Chapter 6. Jesus miraculously furnishes a meal for 5000 men with women and children, and thus manifests Himself as the Bread from heaven. This provokes the crisis in Galilee.—Vv. 1–13. The miracle narrated.—Ver. 1. μετὰ ταῦτα, John’s indefinite note of time. The interval between chap. 5 and chap. 6 depends on the feast alluded to, 5:1. If it was Purim, only a month had elapsed; if it was Passover, a year. In any case Jesus had left Jerusalem, the reason being that the Jews sought to slay Him (7:1).—ἀπῆλθεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς, “Jesus departed,” but whence? Evidently from Capernaum and the neighbourhood; cf. Mt. 14:13, Mk. 6:30, Lk. 9:10.—πέραν … Τιβεριάδος, “to the other side of the Sea of Galilee, of Tiberias”. In 21:1 it is called simply τῆς Τιβεριάδος. The second title may here be a gloss, either by the evangelist himself or by a later hand, to distinguish the lake from Merom, or possibly because the latter name was more familiar to some of John’s readers than the former. [Pausanias, v. 7, 3, calls it λίμνη Τιβερίς.] Grotius, followed by Meyer, says: “Proprius denotat lacus partem quae ab adsito oppido, ut fieri solet, nomen habet proprium”. Consequently he thinks of Jesus as crossing the Jordan below the lake. This is groundless. The town Tiberias was only built by Herod about the year 20 a.d. (Smith’s Hist. Geog., 448). The exact locality where the following scene is laid seems to have been at the northeast corner of the lake, not far from Bethsaida Julias.—καὶ ἠκολούθει … ἀσθενούντων. “A great crowd followed Him,” out of Galilee into Gaulanitis, the reason being ὅτι ἑώρων [plural although ἠκολούθει is singular], “because they had seen the miracles which He was doing [imperfect of continuous action] on the sick”.—ἐπί with genitive denotes the object towards which action is directed, ἐπʼ οἴκου, homewards, etc. Meyer, Weiss (and Holtzmann) take it as meaning “among”.—ἀνῆλθε δὲ εἰς τὸ ὄρος ὁ Ἰησοῦς, “and Jesus went up,” from the level of the Jordan and the lake, to the higher ground on the hill; καὶ ἐκεῖ … αὐτοῦ, “and there sat down with His disciples,” having apparently left the crowd behind, for the sitting down with the disciples indicated that rest and peace were expected.—Ver. 4. But another crowd was to be accounted for, as ver. 4 intimates, ἦν δὲ ἐγγὺς … Ἰουδαίων, “now the Passover, the Jewish feast, was at hand”. [Grotius says: “Hoc ideo interjicit, ut intelligatur tempus fuisse opportunum ad eliciendam multitudinem, et quo melius cohaereat quod de herba sequitur”. Godet’s account of the insertion of this clause, that it was meant to show that the nearness of the Passover suggested to Jesus the idea “we will keep a Passover here,” is plainly out of the question.]—ἐπάρας οὖν … Jesus therefore (or better, “accordingly”; οὖν connects what He saw with the foregoing statement).—Ver. 5. πολὺς ὄχλος ἔρχεται, not the same crowd as was mentioned in ver. 2, else the article would have been inserted, but a Passover caravan coming from some other direction, and probably guided to Jesus’ retirement by some of those who had followed in the first crowd. Seeing the crowd approaching, He initiates the idea of giving them a meal. The synoptic account is different.—λέγει πρὸς τὸν φίλιππον. Why to Philip? The question was put to Philip not because he happened at the moment to be nearest to Jesus (Alford); nor, as Bengel suggests, because he had charge of the commissariat, “fortasse Philippus rem alimentariam curabat inter discipulos”; nor “because he knew the country best”; nor only, as Euthymius says, ἵνα τὴν ἀπορίαν ὁμολογήσας, ἀκριβέστερον καταμάθη τοῦ μέλλοντος γενέσθαι θαύματος τὸ μέγεθος; but Cyril is right who finds the explanation in the character of Philip and in the word πειράζων of ver. 6 [γυμνάζων εἰς πίστιν τὸν μαθήτην]. Philip was apparently a matter-of-fact person (14:8), a quick reckoner and good man of business, and therefore perhaps more ready to rely on his own shrewd calculations than on unseen resources. This weakness Jesus gives him an opportunity of conquering, by putting the question πόθεν ἀγοράσωμεν ἄρτους; “Whence are we to buy bread?” [lit. loaves]. πόθεν may either mean “from what village,” or “from what pecuniary resources”. Cf. πόθεν γὰρ ἔσται βιοτά; Soph., Philoct., 1159.—Ver. 7. Philip swiftly calculating declares it impossible to provide bread for so vast a multitude, Διακοσίων … λάβῃ. “Two hundred denarii worth of loaves are not enough for them that each should receive a little.” “Denarius” means containing ten; and originally the denarius contained ten asses. The as was originally an ingot of copper, aes, weighing one lb.; but long before imperial times it had been reduced to one ounce, and the denarius was reckoned as equal to sixteen asses or four sesterces, and taking the Roman gold piece like our sovereign as the standard, the denarius was equivalent to about 9½d., which at that time was the ordinary wage of a working man; sufficient therefore to support a family for a day. If half was spent in food, then, reckoning the family at five persons, one denarius would feed ten persons, and 200 would provide a day’s rations for 2000; but as Philip’s calculation is on the basis not of food for a whole day, but only for one meagre meal, a short ration (βραχύ τι), it is approximately accurate. There were between five and ten thousand mouths. See Expositor, Jan., 1890.—Ver. 8. With the same matter-of-factness as Philip εἷς … Πέτρου, “one of His disciples, Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter,” a description apparently inserted in forget fulness that it has already been given, 1:41, supplementing Philip’s judgment, cf. 12:22, λέγει αὐτῳ, “says to Him” [the dative still holds its place after λέγει, and has not quite given way, as in modern Greek, to πρός with accusative, cf. ver. 5]. Ἔστι παιδάριον ἓν ὧδε. “There is here one little boy.” [ἓν is rejected by modern editors. May it not have been rejected because unnecessary? At the same time it must be borne in mind that although in Mt. (8:19 and 26:69) εἷς is used as an indefinite article—as in German, French, etc.—it is not so used in John. The Vulgate has “est puer unus hic”. Meyer thinks it is inserted to bring out the meagreness of the resources, “but one small boy”.]—Ver. 9. ὃ ἔχει … ὀψάρια. The Synoptic account speaks of these provisions as already belonging to the disciples.—κριθίνους, the cheapest kind of bread; see Ezek. 13:19, and the extraordinary profusion of illustrations in Wetstein, among which occurs one from the Talmud: “Jochanan dixit, hordeum factum est pulchrum. Dixerunt ei: nuncia equis et asinis”; and from Livy, “Cohortibus, quae signa amiserant, hordeum dari jussit”.—καὶ δύο ὀψάρια, in Mt. 14:17, ἰχθύας, see also John 21:10.—ὀψάριον is whatever is eaten with bread as seasoning or “kitchen,” hence, pre-eminently, fish. So Athenaeus, cited by Wetstein. In Numbers 11:22 we have τὸ ὄψος τῆς θαλάσσης.—ἀλλὰ ταῦτα τί ἐστιν εἰς τοσούτους; exhibiting the helplessness of the disciples and inadequacy of the means, as the background on which the greatness of the miracle may be seen.—Ver. 10. The moral ground for the miracle being thus prepared Jesus at once says, ποιήσατε τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ἀναπεσεῖν. [For the form of speech cf. Soph., Philoct., 925, κλύειν … με … ποιεῖ.] This order was given for two reasons: (1) that there might be no unseemly crowding round Him and crushing out of the weaker; and (2) that they might understand they were to have a full meal, not a mere bite they could take in their hand in passing. Obedience to this request tested the faith of the crowd. They trusted Jesus.—ἦν δὲ χόρτος πολὺς ἐν τῷ τόπῳ, “now there was much grass in the place,” contrasting with the corn-lands and olive-yards of the opposite shore, where the large crowd could not easily have found a place to lie down. Mark rather brings out the contrast between the colours of the dresses and the green grass (6:39): ἐπέταξεν αὐτοῖς ἀνακλῖναι πάντας συμπόσια συμπόσια ἐπὶ τῷ χλωρῷ χόρτῳ. καὶ ἀνέπεσαν πρασιαὶ πρασιαί, like beds of flowers.—ἀνέπεσον [better ἀνέπεσαν] οὖν οἱ ἄνδρες … the men reclined, not counting women and children (χωρὶς γυναικῶν καὶ παιδίων, Mt. 14:21), in number about five thousand; the women, though not specified, would take their places with the men. Some of the children might steal up to Jesus to receive from His own hand.—Ver. 11. Facing the vast and hungry crowd Jesus took up and gave thanks for the slender provision, ἔλαβε δὲ [better ἔλαβεν οὖν] τοὺς ἄρτους, the loaves already mentioned, καὶ εὐχαριστήσας [Phrynichus says εὐχαριστεῖν οὐδεὶς τῶν δοκίμων εἶπεν, ἀλλὰ χάριν εἰδέναι; and Rutherford says Polybius is the first writer who uses the word in the sense of “give thanks”]. Pagans, by libation, or by throwing a handful on the household altar, gave thanks before a meal; Jews pronounced a blessing, ἁγιασμός or εὐλογία. (Luke 24:30, Mt. 14:19, and especially 1 Tim. 4:4. See also Grotius’ note on Mt. 26:27.) Having given thanks Jesus διέδωκε … τοῖς ἀνακειμένοις. The words added from the Synoptists give a fuller account of what actually happened. But curiosity as to the precise stage at which the multiplication occurred, or whether it could distinctly be seen, is not satisfied. They all received ὅσον ἤθελον, not the βραχύ τι of Philip; and even this did not exhaust the supply; for (ver. 12) ὡς δὲ ἐνεπλήσθησαν, when no one could eat any more, there were seen to be κλάσματα περισσεύσαντα, pieces broken off but not used. These Jesus directs the disciples to gather ἵνα μή τι ἀπόληται, “that nothing be lost”. The Father’s bounty must not be wasted. Infinite resource does not justify waste. Euthymius ingeniously supposes the order to have been given ἵνα μὴ δόξῃ φαντασία τις τὸ γενόμενον; but of course those who had eaten already knew that the provision was substantial and real.—Ver. 13. Συνήγαγον οὖν … βεβρωκόσιν, the superabundance, the broken pieces of the five loaves which were in excess of the requirements, ἃ ἐπερίσσεύσε, filled δώδεκα κοφίνους, that is to say, far exceeded the original five loaves.—κόφινος [French, Coffin, petit panier d’osier; cf. our “coffin” and “coffer”], a large wicker basket or hamper used in many countries by gardeners for carrying fruit, vegetables, manure, soil; and identified with the Jew by Juvenal (3:14), “Judaeis quorum cophinus foenumque supellex”. (See further Mayor’s note on the line, and Sat., vi. 541.) This gives colour to the idea that each of the apostles may have carried such a basket, which would account for the twelve. But why they should have had the baskets with nothing to carry in them does not appear.
Vv. 14–25. The immediate impression made by the miracle and the consequent movements of Jesus and the crowd.—Ver. 14. The conclusion drawn from the miracle by those who had witnessed it, was that this was “the beginning of that reign of earthly abundance, which the prophets were thought to have foretold”. See Lightfoot, Hor. Heb., 552. This at once found expression in the words οὗτός ἐστιν … κόσμον. “This is indeed,” or “of a truth,” as if the subject had been previously debated by them, or as if some had told them He was “the prophet who should come into the world,” ὁ ἐρχόμενος, used of the Messiah by the Baptist (Matt. 11:3) without further specification; but John adds his favourite expression εἰς τὸν κόσμον. That the people meant the Messiah (cf. Deut. 18:14–19) is shown by the action they were prepared to take.—Ver. 15. For Jesus perceived that they were on the point of coming and carrying Him off to make Him king. ἁρπάζειν, to snatch suddenly and forcibly (derived from the swoop of the falcon, the ἅρπη; hence, the Harpies). This scene throws light on the use of ἁρπάζουσιν in Matt. 11:12. Their purpose was to make Him king. Their own numbers and their knowledge of the general discontent would encourage them. But Jesus ἀνεχώρησε πάλιν εἰς τὸ ὄρος αὐτὸς μόνος, “withdrew again (cf. ver. 3) to the mountain,” from which He may have come down some distance to meet the crowd. Now He detached Himself even from His disciples. [μὴ παρέχων μηδὲ τούτοις ἀφορμὴν, Origen.] The Synoptic account is supplementary. The disciples remained behind with fragments of the crowd, but, when it became late, they went down to the sea, and having got on board a (not “the”) boat, they were coming across to Capernaum [Mark says Jesus told them to go to Bethsaida, but that is quite consistent, as they may have meant to land at the one place and walk to the other] on the other side, and it had already become dark, and Jesus had not, or “not yet,” come to them, and the sea was rising owing to a strong wind blowing.—Ver. 19. ἐληλακότες οὖν ὡς σταδίους εἰκοσιπέντε ἢ τριάκοντα. The Vulgate renders “cum remigassent ergo,” and modern Greek ἐκωπηλάτησαν, rightly; see Aristoph., Frogs, 195; and other passages in Elsner. The stadium was about 194 (Rich gives 202) yards, so that nine rather than eight would go to a mile. The disciples had rowed about three miles. [The best discussion of the direction they were taking is in the Rob Roy on the Jordan, p. 374.] θεωροῦσι τὸν Ἰησοῦν περιπατοῦντα ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης “they see Jesus walking on the sea”. It has been suggested that this may only mean that Jesus was walking “by” the sea, ἐπί being used in this sense in 21:1. But that ἐπί can mean “on” the sea is of course not questioned (see Lucian’s Vera Historia, where this incident is burlesqued; also Job 9:8, where, to signalise the power of God, He is spoken of as ὁ περιπατῶν ὡς ἐπʼ ἐδάφους ἐπὶ θαλάσσης). Besides, why should the disciples have been afraid had they merely seen Jesus walking on the shore? They manifested their fear in some way, and He says to them, Ἐγώ εἰμι, I am He, or It is I.—Ver. 20. Hearing this, ἤθελον οὖν λαβεῖν αὐτὸν εἰς τὸ πλοῖον, by which Lücke, Holtzmann, Weiss, Thayer, and others suppose it is meant, that they merely wished to take Him into the boat, but did not actually do so. The imperfect tense favours this sense; and so do the expressions ἤθελον πιάσαι αὐτόν, 7:44; and ἤθελον αὐτὸν ἐρωτᾷν, 16:19; whereas two of the passages cited against this meaning by Alford are in the aorist, a tense which denotes accomplished purpose. On the other hand, the imperfect may here be used to express a continuous state of feeling, and accordingly the A.V., following the Geneva Bible, against Wiclif and Tindale, rendered “they willingly received Him”. So Grotius “non quod non receperint, sed quod cupide admodum”. So, too, Sanday: “The stress is really on the willingness of the disciples, ‘Before they shrank back through fear, but now they were glad to receive Him’ ”. And this seems right. The R.V. has “they were willing therefore to receive Him into the boat”. The καί with which the next clause is introduced is slightly against the supposition that Jesus was not actually taken into the boat (but see Weiss in loc.); and the Synoptic account represents Jesus as getting into the boat with Peter. The immediate arrival at the shore was evidently a surprise to those on board. Sanday thinks that the Apostle was so occupied with his devout conclusions that he did not notice the motion of the boat.
Marcus Dods, The Gospel of St. John (New York: George H. Doran Company, n.d.), 746–750.
The Expositor’s Greek Testament, Volume I (Matthew–John): Commentary
ExpGT 1
For month of April 2024
Ongoing Free item strategy:
Try these Logos Bible Software Discount codes Furnished by Rick Livermore Webmaster220 San Juan Capistrano California – Publisher InformationThis blog post was furnished by Webmaster220 Bible Study Blog other blogs by the same person: |
Posts
.jpg?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/quality,q_70/resize,m_mfit,w_350,h_350/format,webp)
No comments:
Post a Comment