Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 4:37 - 4:38
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_4:37-38. “As well the sower as the reaper, I say, for in this case they are different persons.”
ἐν γὰρ τούτῳ , κ . τ . λ .] for herein, in this relation of sowing and reaping, the saying (the proverb of ordinary life, τὸ λεγόμενον , Plato, Gorg. p. 447 A; Phaed. p. 101 D; Pol. x. p. 621 C; comp. ὁ παλαιὸς λόγος , Phaed. p. 240 C; Gorg. p. 499 C; Soph. Trach. i.) has its essential truth, i.e. its proper realization, setting forth its idea. Comp. Plat. Tim. p. 2 6 E: μὴ πλασθέντα μῦθον , ἀλλʼ ἀληθινὸν (i.e. a real) λόγον . The reference of the λόγος to the words of the servant, Mat_25:24, which Weizsäcker considers probable,[196] would be very far-fetched; the rendering of ἀληθινός , however, as equivalent to ἀληθής , 2Pe_2:22 (de Wette and many others), is quite opposed to the idiosyncrasy of John (so also Joh_19:35). The article before ἀληθ ., which through want of attention might easily have been omitted (B. C.* K. L. T.b Δ . Or.), marks off the predicate with exclusive definiteness. Comp. Bernhardy, p. 322; Kühner, II. 140. With respect to other relations (not ἐν τουτῷ ), the proverb does not express its proper idea.
As to the proverb itself, and its various applications, see Wetstein. The ἀληθινόν of it is explained in Joh_4:38.
ἐγώ ] with emphasis: I, consequently the sower in the proverb.
The preterites ἀπέστειλα and εἰσεληλ . are not prophetic (de Wette, Tholuck), but the mission and calling of the disciples were already practically involved in their reception into the apostolate.[197] Comp. Joh_17:8.
ἄλλοι and αὐτῶν refer to Jesus (whom Olshausen, indeed, according to Mat_23:34, even excludes!), not to the prophets and the Baptist, nor to them together with Christ (so the Fathers and most of the early writers, also Lange, Luthardt, Ewald, and most others), nor in a general way to all who were instrumental in advancing the preparatory economy (Tholuck). They are plurals of category (see on Mat_2:20; Joh_3:11), representing the work of Christ, into which the disciples entered, as not theirs, but others’ work, i.e. a distinct and different labour. But the fact that Jesus was the labourer, while self-evident from the connection, is not directly expressed, but with intentional self-renunciation, half concealed beneath the plural ἄλλοι . He it was who introduced the conversion of mankind; the disciples were to complete it. He prepared and sowed the field; they were called upon to do what was still further necessary, and to reap. The great toil of the apostles in fulfilling their call is not denied; but, when compared with the work of Jesus Himself, it was the easier, because it was only the carrying on of that work, and was encouragingly represented under the cheerful image of harvesting (comp. Isa_9:3; Psa_126:6). If ἄλλοι is to be taken as referring to Philip’s work in converting the Samaritans, Act_8:25, upon which Peter and John entered (Baur), or to Paul’s labour among the heathen, the fruit of which is to be attributed to the first apostles (Hilgenfeld), any and every exegetical impossibility may be with equal right allowed by a ὕστερον πρότερον of critical arbitrariness.
[196] Weizsäcker, in his harmony of the words of John with those of the Synoptics, in which the latter are dealt with very freely (p. 282 ff.), brings in general much that is far-fetched into parallelisms which cannot be demonstrated. The intellectual independence of personal recollection and reproduction in John raises him above any such search after supposed borrowings.
[197] According to Godet, ἀπέστ , is to be taken as referring to a summons, discovered by him in ver. 36, to the work of reaping among the approaching Sycharites. He then takes ἄλλοι κεκοπ . to refer to the labour of Jesus in His interview with the woman. The latter words are said to have been spoken to the disciples, who thought He had been resting during their absence, with a “finesse qu’on oserait presque appeller légèrement malicieuse,” and with an “aimable sourire.” Such weighty thoughts as ἀποστολή and κόπος represent are utterly incompatible with such side hints and passing references. And it is a pure invention to find in ver. 36 an “invitation à prendre la faucille.”