Others said, “When Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence He is” ( ver. 27 ); and there was a difference of opinion, as might be expected in a confused multitude; for not attentively did they listen to His words, nor for the sake of learning. Wherefore He maketh them no answer; yet they said, “Doth Christ come out of Galilee?” And He had praised, as being “an Israelite indeed,” Nathanael, who had said in a more forcible and striking manner, “Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?” ( c. i. 46.) But then these men, and they who said to Nicodemus, “Search and look, for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet” ( ver. 52 ), said it not seeking to learn, but merely to overturn the opinion concerning Christ. Nathanael said this, being a lover of the truth, and knowing exactly all the ancient histories; but they looked only to one thing, and that was to remove the opinion that He was the Christ, on which account He revealed nothing to them. For they who even contradicted themselves, and said at one time, “No man knoweth whence He cometh,” at another, “From Bethlehem,” would manifestly even if they had been informed have opposed Him. For be it that they knew not the place of His birth, that He was from Bethlehem, because of His dwelling in Nazareth, (yet this cannot be allowed, for He was not born there,) were they ignorant of His race also, that He was “of the house and lineage of David”? How then said they, “Doth not Christ come of the seed of David?” ( Ver. 42.) Because they wished to conceal even this fact by that question, saying all that they said with malicious intent. Why did they not come to Him and say, “Since we admire thee in other respects, and thou biddest us believe thee according to the Scriptures, tell us how it is that the Scriptures say that Christ must come from Bethlehem, when thou art come from Galilee?” But they said nothing of the kind, but all in malice. And to show that they spoke not enquiringly, nor as desiring to learn, the Evangelist straightway hath added, that,