² tn Grk “and boiling in spirit” (an idiom for great eagerness or enthusiasm; BDAG 426 s.v. ζέω).

¹ tn This phrase parallels a Hebrew infinitive absolute and serves to underline Jesus’ enthusiasm for holding this meal (BDF §198.6).

³ tn On the term translated “lost your mind” see BDAG 610 s.v. μαίνομαι, which has “you’re out of your mind, you’re raving, said to one whose enthusiasm seems to have outrun better judgment 26:24.”

¹ tn Heb “stirred up” (as in many English versions). Only one verb appears in the Hebrew text, but the translation “energized and encouraged” brings out its sense in this context. Cf. TEV “inspired”; NLT “sparked the enthusiasm of”; CEV “made everyone eager to work.”

³ tn The construction is emphatic with the use of the perfect tense and its infinitive absolute: דָלָה דָּלֹה (daloh dalah). B. Jacob says, “They showed their enthusiasm through the use of the infinitive absolute—And think of that, he even drew water for us; a man did this for us girls” (Exodus, 41).

¹ sn The enthusiasm of the worshipers in the preceding chapter turns sour in this one when Pharaoh refuses to cooperate. The point is clear that when the people of God attempt to devote their full service and allegiance to God, they encounter opposition from the world. Rather than finding instant blessing and peace, they find conflict. This is the theme that will continue through the plague narratives. But what makes chapter 5 especially interesting is how the people reacted to this opposition. The chapter has three sections: first, the confrontation between Moses and Pharaoh (vv. 1-5); then the report of the stern opposition of the king (vv. 6-14); and finally, the sad account of the effect of this opposition on the people (vv. 15-21).

³ sn John 4:44-45. The last part of v. 45 is a parenthetical note by the author. The major problem in these verses concerns the contradiction between the proverb stated by Jesus in v. 44 and the reception of the Galileans in v. 45. Origen solved the problem by referring his own country to Judea (which Jesus had just left) and not Galilee. But this runs counter to the thrust of John’s Gospel, which takes pains to identify Jesus with Galilee (cf. 1:46) and does not even mention his Judean birth. R. E. Brown typifies the contemporary approach: He regards v. 44 as an addition by a later redactor who wanted to emphasize Jesus’ unsatisfactory reception in Galilee. Neither expedient is necessary, though, if honor is understood in its sense of attributing true worth to someone. The Galileans did welcome him, but their welcome was to prove a superficial response based on what they had seen him do at the feast. There is no indication that the signs they saw brought them to place their faith in Jesus any more than Nicodemus did on the basis of the signs. But a superficial welcome based on enthusiasm for miracles is no real honor at all.