John 4:9

4:4-26 There was great hatred between the Samaritans and the Jews. Christ's road from Judea to Galilee lay through Samaria. We should not go into places of temptation but when we needs must; and then must not dwell in them, but hasten through them. We have here our Lord Jesus under the common fatigue of travellers. Thus we see that he was truly a man. Toil came in with sin; therefore Christ, having made himself a curse for us, submitted to it. Also, he was a poor man, and went all his journeys on foot. Being wearied, he sat thus on the well; he had no couch to rest upon. He sat thus, as people wearied with travelling sit. Surely, we ought readily to submit to be like the Son of God in such things as these. Christ asked a woman for water. She was surprised because he did not show the anger of his own nation against the Samaritans. Moderate men of all sides are men wondered at. Christ took the occasion to teach her Divine things: he converted this woman, by showing her ignorance and sinfulness, and her need of a Saviour. By this living water is meant the Spirit. Under this comparison the blessing of the Messiah had been promised in the Old Testament. The graces of the Spirit, and his comforts, satisfy the thirsting soul, that knows its own nature and necessity. What Jesus spake figuratively, she took literally. Christ shows that the water of Jacob's well yielded a very short satisfaction. Of whatever waters of comfort we drink, we shall thirst again.

John 4:9. Then saith the woman, How is it that thou, being a Jew — As it appears by thy habit and dialect thou art; askest drink of me, &c., for the Jews have no dealings — Or rather, no friendly intercourse; with the Samaritans — They would receive no kind of favour from them. That the expression, no dealings, as Dr. Campbell justly observes, “implies too much to suit the sense of this passage, is manifest from the preceding verse, where we are told, that the disciples were gone into the Samaritan city Sychar to buy food. The verb συγχραομαι , is one of those called απαξ λεγομενα , once used: it does not occur in any other place of the New Testament, or in the Septuagint. The Pharisees were in their traditions nice distinguishers. Buying and selling with the Samaritans were permitted, because that was considered as an intercourse merely of interest or convenience; borrowing and lending, much more asking or accepting any favour, was prohibited; because that was regarded as an intercourse of friendship, which they thought it impious to maintain with those whom they looked upon as the enemies of God.”

John 4:9 . πῶς σὺ Ἰουδαῖος ὢν . How did she know He was a Jew? Probably there were slight differences in dress, feature and accent. Edersheim says “the fringes on the Tallith of the Samaritans are blue, while those worn by the Jews are white”. He also exposes the mistake of some commentators regarding the words uttered by Jesus: “Teni li lishtoth”. The reason of the woman’s surprise is given by the Evangelist in the words οὐ γὰρ συγχρῶνται Ἰουδαίοι Σαμαρείταις . “For Jews have no dealings with Samaritans.” Συγχρᾶσθαι literally signifies “to use together with,” so that the sense here might be that the woman was surprised that Jesus should use the same vessel she used; rather it has the secondary meaning “to have intercourse” or “dealings with”; similarly to the Latin utor , see Hor., Ep. , i. xii. 22, “utere Pompeio Grospho,” and xvii. 13, “regibus uti,” to make a friend of, or “be on terms of intimacy with”. The classical phrase is οἶσιν οὐκ ἐπιστροφαί , Eurip., Helena , 440. The later tradition said: “Samaritanis panem comedere aut vinum bibere prohibitum est”. Of course the hostile feeling ran back to the days of Nehemiah. And see Sir 50:25-26 . “With two nations is my soul vexed, and the third is no nation: they that sit upon Mount Seir and the Philistines, and that foolish people that dwelleth in Sichem.” For the origin of the Samaritans see 2 Kings 17, and cf. Farrar’s Life of Christ in loc. Tristram, Land of Israel , 134.

The woman of Samaria (ἡ γυνὴ ἡ Σαμαρεῖτις) Differently expressed from the same phrase in the preceding verse. Literally, the woman the Samaritan. Here the distinctive character of the woman, as indicated by the race, is emphasized. Askest (αἰτεῖς) See on Matthew 15:23. Have no dealings (οὐ συγχρῶνται) Have no familiar or friendly intercourse with. That they had dealings of some kind is shown by the disciples going into the city to buy provisions. Some authorities omit for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans. The Jews treated the Samaritans with every mark of contempt, and accused them of falsehood, folly, and irreligion. The Samaritans sold Jews into slavery when they had them in their power, lighted spurious signals for the beacon-fires kindled to announce the beginnings of months, and waylaid and killed pilgrims on their road to Jerusalem.

9-12. How is it that thou—not altogether refusing, yet wondering at so unusual a request from a Jew, as His dress and dialect would at once discover Him to be, to a Samaritan. for, &c.—It is this national antipathy that gives point to the parable of the good Samaritan (Lu 10:30-37), and the thankfulness of the Samaritan leper (Lu 17:16, 18).

There was a great estrangement of the Jews from the Samaritans, the Samaritans having a peculiar temple built upon Mount Gerizim, in opposition to that at Jerusalem. It is said that the Jews did buy of and sell to the Samaritans, but were restrained by an order of the sanhedrim from using any familiarity with them, or borrowing or receiving any thing as a gift from them; which was the cause of this reply of the woman of Samaria, knowing our Saviour, either by his habit or by his dialect, to be a Jew: this is thought to be the sense of sugcrwntai in this text, though it hath a larger significance, extending to all kinds of commerce.

9 . woman of Samaria ] In both places in this verse we should rather have Samaritan woman : the Greek is not the same as in John 4:7 . The adjective lays stress on the national and religious characteristics. For ‘then’ read therefore , as in John 4:5 . How is it ] Feminine pertness. She is half-amused and half-triumphant. being a Jew ] She knew Him to be such by His dress and by His language. for the Jews , &c.] Omit the articles; for Jews have no dealings with Samaritans . This is a remark, not of the woman, but of S. John, to explain the woman’s question. As He was on his way from Jerusalem she probably thought He was a Judaean. The Galileans seem to have been less strict; and hence His disciples went to buy food of Samaritans. Some important authorities omit the remark.

John 4:9 . Πῶς , how is it ) Her manifest simplicity shines forth from the very first words of the Samaritan woman.— Ἰουδαῖος , a Jew ) From His dress or His dialect she inferred that He was a Jew.— οὐ γάρ , for not ) A parenthesis of the Evangelist, expressing the cause why it seemed strange to the Samaritan woman. The Rabbinical maxim accords with this: To eat the bread of a Samaritan man, and to drink his wine, is unlawful .— συγχρῶνται , use together [have friendly dealings with ]) What is denied is, not all intercourse between the Jews and Samaritans (comp. the previous verse; “His disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat”), but intimacy.

(9) Woman of Samaria (twice).—Better, Samaritan woman. In both cases the Greek has the adjective. It is the religious and national position as a Samaritan which is prominent in this verse. Being a Jew.—This she would know from dress and language. It has been noted that the Hebrew for “Give me to drink,” “Teni lishekoth,” contains the letter Sin, or Shin, which was one of the distinctive points in the Ephraimite pronunciation. They did not say Shibboleth, but Sibboleth (Judges 12:5-6). They would not say “Teni lishekoth,” but “Teni lisekoth.” For the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.—The original has not the articles, For Jews have no dealings with Samaritans. This is a remark made by the writer to explain the point of the woman’s question. She wondered that a Jew, weary and thirsty though he might be, should speak to her. For the origin of the Samaritans, see 2Kings 17:24-41, and Note on Luke 9:52. The later Jewish authors abound in terms of reproach for them—e.g., “He who eats the bread of a Samaritan is as he who eats swine’s flesh;” “No Samaritan shall be made a proselyte;” “They have no share in the resurrection of the dead” (Pirke, Rabbi Elieser, 38; comp. Farrar, Life of Christ, i. 209, note). Jesus Himself speaks of a Samaritan as an alien (Luke 17:16; Luke 17:18; comp. Luke 10:33), and is called a Samaritan and possessed of a devil (comp. John 8:48). But the strictest Jews allowed exceptions to the forbidden intercourse.

If bread was interdicted, fruit and vegetables were not; if boiled eggs were forbidden, fresh ones were not. At no time probably did the Galileans follow the practice of the Judæans in this matter, and hence they go to the city to buy food, while the woman asks this question of a Jew whom she met on the road from Jerusalem. Later, it was only “because His face was as though He would go to Jerusalem “that the Samaritan village did not receive Him; and it is the Evangelist of the Jerusalem ministry, who would have called down fire from heaven then, who adds this note of explanation for his Greek readers now (Luke 9:52-53).