Dositheus,1 in the first century of the Christian era, could act the part of a false Messiah among the Samaritans, and likewise the influence which in a similar manner Simon Magus managed to gain among them when he represented himself as the great power of God (Acts viii. 9, 10). In addition to the abovenamed, Baumgarten-Crusius mentions also Menander. Very important is the fact brought forward by the last-named theologian, that the apostles (according to Acts viii.) found so early an entrance into Samaria on the ground of the Messianic faith. It was indeed very possible that the Samaritan woman at Jacob's well made use of another term for designating the Messiah; but the term here given may be referred to the presumed ministry of the Baptist in Samaria.2

3. The coincidence noticed by Hengstenberg and others, of the five husbands of the Samaritan woman with the fivefold idolatrous worship which, according to 2 Kings xvii. 24, was practised by the five nations from Assyria, and the relation of the sixth husband, who was not the legal husband of the woman, to the mixed Jehovah-worship of the Samaritans, is an ingenious combination of the coincidence of the history of this woman with the political history of the Samaritan people,' which, according to Baumgarten-Crusius (Commentar z. Joh. 153), 'is so striking, that we might be disposed to find in this language a Jewish proverb respecting the Samaritans applied to an individual of the nation.' But thus much is clear in the simple historical construction of the Gospel, that Jesus makes the remark to the woman in a literal sense respecting the husbands whom she formerly had and the one whom she then had. For, had He wished to upbraid the national guilt of the Samaritans by an allegorical proverb, He could not have made use of the accidental turn which the conversation took by the guilty consciousness of the woman in order to appear as a prophet; but He would have felt Himself still more bound to have further developed the obscure proverb. Add to this, the Samaritan

1 [Neander's Church History ii. 123 (Bohn's Tr.); Dr Lange, Die Apostolische Zeitalter ii. 103, 104, Braunschweig 1854; Gieseler, Lehrbuch der Kirchengeschichte i. 63.-TR.]

2 [On the Samaritan expectation of a Messiah, see Hengstenberg's Christology i. 75 (2d edit. Clark), and the references there.-ED.]

VOL. II.

Ꮓ

people practised the five modes of idolatrous worship and the service of Jehovah simultaneously, while this parallel is wanting in the history of the woman. At all events, an allegorical representation of the relation must have treated quite differently those historical relations. According to prophetic analogies, it must have been said inversely, Thou hast lived at the same time with five paramours, and now thou hast not returned to thy lawful husband; thou dost not yet fully belong to him. But allowing the simple fact of the narrative to remain intact, there lies in the aforenamed reference of it certainly no more than a significant, striking correspondency of the relations of this woman to the religious relations of her nation.

SECTION IX.

THE PROPHET IN HIS OWN CITY OF NAZARETH.

(John iv. 43, 44; Luke iv. 14-30; Matt. iv. 12, 13; Mark i. 14; Matt. xiii. 53-58; Mark vi. 1-6.)

The land of Galilee has received its name from a district on the northern borders of Palestine, in the tribe of Naphtali, which was very early so called.1 This circumstance, that the whole land of Galilee received its name from that region which latterly was distinguished as Upper Galilee from Lower Galilee, is of importance for this section, as well as for other passages in the Gospels. Probably the original Galilee, in the mouth of the Jewish people, was emphatically called Galilee; and according to the Israelitish mode of expression, persons might go from Lower Galilee to

originally denoted a circle, hence a Thus, in Josh. xiii. 2 and Joel iii. 4, Philistines, are spoken of. In Josh.

1 Compare Josh. xx. 7, xxi. 32. boundary, the environs of a country. the 'borders' or 'coasts,' nibba of the xx. 11 we read of the 'borders'--Geliloth-of Jordan. But in a more definite sense, the district round the mountain heights of Naphtali appear to have been designated as Galilee. This Galilee was more distinctly described as Galilee of the Gentiles (Isa. ix. 1), since there probably the Jewish and Gentile towns lay together in a district which exhibited a geographical unity.

Galilee, as any one might go from Geneva to Switzerland, or from Berlin to Prussia.1

2

According to Josephus, Lower Galilee was divided from Upper Galilee by a frontier which went from Tiberias to Zabulon. According to the direction of this boundary line, Nazareth belongs to the province of Lower Galilee, while the Cana designated Kana el Jelil by Robinson as our New Testament Kana most probably belongs to the province of Upper Galilee. Most decidedly Capernaum is situated within the borders of Upper Galilee.

From what has been said, it may be explained how Matthew could write that Jesus, leaving Nazareth, came and dwelt at Capernaum,' and that then was fulfilled what was prophesied by Isaiah of the Messianic visitation of Galilee of the Gentiles.*

In the same way the difficulty may be disposed of which is found in the Evangelist John, when he writes, that Jesus, after spending two days at Sychar, 'departed thence and went into Galilee,'—to Galilee, for He himself had testified, ‘that a prophet hath no honour in his own country;' and when the Evangelist, notwithstanding these words immediately preceding, observes, that Jesus was very well received by the Galileans.5

1 By "Galilee of the Gentiles" is commonly understood the northern part of the land, or Upper Galilee.'-Forbiger, Handbuch der Alten Geographie ii. 689.

2 De Bello Jud. iii. 3, § 1.

3 In the exegesis of John's Gospel a counterpart has been sought to the Cana in Galilee; see Lücke's Commentar i. 468. Since Kefr Kenna, which tradition has pointed out as the Galilean Cana, lies in a southern district, so this might be in the province of Lower Galilee, and, according to our supposition, that Upper Galilee was pre-eminently called Galilee, might form the counterpart, especially since the two places were not far from one another. The denomination might be used to distinguish it from Cana in the tribe of Asher; for it also belonged to the politically defined Upper Galilee, though it was not situated in the original Galilean circuit.

* With this a difficulty is solved, which Bruno Bauer (Kritik der Evang. Geschichte i. 23) has urged with a self-complacent prolixity,-when he remarks that the Evangelist knew not that Nazareth was a city of Galilee. We saw before, in opposition to the above-named critic, how a person might go from the wilderness into the wilderness: we see here how it was possible to go from Galilee to Galilee. The expression in Luke iv. 31, He came from Nazareth to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, is also to be explained in the same

way.

5 Even at Capernaum itself the district of Cana seems to have been re

From Samaria Jesus turned His steps to Nazareth, His wonted residence, where His mother still lived with His relations. But here He found, even from the first, no very agreeable reception, and a momentary admiration of His personality (Matt. xiii. 54) soon gave place to a decided aversion. They rejected Him, and Jesus then uttered these words, which have become a perpetual proverb: No prophet is accepted in his own country' (Luke iv. 24).

The Evangelist John, according to the plan of his work, might not narrate the incident; yet he slightly hints at it, since he has assigned the cause why Jesus did not take up His abode at Nazareth, but went to Galilee Proper (Old Galilee), in his own words.

Matthew also at first only mentions the circumstance (iv. 12, 13), that Jesus left Nazareth and settled in Capernaum. But afterwards he recurs to the incident which occasioned the Lord's making this change in His residence. That this is the same incident which we find related much earlier in Luke, can admit of no doubt. Matthew was induced by his peculiar arrangement to bring it in so late. He has formed no connection of events which forces us to consider his narrative as referring to a later period.

Mark does not mention the change of residence; but he also narrates the same incident which is reported by Matthew (vi. 1), in a combination of events, indeed, which is to be taken as an indefinite connection.

But the Evangelist Luke gives to the history its correct chronological arrangement, if we except the inexactness already spoken of, which we find in all the synoptic Gospels; namely, that the return of Jesus from the wilderness is not distinctly separated from His later return from Judea. Luke is obviously occupied with this latter return. According to Matthew and Mark (iv. 12; Mark i. 14), it was caused by John's being cast garded as Galilee in the strictest sense, as appears from John iv. 47. Hence the conjecture may be hazarded, that that district on which Cana lay, adjacent to a round mountain, had been the original circuit, the Galil, from which the province takes its name (Robinson). Accordingly John's mode of expression might be regarded as a provincialism,—as when, for example, a Zuricher says, I am not going to Hutli but to Albis. To any other Zuricher this would be intelligible, since on the spot Albis is distinguished from Hutli; but not by a distant geographer, since he would join Hutli with Albis.

into prison; according to John, there was this in addition, that Jesus could not carry on His work uninterruptedly in Judea.

That the synoptists could not mean the return of Jesus from the wilderness, is plain from the circumstance that John was not then cast into prison. But they might also not mean the second return of Jesus from Jerusalem, which John vi. 1 presupposes; for this time He soon hastened over the Galilean sea, near the east coast, while the former time, according to the three first Evangelists, He spent a longer time on the west coast. John, too, about this time had been already put to death. The synoptists therefore have reported the same return of which John gives us an account in the fourth chapter.

On the way to Nazareth Jesus everywhere appeared as a teacher in the synagogues of Lower Galilee, and His fame always went before Him1 (Luke iv. 14, 15). Accompanied by the disciples He had already gained, He entered His own town. Here He laid His hands on a few sick persons and healed them, as Mark tells us. But he immediately remarks, that the unbelief of His countrymen constantly counteracted and repressed the joyfulness of His spirit, so that, according to the truth and delicacy of His divine life, He could not do many miracles in this spiritual sphere. Thus, already troubled in spirit by their obtuseness, He entered on the following Sabbath into their synagogue. Here He gave an address. After the custom of the ancient synagogue, persons in whom confidence was placed,

2

1 [Fame, and whatever depends on the communication of man with man, varies with the density of the population. The description of Galilee by Josephus (Bell. Jud. iii. 3) gives one the idea of a fat, prolific land, swarming with inhabitants. 'The cities,' he says, 'lie close together, and the multitude of villages everywhere through the land are so populous that the smallest contains upwards of 15,000 inhabitants.' The distinction between cities and villages given by Lightfoot (Hor. Heb. Matt. iv. 23) is in itself interesting, as giving us a glimpse into the civilisation of the Jews, and, in connection with this section, useful. 'What is a great city? That in which were ten men of leisure. If there be less than this number, behold, it is a village.'-ED.] 2 The xarà Tò siwbòç airy,' says Olshausen,' does not refer to an earlier time.' Why not, since Jesus had already been engaged above half a year in His public ministry? Indeed, why should not the expression refer to the simple attendance on the Sabbath, to which Jesus had been accustomed from His youth? Bruno Bauer (i. 255) ascribes to the narrative of Luke the intention of relating the first appearance of Jesus, that he may raise a contradiction out of the expression: 'as His custom was.'