were stunned at this outcome.

rwp@John:7:46 @{Never man so spake} (\oudepote elalsen houts anthrpos\). Police officers are not usually carried away by public speech. They had fallen under the power of Jesus "as the Galilean peasants had been impressed" (Bernard) in verses 28f|. It was the words of Jesus that had so gripped these officers, not his works (15:24|). It was most disconcerting to the Sanhedrin.

rwp@John:7:47 @{Are ye also led astray?} (\M kai humeis peplansthe;\). The Pharisees took the lead in this scornful sneer at the officers. The use of \m\ formally expects a negative answer as in strkjv@4:29|, but the Pharisees really believed it. See also strkjv@6:67|. The verb form is perfect passive indicative of \plana\, for which see verse 12| with perhaps an allusion to that phase of opinion.

rwp@John:7:48 @{Hath any of the rulers believed on him?} (\M tis ek tn archontn episteusen eis auton;\). Negative answer sharply expected. First aorist active indicative of \pisteu\. "Did any one of the rulers believe on him?" "What right have subordinates to have a mind of their own?" (Dods). These police were employed by the temple authorities (rulers). "Power was slipping through their fingers" (Dods) and that was the secret of their hostility to Jesus. {Or of the Pharisees} (\ ek tn Pharisain\). A wider circle and the most orthodox of all.

rwp@John:7:49 @{This multitude} (\ho ochlos houtos\). The Pharisees had a scorn for the _amhaaretz_ or "people of the earth" (cf. our "clod-hoppers") as is seen in rabbinic literature. It was some of the \ochlos\ (multitude at the feast especially from Galilee) who had shown sympathy with Jesus (7:12,28f.|). {Which knoweth not the law} (\ho m ginoskn\). Present active articular participle of \ginsk\ with \m\ usual negative of the participle in the _Koin_. "No brutish man is sin-fearing, nor is one of the people of the earth pious" (_Aboth_, II. 6). See the amazement of the Sanhedrin at Peter and John in strkjv@Acts:4:13| as "unlettered and private men" (\agrammatoi kai iditai\). No wonder the common people (\ochlos\) heard Jesus gladly (Mark:12:37|). The rabbis scouted and scorned them. {Are accursed} (\eparatoi eisin\). Construction according to sense (plural verb and adjective with collective singular \ochlos\). \Eparatoi\ is old verbal adjective from \eparaomai\, to call down curses upon, here only in the N.T.

rwp@John:7:50 @{Nicodemus} (\Nikodmos\). Not heard from since chapter 3 when he timidly came to Jesus by night. Now he boldly protests against the injustice of condemning Jesus unheard. He appears once more (and only in John) in strkjv@19:39| with Joseph of Arimathea as a secret disciple of Jesus. He is a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin and his present act is courageous. {Saith} (\legei\). Dramatic present active indicative as in strkjv@2:3|. {Before} (\proteron\). This is genuine, a reference to the visit in chapter 3, but \nuktos\ (by night) is not genuine here. {Being one of them} (\heis n ex autn\). As a member of the Sanhedrin he takes up the challenge in verse 48|. He is both ruler and Pharisee.

rwp@John:7:51 @{Doth our law judge a man?} (\m ho nomos hmn krinei ton anthrpon;\). Negative answer expected and "the man," not "a man." These exponents of the law (verse 49|) were really violating the law of criminal procedure (Exodus:23:1; strkjv@Deuteronomy:1:16|). Probably Nicodemus knew that his protest was useless, but he could at least show his colours and score the point of justice in Christ's behalf. {Except it first hear from himself} (\ean m akousi prton par' autou\). Third-class negative condition with \ean m\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \akou\. That is common justice in all law, to hear a man's side of the case ("from him," \par' autou\). {And know what he doeth} (\kai gni ti poiei\). Continuation of the same condition with second aorist active subjunctive of \ginsk\ with indirect question and present active indicative (\ti poiei\). There was no legal answer to the point of Nicodemus.

rwp@John:7:52 @{Art thou also of Galilee?} (\M kai su ek ts Galilaias ei;\). Formally negative answer expected by \m\, but really they mean to imply that Nicodemus from local feeling or prejudice has lined himself up with this Galilean mob (\ochlos\) of sympathizers with Jesus and is like Jesus himself a Galilean. "These aristocrats of Jerusalem had a scornful contempt for the rural Galileans" (Bernard). {That out of Galilee ariseth no prophet} (\hoti ek ts Galilaias prophts ouk egeiretai\). As a matter of fact Jonah, Hosea, Nahum, possibly also Elijah, Elisha, and Amos were from Galilee. It was simply the rage of the Sanhedrin against Jesus regardless of the facts. Westcott suggests that they may have reference to the future, but that is a mere excuse for them.

rwp@John:7:53 @This verse and through strkjv@8:12| (the passage concerning the woman taken in adultery) is certainly not a genuine part of John's Gospel. The oldest and best MSS. (Aleph A B C L W) do not have it. It first appears in Codex Bezae. Some MSS. put it at the close of John's Gospel and some place it in Luke. It is probably a true story for it is like Jesus, but it does not belong to John's Gospel. The Canterbury Version on which we are commenting puts the passage in brackets. Westcott and Hort place it at the end of the Gospel. With this explanation we shall proceed. {They went} (\eporeuthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \poreuomai\ used as a deponent verb without passive idea. In this context the verb has to refer to the Sanhedrin with a rather pointless contrast to Jesus.