John 8:48

οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι. Not those who for the moment believed on Him (John 8:31), but the hostile party as a whole. This denial of their national prerogative of being sons of God seems to them malicious frenzy. He must be an enemy of the Chosen People and be possessed. καλῶς = ‘rightly;’ comp. John 4:17; John 13:13; John 18:23 : ἡμεῖς is emphatic; ‘we at any rate are right.’ For the position of ἡμεῖς comp. 1 John 1:4.

Σαμαρ. εἶ σύ. Σύ last, with contemptuous emphasis. The passage implies that this was a common reproach, but it is stated nowhere else. Yet it was most natural that one whose teaching so often contradicted Jewish traditions and Jewish exclusiveness should be called a Samaritan. 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. The two reproaches possibly refer to what He had said against them. He had said that they were no true children of Abraham; they say that He is a Samaritan. He had said that they were not of God: they say that He has a demon.

δαιμόνιον. It is unfortunate that we have not two words in our Bible to distinguish ὁ διάβολος, ‘the Devil’ (John 8:44; John 13:2; Matthew 4:1; Luke 8:12, &c.), from δαιμόνιον (John 7:20; John 10:20; Matthew 7:22, &c.) and δαίμων (Matthew 8:31; Mark 5:12; Luke 8:29; Revelation 18:2), ‘a devil,’ or ‘unclean spirit.’ ‘Fiend,’ which Wiclif sometimes employs (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 the devil,’ 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.