John 7 - The Moody Bible Commentary

3 Events at the Feast of Booths (7:1–8:59)

7:1-2 After these things marks about six months since the Passover (6:4). Jesus stayed in Galilee because in Judea the Jewish authorities were seeking to kill Him (cf. vv. 19-20, 25, 30, 32, 44). The Jewish Feast of Booths (v. 2), also called the Feast of Tabernacles, Tents, or Ingathering, was celebrated by building leafy tents in which Jewish families camped out in fields or on rooftops. It was an eight-day celebration in the autumn after harvest (Sept. or Oct.) in remembrance of when Israel lived in tents during their wanderings in the wilderness (Lv 23:33-43).

a Preparation and Teachings at the Feast (7:1-44)

7:3-5 Jesus had four half-brothers (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). Some or all of His brothers (Jn 2:12) instructed Him to go into Judea, so that His disciples also might see the works He was doing. Their worldly suggestion (v. 4) placed before Jesus the temptation to seek to be known publicly for personal gain—a temptation He overcame (v. 10). If He claimed to be the Messiah, in their opinion He should now show Himself to the world. John’s explanatory comment (v. 5) reveals that not even His own brothers were believing in Him (Cf. 1:11). His brothers did not come to faith until after the resurrection (Ac 1:14).

7:6-7 Jesus was conscious of right timing. His words My time is not yet here (and v. 8; see comment on 2:4) reflect His concern as to when and how He will present Himself as Messiah. It was to lead to His death, not His fame. Your time is always opportune means Jesus’ brothers could go to the feast anytime without threats on their lives. The unbelievers of the world practice evil, and love others who do the same. But the world hates Jesus because He testifies that its deeds are evil.

7:8-9 Although debated, the better mss contain “yet” (omitted in the NASB) and read, I do not yet go up to this feast (v. 8; NKJV, HCSB, NIV). Jewish men were required by the Mosaic law to attend the feast (Ex 23:17; 34:23; Dt 16:16). Jesus would not have left the impression of violating the law. “Go up” has a double sense in that the same Greek word is used of Jesus’ ascension (Jn 3:13; 6:62; 20:17). It was not Jesus’ time to go up (i.e., “to ascend”—Jerusalem is 2,500 feet above sea level, and one went topographically “up” to get to it) to the feast; but it also was not the time for His death, resurrection, and ascension (7:30). For a few more days, Jesus stayed in Galilee to avoid a premature death.

7:10-11 Jesus waited until His brothers had gone up to the feast. Afterward, He Himself also went up … in secret, successfully triumphing over the satanic temptation to seek human glory (cf. v. 4). The wisdom of choosing initially to remain obscure is confirmed by the fact that the Jewish authorities (v. 11) were seeking Him at the feast so they might kill Him (cf. v. 1).

7:12-13 The reference to much grumbling indicates that unbelief had divided the people (Cf. 6:41, 61) and recalls the feast’s theme of Israel’s wilderness wandering during which the people also grumbled because of their lack of faith (Ex 15:24; 16:2; Nm 14:2; see comments on 7:1-2). Some were judging Him to be a good man, though not necessarily the Messiah. Others were saying that He leads the people astray—a charge punishable by death (Dt 13:9-10). No one was speaking openly of Him for fear of the Jews (v. 13). As this statement implies, “grumbling” (v. 12) also carries overtones of suppressed conversation. Any favorable opinions about Jesus expressed openly might bring reprisal.

7:14-15 Jesus chose the midst of the feast to be the opportune time (cf. v. 6) to go into the temple, and to begin to teach. The Jewish leaders were astonished that Jesus had such a thorough grasp of Scripture (How has this man become learned … ?), since He had not been educated formally under a rabbi according to tradition (cf. Ac 4:13).

7:16-17 The Jews reasoned that Jesus’ teaching must be His own. Jesus countered, My teaching is not Mine, but His who sent Me. This fact could be confirmed. If anyone is willing to do the Father’s will (v. 17), i.e., believe in Christ for eternal life (6:40a), he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or whether I speak from Myself. Faith authenticates and internalizes God’s testimony (1Jn 5:10). The Word, when it is believed, is a life-giving seed (1Pt 1:23), bringing assurance through the Holy Spirit that God’s promises are true (cf. Heb 11:1).

7:18-20 He who speaks from himself (such as a false messiah) seeks his own honor. He who is seeking the glory of the One who sent Him refers to Jesus Himself and His heaven-to-earth mission. He is true, and there is no unrighteousness in Him is a claim by Jesus to sinlessness in character and motive. In contrast to Jesus’ righteousness, none of the Jewish authorities kept the Law (v. 19). But neither does anyone (Rm 3:19-20). The attempt to kill (murder) Jesus (cf. v. 1) was in actuality a violation of the sixth Commandment (Ex 20:13). Instead of recognizing the Father speaking through His Son, the crowd (v. 20) absurdly accused Jesus of demon possession (cf. Jn 8:48; 10:20; Mt 12:24).

7:21-22 I did one deed (lit., “work,” a synonym for “miracle,” Cf. 10:25, 32, 37-38) refers to the Sabbath healing of the paralytic (5:1-9). Jesus did other miracles (2:23; 3:2; 7:31). But this healing was thought to violate the law against work on the Sabbath. Yet to fulfill the law, the Jews themselves “worked” on the Sabbath whenever they circumcised (mostly male children on the eighth day, Lv 12:3). Hence if they were consistent, they would not have condemned Jesus for “working” on the Sabbath.

7:23-24 Jesus reasoned that it was contradictory to show concern on the Sabbath for one part of the body (circumcision) but show no concern for the whole body of one in need (I made an entire man well). Blinded by their traditions, Christ’s opponents were judging Him (v. 24) by what “appeared” to them as right (according to appearance), but was not a righteous judgment.

7:25-27 The residents of Jerusalem knew the authorities planned to kill Jesus (cf. vv. 1, 20) but were confused. Jesus was speaking publicly (v. 26), but the rulers did not confront Him. Could it be that they had changed their minds and now secretly thought that He was the Christ? Little did they know that some rulers like Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea (Cf. 12:42; 19:38-39) really did know that Jesus was the Christ. But the crowds reasoned self-assuredly, We know where this man is from; but whenever the Christ may come, no one knows where He is from. See v. 42 for another view of the Messiah’s origin.

7:28-29 The Lord’s reply may be sarcastic as if to say, “So you think that you both know Me and know where I am from?” Jesus repeated previously mentioned descriptions of His identity: (1) He did not come of Himself but by the Father’s authority; (2) the One who sent Jesus is true, but they did not know Him; and (3) Jesus knew the Father, because He was from the Father (1:1, 18), and He sent Him.

7:30-31 Most of the crowd joined with the rulers in seeking to seize the Lord, yet they could not. John described both human (6:15; 10:39) and divine means (7:30, 44; 8:20) that prevented Jesus from being arrested. For His hour, see comments on 2:4 and 4:21. The same phrase “His hour had not yet come” appears in 8:20; in 13:1, the phrase “His hour had come” makes a thematic transition to the “hour” of Jesus’ death. The people expected the Messiah to work miracles like Moses (cf. Ex 4:21 with Dt 18:15, 18). Therefore, because of the signs (Jn 20:31-32), many of the crowd believed in Him. John used his special phrase, “believe in (Him),” to designate their saving faith (see comment on 1:12).

7:32 The chief priests (almost all from the party of the Sadducees) mentioned with the Pharisees implies that a meeting of the Sanhedrin had taken place (for “Sanhedrin,” see comment on 11:47). The chief priests took on a more prominent role at the crucifixion (18:3, 35; 19:6, 15, 21). For “Pharisees,” see comment on 1:24. The officers who were sent were temple police.

7:33-34 The new believers had reasoned, “When the Christ [Messiah] comes, He will not perform more signs than those which this man has, will He?” (v. 31). But they were wrong! The greatest miracle—His death and resurrection—was yet to come (then I go to Him who sent Me). After the resurrection, the Son would return to His Father. You will seek Me (v. 34; Cf. 7:36; 8:21; 13:33) and will not find Me refers either to (1) the empty tomb, or (2) the constant search of Israel for the Messiah after rejecting Jesus.

7:35-36 Christ’s opponents misconstrued His words (vv. 34, 36) as His intent to go on a mission to the Greek-speaking Jewish people throughout the Roman Empire (the Dispersion among the Greeks). While they thought this was improbable, Jesus indeed had such a mission in mind. After His resurrection (v. 33), His message would go to both Jews and Gentiles throughout the Roman Empire.

7:37 According to the Talmud, (Sukk. 4.9), each day during the Feast of Booths (v. 2), a priest would carry water from the spring-fed Pool of Siloam to the temple and pour it out on the altar in expectation of the coming Messiah (cf. Zch 14:16-19). Jesus proclaimed, If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink, i.e., a figurative expression for “let him believe in Me” (v. 38). Jesus was declaring that He was the true springwater in the temple, which brings eternal life (cf. Is 12:3; 55:1). Also, Booths (Tabernacles) celebrated the supply of water given through the rock Moses struck in the wilderness. Jesus fulfilled the imagery of this Rock that provided life-giving water (1Co 10:4). In essence, Jesus claimed to fulfill what the Feast of Booths signified.

7:38-39 The Feast of Booths was the most joyous of Israel’s festivals. The citation from Scripture summarizes several messianic verses (e.g., Is 44:3; 55:1; 58:11; Zch 14:8). He who believes in Me may be taken with the preceding verse (cf. NET, NLT, TEV), leading to a Christological interpretation of the phrase from his [i.e., His] innermost being will flow rivers of living water. Christ is the overflowing source of joyous, living water (eternal life). More likely, the verse teaches that the believer will experience great joy internally in receiving eternal life and the Spirit (v. 39). This matches Jesus’ earlier remark to the Samaritan woman, “the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life” (4:14). For “living water,” Cf. 4:10.

7:40-42 John recorded the mixed viewpoints concerning the Messiah. (1) Some thought that Jesus was the Prophet (Dt 18:15) but not the Messiah (see comment on 1:21; 6:14). (2) Others were saying, “This is the Christ” (v. 41). These were believers (Cf. 11:27; 20:32). (3) Some felt that the birthplace of the Messiah could not be known (cf. v. 27). (4) While others (v. 42) held that He would be from Bethlehem, since David was from Bethlehem.

7:43-44 It is not surprising that a division occurred in the crowd because of Christ. Jesus still divides people today. On the desire of the Jewish leaders to seize Jesus (v. 44), see vv. 30, 32.

7:45-46 The officers or temple guards sent by the chief priests and Pharisees returned empty-handed to the council meeting (the Sanhedrin, v. 32). An explanation was in order. Why did you not bring Him?, the Jewish leaders asked. The temple guards replied (v. 46), Never has a man spoken the way this man speaks. Their response acknowledged that Jesus was a man, but also someone greater than other men (Cf. 1:1, 18).

b The Pharisees’ Council (7:45-52)

7:47-49 The Pharisees criticized the officers. You have not also been led astray, have you? The irony is that the Pharisees are the ones who are the most led astray. No one of the rulers or Pharisees has believed in Him, has he? Nicodemus’s reaction (cf. v. 50) suggests that he was one of the rulers who had believed in Christ, and others soon would (12:42). But as an intimidated disciple at this point, he did not confess his faith outright (Cf. 3:9; 19:38). With a prideful superiority and lack of compassion, the Pharisees condemned the crowd as ignorant and accursed.

7:50-51 John used Nicodemus, not mentioned since 3:1-9, as an example of growing faith. Previously, he had visited Jesus secretly, at night. Now he was mildly defending Jesus publicly by questioning the legal procedures the Jewish leaders were taking. Our Law does not judge a man unless it first hears from him and knows what he is doing, does it? The question implied his companions were not thoroughly investigating the situation as the law required (Dt 1:16-17; 17:2-5; 19:15-19). The Pharisees had just judged the crowds as ignorant of the law. Ironically, Nicodemus called them to account for missing one of its elementary requirements: fairness (“judges shall investigate thoroughly,” Dt 19:18).

7:52 The Pharisees resorted to ridicule. You are not also from Galilee, are you? exposes their prejudice. They thought that no prophet came from despised Galilee. But Jonah (2Kg 14:25) and Nahum (Nah 1:1) came from Galilee. Even more ironic, the prophecy of Is 9:1-2 (quoted in Mt 4:12-16) prophesied that the Messiah would arise in Galilee and “bring light to the Gentiles.”

c Woman Caught in Adultery (7:53–8:11)

7:53-8:2 Based on what is thought to be the most reliable mss, the majority of scholars, including evangelicals, believe that the adulterous woman narrative (7:53–8:11) is not part of the original text. Support for its inclusion includes the following. First, about 1,350 continuous-text mss of John contain the narrative. Second, the story fits the context well. A woman was brought to Jesus in the temple. The only appropriate location for this event would be the Court of Women, the location described in 8:20. Since the Feast of Booths was now over (7:37, 53), everyone went from living in tents (see comment on 7:1-2) to his home [lit., “house”], supporting the legitimacy of 7:53 as part of this episode. In characteristic irony over against the Council’s claim that no prophet comes from Galilee (v. 52), John noted that Jesus went to the Mount of Olives (8:1). It was at the Mount of Olives that Jesus, the greatest prophet of all, would soon give the greatest prophecy of the NT apart from the book of Revelation (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). Early in the morning (v. 2; orthros, “at dawn, daybreak”) symbolically (Cf. 21:4) depicts the breaking in of moral light in the person of Jesus (see comment on 7:52) who, in 8:12, is the “light of the world.” This carries on the light/darkness theme of John. In contrast to “everyone [who] went to his house” (7:53), Jesus went into the temple, His Father’s house (Cf. 2:16, where Jesus called the temple His Father’s house).

Against the inclusion of this episode are several factors. First, it does not fit as well in the context as it is often argued. In 7:52, the Pharisees disputed His claim to be a prophet because of His Galilean origins, and Jesus’ statement in 8:12 serves as a response to their argument. In this case the episode is an unnecessary intrusion into the text. Second, the symbolic connection between Jesus coming “at dawn” into the temple (8:2) with Him dawning as “the light of the world” (8:12) is not clearly borne out in the text. Third, the style and vocabulary are atypical of John’s writing (for the details, see Daniel B. Wallace, “Reconsidering ‘The Story of the Woman Taken in Adultery’ Reconsidered,” NTS 39 [[1993]:290-296). Fourth, at this time, the Jewish people did not have the autonomy to execute people on their own authority. Rome was the final arbiter and probably would not have permitted this. Stephen’s stoning was mob action, not judicial, but this episode does not have the “mob action” feel associated with Stephen’s murder. This makes it unlikely that the episode is historically accurate. Fifth, Jesus words in 8:12 about being the Light of the world are more likely to have been said on the last day of the Feast of Booths (7:37). On that day, there was always a huge torch ceremony on the Temple Mount, as a symbol of the Messiah being the One who would bring light to the world.

Finally, the external ms evidence is strongly in favor of the omission of the episode. Virtually all Alexandrian mss, considered by the majority of scholars to be the oldest and least corrupt mss, omit it, and virtually all Byzantine mss, viewed by the majority of scholars as much later and generally more corrupt, include it. But even when they include it, the episode also “floats around” in various locations in the various mss. This indicates great doubt about its inclusion even among the mss that contain it.

While the preponderance of evidence is against its inclusion, the evidence is not airtight, and since this episode is loved by those who cherish John’s gospel, a commentary on it is provided here.