Jesus and the Samaritan
Woman
By
Wayne Jackson
Jesus Christ was the
master teacher of all times. He taught in such a variety of ways. While he
frequently spoke to the multitudes, he also spent considerable time in
one-on-one situations. He gave kindly attention to the individual.
John’s Gospel account
reveals one such incident. The record of Jesus’ conversation with the Samaritan
woman at Jacob’s well, as contained in John 4, is a rich depository of biblical
information worthy of the careful attention of any devout student.
The narrative falls
into three major segments: First, there is the explanation as to why the Lord
happened to be passing through Samaritan territory (vv. 1-4). Second, there is
the actual exchange between Jesus and this strange woman (vv. 5-26). Finally,
there is the effect that ultimately was produced as a result of this incident
(vv. 27-42). Let us consider each of the segments in some detail.
Strategic
Movements
The Lord’s travels
were not haphazard. They were meticulously orchestrated so as to enhance the
greatest advantage for the success of his coming kingdom. Frequently, timing
was crucial, for everything must proceed on schedule toward that most important
hour on the divine clock (cf. John 7:30; 8:20; 13:1, etc.).
Timing was a factor
in the case of the present context. His ministry had been enormously
successful, as reflected in the number of conversions being effected by his
disciples—eclipsing even the work of John the Baptizer. Because of this
success, the Pharisees were beginning to focus a more hostile interest in him.
So he decided to redirect his labor from Judea in the south, to Galilee in the
north. In so doing, the apostle notes, “he must needs pass through Samaria.”
Several observations are in order:
(1) Note that John 4:1
begins with the words, “When therefore the Lord knew …” Here we learn something
about the incarnate Lord. Though he was deity in nature, he did not
continuously exercise the quality of omniscience. He could, consistent with his
Father’s will, exercise supernatural knowledge (cf. Matthew 12:25); at other
times, he accessed knowledge the ordinary way (cf. John 11:34).
(2) The success of
Jesus aroused the enmity of the Jewish leaders. This jealousy would eventually
reach such an apex that they would deliver their own Messiah to the Roman
authorities for crucifixion. Even Pilate recognized that on account of envy the
Jews had delivered up Jesus (Matthew 27:18).
(3) Men with
shriveled souls have but two ways of exalting themselves—they either boast of
their accomplishments or tear down those they perceive as rivals. Usually, they
do both.
(4) While it may seem
natural to take the expression “must needs” as a geographical reference, since
Samaria lies between Judea and Galilee, passing through Samaria was not the
only route between the two provinces—in fact, it was not the most common one.
Because of Jewish
hostilities toward the Samaritan people (which we will discuss later), the
Hebrews frequently would travel to the east when they had leisure time (see
Josephus, Antiquities
of the Jews
20.6.1, regarding travel at feast times), cross over the Jordan, and thus skirt
the Samaritan territory. Samaria was considered as not belonging to the Holy
Land, a strip of “foreign country” separating Judea from Galilee (Edersheim
1957, 12). Such a detour would take longer than the normal three days of
travel.
The Lord, however,
did not hesitate to traverse Samaritan territory (Luke 9:51-56; 17:11-19; John
4:1ff). Some scholars, therefore, view this “must needs” language as referring
to a “compulsion other than mere convenience. As the Savior of all men, Jesus
had to confront the smoldering suspicion and enmity between Jew and Samaritan
by ministering to his enemies” (Tenney 1981, 54).
Christ’s mission to
earth was regulated on more than one occasion by a heavenly “must” (cf. Luke
2:49; 4:43; 19:5; 24:7; John 9:4; 10:16; 20:9).
At
Jacob’s Well
As Jesus and his
disciples traveled northward through Samaria, they came to a city called
Sychar. The precise location of Sychar is a point of controversy. It was near
Mt. Gerizim, a peak some 2,850 feet high, about forty miles north of Jerusalem.
Some identify the city with modern Askar, slightly more than half a mile north
of Jacob’s well; while others locate the city at the ruins of ancient Shechem
(now Tell Balatah), which is located at the eastern edge of the pass between
Mt. Ebal and Mt. Gerizim. John says it was “near to the parcel of ground that
Jacob gave to his son Joseph” (4:5; cf. Genesis 48:22).
The apostle declares
that “Jacob’s well was there” (4:6). The site of Jacob’s well has been called
“the most authentic of all the Holy Places in Palestine” (A. Parrot, cited in
Freedman 1992, 608). The well is about three hundred yards south-southeast of
Tell Balatah. When it was cleaned out in 1935, it was shown to be about 135
feet deep (cf. 4:11), with the water being some seventy-five to eighty feet
from the surface in the summer (Wright 1965, 216). It is seven and one-half
feet in diameter.
John calls it both a
“spring” (pege [John 4:6, ASV fn]) and a “well” (phrear—a cistern
[4:11-12]), suggesting that its water was supplied by both an underground
spring and rain. “Abundant water comes from springs emerging all along the
north and east flanks of Mount Gerizim” (Stern 1993, 1346). The biblical text
is strikingly accurate.
The
Weary Savior
When the Lord arrived
at Jacob’s well, he sat down, “being wearied with his journey” (4:6). The Greek
word for “weary” is kopiao (from kopos, in secular Greek, a
beating or weariness caused by it). As we might express it, the Savior was
“beat,” i.e., exhausted. John notes that it was “about the sixth hour.” If the
apostle, writing from Ephesus in the late first century, was employing Roman
civil time in his Gospel account, this would be about six in the evening (cf.
Westcott 1981, 282; Edersheim 1947, 408). He possibly had walked all day.
We must not rush by
the phrase too quickly. It emphasizes the humanity of our Lord. I should
underline the term “wearied,” and in my Bible margin write, “for me.” It was
only because of his great love for sinful man that the eternal Word (John 1:1)
became incarnate (1:14) and endured the rigors of humankind. He was hungry
(Matthew 4:2), thirsty (John 19:28), tired (John 4:6), tearful (John 11:35),
and even fearful (Hebrews 5:7). Think about it: he who effortlessly created the
entire universe, now is weary—for you and me!
A
Samaritan Woman Approaches
John records these
words: “There came a woman of Samaria to draw water” (4:7). Two things are
significant: First, she was a Samaritan, and, as the apostle comments, “Jews
have no dealings with Samaritans” (v. 9). Second, her gender presented an
obstacle. Normally, Jewish men did not speak to women in public (4:27). Let us
explore these two matters:
(1) The most common
view as to the origin of the Samaritans is that they were a mongrel breed who
developed as a result of intermarriages between earlier Hebrews of the northern
kingdom of Israel and the Assyrian settlers in Israel following the captivity
of the northern kingdom in 722-21 B.C. Other pagans eventually infiltrated
the land and mingled with them (cf. Ezra 4:2, 9, 10).
The term is found in
the Old Testament only in 2 Kings 17:29, being applied to the remnant in the
land. This group had their own brand of religion—a mixture of “Jehovah” worship
and heathenism. Josiah, the good king of Judah, had sought to remedy this
wickedness in his day (cf. 2 Chronicles 34:6-7).
There was much
animosity between Jews and Samaritans. When the Jews were rebuilding Jerusalem
(following the Babylonian captivity [606-536 B.C.]), the Samaritans
offered their services. They were summarily rebuffed (Ezra 4:1-3) and the
Samaritans responded in kind (4:4ff). Josephus characterizes the Samaritans as
idolaters and hypocrites (Antiquities of the Jews 9.14.3). Edersheim quotes a Jewish saying:
“May I never set eyes on a Samaritan” (1947, 401).
Several centuries
before the birth of Christ, the Samaritans had built their own temple on Mt.
Gerizim to rival the one in Jerusalem. Here, they offered sacrifices according
to the Mosaic code. Anderson notes that during the reign of Antiochus IV
(175-164 B.C.) “the Samaritan
temple was renamed either Zeus Hellenios (willingly by the Samaritans according
to Josephus) or, more likely, Zeus Xenios (unwillingly in accord with 2 Macc.
6:2)” (Bromiley 1988, 304).
This temple was
destroyed by John Hyracanus in about 128 B.C., having been in existence about two
hundred years. Only a few stone remnants of it exist today.
During the first
century, the religion of the Samaritans was similar to that of the Jews, except
that they were more liberal—more kindred spirits of the Sadducees, for example,
than the Pharisees. They accepted the Pentateuch, observed certain Jewish
feasts, and longed for the coming Messiah (John 4:25).
Religiously, though,
they were considered as foreigners. When Jesus instituted the limited
commission (Matthew 10:1ff), the Samaritans were excluded. That by no means
indicates, however, that the Savior was unconcerned with these precious
souls—as this very account proves.
(2) The Jewish
attitude toward women was less than ideal. While the Old Testament afforded
great dignity to womanhood (cf. Proverbs 31:10ff), the Hebrews over the years
had imbibed some of the attitudes of paganism. Many a Jewish man started the
day with a prayer to God, expressing thanks that he was neither a Gentile, a
slave, or a woman!
A Hebrew man did not
talk with women in the street—not even with his mother, sister, daughter or
wife! (cf. Lightfoot 1979, 286-287). According to the most liberal view of
Deuteronomy 24:1, a Hebrew husband could divorce his wife if she was found
“familiarly talking with men” (Edersheim 1957, 157).
William Barclay even
tells of a segment of the Pharisees known as the “bleeding and bruised”
Pharisees; when they saw a woman approaching, they would close their eyes,
hence, were running into things constantly! (1956, 142-143). And yet the Master
addressed this woman: “Give me to drink.”
The Son of God,
therefore, in one fell swoop, broke through two barriers—the one steeped in
racial bigotry, the other a hurtful disposition that distanced the man from one
of the sweetest treasures of God’s creations.
The
Influence of Jesus
One of the statements
in this narrative which seems almost incidental is John’s comment that the
Lord’s disciples, who were traveling with him, had “gone into the city to buy
food” (4:8). Upon closer examination, it is very significant.
Normally, Jews did
not eat food that was produced or handled by Samaritans. The rabbis taught:
Let no Israelite eat
one mouthful of any thing that is a Samaritan’s; for if he eat but a little
mouthful, he is as if he ate swine’s flesh (Lightfoot, 275).
And yet, the
disciples are buying food in Sychar. Perhaps they were already beginning to be
influenced by Jesus’ kindly disposition toward all those fashioned in the image
of God. One cannot but be reminded of a later circumstance when, observing the
boldness of Peter and John, certain Jewish leaders “took knowledge of them,
that they had been with Jesus” (Acts 4:13).
Living
Water
When Christ asked of
this unnamed woman a drink of water, he challenged the best from her. It is
commonly the case that when we offer to assist someone who harbors a grudge
against us, they will ruffle up and resist. Yet, if they are petitioned for assistance, they
surprisingly respond. Jesus appealed to this lady’s kinder instincts, thus
eroding the cultural wall between them.
The woman, with
perhaps a little edge to her voice, responded, “How is it that you, a Jew
[which she could discern by his clothing and manner of speech], asks a drink of
me, a Samaritan woman?” (4:9). She is taken aback, but intrigued. “Who is this
stranger who is willing to address me?”
The Lord seizes the
opportunity, lifts the conversation to a higher plateau, and arrests her
attention further by introducing several matters that were bound to stimulate
her interest.
Christ said:
If you knew the gift
of God, and who it is that says to you, Give me to drink; you would have asked
of him, and he would have given you living water (4:10).
Note that:
(1) Jesus spoke of a
gift. The Greek term is dorea, used only here in the Gospel accounts, which actually
signifies a “free gift” (Vine 1991, 341). A free gift stimulates anyone’s
interest!
(2) Employing
symbolism appropriate to the occasion, he mentions a living water, i.e., a
water that bestows life. This could mean something quite significant to a
person whose day-to-day existence was characterized by deadness.
(3) He associates
these blessings with a who, i.e., he suggested that she was talking at this
very moment to someone special, a depository of life.
There was a great
deal of subtle information packed into a seemingly ordinary statement. It was,
in fact, the gospel in miniature.
Consider:
(1) The offer of
salvation to a rebellious world is the expression of God’s grace; it is a free
gift which cannot be merited or earned (Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 6:23).
(2) It is available
only through that person who was conversing with the Samaritan woman, the
Messiah (John 14:6; Acts 4:11-12).
(3) The result is the
promise of life, i.e., union with God for those who are dead in sin (Romans
6:23; Ephesians 2:1).
The Lord’s statement
produces a startling effect. The woman immediately changed her tone and
addresses the friendly stranger with a term of respect.
“Sir,” she says with
some bewilderment, “you have nothing to draw with, and the well is deep; where
will you get that living water? You’re not greater than our father Jacob, are
you, who gave us this well, which provided water for him, his family, and his
livestock?”
She is still thinking
of literal water of some sort, and her question implies a negative answer (as
the Greek construction indicates). The Savior gently nudges her forward. He
wants to emphasize that he is not speaking of the kind of water contained in
Jacob’s well.
And so he says, in
effect, “One can keep on drinking [a present tense form, suggesting sustained
action] of this water, and he will be thirsty again; but anyone who takes but a
swallow [an aorist tense form—an act] of the water about which I’m speaking,
won’t ever thirst again.” The Lord went on to point out that the spiritual
water of which he spoke would become a bountiful fountain, issuing in eternal
life, i.e., salvation.
Still not grasping
the elevated meaning of the Master’s message, but being tantalized, the woman
courteously urged Jesus to “give me this water” (v. 15).
Sin
Gently Exposed
The Samaritan lady
obviously had both the need for salvation and at least a threshold interest in
things divine. Christ determines, therefore, that it is now time to bring the
discussion closer to home.
In so doing he must
accomplish two goals: First, he must penetrate her conscience with a sense of
sin. Second, it is imperative that he establish his own authority as a
spokesman from God.
“Go, call your
husband, and return,” instructed the Lord.
Abruptly (dropping
that polite “Sir”), she shot back, “I don’t have a husband!”
If I may paraphrase,
Christ replied: “You’ve told the truth, lady. But the fact is, you’ve had five
husbands, and the man you now
are with actually is not your husband. You revealed more truth than you
intended” (cf. 4:18).
There are two ways of
looking at this—neither of which puts this woman in a favorable light. Consider
the Greek verb echo, rendered “have” (v.
17), a form of which is employed four times in verses seventeen and eighteen.
It may be used in the sense of “married to” (cf. Matthew 22:28; Mark 6:18; 1
Corinthians 5:1), or it can signify to “have” or “be with.”
And so, the Lord may
have been saying to the woman: “You’ve been married to five husbands, and the
man to whom you are now ‘married’ is not a ‘husband’ in the true sense.”
Or he may have been
suggesting this: “You’ve been married five times, and the man with whom you now
are living cannot be called a ‘husband.’” Leon Morris, in his scholarly
commentary on John’s Gospel, has discussed this matter in some detail (1971,
264-265). The point is she was in a sinful relationship and she needed the
salvation that only he could offer.
It was a startling
revelation to the woman. This stranger had exposed details of her life he could
not possibly have known naturally. Later she will tell her villagers, “Come see
a man who told me all things I ever did!” (v. 29). That, of course, is
hyperbole. But the information revealed by Jesus was so dramatic that it seemed
like he had drawn the curtain back on every foul deed she had ever done!
The woman was
intelligent. She was a logician! Christ had evidenced supernatural knowledge.
Thus, the woman (returning to her respectful form of address) said, “Sir, I
perceive [Greek theoreo—to give careful
observation to detail] that you are a prophet” (v. 19).
Here is an important
point: since the Samaritans believed there was no prophet after Moses, except
the one of whom the great Hebrew leader had spoken—“a prophet like unto me”
(Deuteronomy 18:15ff)—whom they identified with the Messiah, this lady was
toying gradually with the notion that this man could possibly be the Messiah.
Still, she was uncomfortable; and so she shifted the direction of the
conversation from her personal problems to that of worship—a topic, however,
which undoubtedly was of genuine interest to her.
True
Worship
Possibly pointing to
nearby Mt. Gerizim, she said, “Our fathers worshipped [past tense] in this
mountain, but you [plural—Jews] say that Jerusalem is the necessary place of
worship.” She was referring to the Samaritan temple that had existed on
Gerizim, but had been destroyed a century and a half earlier (hence her use of
the past tense is precise).
There was a
long-standing controversy between the Samaritans and the Jews as to where
worship was to be rendered. The Samaritans contended for Gerizim, the Hebrews
for Jerusalem. The Jews were right, of course (cf. 2 Chronicles 6:6; 7:12;
Psalm 78:68), but that was rather immaterial at this point. Jesus observed that
the time was coming when worship would not be a matter of some external place
(cf. Acts 17:24); rather, it would be spiritual in nature. This is a clear
indication that the end of the Mosaic system itself was nearing.
In drawing the
contrast between Samaritan worship and Hebrew worship, Christ emphasized that
true worship is more than emotion; it is grounded in knowledge.
“You [Samaritans]
worship that which you do not know” (v. 22). Morris notes that the “that which”
(a neuter form) probably denotes an ignorance of the whole system of correct
worship (270). Since the knowledge of proper worship comes through sacred
revelation (the Scriptures), and since the Samaritans rejected all Old
Testament Scripture save the Pentateuch, it is not surprising that they “knew
not” about proper worship.
Away goes the
contention that the format of worship is immaterial, so long as one is sincere.
Then, almost as a side thought, the Lord comments, “For salvation [literally,
‘the salvation’] is come from the Jews.” God had been working a plan via the
Hebrew nation.
Christ then declared
that the hour was coming—indeed now is, i.e., the time is very imminent (cf.
5:25)—when there would be true worshippers. These are worshippers who belong to
God as his redeemed children and who worship consistent with divine revelation.
The Lord describes this class of people as those who worship “the Father in
spirit and in truth.” For “such,” i.e., worshippers of this quality, the Father
“seeks” (constantly—present tense).
It must be noted in
this connection that God does not seek human worship for any selfish motive. He
is not served by men’s hands “as though he needed anything” (Acts 17:25). Being
infinite in all his attributes, Jehovah is not enhanced in any way by human
servitude. Clearly, he desires our service because of what it will do for us. Accepting our worship
is an act of his kindness! (see Why Humanity Should
Serve God).
From this context one
learns that genuine worship is composed of three elements. Each of these must
be briefly considered:
(1) The proper object
of worship is deity and only deity (Matthew 4:10). While this context deals
specifically with the Father, other texts reveal that both the Son and the Holy
Spirit, as possessing the nature of God, are objects of worship.
Deity, as a holy
entity, is worthy of praise (Psalm 18:3). It is sinful to worship nature
(Romans 1:22ff) or objects crafted by human skill (Acts 17:29). Lust for money,
power, etc., can even be a form of idolatry (cf. Colossians 3:5).
(2) True worship must
be in spirit. Genuine worship involves the plunging of one’s spirit into the
act (cf. Romans 1:9; 1 Corinthians 14:15) in a humble and sincere way (cf.
Joshua 24:14). This disposition eschews the superficial, the ostentatious (cf.
Matthew 6:1ff), the self-centered (Luke 18:9ff), and the hypocritical (Matthew
5:23-24; 15:7-9).
(3) Acceptable
worship conforms to truth, i.e., to the “content of Christianity as the
absolute truth” (Arndt and Gingrich 1967, 35). It is not “truth” as one feels
it to be, i.e., subjectively determined, but truth as it actually is, measured
by divine revelation (John 17:17). Thiselton says that true worship is “that
which accords with reality, which men grasp on the basis of revelation” (Brown
1971, 891; cf. Philippians 3:3).
These comprehensive
statements of Jesus to this Samaritan woman regarding the nature and scope of
worship are wonderfully revealing. They contain a marvelous challenge for us to
this very day.
The
Messiah Cometh
We have already
mentioned the fact that this inquisitive lady has concluded that Jesus is a
prophet and that this term, in the Samaritan mind, was associated with the
coming Messiah. The woman now introduces that topic directly.
I know that Messiah
is coming (he that is called Christ): when he comes, he will declare all things
to us (v. 25).
The parenthetical
comment almost certainly is added by John to identify, for Gentile readers, the
meaning of the term, “Messiah.” The woman has not concluded, precisely at this
point, that Jesus is
that Messiah, but she has inched closer to that irresistible proposition.
Note that this woman
believed in:
- the promise of the Messiah;
- the Messiah who had not come, but was
yet to arrive;
- the Messiah who would be a person (not a
mere ideal “concept,” as alleged by modern Jews); and,
- the Messiah who would be a teacher, not
a military conqueror.
In some respects she
seems to have had a clearer vision of the Messiah than even the Savior’s
disciples!
How is it that those
who believed only in the inspiration of the Pentateuch could know of the coming
Messiah? Because, quite obviously, there is sufficient evidence therein to
point in that direction.
The first messianic
glimpse was in Genesis 3:15, where it was indicated that the woman’s “seed”
would ultimately crush Satan. Later, Abraham was told that through his
offspring all nations of the earth would be blessed (Genesis 22:18). Jacob had
foretold the coming of Shiloh (rest-giver) from the tribe of Judah (Genesis
49:10).
In Exodus, the
Messiah had been foreshadowed in the passover lamb (John 1:29; 1 Corinthians
5:7), and in Leviticus various offerings prepared the studious mind for the
Messiah’s redeeming sacrifice (Leviticus 1-5).
In Numbers, the death
of him who was to be “lifted up,” thus to provide healing, was prefigured (21),
and Balaam spoke of the star that would arise out of Jacob, the sceptre out of
Israel, to destroy the enemies of Jehovah (24:17-19). And, as earlier noted,
Moses told of “the prophet” like unto him, to whom all would owe obedience
(Deuteronomy 18:15-19).
Here is an
interesting question to ponder: if the Samaritans could discern the coming of
the Messiah and subsequently identify Christ as the fulfillment of that
abbreviated collection of prophecies—upon the basis of only five Old Testament
documents—what does that say about the Jews, who mostly have been unable to
accept Jesus as the Christ on the basis of more than three hundred prophecies
in thirty-nine different books? (See 2 Corinthians 3:14ff).
Following the woman’s
acknowledgement of the promised Messiah, Jesus simply said to her, “I, the very
one speaking to you, am he.”
Professor Laney’s
comment is interesting:
The Greek text
literally reads, “I am, the one speaking to you.” The words “I am” (ego eimi) are used in the
Septuagint (Ex. 3:14) in connection with the revelation of God’s personal name,
Yahweh (1992, 97).
This same expression,
ego
eimi,
frequently was employed by Jesus, as recorded in John’s Gospel, to stress his
identification with the Father (cf. 6:20, 35, 41, 48, 51; 8:12, 18, 24, 28, 58;
9:9; 13:19; 18:5, 6, 8). It is a subtle affirmation of deity.
Word
of the Messiah Spreads
As the disciples
returned from their mission to obtain food in the city, they were amazed to
discover Jesus “speaking” (the imperfect tense suggests an extended
conversation) to this woman, yet not a one of them was presumptuous enough to
ask the Lord, “What do you want from her?” or, “Why are you talking with this
woman?” The very presence of the Lord was awesome.
Presently, the woman
left her water pot and went into the city. Mention of the water pot is a
curious detail (that lends authenticity to the narrative). Was she so elated
that she forgot her initial mission to the well? Or did she intend to quickly
return, and the jar could be reclaimed then?
Her testimony to the
citizens of the community was compelling indeed. She claimed to have met a man
“who told me all things that ever I did.” This was a strong suggestion of
Jesus’ supernatural nature. Then, with a brilliant stroke of diplomacy, she
asked (if we may paraphrase the original language), “This couldn’t be the
Christ, could it?”
In the Greek, the particle
meti implies an expected
negative response. When one remembers that a woman’s testimony was not counted
for much in that culture, this lady’s shrewdness is revealed by the way in
which she handled this matter. She taunted them with a question which elicited
a negative answer, leaving them perfectly at ease to draw their own conclusion
and contradict her!
Her careful choice of
words produced the exact response for which she hoped. The people of Sychar
departed from the city and made their way (so the force of the imperfect
verb—“were coming”) to find him. In the meantime, the disciples attempted to
persuade Jesus to eat of the food they had brought. The Lord knew, though, that
their education at this time was more important than satisfying his physical
hunger. So he raised the discussion to a higher level by means of an enigmatic
saying. “I have food to eat of which you are not aware,” he said. They murmured
among themselves, “Did someone else bring him food?” The Lord then explained
his symbolism: “I have a nourishment that transcends the physical. It is to
accomplish the plan for which God sent me.” Note that Christ affirms that his
presence on earth is the result of Heaven’s sending activity.
The
Promise of Harvest
We may surmise from
verse thirty-five that it is December or January on the occasion of this
journey (since the harvest occurs in April-May). As the Lord and his disciples
looked upon the greening fields nearby, revealing such promise of a healthy
crop to be harvested later, the Master seized upon the occasion to further
instruct his men.
“You are saying,” he
began, “that in four months, harvest time will be here; aren’t you?” “Look,” he
continued (perhaps beckoning toward a multitude approaching down the road),
“lift up your eyes to the ‘human crop,’ who, even now, are ripe for harvest.”
It is a reality that
some souls are riper than others (cf. Acts 16:6-10).
The Lord stresses
that both those who sow and those who reap are laborers together, and that
their combined activity will result in the production of fruit, i.e., souls who
will inherit eternal life. There are a couple of points here that need
emphasizing:
First, Jesus wants
the disciples to know that other preparation has been in progress with
reference to the Samaritans that will issue ultimately in these people coming
into a knowledge of the truth. The writings of Moses (in the Pentateuch)
doubtless had influenced them. The preparatory work of John the Baptist may
have affected them to some extent, at least indirectly.
Second, Christ is
suggesting to the disciples that their labor, eventually, will involve
evangelizing among these people. This is a prophetic truth that they could
hardly appreciate at this moment, but they would grasp it later.
From this we learn
this important principle: it is almost never the case that one person is solely
responsible for leading another to the Savior. Usually, there are various
people who have contributed to the process along the way. Some plant, others
water, but God gives the increase (cf. 1 Corinthians 3:6). Surely this should
help us to put the matter into proper focus when we are tempted to assume most
of the credit for someone’s conversion to the Lord.
The
Fruit at Sychar
We will subsequently
learn that Jesus spent two days in Sychar teaching the honest people of that
community (v. 40). There are several things which challenge our attention in
this concluding paragraph of the narrative we have been considering. Let us
look at them one by one:
(1) John says that
“many of the Samaritans believed on him.” This reveals that Jesus truly had
prophesied correctly; this was an area white unto harvest.
Further, it indicates
that, in spite of their jaded religious background—very unlikely candidates for
belief—these folks were prime subjects for the gospel. We humans are unable to
judge the quality of the human heart based upon externals.
(2) The Samaritans
believed initially on the basis of the woman’s testimony. Her confession
regarding the exposure of her past probably was so explicit and beyond the
realm of fabrication that she became a compelling advocate for the prophetic
credibility of Christ. This is very telling when we remember that a woman’s
word counted for almost nothing. Women “could not act as legal witnesses”
(Bromiley, 1093). But this woman’s testimony was so powerful that it
transcended that cultural barrier.
Moreover, the fact
that John records this element of the story gives the narrative an aura of
veracity; such a detail would never have been concocted by a fraudulent writer
attempting to provide plausibility to the ministry of Jesus.
(3) John records that
the Samaritans “besought” the Lord to abide with them. The word “besought” is
an imperfect tense form; they “kept on asking him” to remain with them. The
suggestion may be that Jesus resisted at first, perhaps feeling the urgency of
his journey, but then, maybe, relented to their pleadings. If that is the case,
it reveals how the Master can be touched with our sincere urging. They enjoyed
two precious days with the Creator of the universe just because they asked.
As James would later
write: “[Y]ou have not, because you ask not” (4:2b). The disposition of these
Samaritans was in such glaring contrast to others of their kind who, on another
occasion, “did not receive him” (Luke 9:53).
(4) In addition to
the initial many who believed, John says that as a result of Jesus’ sojourn
with them, “many more believed.” This time, though, it was “because of his
word.” They were grateful for the woman’s role in introducing them to Jesus,
but, as a result of their personal investigation, they became all the more
convinced.
One may initially
believe the facts of the gospel based upon his confidence in the veracity of a
loved one or friend. The time must come, however, that he investigates the
facts on his own and come to a deeper faith.
(5) They had not come
to a conviction that Jesus was merely a wise philosopher or a benevolent
socialist; rather, the evidence to which they were exposed during those two
important days grounded them in the truth that this was the Savior of the
world.
No, they were not
universalists, believing that all would be saved—regardless of their obedience;
rather, they came to the understanding that all people were subject to the
universal blessings of the gospel. They knew that Christ was more than just a
Savior to the Jews. He was their Savior too!
Note also that they
did not restrict his saving mission to a small “elect” group, preordained
before the world’s foundation; rather, he was potentially the Savior of the
world (contra Calvinism).
Epilogue
A study of this
thrilling account would be incomplete if we did not notice the success of the
gospel among the Samaritans following the establishment of the Christian
system.
After the death of
Stephen, the Jerusalem church was scattered abroad. In this connection, Philip
the evangelist went to Samaria and proclaimed Christ (Acts 8:5). The multitude
“gave heed with one accord” to his message, which was, incidentally, buttressed
with supernatural signs.
In this connection
one recalls the conversion of Simon the sorcerer (8:9ff). When the report of
Philip’s success came to the attention of the apostles up in Jerusalem, they
sent Peter and John to Samaria, and the new converts were supplied with
spiritual gifts to supplement their ministry (8:14ff). Subsequently, the gospel
was proclaimed in “many villages” of the Samaritans (8:25).
Clearly, much of this
success is traceable to the visit of Jesus to that region, as recorded in John
4:5ff.
