Talk:John 4:1-54

From Feast upon the Word ( Copyright, Feast upon the Word.
Jump to: navigation, search

John 4:3-4[edit]

On the Feast Blog, Brianj wrote:

v. 3-4 : Jesus returns to Galilee after celebrating Passover in Jerusalem and must pass through Samaria. The Jews despised the Samaritans and vice versa. The Samaritans had opposed, by stratagem and by force, the rebuilding of the temple in and the walls of Jerusalem. For their part, the Jews, in 128 B.C., during the reign of John Hyrcanus (of the Hasmoneans; see also the Maccabees), destroyed the temple the Samaritans had built for themselves on Mount Gerizim.

I'd like to include something like that on the commentary page. But, I think for this type of historical background stuff it is good to cite some source. does anyone have any suggestions? --Matthew Faulconer 06:20, 18 February 2007 (CET)

John 4:6-10[edit]

re: the comments about how men didn't speak with women and Jews didn't talk with Samaritans. If we are making a point that depends upon understanding the historical context then we should provide some links below in the related links section that back up these historical claims. Also I deleted the comparison to Nicodemus. I couldn't figure out what is meant by the fact that Jesus was of higher social standing then Nicodemus. This isn't clear to me from the text. --Matthew Faulconer 05:04, 15 February 2007 (CET)

Thanks Matthew, I was getting a bit sloppy in transferring SS lesson comments, and adding a few thoughts of my own as I go, but without careful enough consideration. I actually meant to say that Nicodemus was of higher social standing than Jesus, and Jesus higher than the woman at the well. I'm not sure how true or verifiable either of these claims really are. My sense is that Nicodemus is generally believed to be part of a governing body, mostly I think based on references to Nicodemus later in John. I'll try to look this up. --RobertC 06:20, 15 February 2007 (CET)

OK. Well I had always understood that Nicodemus was of higher social standing too. I'll go ahead and put that back in. Maybe someone in the future will provide support. If you're ok with the comment as it stands now about women and Samaritans, I don't think we need to give some clink to back it up (still it wouldn't hurt if you have something handy) because to me the point then depends on just what the text says. --Matthew Faulconer 03:55, 16 February 2007 (CET)

I'm not convinced it is any better but I worked on it a bit. See what you think. --Matthew Faulconer 04:04, 16 February 2007 (CET)