This is again the second miracle that Jesus did, when he was come out of Judaea into Galilee. This is again the second miracle that Jesus did, when he was come out of Judaea into Galilee.
This is again the second miracle that Jesus did, when he was come out of Judea into Galilee - that is, not His second miracle after coming out of Judea into Galilee; but 'His second Galilean miracle, and it was performed after his return from Judea'-as the former was before He went to it.
Remarks:
(1) If we are right as to the sense of John 4:43-44 - if Jesus, on His return into Galilee, went to Cana, avoiding Nazareth as "His own country," in which He knew that He would have "no honour," according to the proverb which Himself uttered-we have here a strong confirmation of the judgment we have given on the much-disputed question, whether Jesus paid two visits to Nazareth after his public ministry commenced, or only one. See the note at Matthew 4:12, and more fully on Luke 4:16, etc. As in our view He avoided Nazareth on this occasion, because He had become too common among them during His early life, so when He did visit it (Luke 4:16, etc.), it was only to be upbraided for never having yet exhibited to His own town's-people the miraculous powers with the fame of which other places were ringing; and His reception on that one occasion when He visited Nazareth was quite enough to show that a repetition of His visit would be but "giving that which was holy to the dogs." So He left it, as we believe, never to return.
(2) On comparing the faith of the nobleman whose son Jesus healed, with that of the centurion whose servant was restored by the same healing power, we are not to conclude that the believing disposition of the one was at all behind that of the other. Did the nobleman "beseech Jesus that He would come down and heal his son" - as if the thing could not be done at a distance? The centurion also "sent elders of the Jews, beseeching Him that He would come and heal his servant." It is true that Jesus replied to the nobleman, "Except ye see signs and wonders ye will not believe" - referring to the general unpreparedness even of those who believed in Him to recognize His unlimited power-and it is true that the nobleman only proved this by replying, "Sir, come down ere my child die;" while the centurion sent a noble message to Jesus not to come to Him, as that would be too great an honour, and besides there was no need, as it could be done equally well by a word uttered at a distance. But we must remember that the nobleman's case occurred almost at the outset of our Lord's ministry, when faith had much less to work upon than when the centurion applied (Luke 7:2, etc). But what shows that the two cases are as nearly as possible on a par is, that whereas even the centurion's noble message seems to have been an after thought-his faith rising, perhaps, after his first messengers were despatched-the nobleman, as his case became more urgent, reached to the very same faith by another method. For when Jesus answered his entreaty to "come down" by saving, "Go thy way; thy son liveth," "the man believed the word that Jesus had spoken unto him, and he went his way," persuaded the cure could and would be performed without the great Healer's presence.
Thus may two cases, differing in their circumstances and features, be essentially of one character, and thus may a weaker manifestation of faith be consistent with an equal capacity for faith-the opportunities and advantages of each being different. This might indeed baffle man's power to detect and determine. But it is our comfort to know that it is He with whom both had to do, and from Whom they both experienced such love and grace, who is "ordained to be the Judge of quick and dead."