Joh 7:50-53 | Clarke | STEP | Verse 50 Nicodemus - being one of them - That is, a Pharisee, and a ruler of the Jews: see on (note).

John 7:50-53

Verse 50

Nicodemus - being one of them - That is, a Pharisee, and a ruler of the Jews: see on Joh 3:1 (note). Verse 51

Doth our law judge any man - Τον ανθρωπον, the man, i.e. who is accused. Perhaps Nicodemus did not refer so much to any thing in the law of Moses, as to what was commonly practiced among them. Josephus says, Ant. b. xiv. c. 9. s. 3, That the law has forbidden any man to be put to death, though wicked, unless he be first condemned to die by the Sanhedrin. It was probably to this law, which is not expressly mentioned in the five books of Moses, that Nicodemus here alludes. See laws relative to this point, Deu 17:8, etc.; Deu 19:15. Verse 52

Art thou also of Galilee? - They knew very well that he was not; but they spoke this by way of reproach. As if they had said, thou art no better than he is, as thou takest his part. Many of the Galileans had believed on him, Which the Jews considered to be a reproach. Art thou his disciple, as the Galileans are?

Search, and look - Examine the Scriptures, search the public registers, and thou wilt see that out of Galilee there ariseth no prophet. Neither the Messiah, nor any other prophet, has ever proceeded from Galilee, nor ever can. This conclusion, says Calmet, was false and impertinent: false, because Jonah was of Gathheper, in Galilee: see 2Kgs 14:25, compared with Jos 19:13. The Prophet Nahum was also a Galilean, for he was of the tribe of Simeon; and some suppose that Malachi was of the same place. The conclusion was false, because there not having been a prophet from any particular place was no argument that there never could be one, as the place had not been proscribed. Verse 53

And every man went, etc. - The authority and influence of Nicodemus, in this case, was so great that the Sanhedrin broke up without being able to conclude any thing. As the feast was now ended, they were not obliged to continue any longer in or about Jerusalem; and therefore all returned to their respective dwellings.

This verse and the first eleven verses of the following chapter are wanting in several MSS. Some of those which retain the paragraph mark it with obelisks, as a proof of spuriousness. Those which do retain it have it with such a variety of reading as is no where else found in the sacred writings. Professor Griesbach leaves the whole paragraph in the text with notes of doubtfulness. Most of the modern critics consider it as resting on no solid authority.