Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 4:4

And he must needs go through Samaria.

4. he must needs go through Samaria ] There was no other way, unless he crossed the Jordan and went round by Perea, as Jews sometimes did to avoid annoyance from the Samaritans (on the Samaritans, see note on Mat 10:5). As Christ was on his way from Jerusalem, and escaping from the ruling party there, He had less reason to fear molestation. Comp. Luk 9:53.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

And he must needs go through Samaria – Samaria was between Judea and Galilee. The direct and usual way was to pass through Samaria. Sometimes, however, the Jews took a circuitous route on the east side of the Jordan. See the notes at Mat 2:22.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 4. And he must needs go through Samaria.] Or, It was necessary for him to pass through Samaria: for this plain reason, and no other, because it was the only proper road. Samaria lay northward of Judea, and between the great sea, Galilee, and Jordan; and there was therefore no going from Galilee to Jerusalem but through this province. See Clarke on Lu 17:11. From Jerusalem to Galilee through Samaria, according to Josephus, was three days’ journey. See his own life.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Josephus tells us that Samaria is seated between Judea and Galilee, and begins at a town called Ginea: see Luk 9:51,52; 17:11. There were two passages from Judea into Galilee; the one was through the midst of Samaria, Luk 9:51; the other through the eastern parts, by the royal valley, by Jordan, in which it is said that Sichem was. By

Samaria must not be understood the city of Samaria, built by Omri, but the whole country so called, and possessed by the Assyrians, with a mixture of Jews amongst them. Some think that the evangelist addeth this, to excuse our Saviour for going amongst the Gentiles.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

4. must needs go through Samariafora geographical reason, no doubt, as it lay straight in his way, butcertainly not without a higher design.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

And he must needs go through Samaria. Not the city, but the country of Samaria; for the way to Galilee from Judea, lay through the midst of Samaria; nor was there any other way, without going a great way about; see Lu 9:51; and which is also confirmed by Josephus c: and this accounts for his going through Samaria, consistently with his forbidding his apostles going in the way of the Gentiles, or into any of the cities of the Samaritans; since here was a necessity for it, or otherwise he himself would not have gone, where he forbid his disciples; though the prohibition may be understood, not of barely going into a Samaritan city; for it was lawful for them, notwithstanding that, to go into one of them, as appears from Joh 4:8; but of going to preach there,

Mt 10:5. And besides this necessity, there was another thing that lay upon him, and obliged him to take this tour, and that is, the calling and conversion of a certain woman, and other Samaritans, whom the Father had given to him, and he was to redeem by his blood; and the time of whose effectual calling was now come; and therefore he must needs go this way, and at this particular time. The Arabic and Persic versions represent it, as a purpose and determination in his mind to go this way.

c Antiqu. Jud. 50:20. c 5. & in vita sua, p. 1019.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Christ at the Well of Samaria.

      4 And he must needs go through Samaria.   5 Then cometh he to a city of Samaria, which is called Sychar, near to the parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph.   6 Now Jacob’s well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus on the well: and it was about the sixth hour.   7 There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water: Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink.   8 (For his disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat.)   9 Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.   10 Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.   11 The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water?   12 Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle?   13 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:   14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.   15 The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw.   16 Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither.   17 The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband:   18 For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly.   19 The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.   20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.   21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.   22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.   23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.   24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.   25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.   26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.

      We have here an account of the good Christ did in Samaria, when he passed through that country in his way to Galilee. The Samaritans, both in blood and religion, were mongrel Jews, the posterity of those colonies which the king of Assyria planted there after the captivity of the ten tribes, with whom the poor of the land that were left behind, and many other Jews afterwards, incorporated themselves. They worshipped the God of Israel only, to whom they erected a temple on mount Gerizim, in competition with that at Jerusalem. There was great enmity between them and the Jews; the Samaritans would not admit Christ, when they saw he was going to Jerusalem (Luke ix. 53); the Jews thought they could not give him a worse name than to say, He is a Samaritan. When the Jews were in prosperity, the Samaritans claimed kindred to them (Ezra iv. 2), but, when the Jews were in distress, they were Medes and Persians; see Joseph. Antiq. 11. 340-341; 12. 257. Now observe,

      I. Christ’s coming into Samaria. He charged his disciples not to enter into any city of the Samaritans (Matt. x. 5), that is, not to preach the gospel, or work miracles; nor did he here preach publicly, or work any miracle, his eye being to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. What kindness he here did them was accidental; it was only a crumb of the children’s bread that casually fell from the master’s table.

      1. His road from Judea to Galilee lay through the country of Samaria (v. 4): He must needs go through Samaria. There was no other way, unless he would have fetched a compass on the other side Jordan, a great way about. The wicked and profane are at present so intermixed with God’s Israel that, unless we will go out of the world, we cannot avoid going through the company of such, 1 Cor. v. 10. We have therefore need of the armour or righteousness on the right hand and on the left, that we may neither give provocation to them nor contract pollution by them. We should not go into places of temptation but when we needs must; and then we should not reside in them, but hasten through them. Some think that Christ must needs go through Samaria because of the good work he had to do there; a poor woman to be converted, a lost sheep to be sought and saved. This was work his heart was upon, the therefore he must needs go this way. It was happy for Samaria that it lay in Christ’s way, which gave him an opportunity of calling on them. When I passed by thee, I said unto thee, Live, Ezek. xvi. 6.

      2. His baiting place happened to be at a city of Samaria. Now observe,

      (1.) The place described. It was called Sychar; probably the same with Sichem, or Shechem, a place which we read much of in the Old Testament. Thus are the names of places commonly corrupted by tract of time. Shechem yielded the first proselyte that ever came into the church of Israel (Gen. xxxiv. 24), and now it is the first place where the gospel is preached out of the commonwealth of Israel; so Dr. Lightfoot observes; as also that the valley of Achor, which was given for a door of hope, hope to the poor Gentiles, ran along by this city, Hos. ii. 15. Abimelech was made king here; it was Jeroboam’s royal seat; but the evangelist, when he would give us the antiquities of the place, takes notice of Jacob’s interest there, which was more its honour than its crowned heads. [1.] Here lay Jacob’s ground, the parcel of ground which Jacob gave to his son Joseph, whose bones were buried in it, Gen 48:22; Jos 24:32. Probably this is mentioned to intimate that Christ, when he reposed himself hard by here, took occasion from the ground which Jacob gave Joseph to meditate on the good report which the elders by faith obtained. Jerome chose to live in the land of Canaan, that the sight of the places might affect him the more with scripture stories. [2.] Here was Jacob’s well which he digged, or at least used, for himself and his family. We find no mention of this well in the Old Testament; but the tradition was that it was Jacob’s well.

      (2.) The posture of our Lord Jesus at this place: Being wearied with his journey, he sat thus on the well. We have here our Lord Jesus,

      [1.] Labouring under the common fatigue of travellers. He was wearied with his journey. Though it was yet but the sixth hour, and he had performed but half his day’s journey, yet he was weary; or, because it was the sixth hour, the time of the heat of the day, therefore he was weary. Here we see, First, That he was a true man, and subject to the common infirmities of the human nature. Toil came in with sin (Gen. iii. 19), and therefore Christ, having made himself a curse for us, submitted to it. Secondly, That he was a poor man, else he might have travelled on horseback or in a chariot. To this instance of meanness and mortification he humbled himself for us, that he went all his journeys on foot. When servants were on horses, princes walked as servants on the earth, Eccl. x. 7. When we are carried easily, let us think on the weariness of our Master. Thirdly, It should seem that he was but a tender man, and not of a robust constitution; it should seem, his disciples were not tired, for they went into the town without any difficulty, when their Master sat down, and could not go a step further. Bodies of the finest mould are most sensible of fatigue, and can worst bear it.

      [2.] We have him here betaking himself to the common relief of travellers; Being wearied, he sat thus on the well. First, He sat on the well, an uneasy place, cold and hard; he had no couch, no easy chair to repose himself in, but took to that which was next hand, to teach us not to be nice and curious in the conveniences of this life, but content with mean things. Secondly, He sat thus, in an uneasy posture; sat carelessly–incuriose et neglectim; or he sat so as people that are wearied with travelling are accustomed to sit.

      II. His discourse with a Samaritan woman, which is here recorded at large, while Christ’s dispute with the doctors, and his discourse with Moses and Elias on the mount, are buried in silence. This discourse is reducible to four heads:–

      1. They discourse concerning the water, v. 7-15.

      (1.) Notice is taken of the circumstances that gave occasion to this discourse.

      [1.] There comes a woman of Samaria to draw water. This intimates her poverty, she had no servant to be a drawer of water; and her industry, she would do it herself. See here, First, How God owns and approves of honest humble diligence in our places. Christ was made known to the shepherds when they were keeping their flock. Secondly, How the divine Providence brings about glorious purposes by events which seem to us fortuitous and accidental. This woman’s meeting with Christ at the well may remind us of the stories of Rebekah, Rachel, and Jethro’s daughter, who all met with husbands, good husbands, no worse than Isaac, Jacob, and Moses, when they came to the wells for water. Thirdly, How the preventing grace of God sometimes brings people unexpectedly under the means of conversion and salvation. He is found of them that sought him not.

      [2.] His disciples were gone away into the city to buy meat. Hence learn a lesson, First, Of justice and honesty. The meat Christ ate, he bought and paid for, as Paul, 2 Thess. iii. 8. Secondly, Of daily dependence upon Providence: Take no thought for the morrow. Christ did not go into the city to eat, but sent his disciples to fetch his meat thither; not because he scrupled eating in a Samaritan city, but, 1. Because he had a good work to do at that well, which might be done while they were catering. It is wisdom to fill up our vacant minutes with that which is good, that the fragments of time may not be lost. Peter, while his dinner was getting ready, fell into a trance, Acts x. 10. 2. Because it was more private and retired, more cheap and homely, to have his dinner brought him hither, than to go into the town for it. Perhaps his purse was low, and he would teach us good husbandry, to spend according to what we have and not go beyond it. At least, he would teach us not to affect great things. Christ could eat his dinner as well upon a draw well as in the best inn in the town. Let us comport with our circumstances. Now this gave Christ an opportunity of discoursing with this woman about spiritual concerns, and he improved it; he often preached to multitudes that crowded after him for instruction, yet here he condescends to teach a single person, a woman, a poor woman, a stranger, a Samaritan, to teach his ministers to do likewise, as those that know what a glorious achievement it is to help to save, though but one soul, from death.

      (2.) Let us observe the particulars of this discourse.

      [1.] Jesus begins with a modest request for a draught of water: Give me to drink. He that for our sakes became poor here becomes a beggar, that those who are in want, and cannot dig, may not be ashamed to beg. Christ asked for it, not only because he needed it, and needed her help to come at it, but because he would draw on further discourse with her, and teach us to be willing to be beholden to the meanest when there is occasion. Christ is still begging in his poor members, and a cup of cold water, like this here, given to them in his name, shall not lose its reward.

      [2.] The woman, though she does not deny his request, yet quarrels with him because he did not carry on the humour of his own nation (v. 9): How is it? Observe, First, What a mortal feud there was between the Jews and the Samaritans: The Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans. The Samaritans were the adversaries of Judah (Ezra iv. 1), were upon all occasions mischievous to them. The Jews were extremely malicious against the Samaritans, “looked upon them as having no part in the resurrection, excommunicated and cursed them by the sacred name of God, by the glorious writing of the tables, and by the curse of the upper and lower house of judgment, with this law, That no Israelite eat of any thing that is a Samaritan’s, for it is as if he should eat swine’s flesh.” So Dr. Lightfoot, out of Rabbi Tanchum. Note, Quarrels about religion are usually the most implacable of all quarrels. Men were made to have dealing one with another; but if men, because one worships at one temple and another at another, will deny the offices of humanity, and charity, and common civility, will be morose and unnatural, scornful and censorious, and this under colour of zeal for religion, they plainly show that however their religion may be true they are not truly religious; but, pretending to stickle for religion, subvert the design of it. Secondly, How ready the woman was to upbraid Christ with the haughtiness and ill nature of the Jewish nation: How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me? By his dress or dialect, or both, she knew him to be a Jew, and thinks it strange that he runs not to the same excess of riot against the Samaritans with other Jews. Note, Moderate men of all sides are, like Joshua and his fellows (Zech. iii. 8), men wondered at. Two things this woman wonders at, 1. That he should ask this kindness; for it was the pride of the Jews that they would endure any hardship rather than be beholden to a Samaritan. It was part of Christ’s humiliation that he was born of the Jewish nation, which was now not only in an ill state, subject to the Romans, but in an ill name among the nations. With what disdain did Pilate ask, Am I a Jew? Thus he made himself not only of no reputation, but of ill reputation; but herein he has set us an example of swimming against the stream of common corruptions. We must, like our master, put on goodness and kindness, though it should be ever so much the genius of our country, or the humour of our party, to be morose and ill-natured. This woman expected that Christ should be as other Jews were; but it is unjust to charge upon every individual person even the common faults of the community: no rule but has some exceptions. 2. She wonders that he should expect to receive this kindness from her that was a Samaritan: “You Jews could deny it to one of our nation, and why should we grant it to one of yours?” Thus quarrels are propagated endlessly by revenge and retaliation.

      [3.] Christ takes this occasion to instruct her in divine things: If thou knewest the gift of God, thou wouldst have asked, v. 10. Observe,

      First, He waives her objection of the feud between the Jews and Samaritans, and takes no notice of it. Some differences are best healed by being slighted, and by avoiding all occasions of entering into dispute about them. Christ will convert this woman, not by showing her that the Samaritan worship was schismatical (though really it was so), but by showing her her own ignorance and immoralities, and her need of a Saviour.

      Secondly, He fills her with an apprehension that she had now an opportunity (a fairer opportunity than she was aware of) of gaining that which would be of unspeakable advantage to her. She had not the helps that the Jews had to discern the signs of the times, and therefore Christ tells her expressly that she had now a season of grace; this was the day of her visitation.

      a. He hints to her what she should know, but was ignorant of: If thou knewest the gift of God, that is, as the next words explain it, who it is that saith, Give me to drink. If thou knewest who I am. She saw him to be a Jew, a poor weary traveller; but he would have her know something more concerning him that did yet appear. Note, (a.) Jesus Christ is the gift of God, the richest token of God’s love to us, and the richest treasure of all good for us; a gift, not a debt which we could demand from God; not a loan, which he will demand from us again, but a gift, a free gift, ch. iii. 16. (b.) It is an unspeakable privilege to have this gift of God proposed and offered to us; to have an opportunity of embracing it: “He who is the gift of God is now set before thee, and addresses himself to thee; it is he that saith, Give me to drink; this gift comes a begging to thee.” (c.) Though Christ is set before us, and sues to us in and by his gospel, yet there are multitudes that know him not. They know not who it is that speaks to them in the gospel, that saith, Give me to drink; they perceive not that it is the Lord that calls them.

      b. He hopes concerning her, what she would have done if she had known him; to be sure she would not have given him such a rude and uncivil answer; nay, she would have been so far from affronting him that she would have made her addresses to him: Thou wouldest have asked. Note, (a.) Those that would have any benefit by Christ must ask for it, must be earnest in prayer to God for it. (b.) Those that have a right knowledge of Christ will seek to him, and if we do not seek unto him it is a sign that we do not know him, Ps. ix. 10. (c.) Christ knows what they that want the means of knowledge would have done if they had had them, Matt. xi. 21.

      c. He assures her what he would have done for her if she had applied to him: “He would have given thee (and not have upbraided thee as thou doest me) living water.” By this living water is meant the Spirit, who is not like the water in the bottom of the well, for some of which he asked, but like living or running water, which was much more valuable. Note, (a.) The Spirit of grace is as living water; see ch. vii. 38. Under this similitude the blessings of the Messiah had been promised in the Old Testament, Isa 12:3; Isa 35:7; Isa 44:4; Isa 55:1; Zec 14:8. The graces of the Spirit, and his comforts, satisfy the thirsting soul, that knows its own nature and necessity. (b.) Jesus Christ can and will give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him; for he received that he might give.

      [4.] The woman objects against and cavils at the gracious intimation which Christ gave her (Joh 4:11; Joh 4:12): Thou hast nothing to draw with; and besides, Art thou greater than our father Jacob? What he spoke figuratively, she took literally; Nicodemus did so too. See what confused notions they have of spiritual things who are wholly taken up with the things that are sensible. Some respect she pays to this person, in calling him Sir, or Lord; but little respect to what he said, which she does but banter.

      First, She does not think him capable of furnishing her with any water, no, not this in the well that is just at hand: Thou has nothing to draw with, and the well is deep. This she said, not knowing the power of Christ, for he who causeth the vapours to ascend from the ends of the earth needs nothing to draw. But there are those who will trust Christ no further than they can see him, and will not believe his promise, unless the means of the performance of it be visible; as if he were tied to our methods, and could not draw water without our buckets. She asks scornfully, “Whence hast thou this living water? I see not whence thou canst have it.” Note, The springs of that living water which Christ has for those that come to him are secret and undiscovered. The fountain of life is hid with Christ. Christ has enough for us, though we see not whence he has it.

      Secondly, She does not think it possible that he should furnish her with any better water than this which she could come at, but he could not: Art thou greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well?

      a. We will suppose the tradition true, that Jacob himself, and his children, and cattle, did drink of this well. And we may observe from it, (a.) The power and providence of God, in the continuance of the fountains of water from generation to generation, by the constant circulation of the rivers, like the blood in the body (Eccl. i. 7), to which circulation perhaps the flux and reflux of the sea, like the pulses of the heart, contribute. (b.) The plainness of the patriarch Jacob; his drink was water, and he and his children drank of the same well with his cattle.

      b. Yet, allowing that to be true, she was out in several things; as, (a.) In calling Jacob father. What authority had the Samaritans to reckon themselves of the seed of Jacob? They were descended from that mixed multitude which the king of Assyria had placed in the cities of Samaria; what have they to do then with Jacob? Because they were the invaders of Israel’s rights, and the unjust possessors of Israel’s lands, were they therefore the inheritors of Israel’s blood and honour? How absurd were those pretensions! (b.) She is out in claiming this well as Jacob’s gift, whereas he did no more give it than Moses gave the manna, ch. vi. 32. But thus we are apt to call the messengers of God’s gifts the donors of them, and to look so much at the hands they pass through as to forget the hand they come from. Jacob gave it to his sons, not to them. Yet thus the church’s enemies not only usurp, but monopolize, the church’s privileges. (c.) She was out in speaking of Christ as not worthy to be compared with our father Jacob. An over-fond veneration for antiquity makes God’s graces, in the good people of our own day, to be slighted.

      [5.] Christ answers this cavil, and makes it out that the living water he had to give was far better than that of Jacob’s well, Joh 4:13; Joh 4:14. Though she spoke perversely, Christ did not cast her off, but instructed and encouraged her. He shows her,

      First, That the water of Jacob’s well yielded but a transient satisfaction and supply: “Whoso drinketh of this water shall thirst again. It is no better than other water; it will quench the present thirst, but the thirst will return, and in a few hours a man will have as much need, and as much desire, of water as ever he had.” This intimates, 1. The infirmities of our bodies in this present state; they are still necessitous, and ever craving. Life is a fire, a lamp, which will soon go out, without continual supplies of fuel and oil. The natural heat preys upon itself. 2. The imperfections of all our comforts in this world; they are not lasting, nor our satisfaction in them remaining. Whatever waters of comfort we drink of, we shall thirst again. Yesterday’s meat and drink will not do to-day’s work.

      Secondly, That the living waters he would give should yield a lasting satisfaction and bliss, v. 14. Christ’s gifts appear most valuable when they come to be compared with the things of this world; for there will appear no comparison between them. Whoever partakes of the Spirit of grace, and the comforts of the everlasting gospel,

      a. He shall never thirst, he shall never want that which will abundantly satisfy his soul’s desires; they are longing, but not languishing. A desiring thirst he has, nothing more than God, still more and more of God; but not a despairing thirst.

      b. Therefore he shall never thirst, because this water that Christ gives shall be in him a well of water. He can never be reduced to extremity that has in himself a fountain of supply and satisfaction. (a.) Ever ready, for it shall be in him. The principle of grace planted in him is the spring of his comfort; see ch. vii. 38. A good man is satisfied from himself, for Christ dwells in his heart. The anointing abides in him; he needs not sneak to the world for comfort; the work and the witness of the Spirit in the heart furnish him with a firm foundation of hope and an overflowing fountain of joy. (b.) Never failing, for it shall be in him a well of water. He that has at hand only a bucket of water needs not thirst as long as this lasts, but it will soon be exhausted; but believers have in them a well of water, overflowing, ever flowing. The principles and affections which Christ’s holy religion forms in the souls of those that are brought under the power of it are this well of water. [a.] It is springing up, ever in motion, which bespeaks the actings of grace strong and vigorous. If good truths stagnate in our souls, like standing water, they do not answer the end of our receiving them. If there be a good treasure in the heart, we must thence bring forth good things. [b.] It is springing up unto everlasting life; which intimates, First, The aims of gracious actings. A sanctified soul has its eye upon heaven, means this, designs this, does all for this, will take up with nothing short of this. Spiritual life springs up towards its own perfection in eternal life. Secondly, The constancy of those actings; it will continue springing up till it come to perfection. Thirdly, The crown of them, eternal life at last. The living water rises from heaven, and therefore rises towards heaven; see Eccl. i. 7. And now is not this water better than that of Jacob’s well?

      [6.] The woman (whether in jest or earnest is hard to say) begs of him to give her some of this water (v. 15): Give me this water, that I thirst not. First, Some think that she speaks tauntingly, and ridicules what Christ had said as mere stuff; and, in derision of it, not desires, but challenges him to give her some of this water: “A rare invention; it will save me a great deal of pains if I never come hither to draw.” But, Secondly, Others think that it was a well-meant but weak and ignorant desire. She apprehended that he meant something very good and useful, and therefore saith Amen, at a venture. Whatever it be, let me have it; who will show me any good? Ease, or saving of labour, is a valuable good to poor labouring people. Note, 1. Even those that are weak and ignorant may yet have some faint and fluctuating desires towards Christ and his gifts, and some good wishes of grace and glory. 2. Carnal hearts, in their best wishes, look no higher than carnal ends. “Give it to me,” saith she, “not that I may have everlasting life” (which Christ proposed), “but that I come not hither to draw.“

      2. The next subject of discourse with this woman in concerning her husband, v. 16-18. It was not to let fall the discourse of the water of life that Christ started this, as many who will bring in any impertinence in conversation that they may drop a serious subject; but it was with a gracious design that Christ mentioned it. What he had said concerning his grace and eternal life he found had made little impression upon her, because she had not been convinced of sin: therefore, waiving the discourse about the living water, he sets himself to awaken her conscience, to open the wound of guilt, and then she would more easily apprehend the remedy by grace. And this is the method of dealing with souls; they must first be made weary and heavy-laden under the burden of sin, and then brought to Christ for rest; first pricked to the heart, and then healed. This is the course of spiritual physic; and if we proceed not in this order we begin at the wrong end.

      Observe, (1.) How discreetly and decently Christ introduces this discourse (v. 16): Go, call thy husband, and come hither. Now, [1.] The order Christ gave her had a very good colour: “Call thy husband, that he may teach thee, and help thee to understand these things, which thou art so ignorant of” The wives that will learn must ask their husbands (1 Cor. xiv. 35), who must dwell with them as men of knowledge, 1 Pet. iii. 7. “Call thy husband, that he may learn with thee; that then you may be heirs together of the grace of life. Call thy husband, that he may be witness to what passes between us.” Christ would thus teach us to provide things honest in the sight of all men, and to study that which is of good report. [2.] As it had a good colour, so it had a good design; for hence he would take occasion to call her sin to remembrance. There is need of art and prudence in giving reproofs; to fetch a compass, as the woman of Tekoa, 2 Sam. xiv. 20.

      (2.) How industriously the woman seeks to evade the conviction, and yet insensibly convicts herself, and, ere she is aware, owns her fault; she said, I have no husband. Her saying this intimated no more than that she did not care to have her husband spoken of, nor that matter mentioned any more. She would not have her husband come thither, lest, in further discourse, the truth of the matter should come out, to her shame; and therefore, “Pray go on to talk of something else, I have no husband;” she would be thought a maid or a widow, whereas, though she had no husband, she was neither. The carnal mind is very ingenious to shift off convictions, and to keep them from fastening, careful to cover the sin.

      (3.) How closely our Lord Jesus brings home the conviction to her conscience. It is probable that he said more than is here recorded, for she thought that he told her all that ever she did (v. 29), but that which is here recorded is concerning her husbands. Here is, [1.] A surprising narrative of her past conversation: Thou has had five husbands. Doubtless, it was not her affliction (the burying of so many husbands), but her sin, that Christ intended to upbraid her with; either she had eloped (as the law speaks), had run away from her husbands, and married others, or by her undutiful, unclean, disloyal conduct, had provoked them to divorce her, or by indirect means had, contrary to law, divorced them. Those who make light of such scandalous practices as these, as no more than nine days’ wonder, and as if the guilt were over as soon as the talk is over, should remember that Christ keeps account of all. [2.] A severe reproof of her present state of life: He whom thou now hast is not thy husband. Either she was never married to him at all, or he had some other wife, or, which is most probable, her former husband or husbands were living: so that, in short, she lived in adultery. Yet observe how mildly Christ tells her of it; he doth not call her strumpet, but tells her, He with whom thou livest is not thy husband: and then leaves it to her own conscience to say the rest. Note, Reproofs are ordinarily most profitable when they are least provoking. [3.] Yet in this he puts a better construction than it would well bear upon what she said by way of shuffle and evasion: Thou has well said I have no husband; and again, In that saidst thou truly. What she intended as a denial of the fact (that she had none with whom she lived as a husband) he favourably interpreted, or at least turned upon her, as a confession of the fault. Note, Those who would win souls should make the best of them, whereby they may hope to work upon their good-nature; for, if they make the worst of them, they certainly exasperate their ill-nature.

      3. The next subject of discourse with this woman is concerning the place of worship, v. 19-24. Observe,

      (1.) A case of conscience proposed to Christ by the woman, concerning the place of worship, Joh 4:19; Joh 4:20.

      [1.] The inducement she had to put this case: Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. She does not deny the truth of what he had charged her with, but by her silence owns the justice of the reproof; nor is she put into a passion by it, as many are when they are touched in a sore place, does not impute his censure to the general disgust the Jews had to the Samaritans, but (which is a rare thing) can bear to be told of a fault. But this is not all; she goes further: First, She speaks respectfully to him, calls him Sir. Thus should we honour those that deal faithfully with us. This was the effect of Christ’s meekness in reproving her; he gave her no ill language, and then she gave him none. Secondly, She acknowledges him to be a prophet, one that had a correspondence with Heaven. Note, The power of the word of Christ in searching the heart, and convincing the conscience of secret sins, is a great proof of its divine authority, 1Co 14:24; 1Co 14:25. Thirdly, She desires some further instruction from him. Many that are not angry at their reprovers, nor fly in their faces, yet are afraid of them and keep out of their way; but this woman was willing to have some more discourse with him that told her of her faults.

      [2.] The case itself that she propounded concerning the place of religious worship in public. Some think that she started this to shift off further discourse concerning her sin. Controversies in religion often prove great prejudices to serious godliness; but, it should seem, she proposed it with a good design; she knew she must worship God, and desired to do it aright; and therefore, meeting with a prophet, begs his direction. Note, It is our wisdom to improve all opportunities of getting knowledge in the things of God. When we are in company with those that are fit to teach, let us be forward to learn, and have a good question ready to put to those who are able to give a good answer. It was agreed between the Jews and the Samaritans that God is to be worshipped (even those who were such fools as to worship false gods were not such brutes as to worship none), and that religious worship is an affair of great importance: men would not contend about it if they were not concerned about it. But the matter in variance was where they should worship God. Observe how she states the case:–

      First, As for the Samaritans: Our fathers worshipped in this mountain, near to this city and this well; there the Samaritan temple was built by Sanballat, in favour of which she insinuates, 1. That whatever the temple was the place was holy; it was mount Gerizim, the mount in which the blessings were pronounced; and some think the same on which Abraham built his altar (Gen 12:6; Gen 12:7), and Jacob his, Gen. xxxiii. 18-20. 2. That it might plead prescription: Our fathers worshipped here. She thinks they have antiquity, tradition, and succession, on their side. A vain conversation often supports itself with this, that it was received by tradition from our fathers. But she had little reason to boast of their fathers; for, when Antiochus persecuted the Jews, the Samaritans, for fear of sharing with them in their sufferings, not only renounced all relation to the Jews, but surrendered their temple to Antiochus, with a request that it might be dedicated to Jupiter Olympius, and called by his name. Joseph. Antiq. 12. 257-264.

      Secondly, As to the Jews: You say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. The Samaritans governed themselves by the five books of Moses, and (some think) received only them as canonical. Now, though they found frequent mention there of the place God would choose, yet they did not find it named there; and they saw the temple at Jerusalem stripped of many of its ancient glories, and therefore thought themselves at liberty to set up another place, altar against altar.

      (2.) Christ’s answer to this case of conscience, v. 21, c. Those that apply themselves to Christ for instruction shall find him meek, to teach the meek his way. Now here,

      [1.] He puts a slight upon the question, as she had proposed it, concerning the place of worship (&lti>v. 21): “Woman, believe me as a prophet, and mark what I say. Thou art expecting the hour to come when either by some divine revelation, or some signal providence, this matter shall be decided in favour either of Jerusalem or of Mount Gerizim; but I tell thee the hour is at hand when it shall be no more a question; that which thou has been taught to lay so much weight on shall be set aside as a thing indifferent.” Note, It should cool us in our contests to think that those things which now fill us, and which we make such a noise about, shall shortly vanish, and be no more: the very things we are striving about are passing away: The hour comes when you shall neither in this mountain nor yet at Jerusalem worship the Father. First, The object of worship is supposed to continue still the same–God, as a Father; under this notion the very heathen worshipped God, the Jews did so, and probably the Samaritans. Secondly, But a period shall be put to all niceness and all differences about the place of worship. The approaching dissolution of the Jewish economy, and the erecting of the evangelical state, shall set this matter at large, and lay all in common, so that it shall be a thing perfectly indifferent whether in either of these places or any other men worship God, for they shall not be tied to any place; neither here nor there, but both, and any where, and every where. Note, The worship of God is not now, under the gospel, appropriated to any place, as it was under the law, but it is God’s will that men pray every where. 1Ti 2:8; Mal 1:11. Our reason teaches us to consult decency and convenience in the places of our worship: but our religion gives no preference to one place above another, in respect to holiness and acceptableness to God. Those who prefer any worship merely for the sake of the house or building in which it is performed (though it were as magnificent and as solemnly consecrated as ever Solomon’s temple was) forget that the hour is come when there shall be no difference put in God’s account: no, not between Jerusalem, which had been so famous for sanctity, and the mountain of Samaria, which had been so infamous for impiety.

      [2.] He lays a stress upon other things, in the matter of religious worship. When he made so light of the place of worship he did not intend to lessen our concern about the thing itself, of which therefore he takes occasion to discourse more fully.

      First, As to the present state of the controversy, he determines against the Samaritan worship, and in favour of the Jews, v. 22. He tells here, 1. That the Samaritans were certainly in the wrong; not merely because they worshipped in this mountain, though, while Jerusalem’s choice was in force, that was sinful, but because they were out in the object of their worship. If the worship itself had been as it should have been, its separation from Jerusalem might have been connived at, as the high places were in the best reigns: But you worship you know not what, or that which you do not know. They worshipped the God of Israel, the true God (Ezr 4:2; 2Ki 17:32); but they were sunk into gross ignorance; they worshipped him as the God of that land (2Ki 17:27; 2Ki 17:33), as a local deity, like the gods of the nations, whereas God must be served as God, as the universal cause and Lord. Note, Ignorance is so far from being the mother of devotion that it is the murderer of it. Those that worship God ignorantly offer the blind for sacrifice, and it is the sacrifice of fools. 2. That the Jews were certainly in the right. For, (1.) “We know what we worship. We go upon sure grounds in our worship, for our people are catechised and trained up in the knowledge of God, as he has revealed himself in the scripture.” Note, Those who by the scriptures have obtained some knowledge of God (a certain though not a perfect knowledge) may worship him comfortably to themselves, and acceptably to him, for they know what they worship. Christ elsewhere condemns the corruptions of the Jews’ worship (Matt. xv. 9), and yet here defends the worship itself; the worship may be true where yet it is not pure and entire. Observe, Our Lord Jesus was pleased to reckon himself among the worshippers of God: We worship. Though he was a Son (and then are the children free), yet learned he this obedience, in the days of his humiliation. Let not the greatest of men think the worship of God below them, when the Son of God himself did not. (2.) Salvation is of the Jews; and therefore they know what they worship, and what grounds they go upon in their worship. Not that all the Jews were saved, nor that it was not possible but that many of the Gentiles and Samaritans might be saved, for in every nation he that fears God and works righteousness is accepted of him; but, [1.] The author of eternal salvation comes of the Jews, appears among them (Rom. ix. 5), and is sent first to bless them. [2.] The means of eternal salvation are afforded to them. The word of salvation (Acts xiii. 26) was of the Jews. It was delivered to them, and other nations derived it through them. This was a sure guide to them in their devotions, and they followed it, and therefore knew what they worshipped. To them were committed the oracles of God (Rom. iii. 2), and the service of God, (Rom. ix. 4). The Jews therefore being thus privileged and advanced, it was presumption for the Samaritans to vie with them.

      Secondly, He describes the evangelical worship which alone God would accept and be well pleased with. Having shown that the place is indifferent, he comes to show what is necessary and essential–that we worship God in spirit and in truth,Joh 4:23; Joh 4:24. The stress is not to be laid upon the place where we worship God, but upon the state of mind in which we worship him. Note, The most effectual way to take up differences in the minor matters of religion is to be more zealous in the greater. Those who daily make it the matter of their care to worship in the spirit, one would think, should not make it the matter of their strife whether he should be worshipped here or there. Christ had justly preferred the Jewish worship before the Samaritan, yet here he intimates the imperfection of that. The worship was ceremonial,Heb 9:1; Heb 9:10. The worshippers were generally carnal, and strangers to the inward part of divine worship. Note, It is possible that we may be better than our neighbours, and yet not so good as we should be. It concerns us to be right, not only in the object of our worship, but in the manner of it; and it is this which Christ here instructs us in. Observe,

      a. The great and glorious revolution which should introduce this change: The hour cometh, and now is–the fixed stated time, concerning which it was of old determined when it should come, and how long it should last. The time of its appearance if fixed to an hour, so punctual and exact are the divine counsels; the time of its continuance is limited to an hour, so close and pressing is the opportunity of divine grace, 2 Cor. vi. 2. This hour cometh, it is coming in its full strength, lustre, and perfection, it now is in the embryo and infancy. The perfect day is coming, and now it dawns.

      b. The blessed change itself. In gospel times the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth. As creatures, we worship the Father of all: as Christians, we worship the Father of our Lord Jesus. Now the change shall be, (a.) In the nature of the worship. Christians shall worship God, not in the ceremonial observances of the Mosaic institution, but in spiritual ordinances, consisting less in bodily exercise, and animated and invigorated more with divine power and energy. The way of worship which Christ has instituted is rational and intellectual, and refined from those external rites and ceremonies with which the Old-Testament worship was both clouded and clogged. This is called true worship, in opposition to that which was typical. The legal services were figures of the true,Heb 9:3; Heb 9:24. Those that revolted from Christianity to Judaism are said to begin in the spirit, and end in the flesh, Gal. iii. 3. Such was the difference between Old-Testament and New-Testament institutions. (b.) In the temper and disposition of the worshippers; and so the true worshippers are good Christians, distinguished from hypocrites; all should, and they will, worship God in spirit and in truth. It is spoken of (v. 23) as their character, and (v. 24) as their duty. Note, It is required of all that worship God that they worship him in spirit and in truth. We must worship God, [a.] In spirit, Phil. iii. 3. We must depend upon God’s Spirit for strength and assistance, laying our souls under his influences and operations; we must devote our own spirits to, and employ them in, the service of God (Rom. i. 9), must worship him with fixedness of thought and a flame of affection, with all that is within us. Spirit is sometimes put for the new nature, in opposition to the flesh, which is the corrupt nature; and so to worship God with our spirits is to worship him with our graces, Heb. xii. 28. [b.] In truth, that is, in sincerity. God requires not only the inward part in our worship, but truth in the inward part, Ps. li. 6. We must mind the power more than the form, must aim at God’s glory, and not to be seen of men; draw near with a true heart, Heb. x. 22.

      Thirdly, He intimates the reasons why God must be thus worshipped.

      a. Because in gospel times they, and they only, are accounted the true worshippers. The gospel erects a spiritual way of worship, so that the professors of the gospel are not true in their profession, do not live up to gospel light and laws, if they do not worship God in spirit and in truth.

      b. Because the Father seeketh such worshippers of him. This intimates, (a.) That such worshippers are very rare, and seldom met with, Jer. xxx. 21. The gate of spiritual worshipping is strait. (b.) That such worship is necessary, and what the God of heaven insists upon. When God comes to enquire for worshippers, the question will not be, “Who worshipped at Jerusalem?” but, “Who worshipped in spirit?” That will be the touchstone. (c.) That God is greatly well pleased with and graciously accepts such worship and such worshippers. I have desired it,Psa 132:13; Psa 132:14; Son 2:14. (d.) That there has been, and will be to the end, a remnant of such worshippers; his seeking such worshippers implies his making them such. God is in all ages gathering in to himself a generation of spiritual worshippers.

      c. Because God is a spirit. Christ came to declare God to us (ch. i. 18), and this he has declared concerning him; he declared it to this poor Samaritan woman, for the meanest are concerned to know God; and with this design, to rectify her mistakes concerning religious worship, to which nothing would contribute more than the right knowledge of God. Note, (a.) God is a spirit, for he is an infinite and eternal mind, an intelligent being, incorporeal, immaterial, invisible, and incorruptible. It is easier to say what God is not than what he is; a spirit has not flesh and bones, but who knows the way of a spirit? If God were not a spirit, he could not be perfect, nor infinite, nor eternal, nor independent, nor the Father of spirits. (b.) The spirituality of the divine nature is a very good reason for the spirituality of divine worship. If we do not worship God, who is a spirit, in the spirit, we neither give him the glory due to his name, and so do not perform the act of worship, nor can we hope to obtain his favour and acceptance, and so we miss of the end of worship, Mat 15:8; Mat 15:9.

      4. The last subject of discourse with this woman is concerning the Messiah, Joh 4:25; Joh 4:26. Observe here,

      (1.) The faith of the woman, by which she expected the Messiah: I know that Messias cometh–and he will tell us all things. She had nothing to object against what Christ had said; his discourse was, for aught she knew, what might become the Messiah then expected; but from him she would receive it, and in the mean time she thinks it best to suspend her belief. Thus many have no heart to the price in their hand (Prov. xvii. 16), because they think they have a better in their eye, and deceive themselves with a promise that they will learn that hereafter which they neglect now. Observe here,

      [1.] Whom she expects: I know that Messias cometh. The Jews and Samaritans, though so much at variance, agreed in the expectation of the messiah and his kingdom. The Samaritans received the writings of Moses, and were no strangers to the prophets, nor to the hopes of the Jewish nation; those who knew least knew this, that Messias was to come; so general and uncontested was the expectation of him, and at this time more raised than ever (for the sceptre was departed from Judah, Daniel’s weeks were near expiring), so that she concludes not only, He will come, but erchetai–“He comes, he is just at hand:” Messias, who is called Christ. The evangelist, though he retains the Hebrew word Messias (which the woman used) in honour to the holy language, and to the Jewish church, that used it familiarly, yet, writing for the use of the Gentiles, he takes care to render it by a Greek word of the same signification, who is called Christ-Anointed, giving an example to the apostle’s rule, that whatever is spoken in an unknown or less vulgar tongue should be interpreted,1Co 14:27; 1Co 14:28.

      [2.] What she expects from him: “He will tell us all things relating to the service of God which it is needful for us to know, will tell us that which will supply our defects, rectify our mistakes, and put an end to all our disputes. He will tell us the mind of God fully and clearly, and keep back nothing.” Now this implies an acknowledgement, First, Of the deficiency and imperfection of the discovery they now had of the divine will, and the rule they had of the divine worship; it could not make the comers thereunto perfect, and therefore they expected some great advance and improvement in matters of religion, a time of reformation. Secondly, Of the sufficiency of the Messiah to make this change: “He will tell us all things which we want to know, and about which we wrangle in the dark. He will introduce peace, by leading us into all truth, and dispelling the mists of error.” It seems, this was the comfort of good people in those dark times that light would arise; if they found themselves at a loss, and run aground, it was a satisfaction to them to say, When Messias comes, he will tell us all things; as it may be to us now with reference to his second coming: now we see through a glass, but then face to face.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

He must needs pass through Samaria ( ). Imperfect indicative of the impersonal verb with subject infinitive () and accusative of general reference (). Note repetition of . It was only necessary to pass through Samaria in going directly north from Judea to Galilee. In coming south from Galilee travellers usually crossed over the Jordan and came down through Perea to avoid the hostility of the Samaritans towards people who passed through their land to go to Jerusalem. Jesus once met this bitterness on going to the feast of tabernacles (Lu 9:51-56).

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Must needs. Because this was the natural route from Jerusalem to Galilee. Possibly with a suggestion of the necessity arising from the Father ‘s will. John does not put this as a mission undertaken to the Samaritans. Jesus observed the law which He imposed on His disciples (Mt 10:5).

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

JESUS AND THE WOMAN OF SAMARIA v. 4-13

1) “And he must needs,” (edei de auton) “And it behooved him,” in doing His Father’s will and work, because there was a Divine need for His word and testimony. It was both the shortest way to Galilee and His testimony was needed there.

2) “Go through Samaria.” (dierchesthai dia tes Samareias) “To pass through Samaria,” as surely as there was a Divine need and call for Philip to go down into the desert of Gaza, Act 8:26-40; and for Paul and his witnessing missionary companions to go into Macedonia, Act 1:6-10. Samaria lay between Galilee and Judea, some 35 miles north of Jerusalem, the smallest province of Palestine, with the city of Samaria, later called Sabaste, as its main population center.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

44. For Jesus himself testified. The apparent contradiction which strikes us here at first sight, has given rise to various interpretations. There is an excess of subtlety in the explanation given by Augustine, that Christ was without honor among his own countrymen, because he had done more good among the Samaritans in two days only than he had done, in a long time, among the Galileans; and because, without miracles, he gained more disciples in Samaria than a great number of miracles had gained him in Galilee. Nor am I satisfied with the view of Chrysostom, who understands Christ’s country to be Capernaum, because he dwelt there more frequently than in any other place. I rather agree with Cyril, who says that he left the city of Nazareth, and departed into a different part of Galilee; for the other three Evangelists mention Nazareth, when they relate this testimony of Christ. The meaning might indeed be that, while the time of full manifestation was not yet come, he chose to remain concealed in his native country, as in a more obscure retreat. Some, too, explain it to mean, that he remained two days in Samaria, because there was no reason why he should hasten to go to a place where contempt awaited him. Others think that he went straight to Nazareth, and immediately left it; but, as John relates nothing of this sort, I do not venture to yield to that conjecture. A more correct view of it is, that when he saw himself despised in his native city Nazareth, he rather withdrew to another place. And, therefore, it immediately follows (verse 46) that he came into the town of Cana. What is next added — that the Galileans received him — was a token of reverence, not of contempt.

A Prophet hath no honour in his own country. I have no doubt that this saying was common, and had passed into a proverb; (88) and we know that proverbs are intended to be a graceful expression of what commonly and most frequently ( ἐπὶ τὸ πολὶ) happens. In such cases, therefore, it is not necessary that we should rigidly demand uniform accuracy, as if what is stated in a proverb were always true. It is certain that prophets are usually more admired elsewhere than in their own country. Sometimes, too, it may happen, and in reality does happen, that a prophet is not less honored by his countrymen than by strangers; but the proverb states what is common and ordinary, that prophets receive honor more readily in any other place than among their own countrymen.

Now this proverb, and the meaning of it, may have a twofold origin; for it is a universal fault, that those whom we have heard crying in the cradle, and whom we have seen acting foolishly in their boyhood, are despised by us throughout their whole life, as if they had made no progress, since they were boys. To this is added another evil — envy, which prevails more among acquaintances. But I think it probable that the proverb arose from this circumstance, that Prophets were so ill-treated by their own nation; for good and holy men, when they perceived that there was in Judea so great ingratitude towards God, so great contempt of his word, so great obstinacy, might justly utter this complaint, that nowhere are the Prophets of God less honored than in their own country. If the former meaning be preferred, the name Prophet must be understood generally to denote any teacher, as Paul calls Epimenides a prophet of the Cretians, ( Titus 1:12.)

(88) “ Commune, et qui etoit passee en proverbe.”

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(4) He must needs go through Samariai.e., following the shortest and most usual road, and the one we find Him taking from Galilee to Jerusalem (Luk. 9:52; see Note there). Josephus spoke of this as the customary way of the Galileans going up during the feasts at Jerusalem (Ant. xx. 6, 1). The Pharisees, indeed, took the longer road through Pera, to avoid contact with the country and people of Samaria, but it is within the purpose of His life and work (needs go, i.e., was necessary that He should go) to teach in Samaria, as in Juda, the principles of true religion and worship, which would cut away the foundations of all local jealousies and feuds, and establish for all nations the spiritual service of the universal Father (Joh. 4:21-24).

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

4. Needs go through Samaria As the province of Samaria spread its broad territories from Jordan to the Mediterranean sea, between Judea and Galilee, it was necessary to cross it, (see map, and note on Mat 2:1,) unless he would take a circuit around through Peraea on the east side of Jordan. It was, therefore, purely a geographical necessity.

Starting from Jerusalem, (at the present day he would pass through the Damascus gate,) our Lord, with his disciples, proceeds northward, and after a journey of nearly forty miles arrives near the very ancient city of Sychar, Shechem, or Nablous. “Well mounted Europeans,” says Tristam, “ride in one day from Nablous to Jerusalem; but their muleteers and baggage often occupy two days.” Our Lord’s route lay through historic ground. He passed doubtless through Gibeah, the ancient capital of the kingdom of Saul; through Bethel, where Jacob had his dream of the ladder and the angels; near Shiloh, the first dwelling-place of the tabernacle and the ark in Canaan, and the scene of the downfall of the house of Eli. At the terminus of this journey three objects of special interest occur in succession: Jacob’s well, Joseph’s tomb, and the ancient city of Shechem, between the mountains Gerizim and Ebal. (See cut of Shechem and Jacob’s Well.)

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘And he had to pass through Samaria.’

The road through Samaria lies between Judea and Galilee, and although some Jews would take the long way round through Transjordan because they saw Samaria as an unclean land, and they wanted to avoid the danger of becoming ‘unclean’ as a result of the failure of many in Samaria to follow rigid rules of ritual cleanliness, Jesus clearly did not see this as applying to Him.

‘He had to pass’ . ‘Edei’ – ‘it was necessary’. Was this the divine necessity? (Compare Joh 3:7; Joh 3:14; Joh 3:30; Joh 4:24; Joh 9:4; Joh 10:16; Joh 12:34; Joh 20:9). Or was it just the geographical necessity? While there was a recognised longer route to take it would have smacked of racial and religious prejudice. The truth is probably that we are again to take the double meaning. The Gospel is full of these nuances.

On His journey He passed through the land of the Samaritans. The Samaritans were a people despised by the Jews, and yet not looked on as Gentiles. It is doubtful if they were descended from the intermixture of the Israelites left in the land when Samaria was sacked in 722 BC, and the people brought in from other lands to replace those who had been deported, with whom they intermarried. They may, however, have been descended from YHWH worshippers who had remained in the land and had come together to form a community in order to preserve their own form of worship. Or they may have resulted from a group who arrived later seeking a home for themselves where they could follow their own religious beliefs. Certainly some of the people left in the land by the Assyrians had at least continued to look to the Temple at Jerusalem (Jer 41:5), but after Judah’s exile, when the Temple was being restored, the Samaritans had offered their help, and had been refused any part in it. They were looked on as being religiously unacceptable. And there is no doubt that their religion was not orthodox Judaism. The hellenisation of that part of the world by Alexander the Great had resulted in the disappearance of most people in the region into the mass of hellenists. The Samaritans stood out among them, being centred around Shechem and following a distorted form of Yahwism.

Certainly it seems that the later ‘Samaritans’ were connected with the area around Shechem ( Sir 50:26 ; 2Ma 5:22 on; Joh 6:2), and one of Josephus’ sources describes them as ‘Shechemites’. After a long period of desolation Shechem had been rebuilt in the late 4th century BC, and at that stage they had built their own Temple, with a genuine Aaronic priesthood, on Mount Gerizim, which was later destroyed by John Hyrcanus (about 128 BC). They accepted the Law, but had their own version of it in the Samaritan Pentateuch, which named Mount Gerizim as the place of sacrifice. They believed in the one God, and the coming of a deliverer, ‘the Taheb (restorer)’, identified by them with ‘the prophet’ in Deu 18:15. They were therefore not looked on as pagans, but as second rate worshippers of the one God, and for that reason tolerated, but only in order to be dismissed as heretics.

Thus their connections with the earlier ‘Samaritans’ may have been tenuous. They may have been a group who had kept themselves relatively clean from the introduction of the various gods of the nations, and maintained their own relatively pure system of worship, or they may have been a group that arrived later and settled there. They were, however, despised by men like the Judaisers, and indeed by most Jews.

Nothing therefore would have seemed less likely to most Jews than the spiritual transformation of a loose woman who, on top of that, was a despised Samaritan. Yet here at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry He demonstrates that there are no barriers of race or past morals to prevent anyone from coming to God, once the heart is set in the right direction, and that God is ready to accept them.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Samaritan Woman ( Joh 4:4-42 ).

In this story of the Samaritan woman in Joh 4:4-42 Jesus depicts Himself as the Gift of God Who can give men living water (Joh 4:10), and can thus give men a spring of water within which will well up to eternal life (Joh 4:14). This is in line with the promise that in God is the ‘fountain of life’ in Psa 36:9, and the indication that God is the spring of living waters in Jer 2:13. Thus Jesus is here portraying Himself as fulfilling what God would be to His people. His words also tie in with the many references in the Old Testament to God as being like a water source Who satisfies men’s thirst (e.g. Psa 23:2; Psa 46:4; Isa 44:3-4; Isa 55:1; Isa 48:21 etc.), and this includes the going forth of ‘His word’ like the effects of rain and snow producing life (Isa 55:10-11); the reference in Isaiah to a coming king who will be like rivers of water in a dry place (Isa 32:1-2); and the reference to the mirage becoming a pool and the thirsty ground springs of water at the time when the lame and blind are healed (Isa 35:5-7). These prophecies had in mind the days of restoration, the says of the Messiah. So Jesus claim may here be seen as both Messianic, and a claim to be the Son of God.

In context it illustrates well what we have seen in chapter 3 that the Spirit works where He wills (Joh 3:8), and the picture of life-giving water is again used, this time referring to a spring bubbling up within to give eternal life. The heavenly rain is falling and men may now drink of it abundantly. Here is full proof that Jesus sees the Spirit as now at work.

Once again we also have the contrast of the old with the new, the old water of Jacob’s well is replaced by the new living water which is the gift of God through Jesus, the old worship in Jerusalem and on Mount Gerizim is replaced by the new worship in Spirit and truth.

The story then leads up to an admission by Jesus that He is the Messiah (Joh 4:26), whilst the Samaritans themselves declare that He is ‘the Saviour of the world’, a title almost certainly having Messianic significance. Jesus’ Messiahship shines out throughout the whole account.

Note the vividness with which the writer recounts the story. Much of it is put in the present tense in order to carry the reader along with it, and its incidental detail cries out that it is an eyewitness report. We get the decided impression that whoever was responsible for the recounting of this story was there. This is backed up by the fact that examination of the account reveals that it was written by someone who was very familiar with Samaria, just as elsewhere familiarity with Judea and Perea has been obvious. He knew of the road that led through this part of Samaria. He not only knew of the well, but was aware that it was a deep one. He seems aware of the overhanging steeps of Gerizim. He knew that it was an area where ripened corn might be expected. Those who have lived in Palestine say that they feel as they read these accounts that they are breathing the air of Palestine once again. Indeed such factors are continually true of this Gospel, underlining that the Gospel was written by an eyewitness, or someone who obtained his information from eyewitnesses and faithfully recorded what he was told.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Joh 4:4-5. And he must needs go through Samaria. In his way to Galilee, Jesus was obliged to pass through Samaria, where one evening, being wearied with his journey, he sat down by Jacob’s well, not far from the city of Sychar, which the evangelist tells us was near to the parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his Son Joseph. Now if, as Mr. Maundrell conjectures, the plain beginning at Jacob’s well was part of that parcel, Sychar might justly be said to be nigh to it, though it was as far distant as the present Naplosa, which is about a mile from it; but if Sychar in our Lord’s time, as is probable, extended further towards the well than Naplosa does at present, the propriety of the evangelist’s expression will appear yet more fully. It seems evident, however, from this history, that Sychar was at some distance from the well: for the disciples are said to have gone away into the city to buy meat, Joh 4:8 while the woman talked with Jesus at the well; and Joh 4:30 we are told that the Samaritans, on hearing what the woman said concerning Jesus, went out of the city, and came to see him, Joh 4:40. Besides, that the town was at some distance from the well, seems highly probable from the earnestness wherewith the woman begged Jesus to give her such water as would prevent her from being athirst, and from coming thither to draw. It seems, her coming from the town to the well was a great labour, from which she wished to be free. The name of this place was originally Sichem, but was changed into Sychar by the Jews, as a name of reproach; for Sychar signifies, in the Syriac language, a drunkard and a liar.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Joh 4:4-5 . ] from the geographical position; and hence the usual way for Galilaean travellers lay through Samaria (Josephus, Antt . xx. 6. 1), unless one chose to pass through Perea to avoid the hated land, which Jesus has at present no occasion to do. Comp. Luk 9:52 .

] towards a city (not into , Joh 4:28 ff.). Comp. Mat 21:1 ; see Fritzsche, ad Marc . p. 81.

] (not , as Elz. has, against the best witnesses) is, according to the usual opinion, though, indeed, the , comp. Joh 11:54 , pointing to an unknown place, does not tally with it, the same town as that called (LXX. , comp. Act 7:16 ; also , comp. Josephus) in Gen 33:18 , Jos 20:7 , Jdg 9:7 , et al.; after the time of Christ, however, called Neapolis (Joseph. Bell. iv. 8. 1), and now Nablus. See Crome, Beschreib. von Pal. I. p. 102 ff.; Robinson, III. 336; Rosen, in the Zeitschr. d. morgenl. Gesellsch. 1860, p. 634 ff. Upon the remnant of the Samaritans still in this town, see Rogers on the Modern Samaritans, London 1855; Barges, les Samaritains de Naplouse, Paris 1855. The name , [182] which Credner quite arbitrarily tries to refer to a mere error in transcription, was accordingly a corruption of the old name, perhaps intentional , though it had come into ordinary use, and signifying drunken town (according to Isa 28:1 ), or town of lies , or heathen town , after Hab 3:18 ( ). Reland takes the former view, Lightfoot and Hengstenberg the latter, Hengstenberg supposing that John himself made the alteration in order to describe the lying character of the Samaritans quite against the simplicity of the narrative in general, and the express in particular. This . , and the difference in the name, as well as the following , etc., and Joh 4:7 , suggest the opinion that Sychar was a distinct town in the neighbourhood of Sychem (Hug, Luthardt, Lichtenstein, Ewald, Brckner, Baeumlein). See especially Delitzsch, in Guericke’s Luth. Zeitschr . 1856, p. 244 ff.; Ewald, Jahrb . VIII. 255 ff., and in his Johann. Schr . I. 181. The name may still be discovered in the modern al Askar , east of Nablus. Schenkel still sees here an error of a Gentile-Christian author.

The belonged to Sychem (Gen 33:19 ; Gen 48:22 , LXX. Jos 24:32 ), [183] but must have lain in the direction of Sychar.

] the town lay in the neighbourhood of the field, etc. Here only in the N. T., very often in the classics, as a simple adverb.

[182] Concerning the Talmudic name , see Wieseler, Synopse, p. 256 ff.

[183] The LXX. in Gen 48:22 render by , the error being that they took the Hebrew word directly as a name, whereas it is only an allusion to the town Sichem.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

And he must needs go through Samaria. (5) Then cometh he to a city of Samaria, which is called Sychar, near to the parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph. (6) Now Jacob’s well was there. Jesus therefore wearied with his journey, sat thus on the well. And it was about the sixth hour. (7) There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water. Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink. (8) (For his disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat.) (9) Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me which am a woman of Samaria? For the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans. (10) Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water. (11) The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water? (12) Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle? (13) Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: (14) But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him, shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. (15) The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw. (16) Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither. (17) The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband: (18) For thou hast had five husbands, and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly. (19) The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. (20) Our fathers worshipped in this mountain and ye say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. (21) Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. (22) Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. (23) But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. (24) God is a spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. (25) The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. (26) Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he. (27) And upon this came his disciples, and marvelled that he talked with the woman; yet no man said, What seekest thou? or, Why talkest thou with her? (28) The woman then left her water-pot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men, (29) Come, see a man which told me all things that ever I did; is not this the Christ? (30) Then they went out of the city, and came unto him. (31) In the mean while his disciples prayed him, saying, Master, eat. (32) But he said unto them, I have meat to eat that ye know not of. (33) Therefore said the disciples one to another, Hath any man brought him ought to eat? (34) Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work. (35) Say not ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest, behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest. (36) And he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal; that both he that soweth, and he that reapeth, may rejoice together. (37) And herein is that saying true, One soweth, and another reapeth. (38) I sent you to reap that whereon ye bestowed no labour: other men laboured, and ye are entered into their labours. (39) And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him, for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did. (40) So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them. And he abode there two days. (41) And many more believed because of his own word; (42) And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.

Were I to enter into a full comment upon this interesting interview of Christ with this woman of Samaria, it would fill very many pages; and after all I should leave unnoticed, as all Commentators gone before have done, numberless precious things contained in it. I must therefore pass over the consideration of what is generally brought forward by our Lord, to the Reader’s own observation; praying, and hoping, that God the Holy Ghost will sweetly open the whole, and bring home our Lord’s words to his heart, as he did to the woman of Samaria, and many of her countrymen; and render his own most blessed discourse profitable, by his own most gracious power. Some few of the more prominent features contained in this sermon of Jesus, I beg the Reader to remark with me; and may the Lord write them on our hearts. And, first: it is not the least subject of moment to observe, the needs be, which is said for Jesus going through Samaria. It is true indeed that if Christ was going into Galilee, (see Joh 4:43 ,) as he now came out of Judaea, he could go no other way. But it doth not follow, that there was a necessity that he should go at that time into Galilee. But whatever other causes there might be to this constraint, the conversion of this woman to the faith of Christ, and certain of her countrymen also, became sufficient cause. This was the time, the place, the manner, the method, and the whole train of events, linked in the chain with it; which, from all eternity had been marked for Christ’s calling to himself this woman, and other Samaritans, who were effectually wrought upon, to the knowledge and belief of Jesus. Reader! what a sweet thought is it, that all things are arranged with infinite wisdom, for all the purposes of Christ’s Church and people, in the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God. What the world calls chance, and accident; the believer cannot admit in his creed. Everything, from the numbering of the hairs of, our head, to the bringing home the Church to glory, is arranged, ordered, and appointed; and to a minuteness, which nothing can counteract, by the stratagem of men, or devils. Dan 4:35 ; Rom 11:36 .

The conversation which took place at the well, between Jesus and this woman, I pray the Reader to observe, began with our Lord. Yes! all the overtures of grace come first from the Lord. 1Jn 4:19 . But what wonderful discoveries the Lord made to her of herself. He unrips her very heart, and lays open to her, some of her most secret sins. He next reveals to her himself, and sweetly inclines her affection to feel her want of him, and to incline her heart to desire him. And so earnest was she when once these great things were done for her, that every poor sinner like herself should be made a partaker of such free rich mercy; that she forgot her errand at the well, left her water pot there, and ran to the city, with a pressing invitation to her countrymen to come and see Jesus! Reader! depend upon it, that such effects as this woman felt, will be, in the instance of every poor sinner, whom the Lord by his Spirit, hath convinced of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment. Those two grand points, are always joined together. In the same moment that God the Holy Ghost humbles the soul for sin; he leads that soul to feel the need of a Savior. So that self-abhorrence, and Christ exalted, will always go together. I must not enlarge: but before I quit this most important view of the subject, I entreat the Reader for his further conviction on this point, to read the certain truth of it, in the lives of holy men of old. What said Job, when he had seen God in Christ. Behold I am vile, (said he,) what shall I answer thee: I will lay my hand upon my mouth! Job 40:4 . See also Job 42:5-6 . What said Isaiah, after he had been admitted to a view of that glorious vision, of the glory of Christ: Woe is me, (said he,) I am undone; for I am a man of unclean lips; mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts. Isa 6:1-5 , compared with Joh 12:41 . What said David, Psa 143:2 . What said Paul, Rom 7:23-24 . Reader! such will the best of men say, when once the Holy Ghost hath opened to their view their own vileness, and the Lord’s holiness!

And, Reader! do allow me to lead you into an enquiry, before you quit the subject; that you may ask your own heart, whether

you have met the Lord God of the Hebrews, as this woman did, and he hath made similar discoveries to your conscience, as he did to hers. Have you seen sin, exceeding sinful? Have you seen Christ exceeding precious? Hath Jesus truly discoursed with you by his Spirit: and have you with Him by faith? If you have met with Christ in this most blessed saving way, then do you know him as he is: the Christ of God, the Sent of God, and One with God; so that you can truly say with holy men of old, We believe, and are sure, that thou art Christ the Son of the living God! Joh 6:69 . Nothing short of this knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ, and this knowledge of yourself, can enable you to do as this woman did; believe on him for yourself, and commend him to others. Oh! for grace, in this Christ-despising day, and generation, so to know the Lord, and so to believe in him, for life and salvation, that like this woman, we may be able to invite others from heart-felt joy; and like the Samaritans under the same heart-felt conviction, to say: Now we believe, not because of the saying of another, but from having heard him ourselves; and know that He is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world!

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

4 And he must needs go through Samaria.

Ver. 4. He must needs go ] Happy for them that they lay in our Saviour’s way, to be looked upon; his feet drop fatness. Luther had rather be with Christ in hell than in heaven without him, Malim praesente Christo esse in inferno, quam absente eo in coelo. Luther in Gen 30:1-43 .

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

4. ] If He was already on the borders of Samaria, not far from non (see note on ch. Joh 3:23 ), the direct way was through Samaria. Indeed without this assumption, we know that the Galilans ordinarily took this way (Jos. Antt. xx. 6. 1, beginning). But there was probably design also in the journey. It could not have been mere speed ( , Jos. Vit. 52), since He made two days’ stay on the way.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Joh 4:4 . . The is explained by the position of Samaria interposed between Judaea and Galilee. Only the very sensitive Jews went round by Peraea. The Galileans were accustomed to go through Samaria on their way to the feasts at Jerusalem (Josephus, Antiq. , xx. 6, 1). Samaria took its name from the city Samaria or Shomron, built by Omri as the capital of the kingdom of Israel (1Ki 16:24 ). After being destroyed by Hyrcanus, the city was rebuilt by Herod and called Sebaste in honour of Augustus. The territory of Samaria in the time of Christ was included in the tetrarchy of Archelaus and was under the procurator Pontius Pilate. Herod Antipas’ domain marched with it north and east.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

He must needs = it was necessary [for] Him. See Josephus, Life, 52. Antiquities xx. vi. 1. A necessity not only geographical, but including the Divine counsels.

go = pass. Greek. dierchomai. Compare Joh 8:59.

through. Greek dia. App-104. Joh 4:1.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

4.] If He was already on the borders of Samaria, not far from non (see note on ch. Joh 3:23), the direct way was through Samaria. Indeed without this assumption, we know that the Galilans ordinarily took this way (Jos. Antt. xx. 6. 1, beginning). But there was probably design also in the journey. It could not have been mere speed ( , Jos. Vit. 52),-since He made two days stay on the way.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Joh 4:4. ) In the very passing through He did great things.- , through Samaria) An admirable arrangement [economy], especially at that early period. What Jesus afterwards forbade the disciples, Mat 10:5, Into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not, He Himself avoided in this place. The Samaritans went out to Him, Joh 4:30; nor, except when besought, did He give them two days, Joh 4:40. Nay, even He so guided His conference with the Samaritan woman, that it was only at her earnest request He imparted His grace to her; Joh 4:15, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not. [He adopted a similar method towards the Gentiles: Mat 15:21, etc. (The woman of Canaan); Mar 7:24, etc. [The same woman, termed a Greek (or marg., a Gentile), a Syro-Phenician].-Harm., p. 171.]

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Joh 4:4

Joh 4:4

And he must needs pass through Samaria.-Samaria lay between Judea and Galilee. In going from one to the other Samaria must be passed through or the person must cross the river Jordan, go on the east side, and cross over to Judea below the southern boundary of Samaria. This greatly increased the distance.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Mat 10:5, Mat 10:6, Luk 2:49, Luk 9:51, Luk 9:52, Luk 17:11

Reciprocal: 1Ki 13:32 – in the cities 1Ki 16:24 – the name of the city 1Jo 5:11 – God

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

4

Samaria lay between Judea and Galilee, which is the reason this verse says he must needs go through Samaria.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

And he must needs go through Samaria.

[He must needs go through Samaria.] Josephus tells us, It was the custom for the Galileans, in their journeying to Jerusalem to their feasts, to go through Samaria.

Our countryman Biddulph describes the way which he himself travelled from Galilee to Jerusalem, anno Domini 1601: out of whom, for the reader’s sake, I will borrow a few passages. He tells us, that on March 24 they rode near the sea of Galilee, and gives the computation of that sea to be in length about eight leagues and in breadth five. Now a league is three miles. After they had gone about seven miles, having the sea of Galilee on their left hands, they went up a hill, not very steep, but very pleasant; which (he saith) is said to be the hill mentioned Joh 6:3. [Although here indeed either I am mistaken or his guides deceived him; because that mountain was on the other side of the sea.]

However he tells us, that from the top of this hill they discerned Saphetta, the Jews’ university. All the way they went was infinitely pleasant, the hills and dales all very fruitful: and that about two o’clock in the afternoon they came to a certain village called by the Arabians ‘Inel Tyger,’ i.e. ‘The merchant’s eye.’ When they had taken some food and sleep, their mind leaped within them to go up mount Tabor, which was not far off. [I fear his guides deceived him here also concerning this mount.]

On the twenty-fifth of March they spent the whole day in traversing the pleasant fields of Bashan near the hill of Bashan. In the way they saw some rubbish of the tower of Gehazi, 2Ki 5:24; and came to a town commonly called ‘Jenine,’ of old ‘Engannim,’ Jos 15:34 [more truly, Good man, Jos 19:21], distant from Tabor two-and-twenty miles; a place of gardens and waters, and places of pleasure. There they stayed all the next day, upon the occasion of a Turkish feast called ‘Byram.’ March 27, riding by Engannim they were twice in danger; once by thieves, dwelling hard by; another time by the Arabs, in a wood about twelve miles thence. That night they came to Sychar, a city of Samaria, mentioned John_4; distant from Engannim seven-and-twenty miles. They stayed there the next day. It is now called Napolis: Jacob’s well is near it, the waters of it sweet as milk.

March 29, they went from Sychar towards Jerusalem; the nearer to which place they came, the more barren and unpleasant they found the soil. At length, coming to a large grove or wilderness full of trees and hills [perhaps this was mount Ephraim], from the top of the hill they saw the sea on the right hand, and little vessels upon it passing to Joppa. About three or four in the afternoon they came to a ruinous town called ‘Beere,’ of old (as was reported to them) ‘Beer-sheba,’ a great city [but more probably ‘Beeroth,’ mentioned Jos 18:25]. It is said, that was the place where Christ’s parents first missed him in their journey, Luk 2:44. They would have lodged there that night, being weary and hungry, and having spent their provision, but they could have nothing fit for themselves or their horses; and being from Jerusalem but ten miles, they went on; and after having travelled five or six miles, had a view of the city. Thus our countryman, a clergyman, tells us in his book.

This interposition of Samaria between Galilee and Judea must be remembered, when we read the borders and portions of the tribes set out, Ezekiel_48; where Manasseh and Ephraim (the country of Samaria) are bounded and set out as formerly, but must not be reckoned under the notion of Samaria, as they had been.

Necessity itself found, or made a way betwixt Judea and Galilee through Samaria; because, indeed, there was no other way they could go, unless a long way about, through the country beyond Jordan. Nor was there any reason why they should make any difficulty of going through Samaria, unless the hostility of the country. For,

“The country of the Cuthites is clean.” So that without scruple they might gather of the fruits and products of it. “The gatherings of their waters are clean.” So that a Jew might drink, or wash himself in them. “Their dwellings are clean.” So that he might enter thereinto, eat or lodge there. “Their roads are clean.” So that the dust of them did not defile a Jew’s feet.

The method of the story in this place, by comparing it with other evangelists, may be thus put together: Herod had imprisoned John Baptist, under pretence of his growing too popular, and that the multitude of his followers increasing, tended to innovate. Our Saviour understanding this, and withal that the Sanhedrim had heard something of the increase of his disciples too, withdrew from Judea into Galilee, that he might be more remote from that kind of thunderbolt that St. John had been struck with.

Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels

Joh 4:4. And he must needs go through Samaria. The natural route from Judea to Galilee lay through Samaria. The other route, through the country on the east of Jordan, was so much longer that no one would choose it unless desirous of avoiding Samaria. The necessity here spoken of, therefore, may simply have reference to geographical position, and to the present urgent motive for reaching Galilee without delay. Still the use of must in this Gospel compels us to lay an emphasis on the word, and to interpret it as denoting more than merely usage or convenience. If the Evangelists thought is that the hostility of the Pharisees (partly actually existing, partly foreseen) made it necessary for the Saviour to hasten into Galilee, then he would have us understand that the Jews themselves brought about this visit to the hated nation of the Samaritans. But above and beyond all this, there seems a clear intimation of the truth brought before us in Joh 4:34, chap. Joh 9:4etc: here, as always, Jesus acts according to His knowledge of His Fathers will.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Here observe, 1. How wonderfully the wisdom of God overrules the malice of men for his own glory, and the good of others. The malice of the Pharisees in Judea drives Christ into Galilee, and in his passage through Samaria, the first fruits of the Gentiles are called, and particularly the woman of Samaria.

Observe, 2. How in every step of Christ’s way he was doing good to the souls of men. In his passage through Samaria into Galilee, a poor woman is brought to know him to be the true Messias.

Observe, 3. Our holy Lord, in his journeying from place to place, did travel usually on foot; and the weakness of his body, upon travelling, shews him to truly and really man, and in all things like unto us, sin only excepted.

Our blessed Lord did not only take upon him our nature, but the infirmities of our nature also.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Joh 4:4-6. And he must needs go through Samaria The road from Judea to Galilee lying directly through it. Then cometh he In the progress of his journey; to a city of Samaria, called Sychar The original name of the place was Sichem, or Shechem, but now the Jews called it Sychar, which name they used as a term of reproach, intimating thereby that it was the seat of drunkards, see Isa 28:1; near to the parcel of ground that Jacob Having purchased it of the children of Hamor, Gen 33:19; gave to his son Joseph By a particular grant. See Gen 48:22; Jos 24:32. The word , here rendered parcel, is translated by Dr. Campbell, heritage, as meaning, he observes, an estate in land; and that, since the estate here spoken of was given by the patriarch to his son Joseph, to be possessed by him and his posterity, it may be properly denominated heritage. Now Jacobs well was there A well so called, as having been used by Jacob and his family, while he dwelt in those parts. See Gen 33:18; Gen 35:4. Jesus, being wearied with his journey For he was subject to all the innocent infirmities of human nature; sat thus Weary as he was, on the side of the well; and it was about the sixth hour Or just high noon: so that the heat co-operated with the fatigue of the journey to increase both his thirst and faintness. It must be observed, that in the latitude in which Judea lies, the weather is sometimes exceeding hot at noon, even in December, and on days when the cold has been very severe in the morning.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Vv. 4, 5. Now he must needs pass through Samaria. He cometh thus to a city of Samaria called Sychar,near to the parcel of ground which Jacob gave to his son Joseph.

, it was necessary: if one would not, like the very strict Jews, purposely avoid this polluted country (comp. p. 416); Jesus did not share this particularistic spirit. The name Sychar is surprising; for the only city known in this locality is that which bears the name of Shechem, and which is so frequently mentioned in the Old Testament. Can there be an error here of a writer who was a stranger to Palestine, as the adversaries of the authenticity of our Gospel claim? We think the solutions scarcely probable which make the name Sychar a popular and intentional corruption of that of Shechem, deriving it either from Scheker, falsehood (city of falsehood, that is to say, of heathenism), or from Schekar, liquor (city of drunkards; comp. Isa 28:1, the drunkards of Ephraim). We might rather hold an involuntary transformation through an interchange of liquid letters which was frequent (as e.g., that of bar for ben, son).

But the most natural solution is that which is offered by the passages of Eusebius and Jerome, in which two neighboring localities bearing these two distinct names are positively distinguished. Eusebius says in the Onomasticon: Sychar before Neapolis. Neapolis, indeed, is nothing else then the modern name of Shechem. The Talmud speaks also of a locality called Soukar, of a spring Soukar, of the plain of Soukar. At the present day also, a hamlet exists very near Jacob’s well and situated at the foot of Mount Ebal, which bears the name El-Ascar, a name which very much resembles the one which we read in John and in the Talmud. Lieut. Conder and M. Socin also give their assent to this view. It seems certain, moreover, that the ancient Shechem was situated somewhat more to the east than the present city of Nablous. This is proved by the ruins which are discovered everywhere between Nablous and Jacob’s well (see Felix Bovet, Voyage en Terre-Sainte, p. 363). Petermann (art. Samaria in Herzog’s Encyclop. xiii. p. 362) says: The emperor Vespasian considerably enlarged the city on the western side. In any case, to see, with Furrer, in this name Sychar an indication of the purely ideal character of the account, one must be thoroughly preoccupied by a preconceived theory (Bibellex., iii., p. 375). It is at Nablous that the remnant of the Samaritan people who are reduced to the number of about one hundred and thirty persons live at the present day.

According to de Wette. Meyer, and others, the gift of Jacob to Joseph, mentioned in this fifth verse, rests on a false tradition, even arising from a misunderstanding of the LXX. Gen 48:22, Jacob says to Joseph: I give thee one portion (Schekem), above thy brethren, which I took from the Amorites with my sword and my bow. As the patriarch has just adopted as his own the two children of Joseph, it is natural for him to assign to this son one portion above all his brethren. But the Hebrew word (Schekem) which denotes a portion of territory (strictlyshoulder) is at the same time the name of the city, Shechem; and it is claimed that the LXX., taking this word in the geographical sense (as the name of a city), gave rise, through this false translation, to the popular legend which we find here, and according to which Jacob left Shechem as a legacy to Joseph. But it is incontestable that when Jacob speaks of the portion of country which he had taken from the Amorites with his bow and his sword, he alludes to the bloody exploit of his two sons, Simeon and Levi, against the city of Shechem (Gen 34:25-27): Having taken their sword, they entered the city of Shechem, and slew all its inhabitants and utterly spoiled it. This is the only martial act mentioned in the history of the patriarch.

Notwithstanding its reprehensible character, Jacob appropriates it to himself in these words, as a confirmation of the purchase which he had himself previously made (Gen 33:19) of a domain in this district of Shechem, and he sees therein, as it were, the pledge of the future conquest of this whole country by his descendants. Thus, then, by using in order to designate the portion which he gives to Joseph, the word schekem, it is the patriarch who makes a play upon words, such as is found so frequently in the Old Testament; he leaves to him a portion (Schekem) which is nothing else than Shechem. His sons so well understood his thought, that, when their descendants returned to Canaan, their first care was to lay the bones of Joseph in Jacob’s field near to Shechem (Jos 24:32), then to assign, as a portion, to the larger of the two tribes descended from Joseph, that of Ephraim, the country in which Shechem was located. The LXX. not being able to render the play upon words in Greek, translated the word schekem in the geographical sense; for it was the one which had most significance. There is here, therefore, neither a false translation on their part, nor a false tradition taken up by the evangelist.

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

Verse 4

Samaria; a country lying between Judea and Galilee.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

The most direct and most popular route from Judea to Galilee went through Samaria. [Note: See the map "Two Routes between Judea and Galilee" at the end of these notes.] Even though the Jews and the Samaritans did not get along, most Galilean Jews chose to travel through Samaria rather than taking the longer route through Perea, east of the Jordan River, which Judean Jews preferred. [Note: Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 20:6:1; Edersheim, 1:394.] Therefore John’s statement that Jesus "had to" pass through Samaria does not necessarily mean that divine compulsion alone moved Him to choose that route. However most students of this passage have believed that one of the reasons Jesus took this route was to minister to the Samaritans.

Politically Samaria was part of the Roman province of Judea in Jesus’ day. Nevertheless culturally there were ancient barriers that divided the residents of Samaria from the Jews who lived in Galilee and Judea. Wicked King Omri had purchased the hill on which he built Samaria as the new capital of the northern kingdom of Israel (1Ki 16:24). The name Samaria eventually came to describe the district in which the city stood and even the whole Northern Kingdom. After the Assyrians captured the city and terminated the kingdom of Israel in 722 B.C., they deported the substantial citizens and imported foreigners who intermarried with the remaining Israelites. Most of these foreigners continued to worship their pagan gods (2 Kings 17-18). The Jews who returned to Jerusalem after the Exile regarded the residents of Samaria as racial half-breeds and religious compromisers. The Samaritans resisted Nehemiah’s attempts to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Neh 4:1-2). They built a rival temple on Mt. Gerizim opposite Shechem about 400 B.C., which they dedicated to Zeus Xenios. John Hyrcanus, the Hasmonean ruler of Judea, destroyed it and Shechem about 128 B.C. These actions all resulted in continued hostility between the two groups. The Samaritans continued to worship on Mt. Gerizim and accepted only the Pentateuch as canonical. A small group of Israelis who claim to be able to trace their ancestry back to the Samaritans survives to the present day.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles