Joh 7:45-52 | RWP | e4.org | Why did ye not bring him? ( Δια τ ουκ ηγαγετε αυτον; ). Second aorist active indicative of αγω . Indignant outburst of the Sanhedrin (both Sadducees and Pharisees) at the failure of the ( τους , note article here referring to verse ) temple police to arrest Jesus. "Apparently they were sitting in expectation of immediately questioning him" (Dods). They were stunned at this outcome.

‏ John 7:45-52

Why did ye not bring him? ( Δια τ ουκ ηγαγετε αυτον; ). Second aorist active indicative of αγω. Indignant outburst of the Sanhedrin (both Sadducees and Pharisees) at the failure of the ( τους, note article here referring to verse 32) temple police to arrest Jesus. "Apparently they were sitting in expectation of immediately questioning him" (Dods). They were stunned at this outcome.

Never man so spake ( ουδεποτε ελαλησεν ουτως ανθρωπος ). Police officers are not usually carried away by public speech. They had fallen under the power of Jesus "as the Galilean peasants had been impressed" (Bernard) in verses 28f. It was the words of Jesus that had so gripped these officers, not his works (15:24). It was most disconcerting to the Sanhedrin.

Are ye also led astray? ( Μη κα υμεις πεπλανησθε; ). The Pharisees took the lead in this scornful sneer at the officers. The use of μη formally expects a negative answer as in 4:29, but the Pharisees really believed it. See also 6:67. The verb form is perfect passive indicative of πλαναω, for which see verse 12 with perhaps an allusion to that phase of opinion.

Hath any of the rulers believed on him? ( Μη τις εκ των αρχοντων επιστευσεν εις αυτον; ). Negative answer sharply expected. First aorist active indicative of πιστευω. "Did any one of the rulers believe on him?" "What right have subordinates to have a mind of their own?" (Dods). These police were employed by the temple authorities (rulers). "Power was slipping through their fingers" (Dods) and that was the secret of their hostility to Jesus.

Or of the Pharisees ( η εκ των Φαρισαιων ). A wider circle and the most orthodox of all.

This multitude ( ο οχλος ουτος ). The Pharisees had a scorn for the amhaaretz or "people of the earth" (cf. our "clod-hoppers") as is seen in rabbinic literature. It was some of the οχλος (multitude at the feast especially from Galilee) who had shown sympathy with Jesus (7:12, 28f.).

Which knoweth not the law ( ο μη γινοσκων ). Present active articular participle of γινωσκω with μη usual negative of the participle in the Koine. "No brutish man is sin-fearing, nor is one of the people of the earth pious" (Aboth, II. 6). See the amazement of the Sanhedrin at Peter and John in Ac 4:13 as "unlettered and private men" ( αγραμματο κα ιδιωτα ). No wonder the common people ( οχλος ) heard Jesus gladly (Mr 12:37). The rabbis scouted and scorned them.

Are accursed ( επαρατο εισιν ). Construction according to sense (plural verb and adjective with collective singular οχλος ). Επαρατο is old verbal adjective from επαραομα, to call down curses upon, here only in the N.T.

Nicodemus ( Νικοδημος ). Not heard from since chapter 3 when he timidly came to Jesus by night. Now he boldly protests against the injustice of condemning Jesus unheard. He appears once more (and only in John) in 19:39 with Joseph of Arimathea as a secret disciple of Jesus. He is a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin and his present act is courageous.

Saith ( λεγε ). Dramatic present active indicative as in 2:3.

Before ( προτερον ). This is genuine, a reference to the visit in chapter 3, but νυκτος (by night) is not genuine here.

Being one of them ( εις ων εξ αυτων ). As a member of the Sanhedrin he takes up the challenge in verse 48. He is both ruler and Pharisee.

Doth our law judge a man? ( μη ο νομος ημων κρινε τον ανθρωπον; ). Negative answer expected and "the man," not "a man." These exponents of the law (verse 49) were really violating the law of criminal procedure (Ex 23:1; De 1:16). Probably Nicodemus knew that his protest was useless, but he could at least show his colours and score the point of justice in Christ's behalf.

Except it first hear from himself ( εαν μη ακουση πρωτον παρ' αυτου ). Third-class negative condition with εαν μη and first aorist active subjunctive of ακουω. That is common justice in all law, to hear a man's side of the case ("from him," παρ' αυτου ).

And know what he doeth ( κα γνω τ ποιε ). Continuation of the same condition with second aorist active subjunctive of γινωσκω with indirect question and present active indicative ( τ ποιε ). There was no legal answer to the point of Nicodemus.

Art thou also of Galilee? ( Μη κα συ εκ της Γαλιλαιας ει; ). Formally negative answer expected by μη, but really they mean to imply that Nicodemus from local feeling or prejudice has lined himself up with this Galilean mob ( οχλος ) of sympathizers with Jesus and is like Jesus himself a Galilean. "These aristocrats of Jerusalem had a scornful contempt for the rural Galileans" (Bernard).

That out of Galilee ariseth no prophet ( οτ εκ της Γαλιλαιας προφητης ουκ εγειρετα ). As a matter of fact Jonah, Hosea, Nahum, possibly also Elijah, Elisha, and Amos were from Galilee. It was simply the rage of the Sanhedrin against Jesus regardless of the facts. Westcott suggests that they may have reference to the future, but that is a mere excuse for them.