Attributed commentary excerpt
John Gill's Exposition on John 2:4
A historical reference excerpt for this verse. Read it alongside the biblical text and other available sources.
Exposition of the Old and New Testament
John Gill (1697–1771) · 18th-century historical commentary
Source: BibleWord.ai's local reference edition of this named work.
Jesus saith unto her, woman, etc.] Calling her “woman”, as it was no ways contrary to her being a virgin, (<480404>Galatians 4:4), so it was no mark of disrespect; it being an usual way of speaking with the Jews, when they showed the greatest respect to the person spoken to; and was used by our Lord when he addressed his mother with the greatest tenderness, and strongest affection, (<431926>John 19:26). The Jews frequently object this passage to us Christians: one of their writers his objection in this manner f85 : “they (the Christians) say, the mother of Jesus is never called a woman their law; but here her son himself calls her a man.” Another puts it thus f86: “it is their (the Christians) belief, that Mary, even after she brought forth Jesus, was a virgin; but if she was, as they say, why does not her son call her by the name of virgin? but he calls her a woman, which signifies one known by man, as appears from (<430204>John 2:4 8:10).” To which may be replied, that the mother of Jesus is never called a woman in the New Testament, is not said by us Christians: it is certain she is so called, both here, and elsewhere; but then this is no contradiction to her being a virgin; one, and the same person, may be a virgin, and a woman: the Abraham’s servant was sent to take for wife for his son Isaac, is called a woman, though a virgin that had never known any man, (<012405>Genesis 24:5,8,14,16,43,44). Besides, we do not think ourselves obliged to maintain the perpetual virginity of Mary, the mother of our Lord; it is enough that she was a virgin when she conceived, and when she brought forth her firstborn: and as the Jews endeavour to take an advantage of this against the character of Mary, the Papists are very solicitous about the manner in which these words are said, lest they should be thought to contain a reproof, which they cannot bear she should be judged worthy of; or suggest any thing to her dishonour, whom they magnify as equal to her son: but certain it is, that the following words, what have I to do with thee? show resentment and reproof. Some render the words, “what is it to thee and me?” and give this as the sense; what concern is this of ours? what business have we with it? let them look to it, who are the principal in the feast, and have the management of it. The Jew f87 objects to this sense of the words, but gives a very weak reason for it: “but I say, (says he,) who should be concerned but the master of the feast? and he was the master of the feast:” whereas it is a clear case that he was one of the guests, one that was invited, (<430202>John 2:2), and that there was a governor or ruler of the feast, who might be more properly called the master of it than Jesus, (<430208>John 2:8,10). However, since Christ afterwards did concern himself in it, it looks as if this was not his meaning. Others render it to the sense we do, “what have I with thee?” as the Ethiopic version; or “what business hast thou with me?” as the Persic version; and is the same with, Ælw yl hm, “what have I to do with thee?” used in (<111718>1 Kings 17:18 <120301>2 Kings 3:13), where the Septuagint use the same phrase as here; and such a way of speaking is common with Jewish writers f88: hereby signifying, that though, as man, and a son of hers, he had been subject to her, in which he had set an example of obedience to parents; yet, as God, he had a Father in heaven, whose business he came to do; and in that, and in his office, as Mediator, she had no…
This public page shows a contextual excerpt from the locally available source text.
How to use this source
This excerpt is attributed to its named commentary. It is included as a historical study resource and should be evaluated in light of Scripture and other relevant evidence.
