John 8:48

Then answered the Jews The best MSS. omit the particle, which if it were genuine should be rendered -therefore," not -then:" The Jews answered. This denial of their national prerogative of being sons of God seems to them malicious frenzy. He must be an enemy of the peculiar people and be possessed.

Say we not well i.e. rightly: comp. John 4:17; John 13:13; John 18:23. -We" is emphatic; -we at any rate are right."

that thou art a Samaritan "Nowhere else do we find the designation -a Samaritan;" yet it might naturally we might say inevitably be given to one who seemed to attack the exclusive privileges of the Jewish people." S. pp. 159, 160. It is therefore a striking touch of reality, and another instance of the Evangelist's complete familiarity with the ideas and expressions current in Palestine at this time. Possibly this term of reproach contains a sneer at His visit to Samaria in chap. 4, and at His having chosen the unusual route through Samaria, as He probably did (see on John 7:10), in coming up to the Feast of Tabernacles. The parable of the Good Samaritan was probably not yet spoken.

and hast a devil It is unfortunate that we have not two words in our Bible to distinguish diabolos, - theDevil" (John 8:44; John 13:2; Matthew 4:1; Luke 8:12; &c., &c.), from daimonionor daimôn, - adevil," or -unclean spirit." -Fiend," which Wiclif sometimesemploys (Matthew 12:24; Matthew 12:28; Mark 1:34; Mark 1:39, &c.), might have been used, had Tyndale and Cranmer adopted it: demon would have been better still. But here Tyndale, Cranmer, and the Geneva Version make the confusion complete by rendering -and hast thedevil," a mistake which they make also in John 7:20 and John 10:20. The charge here is more bitter than either John 7:20 or John 10:20, where it simply means that His conduct is so extraordinary that He must be demented. We have instances more similar to this in the Synoptists; Matthew 9:34; Matthew 12:24; Mark 3:22; Luke 11:15.