Sermon Tone Analysis

*4:1-42*   The second discourse passage of the Gospel, but one which is intimately related to the incident with which it is associated.

It actually contains three discourses, skilfully integrated with a narrative presented in a series of distinct scenes:

 

(i)    vv 1-6        :     Introductory

(ii)   vv 7-15      :     *1st scene* - Jesus’ initial encounter with the woman, occasioning his words about living water       

(iii)  vv 16-26    :     *2nd scene* - Jesus prompts a mutual revelation, the setting for his words about true worship

(iv)  vv 27-30    :     *3rd scene* - the return of the disciples prompts the woman’s departure and her testimony to Jesus in the city

(v)   vv 31-38    :     *4th scene* - the disciples with Jesus, the occasion for his words about God’s harvest

(vi)  vv 39-42    :     *5th scene* - Samaritans respond with faith

 

The passage continues the themes of the previous two chapters (newness, linked with water symbolism and the issue of worship; testimony and belief, related to the identity and work of Jesus).

But it also marks a new stage (Jesus moves outside orthodox Judaism to the Samaritans, and is eventually hailed as o` swthr tou kosmou).

* *

*1-4*  A linking statement between the incidents on either side, explaining Jesus’ presence in Samaria.

The obvious inference is that Jesus perceives the growing hostility of the Pharisees and retires prudently to Galilee, since it is not yet h` w`ra for confrontation.

Verse 4 makes sense as a simple geographical note [Josephus confirms that, despite their antipathy toward the Samaritans, Jews commonly took the direct route between Judea and Galilee, through Samaria], although it is possible that it carries a secondary sense of divine purpose.

Neither of the *textual variants (vv.1,3)* is of significant interest.

*5*  There is some debate over the identification of the polij to which Jesus comes.

There is, first, a *textual variant*, but there is strong manuscript support for Sucar, as reflected in the UBS4 A rating.

Of the other readings, Sicar and Shcar look like pronunciation-based spelling variants, while Sucem has limited and non-Greek support, and looks like a modification to suit the expectation of the obvious location of Shechem.

Almost certainly, we should accept Sucar, and this might well (though by no means certainly) be identified with the modern Askar, quite near the site of ancient Shechem.

Michaels points out (p.76) that Askar’s being about a kilometre away from the probable site of the well actually fits the narrative even better than greater proximity.

What John stresses is the close association of the location with Jacob and Joseph, who were especially significant figures for the northern kingdom and hence for Samaritans – cf.

*Joshua 24:32* (also Genesis 33:19; 48:22).

*6*  Reinforces the above association.

And we have here (in kekopiakwj, “having grown weary”) a reflection of Jesus’ genuine humanity, whether intentional or not.

The time note may serve to explain Jesus’ weariness and thirst, or may suggest the woman came at an unusual time and hence that she was a social outcast because of her reputation.

*7f*  Sets scene for encounter, the note about the disciples explaining Jesus’ being alone.

But both Jesus and the disciples are depicted as being ready to interact with Samaritans (the purchase of food is especially significant).

Ridderbos points out (p.154) that the opening clause “contains precisely those words that will dominate the conversation that now follows” (i.e.

gunh, Samareia, u`dwr).

*9*  This underlines this readiness, and probably implies that her being a woman is an additional factor [Carson cites a slightly later rabbinic statement, probably reflecting longstanding popular sentiment: “the daughters of the Samaritans are menstruants from the cradle”].

Note the repetition of terms of ethnic identification.

*10* The expression h` dwrea tou qeou can either refer forward to u`dwr zwn or be a term for the Torah.

Either way, Jesus seizes the opportunity to bring the conversation around to his identity and his mission.

The precise significance of u`dwr zwn is debated.

It clearly uses the fact that fresh spring water was prized and there may also be an OT background (e.g. the water from the rock in Num.20:11; also Is.12:3, *Jer.2:13*).

As to deeper meaning here, verse 14 suggests zwh aivwnioj, or its source (the Spirit?).

 

*11f*  The woman betrays that she understands neither Jesus’ mission nor his identity, although her first use of kurie suggests a dawning respect.

She takes him to be speaking of spring water and assumes that he cannot be a greater person than the patriarch Jacob.

There is dramatic irony in her response, however: John is presenting Jesus precisely as a greater-than-Jacob, who does a new and greater thing.

*13f*  Jesus makes his meaning a little clearer, certainly its universal relevance and its metaphorical character.

John is probably conscious of rich Old Testament echoes [see Carson, p.220], of which Isaiah 55:1 is perhaps most significant (*see Isaiah 55:1,5,7*).

A Samaritan might have been expected to think of their hoped-for prophet, to whom *Numbers 24:7* seems to have been applied (certainly a little later).

The expression ouv mh diyhsei eivj ton aivwna is emphatically negative, and may possibly recall *Ecclus.

24:21*, if so exceeding by reversal what is there said of Wisdom~/Law.

*15*  But the woman still fails to understand (or else is ironically expressing her scepticism : “if you’re so great, then do this for me”).

Note the repetition of kurie.

Perhaps John wants us to see that this is appropriate here in a stronger sense than the woman intends.

*16*  Jesus appears to change the subject abruptly, but is actually pointing to the woman’s real need and in so doing to his own identity (as vv 17-19 reveal).

*17f*  Jesus reveals his knowledge of the woman’s history and her sinfulness.

Clearly her present relationship is irregular, while the linking with this of her five previous husbands suggests irregularity there as well.

Even if the possibility of successive legitimate marriages be allowed, it then may become relevant that the Rabbis disapproved a woman’s remarrying more than once, or twice.

Köstenberger (152f.)

suggests a play on the sense of anhr, so that her “men” may not necessarily be husbands, and her present man may not be hers, but another’s.

*19*  Like Nathanael, she is impressed by Jesus’ knowledge, which she takes to be a prophet’s insight.

This affects how we understand the third use of kurie.

*20*  She then raises a major issue between Samaritans and Jews - the lack of immediate connection has prompted speculation about her motive, but this is risky, since John displays no interest in it, and it is certainly not strange to seek the opinion of a profhthj on such a matter.

“This mountain” is Mt Gerizim and the Samaritans’ choice of it reflects both their interpretation of the Pentateuch and their history - look at *Deut.11:29f.,12:5*

[see further in Carson, p.222]

 

*21*  Jesus initially downplays the significance of this debate by pointing to a future when it will be irrelevant (an indefinite future as he speaks, but John’s use of w`ra hints that it is the future Jesus himself ushers in).

*22*  Jesus does not declare explicitly for Jerusalem, but does affirm the Jewish tradition, which includes the central place of Jerusalem.

It also includes their larger canon of Scripture, over against the Samaritan (the tradition which John sees as fulfilled in Jesus as Messiah).

In 22a the use of the plural u`meij - Jesus addresses the woman as representative of the Samaritan people, thus maintaining the emphasis of the chapter on this great division, which he is about to bridge.

*23f*  A pregnant yet somewhat ambiguous declaration.

In the light of the combination of terms used and of the context, I would understand its primary implications to be these four:

(i)  Jesus as the One sent by the Father brings the decisive hour and the new worship (Barrett,238 makes the helpful point that the expression o` pathr toioutouj zhtei is essentially a statement of the Father’s purpose in sending the Son)

(ii)  As a result the issue is no longer the place of worship but the character of our worship

(iii)  True worship will recognise Jesus as the Son, the bearer of God’s Spirit and God’s truth (i.e., the reader is meant to understand this eventually in the light of the linking of pneuma and alhqeia in the Farewell Discourse)

(iv) True worship will be shaped by the Spirit and truth imparted by Jesus

!

See further, Carson, pp.224-226; KeenerI, pp.608-619

 

*25*  The woman seems now to recognise something of what Jesus says, but not its present fulfilment in himself.

So she relates it to the Jewish hope of the Messiah, but understood in Samaritan fashion as primarily a prophet (the Samaritan Taheb <Restorer> is the second Moses, the promised prophet of *Deut.18:18*).

The use of both Messiaj and Cristoj probably underlines this important moment.

*26*  Jesus now declares the key missing element: he is the Messiah.

The evgw eivmi is at least emphatic, but probably also anticipates the later occurrences of the expression.

*27*  This underlines the unconventionality of what Jesus was doing.

The Imperfect evlalei might suggest an extended conversation, which is certainly what has just been recorded.

Much (not all) Jewish thought considered that a rabbi should not waste his time talking to a woman, and certainly that they should not be treated as serious disciples.

/Several commentators expand on this, e.g.

K//ö//stenberger, p.159./ Their silence may suggest respect for Jesus’ judgement or simply reluctance to get involved with this woman themselves.

*28f*  But she proves the fruitfulness of Jesus’ attention to her by going and bearing witness.

The form of her testimony [introduced by mhti] expresses some uncertainty (since an outright negative doesn’t fit the context), but it is not clear whether this reflects her own hesitancy or, especially in the light of v.42, her sensitivity to theirs.

It is not clear how much we should make of the detail of her leaving her jar behind.

If we are guided by what has preceded, the most natural interpretation (if we see it as more than a lively detail suggestive of haste) is that it points to her having found the u`dwr zwn.

*31f*  The disciples’ urging Jesus to eat is natural, and in line with the expectation that disciples should care for the physical well-being of their master [so, Köstenberger, 160f.].

But in the narrative it provides Jesus with an opportunity to teach them something, and John with a discourse related to, though distinct from, the earlier one about living water.

There may also be a parallel with the woman’s leaving of her jar.

* *

*33*  The disciples, like the woman (and others in these early chapters), fail to understand.

*34*  A probable reference to *Deut.8:3*:

Jesus lives as God desires his people to do.

Its terms also bring together three prominent themes of the Gospel: Jesus’ obedience; his being sent; his doing the works of God.

 

*35a*  There have been attempts to identify a particular time, the time of a festival, but most natural is a reference to the gap between the latest sowing and the beginning of harvest, especially since harvest is a common eschatological metaphor.

If so, then the emphatic u`meij conveys that this is well known to them.

* *

* *

*35b-36*  Hence: the eschatological harvest has begun (possibly with a scriptural reference to Amos 9:13 and a contextual reference to the approaching Samaritans).

*Read Amos 9:13-15.

*If so, Jesus is the reaper and either the Father or the prophets constitute the sower.

But some see a reference to a future harvest, viewing Jesus as sower and his disciples as reapers – see Moloney, 139f.,144.

* *

*37f*  The expression evn gar toutw| can refer forward or back, but here the former seems easier.

Jesus takes a common saying, but gives it a new and positive twist (usually it had idea of injustice or judgement).

Some have queried its appropriateness here, but it can apply if we see the disciples as already sharing in Jesus’ harvest in vv 39-42.

However, it is likely that we are also meant to see this event as anticipatory, either specifically of the Samaritan influx recorded in Acts 8 or more generally of the fruitful ministry of the apostles in the earliest days of the church.

*39-42*  A description of the Samaritan response, furthering Johannine themes of testimony and faith.