i!!lil I ll I'lf Sip
Hi J! Ill

1 wm

IllSi
fllfjB
iSSSli lis i

111 ill i'l III i"
i Far P a
; II!

MPy£o 828lh U)

V"

/F-iV

zrrJ

ANALECTA THEOLOGICA:
A
CRITICAL, PHILOLOGICAL, AND EXEGETICAL
COMMENTARY
ON THE
NEW TESTAMENT:
ADAPTED TO THE GREEK TEXT;
COMPILED AND DIGESTED FROM THE MOST APPROVED SOURCES,
BRITISH AND FOREIGN ;
AND
SO ARRANGED AS TO EXHIBIT THE COMPARATIVE WEIGHT OP THE
DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON DISPUTED TEXTS.

BY THE REV.

WILLIAM TROLLOPE, M.A.
OF PEMBROKE COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE,
AND FORMERLY ONE OF THE MASTERS OF CHRIST'S HOSPITAL.

'EyKuTTTtTC eis Ttis y/Oa$ds, t&$ aXijCfls pnati? HvEv/xaTos too dyiou.
Clement. Epist. ad Corinth. § 45.
" As drink is pleasant to them that be dry, and meat to them that be hungry ; so is the
reading, hearing, searching, and studying of the Holy Scripture to those that bo desirous to
know God or themselves, and to do his will." — Homily I.

IN TWO VOLUMES.
VOL. T.

NEW EDITION.

LONDON:
PRINTED FOR T. CADELL, STRAND ;
W. BLACKWOOD, EDINBURGH ; AND R. MILLIKEN, DUBLIN.

MDCCCXL1I.

LONDON :
UILlUittT & RIVJNOTOX, PrtlNTERS,
ST. JOHN'S SQUARE.

82.6 *b

THIS COMMENTARY,
ORIGINALLY DEDICATED TO
WILLIAM VAN MILDERT, D.D.
LATE LORD BISHOP OF DURHAM,
IS NOW RE-INSCRIBED TO
THE REV. THOMAS DALE, M.A.
VICAR OF ST. BRIDE'S, FLEET STREET,
&C. &C. &C
WITH MINGLED ESTEEM, AFFECTION, AND GRATITUDE,
BY THE AUTHOR.
February, 1842.

PREFACE.

The Analecta Theologica are now again submitted to
the indulgence of the reader, and offered for the assistance
of the Student in Divinity, with a title more accurately
descriptive of the compilation, its nature, and design.
As the changes which have been made in the body of the
work are exceedingly few and unimportant, it will suffice
to repeat, with little variation, the remarks with which
it was first introduced to public notice.
The study of the Holy Scriptures naturally divides
itself into two parts ; — general and particular. Under
the former are included the several important subjects
of the Genuineness, Authenticity, Credibility, and Inspi
ration of the entire contents of the Sacred Canon ; the
languages in which they were originally composed ;
the rules and principles of Scripture Interpretation ;
the Geography of the Holy Land ; and the history,
habits, customs, and opinions of its inhabitants : toge
ther with a variety of collateral and inferential testi
mony from Heathen writers, in corroboration of the
whole. The latter consists in a close and careful exami-

VI PREFACE.
nation of the Scriptures themselves ; in applying to
them the rules of critical investigation previously
established ; in observing their peculiar phraseology
and idiomatic expressions ; in comparing one scripture
with another, for the purpose of substantiating doctrines,
and illustrating precepts ; in detecting the minutiae of
verbal forms and usages, and the comparative value of
various readings ; and in exemplifying, by philological
research, the language, sentiments, and allusions of the
inspired penmen.
So far as the general subject is concerned, a work
has now been for many years before the public, of which
the extensive circulation and numerous editions sufficiently
attest the great utility, and the high reputation in which
it is deservedly held. It has long been the standard
text-book of our universities ; to the student, who is
anxious to make any proficiency in Theology, it is
altogether indispensable; nor is it less valuable, as a
book of almost incessant reference, to the more matured
divine. I allude to the Rev. T. H. Horne's '¦'¦Introduc
tion to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy
Scriptures." With respect, however, to the particular study of
the Sacred Writings, the means of its prosecution
are not so attainable. There are, it is true, numerous
Commentaries ; any one of which would be sufficient
of itself to supply that portion of information, which
is absolutely required from the candidate for holy
orders. Indeed, we might attempt in vain to specify
any class of literary labour which exhibits more sound
learning, and more extensive and accurate research, than

PREFACE. VU
the several Commentaries of our own divines. This,
however, is not the point. The opinion of any one,
or even several of the best interpreters, especially in
passages of difficulty and doubt, can lay but a super
ficial foundation for a professional knowledge of divinity,
and, as such, unsatisfactory even to the student him
self. The references too, which are continually made
to other interpretations, naturally induce an anxiety to
procure a closer insight into their respective merits,
and to have the option of forming his own opinion on
the matter in debate. It is clear, however, that the
limited interval between the time of taking his acade
mical degree and of entering the Church, renders it
impossible to wade through the voluminous folios of
the various Commentaries on the Scriptures : and the
enormous expense of procuring them is no less a bar
to his wishes, even if he had leisure for their gratifi
cation. Several attempts have been made to facili
tate this branch of Theological Study, by means of
abstracts or summaries of the principal Commentaries
on the New Testament ; but none of them appear
to have answered the end proposed. From the want
of perspicuity in their arrangement, they are calculated
to perplex rather than assist. No order or uniformity
is observed in the connexion of the different exposi
tions ; their comparative probability is entirely over
looked ; and the enquirer is left in a maze of conflicting
opinions, without any guide to direct his escape from
the labyrinth of uncertainty, in which he finds himself
bewildered. Such at least were the difficulties, with which my
own entrance on the study of the New Testament was

viii , preface.
encumbered. The work, in which I had hoped to find
at least a useful compendium of the most received
authorities, proved to be most unsatisfactory, even on
points of minor importance ; and a reference to such
of the quoted Commentaries, which I had the means of
consulting, attested the meagre outline, into which they
had been reduced. In many instances, the heads of an
argument only were to be found; sometimes, nothing
more than a reference to a particular writer ; and seldom,
if ever, sufficient to dispense with the necessity of fur
ther enquiry. In short, a fair idea of the work in ques
tion may be gathered from the fact, that the Preface to
St. John's Gospel, and the all-important subject ofthe
Logos, are passed over without a single word.
Some years have now elapsed since I conceived the
design of a work which should remedy these defects, of
which the student has such reason to complain. To
smooth the path of learning in one branch of Theology,
as Mr. Home had done in another, was indeed a task of
no small labour. Something, however, might be done;
and I thought that my time could not be ill spent in
removing out of the way of others those obstacles, which
I had been obliged to encounter myself. It appeared
to me, that by collecting into one point of view the
several opinions of the best Commentators, British and
Foreign, on the New Testament, condensed into as
small a compass as was consistent with perspicuity, and
exhibiting the relative weight of the arguments by which
they were supported, the object, which I proposed to
myself, would be effectually attained. The student would
thus be presented with a comprehensive digest of the
criticism, philology, and exposition of the sacred text,

PREFACE. IX
and enabled to judge of the merits of each particular
comment, without any reference whatever to the Com
mentators themselves. My plan being thus developed,
and some progress already made, I was deterred from
proceeding for a time by the announcement of a work,
from which I augured the fulfilment of the very task
which I had imposed upon myself. In this, however, I
was greatly disappointed ; and the publication of the work
in question induced me to take up my pen afresh.
While speaking of the imperfections of others, how
ever, I would by no means be considered insensible to
my own. In a work of this nature, the labour of which
can be duly appreciated by those alone who have been
engaged in similar undertakings, improvements will con
tinually suggest themselves; and I shall be ever ready
to receive, with gratitude, the friendly hints either of
public or private criticism. In the mean time, it will
be sufficient to say a few words concerning what has
been hitherto attempted. Whether I have always suc
ceeded in directing the reader's attention to the best
solution of a difficulty, it is not for myself to judge ; but
I am not conscious of having shrunk from the task, or
of leaving the matter in the dark, in a single instance.
The several interpretations of any disputed or doubtful
passage have been arranged in the order of their respective
merits, beginning with that which has the least, and
ending with that which has the greatest, degree of pro
bability. Every argument of weight, adduced in support
of each opinion, is concisely stated ; objections are con
futed or confirmed ; and the principal authorities in
favour of the adopted exposition are given at the end
of the note, distinguished from those on the contrary side,

X • PREFACE.
which are enclosed within brackets. It would have been
manifestly impossible to subjoin the name of every com
mentator, who may have been consulted on any given
passage ; but it is at the same time unnecessary, as they
frequently tread in the same steps, and employ the same
or similar illustrations.
I have taken for granted, that every student pos
sesses, or has the means of access to, Mr. Horne's
Introduction. All points, therefore, which he has han
dled, are purposely omitted ; except in some few in
stances, which seemed to require a fuller investigation
than the nature of his work would admit. To him,
then, the student is referred on all points connected
with the Geography, Institutions, Sects, Customs, and
Antiquities of the Jews ; for an account of the several
Writers on the New Testament, the Dates of their
several Books, and Analyses of their Contents ; and
on all other subjects of general information connected
with their critical study. Since, however, the Chronology
of the New Testament has lately been the subject of
much diligent and learned investigation, it has been
deemed expedient to prefix to the Commentary three
Tables, compiled from Greswell's Dissertations, and a
fourth from the calculations of the late Dr. Burton.
In conclusion, I have merely to express my thanks
to those Reviewers who have spoken favourably of the
work, and to those private friends whose opinions, though
perhaps less impartial, have not been less gratifying and
encouraging. Nor would I omit to repeat my prayers
to Almighty God for increased success in facilitating,
by means of a laborious, and, I trust, useful undertaking,

PREFACE. XI

the effective study of the Gospel of his Son. Et si ea, quce
in his libris exponuntur, tantopere eligenda fuerunt quanto
studio electa sunt, profecto neque nos neque alios industries
nostree pcenitebit. (Cic. de Invent. II. in Prooem.)

TABLE I.
CHRONOLOGY OF THE GOSPEL HISTORY.
A.D. 26 Commencement of the ministry of John the Baptist, October 5.
27 Baptism of Jesus, in the end of January.
Commencement of Christ's ministry, and the first cleansing of the Temple,
Monday, April 5 (Nisan 10).
First Passover, Friday, April 9 (Nisan 14).
Arrival of Jesus at Sychar, Thursday, May 13.
Imprisonment of the Baptist, Sunday, May 16.
First feast of Pentecost, Sunday, May 30.
Call of the four disciples, Friday, June 4. v
First preaching of Christ at Capernaum, Saturday, June 5.
First circuit of Galilee, Sunday, June 6.
First feast of Tabernacles, Monday, October 4.
First feast of Dedication, Sunday, December 12.
28 Miracle at the Pool of Bethesda, Saturday, March 25 (Nisan 10).
Second Passover, Wednesday, March 29 (Nisan T4).
Second feast of Pentecost, Friday, May 19.
Ordination of the Twelve.
Second general circuit of Galilee.
Second feast of Tabernacles, Saturday, September 23.
Death of John the Baptist.
Third general circuit of Galilee.
Second feast of Dedication, Friday, December 1.
29 Mission of the Twelve, February.
Feeding of the five Thousand, Thursday, April 5.
Discourse in the synagogue of Capernaum, Saturday, April 7-
Third Passover, Monday, April 16.
Confession of Peter, Sunday, May 20.
Transfiguration, Sunday, May 27.
Third feast of Pentecost, Wednesday, June 6.
Third feast of Tabernacles, Thursday, October 11.
Appearance of Jesus at the feast, Monday, October 15.
Miracle on the man born blind, Thursday, October 18.
Third feast of Dedication, Wednesday, December 19.
30 January. Raising of Lazarus, retreat to Ephraim.
February. Return to Capernaum, and mission of the seventy.
March. Fourth general circuit of Galilee.
Passage through Jericho, Friday, March 29 (Nisan 7).
Arrival at Bethany, Saturday, March 30 (Nisan 8).
Anointing at Bethany.
Resort of the Jews to Bethany, Sunday, March 31 (Nisan 9).
Procession to the Temple, Monday in the afternoon, April 1 (Nisan 10).
Second cleansing of the Temple, Tuesday morning, April 2 (Nisan 11).
Close of our Lord's public ministry, Wednesday evening, April 3 (Nisan 12).
Prophecy on the Mount.
Agreement of Judas with the Sanhedrim.
The last Supper, Thursday night, April 4 (Nisan 13).
The fourth Passover, Friday, April 5 (Nisan 14).
The Crucifixion.
The Resurrection, Sunday, April 7 (Nisan 16).
The Ascension, Thursday, May 16 (Zif, or Jar, 26).

TABLE II.

CHRONOLOGY OF THE ACTS, AND OF SUBSEGUENT EVENTS
TO A.D. 116.
A.D. 30 Descent of the Holy Ghost, Pentecost, Sunday, May 26.
About 32. Council of Gamaliel.
36 Removal of Pilate, Autumnal quarter.
37 Death of Tiberius, March 16.
First year of Herod Agrippa I.
Appointment of Deacons, Passover, March.
Martyrdom of Stephen, Pentecost, May.
Preaching of the Gospel to the Samaritans, May.
Conversion of the Eunuch, May.
Preaching of the Gospels to native Jews out of Judaea, May.
Conversion of St. Paul, Autumn.
38 Return of St. Paul from Arabia to Damascus.
Commencement of St. Paul's ministry, Passover, April.
Beginning of the fourteen years (Gal. ii. 1 ), April.
40 Deprival of Herod Antipas, Winter.
Fourth year of Herod Agrippa, Spring.
Attempt of Caius Caesar to erect his statue in the Temple, Spring.
Beginning of the rest to the Churches (Acts ix. 31), Autumn.
41 Death of Caius, January 24.
First visit of St. Paul to Jerusalem after his conversion, Passover, April 4.
Date of the Ecstasy (2 Cor. xii. 2), April.
Departure of Paul to Tarsus, about April 19.
Conversion of Cornelius, May.
Preaching of the Gospel to foreign Hellenistic Jews, May.
Mission of Barnabas to Antioch, Midsummer.
Arrival of Paul at Antioch, Autumn.
42 Appointment of James, first Bishop of Jerusalem.
Departure of the Apostles from Judaea.
Prediction of the famine by Agabus, Autumn.
43 Death of James the elder,and imprisonmentof Peter.aboutthe Passover, April 12.
Second visit of St. Paul to Jerusalem, with the contributions from the Chinch
at Antioch, April or May.
Commencement of the famine, Midsummer.
Return of Paul and Barnabas to Antioch.
Death of Herod Agrippa.
44 Mission of Paul and Barnabas to the Gentiles, Pentecost, May 21.
About 45. Return to Antioch.
About 48. Council at Jerusalem, third visit of St. Paul.
49 St. Paul's second journey, Pentecost, May 26.
His first viait to Galatia, Summer or Autumn.
Famine in Greece, Autumn.
Disturbances in Judaea, September and October.
50 Arrival of Paul at Athens, Winter.
Edict of Claudius, Winter.
First visit of St. Paul to Corinth, Spring.

TABLE II. XV
A.D. 51 Gallio, proconsul of Achaia.
52 St. Paul's first visit to Ephesus, Winter.
His fourth visit to Jerusalem, close of the fourteen years (Gal. ii. 1), Passover,
April 3.
Return of Paul to Antioch, Spring.
Beginning of St. Peter's circuit, Pentecost, May 24.
Rebuke of St. Peter at Antioch, Summer.
St. Paul's second visit to Galatia, Autumn.
Preaching of Apollos at Ephesus and Corinth.
53 Commencement of St. Paul's residence at Ephesus, Winter.
Arrival of St. Peter at Corinth, Spring or Summer.
54 First arrival of St. Peter at Rome, Spring.
Collections in the Churches of Asia and Greece, Autumn.
Death of Claudius, October 13.
55 Letter of the Corinthians to St. Paul, Winter.
Arrival of Titus at Ephesus from Galatia, Spring.
His mission to Corinth, Spring.
Mission of Timothy and Erastus to Macedonia, Summer.
Departure of Paul from Ephesus, Summer.
His circuit of Macedonia, Summer and Autumn.
56 His second visit to Corinth, Winter.
Death of the High Priest Jonathan, Passover.
Departure of St. Paul from Philippi, Monday, March 27.
His trial before Felix, Sunday, May 21.
Defeat of the Egyptian impostor, Midsummer.
58 Mission of Paul to Rome, August.
His shipwreck on the island of Malta, November.
59 His arrival at Rome, March.
60 Arrival of Timothy and Epaphroditus, Midsummer.
61 St. Paul's liberation and visit to Spain, Spring.
Imprisonment of Timothy at Rome.
62 Martyrdom of James the Just, Midsummer.
63 St. Paul's return from Spain, and Timothy's liberation, Spring.
64 St. Peter's second visit to Rome, Spring.
Circuit of Crete, Spring or Summer.
Commencement of Nero's persecution, July.
65 Wintering of St. Paul at Nicopolis, in'Epirus.
Circuit of Dalmatia, Spring or Summer.
Martyrdom of St. Peter at Rome.
66 Apprehension of St. Paul in Asia, Winter.
Second arrival of St. Paul at Rome, and his appearance before Nero, Spring.
Martyrdom of St. Paul, Summer.
67 Commencement of the Jewish war, Spring.
Defeat of Cestius Gallus, October.
68 Death of Nero, June 9.
C9  Galba, January 15.
 Otho, April 17.
 Vilellius, December 21.
70 Commencement of the siege of Jerusalem, Sunday, April/13.
Cessation of the daily sacrifice, Sunday, July 13.
Burning of the Temple, Sunday, August 3.
Destruction of Jerusalem, Sunday, August 31.
73 Recapture of Massada, Tuesday, April 11.
74 Insurrection of Jonathan.
75 Suppression of the Temple of Onias, Spring.
94 Writings of Josephus.
About 107. Death of Simon, the Canaanite.
About 116. Martyrdom of Symeon, Bishop of Jerusalem.

TABLE III.

DATES OF THE GOSPELS AND EPISTLES, AND THE PLACES
WHERE THEY WERE WRITTEN.

Hebrew Gospel of St. Matthew 
Greek Gospel of St. Matthew 
Gospel of St. Mark 
Gospel of St. Luke 
Gospel of St. John 
Acts of the Apostles 
Thessalonians I. and II 
Corinthians I. (Winter) 
 ¦ II. (Autumn) 
Galatians 
Romans (Spring) 
Peter I  -J
Ephesians (Spring) 
Colossians (Summer) 
Philemon 
Philippians (Autumn)  ; . ,  , 
Hebrews (Spring) .'. 
Titus (Summer) 
Timothy 1. (Winter)  ¦[
Peter 1 1 
Timothy II. (Spring) 

PLACE.

DATE.

Judaea

A.D. 42

Rome

55

Rome

55

Rome

60

Ephesus Rome

101 60

Corinth

50

Ephesus
Macedonia

55
55



55

Cenchreae

56

Babylon
(in Egypt)
Rome

J5!J 60

* Italy
Macedonia

63
64

Nicopolis

| 65

(in Epirus)

Rome

—



—

TABLE IV.

DATES AFTER Dr. BURTON. A. D.
Crucifixion \
Conversion of St. Paul /  ol
Paul and Barnabas at Jerusalem as early as  33
St. Paul's second Apostolical journey  4g
His first arrival in Rome  5g
St. Matthew's Gospel  about 60
St. Mark^s  a few years after 58
St. Luke's, while Paul was at Caesarea  ". .from 53 to 55
St. John's, at Ephesus  ,  96 to 100
Acts, while Paul was at Rome  56 to 58
Thessalonians h | from Corinth { •;;;;;;;;;•¦; ;  «
Titus ] ("  .....".'.'..'.'.'.'.'.' 51?
Galatians > from Ephesus <  52 ?
Corinthians I.J (_  52
Timothy I., from Troas  52 ?
Corinthians II., from Macedonia  52 ?
Romans, from Corinth  ,  53
Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, Philippians, from Rome  58
Hebrews, uncertain whence written  58
Timothy II., from Rome  64, 65, or 66
Peter 1. and II., shortly before the Apostle's martyrdom.

ANALECTA THEOLOGICA.

INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS.

On the Title ; and on the Words AIAGHKH and EYAI"TEAION.
I. The collection of writings composed after the ascension of
Christ, by the Apostles and Evangelists, under the acknowledged
influence of divine inspiration, was, in a very early age, formed
into one series, with the general title of H KAINH AIAGHKH,
or, as it is found in some copies, THS KAINHS AIAGHKHS
AI1ANTA. The word airavra, in the latter form, seems to have a
marked reference to the prevailing consent of the Christian Church,
that these, and these only, compose the entire code of writings which
are to be received as Canonical; i. e. which were unquestionably
written by the disciples of our Lord, to the complete exclusion of
those which are apocryphal, or of uncertain authority. The pre
cise time, at which this collection was made, is uncertain ; but it
should seem to have been during the second century, immediately
after the death of the Apostles and their immediate successors ;
when the early Christians, deprived of the benefit of instruction
from themselves, sought it more eagerly from their writings and
histories. It appears also from Tertullian, adv. Marcion. IV. 1.
that the Latin Christians used the word Testamentum, in rela
tion to these writings, before the close of that period, though the
words Kaivr) SiaflijKTj are not found in that acceptation till the
time of Origen, who so employs them in his Treatise 7repi apxiov,
IV. 1. The appellation thus given evidently arose out of several
passages of Scripture, more particularly 2 Cor. iii. 14. 16. — where
St. Paul denominates the religious institutions of Moses and of
Christ respectively TraXaia 8ia0r7Ki) and icaivri SiaQfiKri, — compared
with Jerem. xxxi. 31. where the Septuagint version uses the words
Kaivrj SiaOfiKv, in a prophetic announcement of the dispensation
of the Messiah. Compare also Matt. xxvi. 28. Mark xiv. 24. Luke
xxii. 20. Gal. iii. 17. Heb. viii. 8. Hence the words, by a com-
VOL. I. B

2 INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS.
mon metonymy, came at length to signify the Books, wherein the
writings relating to the religion of Christ were contained ; and the
Sacred Scriptures of the Jews being called 'H TraXaia Ata0t>»7,
those of Christians were superadded under the title of 'H Kcuvrj
AiaOriKn. In the time of the Maccabees, however, the Penta
teuch, or probably the whole of the Jewish Scriptures, were
known under the name of j3(/3Xtov diaOriKrjg. 1 Mace. i. 57.
LXX.
II. The word AtaQfiicr) signifies literally an arrangement, from
BiariOrnnt, to set in order ; and may therefore imply either an
arrangement to take place immediately ffoedusj, or at one's
death (testamentwm). In the latter sense the word Sta^Krj
generally occurs in the classic writers. Suidas : SiaOfiKri' 17 liri
OvnmcovTOQ Siara^ig. Throughout the O. T., however, the
word JTH2, which invariably signifies a Covenant, is always
rendered diaQnicr) by the LXX ; nor is this latter word ever em
ployed in the N. T., with one single exception, in Heb. ix.
15 — 20. (see note in loc.) in any other acceptation than that of
Covenant; and such is probably the notion which the early
Greek disciples always attached to it. We, on the contrary, are
accustomed to render the word by Testament ; and since it would
be absurd to speak of the testament of God, who, as a Being
incapable of death, cannot have made such an instrument, we
generally understand the Testament of Christ. But this expla
nation evidently removes but half the difficulty ; and, in respect
to the Jewish dispensation at least, the word is wrongly trans
lated. It may be inferred, therefore, that as in Galat. iv. 24. Svo
Siadr\Kai are mentioned, where the Law and the Gospel are evi
dently intended, since the former was confessedly a covenant, the
latter must be so also. And it is clear also, that Baptism and the
Lord's Supper being sacraments of this Kaivrj StaflijKjj, as circum
cision was of the waXaia Sta&^KTj, these axe federal rites and cere
monies, stipulations and promises, which again refer to a Covenant,
not to a Will or Testament. In neither case, therefore, does Tes
tament afford the proper meaning of the word. The error
evidently originated in the ignorance of the Latin translator, who,
mistaking the meaning of iSia%r)Kr), rendered it by testamentum,
which, though it corresponds to the Greek in one sense, is an
improper translation in the present instance. Jerome, in cor
recting the old Latin version, altered testamentum in the O. T.
into either foedus or pactum; and he expressly states in his
Commentary on Malachi, Ch. II. T. III. p. 1816. that testa
mentum, as used in the old version, must be understood to signify
a covenant. Notandum, says he, quod Berith, verbum Hebrai-
cum,Aquila <jvvQr)Kr\v, id est, pactum, interpretatur ; LXX sem
per $ia%r)Kr)v, i. e. testamentum: et in plerisque Scripturarum
locis, testamentum non voluntatem defunctorum sonare, sed pac
tum viventium. Our translators have retained Testament, as far
10

INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS. 3
as regards the title of the Scriptures ; but they have properly
translated the Hebrew word Covenant, in the O. T., retaining
Testament generally in the N. T., except in relation to the
Jewish dispensation. It is not improbable that the propaga
tion of the error may have been in some measure furthered
by the train of the Apostle's reasoning, in the passage already
alluded to in his Epistle to the Hebrews. And indeed, upon the
ground of this reasoning, it may not be amiss to include both
significations of Sta^jjKrj in the rendering of the title ; that of
Covenant, as being most agreeable to the scriptural use of the
¦word, and to the nature of the Gospel, as promising mercies
upon certain conditions ; that of Testament, wherein the death of
Christ, the testator, is recorded as the seal and earnest of the
Christian's inheritance. Michaelis, Marsh, Hammond, Lard-
ner, &c.
III. With respect to the titles of the several books which
compose the N. T., the word EvayytXiov, which we translate
Gospel, seems alone to require explanation. The word, as
well as the verb tvayyeXiZio, is clearly derived from the adverb
sv and ayyeXla, a message; and in strict accordance with this
derivation, it always, in classic writers, denotes either good
tidings, or the reward given to the bearer of good tidings.
The latter of these significations is to be met with in Horn. Od.
IS. 152. 166. EvayyiXiov Si fioi eotgj. Eustath. ayaSriG ayytXtac;
Swpov. In other authors the former meaning is almost universal.
Compare iEsch. Agam. 20. 253. 255. Eur. Med. 941. Arist.
Plut. 764. Equit. 643. 647. 656. Xenoph. Hellen. I. 6. 29. In
the Septuagint it corresponds throughout to the Hebrew word
i"TH£Q, beshreh, which signifies good news. Compare 1 Sam.
xxxi. 9. 2 Sam. i. 20. xviii. 20. 27. Isaiah lxi. 1. Jerem. xx.
15. Hence, from being used in several prophecies relating to
the Messiah's advent, as expressive of an eminent quality of the
Christian dispensation, it became by degrees to serve as a name
for the dispensation. Hence Theodoret observes upon Romans,
I. 1. T. III. p. 10. B. EvayyiXiov Si ti ta'ipvy/Jia Trporrriyopev-
atv, a>£ 7toXAojv ayaSsuv v-iricrxyovfizvov Yoprrytav. ILvayytXi-
Z^rai yap rac tov Qeov KaraXXayaQ, rfiv te ciapoXov tcaraXvoiv,
rHiv a/AaprrifiaTdov rf/v cMJteaiv, tov Savarov rrjv navXav, rCov vsicptov
rr\v avaaraaiv, rrjv ^ojjjv ttjv alwviov, rr)v paaiXtiav tCov ovpavtov.
To this sense of the word, the English Gospel precisely corres
ponds, being compounded of two old Saxon terms, God, i. e.
good, and spel, tidings ; though we never attach to it its simple
derivative meaning, as in the Greek. Hence, therefore, as Camp
bell justly observes, the word tvayyiXiov should not be rendered
Gospel, when it is contained in a quotation from, or an allusion to,
the prophets; as, for instance, in Matt. ix. 5. Luke iv. 18. vii.
22. Rom. x. 15. Heb. iv. 2. since this application of the word
was not then in use. Other cases will also frequently occur, in

4 INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS.
which the word should evidently be retained in its simple meaning
of good tidings ; for instance, where the sense is limited by a
second substantive ; as in several of the examples adduced by Mr.
Home : Introduction ; Vol. IV. p. 240. In St. Paul, however,
the word is frequently used in its derived sense, as implying the
religious institution of Christ, whence it sometimes also signifies
the ministry of the Gospel. See Rom. i. 9. 1 Cor. ix. 18.
2 Cor. viii. 18. and elsewhere. Hence also, in very early times,
it was employed to denote the entire history of the life, actions,
death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ : in which sense it is used
in the title of the four narratives, which were written by Mat
thew, Mark, Luke, and John ; who, from this circumstance, are
called EvayytXiarai, Evangelists. These titles, however, though
very ancient, and doubtless added by those who were well ac
quainted with the authorship of the respective histories, were not
prefixed to the Gospels by the writers themselves. Still the usage
seems to be sanctioned by St. Mark, who has used the word in
the same signification in ch. i. 1. xiv. 9. See note on the former
passage. Hammond, Campbell, Whitby, Father Simon, &c.
In the inscriptions of the Gospels, (EvayyiXiov Kara MarOalov,
Kara Map/cov, &c.) the preposition should not be rendered juxta,
or secundum, as in the old Latin versions ; after which our transla
tors have translated it according to. The proper translation is
that of Castalio, who has Authore Matthceo, &c. ; since the true
import of the titles is, the Gospel written by Matthew, Mark, 8$c.
Thus Polyb. Hist. III. 6. al icar ,Avvt(5avTrpd^eig, i. e. the ex
ploits of Hannibal. iElian. V. H. II. 41. 17 kot' avrbv aplrij.
So also in Acts xvii. 28. riveg riov ica^' vfiag iroiryrCov. Nor does
this at all invalidate the claim of the Evangelists to inspiration.
Paul does not hesitate to call the Gospel with which he was
inspired, his Gospel ; nor does any one scruple to call the Epis
tles written by St. Paul, Paul's Epistles. It may be observed,
that in some of the less esteemed MSS. and EDD. the epithet
ayiov is joined with EvayyiXiov, which is evidently a refinement,
and not in good taste, of a recent date. The word tvayyiXiov
occurs in the N. T. upwards of seventy times, and never with this
epithet attached to it. Campbell, Elsner, Wetstein.
Note . — On the general design and importance of the Gospels,
on their authenticity, genuineness, dates, authors, contents, &c. ;
and on the sources of the three first Gospels, the reader is
referred to Mr. Home's Introduction, Vol. IV. Part 2. On the
Analysis of the New Testament. With respect to St. Matthew
in particular, the questions respecting the language in which he
wrote his Gospel, and the Socinian objections to the genuineness
of the two first chapters, are discussed at large in the same inva
luable work.

ST. MATTHEW'S GOSPEL.

CHAPTER I.
Contents : — The Genealogy of Christ by his supposed Father,
vv. 1 — 17. The miraculous Conception and Birth of Jesus,
18—25. [Enlarged account in Luke i. 26.— ii. 39.]
Verse 1. BifiXog -yEVEo-soje. Some commentators understand
an ellipsis of the words, r(§' sort, This is the book, &c. So also
in Mark i. 1. Compare Gen. ii. 4. v. 1. LXX. But whether the
words are considered as the title of the whole Gospel, with some ;
or of the first sixteen verses only, with others ; it is clear that no
such addition is necessary. Of the import of the words them
selves, the more probable opinion is, that they extend only to the
genealogy of our Lord, with which the Gospel opens. The word
yivemg, indeed, in one of its derived senses, is used to imply life,
i. e. the duration of life; as in Judith xii. 18. LXX. rrapd Trdaag
rag rifiipag rric ysvieswg fiov. Compare Wisd. vii. 5. Epist.
James iii. 6. Hence j3ij3Xoe ytviaewg 'Ir/crou XpKrTov may
be understood to comprehend the entire history of the Life and
Ministry of Jesus Christ; as the corresponding words in the
Hebrew, JITmil ")3D, Sepher Toldoth, Gen. v. 1. xxxvii. 2. are
sometimes supposed to embrace the entire histories of Adam and
Jacob, with their descendants, respectively. It is by no means
clear, however, that such an extensive signification is admissible;
and in Gen. ii. 4. LXX, the expression /3tj3Xoc yeviowg ovpavov
koh -yijc, bears much nearer relation to origin and genealogy
than to an entire history. Compare also Exod. vi. 24, 25.
Numb. i. 18. 1 Chron. iv. 38. where yivsatg is evidently used
in this simple sense. In short, the title yivtaig is affixed to
the opening of the Gospel, in the same signification as it is
affixed to the first book of Moses, or the opening of the Penta
teuch ; and so it was clearly understood by Owen, the well-known
epigrammatist, in the following couplet, written about two centuries
ago. Epigr. adPrinc. Henric. 11.76. Explicat hie Christi Genesin
liber, alter Adami ; Incipit a Genesi Lex et Evangelium. Homer
has employed the word in a somewhat analogous, though not pre
cisely similar, signification ; II. S. 246. The word fiifiXog, which

6 MATTHEW I. 1.
properly signifies a written book ; as in Mark xii. 26. Luke iii.
4. Acts xix. 9. may also be rendered a register or table, as in
the passages above cited, and in the phrase r\ /3ij3Xoe Ziitrjg, i. e.
the register of those who shall inherit eternal life : Philip, iv. 3.
Revel, iii. 5. and elsewhere. Compare Isaiah xxxvii. 14. Jerem.
xxxii. 12. Mark x. 4. Schleusner cites Herod. II. 100. kote-
Xfyov ot tpEEC £k j3i/3Xwv aXXwv j3a<7(X£uJV ovo/iara. But here
the true reading is j3u/3Xow. Grotius observes, that there are
several £7rcypa0ai jusptKat, or titles of detached passages, in the
O. T. and properly renders the words in question Descriptio
Originis. Beza, Grotius, Lightfoot, Macknight, Dod
dridge. — [Hammond, A. Clarke, Beausobre, Gilpin, &c]
Whitby understands the phrase to signify the Narrative or re
hearsal of the generation or birth of Christ.
With respect to the Genealogy itself, great questions have been
founded upon the disagreement which exists between it, and that
which is given by St. Luke, ch. iii. The earliest solution of the
difficulty is that which is given by Africanus, in an epistle to
Aristides, preserved by Eusebius : Eccles. Hist. I. 7. and
strongly advocated by Whitby. He observes, that the discre
pancy may be accounted for by supposing that the pedigree in
Matthew is that by the natural, and in Luke by the legal father
of Joseph. See on Matt. xxii. 24. Thus in reckoning the gene
rations according to Matthew, from David by Solomon, Matthan
will be found the third from the end, who begat Jacob, the father
of Joseph ; but in reckoning with Luke, from David by Nathan,
the third from the end is Melchi, whose son Heli is also stated
to be the father of Joseph. Hence it should seem that Matthan
and Melchi successively married the same wife, whose name,
according to Africanus, who says that he received his account
from the relations of our Lord, was Estha ; so that the children
of each marriage were brethren by the mother. Thus Matthan
descending from Solomon, begat Jacob ; and Melchi, descending
from Nathan, having married the widow of Matthan, begat Heli.
Again, Heli married, and dying without issue, Jacob took his
wife, and begat Joseph, who, because the law required the seed
to be raised to the deceased brother, was accounted the son of
Heli. It is obvious, however, that there are great objections to
this solution of the case. For the natural and legal fathers of
Joseph, who should have been brothers, do not appear to have
been more nearly connected than as descendants of David, by
lines diverging from each other in an unknown degree. It re
mains to be proved also, that children were said to be sons of
their legal, as well as of their natural fathers ; an assumption, with
which the opinion of Maimonides is directly at variance. This
author observes : Fratres uterini nequaquam habebanturfratres,
sive in causa hcereditatis cernendce, sive in causa ducendce fra-
trice, sive exeundi calc&i. Lamy, Harm. p. 3. Dr. Barrett, the

MATTHEW I. 1. 7
substance of whose deep and learned investigations are given by
Adam Clarke, in an Appendix to Luke iii. has examined the
difficulties of this hypothesis, and gives it up on the principle,
that it leaves us entirely in the dark, as to the lineage of Mary,
from whom alone Christ really sprung ; and proves nothing more
of his relation to David, than that his mother was married to one
of the descendants of that prince. It is evident to the most cur
sory observer, that this can never come up to the import of the
passages of Scripture, which tell us that Christ was made of the
seed of David, Rom. i. 3. and that according to the flesh he was
made of the fruit of his loins, Acts ii. 30. The best solution of
the difficulty is that of Lightfoot, who supposes that Matthew,
writing more immediately for the Jews, proves Christ to be
their Messiah, and heir to the throne of David, by legal descent
from Abraham and David; whereas the object of Luke, in
writing for the Gentiles, to whom the promise was given before
the Mosaic dispensation, was to prove the same Christ to be the
predicted seed of the woman, who was to bruise the serpent's
head ; for which purpose it was necessary to trace the descent
from Adam. In St. Luke's genealogy, therefore, Joseph, whom
Matthew expressly states to be the son of Jacob, is represented
as the son of Heli, by virtue of his marriage with Mary ; since
the Jews excluded the names of women from their tables of
descent. Or it may be, that Jesus himself is called the son
of Heli, being really his grandson; in which case we have a
parallel example in Gen. xxxvi. 2. where Aholibamah's pedigree
is thus deduced: Aholibamah, the daughter of Anah, the daugh
ter of Zibeon. Now it appears by vv. 24, 25. that Anah was
the son, not the daughter of Zibeon ; so that Moses calls Aho
libamah the daughter both of Anah and Zibeon, precisely as
Luke calls Jesus, the son both of Joseph and Heli. In confir
mation of this theory, it may be remarked, that the Talmudists
speak of Mary as the daughter of Heli; and though she is also
represented as the daughter of Joachim and Anna, there is little-
doubt that Joachim is a name of like import with Heli, Luke iii.
23. or Heliakim, 2 Chron. xxxvi. 4. each being derived from
Hebrew names of the Deity. There is reason to suppose also,
that had Luke intended to give the pedigree of Joseph, and not of
Mary, the two tables, which correspond exactly between Abraham
and David, would not have varied from David to Christ. _
One point at least, with respect to these genealogies, is indis
putable ; viz. the accuracy of the Evangelists. Tables of pedi
gree were kept among the Jews with the greatest punctuality and
exactness, and laid up in the secret archives of the temple. See
Euseb. Eccl. Hist. I. 6. It was, doubtless, from these registers
that St. Matthew and St. Luke compiled their genealogies ; for
Josephus, after a recital of his own pedigree, informs us that he
derived it from the same source ; De Vita Sua, p. 99b. rpv fxtv

8 MATTHEW I. 1.
ovv tov yivovg -fi/jiwv StaSo^rjv, wg Iv Tatg Srifiocrlaig SiXroig ava-
yeypafifiivriv evpov, ovTwg rrapaTiSsfiai. Hence any flaw in the
documents themselves cannot be attributed to the Evangelists ; and
as no charge of infidelity in the transcription was brought against
them either by the Jews, who would have anxiously detected any
inaccuracy, as impugning the title of Christ to the Messiahship ; or
by any of the early enemies of the Gospel ; we may fairly conclude
that their honesty could not be questioned. In preserving the
line of David, indeed, the Jews were more especially careful, as
upon this their hopes of tracing the Messiah depended ; so that
St. Paul confidently appeals to the lineage of Christ in Heb. vii.
14. Compare 2 Tim. ii. 8. The insertion, therefore, of these
tables proves, beyond all doubt, the belief of the writers that the
Messiah was to be of the lineage of David ; and that Jesus, in
fulfilling this particular, was the expected Redeemer.
Several genealogies, similar to those of the Evangelists, are
to be found in the O. T. Among others also, quoted by
Wetstein, there are three in Herod. IV. 147. VII. 204. VIII.
131. remarkably parallel with that of St. Luke. An inscription,
found at Palmyra, and supposed to be nearly cotemporary with
the Apostolic age, is cited by Harmer from Mr. Wood's work,
which rendered literally into Latin runs thus : Senatus Populus-
que Abialamenem, Puri jilium, Mocimi nepotem, /Eranis pro-
nepotem, Matthce abnepotem, et jEranem patrem ejus, viros pios
et patriae amicos, et omni modo placentes patrice patriisque Diis,
Honoris gratia. Anno 450, mense Aprili. Lightfoot, Clarke,
Macknight. — [Whitby.]
Ibid. 'Irjo-ov XpiaTov. See on v. 16.
Ibid, vlov Aa|3tS', vlov ^Afipad/i. The son of David, the son
of Abraham. The Evangelist here states what he is going to
prove ; viz. that Jesus Christ, in accordance with the prophe
tical character of the Messiah, was descended from Abraham and
David. See Gen. xii. 3. xxii. 18. 2 Sam, vii. 16. Psalm lxxxix.
4. Isaiah ix. 7. Jerem. xxiii. 5. Ezek. xxxvii. 24. Amos ix. 11.
and compare Acts iii. 25. Luke i. S3. That the Jews expected
their Messiah to answer this character is evident from Matt. xii.
23. xxi. 9. xxii. 42. and from the Talmudic writings. David is
mentioned first in order, though last in time, as the promise to
him was more explicit, and would naturally be fresher in the
memory of the Jews. The word vlbg is here applied, after the
Hebrew custom, to any descendant, however remote. Hence
Grotius observes : Non tantum pater Jilium, sed pronepotem pro-
avus genuisse dicatur. So also yevvav, v. 8. Compare Gen. xxix.
5. with xxiv. 47. Nepos is used in the same extensive applica
tion in Latin. Whitby, Lightfoot, Grotius, Macknight, &c.
Campbell and Wakefield understand vlov indefinitely, and trans
late a son of David, a son of Abraham. But, even without con
sidering the passage as a translation from a Hebrew original, the

MATTHEW I. 1. 9
Greek usage will readily admit vlov to be anarthrous. The want
of the article before yeviattog is nearly similar. Middleton.
As we shall have frequent occasion to speak of the use of the
article in the Greek text, it may be adviseable to present the
reader, in this place, with
[A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE GREEK ARTICLE.
The Greek article is undoubtedly a definitive. The nature
and use, however, of this part of speech was but little ascertained,
till it was illustrated and explained by the late learned Bishop of
Calcutta, who, has shown that it is the pronoun relative 6, which
together with its adjunct forms a proposition by means of the
participle of existence expressed or understood. The pronominal
nature of the article is proved at once by the following instance
in Homer, II. n. 793. TOY 8' dirb juev KpaTbg KYNEHN /3aXe
$otj3oc 'A7rdXXojv' 'H Se KvXivdofiivr] Kava-^rjv e^e iroaaiv vip' iV-
7rwv. Had the sentence ended here, 'H would be a pronoun relative
referring to kuvejji', exactly as tov refers to Patroclus ; but it hap
pens that the poet has added in the next verse avXwmg TpvtpdXua ;
so that in fact the difference between the article and pronoun is
merely accidental. Hence it appears that the proposition formed
by the article and its adjunct differs from ordinary propositions
only as assumption differs from assertion, i. e. as the participle
u>v differs from the verb sort. Thus 6 avr)p must signify he, or
the male, being, or assumed to be, a man. Sometimes indeed the
participle is expressed, as in Aristot. de Mor. IV. 2. ol juaX«jra
aiiioi "ONTES ^Kiora irXovTovm; where the participle might have
been omitted without affecting the author's meaning. Such being
the nature of the article, its insertion or omission will in general
be found to be regulated by the following rules.
I. The article is inserted, 1. when the same noun is repeated,
or a synonymous one is used, in reference to the same person or
thing, or even when no such person or thing has been mentioned,
provided its existence may be inferred from what has been said.
iEschin. in Ctesiph. §. 56. ovrog I1P0A0Y2 TOig TroXefiioig ~Nv/i-
<j>aiov <j>vyag lyivcro, THN icpio-iv ov^vitofitivag. Here rrjv Kpimv
is the trial to which the traitor would have been subjected, and
the article is sanctioned by the preceding mention of TrpoSovg.
2. Before nouns employed icar l%oxhv> in reference to some object
familiar to the mind of the hearer ; and that not only in cases of
preeminent worth, but wherever the person or thing spoken of is,
for some cause or other, well known. 3. With monadic nouns,
i. e. nouns indicating persons or things where one only can be the
subject of discourse. Thus Lysias, Orat. Gr. T. V. p. 139.
'EKi<6\pag TA2 Ovpag, uarjXOev dg THN yvvaiKwv'iTiv. This case
is nearly allied to the preceding. 4. Where the article is used
for a pronoun possessive, as in Theoc. Idyl. III. 52. aXyito TAN

10 MATTHEW I. 1.
KE0aXav, i. e. my head. 5. Before the names of the great ob
jects of nature, as 6 ovpavog, 17 yr), &c. except in some cases
"HXioc, which is considered a proper name. 6. Before adjectives
in the neuter gender, used to denote some attribute or quality in
its general or abstract idea : thus to aorpov for crorpia, and the like
examples abound. 7. Words in regimen either both take or
both reject the article ; as Xiovrog (TKVfiviov, or TO TOY XiovTog
(jKVfiv'iov. So also do, 8. Partitives, between which and their re
spective wholes a like mutual relation subsists. Upon the same
principle depends, 9. The use of the article with filv and Si. 10.
In all the preceding instances the article and its adjunct together
recall some familiar idea ; but cases occur in which the article can
refer to nothing in the mind of the reader. Thus Demosth. de
Coron. §. 71. rrovripbv 'O avKoQdvTng dei. Here the allusion is
general, and examples occur continually, especially in the plural
number, so often as an affirmative is true alike of all persons or things
in question. The reference in these cases, though not familiar to
the reader, is undoubtedly perceptible to the mind of the writer.
II. The article is omitted, 1. In propositions which merely
affirm or deny existence, in which, from the nature of the article,
it would be superfluous. ^Esch. c. Ctes. §. 26. Eorat filv tlprivn.
2. Before nouns preceded by verbs or participles, substantive or
nuncupative; in which case the verb or participle in question
precludes its being again expressed or understood, which is es
sential to the nature of the article. Demosth. de Cor. §. 23.
dhiog t'lfxi tov woXtfiov. 3. After verbs of appointing, choosing,
creating, &c. Demosth. de Cor. §. 59. riyifiinv ko.1 Kvpiog lipids
QiXnnrog cnravTiov. This case is nearly analogous to the last. 4.
With nouns in apposition, denoting the object of the preceding
noun. Demosth. de Cor. §. 69. Sivapiv e7y_ev 17 noXig Toiig vrjo-uo-
rag. 5. In negative propositions, involving universal exclusion in
the objects spoken of. Demosth. de Cor. §. 28. oi> vavg, ov te'y_»?,
Tr)g woXiwg tote KEKTf]fiivr\g. Here the orator could not have said
Tag vavg, since the article necessarily implies an existence, which
is inconsistent with the nature of the proposition. 6. Before
nouns in regimen, of which the former is indefinite, and conse
quently the latter, philosophically speaking, must be indefinite
also : for instance, in the example given in art. 7. of the last sec
tion, of an indefinite Xeovtoc, there can be no definite (jKVfiv'iov.
The converse is also true.
III. Besides the above instances of insertion and omission,
the two are sometimes combined; for instance : 1. The subject
is generally found with the article, the predicate without it ; as in
Aristot. Anal. Post. II. 3. ov yap sort TO ETr'nrtSov <*xwa, ovSl
TO <JXnila iir'nrt&ov. 2. When two or more attributives, such as
adjectives, participles, and nouns expressive of character, rela
tion, and dignity, joined by a copulative or copulatives, are as
sumed of the same person or thing; before the first the article is

MATTHEW I. 2, 3. 11
inserted, before the others omitted. This is Mr. G. Sharpe's
rule, and it is illustrated in Mr. Home's Introduction, Vol. II.
p. 538. It is not, however, without three exceptions, — of names
of substances considered as substances— of proper names — and of
abstract ideas : such as 'O XiOog koX xpvaog. iEsch. c. Ctes. §.81.
tov AXit,avopov Kat QiXnnrov. Plato, tt)v aTTEipiav k<xi drraiSEvcriav.
In these cases the substances, persons, and qualities are evidently
distinct, so that the repetition of the article is unnecessary.
IV. The principal difficulty with respect to the Greek article
relates to its use with proper names, and before abstract nouns.
1 . In the former case it appears that the article is frequently used
before proper names of celebrity, before those which have been
previously mentioned, and those which are familiar to the hearer ;
generally also before the names of Deities and places. 2. The
use of abstract nouns in Homer is extremely rare. Where, how
ever, they do occur, it is always without the article. There is
considerable doubt as to the principles upon which it is used
before these nouns in other writers ; it seems, however, to be
usually prefixed when the noun is used in its most abstract
sense — when it is personified — when the article is employed as a
possessive pronoun — when there is any reference, either antici-
pative or retrospective. There are, of course, anomalies to be met
with in every application of the rules which have been laid down ;
particularly in the occasional insertion or rejection of the article
after prepositions : and there are some other minutiae which it is
here impossible to investigate. Such as occur in the N. T. of
any material importance will be noticed in their places. Mid-
dleton.]

Ver. 2. Tovg oSeXoSovc avTov. The brethren of Judas are men
tioned, because, though they were not the Messiah's progenitors,
they were on an equal footing with Judas in respect of religious
privileges. Their names may also have been added to comfort the
dispersed tribes, who were not yet so fully returned out of cap
tivity as Judah was, with an assurance of their interest in the
promised blessing. The case was otherwise with- Ishmael and
Esau, whose posterity were excluded from the privileges of the
covenant; and therefore, though the sons of Abraham and Isaac
respectively, their names are omitted in the Genealogy. Light
foot, Macknight, Whitby. Wetstein is of opinion, that the
brethren of Judas are named in consequence of the Jewish pre
judice against Christ's being preferred to his brethren. See Matt.
xiii. 55. sqq. But in all probability the Apostle transcribed the
Genealogy precisely as he found it in the public registers.
Ver. 3. tov $aplg ical tov Zapd. Mentioned together as being
twin brothers, and striving for primogeniture : Gen. xxxviii. 28.

12 MATTHEW I. 5, 6.
sqq. Also to identify Pharez ; for, unless Zara had been spoken
of, considering the infamy of Pharez' birth, we might have ima
gined that some other son of Judas, called also Pharez, was our
Lord's progenitor, as the Jews frequently had several children of
the same name. Hence Thamar is likewise mentioned. It may
also be remarked that only four women are mentioned in this
Genealogy ; most probably because in them only was the law
departed from, which enjoined the heirs of the promised blessing
to take to them wives of their nearest kindred. It has been
thought by some that they are inserted as being respectively no
torious for some infamy ; Thamar for incest, Rahab for fornica
tion, Ruth for Heathenism, and Bathsheba for adultery ; so that
an answer would here be afforded to the cavils of the Jews against
the mean condition of the mother of our Lord, since some of their
most distinguished countrymen were descended from women,
whose qualities rendered them meaner than she was. Whitby,
Macknight, Wetstein.
Ver. 5. Payaj3. There is considerable doubt whether this Ra
hab was the harlot of Jericho, mentioned in Josh. ii. 1 . and whose
extraordinary faith is applauded by St. Paul, Heb. xi. 31. or
some other person of the same name. Theophylact embraces the
latter opinion, and he is followed by many modern commentators.
The Jews indeed have a tradition that Rahab the harlot was mar
ried to Joshua, by whom she became the mother of eight priests ;
(see Kimchi on Josh, in loc.) This, however, cannot be true,
whether she be considered the wife of Joshua or Salmon, since
neither of them were of the tribe of Levi. But it is objected
that the Rahab in question could not have been the mother of
Booz, and the wife of Salmon, since the Israelites were forbidden
to intermarry with any of the idolatrous nations of Canaan, (Exod.
xxxiv. 16. Deut. vii. 3.) not to mention that she must have been
nearly one hundred years old at the time of the birth of Booz,
since there are only four descents from Salmon to Jesse, in near
four hundred years. But though Rahab was originally a Heathen,
she may have become a proselyte, (which is highly probable from
the manner in which she is mentioned by St. Paul,) as Ruth, the
Moabitess, whom Booz, (Ruth iv. 13.) and Maachah, the daughter
of the King of Geshur, whom David married, (2 Sam. iii. 3.)
undoubtedly were. With respect to the age of Rahab at the
birth of Booz, it is answered from the Targum, that Salmon,
Booz, and Obed were men of extraordinary piety, so that God
may be supposed to have vouchsafed to them a longer life than
ordinary, and strength, as in the case .of Abraham, to beget chil
dren in their old age. Lightfoot, Whitby, Macknight, &c. 
[Marsh, &c]
Ver. 6. Aaj3l8 tov fiamXia. David has the title of King given

MATTHEW I. 8. 13
him because he was the first king of his family, and because he had
the kingdom entailed upon his children, whence the reign of the
Messiah was to spring: thence called the throne of the house of
David. Ezek. xxxvi. 35. Psalm cxxii. 5. Macknight, Whitby.
Ibid, ek rijc tov Ovpiov. E. T. Of her that had been the wife
of Uriah : i. e. Bathsheba. It is to be observed, that Solomon was
not born in adultery, but after the second marriage of Bathsheba.
The crime of Davidhaving been repented of, it pleased God to fulfil
the promise made to him, by means of this very woman. Whitby.
There is here an ellipsis, not only of yvvaiK.bg, but of 7rorE. The
omission of the adverb is not unfrequent : thus in Matt. x. 3. 6
TsXwvtig. Ephes. iv. 28. 6 kXeVtwv. James v. 1 1. Tol>g vrrofiivovTag.
With respect to the other omission, the words yvvr), fiv^vpi TraTr)p,
vlbg, and the like, are continually dropped before proper names
in the genitive case, and must be supplied in any particular case
from the reader's knowledge of the subject. Compare Matt. iv.
21. xxii. 25. xxiv. 41. Mark ii. 14. xv. 40. 47. xvi. 1. Luke
vi. 16. John vi. 71. xii. 4. xix. 23. xxi. 2. 15. 17. Acts i. 13.
vii. 1 6. xii. 22. The present ellipsis is sanctioned by the fol
lowing: Eurip. Orest. 1702. ttj 'HpcucXs'oue "Hj3#. Arist. Lysist.
63. 17 QEayivovg. and particularly Virg. JEn. III. 319. Hectoris
Andromache. Lucan. Phars. II. 383. liceat tumulo scripsisse,
Catonis Marcia. In these last olim, as well as uxor, must evi
dently be supplied.
Ver. 8. Tov'OZiav. TJzziah; 2 Kings xv. 32. This prince was
in fact the great-grandson of Joram, three kings being omitted
in the Genealogy, viz. Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah, who was
really the father of Uzziah. See 1 Chron. iii. 12. 2 Chron.
xxvi. 1. The most probable reason for this omission was the
curse twice denounced against the idolatry of the house of Ahab,
(1 Kings xxi. 21. 2 Kings ix. 8.) to which these princes be
longed ; since the mother of Ahaziah was Athaliah, the daughter
of Ahab. This supposition is greatly confirmed by the extent of
the curse to the third generation; and it is certain that the Jews
frequently omitted names in their genealogical records, and more
especially on account of wickedness and idolatry. Thus five de
scents fromMeraiah are omitted; Ezra vii. compared with 1 Chron.
vi. and the whole tribe of Dan is omitted for idolatry in Rev. vii.
Simeon is passed over in the blessing of Moses, Deut. xxviii. for
his cruelty at Sychem ; and Joab, in the account of the worthies
of David, 2 Sam. xxiii. for his cruelty to Amasa and Abner.
Some commentators, however, would insert the names omitted,
but without any authority. The omission cannot in the least
affect the design of the Apostle, since by passing from Joram to
Ozias he still keeps in the same line, which is sufficient to shew
that Jesus was of the lineage of David. Lightfoot, Wall,
Whitby. — [Newcome. ]

14 MATTHEW I. 11.
Ver. 11. rovg aStX(povg avrov. Josias had three sons who sat
on the throne of Judah, and are therefore mentioned with Jecho-
nias, who was the eldest. The second son, Jehoahaz, was elected
by the people to succeed his father, but being quickly removed,
Jechonias or Jehoiakim was placed on the throne. Zedekiah, the
third son, succeeded his nephew Jehoiakim, the son of the pre
sent Jechonias. See 2 Kings xxiii. 31. sqq. xxiv. 15. sqq. It will
be observed that the. fourteen generations from David to the cap
tivity are incomplete, which is readily accounted for by Jerome
on Dan. i. who observes that the Jechonias in this verse and the
next are different persons, the latter being the abovementioned
son of the former. In the Hebrew the names of the father and
son are respectively Jehoiachim and Jehoiachin, in which the
difference is so trifling that the Greek names can scarcely have
been otherwise than the same. The former was called Eliachim
before his accession to the throne, and Jechonias not only by
Matthew, but in 3 Esdras i. 34. Josephus has also given these
two kings one common name, Antiq. x. 12. In some copies, in
deed, arising most probably from some over zealous transcriber,
the number of generations is filled up thus : from 1 Chron. iii.
15, 16. tov 'IojayEfyt* 'Ioja^Ei/x Se Eylvv^o-E k. t. X. This cor
rection, however suspicious, is at least a guide to the solution of
the difficulty ; and although it is the only instance throughout the
Genealogy in which the name of the same person is not re
peated, the particularity is not without example. In the account
of Jonathan's posterity, 1 Chron. ix. 41. there is a similar omis
sion, which the translators have supplied from ch. viii. 35. With
respect to the prophecy of Jeremiah, (xxii. 30.) Write ye this man
childless, &c. it should be observed that the Hebrew ""THl? should
rather be rendered stript or naked, i. e. deprived of his kingdom.
That he had children is evident from Jer. xxii. 28. compared
with 1 Chron. iii. 17. and so the LXX translate the word ekk?j-
pvKTog, ejected by an herald; i. e. abject. Salathiel, however,
seems to have been only the legal successor of Jechonias, being
really the son of Neri, as stated in Luke iii. 27. Lightfoot is of
opinion that Jehoiachim did actually die childless, and that his
name was properly omitted by St. Matthew, as having been de
nied a kingly burial, and therefore unfit to be mentioned in the
lineage of Christ. See Jer. xxii. 19. In this case the difficulty
maybe obviated, but far less satisfactorily, by supposing that
David not only closes the first class but begins the second ; as
the ancient physicians compute weeks of sickness, (see Galen on
Hippocrat. de Prcenot. I. 3.) or as the Jews calculate the double
vow of a Nazarite, making the 30th day the last of the first, and
the first of the second period. Whitby, Wells, Macknight
Beausobre, Grotius. — [Lightfoot, Wetstein, Bowyer, &c]
Ibid. £7rt T^g [iEToiKEaiag. Some suppose there were three
others only two removals of the Jews to Babylon : the former

MATTHEW I. 12, 13. 16. 15
is the more probable and received opinion ; according to which
the first took place in the fourth reign of Jehoiachim, son of
Josiah, B. C. 606, the second under his son Jehoiachin, B. C.
598, and the last eleven years afterwards, under Zedekiah,
B. C. 588. The second opinion is founded upon the assumption
that the two first coincide, and that Jehoiachin, the son of Je
hoiachim, is intended in Dan. i. 1. as well as in Jer. xxii. See
Home's Geographical Index, art. Babylon, in fine. The word
|UETO(KEo-ia, which signifies properly a migration, or change of
abode, seems to have been used for the purpose of avoiding any
unnecessary offence to the Jews, for whom the Evangelist more
especially wrote, and to whom the more expressive word alxjua-
XioTia would have been peculiarly ungrateful. Lightfoot, Camp
bell. — [Macknight.]
Ver. 12. EaXaSttjX lylvvjjtrE tov Zopo(3dj3eX. Zorobabel is
called the son of Pedaiah, 1 Chron. iii. 19. It seems, therefore,
that Pedaiah raised up offspring to his elder brother SalathieL
Newcome.
Ver. 13. 'Aj3tovS. Among the sons of Zorobabel, 1 Chron. iii.
19. Abiud is not mentioned. Probably he was the same as Meshul-
lam, as many persons about the time of the captivity had different
names in Babylon from those used in their own land. Hence, as
Jechonias was called Shallum, i. e. finished, because the race of
Solomon ended in him : so Abiud may have been called Me-
shullam, i. e. requited, because in him the glory of the house of
Solomon was renewed, after their return from Babel. Zorobabel
had another son, Rhesa, Luke iii. 27. who probably corresponds
with Hananiah mentioned in the Chronicles. Lightfoot,
Whitby.
Ver. 16. TovavSpa M. That is, the betrothed husband of Mary.
See v. 18. The titles of husband and wife are given in Scripture
to those who are only betrothed : thus Rachel is called the wife
of Jacob, Gen.xxix. 21. See also Deut. xxii. 24. Beausobre.
Ibid. 'Irjo-ovCj 6 Xiyo/iEvog XpiaTog. Either, Jesus who is
called Christ, that being a surname which, when Matthew wrote,
was frequently given him ; or, Jesus who is accounted, i. e. who
is the Christ, or Messiah. The latter seems to be the more pro
bable interpretation, and the idiom which it involves is not only
familiar to the Hebrews, but of frequent occurrence in classic
writers. Compare Matt. v. 19. Luke i. 76. John xxvii. 17. 29.
1 John iii. 1. also Horn. II. B. 260. P. 138. and elsewhere; and
see my note on Eur. Phcen. 10. Pent. Gr. p. 304. It must be
confessed, however, that XiyEaOai is far less usual in this sense
than KEfcXrjo-flaj. The name 'Irjo-oic corresponds with the Hebrew
Joshua, VWW, which signifies a Saviour. Compare Acts vii. 45.

16 MATTHEW I. 17.
Heb. iv. 8. It was generally applied by the Jews as a distin
guishing title of conquerors and public benefactors ; (see Obad.
21.) and thence, by divine injunction, transferred to the Messiah,
who was to save his people from their sins, v. 21. The name
admits of two Greek derivations, viz. from idofiai, sano, or from
irifii, mitto ; but these are mentioned as mere matters of curiosity,
as the name is essentially Hebrew. Alb. Gloss. Gr. p. 199. ecod.
Coislin. XXIV. to 'Irjcrove ovojia ova toriv 'EXXtjvikov, dXXd ttj
Efipaiiov (pwvy ovtii) XiytTai' lp/xrjv£W£rat yap 'I?j<xoii 17 (Tojrr/p/a.
The word Xptcrroe is properly an appellative, signifying anointed,
and corresponding with the Hebrew rTttfO, Meshiach, which was
applied by the Jews to their kings, high-priests, and prophets,
who were admitted, with the ceremony of anointing, into the
exercise of their holy functions. Thus it is applied to Saul,
1 Sam. xxiv. 6. and to Cyrus, Isa. xlv. 1. Compare also 1 Kings
xix. 16. Ps. cv. 15. Hence in the Prophets, the mediator of the new
covenant is sometimes pointed out under this title, as in Psal. ii. 2.
Isa. lxi. 1. Dan. ix. 25, 26. and so, at length, it was used icar'
iZoxnv, of our blessed Lord. In the O. T. the word is always
translated anointed, except in Dan. ix. cited above : and in the
N. T. the corresponding Greek word is invariably rendered
Christ. It will be readily seen, however, that in the generality
of instances where it is not used as a surname of Christ, the article
should be inserted, as the word is clearly indicative rather of the
office than the person of Jesus. Compare, for instance, Ps. ii. 2.
with Acts iv. 26, 27. E. T. It is true, however, that the word
Christ, though originally an appellative, became at length, from
its frequent application to one individual, to supply the place of a
proper name ; an effect which was considerably hastened by the
commonness of the name Jesus among the Jews. This practice
was already in use at the time when the Evangelists wrote ; as is
evident from the openings of the Gospels of Matthew and Mark ;
and by degrees the name Jesus was very much dropped, till at
length our Lord was known only by that of Christ. See Tacitus,
Suetonius, and Pliny, passim. It may be observed generally,
that when applied in this way, Xptoroe is without the article. Gro
tius, Campbell.
Ver. 17. 7rao-cu olv al ysvEai k. t. X. The succession of
Christ's ancestors is divided by the Evangelist into three classes,
each of which produced a change in the government of the Jews!
In the first they were under judges and prophets, in the second
under kings, and in the last under the Asmonsean princes.
The first brought them to glory in the kingdom of David, the
second to misery in the captivity of Babylon, and the third to
glory again in the kingdom of Christ. The first begins with
Abraham, who received the promise, and ends with David, who
received it again more clearly ; the second begins with the build-

MATTHEW I. 18. 17
ing of the Temple, and ends with its destruction ; the third begins
with the return from captivity, and ends in the spiritual delivery
of Christ. It seems to have been a custom with the Jews to
divide their genealogical computations, &c. into classes for the
sake of memory. Lightfoot, Whitby, Macknight, Grotius,
&c. The word yEVEa occurs in the sense in which it is here used
to denote family succession, in Numb. xiii. 23. Jer. viii. 3. LXX.
The usage is sanctioned also by Herodotus, Isocrates, and Po-
lybius. So also in Josephus, Antiq. I. 10. 3. V. 9. 4. VII. 5. 2.
Philo de Vit. Mos. p. 603. E. Wetstein, Krebs, Loesner.
Ver. 18. fivriGTEvQi'iarig yap rij? firirpog. Among the Jews some
time usually elapsed between the espousals and the consummation
of the marriage. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. P. IV. ch. 3. §.
3. p. 423. The verb (TweXOalv is understood by some to refer
simply to the removal of the bride to her husband's house ; by others,
to sexual intercourse. In the former case it is synonymous with
?rapaXaj3av, vv. 20. 24. Kypke is in favour of the former opinion,
but the latter is more probable, as the examples adduced in sup
port of it are far more decisive. Strabo XV. p. 1068. Tovrotg,
i. e. Persis, K.a\ /xrjrpao-t av vipxEa Oat vtvofiiaOai. Compare Plutarch.
de Fort. Rom. p. 320. Joseph. Ant. I. 19. XII. 4. Philo de
Char. p. 706. C. de special, legg. p. 780. B. Diodorus Sic.
writes at length, gweXOuv tig bfiiXiav, Lib. I. p. 49. In the
same sense the Latins use convenire. Elsner, Krebs, Loesner. —
[Kypke.] The verb, however, may probably include both senses.
Of the particles yap and Trpiv t), see Hoogeveen de Particulis, p.
88. Viger. de Idiom. Gr. p. 352.
Ibid. svpiOri iv -yaorpl E^ovcra. For r\v Eyoucra, i. e. ££%£•
The verb tvp'iaicEadai, in the sense of Eivai, occurs in Luke xvii.
18. Rom. vii. 10. Gal. ii. 17. 1 Pet. ii. 22. It is generally explained
as an Hebraism, (compare Gen. ii. 20. Exod. xxxv. 23.) but the
usage is sanctioned also by classical authority. Eurip. Iph. T.
777. ttov 7tot' ovff zvpr)fME%a; so Joseph. Antiq. VII. 7. fir) /3o»j-
$Etct tu)v (piXiov EvpiaKOiTO tov kivSvvov Siaipvywv. The phrase
iv yaaTpl 'ix£lv> involving an ellipsis of the word fiplipog, is found
in Pausan. Messen. 33. Attic. 6. Athen. X. p. 453. Artemid.
Oneirocrit. II. 18. III. 32. Compare also Luke i. 31. xxiv. 19.
1 Thess. v. 3. Sirac. XL. 1. LXX. Some understand an ellipsis
of 'ififipvov rather than (5pi(pog, but the latter is sanctioned by
Luke i. 41. 44. and /3pt'oioe is used of an unborn child in Homer,
II. ¥. 266. The perfect phrase, however, is thus employed by
Palasphatus de Incred. II. 3. ovSi <pipnv ijSuvaro yvvr) 'ifjfipvov
e'yov ye Kspara. Kypke, Elsner.
Ibid, ek irvEVfiaTog dy'iov. Wakefield translates, a holy
spirit, probably from the omission of the article ; but after pre
positions, anomalous cases of this kind frequently occur. There
are six meanings of the word TrvEVfxa, clearly distinguishable in
VOL. I. C

18 MATTHEW I. 19.
the N. T.— 1. Breath, or wind; in which sense it rarely occurs :
Matt, xxvii. 50. John iii. 8. Rev. xiii. 15.— 2. The intellectual
or spiritual part of man, as distinguished from crap!;, his carnal
part.— 3. Spirit, as abstracted from body or matter : whence is
deduced the idea of immaterial agents. Compare Luke xxiv. 34.
John iv. 24. Acts xxiii. 9. The TrvtvfiaTa of the demoniacs
belong to this head. — 4. The Spirit, kut goxvv ; i. e. the Third
Person in the Trinity : in which acceptation, except in anoma
lous cases like the present, it is never used without the article.
It may be observed, however, that in all the passages where per
sonal acts are attributed to the irvEv/ia dyiov, and which are,
therefore, adduced to prove the personality of the Holy Ghost,
the article is invariably prefixed. See Matt, xxviii. 19. Mark i.
10. Luke iii. 22. John i. 31. Acts i. 16. xx. 28.-5. The influ
ence, not the Person, of the Spirit ; in which sense, except in
cases of reference or renewed mention, the article never appears.
— 6. The effects of the Spirit. From the fourth and fift h heads
we may at once refute the notion of those, who pretend that the
Holy Spirit is merely an influence ; since the sacred writers have
clearly, and in strict conformity with the analogy of language,
distinguished the influence from the Person of the Spirit. As to
Mr. Wakefield's translation of the present passage, which implies
^plurality of Holy Spirits, the ordinary ministers of Almighty
Providence, it is irreconcileable with the phraseology of the N. T.,
in which ¦nvEvfxaTa dyia are not once mentioned. Bp. Middle-
ton. Some have supposed that the words ek -rrvEvfiaTog dyiov,
were originally merely a marginal gloss, which, at iength, found
its way into the text ; since the revelation of the virgin's miracu
lous conception has not yet been made. But the words are
found in all the MSS., and it is very natural for the historian to
speak by anticipation of an event, the circumstances of which
were passing in his mind. [Beza, Markland.]
Ver. 19. SiKaiog. Chrysostom explains this word by xpnvrbg
kcu iTTiuKrjg, and many of the best commentators are disposed to
render it in the sense of merciful, lenient; and that it will
bear such a signification, may be proved from the best autho
rities. Compare Eurip. Med. 722. ^Esch. Choeph. 759. and
see Wakefield's Silv. Crit. §. 164. So also in Latin; Horat. Od.
III. 18. 3. parvis JEquus alumnis. The Hebrew pH2£ is used
in a similar sense. Compare Psalm cxlv. 17. with vv. 16, 18. 9.
See also Matt. xx. 15. 1 John i. 9. and also on Matt. vi. 1.
It is by no means necessary, however, in the present instance,
to depart from the ordinary acceptation of the word, which seems
to have been used at this time as a vox signata for a strict ob
server of the Law. Compare Luke xx. 20. There is nothing
in Joseph's conduct which militates with this signification. See
next note. Lightfoot, Macknight. — [Grotius, Hammond,

MATTHEW I. 20. 19
Michaelis, Kuinoel, &c] In general, however, the word
tiKaiog admits of two senses ;— 1. strictly observant of justice in
our dealings, and particularly in our judicial proceedings ; e. g.
Matt. xx. 4. Philip, iv. 8.-2. righteous, upright; in relation
to the general tenor of our life : as in Matt. v. 45. et passim.
Hence Campbell adopts a middle course, and renders it worthy. '
Ibid. irapaSEiyfiaTiaat. E. T. to make her a public example.
This is the true meaning of the word, as it appears from A. Gell.
VI. 14. where three degrees in punishing offences are enume
rated: the first, vovdEaria, admonition; the second, Ti/xwpia,fine ;
and the third, irapaSE'iyfia, when punishment is used for example
sake, that others may be deterred from the like offences. Hence
the term was usually applied to capital punishment ; as in Polyb.
Hist. II. 60. VI. 36. So also exemplum is used by the Latins.
Tacit. Annal. XII. 20. 4. Sontes et novissima exempla meriti.
Caesar B. G. I. 31. In eos omnia exempla cruciatusque edere.
Compare Terent. Adelph. V. 1. 10. Plaut. Mostell. V. 1. 67. In
a similar acceptation the expression adopted by our translators
is generally understood by ourselves. Such, however, does not
seem to be the extent of the meaning in this place ; but simply, to
expose. It was the wish of Joseph to injure the reputation of
Mary as little as possible ; and this more especially in a case so
extraordinary. Mary had, doubtless, in her own vindication,
informed him of the vision of the angel ; and though he might
not be wholly satisfied with her account, the strength of his
attachment, and the possibility that her statement might be true,
would deter him from proceeding to extremities ; at the same
time that his strict observance of the law would prevent his mar
riage with one who had the least stain upon her chastity. Thus
Chrysostom evidently understood the passage, in reference to
which he clearly distinguishes between -KapaSEiyfiaTCCtiv and
KoXdZtiv ; and Polybius also uses the former verb in a sense
entirely distinct from punishment. (Legat. 88.) Had Joseph
accused her of adultery before the priests, the punishment would
have been lapidation; Deut. xxii. 23. He therefore gave into
her bosom a bill of divorce, before two witnesses only, without
assigning any reasons for the measure which he adopted. And
this was all which the law required; as Buxtorf observes, de
Divort. pp. 76. 125. upon the authority of Maimonides and
Abarbanel. Lightfoot, Macknight, Whitby, Campbell,
Hammond, Grotius, &c.
¦ Ibid. diroXvaai. To divorce ; as Matt. v. 31. xix. 7. Mark
x. 4. Luke xvi. 18. Lightfoot, Campbell.
Ver. 20. TavTa §e avTOv ivdvfjiriOivTog. Hoc cum animo cogita-
ret. Kuinoel. The verb IvOvfitiaOai properly signifies to desire,
to wish for ; as in Deut. xxi. 11. Josh. vii. 21. LXX. But it is
also used to denote any action of the mind ; thus to form an
c 2

20 MATTHEW I. 21.
Opinion bfone ; Matt. ix. 4. and here, to deliberate, or meditate.
So again in ^4cfa x. 19. In the sense of this passage it occurs
in Thucyd. II. 40. Aristoph. Eccles. 138. Joseph. Antiq. XV.
5. 3. SCHLEUSNER, WeTSTEIN.
Ibid. "AyyaXog Kvpiov. Most probably, Gabriel: as in Luke
i. 19. The word dyytXog in the N. T. is used both as an appel
lative, denoting an office; and also as the title of a particular
class of beings, in which case it closely approximates to a proper
name. In the latter usage it corresponds precisely with the
English Angel; but in the former it should be, though it is not
in the E. T., always rendered messenger. With respect to pro-<
phetic dreams, it may be observed, that the ancients in general
put great faith in them ; in reference to which belief the phrase
kut bvap (pavrivai, and the like, are frequently found in the
classic writers. But see especially Horn. II. A. 63. The super
stition had doubtless its origin in primitive revelation. God in
early times frequently adopted this method of manifesting himself
to his chosen people ; and sometimes also, for especial purposes,
to distinguished Heathens ; as Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, and
others. But it is generally believed, that prophecy in general,
except in the case of Simon the Just, ceased in the Jewish
Church since the time of Malachi, who closes the Canon of the
O. T. By the prophetic dream of Joseph, another species of
communication was now re-opened between God and his faithful
servants, in addition to those more direct revelations which had
already been made to Zacharias and Mary; recorded in Luke i.
As dreams of this nature were clearly distinguishable from those
of ordinary occurrence, Joseph was at once convinced of the
approaching birth of Christ, and of the spotless purity of his
Virgin-Mother. Wetstein, Campbell, Macknight.
Ibid. irapaXafic'iv. Scil. from her parents, at whose hands the
husband received his bride. There is an ellipse of the words
Etc oMav. ^ So Joseph. Antiq. I. 19. 7. SiEXdovvng aXX?7e £7rra-
eteoc ttjv 'PaxvXav napiXafiEv. Compare Lucian. Toxar. 24.
Arrian. de Exped. Alex. VII. 4. Joseph. Ant. IV. 8. The
omission is supplied in Lucian. Timon. 17. yvvalna ilg oldav
7rapaXaj3av. Elsner.
Ibid, to yEvvr)6iv. The neuter is generally used of an unborn
child; of which the sex is yet unknown. So to yivvrjOiv, Aris-
tot. Polit. I. 8. Plutarch. Thes. p. 40. E. de Anitn. Tranq. p.
467. Dionys. Ant. Rom. III. 10. ro yEwrfn^fiEvov, Lucian.
Tim. 52. toteX6ev, Lucian. Dial. Mer. 2. Compare Luke i.
35. Herod. I. 29, 30. Joseph. Ant. II. 5. III. 10. IV. 8.
Wetstein, Kypke.
Ver. 21. avrbg yap trdxrEi K. t. X. Dr. Maltby observes,
(Sermons, Vol. II. p. 546.) that there are four distinct significa
tions of the verb awtuv in the N. T. — 1. To preserve generally,

MATTHEW I. 22, 23. 21
from any evil or danger whatsoever. — 2. To preserve from sick
ness ; to heal. — 3. To preserve from the temporal anger of the
Almighty; a notion founded upon expressions in the Jewish
prophets ; and exemplified in the events attending upon the de
struction of Jerusalem. — 4. To give future salvation in heaven.
The word occurs more than one hundred times in the N. T. and
the different senses are easily discernible. — Of the name Jesus,
see on v. 16.
Ver. 22. "iva irXripioBy. The conjunction 'iva denotes that there
was as exact a conformity between the event, and the passage
quoted, as there would have been, if the former had been effected,
merely for the accomplishment of the latter. When there is a
direct prophecy in the O. T., the event did not take place for
the mere purpose of fulfilling it ; but God pre-determined the
event, and foretold it by its prophet. Sometimes, indeed, it must
be considered as representing not the consequence or design, but
the event 'only; as in Matt, xxiii. 26. Luke ix. 45. xi. 50. The
phrase 'iva wXr)pw8ri, therefore, should rather be translated ; so
that it was fulfilled. Compare Malt. xxi. 4. xxvi. 56. John
xix. 24. The words are not to be understood as spoken by the
Angel, but as an observation of the Evangelist : and the words
tovto Si oXov, all this, comprehend not only what is men
tioned in the preceding verses, but the whole particulars of the
transaction ; and, among the rest, the circumstance, that Joseph
knew not Mary till after her delivery, upon which the accom
plishment of the prophecy depended, no less than her miraculous
conception. Pearce, Newcome, Campbell, Whitby, &c. —
For a general view of the prophecies relating to the Messiah, see
Home's Introduction, Vol. I. pp. 363. 641. sqq. See also Vol.
II. P. II. Ch. 7.
Ibid. Sid tov irpoipriTov. Isaiah vii. 14. The application of
this passage is a remarkable instance of double sense in prophecy.
In the first sense, it applied to a child to be born in the time of
Isaiah, and to be a sign to Ahaz of his deliverance from two
invading kings : in the latter it referred to the Messiah. In the
former birth, there was nothing miraculous : the child was to be
born of one who was a virgin when the prophecy was given, but
who did not remain so afterwards. In the second, the mother
was to be still a virgin when the child was born. The first ap
plication was marked by the limited time fixed by the prophet for
the deliverance of the land: Isaiah vii. 15. The second appli
cation was marked by the name Immanuel; which had no refer
ence to the first child. R. Nares. The Evangelist cites no more
of the prophecy than relates to the miraculous birth of Christ ;
the remainder being solely applicable in its primary acceptation.
Ver. 23. r) napdivog. The Jews endeavour to evade this pro-

22 MATTHEW I. 25.
phecy by asserting, that the Hebrew PID^, Olma, is not rightly
translated virgin. The ancient Targumists, however, agree in
referring the prediction to their Messiah ; and the word is trans
lated 7rap0£voe, in their own Septuagint Version, which was made
three hundred years before St. Matthew wrote his Gospel. Its
derivation is also from CPi?, to hide or cover, in allusion to the
Eastern custom of keeping their virgins apart from the company
of men. Thus 2 Mace. iii. 19. al KaraKXEiaTOi twv TrapOtviov.
Compare Philo; Orat. in Flacc. p. 757. A similar custom is
well known to have prevailed among the early Greeks. It may
also be observed, that the promise is given as a sign, in order to
confirm the hopes of the house of David; to which a natural
conception would scarcely amount. Lightfoot, Whitby, Gro
tius. Ibid. KaXicrovai. They shall call ; i.e. it shall be called, or it
shall be: a personal for an impersonal verb. So Gen. xvi. 14.
Exod. xv. 23. Isaiah ix. 6. Jerem. xxiii. 6. Neh. ii. 7. Micah
ii. 4. Amos iv. 2. 4. and Luke xii. 20. See also above on v. 16.
whence it will appear that the fulfilment of the prophecy depends
not upon Christ's being literally called Emmanuel, but upon his
being so ; i. e. God with us. Now such he really was, by ap
pearing on earth in his human nature, (John i. 14.) ; and that
this is the true design of the application, is evident from the
Evangelist himself, who has interpreted both the names, Jesus as
well as Emmanuel; to shew that the prophecy was fulfilled, not
in the names themselves, but in the application of them. Some,
indeed, have thought the word mrf and Wit, Aish, and Jehovah,
enter into the composition of the word iWlrT ; so that Jesus will
signify the man Jehovah, or the Lord incarnate. But there can
be no doubt, that the true derivation is that given under v. 16.
Whitby, Lightfoot, Macknight, Grotius.
Ver. 25. 'iiog ov eteke k. t. X. We learn from the Rabbinical
and Talmudistic writers, that the Jews applied the title of first
born to their Messiah. But from certain prerogatives attached
to primogeniture, this title was equally given to those entitled to
such prerogatives, whether the parents had issue afterwards or
not. Compare Exod. xiii. 2. xxxiv. 19. Neither does it follow,
from the words of the Evangelist, that Joseph had any know
ledge of Mary, subsequent to the birth of Christ ; although the
turn of the expression clearly suggests the affirmative rather than
the negative. For examples are to be found, in which the phrase
of doing or not doing a thing, till some other thing come to pass,
is used in cases where it also could not have been done after
wards : as, for instance, in Gen. viii. 7. 1 Sa?n. xv. 35. 2 Sam.
vi. 23. Isaiah xxii. 14. It is clear, however, that these are not
cases in point, inasmuch as they relate to things not done after
wards, because they could not be done afterwards ; which is not

MATTHEW II. 1. 23
so in the matter before us. At all events, it is in no wise impor
tant, perhaps it is impertinent to inquire, whether Mary had any
other children besides Christ. The voice of antiquity speaks in
the negative; and upon this supposition, that Joseph had no
connexion whatever with his wife, somewhat of similarity has
been observed in the conduct of the peasant of Colonus ; (Eurip.
Elect. 43. sqq.) and of Alexander towards Olympias, as related
by Plutarch. Still the contrary opinion seems to have greater
probability on its side, as the laws enjoined a strict fulfilment of
the duties of the marriage-bed, (Exod. xxi. 10.) ; so that, as the
angel imposed no restriction in this particular, it is not easy to
conceive that he would have neglected them. See Selden de Uxor.
Hebr. III. 4. If they had no issue, which was probably the
case under any consideration, wherever our Lord's brethren are
mentioned, the term must be understood of his near relations. —
Whitby, Campbell. — [Lightfoot, Grotius, Macknight,
Wetstein.] The euphemism used in this passage is frequent in
the O.T. See Gen. iv. 1. 17. 25. xxxviii. 26. Judges xix. 25.
1 Sam. i. 19. So the Greeks use yivwaKEiv. See Callim. Epigr.
58. and Plutarch, passim. Thus also in Latin: Catull. Carm.
LXXII. 1. Dicebas quondam solum te nosse Catullum, Lesbia.,
— Elsner, Kypke, &c.

CHAPTER II.
Contents: — Visit of the Eastern Magi, vv. 1, 2. Herod's
Suspicion, 3 — 8. Departure of the Magi, and the Flight
of Joseph with the Child into Egypt, 8—15. The Murder
of the Innocents, Herod's Death, Joseph's Return, and
Cliange of Residence, 15 — 23.
Ver. 1. tov Si 'IrjcroD ytvvvOivTog k. t. X. When Jesus was
born; i. e. shortly after his birth. It will here be advisable to
offer a brief statement upon the subjects of
[the chronology of the visit of the magi, and the nativity
of christ.
The precise date of the arrival of the Magi is not agreed upon
by ecclesiastical writers. Some fix it one, and others nearly two
years after the Nativity ; but the most probable opinion is that of
Mr. Benson, who supposes that it took place between the 39th
and 42d day from the birth of Christ. The impression which
naturally arises from reading the narrative of Matthew, is the
10

24 MATTHEW II. 1.
close proximity of these occurrences ; and this impression is
strongly confirmed by the use of the aorist yevvriQivrog, followed
by the word iSov. Compare w. 13. 19. where precisely the
same construction is employed, in relation to events immediately
succeeding each other. To this effect is the express testimony of
Justin ; A. D. 150. in his Dialogue with Trypho ; 303. dfia yap
tov yEvvr)9r)vai avTov, Mdyoi air 'Apaj3iac; irapayEvofiEvoi 7rpocr£-
K\ivr\<yav avT$. In this view of the case, however, an objection
arises from the unnecessary wantonness of Herod's cruelty, in
extending the massacre of the Innocents to children from two
years old and under, when he must have known that the object
of his suspicion could not be more than two or three months old.
It might be replied, that the character of Herod, as pourtrayed
by Josephus, would fully justify a belief in the extent of his
barbarity, however aggravated. It appears, also, that the word
SisTfjg, v. 16. which occurs no where else in the N. T. or the
LXX, admits of a sense which confines the murder to those who
had completed their first year only ; thus diminishing the enor
mity of the act by one half. Hesychius explains it, Si oXov tov
ETovg. The word SiET-i)aiog also, according to the Lexicons,
signifies annual; and Sjeti^uj is used by Aristotle, Hist. Anim.
IX. 5. of living a whole year. See also Home's Introd. Vol.
III. p. 177. This, however, is by no means decisive against
the ordinary use of Sjetj'/c ; and it is by no means improbable
that the authorized translation is correct. It appears from a
comparison of v. 7. with v. 16. that Herod's edict was regulated
by the answer of the Magi to his inquiry respecting the time at
which the star appeared. This we may easily believe to have
happened some considerable time before they undertook their
journey: during which time they may have been employed in
meditating upon so singular an occurrence ; and in making ar
rangements for their departure. It is evident that the visit of the
Magi must have been after the presentation of Christ in the
Temple; otherwise, their costly presents would have enabled
Mary to have made the greater offering at her purification, in
stead of the lesser one, Luke ii. 24. The danger, also, of pre
senting Christ, after the alarm which was excited in Herod's
mind, and communicated to Joseph in the dream which warned him
to fly into Egypt, is sufficient proof that the purification took place
before that event. The wonders, however, which took place in
the Temple at the presentation, and the prophetic declaration to
Simeon and Anna, would have rendered Herod's charge to the
Magi useless, and the murder of the Innocents nugatory ; as the
publicity which must have been given to those events, would have
acquainted the Sanhedrim, whom Herod summoned upon this
occasion, with the parents, condition, and abode of the child Jesus.
Hence it is reasonable to conclude, that the Visit of the Magi was
nearly cotemporary with the Presentation ; and that, in all pro-

MATTHEW II. t. 25
bability, these Eastern sages arrived at Jerusalem, and were sum
moned before Herod, a little before, and proceeded to Bethlehem,
a little after the latter event. The child might have been presented
in the morning ; then returning to Bethlehem, a distance of little
more than five miles, have received the Magi in the evening ;
and set off for Egypt at night. Hence, as there is no reason to
suppose that Mary delayed her purification beyond the legal
period ; i. e. after forty days from her delivery, the Visit of the
Magi occurred between the thirty-ninth and forty-first day after
the Nativity.
With respect to the Nativity itself, we are told in this verse
that it happened in the days of Herod the king. Now Herod
began his reign, according to Josephus, (Ant. XIV. 26.) in the
consulship of Pollio and Calvinus, which corresponds with the
year A. U. C. 714. J. P. 4674. It appears also from the same his
torian, (Ant. XIV. 24.) that he did not leave Jerusalem for Rome,
where he was made king, till after the Pentecost of that year,
which is fixed on the 9th of June. Hence the commencement of
his reign must be between July and December ; J. P. 4674. Now
he reigned thirty-seven years ; (Joseph. Ant. XVII. 10. B. J. I.
21.) i. e. more than thirty-six and less than thirty-eight years.
Hence July, J. P. 4674 + 36 = July, J. P. 4710. Again, Dec.
J. P. 4674 + 38 = Dec. J. P. 4712. Therefore, the latest period
to which we can assign the death of Herod, is Dec. J. P. 4712 ;
and the earliest is July, J. P. 4710. Now Josephus (Ant.
XVII. 8.) mentions an eclipse of the moon, as happening at the
time of the execution of the Rabbis, who pulled down the eagle
which Herod had set over the gate of the Temple, which, by astro
nomical calculations, is fixed to the night of Mar. 13, 4710. It
is certain that Herod was alive at this time, though, from the
reports which prevailed, that he was either dying or dead, it is
equally clear that his disease had made some progress. It may
also be collected from the historian, that he died before some
Passover. This, however, could not be the Passover which fell
on Apr. 11, 4710, as he could not then have entered the thirty-
seventh year of his reign. Neither could it be the Passover
J. P. 4712, for, in this case, the banishment of Archelaus, which
is fixed by Josephus (B. J. II. 7. 3.) to the ninth year of his
reign, could not have happened J. P. 4719, as stated by Dio
Cass. IV. p. 567. B. Hence, therefore, the death of Herod,
and, consequently, the birth of Christ, must have taken place
before the Passover J. P. 4711. Further, in Matthew's account
of the Visit of the Magi, and the Massacre at Bethlehem, there
is no allusion to Herod's being, at that time, ill ; and Josephus in
forms us, (Ant. XVII. 8.) that popular opinion attributed his last
illness to the vengeance of God, in consequence of his unparal-
lelled cruelties and crimes, in the number of which the Massacre
of the Innocents could not be omitted. Hence, in the absence

26 MATTHEW II. 1.
of direct testimony, we may conclude, that this massacre pre
ceded the commencement of his disease. It is also deducible
from the train of events in the narrative of the Jewish historian,
that his affliction commenced no long time before the execution
of the Rabbis, on the 13th of March, J. P. 4710. Since, how
ever, it had made some progress at that time, a fair hypothesis
will, perhaps, fix it about a month earlier ; i. e. about Feb. 13th,
J. P. 4710. Placing, therefore, the arrival of the Magi on or
before this day, and reckoning forty days backwards, for the
period of Mary's purification, we fix the birth of Jesus on or
before Jan. 3, J. P. 4710, i. e. rather more than a year before
the death of Herod. Benson. See further on Luke iii. 1.
Of the history and characters of Herod the Great, and others
of his family mentioned in the N. T., see Home's Introduction,
Vol. III. P. II. Ch. 2. The dates of our Saviour's Baptism and
Crucifixion will be considered in their proper places.]

Ver. 1. Bj)0Xee/x rrjc 'IouSaia?. See Home's Geographical
Index; v. Bethlehem.
Ibid. May oi dirb dvaroXwv. E. T. Wise men from the East ;
properly, Eastern Magi. The term wise men, is too indefinite ;
as the persons here spoken of were a particular class among the
Orientals, no less distinguished by their peculiar habits and pur
suits, than any of the Grecian sects. They originated in Persia ;
but afterwards spread into other countries, particularly into Assy
ria and Arabia, bordering upon Judaea on the East : see Plin.
N. H. XXX. 1. They constituted the priesthood, and were
collected into colleges ; devoting their time almost exclusively to
astronomy, or rather astrology ; for which purpose they kept a
regular account of the principal phenomena of the coelestial
bodies. The doctrines which they professed are said to have been
originally derived from the Institutions of Abraham, who purified
them from the superstitious errors of the Zabian idolatry. This
purity, however, became again corrupted; and was again re
stored by Zoroaster, who is supposed to have been an attendant
upon the prophet Daniel, from whom he probably obtained that
perfect acquaintance with the Mosaic writings, which his religion
exhibits. It has been supposed that Zoroaster was divinely
inspired ; and that it was in consequence of a prediction, which
he had delivered, that the Magi recognised the star which
appeared at the Nativity. See Prideaux, Connection; Vol. I. B.
IV. Hyde, de Relig. Vet. Pers. XXXI. It has been generally
supposed, however, that they derived their information from the
prophecy of the Arabian prophet, Balaam; Numb, xxi v. 17.
which the Chaldee Paraphrast and Jewish commentators agree
in referring to Christ. This prophecy might possibly suggest

MATTHEW II. 1. 27
the enquiry which they made on their arrival at Jerusalem;
ttov eotiv 6 TE^Ete /3a<riX£i>e twv 'IouScuwv. See Home's
Introd. Vol. IV. p. 18. But from whatever source it originated,
certain it is, that at this time a general expectation prevailed in
the East, that a remarkable person would shortly be born, who
would obtain the universal empire of the world. See Sueton. in
Vespas. c. 4. Tacit. Hist. V. 13. Joseph. B. J. VI. 5. 4. If, as
is more generally believed, upon the authority of Justin Matryr,
Tertullian, and Epiphanius, the Magi were Arabians ; this ex
pectation was doubtlessly derived from the promise made to
Abraham, whose descendants they were by Ishmael. It has
been inferred, however, from Dan. v. 11. that they were Chal
deans ; but Chaldaea is always described as lying to the North,
not to the East of Judaea. Compare Jerem. i. 14, 15. vi. 22.
Joel ii. 20. Alberti and others think that they were learned
Jews, many of whom were resident in various parts of the East ;
being the posterity of those who did not return home after the
captivity. But if this had been the case, they could not have
been ignorant of the prophecies respecting the place of their
Messiah's birth ; and the Gentile world would have been left
without any intimation of the approaching light of the Gospel,
which was eventually to shine upon them, as well as upon the
Jews. The opinion that they came from Arabia is confirmed by
the circumstances that this country is called the East in Scrip
ture, as Judg. vi. 3. Job i. 3. and that it produces the gifts
which the Magi offered to the infant Jesus ; gold, frankincense,
and myrrh. See Psalm lxxii. 13. Virg. Georg. I. 57. Mn. I.
416. The Hebrew name of the Magi, D'OilD, Mahghim, which
occurs once in the O. T. in Isaiah viii. 19. is derived from the
inn, hagah, to mutter; and, in a metaphorical sense, to medi
tate. The LXX render it by ot dwb Trig KoiX'iag (pwvovai, in
reference, as Le Clerc supposes, to their custom of muttering their
prayers in a low voice, which seems to be alluded to by Herodot.
I. 131. Macknight rather deduces it from the secondary sense
of the verb. It is evident from the tenor of the passage, that
the word is used by Isaiah in a bad sense, similar to the word
magician, which has been derived from it. That the Magi,
however, were originally persons of the highest repute, is evident
from various ancient writers. See Xenoph. Cyrop. IV. 5. 16.
Diog. Laert. I. 1—9. .Elian. V. H. II. 17. IV. 20. Porphyr.
de Abstin. IV. 16. Cicer. de Div. I. 23. Justin. I. 9. 7. XII.
13. 4. Q. Curt. V. 1. — The expression ct7ro dvaToXCov is similar
to ol awo Tr]g QEoaaXov'iKrig 'lovSatoi, Acts xvii. 13. ol dirb Trig
'lTaXiag, Heb. xiii. 24. So Virg. Georg. III. 2. Pastor ab
Amphryso. Instead of the plural civaroXcu, which is more
usually employed to signify the East, as in Matt. viii. 11. xxiv.
27. Luke xiii. 29. the singular dvaToXf) occurs in the next verse,
as in Rev. xxi. 13. It is to be remarked, that the words iv rrj

28; MATTHEW II. 2, 3.
dvaroXrj refer to the situation of the Magi, not of the star ; unless
we understand them, with some of the critics, of the rising of the
star. In this case, however, the pronoun avrov would properly
have been added ; and dvaroXi) is not elsewhere used in this sense,
except in reference to the sun or moon ; as in Luke i. 79. Isaiah
lx. 19. LXX.
Ver. 2. avTov tov daripa. There is a great diversity of opi
nion respecting this star. Lightfoot supposes that it was the
glory of the Shechinah, and the same which appeared to the
shepherds : Luke ii. 9. Some of the ancients were of opinion,
that it was the Holy Spirit ; others suppose it was an angel ;
others a new star ; others a comet ; and others a meteor. The
latter opinion is most probable ; and there is no doubt that the
appearance, of whatever nature it might be, was miraculous, and
that the course which the Magi were to pursue, was explained to
them by revelation. The Jews had a very early tradition that a
new star would appear at the coming of the Messiah ; in accord
ance with which, the impostor in the time of Adrian took the
name of Barchobas ; i. e. the son of a star. The heathens
thought that the rise of a new star portended the birth or death
of a great personage. An opinion also prevailed among them
that stars were sent by the gods as guides to their favourites in
perplexed situations. Compare Apoll. Rhod. IV. 294. sqq.
Diod. Sic. XVI. p. 460. Plutarch, in Timoleon, p. 239. Virg.
Mn. II. 692. sqq. See Virg. Eclog. IX. 47. Lucan. Phars. I.
527. Juven. Sat. VI. 407. Sueton. Cses. 88. Claud. 46. Vesp.
23. Tacit. Annal. XIV. 22.
Ibid. 7rpocrKuvi7cra{ avT<$. Of the Eastern custom of prostra
tion before superiors, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 440. sqq.
The same custom is also recognised in Greek and Latin authors.
See Eurip. Phcen. 300. Helen. 275. Hence Cornel. Nep.
Conon. 3. Necesse est enim, si in conspectum veneris, venerari
te regem; quod wpoaKWEiv illi vacant. The verb irpouKWElv
is also applied in a more exalted sense to the homage paid to
God: as in Matt. iv. 9, 10. Luke iv. 7. John xii. 20. So also
in Joseph. Ant. VI. 7. 5. wpo&KWEt r&J GeoJ. In both senses the
word is found both with a dative and an accusative ; as Herod.
I. 134. Arist. Plut. 771. Instead of 7rpo<7KW£iv in a religious
sense, the synonymous verb TrpoaririTVEiv is sometimes used.
Compare Matt. viii. 2. ix. 18. with Luke v. 12. viii. 48. Origi
nally the English word worship was applied in the double sense
of adoration and respect.
Ver. 3. ndaa 'IspoaoXv/ia. As 'lEpoaoXv/na is always neuter
in the N. T., it is clear that 17 iroXig is here understood. Kypke,
however, adduces two passages from Josephus, in which he sup
poses it to be feminine : but in the first, Cont. Apion. I. p. 1047.

MATTHEW II. 4, 5, 6. 29
the true reading is 'hpovcraXruj. ; and in the other, B. J. VII.
18.^ the participle dXovaa is referred to 'UpovoXvua, by the figure
¦n-pbg to arifiaivofiEvov, which is common in the best writers. An
ellipsis of iroXig is not unusual ; more particularly when the name
of the country follows in the genitive ; as in vv. 1. 5. The verb
rapoTTEtv, in this passage, has been supposed to be applied in
senses somewhat different to Herod and Jerusalem respectively,
but without reason. The same emotion was excited in both cases,
though from different causes. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p.
98. It may be observed also, that the consternation of the Jews
may have arisen from a traditional belief, which appears to have
prevailed among them, that the reign of the Messiah would be
preceded by a long series of national calamities. Middleton,
SCHOETGEN. Ver.. 4. apy/EpEtc ical ypa/ifiaTElg. That is, the Sanhedrim.
See Home's Introd. Vol. III. Part II. Ch. 3. Sect. 1. §. 3.
Also Part III. Ch. II. Sect. 2. and Ch. VI. Sect. II.
Ver. 5. Sid tov irpocpriTov. Micah v. 2. This prophecy cor
responds neither with the Hebrew original or the LXX. Micha-
elis supposes that the Scribes gave an explanation, rather than a
literal translation, of the passage to Herod, for the incorrectness
of which, if it be incorrect, the Evangelist is in no ways answer
able. But see Home's Introd. Vol. II. pp. 396. 443. note ; and
Vol. IV. p. 181.
Ver. 6. yri 'IouSa. City of Judah. The E. T. translates as if
the reading were yrj in the dative. Of -yij in the sense of iroXig,
we have frequent examples in the Greek tragedians. iEsch. Theb.
101. wpoSuxjEig Tav riav yav. Schol. iroXiv. So also Eurip.
Phcen. 6. 252. Ion. 264. Suppl. 399. compare v. 405. The
Hebrew "Ity, is also rendered yr? in Jerem. xxix. 7. xxxiv. 22.
and elsewhere. Kuinoel, Kypke.
Ibid, iv Tolg riyEfioaiv. The Hebrew is ^bii, Alphi, which
is rendered by the LXX ^tXtao-iv, the thousands. Some have
supposed that the true reading of the Hebrew is ''S'PN, Alufi,
which is derived from the same verb, and translated riya/xovEg in
Gen. xxxvi. 15. Exod. xv. 15. 1 Chron. i. 51. LXX. But the
Jews being divided into thousands, the word is often used to
signify a tribe, ox family, as in Judg. vi. 15. and as over each of
these thousands a prince or chief presided, {Exod. xviii. 25.
1 Sam. x. 19.) the heads of such families may here imply, by
synecdoche, the families themselves. The verb woi/iaivEiv in the
sense of regere, originated in the days of primitive simplicity, and
is amply illustrated in Homer's Troifirjv Xaiov, II. A. 265. et
passim. Hence Maxim. Tyr. Diss. XL. p. 406. Kvpog fiiv yap
rtyEiTai Hepaiov we woifxfiv OptfinaTiov. See also Essek. xxxiv*

30 MATTHEW II. 7, 8. 10, 11, 12.
23, 24. It is here well applied to the pastoral nature of the
Messiah's kingdom, John x. 14. xxi. 6.
Ver. 7. riK.pi(5<A>GE 7rap' ai/rtov. Obtained from them exact in
formation. So again v. 16. The phrase dicpifiovv ti is used in
this sense in Herodian. I. 11. 14. iElian. Hist. An. III. 9.
Schleusner understands the expression in this sense only in v. 16.
making it here synonymous with aKpifiwg e^etoZeiv. So also the
E. T. in both places, but improperly.
Ver. 8. iropEvdivTeg I^EracrarE. Infra v. 23. iXQwv kot^ktio-e.
The participles of verbs of motion are frequently used pleonasti-
cally with finite verbs. So Xenoph. Mem. III. 9. 9. <rv y Iwv
Trjv Kara (tuvtov 'iXa. Thucyd. III. 73. IcnjyEirat iX8H>v Tolg iv
teXei ovmv. Compare also Horn. II. N. 9. Herod. VIII. 225.
Arist. Nub. 99. Vesp. 789. Soph. Phil. 353. But although in
these expressions the participle seems to convey no peculiar
sense, it is to be remarked that the idea of quickness is meant to
be conveyed by it. See Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 557.
Ver. 10. Exaprjo-av xa9av' See mv note on Soph. Ant. 551.
Pent. Gr. p. 247.
Ver. 11. Oriaavpovg. Caskets. The word is used in this
sense in Herod. II. 51. 121.150. III. 37. IV. 162. (SeeValck.
in loc.) Xenoph. Anab. V. Pausan. VI. 19. X. 11. Herodian.
II. 6. 11. III. 13. 9. Joseph. Ant. IX. 8. 2. Hesych. 6r,<Tavp6g-
Elg dyaXfiaTiov icat ^prjjuarcov $ hpwv aTroQsGiv dlicog. In the
same sense we have yaZ,o<pvXdKiov, 1 Mace. iii. 28, 29. diroOriicri,
Essek. xxviii. 13. LXX. Schleusner, Wetstein. Of the
custom which prevailed in the East, of never approaching their
kings without a present, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 90. It
has been supposed that the gifts which the Magi brought to
Christ were emblematic of his character : gold being offered as to
a king, frankincense as to a God; and myrrh, being principally
used in embalming, as indicating his death. The occurrence
itself seems to have been peculiarly providential, as furnishing
his parents with the means for undertaking their journey to
Egypt. Doddridge. In the beginning of the verse some copies
have Evpov instead of e'iSov, but all the oldMSS. andEDD. have
e'iSov, which is unquestionably the true reading.
Ver. 12. xPrHxaTlcr^VT'1^- The verb xpr)/uart'?EO'^a(j in the
passive, signifies, throughout the N. T. divinitus moneri. Hence
Theophylact on this passage : xPWaT'l^>i<y^al' Tapd Qeov d-rroKd-
Xvxpiv SixtaOai. Hesych. EXP*inaT(<r6r)' irpoE<priTEvdri. Sometimes
the source of the revelation is specified ; and here also virb Qeov
is evidently understood, though not expressed. Compare Luke ii.

MATTHEW II. 13. 15, 16. 31
26. Acts x. 22. Heb. viii. 5. xi. 7. xii. 25. So also Joseph. Ant.
X. 1. 3. X9WaTi<*avTog avT$ tov Qeov. In classic writers the
verb xpvH-aTiZEiv signifies to transact, or debate on public busi
ness; from xpvfia, negotium ; as Thucyd. V. 5. ixpfiftaTura 7T£p*
<piXiag ToXg 'Adrivaioig. Compare Arist. Thesm. 377. ^Elian.
V. H. II. 15. III. 4. IX. 3. Polyb. Hist. 27. Hence, so to
act, as to acquire a name thereby; and so to be surnamed, or
called, generally. ^ So Diod. Sic. p. 761. SidSrifia TTEptidETo Ka\
to Xoiirbv ixprinaTiZE fiaaiXEvg. The active verb occurs only
twice in the N. T. and in this signification : Acts xi. 26. Rom.
vii. 3. In other writers the verb xPaw signifies oraculum edo.
Ver. 13. Elg AiyvtTTov. Egypt was pitched upon as the
place of Christ's refuge, from its proximity to Bethlehem, and
its being at the same time out of Herod's jurisdiction. Besides,
there were many Jews in Egypt, (Jerem. xliii.) particularly in
Alexandria, where they had built a temple ; so that Joseph would
reside among them in perfect safety. Wetstein, Macknight,
Lightfoot. In the end of the verse svEica is understood.
Ver. 15. 'iiog Trig teXevt^. Scil. tov (5iov. The same ellipsis
occurs after the verb teXevtqv, infra v. 19. Luke vii. 2. So also
frequently in the classics. The omission is supplied in Eur.
Hec. 419. irol rfXEvr/ycrci) fiiov ; In the same manner finis is
used elliptically for finis vita in Tacit. Annal. VI. 25. and the
verb fin'ire, ibid. 51.
Ibid. Vc, AiyvTTTov k. t. X. These are the words of Hos. xi. 1.
not of Balaam, Numb. xxiv. 8. They are not cited by St. Mat
thew merely by way of application or accommodation : but, re
ferring primarily to the deliverance of the children of Israel out of
Egypt, they were secondarily and figuratively fulfilled in the person
of Christ. That Israel was a type of Christ appears from Exod.
iv. 22. where he is called by God his son, his first born ; whence
also Israel is put for Christ, Isa. xlix. 3. Now as a prophetical
prediction is then fulfilled, when what was foretold is come to
pass, so a type is then fulfilled, when that is done in the anti
type which was before done in the type. It is no objection that
the remainder of the prophecy does not belong to Christ, as
Matthew only notices the resemblance between the type and anti
type, in that both were called out ofEgijpt. Whitby,
Ver. 16. ivEiraixOri. Was mocked; i. e. deceived. The Jews
generally characterized any disrespectful treatment as mockery.
Compare Gen. xxxix. 14. 17. Numb. xxii. 22. Judg. xvi. 10.
After awoaTEiXag there is an ellipsis of the word Tivag, scil.
officers, or soldiers. Bos supplies dyyiXovg. The same con
struction occurs in Plutarch, de Educat. XIV. 30. koi 6 fiiv
nifixpag oWXe tov Qeokpitov. In the same manner the Latins omit

32 MATTHEW II. 17, 18. 20.
quendam or quosdam. Justin. V. 9. miserunt, qui eum mtercipe-
rent. The example from Acts xix. 31. and the like, cited by
Bos, are not precisely analogous. In Tovg iraiSag the masculine
article plainly denotes that the male children only were slain.
Instances indeed occur where the masculine article is used with
nouns of the common gender in reference to the whole species,
both male and female ; but in these cases the application is ge
nerally manifest from the subject or occasion. Besides, the his
torian seems purposely to have changed the word iraiSiov, which
is also used for child in this chapter ; as that word, being neuter,
could not mark the distinction of sex. Neither would it have fur
thered Herod's purpose to have sl&ughtexed female children, as
they could not have become kings of Israel. The term dirb
SiETovg is considered in v. 1. Of the motives which induced
Herod to issue this barbarous order, and of the silence of Jo
sephus upon the subject, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 98.
and Vol. I. p. 629. (Append. No. 3. §. 7.) respectively.
Ver. 17. tote EirXripioOr). This citation is evidently only an
accommodation of the prophecy of Jerem. xxxi. 15. See Home's
Introd. Vol. II. p. 458. The prediction itself applies only to
Nebuzaradan at Ramah, the only place named by the prophet ;
whereas the massacre of the infants was at Bethlehem. Besides,
the persons to whom the prophecy applies were not slaughtered,
but, on the contrary, their return from captivity is expressly fore
told, vv. 16, 17. The adaptation, however, of the prediction to
the murder of the innocents, has a peculiar beauty in it. Rachel
being buried in the fields of Bethlehem, (Gen. xlviii. 7.) is re
presented, in a poetical hyperbole, as awaked by the cries of her
children, who were slaughtered near her. Others have sup
posed that the prophecy is not simply accommodated by St. Mat
thew, but that it received a second and more perfect fulfilment in
the event here recorded. Marsh, Macknight, Lightfoot,
Grotius. — [Whitby, Michaelis.]
Ver. 18. Oprivog ical KXavB/ibg koI oSvp/iog. In some of the
copies the words Oprivog ko\ are wanting, and the Vulgate has
only Ploratus et ululatus multus. The LXX has the passage in
full, though there are but two corresponding words in the original.
The accumulated expression, which Matthew adopted from the
Greek translation, beautifully expresses the aggravated grief of
the mourners. Of the expression ovk ej vat, signifying to be dead,
see my note on Horn. II. B. 641.
Ver. 20. TsOvriKam yap ol Zr)TovvTEg k. t. X. The same words
are used of Moses in Exod. iv. 19. Lightfoot, Grotius. It is
evident that Herod only is intended ; the plural instead of the
singular, in cases of emphasis, being frequently employed by the

MATTHEW II. 22, 23. III. 1. 33
best writers. See my note on Soph. CEd. T. 336. Pent Gr
p. 31.
Ver. 22. 'ApxIXaoe. He had the government of Judaea, Sa
maria, and Idumaea, under the title of Ethnarch. See Home's
Introd. Vol. I. p. 204. III. p. 98. The adverb |«r is sometimes
used, which Gataker denies, to denote motion to a place, for
ekeicte. Herod. I. 121. iXQwv Si eke?, Traripa te koi fir,Tipa Evpf)-
<TEig. Compare Arrian, Epict. III. 26. Achil. Tat. II. 89.
Polyb. I. 26. Thucyd. III. 71. Xenoph. Cyrop. VII. 1. 16.
Wetstein, Elsner, Kypke.
Ver. 23. slg troXiv. For iv ttoXei. So Joseph. Ant. XX. 1,
Toiig Eig Trjv nEpatav KarotKOiivrae 'lovSaiovg. The true reading
is NaZapid. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 341.
Ibid, oti NaZvpaiog icXridricTETai. In order to illustrate this
passage, some of the commentators have found a coincidence be
tween the gentile noun here employed and the Hebrew name for
a Nassarite ; and others derive it from a word signifying branch, in
reference to the prophecy of Isaiah, xi. 1. But the most probable
interpretation is that given in Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 391.
note. Dr. Middleton would translate the Nassarene Kar' eIovjjv.
The article could not be inserted in the Greek. See on Ch. 1. 1.
on the Greek article, §. II. 2. p. 10.

CHAPTER III.
Contents : — John the Baptist ; his Manner of Life, and
Ministry, w. 1 — 12. [Mark i. 2 — 8. more fully Luke iii.
1—19.] The Baptism of Christ, w. 13—17. [Mark i. 9—11.
Luke iii. 21—23.]
Verse 1. ev rate rifiipaig EKEivaig. In those days, i. e. some time
before Christ left Nazareth, the last thing mentioned being his
residence in that city ; and the events in this and the preceding
chapter being connected by the particle Si. The particle indeed
is wanting in several MSS., but it is nevertheless undoubtedly
genuine ; as it is far easier to account for its omission than its
insertion. Now John was about six months older than Christ,
and as each most probably entered upon their ministry in his
30th year, according to the practice of the Levitical law, (Numb.
iv. 3.) it may fairly be conjectured that the former entered upon
his ministry so much earlier. See on Luke iii. 1. The use of
rifiipai in the plural is not unusual in the N. T. as, for instance,
vol. 1. D

34 MATTHEW III. 1.
in Matt, xxiii. 30. Luke ii. 6. xix. 42. et passim ; but it is ex
tremely rare in Attic. We have, however, iv vaTipaiaiv riiiipaig,
.Esch. Agam. 1656. for which Sophocles says iv vo-Tipy xp°vV>
CEd. C. 641. Also Thucyd. VII. 33. weoI rdc avrdg vnipag.
Pind. 01. I. 3. dfiipai S' iTriXonroi fiapTvpEg ootp&TaTOi. See
Blomfield's Gloss, on iEsch. 1. c. In the same sense we find
illis diebus, Virg. ^En. II. 340. Liv. XXVII. 15. Campbell,
Schleusner. Ibid. 6 BairTi<TTr)g. A title of his office, not a proper name,
but equivalent to 6 J3airrZ£wv, Mark vi. 14. That baptism had
been in use among the Jews as a religious ordinance, before the
ministry of John, has been disputed by the learned ; though it
should seem without reason. The fact is not expressly asserted
in Scripture ; but there is still very little doubt that it formed
part of the ceremony of the admission of Gentile proselytes into
the Jewish religion. The Persians were not only acquainted
with the rite, but practised it upon infants. Pro infantibus utun-
tur Baptismo, seu lotione, ad animce purificationem internam :
Hyde de Rel. vet. Pers. c. 34. It is therefore highly probable
that the Jews, with whom several Oriental customs prevailed, re
tained this among the rest. The Talmuds indeed affirm that a
person is not a proselyte till he be both circumcised and bap
tized, and a convert to Judaism is expressly called by Arrian
(iEJiafi/iivog, (Epict. II. 9.) which seems decisive on the subject.
Besides, there is allusion to the use of baptism in the consecra
tion of priests more than once in the O. T. (Levit. viii. 6. Exod.
xxix. 4.) and it was confidently expected from a passage in Zech.
xiii. 1. that it would form part of the office of the Messiah, or
those connected with him. See John i. 25. In short, the very
manner in which the account of John's baptism is introduced by
the Evangelist is alone sufficient to prove that its use was already
familiar to those for whom he wrote. The term itself is used
without the slightest explanation ; his disciples make no enquiry
respecting the nature of the rite, and the only doubt that seems
to have arisen in their minds relates to the authority of John in
administering it. It must be allowed that they had a very poor
idea of the real intent and signification of the ceremony, from
which they ought to have inferred the necessity of a change in
their opinions and practices, similar to that required of the bap
tized proselyte, together with an entire and exclusive reception of
the religion of the Gospel, into which they were received with
the same forms as those with which the Jewish converts renounced
the errors of Heathenism and Idolatry, and conformed to the
Mosaic dispensation. Lightfoot, Macknight, Whitby.
Ibid, iv ttj ipy/xi? Tr)g 'lovSaiag. See Home's Introd. Vol.
III. Part I. Ch. II. §. 8. The participle Krjpvcrowv is here pro
perly applied to the Baptist as the herald or harbinger of the
Messiah ; and wherever the verb or its derivatives are used in the

MATTHEW III. 2. 35
N. T. or the LXX, it is almost universally in reference to a thing
published or proclaimed. In the present instance the Baptist's
proclamation is contained in the words of the succeeding verse.
Compare Matt. iv. 17. x. 7. Luke xxiv. 47. Acts xxviii. 31.
Jonah iii. 2. LXX. Hence the word is distinct from EvayysXiZio,
to preach the Gospel, KarayyiXXon, to announce, XaXiw, to speak,
SiaXiyofiai, to discourse, and SiSdvKEiv, to teach ; all of which are
rendered to preach in the E. T. Campbell.
Ver. 2. (UETavoEirE. E. T. Repent ye. In this translation no
great impropriety exists, as it is generally agreed among theolo
gians that the repentance inculcated in the Gospel comprehends
such a reformation of life as will be permanent and lasting. The
verb /xEravoEtv includes this comprehensive sense, denoting a
change for the better ; in which it differs essentially from nETa/xi-
Xect&u, which implies simply a change, whether it be for the better
or the worse. In the LXX indeed the two verbs are synonymously
employed ; but there is a marked distinction between them in the
N. T. the first corresponding more nearly with the English to
reform, the latter with to repent. The difference is obvious :
every one who reforms repents ; but every one who repents does
not necessarily reform. Hence, wherever the change of mind,
which the preposition fiETa denotes, is inculcated as a duty, or
the necessity of it stated as a doctrine of Christianity, the terms
are invariably fiEravoEtv and fiETavoia. Compare Mark vi. 12.
Luke xiii. 3. 5. Acts ii. 38. xxvi. 20. and elsewhere. On the
other hand, whenever a mere sorrow is intended, which does not
necessarily imply reformation, these terms are never used, but
always /j.ETau.iXE<rOai and fiETa/iiXEia. Thus, the repentance of
Judas, which drove him to despair, is expressed by nETa/iEXwdElg,
Matt, xxvii. 3. In 2 Cor. vii. 10. St. Paul has employed both
words, so as clearly to mark the difference : 17 Kara Qeov Xvwjj
[XETavoiav Eig awTtipiav dfiETafiiXriTov KaTEpyci^Erat. Had the two
words been convertible the Apostle would doubtless have used the
adjective d/xETavonTov, as in Rom. ii. 5. in order to preserve the
paranomasia, which is given, but improperly, in the E. T. It is
the opinion of Grotius that this distinction is not well founded,
but the passages upon which he forms his judgment, viz. Matt.
xxi. 29. Heb. xii. 17. are not to the point. Campbell.
Ibid. riyyiKE yap k. t. X. The synonymous expressions 17
/3acrtXEta tCov ovpavwv, and 17 fiaaiXEia tov Qeov, which recur per
petually in the N. T. are not only used to denote in their most
direct sense, the regions of endless felicity in heaven, as in Matt.
v. 10. 12. vii. 21, 22, 23. Mark ix. 46, 47. and elsewhere, but
also, in manifest allusion to the prophecies of the O. T. and par
ticularly Dan. ii. 44. vii. 13, 14. to represent the spiritual king
dom of Clirist, or the Gospel dispensation. This latter sense
evidently belongs to this place ; and so also Matt. iv. 17. x. 7.
d 2

36 MATTHEW III. 3, 4.
Luke x. 9. xvii. 21. and elsewhere, where it is said to be at
hand : again, when Christ is said to preach the Gospel of the
kingdom, as in Mark i. 14. Luke xvi. 16. and elsewhere; in
almost all the parables that speak of it, and probably in Matt. xi.
11, 12. xiii. 11. 19. 52. xvi. 19. xx. 21. xxiii. 13. Mark xii. 34.
Luke xiv. 15. In some places it is doubtful which of the two
senses is to be affixed to the term. See Matt. v. 3. 19, 20. vi. 33.
viii. 11. xix. 12. 24. Markx. 14, 15. 23. sqq. Luke xviii. 29. xxii. 29.
That the two expressions are synonymous is evident from Matt.
iv. 17. v. 3. xi. 11. xiii. 11. xix. 14. with Luke vi. 20. Marki. 15.
Luke vii. 28. Mark iv. 11. x. 14. respectively. It is clear that
the English word kingdom does not clearly designate the latter of
the two acceptations in which the phrase is used, as denoting the
epoch or cera of the Gospel dispensation, which would be more
correctly expressed by the word reign. It is proper to remark that
the form, rjyytKE yap, used first by the Baptist, then by our Lord
himself, and lastly by his disciples in his life-time, is never re
peated after his resurrection. It is also to be observed, that ov
pavog in the singular implies simply the sky, whereas ovpavol, in
the plural, is equivalent to the Hebrew reduplication O^ltf '•Dttf,
i. e. the heaven of heavens, the throne of God, and thence meta
phorically, God himself; as in Dan. iv. 26. Psal. lxxiii. 9.
Whitby, Lightfoot, Campbell. The perfect riyyucE is here
used for the present. See Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 500. Viger, de Idiom.
p. 166. and Hermann ad loc.
Ver. 3. 'Hcratou tov irpoipriTov. Chap. xl. 3. The words of
the Evangelist agree in sense, though not exactly in terms, both
with the Hebrew and the LXX. Instead of avrov the LXX
reads tov Qeov rifiiov, with which the Hebrew agrees, and adds in
the desert. We have the same citation in Mark i. 3. and more
at length in Luke iii. 4 — 6. The custom to which the prophet
alludes is amply illustrated in Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp.
92, 93.
Ver. 4. svSvfia dvb TpixCov icafiriXov. There were two species
of cloth made of camel's hair : of the finer hair a beautiful stuff
was manufactured, similar to that which is now, though made of
wool, called camlet; and of the long shaggy hair a much coarser
material was made, of a texture somewhat like that of the cloth now
used to lay over goods. Of this latter, no doubt, was the garment
worn by the Baptist, and the like, as Chardin assures us, together
with great leathern girdles, are worn by the Eastern dervises to
this day. According to the Rabbinical writers, the Nazarites
wore a similar garment : but though John was a Nazarite, it is
more probable that he used the habit in question in imitation of
the prophets, (Zech. xiii. 4.) and more especially of Elijah, who
was clad in precisely the same way. See 2 Kings i. 8. In the

MATTHEW III. 5. 7. 37
austerity of his life also he closely resembled his illustrious proto
type. See Home's Introd. Vol. IV. p. 148. And it was the idea
which prevailed among the Jews, that John was a prophet, toge
ther with the prevailing expectation of the Messiah's approaching
advent, which was mainly instrumental in drawing their attention
to his ministry, (Matt. xi. 16. xxi. 25.) In concurrence with this
belief his divine commission is opened in the same form as that
with which the prophets in the O. T. asserted their authority.
Compare Luke iii. 2. with Jerem. i. 24. Ezek. i. 3. vi. 1. vii. 10.
Joseph Ben Gorion expressly calls him a prophet ; and from the
habit which he assumed, the austerities which he practised, and
the office which he filled, he revived in every respect the spirit of
prophecy, which had been lost to Israel for a space of 400 years.
Lightfoot, Campbell, Grotius.
. Ibid. dicpiSsg. Locusts. Bochart mentions ten different kinds of
these animals in the Scriptures. Some of these were permitted by
the law to be eaten, Levit. xi. 22. and there is no doubt that they
were used for food by several of the Eastern nations, and are so
still to this day. Diodorus Sic. XXIV. 3. mentions a people of
^Ethiopia who were called Acridophagi ; and Bochart observes,
Hieroz. II. 4. 7. that locusts were a common meat in Palestine.
See also Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 71. There is no sufficient
reason for supposing that John's food consisted of any other than
these insects ; or that the fruit of the locust-tree, or wild pears,
are here intended. In support of these conjectures, which have
been supported by Dr. W. Knatchbull and others, much learned
research has been wasted, and alterations in the text proposed,
which are wholly unnecessary, and not very probable. Whitby,
Macknight. — [Hammond.] The wild honey, jueXi ayptov, which
constituted another part of the Baptist's food, was procured from
the clefts of rocks and hollow trees, where it had been depo
sited by immense swarms of wild bees, and whence in hot weather
it bursts from the comb, and flows down in great purity and
plenty. Josephus calls the country near Jericho x^9a ^Xitto-
Tpocpog. See also Shaw's Travels, p. 337. Maundrell, p. 24.
Reland's Palestine, p. 374. Some have supposed that the honey
here meant is a sweet syrop procured from dates, mentioned
by Joseph. B. J. V. 3. and called by some writers palm honey.
See Bochart Hieroz. Vol. III. p. 377. But it appears from
Pliny, N. H. XXIII. 4. and other writers, that this was not
altogether wholesome, and sometimes attended with unpleasant
effects, so that the honey of bees is doubtless to be understood in
this place. Lightfoot, Macknight, Wetstein, &c.
Ver. 5. 17 7T£pi'xwpoe tov 'IopSavou. See Home's Introd.
Vol. III. p. 54.
Ver. 7. yEvvijjiiara ixiSvwv. In allusion, probably, to Gen.

38 MATTHEW III. 8, 9.
iii. 15. where wicked men are called the seed of the serpent, i. e.
of the Devil; unless the use of the plural seems rather to imply
sinners in general. The word 'ixiova is employed in a meta
phorical sense, closely analogous to that of the Scriptures, in the
classic authors. Compare ^Esch. Cho'eph. 243. 981. Soph. Ant.
531. Phil. 1106. Eurip. Alcest. 309. Androm. 271. Ion. 1262.
The expression employed by the Baptist is evidently opposed to
their presumptuous boast, of being the children of Abraham, v. 9.
It is supposed by some that the question contained in the words
Tig v-rriSEi^Ev vfitv k. t. X. implies a strong negation ; but it is rather
expressive of admiration that men should do things so contrary
to their natural tempers and inclinations. It is probable that the
Pharisees and Sadducees offered themselves to John's baptism,
with a view of escaping that punishment, (pvyEiv dirb Trig jueXXov-
crr/e bpyr)g, which they expected to fall on the enemies of Christ,
in the approaching establishment of his kingdom. Malach. iv. 6.
It has been supposed, however, that they intended to obtain sub
jects of information against the Baptist, for the purpose of ac
cusing him to the Sanhedrim. Of the Pharisees and Sadducees,
and Jewish sects in general, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. Part
3. Ch. vi. §. 2. The verb viroSEiKWfu properly signifies to shew,
and thence to instruct, to advise. Compare Luke vi. 47. xii. 5.
2 Chron. xv. 3. Job vi. 24. Prov. iv. 4. LXX. A difference has
sometimes been supposed to exist between the simple participle
fiiXXwv and julXXwv 'iaEcrOai. But where fiiXXwv is placed by
itself, the verb 'iuEaOat is always understood. Instances of each
usage are without number : e. g. Demosth. c. Mid. §. 33. tov
fiiXXovTa dyiova. Whitby, Macknight.
Ver. 8. Kap7r6v d^iov. This is doubtless the true reading. It
is found in the old EDD. and best MSS. Some copies have Kap-
7ro£>e dXiovg in the plural, as in Luke iii. 8. whence it was most
probably inserted by some ignorant transcriber in this place. The
expression Kap7rov ttoieiv is generally considered an Hebraism.
Compare Gen. i. 1 1. It is found, however, in some classic writers ;
and the metaphorical use of Kap7roe, which frequently recurs in
the N. T. is sanctioned by Demosthenes, p. 328. ed. Reiske,
TavTng (jng jUEXlrr/c) rovg tcapwovg eSei KaXovg Kal ytvvaiovg Kal
irdaiv UMptXi/iovg Etvat. WETSTEIN, SCHLEUSNER.
Ver. 9. waTipa 'ixofitv tov 'Aj3paa/x. The Jews at this time
were immersed in the lowest depths of moral and religious de
pravity. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. Part III. Ch. 6. §. 3.
This degeneracy was materially owing to the strength of certain
prejudices, to which their traditions and their perversions of the
Scriptures had given rise. Among these in particular may be
noticed the persuasion which they had imbibed, and to which the
Baptist here alludes, that they were irreversibly certain of the

MATTHEW III. 10. 39
divine favour, from which they totally excluded the Gentiles, in
consideration of their descent from Abraham. The benefits de
rived from their patriarchal ancestor were considered as uni
versal, and extending alike to saint and sinner. They enter
tained a ridiculous notion, a perversion probably of Jerem. xxxi.
35. that Abraham sat by the gates of Hell, and permitted no
wicked Israelite to descend into it. See Talmud. The Chaldee
paraphrasts also assert that Hell fire hath no power over sinners
of Israel, because Abraham and Isaac descend thither to fetch
them thence. Pococke's Miscel. pp. 172. 227. The belief of
these absurd doctrines had taken such fast hold upon their minds,
that it was necessary for Justin Martyr, in the second century, to
dissuade them from listening to their Rabbins, who told them,
that being Abrahams seed, the kingdom of Heaven would be
given to them, even though they continued in disobedience and
unbelief: Dial. Tryph. From whatever sources they derived
these opinions, they clearly overlooked the conditional turn of the
promise, (Gen. xviii. 19.) with which the declarations of the Bap
tist exactly coincide. Whitby, Lightfoot, Doddridge. The
phrase Sokw XiyEiv occurs in Xenoph. Mem. IV. 2. 20. It seems
to be pleonastic, as we have Sokeiv Eivai for simply stvai. So
also Soke'lv (paivEtrOai, Xen. Mem. II. 1. 22. Cyrop. VIII. 3. 24.
It may also be considered as an Hebraism, for the same form
occurs frequently in the Talmud. So also the expression XiyEiv
iv iavToig, which is found in. Esther vi. 6. LXX. Lightfoot,
Grotius, Kuinoel^
Ibid, ek twv XiQwv tovtiov k. t. X. The early fathers seem to
have understood this expression figuratively, in reference to the
idolatry of the Gentiles, who worshipped stones, (Clem. Alex.
Prohept. p. 3.) or from the hardness of their hearts, (Jerome,)
so that the Baptist meant to assert that God could raise up chil
dren to Abraham even from among the heathen, who, as the spi
ritual seed intended in the promised blessing, would be received
into God's favour instead of the rejected Jews. It has also been
supposed that John meant to designate the multitude around him;
the uneducated vulgar being frequently compared to stones.
Thus Plaut. Mil. Glor. II. 2. 81. neque habet plus Sapientice,
quam lapis. Other instances are cited by Wetstein. The most pro
bable opinion seems to be, that the words are a general affirmation
of the omnipotence of God, who had originally created man from
the dust of the earth, and had already given a child to Abraham
miraculously, and could therefore raise up children to the Patri
arch, even from the dust under their feet. See also Rom. iv.
Whitby, Lightfoot, Macknight.
Ver. 10. riSn Si koi k. r. X. And even now, $c. The powerful
language in which John delivers this declaration, and the forcible
construction of the passage, seems to point to a period of desola-

40 MATTHEW III. 11.
tion which was at no great distance. It was a warning, therefore,
which would fall in with their apprehensions of impending
danger, and would naturally induce them to adopt the means of
deliverance. The construction of the verse is in the present
tense, KEiTai, itcicoirTETai, j3aXXfTat. In v. 12. it changes to the
future, SiaicaOapiEi, avvdS,Ei, KaTaKabaEi. It may, therefore, be in
ferred that the denunciation is twofold, referring, primarily, to the
approaching destruction of Jerusalem, and, finally, to the day of
judgment. There is, probably, an allusion in this passage to Isai.
x. 33. xi. 1. which the Jews applied to the Messiah, and thence
inferred that he Vould come immediately upon the destruction of
Jerusalem. Schmidius, Lightfoot, Grotius.
Ver. 11. iv vSart. The preposition is redundant, or equiva
lent with <rvv, as in Soph. CEd. T. 821. Horn. II. A. 586. See
Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 401. Obs. 2. Campbell renders it in, and com
pares iv t$ 'IopSavp, v. 6. observing also that the verb /3a7rri?£tv
means to dip, or immerse, and that the baptized are said dvafiai-
veiv dirb tov vSarog, v. 16. But the cases are not exactly in
point, since to immerse in fire, or in the Holy Ghost, is neither
intelligible nor possible ; nor is the rendering altogether recon-
cileable with his own opinion, which seems to be extremely just,
that the present verse represents the manner in which Christ
will admit his disciples, and the next that in which he will
judge them at the end of the world. The baptism iv rcj> 'Iop-
Sdvo designates the place, and ev t<$ vSaTi the manner of the
ceremony. The words koi 7rupt are wanting in many MSS.
but they are doubtless genuine, being found in some of the older
versions and MSS. and having been probably rejected because
they are wanting in Mark i. 8. Wakefield and others translate
with a holy wind and with afire ; urging that the article is gene
rally used when the Holy Spirit is meant, and that the following
verse, which he considers as an illustration of the present, re
quires such an interpretation. But the ensuing verse is a con
sequence, and not an illustration of the present, and the article
can decide nothing in the present instance. See on Matt. i. 18.
where the fifth sense adduced is that which applies here. The
Holy Spirit in his personal acceptation cannot, but his influence
may, be associated with fire. Middleton.
[ON THE BAPTISMS OF JOHN THE BAPTIST AND THE MESSIAH.
It is plain from this passage that John's baptism was notthe same
in substance with that of Christ. As John was sent to make ready
for the appearance of the Messiah, so may the rite which he admi
nistered be considered as preparatory to the more efficient ordi
nance of our Lord. The Baptist himself did not affirm that any of
those spiritual gifts were annexed to his ministry, which certainly
were conferred upon the disciples of Jesus by the descent of the

MATTHEW III. 12. 41
Holy Ghost. He baptized with water only, thereby affording an
emblematic representation of that internal purity which would be
required in every member of the Christian covenant. His was only
the outward visible sign ; Christ's was the inward spiritual grace,
openly shed upon the Apostles on the day of Pentecost, when this
declaration of John respecting the Messiah's baptism was fulfilled.
Besides, if the baptism of John were equivalent with that of the
Messiah, whence arose the necessity of re-baptizing those, who
had already partaken of his rite 1 Acts xix. 1 — 6. The baptism
of John may, probably, have been the same with that of the dis
ciples of Jesus before his ascension : but be it remembered, that
during his ministry Jesus himself baptised not, but his disciples ;
(John iv. 2.) and it was not till the miraculous descent of the
Holy Ghost, in the shape of fiery tongues, that the fulfilment of
John's prediction, as stated above, took place. This is evident
from the promise of our Lord himself, in Acts i. 5. and to this
the words Kat 7rupt manifestly refer, and are to be rendered exe-
getically, (Spiritus, qui est ignis: Elsner,) as representing the
symbol of the Holy Spirit. It must be remarked, however, that
these words of the Baptist are so constructed, that they would
naturally be referred to a transaction of the Messiah's life ; and
that they might at first sight appear to affirm, that he would not
adopt a baptism with water for the admission of his disciples.
But it cannot be supposed that John would heedlessly have ha
zarded a prediction of this extraordinary nature ; and still less,
that events would subsequently arise, and unexpectedly coincide
with what he had foretold. Their fulfilment, therefore, must be an
ample proof that the word of the Lord directed his prediction ;
and, as an obvious inference, that the record which he bore to the
mission of Christ is indisputably true.]

Ibid, tu vwoSrifiaTa j3acrracra(. See Home's Introd. Vol. III.
p. 415. In Mark i. 7. and Luke iii. 16. it is Xvcrai tov IfidvTa
tC)v inroSrifidTwv ; but the expressions are clearly synonymous.
Among the Jews, the office alluded to, though of a servile descrip
tion, was also performed by disciples for their instructors, as it
appears from the Talmudists, and Euseb. Hist. Eccl. IV. 15.
The adjective iaxvP°G here signifies powerful in the highest
sense, as in Rev. xviii. 8. and Uavbg, in the sense of d%iog, is
sanctioned by Herod. VIII. 36. Dion. Hal. Ant. R. II. 65.
Aristaenet. III. 19. Kypke, Schleusner.
Ver. 12. ov to tttvov k. t. X. The allusion in this passage is
to an ancient process in agriculture, by which the chaff was
driven towards a fire prepared for burning it, in order that it
might not be blown back, and mixed again with the wheat.
There is a similar description in one of the Jewish expositions

42 MATTHEW III. 13.
of Psalm ii. Then comes the threshing; the straw they throw
into the fire, the chaff into the wind; the wheat they keep on the
floor. So the nations shall be burnt, but Israel preserved. Midres
Tillin. The tttvov was properly a winnowing shovel, of very
ancient use, and extremely simple ; the fan, by which it is impro
perly rendered in E. T. was more cumbersome, contrived for
raising an artificial wind by the help of sails, and therefore unfit
to be used by the hand. There is mention of both these imple
ments, tttvov and Xikjuwv, in Isai. xxx. 24. The whole passage
will be fully understood by referring to Home's Introd. Vol. III.
p. 457. sq. We meet with the verb SiaKaOaipu) in the sense
which it bears in this passage in Xenoph. CEcon. 24. nadapov/iEv
tov o-'itov, XiKfiuivTEg Ta dxvpa. After dirodf)Kriv many MSS
and the Syriac version add avTov ; but the article alone has the
form of the possessive pronoun, ignorance of which has given rise
to several various readings of the same kind. Lightfoot, Camp
bell, Macknight, Middleton.
Ver. 13. tote vapayivETai k. t. X. The particle tote does not
define the exact point of time at which the baptism of Christ took
place, but simply fixes it to the time when John was baptizing.
The same latitude is observable in Matt. iv. 1. The question of
the date of Christ's baptism, and the time which elapsed between
the commencement of John's ministry and that of Christ, is dis
cussed under Luke ii. 1. It may be observed, that by his bap
tism in the Jordan, Christ entered upon the work for which he
came into the world precisely upon the same principles, on which
the priests were dedicated to the Temple service. Compare Exod.
viii. 6. xl. 12. Heb. ii. 17. This seems to be the primary force
of the reason with which he obtained the acquiescence of John
in his baptism ; though it also comprehended the propriety and
necessity of justifying all the counsels of divine wisdom. Though
the law was now to be abolished, it had originally been estab
lished for wise and indispensable purposes ; and it was therefore
advisable that the Messiah should acknowledge its divine insti
tution, and sanction its ordinances. The selection of the Baptist
for the performance of the ceremony was obviously intended to
answer the most important purposes. The numbers which daily
flocked to his preaching would thus be witnesses of the wonderful
scene which followed ; and the superb testimony to the divine
mission of the Messiah, attended by the manifestation of the whole
glory of the Trinity, and the express declaration of the Father to
the dignity of the Son, delivered by the voice from heaven in the
ears of the assembled multitude, established at once in the most
public manner the authority both of Christ and his forerunner.
The voice from heaven was a completion of 2 Sam. vii. 14.
Psal. lxxxix. 26, 27. Isaiah xiii. 1. and the title, Son of God,
belongs, as the Jews themselves allow, to their Messiah. See

MATTHEW III. 15, 16, 17. 43
Psal. ii. 7. Isaiah vii. 14. and compare Matt. xxvi. 63. Luke
xxii. 67. 70. John i. 41. 49. also Matt. xvi. 16. 20. Mark viii.
29. Luke ix. 20. This appellation, therefore, bestowed upon
him in a manner so august and solemn, ought to have been de
cisive in convincing them of his divine pretension. Lightfoot,
Whitby, Macknight.
Ver. 15. d(pEg dpn. Schleusner renders these words permitte
quceso ; observing that dpTi is here an hortative particle, equiva
lent to Sfj, or the Hebrew iO, but the usual import of the adverb
is equally applicable. With respect to the Baptist's hesitation
in complying with the reque'st of Jesus, it could only have pro
ceeded upon a certainty that he who stood before him was the
very person, of whom he was the forerunner. This, however,
appears at first sight to contradict an assertion of the Baptist
himself made shortly after the event in question. But see on
John i. 33.
Ver. 16. The adverb EvOvg, though joined with dvifiv, belongs
properly to dvEi^x^^av. Instances of this construction recur in
Mark i. 29. xi. 2. Grotius, Campbell. Rosenmuller does
not understand the words to Trvtvfia tov Qeov in a personal sense,
but simply as signifying a strong emotion in the mind of our
Saviour, now entering on his ministry. But Luke, iii. 22. says to
irvEvfia to dyiov awfiariKi^ eiSei, which gives the personal sense
of TTVEv/na in the most unequivocal terms. Middleton. The de
scription, however, of this circumstance is ambiguous. Tertullian
and Augustin supposed that the symbol of the Spirit's presence
was a material dove, and others are of opinion that it had both
the shape and motion of a dove, thereby representing that in
nocence and meekness, which were so clearly exemplified in the
character of Christ. But the more probable supposition is, that
the Holy Spirit, in some visible form, probably that of a flame or
body of fire, descended with an hovering motion like that of a
dove ; the peculiarity of which is noticed by Virgil, JEn. V. 216.
Fertur in arva volans ; mox aere lapsa quieto Radit iter liqui-
dum, celeres neque commovet alas. Had it been a dove in shape
as well as in motion, the expression, instead of wo-ei 7r£ptcrr£pav,
would have been wctei 7T£ptcrr£pae, as wctei irxjpbg, Acts ii. 3.
Whitby, Hammond, Macknight, Wetstein, Lightfoot.
Ver. 17. ovTog ian k. t. X. In Mark i. 11. these words are
addressed to Christ himself: <n> e1 6 vlbg k. t. X. Hence it has
been supposed that both forms were pronounced ; first while the
Spirit was descending, directly to Christ himself; and again after
the Spirit had lighted upon him, to the Baptist and the multi
tude. This supposition would, undoubtedly, render the miracle
very remarkable, but as the two forms are precisely the same in

44 MATTHEW IV. 1.
sense, the difference in the words is very immaterial. The ex
pression ei/SokeTv iv tivi is a Hebraism, as in Psal. cxlix. 4.
LXX. ewSokeTv iv t$ Xaq. The aorist EvSoKrjcra is not here
used simply for the present, but it has the signification which it
regularly bears in the best Attic writers, of the Latin soleo, in
cluding the past, present, and future. ' See Zeune and Hermann
on Viger, p. 164. Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 503. 3. Of the adjective
dyawriTbg see my note on Homer II. Z. 400. Its true sense
is clearly deducible from John xvii. 26. Macknight, Gro
tius.

CHAPTER IV.
Contents: — The Temptation of Christ, w. 1 — 11. [Mark i. 12,
13. Luke iv. 1 — 13.] Imprisonment of John ; Christ teaches
in Galilee, w. 18—25. [Mark i. 16—21. Luke iv. 14—32.]
Verse 1. ElgTrjvEpri/iov. The people of Palestine shew the wil
derness in which our Saviour is supposed to have been tempted,
and from the forty days, during which the temptation lasted, it
has acquired the name of Quarantaria. It is a rugged and wild
ridge of mountains to the north of the road which leads from Je
rusalem by the Mount of Olives to Jericho. It seems- more pro
bable, however, that the scene of the temptation was the great
Desert of Arabia, in which Mount Sinai is situate, of which see
Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 55. Not to mention that Jesus
would not have been entirely in solitude in the former retreat,
and that provisions would be easily attainable, the fast of our
Lord has an evident reference to those of Moses and Elias, which
took place in the Desert of Arabia, (Exod. xxxiv. 28. 1 Kings
xix. 8.) The word SidfioXog signifies properly a calumniator,
traducer, false accuser, from SiafidXXEiv. In the N. T. it is
sometimes an appellative, as in 1 Tim. iii. 11. 2 Tim. iii. 3. Tit.
ii. 3. and probably John vi. 70. but more generally it is used to
denote icar e^ox^v, the great enemy of God and man, whom we
call the devil; and as such, it is the word by which the Hebrew
]12W, Satan, which signifies an adversary, (Numb. xxii. 22.
1 Sam. xxix. 4.) is translated by the LXX, in Job i. and ii.
Zech. iii. 1. 1 Mace. i. 36. As proper names, the Hebrew and
Greek words readily convey the same idea, since the notion of an
enemy and a calumniator are closely allied ; and the verb Sia-
fidXXEcrdai also signifies to hate, as employed by Strabo, p. 792.
See Casaubon in loc. It is observable also that in this sense it
generally takes the article, and is never used in the plural. In
the same manner we have 6 iriipdZwv, 6 irovnpbg, 6 dvriSiKog,

MATTHEW IV. I. 4,5
and the like terms, by which the devil is designated Kar iZoxnv.
The words i>7ro tov wvEvfiaTog are evidently to be understood of
the Holy Spirit. There is no ground, either from the expression
or the context, to interpret it of the devil. The expression in
Luke iv. 1. is iv t<£ wvEv/jiaTi, where the preposition iv with the
dative is used for virb, or Sid, with the genitive, in which sense it
is occasionally used by the best writers. See Matt. Gr. Gr. §.
577. 4. The compound dvr)x®n has only the force of the simple
verb. Luke has tjyeto. Michaelis, Middleton, Campbell,
Kuinoel. It will be proper to make a few general remarks
upon [THE TEMPTATION OF CHRIST IN THE WILDERNESS.
The Unitarians assert, in the Notes to their Improved Version
of the N. T. that the form of expression, avrjx^l virb tov ttvev-
fiaTog, denotes that the historian is about to describe a visionary
scene, and not a real event, in confirmation of which they refer
to Rev. i. 10. Acts xi. 5. In the first of these passages St.
John's expression is iyEvo/iriv iv irvEvfiaTi; and in the latter St.
Peter describes his vision as ev EKtrrao-Et opa/xa. It is clearly
discernible that the latter of these forms is entirely distinct from
that of St. Matthew, and that while in its plain and obvious sense
it describes a visionary scene, the natural impression which arises
from those of the Evangelist is that of a positive action of our
Saviour, viz. his going into the desert at the suggestion of the
Spirit. In Matt. xii. 28. Luke ii. 27. Acts viii. 29. x. 19.
where similar expressions occur, it cannot be supposed that the
actions described are merely imaginary. The citation from the
Revelations indeed nearly coincides with that employed by St.
Luke in the parallel passage, fiyETO iv t$ irvEv/xaTi, chap. iv. 1.
but with this material difference, that it wants the article. In the
Gospels, therefore, to wvExifxa evidently denotes the influence of
the Spirit ; in the Revelations it must be referred to the second
sense of the word noticed under Matt. i. 18. At the same time
it must be confessed, that several of the commentators, both an
cient and modern, without any leaning to Socinian tenets, have
thought that the temptation was simply a vision, and some diffi
culties may doubtless be removed by this supposition. But these
difficulties are merely theoretical, arising from the mysterious
nature of the transaction ; which, therefore, like all other myste
ries, is beyond the reach of human investigation. Now, there
is not the slightest intimation throughout the narrative, that the
temptation is merely a vision ; and the reasons for adhering to a
literal interpretation amount almost to demonstration. It is cer
tain, for instance, that the feeling of hunger could not have been
ideal ; and that a vision of forty days' continuance is beyond the
bounds of credibility. Some weight, also, is due to the observa
tion, that all the prophets of the O. T. except Moses, saw

46 MATTHEW TV. 2, 3.
visions and dreamed dreams ; and that St. Paul and St. Peter,
the prophets of the N. T. did the same. Hence, Moses being
a type of Christ, it is reasonable to expect, that in this, as in
other particulars, the resemblance would be preserved between
them. Besides, the thing is in itself extremely probable, that
there should be a real and personal conflict between Christ and
Satan, when the former entered upon his ministry. He had
ruined the first Adam, and he might, therefore, hope to be equally
successful with the second. It is the ingenious observation of a
learned friend of Bishop Porteus, that the Temptation of Christ
in the Wilderness, bears an evident analogy to the Temptation of
Adam in Paradise. The suggestion has been followed up by
Mr. Townsend in several points of similitude, which are closed
by a curious tradition, that the temptation of Adam and Eve in
Paradise was of forty days' duration. We may also remark
farther, that the character and design of the temptation, will be
considerably illustrated by a comparison with the Crucifixion.
(See Encyclop. Metropol. Vol. X. p. 604.) Each was the hour
of Satan; at the commencement, and the close, respectively, of
the work of Christ. Now Satan had brought into the world sin,
as well as death : and the temptation appears to have been with
regard to sin, what the crucifixion was with regard to death. It
was, therefore, a vicarious transaction. Christ was first tempted
instead of his Church, and afterwards died instead of it. But
as his death did not imply that his Church should not afterwards
be subject to mortality, but only that the great " sting of death"
should be subdued ; so his temptation did not deliver his Church
from being subsequently tempted, but only indicated, that with
the temptation there should always be a way to escape, so that
it would not be necessarily fatal. It is observable also, that
there is a singular coincidence between the petitions of the Lord's
Prayer and the temptation. See on Matt. vi. 9. Lightfoot,
Whitby, Grotius, Porteus, &c. — [Farmer.]

Ver. 2. TEooapdizovTa. The number forty is marked by
several occurrences. The flood lasted forty days; so did the
fasts of Moses, Elijah, and the Ninevites. The days of purifi
cation after child-birth were the same in number. It is recorded
also by Diog. Laert. VIII. 40. and others, that Pythagoras took
no food for forty days before his death. Grotius, Wetstein.
Ver. 3. 6 TTEipdZ,i»v. This use of the participle with the article
has been improperly considered an Hebraism, as it is to be met
with continually in the best Greek authors. Thus Herod. I.
120. ol yEtvdfiEvoi, parentes. Xenoph. Apol. Soc. 20. ol <bv-
Xacro-ovTEc, for ol fvXaKEg. Thucydides abounds with examples.
See Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 570. Another Hebraism has also been

MATTHEW IV. 4. 47
noticed- in this verse ; viz. the use of eiiteTv in the sense oijubere;
which, however, it bears also in Eurip. Hec. 552. Iph. A. 95.
Iph. T. 85. So also dico, in Latin ; Sil. Ital. IX. 474. Kuinoel,
Albert, Palairet. In the words « vlbg e\ tov Qeov, both
Campbell and Wakefield translate a Son of God; but there are
instances which prove incontestibly, that neither of the expres
sions, vlbg tov Qeov, or vlbg Qeov, were ever meant to be taken
in a lower sense than 6 vlbg tov Qeov, which is always allowed
to be meant in the highest sense. Thus in Mark i. 1. vlbg tov
Geou, is spoken by the Evangelist himself of Jesus ; and in John
x. 36. by Christ himself, of himself. Again, in Matt, xxvii. 43.
the form vlbg Qeov, without either of the articles, occurs in refer
ence to the crime laid to Christ, that he said, lam the Son of God.
Compare also Matt, xxvii. 40. Luke i. 35. Rom. i. 4. The
words Geo? and Kvptoe, in the sense of God, either take or
reject the article indiscriminately ; a license, which these words
derive from their partaking of the nature both of appellatives and
proper names, (see on Luke i. 15.); so that it is allowable to
write either 6 vlbg tov Qeov, or vlbg Geou, indifferently. The
reason why we meet with <n> eI 6 vlbg tov Qeov, and ov eI vlbg
tov Qeov, is, that here two principles interfere ; after verbs sub
stantive the article should be omitted ; but where a pronoun pre
cedes, it is not unfrequently inserted. In such instances, the
existence is assumed, the purport of the proposition being to
identify the predicate with the subject. Thus in Plato, Vol. X.
p. 89. ei Etcriv aurai at iSiat twv ovtwv ; where that these are
iSiai tCov ovtwv, is the basis of the inquiry ; and the only doubt
is, whether these be they. The argument of Campbell, founded
upon the degradation of our Saviour's character, arising either
from the ignorance or the malignity of Satan, and supposed to be
implied in the absence of the article, has no great weight in it.
Ignorance is no where in Scripture ascribed to the Evil Spirit;
nor is it probable that he should be unacquainted with Christ's
pretensions ; and malignity would rather have prompted him to
exaggerate those pretensions, at a time when he was endeavouring
to shew their futility. The expression, if thou be, can only be
understood as a sneer at our Saviour's known pretensions. Mid-
dleton. It is observable, that dpToi, in the plural, should be
rendered loaves ; not, as in E. T., bread; being opposed to XiOoi,
stones. Luke i. 3. has XiOip and dpTog, in the singular ; but the
mere difference in the turn of the expression is of no moment.
Besides, these stones may mean simply, one of these stones ; as
the cities of Gilead, Judg. xii. 7. mean only one of the cities.
So in Reuben's speech, Gen. xiii. 37. the words slay my two
sons, must be interpreted, two of my sons ; as Reuben had four
sons at this time. See Gen. xlvi. 9. Campbell, Lightfoot.
Ver. 4. yiypaiTTui. Deut. viii. 3. The allusion is to the many
10

48 MATTHEW IV. 5.
great blessings, particularly the gift of manna, which God had
bestowed upon the Israelites in the wilderness. In this tempta
tion, Christ had been solicited to doubt the evidence of his mis
sion, and to distrust the divine power, as insufficient to sustain
him without food ; although a virtual promise had been given
him of support, in the Spirit's suggestion to undertake the fast ;
just as a promise of sustenance was made to the Israelites, when
God commanded them to go into the desert. Hence the tempta
tion is properly repelled by citing the words of Moses, in which
he assures them, that it is a far less important concern to provide
for the wants of life, than to maintain a rational and religious
trust in God's providence. There is a parallel sentiment in
Wisd. xvi. 26. LXX. Oi»x al ysviasig tH>v Kapirwv Tpicpovaiv
dvdpwirov, dXXd to pr/fid aov Tovg aoi iriaTEvovTag SiaTripEi.
The phrase iir apry Z,r\v is found in Polyb. Hist. VI. 7. Max.
Tyr. Diss. XIX. So also Diss. XXVII. 6. fiioTivEiv iw' o'ivt$.
Alciphron. III. 7. eVi dvfioig koi dX<piTotg <5iaj3ocrKEtv ttjv yacr-
Tipa. Demosth. Orat. Fun. p. 153. without the preposition:
Tovg Kapirovg dig Z,Coaiv dvBpwrroi. Wetstein, Macknight,
Kypke, Kuinoel. — The article is omitted before av0pw7roe on
the principle of exclusive prepositions. See on Matt. I. Sect. II.
§. 5. The LXX have the article, which, no doubt, originated
in the n emphatic of the Hebrew. Middleton. — We may observe,
that ZJiaETai, in the middle voice, is here very expressive : Man
shall not support himself; i. e. without a religious dependence
upon the goodness of God. The future, signifying to be wont,
is a usual idiom. See Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 503. 4.
Ver. 5. dyiav iroXiv. Jerusalem. See Home's Introd. Vol.
III. p. 18. The verb TrapaXafifidvEtv does not signify sublimem
rapere, i. e. to transport through the air, as some have supposed ;
but merely, to take with one, to take as a companion. In this
sense it is evidently used in Numb, xxiii. 14. LXX. Matt. xvii.
1. So also iElian, V. H. II. 18. 7rapaXrjc/>0£ie vtto IlXaTtovog
Etc to avfjiirouiov. Anton, de Seipso : c. 21. 7rapaXaj3wv tjjv Kopjjv.
Hence the verb "larrim merely implies persuasion or assistance, and
may be rendered, induced him to stand. Compare Matt, xviii. 2.
Albert, Kuinoel, Macknight. — [Grotius.] The commen
tators are greatly at variance on the meaning of the word 7TT£pu-
yiov. There is little doubt that it was something Monadic, and
that the E. T. improperly renders to irTEpvyiov , a pinnacle ; since,
if there had been several 7rr£piiy(a, we should probably have read
ti irTEpvyiov. Now, there is no instance in any author, where
irTEpvyiov is applied to a building : but Wetstein has collected
some passages, in which the cognate word 7n-£pov is synonymous
with aEToc or diTWfia, a term appropriated to the roofs of tem
ples. See Schol. Arist. Av. 1110. Dion. Hal. A. R. Vol. II. p.
789. ed. Reisk. Joseph. Ant. XV. 11. in which last place it is

MATTHEW IV. 6, 7. 49
spoken of the tabernacle ; and is applied, as it should seem, on
account of the figure, which the transverse section of a pointed
roof, or the gable, presents. Hence, if the pointed roof of the
temple be wTipov, the 7rrEpvytov may be a similar kind of pointed
roof, of smaller dimensions ; probably that of the great eastern
porch; which is the opinion of Lightfoot. However, Wetstein
and Michaelis understand it of the royal porch, which over
looked the precipice at the East and South of the temple. This
situation is, perhaps, better suited to the history ; but the matter
is to account how the roof of this building could be called to irTE
pvyiov tov upov. The question, doubtlessly, involves a case of
great difficulty. Middleton. Of the temple, its courts, &c. see
Home's Introd. Vol. III. P. III. Ch. I. §. 2.
Ver. 6. yiypairrai yap' "Oti k. t. X. In the former tempta
tion the devil had endeavoured to make our Lord distrust God's
promise and providence ; in this he attempted to make him pre
sume too much upon them. In order more effectually to throw
him off his guard, the very reverse of the means before applied
are resorted to, and backed by a quotation from Psal. xci. 11.
most ingeniously and subtilly perverted to further his design.
It has been thought that the passage is mutilated as well as per
verted ; but in Luke iv. 10. the insertion of the words tov Sia-
fvXd^ai cfe, which are omitted in Matthew, renders the citation
complete. The passage, however, is merely a conditional pro
mise of God to protect his servants while they continue in the
path of duty ; but it does not allow them to expose themselves to
unnecessary danger, with the vain presumption that God will
interfere to deliver them. The words iirl x£lp<*>v dpovai <te are
a metaphor taken from a nurse's attention to a child : in teach
ing it to walk, she lifts it over the stones and obstacles which
occur in the path, that it may not fall over them. Xenophon
has a similar allusion in Cyrop. VII. 5. 50. oxjte juovov ovk iv
Taig dyKaXaig irEpiE<pipofjiEv avrovg dyairwvTEg. The phrase
irpooKOTTTiiv irpbg Xidov tov iroSa is proverbially expressive of
any great difficulty or danger. Of the adverb /xjjttote, in the
sense of the simple fir), we have examples in Matt. vii. 6. xiii.
29. xv. 52. xxv. 9. xxvii. 64. Macknight, Kuinoel, Raphe-
lius, Grotius, A. Clarke.
Ver. 7. ovk iKirEipdcrEig k. t. X. The verb EKTTEtpa^Etv in this
passage does not mean to tempt in its ordinary acceptation, but
to make trial of, to put to the proof . So in Gen. xxii. 1. LXX,
6 QEog iiTEipaoE tov 'Afipadfi. Compare also Exod. xvii. 27.
Numb. xiv. 22. Psal. lxxviii. 18. cvi. 14. and see Limborch.
Theol. V. 22. 16. The import then of the passage, which is
cited by our Lord from Deut. vi. 10. is this : that having had
sufficient proof of the power and veracity of God, particularly in
vol. i. e

50 MATTHEW IV. 8.
the miraculous testimony of the Spirit at his baptism, it would be
idle and presumptuous to require more. Some of the commenta
tors, however, suppose that our Saviour warns, not against pre
sumption, but distrust and want of confidence, which would
identify this temptation with the preceding. Rosenmuller, Dod
dridge, Campbell. — [Hammond, Whitby, Grotius.] It has
been proposed to point after 7raXtv instead of 6 'IrjcroOc;, thus re
ferring the adverb to 'i(pr\ instead of yiypairTai. This method,
however, renders the sentence very awkward and abrupt ; and
7raXtv may be well rendered insuper, prceterea, in which sense it
occurs in Rom. xv. 10, 11. 2 Cor. x. 7. Heb. i. 5. and else
where. Compare also Soph. Phil. 342. The notion of con
tra, which some have attached to it, does not suit the passage.
It is so explained, however, by the Scholiast on Soph. El.
1046. irdXiv' Etc to ivavriov. Kuinoel, Palairet. — [Camp
bell, Albert.]
Ver. 8. irdaag Tag fiamXEiag tov Koo-fiov. It has been ob
served, that if these words are to be understood in a literal sense,
the transaction described by them is impossible. Hence, some
commentators, who admit the reality of our Lord's temptation in
the main, are disposed to consider this incident as merely vi
sionary, and in support of this opinion the words iv any/iy xpo-
vov, which are added in the parallel passage of St. Luke, have
been particularly insisted upon. But on this, as on other
occasions, there is clearly no middle course to be taken; and
the event was either altogether real or altogether imaginary.
Not to mention, however, that the occurrence has every appear
ance of a real action, it is evident that had it been simply a vision,
there would have been no occasion to ascend a lofty mountain.
Now the term 17 olKovfiivri, employed by St. Luke, iv. 5. appears
to have been used in a restricted sense to denote only the Land
of Palestine. See on Luke ii. 1. Hence, if .the corresponding
word Koajiog be here limited to this signification, which it clearly
bears in Rom. iv. 13. the prospect afforded to our Lord was no
more than was presented to Moses from Mount Nebo, Deut.
xxxiv. I. ; and it is highly probable that this same mountain was
also the scene of the temptation. What renders this more pro
bable is, that Judaea was at this time divided into several princi
palities, some of which are mentioned in Luke iii. 1. and that the
governors of these divisions, whether ethnarchs or tetrarchs, are
dignified with the title of jiamXEig, kings. See Matt. ii. 22.
xiv. 9. It is to be observed also, that the verb Seikvvvui does not
necessarily imply to exhibit to the sight, it may mean simply to
point out ; so that the Tempter may be understood merely to have
described the several situations of the different kingdoms, and to
have stated their relative importance, wealth, and magnitude,
which is the import of the word So?a. In this sense the verb
10

MATTHEW IV. 9, 10, 11. 51
occurs in Herod. III. 13. 9. .Elian. V. H. III. 1. There is, in
fact, an ellipsis of Tip Xoyq, which is supplied in Eurip. Here. F.
Aoyotcrt tj)v tovS' dp.aBiav vwip uiOsv Afloat. .Elian. Hist. Anim.
XVII. 8. Sei^oi t<£ Xoytj), d>g EKtivog ypd<pEi. Hence, it is not
absolutely necessary to limit the sense of Koafiog as above ; but
the Roman empire may possibly be intended, in which accepta
tion 17 otKoi/juEvrj also is frequently employed. Macknight, Mi-
chaelis, A. Clarke, Kuinoel, Palairet. — [Grotius, Light
foot, Whitby.] Beza supposes that the power of vision was
miraculously extended both in the case of Moses and of Christ.
But there is no necessity for such a notion. Modern travellers
observe, that from several of the mountains of Palestine the view
is exceedingly beautiful and extensive.
Ver. 9. idv tteowv irpocrKwricrrig fioi. See on Matt. ii. 2. The
irpocFKvvrimg of the Greeks was paid only to their gods. See
Herod. VII. 136. Hence the distinction observed by the early
Christians in this custom. They did not scruple to pay the re
verence which was offered, koto to vEvo/xicrfxivov, to the Eastern
princes, but resolutely refused to prostrate themselves before the
images of the Pagan divinities. This fact is grossly underrated
by Gibbon, Decline and Fall, ch. 23. Grotius.
Ver. 10. inrayE biriau) fiov. E. T. Get thee hence. In
some MSS. the words oiriaw fxov are omitted, but they are in all
probability correct. In Luke iv. 8. the whole clause is an inter
polation. The object of this temptation was idolatry. Indignant,
therefore, at the consummate impudence of the Tempter, Christ
spurns him from him, and silences him at once by a quotation
from Deut. vi. 13. x. 20. The verb XaTpEt'co signifies properly
to serve simply; as in Soph. Trach. 40. Xenoph. Cyrop. III. 1.
20. Hesych. XaTpEino' SovXevw. And so the Lexicographers
generally. In the LXX, and in the N. T., however, the word is
confined to the notion of divine worship. See Luke i. 74. ii. 37.
iv. 8. Acts vii. 42. et passim. Schleusner.
Ver. 11. The verb SmkoveIv signifies properly to serve at
table, and we have the complete phrase cWkoveTv Tpa;ri£a(e in
Acts vi. 2. Hence Eurip. Cyclop. 31. Seittvojv Siaxovog. Anacr.
Od. IV. fiiQv noi SiriKovE'iTw. Compare Matt. xxii. 13. Luke x.
40. John ii. 9. It is clear, therefore, that Jesus was supplied by
the angels with food and such other necessaries as his present
situation required. Macknight, Wetstein. It is observable,
that the order in which the temptations are recorded by St.
Matthew is different from that in which they occur in St. Luke ;
the two last being transposed by the latter Evangelist. Now it so
happens that Matthew uses the adverbs tote and 7raXtv, vv. 5. 8.
which seem in a manner to fix the order of his narratives, whereas
v. 9.

52 MATTHEW IV. 12, 13.
Luke has merely employed the connecting particle Kal. The de
parture of Satan also after the last temptation is expressly noticed
by Matthew, and not by Luke. Hence, although it is a matter
of little importance, the order of Matthew may fairly be adopted
as that in which the events actually took place. Some commen
tators, however, in order to reconcile the two Evangelists, sup
pose that the temptation to idolatry was twice repeated; and
others, with no greater probability, that the order of Luke ori
ginally coincided with that of Matthew, but was afterwards dis
turbed by some careless transcriber. The only authority is that
of Ambrose, who, in his fourth book on Luke, has explained the
temptation in Matthew's order. Macknight. Mr. Townsend, in
his Chronological Arrangement of the N. T., conceives that the
difference in the order of the two accounts originated in the dif
ference of purpose for which the Evangelists respectively wrote.
In repulsing the third temptation, as it stands in St. Matthew,
our Lord shewed his contempt of all worldly power, and inti
mated that the expectations which the Jews entertained of the
Messiah's temporal kingdom were altogether unfounded. The
Evangelist, therefore, who wrote expressly for Jewish readers,
placed this temptation last in the series, as more important than
the preceding. For the like reason, Luke, in writing for the Gen
tiles, concluded his narrative with Satan's attempt to make Christ
throw -himself from the pinnacle of the temple. So great a de
monstration of divine power would undoubtedly have been immor
talized, and honoured with the highest worship of Pagan super
stition. Christ's refusal, therefore, to avail himself of this homage,
would, in the opinion of a heathen, be the highest pitch of virtue.
It should seem then, that in both instances the climax is preserved
according to the opinions and prejudices prevalent among those
whom the writers respectively addressed.
Ver. 12. 7rap£§o0r|. Scil. £tc <pvXaKriv. The ellipsis is sup
plied in Acts viii. 3. xxii. 4. So also Diod. Sic. p. 195. Rliod.
irapaSiSoodai slg <pvXaKag. See Bos. Ellips. p. 321. For the
particulars of John's imprisonment see Matt. xiv. 3. sqq. There
is here a chasm in the history, which is supplied in the opening
of St. John's Gospel.
Ver. 13. <cat KaraXt7rwv Trjv Na^apsT, k. t. X. From this
time our Lord seems to have made Capernaum his ordinary
place of residence, and to have entirely forsaken Nazareth, where
he had spent the first thirty years of his life. Hence Capernaum
is called his own city, Matt. ix. 1. and here, as a citizen, he paid
tribute, xvii 24. It is worthy of remark, that a regular tradition
prevailed among the ancient Jews, that their Messiah would
begin his ministry in Galilee. Johar. Genes. 6. 74. 290. Revela-
bitur Messias in terra Galilcea. The reason which may have

MATTHEW IV. 15, 16. 53
determined him to devote so much of his ministry to this part of
Galilee, seems to have been the extensive population, and the
multitude of villages of which it consisted ; together with its
distance from Jerusalem. A wide theatre would thus be opened
for the propagation of his Gospel, and he would be less liable
to the opposition of the Scribes and Pharisees, who had evinced
the most decided hostility to him from the very commencement
of his preaching. A. Clarke, Macknight, Schoettgen. For
the situation, &c. of Nazareth, Capernaum, &c. see Home's
Geographical Index.
Ver. 15. yij Zaj3ovXwv k. t. X. Isaiah ix. 1. Of the difference
between St. Matthew's citation of this prophecy and the Hebrew
original see Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 370. The division of
the words there proposed is confirmed by the Chaldee Para-
phrast and the Latin Vulgate. The countries here mentioned
were those which principally suffered in the Assyrian invasion,
under Tiglath Pileser, 2 Kings xv. 29. To compensate for these
afflictions the Prophet consoles them with the prospect of glory
in the latter days ; and accordingly they were the first to receive
the light of the Gospel. By some this prophecy is considered
only in the light of a simple accommodation, but improperly.
Mede. The expression bSbv QaXdaarig seems to involve an
ellipsis of the preposition koto, but it is somewhat obscure and
indefinite. Its true meaning seems to be near the sea, or to
wards the sea ; i. e. the lake of Tiberias. The article before
OaXdcrvrig seems to have been omitted by the LXX from consi
dering bSbv in the light of a preposition. The words are literally
translated from the Hebrew QTI "p"T, which would properly be
rendered versus mare. It is observable, also, that the Hebrew
"OVD, mdber, rendered 7rlpav by the LXX, signifies indiffe
rently on this side, and on the other side. Compare Deut. i. 1.
iv. 49. Numb, xxxii. 19. Now Zabulon and Napthali were on
the same side of the Jordan with Jerusalem and Judaea, where
Isaiah exercised his prophetical office. Campbell, Middleton,
Beausobre. Ver. 16. KaOri/iivog iv itkotei, k. t. X. The Hebrew would
have been more closely rendered 7ropEDo/xEvoe, and some have
supposed that the Evangelist used the participle Kadrifxivog as
more expressive of the degraded and miserable state of the
people in question. But the verb KadrjaOai, both here and in
the end of the verse, signifies simply degere, versari, which is
all that the original is meant to convey. So also in Judith v. 3.
1 Mace. ii. 1. 29. Grotius, Lightfoot, Kuinoel. — [Albert,
A. Clarke.] The metaphorical use of o-kotoc and <pwg, in re
ference to the darkness of heathen idolatry, and the light of the
Gospel, occurs repeatedly in the Scriptures. The latter word in

54 MATTHEW IV. 17, 18.
this passage seems rather to designate the minister of the Gospel
than the Gospel itself. Compare Rom. ii. 19, 20. Somewhat
analogous is the use of the verb QidtIZeiv, in the sense of docere,
Judg. xiii. 8. For similar instances in classic writers see my
note on Horn. II. Z. 6. In continuation of the same mode of
speech, the verb avarE'XXEiv, which is properly used of the rising
sun, is here applied to the advent of the Messiah. Compare Heb.
vii. 14. The expression X"*>Pa KC" <rKiq. Qavdrov is also meta
phorical, and represents the spiritual darkness in which these
people lived before they received the light of the Gospel, being
dead in trespasses and sins. In the LXX the words are x^Pa
oKiug OavaTov, which correspond exactly with the Hebrew.
Both forms, however, are equivalent, and are indifferently used
for iv y&pa okioevti. We have the phrase mortis umbra in Ovid.
Met. V. 191. Virg. .En. VI. 268. The pronoun avTotg at the
end of the verse is redundant. Compare Matt. viii. 5. ix. 27.
Johnxv. 2. xviii. 11. So Xenoph. Cyrop. I. 3. 15. irEipdcrofiai
t<£ TrdiTTTt^, dyaOiov liririiov KpaTiaTog £>v liriTEvg, avfifiaxEiv avTtjp.
II. 3. 4. Toig /xrj OiXovcriv iavTOig irpouTaTTEiv ekttoveiv rayaOa,
dXXovg avTotg 6 6tbg iiriTaKTripag SiSiom. See Viger. p. 134.
Weiske, de Pleonasm. Gr. p. 45. considers the redundance as a
mere Hebraism. Wetstein, Kuinoel, Elsner, Campbell,
Raphelius. Ver. 17. juEravoEtTE" k. t. X. See on Matt. iii. 2. The same
had been the proclamation of John the Baptist, urged by the
same motives. The same also was the injunction of the Apostles
and their immediate successors, and must ever continue to be
enforced by the faithful ministers of the Gospel, as the ground
work and foundation of true Christianity.
Ver. 18. Svo dSEX<povg. Simon and Andrew, formerly inha
bitants of Bethsaida, but now of Capernaum, (Mark i. 29.) had
become our Lord's disciples upon a former occasion. See John
i. 41. sqq. The calls given to the disciples at the commence
ment of Christ's ministry seem to have been only temporary ; or
at least, admitting of their ordinary pursuits and occupations : till
at length twelve were chosen to be with him always, (Mark iii. 13.)
an expression which plainly implies that till then they had only
attended him occasionally. From the ready compliance of James
and John, v. 22. it may be inferred that they also had been pre
viously acquainted with him. Theophylact observes : ouroi tov
'Iwdvvov iyivovTO fiaOriTai' £ct>vroe Si eti tov 'Iwdvvov, 7rpocrijX-
6ov Tcji XpiaToji' cue Se EtSov TOV 'i&IOVVTJV Sect/zed 0EVra, irdXiv
iiriaTpEipav slg Trjv dXiEVTiKr)v' Kal oiiTwg iXOwv 6 Xpierrbg dXuvsi
ai>Tovg. It seems at least probable that their attendance upon
Christ was less constant just at the time of John's inrprisonment,
as one of the pretexts for his apprehension, mentioned by Jo-

MATTHEW IV. 19. 23, 24. 55
sephus, was the danger to be dreaded from the number of his
disciples. Whitby, Macknight, Lightfoot. Of the twelve
Apostles, see Matt. x. 2.
Ver. 19. aXtEtc; dvdpwiriov. The meaning of this expression
is sufficiently clear: it has been supposed that Christ alludes
to the prophecy in Ezek. xlvii. 10. The following a person, in
the Jewish phrase, signifies becoming his disciple; hence the
terms Sevte ott'ktu) fiov, in this, and ^KoXou^rjcrav aurc£, in the
next verse. Compare 2 Kings vi. 19. A. Clarke.
Ver. 23. crvvayojyaig ovtCjv. Scil. of the Jews settled in Ga
lilee. Pronouns demonstrative are frequently referred to words
implied in a preceding word either from the sense or the compo
sition. See Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 435. Of the Jewish synagogues,
see Home's Introd. Vol. III. Part III. Ch. 1. §. 4. The words
Kijpvcrcrtov to EiiayyfXiov Trje fiacriXEiag are explained above on
Matt. iii. 2. Between the words voaog and /xaXaKia there is a
material distinction : the former is a confirmed or chronic dis
order, the latter only a temporary malady. Euthym. vocrog fiiv
i<jTiv ?( X90via irapaTpairr) Trig tov awfiaTog \%Eiog, jiaXaKia Si
dpxv xaw^o-Etoe (rufiaTog. Nearly to the same purport is the
Gloss, of Theophylact.
Ver. 24. Sai/ioviZofiivovg. Those which were possessed with
devils. E. T. It should rather be, by dcemons; for though there
are multitudes of dcemons, there is but one kot' i^oxvv, the devil.
See above on Matt. iv. 1. In reference to the former the word
invariably used is Saifiovsg or Saifiovia. Of these two, however,
though the diminutive Saifiovia occurs repeatedly, the noun itself
occurs only five times throughout the N. T., viz. once in each of
the three first Gospels, in reference to the Gadarene maniac, and
twice in the Apocalypse. The subject of dcemoniacal possession
is briefly touched upon by Mr. Home, (Introd. Vol. III. p. 476.)
but as it involves a question which has been more discussed
than almost any other point of Scripture criticism, it should seem
•advisable to state the arguments somewhat more at length.
[on the demoniacs of the new testament.
The word Aat/xwv is applied by the old Greek poets to the Su
preme Deity ; and by the philosophers to the gods in general,
and their descendants. Deified heroes also, and the spirits of
departed friends, were included under the same name. It is
evident that none of these modifications of the term have any
affinity with the case in question ; nor, in fact, does the Heathen
mythology present any idea of daemonism, at all analogous with
that of the Gospels, with one apparent exception, perhaps, .in the

56 MATTHEW IV. 24.
well-known instance of Socrates. It was the opinion of Cicero,
in which he was preceded by Xenophon and Plutarch, that the
daemon of this philosopher was nothing more than an innate prin
ciple of action and disposition, which developed the character of
its possessor. See Cic. de Div. I. 53. The Jews, however,
always understood the word in a bad sense. They are also said
to have attributed several kinds of diseases, and other calamities,
to the agency of malignant spirits : — a notion which they, in all
probability, derived from the Chaldeans and other nations around
them, as it is no where sanctioned in the O. T. Hence it has
been affirmed, that the Evangelists, in relating our Saviour's
miraculous cures of daemoniacal possession, merely adopted the
popular language of the time, in the same manner as the term
" bewitched," and others of a similar nature, are used by our
selves, without implying any belief in the beings, in whom
they originated. This argument is supported by the peculiar
character of the Eastern language, which is in itself highly figu
rative and metaphorical ; and it is further added, that the daemo-
niacs in the N. T. discover no symptoms which are not incidental
to epilepsy and insanity at present. Our Saviour also, it is urged,
attributes a sort of personal agency to other diseases which he
cured, as well as to the daemoniacs. Thus, for instance, he re
buked a fever, Luke iv. 39. But against these arguments, which
are the strongest that are adduced in favour of unreal possessions,
the proofs which are alleged in favour of a literal interpretation
of this important class of our Lord's miracles, amount almost to
demonstration. In the first place, the Evangelists affirm in the
plainest language, that the daemoniacs were possessed with devils ;
and our Lord is represented as addressing them, as separate and
individual beings, distinct from the bodies of the persons into
whom they had entered. They are represented as performing
personal actions, as addressing Christ, and acknowledging his cha
racter, his office, and authority, and as passing from one body into
another. Numbers also are said to take possession of the same
object. Neither is it true that our Saviour employs the same terms
in the removal of these and other diseases ; but makes a constant
distinction between curing or healing the one, and casting out the
other. Is it probable, then, that Christ would have combined all
these striking particulars, for the mere purpose of falling in with
a popular opinion, which he must have known to be incorrect ?
Surely such a practice would have been wholly inconsistent with
the dignity of a divine agent ; not to mention that the propagation
of a confessed error would ill suit with the character of inspired
writers, in a work intended for the spiritual improvement of every
age and nation of the world. It cannot be objected that daemo
niacs were confined to the time of Christ's ministry, as accounts
of them are on record both before and after the Gospel aera. See
Joseph. Ant. VII. 2. Iren. II. 2. Just. Mart. Dial. p. 311. The

MATTHEW V. 1. 57
probable reason of their extraordinary power during this period is
well stated by Mr. Home. — Whitby, Macknight, A. Clarke,
Doddridge. — [Mede, Dodwell, Farmer, Wetstein, Lard-
NER, &C.]

CHAPTER V.
Contents -.—Commencement of the Sermon on the Mount. ¦
[Luke vi. 20. sqq. and elsewhere.]
Verse 1. Etc to opog. It is generally supposed that some par
ticular mountain, well known in the neighbourhood of Caper
naum, is here intended; and Mount Tabor is that which has
been fixed upon as the most probable. But though the article
is undoubtedly definite, it does not necessarily direct us either to
Mount Tabor, or elsewhere. Reland observes, (Palest. Vol. I.
p. 306.) Judcei in Talmude terram suam in tria dividunt, respectu
montium, vallium et camporum. Hence to opog may mean no
more than the mountain district, as distinguished from the other
two ; in which sense the LXX have so employed the term in
Gen. xix. 17. and more clearly in Josh. ii. 22, 23. And, indeed,
it seems more probable that our Saviour would not have led the
multitude so far as Mount Tabor, as a part of'the ridge lay much
nearer to Capernaum, and would equally answer the purpose of
retirement, which he seems to have had in view. Middleton.
There is a considerable diversity of opinion respecting the iden
tity of this discourse with that recorded in Luke'vi. 20. sqq. The
healing of diseases, which is described by St. Luke as imme
diately preceding the delivery of the discourse, is stated to have
taken place in a plain ; and the precepts recorded by St. Luke
form a portion only of those delivered by Christ on the Mount,
varying in the order in which they are here given, and frequently
differing in the turn of the expression. The events preceding
and following them are differently arranged with respect to the
time of the discourse, as it stands in the arrangement of the two
Evangelists respectively. Thus the naming of the Apostles,
which stands in St. Matthew in chap. x. 1. is recited by St. Luke
only a few verses before the commencement of the discourse.
Still it should seem that the two Evangelists refer to the same
event. It is recorded by both, that immediately after the sermon
Christ returned into Capernaum, and healed the servant of a cen
turion ; a cure which was attended with such remarkable circum
stances, that it can hardly be supposed to have been repeated in
the same city. With respect to the disagreement in the place of
delivery, Luke mentions that diseases were healed in the plain,

58 MATTHEW V. 3.
but it is not clear that he records the sermon in the same continued
context. It may be, that in his way to the mountain, Christ
stood in the plain, and healed the diseases, and sat down to teach
upon a more elevated spot. With respect to the portion which
St. Luke has selected from the discourse, it seems to be that
which was more expressly intended for the disciples ; an opinion
which is supported by the altered form in which the beatitudes,
of which he recites but two, are given : — Blessed are ye, &c.
The difference of expression is readily attributed to the style of
writing, peculiar to each historian respectively. Lightfoot, Gro
tius, Michaelis. — [Bedford, Doddridge.] With respect to
the subject matter of the sermon on the Mount, it may be consi
dered as the most comprehensive and, at the same time, the most
simple epitome, of moral doctrine, which was ever delivered. It
embodies the whole practice of Christianity. As it was necessary
that the great articles of faith should be represented by facts
rather than by words ; — by the incarnation and crucifixion, resur
rection and ascension of our great high priest, — these are, of
course, unnoticed in this discourse. But he instructed his disci
ples in those essential qualifications of a true believer, which are
not only the ornaments and graces of a Christian life, but the evi
dences of that faith which the Gospel requires. The injunctions
are, in a great measure, directed against particular errors of the
Jews, and their more immediate reference can only be investigated
by an acquaintance with the Rabbinical doctrines and writings ;
but they apply in their general tone and spirit to all ages and
denominations of Christians. Lightfoot, Michaelis, Le Clerc.
Ver. 3. ol ittwxoi t$ irvEvfiaTi. In the parallel passage of
St. Luke, it is simply ol tttioxo'i. Wetstein would refer the words
tio irvEvfiaTi to juaKaptot. But this would evidently violate the
uniformity of expression observed throughout the beatitudes, even
if it were clear that the position of the words would admit of such
a construction. It is, nevertheless, supposed by some, that the
poor, simply as such, are intended ; and Campbell has translated,
the poor, who repine not ; a rendering, of which the original will
surely never admit. At all events, it is clear that our Lord never
intended to attach a blessing to the state of poverty itself, other
wise than as humility of condition seemed the most natural source
of humility of mind. Thus the Gospel is said to be preached
to the poor, not to the exclusion of the rich, but because they
would be less encumbered by the vanities of the world, and there
fore more accessible to the plain and simple truths of Christi
anity. In like manner the term rich, which is opposed to poor,
in Luke vi. 24. does not signify the rich without limitation ; but, as
our Lord himself elsewhere restricts it, it denotes those only who
trust in riches, and are proud and arrogant in the possession of
them. (Mark x. 23, 24.) The connexion between poverty and

MATTHEW V. 4, 5, 6. 59
piety is illustrated in the Latin proverb : Bonce mentis sororpau-
pertas. So also Menander : aft vojut£ov0' ol irivriTEg rav cTewv.
It seems, then, that St. Luke has recorded the beatitude pre
cisely as our Lord recited it ; whereas Matthew has explained the
metaphor by the addition of the words r<£ irvEvuaTi. With the
same view he has also added the words tjjv SiKaioaivriv, in v. 6.
as an explanation of the metaphor contained in the expression,
7r£tvwvT£c; Kat SiipuvTEg. The article in Tt£> irvEv/nari is used in
the sense of the possessive pronoun ; as also in rr/ KapSiq, in v. 8.
A similar form is Z,iwv Tt£ irvEv/iaTi, Acts xviii. 25. The text,
moreover, exactly corresponds with the Hebrew, nil 731£>, She-
pal Ruach, which the LXX translate dXiyoipvxog, in Isaiah lvii.
15. The Jewish Rabbins have some good sayings on the dispo
sition recommended in this text : among others, that of Rabbi
Chanina : Why are the words of the law compared to water ;
because, as waters flow from heights, and settle in low places,
so the words of the law rest only with him who is of a humble
heart. Whitby, A. Clarke, &c. — [Grotius, Wetstein, Camp
bell.] The expression j3a<r<XEta rctiv ovpavCov, in this passage,
embraces both the significations noticed on Matt. iii. 2.
Ver. 4. ol irEvBoiivTEg. Those who mourn ; scil. after a godly
sorrow unto repentance. This beatitude, as well as the last, will
be illustrated by a comparison with 2 Cor. vii. 10. Of the verb
7rapaK£KXTjcr0a£, see on John xiv. 16.
Ver. 5. ol irpaETg. The meek. It was this character which
our Lord inculcated above all others in his followers ; and it
seems to combine those dispositions of gentleness, inoffensiveness,
and forgiveness, which are recommended in almost every page of
the N. T. as the proper feelings with which we ought to meet
our fellow-men. In this respect it is distinct from the first beati
tude, which seems to relate more especially to the relation in
which we stand to God ; and hence it probably arises, that the
blessing assigned to this Christian grace is primarily an earthly,
as that of the former was a heavenly one. The promise of inhe
riting the earth, is cited from Psalm xxvii. 11. where the refer
ence is undoubtedly to the possession of the promised land of
Canaan, which is repeatedly called yrj in Scripture. See Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 1. Inasmuch, however, as the earthly
Canaan was a type of heaven, the beatitude also points to a spi
ritual, no less than to a temporal, inheritance. Whitby, Beau-
sobre. Ver. 6. ol tteivwvtec k. t. X. This beatitude refers to those
who have formed such a habit of piety in their minds, that it acts
spontaneously like their appetites. The metaphor employed
needs no explanation, being of frequent occurrence in writers oi

60 MATTHEW V. 7, 8.
all ages and nations. In the Scriptures it occurs in Psalm xvii.
15. Isaiah xii. 17. Ii. 1. lxv. 13. John vii. 37. and elsewhere.
So Phil. Jud. de Allegor. Xifibv apeTijc. Xenoph. Cyr. IV. 6.
7. iy£j ifiiv Siipio xap'l^i,T^at- VIII. 3. 16. TTEivfiaag XPVI^dTwv.
Virg. iEn. III. 57. Auri sacra fames. Horat. Epist. I. 18. 23.
Quern tenet argenti sitis importuna {amesque. Cic. Tusc. IV.
17. sitienter expectabo. The verbs 7T£tvav and Siipdv are found
with an accusative in the LXX, as also in Philo and Josephus ;
but there is no classical authority for the usage. Gilpin, Gro
tius, Kuinoel. The verb xoPTa^tar^ah which is properly
used in relation to brutes, is sanctioned in its present usage
by Arrian. Epict. I. 9. ote xoprdcr07|T£ arifitpov, KadriadE kXoi-
ovrEg TTEpX Trig avpiov, itoOev (pdyriTE. Meander ap. Aihen. XV.
14. d7TEV£yKaTtt) fioi ti)v TpdiTE^av, iKavwg KEXOpTwcr/iai yap.
Hence Priscian. Init. Gram. XVIII. p. 103. notices the follow
ing Attic forms : Yoprd^ti) cte dpTCj», x°PTa£w <te dprov, ixoprda-
Qriv woXXo'ig dyadotg. Wetstein, Elsner, Kypke. — [Gata-
ker.] Ver. 7. iXEri6i)<rovTai. Shall obtain mercy ; scil. from God in
the day of judgment; though the beatitude may also involve the
promise of similar merciful treatment from our fellow-men. Com
pare Matt. v. 45. vi. 14. Mark xi. 25. James ii. 13. Eccles.
xxviii. 2. Under the idea ofmercy, the Jews included the pardon
of injuries, and alms-giving. In the tract Shabbath, p. 151;
there is a saying very like this of our Lord ; He who shews
mercy to men, God will shew mercy to him ; but to him who
shews no mercy to man, God will shew no mercy. The English
reader will immediately remember that beautiful delineation of
mercy, inferior only to inspiration, in our immortal Shakspeare :
Merchant of Venice, Act. IV. Sc. I. Grotius, Beausobre, A.
Clarke.
Ver. 8. ol KaOapol rrj KapSia. The pure in heart. This is di
rected against the Pharisees, who affected outward purity, and laid
great stress upon the constant tvashings and cleansings, in which
their religion principally consisted. God, says Origen, has no
body, and, therefore, is invisible ; but men of contemplation can
discern him with the heart and understanding. But a defiled
heart cannot see God; and he must be pure, who wishes to enjoy
a proper view of a pure Being. A similar remark is made by
Seneca: Nat. Qucest. Lib. I. Malo caruisse, animum prceparat
ad cognitionem Dei, dignumque efficit, qui in consortium Dei
veniat. So again, Epist. 87. Animus nisi purus et sanctus Deum
non capit. The expression tov 8eov BirTEadai may, however, be
an Hebraism, signifying to possess God; i. e. to enjoy his feli
city, especially in the life to come. For to see a thing was used
among the Jews for possessing it. Compare Psalm xvi. 10.

MATTHEW V. 9, 10. 61
John iii. 3. 16. and see Isaiah xxxiii. 15. sqq. Possibly our
Lord alludes to the advantages possessed by those who were
legally pure, of entering into the sanctuary, from which those
who had contracted any legal defilement were excluded. This
was obviously typical of admission into the presence of God.
Beausobre, Michaelis, A. Clarke.
Ver. 9. utot Geou KXriOfoovTai. Shall be called; i. e. shall be,
the sons of God. See on Matt. i. 16. God is called the Father
of Peace in Rom. xv. 20. 2 Cor. xiii. 11. and elsewhere fre
quently in the Epistles. Hence, those who cultivate the dispo
sition here recommended, imitate God in this respect, and are,
therefore, represented as his children ; — as those, whom he will
love with a father's affection, and bless with everlasting peace in
heaven. The Etpjjvoirotot, however, are not merely those who
are peaceably inclined themselves, and of a pacific and forgiving
disposition, but they endeavour also to promote peace among
others. The word itself does not occur elsewhere, either in the
LXX or the N. T. but the cognate verb Etpr)vo7rot£tv, occurs in
Col. i. 20. where, from the context, it evidently signifies to re
concile those at variance, to make peace. Etymology also, and
classical usage, concur in affixing this sense to the word. Iso-
crat. de Pace : </>jjjui Se xpvvai iroiEiadai ttjv Etpvjvjjv 7rpoc; a7rav-
rag dvOpwirovg. Pollux, I. 152. irEpl avfifidx^v Eiprivoiroiwv
Kat iroXEfioiroiwv. Compare also Xenoph. Hellen. VI. 3. 4. So
it is likewise explained by Chrysostom. Indeed, if nothing more
were intended, than those who were peaceably disposed, this
beatitude would nearly coincide with the third ; whereas, though
closely related, they are certainly distinct. Grotius, Whitby,
Campbell, Kuinoel. — [Wall.]
Ver. 10. fiaKapioi ol SESiwy/xivoi k. t. X. So 1 Pet. iii. 14.
dXX el Kal irduxoiTE Sid SiKaioavvriv, fiaKapioi. The word Sido-
keiv is rendered by Beza, in its well known forensic sense, judi-
cio persequi ; in reference to the judicial informations with which
the early Christians were incessantly persecuted. But it seems
rather to signify, in this verse at least, venari, exagitare. Thu-
cyd. I. 137. irdpEifii SiwKOfiEvog virb tHiv 'EXXtivwv Sid tjjv trrjv
tpiXlav. The persecution here mentioned, includes all outward
acts of violence ; such as martyrdom, imprisonment, and the
like. In the next verse our Lord alludes to the persecution
of the tongue; as slander, reviling, ridicule, &c. so that Siw-
keiv may there include its legal acceptation. In Clem. Alex.
Strom. IV. 6. there are three various readings of the conclusion
,of this beatitude: 1. oti avTol Eaovrai teXeioi. 2. oti eEovctc
TOITOV OTTOV OV SllDX^V^OVTai. 3. OTI aVTOl viol Qeou KXr)0r)-
aovTat. The two first are, probably, the substitutions of some
injudicious copyist, in order to remove the supposed inelegance

62 MATTHEW V. 13, 14.
of a repetition ; and the latter clearly arose from a confusion of
this verse with the preceding. Grotius, Michaelis, A. Clarke.
Ver. 13. ifiEig eote to aXag Tt)g yrjg' k. t. X. For the meaning
of this passage see Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 665. Maundrell,
in his Travels, speaking of the Valley of Salt, states that he
tasted some, which had been exposed to the atmosphere, and had
entirely lost its savour. It is probable, however, that our Lord
here alludes to a bituminous and. fragrant species of salt, generated
at the Lake Asphaltitis ; great quantities of which were thrown
by the priests over the sacrifices, to counteract the smell of the
burning flesh, and to hasten its consumption. This substance,
however, was easily damaged by exposure to the atmosphere ;
and the portion of it thus rendered unfit for the purpose to
which it was ordinarily applied, was strewed upon the pavement
of the temple, to prevent slipping in wet weather. A. Clarke,
Schoettgen. With respect to the construction, the verb aXtcr-
6r)<TETai must be referred to aXae, as a nominative : How (iv t'ivi,
sc. Tpoirq,) shall it, i. e. the salt, recover its savour. In the
parallel passage, Mark ix. 50. the precept is differently modelled ;
and the verb fiwpaivErrOai is there supplied by its equivalent
dvaXov yEviaOat. This use of the word, which is derived from
fiiopog, foolish, is analogous to that of the adjective fatuus, in
Latin, which is applied to food in the sense of insipid. Martial.
EpigT. XIII. 101. fatua beta. XI. 32. 8. fatua placenta.
Hence both the Greek and Latin terms correspond exactly with
the Hebrew 7BJ"I, which signifies both foolish and unsavoury.
Compare Job i. 22. vi. 6. xxiv. 12. Jerem. xxiii. 13. Lament.
ii. 14. Lightfoot, Kuinoel.
Ver. 14. to <pwg tov koctjuoii. The light of the world ; i. e.
the instruments, whereby God has chosen to illuminate the minds
of men, and to enlighten the world by the publication of the
Gospel. The title C27W "0, ner olam, i. e. light of the world,
was one which the Rabbis arrogated to themselves ; and from
them transferred by Christ to his own disciples. It was also one
of the designations of the Messiah, so that Christ may be under
stood to mean : Ye have heard that the Messiah is called the
" Light of the world," as indeed he is : but I say unto you, that
ye are also so : and, therefore, as a city, &c. The first part
of the simile, which runs through the two following verses, was
probably suggested to our Lord by the city Bethulia, situate a
few points to the north of Mount Tabor, and distinctly visible
from the spot where the sermon was delivered. In the next
verse, the verb ku'ieiv, signifying properly urere, is used in the
sense of accendere. The proper expression would have been
Xvxvov diTTtiv, as in Luke viii. 16. The other form, however
is not unsupported by classical authority. Xenoph. Hellen. VI.

MATTHEW V. 17. 63
6 juev Xvxvog EKaisTO. Artemid. II. 9. Xi>xvog Se KaiSfiEvog iv
otKt'a Xa/nrpog. Themist. Orat. 4. tci X\>xva koiovte?. The
modius, (bushel, E. T.) was a measure, both among the Greeks
and Romans, containing, in fact, a little less than an English
peck ; but it is clear that nothing here depends upon the capa
city of the measure. It appears from Fulgentius, (Mythol. III.
6.) that those who had bad designs, frequently concealed a lamp
under a modius, or elsewhere, that they might have light at hand,
when the time arrived for the execution of their purpose. In the
last clause of the simile, v. 16. the more classical form would
have been iSovTEg So^dauxri ; not to mention that the verb SoE,d-
Z,eiv signifies opvnari, sentire, rather than laudare. The latter
meaning, however, is sanctioned by Diodorus Siculus, Polybius,
and other writers. Lastly, it is observable that the word <pH>g,
is transferred, by an easy change in the metaphor, from the
teachers themselves, to the doctrine which they delivered. A.
Clarke, Wetstein, Kuinoel, Kypke, Schoettgen, &c. The
article is inserted before jioSiov and Xvxviav, upon the principle
of monadic nouns ; as one only of each would probably be found
in a house. Middleton, Campbell.
Ver. 17. KaTaXvaai tov vofiov. In St. Paul's Epistles the
word vdfiog is used in various senses, but in the Gospels and the
Acts it always means the Laiv of Moses. See on Rom. ii. 13.
That the Mosaic dispensation was introductory to that of the
Gospel ; see Home's Introd. Vol. I. p. 429. VI. Judaism was
never intended to have been of perpetual obligation, but to give
place to the Gospel as soon as it had answered the purposes for
which it was originally designed. It is to be considered as a
portion of one great scheme of Revelation, every part of which,
like the parts of a well-constructed machine, is admirably calcu
lated to answer its destined end. But though the introduction
of Christianity abolished, as a natural consequence, the external
forms and ceremonies of the Jewish law, it is evident from the
whole tenor of the sacred writings, that while the ceremonial
law alone was repealed, the moral precepts are still of perpetual
obligation. It is not to be supposed, indeed, that an all-wise
God would have prescribed a law, considered as a rule of life,
under one dispensation, which should be at variance with his
established regulations under another. Now the verbs KaTaXwai
and irXripuxrai, which are here opposed to each other, evidently
signify to render inefficient and efficient respectively. This is
the sense which the context requires, and it is sanctioned by the
usage of various authors. Thucyd. VIII. 76. Tovg iraTpiovg vo-
fiovg KaraXvaavTag. Heliod. iEthiop. V. 15. KaTaXvEig tov
vofiov tov Xr/orptKOv. Philost. Vit. Apollon. C. 40. vofiovg-fiiv
KaTaXvEadai. The simple verb Xveiv is used infra v. 19. in a
less extensive sense than the compound. So in Latin, solvere.

64 MATTHEW V. 18.
Q. Curt. X. 2. 5. solvendarum legum id principium esse cen-
sebant. Liv. VIII. 7. disciplinam militarem sohisti. Compare
also John xi. 35. With respect to the verb 7rXjjp(ocrat, its sense
is sufficiently marked by the opposition. See also Matt. iii. 15.
Acts xiii. 27. Rom. xiii. 8. Gal. v. 14. vi. 2. So Herod. I.
199. EK7rXr|t7at tov vofiov. Hence it is inferred, that the moral
law alone is here intended, the precepts of which our Lord ex
alted into a higher degree of excellence, and freed from the
false glosses and erroneous interpretations of the Scribes and
Pharisees. It is to be observed, however, that in answering
the types, and fulfilling the prophecies, He perfected also the
ceremonial law : the retention of which was absolutely unneces
sary, after that the shadow of the things which it represented
was supplied by the substance. Whitby, Hammond, Light
foot, Grotius.
Ver. 18. dfiriv. Verily. This word, which is Hebrew, is
either affirmative or precative : in the former sense it is equi
valent to the Greek dXriQwg, and so it is rendered in Jer. xxviii.
6. LXX. Compare Matt. xvi. 28. with Luke ix. 27. In the
latter sense it is rendered yivouro. Thus the five books of
Psalms, according to the Hebrew division, end each with Amen,
Amen; which the LXX translate yivovro, yivouro ; and the
Latins flat, fiat. Suidas : dfiriv' aXriOHjg, rj dvrt tov yivovro. In
reference to the proper signification of the word, our Saviour is
called the Amen ; the true and faithful witness, Rev. iii. 14.
Grotius, Calmet. The expression 'iwg dv irapiXQr) k. t. X. is
proverbial, denoting an impossibility, as in Matt. xxiv. 35.
Mark xiii. 31. Luke xvi. 17. xxi. 3. Compare Psal. lxxii. 7.
Isaiah liv. 10. Jerem. xxxiii. 20. So Dion. Halicarn. VI. 95.
Pwfiaioig Kal raig AaTEivwv ttoXe<tiv dirdaaig Eipjjvi) 7Tp6c dXXrj-
Xotc eotw, fiixpig dv ovpavog te koi y?j Trjv avTrjv ardaiv Expert.
Grotius, Wetstein.
Ibid. IQiTa ev r) fiia KEpaia. The iota, or Hebrew yod (*), was
the smallest letter in the alphabet, and thence it was sometimes
employed by the Jews to denote a short precept of the law.
The Kipaia, or tittle, has been supposed by some to denote the
vowel points of the language ; but, not to mention that these are
supposed to have been introduced at a much later period, it is
amply proved, by several passages in the Rabbinical writers, that
it refers to the apices, or small points, which distinguish several
of the Hebrew letters from each other. In Shir Hashirim
Rabba are these words : Should all the inhabitants of the earth
gather together in order to whiten one feather of a crow, they could
not succeed; so if all the inhabitants of the earth should unite to
abolish one (') yod, which is the smallest letter in the whole law,
they would not be able to effect it. In Vayikra Rabba, §. 19.
it is said : Should any person, in the words of Deut. vi. 4.

MATTHEW V. 19. e5
Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is (TIN, achad,) one Lord,
change the T into a") he would ruin the world; because the word
in**, achar, signifies a false God. Again : Should any one, in
the words of Exod. xxxiv. 14. Thou shalt worship no ("in**,
achar,) other God, change the "1 into a "J, he would ruin the
world; because the commandment would then run thus : thou
shalt not worship the only, i. e. the true God. These instances,
selected'from a variety of a similar nature, are sufficient to ex
plain the import of the passage. Our Lord asserts the eternal
obligation of the moral law, the precepts of which he enforced in
their strictest sense, and explained them (v. 21. sqq.) as extending
to purity of thought, as well as innocence of action. Lightfoot,
A. Clarke, Schoettgen.
Ver. 19. tiov evtoXwv tovtii)v t£jv iXaxlaTiov. The Pharisees
were remarkable for making distinctions between weightier and
lighter matters of the law ; and for giving loose interpretations
to the precepts contained in it. They had distorted the meaning
of many passages in the O. T., according to their own notions
of easy morality ; and the sanction of the Scribes, who belonged
chiefly to their own sect, and whose decisions were esteemed
weighty, even above the words of the law itself, had enabled
them to give to their pretended sanctity a faint shadow of con
formity with the precepts of the Levitical code. In the Jeru
salem Talmud, p. 3, 2. is the following declaration : The words
of the Scribes are lovely above the words of the law ; for the
words of the law are weighty and light, but the words of the
Scribes are all weighty. Hence, therefore, and from the tenets
of the Scribes and Pharisees, as explained in Home's Intro
duction, the import of our Lord's denunciation against them in
this and the following verse, is sufficiently apparent. The king
dom of heaven may here mean the Christian Church ; and those
whom he describes as being greatest and least therein, are those
professors of his religion, who do, or do not, respectively act up
to their profession. The meaning, however, may also extend to
the Church, in its state of glory in heaven. Macknight, Whitby,
Grotius. It is evident that the verb Xveiv, in this verse, is less
extensive in signification than the compound KaTaXvuv, v. 17.
The verb here opposed to Xveiv is 7rot£tv, which fixes the sense
of each verb respectively to simple neglect of, and obedience to,
the precepts in question. Campbell. The positive adjective
jUE'yac is here put for the superlative fiiyiaTog, in opposition to
iXdxiGTog, in the preceding clause. This is a very familiar Hebra
ism; (compare Nehem. viii. 17. 1 Sam. viii. 14. Matt. xx. 26.)
but it is not exclusively so. Soph. Ant. 72. KaXov fioi tovto
woiovvn OavEtv. Schol. EvKAEEerraTov. Diodorus has fisydXriv
/3acriX£tav for (UEytcn-jjv, p. 544. B. Munthe, Kuinoel. Of
VOL. I. F

66 MATTHEW V. 21, 22.
the omission of rije SiKaioavvr\g before tiov ypafijxaTuov koi <P.
in v. 20. see my note on II. P. 51 .
Ver. 21. rote apxaiote. E. T. by, and in the margin, to them
of old time ; i. e. those who lived under the patriarchal and
Jewish dispensations. See Gen. ix. 6. Exod. xx. 13. Many
commentators are in favour of the latter rendering, as in 2 Sam.
v. 6. LXX. ippiOri rtj> Aaj3tS. Compare also Rom. iv. 12. 26.
Gal. iii. 16. Rev. ix. 4. vi. 11. At the same time the dative is
frequently used instead of the genitive with virb or Sid. Dion.
Halic. A. R. II. p. 103. cue dpnTai fioi irpoTspov. It is highly
probable also, that the passage corresponds with the common
Talmudic expression, Dixerunt major es nostri. Schleusner,
SCHOETTGEN, KuiNOEL, PALAIRET.  [CAMPBELL, RoSENMUL-
ler, Doddridge.] Kypke and Kuinoel understand the ol dp-
Xaiol to be the Jewish teachers immediately preceding the Gospel
age, during the period in which the spirit of the moral law had
been most shamefully perverted. There is no doubt that our
Lord alludes to these corruptions ; in opposition to which he
pointed out the true scope and intention of the law, which had
been made of none effect by their traditions. This is evident
from the transgression in question being amenable ry KpiaEi, to
the Judgment, i. e. to one of the inferior courts of judicature
among the Jews ; probably that which consisted of twenty-three
judges ; of which, and of the Council or Sanhedrim, tcjj gweSp'iio,
mentioned in the next verse, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. Ch.
III. Sect. I. §. 3. Moreover, the words nxovaaTE oti ippiOri
can scarcely apply to a written law ; so that the opposition is not
between the precept of the law and the Gospel, but between our
Saviour's explanation of the law, and that of the Jewish doctors,
which they pretended to have derived from Moses by tradition.
Lightfoot, Whitby, Grotius, Macknight.
Ver. 22. tc£ dSsX^ avrov. That is, with any one. Compare
Gen. xxvi. 21. Joel ii. 8. The Jewish Church consisted of two
denominations of men; viz. brethren, or Israelites, who were all
of one blood; and neighbours, or proselytes. Thus, every
Israelite was called .TVQ 32, Ben Berith, a son of the covenant.
This distinction is removed under the Gospel, under which we
are all brethren. Grotius, Lightfoot, Macknight. The ad
verb £tKrj is wanting in the Vatican MS. and two others, in
several versions, and in Justin M., Origen, and Tertullian.
Hence it has been supposed by some to be merely a marginal
gloss, which, by degrees, has found its way into the text. The
word, however, is found in the Syriac, and most of the ancient
MSS., supported by the authority of Irenaeus, Cyprian, Chry-
sostom, and others of the early fathers. Besides, as all anger is
not unlawful, but only that which is causeless or immoderate, to

MATTHEW V. 22. 67
which restriction the adverb pertains, the sense evidently re
quires its insertion. Grotius, Whitby, Beausobre. — [Mill,
A. Clarke.]
Ibid. paKa. Heb. npl, from pi, rak, to be empty. The word
is a term of great reproach among the Jews, signifying a person
of weak understanding, and consummate vanity. In the ensu
ing clause, the idea attached to the word fiwpi is evidently
intended to rise a degree higher in reproach and malevolence.
Hence it has been conjectured, that it is not the Greek fioSpbg,
but the Hebrew illlD, rebellious apostate, which is here in
tended ; and which was expressive among the Jews of the most
aggravated guilt. Lightfoot, A. Clarke.
Ibid. Ttjv yisvvav tov irvpog. The Gehenna of fire. E. T.
Hell-fire. The word ysEvva is composed of two Hebrew words,
D3H N^, gia Hinnom, i. e. the valley of Hinnom, a place near
Jerusalem, mentioned in Josh. xv. 8. where the LXX have sic;
<pdpayya ^Evvofi. It was here that children were sacrificed by
fire to Moloch, the Canaanitish idol ; whence the place was also
called Tophet, which signifies a drum, from the noise which was
raised by that instrument, in order to drown the cries of the help
less victims: 2 Kings xxiii. 10. From these barbarities the
place became in time to be considered as an emblem of the place
of torment, reserved for the punishment of the wicked in a future
state ; and in this sense the word ykvva is used invariably, or,
. at least, with no decisive exception in the N. T. In the O. T. it.
is not so mentioned, and, accordingly, the word yEivva does
not occur in the LXX, but the Hebrew is literally rendered as
above. In Joshua xviii. 16. the MSS. vary between ya'avvofi
and yaiEvva. The Targums employ the word in the sense - of
Hell, on Ruth ii. 12. Psalm cxl. 12. Gen. iii. 24. and elsewhere.
Lightfoot, Campbell. Mr. Hewlett, however, supposes that
the word is here employed in its literal sense, without any refer
ence to its metaphorical meaning. Our Lord has mentioned
three gradations of crime, and annexed to each its appropriate
punishment. In the two former cases the punishments are tem
poral, and such only as the judicial tribunals, which were now
deprived of the power of life and death, could award. Hence
Mr. Hewlett infers, from the analogy of our Saviour's reasoning,
that the punishment annexed to the last crime would also be of a
temporal nature ; more particularly as the offence can only be
considered as an abuse of speech, like the preceding, though in a
more aggravated form. It is to be observed, however, that our
Lord is speaking with reference to the law respecting murder,
and that the consequences of anger, attended with abuse of
speech, may lead eventually to crimes of the deepest dye ; so as
to bring the sinner into imminent danger of the divine vengeance.
In the two preceding cases also, it is possible that Christ intended
to intimate a certain analogy between the tribunal of the Jewish
f2

68 MATTHEW V. 25. 27.
courts and that of our heavenly Judge. At all events, the con
nexion of the declaration with the succeeding admonitions evi
dently points to this interpretation of the word ; at the same time
that forgiveness is offered upon reconciliation with the injured
party. The necessity of a peaceable disposition is first enforced
by the assurance that God will not accept the offerings made to
him, in compliance with the Levitical law of restitution, unless
such compliance proceeds from the heart ; and the exhortation is
then enforced by the consideration of what is reckoned prudent
in ordinary law-suits. The import of the precept contained in
the two following verses is fully explained in Home's Introd.
Vol. III. p. 392.
Ver. 25. iv ry 6Sy. Heinec. Antiq. Rom. IV. 6. 18. Sole-
bant etiam reus et actor nonnunquam transigere in via, et tunc
quoque dimittebatur, qui in jus fuerat vocatus. The Romanists
have pressed this passage into their service, for the purpose of
supporting the doctrine of purgatory. For the true interpreta
tion of it, see Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 596. and for a full
account of the judicial terms employed in it, the reader will
consult the second part of the same work; Vol. III. Ch. 3.
Sect. I. The quadrans (KoSpdvTrig) was a Roman coin, value
about three halfpence.
Ver. 27. ov fioixtvaEig. This precept the Rabbis interpreted
literally, as merely forbidding to lie with another man's wife :
and it appears from the Targum on Exod. xx. 13. that they
were very loose moralists in this respect. Our Lord there
fore asserts, that it is not only the act, but the unchaste desire
also, — the adulterous eye, as it is called, 2 Pet. ii. 14. which is
included in the precept. The verb iiridvfiEiv, in this sense, is
sanctioned by Herod. I. 216. rije ydp iiriOvfiriaEi yvvaiKog Macr-
crayETrje avtjp fiiayiWai dSswg. M. Antonin. c. 1. Tavrrjv iSwv,
iiTE6vfiri<TEv avTr/g. It is to be observed, that our Lord here
speaks of married women : the words fioixtvEiv and fioixEia being
used chiefly in this sense. See on v. 32. The word ywr) is
limited to the sense of ywr) aXXorptain Clem. Alex. Strom. VII.
13. Theoph. ad Austol. III. 13. Origen. Horn, in Gen. i. 17.
It maybe curious to subjoin a few passages from heathen writers
of a somewhat similar character with the precept ' of our Lord.
^Elian. H. V. XIV. 28. ov fiovov 6 dSiKfoag KaKog, dXXd Kal 6
ivvo-rjcrag dSiKriaat. Juven. Sat. XIII. 208. Has patitur pcenas
peccandi sola voluptas ; Nam scelus intra se taciturn qui cogitat
ullum, Facti crimen habet. Senec. de Ira, I. 3. Injuriam qui
facturus est, jam facit. Epist. 51. Projice, qucecunque cor
tuum lanient ; quce, si aliter extrahi nequirent, cor ipsum cum
Us revellendum erat. In the following verses there is allusion
to the amputation of diseased members of the body, in order to

MATTHEW V. 31. 69
prevent the spreading of the complaint. By the offending eye,
and the offending hand, are evidently meant the eye of concu
piscence, and the hand of violence, which it is necessary to re
strain by a powerful resolution, lest the gratification of impure
desires endanger our salvation. This, says Chrysostom, is a
mild and easy precept; — it would have been much more hard to
have been commanded to gaze familiarly upon women, and then
to abstain from impure connexion with them. The Rabbins have
a saying similar to this of our Lord's : It is better to be scorched
with a little fire in this world, than to be burned with a devouring
fire in the next. The verb aKavSaXiZ,nv signifies, to put a
stumbling block in one's way ; from cncavSaXov, a stumbling block,
or as it is explained by Suidas, a trap. Judith v. 1. LXX. e'0»i-
Kav ev Toig irsSioig mcdvSaXa. Hence, to tempt, to lead astray,
to cause to offend. Whitby, Lightfoot, Macknight, Kui
noel.
Ver. 31. diroaTaaiov. A writing of divorce. The following is
a common form of such a document ; On the day of the week
 , in the month—  , in the year  ,from the beginning
of the world, according to the common computation in the pro
vince of  ,• I, N. the son of N. by whatever name I am
called, of the city  , with entire consent of mind, and without
any compulsion, have divorced, dismissed, and expelled thee, M.
the daughter of M., by whatever name thou art called, of the
city  , who wast heretofore my wife ; but now I have dismissed
thee : — thee, I say, M., the daughter of M., by whatever name
thou art called, of the city  ; so as to be free, and at thy own
disposal, to marry whomsoever thou pleasest, without any hind
rance from any one, from this day for ever. Thou art there
fore free for any man. Let this be thy title of divorce from
me, a writing of separation and expidsion, according to the law
of Moses and Israel. — This writing was sealed with the hus
band's seal, and signed by two witnesses. — Of the reason which
rendered this indulgence necessary, and the shameful abuse
which was made of it by the Jews, see Home's Introduction,
Vol. III. p. 428. ; and of the controversy between the schools of
Schammai and Hillel, on the subject of divorce, see ibid. p. 376.
The grand subject of dispute was the word Jlliy, oruth, rendered
uncleanness, in Deut. xxiv. 1. which Shammai held to mean
whoredom ; and Hillel, any defect whatever, whether of person
or disposition. When, upon another occasion, (Matt. xix. 3.)
our Lord was consulted upon this subject, with the secret inten
tion of eliciting from him an offensive answer, he first enforced
the solemn obligation of the marriage contract, by a reference to
its original institution ; and upon the law of Moses being objected
in reply, he limited the license of divorce, by a repetition of the
precept which he has here delivered.

70 MATTHEW V. 32, 33.
Ver. 32. irapEKrbg Xoyov iropvEiag. E. T. saving for the
cause of fornication. Kuinoel considers Xdyov to be redundant,
and analogous to the Hebrew 121 by, which is put for by. Com
pare 2 Mace. iii. 6. Tob. xii. 6. There is considerable differ
ence of opinion with respect to this clause of exception ; some
interpreting the word 7ropv£ta, of fornication before marriage;
others of adultery; and others of vice generally. The more
general opinion is that which understands the term of adultery,
properly so called. But the word employed in this sense
throughout the N. T. is fioixita, and there are several passages
in which fioixtia is distinguished from 7ropv£ta in such a manner,
that if the two words be equivalent, one of them would be most
unnecessarily redundant. Thus in 1 Cor. vi. 10. where Schleus-r
ner remarks that 7ropvoi a fiotxol diserte distinguuntur. Com
pare also Matt. xv. 19. Mark vii. 21. Gal. v. 19. Heb. xiii, 4.
Hence commentators have imagined 7ropv£ta stands for a class of
crimes, of which fioixiia is a particular offence. Thus Selden
affirms, that it is equivalent to /Yliy, oruth, and was used by
our Lord in reference to Deut. xxiv. 1 . But it was the object of
our Lord not to confirm but to restrict the abused law of divorce.
Mr. Morgan, in his elaborate appendix to his work on Marriage,
Adultery, and Divorce, has thoroughly investigated the meaning
of the word by a careful examination of the passages in which it
occurs, not only in the N. T. and the LXX, but in Josephus,
Philo, and the early fathers. The result of this examination is,
that 7ropvEt'a, in its primary acceptation, and in accordance with
its derivation, 7rapd to iroppu) veveiv, given by Suidas after Theo-
doret and Athanasius, signifies religious apostacy or idolatry ;
and thence any specific act of idolatry, and more especially the
intermarriage of a Jew with an idolatrous Gentile. Schleusner,
among other interpretations of the word, includes incest; a no
tion which the Jews extended to all intermarriages with heathen
or strange women, as they were called. Hence the same lexico
grapher explains one text, Tob. iv. 13. de conjugio cum muliere
aliena, i. e. Gentili. Such marriages are expressly forbidden in
Exod. xxxiv. 12. 15, 16. Deut. vii. 1 — 4. and the violation of
the commandment, during the captivity at Babylon, was a source
of the deepest affliction to Ezra and Nehemiah, who considered it
in the light of a rejection of God's covenant. Adultery, in fact,
was a capital crime ; and therefore our Lord can scarcely be supr
posed to have ordained a divorce against those, who were to be
strangled to death. The question is undoubtedly one of consi
derable difficulty, and those, who would wish to enter deeply into
its merits, will find it amply and ably discussed in the work above
referred to.
Ver. 33. ovk iiriopKr)<TEtg. Levit. xix. 12. The morality of
the Jews on this point was truly execrable. They maintained
10

MATTHEW V. 34. 71
that a man might swear with his lips, and annul the oath in the
same moment with his heart ; a doctrine below the standard even
of heathen rectitude. See Horn. II. I. 312. They held also that
oaths are obligatory according to the nature of the thing by which
a man swears ; asserting that the law, which our Saviour here
cites, referred to those oaths only which were of a binding nature.
Instances of this distinction, which they made between oaths
that were and were not binding, are expressly cited and con
demned by our Lord in Matt, xxiii. 16. and the injunction here
given against swearing by Heaven, by Jerusalem, &c. is in rela
tion to a variety of frivolous adjurations which were constantly
in their mouths. Numberless forms of these oaths are to be
met with in their writings. Maimonides observes that it was
customary with them to swear by the creatures ; and that if any
man swore by the Earth, by Heaven, by the Sun, &c. although
the mind of the swearer be under these words to swear by him
who created them, yet this was not an oath. The Mischna as
serts, that if any man adjures another by Heaven or Earth, his
oath is not binding ; but if he adjure him by the Almighty, or any
other title of God, then his oath was binding. This doctrine is
also recognised by Philo, de Legg. Spec. p. 770. Ed. Par.
Martial seems to allude to this as a notorious opinion of the
Jews, Epig. II. 95. Ecce negas, jurasque mihi per templa To-
nantis : Non credo : Jura, Verpe, per Anchialum. The word
Anchialus is supposed to be formed from the Hebrew name of
God; so that the oath proposed was of all others the most so
lemn and binding. Their judicial oaths were always in the
name of God, Exod. xxii. 10. To these, therefore, our Lord's
prohibition evidently does not extend. See Deut. vi. 13. Heb.
vi. 16. Under the following reference the student will find a
variety of Pagan adjurations not unlike those of the Jews. Apoll.
Rhod. I. 699. Virg. Ma, IX. 300. 429. XII. 176. 197. Ovid,
Trist. V. 4. 45. Catull. LXVII. 40. Juven. Sat. VIII. 106.
Horat. Od. II. 8. 5. Whitby, Lightfoot, Schoettgen, A.
Clarke, Macknight.
Ver. 34. Opovog sari tov Qeov. Herod. IV. 68. Tag Si fiaai-
Xri'iag lariag vbfiog ~S.Kv6y<ri jd pdXiaTa 'eoti bfivwai tote, eVeciv
tov fiiyi(TTov opKov iOiXuxri bfivwai. This passage will farther
serve to illustrate the proper classical government of the verb
bfivwai, which is regularly followed by an accusative, as in
James v. 12. So again in Soph. Menalip. fr. "Ofiwfii 8' «£pov
al9ip\ otKr/tnv Atog. The preposition ev is added Hebraice.
Compare Gen. xxii. 16. Jos. ii. 12. In v. 35. eJc is substituted
for ev, as in Matt. ii. 23. The inference which our Lord would
here establish is, the solemn obligation of oaths of every descrip
tion, and the consequent impiety of employing them in common
conversation, and upon every trifling occasion. In swearing by

72 MATTHEW V. 37, 38.
God's inanimate creatures, who are incapable of witnessing or
avenging perjury, we are no less guilty of the crime, and no less
amenable to punishment. The oath is a virtual appeal to the
Creator himself, who is the Lord of Heaven and Earth, and all
things therein : not to mention that the oath implies a solemn
imprecation, that we may be deprived of the benefits we derive
from those creatures, by which we rashly swear. The expres
sions employed in this and the following verse are from Isaiah
Ixvi. 1. Psal. xlviii. 1, 2. xcv. 3. A. Clarke, Macknight,
Kuinoel.
Ver. 37. val vai ov ov. In James v. 12. this sentiment is
more fully expressed thus : Let your yea be yea, and your nay,
nay. The first yea and nay therefore signify the promise or as
sertion, the second its fulfilment, according to this construction:
6 Xdyoc; vfiwv b val, ecttw vai' b Si Xoyog 6 ov, eotw ov. Accord
ingly the word yea is used as a promise in Rev. i. 7. and as the
fulfilment of a promise in 2 Cor. i. 10. On the other hand, it is
said of those who do not fulfil their engagements that their
word is yea and nay ; 2 Cor. i. 18, 19. Macknight, Kuinoel.
In the words ek tov irovripov the article determines nothing, as
has been supposed, respecting the question, whether the meaning
be of evil, or of the evil one. The neuter adjective with the arti
cle may doubtless be used in the place of a substantive, and so to
irovripov is found in one indubitable instance, (Rom. xii. 9.) where
it is opposed to to dyaQov. The latter interpretation, however,
is more probable, and it is sanctioned by the declaration of our
Lord in John viii. 44. One of the MSS., indeed, and Gregory
Nyssen, a commentator of the fourth century, read ek tov Sta/3d-
Xov : and the Syriac translator has used the same word in this
place which he has employed for b irovripbg, Matt. xiii. 19. and
other undoubted cases ; and also for tov SiafioXov, Acts x. 38.
In the Lord's Prayer, again, he has used the same word ; and
there the fathers almost unanimously so understood it. Mid-
dleton, Whitby. — [Campbell, Grotius.] In v. 39. t$
irovripy signifies not the evil one, Kar' iZoxhv, but the evil
person ; i. e. him from whom injury has been received. The
case comes under the first rule of insertion, noticed on Matt. i.
1. p. 9.
Ver. 38. b(p6aXfibv civrt 6<p0aXfiov, k. t. X. Scil. SwrrEig. Our
Lord refers to the law of retaliation, mentioned in Exod. xxi. 24.
Levit. xxiv. 19. Deut. xix. 21. of which, and its abuse in our
Saviour's time, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 137. and for an
exposition of the doctrine laid down in this and the following
verses, Vol. II. p. 636. sqq. The law of Solon on this point
enacted, that if a man had put out the eye of another who had
but one, the offender was condemned to lose both his eyes, inas-

MATTHEW V. 39, 40, 41. 73
much as the loss of one would not be an equivalent misfortune :
Diog. Laert. in Solon. I. 57.
Ver. 39. The verb dvTterrjjvai here signifies not only to resist,
but to repay, to retaliate. A similar admonition to this of our
Lord is given, but from a different motive, by Seneca, de Ira :
II. 34. Cum pare contendere anceps est, cum superior e furio-
sum. Percussit te ? Recede : referiendo enim occasionem scepius
feriendi dabis. Several of the Heathen philosophers also repre
sented revenge as a weak and degrading passion. So Juven.
Sat. XIII. 199. Infirmi est animi, exiguique voluptas Ultio. The
contempt attached to this passion might sometimes probably pre
vent its effects ; but it is easy to perceive the superiority of
motive which is held out by the Gospel to the opposite virtue,
forgiveness of injuries. Smiting on the face is a proverbial ex
pression denoting contumely and insult. Liv. iv. 35. prcebere ad
contumeliam os. Tacit. Hist. III. 31. prceberi ora contumeliis.
See Lament, iii. 30. 2 Cor. xi. 20. Grotius, Kuinoel, Le
Clerc.
Ver. 40. OiXovri trot Kpi9r)vai. E. T. Sue thee at the law:
Vulg. judicio contendere. In this sense the verb KpivEaOai oc
curs in Job ix. 3. Joel iii. 2. Hos. ii. 2. LXX, and elsewhere.
From its forensic signification, however, the word sometimes
passes, by an easy transition, to denote a dispute or contention
of any kind. Hesych. KpivwfiEOa' dvrl tov fia\<*>fiE6a Kat StaXEyco-
fiEOa. Hesiod. Theog. 535. ekpivovto OeoI ovriroi t dvdpwiroi.
If the primary sense of the word be retained, our Saviour will be
understood as speaking of litigious characters, who vex others
with iniquitous and unfounded suits of law, for the purpose of
unjustly depriving them of their property. The participle Oi
Xovri is here redundant, as Deut. i. 5. Hos. v. 11. So also in
Horn. II. H. 375. Longin. de Sublim. XXXVIII. 2. Xen. Cyrop.
I. 1. 3. Anab. VI. 2. 6. Mem. II. 6. 27. Of x<-™v, the upper,
and Ifidnov, the under garment, see Home. Whitby, Kuinoel.
Ver. 41. dyyapEwcra. This verb is derived from the Persians,
among whom the king's couriers, or messengers, were called
"A-yyapot. Hesych. dyyapoe" 17 Xi$i,ig nspcriKri" arifiaivEi Si ko!
rovg ek SiaSoxwG fiaaiXiKOvg ypafifiaro<p6povg. So also Suidas.
These messengers had the royal authority for pressing horses,
ships and men, to forward them in the service on which they
were employed. The custom still prevails ; and there is no
pardon for him who refuses a chappar, as he is now called, the
use of the best horse in his stable. See Herod. VIII. 98.
Xenoph. Cyrop. VIII. 6. 17. Arrian, Epict. III. 18. Joseph.
Ant. XIII. 3. The Jews also, and other provinces, were com
pelled by the Roman governor, to furnish their posts with horses,

74 MATTHEW V. 43.
and to accompany them on the road: an exaction which was
afterwards remitted by Demetrius. See Plin. Epist. X. 14. 121.
Joseph. Ant. XIII. 5. From this usage the verb came to denote
any act of oppression and compulsory violence. It occurs again
in Matt, xxvii. 32. Mark xv. 21. arid frequently in the Talmudic
writings. Michaelis, Lightfoot, Grotius. Of the fiiXiov, or
Roman mile, and other Latinisms in the N. T., see Home's
Introd. Vol. II. p. 30.
Ver. 43. Kal fiiafiaeig tov ix&pov trow. Of the extreme de
testation and abhorrence which the Jews entertained for the Gen
tiles, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 376. 387. The passage
to which our Lord refers is Levit. xix. 18. where this last clause
does not appear, nor is it to be found in the Law. The doctors,
however, pretended that it was deducible from the first part of
the precept, which seems to limit forgiveness to Israelites ; and
they supported their opinion by an appeal to tradition, and by
the precepts concerning the idolatrous nations. To some of
these nations, indeed, enmity was authorised, more especially
the Canaanites, Deut. vii. 1. the Midianites, Numb. xxxi. 2.
the Amalekites, Exod. xvii. 14. As for the Moabites, they were
never to receive them into their communion, Deut. xxiii. 3. and
the same command extended to the Edomites and Egyptians, but
to the third generation only, Deut. xxiii. 7. Such, therefore, being
their situation with respect to the nations in and near Canaan,
they looked upon every heathen in the same light, and considered
them as enemies upon whom it was lawful to avenge themselves,
if they had an opportunity. Their aversion to the Samaritans
was equally powerful; so that they would not condescend to
salute either the one or the other. But the precepts cited above
evidently had no reference to the disposition with which particular
persons among the Jews were to meet particular persons among
the Heathens, but merely described the manner in which they
were to treat them as bodies politic, in which capacity it was
most just to destroy them because of" their abominations and
idolatries, (Levit. xviii. 25 — 28.) but not till the measure of their
iniquity was completed. The Jews were God's ministers, and
they were to punish without hatted : but overlooking the reason
and intent of these precepts, they absurdly extended them to
heathens in general ; in direct opposition to the express injunc
tion of the Law, that they were to love the stranger that dwelt
among them as their own people, Levit. xix. 34. In fact,
they did not hesitate to indulge private enmities against their
brethren. Macknight, Whitby. Instead of irXrunov the codex
Grcevii reads (piXov, and in v. 47. instead of dSEX<poi/g, a great
number of MSS. have (piXovg. In either case the sense is the
same ; but the received readings are more conformable to the
Jewish mode of address. See above on v. 22.

MATTHEW V. 44, 45. 48. 75
Ver. 44. e>»)pEa£dvTCtjv. E. T. Despitefully use ; Vulg. Ca-
lumniantibus. The verb signifies generally, to injure, either by
word or deed ; to threaten, to maltreat, to calumniate. Com
pare Herod. VI. 9. Thucyd. I. 27. Frequently, however, it has
a forensic signification, for bringing a criminal charge, or false
accusation, against any one : and so it is used in the only other
place of the N. T. except the parallel passage of Luke, where it
occurs : 1 Pet. iii. 16. So also Pollux, VIII. 30. Philost. Vit.
Apollon. VIII. 4. Joseph. Ant. XVI. 4. Hence its connexion
with Siwkeiv has induced spme commentators to affix to it the
same meaning here also. But Siwkeiv is not used in a judicial
sense ; and as our Lord has already spoken of those who perse
cute with their words, it seems probable that he here alludes to
those who injure by their actions. The clause is wanted in some
MSS. and versions : and Origen has cited the verse five times
with the same omission. Kuinoel, Kypke. — [Elsner.]
Ver. 45. on tov r/Xiov k. t. X. The immortal gods, says An
toninus, de Seipso, VII. 70. not only patiently bear with wicked
men, but take all manner of care of them ; and shalt thou, a
mortal man, be weary of bearing with them ? So Seneca, de
Benef. IV. 26. Si Deos imitaris, da et ingratis beneficia. Nam
et sceleratis sol oritur, et piratis patent maria. Compare Job
xxv. 3. The neuter verb dvariXXw is here used in an active
signification for dvariXXEiv iroiio ; and verbs not regularly transi
tive are frequently employed in this manner, to express the He
brew conjugation Hiphil. Thus in 1 Sam. viii. 22. Psalm cxlvii.
8. LXX. 2 Cor. ii. 14. et passim. The same idiom is also em
ployed by the best Greek writers. See my note on Eurip. Phoen.
233. Pent. Gr. p. 317. In the next verse there is an ellipsis
of the adverb fiovov, which is supplied in v. 47. So also in
Matt. xxiv. 8. Mark ix. 37. Luke xiv. 12, 13. John xii. 44.
Acts v. 4. Rom. iii. 28. iv. 9. 1 Cor. xiv. 22. 1 Tim. v. 23.
Philem. 17. For classical authorities, see Bos Ellips. Gr. p. 482.
Of the TiXdvai, publicans, and of the Jewish modes of salutation,
see Home. Whitby, Grotius.
Ver. 48. taEaOi ovv vfiEig teXeioi. Future for imperative. See
my note on Horn. II. K. 88. It is evident that the precept here
given cannot be understood in that latitude, of which the words
would literally admit. The perfection of the divine goodness is
absolutely universal and infinite ; and, consequently, unattainable
by the most active human exertion. The meaning is, that we
are to form our principles of duty as near as possible upon the
divine pattern; and, by a contemplation of his perfections, to
strive to imitate our Creator, more especially in acts of benevo
lence and good-will towards our fellow-men. The particle wcnrEp
does not always denote equality; but only such a degree of

76 MATTHEW VI. 1.
analogy, however imperfect, as is pointed out in the things com
pared. The word teXe£oc, also, is frequently to be understood
in Scripture of such perfection merely as human virtue can
attain. See Coloss. i. 28. iv. 12. James iii. 2. Justin M. (Dial.
Tryph.) calls the mere embracing of Christianity, teXeiov ysvia-
Oai. In the parallel passage, Luke vi. 36. the word is not te-
Xe<o£, but olKripfiovEg, which limits the precept more expressly to
the duty of Christian love, one with another. Whitby, Gro
tius, Macknight.

CHAPTER VI.
Contents : — Continuation of the Sermon on the Mount.
Verse 1. ttpoctexete. Scil. tov vow. So also Acts xvi. 14.
Heb. ii. 1. The omission is supplied in Arist. Nub. 1010. Pac.
174. The construction is : irpouix^rE tov vow, wgte fir) ttoieiv
k. t. X. In the latter clause of the verse there is also an ellipsis,
which must be filled up from the preceding sentence : eI Se tt?7yE,
scil. 7rpo(TEX£T£ k. t. X. Similar instances will be found in my
note on Horn. II. A. 135.— The MSS. Edd. and versions vary be
tween SiKaioaww and iXsrifioirvvriv. Our translators have adopted
the latter, and it seems to have been very commonly received. It
is highly probable, however, that the true reading is SiKaioavvriv,
instead of which EXsrjjUocriivjjv, which was originally only a mar
ginal gloss, has, by some careless copyists, been substituted in
the text. Our Lord, in all probability, used the word Hpllt,
Tsadekah, which was used to denote not only righteousness, ge
nerally, but more especially, alms-giving. This latter meaning
is confirmed by a variety of passages in the Talmudic writings,
and the Hellenists frequently employ SiKaiorrvvr} in the same
signification. In the O. T. however, Hp12J always imports
righteousness ; and it was only afterwards that it became in po
pular language to mean alms ; in giving of which, the Jews con
sidered that a great part of religion consisted. But though
SiKaioawri sometimes implies alms, it does not always do so ;
just as Te'XEtoe, which seems to convey the idea of merciful, in
the last verse of chap. v. is not confined to perfection in that
point only. The fact is, that our Lord delivers his precept
generally, using the word SiKaioawnv, righteousness; of which
he immediately specifies the several particulars of alms, v. 2.
prayer, v. 6. and fasting, v. 16. The Jews were addicted to
an ostentatious display in all and each of these legal observances ;
and the similitude of the form in which the rational discharge of
them is inculcated, together with the change of number from the
plural to the singular after the general exhortation, evidently proves
that they are all included in the first general term SiKaiovvvr).

MATTHEW VI. 2, 3. 77
Those interpreters, on the contrary, who read eXe7)juo<t6v»)v, or
limit StKatoowrjv to alms-giving, confine the import of the first
verse to the three which succeed it. Griesbach has restored
StKatocrvvriv in his edition ; and he is supported by the Vatican
MS. and the Codex Bexce. The Latin vulgate has justitiam ;
and so Tertullian, Augustin, and most of the Latin Fathers.
The verb OsaOrivai, spectari, is widely different from b<pOrivai,
videri. Our Lord does not forbid public almsgiving, anymore
than he forbids public prayer ; but an ostentatious desire of gain
ing the applause of men, rather than the inward satisfaction of
an approving conscience. Cicero has a parallel sentiment in
Tusc. Qusest. II. 26. Mihi quidem laudabiliora videntur omnia,
quce sine venditatione, et sine populo teste fiunt. Nullum thea-
trum virtuti conscientia majus est. Beza, Mill, Doddridge,
Whitby. — [Lightfoot.]
Ver. 2. fir) rraXiriayg EfiirpocrOiv <rou. It has been thought by
some that the Pharisees literally sounded a trumpet before them,
under pretence of collecting the poor to receive their alms, but
really for the purpose of ostentation. Others again suppose, that
a custom prevailed among the Jews, similar to that of the Per
sian Dervises, who carry horns with them, and blow them upon
receiving alms, in honour of the donor. To neither of these
customs, however, is there the most distant allusion in any of the
Jewish writings ; and, at all events, our Lord clearly addresses
the giver, and not the receiver. It is most probable, therefore,
that sounding a trumpet is merely a proverbial phrase for courting
publicity: in reference to the custom, both among Jews and
Heathens, of making proclamations, and summoning the people,
by a trumpet. Cicero has an expression somewhat similar;
Epist. ad Divers. XVI. 21. Buccinator existimationis. Grotius,
Lightfoot, Whitby, Kuinoel. — [Macknight, Harmer.]
Ibid, airixovm tov fiiaObv avriov. They have their reward ;
viz. the empty praise, which they are so eager to obtain from
men. In this sense d7r£'x«v is used Phil. iv. 18. Gen. xliii. 43.
LXX. So Callim. Epig. 54. 17 ypr)vg fiaaOiov wg airix^i X"P""a?-
Suidas : ottexov* tt; alriaTiKy, dvrl tov aTriXa(3ov. Some would
translate, fall short of their reward; but in this sense d^xE'v is
always constructed with a genitive.
Ver. 3. fifi yvwrio v dpiarEpd <rov k. r. X. This is a prover
bial expression, indicating so strict a secrecy as to avoid, as it
were, the observation even of ourselves. The ellipsis of the
word x£'p with dptcn-Epd, Se^m, and the like adjectives, is copi
ously illustrated in Bos Ellips. Gr. p. 327. In the next verse,
ev tc£ KpvTTTip, and iv rcj> c/>av£pc[), (scil. to7tcj),) are put for the
adverbs Kpvirrwg and (pavspwg respectively. There may be an
allusion in the former to the secret chamber in the Temple, in

78 MATTHEW VI. 5. 7.
which pious persons deposited their alms privately, for the relief
Of the poor. The promised reward is chiefly in reference to a
future life, when it will be delivered openly, in the presence of
saints and angels, and the spirits of just men made perfect. See
Matt. xxv. 34. Luke xiv. 14. 1 Pet. i. 7. Rom. ii. 7. 10. From
the omission of iv t$ (pavspy, in this verse and v. 18. in a great
number of MSS., Griesbach supposes that it was only once
written by St. Matthew, in v. 6. and thence supplied in the other
places by some copyist. Kuinoel, Whitby, Gill.
Ver. 5. Icttcjtec. Standing. Of the Jewish attitudes, places,
times, and forms of prayer, see Home. Their phylacterial prayers
were extremely long ; and if they were overtaken in the street by
the canonical hours, they were still called upon to repeat them ;
so that the Pharisees continually availed themselves of this
opportunity of displaying their pretended sanctity. The Jeru
salem Talmud has the following: / observed the Rabbi Jannai
standing and praying in the street of Trippor, and repeating
an additional prayer at each of the four corners. The early
Christians always kneeled in prayer, (Acts ix. 40. xx. 36. xxi. 5.)
except on the sabbath-day, and between Easter and Pentecost,
when they stood, for the purpose of testifying their joy at the
resurrection of Christ. See Tertull. de Coron. c. 3. Just. Mart.
Resp. ad Qucest. 115. Lightfoot. In the next verse, rafiiEtov
is an upper chamber, sometimes called virEpwov, which was set
apart for the purposes of retirement and prayer. It answers to
the Hebrew TVby. Kuinoel.
Ver. 7. /3aTToXoy/)cn}TE. E. T. Use vain repetitions. The
word is found in no ancient writer. Suidas, after explaining it
by 7roXvXoyta, gives its derivation from one Battus, a king
of Lydia, who is said to have written some tedious odes, or
hymns, addressed to idols, full of repetition and tautology. So
also Hesychius, Eustathius on Horn. Od. Q. p. 833, 43. and
others. Compare Herod. IV. 155. The repetitions here al
luded to abound in Heathen writers, and the Scriptures also
afford us examples; as, for instance, in the prayer of the
priests of Baal; (1 Kings xviii. 26.) and of the Ephesians,
(Acts xix. 34.) Hence Terent. Heaut. V. 1.6. Ohe jam desine
Deos, uxor, gratulando obtundere, Tuam esse inventam natam ;
nisi illos ex tuo ingenio judicas, Ut nil credas intelligere, nisi
idem dictum sit centies. The Jewish Rabbins laid it down as a
maxim, that he who multiplies prayer shall be heard; and that
a long prayer shall not return empty. And, indeed, our Lord
must not be understood to forbid any repetitions in prayer
whatsoever, for such may frequently be the result of earnestness
and fervour : as in our Lord's prayer in the garden, which was.
thrice repeated; that of the prophet Daniel, ch. ix. 3 — 20 ; and

MATTHEW VI. 9. 79
some others in Scripture. The injunction is directed against
such long and pathetical entreaties, wherein words of the same
meaning are multiplied, not only tending to the fatigue and care
lessness of the worshipper, but implying, as our Lord remarks in
the next verse, a degree of ignorance and want of attention in the
Deity. Examples, however, of short and comprehensive prayers
may be found even among the Heathen. Thus Socrates, in Xen.
Mem. I. Ei>xtro irpbg roiig Geovc airXug rdyaOd SiSovai, wg roiig
0£oi>c KaXXtora EtSorae, birola ayaOd iari. See also the prayer
cited from Plato in my note on Horn. II. A. 20. and compare
Juvenal, Sat. X. 344. sqq. Lightfoot, Whitby, Wakefield,
Grotius. Ver. 9. 7rpocr£t;x£cr0E vfiE~ig. The pronoun is emphatic, in op
position to ol eOvikoI, v. 7. The form of prayer which our Lord
here gives to his disciples, in conformity with the practice of the
public teachers of the Jews, who generally gave a set form to
their respective flocks, is compiled from the nineteen prayers of
their Liturgical service : at least, the substance of each petition is
to be found in them, with the exception of the clause, as we for
give our debtors. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 306. There
is also a coincidence, somewhat remarkable, between the Lord's
Prayer and the circumstances of his Temptation. Thus in the
prayer : Give us this day, SfC. Temptation : Command these
stones, fyc. — Prayer : Lead us not into temptation : Temptation :
Thou shalt not tempt, fyc. — Prayer : Thine is the kingdom, 8(C.
Temptation : He shewed him all the kingdoms, eye. — The peti
tion : Forgive us our trespasses, §c. which here also wants a
counterpart, is exemplified in the prayer for his murderers during
his last trial upon the cross. See Encyclop. Metropol. Vol. X.
p. 605. note. In giving this form, our Lord by no means in
tended to exclude all other devotional addresses to the Almighty. .
His meaning is, that we frame our prayers after this model, and
introduce the prayer itself into our public and private services.
It has been thought that the word ovrwg does not imply a com
mand to utter the precise words, but merely a form similar to that
of our Lord. But in Luke xi. 2. the command is express : When
ye pray, say, Our Father, Sfc. and the word ovrwg is used to
prescribe a set form in several places. Thus in Numb. vi. 23.
LXX. ovriog EvXoy77<TT|TE, in reference to the Aaronical Bene
dictions. Compare also Numb, xxiii'. 5. 16. and God's words,
as directed to the prophets, ovroag XiyEi 6 Kipiog, Isaiah viii. 1 1 .
et passim. We find, indeed, in the Acts, prayers made by the
Apostles, under particular circumstances, without any direct inti
mation of the use of this form ; but, at the same time, it is more
than probable that it always formed a part of their devotions. See
Acts i. 24. ii. 42. iv. 24. 30. The prayer consists of a Preface,
six Petitions, and a Doxology. Lightfoot, Whitby, Grotius..

80 MATTHEW VI. 9.

on the lord s prayer.

The Preface. ndrEp i7juwv, 6 ev role otipavoie. This address
is often found in the Jewish Seder Tephiloth, or Form of Prayers,
and is expressive of the highest reverence for the attributes of
the Deity. It does not confine his presence to Heaven, but in
dicates at the same time his omnipresence, his omniscience, his
majesty and dominion, his purity and holiness ; as will be seen
at once by a comparison of the following texts : 1 Kings viii. 37.
2 Chron. xx. 6. Psalm xi. 4. xxxiii. 13. cxv. 3. Deut. xxvi. 15.
Isaiah lvii. 15. The use of rifiwv in the plural is also in ac
cordance with a maxim of the Jews, that a man should not pray
alone, but join with the church, i. e. whether in public or private,
he should always use the plural number, as including all the
chosen people of God. As Christians, we pray for our brethren,
i. e. for all mankind, who are equally children of the same com
mon parent : and we address God as our Father, since he is such
by right of creation, providence, and preservation; and more
especially by right of adoption and grace. Compare Mai. ii. 10.
Deut. xxxii. 6. John i. 12. Rom. viii. 15, 16. Gal. iii. 26.
Erasmus has a beautiful comment upon this portion of the prayer :
Pater vocatur, ut clementem et benignum intelligatis : In ccelis
esse dicitur, ut illic sustollatis animos vestros, neglectis bonis
terrenis : Vestrum appellatur, nequis sibi proprium aliquid vin-
dicet, cum ex unius beneficentia proficiscatur omnibus, quicquid
habeant, et hac in parte sit Regum et Servorum cequalitas.
Lightfoot, Whitby, Macknight.
Petition 1. ay laaOryrii) to ovofid gov. This and the following
petition are found in the Jewish Kaddish Magistrorum, or
Forms of Prayer, which the doctors taught their disciples. By
the name of God is to be understood God himself, as manifested
to us in his attributes and perfections. Similar instances of me
tonymy will be found in Acts i. 15. Ephes. i. 21. Heb. i. 4.
The commentators describe this use of civojua as a Hebraism,
but it is found also in Greek writers. Thus in Eurip. Orest.
1080. 3) ttoOeivov ovofi b/iiXiag ifirjg, for & ttoOeivi) bfiiXia. See
Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 430. 6. The verb dytd^Etv signifies properly to
set apart from common, and to appropriate to sacred purposes.
So 2 Tim. ii. 21. iarai ekeTvoc ei? Tifir)v riyiaufiivov. Hence it
has various derived senses, and amongst the rest, to worship, to
adore, as in 1 Pet. iii. 15. Geov dytdrjarE ev rate KapStatc bfiuv.
Compare Isaiah viii. 13. Sirac. xxxvi. 4. LXX. Chrysostom
Horn. XIX. on this passage: dyiaaOfirw So^adOrirw. Hence
the meaning of the petition is, May thy existence be universally
believed, thy perfections loved and imitated, thy works admired,
thy supremacy over all things acknowledged, and thy providence
reverenced and confided in. The use of the imperative dyiaadrirw
for the optative is remarkable. Macknight, Whitby, A. Clarke.

MATTHEW VI. 10, 11. 81
Ver. 10. Petition 2. eXOetio 17 j3a<nXEfa crov. The import of
these words may be readily deduced from the notes on Matt.
iii. 2. The Jews considered that no prayer was available unless
it mentioned the kingdom of God ; in accordance with which
maxim the following petition formed a part of their daily
prayers : Let him make his kingdom reign ; let his redemption
flourish; and let his Messiah come and deliver his people. See
Vitringa de Synagog. Vet. II. 3. 8. p. 962. The origin of these
supplications will be found in Isaiah ix. 7. Dan. vii. 14. 27.
Psalm lxx. 11. and elsewhere. It has been said that the king
dom of God, in the sense in which it is commonly used in Scrip
ture of the Gospel dispensation, is already come, and therefore,
that it is superfluous to pray for it. But in this petition we are
taught to pray that the knowledge of the Christian faith may
come to all nations of the world ; that his kingdom may be ad
vanced by the coming in of the Jews and the fulness of the Gen
tiles; and that finally, through the obedience of faith, all man
kind may become partakers of his kingdom of glory in heaven.
Whitby.
Petition 3. yEvrjOrjTCu to OiXrifid crov, tog iv ovpavijp, Kat iirl Tr)g
yrig. It is not the import of this petition, that God may do his
own will, for that would be needless, (Eccles. viii. 3. Isaiah
xlvi. 10. Rom. ix. 19.) — nor that the will of Providence may be
done upon us — nor that we may on earth be equal to the angels
in the perfection and alacrity of our obedience — -nor that God will
compel us to do his will. The meaning is, that we may endea
vour to imitate the angels in their ready and constant obedience
to the will of God, and willingly submit to the dispensations of
his providence, at all times, and under all conditions whatsoever.
The substance of the request is found in the Seder Tephiloth of
the Jews, and sentiments somewhat similar in expression are to
be met with in heathen writers. Arrian, Epict. II. 17. /iriSiv
dXXo OeXe, f) a 0 Qsbg OeXei, rrjv ekkXio-jv tw Gecu xaP'lC7al> ekeIvi^
irapaSbg, ekeivoc KvjJEpvaTw. Senec. Epist. 74. Placeat homini,
quicquid Deo placuit. The omission of the particle ovtid before
oti Tr)g yije in the second clause, is sanctioned by Thucyd. VIII.
1. Kat cue e'So^ev avrotg, Kat £7rotovv ravra, i. e. ovtio Kal iwoiow.
So also in Latin, Virg. Eclog. V. 33. Ut gregibus iauri, segetes
utpinguibus arvis, Tu decus omne tuis. The same ellipsis is in
Lukevi. 31. Johnxx. 21. Acts vii. 51. Rom. i. 28. Ephes. iii. 5.
1 John ii. 18. See Bos Ellips. Gr. p. 486. Whitby, Mack
night, Grotius.
Ver. 11. Petition 4, tov dprov rifiiov k. t. X. As the three
first petitions of the prayer relate to the glory of God, the three
last involve the consideration of our own wants and infirmities.
Here, under the word bread are included all the necessaries of
life. So Abraham, in Gen. xviii. 5. after saying, / will fetch a
VOL. I. G

82 MATTHEW VI. 11.
morsel of bread to comfort your hearts, brought out also butter,
and milk, and the calf which he had killed, In this place, how
ever, the term extends its signification to the supply of our spi
ritual wants. Whitby, Macknight. With respect to the import
of the word £7nov<rtoe, the commentators are greatly divided in
their opinions. It is to be found in no Greek writer, and
throughout the O. and N. T, only in this passage and the pa
rallel place of Luke xi. 3. Origen observes, de Orat. 16. irpctrrov
Si TOVT IdTEOV, OTI ri Xi^,ig T) 'E7nov<TJoe Trap' OV$SVl Th)V 'EXX17VCJV
ovte rctiv ao<p£)V wvo/iaarai, ovte ev Ty t£)V ISiwtwv a-vvr)0Eiq te-
Tpinrai, dXX' eoike iTETrXdcrOai virb twv EvayyEXiartov. Hence
the variety of significations that have been affixed to it, accord
ingly as it is differently derived. Some have explained it as
signifying 6 rfje imovarig vfiipag, so that the petition will be,
Give us this day our bread' for the morrow, Michaelis, among
others, is in favour of this interpretation ; and it is somewhat sup
ported by the word 1TO, mecher, signifying dies crastinus, which
supplies the place of iiriovaiog in the Nazarene Gospel. It is
true, also, that 17 iiriovari, scil. rifiipa, is a classical elliptic
phrase, denoting the morrow; and so it occurs in Acts vii. 26.
But this interpretation is too obviously at variance with the com
mand of our Lord, vv. 25. 34. to take no thought for the mor
row. The Fathers Jerome and Ambrose translate the word su
per substantialis, by which the latter understands the bread of life,
John v. 48. Erasmus also takes the petition in a spiritual sense :
Ale, Pater, quod genuisti : prospice nobis, ne nos deficiat panis
ille tuus doctrince coelestis, ut eo quotidie sumpto confirmemur , et
adolescamus, et vegeti reddamur ad tua jussa perficienda. In
the Latin Vulgate, however, Jerome has given panem quotidia-
num, which our translators have followed, and which seems to
have arisen from the addition of to KaO' rifiipav, in Luke xi. 3.
Eisner supposes that d'prov iiriovcnov means our promised bread;
i. e. that portion of good things, which as God's children, we
have right to, as by inheritance. But the word ovaia, the usage
of which in Luke xv. 12. is thought to warrant this interpreta
tion, does not signify an inheritance, but simply substance, or
property, however obtained. Compare ibid. v. 15. The term,
however, is in all probability a derivative of ovaia, and the mean
ing assigned to it by Theophylact seems to be correct; viz. iirl
ry obaiq Kal avarduEi rifiwv avrapKrig, that which is sufficient for
our maintenance and support. To the same effect are the glosses
of Basil, the Etym. M. Suidas, and others : and the interpreta
tion exactly corresponds with the prayer of Agur for rd Siovra
Kal rd alrapKri, Prov. xxx. 8. LXX. Wakefield is of opinion
that the word was originally separated into iirl ovoiav, till at
length it coalesced, and became the E7rtovcrtov of the text. But
Kuinoel has pointed out a similar import of the preposition iirl
in such compounds as £7rtX»jvtov and Eirird(piov : answering at

MATTHEW VI. 12, 13. 83
the same time an objection of Scaliger, that the word should be
iirovmog, by producing the adjectives iwiEiKrjg, iwiopKog, and
others, in the composition of which the i is not sunk. It may
be observed, in conclusion, that there is probably a reference to
the daily supply of manna in the wilderness, of which a suffi
ciency for the day was collected every morning, a double portion
being given on the sixth day to prevent a breach of the Sabbath.
In this view, also, the petition is in strict accordance with that
in the Jewish formularies : Lord, the necessities of thy people
Israel are many,- and their knowledge small, so that they know
not how to disclose their necessities : Let it be thy good plea
sure to give to every one what sujficeth for food. Beza, Mede,
Macknight, Doddridge, Rosenmuller, Kuinoel. — [Wet
stein, Lightfoot, Grotius, &c]
Ver. 12. Petition5. d<ptg rijiiv rd bipEiXrifiara rifiCiv, k. t. X, Obe
dience is a debt we owe to God, in which we daily fail, and there
fore stand in need of daily forgiveness. Hence the use of the word
b<pEiXfifiaTa, which answers to d/iapriag, in the parallel place of
Luke. It has been already observed, that the last clause of this pe
tition is not to be found in the Jewish formularies : it is, therefore,
a peculiar feature in the Christian religion, and our Lord accord
ingly enforces it again at the conclusion of the prayer, vv. 14, 15.
as the only ground upon which we can expect the forgiveness of
our Maker. Upon other occasions also he dwells strongly upon
the necessity of mutual forgiveness ; and more especially in the
parable of the unforgiving servant, Matt, xviii. 23. which may
be considered as a practical comment upon this petition. The
subjoined declaration is evidently connected with this verse by
the causal particle ydp ; and it is remarkable what a difference
exists between the mild word irapairrtofiara, (slips, failings, from
iriirTto,) which is employed in reference to the injuries we receive
from our fellow men, and the strong term ofpEiXrifiara, which in
dicates our sins against God. We are not to infer, however,
that forgiveness of injuries alone will ensure our pardon. The
negative declaration of v. 15. is undoubtedly true, but the af
firmative precept requires the limitation, that no other condition
be wanting : and the same is true of all other direct promises.
Whitby, A. Clarke.
Ver. 13. Petition 6. fir) alcFEviyKyg k. r. X. That is, suffer
us not to be led, &c. Tertullian, Cyprian, and others of the
early fathers render the clause Ne nos patiaris induci ; and some
of them explain the word temptation, as that quam ferre non
possumus. Compare 1 Cor. x. 13. The petition does not im
plore an entire freedom from temptations, but that God would
grant us his grace1 that we may be able to' overcome them, and
thus be delivered from the wiles and malice of the devil. We
g 2

84 MATTHEW VI. 13.
are taught to consider our own inability to stand without God's
assistance ; but in humble assurance of his aid and deliverance,
co-operating with our own exertions, we ought to rejoice when
toe fall into divers temptations, for the reasons assigned by St.
James, i. 2. 12. That tov irovripov is here masculine, and to
be understood of the devil, see on Matt. v. 37. The opinion is
confirmed by the Jewish formularies. Thus, in the Mischna,
Tit. Beracoth, we have this prayer of the Rabbi Judah, Let it
be thy good pleasure to deliver . us from Satan the destroyer,
from a hard judgment, and a hard adversary. Whitby, Light
foot, Grotius.
The Doxology. on aov iunv ») j3a<TtXa'a, k. t. X. This Doxo-
logy is wanting in the Vatican and several other ancient Greek
MSS. It is also variously written in other MSS., and is omitted
by most of the fathers, both Greek and Latin. Now the Jews
usually closed their phylacterial prayers by repeating, Blessed
be the name of the glory of his kingdom for ever and ever ; and
a similar custom prevailed among the early Christians, various
forms of whose doxologies are extant in the writings of Poly-
carp, Clement, and other fathers. Hence it is supposed by
some of the most eminent critics, that it never made a part of
the ancient text, but was interpolated from the early Liturgies,
in which it formed the response of the people, the prayer alone
being uttered by the priest. On the contrary, it is observed,
that the Alexandrian and many other Greek copies have the
doxology, together with the Syriac version, which was probably
made in the first century, and several early Eastern transla
tions. Neither is it probable that the Greek church would pre
sume to add from their own Liturgies to a form composed by
our Lord himself: and that only in Matthew, and not in Luke,
where the doxology is wanting. It is not unlikely, therefore,
that the prayer was delivered on two several occasions, upon one
of which the clause was omitted; and that the Latin copies, in
which it is chiefly wanting, and which are in other respects fre
quently faulty, left it out altogether, lest the Evangelists should
appear to be at variance on a point so important. The objection
that its insertion interrupts the connection between vv. 12 and
14, is not removed by its omission ; and it is clear that the
enforcement of a special precept was necessarily deferred till
the conclusion of the prayer. In a word, the doxology is so
simple, appropriate, and sublime, that its non-appearance in
some MSS. can never be looked upon as sufficient for rejecting
it. In a few copies only the word Amen is also wanting ; and
our Lord can scarcely be supposed to have omitted it, as it is
found at the foot of several prayers in the O. T. Compare
Numb. v. 72. Nehem. v. 13. viii. 6. Psalm lxxii. 19. Whitby
Lightfoot, A. Clarke, Doddridge. — [Mill, Wetstein)
Griesbach, Campbell.] The term slg rovg alwvag, as derived

MATTHEW VI. 16. 85
from atd ctiv, semper existens, implies in its primary sense ab
solute eternity : this is Aristotle's definition. Sometimes, how
ever, the words alibv and alwviog denote only a finite period,
when the duration is of long and unknown continuance, or such
as the thing spoken of is capable of admitting. Thus alihv
sometimes signifies the life of man, the duration of the world,
&c. Compare also Gen. xlix. 26. Prov. xxii. 28. LXX. 2 Tim.
i. 9. In reference to God it is necessarily understood in its
primary and grammatical sense. A. Clarke, Macknight.
Ver. 16. brav Si vtjcttevtjte, k. r. X. Several fasts, upon
especial occasions, besides those of Moses and Elijah, are men
tioned in the O. T. as that of Joshua and the elders, Josh. vii. 6.
of the eleven tribes, after their defeat at Gibeah, Judg. xx. 26.
of David, over his sick child, 2 Sam. xii. 16. of Ezra, ch. viii. 2.
and of Daniel, ch. ix. 1. Compare also Jerem. xxxvi. 9. Joel
i. 14v Zech. viii. 19. The only fast, however, appointed by
divine command, was that of the Feast of expiation, Levit. xvi.
29. so that all the rest must be considered as merely of private
institution. In later times the Jewish fasts increased in number
to a great extent, and Maimonides has given a list in which three
or four are assigned to each month of the Jewish Calendar.
Besides these, private fasts were enjoined upon individuals, in
behalf of any of their friends or relations who were sick, or lost
in the wilderness, or imprisoned, or otherwise afflicted. If no
calamity called for this observance, persons frequently devoted
themselves to stated fasts merely for the cause of religion, in
which hypocrisy frequently took so great a part as to call for the
severe animadversion of our Lord. See Home's Introd. Vol.
III. p. 324, note, and p. 378. The outward expression of hea
viness and sorrow which they exhibited is here marked by the
adjective aKvOpumol, (E. T.ofa sad countenance,) properly sig
nifying one who contracts his eye-brows, which usually indicates
moroseness or sorrow. Hence, in Xen. Mem. II. 7. 12. it is
opposed to iXapog ; and ibid. III. 10. 4. to (paiSpog. Phayori-
nus : a-KvOptoirog- arvyvbg, Xvirripbg. The verb acpaviZuv signi
fying to cause to disappear, to spoil, to destroy ; in which sense
it occurs infra v. 20. Suidas : atpaviaai' bXwg to oveXeiv Kai
d<pavig TTotrja-at. Compare Xen. Mem. I. 2. 58. Arrian. Exped.
Alex. I. 9. Joseph. Ant. I. 11. 1. Hence, it here implies to dis
figure, to soil, to defile, as a part of the ceremony of fasting
consisted in sprinkling ashes and clay upon their heads, and
leaving their faces unwashed, squalid, and neglected. See 2 Sam.
i. 2. Esther iv. 1. Isaiah lxi. 3. Ezek. xxvii. 30. Dan. x. 3. In
opposition to this custom our Lord's injunction is, to appear as
usual, that our fasting may not merely consist in outward show.
Lightfoot, Kuinoel, Doddridge, Macknight.
With respect to Christians, neither our Saviour nor his Apostles

86 MATTHEW VI. 19.
have left any positive precept in regard to fasting ; but it is clear,
both from the example of Christ himself, and his admonition in
this place, that he considered it as a devout exercise, and as such it
was very early practised in the Christian church. See Bingham's
Orig. Eccles. xxi. 1, 2. Hence the Church of England has
appointed certain fixed seasons, such as Lent, the Ember-days,
&c, for fasting ; and other days are sometimes set apart for the
purpose, upon occasion of any national calamity or distress. The
act, properly considered, is undoubtedly beneficial, and it is re-,
commended in the Homily of Good Works ; first, in order to
chastise the flesh, that it be not too wanton, but tamed and
brought in subjection by the spirit ; secondly, that the spirit may
be more fervent and earnest in prayer ; and thirdly, that our
fast be a testimony and witness with us before God of our hum
ble submission to his high majesty, when we confess and acknow
ledge our sins unto him, and are inwardly touched with sorrow
fulness of heart, bewailing the same in the affliction of our
bodies. The Church cf Rome distinguishes between days of fast
ing and days of abstinence, for which there is not the slightest
authority in Scripture. The word vr)arig, as derived from vr)
lar'tEiv, clearly denotes a total abstinence from food for an ap
pointed time ; and, consequently, the mere abstaining from flesh,
and living on fish, is in fact no fast. It is clear, however, that
in the discharge of this duty regard must be paid to men's con
stitutions, for it may happen that a rigorous fast would, in some
cases, render us wholly incapable of the exercise of piety, which
it is intended to promote. Whitby, Macknight, A. Clarke.
Ver. 19. fir) OricravpiZETE k. r. X. Of the scope and proper
interpretation of this part of our Lord's discourse, see Home's
Introd. Vol. II. p. 636. sqq. of tropes and figures, §. 8. The
allusion is to the oriental custom of laying up treasures of various
kinds, but especially garments," which formed a principal part of
the wealth of those times : of this also see Home, Vol. III.
p. 419.
Hid. f3pw<Ttg. Whatever eats into any valuable substance.
The word exactly expresses the Hebrew bVTl, from bVT\, to
consume or eat; rendered by the LXX KariSErai in Deut.
xxviii. 51. and applied to locusts, Joel i. 4. Hence it has been
by some translated canker, (E. T. rust ;) but the words always
used in this sense by Greek authors are log and Evpwg ; so that
a species of worm is probably intended, called in Greek fipumg,
and in Latin curculio, which derives its name in both lan
guages from its voracious feeding. In Isaiah 1. 9. Aquila has
fipihaig, and the LXX <rr)g for the Hebrew word VWy, osis, ren
dered moth. In St. Luke the moth, arf)g, only is mentioned ;
aud Casaubon is of opinion that orjg Kal fipuxrig is here an hen-
diadys for of)g fipwaKovaa, a devouring moth ; but this interpre-
10

MATTHEW VI. 22. 24. 87
tation is refuted by the use of the disjunctive particle ovte in the
next verse. Kuinoel, Wakefield, Rosenmuller. — [Kypke.]
The verb StopvrTEiv signifies to dig through ,• and it is clearly
used with reference to the manner in which Eastern houses were
constructed. See again Home. Aristoph. Plut. 565. kXeVteiv
koi rovg roixovg SiopvrTEiv. Wetstein.
Ver. 22. 6 Xvxvo? tov uwfiarog k. t. X. Chrysostom : "Oirsp
yap iariv b<pOaXnbg tcj! awfiari, tovto 6 vouc; ry ipvxy- "H<rtiEp
yap tHiv bcpOaXfiCiv TvipXwOivrwv, to itoXv Trig twv Xonrctiv /ieXwv
Evspysiag olxErai, tov (puyrbg avrolg (tj3e<t0£vtoc' ovtco Kat Trig
otavoiag SiaipOapEiarig, fivpiwv 17 Zwr) crow kokgjv E/iirXriaOfiaETai.
The same similitude is to be met with in various authors. Arist.
Topic. I. 14. cLe <p<Lg iv b(pOaXfit^, vovg iv ^vxv- Ovid.
Met. XV. 63. Quce natura negavit Visibus humanis, oculis ea
pectoris hausit. Cic. Tusc. I. 15. Cum antea homines nihil
animo videre possent, sed omnia ad oculos refer rent. So our
own Shakspeare, in his Hamlet (Act I. Sc. 2.), speaks of the
mind's eye. It is supposed by the generality of commentators
that the bipOaXfibg airXovg is intended to designate liberality of
disposition, in opposition to coveiousness, which is denoted by
b<pOaXfibg irovripog. The import, therefore, of the precept is this :
— that as the body will be enlightened if the eye be sound and
good, or darkened if the eye be diseased, so the mind will be full
of light if the reason be unimpaired, and full of darkness if it be
perverted by covetousness and too great a love of worldly trea
sures and enjoyments ; but with this difference, that mental dark
ness is infinitely more dangerous and destructive in its conse
quences than natural blindness. This interpretation is sanctioned
by a variety of passages, in which d7rX6Yr?e is used to denote
liberality; and an evil eye, bcpQaXfibg irovnpbg, to indicate a grudg
ing and avaricious disposition. Compare Prov. xi. 25. xxiii. 6.
xxvii. 20. Ecclus. xiv. 10. xxxv. 10. Tob. iv. 16. Rom. xii. 8.
2 Cor. viii. 2. ix. 11. 13. James i. 5. The Jews also had a fami
liar saying: He that gives, let him do it with a good eye; i. e.
freely, liberally. Some understand the terms more generally ;
but the context, both in what precedes and follows, is evidently
in favour of the more received interpretation. Theophylact ex
plains a7rXove by vyir)g, and irovripog by vocrioSrig. Hammond,
Lightfoot, Whitby, Le Clerc. — [Doddridge, Kuinoel.]
Ver. 24. Svol Kvpiotg. Euthymius adds ivavria iiriTaTrovaiv.
And so Chrysostom, Horn. 22. The word fiafifiwvdg is of Syriac
origin, denoting riches, as it appears from that version in this
place. In this sense the same word, NJftO, is used in Exod.
xxi. 30. and IIDO, mammon, in the Targum of Onkelos, Exod.
xviii. 21. and of Jonathan, Judg. v. 19. 1 Sam. viii. 3. Compare
also Luke xvi. 9. 11. Hence Jerome: Gentili Syrorum lingua
Mammona dicitice appellantur. And Augustin : Lucrum Punice
vol. 1. g 4 -J--

88 MATTHEW VI. 25. 27.
Mammon dicitur; the Carthaginians being originally from Syria
and Phoenicia. Hesychius explains it by driaavpbg, and it is
supposed by some to be a corruption of the Chaldee TlDtOD.
Castel, however, derives the word from ]Qti, aman, to trust, to
confide, because men are apt to trust in riches. It is to be ob
served that Wealth is here personified, unless, as some suppose,
there was an idol of this name among the Syrians, identical
with the Plutus of the Greeks. With respect to the construction
of the passage, it is evident that the verse contains a simile, in
which the comparing particles cocra-Ep and ovtwq are to be sup
plied: As ye cannot serve two masters, &c. so ye cannot serve
God and Mammon. The verbs fiio-E'iv and dyairqv are to be
understood as simply meaning to love less, and to love more,
respectively ; in which sense they are repeatedly used in Scrip
ture. See Gen. xxix. 31. LXX. Luke xiv. 26. John xii. 25.
Rom. ix. 13. With the sentiment we may compare Pers. Sat.
V. 1 54. En quid agis ? duplici in diver sum scinderis hamo.
Hunccine, an hunc, sequeris? Subeas alternus oportet Ancipiti
obsequio dominos, alternus oberres. Wetstein, Parkhurst,
Grotius, Macknight.
Ver. 25. fir) fiEpifivdrE. Be not anxiously solicitous. Vulg.
Ne soliciti sitis. The E. T. take no thought, which does not
now give the sense of the original, fully expressed it at the time
when our translation was made. Thus Holinshed, a. d. 1 140,
writes, " Taking thought for the losse of his houses and monie,
he pined away and died." Thus again in Phil. iv. 6. finSiv
fiEpifivdrE cannot possibly enjoin carelessness, respecting what
is the object of a prayer to God. Compare also Dan. iii. 16.
1 Pet. v. 7. and see 1 Tim. v. 8. 2 Thess. iii. 8. This inter
pretation is confirmed by the parallel passage of St. Luke> who
uses the word fiETEwpiZtaOai, to be of an unsettled and doubtful
tnind. In two MSS., in most of the ancient versions, and in some
of the early fathers, the clause Kat ti ttItite is wanting, and its
authenticity is suspected by Griesbach. It recurs, however, in
v. 31, where there is not the slightest variation in any of the
copies ; and it was the general custom of the Hebrews to mention
meat and drink, hunger and thirst, and the like, in conjunction.
Grotius, Beausobre. The adjective vXeiov should be rendered
of more value; in which sense it is used in Numb. xxii. 15. LXX.
Matt. xxi. 36.. and the best Greek writers. A. Clarke. In the
next verse ififiXtyaru is explained by Karavo^crarE in Luke xii. 24.
Ver. 27. r)XtKiav. E. T. stature; and this is doubtless one
sense of the word, as in Luke ii. 52. whence some would retain
it in this place also, and in Luke xii. 25. But it signifies also
age, or life-time, John ix. 21. 23. Heb. xi. 11. It is clear,
therefore, that in any case the meaning of the word must be
determined by the context. Now the' admonition of our Lord is

MATTHEW VI. 28. 30. 32, 33. 89
given in regard to an over-anxiety respecting food and raiment,
which, though necessary to the preservation and convenience of
life, can have no connection with growth or stature. It is true,
indeed, that irf/xve is properly a measure of extension, but fre
quent instances occur of the metaphorical application of this and
similar words to denote the duration of time. Compare Psalm
xxxix. 5. Mimnermus (ap. Stob. p. 158.) says of leaves in spring,
Toi? IkeXoi, irrixviov iirl xpovov av0Erw rifdr/g TEpirdfiEOa. Diog.
Laert. VIII. 16. airiOa/ir) tov j3tov. Besides, the addition of a
cubit to a man's stature would be something considerable, amount
ing to nearly the fourth part of the height of some men, which
is clearly at variance with the scope of the passage. Campbell,
Macknight, Hammond. — [Beza, Grotius.]
Ver. 28. Kpiva. Plin. N. H. xxi. 5. Est et rubens lilium,
quod Greed Crinon vocant. The white lily does not grow wild
in Palestine. Probably the amaryllis lutea is intended, as Sir
J. E. Smith supposes. The verb av^dvEiv has a transitive and
intransitive sense ; and augere is used intransitively in Catul.
lxiv. 323. O decus eximium, magnis virtutibus augens. Solomon
is probably mentioned in preference to any other prince, as
exceeding in power, wealth, and magnificence all the kings who
went before, or came after him. Macknight. The whole vege
table system is comprised by the Hebrews under the two classes,
yy, ots, and 2W, osheb. See Gen. i. 11. The latter of these
is rendered x°PT0G hy the LXX, and includes all herbs whatso
ever ; the withered stalks of which the Jews employed for heating
their ovens, &c. In ver. 30. the word evidently includes the lilies
mentioned above, and is not, therefore, correctly rendered in the
E.T. grass. Hence there is no authority for translating KXtj3avov,
a still; nor is there the slightest evidence from any ancient author,
that the art of distillation was then known. Grotius, Campbell.
The word 6Xryo7ncrro£ is by Campbell properly rendered distrust
ful, scil. of the care of Providence.
Ver. 32. e6»vjj. The Gentiles. See Home's Introd. Vol. III.
p. 3. It is the general character of the Heathens that' they
prayed to their gods, and laboured themselves, for no blessings
but the temporal ones here mentioned, as is plain from the tenth
Satire of Juvenal. Macknight.
Ver. 33. tt)v SiKaioawriv avTov. His righteousness, i. e. the
holiness of life which he requires in his creatures. So in Rom.
iii. 21, 22. x. 3. the righteousness of God is opposed to that of
the unconverted Jews, where in neither case is personal righte
ousness intended. The righteousness which the Jews are de
scribed by the Apostle as being desirous of establishing, was a
system of morality, fabricated by themselves, and consisting
chiefly in ceremonies and mere externals. Compare also Micah

90 MATTHEW VI. 34. VII. 1. 3.
v. 5. James i. 20. Campbell. Some of the Fathers ascribe
the following saying to Christ: — airEtcrfle rd fieydXa, Kal Ta fiiKpd
vfiiv irpooTEOria-ETai. It is probably a gloss upon this verse. See
Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 328.
Ver. 34. 17 KaKia. That is, troubles and vexations ; in which
sense the word is used in Eccles. xii. 1. LXX. Chrysostom:
KaKta- raAa£7rci>pi'a. With the sentiment we may compare Eurip.
Helen. 338. Mi) irpo/iavrig dXyiwv ripoXdfijiav', ct> (piXa, yoovg.
Mosch. Idyl. IV. 65. *H ovx aXig oig ixbfiEaOa to Sevtotov aiix
hr rjjuap rVyvojuEvote ; k. t. X. See also Soph. Trach. 960. Anacr.
Od. xv. 1. Of the construction see Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 439. Obs.

CHAPTER VII.
Contents : — The Sermon on the Mount concluded.
Verse 1. fir) k/jivete, k. t. X. Luke adds,, ch. vi. 37. fir) Kara-
StKa^ETt, koI ov /ir) KaraSiKaaOriTE. Hence it appears that our
Lord here reproves the rash judgment, which men are so apt to
pass upon others, condemning them precipitately, and frequently
when they are themselves more guilty than those whom they
think fit to censure. Compare James ii. 13. where eXeoc; is op
posed to Kpimg. The Jews were highly criminal in this respect,
though many excellent maxims in regard to the error are to be
found in the Talmudistic writings. There is also a similar sen
timent in Isocrat. in^Eginet. p. 778. Kai roiovrovg poi yEviadai
SiKacrrdg Sio/iai, o'iwv irsp dv avrol tvx&v d^iwaiqTE. So Cic. in
Ver. III. 1. Qui sibi hoc sumpsit, ut corrigat mores aliorum,
atque peccata reprehendat, huic quis ignoscat, si qua in re ipse
a religione officii aberraverit ? It is clear that forensic judgment
is not included in our Lord's admonition. Macknight, Whitby,
Kuinoel. Of the various readings in v. 2. see Home's Introd.
Vol. II. p. 349. The clause is proverbial. Compare Hor. Epist.
I. 7. 98.
Ver. 3. to Kapipog. E. T. the mote, i. e. an atom, such as
those which float in the sun-beams. But it should rather be
rendered a splinter, by which means the analogy between Kap-
<pog and SoKog is preserved. Hesych. Kapc/>oc' KEpaia ZvXov
Xeittj). The expression is proverbial, and of frequent occurrence
in the Talmud, so that there is no authority for the supposition
that the words are employed to denote certain disorders of the
eye. The classical student will recognise the following parallels.
Menand. Fragm. p. 214. OvSslg dip' avrov rd KaKa awopq,
TldfiipiXE, Sa0we. ETEpou S' dtrx^/uovovvToc oipErai. Plutarch.
de Curiosit. p. 515. T£ dXXorptov, dvOpioirs j3a<TKavt£>raTE, kokov
bZvSspKEig, to S' 'ISiov irapafiXiirEig ; Sosicrates, ap. Stob. 'Aya-
Ool Si TO KOKOV ECT/XEV i(p' ETEpwV tOEtV, AvjTol S' OTav TTOllOflEV, OV

MATTHEW VII. 4. 6. 91
yiyvuHTtcofxtv. Horat. Sat. I. 3. 25. Cum tua pervideas oculis mala
lippus inunctis, Cur in amicorum vitiis tam cernis acutum, Quam
aut aquila, aut serpens Epidaurius. Seneca, de vita beata, §. 27.
Papulas observatis alienas, obsiti ulceribus. Cic. Tusc. Qucest.
III. 30. Proprium est stultitice, aliorum vitia cernere, oblivisci suo-
rum. Grotius, Lightfoot, Kuinoel, Albert. — [Doddridge.]
Ver. 4. dipEg, £Kj3dXco. For similar instances of the omission
of 'iva before the subjunctive, see my note on Eurip. Phoen. 734,
Pent. Gr. p. 346.
Ver. 6. fir) Suite to dyiov k. t. X. The connection between
this verse and those which precede and follow it, if, indeed, any
such connection exists, is not very discernible. It has been
conjectured from the circumstance that most of the precepts
contained in this Sermon are found scattered throughout St*
Luke's Gospel, that no such Discourse was ever delivered by
our Lord, but that it was compiled by St. Matthew from the
various sayings of Christ which he uttered during his ministry.
But the opening and closing declarations of the Evangelist are
in direct opposition to such a conclusion, and it will readily be
admitted, that occasions would arise in which precepts of such
general importance might advantageously be repeated. Neither
is it to be expected, that in admonitions of such extensive appli
cation each would arise immediately out of the preceding, in an
uninterrupted connection ; and, accordingly, many of them may
perhaps be considered as detached rules of Christian conduct.
In the present instance, indeed, the dogs and swine have been
supposed to mean those censorious and harsh judging persons
against whom our Lord's last admonition is directed. But it is
better, perhaps, to understand the terms of those who resist and
despise the Gospel generally ; as the Jews, Acts xiii. 41. 46.
and the Scribes and Pharisees, Matt. ix. 34. xii. 24. Luke vi.
1 1 . John xi. 47. et passim. Such symbolical expressions are
frequent in the N. T. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 483.
Clement Alex, supposes that they were originally so employed
by the Oriental sages, and thence adopted not only by the He
brews, but transported by Pythagoras, who had studied in
Egypt, into Greece. Homer has employed several terms of re
proach of the same description. See II. Z. 344. and elsewhere.
The Epanodos in this verse is illustrated in Home's Introd.
Vol. II. p. 490. We have other instances in Matt. xii. 22.
xxiii. 16. 20. 25, 26. Rom. ii. 12, 13, 14. xiv. 3, 4. 10. 1 Cor.
vi. 11. Philem. 5. Heb. x. 33, 34. 2 Pet. iii. 4—8. Whitby,
Grotius, Hammond. The E. T. renders to dyiov that which
is holy generally ; but, as used in conjunction with papydpirag,
the pearls which are cast to swine, it should seem to denote
more particularly something which may be thrown to dogs ; a
portion probably of the flesh of a sacrificed victim. Kuinoel in-

92 MATTHEW VII. 7. 9. 11.
deed supposes, with Eichhorn, that the word in the Hebrew
Gospel was originally Nttflp, which signifies an ear-ring, Exod,.
xxxii. 2. and would, therefore, be well opposed to pearls in this
place. The Orientals attributed a degree of superstitious sanc
tity to these jewels, which may have given rise to the substitution
of to Sy tov in the Greek. At all events, it is clear that the doc
trines of the Gospel are represented under a metaphor, which
was often similarly applied by the Jews. Compare Prov. ii. 4.
xxv. 22. Matt. xiii. 45. Kuinoel.
Ver. 7. a'tTEtTE, koi So6r)(TETai vfiiv' k. t. X. Ask, and it shall
be given you; that is, as we learn from vv. 9, 10. if we ask
those things which are expedient, seek what is just and proper,
and knock with earnestness and faith. We have a similar sen
timent in Arrian, Epict. I. 28. III. 26. £/)tei koi EvpnaEig.
Soph. Fragm. ap. Plutarch, de Fortun. p. 98. Td piv SiSaKrd
fiavddvto, rd S' Evpsrd ZtjtuT rd §' evkto Trapd 6eu>v yrrio dfiriv.
Kypke. After the verb kpovete there is an ellipsis of ri)v Ovpav.
The omission is supplied in Luke xiii. 25. Xen. Sympos. I. 11.
Compare Rev. iii. 20. The same ellipsis occurs with dvotystv
in Matt. xxv. 11. Acts xii. 16.
Ver. 9. t) rig iartv k. t. X. The particle fj is used in this place
simply to mark the continuation of the same subject: as is
clear from the parallel passage, Luke xi. 11. where Se is em
ployed. The word dvOpooirog is evidently emphatic, and in
tended to illustrate the goodness of our heavenly Father by a
comparison drawn from the conduct of human parents. That it
is not redundant, as is sometimes the case, appears from its
situation at the end of the clause. In the end of the sentence
the adverb fir) is simply interrogative, without implying a nega
tion, as in Gen. xviii. 14. xxviii. 37. Judg. ix. 9. 11. 13.
2 Sam. xiv. 19. Jerem. xxxii. 27. and elsewhere. The illus
tration here employed is proverbial, and not confined to the
Hebrews. A benefit grudgingly given is called by Seneca, de
Benef. II. 7. panis lapidosus ; and hence Plautus : Altera manu
fert lapidem, panem ostentat altera. Erasmus has also pre
served a Greek proverb, dvrl 7rEpKjje o-Kop7rtov, which is ana
logous with that in the following verse. This latter, however,
is a little varied in Luke xi. 12. The verb oIteIv, it may be ob
served, should properly be joined to a genitive of the person
with the preposition n-apd or ek, so that the double accusative is a
Hebraism. Compare JosA. xv. 18. Ezra vii. 21. LXX. Whitby,
Campbell.
Ver. 11. irovripoi. Some render this adjective wicked gene
rally, others avaricious, which latter sense it frequently bears,
as in Prov. xxiii. 6. and elsewhere. See above, on Matt. vi. 22.
Perhaps this is preferable; but, at all events, it is justly ob-

MATTHEW VII. 12, 13. 15. 93
served by Chrysostom : ravra Si 'iXsysv ov koki^cov to ylvog,
dXXd irpbg dvriSia(JToXr)v rr)g dyaOorrirog ri)g avrov, scil. Geou.
The expression o't'SarE SiSovai is a paraphrasis for S'iSote. So
Julian, in Anthol. I. 13. 12. TroXtr? (ppivag oISev bwdZ,Eiv. Pro-
pert. I. 11. 12. Sciat currere. In the parallel passage, Luke
xi. 12. for Sbfiara dyaOd we have irvEv/ia dyaOov. Kuinoel,
Palairet. Ver. 12. 7rdvTa ovv oaa k. t. X. The particle ovv does not
connect this verse with the preceding. Phavorinus observes
that it is sometimes an expletive, and merely used to de
note transition. It sometimes also indicates a recurrence to a
subject which has been for some time discontinued ; and may,
therefore, refer to the injunction delivered in v. 1 . which is here
enlarged and generalized. See Hoogeveen. With respect to
the precept itself, compare Tobit iv. 15. Sirac xxxiv. 15.
In the Talmud we find the Rabbi Hillel exhorting a Gentile
proselyte to do not that to another which he would hate to be
done to himself. For this, says he, is the whole law, and all
else merely an explanation of it. See also Home's Introd. Vol.
I. p. 480. The same rule of conduct is also to be met with in
heathen writers ; among others, Isocr. ad Nicocl. Or. 3. "07T£p
av fiiaEig irap' iriptov aoi yEviuOai, Etc iripovg fir) ito'iei. Symma-
chus : d irdcxxovTEg v<p' iripitiv 6pyt^£cr0£, TavTa toic dXXoig fir)
itoieite. Compare also Herod. I. 142. VII. 136. Whitby,
Wetstein.
Ver. 13. e?<teX0ete Sid rr)g cttevjjc 7rvXrje" k. t. X. Luke xiii.
24. dyci>vi?E(70£ eI(teX6eTv. Under the figure of a gate, opening
into a road, which leads to a distant citadel, our Lord represents
the dangers and difficulties which attend the Christian in his
entrance upon, and during his progress through, his course of
earthly probation for the kingdom of heaven. We have a pas
sage closely parallel in Cebet. Tab. 12. Ovkow bpag ko! Ovpav
rtva piKpdv, Kat bSov nva irpb rr)g Ovpag, ring ov iroXv oxXarat,
Kat 7rdvv oXtyot iropEvovrai, waiTEp Si dvoSiag rivbg rpaxiiag Kal
wETptoSovg uvai Soke!. Avrn roivvv eotiv 17 bSbg 17 dyovcra Trpoe
rr)v dXriOivrjv 7rat§£tav* Kat ,udXa y£ xaXE7rr| irpomSElv. Compare
Diod. Sic. p. 296. B. Hesiod. Op. D. 285. Xen. Cyrop. II. 2.
24. ./Elian. V. H. XIII. 32. Cic. Offic. I. 32. Senec. de Vita
Beata, c. 1. Sil. Ital. VI. 120. XV. 101. In the next verse,
for on, some MSS. read n, which Grotius, Campbell, and
Griesbach, prefer in the sense of S>g. So the Vulg. Quam an-
gusta porta, §c. supported by several of the early Fathers. If
the vulgar reading be correct, it should be rendered but; in
which sense it occurs in Numb, xxvii. 3. 1 Kings xxi. 15.
2 Kings i. 4. Jerem. xxxv. 7. Whitby, Kuinoel.
Ver. 15. ^EvSoTrporir/Twv. E. T. False prophets. But Trpo-

94 MATTHEW VII. 16. 19. 21.
tynvrig, not only means a prophet, but simply, a teacher of
religion. Hence the word ^EvSoTtpo^rnng is convertible with
^Ett8o8i8derKaXoe, 2 Pet. ii. 1. So Trpo^tmiv is, simply, to
teach, infra v. 22. The formula irpoaix^v diro nvog is the same
with c/>oj3£tcr0at dir6 nvog, Luke xii. 4. Compare Deut. xxiii. 9.
Sirac vi. 13. xi. 33. LXX.— By ivSvfiara irpo(3aTwv, may
probably be intended the hairy garment, with which the pro
phets were usually clothed, (see on Matt. iii. 4.) and which
is called jurjXcoT^e, Heb. xi. 37. or the expression may be
taken, metaphorically, to denote an external appearance of inno
cence and piety. The former is the more probable interpre
tation. So Horat. Epist. I. 16. 46. Introrsum turpem, speciosum
pelle decora. Compare Acts xx. 29. Ovid. Am. I. 8. 21.
Horat. Sat. II. 1. 65. The preposition iv is used in the sense
which obtains here, in Herod. II. 159. Joseph. Ant. XVIII.
6. 7. So Ovid. A. A. II. 292. Sive erit in Tyriis, Tyrios
laudabis amictus. With the epithet dpitayEg, as applied to
wolves, compare Lycoph. Cass. 1309. Horat. Od. IV. 4. 50.
Kuinoel, Campbell.
Ver. 16. rapirwv. See on Matt. iii. 8. By the fruits, some
commentators understand the doctrine of these false teachers,
and others their works. The latter seems the preferable inter
pretation ; and the evil designs and actions, to which our Lord
alludes, are frequently reprobated by his Apostles. Compare
1 Tim. i. 4. iv. 7. vi. 5. 2 Tim. ii. 16. 23. iii. 2. Tit. i. 11.
iii. 9. 2 Pet. ii. 3. 10. Jude 4. 8. 16. Whitby. — [Macknight.]
Ibid, firin avXXiyovaiv k. t. X. This illustration is prover
bial. Theogn. 537. Ovte ydp ek crKvXXrje poSa ipvErai, ovS'
vaKivOog. Galen, de Curat. 'O ynopybg ovk dv ttote Swr)<raiTo
Troiriaai tov fidrov iKipipEiv fiorpw. Senec. Epist. 87. Non
nascitur ex malo bonum, non magis quam ficus ex olea. Ad
semen nata respondent. Compare also Theocr. Idyl. I. 132. Virg.
Eclog. III. 38. VIII. 52. Nemesian. I. 75. Wetstein, Kuinoel.
Ver. 19. 7rdv SivSpov k. t. X. This verse is repeated from
Matt. iii. 10. in which place the connection is clear and intelli
gible. Here, however, it rather impedes the argument, and it
is not improbably an interpolation. Bowyer.
Ver. 21. ov 7rde. Not every one; i. e. no one. So Horn.
Od. Z. 24*0. ov irdvTiov OeCov. The word mpiog is frequently
used in the N. T. in the sense of SiSdaKaXog, (John xiii. 13. 14.
16.) as the title by which the Jewish rabbis were addressed by
their disciples. It appears, therefore, from this and the follow
ing verse, that the mere outward profession of faith in Christ, as
our Master and Redeemer, without an active obedience to his
laws, will avail nothing towards obtaining salvation. A. Clarke,
Kuinoel, Whitby.

MATTHEW VII. 22, 23, 24. 95
Ver. 22. iv iiuivy ry vfiipa. Scil. in the day of judgment.
Compare Matt, xi, 24. with Luke x. 12. Many passages may
be found in the Talmud wherein the Jews adopt a similar mode
of expression. Schoettgen, Wetstein. It appears from
Origen, contra Cels. I. p. 7. that miracles were performed in
the name of Christ during the early ages of Christianity by men
whose lives were inconsistent with the doctrines of the Gospel ;
nor is there any reason to doubt his testimony ; for though mi
racles cannot be wrought in confirmation of a false doctrine,
there is no absurdity in supposing that they may have been per
mitted to be wrought by evil men, not indeed in attestation of
the doctrine or piety of the doer, but of the truth of the religion
which, however his own practice may contradict his principles,
he outwardly professes and supports. Thus God prophesied
truly by the mouth of Balaam, Numb, xxiii. and the power of
healing diseases was given to Judas, in common with the rest of
the twelve, Matt. x. 1. See also Matt. xxiv. 24. Acts xvi. 18.
xix. 13. Whitby, Grotius.
Ver. 23. 6/uoXoy/)crco avro'ig. I will plainly declare to them.
In this sense the word occurs iniElian, V. H. II. 4. Herodian,
III. 6. Examples of yiyvwaKEiv, and the corresponding He
brew verb XI1, signifying to approve, will be found in Psalm i.
6. Ixxix. 16. Amos iii. 2. 1 Cor. viii. 3. 2 Tim. ii. 19. The
clause d7roxcop£TT£ a7r' ifiov k. t. X. is from Psalm vi. 9. Gro
tius, Kuinoel.
Ver. 24. rovg Xoyovg rovrovg. That is, the pure and whole
some precepts contained in this and the two preceding chapters.
The simile here employed by our Lord is fully illustrated" in
Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 32. 68. 392. ; and several of the
same kind, suggested by the peculiarities of the climate of
Judaea, are to be found in the Rabbinical writings. A saying of
Elisha, the son of Abuja, will furnish a specimen : The man who
studies much in the law, and maintains good works, is like to a
man who built a house, laying stones in the foundation, and
building brick upon them ; and though many waters come
against it, they cannot move it from its place. But the man
who studies much in the law, and does not maintain good
works, is like to a man who, in building his house, put bricks
at the foundation, and laid stones upon them; so that even
gentle waters shall overthrow that house. Aboth. Rab. Nath.
A. Clarke.
Ibid, iirl ri)v irirpav. E. T. upon a rock. But the article
seems to denote something more definite. Now in the parable
of the Sower, Luke viii. 6. iirl rrjv irirpav signifies on the rocky
or stony grpund; and it is, therefore, more than probable, that
in this place also the words havela similar meaning, espe-

96

MATTHEW VII. 29.

daily as opposed to iirl rf)v dfifiov. In Luke, though the moral
is the same, the illustration is somewhat different. There the
wise man builds his house, first laying a foundation on the rock;
the foolish man builds iirl rr/v yr)v, and that too xwP1^ Ot/iEXiov.
Middleton. In the next verse irorafiol is properly rendered
floods, or torrents. So xe'lH-aPP°t- irorafiol, Hom. II. A. 452. et
passim. Hammond.
Ver. 29. E^ovcriav ex">v. Some commentators, after Jerome
and Theophylact, refer this authority, with which Christ spake,
to his delivering the law in his own name, as the original framer,
and not the mere interpreter of it. But this seems to be some
what at variance with the declarations made by him upon several
occasions, that his doctrine was not his own, but his that sent
him; John vii. 16. xvii. 18. and elsewhere. Hence Lightfoot
and Whitby suppose that he spoke as a prophet, having au
thority from God to deliver his message ; not as the scribes,
who merely interpreted the Scriptures according to the traditions
of their forefathers. But the word i^ovaia seems rather to de
note the force and power with which he spake : his persuasive
eloquence, irresistible arguments, and perspicuous statements, so
different from the trifling and frivolous disputations of the
doctors and scribes. Hom. II. I. 689. 'Q,g 'iipaO'' ol S' dpa
irdvrsg aKrjv iyivovro cnwiry, Mv0ov dyaaadfiEvoi' fidXa yap
KparEpwg dyopEvcre. A. Clarke, Kuinoel, Rosenmuller. —
[Doddridge, Le Clerc] After ypafifiarEig the words Kal ol
Qapiaaioi are added in several MSS. and Versions, but without
any probable authenticity.
Note. — It was observed on v. 6. supra, that many of the pre
cepts iii the Sermon on the Mount were delivered by our Lord
upon more than one occasion. The subjoined Table, from Bp.
Marsh's Dissertation on the three first Gospels, represents the
parallel passages as they are scattered throughout the Gospel of
St. Luke.

MATTHEW.

LUKE.

MATTHEW.

LUKE.

V. 3—6.

VI. 20, 21.

VI. 19—21.

XII. 33, 34.

11,12.

22, 23.

22, 23.

XI. 34—36

15.

XI. 33.

24.

XVI. 13.

18.

XVI. 17.

25—33.

XII. 22—31

25, 26.

XII. 58, 59.

VII. 1—5.

VI. 37—42

32.

XVI. 18.

7—11.

XI. 9—13.

39—42.

VI. 29, 30.

12.

VI. 31.

44.

27, 28.

13.

XIII. 24.

45.

35.

16—21.

VI. 43—46

46, 47.

32, 33.

22, 23.

XIII. 25—27.

48.

36.

24—27.

VI. 47— 49

VI. 9—13.

XI. 2—4.

MATTHEW VIII. 1, 2, 3. 97
CHAPTER VIII.
Contents : — A Leper cleansed; vv. 1 — 4. [Mark i. 40. Luke
v. 12.] The Centurion's Servant healed; 5 — 13. [Luke vii.
1.] Peter's Wife's Mother, eye. cured; 14 — 17. [Mark i. 29.
Luke iv. 38.] Two Disciples offer themselves; 18 — 22.
[Luke ix. 57.] The Tempest stilled ; 23—27. [Mark iv. 35.
Luke viii. 22.] The Gadarene Dcemoniac ; 28 — 34. [Mark
v. 1. Luke viii. 21.]
Verse 1. KaTa/3dvTi Se ovtc^. The pronoun is redundant, as
in Matt. iv. 16. The construction may also be explained, as a
substitution for the genitive absolute. It occurs again infra v. 5.
and Matt. xxi. 23.
Ver. 2. KipiE, idv OiXyg, k. t. X. The vocative KvptE was a
usual form of address among the Jews, where the person was
unknown. Compare John iv. 19. xii. 21. xx. 15. So also
among the Latins : Senec. Epist. 3. obvios, si nomen non suc-
currit, dominos salutamus. Martial. Epigr. I. 113. Cum te non
nossem, dominum regemque vocabam ; Cum bene te novi, jam
mihi Prisons eris. The leper, therefore, may possibly have looked
upon Christ merely as a prophet sent from God, with the power
of working miraculous cures, at the same time that he was not
certified as to his being the Messiah. Nevertheless, the word is
continually employed in the most sacred sense, as equivalent to
the Hebrew T31N, Adoni, and, consequently, may have been so
used in the present instance. Grotius, Le Clerc, Kuinoel.
There is a peculiar humility and modesty in the manner of the
leper's address, evincing the highest respect for the character,
and the most confident assurance of the power of Christ. Com
pare Wisd. Sol. xii. 18. The following are also instances of
similar delicacy; Arrian, Epict. III. 10. Appian, B. G. III. p.
371. Arist. T. II. p. 417. Horat. Epod. XVII. 45. Sat. II. 6. 39.
Wetstein. Of the Leprosy, and the Levitical law respecting it,
see Home's Introd. Vol. III. Part III. Ch. 5. Sect. 2. §. 4. and
note, p. 292.
Ver. 3. ritparo. The same legal impurity is attached to those
who touched an unclean person, or a dead body, as to those who
were actually infected. Hence it has been inferred, in opposi
tion to Gal. iv. 4. that Christ was not under the law. But miracu
lous cures, such as that performed by Elijah, 1 Kings xvii. 19. and
Elisha, 2 Kings iv. 34. were clearly exempted from the ritual in
junctions. Besides, the touch and the cure in the present in
stance were simultaneous ; so that no impurity could have been
incurred. Whitby, Grotius.
VOL. I. H

98 MATTHEW VIII. 4.
Ver. 4. 6pa jujjSevi e'iV^c. Of the nature and design of our
Lord's miracles in general, see Home's Introd. Vol. I. Ch. IV.
Sect. 2. and of his reasons for enjoining secresy in particular
cases, ibid. p. 235. In the present instance, it is probable that
the injunction only extended till he had submitted himself to the
inspection of the priest, whose office it was to declare him clean.
The immense multitude which must have been witnesses of the
miracle, upon the supposition that it occurred in the order of St.
Matthew's narrative, is wholly inconsistent with any idea of pre
venting its publicity ; so that the object in view seems to have
been to keep the priest in ignorance of the transaction, lest his
jealousy should induce him to deny the reality of the cure. Gro
tius, Kuinoel. It has been supposed, however, that the real
date of this miracle is prior to the Sermon on the Mount ; and
that the Evangelist deferred the relation of it, together with that
of some others which were performed in the early part of our
Lord's ministry, for the purpose of placing the Sermon in a pro
minent point of view, and of giving in succession, at the close of
the discourse, a series of the miracles, of which he had spoken
in general terms immediately before its commencement. This
supposition is considerably supported by the improbability of
meeting with a leper in so great a concourse of people as are said
to have been assembled on the Mount ; not to mention that the
injunction of secresy, which must otherwise be limited, is given
in as general terms, and apparently with the same intention, as
upon any other of the occasions when our Lord thought proper to
enforce it. The place which the event holds in St. Luke's nar
rative is also in favour of this conclusion, since there is no reason
for supposing, with some commentators, that the Evangelists
have recorded two different transactions. Lightfoot, New-
come. — [Doddridge, Macknight.]
Ibid. Etc juapr^ptov avrolg. There is considerable differ
ence of opinion respecting the import of these words ; some re
ferring the pronoun avro'ig to the priests, and others to the
people ; now the priest was but one, UpEl, whereas avrolg is in
the plural ; and though the singular may be explained in a col
lective sense as indicating the whole body, still it is clear that
the offering could not be for a testimony to them, since they had
ocular evidence of his purity from inspection in private, before
the man was permitted to make the oblation in the Temple.
The ceremony consequent upon this permission was the public
testimony to the people that the man's uncleanness was removed,
and that he was no longer secluded from their society. The an
tecedent, therefore, to the pronoun them, though not expressed,
is easily supplied by the sense. This attestation to the cure
would also be a testimony to the divine mission of Christ, who
had effected it; in which sense the word fiaprvpiov is most
generally employed in the N. T. Compare Matt. x. 18. xi. 5.
10

MATTHEW VIII. 5, 6. 99
xxiv. 14. Luke ix. 5. It was allowed by the Rabbins that curing
the leprosy would be one of the characteristics of the Messiah.
Campbell, Whitby, A. Clarke, Hammond. — [Rosenmuller.]
Kuinoel considers that the testimony was intended to be pro
duced against the priests, should they be subsequently induced to
deny the cure.
Ver. 5. 7rpo<7fjX0£v avni! EKOTovTapxoe, k. t. X. Some com
mentators have imagined that this miracle is different from that
which is recorded in Luke vii. 1. but the extraordinary similarity
of the circumstances connected with each cannot plausibly be
accounted for upon any other supposition than that of identity.
The supposed points of difference between the two Evangelists
are these : 1. St. Matthew relates the cure of the Centurion's
son, iralg ; St. Luke of his servant, SovXog : 2. The Centurion
in St. Matthew is said to solicit for himself what in St. Luke he
solicits by the intervention of his friends : 3. It does not appear
from St. Matthew that the Centurion was a proselyte. Now,
not to mention that iralg is actually interchanged with SovXog in
Luke vii. 7. it is well known that the Hebrews were accustomed
to soften down the name of servant into that of son, as in Gen.
xxii. 5. Judg. ix. 54. 2 Sam. ii. 14. xv. 14. 2 Kings x. 5. where
the LXX have iralg or 7ratSdptov. The same usage prevailed
also among the Greeks and Romans. Compare Aristoph. Ran.
192. Anacr. Od. XXXVI. 9. Horat. Od. I. 38. 1. II. 11. 18.
Propert. III. 23.23. Pollux III. 8. KaXovvrat iralSEg 01 SovXoi
irapd rolg 'ArrtKote. With regard to the persons by whom the
request was made to Jesus, it is to be observed, that the Jews
were wont to look upon a thing which was done at their desire, in
the same light as if it were done by themselves. Thus in Mark
x. 35. the sons of Zebedee are represented as preferring a request
to Christ, which, according to Matt. xx. 20. was really preferred
in their name by their mother. Lastly, although it does not im
mediately follow from St. Matthew's account that the Centurion
was a proselyte, there is still nothing from which the contrary
can be inferred ; so that it may fairly be concluded that one
Evangelist has given a fuller account than the other of the same
transaction. At the same time, it is sufficiently evident from the
declaration of our Lord in v. 10., that the Centurion was not an
Israelite by birth. Whitby, Grotius, Lightfoot, Hammond,
Kuinoel.— [Macknight.]
Ver. 6. fiifiXriTai. Decumbit ; i. e. is laid forth without
power qf motion. Compare infra v. 14. Exod. xxi. 18. LXX.
There is an ellipsis of oti rr)g KXivrig, as appears from Matt. ix. 2.
Mark vii. 30. Lightfoot, Kuinoel. The verb j3a<ravt^£tv sig
nifies to torture, from j3dcravoc, which denotes properly a Lydian
stone, upon which metals were proved ; (Find. Pyth. X. 105.)
h 2

100 MATTHEW VIII. 8, 9, 10, 11.
and thence, an instrument of torture. It has been observed,
however, that the palsy, or paralysis, is not attended with pain,
so that $aaaviZ,6fiEvog should rather be rendered afflicted. But
it appears from Celsus and Aretaeus, that apoplexy was also
classed under the head of paralysis ; and it is certain that there
are cases in which the patient suffers considerable pain. Compare
1 Mace. xii. 55, 56. LXX. Rosenmuller, Kuinoel. — [Camp
bell, Hammond.]
Ver. 8. £i7T£ Xoytj). This is unquestionably the true reading,
and it has the support of a very great number of MSS., versions,
and Fathers. Hence, it is received by Griesbach instead of Eliri
Xoyov. Euthymius explains it by ev Xoyw \piXw. So Terent.
And. I. 1. Quin tu uno verbo die, quid est, quod me velis.
Wetstein, Kuinoel. Of ckovoc in the sense of d^iog, see on
Matt. iii. 11. and compare John i. 27.
Ver. 9. v7ro HZovaiav. Scil. raaaofiEvog. This same participle
is omitted in Acts viii. 27. xii. 20. In the parallel passage,
Luke vii. 8., the ellipse is supplied: so also in Diod. Sic. p. 201.
B. ovk rjcrav v7ro jutav riysfioviav TErayfiivoi. The noun i%ovaia
is used in the abstract for the concrete. Compare Rom. xiii. 1.
with v. 3. and Luke xii. 11. with Matt. x. 18. Kuinoel. Of
the discipline here alluded to, and the argument employed, see
Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 223. 225.
Ver. 10. ovSe ev t£ 'Icrpa^X k. t. X. The faith of the Cen
turion, which elicited this declaration from our Lord, consisted
in the just conception which he entertained of the miraculous
power with which he was endued. It is probable that the idea
which he thus formed of Christ originated in the cure which had
been effected some time before upon the nobleman's son, who dwelt
at this same place, Capernaum, at the distance of a day's journey
from Cana, where the miracle was performed. Kuinoel, Mack
night. Of the various notions affixed to the word iriarig, faith,
in the N. T., see, for the present, Home's Introd. Vol. II. p.
733. It will be necessary to notice its theological application
more particularly in the notes on the Epistle to the Romans.
With the proper name 'Io-pa^X there is an ellipse of the word
Xa£. Compare Acts xiii. 23, 24. So also Matt. xv. 24. xxvii.
42. Mark xv. 32. Luke i. 68. vii. 9. et passim. Sometimes
otKoe would be more properly supplied from Matt. x. 6. See
Bos Ellips. Gr. p. 153.
Ver. 11. awb avaroXwv ko! Svarfiwv. Scil. riXiov. In Luke
xiii. 29. are added the words ko! dirb Boppq ko! Notov. Both
expressions are equally applied to denote from all quarters of
the world. Compare Josh, i. 4. 15. Psal. lvii. Xen. Cyrop. I.

MATTHEW VIII. 11. 101
1.3. Of the Jewish custom of reclining at meals, alluded to in the
verb dvaKXtvEoQai, see Home, Vol. III. pp. 397. 448. and my note
on Hom. II. I. 218. Judithxii. 15. LXX. dvaKXivE<T0ai Eig to i<r-
O'ieiv. From the exalted faith evinced by the Centurion, our
Lord takes occasion to declare the merciful purpose which God
entertained towards the Gentiles, of admitting them on equal
terms with the believing Jews, into a participation of the pro
mises made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, from which the un
believing Israelites would be excluded. This he expresses under
the familiar representation of a sumptuous feast, agreeably to the
custom of the Jews, who were wont to pourtray the rewards of
the righteous by the same figure. Compare Matt. xxii. 1. Luke
xiv. 15. Rev. xix. 9. So in the Talmud: Thus saith the God
of Israel : Ye offer me shew-bread and sacrifice in this life :
and in the world to come I will spread for you a great table,
which the Gentiles shall see and be ashamed. And though the
joys of heaven be all of a spiritual kind, the metaphor is not only
appropriate, but necessary ; since it is only by similitudes taken
from this life, that our condition in the next can be brought to the
level of our understanding. The same manner of speaking was
also in use among the Greeks, who represent Tantalus and Ixion
as feasting with the gods, thereby denoting the height of human
felicity. Hence Empedocles, speaking of the state of the just :
,A0avdroig dXXot(Tiv bfiiarioi, iv Si rpairiZaig EvvtEC- Epictet.
Enchirid. 21. icy irori tujv Oeiov dialog avfiirorrig. But in order
to understand more fully the figure here employed, it is to be
observed, that these banquets were usually made at night, and
thence called coence convivales. They were frequently pro
tracted to a late hour, and the houses were accordingly illumi
nated with great splendour. See Athen. XV. p. 699. and Plu
tarch, Symp. IV. 93. While the guests, therefore, were sur
rounded with a blaze of light, those who were excluded were in
darkness without, which was rendered more abundantly gloomy
by the profusion of light within. It is necessary to observe,
further, that the guests entered by a gate which was closed as
soon as the company invited had arrived ; nor was it re-opened
to any who came too late. Compare Matt. xxv. 11. Luke xiii.
24, 25. John x. 1. Hence it should seem that those who were
shut out were not only involved in darkness, but exposed to
hunger, cold, and mortification, which our Lord represents by
weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth, as emblematic of
the wretched state of those who are excluded from the privilege
of the Gospel here, and its promises hereafter. We may ob
serve, lastly, that the assurance here held out to the Gentiles
was in direct opposition to the Rabbinical doctrine that all
Israel should have a portion in the world to come ; but that the
heathen should be fuel for Hell fire. Pirk Eliezer, IX. 4.
Whitby, Macknight, Le Clerc, Schoettgen, Another in-

102 MATTHEW VIII. 12. 14. 16.
terpretation is given in Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 433. which
is rather applicable to Matt. xxii. 13. See also Vol. III. Part
III. Ch. 2. Sect. l.§. 1.
Ver. 12. ol viol Tr)g fiacriXEiag. The Jews ; who were the
chosen people of God, and to whom an admission into the Gospel
kingdom was first offered. The word vlbg is here used, like the
Hebrew 33, ben, to denote a person possessing some kind of
property in the thing denoted by the noun to which it is pre
fixed. So Luke x. 6. 6 vlbg rrig iiprivrig. Compare Psalm xl.
10. lxxxviii. 12. cii. 21. Kuinoel. At first sight, the insertion
of the article before KXavOfibg and j3pvy/xoe may appear arbi
trary, but the expression occurs in the N. T. seven times in
the same form, and the reason is easily discovered. The weep
ing and gnashing of teeth spoken of is that of the persons last
mentioned; and the sense is, There shall they weep and gnash
their teeth. Without the article the preposition would have
asserted only that some persons should there weep, which is all
that the E. T. expresses, but which falls short of the real mean
ing. Middleton. The word copct in v. 13. signifies a moment,
or instant of time. The expression is equivalent to EvOiug,
supra v. 3. : with a numeral adjective, however, it means an
hour, properly, as in John xi. 9. Acts ii. 1 5. Campbell.
Ver. 14. j3eJ3Xt|juev7iv. See on v. 6. — 7T£v0£pdv. See the
Lexicon to my Pent. Gr. v. ya/xj3poe. Peter was a native of
Bethsaida, from whence he removed, with his brother Andrew,
to Capernaum, probably in consequence of his marriage with a
woman of that place. Of the several particulars of his life, see
Home's Introd. Vol. IV. p. 445. We have no positive evi
dence in the N. T. that any other of the Apostles were married,
except Peter ; though it seems highly probable from 1 Cor. ix. 5.
that such was the case. Ignatius, in his interpolated Epist. ad
Phil. §. 4. speaks of Peter and Paul, and other Apostles ; and
St. Basil, 7T£pt dn-oTayfjc /3tov, T. II. p. 234. of St. Peter and the
rest of the Apostles, as being married. Omnes Apostoli, says St.
Ambrose, on 1 Cor. xi. exceptisJohanne et Paulo, uxores habuisse
dicuntur. Other testimonies might also be adduced; but the
single instance of St. Peter is sufficient proof that the Romish
Church have no apostolical authority for imposing celibacy on
their priests. It is the observation of Theophylact, that marriage
is no hindrance to virtue, since the chief of the Apostles had his
wife. Whitby. Of the verb cWkoveTv, in the next verse, see
on Matt. iv. 11. For avrolg, a great number of MSS. read
avrijj, and they are supported by the principal versions, and
several of the Fathers.
Ver. 16. oTpiag ytvofiivrig. That is, after sun-set; for at

MATTHEW VIII. 17. 103
that time the sabbath, on which day these events happened,
(Mark i. 21.) ended. See Home, Vol. III. p. 304. Hence
the Rabbins say : the sabbath doth not enter, but when the sun
is set. Whitby, Lightfoot. The expression £Kj3dXXEtv Xoytj>,
may be aptly illustrated by Cic. Catil. Or. 2. Ego vehemens ille
consul, qui verbo cives in exilium ejicio. Kuinoel.
Ver. 17. oirwg irXripioOy k. t. X. The citation is from Isaiah
liii. 4. in which sublime chapter are prophetically described the
propitiatory sufferings of Christ for the sins of the world. But
because the Apostle has applied the words more immediately to
the healing of the sick, some commentators have concluded that
they were merely cited as an accommodation, and not accord
ing to the sense of the prophet. Since, however, the Jews con
sidered sickness and disease as the temporal punishment of sin,
and our Lord himself, in accordance with this opinion, frequently
said to those whom he healed, " Thy sins be forgiven thee,"
the prophecy may have had its first fulfilment in the removal of
bodily infirmities, and have been more completely accomplished
in the full remission of our sins, by the sacrifice on the cross.
Whitby, Grotius. The Socinians have made use of the passage,
as cited by St. Matthew, to invalidate the doctrine of the Atone
ment ; asserting, that it simply relates to the removal of diseases,
without any reference to a propitiatory sacrifice. In support of
this assertion, they argue that the word Ej3dcn-acr£v signifies he
bore away, he removed; without the idea of bearing in person ;
and the word aiirbg, himself, is entirely overlooked in the Uni
tarian version. Schleusner also, though he has rightly inter
preted the passage, has attempted to give fiarrTaZw the sense of
tollo, upon the authority of John xii. 16. xx. 15. where porto
is clearly the more suitable interpretation. The other instances
which he has cited, do not apply : and, if they did, fiaardZEiv is
expressed in Isaiah liii. 4. by the Hebrew 72D, which occurs
only six times in the O. T. in the active voice, and always in the
sense of portare. It should seem also, that d<r0Ev£tae and vocrovc,
as well as their corresponding Hebrew words, may be under
stood to relate to bodily infirmities, and mental maladies respec
tively, so that the first clause will relate to diseases removed, the
latter to sufferings personally endured. Nor is it surprising that
so distinguishing a character of the Messiah, as that of his
healing all manner of diseases with a word, — a character too,
which Isaiah himself has depicted so strongly in chap. xxx. 5.
that our Saviour quotes his very words in proof of his Messiah-
ship, (Matt. xi. 4.) — should be introduced in a place where his
main object was to represent the plan of our redemption by means
of Christ's sufferings ; more particularly as the Jews connected
the ideas of sin and disease, so that an allusion to the one would
naturally suggest the mention of the other. That the Evangelist,

104 MATTHEW VIII. 18, 19.
on the other hand, though speaking more immediately of bodily '
diseases, should, at the same time, cite the latter member of the
prophecy, which relates to the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ,
will appear equally reasonable from the consideration, that the
healing of bodily distempers, would naturally suggest the more
important object of the Messiah's mission ; that of saving men
from their sins. Rennell, Magee.
Ver. 18. Etc rb iripav. To the opposite side; scil. of the lake
of Gennesareth, (Luke viii. 22.) : whence he proceeded to the
country of the Gergesenes : v. 28. Let it be remarked, that
crossing this lake does not always denote sailing from the east
side to the west, or inversely; though the river Jordan, both
above and below the lake, ran southwards. The lake was of
such a form, that, without any impropriety, it might be said to be
crossed in other directions, even by those who kept on the same
side of the Jordan. Campbell. Upon the present, and other
occasions, our Lord seems to have avoided keeping the multitude
together, in order to prevent any appearance of sedition; a cau
tion, which Pilate's readiness to receive any information relative
to tumultuary proceedings rendered highly necessary. See
Joseph. Ant. XVII. Le Clerc.
Ver. 19. sic ypa/ifiarEvg. The numeral sic is here used for
the indefinite pronoun tic, as in Luke v. 12. xxi. 19. John vi. 19.
xx. 7. The usage is explained as an Hebraism; (see- Gen.
xxvii. 44. LXX.) but it is sanctioned by the best Greek writers.
Plutarch, de Audit, p. 46. ilg EylXacrEv. Lucian. in Dcemonact.
p. 1012. Eva yap totov kvvikov. So unus in Latin : Terent.
And. I. 1: 91. Forte unam aspicio adolescentulam. Kypke,
Wetstein. It should seem that this Scribe was induced by
interested motives, and with a view to the pleasures and profits
of Christ's kingdom, the nature of which he did not comprehend,
to become his disciple. Our Lord at once checks his ardour, by
assuring him that he was not likely to better his worldly condition
by following one, who had not where to lay his head, This ex
pression the reader will find illustrated in Home's Introd. Vol. II.
p. 334. The forwardness of the Scribe, however, though from a
wrong motive, appears to have aroused the negligence of a par
ticular disciple, who would have excused himself from attending
upon Jesus, till the death of his father. Now the duty of super
intending the obsequies of a parent was considered of the
highest importance by the Jews, and, indeed, by the ancients in
general. See Tobit vi. 15. Joseph, adv. Apion. II. 27. Hom.
Od. B. 201. The disciple's father, therefore, though probably
advanced in years, was not so near his end, perhaps, as his son
imagined; so that the case was not so urgent, as to interfere
with the more important concerns of the Gospel. Compare

MATTHEW VIII. 20. 105
' 1 Kings ix. 20. Clemens Alex, has preserved a tradition, that
Philip was the person here alluded to ; but the name of disciple
was common to all who professed to believe in Christ ; so that it
may have been merely one of those, who were constant attendants
upon his preaching. See John vi. 66. Macknight, Le Clerc,
Grotius. The history here recorded is related by St. Luke, during
our Lord's journey through Samaria: ch. ix. 57. It seems,
however, to have happened in the order of St. Matthew's narra
tive ; and to have been introduced by St. Luke into the place
which it holds in his Gospel, on account of its affinity to the
subject. Grotius. — [Macknight.]
Ver. 20. at dXwirEKEg k. t. X. Plutarch has a similar senti
ment in T. Gracch. p. 828. C. to piv Oripia rd rr)v 'IraXlav
VEfxofiEva Kal c^pcuXeov £X£I) Kai KOiralov icrrlv avrwv EKacrrto, Kal
KaraSixjEig' rolg Si virip 'IraXiag paxofiivoig Kal diro0vri<TKOvaiv
aipog Kal (potrbg, dXXov Se ovSevoc, fiirEanv, dXX' doiKOi Kal
dviSpvroi fiErd tekvCov irXavwvrai. The noun (pwXsbg signifies
a den, or lair, of a wild beast. Hesych. (pwXEog' airriXaiov, ov
rd Oripia Koifidrai. Compare Theocr. Idyl. I. 115. XXIV. 83.
Pausan. VIII. 16. Apoll. Bibl. I. 9. 11. .Elian. V. H. VI. 3.
Also, Karauicrivwa-ig does not imply a nest, but simply a place of
shelter; a perch, or roost. Thus the verb KaTacnc^vovv is used
in Matt. xiii. 32. Luke xiii. 19. of birds perching, and taking
shelter upon branches. Wetstein," Kuinoel, Campbell.
Ibid. 6 vlbg rov dvOpwirov. This title, as applied by Christ
to himself, occurs seventeen times in St. Matthew, twelve times
in St. Mark, twenty-one times in St. Luke, and eleven times in
St. John ; in all, sixty-one times, and always with this pecu
liarity, that it is always so used by Christ himself, and never by
any other person. There is a single exception, in Acts vii. 56.
where it is so applied by the martyr Stephen. In the O. T. two
of the prophets, Daniel and Ezekiel, are called sons of men; by
which they were reminded, that, although they were instruments
in the hands of God, and had obtained great favour in his sight,
still there was an immeasurable distance between them and their
Maker. But in the N. T. the title belongs to Christ, kot' i%o-
Xvv, as is clear from the corresponding term, 6 vlbg rov Qeov,
(see on Matt. iv. 3.) in connexion with which, it clearly proves,
that after some manner or other, to us unknown at present, he
united in his person the human and divine natures ; thus entirely
subverting the directly opposite tenets both of Gnostics and Soci-
nians. The title itself is evidently taken from Dan. vii. 13.
where eternal dominion is ascribed to Christ, as being the Son
of Man ; and from this prophecy, the Jews expected that their
Messiah would assume the appellation. Aben Esra has this
saying of the Rabbi Joshua; He, who cometh as the Son of
Man, is Messiah; and this is a sure thing. Hence it appears,

106 MATTHEW VIII. 22. 24, 25.
that although the name is assumed by Christ, in reference to his
humiliation, in taking upon him our flesh, it was still in itself an
appellation of the most exalted dignity. Paley, Macknight,
Schoettgen, &c.
Ver. 22. dfsg rovg veKpovg k. t. X. The dead, ol vsKpol, are
frequently in Scripture those, who are dead in trespasses and
sins: as Eph. ii. 1. Col. ii. 13. 1 Tim. v. 6. Rev. iii. 1. The
same metaphor was employed by the Grecian sages. Clem.
Alex. 4. iv tt5 (iapfidpw (piXoaoipiq vEKpoiig KaXovai roiig ektte-
trovrag tojv Soypdrwv, Kal KaOvirord^avrag rov vovv rolg 7rdc/£crt
4>vx<-Kolg. Hence Soph. Ant. 1165. rag ydp riSovdg "Qrav
irpoSCoaiv dvSpsg, ov riOrifi iyd) 2,yv tovtov, dXX' Efi\pvx°v i7yov-
p.ai vEKpov. In the present passage, the word, by a common
rhetorical figure, bears a different meaning in the beginning of
the sentence, from that which it bears in the end ; so that the
import is : Let the spiritually dead, who are insensible to the
concerns of the soul and eternity, employ themselves in burying
those who are naturally dead. Of this figure, which is called
antanaclasis, there are several instances in the Scriptures. See
Psalm xviii. 26. Isaiah lxv. 11. Jerem. xxxiv. 17. Matt. v. 19.
xii. 50. Rom. xiv. 13. 1 Cor. viii. 2. Gal. iv. 9. Rev. xxii. 18, 19.
Juvencus, in his Hist. Evang. II. 23. thus translates this passage:
Et sine defunctis defunctos condere terra. The expression was
probably proverbial. Whitby, Grotius, Albert, Palairet.
Ver. 24. aEiapog. A tempest. So Jerem. xxiii. 19. LXX.
The word more properly denotes an earthquake ; as in Luke
xxiv. 7. Xen. Hellen.* IV. 7. 4. but it is also used of a storm at
sea, and is convertible with XaiXaip. Compare Mark iv. 37.
Luke viii. 23. Virg. Mn. I. 135. Motos componere fluctus.
Grotius, Kuinoel. The sudden squalls, and as sudden calms,
with which the lake of Gennesareth is visited, (see Home's In
trod. Vol. III. p. 40.) have tempted some of the German com
mentators to hazard an opinion, that there was nothing miraculous
in the transaction here related. But though the wind may cease
on a sudden, the agitation of the water will not immediately
subside : so that the instantaneous calm was an undeniable proof
of the miracle. It remains also for such reasoners to prove, that
our Lord was aware that the tempest was then about to cease in
the instant ; and to account for the terror of his disciples, and
their consequent wonder at the cessation of the storm. To still
the raging of the sea, was always looked upon as an operation
of the Deity : and it was doubtless the decisive exercise of this
power, that called forth the expression of admiration in v. 27.
Compare Psalm lxv. 7. cvii. 25. Whitby, Kuinoel, Jortin.
Ver. 25. rjyetpav avrov, Scil. 1% virvov. The ellipsis is com-

MATTHEW VIII. 28. 107
pleted in Hom. II. E. 422. — In several of the best MSS. avrou
is wanting, nor is it required, as the article of itself involves the
sense of the possessive pronoun. The Vatican also, and some
versions, omit paOryral, probably from a like omission in Mark
iv. 38. Luke viii. 24. Wetstein, Griesbach. In the following
verse the word 6Xiyo7rtoToi seems to imply a want of confidence,
which his disciples ought not to have entertained, after witnessing
the divine power which he had already exercised. Since his
miracles had previously been confined to the cure of diseases,
they probably feared lest he should be unable to subdue the fury
of the elements. Hence, we perceive an additional cause for the
exclamation, TroTa7roe iariv ovrog, k. t. X. Qualis quantusque
sit, 8$c. The verb iiririfiav, it may be remarked, signifies not
only to rebuke ; but to restrain, to-quell. Compare Luke iv. 35.
Psalm xviii. 17. lxviii. 31. civ. 7. LXX. Luke iv. 35. 39. In
the parallel passage of Mark, the expression is : eitte ry OaXdo-ay,
aiwira. Macknight, Kuinoel.
Ver. 28. rspyEcnjvwv. It is not improbable that Origen intro
duced this reading upon mere conjecture. Before his time, the
copies, for the most part, varied between rEpacrrjvcov and TaSa-
prjvwv. Now Gerasa, according to Origen, (T. IV. p. 140.)
was a city of Arabia, ovte fldXacrcrav ovte Xipvriv irXriaiov k'xovcra.
Several of the commentators are in favour of raSap?)vc5v, as in
Mark v. 1 . Luke viii. 6. ; and the distance of Gadara from the
border of the lake was not so great as to authorize its rejection.
According to Joseph. B. J. V. 3. from Gadara to Tiberias,
which lay on the opposite side of the lake, was a distance of
sixty stadia ; and the width of the lake, on the same authority,
was forty stadia ; so that the distance of the city from the water
side, will be less than two and a half English miles. Where, then,
is the improbability, allowing it were even twice that distance,
that the news of the miracle here recorded, should be carried
thither immediately? Still TEpyEcrrjvcov may be the true reading,
without producing any discrepancy in the narratives of the Evan
gelists ; Matthew giving the general name of the country, in which
Gadara was comprehended. See Home's Geographical Index.
Somewhat similar is the promiscuous use of the names Argos and
Mycence by the Greeks ; and the confusion of the neighbouring
towns of Pharsalia and Philippi by the Latins. See Elmsley on
Eurip. Herac. 188. Heyne on Virg. Georg. I. 489. Whitby,
Kuinoel. Of the nature and design of this miracle, see Home's
Introd. Vol. I. p. 246. With respect to its moral application, it
is well observed by Mr. Jones, of Nayland, that sin in man is
what the devil is in a daemoniac : and it is clear that a man may
be under the dominion of a legion of evil passions at once. It
is supposed by those who deny the reality of daemoniacal posses
sion, that the person here cured was merely a maniac, labouring,

108 MATTHEW VIII. 29.
perhaps, under the disease called Lycanthropia ; of which see
Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 515. But it seems impossible to
apply the terms which the Evangelist employs in any other than
a personal sense ; and, at all events, the effect produced upon
the swine, cannot be explained upon any such hypothesis. It
is worse than idle to talk of gregarious animals being seized with
sudden panics ; and with respect to the opinion, which has been
maintained by some, that the swine were driven down the pre
cipice by the maniacs, it is sufficient to reply, that the words of
the Evangelists will not bear the construction. Indeed, it is
more than probable, that part of our Lord's object in consenting
to the request of the daemoniac, was to prove the reality of such
possessions, and to shew the power and malignity which the
daemon exercised over the possessed. In addition to what has
been said before (p. 55.) of daemonism in general, we may observe,
that the witnesses of our Lord's miracles entertained no doubt as
to its true character ; since they looked upon the devils as a set
of inferior agents, of whom Beelzebub was chief. Matt. xii. 24.
Whitby, Doddridge. — [Rosenmuller.] With respect to the
apparent discrepancy between St. Matthew, who mentions two
daemoniacs, and Mark and Luke, who mention only one, it is
probable that one was more fierce than the other, or that there
was some circumstance in the cure, which rendered it more re
markable. There is a rule of Le Clerc, which may here be ap
plied : Qui plura narrat, pauciora amplectitur ; qui pauciora
memorat, plura non negat. Newcome, Hammond.
Ibid. pvrifiEiwv. Of the tombs of the Jews, which were
situated chiefly in desert and mountainous places, see Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 526. An opinion prevailed among the Jews
and early Christians, that the departed souls of wicked men
seized upon the bodies of the living, and made them daemoniacs.
See Joseph. B. J. VII. 23. Hence it has been imagined, that
the daemons probably frequented the tombs, in order to confirm
this vain persuasion. But it is more probable that the daemoniac
took refuge in them as a place of shelter ; as it is known that
wretches in extremity sometimes did the like. Compare Arist.
Equit. 790. Elsner, Doddridge. — [Hammond, Wetstein.]
Ibid. xaX£7rot. Fierce, terrible. Hesych. x<*X.E7roV mcXripoe.
Hom. Od. T. 201. xa^i7r°s SI rte copope Saipwv. Aristot.
H. A. VI. 18. ot vsg ol dypioi tteoI rrjv bxtiav x«X£7rwTaTot.
Of the verb ItrxvEtv, in the sense of <5vva<x0at, we have an example
in Gen. xxxi. 29. LXX. Wetstein, Kuinoel.
Ver. 29. 7rpo Kaipov. Before the time ; i. e. before the day of
judgment ; at which time it was supposed that evil spirits would
be deprived of their power, and confined for ever with encreased
torments in the bottomless pit. See 2 Pet. ii. 4. Jude 6. The
words /caipoe and XQ^voQ differ in this, that the latter designates

MATTHEW VIII. SO. 109
any period, however indefinite ; whereas the time denoted by the
former is definite and fixed. The import of the word fiaaaviaai
in this place, is illustrated by the expression Eig rfiv dfivcrcrov
oiteXOeIv, Luke viii. 31. Of the phrase ri riplv mi <rot, see Matt.
Gr. Gr. §. 385. 10. It occurs frequently in the O. T. in refer
ence to the troublesome interference of one person in the affairs of
another. Compare Judg. xi. 12. 2 Sam. xvi. 10. 2 Kings ix.
18. Ezra iv. 3. John ii. 4. In some MSS. the word 'Ir|<n>u is
omitted. Kuinoel, A. Clarke.
Ver. 30. paKpdv. Scil. bSov. E. T. a good way off. Vulg.
Non longe ; probably from some MS. of which the reading was
ov paKpdv. Mark and Luke read ekh. In discrepancies of this
nature, there is more of appearance than reality. In such gene
ral ways of speaking, there is always a tacit comparison ; and
the same thing may be denominatedy*«r, or not far, according to
the extent of ground with which, in our thoughts, we compare it.
The word paKpdv may, therefore, be very properly rendered at
some distance ; in which sense the adverb /iaKpo&£v is used in
Luke xviii. 13. where the Pharisee and Publican could not have
been very considerably asunder. Compare also Exod. xxxiii. 7.
LXX. Diod. Sic. p. 558. E. Rhod. In the same indefinite
manner the Latins employ procul. Terent. Hecyr. IV. 3. 1.
Quern cum istoc sermonem habueris procul hinc stans accepi. See
also Liv. X. 8. Virg. .En. VI. 10. where Servius observes :
procul, non longe ; procul enim est, quod prae oculos, et quod
porro ab oculis est. Campbell, Kuinoel.
Ibid. 7roXXtuv. About 2000 ; according to Mark v. 13. In
the following verse, for iirirpsipov -ripiv dirEXOElv, several MSS.
have d7rocrr£(Xov ripdg, which is probably correct; the vulgar
reading having been substituted in the text, from Mark and
Luke, in order to sanction the opinion, that our Lord's answer
implies assent only, and not command. The same arguments,
however, which vindicate the justice of the miracle upon the
former supposition, are equally conclusive in either case; and
the power of Christ is certainly more clearly demonstrated by
understanding the words in the sense of a positive mandate.
Griesbach, A. Clarke. Of the name of the daemoniac (Legion),
and other circumstances of the miracle, which Matthew has
omitted, see the parallel passage in Mark.

110 MATTHEW IX. 1, 2.

CHAPTER IX.
Contents: — The Cure of the Paralytic, vv. 1 — 8. (Markii. 1.
Luke v. 17.) The Call of Matthew, and the Answer to Johns
Disciples respecting Fasting, 9 — 17. (Mark ii. 14. Luke
v. 27.) The ruler Jairus's Daughter raised, and the Issue of
Blood stopped, 18 — 26. (Mark v. 22. Luke viii. 41.) Two
blind Men restored to sight; a dumb Daemon ejected; and
the lamentable state of the Jewish nation deplored, 27 — 38.
Verse 1. rrjvlSiav ttoXiv. Capernaum; where he seems to
have commonly resided in the house of Peter. See on Matt.
iv. 13. and compare Matt. viii. 13.
Ver. 2. dipiwvrai aoi al dpiapriai <rov. It has been already
observed, on Matt. viii. 17. that the Jews looked upon diseases
as the temporal punishment of sin. In reference to this opinion,
they had a maxim, that no diseased person could be healed, till
all his sins had been remitted; which seems to have been founded
on Psalm ciii. 3. Compare also Deut. xxviii. 21. Isaiah xxxiii.
24. Psalm xii. 3, 4. See Kimchi in loc. Hence some com
mentators have supposed, that Jesus here speaks not of the
remission of eternal punishment ; but merely of some particular
offence, probably drunkenness, the penalties of which the paralytic
was now suffering. In support of this interpretation it is urged,
that the cure was not performed in consideration of the faith of
the paralytic himself ; but of " their faith ;" i. e. the faith of those
who brought him. But the faith of the sick man was unques
tionably included in the pronoun their; nor is it to be supposed
that his persuasion of the power of Christ was less firm, than
that of his supporters. Besides, if the removal of temporal
punishment only were intended, that and the removal of the
disease would have been identical ; so that, on this supposition,
the words only imply a promise of forgiveness, since the cure
was not immediately consequent upon the declaration. Nei
ther would there have been any ground for the imputation of
blasphemy, which our Lord read in the thoughts of the Scribes ;
since the performance of a mere miracle did not necessarily imply
an assumption of divinity; whereas the remission of eternal
punishment is an operation of God alone ; and the inference of
the Jews was justly drawn, but perversely applied. See Exod.
xxxiv. 7. 2 Sam. xii. 23. Isaiah xliii. 25. Matt. xxvi. 65. This
perversion, indeed, was to be expected from their prejudices ; by
which they were also prevented from acknowledging another
proof of the Godhead, which Christ exhibited on this occasion ;
viz. his knowledge of their hearts ; a knowledge, the want of

MATTHEW IX. 3. 5. Ill
which was objected by the Rabbis to the impostor Barchochebas :
and which the Scriptures themselves esteemed, no less than the
remission of sins, to be peculiar to the Deity. See 1 Sam.
xvi. 7. 1 Chron. xxviii. 9. 2 Chron. vi. 30. Psalm vii. 9. Jerem.
xvii. 10. It is probable that our Lord preceded the cure of the
disease by the assurance of forgiveness, in order to raise the
hopes of the paralytic, who, from a consciousness of the enormi
ties of his past life, thought that Jesus might pronounce him
unworthy of mercy, at the same time that he had a perfect con
fidence in his power to afford it. With regard to the objection,
that the words, whether is it easier, eye. imply that it is equally
easy to do one as the other ; whereas, the disciples could cure
diseases, but could not forgive sins ; (John v. 14. ix. 2.) it is re
plied, that our Lord uses the words in relation to his own omni
potence, and not of miraculous agency in general. See note on
v. 5. infra. We may, therefore, fairly conclude, that the forgive
ness here offered extended to the remission of eternal punish
ment, in respect to the transgressions of the convert, to the time
of this first manifestation of his faith. Lightfoot, Grotius. —
[Whitby.] It has been disputed, whether the verb dcpiwvrai
is the aor. 2. subjunctive, or the perf. pass, indicative. The
latter seems to be correct : so that dipiwvrai is put for dipElvrai,
as in Luke viii. 47, 48. 1 John ii. 22. See Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 206.
II. 2. Kuinoel. Of the evidence in favour of the reality of this
miracle, see Home's Introd. Vol. I. p. 254.
Ver. 3. fiXaaiprifiEl. Impie loquitur ; injurius est in Deum. In
this sense the word is generally employed by the Evangelists :
though it more properly signifies to revile, to calumniate; in
accordance with its derivation, 7rapd to rr)v iprifiriv fiXdirrsiv ;
(Icedere famam ; Cic. Cluent. 5.) So it occurs continually in
Demosthenes ; and it retains its true signification also in Mark
vii. 22. Coloss. iii. 8. Ephes. iv. 31. Plato has used the word
in a religious sense ; Alcibiad. I. and de Repub. II. in fine : and
so Menander : 'O XoiSopwv tov iraripa SvvipripEl Xoyto' Ti)v Etc
rb OeIov 8e /xeXetci fiXacriprifiiav. Grotius, Kuinoel.
Ver. 5. eWeIv. That is, to say with effect. Merely to pro
nounce the words of either sentence is equally easy to all ; and
to say both with effect were equally easy to our Lord. In the
former case, however, the effect was invisible, and the multitude
might question the effect altogether ; but the immediate conse
quence of the order in the latter case was an ocular demonstra
tion of the power with which it was accompanied, and to say the
one with effect, which effect was visible, was a manifest proof
that the other was said also with effect, though the effect was in
visible. And this is the use which our Lord makes of the cure.
Campbell.

112 MATTHEW IX. 6. 9, 10. 12.
Ver. 6. tote Xlyst r£ 7rapaXvrtK^. These words are evidently
parenthetical : and mark the change of our Lord's address from
the Scribes to the paralytic. The expression apai rr)v kXivjjv
is illustrated in Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 397. The word
iZovaiav, in v. 8. is repeated in reference to its use here ; so
that it cannot be understood, as some have suggested, as an ab-
stractum pro concreto, in the sense of iZovuiav 'ixovra. By a
common enallage the plural toTc dvOpwiroig is put for nvl dv-
Qptoirw, i. e. Xpiarw. Kuinoel.
Ver. 9. iirl rb teXuiviov. At the toll-office, or custom-house ;
which was probably a kind of booth erected on the side of the
lake for collecting the toll of passengers. See Home's Introd.
Vol. III. p. 185. Porphyry and Julian, two of the earliest and
most inveterate enemies of Christianity, have accused Matthew of
rashness and indiscretion, in thus hastily following one, of whom
he could have little or no knowledge. But as it is evident that
this publican lived in or near Capernaum, which was the prin
cipal scene of the early part of our Lord's ministry, he may
indeed have been his disciple long before, though he had not yet
received permission to follow him. Macknight, Le Clerc.
It is observable, that the Evangelist speaks of himself in the third
person, after the manner of historians in general, and more
especially Caesar in his Commentaries. See also Dan. i. 6. Jerem.
xxxii. 27. John xiii. 23. This way of writing is adopted to
avoid egotism and ostentation. Kuinoel.
Ver. 10. Iv ry otKta. That is, in his house; scil. of Matthew.
See Mark ii. l4. Luke v. 29. It has been doubted, indeed,
whether Matthew and Levi are the names of the same individual ;
but the account of the feast, and subsequent events, as given by
the three Evangelists, are so closely analogous, and it was so
usual with the Jews to have two names, as in the cases of Simon,
who was also called Peter, and of Lebbceus Thaddceus among the
Apostles, that there can be no reasonable question of their iden
tity. See Home, Vol. III. p. 272. Rosenmuller. The word
dfiaprwXbg, sinner, is generally used in the Gospels, and indeed
throughout the N. T. either to signify a Heathen, or such of the
Jews who, from their illicit practices, were looked upon in the
same light with the Heathen. Of this latter class the Talmud
enumerates dicers, usurers, plunderers, publicans, shepherds of
lesser cattle, (i. e. swine,) those that sell the fruit of the seventh
year, &c. Compare Matt. xi. 19. xxvi. 45. Mark ii. 15 — 17. xiv.
41. Luke v. 30—32. vi. 32—34. vii. 34. 37. 39. xv. 1, 2. 7. 10.
Johnix. 16. 24, 25. 31. et passim. A. Clarke, Grotius.
Ver. 12. ov x?E'av exoV(TIV k- t- X. This is a common pro
verb, which no one could possibly misunderstand or misapply.

MATTHEW IX. 13. 113
Diog. Laert. VI. 6. 'Avrtcr0£VTje ovEtStSojUEvoc rrorE iirl tcu irovr\-
pdlg avyyEviaOai, Kal ol larpol, <pr)<rl, psrd tCjv voctovvtwv eiuIv,
dXX' ov 7rvp£TTOvcrt. Sayings to the same effect are recorded of
Diogenes, ap. Stob. XI. and of Pausanias and Phocion, by
Plutarch. Hence Ovid, de Pont. III. 4. 7. Firma valent per
se, nullumque Machaona qucerunt ; Ad medicam dubius confugit
ceger opem. In Luke v. 31. the word vytatvovrEe is substituted
for ictxvovtec. A. Clarke, Wetstein.
Ver. 13. 7rop£v0EVT£c; Se pdOETE. This phrase is equivalent
with the Hebrew 107) N2J, tsa velimed, a form in frequent use
among the Rabbins, when they referred their disciples to the
sacred writings. The words ri ianv are also an instance of the
mode of citation, without any direct reference, employed by the
Jewish doctors. The passage here quoted is from Hos. vi. 6.
and our Lord refers to it in proof that deeds of charity, and par
ticularly the conversion of the sinner, are more acceptable than sa-
crifice ; i. e. than the greatest duty of the ceremonial law, and con
sequently than the most punctual observance of the entire ritual.
The word eXeoc is here used in its more extensive sense of uni
versal benevolence, as in Tit. iii. 3. Heb. iv. 6. It is clear, however,
that the import of the passage is comparative, not absolute ; for
sacrifice, though of less importance than mercy, was still a duty
of the first importance. The LXX, indeed, for Kat pr) read r),
subaud. pdXXov, as in Hom. II. A. 116. not to mention that koi
pr) is used for pdXXov rj in classic authors ; unless povov he un
derstood, which may also be the case in the present instance.
Isocrat. ad Nicocl. p. 42. EXXEiVav atpov, KAI MH 7rXEovd£E<v*
al yap pETpiorr)TEg MAAAON ev ralg EVOEtatc;, *H ralg vwEpjdo-
Xalg tcrxvovcrtv. Compare Gen. xiv. 8. Exod. xvi. 8. Prov. viii.
10. Joel ii. 13. LXX. John vi. 27. 1 Cor. i. 17. By the righte
ous, SiKalovg, are not meant, as some have supposed, those who
trusted in themselves that they were righteous, (Luke xviii. 9.) for
such are more especially called to repentance by the Gospel.
See Matt. iii. 8. Rev. iii. 1 7. Neither are those intended who
are entirely free from sin, for where is the man that sinneth not?
James iii. 2. 1 John i. 8. but those who strive, so far as human
nature is capable, to abstain from all known sin, praying for the
assistance of God's grace to cooperate with their own imperfect
endeavours, and " walking in all the commandments of the Lord
blameless." Such were Zacharias and Elizabeth, Luke i. 6. and
Simeon, Luke ii. 25. The words Etc pEravoiav are omitted in
several of the best MSS. and versions, and some of the ancient
Fathers : they are found, however, in Luke v. 32. and it is
agreed on all hands, that if they are not expressed in this place,
they must be understood. With respect to the sentiment, a very
similar one is ascribed to Zaleucus in Diod. Sic. p. 299. C. ol
OeoI ov xa'lPoval ra'C ™v irovtiptov Ovaiaig te Kat Sawavalg, aXXd
VOL. I. I

114 MATTHEW IX. 15, 16.
Tate tiov ayaOwv dvSpwv SiKalaig te Kal KaXalg InirriSEVGEai.
Whitby, Grotius, Macknight, A. Clarke, Kuinoel, Munthe.
Ver. 15. ot viol rov vvptpuvog. The sons of the bride-cham
ber : i. e. the personal friends of the bridegroom, (John iii. 29.)
who formed the marriage procession, and were admitted to a par
ticipation of the seven days' festivity, consequent upon the mar
riage. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 416. They were called
by the Greeks irapdwpipoi ; by the Latins pronubi ; and by the
Hebrews Schoshbenim. Of the Jewishfasts see on Matt. vi. 16.
It is remarkable that our Lord does not here either enjoin or
forbid fasting ; though it is clear from his manner of expression
that he approved of it as a religious exercise at proper seasons.
He did not mean, as the Montanists affirm, that the Pharisaical
fasts would ever be introduced into his Church, but that his dis
ciples would fast and mourn on account of the various calamities
which would befal them after his departure, and as often, in after
times, as any particular circumstance of danger and distress might
require it. Instances of such fasts occur in Acts x. 30. xiii. 2, 3.
xiv. 23. 1 Cor. vii. 5. The force of our Lord's answer will ap
pear more appropriate from the fact that John was now in prison,
so that his followers were fasting in consequence of their master's
removal from them. Whitby, Grotius, Macknight. The
particle pr) is simply interrogative, implying a negation of the
question proposed ; and the verb Svvavrai is redundant. So also
in Gen. xliii. 32. John xii. 39. (comp. v. 37.) Xen. Mcon. XI.
11. Kuinoel.
Ver. 16. iirij3Xripa paKovg dyvdipov. A patch of undressed
cloth; i. e. of cloth which has not passed through the hand of
the fuller, (yvarpEvg.) Luke has Kaivbv, which, however, does
not affect the sense of the passage. The iwifiXripa, after it is
sewed in, becomes irXripwpa avrov, scil. Ipariov ; and the words
atpEt d7ro rov Ipariov are equivalent to a'tpsi pipog n tov Ipariov.
Compare Levit. x. 18. LXX. and see Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 574.
Hence, the meaning of the passage is, that the patch of new
cloth, being of a harsher texture and less yielding than that which
has been frayed and worn, will eventually tear away the edges of
that to which it is sewed, and encrease the rent. The inference
which our Lord intended to deduce from this similitude, and that
to the same effect in the next verse, was the inexpediency of im
posing too severe restrictions upon his followers in that early
stage of his ministry. It has been objected, however, that al
though the Pharisees were trained to frequent fastings, the same
was not the case with John's disciples ; and that, therefore, the
followers of Christ might fast as well as they. But it is not im
probable that many of John's disciples were of the sect of the
Essenes, (see Home) whose habits of abstinence were as severe

MATTHEW IX. 18. 20. 115
as those of the Pharisees themselves : not to mention that the
peculiar austerities of the Baptist might have influenced the cha
racter of those who attended him. Albert, Whitby, Dod
dridge. The word d<TKog should be rendered a leathern flask,
or skin. See Home's Introd. Vol: III. p. 466.
Ver. 18. dpxwv sic. For rig, as in Matt. viii. 19. The name
of this ruler was Jairus, whom Mark (v. 22.) calls 'iva nSv dp-
Xtcrvvaytuycov, and Luke (viii. 41.) dpxovTa Ttjc (rvvaywyrjg.
See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 253. and of the miracle itself,
and the Jewish customs illustrative thereof, see the same work,
Vol. I. p. 259. III. p. 524. and my note on Hom. II. 2.
339. The words dpn ETsXEVTrjo-E are wrongly rendered in the
E. T. is even now dead ; since it appears from the other Evange
lists, that at the time the ruler left his house, his daughter was still
alive ; and it was not till after the cure of the infirm woman that
his servants met them with the news of her death. The proper
translation would be, she is by this time dead; a very natural
conjecture respecting one whom he left in her last extremity.
Mark's expression is iaxdriog e'x£(, and Luke's diriQvrioKEv. This
sense of dpTt is sanctioned by Philostratus, who explains it 7T£pi
rov Kaipbv rwv pripdnov. With respect to the verb ditoOvriaKEiv,
employed by Luke, it is sometimes used like the Hebrew J110,
of those at the point of death; as in Joseph. Ant. V. 1.1. Com
pare Gen. xx. 3. xlviii. 21. Deut. v. 22. Isaiah xxxviii. 1.
Whitby, Campbell, Kuinoel.
Ibid. iiriOsg ri)v x£'Pa <J0V- Imposition of hands was usually
employed by the prophets and men of God for the purpose of
conveying their divine influence to the bodies or souls of men.
Compare Numb, xxvii. 18. 20. 2 Kings v. 11. Matt. xix. 13.
Acts iv. 30. Grotius.
Ver. 20. ywr) alpoppoovaa. The disease, with which this
woman was afflicted, was most probably that which Hippocrates
(de Morb. 1 . 3.) designates as the poog alparwSrig ; the nature of
which it is unnecessary to describe. Suffice it to say, that the
complaint appears to have been exceedingly inveterate, and to
have baffled every attempt of medical skill. See the parallel pas
sage in Mark v. 25. sqq. The /cpdcr7r£c5ov rov Ipariov was one
of the JT2MI, tsitsith, or tassels, which the Jews were com
manded to wear on their garments, for the purpose of reminding
them of the commandments of the Lord. See Home's Introd.
Vol. III. p. 403. Hence a peculiar sacredness was attached to
them, (Matt, xxiii. 5.) which seems to have led the woman to
touch them rather than any other part of Christ's dress ; not to
mention that touching the hem of the garment was looked upon
as a mark of reverence and respect. The nature of her disease,
which was considered unclean, (Levit. xv. 25.) and the delicacy
i 2

116 MATTHEW IX. 24. 27. 30.
which forbad her to make any public acknowledgment of it, were
the probable motives which induced her to approach our Saviour
in secresy. Campbell, Kuinoel. Of the verb au>Z,Eiv, which is
used in the next verse in the sense of sanare, see 'on Matt. i. 21.
and compare Mark vi. 56. Luke viii. 36. xvii. 19. xviii. 42. John
xi. -12. Acts ix. 9. Doddridge.
Ver. 24. ov ydp diriOavE k. t. X. The verbs kuOevSeiv and
KOipdaOai are frequently used in the sense of airoOvr)<jKEiv ; a
Euphemism common to the ancients generally. Compare John
xi. 11. 13. and see my note on Hom. II. A. 241. Here, how
ever, the two verbs are directly opposed to each other, so that
each must undoubtedly be used in its proper signification. It
has been argued, indeed, that the girl was not really dead, but
that she had merely fallen into a trance or swoon ; but the whole
tenor of the narrative is directly at variance with any such conclu
sion. Our Lord evidently intended to signify that she was not
dead, so as to continue under the power of death ; since he was
about to raise her as from a natural sleep. This interpretation is
in itself a sufficient reply to the casuistical sophistry of the Jesuits,
who adduce this passage in defence of their principle of mental
reservation. Le Clerc, Wetstein, Whitby. — [Michaelis,
Kuinoel.] In the next verse the verb EKj3dXXEtv is to be under
stood in a milder sense than that usually applied in the N. T. ; it
signifies merely to dismiss or exclude; scil. from the damsel's
apartment, into which he entered unattended, except by Peter,
James, and John, and the parents of the deceased. See Mark v.
37. sqq. Had the crowd been admitted indiscriminately, the press
would have prevented a close examination of the miracle, and un
founded reports might have arisen, so as to invalidate the credi
bility of the transaction. Instances of the use in which £K/3dXXstv
is here employed, may be found infra v. 38. Matt. xii. 20. 35.
xiii. 52. Mark i. 43. Luke x. 35. John x. 4. Acts xvi. 37. Rev.
xiv. 16. In v. 25. the gender of avrijg is referred to the sex
implied in Kopdmov, and not to the noun itself. Compare Matt.
xxviii. 19. Hammond, Rosenmuller, Kuinoel.
Ver. 27. vie Aa/3/S. This title was a most decided acknow
ledgment of our Lord's Messiahship ; and it is probable that the
men were induced to make it from the convincing proof which
his miracles afforded of the fact. See on Matt. i. 1. and com
pare Matt. xii. 23. John iv. 29. Grotius, Lightfoot. The
restoration of sight is one of the most prominent of the cures
effected by Christ ; and it is attested by modern travellers, that
blindness is a calamity of unusual frequency in the East.
Ver. 30. ivE^pipriaaro. He strictly charged. Suidas : juet'
avorripoTriTog lirEripriaEv. Chrysostom, Hom. 13. oi»x d7rXovc

MATTHEW IX. 32. 34. 36. 117
keXevh, dXXa Kal psrd 7roXXi}e (npoSpiWrirog. Compare Mark i.
43. with Luke v. 14. John xii. 16. The expression dvEc^x^wav
ot bipOaXpol is an Hebraism of the same import with dvapXiirsiv.
Compare Isaiah xxxv. 5. Matt. xx. 33, 34. Kuinoel.
Ver. 32. Kuxpbv SaipoviZopsvov. It is evident from the con
text, that the daemon by whom the man was possessed, had de
prived him of the power of speech, for as soon as the ejection
was effected the dumb spake. The expression of admiration in
v. 33. was naturally elicited by the number and variety of mi
racles, and those too of the most extraordinary kind, which
Jesus had exhibited in the course of a few hours : such as the
greatest of the prophets, and not even Moses himself, had ever
performed. The adverb ovrwg is there employed instead of
to£ovto ti, or rovro. So 1 Sam. xxiii. 17. LXX. ~2,aovXb irarrip
poi oiSev ovrwg. Psalm xlvii. 6. avroi iSovrsg ovruig iOavpaaav.
Ver. 34. iv r<£ dpxovn k. t. X. That is, Beelzebub. See on
Matt. x. 25. This imputation is refuted by our Lord in Matt.
xii. 24.
Ver. 36. EiT7rXayxvtcr0Tj. ^as moved with compassion. The
verb airXayxviZzavai is met with only in the N. T. and LXX,
where it always signifies to be moved with pity or compassion.
Its derivation is from cr7rXdyxva, viscera; but it is perfectly dis
tinct from the sacrificial term crcrXaxv£v£iv, which occurs in
2 Mace. vi. 8. in the sense of sacrificare. The Jews looked
upon the bowels as the seat of love and sympathy, and so applied
the organ to the sense, as in Psalm li. 3. and elsewhere. In
Wisd. x. 5. LXX. the word cr7rXdyxva is so employed. The read
ing iuKvXpivoi is that of a great number of MSS., versions, and
fathers ; and Griesbach has adopted it instead of the old word
ekXeXvppevoi, for the very probable reason that a more difficult
reading is not likely to be substituted in the place of one, of
which the meaning is evident. Now the verb iiikvEaOai is used
either of mental or bodily fatigue, instances of which in either
acceptation are of frequent occurrence. See 2 Sam. xvi. 2.
1 Mace. iii. 17. Mark viii. 3. Gal. vi. 9. Heb. xii. 3. With
respect to <TKvXXEtv, its primary meaning is to tear the hair ;
(Hesych. ctkvXXeiV to rolg 6vv%i airqv.) Hence, to afflict, or
torment, as in 3 Mace. iii. 25. iv. 6. LXX. and so generally, to
tire, to fatigue. In this latter sense the verb is found in Herod.
IV. 13. 8. VII. 3. 8. with which we may also compare the usage
of the Latin vexare in Q. Curt. V. 10. Ut vexatos milites quiete
firmaret. It is not improbable, therefore, that the old reading
may have been originally a gloss, which at length found its way
into the text. The participle ippippivoi, signifying properly
thrown down, may be rendered neglected, unprotected, as in

118 MATTHEW IX. 37. X. I.
Herodian, II. 6. ippippivriv Tr)v dpx»)v dpirdZ,Eiv. Under the
figure, therefore, of a flock without a shepherd, fatigued, with
wandering, and exposed to danger, our Lord depicts the wretched
state of the ignorant Jews, whom the Pharisees considered as
accursed, (John vii. 49.) and treated with the most unpardonable
neglect. Hence they are called the lost sheep of the house of
Israel, Matt. x. 6. Similar images are employed in 1 Kings
xxii. 17. Judith xi. 19. Kuinoel, Grotius, Kypke, Dod
dridge. Ver. 37. 6 piv Osparpbg k. t. X. The expression is proverbial.
Our Lord's meaning is, that the immense multitudes which fol
lowed him, although neglected by their spiritual guides, were
desirous of receiving instruction ; and the prayer, which he now
puts into the mouth of his disciples, is well connected with their
mission as Apostles, in the opening of the next chapter. The
comparison is borrowed from agricultural pursuits, as are many
others which are found in the Scriptures. See Home's Introd.
Vol. III. p. 469. In the Rabbinical writings also the doctors
are represented as reapers, and their work of instruction as the
harvest : thus in Idra Rabba, §. 2. The days are few; the cre
ditor urgent ; the crier calls out incessantly; and the reapers are
few. The word s'pyov and its derivatives are continually em
ployed by the classic writers in relation to husbandry. Grotius,
Kuinoel, A. Clarke.

CHAPTER X.
Contents : — The names and mission of the twelve Apostles ;
and the instructions, exhortations, and promises with which
they are sent forth. [Mark vi. 7. Luke ix. 1.]
Verse 1. itiova-iav irvEvpdrwv. The preposition Kara is in
serted in several of the best MSS. and versions, and in Luke
ix. 1. the expression is i^ovuia iirl irdvra Ta Saipovia. But
irvEvpdrtov may here be considered as what the grammarians call
the genitive of the object. So Ecclus. x. 4. LXX. E^ovcrta tjjc
yijc. Matt. xx. 31. jdXauipripia rov irvEvparog. Compare Isaiah
iii. 14. Joel iii. 19. 1 Cor. ix. 12. In communicating to others
the power over evil spirits, and of working miracles in his name,
(compare Luke x. 17.) our Lord has given an unanswerable proof
of his omnipotence. None but God could bestow this power ; and
in this respect is Christ distinguished from all the prophets of
the O. T., of whom, though some worked miracles themselves,
none enabled others to do so. Joshua, indeed, received " the
10

MATTHEW X. 2. 119
spirit of wisdom" from Moses, Deut. xxxiv. 9. and the spirit of
Elijah rested on Elisha, 2 Kings ii. 15. But in the first instance
the communication was made by the immediate command of God,
and in the other, Elijah's reply to the request of Elisha evidently
implies that the thing prayed for was not at the prophet's disposal.
Arnobius, (adv. Gent. I. p. 30.) in applying this argument to the
Gentiles, asks, Alicuine mortalium Jupiter Me Capitolinus hujus-
modi potestatem dedit ? In the commission here given to the
twelve Apostles was laid the foundation of the Christian ministry,
and the first authority given to the establishment of a regular
priesthood. The commission was enlarged just before our Lord's
ascension into heaven, when the Gentiles were admitted to an equal
share with the Jews in the privileges of the Gospel. The office
of the seventy disciples, whom our Lord subsequently discharged
to preach to those cities which he was shortly about to visit,
(Luke x. 1 .) was subordinate to that which is here assigned to
the twelve ; a distinction in which we recognise the sanction of
the great Author and Finisher of our faith to a triple order in the
ministry. Christ, as the head, commissioned twelve apostles and
seventy disciples to work with him in the first preaching of the
Gospel ; and the Apostles, Presbyters, and Deacons of the pri
mitive Church, presignified by the High-Priest, Priests, and
Levites of the Jewish temple, have been followed in uninter
rupted succession by the Bishops, Priests, and Deacons of our
own establishment. Kuinoel, Whitby, Holden.
Ver. 2. SwSsKa diroaroXtov. The word d7rocrToXoc signifies,
properly, a messenger dispatched upon some business of import
ance, as in 1 Kings xiv. 6. which is the only place where it occurs
in the LXX. Among the Jews it denoted an officer, commissioned
by the high priest to collect the tributes due to the temple, from
the Jews who lived at a distance from Jerusalem. The office
originated with the Patriarchs, and continued to exist even after
the destruction of the temple, and the dispersion of the people
by Titus Vespasian. Jerome, in accounting for the expression
used by St. Paul in Gal. i. 1., says, Usque hodie a patriarchis
Judceorum Apostolos mitti constat. Ad distinctionem itaque
eorum qui mittuntur ab hominibus, et sui, qui sit missus a Christo,
tale sumpsit exordium : Paulus apostolus, non ab hominibus,
neque per homines. In the N. T. it is used more especially as
the designation of those disciples whom our Lord commissioned
to preach the Gospel ; and in one place (Heb. iii. 1.) it is applied
preeminently to Christ himself. In 2 Cor. viii. 23. we meet with
the expression dironroXoi EKKXrjcrtwv, but the denomination
Apostles of Christ seems to have been given to none but the
twelve, to Matthias, who was substituted in the place of Judas,
and to Paul and Barnabas, who were commissioned to the Gen
tiles. It has afforded subject for speculation to discover the

120 MATTHEW X. 2.
reason of Christ's limiting the Apostles to twelve ; probably he
had the twelve Patriarchs in view, or the twelve tribes of Israel ;
such a conclusion, at least, may fairly be drawn from Matt. xix.
28. Campbell, Grotius.
Ibid, irpwrog. This word, though found in all the MSS., has
been supposed to be interpolated by some zealot who wished to
establish the Pope's primacy ; but there can be no doubt of its
authenticity. Still there is nothing in it to support the preten
sions of the prelates of Rome. It is a sufficient explanation of
the passage, that Peter was the Apostle first called to the mi
nistry ; and the same interpretation will apply to the assurance
that Peter was the rock on which Christ would build his Church,
especially if we recollect that the same Apostle was commissioned
to the Jews, to whom the covenant of salvation was first to be
proposed. It is evident also from the different order in which
they are enumerated by the several Evangelists, that they were
all placed on the same footing in respect of rank. Theophylact,
irporiOri<Ti Si IlETpov Kal 'AvSpiav, Siori Kal 7rpci)TOKXrjTOt. MlD-
dleton, Rosenmuller. Of the name of Peter see on Matt.
xvi. 18. ; an account of his life, as also of the other Apostles,
whose writings are contained in the Canon of the New Testa
ment, and some others incidentally, will be found in Home's
Introduction : it will therefore only be necessary to notice briefly
those whom his plan did not embrace, leaving those of whom he
has spoken with a simple reference.
2. Indrew. } Horne' Vo1' IIL ?• U5-
4* John ' f ^ons °f ^ebedee. Ibid. pp. 311. 441.
5. Philip. This Apostle was a native of Bethsaida, John i.
44. By some he is supposed to have been called to the apostle-
ship after Andrew and Peter, who were natives of the same
place ; and by others before them. It was to him that our Lord
proposed the question, whence they should buy bread to feed the
5,000 in the wilderness, John vi. 5. He was the person to whom
the Greeks applied for admission to an interview with the Mes
siah, John xii. 20. and it was he who was gently rebuked by
Christ for his too great inquisitiveness respecting the divine na
ture, John xiv. 8. According to Clement he was a married man;
and Papias, an early writer cited by Eusebius, mentions that he
had two unmarried daughters residing with him at Hierapolis, a
city of Phrygia, where he abode after our Lord's ascension, 'it
seems that he was very active in preaching the Gospel in Asia
Minor, where it is said, that among other miracles which he per
formed, he raised a dead man to life. The manner of his death
is uncertain : by some he is supposed to have been crucified ; but
Clement enumerates him among those of the Apostles who did
not suffer martyrdom. Cave, Lardner.

MATTHEW X. 2. 121
6. Bartholomew. It is generally supposed that this disciple
is the same with Nathanael, whom Philip first introduced to Christ,
as related in John i. 45. This identity is amply confirmed by
the fact, that Bartholomew is not mentioned as an Apostle by
St. John, nor Nathanael by the other Evangelists, and that the
former speaks of Philip and Nathanael in conjunction, the latter
of Philip and Bartholomew. Besides, unless Nathanael had
been already among the twelve, it seems strange that he should
not have been considered a qualified candidate to supply the
place of Judas. He was undoubtedly called Bartholomew, as
the son of Tolmai, just as Peter was called Barjona, and Joses
Barnabas. He was a native of Cana in Galilee, and it is pro
bable that before his call to the ministry he followed the occupa
tion of a fisherman, John xxi. 2. ; but the Gospel account of him
contains little else than the history of his first introduction to
Jesus, and the statement by St. Luke that he was one of the
witnesses of the resurrection. After this event he is said to have
been engaged some time with Philip at Hierapolis, and also to
have laboured in India and among the Lycaonians ; according to
Jerome he finished his life by crucifixion, at Albanopolis, in
Armenia. Cave, Lardner.
7. Thomas, called also Didymus, John xx. 24. The two
names are alike in signification, the one being Hebrew and the
other Greek for a twin ; whence it is probable that he was a
native of Decapolis, or some other place which was inhabited
both by Jews and Greeks, who called him each by their national
appellation respectively. He also seems to have been associated
with the sons of Zebedee and Nathanael as a fisherman. Of his
first connexion with our Lord we have no information, and the
only remarkable point in his history is his extreme want of faith,
related in John xx. 24. His ministry, subsequent to bur Lord's
ascension, is said to have been exercised chiefly in Parthia ; and
it has been supposed by some that he was the founder of a race
of Christians who have been discovered to exist near the coast
of Malabar, with the name of the Christians of St. Thomas ;
but others attribute their origin to a Syrian bishop, who flou
rished considerably later than the apostolic age. The place and
manner of his death are equally uncertain, though a tradition
exists that he was killed by a lance at the instigation of the
Brahmins, near Malipar, a city of Coromandel. Cave, Lardner.
8. Matthew. See Home, Vol. III. p. 261.
9. James, the son of Alpheus. Ibid. p. 441.
10. Lebbeus, surnamed Thaddeus. Ibid. p. 490.
11. Simon, the Canaanite. There is nothing of any import
ance concerning this Apostle to be found in the Gospel narrative.
Some have inferred from the distinctive appellation here given
to him, that he was born at Cana in Galilee, and probably the
bridegroom at whose house our Lord performed his first miracle.

122 MATTHEW X. 4.
But it is more correct to derive the word from the Hebrew N3J5,
Kana, signifying zealous; so that it is precisely equivalent with
the Greek ZnXwTrjg, by which he is designated in Luke vi. 15.
This title, which was probably intended to distinguish him from
Simon Peter, either denotes the warmth of his zeal in support of
the Gospel, or which is more likely, implies that he was origi
nally a Pharisee, a portion of which sect, from their intemperate
zeal in maintaining their religious observances, had acquired the
name of Zealots. See Joseph. B. J. IV. 12. and Home's Introd.
Vol. III. p. 381. After preaching in Egypt, Africa, and Mauri
tania, Simon is said to have visited Britain, and there to have
suffered martyrdom. Hammond, Lightfoot. — [Macknight,
Doddridge".] 12. Judas Iscariot. The sum of the history of Judas is
contained in the words subjoined to his name by the Evangelists,
6 Kat -KapaSovg avrbv, who even betrayed him ; for such is the
true rendering : not as the E. T. who also betrayed him. He
was the son of one Simon, John vi. 71. and he was called Iscariot
to distinguish him from Judas Thaddeus ; but the commentators
are by no means agreed in respect to the meaning and origin
of the name. It is supposed by some that it has reference to the
town of Kerioth, in the tribe of Judah, mentioned in Josh. xv.
25. where Judas was probably born : and this is somewhat con
firmed by a various reading of John vi. 71., where some MSS.
read d7r6 Kaptcurov. But there is another derivation of which
the word admits, in relation to the death of Judas, who hanged
himself, since the Hebrew N10DN, ascara, denotes strangulation
or suffocation. This idea is considerably strengthened by the
circumstance, that, wherever the word occurs, it is almost always
without the article, or at least with a variation in the MSS.
Now if a place of birth or residence were denoted, the article
should be prefixed, as in Mapta 17 MaySaXjjvr) ; not to mention
that the participle E7rtKaXov/x£vov, which is affixed in Luke xxii.
3. seems to indicate strictly a surname, as in this very place, E7rt-
kXt)0eic; QaSSaiog. Compare Acts i. 23. x. 5. xii. 12. The
article in this place is omitted, and it should seem correctly, in
many MSS. Lightfoot, Middleton. — [Schleusner.] Of the
treachery of Judas, as an evidence of the truth of Christianity,
see Home's Introd. Vol. I. p. 404.
Ver^ 4. 7rapaSove. The verb 7rapaSovvai is to deliver up,
irpoSowai, to betray; so that the former simply expresses a
fact, but the other marks the fact as criminal, and is properly a
term of reproach. Hence we cannot but remark the candour
and ingenuousness of the Evangelists, who content themselves
simply with relating facts, without any expression either of cen
sure or commendation. Surely this is an unquestionable proof of
veracity. Wetstein, Campbell. See Home, Vol. I. p. 139. sqq.

MATTHEW X. 5. 8. 123
Ver. 5. Etc bSbv iOvwv. For Etc bSbv rj dyEi e!c rd sflvr/. So
Jerem. ii. 18. LXX. -ft bSbg Alyiirrov. Compare Numb. xxi. 33.
Kuinoel. We may observe, that the preference here given to
the Jews is founded upon the gracious promises of God to their
forefathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob ; whence they became
the children of the kingdom (Matt. viii. 12. xv. 24.) to whom
the adoption and promise more especially belonged. See Luke
i. 54. Acts xiii. 46. Rom. ix. 4. xv. 8. It was expedient, more
over, that Christianity, considered as the perfection of that grand
scheme which the Patriarchal and Jewish dispensations had begun
and matured, and receiving its chief support from its connection
with these dispensations by type and prophecy, should first be
established among those people, among whom the records re
specting it were preserved. It is clear, also, from the inveterate
hatred which the Jews entertained for the Heathen and the Sa
maritans, that had the Gospel been preached to them all simul
taneously, the former would have rejected it universally. The
prejudices of the Apostles themselves ran so high on this head,
that it was not till some time after our Lord's ascension that they
could persuade themselves of the fact, that the Gentiles were to
be admitted to equal privileges with themselves. We see also a
regular gradation, which will be noticed more particularly in the
Notes on the Acts, in the method adopted by them, under the
direction of the Spirit, in the discharge of their commission.
The appeal was made in regular succession to Jews, to prose
lytes, to devout Gentiles, and lastly to idolaters; and in the
various cities which they visited, it was not till the Jews had re
jected the Gospel that they turned to the Heathen. See Acts
xiii. 46. Whitby, Macknight. Of the expression 7rpo/3aTa
diroXtoXora, in the next verse, see on Matt. ix. 36.
Ver. 8. vEKpovg syEtpETE. These words are found in the com
mon Greek copies, but they are omitted in a great number of the
most valuable MSS. and versions, and unnoticed by several
Fathers. Griesbach argues for .their authenticity, but at the
same time he admits it to be extremely doubtful; and unless we
allow that the commission here given contains many articles,
which extend to the more comprehensive charge with which the
Apostles were entrusted after Christ's resurrection, the clause must
unquestionably be rejected. This, indeed, has been denied ; but
compare infra vv. 18. 21. 23. From the fact, however, that the
Apostles did not exercise this power during our Saviour's life,
and that no allusion is made to it in the beginning of the chapter,
or in the parallel place of St. Luke, the weight of argument seems
somewhat in favour of interpolation. It is also remarkable, that
in John v. 25. our Lord evidently speaks of this power as pe
culiar to himself, which he would scarcely have done, if he had
previously communicated it to his disciples. Neither is it probable

124 MATTHEW X. 9.
that their boast of having the devils subject to them in Luke x.
17. would have been limited to this inferior gift, had they been
in possession of one so much more valuable. Grotius, Mill,
Campbell, Rosenmuller. — [Whitby, Macknight.]
Ibid. SwpEav eXojSete, SwpEav Sote. These words have been
perverted into an argument against the maintenance of the mi
nistry. But that the direction relates solely to the miraculous
cures which the Apostles were empowered to perform, and not
to the stated offices of their function, is evident from Luke x. 7.
where our Lord, in giving a like commission to the seventy, bids
them eat and drink what was set before them, because the la
bourer was worthy of his hire. For the very same cause he here
forbids them to provide gold for their journey, intimating, that
while they were preaching the Gospel they had a right to main
tenance from those who enjoyed the benefit of their labours, and
that Providence would take care that they should be supplied
with necessary support in fulfilling their commission. Accord
ingly we find the Apostles receiving maintenance as their due,
1 Cor. ix. 4, 5. 14. Gal. vi. 6. The injunction, therefore, forbids
them to make a trade of the miraculous gifts, similar to that of
the Jewish exorcists. See Joseph. Ant. VIII. 11. Whitby,
Macknight, Le Clerc. The accusative Swpsdv is used ad
verbially, Kara being understood, as a gift, gratuitously, freely.
Compare Herod. I. 70. and see Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 423.
Ver. 9. Ete rag %d>vag. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 402.
and of the extent of our Lord's command see the same work,
Vol. II. p. 319. also Vol. III. p. 311. The Romans also seem
to have applied their girdles to the purpose of purses. Compare
Liv. XXXIII. 29. A. Gell. XV. 12. Sueton. Vitell. 16. The scrip,
irripa, was a leathern bag in which shepherds and travellers
carried their provisions, such as that in which David is said to
have collected the stones with which he slew Goliah. By com
paring this passage with the parallels in Mark vi. 8. Luke ix. 3.
there is a trifling diversity in the form of our Lord's injunction.
This is easily removed by reading pafiSovg in Matthew and
Luke, upon the authority of a great number of MSS. and ver
sions. At the same time there is no absolute necessity for any
alteration, since the import of the precept is not affected by the
form which it assumes in the different historians. The Apostles
are ordered to set out on their journey without making any ad
dition to the apparel with which they were supplied, and to trust
to God for whatever else might be necessary for their support.
Their Master's object in giving the command was partly to free
them from any incumbrances which might retard their progress,
and partly to convince them of the singular care that would be
taken of them while engaged in the work to which he had ap
pointed them. Macknight, Kuinoel.

MATTHEW X. 11, 12. 15. 125
Ver. 11. d^iog. Scil. vpwv, as d^tog pov, Acts xxxvii. 38. or
the words 7rap' tj5 dv pe'ivtite may be supplied from what follows.
So in v. 13. 17 oiKta d£ia, where oiKta, the house, is put for the
inhabitants. The word dS,iog is thus put absolutely, so that the
sense is to be gathered from the context, more frequently than
has been imagined. Demosth. Epist. 3. p. 115. dipElaOaiSi
KaXwg TTOiovvri' d^iog ydp dvrjp. Adv. Leptin. p. 377. npqv
roiig ovrag d^tovc. In this place, compared with v. 14. it clearly
implies not only a person of good reputation, but of an honest, sin
cere, and pious disposition, who would be ready to attend to the
terms proposed to him, and not reject the Gospel without a
candid examination of its proofs. Some have understood it to
mean hospitable, but without any sufficient authority. With
respect to the injunction itself, we may fairly infer from it, that
the acceptance or rejection of the Gospel by those to whom it is
offered, depends upon no exclusive partiality in its Author, but
solely in the disposition with which the offer is regarded.
Kypke, Whitby. — [Lightfoot, Macknight.]
Ver. 12. d(r7rdcra<T0E avrr)v. The Vulgate adds Dicentes,
Pax huic domui; and the corresponding words are in some
Greek MSS., but not in so many as to authorise their reception
into the text. That such was the Jewish form of salutation is
well known, and the word Elpryvri, in v. 13. naturally refers to
this form as understood in the verb dairdaaaOE. The clause was,
no doubt, inserted from Luke x. 5. and many such interpolations
seem to have been made by some over zealous copyists, in order
to render the Gospels more conformable to each other. The ex
pression irpbg vpdg i-rnarpaiprivai is proverbial, denoting that no
benefit should result from the benediction pronounced. Compare
Psalm xxxv. 13. Isaiah lv. 11. It may be observed, that under
the word peace, D1 bv, the Jews included all blessings, whether
spiritual or temporal. Hence the saying of their Rabbins :
Great is peace, for all other blessings are comprehended in it.
Campbell, Grotius, Whitby, A. Clarke. Of the custom
alluded to in the next verse see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 3.
Ver. 15. ev vpipq KpiaEwg. The Unitarian version renders a
day of judgment; and so also Mr. Wakefield, though not with
the Socinian intention of denying the existence of a future judg
ment. In order to support this doctrine it is necessary to refer
the declaration of our Lord to the destruction of Jerusalem, so as
to contain a denunciation of greater severity than that which had
already been inflicted upon Sodom and Gomorrah, for refusing to
attend to the preaching of Lot. But the punishment here threat
ened against these cities is evidently future. In Luke x. 14. the
expression employed is iv ry KpiaEi, which is too plainly definite
to admit of any doubt ; and it cannot be supposed that people pol-

126 MATTHEW X. 16, 17.
luted with such unnatural lusts can escape the judgment of that
great day, the certainty of which is so clearly made known in
John v. 28. Rom. ii. 16. and other passages of the N. T. as to
defy the contradiction of any but the most determined unbeliever.
With respect to the aggravation of sin in the Jews, which is here
represented as obnoxious to greater punishment than that which
will be allotted to Sodom and Gomorrah, it consisted in its being
committed against greater light, and a clearer revelation of the
will of God and his divine perfections. Whitby, Middleton,
Grotius. Ver. 16. iSov, lyw k. t. X. Two similes are united in this
verse, of which, the one indicates the danger to which the Apostles
would be exposed, and the other the means of avoiding them.
There is a beauty in the latter which is very striking ; the pru
dence and sagacity of the serpent, which is represented as (ppovi-
pmrarog icavrtov rwv uripiiov rCiv iirl rrig yfje in Gen. iii. 1. has
been recorded by naturalists ; and the dove has ever been esteemed
as the emblem of innocence, harmlessness, and simplicity, Hos.
vii. 11. Our Lord, therefore, advises his disciples irpoaixuv dirb
twv dvOpwiriw, to beware of men, by means of the union of the two
qualities, so as to abstain from provocation on the one hand, and
to escape from persecution on the other. The Talmud attributes
a saying somewhat similar to the Rabbi Jehuda: The holy
blessed God said to the Israelites, Ye shall be towards me as
upright as the dove, but towards the Gentiles as cunning as ser
pents. Wetstein, Rosenmuller, Doddridge. Instead of
aKspatot the Codex Bezae reads d7rXov<7TaTot, which is evidently
derived from an ancient Gloss. Etym. M. aKipaiog' 6 pr) KEKpa-
pivog KaKolg, dXX' a7rXovc Kat dirolKiXog. But perhaps the true
derivation is from KEpaiZto, Icedo, rather than from KEpdcu, misceo.
See my note on Hom. II. B. 861. Kuinoel. The various trials
for which our Lord here prepares his disciples did not befal them
during their first mission ; but the prediction was fully accom
plished after his ascension. Thus we find Peter and John called
before the Sanhedrim, Acts iv. 6. and beaten, Acts v. 40. James
and Peter before Herod, Acts xii. 3. and Paul before King
Agrippa ; before the Roman governors Gallio, Felix, and Festus ;
and last of all, before the Emperor Nero, and his Prefect, Helius
Caesarianus. Macknight.
Ver. 17. tiov dvOpwirwv. That is, the men,v?ho had just been
represented under the designation of wolves. The article, there
fore, is prefixed upon the principle of renewed mention, and not
to particularize the Jewish nation, although in this instance it is
clear, from the context, that the Jews are more especially in
tended. Markland can scarcely have been aware of the diffi
culties which would arise from adopting the distinction which he

MATTHEW X. 18. 20—23. 127
has proposed between dvOpiniroi and ol dvOpunroi in the three
first Gospels, referring the former exclusively to the Heathen,
and the latter to the Jews. This distinction, as he allows, va
nishes in the Acts and the Epistles, because it had ceased before
the writing of those pieces ; and that there is no reality in it
whatever, will readily appear from Matt. vi. 14. vii. 12. xiii. 25.
xv. 9. xix. 6. In this very chapter, v. 32. the meaning of ol
dvOptonoi is adequately expressed by our English phrase, the
world, as opposed to God, who is mentioned in the same verse.
Middleton. By the synagogues here mentioned, some have un
derstood the councils of twenty-three judges, others the Sanhedrim,
and others again, certain large assemblies of the elders, which were
sometimes held for special purposes, as that which Josephus
mentions to have been summoned by Herod the Great. But
there is no reason why the common synagogue should not be in
tended, the rulers of which were invested with the power of scourg
ing the delinquents who fell under their cognizance. Compare
Matt, xxiii. 24. Acts xxii. 19. and see Home's Introd. Vol.
III. pp. 113. 253. Lightfoot, Wetstein. — [Beza, Grotius.]
Ver. 18. Etc paprvpiov avrolg. Scil. of the truth of the Gos
pel; which would be confirmed by the readiness and fortitude
with which they suffered in defence of it. See this argument
applied in Home's Introd. Vol. I. p. 138.
Ver. 20. ov ydp vpslg ecte k. t. X. The inference which the
Romanists, Quakers, and others, have drawn from this verse, in
favour of their doctrine, that the divine influence operates in the
same manner at present, is altogether unfounded. They may
as well claim to themselves the miraculous powers with which
the Apostles were endowed. Whitby.
Ver. 21. iiravaarrictovTai. Shall rise up ; i.e. as witnesses.
Compare Hist. Susan, v. 51. LXX. In Matt. xii. 41. iv rtj
KpicrEi is added. There seems to be no doubt that all the terms
in this and the preceding verses are forensical. Of the verb 7ra-
paSiSovai, subaud. Eig <pvXaKr)v, see on Matt. iv. 12. unless we
understand Eig awiSpia from v. 17. The verb Oavarwrjovrnv
must be understood of the endeavour, not of the act. Kuinoel.
Ver. 22. virb wdvrtov. By all; i. e. by the generality of men.
This limited sense of the adjective is not unfrequent. Compare
Exod. ix. 6. xiv. 7. 1 Chron. x. 6. xiv. 17. John xii. 32. Phil.
ii. 21. Rom. v. 18. Macknight, Doddridge.
Ver. 23. brav Si Siwkwctiv k. t. X. There is a curious repeti
tion of this clause in several MSS. which is adopted by Origen
and others of the Fathers. Some copies also, for iv ry iroXsi

128 MATTHEW X. 24, 25.
ravry read ek rr)g iroXswg ravrng. The former variation probably
arose from negligence, and the latter from the ignorance of some
copyist, who understood Siiokeiv in the sense of EKj3dXX£tv, for
getting that it also signifies generally to persecute. Kuinoel. —
[Griesbach.] Ibid. teXeo-tjte rag iroXEig. Some render teXeTv to instruct ;
and the adjective teXekdv is certainly explained by pavOavovrwv
in 1 Chron. xxv. 8. LXX. Compare 1 Cor. ii. 6. So also
Ovid : Phillyrides puerum cithara perfecit Achillem. The
Greek fathers call baptism rEXEitoaig. See Leigh's Critica Sacra :
p. 326. But the expression here used is elliptic for TEXiarirE bSbv
Sid rag iroXEig. There is, indeed, no classic authority for this
use of the phrase teXeIv iroXiv, but we find the verb dvwiv and
its compounds employed in a similar manner. Thus Polyb. p.
330. ed. Gron. Siavvaag rrjv ril>v 'Icropfipwv KaXovpivriv x<^Pav-
Ibid. p. 437. dvxiuag roiig irpoEipripivovg roirovg. In the same
sense Florus I. 18. 1. consummare Italiam. A. Clarke, Kui
noel. By the coming of the Son of Man, here mentioned, some
understand his resurrection from the dead, others the miraculous
effusion of the Spirit, called by our Lord himself his coming,
John xiv. 18. and others again, the destruction of Jerusalem,
which is unquestionably signified by the same expression iii
Matt. xxiv. 30. xxv. 13. Mark xiii. 26. Luke xviii. 8. and else
where. The latter seems to be the most probable, inasmuch as
the sufferings here predicted had not reached any height till after
the ascension. Whitby, Lightfoot, Macknight. Hence the
word tIXoc, in the preceding verse, may refer to the completion
of the destruction predicted, and the salvation promised be no
other than deliverance from the calamities which attended that
dreadful event. Some commentators, however, understand eternal
salvation, taking teXoc in the sense of teXevt?), which constantly
denotes death. So Theophylact on this passage : <JtoZ,EaOaC Trig
alwviov pErixEiv ?corjc. Our Lord's meaning may probably in
clude both ; but the fleeing to the mountains, mentioned in con
nection with the same promise delivered upon another occasion,
(Matt. xxiv. 16. Mark xiii. 14. Luke xxi. 21.) can only extend
to a temporal escape. Hammond, Wetstein.
Ver. 24. ovk e<tt£ paOnrr)g k. r. X. This is a Hebrew pro
verb, indicating that a disciple could not reasonably expect to
meet with better treatment than that which his master had ex
perienced. It is quoted by Aben Ezra on Hos. i. 2., and, like
many others of a similar description, applied by our Lord to
illustrate the subject of his discourse. Hammond.
Ver. 25. BeeX£e/3ovX. This is the reading of almost all the
best MSS. The E. T. follows the Vulgate, into which Jerome
introduced Beelzebub, probably from the idea that the Ekronite

MATTHEW X. 26. 129
idol, called in 2 Kings i. 2"QT ,1?3, is intended, the termination
/3 being changed into X, in accordance with the nature of the
Greek language, in which no word is found to end with |3. Now
the meaning of this title is, the Lord of flies, and was evidently
intended by the Ekronites, as an appellation of honour, similar
to that under which the early Greeks sacrificed to Hercules, as
Zevc ' Airopviog, the banisher of flies. See Pausan. Arcad. VIII.
p. 653. ed. Lips, and compare Plin. N. H. XXIX. 6. But
whatever be the true reading, it is clear that the name was
applied to our Lord as a title of contempt ; whence it is highly
probable that the name is, in fact, that of the idol above men
tioned, which the Jews had altered, by a change of the last
letter, into an appellation of the most odious import; signifying the
god of dung (^'nO- This supposition is considerably supported
by the fact, that the custom of altering names, in order to dese
crate idols, was very common with the Jews. Thus the town
which was called Betliel, i. e. the house of God, was afterwards
called Bethaven, or the house of vanity: and the name of For
tune, iTHJ, gediyah, was changed into W9J, geliya, signifying
a stink. It is also remarkable, that the most ignominious name
which could be bestowed upon idols, was 7'DT, zebid. So the
Jerusalem Talmud; Tit. Beracoth, p. 12. Even to those who
have stretched out their hands in a dunghill, i. e. in an idol's
temple, there is hope. Again : He that sees them dunging, i. e.
sacrificing, to an idol, let him say ; Cursed be he that sacri
fices to a strange God. Lightfoot, Grotius. — [Whitby, Le
Clerc]
Ver. 26. pr) ovv c/>o|3r)05ir£ k. t. X. These words admit of
two senses, each of which are equally good : — (1.) Let not the
malice of these persecutors deter you from preaching the Gospel,
or make you despair of its success : for though it will be ob
scured by the calumnies and opposition of unbelievers, it shall
at length enlighten the whole world. Or, (2.) Fear not the
calumnies with which they load you, for I will make your inno
cence and integrity, as well as the excellence of your doctrine, as
clear as the light ; especially in the face of men and angels at
the last day. Of the custom alluded to in the following verse,
see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 258. It may be added, that
the latter clause of the verse has a probable reference to the pro
clamation made by the minister of the synagogue on the Sabbath-
eve, who sounded a trumpet six times from the roof of a lofty
house, to announce the approach of the Sabbath. See Bab.
Talmud: Tit. Schabbath, p. 35. Other proclamations also were
made from the house-tops ; and Hegesippus, ap. Euseb. II. 53.
mentions the preaching of James the Just from the roof of the
Temple at the Passover. The flat roofs of the Jewish houses
were rendered serviceable to a variety of purposes. Compare
VOL. I. k

130 MATTHEW X. 28, 29.
Deut. xxii. 8. Josh. ii. 6. Judg. ix. 51. Nehem. viii. 16. 2 Sam.
xi. 2. 2 Kings xxiii. 12. Isaiah xv. 3. Jerem. xxxii. 29. y4ete
x. 9. Our Lord here intimates the future promulgation of those
doctrines, which were at present concealed, and of which, in
fact, the Apostles themselves did not fully comprehend the nature
till after his ascension ; such as the abolition of the Jewish law,
the call of the Gentiles, &c. &c. Whitby, Lightfoot, Gro
tius, A. Clarke.
Ver. 28. koi pi) (Po(3eI<t0e k. t. X. This passage is strongly
illustrative of the existence of the soul in a separate state after
death, and its perception of that existence ; since the soul would
otherwise be as properly killed as the body. In respect to their
resurrection and re-union, men can no more kill one than the
other ; so that the death of the soul here spoken of, can be no
other than its privation of that sensation, which it enjoys after
its separation from the body. In this sense, the Jews would
certainly understand the words of Christ, since it was one of
their distinguished tenets, which had obtained among them from
the time of Ezra, that the soul, after the death of the body, was
capable of bliss or misery, and therefore of sensibility. Hence
Wisd. xvi. 13. LXX. crv yap, (Kvpts,) £wi)e Kat Oavdrov
i^ovariav £X£(C) Ka' Kardysig Eig irvXag qSov, Kal avdysig' dvOpw-
irog Si diroKTEivEi piv ry KaKtg avrov' ec,eX0ov Si irvEvpa ovk
dva<rrplc/)£t, ovSi avaXvii ipvx"hv 7rapaXr)c/>0£icTav. A similar argu
ment is used in the treatise 7T£pt avTOKparopoe Xoyiapov, §. 13.
ascribed to Josephus, by Aben Ezra on Exod. xx. 3. and Arrian.
Epict. I. 9. Compare 1 Sam. ii. 6. Isaiah li. 7. With respect
to final retribution, the Rabbins do not seem to have been agreed
in opinion. While some of them advocate the annihilation of
the souls of the wicked, others are of opinion that they will be
doomed to exist for ever in wretchedness : each party, of course,
including the whole Gentile world in their damnatory decision.
See Kimchi on 2 Sam. xxv. 29. Psalm i. and civ. Tacitus re
lates, that the Jews coincided in opinion on this point with the
Egyptians : Hist. V. 5. Now the Egyptians believed that the'
duration of punishment varied in proportion to the aggravation
of crime ; and from them Homer and Plato, and subsequently
Virgil, seem to have derived their opinions. The observation of
Philo on this subject, in his treatise on rewards and punishments,
is very just : Men think, says he, that death is the end of their
troubles, whereas it is only the beginning of them. It is the lot
of the wicked, that they live in death, and suffer as it were con
tinual death. Whitby, Doddridge, Grotius.
Ver. 29. Svo arpovOia. This probably alludes to the sparrows
and other small birds, which were sold in the Temple-courts for
the purpose of sacrifice. Some, indeed, have supposed that our

MATTHEW X. 32. 34. 131
Lord had particularly in view the two birds, which made a part
of the leper's offering, (Levit. xiv. 4.) ; inferring that Providence
determined which of the two should live, and which be killed.
But as five sparrows are mentioned in Luke xii. 6. it is merely
intended, perhaps, to signify the Universality of the divine provi
dence, without any particular reference whatever. Of the Gre
cian sages, Plato and Athenagoras admitted, and Epicurus
denied, the interference of the Deity in the concerns of his crea
tures ; others believed in his care of the creation generally, but
not of its constituent parts ; and others again allowed it in the
case of men, but not of the inferior animals. This latter doc
trine was also maintained by some of the Jewish Rabbins, from
whom, perhaps, it was adopted by Pythagoras, and by him intro
duced into Greece. The Jews, however, for the most part, were
of opinion, that a superintending Providence protected the most
insignificant objects in creation ; and sentiments to this effect
are frequent in their writings. Thus in Bereschith Rabba, §.
79. p. 77. Even a bird is not taken without heaven, i. e. without
the will of God; how much less the life of man. Again, in
Schabbath, p. 107. God nourishes all things, from the horn of
an unicorn to the eggs of a louse. Compare 1 Cor. ix. 9. The
expression in the next verse, which is illustrative of the same
doctrine, is manifestly proverbial. Compare 1 Sam. xiv. 45.
2 Sam. xiv. 11. 1 Kings i. 51. Acts xxvii. 34. So in Perikta,
p. 18. Do I not number every hair of every creature. Schoett-
gen, Grotius, Doddridge.
Ibid. dvEv rov irarpbg vpiov. Origen inserted rr/g j3ovXr)g,
which is also found in some MSS. and versions. But there is no
good authority for the authenticity of the reading ; and the ex
pression in the text is idiomatic Greek. Compare Hom. Od. B,
372. Pind. Olymp. IX. 156, and see my note on II. I. 49.
Palairet. Of the dacrdpiov, or Roman as, see Home.
Ver. 32. bpoXoyriaEi iv ipoi. The verb bpoXoytlv is properly
construed with an accusative, as in Acts xxiii. 8. xxiv. 14. The
dative with ev is an Hebraism. See 1 Kings viii. 33. and com
pare Luke xii. 8. Rom. x. 9. The verse contains a promise of
eternal reward to the faithful followers of Christ, whom the
terrors of persecution cannot tempt into a denial of the faith, or
deter from maintaining the truth of the Gospel. Kuinoel.
Ver. 34. pr) vopicrr)TE, k, t. X. The Jews had indulged them
selves in a persuasion, derived from their ancient prophets, and
more especially Isaiahix. 6. xi. 6. that the coming of their Messiah
would be attended with peace and prosperity throughout all the
land of Judaea. But though the nature of that religion which he
came to establish was such as to produce the most beneficial
results, and though his government will finally be settled in
k 2

132 MATTHEW X. 35, 36. 38.
universal peace, still those effects would be preventedby the wick
edness and the ignorance of men from being immediately accom
plished. The sword to which our Lord more especially alludes
in this verse, is the Roman sword, which about forty years after
his ascension laid Jerusalem in ruins ; and the dissensions which
he mentions in the parallel passage of Luke xii. 51. and which
are particularized in the following verses, are those which so
sadly marked the first ages of Christianity. But the declaration
extends to the various divisions and persecutions which the adver
saries of the Gospel have raised in the world, from that to the
present time. The expression which our Lord employs, denotes
no intention on his part of producing this result ; but is merely
predictive of the fact. It is an energetic mode of declaring the
certainty of a foreseen consequence of any measure, by repre
senting it as the purpose for which the measure was adopted.
The idiom is familiar to the Orientals, and not unfrequent in
writers of other countries. See Home's Introd. Vol. II. pp.
635. 644. Whitby, Lightfoot, Campbell.
Ver. 35. Sixdaai dvOpwirov. The verb Stxd^Eiv signifies pro
perly, to divide into two parts; whence it is here employed in the
strong metaphorical acceptation ; to disunite, to set at variance.
In the parallel place Luke uses SiapEpiZ,Eiv. So Gen. x. 25.
1 Chron. i. 19. LXX. Kuinoel.
Ver. 36. ixOpol tov dvOptoirov. E. T. a man's foes ; in which
the force of the article is not apparent. Now the passage is
taken from Micah vii. 6. where the words of the LXX are
ixOpol irdvTEg dvSpbg ol dvSpEg ol iv ri£ o'ikw avrov. If for
TrdvTEc we read irdvrog, which is not improbably correct, the
passage in Micah and Matthew will be equivalent : for tov dv
Opwirov will mean every man, or men generally, coinciding
exactly with 7rdvToc dvSpog. Otherwise there must be a renewed
reference to oiKoSEOTroTJje preceding. Middleton. The decla
ration in v. 37. implies the unworthiness of those who prefer the
religion in which they have been brought up, and which their
nearest relatives still embrace, be it Jewish or Heathen, to that
of Christ. Le Clerc.
Ver. 38. Xapfidvsi tov aravpbv. This is an allusion to the
custom of the Romans, who compelled the criminal to bear the
cross, on which he was to suffer, to the place of execution :
John xix. 17.^ Hence Plutarch, p. 554. A. iKaurog nZv KaKovp-
yc5v £Kc/>£pEt tov avrov (xravpov. The figure, therefore, expresses
with great energy the readiness which every Christian ought to
exhibit, in enduring the severest reproaches, cruelties, and even
the most ignominious death, for the sake of Christ. Macknight,
Wetstein.

MATTHEW X. 39, 40. 42. 133
Ver. 39. 6 svpwv r^v ipvxvv k. t. X. There is in this sen
tence a kind of paronomasia, whereby the same word is used in
different senses, in order to convey the sentiment with greater
energy. He, who by weakly betraying the charge with which he
is entrusted, preserves his temporal life, shall lose eternal life :
and the converse. The same figure is employed in Matt. viii.
22. xiii. 12. In the present instance the antanaclasis is con
tained in the double meaning of the word ^vx»7, which signifies
both life and soul. Examples of the latter meaning are unneces
sary ; the former is illustrated by Matt. vi. 25. xvi. 25. John x.
11. Xen. Cyrop. VI. 4. 3. Mem. III. 12. 2. Isocr. Paneg. §.
24. So Horat. Od. I. 12. 37. animce prodigus. The participle
Evpwv is used in the sense of <xc6£uiv, or rather of vuiZeiv OiXhiv.
Compare Mark viii. 35. Luke ix. 24. xv. 24. 32. xvii. 33. With
respect to the sentiment, the student will scarcely fail to compare
the noble parallel in Juven. Sat. VIII. 83. Summum crede nefas
animam prceferre pudori; Et propter vitam vivendi perdere
causas. Grotius, Campbe-ll, Kuinoel, Wakefield.
Ver. 40. 6 SExopsvog vpag k- t. X. In v. 14. supra, Christ
had prepared his disciples for the rejection of themselves and
their doctrine, and stated the penalty annexed to such con
duct ; he now proceeds to apportion the rewards of the contrary
part. These rewards have been supposed by some to be merely
temporal, consisting in a participation of those gifts, with which
the Apostles were endued. But there seems to be no just ground
for this limitation ; for although an act of kindness, such as pre
senting a disciple with a cup of cold water, may be occasionally
performed by a wicked man, it is clear from Christ's own words,
that a Christian motive, as well as the act itself, is essential to
ensure the reward. 'YhepropAet or teacher (see on Matt. vi. 15.)
must be received in the name of a prophet ; i. e. because he is a
prophet, and for the sake of him that sent him. This import of
the expression Etc bvopa is confirmed by that of the Hebrew
Ot£>7, leshem, as employed in the Talmudical writings. Thus
in Sanhedr. Berach. Whoso studies the law, in the name of the
law, i. e. because it is the law, he, eye. The assurance which
Christ holds out to his disciples, is very analogous to certain
sayings, which are common among the Rabbins. Thus : He
who receives a learned man or an elder into his house, receives
the Shechinah. And again : He who speaks against a faithful
pastor, speaks against God himself . Whitby, Schoettgen. —
[Macknight.] Ver. 42. Iva rwv piKptov tovtwv. It has been supposed that
some very young persons were present, to whom our Lord more
particularly pointed. Others have imagined that there is an oppo
sition between the piKpol, StKatot, and irpoipiirai, intended to desig-

134 MATTHEW XL 1.
nate three different degrees of perfection in the Christian character:
the first, those who have only just embraced the Gospel; the se
cond, those who have made some progress in Christian holiness ;
and lastly, the perfect men of God. Clement Alex, has observed
a similar gradation between the called, the elect, and the perfect,
(kXtitoi, ekXektoi, teXe'ioi.) But this is mere conjecture : and it
is probable that this verse is simply a more energetic repetition
of the sentiment contained in the preceding. From the similar
construction throughout it is evident that 'iva rdv piKpwv is iden
tical with 'iva tcov paOrirtov, and consequently, that piKpwv must
either agree with paOrirCov understood, in reference to the humble
condition of the disciples, or is used substantively, like the He
brew ]V2p, keton, which signifies both parvus and discipulus.
The term paOrirfig will thus include both irpoipriTrig and SiKaiog,
of which the former denotes a teacher, the latter merely a pro
fessor, of the Gospel. Kuinoel. — [Newcome, Grotius.]
Ibid, \pvxpov. Scil, vSarog. So Arist. Nub. 1040. Osppiy
XoiiEaOai. See also Bos Ellips, Gr, p. 313. In Mark ix. 41.
the ellipsis is supplied. We have the verb ¦kot'iZ.eiv with a double
accusative in Numb. v. 6. Analogous with the sentiment is the
saying of the Rabbins : He that gives food to one that studies in
the law, God will bless him in this world, and give him a lot in
the world to come. Kuinoel, A. Clarke,

CHAPTER XI.
Contents: — John's Message to Jesus, and the testimony of
Jesus concerning John, vv. 1 — 19. [Luke vii. 18.] Con
demnation of the Galilcean cities, and the blessings of the
Gospel announced; vv. 20 — 30. [Luke x. 15. 21.]
Verse I. iroXsmv avnov. Scil. of the Galilaeans; for Christ
was now in those parts. It is not uncommon in the Oriental
dialects to employ a pronoun, where the antecedent to which it
refers is not expressed, and must be supplied from the context.
So Matt. xii. 9. Luke iv. 15. In the next verse, for XptcrTou
some few MSS. read 'IV(tqv, but the received text is unquestion
ably correct. The word Xpiarbg, when alone, and with the
article, is always in the N. T. the name of an office ; and there
fore the import of the sentence is : When John had heard that
those works were performed by Jesus, which were characteristic
of the Messiah, lie sent, #c. Campbell, Kuinoel. Of John's
imprisonment see Matt, xiv. 3.

MATTHEW XI. 3. 135
Ver. 3. erv Et 6 EpxojUEvoc, k. t. X. The title He that is com
ing, or He that is to come, (the present being put for the future,
to denote the certainty of the event) was that under which the
Jews designated their expected Messiah, and which they had
adopted from Habak. ii. 3. Dan. vii. 13. Compare Matt. iii. 11.
xxi. 9. xxiii. 39. Luke xix. 38. John i. 15. 27. vi. 14. Heb.
x. 37. [OF THE MESSAGE OF JOHN THE BAPTIST TO CHRIST.
Commentators are greatly divided in opinion respecting the
import of this message, and the motive of the Baptist in sending
it. According to some, who have followed in the steps of Justin
and Tertullian, it was suggested by a desire to satisfy some
scruples which existed in his own mind respecting our Lord's
divine mission ; and a few have even gone so far as to imagine,
that these doubts originated in a disappointed expectation of de
liverance from the confinement to which he was now subjected.
But the descent of the Holy Ghost at the baptism of Christ in
Jordan, and the testimony from heaven, Matt. iii. 17. the divine
impulse by which he had previously recognized him as the Mes
siah, (see on John i. 33.) and his own repeated testimonies to his
being the Lamb of God, John i. 15. 26. 33. iii. 28. sqq. are en
tirely at variance with such a supposition. At all events, it is
altogether incredible that the question implies a fretful remon
strance, that no miracle had been performed by Christ in the
Baptist's behalf. A man of John's severe habits, who had spent
his life in the most rigid and secluded manner, practising every
species of austerity and self-denial, would never have been in
duced, by the circumstances of his present imprisonment, which
does not appear to have prevented an intercourse with his friends,
to send a peevish and impatient message of complaint ; implying
at least, in this view of the case, that he was wavering in his
belief of the Messiah's claims. These opinions, however, are
not without learned and excellent advocates, who have main
tained that, inauspicious as they must appear, they cannot affect
the evidence for the truth of the Gospel. But a far more satis
factory solution of the difficulty is that which is adopted by those
commentators, who think with Euthymius and Theophylact, that
the doubts, which it was the object of the message to remove,
existed in the minds of John's disciples. This explanation de
rives considerable support from the dispute which had actually
arisen in that quarter with respect to the baptism of Jesus, and
their master : and there are many other considerations which
will here have weight, that could not apply to John himself.
The notion which they had in common with the rest of their
countrymen in regard to the temporal nature of the Messiah's
kingdom, might have made them hesitate in admitting his claims ;

136 MATTHEW XI. 5.
and although John himself could never have sent an angry mes
sage to Jesus, it is not impossible that his disciples may have
been offended at their master's continued confinement, without
any endeavour on the part of Jesus to release him. It should
seem, therefore, that it was the Baptist's design to refer them to
Christ himself for the removal of their scruples, and afterwards
to adapt the lesson which they might receive from him, to the
purpose of future instruction. Our blessed Lord, perceiving at
once the intention of his forerunner, afforded him the most effec
tual means of performing it. By an extraordinary display of his
supernatural endowments he exhibited before their eyes a splen
did and complete fulfilment of a most remarkable prophecy, and
sent them back to their master for the application. The caution
with which he concluded his answer, v. 6. will thus apply to the
messengers themselves, and would induce them to give a ready
assent to the Baptist's admonitions. It appears, therefore, that
the message, instead of arguing the existence of any doubt in the
mind of John, which would naturally invalidate his former tes
timony, was, in fact, intended to establish his disciples in the
belief of that testimony. Limborch, indeed, contends that John
had no other view than a direct affirmation of the Messiah's
claims ; which, as he was prevented by his imprisonment from
delivering in person, he determined to effect by means of his
disciples. In conformity with this conjecture, he would render
the passage without an interrogation : TJiou art he that should
come; and do we look for another ? This notion, however, at
the same time that it entirely destroys the force of our Saviour's
reply, is inconsistent with the grammatical construction of the
sentence. An hypothesis has also been started, that John, en
tertaining no doubt of Christ's pretensions, intended to urge him
to a more speedy establishment of that kingdom, the nature of
which he did not himself entirely comprehend. But John was a
prophet of more than ordinary qualifications ; and it cannot be
conceived, even though the full spirit of his declaration were un
known to himself, that any thing would proceed from him di
rectly or indirectly at variance with the commission, to which he
was divinely appointed. Hammond, Whitby, Doddridge. —
[Lightfoot, Wetstein, Macknight, Kuinoel.]

Ver. 5. rvipXol dvapXiirovm. Our Lord here plainly alludes
to the prophetic descriptions of the Messiah delivered by Isaiah,
thus indirectly asserting his divine commission. The allusions
are more particularly to Isaiah xxxv. 5, 6. lxi. 1. There is no
place in the Prophets which predicts the cleansing of lepers, or
raising the dead, among the characteristics of the Messiah, but
the latter, as well as the former, of these tokens (see Matt. viii.

MATTHEW XI. 7. 137
4.) was traditionally expected to distinguish his reign. The
Rabbins affirmed, that in the land where the dead should arise,
the kingdom of the Messiah would commence ; and it is clear
from John vii. 31. that the most astonishing miracles were looked
for at his hands. Upon this, therefore, as upon other occasions,
our Lord not only appealed to the evidence of prophecy, but
realized the expectations which their traditions had led them to
encourage. Whitby, Schoettgen.
Ibid, irrioxoi. This may include the poor in spirit; but
there is, at the same time, no reason to depart from the obvious
sense of the word. The prophetic declaration, to which our
Lord alludes, seems to have had a special reference to the
Scribes and Pharisees, who neglected and despised the poor as
people of the earth, (John vii. 49.) and held it as a maxim, that
the Spirit would only rest upon the rich. The verb EvayyfXt^Ecr-
Oai implies not only the act, but the effect, of preaching ; i. e.
the' conversion of those to whom the Gospel is addressed. It
frequently happens that verbs are so used as to denote the full
effect of the action which they represent. Compare Isaiah lxv. 1.
Rom. x. 20. Gal. vi. 1. Tit. iii. 11. So in the next verse, cncav-
SaXi<rOr)vai is to be ensnared into sin, by reason of the scandal
Or offence set before him ; i. e. by any thing which obstructs the
Christian course, or causes to fall from the faith. See on Matt.
v. 27. and compare Matt. xiii. 21, 57. xv. 12. xvii. 27. xviii. 6,
7. xxvi. 31. Mark iv. 17. xiv. 27. Luke vii. 23. John xvi. 1.
Rom. ix. 33. xiv. 13. 21. and elsewhere. Whitby, Hammond,
Grotius. Ver. 7. KaXapov iiirb dvipov (TaXsvopEvov. It is supposed by
some that these words are to be taken in their natural sense ;
and that the interrogative form of the sentence implies a nega
tion, to the effect that it was not the sight of a trifling thing, such
as a reed, with which the wilderness abounded, that induced the
multitudes to resort thither during the time of John's ministry.
But it is far preferable to understand the expression as meta
phorically descriptive of a weak unsteady mind, yielding from
side to side as a reed shaken by the wind. So Euthymius :
Koxxpov Kal Evpiiricrrov dvOpwirov. This import of the words is
fully authorized by what follows in v. 8. where our Lord intends
to eulogize the austere and mortified life of the Baptist, as he
here proclaims the steady consistency of his conduct. The force
of the allusion, indeed, is contained in the agitation of the reed,
rather than in the reed itself, and the words virb dvipov uoXevo-
Pevov are altogether unmeaning upon any other supposition.
Compare Ephes. iv. 14. Heb. xiii. 9. This view of the case is
further confirmed by the observations on v. 3. Whitby, Mack
night, Kuinoel. — [Grotius, Campbell, Rosenmuller.]

138 MATTHEW XI. 9. 11.
Ver. 9. TTEpKTcrcfTEpov irporpiiTOv. See the next note. The
citation in v. 10. is from Mai. iii. 1. of the difference between
which and the original Hebrew see Home's Introd. Vol. II. p.
208. It may be remarked, however, that this difference does
not affect the correctness and veracity either of the Prophet or
the Evangelist. For though Christ be a distinct person, yet he is
one and the same God with the Father ; so that with the Evange
lists the persons are not confounded, and with the Prophet the
Godhead is not divided. The fulfilment of the prophecy in John
is a convincing evidence of his heavenly commission, and, by
consequence, of the truth of the Christian religion. Some, in
deed, have asserted its completion in Malachi himself, arguing
from the signification of which his name admits, and from his
being the last prophet before the Messiah's advent. But the
length of time which intervened between Malachi and Christ
cannot be reconciled with the sudden coming of the Lord to his
Temple, foretold in the prediction ; not to mention that the de
claration of the Evangelist is an unanswerable proof that the
Baptist alone can be the object of the prophecy. Compare also
Mai. iv. 5, 6. with Matt. iii. 10. Luke i. 17. Jones. Of the
custom alluded to, see Home, Vol. III. p. 92.
Ibid. dyyfXov. This term was not confined to those who
were sent on more important commissions, as Moses, Numb. xx.
16. but applied generally to prophets, and those who held any
sacred office. Maimonides : Propheta non raro vocatur angelus.
The high-priest is so called in Mai. ii. 7. and so Diod. Sic.
(speaking of the Jews,) 'Apx^pia vopi%ov<ri aiirolg ayysXov y£-
vi<rOai tH)v rov Oeov irpoaraypdrtov. Compare Judg. ii. 1.
2 Chron. xxxvi. 15, 16. Isaiah xliv. 26. Hagg. i. 13. In Rev. ii.
1. it would be well rendered bishop, ox president. Beausobre. —
[Grotius.] Campbell would here translate angel, although a
human messenger is intended, from the idea that there is a com
parison between the two titles Prophet and Angel, with a view
to exalt the latter. But the comparison does not consist in the
name, but in the office ; and the English word angel is confined
to a peculiar class of heavenly beings, which is not the case with
the Greek. See on Matt. i. 20.
Ver. 11. pEiZwv. Luke vii. 28. pE%tov irpoiprirng. As a pro
phet, John the Baptist excelled in every thing which belonged
to the character. He was commissioned by God, and had im
mediate communication with him, John i. 33. He foretold that
the kingdom of heaven, spoken of by Daniel, was at hand ; and
he predicted the destruction of Jerusalem, as a punishment for
the impenitence of the Jews, and their obstinate rejection of the
Messiah, Luke iii. 17. But the preeminence which our Lord
declares him to have possessed above the prophets of the O. T.
seems to have consisted in the clearness and precision, with which

MATTHEW XI. 12. 139
his predictions were delivered, and in the superior dignity of his
office, as the immediate foreranner of Christ. The time of his
appearance also was in those days which " many prophets and
righteous men had desired to see, and had not seen them." The
prophets of old had only foretold the Messiah's advent as a dis
tant event, but it belonged to John to introduce him personally
to the world. Hence, he was looked upon in early times as the
grand connecting link between the Jewish and Christian dispen
sations. Tertull. adv. Marc, IV. 33. Quasi non et nos limitem
quendam agnoscamus Johannem constitutum inter Vetera et nova,
ad quern desineret Judaismus, et a quo inciperet Christianismus.
In his character too of the Messiah's harbinger he was himself
the subject of prophecy, and he was ushered into the world by
a train of the most miraculous events. It may be inferred, also,
from the strong expression of our Lord in the next verse, that the
effects of his ministry were in perfect accordance with the superior
importance of his office. Still every teacher of the Gospel, though
much inferior to John in those points which distinguished him from
the ancient prophets, — for this seems to be the import of the com
parative piKporEpog, scil. 'Iwdwov, — is greater than he. The
Apostles, for instance, excelled the Baptist in their more intimate
acquaintance with the real extent and design of Christianity ; they
were employed in erecting the kingdom, of which John had only
announced the beginning ; they preached Christ crucified, his re
surrection and ascension, and were endued with more abundant
light to make known the blessing of the covenant which he sealed
with his blood ; they were endued also with supernatural powers,
whereas " John did no miracle," John x. 41. and they were
filled with the Holy Ghost, which had not fallen upon him, John.
vii, 39. This reasoning extends in part to Christians in general ;
but it is clear that the greatness alluded to is that of knowledge
and illumination with respect to the kingdom of grace, and not
of recompence in the kingdom of glory. Whitby, Macknight,
Lightfoot, Grotius. The verb iyEipEaOai, and its synonym
dvaarrivai, are used especially of illustrious characters, whose
superior qualifications raise them above the ordinary level of
mankind. The corresponding Hebrew word is Dp, kum. Com
pare Exod. i. 8. Deid. xiii. 1. xviii. 15. 18. xxxiv. 10. Judg.
xxiv. 24. John vii. 52, Kuinoel.
Ver. 12. 17 fiaaiXiia riov ovpavwv f3id%Erai, k. t. X. The
verb /3td^£tv signifies to assault, to attack with violence ; and it
here contains a metaphorical allusion to a siege. Hesych. /3td-
Z,ETaC fiiaiwg KparElrai. Erasmus : vi invaditur, sive oecupatur.
Compare Exod. xix. 24. LXX. With respect to the meaning
of the latter clause, which is evidently a more forcible repetition
of the former, there are two opinions, which are essentially dif
ferent from each other. According to one of these opinions, the

140 MATTHEW XI. IS, 14.
jdiaaral are those who, by their continual attendance on the doc
trine of the Gospel preached to them, their care to understand
it, and their readiness to receive it, evince their eager desire to
be made partakers of the Messiah's kingdom. On the other
hand, it is contended that our- Lord alluded to the publicans and
sinners, and the meaner crowd of the Jews, who had formerly
lived by rapine and violence, and were looked upon by. the
Scribes and Pharisees as persons unworthy of the blessings of
the Messiah ; but who, in consequence of John's preaching, had
been induced to embrace the Gospel, and amend their lives in
conformity with its precepts. This latter interpretation is not
only abundantly confirmed by Matt. xxi. 31. Luke vii. 29. xvi.
16. but is exactly what one would expect from the absence of
the article before fitaorai. Had the article been inserted, ol
(Hiaaral would have included a whole species or class, and would
therefore have been the reading on the first supposition ; but
jiiatrral, (as pdyoi, Matt. ii. 1. dyyEXoi, iv. 11.) denotes only
certain individuals of a class ; those, namely, who had attended
to the Baptist's call to repentance ; since it is too much to expect
that all the violent would do so without exception. It is re
markable that Schleusner, who adopts the other explanation, has
twice quoted the passage, (viz. under fiiaarri g and dpirdZw) and in
both instances with ol fiiaaral, upon the authority, unless alto
gether from accident, of a single MS. To return to the verb j3id-
Z,E<rOai, we may observe, that as force is repelled by force, there
may be a further allusion to the obstacles which were raised
against the reception of the Gospel by the Scribes and Pharisees,
and, in fact, by the passions, prejudices, opinions, and autho
rities of every human institution whatsoever. Lightfoot, Gro
tius, Rosenmuller, Middleton, Schoettgen, Wetstein, &c
Ver. 13. 7rdvr£c ydp ot irpoiprirai k. t. X. The causal particle
ydp marks the reason of the wonderful success which attended
the Baptist's preaching. The dispensation of the Law was now
passing away, and the events predicted by the prophets were
now passing before their eyes, John being in fact that prophet
whom Malachi had foretold under the name of Elijah, as ap
pointed to introduce the promised Messiah to the world. It was
a common saying with the Jews before the birth of Christ, that
the prophets prophesied only until the times of the Messiah.
Macknight, Schoettgen.
Ver. 14. SiXaaOai. Credere; as in Luke viii. 13. Acts viii.
14. Soph. CEd. T. 217. Taju' idv OiXyg 'iirr, KXvwv SiX^0ai.
The pronoun tovto is evidently understood ; and so in Eurip.
Hipp. 694. k'xw §£ Kaycu 7rpoc TaS', ei Si'£,Ei, XiyEiv. In the same
sense is used the Hebrew 73p, caphal, which is rendered by
TtdOiaOai in Esth. iv. 4. LXX. Wetstein, Kypke, Kuinoel.

MATTHEW XI. 14. 141

[on the typical resemblance between JOHN THE baptist
AND ELIJAH.
Our blessed Lord in this place declares the fulfilment in the
person of the Baptist of the celebrated prophecy in Mai. iv. 5.
Behold I will send you Elijah the Prophet before the coming of
the great and terrible day of the Lord. Nevertheless, objec
tions have been raised against its accomplishment in John, rest
ing chiefly upon the answer which he returned to the enquiry of
the Priests and Levites, who were sent to examine into the nature
and design of his mission. Upon his candid disavowal of any
claim to be received as the Christ, they immediately demanded of
him, Art thou Elias ? and he saith, I am not : John i. 21. This
question was doubtless suggested by a tradition which generally
prevailed at the time, — founded in all probability upon a misin
terpretation of the LXX translation of this very passage in
Malachi, and strengthened by the belief which the Jews seemed
to have imbibed during the Babylonish captivity, of the Pagan
doctrine of the Metempsychosis, — that Elijah would be restored
to life, and precede their Messiah in person. This expectation
may be traced in several passages of the N. T. (Matt. xvi. 14.
xvii. 10. xxvi. 49. Mark ix. 12. 15.) and Trypho, the Jew,
affirms his persuasion that the Tishbite would appear to anoint
the Messiah, and manifest him to the people. Justin M. Dial.
pp. 153. 235. ed. Thirlby. There seems also to be an allusion
to the same opinion in the beautiful eulogium which is passed
upon Elias by the son of Sirac, Ecclus. xlviii. 10. 6 7rapaypac/>£tc
Iv iXiypoig Eig Kaipoxig. Perhaps, however, the words will admit
of a different version from the E. T., so as to represent Elias as
the type or exemplar (tXEy pog) of what the Baptist would be in
after times. In the Talmudistic writings there are many passages
to this effect, and prayers abound in their Liturgies, of which the
following is a specimen from the Dictionary of Elias the Levite :
Elias was in the days of Gibeah : so let it be God's good tvill
that he may be with us in this time, and let that verse be accom
plished upon us, Behold I send you Elias. So is the prayer of
Elias the author. The modern Jews, to this day, pray for the
appearance of Elijah ; in hopes that he will be immediately fol
lowed by the Messiah.
Now it is very clear that the Baptist was not Elias, according
to the sense in which he was expected by the Jews ; and, conse
quently, his answer to the messengers cannot invalidate the asser
tion of Jesus, that he was Elias which was for to come. That the
figurative adoption of a name by no means argues an identity of
person, is admitted by the Jewish Rabbins ; and in reference to
this very fact Maimonides delivers his opinion to this effect, in
which he is supported by R. Tachuma, a commentator ol consi-

142 MATTHEW XI. 14,
derable note. " Doubtless," says he, " here is a promise of the
manifestation of a prophet in Israel a little before the appear
ance of the Messiah, whom some of the learned would have to be
Elias, the Tishbite; but others, and among them the great
Dr. Maimonides, think this prophet shall be of equal degree ivith
Elias, for the knowledge of God, and reverence of his holy
name ; and that he is therefore called Elias." Indeed, nothing
can be objected to this explanation of the prophecy, which would
not have the same weight in regard to others, where the same
mode of designation is used. In several places where the Mes
siah is spoken of under the title of David, as Hos. iii. 5. Jerem.
xxx. 9., it has never been doubted to whom the appellation is
applied : and the Jews themselves called this very Elias by the
name of Phineas, in allusion to some faint resemblance between
the two persons. See Levi Gershun on 1 Kings xvii.
Most of the Jewish expositors acknowledge that the prophecy
under consideration regards the Messiah ; and even those who
refer it to the restoration of the Shechinah, virtually concede
the same point. For the want of this symbol of the divine pre
sence in the second temple was supplied by the personal glory of
the Son of God. It is true they deny that the Messiah and
his forerunner have appeared, and consequently assert the non-
fulfilment of the prophecy. But with those who are free from
their prejudices, it is not necessary to adopt the interpretations
which depend upon them ; more especially as the true import of
the typical character of Elias is fully explained in the Gospel.
The angel, in manifest allusion to the prediction of Malachi, ex
pressly told Zacharias that his son would be endowed with the
spirit and power of Elias, Luke i. 17. and these qualifications
were communicated to the Baptist as the spirit of Moses was
given to the Elders, Numb. xi. 25. and as the spirit of this same
Elijah was shed upon Elisha, while he witnessed the ascent of
his teacher into Heaven, 2 Kings ii. 15. Now, although the re
semblance between John and Elijah is observable in their rigid
austerity of life and manners, and extended even to the external
peculiarities of dress, in the discharge of their respective offices
it was still more conspicuous. In the spirit of Elias the Baptist
fearlessly stood forward in the cause of expiring religion, and in
his power he rekindled the dying embers of piety and virtue. In
his spirit he was exceedingly jealous for the Lord of Hosts, and
in his power he turned many of the children of Israel to the
Lord their God, Luke i. 16. In the spirit of him who shrunk
not from the threats of Ahab and Jezebel, he boldly reproved
the incestuous intercourse of Herod and Herodias ; and in his
power he struck terror into the heart of the guilty monarch.
One point at least is clear, with respect to John's answer to
the messengers :— it must at once remove all suspicion of impos
ture and deceit. Had he been a deceiver, he would instantly

MATTHEW XI. 15, 16, 17. 143
have adopted any measure, which, by flattering the prejudices of
the people, would have tended to ensure his success. It cannot,
therefore, be supposed that he would have neglected the oppor
tunity which now presented itself; when they wanted but his
own sanction to receive him as the forerunner of their expected
Messiah. His outward appearance, his apparent zeal, and his
severe religion, were all in unison with their most favourite no
tions. The opportunity was suggested by themselves, and suc
cess was certain. Imposture never could have disregarded so
favourable an occurrence. Lightfoot, Whitby, Mede, Mack
night.]

Ver. 15. 6 e'xcuv Sira aKovEiv, aKovirw. That is, Let him hear
and understand: and not like the Jews, and especially the
Pharisees, (?j yEvsd avTrj, v. 16.) who rejected the counsel of God
against themselves, (Luke vii. 30.) by perversely resisting the
evidence of the Gospel, in whatever shape proposed. The verb
aKovav is used in the sense of intelligere in Mark iv. 33.
1 Cor. xiv. 2. and the expression aKovETE Kat gw'iete occurs in
Luke xv. 10. The admonition is a strong and general appeal to
the reason and understanding, demanding an impartial and un
prejudiced examination of the doctrines proposed for our recep
tion : it is repeatedly used in the N. T. after prophetic declara
tions figuratively expressed, or after parables descriptive of im
portant truths, and demanding the more especial consideration
of mankind. Compare Matt. xiii. 9. Mark iv. 9. Luke viii. 8.
Rev. ii. 7. 11. 17. 29. Macknight, Kuinoel, Campbell.
Ver. 16. t'ivi bpoiwtrtx). This is the usual form of introducing
a parable ; and it is frequently found in the Talmud. So Mark
iv. 30. Luke xiii. 18. 20. For 7rat§apto(t; iv dyopalg many MSS.
read vaiSioig iv dyopq, probably from Luke vii. 32. ; but which
ever be the true reading, any public place , and not the forum or
market in particular, is evidently intended. See Prov. i. 20.
Isaiah xv. 3. Amos v. 16. Zech. viii. 5. LXX. in all which
places the Hebrew word denotes a market-place ; and in the
last, where the Greek is iv ralg irXarEiaig, there is an allusion,
as here, to the sports of children. In the same sense dyopd is
also used in Tob. ii. 3. 3 Esdr. ii. 18. 2 Mace. ii. 10. LXX.
The verb KaOnaOai signifies generally ver sari, as in Matt. iv. 16.
Kuinoel. Ver. 17. nvXrieapEv vplv, k. t. X. In Judea it was usual at
feasts to have music of an airy kind, accompanied with dancing ;
and at funerals melancholy airs, while the friends of the deceased
testified their grief by striking their breasts, and utterm§_ dol_e*ul
lamentations. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 480. 5^4.
10

144 MATTHEW XI. 19.
Among parties of children, imitating these things in their diver
sions, while one set performed the music, if the other refused to
answer them by dancing or lamenting, it naturally gave rise to the
complaint, We have piped unto you, <ye.,. which at length passed
into a proverb. Epictet. 35. dig rd iraiSla dvaarpa^iiay, a vw piv
iraXaiardg iraiZ,Ei, vw Si avXrirdg, viiv Si povopdxovg, Elra GaXwi-
Z,ei, Eira rpayaySsl. See Arrian, Epict. II. 16. III. 15. There is
a saying of R. Passa in the Gemara exactly parallel to this : /
lamented to you, and you did not attend ; I smiled to you, and
you did not regard it ; alas ! that you will not decide between
good and evil. In applying the proverb to the Pharisees, our Lord
intimated that the divine wisdom had employed every method
proper for converting them, but in vain. By the mournful airs
he represented the severe austerities of the Baptist, which so
utterly eclipsed their own hypocritical mortifications, that they
attributed his conduct to madness and daemoniacal possession.
The cheerful music, on the other hand, fitly pourtrayed the mild
and engaging manner of our Saviour's instructions, which he im
parted to all, even publicans and sinners, and drew down the Pha
risaical insinuation of gluttony and intemperance. It is obvious
that the comparison extends to the whole parable ; and that the
children complained of, not those who made the complaint, are
meant to represent the Jews. Macknight, Grotius. Of the
verb TjvXijcra/zEv, it may be remarked that the tibia ox pipe was
used both at feasts and funerals by the Greeks and Romans, as
well as by the Jews ; and it is to this double use of the tibia that
our Lord refers. Compare Isaiah xvi. 11. Jerem. xlviii. 36.
Luke xv. 25. ^Esop. Fab. XXXIX. 94. Propert. El. III. 10.
23. Ovid. Heroid. XII. 139. The verb OpwElv here signifies
to chaunt a dirge. So 2 Sam. i. 17. LXX. iOprivriuE rbv flprjvov.
In Jerem. ix. 17. the prceficce, or women hired to sing at fune
rals, are called al Qpnvovaai, as they are also designated in
.Esop. Fab. CXXII. Compare Hom. II. Q. 722. After 'eko^oitOe
there may be an ellipsis of crrlpva or crrfiOEa, the former of which
is supplied in Lucian. Dial. Meret. and the latter in Dioscor.
Epig. VIII. 2. Perhaps, however, the middle verbis sufficient,
which, of itself, denotes KoVrEtv Eavrov. The same use of the
verb occurs in Rev. i. 7. xviii. 9. In Luke vii. 32. the word
employed is KXa'uiv. Grotius, Kuinoel, Campbell.
Ver. 19. Kat iSiKaaljOr) n aoipia k. r. X. There is considerable
difference of opinion among the commentators respecting the
meaning of this passage. Eisner thinks the clause was spoken
by the Pharisees, and maintains that iSiKaiwOri should be ren
dered is condemned, in accordance with the sense which the word
is explained to bear in Eurip. Herac. 191. Thucyd. III. p. 200.
so that the sense would be, the doctrine is condemned by its dis
ciples. But it is far more natural to take the sentence as our

MATTHEW XI. 21. 145
Lord's reflection on the conduct of the Jews, the particle Kat
being understood in the sense of dXXd, but, as in Gen. xxxi. 7.
Exod. i. 7. Psalm iv. 5. LXX. Matt. xii. 43. xiii. 22. John v.
40. and, indeed, admitting that the sense assigned to SiKaiow is
warranted by the passages cited in support of it, it is highly impro
bable that such is its meaning here, since in every other passage
where the word occurs in the N. T. and the LXX. it is inva
riably employed in a favourable meaning, to justify, i. e. to ac
count just or righteous, to acquit, to absolve. Others sup
pose that our Lord applies <ro<pia to himself; others, again, that
under the word tekvcuv he includes himself and the Baptist; and
it has also been thought that by the children of wisdom are
meant the fruits or effects of wisdom, probably from the circum
stance that the Vatican MS. reads ipywv instead of tekvwv. But
the best interpretation seems to be that which depends upon the
ordinary sense of StKatovv in the N. T., the aorist being used, as
elsewhere repeatedly, for the present, and the preposition a7r6
being placed for virb, as in Isaiah xiv. 25. LXX. 1 Mace. viii. 6.
Acts x. 21. The counsel of God, i. e. the method which he
adopted to reclaim the Jews, is here denominated Wisdom, (com
pare Luke vii. 30. 35.) and her children are those who humbly
and piously embrace the all-wise dispensations of God. In this
acceptation the words tIkvov and vlbg are frequently used in
Scripture. Compare Luke xvi. 18. Eph. ii. 2. v. 6. and see note
on Matt. viii. 12. The passage, therefore, may be thus para
phrased : — The conduct of John the Baptist and myself, how
ever different, are alike conformable to the divine wisdom ; and
those who are enlightened by this wisdom will justify both, i. e.
will vindicate the propriety of both, as the result of different cir
cumstances. Grotius, Macknight, Campbell, Jones, Kui
noel. — [Elsner, Markland, A. Clarke.]
Ver. 21. ovai aoi, XopaZiv k. r. X. E. T. Woe to thee! eye.
But the exclamation is rather indicative of pity than of anger, and
would be better rendered by the interjection alas! Of the towns
here mentioned see Home's Geographical Index. Chorazin is
not elsewhere mentioned, except in the parallel place of Luke x.
13. and the only account of it is to be found in Jerome, de locis
Hebr. p. 4. C. who places it two miles from Capernaum. Some
have thought with Origen in Philocal. §. 27. p. 109. ed. Spencer.
that it should be written XiLpa Tiv, the region of Zin ; and that
X<*>pa is added to distinguish it from the wilderness of the same
name. But our Lord speaks expressly of rag iroXEig, cities,
v. 20. and it is mentioned in connexion with Capernaum and
Bethsaida, and in opposition to Tyre and Sidon. There is no
MS. authority for Origen's conjecture. Our Lord alludes in
this verse to the prophetic denunciations against Tyre and Sidon
in Isaiah xxxiii. 1. Jerem. xxv. 22. xlvii. 4. Ezek. xxvi. xxvii.
VOL. I. L

146 MATTHEW XI. 23.
xxviii. Zech. ix. 2. and asserts, that if these denunciations had
been accompanied with miracles, such as he exhibited in the
cities of Galilee, they would have repented in sackcloth and
ashes; which were the usual token of the .bitterest grief. See
on Matt. vi. 16. Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 503. and my note
on Hom. II. 2. 27. The same sentiment extends through the
following verses, except that Capemaum seems to be mentioned
separately, as being the constant residence of our Lord, and the
more favoured witness of his miracles and discourses. Hence,
also, it is compared with Sodom, which afforded the most terrible
example of divine vengeance which the world had ever beheld.
A. Clarke, Kuinoel, Macknight. Of the declaration in the
following verse see on Matt. xv. 2.
Ver. 23. twg tov ovpavov vi//it>0£icra. Euthymius : Sid to kot-
oikeiv iv avry rov Xptcrrov, Kat rd 7roXXd t£jv Oavpdrwv iv avry
TEXiaai. The expression is occasionally used as hyperbolically
descriptive of lofty buildings, trees, &c. as in Gen. xi. 4. Dan.
iv. 8. and thence metaphorically applied to represent a state of
prosperity, and the enjoyment of the greatest privileges. Compare
Isaiah xiv. 13. sqq. 2 Mace. ix. 10. So Hom. Od. I. 20. Kat
pEv kXeoc ovpavov "ikei. Horat. Od. I. 36. Sublimi feriam sidera
vertice. It is clear, therefore, that the opposite expression 'iwg qSov
KaTaj3t/3a<r0jjvat is similarly proverbial of a state of despair, and
desolation. Compare Isaiah xiv. 15. lvii. 9. Tob. xiii. 2. Both
are united in Epigr. Incert. ap. Anthol. I. 80. 15. ad Fortunam:
roiig S' dirb rHiv vec^eXwv slg d't'Stjv Kardysig. Compare Job xi. 8.
Psalm exxxix. 8. Amos ix. 2. The word qSrig occurs eleven
times in the N. T. where, in the E. T. it is invariably rendered
Hell, except in one instance, (1 Cor. xv. 55.) where it is trans
lated grave. In the Greek poets it is used as the proper name
of Pluto, the god of the Infernal Regions, though it more cor
rectly imports the Infernal Regions themselves, answering to
the Latin, Orcus, or rather Infernus, comprehending the recep
tacle of all the dead, and including both Elysium, the place of
the blessed, and Tartarus, the abode of the miserable. The
derivation of the word is from a priv. and e'ISw, video, evidently
originating in the notion which was entertained both by Greeks
and Hebrews, and indeed by the ancients in general, that the
repository of departed souls is under ground. Such being the
import of the word qSrig, it is evident that it is improperly ren
dered Hell in the sense which is now affixed to the word ; and
for which the Greek appellation is ylEwa. See on Matt. v. 22.
In the O. T. the corresponding word is VlNty, sheol, which sig
nifies the state of the dead in general, without any distinction of
good or bad ;. and in translating the word, the LXX have almost
invariably used qSrig. Neither can the word with any propriety
be rendered grave, although there are some places in which the

MATTHEW XI. 25. 147
term would express the purport of the sentence with sufficient
clearness, as in Gen. xxxvii. 35. xiii. 38. But the Hebrew word
for grave or sepulchre is 12p, keber, corresponding with the
Greek rdipog ; and although the word would occasionally suit the
sense equally well with qSrig, in particular instances, it is clear
from other passages that the two are not identical. Campbell.
Ver. 25. a7roKpt0E^c eIwev. This phrase is often used in the
N. T. where nothing has gone before to which an answer could
be accommodated ; in which case it must be referred to some
Xoyoe ivSidOETog, or inward conception, in connection with what is
passing in the speaker's mind. In the present instance our Lord's
ejaculation is evidently the consequence of his reflection upon the
infidelity of those cities, among which he had done his mighty
works, and of those Pharisees who rejected the doctrines both of
himself and the Baptist. In other places the answer is directed to
the thoughts of those around him, as in Matt. xxii. 1 . Luke v. 22.
vii. 39, 40, or to their actions, Mark xiv. 48. or to some subject
or circumstance which naturally elicits the observation. Compare
Matt. xvii. 4. xxvi. 63. xxviii. 5. Mark ix. 38. Luke i. 60. xxii.
51. The Hebrew TMy is used in the same manner. Compare
Gen. xviii. 27. Deut. xxi. 7. xxvi. 5. xxvii. 14. Job iii. 2. Cant.
ii. 10. Dan. ii. 37. Whitby, Kuinoel. The words iv eke'ivw
nd Koipq evidently fix the order of the narrative, and conse
quently prove that Luke x. 21. is a repetition of the same words
upon another proper occasion. Besides, the relative ravra can
only refer to those doctrines of divine wisdom, the rejection of
which by the Pharisees had just been the subject under consi
deration. Doddridge.
Ibid. l^opoXoyovpai. This verb sometimes denotes to con
fess sins, sometimes to acknowledge favours, and sometimes also
to adore or venerate. In this last sense it is to be understood
when followed by a dative, as in Luke x. 21. Rom. xiv. 11.
Philo Alleg. I. p. 55. A. 6 Trjc tov Qeov (ppovriaitog d(TKr}rr)g i%o-
poXoyElrai EvxapiTTiKwg t<£ to dyaObv dipOovwg Swpriaapivto.
Euthymius explains it by EvxapurrCo. Compare Gen. ix. 33.
Psalm xxviii. 7. The terms wise and learned, croipol ko.1 (tvvetoI,
must be understood as equivalent to the Hebrew D^DDH, haca-
mim, and 0^123, nebonim, (Deut. i. 13. Prov. iii. 7.) which,
after the establishment of academies in the country, were often
used to denote those who had the superintendency of these semi
naries, or a principal part in teaching. Hence they are here
applied to the Scribes, who had acquired considerable learning
and skill in tradition, and thence became, as St. Paul describes
them in 1 Cor. iii. 18. ol SoKovvrEg aoipol Eivai. Accordingly,
they are contrasted not with pwpol, fools, but with vrivioi, babes,
i. e. illiterate persons, whose minds had not been cultivated in
the schools of the Rabbins ; and who were, therefore, from a
l 2

148 MATTHEW XI. 26, 27.
modest consciousness of their own inferior acquirements, more
readily disposed to cultivate the spiritual wisdom of the Gospel.
There are some remarkable sayings in the Talmudists, somewhat
similar to this. Thus in Bava Bathra, Tp. 12. R. Jochanan said,
From the time in which the Temple ivas destroyed wisdom was
taken away from the prophets, and given to fools and children.
Again, Synop. Sohar. p. 10. In the days of the Messiah, every
species of wisdom, even the most profound, shall be revealed ;
and this even to children. It is to be remarked that our Saviour
does not praise God, because he had hid these things from the
wise, but, that having done so, he revealed them to babes.
Chrysostom : ov roivw Sid tovto (scil. to airoKpv(pr)vai dirb <so-
<pu>v) xa'lPu> dXX' oti a aoipol ovk 'iyvwuav, iyvioaav oiirot. We
have the same idiom in Isaiah xii. 1. Rom. vi. 17. Neither can
he be said to have hidden these things at all, otherwise than that
he foresaw and permitted the consequence of Pharisaical obstinacy
and pride. A similar remark will apply to a variety of passages
in Scripture. Compare Exod. vii. 3, 4. 2 Sam. xii. 11, 12.
xxiv. 1. 1 Kings xxii. 23. Campbell, Kuinoel, Whitby,
Doddridge, A. Clarke.
Ver. 26. ovrwg iyivsro EvSoKta k. t. X. That is, £v§OK»jcrae
ovtwc 7Toti7<rai. The word evSokio corresponds with the Hebrew
iliJI, and denotes the decree or determination of the divine will.
Compare 1 Sam. xii. 22. 2 Mace. xiv. 35. 1 Cor. i. 21. This
verse, it may be observed, is an energetic repetition of the pre
ceding, the words i^opoXoyovpai aoi being understood to com
plete the sentence. Kuinoel, Grotius.
Ver. 27. 7rdvra juoi irapESoOri k. t. X. Some have supposed
that by 7rdvTa, all power, is intended, as in Malt, xxviii. 18. and
others that persons are meant rather than things, in reference to
the babes of which our Lord had just been speaking. The pas
sage is unquestionably attended with difficulties, but it may be
fairly gathered from the context that the counsel of God is still
the subject of the discourse, with the furtherance of which Christ
was commissioned by the Father. The verbs Sowai and 7rapa-
Soiivai are frequently used in the sense of tradere or docere, as
in Mark vi. 13. Luke i. 2. 1 Cor. xv. 3. Plato Phileb. p. 374.
Hence, 7rapdSocnc, prceceptum, institutum, Matt. xv. 2. 1 Cor.
xi. 2. The sense of the passage therefore will be, The doctrines
which I deliver I have received from my Father. Compare John
xvii. 7, 8. In this text there is an evident intimation of a certain
distinction and subordination in the persons of the Godhead; and
that though the glory is equal in all, and their majesty co-eternal,
still the attributes of divinity mysteriously originate with the
Father. The clause immediately following asserts a reciprocal
knowledge of the Father and Son, which is beyond the compre-

MATTHEW XI. 28, 29. 149
hension of every human being, such knowledge as we possess of
the Father being obtained by communication from the Son.
With this declaration our Lord naturally introduces the invita
tion which he is about to offer to those, who were inclined to
come to him, and to learn of him those precepts of divine wisdom
which it was his office to reveal. Kuinoel, Beausobre. — [Ham
mond, Doddridge.]
Ver. 28. kotticuvtec Kat wEipopriapivoi. The labours and
burdens to which Christ primarily alludes, are the ceremonial
observances of the Jewish law, rendered yet more irksome by the
false interpretations of the Scribes, and thence called <popria
fiapia, SvcrfidijTaKTa, Matt, xxiii. 4. Compare Acts xv. 10.
The expression may also be extended metaphorically to those
who laboured under the weight of their sins. Every Jew was
under an obligation of appearing in the Temple at Jerusalem at
least three times every year ; and it is not improbable that the
tenor of our Lord's discourse was here suggested by the con
course of people who were assembled upon one of these occa
sions ; many of whom came from a considerable distance, some
laden with burdens, and all fatigued with their journey, Kui
noel, Grotius, Hammond, Jortin. See also Home's Introd.
Vol. II. p. 490.
Ver. 29. The expressions dpat tov Zvybv, and paOElv aw
ipov, are nearly equivalent, the latter being simply explanatory
of the former ; and both, like Sevte 7rpoe pi in the preceding
verse, containing an invitation to become the disciples of Christ,
and to embrace the Gospel. The Hebrew word 7lJ?, oval, which
signifies properly a yoke, by which oxen are harnessed to their
work, is used metaphorically to denote any bond, or obligation,
and thence applied by Christ to his religion, in opposition to
Judaism, which is called Zvybg SovXEiag, Acts xv. 10. Compare
Gal. v. 1. The same meaning is expressed without a metaphor
in 1 John v. 3. TrjpEtv ivroXdg oil fiapsiag. The figurative sense
of Zvybg is exemplified in Deut. xxviii. 47, 48. 1 Kings xii. 4.
Psalm ii. 3. Lament, iii. 27. Isaiah x. 27. So especially in
Ecclus. Ii. 26. LXX. tov rpdxr\Xov vpwv vwoOete iiirb %vybv,
Kal iiriSE%,daOii) 17 ipvxrj vpwv iratSEiav' iyyvg iariv EupEtv aiiri'iv.
In the Talmudists we meet with the yoke of the law, of the pre
cept, of the Kingdom of Heaven, of repentance, of faith, and the
like ; and in Shemoth Rabba it is said, Because the ten tribes
did not take the yoke of the holy and blessed God upon them ;
therefore Sennacherib led them into captivity. The same meta
phor is also employed by Grecian philosophers. Thus Cleanthes
in Diog. Laert. VII. 5. 4. avrbg povog SwaaOai j5a<TTaZeiv to
Zfiviovog (popriov. Compare Pind. Pyth. II. 172. Campbell,
Lightfoot, Kuinoel, A. Clarke.

150 MATTHEW XI. 30. XII. 1.
Ibid, &rt irpdog Elpi k. t. X. Parallel to the sense in which
these words are sometimes understood is Senec. Consol. ad
Polyb. §. 36. Discat ab eo clementiam, atque a mitissimo omnium
principe mitis fieri. But it does not appear to be so much our
Lord's aim to recommend his virtues to the imitation of the
people, as himself to their choice as a teacher. The whole is to
be explained, therefore, as having a view to this end : Be in
structed by me, whom ye will find a meek and condescending
teacher, not rough, haughty, and impatient, like the Scribes ;
but one who can bear with the infirmities of the weak, and will
adapt his lessons to the capacities of the learners. The adjective
irpqog denotes mild, gentle, as in Matt. xxi. 5. and so Herodian,
IV. 3. pirpiov te Kat irpqov iavrbv roig irpoaioiKTi irapElx^v. In
James iv. 6. rairEivbg is opposed to vn-Ep-r)<pavog, and therefore
may be rendered unassuming. The noun dvdiravmg, as the verb
dvairavEiv in v. 28., are properly opposed to Zvybg, and indicate
relief from the burden of the Jewish ceremonies, and thence, in
an extended sense, the rest of heaven. Xen. Cyrop. VII. 5. 47.
Sokei poi Kat -r) iprj ipvxfi dvairavaEwg nvog d^tovv TuyxdvEtv.
Compare Ecclus. Ii. 26, 27. Campbell, Kuinoel, Elsner,
Kypke.
Ver. 30. xpi0"™?' Properly useful; and so it is understood
by some in this place : but as applied to a yoke, it is well ren
dered in the E. T. easy, i. e. adapted to the strength of those
who bear it. Compare Ephes. iv. 32. 1 Pet. ii. 3. It is opposed
to fiapiig in Joseph. Ant. VIII. 8. 1. The adjective iXaippbg
also is properly translated light. Lucian. de Merced. Cond,
§. 13. Zvybv iXa<ppov te Kat Evipopov. Diog. Laert. in Vit. Solon.
I. 2. 15. ev ydp Or)KE vopovg avrolg axOsa Koviporara. Wet-
stein, Kypke.

CHAPTER XII.
Contents : — Christ defends his disciples from an imputed
breach of the Sabbath, in plucking ears of corn; vv. 1 — 8.
[Mark ii. 23. Luke vi. 1.] He restores the withered hand,
and the Pharisees seek his life; vv. 9 — 14. [Mark iii. 1. Luke
vi. 6.] A prophecy fulfilled ; w. 15 — 21. A demoniac cured,
the calumnies of the Pharisees refuted, and the Scribes re
proved^ w.22 — 16. [Mark iii. 19. Luke xi. 14.] The faith
ful disciples of Christ declared to be his kindred; vv. 46 — 50.
[Mark iii. 31. Luke viii. 19.]
Verse 1. iv eke'ivm t$ Katpcjt. The time is more definitely
marked in Luke vi. 1. By the plural adfifiam nothing more is

MATTHEW XII. 2, 3. 151
understood than if the singular had been employed. The He
brew J"Qty is sometimes rendered crd/3j3arov, and sometimes
crdj3/3aTa, by the LXX. Compare Exod. xxxi. 14. Levit. xxiii.
32. Joseph. Ant. III. 10. Kara Se iftSopriv ripipav, ring crd/3/3ara
KaXElrai. Horat. Sunt hodie tricesima Sabbata. See also Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 171. With the adjective mropipwv we
must supply x^pt^v. The same ellipsis is found in Xen. Cyr.
I. 4. 16. to ipyduipa, scil. x^pta. It is clear, from the Jewish
writings, that there were public paths through their fields. Kui
noel, Grotius, Lightfoot.
Ver. 2. 6 ovk Effort k. r. X. In the time of our Lord the
Jewish traditions respecting the observance of the sabbath,
were excessively minute and tedious. See Home's Introd. Vol.
III. p. 302. sq. It was mainly owing, indeed, to their super
stitious notions respecting the legality of self-defence on this day
that Pompey was enabled to take Jerusalem. See Dion. Cass.
XXXVI. With respect to the profanation here charged upon the
disciples, it has been thought that it consisted in breaking their
fast before the performance of their morning service. See Acts
ii. 15. But the objection is not confined to this particular, being
delivered, as well as our Saviour's reply, in general terms. It
appears from the Rabbinical writings that the Jews divided sab
batical violations into two classes, the first of which contained
thirty-nine principal offences, each of which included a variety
of subdivisions. Hence, in reference to the injunction against
reaping, Exod. xxxiv. 21. it was ordained in one of their
canons, that he that reapeth on the Sabbath, even to the quantity
of a fig, is guilty ; and Maimonides affirms, that plucking ears
is reaping. That this, however, was contrary to the spirit of
the law is evident from Exod. xii. 16. and our Lord, in proof of
this, refers them to the example of David,, and the practice of
the priests ; and adduces a declaration of the Almighty, which he
had already cited upon a similar occasion, (Matt. ix. 13.) dis
pensing with the ritual observances of the law in cases of ne
cessity, or for purposes of charity. Whitby, Lightfoot, A*
Clarke. Ver. 3. ol pet avrov. From the words of Ahimelech to
David upon this occasion, 1 Sam. xxi. 1 . it appears that he was
alone, and had no man with him ; but this must be understood
comparatively, with regard to the train of nobles with which he
was usually attended. The aptness with which our Lord applied
this story in vindication of his disciples will readily appear from
the interpretation of the ancient Rabbins, produced by Kimchi
on the passage : It is a small thing to say that it is lawful for
us to eat these loaves taken from before the Lord, when we
are hungry ; for it would be lawful to eat this very loaf, which

152 MATTHEW XII. 5, 6.
is now set on, which is also sanctified in the vessel, (for the table
sanctifieth) ; it would be lawful to eat even this when another
loaf is not present with you to give us, and we are so hunger
bitten. Again : There is nothing which may hinder taking care
of life beside idolatry, adultery, and murder. If, therefore,
hunger were a sufficient justification in the case of David, it was
no less so in the case of the disciples. Lightfoot, Whitby.
Of the next verse see Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 235. 296.
It is clear that it was not the holy place into which David went,
for the loaves of which he partook had been removed from before
the Lord, and new bread had been placed in their room. See
1 Sam. xxi. 6. Campbell.
Ver. 5. aviyviuTE iv riji vopw. It is not meant that these
words are to be found in the Law, but that the priests are en
joined in the Law to perform such servile works in the Temple
on the Sabbath, as considered separately from the end of it, were
a profanation ; but no accusations were preferred against them,
because it was necessary to the public worship, for which the
Sabbath was set apart. From Numb, xxviii. 9. it appears that
two additional lambs were sacrificed on the Sabbath, by which
the ordinary work of the week was doubled. Compare Exod.
xxix. 38. In the Talmud, Schabbath, p. 17. it is stated that
the servile works which are done about holy things are not ser
vile : and Maimonides affirms that there is no Sabbatism at all
in the Temple. Macknight, Lightfoot, Whitby. It is ob
servable that the Hebrew word for Sabbath signifies also rest,
and it is used in both senses in this verse. The Evangelist
seems to indicate this difference of meaning by varying the
Greek inflection of the word, using crdj3/3acrt, from crdj3j3ae, for
the day, and crd|3j3aTov for the sabbatical rest. Campbell.
Ver. 6. roii Upov pEiZwv. In this declaration our Lord anti
cipates an objection that the service of the Temple, which ren
dered the duties of the priests a labour of necessity, was no
excuse for the disciples. To this it is replied, that they were
engaged in the service of one much greater than the Temple, so
that any work which was necessary for their support in the pro
secution of that service, was equally allowable with the ministra
tion of the priests ; more especially as their's was an employ
ment of mercy, and therefore of far greater importance than sa
crifice or any other ritual observance. In many MSS. the read
ing is pE~iZ,ov, which is sanctioned by several of the ancient Fa
thers, and is also more conformable to our Lord's manner upon
similar occasions. It must not be referred, however, as some have
supposed, to the great work, which was then going on. See on
v. 41. infra. Christ may, probably, have alluded to his own
body, as being the noblest Temple of the Deity, (John ii. 21.) or

MATTHEW XII. 8. 10. 153
rather perhaps to himself, as the Lord of the Temple. Compare
Mai. iii. 1. Heb. iii. 3. The Jews esteemed nothing greater
than the Temple, except the God who was worshipped in it.
Grotius, Macknight, A. Clarke, Doddridge. — [Kuinoel.]
Ver. 8. Kvptoe ydp iari k. t. X. The true sense of the pas
sage is declaratory of our Lord's power, as Lord of the Sabbath,
to dispense with the laws relating to its observance. The particle
ydp is not here causal, but merely transitive ; or rather, the
cause to which it refers is not expressed, but to be understood as
passing in the mind of the speaker. See my note on Hom. II. A.
123. In Mark ii. 28. the clause is introduced by the particle
oxtte instead of ydp, by which it has been supposed to be con
nected with the observation, that the Sabbath was made for man,
and not man for the Sabbath, which precedes it in that Gospel.
There can be no doubt as to the sense in which our Lord intended
these words to be understood, viz. that the rest of the Sabbath,
which was instituted for the sake of man, tired with the labours of
the week, ought therefore to yield to the good of man. But in
order to interpret the succeeding clause as an inference from this
declaration, it is necessary that the term 6 vlbg tov dvOpwirov
should be explained of man generally, in which acceptation it is
no where else to be found in the Gospels ; not to mention that
the inference would be in fact nothing more than a repetition of
the premises. It is much better, therefore, to consider the clause
as a new argument, and to render Sxtte moreover, in which sense
it is sometimes, though not very frequently, employed. We can
scarcely suppose that Matthew and Mark intended the words to
be understood differently ; and little dependence can be placed
upon the signification of particles, in the critical employment of
which the Evangelists do not appear to have been very exact.
With respect to the objection, that the clause taken in this sense
is a direct assertion of the Messiahship, which Christ studiously
avoided, it is answered, that there were occasions upon which he
did not hesitate to avow his pretensions, as in John ix. 35. 37.
and elsewhere. Whitby, Doddridge. — [Grotius, Kuinoel.]
Of the various reading in this verse, see Home's Introd. Vol. II.
p. 182.Ver. 10. x£'Pa *X0)V %vpdv. Probably through a partial pa
ralysis. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 516. This cure is
stated in Luke vi. 6. to have been performed iv iripw <7aj3j3aT<t>,
on another Sabbath, probably on that immediately subsequent to
the date of the occurrence in the corn-fields. The relation of
time is less distinctly marked by Matthew, but the same order is
preserved in the narrative of both Evangelists.
Ibid. Et E^Ecrri k. t. X. This question is, in fact, a virtual
denial of the legality of healing on the Sabbath day. It was a

154 MATTHEW XII. 11. 13, 14.
canon of the Jews that no medicine should be prepared, or any
service done on the Sabbath, which was not actually necessary
for the preservation of life, (Tertull. adv. Marcion. IV. 12.) and
a number of cases are enumerated by Maimonides, in Schabbath,
§. 21. in which the application of anyremedy is forbidden. Among
others, pain in the loins, tooth-ache, sore throat, &c. are excluded
from relief till the following day. The School of Schammai, how
ever, went so far as to prohibit any attention whatsoever to the
sick on the Sabbath, making it illegal even to console or to visit
them; Schabbath, p. 12. 1. In opposition to this doctrine our Lord
did not hesitate to heal the withered hand, and although the cure-
was effected by a word, without any medicinal application, and
therefore could not really be obnoxious to the Jewish canon, it
could not fail to mark his disapproval of their uncharitable deci
sions. The pretended miracle related by Tacitus to have been
performed by Vespasian, may be compared with this of Christ's,
for the purpose of investigating the degree of credibility to which
each is respectively entitled. It is cited and examined by Mr.
Home, Introd. Vol. I. p. 294. Lightfoot, Schoettgen,
Wetstein. Ver. 11. ovxi KparriaEi avrb, Kal eyEpst; It was a maxim of
the Jews to take tender care of the goods of an Israelite, in ac
cordance with which it was lawful, if a beast fell into a ditch or
a pool of water, to bring him food in that place if possible, but if
not, to bring clothes and litter, and bear up the beast. Hence
R. Lazar saith, If a beast or its foal fall into a ditch on a holy-
day, let him lift up the former to kill him ; but let him give
fodder unto the latter, lest he die in that place. To these maxims
Christ very properly appeals in vindication of his intention to
restore the man's hand ; arguing a minori ad majus, that it was
a greater duty to act for the benefit of man than of beast. In
after times the Rabbins denied the legality of these practices ;
but it is certain that they were allowed in the time of Christ, and
in all probability revoked in consequence of his appeal to them.
The inference deduced in favour of doing well on the Sabbath
day, is also sanctioned by several Jewish canons. Whitby,
Lightfoot, Schoettgen.
Ver. 13. diroKaTEardOr). This verb properly denotes restora
tion, redintegration; and so, to restore to health. In this sense
it is used in Exod. iv. 7. LXX. Matt. xi. 13. Mark iii. 5. viii.
25. Luke vi. 10. Apollod. Bibl. III. 6. dTroKaTacrT^vat TrdXtvrdc
bpdaEig. Elsner.
Ver. 14. avpfiovXiov iXafiov. This expression is a Latinism,
consilium capiebant. Its recurrence is so frequent in Latin
writers as to supersede the necessity of illustration. The parti-

MATTHEW XII. 18, 19. 155
ciple e£eX0ovtec signifies the departure of the Pharisees from the
synagogue, and cannot be understood as denoting a hostile at
tack, in which sense it is sometimes used by Xenophon and other
writers. That the construction is crujuj3ouXtov £'Xaj3ov Kar av
rov, and not Kar' ovtov eSeXcJovtec, is clear from Matt, xxvii. 1.
Mark iii. 6. Kuinoel.
Ver. 18. iSov, 6 7raTe juov, k. t. X. This prophecy is cited
from Isaiah xiii. 1. as presignifying the quiet and unobtrusive
way in which Christ should propagate his religion, abstaining
from any violent or clamorous measures, and offering no re
sistance to those who opposed him. The chief import of the
prophecy, as far as regards the object to which it is applied by
the Evangelist, is laid in the second verse ; which was fulfilled in
our Lord's withdrawing himself from the rage of the Pharisees,
and in charging his disciples not to make him known. With
this conduct, however, the whole prediction is intimately con
nected, as pourtraying the means by which the Gospel would be
published, not only by himself, but by his apostles and ministers,
to the end of the world. Christianity was not to be promoted by
outward acts of violence, but by meekness and gentleness ; and
by this means it is to be at length established in all the nations
of the earth. With respect to the doubts which have existed as
to the true application of the prophecy, it is enough that Matthew
has established its Evangelical sense, so that there can be no
authority for understanding it either of the exiled Israelites, the
prophet himself, or Cyrus, to all of whom it has been referred by
one or other of the commentators. The LXX seem to have in
clined to the former opinion, unless, indeed, the version has been
corrupted, which is not improbable. See Home's Introd. Vol. II.
p. 208. The titles with which the prediction opens are fre
quently applied to the Messiah in the O. T., and appropriated
to him in the New. Compare Psalm xl. 7 — 9. Isaiah xlix. 3. 5.
1. 10. Iii. 18. liii. 11. Zech. iii. 8. with John xvii. 4. Philip, ii.
7. See also Matt. iii. 17. John iii. 35. Ephes. i. 6. Col. i. 13.
The verb alpEri^Eiv signifies properly to select, to choose ; as in
1 Chron. xxviii. 4. 6. LXX. and thence, to love, to favour,
Numb. xiv. 8. In the LXX translation of the passage of Isaiah
the corresponding word is dvriXr)ipopai, which comes nearer to
the Hebrew original : the sense, however, is the same in either
case, as indicating the divine favour and protection. Hesych.
ypETiadpr\v' riydirri<ra, iiTEOvpriaa, ripdaQriv. KuiNOEL. Of the
word Kpiaig see on v. 20.
Ver. 19. ovk ipiau, ovSe Kpavydati. That is, he shall not be
contentious, or clamorous, in the discharge of his office, making
no ostentatious display of his doctrines. This declaration was
fulfilled by his ceasing to dispute with those Pharisees who had

156 MATTHEW XII. 20.
been led by the unanswerable reply which he made to their charges,
to seek his destruction. The terms employed are sometimes un
derstood in a military sense, in reference to the Jewish expecta
tion of a temporal warrior ; but such an interpretation is over
strained and unsatisfactory. Whitby. — [Macknight.]
Ver. 20. KaXapov awrErpippivov k. t. X. A reed, in Scrip
ture, is an emblem of weakness, as in Ezek. xxix. 6. and conse
quently a bruised reed must signify that state of weakness which
borders on dissolution. The expression is obviously metaphori
cal, as also the Xivov rvipopsvov, smoking flax, which is intended
to convey a similar idea. Flax was used for the wick of a
lamp or taper, and thence by metonymy denotes the taper itself,
which, when nearly extinguished, emits more smoke than light.
With respect to the allusion here employed Jerome observes :
Qui peccatori non porrigit manum, et qui non portat onus fratris
sui, is calamum quassatum confringit ; et qui modicam scintillam
fidei contemnit in parvulis, is linum fumigans extinguit. We
may observe that there is a stronger import in the prophecy than
the words immediately convey. By not breaking the bruised
reed, it is intimated that he will thoroughly repair and restore it ;
and by not quenching the flax, that he will rekindle and enliven
it: in other words, that he will reanimate the almost extin
guished goodness, and strengthen the wavering faith in the
heart of the sinner, till, by that means, he fully establishes his
Gospel throughout the world, and triumphs alike over Jewish
opposition and Gentile idolatry. And, although he removed
from the scene of immediate danger, he continued the same acts
of charity and instruction as before, so as fully to answer the
character which the prediction displayed. Whitby, Hammond.
Ibid, iwg dv £Kj3dXp k. t. X. Some interpret this clause, Till
he turns condemnation to victory ; and others, Till he exercise
judgment upon the stubborn unbelieving Jews to the uttermost ;
understanding Eig vlKog, to the end, ox for ever. But the most
probable interpretation is, Till he make his Gospel triumphant ;
i. e. till he fully establish his religion. The word Kpttrtc;, both
here, and supra v. 18. is rendered from the Hebrew ID3tyD,
mishpat; and may therefore be employed, like that word, to signify
a divine law or rule of life. Compare Gen. xviii. 19. 1 Kings
ix. 4. Psalm cxix. 108. That the phrase Etc vTkoc ekjSoXXeiv
may mean to render victorious, is manifest from similar expressions
in classic writers, such as Etc dSvvaTov £Kj3dXX£tv, to render im
possible ; Polyb. I. 68. So Plato, Epict. VII. slg dvappoariav
Kal dirpEWEiav 'ek^oXXeiv. For Etc vlKog the LXX read Etc; 0X17-
OEiav, which is somewhat in favour of Dr. Randolph's interpreta
tion, amounting, in fact, to the same thing: (see Home, ubi
supra.) But the above method is more satisfactory, and more
generally received ; and it is also confirmed by the insertion of

MATTHEW XII. 23. 25. 27. 157
the article before Kptcrtv, so as evidently to represent the pos
sessive pronoun. Gill, Raphelius, Middleton. — [Light
foot.] Ver. 23. 6 vtoc AavtS. See on Matt. i. 1. ix. 27. It was
the persuasion implied in this expression that Jesus was the
Messiah, and their fear that their credit with the people would
be considerably diminished by the authority of Christ, which in
duced the Pharisees to calumniate the miracles which he per
formed, and attribute them to collusion with the devil. This
persuasion had not yet risen into conviction ; and it was their
wish, by this insinuation, to remove it. The particle prin does
not signify nonne, but num, as in Matt. vii. 16. Mark iv. 21.
xiv. 19. et passim. To render it by a negative would almost in
variably pervert the sense. In the present instance, indeed,
there would be little apparent difference whether is this or is
not this were used, except that the former implies that disbelief,
the latter that belief, preponderates. The verb iE,iarripi in the
beginning of the verse is used generally of any mental emotion.
Compare Mark iii. 21. Xen. Mem. I. 3. 12. Here it evidently
denotes admiration and astonishment, as in Gen. xliii. 33. Psalm
xlviii. 6. Judith xii. 15. xv. 1. Hesych. i^iaravro' iOavpaZov.
Whitby, Campbell, Kuinoel. Of the name Beelzebub see
on Matt. x. 25.
Ver. 25. 7rdcra j3atnX£ta k. t. X. The first part of our Lord's
answer to the imputation of the Pharisees, contained in this and
the following verse, is a reductio ad absurdum. The safety of a
state or family, says he, depends upon its concord and unanimity,
and must be at once destroyed by the discords and divisions of
its members. It is, therefore, absurd to imagine that Satan would
endanger the welfare of his kingdom by assisting me in ejecting
his agents from the bodies of men, into which he himself has
given, them power to enter. The influence which our Lord ex
erted, both by his doctrine and miracles, was in direct opposition
to the advancement of the empire of the devil, and, therefore, little
likely to be assisted by his connivance and co-operation. A si
milar argument is employed by Seneca, de Ira, II. 31. Salva
autem esse societas nisi amove et custodia partium non potest.
Cic. de Amic. 7. quce enim domus tam stabilis, quce tam firma
civitas est, quce non odiis atque dissidiis funditus possit everti ?
Compare Soph. Ant. 672. Kuinoel.
Ver. 27. ol viol vpwv. Your children; i. e. your disciples,
scil. of the Pharisees. It was a custom with the Jews to use the
terms father and son of a teacher and his scholar. Compare
1 Kings xx. 35. 2 Kings ii. 3. 2 Tim. i. 2. Philem. 10. That
many of the Jews did at this time endeavour to cast out daemons

158 MATTHEW XII. 28.
is evident from Luke ix. 4. Acts xix. 13. From various passages
in the Fathers it appears that upon these occasions they invoked
the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; and Jose
phus states expressly that the art of exorcism was imparted by
God to Solomon, who left behind him instructions by which
devils were so effectually cast out as never to return again. See
Justin, Dial. Tryp/i. p. 311. C. Iren. II. 5. Origen c. Cels. IV.
p. 183. Joseph. Ant. VII. 6. 3. VIII. 2. 5. The argument
here employed by our Lord is extremely conclusive : — " If the
person who casts out devils proves himself thereby to be in
league with Satan, then are your disciples, and you their in
structors, in league with him; and consequently your calumnious
charge against me evidently applies equally to them." It is not
necessary to this conclusion, that the daemons were actually ex
pelled by these exorcists ; although it is possible that the invoca
tions of Jehovah may sometimes have been attended with success.
Nothing more is required than that the Jews thought they were
expelled, and that they did not attribute their expulsion to the
agency of Satan, as they did the miracles of Christ. Whitby,
Macknight, Kuinoel.
Ver. 28. iv irvEvpan Qeov. In Luke xi. 20. we have ev Sok-
rvXw Qeov. The expressions are equivalent, and imply simply
by divine co-operation ; the sense in which wvEvpa is here used
being the fifth assigned to it under Matt. i. 18. Our Lord's
argument proceeds thus : " It is clear that the kingdom of Satan
is overthrown, and the kingdom of God about to be established :
for before the goods of a strong man can be plundered, a
stronger than he must take possession of his house ; so that the
kingdom of Satan can only have been overthrown by a more
powerful adversary. If then I do not my miracles by Satanic
agency, but by divine co-operation, you ought to admit my claims
to the Messiahship. And that I am sent to establish the king
dom of God in opposition to the kingdom of Satan is evident, for
not only does not Satan cast out Satan, but he will not yield to a
power which is not greater than his own, v. 29. and conse
quently, since I do act by a power superior to him, and in oppo
sition to his dominion, it follows that I am his enemy, according
to the maxim, He that is not with me, eye. v. 30." Some, in
deed, suppose that Christ intended to apply this proverb to the
Pharisees, as indicating their opposition to the kingdom of God,
announced in Dan. iv. 34. vii. 14. and their advancement of the
interests of the devil. But the pronouns are used indifferently
in expressions of this nature, and there is no occasion to refer
ipov to Christ. The converse of the maxim is equally true with
the maxim itself, and it is employed by Christ, without any con
tradiction, in Luke ix. 58. In Prov. xxvi. the proverb in v. 4.
is reversed in v. 5. so that both are equally applicable to two dif-

MATTHEW XII. 31. 159
ferent cases. In the latter clause there seems to be an allusion
to the amassing of money on the one hand, and its loss on the
other. Nothing similar, however, is to be found in the Jewish
writings, which might serve as a direction in the application of
the maxim. Euthymius observes : Si iripov Xoyiapov |3Ej3aiot,
on paXXov ExOiorog avry iariv b dpx&>v tcov Saipoviwv. Kui-
noel, Macknight. — [Le Clerc, Whitby.] In the following
verse it has been thought that rov tcrxvpov is written with the
article, because it has a more particular reference to Satan men
tioned above. A comparison, however, with Luke xi. 21, 22.
will shew that Satan is not here meant, for there we find men
tion of 6 tuxvpoTEpoc;, which destroys the notion that 6 ta-xvpoe
was meant Kar' e^ox^v. The insertion of the article comes under
the tenth instance mentioned under Matt. i. 1. p. 10. Middle-
ton, Wakefield.
Ver. 31. Sid tovto. This inference is not connected with the
member of the discourse immediately preceding it, but it arises
from the whole series of the reasoning. Euthym. Sioti roiavra
Kar1 ipov XiyETE. With respect to the nature of the sin, or rather
the blasphemy, for it consisted in words not in deeds, which our
Lord here declares to be irremissible, great doubts are enter
tained by theologians, and the solution of the point is unques
tionably attended with considerable difficulty. One thing, how
ever, is clear, that it is closely connected with the wilful and
malicious perverseness of the Pharisees in ascribing the miracles
of Christ, the reality of which they could not deny, to the agency
of the devil. This is evident from the whole tenour of the pas
sage, and more particularly from Mark iii. 28 — 30., where the
bearing of the discourse is more distinctly marked. But whether
it was the conduct of the Pharisees upon this particular occasion
which constituted the sin in question, or whether it consisted in
speaking evil of those gifts which would be poured forth upon
his disciples by the effusion of the Holy Ghost after the ascen
sion, and that our Lord was induced, by the proximity which the
sin of the Pharisees bore to it, to warn them against it, is the
point under dispute. The immediate connexion of the passage
seems to decide in favour of the former opinion, and it is easy
to discern the reason which should induce so strong and fearful
a denunciation. There could be little hope that persons who
were so hardened in malice as to deny the evidence of their
senses and judgment, would ever be prevailed with to accept the
proffered terms of salvation. But the arguments in support of
the other interpretation are cogent, not to say conclusive. In
the first place, our Lord's saying immediately that blasphemy
against himself was pardonable, seems to point to miracles in
which he was not the visible agent ; and in accordance with this
declaration is his prayer for his murderers on the cross, for
10

160 MATTHEW XII. 32.
whom it could only be urged in excuse that the evidence of his
resurrection, followed by the descent of the Holy Spirit, had not
yet taken place. This glorious manifestation of divine power
ought also to be effectual in removing the prejudices which they
entertained in respect to the meanness of his birth, the place of
his abode, and the spiritual nature of his kingdom. After this
display no farther evidence would be afforded them, so that their
wilful and perverse blindness would render pardon altogether
hopeless. Some understand the words ovk dipEOriaErai as merely
denoting extreme difficulty in obtaining pardon, but this inter
pretation is scarcely reconcileable with the strong expression
with which it is joined in the next verse. The future is used in
the sense of condonari possunt ; and so araOr)aErai, v. 25. Siap-
irdcrEi, v. 29. Whitby, Macknight, Doddridge. — [Wetstein,
A. Clarke, Kuinoel.]
Ver. 32. ovte ev tovtcjj tcj> aliivi, ovte iv rcj> piXXovrt. Sins
of ignorance admitted of expiation under the Jewish Law,
Numb. xv. 28. ; but for presumptuous sins, among which must
be classed that of which Christ is here speaking, there was no
remission under the Mosaic dispensation. See Numb. xv. 30.
xxxv. 31. 1 Sam. ii. 25. From a fond imagination, however, of
the final happiness of all the seed of Abraham, the Jews had im
bibed a notion that all sins whatsoever were expiated by death,
Or, at least, would be forgiven after it. Now by the world to
come the Jews sometimes meant the state after death ; and so
Rab. Tancum : The world to come is when a man has departed
out of this world. Hence Christ has been supposed to allude to
these expectations, and to assure them that in this case at least
they were unfounded. But there certainly can be no such allu
sion, for the Scripture acknowledges only two times for the re
mission of sins, one of the penitent sinner here on earth, Matt.
ix. 6. and the other at the day of judgment, when sentence of
absolution shall be passed upon the imperfections of the faithful
servants of Christ, 2 Tim. i. 18. It may be remarked by the
way, therefore, that the Popish doctrine of purgatory derives no
sanction from this passage. The phrase employed is a common
proverb, denoting that a thing should never happen. Thus
R. Eleezer declares that the Samaritans have no portion in a
future state, because it is said, You shall not build with us,
either in this world or the world to come. Compare Mark iii. 29.
Luke xii. 10. Others, however, have supposed that by this
world and the world to come are meant the Jewish and Christian
dispensation respectively. The Jews did certainly call the days
of the Messiah the age to come, and the declaration would,
under this interpretation, amount to nearly the same ; but as the
sin under consideration could not be committed till after that age
had commenced, this application of the term is here inadmissible.

MATTHEW XII. 33, 34. 36. 161
Compare 2 Mace. vi. 26. Whitby, Doddridge. — [Lightfoot,
Grotius, A. Clarke.
Ver. 33. r) iroiriaare k. t. X. Christ here returns to his argu
ment. " Moreover," he observes, " my doctrine is a sufficient
proof that my works are not effected by the agency of Satan;
since its goodness marks its divine origin, as good fruit is the
produce of a good tree." But seeing that his reasonings are not
likely to influence the evil hearts of the Pharisees, he breaks off
again, v. 34., and, declaring that their evil words proceed from
evil hearts, assures them, v. 36., that they will be' called to ac
count for them at the last day. The passage will indeed admit
of another interpretation, by referring the simile in this verse to
the Pharisees, but the connexion is more easy according to the
above paraphrase. Euthym. KaraiaxwEi Si irdXiv iripwg av-
roiig, dig dvaKoXovOa Kal irapd (piitriv Karriyopovvrag. MACK
NIGHT, Grotius, Kuinoel. The word iroir)<xarE is here used as
the Latin^ae, and should be rendered suppose. So Xen. Anab.
V. 7. 5. iroiw Si npdg i^airarriOivTag. Kypke.
Ver. 34. ek tow irEpietjEvparog k. r. X. The expression is
proverbial : with the sentiment we may compare the following.
Menander: dvSpbg xaPalCTrip £k Xoyevv yvcopt^ETat. Aristides :
olog 6 rpo7roe, roiovrog Kal 6 Xoyoc. In the next verse, which
is merely a repetition of the present, rii)g KapSiag is omitted in
most of the ancient MSS., in several versions, and by many of
the early Fathers. It was in all probability added as an explana
tion ; but it is sufficiently evident that the treasury here meant
is the heart, mentioned immediately before, the article plainly
indicating a renewed mention. Of the verb EKj3dXXEtv, in the
sense of proferre, (irpocpipEiv, Luke vi. 45.) examples occur in
Eurip. Ion. 924. 959. Helen. 1563. Herod. VI. 69. Polyb.
III. 33. 1. Kuinoel, Kypke, Raphelius, Wetstein. There
has been some discussion respecting the insertion of the article
before ayaOd, compared with its omission before 7rov»jpd. It is
probable, however, that no such difference, as that which the re
ceived text exhibits, originally existed, and that either both ayaOd
and 7rovrjpd had the article, or that both were without it. The
latter of these suppositions is by far the more likely, and a variety
of MSS. are in its favour. In Luke vi. 45. indeed, we have rb
dyadbv and to irovripov : but adjectives in the neuter singular,
used in the abstract sense, require the article. See under Matt.
i. 1. §.6. p. 10. Middleton.
Ver. 36. pripa dpyov. The epithet dpyoc is properly applied
only to persons, and in its primary acceptation denotes idle.
Hence, when applied to words or things, it must be understood
to denote such as spring from habitual idleness ; just as cruel
VOL. I. M

162 MATTHEW XII. 38.
hands are the hands of a cruel person, and a contemptuous look
the look of one who cannot conceal his contempt. Now in this
class the Jews were wont to rank almost all the vices of the
tongue, especially lying and defamation. See 1 Tim. v. 13. In
Exod. v. 9. the Hebrew 1pt£> N1213, lying words, are rendered
by the LXX kevoTc Xdyote, which nearly corresponds with the
expression under consideration; and in the Targum, the ad
jective employed is b®2, which is precisely the same in significa
tion with dpyoe. It appears also from Origen, cont. Cels. II.
p. 73. . that dpyoe Xoyoe, in the language of logicians, is a
sophism, or false reasoning, used with a view to deceive. So
Chrysostom : dpyov* to pi) Kara irpdyparog KEipEvov, to xpsvSig.
It is highly probable, therefore, from the scope of the passage,
that such is the meaning of dpyov pripa here ; and that our Lord
condemns all falsehood generally, and thence, a fortiori, the
calumnious insinuations of the Pharisees in regard to the miracles,
of which they could not deny the truth. All vain and unedifying
words, however, may possibly be included in the expression,
and still the same a fortiori argument will apply. At all events,
there can be no doubt of the sinfulness of what is called by the
Apostle pwpoXoyia, foolish talking, Ephes. v. 4. Cicero ob
serves, de Fato, p. 310, 22. Appellatur a Philosophis dpybg
Xoyog, cui si pareamus, nihil omnino est quod agamus in vita;
and according to Plato, de Legg. IV. p. 832. E. Kovrpwv Kal irrri-
vwv Xoywv fiapvrdrri Z,r\pia. Campbell, Macknight, Whitby,
Grotius. With respect to the construction, 7rdv pripa dpyov
is the nominative absolute. See Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 310. In the
next verse Kat must be rendered or, as in Mark iv. 27. Phil. iv.
16. and elsewhere ; since both clauses cannot be referred to the
same person. Kuinoel, Doddridge.
Ver. 38. aripElov. A sign from heaven : in opposition to Sv-
vapig, a miracle, of which they had been witnesses to several ;
vv. 13. 22. &c. That such is the distinction appears from Matt.
xvi. 1. Luke xi. 16. and they seem to have demanded the ap
pearance of some celestial phcenomenon, from an idea that an
impostor would have less power in producing such a sign, than in
curing diseases and performing miracles upon the earth. See
John vi. 30. They were probably induced to make this demand
by the fact, that such manifestations of divine co-operation had
been afforded by several of the prophets of the O. T., as, for in
stance, by Moses, Exod. ix. 22—24. by Joshua, Josh. x. 12. by
Samuel, 1 Sam. vi. 9, 10. and by Elijah, 1 Kings xviii. 36 — 38.
2 Kings i. 10. Compare Isaiah vii. 1. xxxviii. 8. Our Lord
was well convinced of the idle curiosity, or even worse motive
with which the demand was made, and refused to gratify it ; at
the same time declaring that such a sign would be given at his
resurrection, typified in the history of Jonah. See Matt. xxiv.

MATTHEW XII. 39, 40. 163
30. xxvi. 64. It appears from Luke xi. 16. that the persons
who required the sign were not the same with those who had
attributed his miracles to Beelzebub ; but they were probably
some of the same party. Doddridge, Whitby.
Ver. 39. Under the old covenant the Jewish nation were re
presented as engaged in a marriage contract with God ; and con
sequently any breach of that contract was looked upon in the
light of a spiritual adultery. Hence it has been supposed by
some commentators that the adjective poixaXlg here signifies
idolatrous. But it does not appear that the Jews are any where
accused of idolatry in the N. T. not to mention that 7rdpvoe, not
poixaXlg, would have been the word employed in that accepta
tion. See on Matt. v. 31. Others are of opinion that the
adjective should be rendered spurious, illegitimate; i. e. in
outward appearance only, and not really, the children of Abra
ham. Compare Isaiah lvii. 3, 4. Psalm cxliv. 7, 8. John viii. 39.
But there is no particular allusion in this place to the descent
from Abraham, and the word may very well be taken in its
proper sense. The crime of adultery was dreadfully prevalent
at this time in the Jewish state, and the law of divorce most
shamefully perverted and abused; so common indeed had the
crime become, that R. Jochanan Ben Zacchai had abrogated the
trial by the bitter waters of jealousy, because so many were ob
noxious to it. The Rabbins themselves maintain that a sign was
not to be given, except to a fit generation. Lightfoot, Gro
tius, Kuinoel, Doddridge. — [A. Clarke.]
Ver. 40. tov djTove. Not necessarily, a whale. See Home's
Introd. Vol. II. p^ 560. and of the Jewish mode of reckoning
time, see ibid. p. 180. The typical character of Jonah is clearly
indicated by Christ himself, so as amply to refute the notion
entertained by some, that the book of Jonah is merely a para
bolic history. He expressly states, that the Ninevites were con
verted by his preaching, although unattended with miracles, and
declares, that they would rise up in the judgment against the
Jews, who refused to hearken to his warnings, accompanied as
they were with the most astonishing manifestations of his divine
authority. It would, therefore, be as reasonable to look upon
the Queen of the South as a fictitious character, whose pious
zeal, in taking a long journey to visit Solomon, is contrasted with
the careless negligence of the Jews towards Christ, who was
inculcating precepts of a much higher wisdom than that of Solo
mon at their very doors.
Ibid, iv ry KapSiq rr)g yr)g. That is, simply, in the earth.
So Tyre is said to be in the heart of the sea, Ezek. xxviii. 2.
although it was so near -the continent, that, when Alexander
besieged it, he carried a causeway from the land to the city. The
m 2

164 MATTHEW XII. 41, 42, 43.
expression is taken from Jonah ii. 4. Compare also Exod. xv. 8.
Deut. iv. 11. Psalm xlvi. 3. Prov. xxx. 19. Ezek. xxv. 26.
Jerem. xxvi. 3. Kuinoel, Macknight.
F<?r. 41. dvSpEg NtvsvtTat. So dvSpse Kvprjvatot, Acts xi. 20.
avSpfe 'AOwaloi, xvii. 22. avSpse 'Ec]>£C7iot, xix. 35. The pleo
nasm is frequent in Demosthenes. Of the verb dvaaTJjerovrai,
with which Ey£p0»7(T£Tai, v. 42., is convertible, see on Matt. x. 20.
There is a degree of modesty and delicacy in the use of 7tXeTov
in the neuter gender ; by which our Lord means to insinuate,
rather than affirm, the dignity of his character, without affording
his enemies a handle for contradiction. Kuinoel, Campbell.
Ver. 42. fiaa'iXiaaa vorov. The country over which this
queen reigned, is called in the O. T. Sheba, and is supposed to
be the same with Sabaea, a district of Arabia Felix. But Jose
phus, Ant. VII. 2. will not allow her to have been queen of that
country, because Arabia Felix lay rather to the east, than to the
south of Judea; but derives her title from Saba, a city of Meroe,
an island in the Nile ; the queens of which were afterwards called
Candace. See Plin. N. H. VI. 29. and compare Acts viii. 27.
Her visit to King Solomon is recorded in 1 Kings x. 1. sqq.
Macknight. For fiaa'iXiao-a, the Attics used jSacrtXEia and
fiacriXlg. The LXX employ the Hellenistic form, which is found
also in Diodorus and Josephus. The expression 7T£para yije is
a common idiom, signifying merely a distant land. So Gen.
viii. 9. Deut. xxviii, 49. Psalm lxi. 2. Jerem. xvi. 19. Rom. x.
18. Xen. Ages. 9. 4. <tvveXkv(tteov avTcj! ek irEpdrwv yrje rd
ripipovra. Compare Hom. Od. A. 564. ^Esch. Prom. 425. Eurip.
Med. 540. Thucyd. I. 69. Joseph. B. J. V. 1. 9. Liv. V. 33.
Justin. XII. 5. 8. Kuinoel, Wetstein.
Ver. 43. otov Se to aKaOaprov k. t. X. This parable of the
ejected daemon has been differently applied by the commentators.
Some suppose that our Lord intended to enforce upon those
about him, who had lately been brought to believe in his doc
trine, the necessity of a serious amendment of life ; since a relapse
into their former course of life would be productive of an increase
of guilt and danger. Others refer the allusion more immediately
to the Jews, and the destruction which was hanging over them:
— that the evil spirits which Christ and his disciples had ejected
from the Jews, would seek refuge among the Gentiles: but
finding them more ready to receive the Gospel than the Jews,
and consequently, less fit habitations for daemons, would return
again to their former possessions, till the measure of their ini
quity was complete, and their ruin inevitable. Those who adopt
this solution, by the dry places or deserts, (dvvSpwv) understand
the Gentiles, in opposition to oikov, which they interpret of the

MATTHEW XII. 44. 46. 165
Jews. Doddridge is of opinion, that the circumstance of the
daemons going into desert places, is beautifully imagined to repre
sent those malignant beings as impatient of the sight of mankind,
when restrained from hurting them. But it is needless to strain
every minute point of a parable ; the end of which is abundantly
answered, if the moral intended is clearly expressed ; so that a
variety of lesser circumstances, which are simply added by way
of ornamental amplification, may be fairly neglected, as forming
no part of the general design. The circumstance under consi
deration seems to have been adapted, like the other parts of the
allegory, to the notion of the Jews, who seem to have imagined,
that daemons frequented deserts and uncultivated spots. See the
LXX translation of Isaiah xiii. 21. and compare Tobit viii. 3.
Baruch. iv. 35. Rev. xviii. 2. But, whatever be the application
of the parable, it is evident from the concluding sentence-, ovrwg
Earai k. t. X. compared with v. 39. that it can only be referred
immediately to those Pharisees, who demanded of Jesus a sign
from heaven. It is, therefore, probable, that our Lord intended
to intimate, that the sign they required, would, if granted, be of
no avail ; and though it might produce a momentary conviction,
the daemon of infidelity would quickly return, and, seizing upon
them with greater violence, increase their sin, and hasten their
punishment. In a wider acceptation, the parable will afford
instruction to every age and description of men. Kuinoel, Mac
knight. — [Whitby, Doddridge.]
Ver. 44. arxoXdZovra. Untenanted; and therefore ready for
the reception of a new inhabitant. The verb uxoXd^Etv properly
signifies vacuum reddere, as in Mai. iii. 1 . but here it implies
vacuum esse. The same idea is pursued in the participles crEcra-
pwpivov koI KEKoerpivov, with which oikov must be supplied, meta
phorically denoting the body of the person possessed. So also
must we understand dvd7rav<rte in the preceding verse, which
does not signify rest, but a place of rest. The expression rd
Eirxara k. t. X. in v. 45. is proverbial. Compare Eccles. xxxiv.
30, 31. John v. 14. 2 Pet. ii. 20. Of the number seven, see
Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 416. andmy note on Hom. II. A. 53.
Ver. 46. ol dS£X$oi avrov. It seems to have been very gene
rally believed, that the mother of Jesus remained in perpetual
virginity ; and upon this supposition, our Lord's brethren, as they
are called, are said to have been really his cousins. That the
Hebrews frequently employed the word brother in this and similar
acceptations, is clear from Gen. xiv. 14. xx. 12. xxix. 10. Levit.
xxv. 48. Deut. ii. 4. 8. Tobit iii. 7. So in Latin frater is some
times used, as in Q. Curt. VI. 10. 24. Hence it is clearly pos
sible, that the sons of Mary, the wife of Cleophas, and sister of
the blessed Virgin, are here spoken of. See Mark iii. 21. John

166 MATTHEW XII. 50. XIII. 2.
xix. 25. Still there is no positive authority for the supposition,
and there are many who believe, with great probability, that
Joseph had children by Mary after the birth of Jesus. To say
the truth, it seems rather forced to interpret the question in Matt.
xiii. 25. as referring to any other, than the children of Joseph
and Mary, in the strictest sense of the word. The former opi
nion, however, is much more generally followed. See on Matt.
i. 25. There is also another supposition, according to which the
brethren of Christ are stated to be the children of Joseph by a
former wife. Macknight, Campbell. — [Kuinoel, A. Clarke.]
The motive which brought his family to Christ, may be inferred
from Mark iii. 21. 30.
Ver. 50. avrog pov dSEXipbg *-. r. X. It may be, that the par
ticle i}g is here omitted, as the Hebrews frequently drop the
comparative prefix 3. See 1 Sam. xxv. 16. Jerem. xxvi. 18.
where the LXX insert dig. A similar idiom prevails in other
languages. Ovid. Heroid. III. 51. Tudominus, tu vir, tu mihi
frater eras. Compare II. Z. 429. Martial. Epig. VIII. 81. The
sense, however, is equally good without an ellipsis. Our Lord
evidently distinguishes between his natural relations, and those
who are spiritually so, as children of his heavenly Father ; de
claring that his love for the latter is of a nature far more endear
ing than that of any earthly tie. Nor was this the slightest
reflection upon his mother and brethren, who were unquestion
ably among the chief of those who did the will of God. Kui
noel, Macknight.

CHAPTER XIII.
Contents: — The parable of the Sower, vv. 1—9. [Mark iv. 1.
Luke viii. 4.] Reasons for teaching by Parables, w. 10 — 17.
[Mark iv. 10.] Explanation of the parable of the Sower, w.
18—23. [Mark iv. 13. Luke viii. 9.] Parable of the Tares
and Wheat, w. 24—30. [Mark iv. 26.] Of the Grain of
Mustard-seed, w. 31, 32. Of the Leaven, v. 33. A Pro
phecy fulfilled, w. 34, 35. Explanation of the parable of the
Tares and the Wheat, vv. 36 — 43. Parable of the Hidden
Treasure, v. 44. Of the Pearl of great price, vv. 45, 46. Of
the Net, vv. 47 — 50. General application, and the parable of
the Householder, vv. 51, 52. Christ's return to Nazareth, and
his ill-treatment there, vv. 53 — 58. [Mark vi. 1.]
Verse 2. to ttXoTov. Many of the commentators understand
any vessel indefinitely, and the instance has been adduced to prove

MATTHEW XIII. 3. 8. 167
that the article is sometimes used without meaning. But it should
seem that a vessel was kept on the lake for the use of Jesus and
the Apostles, and that this particular vessel was uniformly spe
cified. At Mark iii. 9. our Saviour directs that a vessel should
be constantly waiting for him ; and it was probably one which
belonged to some of the Apostles, who continued occasionally to
follow their former occupation. See John xxi. 3. We find,
indeed, Luke v. 3. that a ship belonging to Simon was employed
by our Saviour for the very purpose here mentioned, which is
afterwards designated to irXolov, in Luke viii. 22. The omission
of the article in some MSS. is attributable to some copyist, to
whom its force was not apparent. Middleton, Wakefield. —
[Campbell, Rosenmuller.]
Ver. 3. iv irapafioXalg. For much valuable information re
specting our Lord's parables, collectively and separately, the
reader is referred to Home's Introd. Vol. II. pp. 399. sqq. The
observations, which it may be necessary to add, will be chiefly
such as relate to the grammatical construction, and such minor
points of exposition, as may not be gathered from that work.
Ibid. 6 cr7T£tpci)v roll aiTEipEiv. Subaud. eveko. It is sup
posed by some critics, that the article is here inserted before
aiTEiptov, after the manner of the Hebrew prefix il before verbs
and participles, when used in the place of verbal nouns. That
these participles, however, do not necessarily have the 1 prefixed,
is clearly proved by Psalm cxxix. 7. and Prov. xxii. 8. where
the participles 1i£p and IHlf are both without it, though the
LXX have thought the article necessary in their version. Hence
it should seem, that the idiom is Greek, rather than Hebrew ; and
it is clear that airEipwv without the article, in the place of <x7rop£ve,
would certainly not be warranted. Instances of the use of par
ticiples with the article, instead of substantives, abound in Greek
writers. See Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 269. Neither is the article, in this
instance, without its design and use, since the three Evangelists,
who record the parable, employ it ; and it is clearly intended to
fix the sense to a particular person. Middleton, Campbell,
Kuinoel, Rosenmuller. In the next verse, xwP'M must be
supplied with irErptoSn. See Bos Ellips. Gr. p. 349.
Ver. 8. o piv ekotov. Of the fruitfulness of the land of Pa
lestine, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 62. sqq. The produce
of the seed which was sown on good ground, however, need not
be understood of a field's yielding a hundred times as much as
was sown in it ; but a single seed producing a hundred grains,
which it might easily do, where it met with a good soil, and was
properly nourished. The same, however, will be true, in a
great degree, of a whole field, of uniform cultivation and fertility.
Ammian. Marcel. XXII. 15. Sementes cum augmento fere

168 MATTHEW XIII. 11.
septuagesimo renascuntur. Compare also Cic. Ver. III. 47.
Varro, I. 24. Columel. III. 3. Plin. N. H. V. 4. Neither is
it necessary to interpret the expression to the full extent of its
literal meaning ; an abundant harvest is all that the import of
the passage requires. Macknight, Kuinoel. Of the sentence
with which the parable is closed, see on Matt. xi. 15.
Ver. 11. on vpiv SiSorai k. r. X. It is not to be inferred
from these words, that our Lord's teaching by parables was the
cause of the blindness and perverseness of the Jews, but that
their perverseness was the cause of his teaching in parables.
They would have been equally obstinate in rejecting his doc
trines had he delivered them in plain terms, and probably have
made them an excuse for opposition and violence, for which,
among other reasons, our Lord thought proper to adopt the
parabolic mode of instruction. See Home, ubi supra. Those
who despise the advantages bestowed upon them, and treat them
with neglect and inattention, are deservedly deprived of those
advantages ; while those who are rich in religious knowledge,
and study to improve it, will find it increase by exercise. This
is evidently the intention of the passage. The proverb in the
next verse is to be interpreted primarily of temporal wealth,
and thence transferred to spiritual possessions. The terms ol
%xovTEg and ol pr) 'IxovrEg, (subaud. xPVf*-<*Ta,) are frequently
used of the rich and poor respectively in Greek writers : and
sentiments of a like import are not unfrequent. Juv. Sat. III.
208. Nil habuit Codrus ; — et tamen illud Perdidit infelix totum
nil. Mart. Epig. V. 81. Dantur opes nulli nunc, nisi divitibus.
By those who were earnest in seeking into the truths of the
Gospel, the parables illustrating it, would, with attentive consi
deration, be readily interpreted ; while nothing but their own
wilful ignorance caused the unbelieving Jews' to lose the little
knowledge of divine things which they already possessed. It
should be observed, that the word pvariipiov does not mean what
we called a mystery; i. e. a doctrine totally undiscoverable by
the human understanding. In the N. T. the word is always used
to denote a secret, any thing not disclosed to the world, though
perhaps communicated to a select number. Thus it is continu
ally joined with the terms d7TOKaXvc/>0Ev, yvcopicr0£v, <pavEpwQiv,
plainly denoting that something is intended, which had been
concealed for ages, but then revealed, and not any thing in its
own nature dark and inconceivable. Compare Rom. xvi. 25, 26.
1 Cor. ii. 7—10. Ephes. i. 9. iii. 3. 5. 6. 9. Col. i. 26, 27. and
also Dan. ii. 18—30. iv. 9. LXX. The moral truths alluded
to in this place, and employed in explanation of the parable, are
very far from being mysteries, in the modern acceptation of the
word ; and it was wilful blindness alone, which concealed them
from the Jews. There is, however, a particular application,

MATTHEW XIII. 13, 14. 169
though it can scarcely be called a distinct sense, in which the
word sometimes occurs in the N. T. It is sometimes used to
denote the figurative sense, as distinguished from the literal,
which is conveyed under any fable, parable, allegory, or the like ;
as in Rev. i. 20. xvii. 7. Perhaps there may be some allusion
to this import of the word in the present passage. Compare
Mark iv. 11. Whitby, Kuinoel, Campbell. See also Home's
Symbolical Index.
Ver. 13. ^XiirovrEg ov j3X£Vovcrt k. r. X. This is proverbial
of those who do not hear and see, so as to improve by the per
ception derived from the use of the senses of hearing and of
sight. The verbs fiXiirEiv and okovecv are used first in their
direct sense, and then extended to include the proper effect of
the faculty employed. Among a variety of less importance, we
have two very striking classical parallels in iEsch. Prom. 456.
Ot irptTiTa piv fiXiirovTEg 'ifSXEirov pdrriv, KXvovTEe ovk jjkovov.
Soph. Fragm. ap. Stob. Tit. IV. Vol. 2. 'AXX' ol KaKwg irpda--
aovTEg, oil Kwipol povov, 'AXX' ovo bpwvTEg Etoropcocrt rdptyavr).
Compare Isaiah xxxii. 3. xxxv. 5. Jerem. v. 21. Kuinoel,
Wetstein.
Ver. 14. 17 irpofnTEia 'Haaiov. The citation is from Isaiah
vi. 9. wherein the prophet gives a faithful picture of the charac
ter of his countrymen, from his own time downwards. By the
compound verb dvaKXrjpovrat, it is signified, that as these words
had already been fulfilled in the days of Isaiah, so they were
again fulfilled in the days of Christ. This interpretation is also
supported by the concluding declaration of the prediction, that
this blindness would continue till the destruction of the Jewish
state. The import of the passage is, that the Jews would cer
tainly hear the doctrines of the Gospel without understanding
them, and see the miracles wrought in confirmation of it, without
perceiving the finger of God in them ; not because the evidences
of the Gospel, either external or internal, were insufficient to
establish it ; but because the corruption of their hearts hin
dered them from discerning those evidences. Two points, there
fore, are clear ; viz. that Christ could not, for cogent reasons,
deliver his instructions in plain terms, and that the prejudices of
the Jews shut their eyes and ears against the perception of his
parables. Why, then, it may be asked, did he deliver them at
all ? Because it was necessary that he himself, during his life
time, should give some account of the nature of his religion, and
of the reception it would meet with ; so that from the agreement
of his parabolic descriptions with subsequent events, they might
be induced to acknowledge his prophetic character, and to acqui
esce more readily in the admission of the Gentiles into a parti
cipation of the divine promises. The phrases aKoy aKomiv and

170 MATTHEW XIII. 15. 19.
fiXE7rovr£e (HXiiTEiv are well-known Hebraisms, marking a pecu
liar emphasis. Compare ii. 17. Luke xxii. 15. Acts iv. 17.
v. 28. We have similar instances, however, in Greek authors.
Of the different turn of the expression in the Hebrew, and the
citation of thisprophecy, see Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 209. note.
The imperative form of the original implies no more than a com
mand given to the prophet, to foretel that the Jews would harden
their hearts in the way described. So in Gen. xii. 13. Me he
restored to mine office, and him he hanged : i. e. he prophesied
to that effect. Compare Jerem. i. ix. Essek. xliii. 3. Mac
knight, Doddridge.
Ver. 15. iiraxwOri ydp k. t. X. A fat heart is a metaphori
cal expression, denoting stubbornness and stupidity. Compare
Deut. xxxii. 15. Psalm cxix. 70. Hesych. iraxwof iraxw vow
t'xovTEe, dvorjrot. In Arist. Nub. 840. apaOrjg and iraxve are
used as synonymous ; and in Herod. II. 9. 15. dvOptowoi -rag
Sidvoiag iraxslg, are explained as pi) paSiwg cruvEivai ovvdjuEvot.
The ancients seem to have thought, that a great quantity of fat
about the heart stupified the intellectual and sensitive powers.
Hence, among the Latins also, persons of the description here men
tioned, are caWedpingues ; Ovid. Met. XI. 148. Pers. Sat. III. 32.
and so truly characteristic is this prophecy of the Jewish nation,
that of all the passages in the O. T. it is most frequently quoted
in the New. Compare John xii. 40. Acts xxviii. 26. Rom. xi. 8.
2 Cor. iii. 14. For KappvEiv, the more approved authors write
KarapvEiv, either with or without the addition of bipOaXpovg.
The proper signification of the word is to squint, and thence, as
explained by the Scholiast on Lucian, T. III. p. 414. bipOaX-
poiig kXe'uiv. The adverb pfiirorE is for 'iva pr), ut adeo non ;
John xii. 40. Macknight, Kuinoel. In illustration of v. 17.
compare Luke x. 24. Heb. xi. 13. 1 Pet. i. 11, 12. Whitby.
Ver. 19. pi) (Twiivrog. E. T. understandeth it not. More pro
perly, disregarding it, not laying it to heart. This is frequently
the meaning of awiripi in the LXX and the N. T. Compare
Nehem. viii. 10. Psalm v. 1. xii. 1. cvi. 7. Prov. xxi. 12. Rom.
iii. 11. Of 6 irovripog, see on Matt. v. 37. We have in Mark
iv. 15. 6 Saravde, Luke viii. 12. 6 Stdj3oXoe. Whitby, Camp
bell, Kuinoel, Hammond.
Ibid. 6 crn-apEte. Some understand <T7ropoe, the seed, or the
word; others dypoe, the ground, or the hearers. The latter was
the opinion of our translators, who render, he who receiveth seed;
and this is proved by the next verse to be correct. So in Mark
iv. 20. ot airapivTEg, those which are sown, Xapfldvovcri to
oirlppa, receive seed; the Greek, like the English- word sown,
being applied equally to the ground or the seed. Macknight,
Kuinoel. — [Campbell, Hammond.]

MATTHEW XIII. 21. 25. 31. 33. 171
Ver. 21. ovk %xH plZ,av. Cicero: Virtutem altissimis radi-
cibus defixam. A like sense is conveyed, without a metaphor,
in the words irpoo-Katpoe ian. (Luke viii. 13. 7rpoe Katpov ttkt-
tevei.) The adjective 7rpo<7Katpoe signifies temporary, unen-
during ; as opposed to atcovtoe, everlasting: 2 Cor. iv. 18. Of
the verb aKavSaXiZ,EaOai, see on Matt. v. 27. xi. 5. Luke paral
lels it with d^iaraaOai. KuiNOEL, Grotius.
Ver. 25. Z,iZ,dvia. It is not easy to determine what plant or
weed is here intended, since the word is mentioned in no other
part of Scripture ; and the Fathers and lexicographers, who have
used it, derived it, in all probability, from this text. Now it
appears from the parable, that, whatever plant is meant, it was
scarcely distinguishable from wheat, till it had put forth the ear ;
and that it was burnt as soon as severed. This could not, there
fore, be the tare, as it is rendered in the E. T. In the Mischna
Tit. Kelayim, which treats expressly of seeds, there is mention
of a degenerate wheat, called D^JIT, sunim, which seems, from
its sound, to be identical with the X,iZ,dviov. Chrysostom also
speaks of the Z,iZ,dviov, as nearly resembling wheat. It is not
improbable, therefore, that the plant intended is the darnel, or
lolium temulentum of Linnaeus, which is precisely of this descrip
tion. It is a noxious weed, terminating, like wheat, in a bearded
spike, having the grains in two opposite rows. If the weed
happens to be reaped, and ground with the corn, the bread
made of the mixture produces sickness and giddiness in those
who eat it ; and the straw has the same effect upon cattle. Virgil
calls it infelix lolium, Eclog. V. 37. and hence Ovid. Fast. I.
691. Et careant loliis oculos vitiantibus agri. Campbell, Light
foot. The parable is descriptive of God's dealings with the
wicked, who intrude themselves into the visible Church of Christ.
See Home ; ubi supra. It is explained by our Lord himself,
infra v. 37. -
Ver. 31. kokkw (TivdirEtog. Of this parable, see Home's In
trod. Vol. II. pp. 404, 405. According to the quantity of a
grain of mustard, is a frequent comparison in the Talmud ; in
which also we have abundant evidence of the size to which the
plant grows in the East. In the tract Peah, p. 20, 2. mention
is made of one that covered the tent of a Potter ; and R. Simeon
Ben Chalaphta speaks of one, into which he was wont to climb,
as men are wont to climb into a fig-tree. Lightfoot. The
comparative adjectives piKporspov and pElZov, are used for super
latives. Compare Matt, xviii. 1. Mark iv. 31. Luke vii. 28.
and see Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 457. Obs. 2. Of the verb Karacncj;-
vow, see on Matt. viii. 20. Kuinoel.
Ver. 33. Z,vpy. Leaven; the property of which is to change

172 MATTHEW XIII. 34. 39.
and assimilate to its own nature, the meal or dough with which
it is mixed. The meaning of this parable is commonly thought
to coincide with that of the preceding. There seems, however,
to be this difference between the two ; the parable of the grain
qf mustard-seed represents the original smallness of the Gospel,
together with its subsequent greatness; whereas this of the
leaven expresses, in a very lively manner, the nature and strength
of the operations of Gospel-truth upon the mind. Euthy-
mius : Sid piv rrig Trapaj3oXrje rov o-ivdtrEwg rr)v avf^cnv rrjg
iriarEwg irporiyopEVGE, rrjv Sid rrig irpoaOriKrig rwv EKaaTorE ttkt-
tevovtwv' Sid Si rrig irapafioXfig rrig Zvprig, rr)v i<rxvv avrr)g
wpoKripvTTEi. Macknight. — [Doddridge.] The three mea
sures or sata of meal, were equal to one ephah, which seems to
have been the usual quantity kneaded at one time. See Gen.
xviii. 6. Judg. vi. 19. 1 Sam. i. 24. In Exod. xvi. 36. the tenth
part of an ephah, is rendered by the Chaldee Paraphrast and the
LXX, the tenth part of three sata or measures. So also the
Targum explains Ruth. ii. 17. Of the capacity of the satum
Josephus observes ; Ant. IX. 4, 5. Ictxvei Se to adrov poStov
koi Tjjtiicru 'IraXtKov. Grotius, Lightfoot.
Ver. 34. x^P'? 7rapa/3oXf/e k. t. X. It is supposed by some,
that this merely applies to the discourses which our Lord delivered
on that day ; but the expression is probably nothing more than a
colloquial hyperbole, signifying that his parables were extremely
numerous. The citation in the next verse is from Psalm lxxviii. 2.
which is attributed to Asaph, who must therefore be the pro
phet meant; and, indeed, he is expressly called a prophet,
1 Chron. xxv. 2. In some MSS. the prophecy was attributed
to Isaiah; and Jerome relates, that Porphyry had objected the
error to the Evangelists. He therefore supposes, that Asaph
was first in the text, for which some ignorant copyist, not knowing
who Asaph was, substituted Isaiah. But as no trace is to be
found of this reading in any of the more ancient copies, and no
allusion to it in the Fathers, it is probable that it originated in
some corrupt Latin copy ; especially as Jerome takes no notice
of Porphyry's objection in his genuine work on St. Matthew.
Le Clerc, Whitby. The verb ipEvyEaOai is properly used of
spouting fluids, as in Pind. Pyth. I. 40. Diod. Sic. p. 181. B.
Rhod. Hence it signifies, metaphorically, to speak, to utter;
as Psalm xix. 2. cxix. 171. cxlv. 7. LXX. The LXX have
tpOiyZopai, and for KEKpvppiva, they read irpofiXripara, which
amounts to the same thing. Kuinoel, Grotius.
Ver. 39. ervvTlXEta tov aliovog. Some are of opinion, that
this parable refers to the Jewish state and people, and, con
sequently, that these words, which are commonly translated, the
end of the world, ought to be rendered, the end of the age, i. e.

MATTHEW XIII. 41. 44, 45. 173
of the Jewish polity. That these words will admit of this sense,
see on Matt. xii. 34. and it may possibly be their primary
meaning here ; but it is far better to interpret them of the final
consummation of all things, as agreeing more readily with the
plain scope of the parable. The word aldiv is nearly synonymous
with Kocrixoe, v. 38. which signifies the world, or the visible Church
in the world, which shall spread by degrees into all nations.
A. Clarke, Kuinoel. — [Campbell.]
Ver. 41. erKavSaXa. Properly, whatever ensnares or seduces ;
(see on Matt. v. 27.) Here it is used in the abstract for the
concrete, and, being joined with roiig iroioiivrag, denotes persons
rather than things. It is understood by many, of those who cause
heresies and divisions in the Church of Christ. At all events,
it is evident that the prerogative of punishing opinions is with
God alone, and the day of judgment is to try the hearts of men,
where religious opinions, and not crimes, are the subject of
enquiry. Campbell, Grotius. In the next verse there is an
allusion to the Eastern custom of burning alive. Compare Dan.
iii. 6. 12. Hos. vii. 4. The expression Kapivog tov irvpbg is a
metaphor identical with ylfvva tov 7rvpoe, Matt. v. 22. Grotius,
Kuinoel. In the beautiful expression in v. 43. our Lord seems
to have had his eye upon Dan. xii. 3. Compare Wisd. iii. 7.
Ecclus. ix. 11. 1 Mace. ii. 62. 1 Pet. v. 4. Macknight.
Ver. 44. 0?)<Tavpc^ KEKpvppivw. This has been supposed to
mean a mine of gold or silver, which had been hitherto undis
covered ; but there is no reason to understand the words in any
other sense than their natural meaning conveys. Upon an ex
pected invasion of the enemy, or even for the purpose of general
security, it was not uncommon with the avaricious to bury their
wealth ; and it is well known that treasures so hidden, have been
discovered accidentally long after the death of the person to
whom they originally belonged. See Horat. Sat. I. 1. 41. sqq.
II. 6. 10. sqq. Virg. Mn. I. 368. Pers. Sat. II. 10. According
to the Jewish canons, it appears that the buyer of land was
entitled to whatever was so found, by right of purchase. Thus
the Mischna, in Baba Metzia, observes, that whosoever buys of
his neighbour, if money be found in the article bought, it belongs
to the purchaser. Wetstein. — [Wakefield, A. Clarke.]
Ver. 45. dvOptoirw ipiropw, k. t. X. The import of this and
the preceding parable is generally supposed to be the same ; and
that both are alike intended to represent the inestimable value
of the Gospel, above every other consideration whatsoever. But
though both parables are descriptive of the effect of divine truth
upon those who find it, there is yet this difference between them,
that the former refers to such as embrace it instantly, and the

174 MATTHEW XIII. 47. 52.
latter to such as attain to it, after a diligent search, and serious
investigation of its merits. Pearls and precious stones formed a
considerable article of traffic among the Orientals ; and there
were merchants who went to a great distance in quest of them.
Pliny remarks : Principium cubnenque omnium rerum pretii
Margaritae tenent. Of the comparison, see on Matt. vii. 6. and
add Prov. viii. 10, 11. Psalm xix> 10. Macknight, Grotius.
— [Kuinoel, A. Clarke.]
Ver. 47. aayrivy. A drag net. In Latin, verriculum, 'thus
explained by Martinus : quod in aquam jacitur ad pisces com-
prehendendos ; imprimis, cujus usus est extrahendis Us afundo.
Ulpian. Digest. XLVII. 10. 7. Verriculum, quod Greece uayrivn
dicitur. This parable will appear peculiarly proper, if we con
sider that it was spoken to fishermen, who had been called from
their occupation with a promise, that they should henceforth
catch men : Matt. iv. 19. It differs from the parable of the tares
in its extent ; representing the final judgment and state of wicked
men in general: and intimates, that by the preaching of the
Gospel, a visible Church should be formed, consisting both of
good and bad men, between whom no distinction could be made
in this world ; but that, at the last day, the wicked would be
separated from the good, and receive sentence according to their
works. There may also be a primary reference to the Jewish
state, and the means of escape that would then be afforded to the
genuine followers of Christ. Macknight, A. Clarke. With
Ik iravrbg yivovg we must supply IxOiSia, or some like word ;
unless, with Kuinoel, we understand Ttvd, as including other
things, besides fish, in the draught. At ali events, the ellipsis,
whatever it be, recurs with the words KaXd and eraTrpd in the
next verse.
Ver. 52. Sid tovto. There is some difficulty in ascertaining
the premises to which this formula refers. Some consider it as
merely denoting transition, like the Hebrew p7, in Judg. viii.
7. Jerem. xlix. 26. and others pronounce it altogether redun
dant. Compare Matt, xxiii. 34. Mark xii. 24. It seems rather
to convey an inference from the question just proposed to the
disciples, in connection with the doctrines which our Lord had
been setting forth in parables. Some of the illustrations which
he had employed were taken from customs and habits of old and
frequent occurrence, similar to those which they repeatedly
heard in the schools of their Rabbis ; while others, on the con
trary, were entirely new, but equally adapted to describe the
nature of the Gospel kingdom. Hence, it should seem, that our
Lord intended to exemplify, in his own conduct, the means
which his Apostles should adopt, as best suited to the propaga
tion of his religion ; accommodating their manner of teaching to

MATTHEW XIII. 54, 55. 175
the disposition of their hearers, and instructing these by parables,
and those by exhortations, according to the tempers, and talents,
and necessities of each respectively. Some, however, under
stand by things new and old, an adequate knowledge of the
Scriptures of the O. and N. T. interpreting ypapparEvg of a
converted Scribe, who would apply his acquired scriptural and
traditional knowledge to the elucidation of the truth of the
Gospel. But Christ has evidently transferred the name to his
own disciples, as holding in his Church a similar office with the
Scribes, who were the authorized expounders of the Scriptures.
So Matt, xxiii. 34. The words paOriTEvOElg rrj fiaaiXEiq, should
be rendered disciplined to the kingdom, i. e. thoroughly ac
quainted with the character and pretensions of the Gospel. For
although the verb paOnrEVEiv, as all others which end in eveiv, is
properly neuter ; (discipulum esse, Matt, xxvii. 57.) it is here used
actively, discipulum facer e, as in Matt, xxviii. 19. Acts xiv. 21.
and ]3a<7tX£ia is not the dative of the instrument, but of the object.
The copies vary between ry fiaaiXEiq, slg rrjv (3a<riXEiav, and Iv
ry )3acriX£ta ; but the former is justly preferred by Griesbach.
With Katvd Kat iraXaia, some supply <TK£vrj, but j3pwpara is pre
ferable; i. e. provisions of various sorts, which the householder
produces as the necessities of his family require. Instruction is
not unfrequently compared to food ; as in Ecclus. xxiv. 23.
Theophrast. Char. VIII. 1. Cic. Topic. 5. See Victor. Var.
Lect. XXVIII. 23. Kuinoel, Grotius. — [Macknight, Els
ner, Hammond.]
Ver. 54. ri)v irarpiSa avrov. That is, Nazareth, where he
had been brought up ; Luke iv. 16. and which is called in v. 23.
as here, 7raTpte avrov, scil. 7rdXte.
Ver. 55. oi>x ovrog sort k. t. X. The pronoun ovrog is here
used, as also in the last sentence, to imply contempt. The low
condition of Jesus and his family were a stumbling-block to his
countrymen, v. 57. so that, instead of inferring from his miracles,
that he was the Messiah, they were induced to reject his preten
sions, and even, as we may infer from v. 58. to abstain from
bringing their sick to him, lest he should heal them. It was
not the wish of Christ himself, but the unbelief and perverseness
of his townsmen, which withheld from them the benefits of his
miraculous powers. Compare Mark vi. 5. Kuinoel, Mac
knight. It is to be observed, that the word tektcov, YvVefaber
in Latin, signifies artificer in general ; at least, one who works
in wood, stone, or metal. Hesych. riKTwv' wag o rExvlrrig.
Hence, it is said, that it does not appear that Joseph was a car
penter; and that all the evidence on this point is from tradition.
See Justin. Mart. Dial. Tryp. p. 94. Origen, c. Cels. VI.
p. 299. But wherever the word is used alone, without an adjec-
10

176 MATTHEW XIII. 57.
tive to fix its application, it always in the Scriptures denotes
a carpenter. This may be proved at once by comparing the
following passages from the LXX with the original Hebrew,:
2 Kings xxii. 6. 2 Chron. xxiv. 12. xxxiv. 11. Ezra iii. 7. Isaiah
xii. 7. Zech. i. 20. There is something analogous in our use of
the word smith ; which is employed to denote almost every arti
ficer in metal, as goldsmith, silversmith, blacksmith, &c. but
when used alone, it always means blacksmith. In Mark vi. 3.
Christ himself is called 6 tektiov. There is in this, however, no
incongruity, as it was required of every father among the Jews
to teach his son some trade, and it is probable that our Lord,
during the thirty years he spent at Nazareth, before he entered
upon his ministry, wrought at the same trade with Joseph. It
is easy to infer this from Luke ii. 51. Campbell, Kuinoel,
Lightfoot. Ibid, ol dSiXipol avrov. See on Matt. xii. 46. According to
Theophylact the names of the sisters of Jesus were Mary and
Salome. The poverty of his mother was one of the objections of
Celsus against Christianity ; and it is recorded of her by Ter-
tullian, that she obtained a maintenance by needle-work. In this
was fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah, xlix. 7. Grotius. The
preposition wpbg is employed here, and in Mark vi. 3. with an
accusative in the sense of apud. So also in John i. 1 . 6 Xdyoe
i)v irpbg tov Qeov. Compare 2 Chron. xxviii. 15. Isaiah xix.
19. Jerem. xii. 17. LXX. The same usage is sometimes, but
very rarely, found in classical Greek. Campbell.
Ver. 57. ovk ion wpoiprfTng k. t. X. This seems to have been
a proverbial expression, meaning that a divine teacher was
usually treated with less respect and attention by his own coun
trymen and connexions (Mark vi. 4.) than he experienced from
strangers. Compare John vii. 5. The general truth of the adage
is illustrated in the case of David, 1 Sam. xvii. 28., and the
reason is obvious. Superior merit seldom fails to create envy,
and the envious are ever ready to detract from the praise of
others, and to turn the knowledge which they possess of them
some way or other to their disadvantage. Similar sentiments are
to be found in profane writers. Plutarch, de Exilio, p. 604. D.
ruiv rppoviptorartov Kal (roipwraTtov bXiyovg dv Evpote ev ralg iav-
rwv Trarpiii KEKriSEvpivovg. Dio Chrys. XLVII. p. 524. B.
7ra<H rote rpiXoaorpoig eSo^e xoXettoc ev ry irarpiSi 6 j3toe. Eurip.
Here. F. 186. ov ydp iaO' oirov 'EtrflXov n Spdcmg pdprvp' dv
Xdfiotg irdrpav. Senec. de Benef. III. 3. Vile habetur quod
domi est. Macknight, Wetstein, Kuinoel.

MATTHEW XIV. 1, 2. 177

CHAPTER XIV.
Contents: — Death of John the Baptist; w. 1 — 12. [Mark vi.
14. Luke ix. 7.] Five thousand miraculously fed ; vv. 13 — 21.
[Mark vi. 35. Luke ix. 12. John vi. 3.] Christ prays in
private; vv. 22, 23. [Mark vi. 45. John vi. 15.] Christ
walks upon the sea, and quells a storm; vv. 24 — 33. [Mark
vi. 47. John vi. 16.] He heals the sick at Gennesareth ; vv.
34—36. [Mark vi. 53.]
Verse 1. 'HpioSrig. Herod Antipas ; of whom, and his title,
the Tetrarch, see Home's Introd. Vol, III. p. 106. Various
conjectures have been started as to the cause of Christ's fame
coming so late to the ears, of this prince. Some suppose that he
had been at Rome during the early part of Christ's ministry ;
and others that he was engaged in the war in Arabia. But the
first of these opinions is altogether unsupported by historical
evidence ; and it appears from Josephus that the war with
Aretas was subsequent to the death, of the Baptist. It is stated
by the historian that the defeat of Herod's army was generally
believed to be a judicial stroke from Heaven in consequence of
the Baptist's murder: Antiq. XVIII. 7. The more probable so
lution is that the report of Christ's miracles had not now, for the
first time, been carried to Herod, but that his increasing fame
had become the subject of more general conversation at the
court, and made a more forcible impression upon the prince's
mind, conscience-struck as he was with his late conduct toward
the Baptist : in addition to which he had imparted to his dis
ciples also the power of working miracles, which could not fail to
elicit more especial attention to their divine Master. Kuinoel,
Whitby. — [Grotius.]
Ver. 2. iraietv. E. T. servants; in which sense the word is
frequently used, (see on Matt. viii. 5.) ; but it is here equivalent
to ipiXoig, friends, courtiers. So the Hebrew liy is sometimes
rendered by the LXX 7ra7e, as in 1 Sam. xviii. 22. and some
times ipiXog, as in Esth. ii. 19. Compare 3 Esdr. i. 30. 1 Mace.
i. 6. Kuinoel.
Ibid, ovrog iariv 'Iwdvvrje k. t. X. This declaration of Herod
has been differently understood. Some have supposed that as
Herod was one of the sect of Sadducees who denied the immor
tality of the soul, it is an ironical assent to the opinion of those
around him. But this is altogether at variance with the per
plexed state of his mind, Luke ix. 3. and the words themselves
will scarcely admit of the hypothesis, which ascribes the alarm
of Herod to his belief in the Pagan doctrine of the transmigra-
VOL. 1. N

178 MATTHEW XIV. 4.
tion of souls. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 369. note.
Others, again, suppose that the Tetrarch was only politically a
Sadducee, without admitting the truth of their religious creed:
but it is not at all unreasonable to suppose that the stings of
conscience would wring from a Sadducee an involuntary expres
sion of fear, which was in perfect accordance with the vulgar ex
pectation that Elias, or some of the old prophets, would appear
again before the advent of the Messiah. Macknight, Whitby,
Lightfoot. — [Grotius, Erasmus.]
Ibid. SwdpEig ivEpyovaiv ev avri^i. The word Sivapig in
the N. T. is most commonly used to denote a miracle, as in
Matt. vii. 22. xi. 20. Acts xix. 11. 1 Cor. xii. 28. Gal. iii. 5.
Heb. ii. 4. Hence IvEpyovo-tv is very generally taken passively,
whereas it is every where in the N. T. used in a transitive or an
absolute sense ; and where the passive is required we have ivEp-
yEiaOai. Some of the commentators therefore have interpreted
SwdpEig of the power of working miracles, as in Acts vi. 8. x.
38. But it is further observable that the verb IvspyEtv is not
only active or absolute, but the action is generally referred to
some being of extraordinary power, as God, the Holy Spirit,
&c. Compare 1 Cor. xii. 6. 11. Gal. ii. 8. iii. 5. Ephes. i. 11.
20. et passim. We may infer, therefore, that SwdpEig is here
some kind of agent, such as angels or spirits, in which sense it
is probably used in Rom. viii. 38. Ephes. i. 21. and certainly in
Euseb. Dem. Evang. IV. 9. SwdpEai xOovtaig ko! irovripolg ttvev-
pacriv 6 7rde twv dvOpuiiriov fiiog kuteSeSovXwto. Hence the
passage should be rendered the spirits are active in him. The
remorse and the fears of Herod for a moment at least shake his
infidelity, and he involuntarily renounces his disbelief in the
existence of spirits, another leading principle of his sect. Mid
dleton, Le Clerc. — [Kuinoel, Campbell, Schleusner, &c]
The account which follows, of the death of John the Baptist, is
introduced episodically, and the aorist throughout is used for
the pluperfect. Hence the verses are parenthetical as far as v.
13. and the reason of Christ's departure to Bethsaida, (Luke ix.
10.) must be sought in this passage. Herod's opinion that John
had risen from the dead, and his wish for an interview with
Christ, (Luke ix. 9.) induced Christ to avoid him ; not from any
suspicion of danger to himself, but from a wish to refresh his dis
ciples after the fatigues of their journey, from which they had re
cently returned ; and lest the populace, enraged at the murder
of John, should create an insurrection, and involve him in the
consequences. Whitby, Kuinoel, Grotius.
Ver. 4. ovk e^eoti k. t. X. Levit. xviii. 16. Hence it is urged
in the Mischna, Tit. Cerikoth, §. I. 1. there are thirty-six cut
tings off in the law, and among them, he that lieth with his
neighbour's wife. There was only one case wherein a man

MATTHEW XIV. 6. 179
might lawfully marry his brother's widow, viz. when he died
without issue. But it appears from Josephus, Ant. XVIII.
5. and 7. that Herodias had a daughter by her husband, and
that the action was perpetrated during the life of her husband,
who lived till the twentieth of Tiberias ; so that it was a com
plication of incest and adultery. Compare Luke iii. 19. It is
not improbable that the declaration of John was made in reply
to some question, or during some conversation, in which Herod
had endeavoured to obtain the sanction of the Baptist to his
marriage with Herodias. For exeiv Mark has yapElv, in which
sense the word is used in the Greek authors. Hom. H. in
Here. 8. e'xsc KaXXlafupov "H/3jjv. Xen. Cyr. I. 5. 4. rov rrjv
dSsXipriv E'xovra- So in Latin, habere. Sueton. Aug. 63. nam
tunc Agrippa alteram Marcellarum habebat. Hesych. ex*™-
iyapElro. In the next verse the same verb is used in the sense
of putare, existimare, as in Matt. xxi. 26. 46. This usage in
Greek, and of habere in Latin, writers, is too common to need
illustration. Herod's dread of John is attributed by Josephus,
who speaks of the Baptist as a good man, to the influence which
he possessed with the people, which seemed to threaten an in
surrection in his favour ; but he probably felt that the reproof
which his crimes had elicited would bring him into contempt
with his subjects. Lightfoot, Campbell, Le Clerc, Kuinoel.
Ver. 6. yEVEcriciiv Se dyopivwv k. t. X. It is not agreed
among commentators, whether the festival here mentioned was
in honour of the birth-day of Herod, or of his accession to the
Tetrarchy. It is unquestiona'ble that the day of their inaugu
ration was celebrated by kings in ancient times. See 1 Kings
i. 8, 9. xviii. 18. Hos. vii. 5. Herod. IX. 110. Plin. Epist.
X. 61. So Josephus, speaking of Herod the Great, Ant. XV.
11.6. (XvvEKirEirTWKEi yap ry vpoOEapiq rov iTEpl tov vabv spyov,
Kat rrjv ripipav ri^ [3a<riXEi rrig apxvc, VV £? 'iOovg itopraX,EOv, Eig
raiirbv iXOslv. But since there is no authority in any Greek
writer of this use of the word yEvlcrta, the common interpretation
is decidedly preferable, especially as it is certain that the ancients
kept their birth-days with great rejoicings. See Gen. xl. 20.
2 Mace. vii. 7. and yEviaiog is employed in this meaning in
Alciphr. Epist. III. 18. 55. whence it appears yEVEcrtcof is here
an adjective, with some substantive understood. Bos supplies
ovpiroaitov, but ripspiov is better ; since dyEiv koprr)v, and dystv
ripipav, are phrases ordinarily signifying, to celebrate a festival.
Compare Thucyd. V. 47. VI. 6. Xen. Cyr. VII. 2, 3. Esth. ix.
18, 19. 21. 2 Mace. i. 9. ii. 16. LXX. Kuinoel, Campbell.
Ibid. wpxijcraTo. It is well known that dancing was practised
by the Jews on occasions of public and private rejoicing. See
Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 480. But it has been thought
this would have been inconsistent with the dignity of Salome ;
n 2

180 MATTHEW XIV. 8, 9.
and it has been suggested in her defence, that she was but a
child, since Herodias had deserted her husband shortly after the
birth of her daughter: Jos. Ant. XVIII. 7. But it seems that
a sort of pantomimic dance, of a most voluptuous description, had
been lately introduced into Judea, similar to that which is repro
bated by Juvenal, Sat. VI. 63. and Horace, Od. III. 6. 21.
The court of Herod would be a fit scene for such an exhibition.
Kuinoel. — [Lightfoot, Michaelis.] The verb bpoXoyElv is
used in the next verse in the sense of promittere ; as in Platon.
Crit. 10. and the phrase opKw bpoXoyslv is supplied by bpvvsiv
in Mark vi. 23. Kuinoel.
Ver. 8. 7rpoj3tj3aa0£t<ra virb rrig prirpbg k. t. X. Compare
Mark vi. 24. The verb 7rpoj3(j3d?Etv signifies to impel, to urge,
to instigate ; as in Exod. xxxv. 34. Deut. vi. 7. LXX. Xen.
Men. I. 2. 17. We meet with irivaZ, in various significations.
Sometimes it signifies a plate, or platter. Thom. M. 7rtvaK£e'
rd dyyEta, ev ote itrOiopEv. In Hom. Od. A. 141. it denotes a
basket, and in II. Z. 168. a tablet. The first meaning will best
suit the present passage ; and so the word charger, as the E. T.
renders it, was formerly employed, though it is now, in this sig
nification at least, obsolete. The request which Herodias enjoins
her daughter to make, was doubtless preferred with a view to
gratify her revenge, by insulting, when dead, the man whom
alive she feared. St. Jerome says, that when the Baptist's head
came into her possession, she drew out the tongue, and pierced
it with a bodkin. A similar instance of female malice is on
record in Fulvia's treatment of the departed Cicero. Kuinoel,
A. Clarke.
Ver. 9. iXvirr)Ori. This verb sometimes denotes anger, as in
Gen. iv. 5. 1 Sam. xxix. 4. Nehem. iv. 5. LXX. and so in Matt.
xviii. 31. Xen. Mem. III. 13. 1. But there is no necessity for
affixing this signification to it in this place, as the causes of
Herod's grief may be readily traced in v. 5. and Mark vi. 20.
and although his vexation was infinitely more on his own account,
than from regard to the Baptist, the same reasons will prove that
his grief was not pretended, as some have supposed. His morti
fication may also have been encreased by the dread, which the
Heathen generally entertained of any ill-omened occurrence on a
birth-day. Mart. Epigr. X. 87. Natalem colimus, tacete lites.
The fluctuation of Herod's mind between admiration of the Baptist,
and the desire to destroy him, is the natural effect of remorse :
and the false shame of shrinking from the performance of an ini
quitous promise, carelessly given, and backed by the wiles of a
wanton woman, as naturally impelled him, however reluctant, to
shed innocent blood. It appears also from the parallel passage
in Mark, that his intention of killing the Baptist, originated in

MATTHEW XIV. 11. IS. 181
the instigation of Herodias ; not to mention that there seems to
have been a delicacy with the Eastern princes of refusing a
request preferred to them during an entertainment. We have a
similar instance in the petition of Amistris to Xerxes, in Herod.
IX. 110. sqq. Compare also Esth. v. 3. With respect to the
oath itself, it is observed by Paley, that the guilt of such promises
lies in the making, not in the breaking of them ; and the obliga
tion ceases, as soon as they are discovered to be unlawful. Ham
mond, Grotius, Whitby. — [Kuinoel.] The verbs av vavaKElaOai,
dvaKEitrOai, KaraKElaOai, and avaKXivEuOat, are interchanged with
each other, in reference to the custom of reclining at meals. See
onMatt. viii. 11. and compare Matt. ix. 10, 11. Mark ii. 15. Luke
vii. 36, 37. Of the ellipsis in the next verse, see on Matt. ii. 16.
Ver. 1 1 . r)vixOri 17 KEipaXr) k. t. X. According to Joseph. Ant,.
XVIII. 5. 2. John was confined in the castle of Machaerus, at
the distance of two days' journey from Tiberias, where Herod
usually resided. It should seem, therefore, from the immediate
execution of the Tetrarch's order, that the affair of the birth-day
took place at Machaerus ; and that this was actually the case,
may be inferred from Josephus : a coincidence so undesigned, as
not to be discovered without the closest investigation of particu
lars. See Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 100. It is worthy of
remark also, in how dispassionate and candid a manner the
Evangelist relates this most atrocious crime. There is no excla
mation, no exaggeration, no invective ; and every allowance is
made, which even a friend of Herod would have urged in exte
nuation of his guilt. We have similar instances of atrocity in
Senec. Octav. 437. Perage imperata ; mitte, qui Plauti mihi
Sullceque referat abscissum caput. Val. Max. IX. 2. Marius
caput N. Antonio abscissum, tactis manibus inter epulas, per
summam animi ac verborum insolentiam aliquamdiu tenuit. Com
pare also Diog. Laert. IX. 58. Eurip. Elect. 856. Liv. XXXIX.
43. Sil. Ital. XL 51. Cic. Senect. 13. Campbell, Raphelius,
Wetstein.
Ver. 13. irEfyj. E. T. on foot. It should be rendered, by land.
The word is, indeed, used in both significations ; but it means
on foot, when opposed to on horseback, and by land, when con
trasted with by sea. So Diod. Sic. p. 711. D. irsZy Kat Kara
OdXarraav. And again in p. 498. irE^y is explained by Kara yfjv.
The same opposition occurs between weZ,eveiv and 7tXeiv in Philo,
de Temulent. p. 263. D. and in Latin the expression classe et
pedibus venire, is found in Cic. Att. III. 8. V. 9. Campbell,
Kuinoel. The desert to which our Lord removed, is stated in
Luke, ix. 10. to have been near the town of Bethsaida ; and the
reason for this is obvious. Bethsaida was situated beyond the
jurisdiction of Antipas, in the territory of Gaulonitis, and there-

182 MATTHEW XIV. 15. 19.
fore subject to Philip, by whom it was afterwards called Julias,
in honour of the emperor's daughter; Joseph. Ant. XVIII. 2. 1.
It may here be remarked, that this Philip, the Tetrarch, is not the
individual who is mentioned above as the former husband of Hero
dias. This latter person is called Herod, not Philip, by Josephus,
who states that he was another son of Herod the Great, by Mari-
amne, and that Philip, the Tetrarch, afterwards married Salome,
the daughter of Herodias : Ant. XVIII. 6. 4. With respect to
the difference in the names ascribed to him by the Evangelists and
Josephus, it is highly probable that the former have given him
the appellation by which he was generally distinguished, whereas
the latter has merely described him by his family name. There
is a similar instance in Acts xii. where the first of Herod's
grandchildren, who is called Agrippa by Josephus, is called
Herod by St. Luke. At all events, there is no just ground to
suspect the Evangelist of any mistake in the name of the first
husband of Herodias. Certain old Hebrew chronicles are extant,
in which, as well as by Gorionides, he is called Philip ; and
which also agree in substance with the Gospel narrative. Whitby,
Lardner, Macknight. Of the verb airXayxvit,EaOai, in the
following- verse, see on Matt. ix. 36.
Ver. 15. bijjiag Si yEvopivrig. That is, the first evening, which
began at three o'clock : see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 169.
The second evening, which began at sun-set, is that mentioned
infra v. 23. In reference to the same time, Luke (ix. 12.) has
17 Se r)pipa rjpSaro kXivhv, and Matthew again in this verse, 17
wpa rjSrj 7raprjX0Ev, which is unnecessarily understood by some,
of the time at which they usually took their meal. The word
wpa, as in Latin hora, frequently signifies a day. Virg. Georg.
I. 425. crastina fallit hora ; i. e. dies postera. Polyb. p. 1040.
rjSrj Se T»je wpae crvyKXaovcrrje. Hence the rendering should be,
the day is far spent. It is probable that the crowds which now
flocked to Jesus, were on their way to Jerusalem, to keep the
approaching Passover. Whitby. — [Macknight.]
Ver. 19. EvXoyjj<7E. Scil. tov Geov, not roiig dprovg. In the
other miracle of the same kind, related in the next chapter, (v. 36.)
instead of EvXoyf)uag, we have Evxapicn-^crac. See also Mark
viii. 6. Luke i. 64. ii. 28. xxiv. 53. John vi. 11. 23. Acts xxviii.
35. James iii. 5. In the accounts of the Last Supper also, what
one Evangelist calls EvXoyEtv, another calls EvxaptcrTEtv. The
two words are, therefore, plainly synonymous. With regard
to the objection, that EvXoysTv is applied in Luke ix. 16. and
1 Cor. x. 16. to the things distributed, it is replied, that the ex
pression in those places is elliptical, more Hebrceorum. Thus in
1 Sam. ix. 13. LXX. EvXoyEt rr)v Qvaiav, for EvXoyst rov Qeov
inrip ri)v Qvaiav, Compare Heb. ii. 17. In Luke ix. 16. indeed,

MATTHEW XIV. 20. 183
some MSS. read EvXoyr/a-E IV avrovg. The cup of blessing,
1 Cor. x. 16. is the cup for which we give thanks, according to
the custom of the Jews, whose beracoth, or benediction of the
bread, answering to our Grace before meat, ran thus : Blessed
art thou, O Lord, our God, the king of the world, who producest
bread out of the earth. Their benediction of the wine, i. e. after
meat, was as follows : Blessed art thou, O Lord, the king of the
world, who Greatest the fruit of the vine. Whitby. — [Campbell.]
Of the construction of the sentence, see my note on Hom. II.
$. 204.
Ibid. KXdaag. Having broken them. The Jewish loaves, or
rather cakes, were broad, thin, and brittle : so that a knife was
not required for dividing them. A. Clarke, Kuinoel.
Ver. 20. SwSsKa Kofivovg irXripEtg. Twelve baskets full. It
was customary with many of the Jews constantly to carry a basket,
and by the number here particularized, it should seem that each
Apostle filled his own basket. Juvenal speaks of the Jews at
Rome as carrying a basket, called as here, cophinus ; Sat. III. 14.
Judceis, quorum cophinus fosnumque supellex: and again, Sat.
VI. 542. Cum dedit ille locum, cophino fcenoque relicto, Arca
num Judcea tremens mendicat in aurem. By Martial also, a Jew
is called cistifer ; Epigr. V. 17. Hence some have supposed
that the cophinus was generally used for carrying various articles
of pedlary ; thus making the Jews, even at that time, a nation of
pedlars. Others suppose that they carried the hay and basket,
mentioned by the satirist, as descriptive of the abject poverty, to
which they were reduced by the destruction of Jerusalem, so as
to live upon hay, which they carried as provisions. It is certain,
however, from Deut. xxviii. 5. and other places, that the cophinus
was in general use in very early times. Hence there is more plau
sibility in the opinion, that it was carried in commemoration
of their Egyptian slavery, when they were accustomed to carry
the stubble for making bricks in a basket which was hung about
their necks, to which there seems to be an allusion in Psalm
lxxix. 6. where the LXX. al x£'p£e avrwv iv rijj KOipivw iSoii-
XEvaav. To this Sidonius Apollinaris seems to refer in Epist.
VII. 6. Ordinis res est, ut, dum in allegorica versamur JEgypto,
Pharaoh incedat cum diademate , Israelita cum cophino. So also
Alcimus Avitus V. 30. Servitii longo lassatam pondere plebem,
Oppressos cophinis humeros, altritaque colla. The more simple
reason, however, for the practice, seems to be the necessity of
carrying their provision with them in Gentile countries, lest they
should incur pollution by partaking of the meat of heathens.
This also would oblige them to carry hay to sleep on, and it is
to this, in all probability, that Juvenal alludes. The capacity of
the cophinus, as a measure, was about three gallons. Hesych.
Koipivog- pirpov x^povv x°«c TpEte. Wakefield, Schoettgen,

184 MATTHEW XIV. 22. 24, 25.
A. Clarke, Kuinoel. Of the evidence of this miracle, the
reality of which is denied by some of the German commentators,
see Home's Introd. Vol. I. p. 254. It may be added, that as it
is one of the most astonishing which our Lord performed, so it is
the only one which is recorded by all the four Evangelists ; and
the account of it was published while many who had been par
takers of the supernatural supply were still alive, none of whom
ever expressed a doubt respecting it. In extent, it was far su
perior to that recorded of Elisha, 2 Kings iv. 42. who fed one
hundred men with twenty barley loaves. In this case the quan
tity of food was greater, the number fed less, and that which
remained to shew that the men were filled was a trifle in compa
rison with the twelve baskets full which were left by the great
multitude whom our Lord satisfied. Macknight. With the
adjective TrsptcrcrEvov supply pipog ; and of the verb x°pTd?Ecr0at
see on Matt. v. 6.
Ver. 22. EvQiwg r)vdyKaaE k. t. X. It appears from John vi.
15. that the multitude thus miraculously fed, astonished at see
ing and feeling the meat extend itself in their hands, proposed,
in the height of their transport, to take him by force, and make
him a king. In order to prevent an insurrection, therefore, in
which he and his disciples might appear to be concerned, he per
suaded them to go before him to Bethsaida, (Mark vi. 45.) while
he dismissed the people. It has been urged that dvayKaZ,Eiv ira-'
plies that the disciples expressed great unwillingness to depart,
thinking that the favourable moment had arrived for Christ to
assert his pretensions, and wishing to join with the multitude in
their mistaken design. But this verb, like |3id?£crc?at, in Gen.
xix. 3. 1 Sam. xxviii. 23. LXX. signifies simply persuaderc, co-
hortari, as in Xen. Mem. I. 2. 44. Eur. Hipp. 926. So also
the Latin cogere ; Cic. Epist. Divers. V. 6. Horat. Sat. I. 4. 14.
Kuinoel, Grotius. — [Macknight.]
Ver. 24. piaov. Either Kara may be understood, or the ad
jective may be referred to 7rXoTov in the nominative, as in Greg.
Naz. Carm. 52. d»e vaiiv piariv KXvSwvog. See Hoogeveen on
Viger, III. 7. 7. The verb fdaaaviZsaOai signifies to be tossed
violently. Compare Exod. xii. 18. LXX. Kuinoel.
Ver. 25. irEpiirarwv iirl rije QaXdaarig. The absurdities of some
of the German divines, and their violations of all grammatical
rules, in order to get rid of the miracles, need only to be men
tioned in order to expose them. Some assert that Jesus and
Peter sustained themselves by swimming ; others, that they waded
in shallow water ; and others again, which is the opinion more
generally adopted by the party, that Jesus was walking by the
sea; i. e. along the shore. With the first of these interpre-

MATTHEW XIV. 26. 185
tations, the verb 7r£pt7rarEtv is at variance ; the second would
require Iv ry QaXaaay, and the last Trctpd ttjv OdXaaaav, as in
Matt. iv. 18. xv. 29. or iirl tov aiyiaXov rrig QaXdaarig, as Matt.
xiii. 2. John xxi. 4. That the preposition iirl must be rendered
upon, is clear from the following passages. Apoll. Rhod. I. 182.
irovrov iirl yXavKolo Oeectkev OioitaToe, ovSe Qoovg fidirrEv iroSag.
Lucian. Philopseud. p. 474. !c/>' vSaroe fiaSiZ,Eiv. 2 Sam. xi. 2.
LXX. Kat TT£pt£7rdTEt IVi tov Swparog rov oikov. Job ix. 8.
7TEpi7raTtov, tog In-' iSdcpovg, iirl QaXdaarig, where the Hebrew is
by. In this last place Job is speaking of the things by which the
omnipotence of God is demonstrated ; and it is not improbable
that the Evangelist had the passage in view. The Egyptians
represented feet walking on the sea, as the hieroglyphic for im
possibility. The expression in the next verse is, l7rt rr)v OdXaa-
aav, which fixes at once the import of the narrative ; since iirl
with an accusative ordinarily signifies upon. See Matt. Gr. Gr.
§. 386. c. Kuinoel, Whitby, Doddridge. Of the watches of
the night, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 169.
Ver. 26. rpdvraapa. A phantasm, or apparition ; E. T. a spi
rit. A popular belief in the existence of apparitions seems to
have been prevalent in almost every age and country. Among the
Greeks and Romans, the idea of ghosts is easily recognized in
Homer and Virgil. See also Eurip. Hec. 54. iElian. V. H.
XII. 64. Plato deRepub. II. and Plin. Epist. VII. 27. 1. who
employs the word phantasmata. That the Jews entertained a
similar notion, is evident from the LXX translation of Psalm
xci. 6. Ov <pof3r]Qri<Ty dirb irpdyparog (Qu. wvEiiparog) SiairopEV-
opivov iv (tkotei, dirb avpirrwparog Kat Satpoviov psaripfipivov.
See also Wisd. xvii. 3, 4. compared with Psalm lxxviii. 50.
They seem to have thought that God created certain spirits, as
instruments of vengeance upon wicked men : (Ecclus. xxxix. 28.)
an opinion which was also followed by some of the heathen phi
losophers. Plutarch. Probl. An illud verius est, quod a quibus-
dam Romanis dicitur, et Chrysippus opinatur, dcemonia qucedam
mala circuire, quibus Dii quasi carnificibus et scelerum ultoribus
adversus injustos et impios utuntur? It has been frequently
attempted to demonstrate the reality of apparitions from various
passages in Scripture, in which God, for special purposes, has
permitted or appointed the supernatural appearance of angels or
spirits. But such occasions have long ceased ; and though the
possibility of their recurrence cannot be denied, it is clear that
the insufficiency of evidence respecting them strongly argues their
improbability. In alledged cases of the kind, the apparition has
never been satisfactorily proved by a competent number of wit
nesses. A heated or diseased imagination will frequently give
rise to illusions, which the fancy at once embodies into objects
of terror and affright ; and it requires a vigorous effort to over-

186 MATTHEW XIV. 31. 33.
come the impression, which the phantom may produce upon the
mind. Whitby, Grotius, Wetstein.
Ver. 31. dXiyo7ricrT£. Peter's love for his master was most
sincere and ardent, and his temper warm and forward, but rash
and inconsiderate. He was fully aware of Christ's power to sup
port him ; but he lost his confidence with the encreasing danger ;
and Jesus accordingly suffered him to sink, in order to make
him fully sensible of the weakness of his faith, and thereby induce
him to recruit it by prayer and industry, and to rest the whole
strength of it upon God. The fidelity and candour with which
the characters in the Gospel history are pourtrayed, is a striking
evidence of the general veracity of the historians. Whitby,
Grotius. Doddridge supposes, that Peter, being an expert
swimmer, as fishermen generally are, trusted more to his art than
to his master ; and Jesus, therefore, wisely permitted it to fail
him. Ver. 33. dXriQwg Qeov vlbg £t. That the want of the article is no
sanction for those who translate a son of God, or, a son of a god,
see on Matt. iv. 3. In defence of the former of these translations,
however, it is alledged that the mariners only meant to say, that
Christ was a prophet, for that such are denominated sons of God ;
but no instance is adduced in which vlbg Qeov is so used. On
the other hand, it is conjectured by some commentators, that the
declaration was made by Pagans ; so that it is parallel to the
common Heathen phrase, 7rpocrKvvEtv we Geov. But this is mere
conjecture ; and in the expressions cite Geov and vlbg eI Qeov,
there is clearly no parallelism at all. Admitting, however, that
they were Pagans, they might still adopt the language of the
Apostles, whose companions they were, upon this extraordinary
occasion. Against this it is urged, that the disciples themselves
were not yet acquainted with our Saviour's divinity; a position
which, though true on the whole, is yet received with too little
restriction. That the expected Messiah would be the Son of
God, was a Jewish doctrine ; and therefore, however unsettled
their faith might be, whenever they did acknowledge him to be
the Christ, they must also have regarded him as the Son of
God. In their intercourse with Christ, moreover, they had often
heard him assume this title to himself; not to announce which to
their familiar associates, is scarcely explicable, upon the common
principles of human conduct. Even, on this supposition, there
fore, that the mariners were Pagans, their exclamation will easily
admit of being interpreted in the highest sense ; not to mention
that it is clearly distinct from the expressions, which are com
monly significant of Pagan admiration. Compare Acts xii. 22.
xiv. 11. Joseph. Ant. XIX, 8. 2. Middleton. — [Campbell,
Wetstein.]

MATTHEW XV. 1, 2. 187

CHAPTER XV.
Contents : — Christ converses with the Scribes and Pharisees
on the subject of traditions, vv. 1 — 20. [Mark vii. 1 .] The
daughter of the Canaanitish woman healed, vv. 21 — 28.
[Mark vii. 24.] Various other cures on a mountain in Galilee,
w. 29 — 31. [Mark vii. 33.] Four thousand miraculously fed,
vv. 32— 39. [Mark viii. 1.]
Verse 1. ol dirb 'IspoaoXvptov y. koI $. That is, belonging
to Jerusalem ; in which sense a7ro is frequently used. See on
Matt. ii. 1. The most learned of the sect were those of Jeru
salem ; so much so, that whatever place they visited, a chair was
placed for them to deliver instruction ; as it appears from Echa
R. I. 1. It does not appear that those who now came to Christ
were deputed by the Sanhedrim ; but there is little doubt that
their intentions were insidious, and that they wished to elicit
from him some observation, upon which they might form an
accusation against him. Euthym. iv irdaaig piv ralg xtopaig rwv
StoSEKa rpvXwv ijaav ypapparslg Kal <f?api(jaioi' 7rovr/poT£poe Se tcuv
dXXwv rjaav ol dirb 'lEpoaoXvpwv, dig rr)v prirpoiroXiv o'lKOvvrsg
Kal Sid tovto TETvrpwpivoi. Kuinoel, Campbell.
Ver. 2. irapaSoaiv rwv irp£crj3vT£pcuv. The noun trapdSoaig
signifies generally a precept ; and thence, as here, any oral tra
dition. See on Matt. xi. 27. Hesych. 7rapdSocrie' dypafyog Si-
SaaKaXia. Of these traditions Josephus observes, Ant. XIII.
10. 6. vopipa iroXXd Tiva irapiSocrav rto Sr)ptj> ol Qapiaaloi ek 7ra-
ripwv SiaSoxvg, dirEp ovk dvayiypairrai iv ralg Mtovaiwg vopoig.
The vopipa here mentioned are now collected into the Talmud :
see Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 341. sqq. III. pp.80. 271. The
first part of the modern Cabbala is an extension of these tradi
tions, containing a variety of maxims, expositions, and cere
monies, which the Jews profess to have received from their
fathers ; and which, though evidently written posterior to the
destruction of the second temple, they pretend to have derived
from Adam, through Moses, downwards. The second part,
or artificial Cabbala, is nothing more than a system of magic,
founded upon the transposition of Scripture names, in which a
certain supernatural and mystical science is supposed to reside.
In respect to the observance, with the violation of which the
Pharisees more immediately charged the disciples of Christ, and
which is more fully stated in Mark vii. 3. sqq. it was required by
no written law of God, and could not therefore be considered as
a 'transgression. According to Maimonides it depended solely
upon the words of the Scribes, who laid down the following canon

188 MATTHEW XV. 4, 5.
respecting it : Whosoever despiseth the washing of hands, is worthy
to be excommunicated ; he will come to poverty, and will be ex
tirpated out of the world. In the Talmud it is asserted that
whosoever eats bread with unwashen hands does as bad as if he
lay with a harlot. It is recorded also that R. Eliazer Ben
Hazer was excommunicated by the Sanhedrim for contempt of
this tradition ; and that R. Akiba died of thirst in prison rather
than drink the water provided for him, which was not sufficient
for washing his hands previously, some of it having been casually
spilt. Indeed, so much stress was laid upon this precept, that
in order to enforce compliance they feigned that an evil spirit,
called RD— "W, shibta, sits at the foot of him who eats without
washing his hands, and makes it hurtful to him- Kuinoel,
Whitby, Hammond, Lightfoot.
Ver. 4. ripa tov iraripa Kat rrjv pryripa. Exod. xx. 12. .The
verb ripqv is used with great latitude in the Scriptures : it im
plies not only respect and submission, but also, like the Hebrew
12D, nourishment and support. See Numb. xxii. 17. xxiv. 11.
Judg. xiii. 17. 1 Tim. v. 17. Ecclus. iii. 8. Iv 'ipyw Kat Xdyc^.
ripa rbv iraripa. That such was the extent of the command is
proved even from their own canons ; in which it was ordained
that a son is bound to provide for his father meat and drink, to
clothe him, to cover him, to lead him in and out, and to wash his
face, hands, and feet. And again, a son is bound to nourish his
father ; yea, to beg for him. Kiddushun, p. 61, 2, 3. Further,
as Tipdv is not confined to its primary signification, so kokoXo-
y£t v means not only to curse, or rather to revile, but to slight, to
neglect; answering to the Hebrew bbp. This clause of the pre
cept is taken from Exod. xxi. 17. with which compare Deut.
xxi. 18. xxvii. 16. Ezek. xxii. 7. LXX. See also Lev. xx. 9.
Prov. xx. 20. Of the duty of providing for parents, as incul
cated by Heathens, see my note on Hom. II. A. 478. p. 301.
The expression Qavdrw teXevtov is a Hebrew pleonasm. Kui
noel, Whitby, Lightfoot.
Ver. 5. Swpov, o idv k. t. X. It appears from Mark vii. 11.
that Swpov is here the interpretation of the Hebrew p13, (Kop-
/35v) signifying a thing devoted to the service of God ; whence
the treasury is called Kop(5avdg, Matt, xxvii. 5. Jos. B. J. II.
9. 4. Of the import of our Lord's observation, see Home's
Introd. Vol. III. pp. 136. 297. That the interpretation there
given is the true one there is abundant proof in the Rabbinical
writings. When a man had a mind to make a vow against using
any particular thing, suppose wine, he said, Let all the wine that
I shall taste be D3p, conem, a word of similar import with
corban. By saying so, however, it was not understood that he
devoted any thing to God, but that he bound himself never to

MATTHEW XV. 6. 189
taste wine ; and if he was induced afterwards to taste it, he in
curred the guilt of sacrilege and perjury. Hence, according to
Maimonides, the term came at length to denote any thing pro
hibited. We may remark, further, that the interpretation which
has been put upon the passage by some, viz. May every offering
which I make to God redound to your advantage, savours rather
of reverence than abuse, and is totally at variance with the sense
of the passage. With respect to the construction, some have
supposed that the apodosis is wanting, and that the reverse of
Qavdrw teXevtijv should be supplied either after wipEXriQyg, or at
the end of the verse. Euthymius suggests r)XEvOipwrai, and so
the E. T., who insert he shall be free at the end of the first
member. But there seems to be no necessity for any ellipsis
whatever. The conjunction i), which creates the difficulty, is
sometimes in the N. T. like the Hebrew "l, a mere expletive, and
sometimes has the power of other conjunctions. Compare Matt.
xxviii. 9. Mark xiii. 34. Luke ii. 15. 21. 27, 28. v. 35. ix. 51.
xiii. 25. xiv. 1. The sentence therefore will run thus : Whoso
ever shall say, &c. he need not honour, &c. The same observa
tions will apply to the parallel passage of Mark, where the last
words of the sentence are spoken by Christ, and do not, as here,
form part of the tradition. It is to be observed, also, that the
verb understood with Swpov is ecttcij in the imperative, not iori
in the indicative. The formula w^EXElaOai ti ek nvog is strictly
classical. ^Esch. Prom. 229. TotdS' 15 ipov 'O rwv Qewv rvpav-
vog wcpEXripivog. Thucyd. VIII. 96. i% rig ttXeiw coc^eXovvto.
Campbell, Grotius, Kuinoel, Lightfoot.
Ver. 6. Kal riKvpwaarE k. t. X. It is easy to perceive with
what direct force this observation of our Lord bears upon the
unauthorised tradition of the Romish Church. The prediction
from Isaiah xxix. 13. cited in the next verses, is supposed by
the generality of commentators to be merely an accommodation
of the words of the prophet to the present character of the Jews,
of whom they were equally as descriptive, as of those to whom they
were originally directed. In its primary sense it was rather a
rebuke than a prophecy ; and there seems to be no reason
against receiving it in a more enlarged sense, as a prediction re
lating to the times of the Gospel, veiled under a remonstrance
with the people to whom it was addressed. Grotius. — [Micha
elis, Hammond, Whitby, &c] The words lyyt^Et juot ruj
crropan aiirwv Kat are omitted by several excellent MSS. ver
sions and Fathers ; and Griesbach has, therefore, left them out
of the text. But they form part of the prophecy from which
they are quoted ; in which, however, there is no word correspond
ing with pdrwv in v. 9. Hence it has been thought, that the'
in the word Vim, of the original, should be V, since liini is equi
valent with pdrnv in Isaiah xiv. 18, 19. xlix. 4. The conjee-

190 MATTHEW XV. 9. 11, 12, 13.
tjire is by no means improbable ; at the same time, the omission
is of no great importance, since all worship is necessarily vain of
which God does not approve. Grotius. On the subject of
Critical Conjecture, see Home's Introd. Vol. II. pp. 181. 195.
Ver. 9. ivrdXpara dvOpwirwv. The word 'ivraXpa occurs
only three times in the N. T. and always joined with dvQpwirwv ;
as also in the passage of the LXX here quoted. In all these
places also, viz. here, the parallel place of Mark vii. 7. and Col.
ii. 22. the ivrdXpara are mentioned with disapprobation, and
contrasted, by implication, with the precepts of God, which, in
the N. T. are never called. ivrdXpara, but ivroXai. To impose
these ivrdXpara upon the - consciences of men, as things neces
sary, is assuming an authority for which there is no warrant in
Scripture, and, in fact, usurping the prerogative of God ; besides
that they are frequently productive of the most dangerous con
sequences to the followers of the blind guides, who publish
them. Campbell, Whitby.
Ver. 11. to EtcrEpxo/iEvov iig to aropa. Scil. Bread eaten
with unwashen hands. Some interpret it of the unclean meats
forbidden by the Jewish law : but the allusion is evidently to the
cavil of the Pharisees in v. 2. Compare v. 20. This also is
the parable or maxim, of which Peter requests an explanation in
v. 15. as the connexion clearly indicates. Grotius, A. Clarke.
— [Le Clerc] The verb koivovv signifies, to make common ;
from Kotvoe- Hence, to pollute, to defile, to desecrate. He
sych. koivoV aKaQaprov, ]3SeXvktov. Compare Acts x. 14.
xi. 8. Schleusner,
Ver. 12. t6v Xoyov. The words which Christ had spoken
respecting their traditions, which they regarded with greater
reverence than the law itself. Euthym. dvETpETTE ydp rr)v irapd-
Somv twv irpEafivripwv.
Ver. 13. irdaa c/>vTEta. The noun rpvTEia signifies properly,
the act of planting : and thence, by an easy transition, a plant.
It is here evidently employed in a metaphorical sense ; but there
is some difference of opinion with respect to its precise applica
tion. Some commentators explain it of the traditions themselves,
which were the subject in debate ; others, of the Pharisees, who
insisted upon the necessity of observing them ; and others, again,
extend the sense, so as to include both the teachers and their
doctrine. The first of these interpretations is most in accordance
with the figurative language of the Jews, with whom the human
mind is usually compared to a fertile soil, and the precepts, with
which it is imbued, to seeds or plants. Compare Matt. xiii. 29.
88. 1 Cor, iii. 6. Similar instances are not uncommon in pro-
8

MATTHEW XV. 14, 15. 17. 191
fane authors. Plutarch, de Educat. p. 2. yy piv eoikev i) <pvaig,
yscopycj) Se 6 7ratS£vti)v, o-irippari Se al rwv Xoywv iiiroQriKai.
Philo de Allegor. I. p. 44. dig yap iv dyp<£ rd xXwpd (dXaardvEi
Kal avast, ovtw fiXdarripa rov vov to votjtov iari. The purport
of our Lord's observations is this : — The anger of the Pharisees
is of no avail ; their doctrines are not of God, and must,
therefore, be rooted out. " Do you, therefore," he proceeds,
" heed them not ; they are blind guides, ignorant of the ways
of truth, and thinking to lead their disciples to perfection by idle
traditions; so that, unless their mischievous tenets are refuted,
both themselves and their followers will inevitably be involved in
eternal perdition." Kuinoel, Grottos, Kypke. — [Le Clerc,
Whitby.]
Ver. 14. bSriyoi iiat rvipXol rvrpXwv' k. t. X. This is a pro
verbial expression, the import of which has been given in the
preceding note. It occurs again in Luke vi. 39. and similar
sentiments are found in profane writers. Sext. Empir. adv.
Mathem. I. 31. ovte Se 6 drExvoe rov drsxvov SiSdaKEiv Svvarai,
tog oi/Si 6 rvipXbg tov rvipXbv oSrjyEtv. Horat. Epist. I. 17. 4.
ut si ccecus iter monstrare velit. Under rvipXbg is evidently
represented the animi caligo : Juven. Sat. VI. 613. Ephes.
iv. 18. ia-Konapivoi ry Siavoia. Compare Rom. i. 21. x. 10.
The Jews had a tradition that their Rabbins would become
blind, when God came to dwell in his tabernacle. Kuinoel,
Grotius. Ver. 1 5. Trapa(3oXjjv. Not a parable, in the ordinary sense of
the word ; but simply, an apophthegm, or maxim. Etym. M.
irapafioXr)' alviypartoSrig Xoyog. It is clear from the context,
that the reference is to v. 11. and Peter, in all probability, under
stood Christ, as intending to set aside the distinction of meats ;
which induced him to ask for an explanation. Kuinoel. In the
next verse, aKpr)v is used adverbially, subaud. Kara. Hesy
chius explains it by in, still ; and so it occurs in Xen. Anab.
IV. 3. 19. Anacr. XXXIII. 9. Theocr. Idyl. IV. 60. Anthol.
III. 14. 3. Polyb. I. 13. IV. 35. V. 18. Joseph. Ant. XVII.
11. Wetstein, Palairet, Kypke.
Ver. 17. ilg drpESpwva. Into a cloaca, or sink. The word is to
be found in no Greek author whatsoever ; and the explanations
affixed to it by the old lexicographers are not very authoritative^
Suidas: Jerri Se Kat EvQiia 6 dipsSptov, Kat aripaivEi to pipog to
iTEpl rr)v e£oSov. Hence from a misconception of the word
EvUEia, i. e. EvOiia irrtoaig, the nominative case, the word has been
supposed to mean the intestinum rectum; as if the feminine
adjective EvSsta could possibly agree with dipESpdiv, which is
masculine. It amounts, indeed, almost to a certainty, that the

192 MATTHEW XV. 22, 23. 26.
interpretation given above is correct ; and Suidas himself so ex
plains it in another passage : diroirarov Kal Koirpwva Xlyovcrt- 6
Si dt^ESpcuv Kat XovTpevv, j3dp/3apa. So also Stephens, Philoxe-
nus, and others. Our Lord's argument is very simple : — What
goes into the mouth, descends into the stomach, or bowels ; and
that which is impure, passes into the sink, leaving what is fit for
nourishment clear of all impurity. But evil principles, which
have their seat and operation in the heart, and to which the
mouth gives utterance ; these defile a man. Marsh, Campbell,
A. Clarke. — [Michaelis.]
Ver. 22. yvvi) Xavavata. This noble woman is called in
Mark vii. 26. a Greek, a Syro-Phcenician by nation. But the
Phoenicians generally were descendants of Canaan; Judg. i. 31,
32. whence the Canaanites and Phoenicians have been often con
founded. Compare Gen. xlvi. 10. with Exod. vi. 15. LXX,
and Exod. xvi. 35. with Josh. v. 12. See also Home's Geogra
phical Index. It is plain from her being called a Greek, that
she was not a Jewish proselyte, as well as from the whole tenour
of the narrative. Nor is there any thing at variance with this,
in her addressing Christ as the son of David : she might have
learnt the appellation from the Jews, and applied it to Christ as
a title of respect. A. Clarke, Grotius, Doddridge.
, Ver. 23. 6 Se ovk airEKpiQri k. t. X. Our Lord was undoubt
edly acquainted with the virtuous disposition of his petitioner,
but it was necessary to make it evident to the bystanders, and to
convince her most deeply of the value of the favour which she at
last obtained. This was the first instance in which his aid had
been implored by one who was neither an Israelite by birth, nor
by profession ; and the miracle he was about to perform, was to
be of the highest importance. It was a prelude to the admission
of the Gentiles to an equal participation with the Jews in the
covenant of the Gospel ; and as such required some especial
solemnity to mark its performance. Jortin, Horsley.
Ibid. diroXvaov aiirr)v. Send her away ; not, however, with
out granting her request. This is obvious from the answers of
Christ in vv. 24. 26. Hammond, Whitby. Of the next verse
see on Matt. ix. 36. x, 6.
Ver. 26. rolg Kwapioig. Our Lord, in this expression, did
but adopt the common language of the Jews in relation to the
Gentiles, to whom this woman belonged. In the Talmud, Midr.
Thill, p. 1.3. all the nations of the world are compared to dogs.
Compare also Joseph. Ant. VL 9. 4. and see on Matt. vii. 6.
Christ used this appellation, however harsh it might appear,
with a view to make the reflection in v. 28. strike more severely
against the Jews. Lightfoot, Campbell.

MATTHEW XV. 27. 30. 37. XVI. 1. 193
Ver. 27. vat, KvptE" k. t. X. The particle vat does not here
so much imply assent or affirmation ; but it rather denotes the
fervour and earnestness of supplication, and is nearly equivalent
to the Hebrew HI, na, Gen. xiv. 7, 8. xviii. 30. 32. Numb. xii.
13. Compare Philem. 20. Rev. xxii. 20. So also in Eurip.
Hipp. 601. val, ir pog (te rrig <rrigSE%idg EvwXivov. Arist. Nub. 1471.
vat, vat, KaraiSiarOriTi irarpiyov Ata. Whitby. — [Grotius.] The
particles Kat ydp indicate an ellipsis of a preceding member of
the sentence, which may be thus supplied: Yea, Lord; but
grant me a small participation in thy mercies ; for even the dogs
do gather up, &c. This is well preserved in the E. T. by the
word yet. Le Clerc
Ver. 30. KvXXove- This adjective, as distinguished from
XtoXbg, lame, i. e. deprived of, or maimed, in the legs, seems to
denote a loss of the arms, or some weakness or injury in them,
as from palsy, accident, &c. Compare Matt, xviii. 8. and see
Schol. on Arist. Eq. 1083. Hence in the next verse it is op
posed to iiyulg. Elsner, Kypke.
Ver, 37. arrvpiSag. There is a distinction between the Korpi-
vog and «T7rvpte. Compare Matt. xvi. 9, 10. The latter was a
wicker-basket, which the ancients generally used at meals, like
the Latin sportula. Athenaeus, (Lib. 8.) mentions rd dirb airv-
piSog Sslirva, and hence Arrian, Diss. IV. 10. cnrvpiai SEiirvr)aai.
Sueton. in Neron. 15. Publicce coence ad sportulas redactce.
Ibid. Domitian. 7. Sportulas publicas sustulit, revocata ccenarum
rectarum consuetudine. Raphelius. The particulars of this
miracle are exactly parallel with that related in the last chapter.
Of Magdala, v. 39. see Home's Geographical Index.

CHAPTER XVI.
Contents: — Tlie Pharisees require a sign, and are severely
rebuked by Christ, vv. 1—12. [Mark viii. 11.] Peter's ac
knowledgment of Christ's Messiahship, vv. 13 — 20. [Mark
viii. 27. Luke ix. 18.] Christ declares to his disciples the
necessity and consequences of his death and resurrection, vv.
21__28. [Mark viii. 31. Luke ix. 22.]
Verse 1. ol Qapia. Kat 2aSS. These sects, however at va
riance among themselves, always most cordially united in their
opposition to Christ. Theophylact: kov rote SoypamSihravro,
dXXdyE Kara Xptcrrov crvju7rvEov(7t. Compare Matt. xxii. 34. The
same demand of a sign from heaven had been made upon a

194 MATTHEW XVI. 2.
former occasion, and our Lord answered it with the same reply
as he does here, v. 4. See Matt. xii. 30. To the remarks there
made it may be added, that the Jews, understanding the prophecy
in Dan. vii. 13. literally, expected that the Messiah would make
his first public appearance in the clouds of heaven, and take upon
himself the glory of his temporal kingdom. Hence, about this
time, various impostors, pretending to inspiration, affected to shew
them signs in the heavens (aripEia iXEvOEplag) indicative of their
speedy deliverance from the Roman yoke. See Joseph. B. J.
II. 12. 4. In asking a sign, therefore, these hypocrites pretended
an inclination to admit his claims upon receiving this evidence of
his mission, secretly hoping that non-compliance would be con
strued by the multitude, who were ready to acknowledge his
pretensions, into a failure of his power, and cause them to forsake
his company. That they would still have been equally perverse
had our Saviour assented, is clear from the fact, that the same
demand was made in the time of the Apostles, when the signs of
the crucifixion, the resurrection, and ascension, and the descent
of the Holy Ghost had been afforded them: 1 Cor. i. 22.
A. Clarke, Macknight, Doddridge.
Ver. 2. EvSla. Scil. 'iarai. The Jews were very curious in
observing the prognostics of fair or foul weather, and the tempera
ture of the seasons. Thus in the Mischna, Tit. Joma, p. 21, 2.
In the going out of the last days of the feast of Tabernacles, all
observed the rising of the smoke. If the smoke bended north
ward the poor rejoiced, because there would be much rain the -
following year ; if it bended southward, <yc. The Gloss in this
place observes : In the feast of Tabernacles they judged con
cerning the rains ; to which an annual guide was published by
the learned in such matters. The Jews, however, were not
singular in this respect. Similar presages of the weather were
observed also by the Greeks and Romans, as well as in more
modern times. Theophrast. Sign. Pluv. idv dxrlvEg dOpoat dvia-
Xwcrtv, avtovTOe r)Xiov, aripElov vSaToe' Kat brav, dviaxovrog
tov r)Xiov, al avpai otov EKXEtVovTOe XP^if]ia laxwaiv, vSarog
nrnpslov. Aristot. Prob. XXVI. 8. al piv icaOapal SvaEig ev-
Sieivov crr/jU£tov, al Si rErapaypivai x£tjU£P(vov. Plin. N. H.
XVIII. 13. Sol ventos prcedicit, cum ante exorientem eumnubes
rubescunt. Si circa occidentem rubescunt nubes, serenitatem
futurte diei spondent. Virg. Georg. I. 453. Cceruleus pluviam
denunciat, igneus Euros ; Sin maculce incipiant rutilo immisce-
rier igni, Omnia tunc pariter vento nimbisque videbis Fervere.
Compare Arat. Phcen. 837. 858. Stat. Theb. I. 342. The noun
EvSia, from Ate, Jupiter, signifies, a calm and serene sky. Suid.
siiSia' r) dvEv dviptov i)pipa. So Ecclus. iii. 15. LXX. Xen
Hellen. II. 4. 10. .Elian. H. V. IX. 18. In the next verse
oTvyvdZ,Eiv signifies properly to grieve ; and thence applied to

MATTHEW XVI. 3. 11. 195
the weather, to be gloomy, to lour. So in Latin : Tibull. I.
2. 49. Triste ccelum. Plin. H. N. II. 6. Sol cceli tristitiam
discutit. The verb is extremely rare ; but arvyvbg and its deri
vatives in this sense frequently occur. Lightfoot, Wetstein,
Raphelius. Ver. 3. viroKpiral' to piv 7rpocnu7rov k. t. X. From this re
proof it appears, that the refusal of the Jews to acknowledge the
Messiahship of Christ, was owing neither to the want of evidence,
nor to the want of capacity to judge of that evidence. The
accomplishment of the ancient prophecies, (Gen. xlix. 10. Isaiah
xi. 1. xxxv. 5. Dan. ix. 24.) and the miracles which he per
formed, were proof sufficient, and much more easily discernible
than the signs of the seasons. Macknight. Among other senses
of the verb inroKplvEaQai, it admits also that of respondere : as in
Isaiah iii. 6. LXX. Herod. I. 2. Hence, and from the fact
that viroKpirrig bvEipwv signifies an interpreter of dreams, in
Lucian. Somn. §. 17. it has been argued that viroKpiral should
here be rendered interpreters of the weather; or, according to
the English phrase, iveather-wise. But as the genitive Kaipwv,
which determines this meaning of iiiroKpirrjg, is wanting ; and as
the character of hypocrisy is so frequently ascribed to the Pha
risees in the N. T., and they are frequently called viroKpiral,
where there can be no possible reference to the weather, this
application of the word is very precarious, and there can be no
reason for adopting it. Marsh. — [Michaelis.]
Ver. 11. 7rcT>e ov voeTte, k. t. X. There were two reasons
which led the disciples into a mistaken interpretation of our
Lord's admonition. Although the metaphorical application of
the term leaven was not uncommon among the Jews, still it was
rather used to represent evil affections, than evil doctrine. Thus
the Gloss in Berachoth, p. 17, 1. observes: The leaven, which
is in the lump, are evil affections, which leaven us in our hearts.
Still it was used to express doctrine, whether true or false.
Compare Matt. xiii. 33. Gal. v. 9. It was also very common
with the Jewish doctors to prohibit the use of the leaven of hea
thens and Samaritans, and to forbid their followers to buy the
bread of either sect, which they considered as impure. The
disciples, therefore, considered our Lord's observation as an
indirect reproof of their carelessness, lest their negligence should
reduce them to the necessity of procuring food from heathens.
In the construction there is a peculiar ellipsis, which may be thus
supplied : on ov 7T£pi dprov eIttov iiplv, ote ehtov irpoaixEiv
k. t. X. So Plat. Theaetet. p. 458. tovto pi)v 'iXtyov, 6Vt
k. t. X. which Heindorf explains, tovto pi)v iXEyov, Xiywv oti
k. t. X. In the similar passage, Luke xii. 1 . our Lord addresses
the multitude, as well as his disciples, and the Sadducees are not
o 2

196 MATTHEW XVI. IS.
-mentioned ; so that the two narratives are probably distinct.
Lightfoot, Grotius, Whitby.
Ver. 13. riva ps Xiyovaiv k. t. X. The Rabbinical writings,
compared with the Scriptures of the N. T. supply the following
summary of the theological opinions of the Jews in our Saviour's
time, relative to the nature and office of their Messiah. — 1 . They
expected him to be of a nature far surpassing that of men or angels.
Hence one of the Rabbis says : The Messiah is higher than
ministermg angels. Compare Heb. i. 4. — 2. They considered
him to be the Word of God. See on John i. 1. — 3. They be
lieved that all God's transactions with mankind were carried on
through the medium of his Word, the Messiah ; who delivered
the Israelites from Egypt, and brought them into Canaan. — 4.
They believed that the Spirit of the Lord would be upon him,
and manifest itself in miraculous operations. Hence Matt. xii.
28. — 5. They supposed, that the Messiah would appear, not in
a real human body, but in the semblance of one ; Iv SoK^erEt.
This was afterwards the heretical dogma of the Docetae, in refu
tation of which see John i. 14. xix. 34. 1 John iv. 3. — 6. They
expected that he would not be subject to death ; John xii. 34. —
7. Yet they thought that he would offer, in his own person, an
expiatory sacrifice for their sins : John i. 49. — 8. He was to
restore the Jews to freedom. Compare Luke i. 68. xxiv. 21.
2 Esdr. xii. 34. — 9. To restore a pure and perfect form of wor
ship : Luke i. 73. John iv. 25. — 10. To give remission of sins :
Luke i. 76. Matt. i. 21. — 11. To work miracles : John vii. 31.
— 12. He was to descend into Hades, and to bring back to
earth the souls of the departed Israelites, united to their glorified
bodies ; and this was to be the first resurrection. Compare
Ephes. iv. 8, 9. 1 Pet. iii. 18, 19.— 13. The devil was to be
cast into hell for one thousand years. In relation to this incarce
ration, there are a variety of passages in the Talmud. — 14. Then
was to begin the Messiah's kingdom, which was to last one thou
sand years. — 15. At the end of that time, the devil was to be
released, and to excite great troubles and commotions ; but he
was to be conquered, and again to be imprisoned for ever. — 4 6.
Hereupon the second and general resurrection was to take place,
followed by the judgment. — 17. The world was then to be re
newed ; and new heavens, a new earth, and a new Jerusalem
were to appear. — 18. Lastly; the Messiah, having fulfilled his
office, was to deliver up the kingdom to God, at whose right
hand he was to sit for evermore. Bp. Blomfield. It seems by
St. Peter's confession in v. 16. that the Apostles were thoroughly
convinced by the miracles which Christ had performed, that he
was the Messiah. At the same time, the various inconsistent
opinions enumerated above had necessarily biassed their minds ;
and, in particular, they were unable to digest the doctrine of his

MATTHEW XVI. 16, 17. 197
humiliation and sufferings, previous to the establishment of his
heavenly kingdom, and the assumption of that consummate
power and splendour, predicted in Dan. vii. 13. In order,
therefore, to remove these prejudices from their minds, our Lord
opens a conversation with them on the subject of his death and
resurrection, by enquiring into the opinions generally enter
tained of him. The pronoun riva should be rendered, what
kind of person ? in which sense rig is frequently used, like the
Hebrew ""D, 1 Sam. xvii. 55. Compare John viii. 53. Whitby,
Lightfoot. There is a difference of opinion respecting the
construction of this passage, arising from the absence of punctua
tion in the ancient MSS. While some commentators point as in
the E. T. Whom do men say that I, the Son of Man, am ? others
double the interrogation : Whom do men say that I am ? the Son
of Man? But perspicuity of arrangement, before the use of
points, was more especially consulted by writers, in order to
make themselves intelligible ; and it is scarcely possible that the
sentence would have stood in its present form, had it been intended
to convey the sense proposed by the latter punctuation. To soften
the abruptness of the interrogation, some interrogative particle,
such as pr) or prrri, would undoubtedly have been prefixed. Be
sides, the Son of Man is a title, which, though frequently assumed
by Christ of himself, as in the present instance, was not applied
to him by others till after his ascension. In all probability the
reading of those MSS. is correct, which drop the pronoun pE, for
in Mark and Luke rov vlov rov dvOpdiirov is omitted, and pe
properly inserted in its stead. See on Matt. viii. 20. Middle-
ton, Kuinoel. — [Beza, Le Clerc, &c] Of the origin of the
opinions enumerated in the following verses, see on Matt. xi. 14.
xiv. 2.
Ver. 16. X,wvrog. In opposition to the heathen gods, who
are called E'iSwXa dipvxa, Wisd. xiv. 29. vEKpot, Psalm cvi. 28.
Wisd. xxiii. 10. Compare Josh. iii. 10. 1 Sam. xvii. 26. 36.
Jerem. x. 9, 10. Acts xiv. 15. 1 Thess. i. 9. Kuinoel, Gro
tius. Ver. 17. erdp? Kal alpa. This has been interpreted of human
reason, and otherwise ; but there can be no doubt that the ex
pression is merely a periphrasis for man. It is so employed con
tinually in the Talmud, as opposed to God. So in Berachoth,
p. 28, 2. If they were about to lead me before a king of flesh
and blood, and not before the King of kings, &c. Tanchim, p.
18, 3. The holy blessed God doth not as flesh and blood doth;
flesh and blood wound ivith one thing and heal with another ; but
the holy blessed One wounds and heeds with one and the same
thing. The phrase occurs no less than five times in this same
column. Compare 1 Cor. ii. 14. xv. 20. Gal. i. 16. Ephes. vi.

198 MATTHEW XVI. 18.
12. There may be an allusion to the judgment of the Sanhe
drim, with whom it rested to decide the claims of those who as
sumed the character of prophets. It is to be observed, however,
that the revelation here made to Peter was not particularly com
municated; but the result of a conviction, induced by the evi
dence which the miracles and doctrines of Christ had supplied.
Jesus always appealed to his works as sufficiently establishing
his claims ; and there was no further call for an especial revela
tion in the case of Peter than in that of Nathanael, John i. 50.
or the Centurion, Matt, xxvii. 54. or any other believer. Com
pare John v. 36. viii. 18. 24. x. 25. 38. xiv. 11. Lightfoot,
Macknight, Whitby.
Ver. 18. av eT Tlirpog, k. r. X. It is well known that upon
the declaration of our Lord in this and the following verse the
Church of Rome rests its presumptuous doctrine of supremacy
and infallibility. The futility of the Papal claims will appear
from the following considerations.

'&

[on the foundation of the christian church.
The discussion of this point involves, (1.) The relative signi
fication of 77-ETpoe and 7T£Tpa : (2.) Who ox what was the rock
upon which Christ determined to build his Church ; and (3.) To
what antecedent the pronoun avT»je should properly be referred.
I. It is maintained by some writers that there is no distinc
tion between 7T£Tpoe and 7TETpa, in opposition to the Greek
grammarians, who explain the former of a small stone, and the
latter a great stone, or rock. Eustath. on Hom. II. N. 137.
7TETpoe* rb rrig irirpag dirorpriQiv. That it bears this sense in
classic authors is evident from Herod. IX. 55. Callim. Apoll.
22. Soph. CEd. T. 342. ./Eschin. Socrat. Dial. III. 21. In
stances indeed have been adduced from which it should seem that
¦wirpog is sometimes used for irirpa ; but there is no such example
in the N. T. or the LXX. and if it be urged that Peter's Syriac
name, Cephas, means both 71-ETpoe and 71-ETpa, it is replied that
the former meaning is unequivocally appropriated in John i. 42.
II. By most Roman Catholic writers St. Peter himself is
looked upon as the rock upon which Christ was to build his
Church ; and in this interpretation they have been followed by
some of the leading Protestant divines. But by this application
of 7rlTpa a meaning is affixed to irirpog contrary to all legitimate
authority; and it is therefore urged that 7T£Tpoe is changed to
7TETpa solely because the former does not signify a foundation-
stone, and therefore could not be so employed. The usage of
Scripture, however, plainly proves that this is not the case, for
the term rock is wholly confined to God and Christ. Compare
Deut. xxxiii. 4. 2 Sam. xxii. 2. 32. Psalm xviii. 2. It should

MATTHEW XVI. 18. 199
seem, therefore, that the foundation of the Church of Christ was
not Peter himself, but the important truth of which he had just
made confession, that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living
God. This interpretation is supported by many of the ancient
Fathers, and even by some of the Popes themselves. Chrysos
tom, Hom. XIV. in Matt, ry irirpq' rovriari ry iriarEi rr)g bpo-
Xoyiag. Again, Hom. CLXIII. ovk eIttev iirl ri£ irirpw, ovte
ydp iirl Ttjj dvOptoirto, dXX' iirl rr)v iriariv rr)v iavrov coKoSoitrjcrEv
iKKXrja-tav. Augustin in Tract. X. in Epist. 1 John : Quid est,
super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam? Super banc
fidem ; super id quod dictum est, Tu es Christus Filius Dei. So
Pope Greg. M. Epist. III. 32. Vitam vestram inpetra Ecclesice,
hoc est, in confessione B. Petri, solidate. Nor does this inter
pretation destroy the allusion which our Lord evidently intended
to make to the name of Peter, but rather preserves it. Basilius
Seleuciensis observes : ravrrrv ri)v bpoXoyiav irirpav KaXiaag 6
Xptcrroe, IHrpov ovo^ttd^Et rbv irptoTtog ravrr)v bpoXoyr)aavra,
yvwpiapa rije bpoXoyiag rrjv irpoariyopiav StvpovjitEvOe- This
view of the subject will be considerably strengthened by consi
dering what is meant in Scripture by the Church. The word
iKKXriaia signifies primarily a concourse of people, assembled for
any purpose good or bad, (Acts xix. 32. 39.) and therefore re
quires some word to be joined to it to determine its nature, as
the Church of God, the Church of Christ. As applied, how
ever, Kar i^oxvv, it is well defined in the 19th Article to be a
congregation of faithful men, in the ivhich the pure word of God
is preached, and the sacraments duly ministered, according to
Christ's ordinance. This Church is represented in the N. T.
under the figure of a building, of which Jesus Christ himself is the
chief corner stone (Ephes. ii. 20. compare Col. ii. 7. Jude 20.)
laid by the confession and preaching not of Peter only, but of
all the Apostles, who are collectively designated living stones,
ZwvTEg XiOoi, of the edifice : 1 Pet. ii. 4. The term XiOog is
precisely synonymous with irirpog, and the former is not em
ployed by Christ, only on account of the allusion of the latter to
irirpa, the rock on which the Church was built. It is one of
those instances of paronomasia so common in the O. T. Com
pare Gen. iii. 20. xxvii. 36. in which Eve has the same relation
to living, and Jacob to supplanted, as Peter has here to rock.
The Apostle therefore was a irirpog, and not the irirpa of the
Church. III. The Romanists refer the relative avrfje to EKKXrjcn'av, in
which they are followed by almost all commentators, without as
senting however to their explanation, that by the Church is
meant the Church of Rome, or to the inference deduced from it,
that the Church of Rome is infallible. This interpretation is
wholly untenable on the ground of historical fact ; and the gram
matical construction is also against it. For avrrig should un-

200 ~ MATTHEW XVI, 19.
questionably be referred not to the Church, but to the Rock
upon which it was built; i. e. the Gospel. It should be ob
served, however, that under either interpretation of the passage,
the Papal claims can derive no support from it ; as will be fully
shewn under the subject of the Keys, in the next verse. Light
foot, Beza, Gr. Sharpe, Bp. Burgess.— [Grotius, Micha
elis, Whitby, Bp. Marsh, &c]

Ver. 18. irvXai qSov. It is contended by some commentators,
that the word 7rvXat refers to the Oriental custom of meeting and
deliberating at the gates of palaces and cities. See Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 112. sqq. But however plausible may be
the interpretation founded upon this notion, it is certain that the
phrase qSov irvXai is invariably employed to signify death, as
being the entrance into Hades, or the receptacle of departed
souls. See on Matt. xi. 23. and compare Job xxxviii. 17.
Psalm cvii. 18. Isaiah xxxviii. 10, 11. Wisd. xvi. 13. In
stances of the phrase in the same sense in the Greek poets are
too frequent to require particular citation. The meaning of the
passage is, therefore, that the Gospel of Christ shall endure for
ever ; whence it is called the everlasting Gospel: Rev. xiv. 6.
Lightfoot, Middleton. — [Michaelis.]
Ver. 19. rag kXeTc Trje (3aaiXEiag. This expression is plainly
metaphorical. Our Lord's meaning is, that Peter should open
the gates of the kingdom of heaven, or Gospel dispensation, both
to Jews and Gentiles. Accordingly, he was the first who
preached to them, (Acts ii. 41. x. 44. sqq.): and in this sense
he seems himself to have understood the matter : Acts xv. 7.
But by the keys, we may understand also power and authority,
which is the meaning of the metaphor in Isaiah xxii. 22. Hence,
when the Jews made a man a doctor of the law, they placed in
his hand the key of the closet in the Temple, where the sacred
books were kept, signifying thereby his commission to teach, and
explain the Scriptures to the people. In this acceptation, the
phrase is equivalent with that of binding and loosing, by which
it is accompanied and explained ; and the power, though con
ferred upon this occasion more especially on Peter, was after
wards extended to all the Apostles, (Matt, xviii. 18.) and conse
quently gave no oecumenical supremacy to one above another.
Simon Peter, it is true, was one of the most distinguished, as
well as the first in order, of the Apostles ;_ and he was also the
favoured witness of many important facts. But James and John
equally participated in these marks of distinction, and John more
especially enjoyed the peculiar favour of Christ ; John xiii. 25.
Whitby, Macknight, Lightfoot. It will be necessary to con
sider more closely in what this delegated power consists.

MATTHEW XVI. 19. £01

[on the power of the keys.
This power, in its more extended sense, was evidently that of
declaring the laws of the Gospel, and the terms of the Gospel-
covenant. In the language of the Jewish schools, to bind and
loose, was a usual phrase for bidding ox forbidding, granting or
refusing, declaring what is lawful or unlawful. Out of an infi
nity of examples in the Rabbinical writings, a few will suffice
for illustration. Jom. Tobb. p. 60, 1. Why have ye brought
this elder to me ? Whatsoever I loose, he binds ; whatsoever I
bind, he looseth. Orlah, p. 61, 2. R. Chaiya said; Whatso
ever I have bound to you elsewhere, I will loose to you here.
Schabb. p. 16, 4. He asked one wise-man, and he bound; do
not ask another wise-man, lest perhaps he loose. Pesachin, §.
4, 5. That which the school of Schammai binds until the night,
the school of Hillel looseth until the rising of the sun. There
are numberless examples also which close with this sentence :
The school of Schammai binds it ; the school of Hillel looseth it.
From these instances, and from the almost infinite use of the
phrase IDTlDI T)DN, bound and loosed, in the Talmudic wri
tings, the force of the expression is sufficiently manifest. Hence
it appears, that a power of binding and loosing was assumed by
the Jewish teachers, in allusion to which our Lord invested his
Apostles with a similar authority, in deciding what God should
approve or condemn under the Gospel dispensation. We may
observe also a further analogy between the form of our Lord's
declaration and the notions of the Rabbis. They considered
that every thing done upon earth according to the order of God,
was at the same time done in heaven ; whence they were accus
tomed to say, that when the priest, on the day of atonement,
offered the two goats upon earth, the same were offered in
heaven : Sohar, p. 26. The sense, therefore, of the passage is
this : — Since the Mosaic law was now to be retained only in
part, our Lord granted to Peter and the other Apostles, a power,
in the exercise of which they would be directed by the Holy
Ghost, of abolishing or retaining such observances as appeared
inconsistent or consistent, respectively, with the new order of
things, about to be established. Hence they bound, i. e. forbade,
circumcision to believers ; and they loosed, i. e. allowed purifica
tion to Paul, and four other brethren (Acts xxi. 24.) for the
shunning of scandal. At the time of using the keys for the first
time for the admission of the Gentiles into the Church, (Acts
x. 28.) Peter was taught from heaven, that intercourse between
Jew and Gentile, and eating any creature convenient for food,
which before had been bound, were now loosed; and he accord
ingly loosed them. The words of our Lord, (John xx. 23.)
whose sins ye remit, %c. convey a similar power as to persons,

202 MATTHEW XVI. 20, 21.
which that of the keys imparts in respect of doctrine. Instances
of this latter authority were manifested by Peter in the case of
Ananias and Sapphira; and by St. Paul towards Elymas, Hy-
menaeus, Philetus, &c. That the power here communicated ex
tends only to things, and not to persons, is evident from the use
of the neuter pronoun 6, and of oaa, not baovg, in Matt, xviii. 18.
It may be observed, in fine, that the authority here communicated
to the Apostles has been continued, so far as the change of cir
cumstances in the Church requires, through their Episcopal suc
cessors, to the present time. Passages testifying to the belief of
the primitive Church on this point, abound in the Fathers. See
Chrysost. de Sacerdot. III. Cyprian. Epist. 27. Irenaeus, V.
20. Tertull. de Prcesc. 32. Ambros. de Dig. Sacerd. 6. and
Jerome on Psalm xiv. Lightfoot, Schoettgen, Hammond,
Macknight, &c.

Ver. 20. tote SiEarEiXaro k. t. X. The verb SiaariXXEaOai
signifies to enjoin, to charge strictly ; and so in Exod. xviii. 20.
2 Chron. xix. 19. LXX. Acts xv. 24. Some MSS. read Itte-
ripriaEv, from Mark viii. 30. In several copies also, the name
'Irjcrove is inserted before 6 Xpiarbg, but it is evidently redun
dant ; and Griesbach has properly rejected it upon the authority
of fifty-four MSS. The allusion is manifestly to the confession
of Peter in v. 16. Kuinoel, Mill, Grotius.
Ver. 21. dirb tote k. t. X. Although the Apostles were now
thoroughly convinced that their master was the expected Mes
siah, they could not divest themselves of those prejudices, which
they entertained in common with the rest of their countrymen,
respecting the temporal nature of his kingdom ; and it may be
fairly inferred from Peter's exclamation in the next verse, and the
severe rebuke which it elicited, that he was even then cherishing
the expectation of personal aggrandizement. While, therefore,
the popular persuasion rendered it advisable that he should
charge his disciples to tell no man that he was the Christ, he
thought fit, at the same time, to prepare his own disciples for
his sufferings and death, in order to bring down the towering
notions which they had imbibed respecting him. After admo
nishing Peter, he proceeds to repeat, what he had before stated,
(Matt. x. 38.) that instead of temporal honour and dominion,
they had nothing to expect but persecution and affliction in this
life ; at the same time assuring them, that their fidelity would be
eventually rewarded, when he should come in the glory of his
heavenly kingdom. He then concluded by telling them, that
they had no reason to doubt the credibility of these truths ; for
that an event would shortly take place, during the life-time of
some who were then present, which, by its analogy to his appear-

MATTHEW XVI. 22, 23. 203
ance at the last day, would convince them of the certainty of his
prediction. This seems to be the connexion of our Lord's dis
course to the end of the chapter. Macknight, Porteus.
Ver. 21. 7rpEerj3vTEptov Kal d. Kat y. The Sanhedrim. See
Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 115. Also of the inclusive mode of
calculating time, by which Matthew's TpiYrj ripipa is reconciled
with pErd rpElg ripipag, Mark viii. 30. see ibid. p. 180.
Ver. 22. 7rpocrXa/3oitsvoe avrov. Some interpret, taking him
aside ; others, interrupting him ; and others again, embracing
him. The more probable meaning seems to be, taking him by
the hand ; — an action, indicative of affection mingled with sur
prise. There is an example of the use of the verb in this sense
in Plutarch : T. V. p. 375. ed. Reiske. Grotius, Schleusner,
Kuinoel. — [Campbell, Wakefield.] The phrase t'Xswe crot,
(subaud. 6 Gsoe a*;,) is a Hebrew ellipsis : May God be propi
tious to you; i. e. God forbid. The omission is supplied in
1 Cliron. xi. 19. LXX. 'iXswg poi 6 Gsoe roll iroiriaai to pripa
tovto. Compare 2 Sam. xx. 20. xxiii. 17. 1 Mace. ii. 21.
The Hebrew word in these places is elsewhere rendered priSapwg
aoi, as Gen. xviii. 25. 1 Sam. ii. 30. xii. 23. or pi) yivoiro, as
Gen. xliv. 7. 17. Josh. xxii. 19. and so the expression is here
explained: ov pi) 'iarai aoi tovto. Grotius, Campbell, Whitby.
Ver. 23. ov (ppovElg. You do not relish; you are not devoted
to. By the exclamation in the last verse, Peter had manifested
a more eager attachment to the prejudices of the Jews, and an
ambitious desire of earthly advancement, rather than a relish for
the divine appointments, and a pious acquiescence in the counsels
of God, for the redemption of the world. The phrase rppovElv
rd nvbg, ab aliquo stare, is sanctioned by the best writers. He
rodian. VIII. p. 316. rd 'Pwpaitov (ppovriaavrEg. Thucyd. V.
p. 141. rd AaKESatpoviwv rppovtlv. Demosth. Philip. III. p. 46.
Il£Xoirovvt7(7tove raKEcvov (ppoviiaai. Eurip. Frag. 251. irXovrw
xXiSwaa Ovrird Si), ywai, c/>povste- Compare Herod. VII. 102.
Herodian II. 12. 4. VIII. 6. 14. Diod. Sic. XIV. 28. XX. 90.
Athen. V. p. 214, 2. B. Compare Rom. viii. 5. It is remark
able that our Lord, immediately after conferring upon Peter the
power of the keys, should now openly, in the hearing of the
disciples, rebuke him with such signal severity. If the Papists
would rightly consider this, they would be less positive in pro
ducing the passage in support of the primacy of Peter, which
they build upon it. Wetstein, Kypke, Macknight. Of the
word craTavde, an adversary, see on Matt. iv. 1. The noun
a-KavSaXov is used in the abstract for the concrete, denoting the
person instead of the thing. It seems to have been added in
order to limit the signification of the word Satan, which was
merely intended to represent Peter as ah impediment to the

204 MATTHEW XVI. 24, 27.
atonement, by increasing Christ's natural dread of the cross.
See Matt, xxvii. 38. Heb. ii. 18. iv. 15. Grotius.
Ver. 24. u rig 0IXei k. t. X. See on Matt. x. 38, 39. The
expression in v. 26. is proverbial, importing : It signifies nothing
how much a man gains if it be at the expence of his life. That
our Lord has a principal eye to the loss of the soul, or eternal
life, there can be no doubt ; but the word i/<vx*} includes both
meanings, and the sentiment is therefore couched, under a pro
verb, which in familiar use concerns only the present life. The
Greeks had similar maxims. Hom. II. I. 401. Ov ydp ipol
ipvxvc dvrd£,iov, oiiS' baa rpaalv "iXtov iKrrjaQai ev vaiopsvov
TTToXt£c?pov. Eurip. Supp. 784. tovto ydp povov fiporolg Ovk
'ian r dvdXwp dvaXwQiv Xafislv ^vxijv (BporEiav. The phrase
ZripioiiaQat ri)v ipvxvv, which Grotius thinks bad Greek, occurs
in Herod. VII. 37. Philo de Temulent. p. 243. Agathias III.
ri Se KEpSavovjUEV airaaav ri)v IlEpcriSa 7rpocrXajUj3dvovT£e, rde Se
\pvxdg iXripiwpivoi ; To complete the ellipsis the preposition Eig
should be supplied, as in Themist. Orat. VII. p. 97. ovk Eig XP*J~
para Z,ripiwOEig. The word dvrdXXay/xa signifies a thing given
in exchange, a ransom. Eurip. Orest. 1155. dvrdXXay/xa yEv-
vaiov (piXov. So in Joseph. B. J. I. 13. Ant XV. 13. Camp
bell, Wetstein, Elsner, Kypke.
Ver. 27. Iv ry S6%y roil irarpbg avrov. That is, in the bright
glory of the Shechinah, wherein the angel Jehovah was accus
tomed to appear under the old covenant. Compare Matt. xxv.
31. John xviii. 5. Grotius, Schoettgen. Our Lord, in this
and the following verse, evidently alludes to two distinct mani
festations of his glory. The first, in which he will pass sentence
upon every man according to his works, can be no other than
his coming to judge the world at the last day, and the expressions
employed are exactly parallel to those which are unquestionably
meant of the judgment, as Matt. xxv. 31. Rom. ii. 6. 16.
2 Thess. i. 7. Jude 14. Rev. xxii. 12. whereas the latter was to
take place during the life-time of some who were then near him.
There are some, indeed, who understand both verses in reference
to the same event, viz. the destruction of the Jewish nation,
which took place about forty years after. If the words be taken
in this signification, the angels must either denote those destroy
ing angels whom he would employ to execute his vengeance
upon Jerusalem, or the Apostles and ministers who were to set
up the future kingdom of the Gospel dispensation ; and the re
tributive justice displayed can be only understood in a limited
sense. But the explanation is far more generally received, which
refers the two verses to different events, and as the argument is
not impaired, or the connection hindered by such an interpreta
tion, there can be little doubt that it is correct. See above, on v.

MATTHEW XVI. 28. 205
21. Still there, is a question as to the particular display of his
glory, which our Lord promises in the last verse. Some refer it
to our Lord's ascension into Heaven, and the first preaching of
the Gospel upon the descent of the Holy Ghost ; others to the
signal display of his power in the destruction of Jerusalem ; and
others again, to the Transfiguration. In the first of these inter
pretations there is no allusion to our Lord's coming to judg
ment, so that the connection between the two verses is entirely
lost. With respect to the second opinion, it is certain that the
divine vengeance, which was shortly to burst upon Jerusalem, is
frequently represented in similar terms with those employed in
this place. So Mark xiii. 26. Luke xxi. 31. John xv. 22. Heb.
x. 37. Rev. i. 7. In Luke xix. 27. also this advent is introduced
as a proof of Christ's second coming to judgment ; and in Matt.
xxiv. the destruction of the Jews is connected throughout with
the proceedings of the last day in the most emphatic manner.
Still there are circumstances which seem to decide strongly in
favour of the other opinion. Our Lord declares that some of his
disciples then present would be witnesses of the glorious appear
ance in question, whereas it is not known that any except St.
John survived the fall of Jerusalem. Now, although nvEg may
be used indefinitely of one individual, still an event took place
only a few days subsequent to Christ's declaration, at which
three of his chosen followers were present, and were witnesses
to his transfiguration into the glorified appearance which he
would assume at his second coming. It is more reasonable,
therefore, to refer the prediction to that occurrence, which is
described in the same terms as St. John applies to the Son of
Man in his state of glory in Heaven, Rev. i. 13. sqq. His ap
pearance, too, after being transfigured, is called his glory in
Luke ix. 32. - St. John uses the same expression : We have
seen his glory, as of the only begotten of the Father, &c. John
i. 14. Compare also 2 Pet. i. 16. sqq. The objection that so
short an interval occurring between the prediction and its fulfil
ment, is scarcely consistent with the emphatic assurance, there
be some standing here who shall not see death, is of no great
weight. The expression is merely a strong affirmative suited to
the solemnity of the occasion. Macknight, Porteus. — [Whitby,
Grotius, Hammond, &c]
Ver. 28. The expression yEiiEaOai Oavdrov is a Hebraism,
synonymous with which are OstopElv tov Odvarov, John viii. 51.
and iSeiv Odvarov, Luke ii. 26. Heb. xi. 5. In the classic writers
also the verb yEiiEaOai is employed in a like signification with diffe
rent nouns. Arist. Ran. 465. ov pi) Siarp'npyg, dXXd yEvaai rrig
¦Qiipag. Soph. Txach. 1108. poxOwv pvplwv iyEvadpiiv. Schol.
1. c. lyEvcrdttrjv- I7r£tpd<r0rjv, Trapav ectxov. Hesych. yevsaOai-
VEipdaai, fyaaOai. Compare also Soph. Ant. 1005. Eurip.

206 MATTHEW XVII. 1, 2.
Hipp. 667. Alcest. 1069. Here. F. 1356. Lycoph. Cass. 382.
The expression frequently occurs in the Rabbinical writings.
So Tertull. adv. Marcion. III. 149. Qui nondum debita mortis
gustavit, quoniam rursum venturus in orbem est.

CHAPTER XVII.
Contents : — The transfiguration of Christ, vv. 1 — 13. [Mark
ix. 2. Luke ix. 28.] A deaf and dumb spirit cast out, vv.
14 — 21. [Mark. ix. 14. Luke ix. 37.] Christ again foretells
his death and resurrection, vv. 22, 23. [Mark ix. 30. Luke ix.
43.] He procures by miracle the money to pay tribute at
Capernaum, vv. 24 — 27.
Verse 1 . peO' i)pipag 'e%. So Mark ix. 2. but Luke diaEl i)pi-
pai oKriii. But, not to mention the latitude allowed by the ad
verb wcra, the difference between the Evangelists may be ac
counted for by supposing that the computation of Matthew and
Mark was exclusive, and of Luke inclusive. (See Home.)
There is a parallel instance in Sueton. Galb. 17., where we are
told that Piso, before he was murdered, lived six days in the
character of Caesar ; and Piso himself, in his speech to his sol
diers, mentions the same space of time : Tacit. Hist. I. 29. Sex-
tus dies agitur, Commilitones, ex quo, eye. In Tacit. Hist. I.
29., however, it is stated that he was Caesar only four days ; and
so also in ch. 19. Macknight. The scene of the transfigura
tion was, probably, Mount Tabor. See Home's Introd. Vol.
III. p. 50.
Ver. 2. pETEpopiptoOrj. The signification in which this word
is applied by Ovid and other writers, as denoting a change in
substance, as well as appearance, is well known. It is clear
that it is here confined to a change of external appearance only.
Luke ix. 28. rb slSog roll irpoadnrov avrov ETEpov lylvEro. In a
similar acceptation it is used by iElian V. H. I. 1. Wetstein,
Macknight. [qn the transfiguration.
Some of the foreign divines have endeavoured to represent
this important and wonderful event as nothing more than an il
lusive vision, which the Apostles saw in their sleep. The inter
pretation is in perfect keeping with the system, which would
deny all supernatural agency whatever in the history of the N. T.,

MATTHEW XVII. 2. 207
but it is so perfectly at variance with the natural sense and con
comitant circumstances of the case, that every candid enquirer
will convince himself at once of its fallacy. The transaction
itself was intended to effect several most important purposes.
In the first place, it was designed as the fulfilment of that pro
mise which our Lord had given to his disciples six days before,
that some of them should be witnesses of the glory in which he
would appear at the last day, as the universal Judge, and reward
every man according to his works. See on Matt. xvi. 27.
There is indeed no direct symbol of our Saviour's resurrection
in the transfiguration, but as Jesus is there represented in his
glorified state, which he was to reassume after his resurrection,
that event must be supposed to have previously taken place ; and
those important doctrines which are founded upon it, a general
resurrection, and a day of retribution, axe expressly represented.
In confirmation of these truths, Moses and Elias, who had long
before departed out of the world, are brought back to it again,
and by the state of glory in which they appeared, (Luke ix. 31.)
a glory somewhat similar, we may suppose, though far inferior,
to that with which Christ was invested, afforded a visible de
monstration of the rewards which the just would inherit in a
future life. It is to be remarked, also, that these great per
sonages were not only seen but heard conversing with Jesus,
and it appears from St. Luke that the subject of their conversa
tion was Christ's death at Jerusalem, including most probably a
variety of important topics with which it was connected, such as
the nature, cause, and consequence of the atonement, and, in fact,
the whole scheme of the redemption of mankind. This would
naturally occasion a great change in the sentiments of the Apos
tles respecting the sufferings which Christ was shortly to un
dergo, and soften those prejudices which they still entertained in
regard, to the nature of his kingdom, and the removal of which
seems to have been another of the immediate objects of the transfi
guration. It was farther intended to signify, in afigurative manner,
the cessation of the Jewish, and the commencement of the Chris
tian dispensation; and thus to vanquish the prepossessions of
the disciples in favour of the perpetual duration of the Mosaic
law, the entire constitution of which, ceremonial as well as moral,
they placed on an equal footing with the dispensation of the
Gospel. We may conceive, therefore, that Moses, as the repre
sentative of the law, and Elijah as the chief of the prophets,
came to render up their authority into the hands of Christ, as
the end of the law, and to whom all the prophets bore witness.
It seems, indeed, from Peter's proposal in v. 4,. that the Apos
tles at first construed the presence of these illustrious personages
into a confirmation of their opinions, as if they were of equal
dignity and authority with Christ himself: but their immediate
departure, and the voice from heaven commanding attention to

208 MATTHEW XVII. 2.
Christ alone, in evident allusion to Deut. xviii. 15. tended to
undeceive them, and eventually, though not instantly, convinced
them, that the Levitical ceremonies were abolished, and the pro
phecies fulfilled.
Such appears to have been the design of the Transfiguration :
— it remains to notice a few particulars of the transaction. — 1 .
Some fanciful reasons have been assigned by some of the com
mentators, for his taking with him only three of his disciples.
But as the law required only two or three witnesses to establish
a regular and judicial proof, our Saviour frequently chose to have
only this number at some of the most important and interesting
scenes of his life. The same three seem to have been always
selected upon these occasions ; and as they were now witnesses
of his glory, so they were afterwards of his agony in the garden ;
Matt. xxvi. 37. John was his beloved Apostle ; James, his
brother, would naturally be brought under his more frequent
notice ; and the zealous and attached, though rash and inconsi
derate, Peter, could not but hold a high place in his esteem.
Upon the present occasion, however, he was the very person who
had expressed himself with so much indignation on the subject
of our Saviour's sufferings, and it was, therefore, more especially
necessary that he should be admitted to a spectacle, which was
so well calculated to remove those impressions from his mind. —
2. It appears from Luke ix. 32. that the Apostles were asleep
during the early part of the transaction. This may have arisen
from fatigue, more especially as the occurrence seems to have taken
place in the night ; for it was not till the next day (Luke ix. 37.)
that they came down from the mount. At all events, we are
told in the same verse, that they were awake, when they saw
Moses and Elias talking with Jesus : so that their temporary
sleep does not at all favour the idea that the whole representation
was a dream or vision. It may not have been proper for them
to have seen the manner in which our Lord assumed his glorious
form, and therefore the Transfiguration was complete, before they
were allowed to witness it. — 3. It has been disputed whether the
presence of Moses and Elias was a bodily, or merely a visionary
appearance. There seems, however, to be no reason to doubt
that they actually appeared in their own persons : and it has
been affirmed, that their bodies were reserved for this very pur
pose. With respect to Elias, who did not see death, but was
taken up into heaven, (2 Kings ii. 11.) there is no difficulty;
nor is there any reason to suppose that the body, in which Moses
appeared, was otherwise than real. The place of his burial was
indeed unknown, and his body is said to have disappeared, (d<pa-
viaOr)vai, Joseph. Ant. IV. 8.); in accordance with which is the
Jewish tradition, that he ascended, and ministered to God in
heaven : Pesikta, p. 23, 1. Still it is certain that he was buried
in a valley in the land of Moab, Deut. xxxiv. 6. and therefore

MATTHEW XVII. 2. 209
must have seen corruption. But it was as easy for Omnipotence
to restore life and form to a body mouldered into dust, as to
re-animate a body that was preserved uncorrupted and entire ;
and this, indeed, would be a much exacter emblem of our own
resurrection. It will be readily admitted, therefore, that Elias,
having been carried into heaven without undergoing death, was
here a proper representative of those who shall be found alive
at the last day ; as Moses was of those who died, and will be raised
to life again. The Apostles were informed of the identity of
Moses and Elias, either by revelation, or by the tenor of their
conversation, or by the appellations which were given them by
Christ. — 4. It is not possible, in our present state of existence,
to comprehend the nature of the change which took place in our
Lord's appearance upon this occasion. The cloud, which over
shadowed the mount, was the well-known token of the divine
presence, which had frequently been seen under the law, more
especially at its delivery upon Mount Sinai. But there was one
marked difference in these manifestations of the Shechinah. On
Mount Sinai, the cloud was dark and thick, and attended with
the most awful circumstances, (Exod. xix. 16.): whereas, at the
Transfiguration, it was bright and luminous, and the voice of the
Father was heard from it, expressive of the most heavenly bene
volence, and of the mild influence of that dispensation which his
beloved Son was about to establish. Still it was the voice of
God, full of the divine majesty, and such as mortal ears could
not support : and the fear of the Apostles, who fell to the ground
in consequence, was analogous to the effect produced upon si
milar occasions upon the prophets of the Old Covenant. Com
pare Gen. xv. 12. Isaiah vi. 5. Ezek. ii. 1. Dan. x. 8. Rev.
i. 17. — 5. There seems to be a peculiar propriety in the charge
which Christ, upon this occasion, gave his Apostles, not to
divulge what they had seen till after his resurrection ; since the
abolition of the Jewish law, which it was one object of the
Transfiguration to typify, was one of those truths which the first
converts were unable to bear. Great numbers of them, who
firmly believed in Christ, were as firmly persuaded of the obli
gation of the Mosaical ordinances ; arid this prejudice continued
in such force long after the death of Christ, as to call for the
most laborious exertions of the Apostles to eradicate it. No
wonder, then, that at this period Jesus should think proper to
prevent the general promulgation of an event, which, by directly
opposing this prejudice, was calculated to produce the most
unfavourable results. An opinion also prevailed among the
Jews, that the Messiah was to abide for ever, (John xii. 34.) ;
so that the disciples did not yet comprehend his allusion to his
death, and reasoned among themselves what his rising from the
dead should mean ; Mark ix. 10. But though Christ forbade
the immediate disclosure of this transaction, there was still a
vol. i. r

210 MATTHEW XVII. 4.
circumstance, riot generally noticed, to which they might after
wards appeal, in confirmation of the truth of it, at any future
period. It appears from Mark ix. 15. that when the people
beheld him after his descent from the mount, they were greatly
amazed. It is not improbable, that, as the face of Moses shone
several hours after he had been with God on Mount Sinai,
(Exod. xxxiv. 1 0.) so something of the glory of the Transfigu
ration remained on our Lord's countenance, which attracted
their surprize and veneration. — 6. Lastly, the Transfiguration
affords a strong argument in favour of the reality of the world of
spirits. It is not possible for man in this state of being to
determine the condition of departed souls ; but it is not impro
bable that they still exist in a state of consciousness, and take a
lively interest in the actions and thoughts of those with whom
they were connected in this life. Porteus, Macknight,
Whitby, A. Clarke, &c.]

Ver. 4. Kvpts, KaXov iariv k. t. X. Peter fancied, no doubt,
that Jesus had now assumed his proper dignity, that Elias had
come according to Malachi's prediction, and that the Messiah's
kingdom had at length begun. He therefore proposed, in the
hurried fervour of his imagination, to provide some accommoda
tion for his Master and the august visitors who had joined him ;
and whom he believed to be equal in dignity with himself. This
seems to be implied in the words not knowing what he said,
Luke ix. 37. Peter knew well enough that he said these words,
but he was mistaken in supposing that Moses and Elias would
remain with them any longer than the object of their appearance
was established. It was also in evident allusion to the unex
pected departure of these extraordinary visitants that the dis
ciples put the question to Jesus, on their descent from the
Mount, respecting the tradition that Elias would appear before
the coming of the Messiah, which they could not reconcile with
so short a stay. Of this tradition see on Matt. xi. 14. That a
similar persuasion prevailed in regard to Moses is proved from
Debarim Rabba, §. 3. p. 255, 2. The holy blessed God said to
Moses, As thou in thy lifetime devotedst thyself to the Is
raelites under the old covenant, so under the new covenant, i. e.
in the times of the Messiah, when I send Elijah the prophet unto
them, ye too shall appear at the same time. See also Tanchuma,
p. 42, 1. Macknight, Schoettgen, Lightfoot. The word
aKrivr), which the E. T. renders Tabernacle, should be more
properly translated tent, or booth. What Peter meant to erect
was a sort of temporary shed, made of the branches of trees
which abounded in the mountainous parts of Judea, and of
which the tents were made at the feast of Tabernacles. Camp
bell, Kuinoel. 11

MATTHEW XVII. 5. 9. 11. 211
Ver. 5. vEipiXri <piiir6g. This reading is authorised by only a
few MSS. but Griesbach has received it instead of the vulgar
lection vE<piXri (pwrEivr), upon the principle that a more difficult
construction is seldom substituted for an easier one, though the
marginal explanation of an unusual phrase has frequently found
its way into the text. There seems to be no great reason for
the change, but the meaning is the same in either case. See
Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 375, 2. The word iiriaKidZ,Eiv is not properly
rendered to overshadow : it signifies rather to surround, a sense
which it also bears in Psalm xc. 4. cxxxix. 7. LXX. where the
corresponding Hebrew word is T)D. Some interpreters refer
the pronoun aiiroiig to Christ, Moses, and Elias ; but others,
more properly, to all present. Kuinoel, Le Clerc, A. Clarke.
Ver. 9. opapa. This word implies any vision, whether it be
represented to the eyes of sleeping or of waking men. The
latter sense is plainly appropriated to it in this passage, from
Mark ix. 9. where the expression employed is d eISov. Luke
has 67rracriav. Hesych. opatta- Oiapa. Kuinoel, Whitby.
Ver. 11. aTTOKaraarriaEi irdvra. E. T. He shall restore all
things. The verb diroKaOtardvai signifies either to restore, or
to complete ; and, in reference to this double meaning, the clause
has been variously rendered. Some understand it to imply he
shall regulate all things, others he shall finish, ox put an end to
all things, i. e. the Jewish dispensation ; and others, again, in
clude both senses. There seems, however, to be an indirect al
lusion to the prophecy in Mai. iv. 5, 6. where the same verb is
employed by the LXX ; so that our Lord has applied to a general
reformation of morals what the prophet illustrated by a particular
instance. It has been objected, however, that the success which
attended the preaching of John was not adequate to the idea
which would be naturally formed from the prophecies concerning
him, and this declaration of our Lord, that he would restore all
things. It is true, indeed, that he did not effect a complete re
formation in religion and morals, and that his exhortations were
insufficient to remove the prejudices of the Jewish nation. But
it should rather seem that the design of the Baptist's ministry,
and not its positive effect, is foretold, for the threatening turn of
the prophecy will scarcely admit of the inference, that his endea
vours would meet with unlimited success. The effects which did
actually attend his preaching will convince every unbiassed en
quirer of the complete fulfilment of the intention of the prophecy.
See Matt. iii. 1 — 7., and especially Luke iii. 3. sqq. where we
find that a general reformation had taken place among the com
mon people, the publicans, and the soldiers. To another objec
tion that diroKaraarfiaEi is in the future, and therefore cannot
apply to the Baptist, who had been some time dead, it is replied,
p2

212 MATTHEW XVII. 12. 14, 15. 17.
that in Matt. xi. 14. also the Baptist is designated as tlie Elias,
b piXXwv ipxtaQai, in reference to the prediction of Malachi,
and the tradition founded thereon. In the next verse, too, the
aorist ^X0e is used ; and it is plain from v. 13. that the Apostles
perceived the meaning of Christ; although at a subsequent period,
(Acts i. 6.) they appear to have understood the restoration of all
things, of the revival of the kingdom of David in their nation,
to be accomplished by the assistance of Elias. Macknight,
Hammond, Grotius, &c. — [Le Clerc, Mede, &c]
Ver. 12. ovk l7rlyvctJ(rav avrov. They did not recognise him ;
i. e. they rejected him, viz. the Jewish rulers and Herod ; but
there were many, on the other hand, who would have even re
ceived him as the Messiah himself. Compare Exod. v. 2. 1 Sam.
ii. 12. Jerem. ii. 8. The verb woieIv is used both in a good and
bad sense, to treat well, as in Malt. xxv. 4. and to treat ill, as in
this place and Gen. xxii. 12. Psalm lvi. 5. LXX. The expres
sion 7roiEiv Iv avrtjJ is a Hebraism. Some MSS. omit the prepo
sition, as in Mark ix. 13. An illustration of the words Sera i)0i-
Xriaav is afforded by Xen. Cyrop. II. 4. 19. aEroe rbv Xayw
dirEVEyKtov iirl Xoipov rivd oil irpoaw, ixprjro ry dypq o ti ?jc?eXev.
Compare Luke xxiii. 25. Kuinoel, Markland.
Ver. 14. yovv7TETttiv. Falling at his knees. Compare Luke v.
8. The ancients consecrated the ear to memory, the forehead
to genius, the right hand to faith, and the knees to mercy. This
advolutio ad genua was distinct from kneeling. Grotius,
Wakefield. See my notes on Hom. II. A. 407. E. 357.
Ver. 15. a-EXrjvtd^Erat. E. T. He is lunatic. It seems from the
effects here described, compared with the additional symptoms men
tioned in Markix. 18. that the disease was epilepsy rather than
lunacy. Celsus Aurel. deMorb. Chron. i. 4. ffli(eni\eritici)publicis
in locis cadendo foedantur , adjunctis etiam externispericulis, loci
causa prcecipites dati, aut in flumina vel mare cadentes. See
also Celsus, de Medicin. III. 23. During the paroxysm those
afflicted with this disease are deprived of their, senses, neither
can they articulate plainly. There is little doubt, therefore,
that the young man was thus afflicted, and the word here used is
descriptive of the influence which the moon is supposed to pos
sess on this sort of malady. It appears from v. 18. that the
disease in this case was the infliction of a daemon, a power with
which evil spirits were especially invested about the period of
Christ's ministry. Campbell, Kuinoel, Hammond, &c.
Ver. 17. ev ysvEa dwiarog ko! Sisarpappivri. There is consi
derable difference of opinion respecting the persons to whom
this rebuke was addressed. Some refer it to the disciples, but
10

MATTHEW XVII. 20. 213
although the epithet dirtarog may apply to them, (comp. v. 20.)
still it is clear that SiEarpappivri cannot : for whatever their fail
ings might be, they were not the result of obstinacy and per
verseness. Others suppose that the father and relations of the
possessed are intended ; but it is hardly consistent to confine
within such narrow limits an expression which our Lord seems
to have borrowed from Deut. xxxii. 30. where it is used of the
whole Jewish nation, and so applied by St. Paul in Phil. ii. 15.
There is also another opinion, which refers the words to the
Scribes, who seem to have been present upon the occasion, and
it is not improbable that their artful representations of the inve
teracy of the disorder, had produced that weakness of faith in the
disciples which prevented them from effecting the cure. But
the more probable solution is that the Scribes were particularly
addressed, yet in such a manner that the whole multitude were
included in the rebuke, not excepting even the disciples. Dod
dridge, Beausobre, Kypke, Kuinoel, &c. — [Whitby, Rosen
muller, Macknight.] In pure Greek the adjectives iriarbg
and diriarog axe properly passive in their signification.; denoting
one who may be trusted, and the reverse : and so they are some
times used in the N. T. Compare Matt. xxiv. 45. xxv. 21. 23.
Luke xii. 46. But the Hellenistic usage is more commonly
active; implying, one who believes, or confides, in another. The
participle StEarpappivog signifies perverse, whether in mind or
morals ; opposed to the sense in which EvOiig is sometimes em
ployed. Acts viii. 21 . r) KapSla aov oiiK'ian EvQtla ivwiriov rov
Geov. So Psalm vii. 12. x. 2. LXX. Euthym. SiEarpappivri' pr)
voovaa to ev6u. The metaphor is taken from distorted vision.
Soph. Aj. 446. bppa Kat tppivEg Sidarpotpot. Grotius, Kypke.
The two interrogative exclamations which follow this address,
are strongly expressive of our Lord's impatience at the continued
infidelity and perverseness of the Scribes, after the repeated
miracles which he had worked among them.
Ver. 20. dig kokkov awd7r£ti>e. From St. Paul's declaration,
1 Cor. xiii. 2. some eminent critics understand by faith as a
grain of mustard-seed, the greatest possible degree of faith ; and
others, from the parable in Matt. xiii. 32. a faith, thriving and
increasing as that grain. But the evident scope of our Lord's
words is at variance with the former of these interpretations ;
and it is not easy to discover the analogy upon which the latter
rests ; since the increase in the parable, is that of the tree, not
of the seed. It has already been observed on that passage, that
a grain of mustard-seed was a proverbial comparison for any
thing extremely small. The Rabbis say ; The globe of the
earth is but as a grain of mustard-seed, when compared ivith the
expanse of the heavens. To remove mountains also, was an
hyperbolical expression, denoting the accomplishment of any

214 MATTHEW XVII. 21.
thing, seemingly impossible. Compare Zech. xiv. 4. Hence
their most eminent teachers, who were remarkable for the depth
of their learning and acquirements, were termed rooters up of
mountains. Thus in Beracoth, p. 64, 1. Rabh Joseph is
Sinai, and Rabbah is a rooter up of mountains ; which is thus
explained in the Gloss : They called Rabh Joseph Sinai, because
he was very skilful in clearing of difficulties ; and Rabbah Bar
Nehemani a rooter up of mountains, because he had a piercing
judgment. Grotius, Lightfoot, Whitby. — [Wakefield,
A. Clarke.]
Ver. 21. tovto Se to yivog k. t. X. Scil. Saipoviwv. Some
commentators, however, supply irlarEwg, rendering the verb
lK7rop£v£er0at, for which Mark has e%eX0e"iv, to advance, or to
improve ; so that the sense would be, The faith, which produces
these results, is only nourished by prayer and fasting. But the
authorities which have been produced to justify the version
affixed to these verbs are altogether inconclusive ; whereas they
are constantly used in the N. T. in reference to the ejection of
daemons. Besides, the application of yivog to an abstract qua
lity, such as faith, can scarcely be admitted ; whereas its appli
cation to different orders of beings is perfectly common, not to
mention that in the parallel passage, Mark ix. 29. there is nothing
but the word dcemon, to which it can refer. To this interpreta
tion it has been objected, that it supposes different kinds of
daemons. By this kind, however, it is not necessary to under
stand this kind of dcemons ; but this kind, or order of beings,
called daemons, as Chrysostom and Theophylact explain the
passage. Thus ylvoe rwv dvQptoirwv is used for dvOpwiroi, as
in Latin, genus mortalium for mortales ; Phaed. II. 1. Vipereum
genus for viperce ; Virg. iEn. VII. 753. At the same time, we
cannot affirm that the daemons were all of one kind; and that
some daemons were more malignant than others, may be in
ferred from Matt. xii. 45. ; to expel which a proportionate
exertion of faith may have been required. Another objection is,
that, whereas in v. 20. the power of expulsion is attributed
solely to faith, it is here ascribed to prayer and fasting. But
this is easily reconciled. Prayer and fasting could have no re
lation to the ejection of daemons, except so far as they tended to
encrease the faith of them, on whom that power had been con
ferred : Matt. x. 1. But if prayer and fasting are necessary
to the attainment of faith, and the daemons could not be ejected
vrithoatfaith, they could not, by consequence, be ejected without
prayer and fasting. This is clearly our Lord's meaning ; and it
is strictly conformable to the logical rule : Quod est causa causae,
est etiam causa causali. As a matter of curiosity, it may be
added, that instead of Iv TrpoerEvxip Kat vriarslq, it has been pro
posed to read Iv 7rpocr£X£t vrjcrrEta, by constant fasting ; in refer-

MATTHEW XVII. 22. 21. 215
ence to the necessity of continued abstinence on the part of the
patient, in order to the cure of the disease. But this is mere
conjecture ; nor is the sense which it yields, either natural in itself,
or pertinent to the occasion. Our Lord would scarcely speak
of ordinary means of cure, in answer to the Apostles' demand,
why they could not miraculously perform it. The whole verse
is wanting in the Vatican, and a few other MSS. and Versions ;
but is acknowledged by those of greatest authority; nor is
there a single copy without it in Mark ix. 29. Doddridge, Ra-
phelius, Munthe, Kuinoel, Whitby, &c. — [Knatchbull,
Bowyer, Sykes.]
Ver. 22. dvaarpErpopivwv. E. T. While they abode ; and
_ such is sometimes the import of this verb, as in Josh. v. 5. LXX ;
but it should be translated, as they passed through. Hesych.
avaarpEipopEvog' WEpiEpxbpEvog. So Polyb. III. 33. KaO' ovg
Kaipoiig iv rote Kara TJ7V 'IraXtav avEarpirpEro. WETSTEIN. The
verb 7rapaSiSo<r0at should here be rendered to be delivered up, not
to be betrayed ; the agency being referred to God, according to
whose counsel Christ was to be made an atonement for the sins
of the world : Acts iv. 27. At the same time, the instrumenta
lity of Judas may also be included. See on Matt. x. 4. Ham
mond, Grotius. It appears from Luke ix. 43. that the disci
ples were exceedingly amazed at the extraordinary power of their
Master, exhibited in the last miracle ; and their wonder was, in
all probability, accompanied with proportionably high expecta
tions of aggrandizement in that temporal kingdom, the establish
ment of which they could not cease to anticipate. Jesus, there
fore, thought proper to moderate their ambitious hopes, by again
predicting his sufferings ; a prediction, which he now frequently
repeated, that, when the event took place, they might remember
that he prepared them for it. From Mark ix. 32. it appears, that
they understood not that saying, and could not reconcile it with
their prejudices and expectations ; but they feared to ask an ex
planation, remembering that he had reprimanded Peter for being
unwilling to bear it. Macknight.

*e

Ver. 24. ot rd SiSpaxpa XapfidvovrEg. Those who collect the
didrachmas, that is, the tax so called ; the plural being used in
reference to the numbers from whom it was severally collected.
It has been thought that this was the poll-tax levied by the
Romans, after Judaea had been reduced into the form of a pro
vince, and which was remitted to the Jews by Agrippa, in the
reign of Claudius. On this supposition, the import of the ques
tion put to Peter coincides with that put to Christ himself by the
Pharisees in Matt. xxii. 17. But it is much more probable that
it was the half shekel paid for the service of the temple by all the
Jewish males above twenty years old, and which Vespasian

216 MATTHEW XVII. 25. 27.
afterwards obliged them to pay to the capitol at Rome. Of both
these taxes, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 183. sq. That
this last is the true interpretation, is strongly proved by the sum
demanded : for the Attic drachma was the fourth part of a shekel,
and therefore the didrachma, or half-shekel, precisely the amount
which the tax imposed. The LXX indeed, on Exod. xxx. 13.
have TJjttterv rov StSpdxjuov, half a didrachm ; but the Alexan
drian didrachm was double the common didrachm. Besides
our Lord's argument, that as Son of the Great King, to whom
the tribute was paid, he could justly have excused himself, is far
more conclusive in reference to the contribution made for the
service of God. It seems too, from the question put to Peter,
that the tribute in question was voluntary, rather than exacted :
and such appears to have been the case from Nehem. x. 32. So
also in the Talmud, Tit. Shekel, §. 2. it is said : On the fifteenth
day of the month Adar, the collectors sit in the cities to receive
this tax, and on the twenty-fifth, they sit in the temple ; they re
ceive from him who gives ; but he that does not give, is not com
pelled. With respect to the objection, that the payment of the
half-shekel was made about the feast of the Passover, which was
now past : it appears from the Talmud, ubi supra, that the pay
ments were by no means regularly made. The persons who col
lected this tribute, were not publicans ; but the diroaroXoi,
employed by the priests to receive the dues of the temple.
Lightfoot, Whitby, Grotius. — [Beza.]
Ver. 25. £ter»jX0£v. Scil. Peter. Jesus seems to have en
tered the house previously to the question of the tax-gatherer ;
but being aware of what had passed, he anticipated Peter, by
opening a conversation respecting it. The word riXri signifies
impost or custom, Ki/vaog, poll-tax. Schol. II. K. 56. riXog'
rryv Ik Ttov iirEiaayopivwv wviwv (poirioaav ralg iroXiai irpoaoSov.
Hesych. Kijveroe" hriKEtpaXalov. They are here used together
for taxes generally. Kuinoel.
Ver. 27. "va Si pi) aKavSaXiawpsv. Namely, by giving oc
casion to imagine that any slight is intended to the Temple and
its service ; or lest others, in far different circumstances, should
be induced thereby to omit the contribution. The stater, as it
appears from this text, was a piece of coin equal in value to two
didrachmas. There is no reason to suppose, with Schmidius,
that the piece was created on this occasion, as the fish might
have swallowed it accidentally. Instances of coins, jewels, &c.
which had been casually dropped into the sea, being found in
the bowels of fishes, are by no means uncommon. Herod. III.
42. tov Si txOiiv rapvovrsg ol OspdirovrEg, EvpiaKOvai iv rr)
vriSvi avrov iviovaav ri)v IIoXvKpdTOve arppayiSa. The om
niscience of Christ, in knowing that the fish had gorged the

MATTHEW XVIII. 1. 217
stater, and his omnipotence in directing that particular fish to
Peter's hook, are sufficient evidence of his creative power, had
it been necessary to make the money for his present purpose.
At all events, by paying the tribute he gave his disciples this
important lesson, that in matters of minor consideration it is
better to recede somewhat from their just rights, than by stub
bornly insisting on them to offend their brethren, or disturb the
state. Doddridge, Macknight.

CHAPTER XVIII.
Contents: — Tlie Disciples contend for superiority, vv. 1 — 6.
The evil and punishment of offences, vv. 7 — 11. Parable of
the lost sheep , w . 12 — 14. Forgiveness of injuries enjoined,
w. 15 — 22. Parable of the servant-debtors, vv. 23 — 35.
[Mark ix. 33. Luke ix. 46.]
Verse 1. pEiZ,wv. The comparative is here used for the po
sitive, reuv dXXwv being understood. SeeonilfaW.xi.il. There
is an apparent contradiction in this transaction, as it is related
by Matthew and Mark respectively. According to the former,
the disciples themselves lay the subject of their dispute before
Jesus for his decision, but St. Mark represents them as back
ward to mention it, though Jesus requested it, because they were
conscious that it would occasion a reproof. Now all matters of
dispute admit, from their very nature, of two different represen
tations : those of the disciples who had laid claim to superiority,
and given rise to the dissention, in all probability expected a
rebuke, and were therefore ashamed and silent when questioned
by Jesus ; while those who considered themselves attacked, and
only maintained their equality with those who asserted their su
perior dignity, had not hesitated to refer the decision of the case
to their Master. Hence arise two different views of the matter,
which will at once account for the discrepancy between the
Evangelists. St. Matthew, who was probably of the latter
class, having been originally a publican, and never particularly
distinguished among the Apostles, relates the circumstance, as
he had been more immediately concerned in it. Mark, on the
other hand, receiving the account from St. Peter, who, from
being one of the disciples more especially favoured by our Lord,
had probably been one of the other party, relates it as more di
rectly applicable to his own view of the case. Thus one records
one part, and the other another part of the transaction, but

218 MATTHEW XVIII. 5, 6.
though neither relate the whole, there is no inconsistency in
what they do relate. Other solutions of the difficulty have
been proposed, but this seems to be the most satisfactory.
Michaelis. It is worthy of observation, that the ambitious dis
putes of the disciples generally followed the mention of Christ's
death and resurrection. Compare Matt. xx. 18 — 20. Luke xxii.
22 — 24. Now, although they could not suppress their sorrow
at the prospect of their Master's sufferings, still the expectation
of the establishment of the Messiah's kingdom, which they con
nected with the resurrection, (see on Matt. xvi. 13.) induced
them to look forward to their own aggrandisement, and to cal
culate upon the respective promotion of each. To check these
foolish emulations Jesus upon this occasion adopted a method
of teaching agreeable to the manner of the Eastern doctors, who
were wont to instruct their disciples by symbolical actions as
well as by words. He placed a child before them, as an ex
ample of that humility, meekness, innocence, and docility, which
would alone entitle them to the glories of his kingdom. Similar
instances of this mode of illustration occur in John xiii. 4, 5. 14.
xx. 22. Acts xxi. 11. Rev. xviii. 21. There is a tradition pre
served by Nicephorus, that the child whom Jesus presented to
them was the martyr Ignatius. Lightfoot, Macknight, A.
Clarke.
Ver. 5. iraiSiov roioiirov. As in the preceding verses our
Lord considers a little child as an emblem of a genuine disciple,
so by the term in this verse he means a disciple only. Euthym.
rjyovv, Eva rivd ysvopEvov cue 7ratStov toiovtov, Xlyeo Si) rairsivbv
Kat evteXi} Kat dirEppipivov. In the same sense piKpol is used
in the next verse. See on Matt. x. 40. 42. Grotius, A.
Clarke.
Ver. 6. oe S' idv aKavSaXiay k. t. X. That is, throw a
scandal in his way, so as to cause him to fall off from the faith.
See on Matt. v. 27. xi. 5. Hence there is no truth in the doc
trine maintained by some, that those who once truly believe in
Christ can never fall short of salvation. In this denunciation
against those who cause others to offend, there is an allusion to
the punishment of drowning, which was in frequent use among
the ancients, and seems to have grown into a proverb for dread
ful and inevitable ruin. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 155.
Whitby, Doddridge.
Ibid. pvXog bviKog. A mill-stone, turned by an ass, and con
sequently much larger than one turned by the hand. Some,
however, derive the adjective ovtKoe from bvog, which was also a
common name for the upper, as pvXr\ was for the nether mill
stone. Hesych. bvog' 6 avwrspog XiOog rov pvXov. But pvXog
alone is put by synecdoche for XiOog pvXiKog, (Mark ix. 42.) so

MATTHEW XVIII. 7. 10. 219
that the former interpretation is preferable. Ovid. Fast. VI.
318. Et quce puniceas ver sat asella molas. The phrase avp-
tyipEi avrig is for avpipipy dv avny, subaud. paXXov. Compare
Mark ix. 42. Schleusner, Kuinoel. — [Campbell.] The
noun irlXayoe, which generally denotes the sea itself, is here
the depth of the sea. Hesych. TrJXayoe' piysOog, irXriQog, (ivObg,
irXdrog OaXdaarig. So Pindar, ap. Plutarch. Sympos. Vii. 5.
Iv 7tovtov TTEXdya. Achill. Tat. I. p. 7. rfje Se QaXdrrrig r)
Xpotd SnrXfj" to jttEv ydp 7rpoe rr)v yrjv iiiripvOpov, Kal KvdvEov to
irpbg rb iriXayog. Alberti, Kypke.
Ver. 7. dirb rctiv crKavSdXcav. On account of offences : such
as those, for instance, alluded to in the preceding verses, by
which we not only offend ourselves, but lead others into sin.
Of this nature are pride, ambition, evil affections, persecutions,
and the like. The preposition a7r6 is used in the same sense as
in this passage in Diod. Sic. p. 131. D. d7ro ravrrje rr)g alrlag.
Our Lord's argument is, that from the corruption of nature, the
perverseness of mankind, and the abuse of that freedom with
which as rational agents we are endowed, offences will na
turally arise ; but so great is the punishment attached to those
who cause these offences, that it is better to endure the greatest
deprivation, such as parting with a limb, than to throw the cause
of stumbling in the way of a weak brother. See on Matt. v. 27.
Macknight, Munthe.
Ver. 10. 6pdr£, pi) Kara(ppovr)ariTE k. r. X. From a general
admonition, our Lord descends to a particular warning ; namely,
against contempt or ridicule. This he enforces by two reasons ;
— 1 . from the peculiar care and affection with which God watches
over his meanest servants, sending his angels to keep them in all
their ways; and 2. from the love of Christ towards them, in
coming into the world to lay down his life for their sakes. The
particle ydp in v. 11. introduces the second reason; which must
not be understood as a proof of the former. Macknight, Kui
noel, Doddridge.
Ibid, ol dyyEXoi avriov. Some have supposed from this text,
that every good man has his particular guardian angel assigned
to him : and such was unquestionably the belief of the Jews, in
which they were followed by several of the early Fathers. See
Origen. Horn. VIII. in Genes. Tertull. de Baptisma; and
Jerome, on this place. The notion is recognized in several pas
sages of Scripture: as, for instance, Gen. xlviii. 16. Psalm
xxxiv. 7. Acts xii. 15. and sjmilar notions are found in heathen
writers. Apuleius de Deo Socrat. Ex hac sublimiore Dcemo-
num copia Plato autumat, singulis hominibus in vita agenda
testes et custodes singulos additos, qui homini conspicui semper
adsint. Plato himself, however, (de Legg. X.J maintains that

220 MATTHEW XVIII. 12. 15.
every person has two daemons, one prompting him to evil, the
other to good. Compare also Hesiod. Op. D. I. 121. Dio
Cass. XXXVII. p. 75. Plutarch. Anton. 33. Hor. Epist. II.
1. 87. But our Lord here speaks of angels in the plural, which
rather intimates that the angels in general are intended, who are
employed collectively in this labour of love, in which the highest
do not disdain to partake. Compare Heb. i. 14. Of the cus
tom here alluded to, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 90.
Whitby, Lightfoot, Doddridge. — [A. Clarke, Grotius.]
Ver. 12. idv yivryrai nvi k. t. X. In this parable our Lord
proceeds to illustrate the arguments which he had just enforced ;
and, by declaring his constant and unwearied solicitude for the
lost sheep which stray from his fold, and his joy at recovering
them, to make his hearers sensible of the sin of causing them to
stray. The expression to diroXwXbg, in the preceding verse,
seems to be equivalent with to irXaviLpEvov in this, 7rpo/3arov
being understood. Compare Matt. ix. 36. x. 6. xv. 24. A
fanciful idea is entertained by some, that there is a mysterious
reference in the number ninety-nine to the angels who sinned,
the proportion of whom to sinful men is as ninety-nine to one.
But this form of speech was very common among the Jews.
Thus in Peah. IV. 2. In distributing grapes and dates to the
poor, although ninety-nine say, " Scatter them," and only one,
" Divide them;" they hearken to him, because he speaks accord
ing to the tradition. So Schab. p. 14, 3. If ninety-nine die by
an evil eye, and but one by the hand of heaven, eye. Lightfoot,
A. Clarke. In the construction, the words l7rt rd oprj should
be joined with dipElg, not with 7rop£v0£te, as in the E. T. The
allusion is to a shepherd feeding his flock upon the mountains,
which were a frequent pasture for sheep ; not to his seeking the
lost one among the mountains. Compare 2 Chron. xviii. 16. Job
xi. 20. Ezek. xxxiv. 6. 13. So Theocr, Idyl. III. 46. Iv ovpiai
pdXa vopEwi. Virg. Eclog. II. 21. Mille mece Siculis errant in
montibus agnce. There is no ambiguity in Luke xv. 4. where Iv
to ipvpto is used, for what is here called iirl rd oprj. Campbell,
Rosenmuller. — [Beza, Schleusner.] Every circumstance in
this, as in other parables, must not be too closely pressed. Our
Lord did not mean that there is greater joy in recovering one
lost sheep, than in the possession of the ninety-nine which had
not strayed. He merely intended an emphatic representation of
the transport which a man naturally exhibits upon the sudden
recovery of a lost possession, and which, for a moment, at least,
exceeds the pleasure which he feels in the undisturbed enjoy
ment of one, even of greater value. Porteus.
Ver. 15. idv Si apaprri'ay k. t. X. From the offended, our
Lord turns to the offending party: pointing out the proper

MATTHEW XVIII. 16, 17. 221
means of reclaiming a sinner, and, in case of incorrigible perse
verance in crime, the course to be pursued in regard to him.
The first step to be taken is private reproof; in allusion most
probably to the Mosaic precept in Levit. xix. 17. to a disregard
of which the Jews attributed the ruin of their state. On this
point Cicero observes, de Senect. 24. Molesta Veritas, siquidem
ex ea nascitur odium, quod est venenum amicitice ; sed obse-
quium multo molestius, quod, peccatis indulgens, prcecipitem
amicumferri sinit. So Plautus : Amicum castigare ob meritam
noxiam Immune est f acinus, verum in cetate utile. In the ex
pression apapTEiv iig ai, the personal pronoun, if understood
definitely, will limit the meaning to personal offences, such as
anger, malice, ridicule, and the like : but it is clear that the
precept may be extended into a general application. The phrase
itself is strictly classical. Thus Thucydides : dpaprdvEi iroXXd
iig r)pdg. M. Anton. VII. 26. brav Tig dpdpry n slg ai. It
is also observable, that the verb KEpSjjvai does not apply exclu
sively to the reclaiming party, but to God. Compare 1 Cor.
ix. 19. Grotius, Kuinoel, A. Clarke.
Ver. 16. idv Si pi) aKovay, k. t. X. If private reproof fail,
the remonstrance should be backed by the authority of one or
two persons of weight and reputation ; not in order to bear tes
timony to the offence, but that the proper means have been taken
to reclaim the offender. In this passage also, there is an evi
dent allusion to the law of Moses, (Deut. xix. 15.) which re
quired at least two witnesses for the establishment of any fact ;
examples of which are found in the Talmud. This law after
wards passed into a proverb. Compare 2 Cor. xiii. 1. John
viii. 17. Lightfoot, Grotius, Kuinoel.
Ver. 17. ei7T£ ry iKicXnaiq. This third step of the proceeding
is also in accordance with the customs of the Jews; who, in the
case of notorious and obstinate offenders, reproved them pub
licly in the synagogue. Thus in the book Musar, it is said ;
He that reproves his brother, must do it first without witnesses,
betwixt his brother and himself alone ; if he amend, it is well ;
if not, take some companions, that thou mayest shame him
before them ; if neither this way succeed, he ought to shame
him, and lay open his fault before many. So Maimonides in
Ashuth, c. 12. If any deny to feed his children, they reprove
him, they shame him, they urge him : if he still refuse, they
make proclamation against him in the synagogue. In a sense
analogous to this, therefore, the admonition of Christ must be
understood ; so that iKKXnaia can be no other than the particular
congregation to which the parties belong. Such was doubtless
the opinion of the primitive Church ; and the public admonition
(Kara koivov) spoken of by Justin M. in Epist. ad Zenam, and

MATTHEW XVIII. 18.
the consequent excommunication of the offender, took place in
the Church, or congregation of which he was a member, accord
ing to the direction of St. Paul: 1 Cor. v. 4. 2 Cor. ii. 6.
Hence, no authority can be derived from this passage for the
assumed infallibility of the Romish Church, assembled in council ;
not to mention the absurdity of supposing, that persons, at what
ever distance removed, could lay their grievances before it.
Besides, the precept could not have been obeyed during the
three first centuries, since no such council ever met till the
time of Constantine. Whitby, Lightfoot, Campbell. Of
the word iKKXrjerta, see on Matt. xvi. 18. and of the Jewish forms
of excommunication, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 149.
Ibid. 6 WviKog Kal b rEXwvrig. The extreme detestation in
which heathens and publicans were held by the Jews is well
known ; and the latter, as well as the former, they considered to
be without the pale of religious society. Hence, in Demai, p.
23, 1. it is said; A religious man, who becomes a publican, is
to be driven out of the society of religion. Again, Maimonides
in Geneshun, §. 3. A Jew that apostatizes, or breaks the sabbath
presumptuously, is altogether like a heathen. Our Lord's
meaning is, therefore, that no religious communion should be
held with a man who refuses to comply with these repeated en
deavours to restore him to a sense of his duty. Lightfoot.
Ver. 18. baa idv Sr)arirE k. r. X. Of this promise, see on
Matt. xvi. 19. where it is made especially to Peter, but precisely
in the same terms in which it is here extended to all the Apos
tles. There is some difficulty, however, and some difference of
opinion, with respect to the meaning of this and the following
verses, as they stand in connexion with what has gone before.
The most natural interpretation seems to be this : " Whatever
determination you make in conformity with these directions re
specting an offending brother, shall be ratified in heaven ; and
whatever guidance ye may ask from above in forming these
determinations, shall be granted you ; for where only two are
acting together for my glory, I am present by my Holy Spirit, to
answer your prayers, and sanction your proceedings." It is
clear that the prayer, to which our Lord promises his present
attention, refers to the binding and loosing, with which it is con
nected : and the consideration that they were to be directed into
all truth, in this matter, confines the promise, in its strictest
sense, to the Apostles alone, however it may be extended, in a
qualified acceptation, to Christians of all ages. Compare Matt.
xxi. 21, 22. Mark xi. 23, 24. John xix. 13, 14. 1 John iii. 22.
v. 14, 15- James v. 16. Hence the opinion, that the promise
refers to the offended and offending party, as maintained by
Origen, Chrysostom, and others of the Fathers; and that it
extends the power of absolution and excommunication to the

MATTHEW XVIII. 19, 20, 21.
successors of the Apostles, is far less probable. The adjective
iravrbg must be understood of all cases, in reference to the power
conferred in this passage. Lightfoot, A. Clarke, Porteus,
Kuinoel, &c. — [Grotius.]
Ver. 19. yEvr)aErai aiirolg. That is, they shall obtain it. This
is not only a Hebraism, as in Josh. xv. 2. xvii. 6. LXX. but it
occurs also in Greek writers. So .ZElian H. V. IX. 25. eI Se
airopilg airEppdrwv, irap' ipov aoi yEviaOw. Eurip. Alcest. 70.
kovO' r) Trap' ripwv aoi yEvi)aETai xdpig. Here. F. 603. pivovri
S' aiiroii irdvra aoi yEvr)aErai. In the same manner Etvat aoi is
used. Lucian. Pseudom. p. 877. 6'rt Ecrrai irdvra, birorav
iOEXi)aw iydi. Compare Mark xi. 24. John xv. 7. Elsner,
Kypke.
Ver. 20. Eig to ipbv bvopa. For Iv tc£> bvopari pov, i. e. in
my service. Compare John x. 25. xvi. 23. with v. 36. Two or
three are here put for any indefinite small number. So Joseph.
c. Apion. II. 32. dp' ovv Kal Trap i\piv ov Xlya) rocrovrove, dXXd
Sio r) rpue syvoj rig irpoSorag yEvopivovg twv vopwv. Kuinoel,
Wetstein.
Ibid. Elpl iv piaw aiirwv. Scil. with my assistance and sup
port ; in the sense of adesse alicui, in Latin. Compare Isaiah
xliii. 2. John iii. 2. Acts xviii. 10. In this passage, therefore,
our Lord declares his omnipresence and divinity ; and in the same
terms as were applied by the Jews to the Schechinah. Thus in
Purke Abbot, III. 1. Where two are sitting at table in discourse
concerning the law, the Shechinah is among them ; according to
Malachi iii. 16. They had a notion, however, that at least ten
should join in prayer, if any extraordinary success was expected.
The following is from the Coran ; Sura, 58. God knoweth what is
in heaven, and what is on earth ; for where three are gathered
together, he is the fourth ; where there are five, he is the sixth ;
and be there few or many, God is among them. Lightfoot,
Schoettgen, Kuinoel.
Ver. 21. woaaKig dpaprr)aEi k. t. X. This is an Hebraic form
of construction for dpaprr)aavri a<pi)aw, scil. rag dpapriag.
Compare v. 35. infra, where, however, the words rd irapawrw-
para aiirwv axe omitted in many MSS., and are probably an in
terpolation. Forgiveness of injuries is the most prominent doc
trine of the Gospel ; and it was in consequence perhaps of our
Lord's frequent inculcation of it, more especially in Luke xvii. 3.
in connection with the subject of discourse in the present chap
ter, that Peter enquired the limits within which this forbearance
was to be exercised. He probably imagined that it might be
carried so far as to be productive of dangerous consequences to
society, by encouraging the ill-disposed to offer repeated in-

224 MATTHEW XVIII. 23.
juries in the hope of continued impunity. It. is to be observed,
however, that sincere penitence on the part of the offender, and
an earnest entreaty of forgiveness, are necessary conditions in
procuring his pardon. This is evident, not only from the pas
sage of Luke cited above, but from the beautiful and affecting
parable by which our Lord makes his reply. In this parable,
which may be considered as a practical commentary on the fifth
petition in the Lord's Prayer, there are three things set in oppo
sition, the Lord and his servant, an immense sum to a trifle, and
the most extraordinary clemency to the most barbarous cruelty.
Its application is easy in respect to each of these particulars.
What, in the first place, are men compared with God ? se
condly, how great sums do each owe to him ? and thirdly, how
trifling comparatively are the offences which our brethren commit
against us, which many do not hesitate to revenge in the most
unchristian spirit of malevolence ? It is unnecessary to draw the
conclusion. Amidst so much excellence as we meet with in the
Gospel, it is not easy to say what is most excellent ; but of all
the parables of our Lord none is more interesting, more affect
ing, coming more home to the feelings, and pressing closer on
the hearts of men, than this of the unforgiving servant. Certain
it is, that in all the characters of excellence, in perspicuity, in
brevity, in simplicity, in pathos, in force, it has no equal in any
human composition whatever. Macknight, Porteus, Grotius.
Ibid, 'itog iirraKig. It is not necessary to refer this question
to our Lord's injunction in Luke xvii. 4. since the number seven
was usually employed to denote multitude or frequency, as in
1 Sam. ii. 5. Psalm xii. 7. cxix. 164. Prov. xxiv. 16. Hence,
in our Lord's reply, the term employed implies an unlimited for
giveness. Compare Gen. iv. 24. where the same expression is
used by the LXX, in which the use of £7rra for iirraKig is re
markable. From Amos i. 3. the Rabbins collected that three
offences should be remitted, but not the fourth. Thus in Joma,
p. 36. 2. They pardon a man once that sins against another ;
secondly, they pardon him ; thirdly, they pardon him ; fourthly,
they do not pardon him. It has been suggested that some of
the Rabbins put the two numbers together, as the utmost limit
of forgiveness ; and that Peter's question is built upon this de
termination. Whitby, Grotius, Lightfoot. — [Macknight.]
Ver. 23. Sid tovto. Euthym. Std to xp^fat Travrors ervyxw-
pEtv rtj> irdvroTE pEravoown. The kingdom of Heaven is here
the Gospel dispensation, (see on Matt. iii. 2.) and the conduct
of God towards unforgiving Christians is represented by that of
the king in the parable, who is called dvOpwirw (iaaiXsl, as op
posed to the Almighty, unless, indeed, the former substantive be
merely redundant, or equivalent to rivi. It is clear that SovXoe
does not here mean a slave, but merely a servant, or minister,

MATTHEW XVIII. 24—26. 225
who was entrusted with the management of the royal estate.
The phrase awaipEiv Xoyov, as in Latin, conferre rationes, is a
usual form denoting to settle an account. Compare Matt. xxv.
19. In the same sense o-vXXoyt^Ecrflat is used in Levit. xxv. 50.
LXX. Kuinoel.
Ver. 24. pvpiwv raXdvrtov. Ten thousand talents. The
talent of gold was equal to about £5,475 English ; so that
10,000 talents would amount to £54,750,000. According to
other calculations they amount to £72,000,000, but in either
case the sum is so immense, that, although the parable is not
affected thereby, it is scarcely possible that so great a debt should
have been contracted by any individual. According to Eutropius,
indeed, (Hist. Rom. IV. 2.) Antiochus paid this sum to purchase
peace with the Romans ; but the authority of Livy is much more
to be relied upon, who states the fine to have been 15,000
talents of silver, of which 500 only were to be paid immediately,
2,500 more when the peace was ratified by the senate, and the
remaining 12,000 as a tribute of 1,000 annually. See Liv.
XXXVII. 45. XXXVIII. 38. It appears also from Polyb.
Legat. XXIV. p. 817. that these were Euboic talents, each of
which were equal to 80 Roman pounds = 80 x 96 denarii of
7 1 each = 80 x £3 sterling = £240. Hence the whole sum
= 240 X 15,000 = £3,600,000; and, according to the same
calculation, the sum mentioned by our Lord = 10,000 x 240 =
2,400,000. The more usual method, however, is to reckon by
weight, at the rate of 750 ounces of silver to a talent, averaging
the value of silver at 5*. per ounce. In this way, 10,000 talents
= 10,000 x 750 x 5 = 37,500,000 shillings = £1,875,000.
The hundred denarii, v. 28. is equivalent to about £3. 2s. 6d.
sterling. Doddridge, Hammond.
Ver. 25. IkIXevctev aiirbv wpaOrivai, k. r. X. This was a
custom which prevailed in early times in other countries, as well
as among the Jews. See A. Gell. XX. 1. Justin. VIII. 1.
With respect to the Jews see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 139.
This bondage, however, was not extended beyond six years,
Levit. xxv. 39. sq. The verb exeiv is here used in the sense of
SwaaOai, as frequently in classic authors. So Plat. Phaed. 21.
ovk ixto iXiaOai. Xen. Cyr. I. 1. 4. 7ra/x7roXXwv iOvwv, iov ouS'
dv rd bvopara e'xoi rig e'itteIv. So in Latin, Cic. pro Rose. §. 35.
Habeo enim dicere. Compare Luke xii. 4. John viii. 6. Eph.
iv. 28. Prov. iii. 27. LXX. With a7roSovvat and diroSoOrivai
we must supply to b<pEiX6pEvov, as in v. 30. Kuinoel.
Ver. 26. The verb paKpoOvpslv, signifying literally to be long
minded, i-e. to wait patiently , as applied to debtors, answers to
the Latin indulgere, though expectare is not unfrequently used
VOL. I. Q

226 MATTHEW XVIII. 28. 31. 34.
in the same sense. Corn. Nep. Attic. II. 3, 4. Expectare et
sustinere. Mart. Epig. IX. 4. Expectes et sustineas, Auguste,
necesse est, Nam tibi quod solvatr non habet area Jovis. Compare
Heb. vi. 15. James v. 7. It is followed, as in this place, by the
preposition £7rt in Wisd. xxv. 18. LXX. In the next verse to
SdvEiov is understood by some to signify merely the interest of
the debt, and not the debt itself; but this is plainly at variance
with v. 32. where brpEiXi) is substituted. It is clear, however,
from the sequel, that the remission was only conditional, and
was eventually cancelled by his future misconduct. Kuinoel,
Hammond, Grotius.
Ver. 28. Kparr)aag aiirbv 'iirviyE. The verbs irviystv and
ayx«v are used by Greek writers of hard creditors, nearly in
the sense of the English throttle. Lucian. D. M. 22. Kat pr)v
dyE,w as, vi) rov IlXovrciiva, dv pi) diroSwg. Sympos. 32. ovSe
dyx<t> roiig paOrirdg, i)v pr) Kara Kaipbv diroSwai roiig piaOovg.
Pollux III. 116. ayx<>>v roiig xpwrdej airoirviywv roiig brpEi-
Xovrag. Aristoph. Equit. 772. xPWaTa ""Xtlcr diriSEi^a iv Tip
Koivw, roiig piv errp£j3Xtov, rove S' dyx<*>v, rove Se pETairwv.
The participle Kpari)aag is a redundant Hebraism, expressive
perhaps of more than ordinary violence. A. Clarke, Wetstein,
Kuinoel.
Ver. 31. iXvirr)Oriaav. Were indignant. See on Matt. xiv. 9.
Thus dxog and x°Xoe are interchanged in Hom. II. A. 188.
224. dxvvpEvog and xt0C>JU£1'oc, ibid. vv. 241. 244. The verb
SiaaaipElv signifies to detail, to give full information, in which
sense the Latin explanare is used in Cic. Epist. ad Div. III.
1.1. Compare 1 Mace. xii. 6. 2 Mace. i. 18. xi. 18. Diod. Sic.
p. 23. B. Kuinoel, Munthe.
Ver. 34. rote fiaaaviaraig. The word fiaaaviari)g properly
denotes an examiner, especially one who examines by torture ;
and as torture was usually exercised against greater criminals, it
came at length to signify a gaoler generally. This seems to be the
meaning here ; unless, indeed, as we may reasonably suppose, the
punishment denounced against the servant did not merely regard
his insolvency, but the injustice, fraud, and cruelty of which he
had been equally guilty. Of the severity with which prisoners
were treated, and of the nature of the punishment generally, see
Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 146. sqq. Doddridge, Hammond.

MATTHEW XIX. 1. 3. 227

CHAPTER XIX.

Contents: — Christ passes from Galilee into Percea, vv. 1, 2.
[Mark x. 1. Luke ix. 51.] His reply to the question respect
ing marriage and divorce, vv. 3 — 12. [Mark x. 2. Luke xvi.
18.] Little children brought to him, vv. 13- — 15. [Mark x.
13. Luke xviii. 15.] His reply to the young ruler, and cau
tion against the danger of riches, vv. 16 — 30. [Mark x. 17.
Luke xviii. 18.]
Verse 1. Eig rd opia rrig 'lovSaiag k. t. X. Properly speaking,
no part of Judaea was beyond Jordan, but it has been supposed
that the country of Percea was sometimes so designated. Jo
sephus indeed observes, in reference to a fortification built by
Hyrcanus, Ant. XII. 5. oSroe 6 roirog iarl psra^ii rrig 'Apafiiag
Kal rrig 'IovSatae iripav tov 'IopSdvov, ov iroppw rrig 'KaaEJiwvi-
riSog. But this proves nothing more than that the fort was
somewhere beyond Jordan, between Judea and Arabia. Others,
therefore, suppose that 7rlpav should be rendered on this side.
See on Matt. iv. 15. But it is more probable that the construc
tion is elliptical, and that it should be supplied from the parallel
place of Mark x. 1., where the reading is Std rov iripav rov
'IopSdvov. During this journey Jesus was at Bethabara, (John
x. 40.) which was certainly beyond Jordan. Macknight. —
[Reland, Le Clerc]
Ver. 3. eI E^Eerrtv dvOpdnrto k. r. X. Our Lord had publicly
delivered his opinion upon this point on a former occasion, and
there can, therefore, be but little doubt that the principal motive
of this insidious question was the hope that a fresh declaration
of his sentiments would subject him to the resentment of the
school of Hillel, who taught that divorces were allowable upon
the most trivial occasions. This is at once apparent from the
parallel place in Luke xvi. 18. The judgment of Christ respect
ing the illegality of divorce is there given in illustration of his
assurance that the law should endure for ever, and as it stands
without any notice of the previous conversation here recorded,
appears somewhat abrupt and unconnected. But if the narrative
be supplied from St. Matthew, the malevolent intention of the
Pharisees is at once apparent : they hoped to draw from him the
exposition which he had formerly given, which they knew to be
at variance with the then existing law, and consequently, in their
view of the case, with his previous announcement of the per
petual obligation of Mosaic institutions. With the most con
summate wisdom, therefore, instead of affording them the desired
opportunity of misrepresenting his doctrine, he first refers them
q2

228 MATTHEW XIX. 4, 5.
to the divine institution of marriage, as stated by Moses ; and
only repeats his former declaration, after he had thwarted their
aims by this unanswerable appeal to their great Lawgiver him
self. The malignity of the question will be yet more evident
from the fact, that it was proposed in the dominions of Herod '
Antipas, to whom our Lord's reply would be more especially
offensive. Kuinoel, Pilkington. There is a various reading
of some MSS. in this passage which should perhaps be noticed:
dpapriav for alriav. It was originally either a marginal gloss,
one signification of atria being a crime, as in Acts xxv. 18. or it
arose from the supposition that the first syllable being dropped,
dpapria would easily be mistaken for alria. The force of the
question, however, as well as the authority of the best MSS., is
decisive against any change in the received text. Of the prepo
sition Kara, in the sense of propter, we have examples in Levit.
xxvi. 28. LXX. Herod. V. 39. Polyb. XV. 11. Joseph. Ant.
I. 18. 2. ; and of 7rde, signifying any whatever, in Rom. iii. 20.
Gal. ii. 16. Raphelius, Krebs, Munthe, Macknight. —
[A. Clarke.]
Ver. 4. ovk dviyvwTE. See Gen. i. 27. ii. 24. As 6 irEipdZwv
is the tempter, Matt. iv. 3. 6 XaXdiv the speaker, Acts vii. 44.
so iroir)aag may be the Creator ; the word dvOpwirovg being
implied, to which avroiig is referred. With the adjectives dpasv
Kal OriXv in the neuter yivog must be supplied, and governed by
the preposition Kard understood. Elsner. — [Kuinoel.] At
first sight it may appear that our Lord's reasoning is inconclusive ;
and Campbell maintains that no argument against divorce can be
deduced from the simple fact that God at the creation made
mankind of different sexes. It should be observed, however,
that the inference does not depend upon God's creating male and
female, but upon what he said, or rather what Adam said by
divine inspiration, when they were so created. At the same time
the Mosaic history relates, that at the beginning, a7r' dpxr/g,
only two persons, one male and one female, were created, plainly
intimating the nature and intention of the connubial state ; and
that two, and two only, should be thus indissolubly united.
Ver. 5. irpoaKoXXriQiiaETai. Properly, sludl be firmly ce
mented, as by glue : a beautiful metaphor, which forcibly inti
mates that nothing but death should separate them. Both the
simple and compound verbs are used in the N. T. in an applied
sense, and so also in the LXX, corresponding with the Hebrew
p21, dabak. Compare Gen. ii. 24. Deut. xi. 22. xxviii. 60.
Josh, xxiii. 8. 2 Kings xviii. 6. Ruth ii. 8. 21. 23. Job xii. 8.
Prov. xviii. 25. Ecclus. vi. 36. xiii. 18. xix. 2. In a sense pre
cisely analogous to that which it bears in this passage we have
Plato de Legg. p. 839. rolg Si irpoaKoXXdaOai, SaiiKovra Kara

MATTHEW XIX. 6. 229
rde %wovaiag. So in Latin, Plaut. Menaech. II. 2. 67. me-
retrices se applicant, agglutinant. In the N. T. the word re
curs in Mark x. 7. Luke x. 11. xv. 15. Acts v. 13. 36. viii. 29.
ix. 26. x. 28. xvii. 34. Rom. xii. 9. 1 Cor. vi. 16, 17. Ephes.
v. 31. and always in a metaphorical signification. Wetstein,
Schleusner, A. Clarke.
Ibid. Eig adpKa piav. An Hebraism for adp%, pia, as in the
next verse. Compare Deut. xxviii. 13. 2 Sam. vii. 14. Psalm
lxix. 1 1 . xciv. 22. There is an old maxim, that friends are, as
it were, pia ^vxv, and inseparable : how much more then should
this be the case with marriage ? Antipater de Nuptiis : Al piv ydp
dXXai (piXiat Kat (piXoaropyiai iolKaat ralg rwv bairpiwv Kara rag
irapaviaEig pi^Eaiv' al S' dvSpoe Kat yvvatKoe rate Si bXwv Kpd-
aEaiv, wg olvog vSari. Ov ydp povov rrig oiiaiag Kat rwv tekvwv
Kal Trig \pvxvg, dXXd Kat rwv awpdriov oiiroi povot KOtviovovai.
Hierocles : 7rpeiiTr| Kat errotxEteoSErjrdrrj retiv Koivcovteuv 17 Kara rov
ydpov. Menander : OtKstov ovrcoe ovSlv lerrtv, Si Adxie, 'Edv
crK07rrj rig, digdvrip te Kal ywi). The expression here employed
is analogous to that which Plato is supposed to have borrowed
from the Hebrews, ervvrfj!;at Kat avp<pdaai iig to aiirb, wars Svo
bvrag 'iva yEyovivai. To the same effect Tacit. German. 19.
Sic unum accipiunt maritum, quomodo unum corpus, unamque
vitam, ne ulla cogitatio ultra, ne longior cupiditas sit. Grotius,
Wetstein. It is remarkable, that in this passage there is no
word answering to Svo in the Masoretic editions of the Hebrew
Bible ; of which see Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 188. In addi
tion to the authorities there cited, that the Hebrew originally
corresponded with the Greek of the N. T., it may be observed,
that the only ancient version which accords with the Hebrew is
the Chaldee, which the Rabbis have constantly used in their
synagogues and schools, and have consequently taken every op
portunity to reduce it into a close conformity with the Masoretic
readings. Campbell.
Ver. 6. oweZev^ev. A metaphor borrowed from the yoking
of oxen, and constantly applied to the marriage union. Herodian
III. 10. oil irdw ri r)S6pEvog ri^ ydpw, dvdyioj pdXXov i) irpo-
aipiaEi aws^Evypivog. Aristot. Polit. VII. 16. to viovg av-
Z,Evyvwai kcu viae. Joseph. Ant. I. 19. 10. rde Ovyarlpae rag
ipdg awiZ,Ev%a. Hence ^Evyoe, a married couple, Xen. CEcon.
Vii. 18. av^vyng, a husband, 3 Mace. iv. 8. LXX. It was a
custom, in fact, among the ancients, when persons were newly
married, to place a yoke upon their necks, signifying thereby
that they were closely linked, and bound to pull equally together
in all the concerns of life. Isidor. de Origin. IX. 8. Conjuges
appellati, propter jugum quod imponitur matrimonio conjun-
gendis. Jugo enim nubentes subjici solent, propter futuram
concordiam, ne separentur. Again : Conjugium est dictum, quia

230 MATTHEW XIX. 7. 10—12.
conjuncti sunt ,- vel a jugo, quo in nuptiis copulantur, ne resolvi
aut separari possint. Hence also the yoke is mentioned among
the symbols of marriage in Achill. Tat. V. p. 315. ipol piv yap
SokeI rd irapovra ydpivv Eivai avpfioXa' Zvybg piv ovrwg iirip
KEtpaXijg KpEpapivog, Ssapol Se 7T£pi rr)v KEpaiav TErapivoi.
Kypke, Wetstein.
Ver. 7. ri ovv Meocnje k. r. X. By the manner of putting this
question one would imagine that Moses had commanded both
the dismission and the writing of divorcement, whereas in fact
he had only permitted the dismission ; but in case they took ad
vantage of this permission, commanded the writing of divorce
ment. Campbell, Macknight, &c. Of this and the two fol
lowing verses, see on Matt. v. 31. sq.
Ver. 10. Et otireoe iartv r) atria k. t. X. If such be the relative
condition of man and wife, &c. The word atria is here used in
a forensic sense, as denoting state ox condition. So the Latin
causa in Cic. Fam. VII. 4. Martial. VII. 92. 5. Kuinoel,
Grotius.
Ver. 11. oil irdvrEg xMPoval K- T- X. The verb vct»p£tv pro
perly signifies capax esse ; hence, as applied to things specu
lative, to understand, to comprehend ; and to things practical,
to obtain, to execute. In the latter of these applied senses it
occurs in Plutarch, Cat. Min. p. 791. a KarwvEe ovk eictiv, oiiSi
to Karwvog (ppovripa x<*>povaiv, oIkteioeiv ri)v daOEvsiav avriov,
Phocylides fr. 84. ov xwP£' ptydXriv oiSaxnv dSiSaKrog okovecv,
.rElian. V. H. III. 9. roaovrov dvSpslog, baov avrcj! Kat 17 ipvxi)
X«jp£t. So also it is used in this passage ; not in the sense of
intelligere, as some have supposed, probably from mistaking the
meaning of the word Xoyoe, which is to be rendered by res, not
by verbum. Antonin. Lib. c. 34. kot^vecte rbv Xoyov. Compare
Mark i. 45. Campbell, Grotius, Wetstein, Elsner. The
import of our Lord's reasoning is this : It is not in every one's
power to live continently ; such, therefore, ought to marry, but
with prudence and circumspection in making choice of a wife.
Those, however, who have the gift, and can restrain their appe
tites, commit no sin in remaining unmarried. Macknight.
Ver. 12. o'LnvEg Evvovx«<rav iavroiig k. t. X. That the am
putation of the desire, not of the member, is here intended, is
evident from the two species of eunuchism previously mentioned:
by the first are signified those who are continent by natural con
stitution ; by the second those whom violence has rendered in
capable of the matrimonial union ; and these last are those who,
from an ardent desire of promoting the interest of religion, have
determined to live in a state of celibacy, unincumbered with the
11

MATTHEW XIX. 13. 231
cares of the world. Among the Rabbins we find these different
kinds of eunuchs described in similar terms ; as, for instance,
eunuchs of the sun, i. e. by the hand of God, or men born impo
tent; eunuchs of men, or those who have been castrated; and
those who make themselves eunuchs, i. e. abstain from marriage,
that they may give themselves up to the study of the law. The
expression was taken allegorically by Chrysostom, J. Martyr,
Tertullian, Cyprian, and the generality of the Fathers, except
Origen, who not only interpreted the words literally, but is said
to have exemplified them upon himself. Our Lord is usually
supposed to have alluded to the sect of the Essenes, of which see
Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 374. sqq. Macknight, Grotius,
A. Clarke.
Ibid. 6 Swdpsvog x^pE'v, x(<,P£('Ta'• This admonition, like
that of St. Paul's, 1 Cor. vii. 26. has a more immediate reference
to the circumstances of the times in which it was delivered. The
arguments which the Papists would derive from it in favour of
celibacy, as a more honourable state than matrimony, are totally
groundless. Marriage is in this very place represented as a
divine institution, ordained in the time of maris innocency, and
the Apostle declares it to be honourable in all ranks and condi
tions, provided the duties attached to it are duly and religiously
performed. If the early propagation of the Gospel, and the per
secutions to which its professors were exposed, rendered it ad
visable at that particular period to remain unmarried, in order
to be free from the unavoidable incumbrances of the married
state ; the recommendation of this practice for temporary pur
poses cannot surely be construed into a law, binding upon all
ages of the world. Besides, our Lord does not recommend celi
bacy, he only permits it as a thing lawful, if a person can so
effectually restrain his passions as to keep himself from falling
into sin. Macknight.
Ver. 13. rag xe'LPac !»«cJp. See on Matt. ix. 18. and to the
passages cited add Gen. xlviii. 14, 15. from whence it more dis
tinctly appears that imposition of hands was used by persons of
peculiar sanctity, in praying for blessings upon children. The
parallel passage in Mark x. 1. is very appropriately selected by
our church as the Gospel for the celebration of Infant Baptism.
It does not indeed directly follow from thence, that infant baptism
was an institution of Christ : but since that may be inferred from
other Scriptures, it is not improbable that our Lord intended an
anticipative reference to it. The narrative clearly proves that
the children who were brought to him were considered capable
of participating in the spiritual blessings of the Christian cove
nant, and consequently of being received into the body of his
church. Christ did not baptize them, nor order his disciples to
do so, because the rite was not yet instituted ; but they had

232 MATTHEW XIX. 14. 16.
already entered into covenant with God by circumcision. Be
sides, though incapable of repentance, infants are as fit to be ad
mitted into Christ's church as they were into the Jewish church,
and therefore, as baptism is the only means of such admission,
fit to be baptized. It has been supposed, since Christ called the
children to him, (Luke xviii. 16.) that they could walk, and were
therefore not of a very infantine age. But the word fipiipog,
which Luke employs, is explained by Eustathius and Phavorinus
of a child under four years old, and consequently much under
years of discretion. So the word is used in 1 Pet. ii. 2. and
that it is so here is further manifest from our Lord's taking them
in his arms, (Mark x. 16.) The children were doubtless those
of believers, since the unbelieving- Jews would scarcely have
sought a blessing from Christ ; and had they been brought to
be healed of any bodily distemper, as some have supposed, the
disciples would not have repulsed them. It should seem that
they considered them incapable of receiving instruction, and con
sequently that their introduction to Christ would only interfere
with more important matters, such as the discussion of the sub
ject of marriage, without producing any advantage either to
themselves or those who brought them. The ancients, at all
events, looked upon this passage as sufficient authority for infant
baptism, as appears even from Tertullian, de Baptism, c. 18.
though he dislikes the custom. So also the Constit. Apost. VI.
15. p. 280. C. Bairri^aTE iipuiv Kal rd vr)irta' " ArpETE ydp, c/>j]eri,
rd iraiSia ipx^auai irpog ps. Whitby, Doddridge, Lightfoot.
— [Elsner.] Ibid. iirEripriaav avrolg. Scil. rote irpoarpipovai. Compare
Mark x. 13.
Ver. 14. rctiv toiovtwv. Theophyiact : rcuv ptpovpivwv rr)v
airXorriTa tovtwv. See on Matt, xviii. 1.
Ver. 16. fie. Supply vEavterKoe from v. 22. and ctpxcov from
Luke xviii. 18. He may have been either a ruler of the Syna
gogue, (Matt. ix. 18.) or, which is more probable, a member of
the Sanhedrim. Compare Luke xxiii. 23. xxiv. 20. 1 Mace. i.
14. 27. Joseph. Ant. XX. 1.2. It has been supposed, from the
sorrow which he exhibited at our Lord's reply, that there was a
degree of hypocrisy in the young ruler's application ; but the
earnestness of his appeal, his respectful demeanour, and, in fact,
all the.circumstances of the case, evidently prove that he fully
intended to acquiesce in the decision of Christ whatever it might
be. Euthymius : ovk r)v Si virovXog b vsaviaKog ovrog, wg rpaai
TivEg' dXXd Trig fpiXapyvpiag r) aKavOa rjjv Xt7rapdv apovpav
r^g \pvxvG avrov SiEXvpyvaro. He was probably confused by
the Pharisaical division of the precepts of the law, some of
which they considered weighty, and others light, and wished

MATTHEW XIX. 17. 233
to be directed by Jesus, whom he looked upon as a teacher of
more than ordinary authority, which of these precepts were
preeminently essential to the attainment of eternal life. The
young man seems to have been of the particular sect of Pha
risees mentioned in Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 372. Kuinoel.
— [Macknight.]
Ibid. Z,wi)v alwviov. The Jews had very imperfect views of a
future state ; so much so that it has been asserted by War-
burton, (Div. Leg. V.) that the doctrine is not to be found in,
and does not make part of, the Mosaic dispensation. Against
this assertion, in its full extent, numerous passages may be cited
from the O. T., and the question now proposed by the young man
is evidently at variance with such supposition, unless, indeed, we
suppose that he had previously conversed with Christ or his
Apostles on the subject. Grotius.
Ver. 17. ri pE XiyEig ayaOov ; This reading is interlined in
Griesbach' s first edition, and wholly rejected in the second, in
order to make way for ri it£ ipwrdg 7T£pt rov dyaftov, which is to
be found in several MSS., in conformity with the Vulgate,
Coptic, Armenian, Saxon, and other versions, supported by
Origen, Eusebius, Cyril, Jerome, Augustin, and others of the
Fathers. But the vulgar reading is nevertheless preferable on
more accounts than one : the evidence from MSS. is beyond
comparison superior ; the versions on both sides nearly balance
each other ; and the internal evidence arising from the connec
tion of the thoughts is decisive on the point There are other
variations also, such as the omission of dyaOi in v. 16. and the
substitution of Ete lerriv 6 dyaObg for ovSEte dyaObg £t pi) Eig, 6
Gfoe, which plainly shew the hand of an interpolator. It is
easy to trace the origin of these difficulties in the evidence which
the passage is supposed to afford against the divinity of Christ ;
and the Socinians have not been backward in appealing to its
authority. But if the object which our Lord had in view be
well considered, there is no ground for apprehension in this
respect. The young ruler had accosted him by the title SeSder-
koXe dyaOi, a mode of address employed towards their most dis
tinguished Rabbis, and of which they were exceedingly proud :
he did not, therefore, mean to assume any imperfection to himself,
but to expose and reprove the vain and wicked flattery which the
Pharisees courted, and which was in all probability offered to
Christ, in conformity with the custom then in use. At the same
time, it is well answered by Maresius, that the Father being the
fountain of the whole Deity, must in some sense be the fountain
of the goodness of the Son : and hence many of the anti-Nicene
Fathers owned that the word dyaObg signally and essentially ap
plied to God the Father, and to Christ only by reason of the
goodness derived to him, as being. God of God. See Clem.

234 MATTHEW XIX. 18. 20.
Alex. Paedag. I. p. 113. 119. Kuinoel, Whitby, Doddridge,
Campbell.— [Mill, Griesbach, Grotius, A. Clarke.]
Ver. 18. ro- ov ipovEvaEig' k. t. X. It is worthy of remark,
that frequently in the N. T. when mention is made of the whole
Law, the second table only is exemplified, as in this place, Rom.
xiii. 8, 9. James ii. 8. 11. and elsewhere. The reason of this
is not that the precepts of this table are of more importance than
those of the first, but because there is a necessary connection
between the duties of piety towards God, and of justice, tem
perance, and charity towards men ; and because these latter are
not so easily counterfeited as the former. On this subject it is
proper also to observe, that the terms of salvation here offered
are not different from those mentioned elsewhere in Scripture.
Though faith is declared expressly by our Lord himself to be
essentially necessary to salvation, still it is faith working by
love ; and it was only this faith that would have influenced the
young man to have parted with all that he had for the sake of the
Gospel. ' The condition too of keeping the commandments is
that by which pious persons in the O. T. are continually repre
sented as obtaining the promise of eternal life. Compare Levit.
xviii. 5. Ezek. xviii. 21. xx. 11. xxxiii. 15. Luke i. 6. At the
same time it is certain that the Law could not of itself give life,
(Gal. iii. 21.) because it required that perfect unsinning obe
dience of which man is incapable : so that the virtuous could not
expect the promised blessings in consequence of their own me
rits, but only from the propitiation and atonement which , God
had appointed to be made for sin. As, therefore, under the
Gospel our justification ariseth not from works, but is by grace
through faith, and yet good works and sincere obedience are
conditions necessary to salvation, and the means of obtaining it ;
so the pious under the Law had just reason to expect the pro
mised reward of obedience, by virtue of the Lamb slain from the
foundation of the world. Whitby, Lightfoot, Macknight.
Of the use of the article in this verse, placed absolutely, see
Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 279.
Ver. 20. Ik vEornrog pov. It is generally thought that vEorr/g
should here be rendered childhood, as relating to an earlier stage of
life, than that which the young man had already attained. Several
MSS., versions, and Fathers omit the words altogether, whence
they have been considered by some as interpolated from Mark
x. 20. Luke xviii. 21. But there is little doubt of their genu
ineness, and as little necessity for departing from the ordinary
meaning of the noun. Its use appears to imply a slight tinge of
arrogance, in a young man wishing to appear older, and conse
quently of higher importance, than his youthful appearance indi
cated. Kuinoel. — [Grotius.]

MATTHEW XIX. 21.23. 235
Ver. 21. 7raiXTjerov erov rd inrdpxovTa. It is evident that our
Lord's command could only refer to the individual to whom he
addressed himself, or, at most, to those who at that particular
time became his disciples. The youth no doubt had understood
the commandments, in the observance of which he had boasted,
in that sense which the Jewish doctors had put upon them, and
which Christ had reprehended in the Sermon on the Mount.
This recommendation, therefore, was intended to lower the high
opinion which he entertained of himself, and to make trial of the
sincerity which he professed, and to convince him of the neces
sity of sacrificing every thing most valuable in this life in the
cause of the religion of the Gospel. But it cannot be inferred
that Christians are hereby bound to sell all their goods and give
them to the poor, thereby in effect becoming one of those to be
relieved out of their own possessions. That there were rich
men in the church even in the apostolic times is clear from
1 Tim. vi. 17. James i. 10. ii. 2. nor does the Apostle require
his converts to sell all, but merely to give of their abundance,
2 Cor. viii. 12. If, therefore, riches fall into the hands of those
who know how to use them to God's glory, and the relief of
their indigent fellow-creatures, there can be no necessity for
parting with them, which is only required when they interfere
with the duty and profession of a Christian. In the first ages of
the Gospel its advancement was attended with persecutions and
dangers of every description, which would not admit of the ad
ditional care and concern which the management of great pos
sessions demand, so that an entire renunciation of the world be
came a necessary exercise of self-denial, especially in those who
were more immediately engaged in the service of Christ. The
case is widely different in these times ; though the precept will
doubtless apply in a modified sense to every age and every class
of believers. We may observe further, that our Lord may have
had an eye to the Pharisaical idea of perfection on this point.
According to their decision no person was bound to give the
poor above the fifth part of his estate, unless in cases of extra
ordinary devotion; but in the Jerusalem Gemara, on Peah I. 1.
the example of R. Ishbab is produced, as distributing all his
goods in charity. Whitby, Lightfoot, Macknight. Of the
word rlXEtoe see on Matt. v. 48. It may also be applied to a
person fully instructed in his duty, in which sense it is opposed
to babes in Christ, Heb. v. 12, 13. vi. 1. Compare 1 Cor. ii. 6.
xiii. 9, 10. Phil. iii. 15. Col, i. 28. So the word 1DJ, gomar,
is used by the Rabbins of a judge fully instructed in the tradi
tions. In Schabbath, p. 31. R. Hillel said to a proselyte, Do
not that to another which is odious to thyself ; that is the ivhole
Law ; and go thy way perfect. Whitby.
Ver. 23.' f3acrtX£tav rwv ovpavwv. See on Matt. iii. 2. In

236 MATTHEW XIX. 25.
whichever sense the phrase be here understood, this declaration
will hold equally true. When it was only by persuasion that
men were brought into a society, hated and persecuted by all the
ruling powers of the earth, Jewish and Pagan, the rich, who had
so much to lose, and so much to fear, would not easily be led to
embrace the Gospel. Compare James ii. 5, 6. As little can
there be any doubt of the justness of the sentiment, in relation to
the state of the blessed hereafter; when the deceitfulness of
riches and the snares into which they lead mankind are duly con
sidered. So close an analogy runs through all the divine dis
pensations, that in most instances such declarations of Scripture
will admit of either interpretation. In the proverbial illustra
tion given by our Lord in the next verse, some critics propose to
read KapiXov, or at least to render KapriXov a cable, upon the
authority of Euthymius, Theophylact, and Phavorinus. But
this is of little weight against the testimony of MSS. on the one
hand, and the frequency of the term in all sorts of writers for
the beast so denominated on the other. Besides, there was a
proverb in use among the Jews, although not precisely identical,
yet so closely similar as to prove beyond a doubt that our Lord
intended to express hyperbolically a thing next to impossible.
Thus in Talm. Babyl. Tit. Berachoth, p. 55. 2. They do not
shew a man a palm-tree of gold, nor an elephant going through
the eye of a needle. Again in Bava Mezia, p. 38. 2. R. She-
shith answered R. Amram, who had advanced an absurdity :
Perhaps thou art one of the Pombedithians , who can make an
elephant pass through the eye of a needle. Among the Babylo
nians, with whom perhaps the proverb originated, elephants were
not uncommon, but they were strangers in Judea ; so that the
camel, which was the largest animal known to the Jews, na
turally gave the turn to the expression. The saying, however,
according to the Jewish form, occurs in the Koran, Sura VII.
37. The impious, who in his arrogance shall accuse our doctrine
of falsity, shall find the gates of heaven shut; nor shall he enter
there till a camel shall pass through the eye of a needle. Camp
bell, Grotius, Lightfoot, Wetstein, Michaelis. — [Whit
by.] Many excellent MSS., followed by some versions, instead
of SieXOeIv read eIoeXOeIv. But the sense is decisive in favour of
the received lection. The rich here spoken of are those who
trust in riches, Mark x. 24. See on Matt. v. 3.
Ver. 25. i£,EirXr)aaovro aipoSpa. This alarm was naturally
suggested by the general knowledge which the disciples had of
the world : they were aware all men were either rich or desired
to be so. But the declaration of our Lord is plainly hyperbo
lical, and to be understood within certain limitations, and as de
noting extreme difficulty rather than actual impossibility. It is
confined too, as before remarked, in its primary sense, to the

MATTHEW XIX. 27, 28. 237
entrance of men into the Gospel kingdom upon earth ; so that
those who were already Christians, and employed their wealth
properly, are excepted : and even those who come under the
class to which our Lord more immediately alluded may be in
duced, as he goes on to affirm, by the influence of the Holy
Spirit, and the promises which the Gospel holds out, to accept
the conditions of salvation proposed to them. Hence the advice
of St. Paul in 1 Tim. vi. 17. sqq. Joseph of Arimathea, Nico-
demus, Joanna, the wife of Chusa, Herod's steward, and Manen,
Herod's foster-brother, were remarkable instances of this tri
umphant power of grace. Celsus objected against this declara
tion of Christ, that it was only a poor imitation of the Platonic
maxim, dyaObv Etvai SiaipEpovrwg, Kat irXovaiov Etvat SiarpEpov-
rtog, dSvvarov. Of the divine Omnipotence, compare Gen.
xviii. 14. Job xiii. 2. Jerem. xxxii. 17. So Homer, II. T. 90.
0£oe Std irdvra teXevtij. See my note in loc. Le Clerc, Gro
tius, Macknight.
Ver. 27. ri dpa 'iarai r)plv, What shall we have therefore1?
Scil. what reward, what treasure in heaven? v. 21. The question
proposed by Peter does not appear to have been dictated by a
feeling of disappointment or dissatisfaction, as some have sup
posed, but from the simple wish, tinged perhaps with a degree
of conscious self-applause, of ascertaining the reward, which
would be assigned to him and the other Apostles, who had ac
tually done what the young ruler had not the courage and the
virtue to do. It is true they had no wealth to relinquish, but
what little they had they cheerfully parted with : they gave up
their all : they took up their cross and followed Christ. Porteus.
— [Macknight.] The expression here employed occurs in Xen.
Anab. I. 7. 7. d%iovvTEg ElSivai ri aipiaiv iarai, idv Kpari)awaiv.
II. 1. 8. ri 'iarai rolg arparttoraig. Aristoph. Nub. 430. dXX'
'iarai aoi tovto irap' i)pwv. A somewhat similar example is no
ticed on Matt, xviii. 19. Kypke, Wetstein.
Ver. 28. The opinions of the commentators upon this passage
are widely different, and it is unquestionably involved in consi
derable difficulty. In the first place, as to the punctuation, some
refer the words iv ry iraXiyyEvEaiq to the participle aKoXovOriaav-
rsg, as denoting the great change which began to take place in
manners and doctrine from the preaching of John the Baptist.
But the Syriac version has what is equivalent to in seculo novo,
which in the Oriental idiom denotes a future state of being.
As they were wont to call the creation yivEaig, any remarkable
restoration or renovation of the face of things was very suitably
termed 7raXiyy£V£crta. The return of the Israelites to their own
land after the Babylonish captivity is so called in Joseph. Ant.
XI. 3. 9. and Cicero adopts the Greek term to denote the re-

238 MATTHEW XIX. 28.
stitution of his rights and property after his return from exile :
Epist. Attic. VI. 6. Philo also, in his Life of Moses, and Cle
ment, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, call the restoration of the
world after the flood by the same name. It is clear, therefore, that
the words should be referred to the verb KaOlasaOE in the subse
quent clause, by placing the point at pov. But here again a new
difficulty occurs as to the particular period which the word 7raXty-
yEvEcrta is intended to designate : by some it has been referred
to the Millenium, and Burnet, in his Theory of the Earth, Vol.
II. p. 229. has founded an argument upon this passage to prove
the renovation of the earth at that crisis. But this supposition,
principally founded upon Rev. xx. 4., like the doctrine of the
Millenium itself, is, to say the least, uncertain and precarious.
Somewhat analogous, and nearly as unsatisfactory, is the opinion
that our Lord alludes to the final conversion and restoration of
the Jews after the destruction of Antichrist. The chief support
to this hypothesis is derived from the circumstance that the
twelve tribes of Israel are the only persons to be judged, which
is interpreted to imply that the Apostles, not by a resurrection of
their persons, but by a reviviscence of that spirit which resided
in them, and chiefly by the Gospel, shall be mainly instrumental
in their conversion. But this limitation of the judicial power of
the Apostles can only be urged in opposition to another interpre
tation of the passage, which is nevertheless very generally re
ceived, and with great appearance of probability, that the rege
neration in question is that which shall take place at the day of
judgment. That this view of the case cannot be admitted with
out some limitations is evident, not only from the fact that both
Jew and Gentile shall then be judged, (Rom. ii. 16.) but that the
Saints also, as well as the Apostles, shall be concerned in the
judgment of the world at the last day, (1 Cor. vi. 2.) so that no
peculiar distinction will apply to the latter in this respect. It is
more than probable, therefore, that the regeneration here in
tended is that which took place at the first preaching of Chris
tianity after the ascension, and that the kingdom then conferred
Upon the Apostles, which is here described by their sitting upon
twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel, is that minis
terial authority with which they were invested by Christ, and
with which he had been previously invested by his Father. Com
pare John xvii. 18. xx. 21. In the very similar passage, Luke
xxii. 30. the figure here employed is coupled with that of eating
and drinking at tlie table of Christ, an expression which clearly
denotes a participation, inferior only to that of their Lord him
self, in the honours and the authority of his mediatorial kingdom.
There is also an evident allusion to the prophecy respecting the
erection of the Messiah's kingdom in Dan. vi. 9 — 13. / beheld
till the thrones were set, eye. for so the passage should be ren
dered, not cast down, as in E. T. Sitting on thrones is, there-

MATTHEW XIX. 29. 239
fore, a figurative expression, in allusion to the custom of princes
having their ministers ranged round them in council ; or, more
probably, to the Jewish Sanhedrim, in which the high priest sat
surrounded by the principal rulers and doctors of the law. The
verb KptvEtv, in the sense of governing or presiding, is sanc
tioned by Gen. xlix. 16. Judg. xii. 7. 1 Sam. viii. 5. Wisd. iii.
8. iv. 14. v. 17. Artemidor. II. 12. KptvEtv ydp to dpxttv 'IXsyov
ol iraXaioi. Hence the meaning of the passage is, that the
Apostles were to rule the Christian Church, of which the Jewish
was a type, by the laws of the Gospel, which their Master in
spired them to preach ; and by the infallible decisions respecting
faith and practice, which he enabled them to give in all difficult
Cases. To this interpretation it is indeed objected, that the only
other text in which Christ is spoken of as sitting upon the throne
of his glory, (Matt. xxv. 31.) relates certainly to the final judg
ment. But in that place circumstances, which are here omitted,
are introduced to define the sense ; not to mention that many
similar, though not precisely the same expressions occur in rela
tion to the period immediately subsequent to the ascension.
Compare Mark xvi. 19. Acts vii. 55, 56. Col. iii. 1. Ephes. i.
20. sqq. Heb. i. 3. viii. 1. x. 12. xii. 2. It is highly probable,
also, that the Regeneration here spoken of is identical with the
Kaipbg SiopOtoaEwg, which limited the duration of carnal ordi
nances, Heb. ix. 10. and with the piXXiw aldiv, Heb. vi. 5.
(compare Heb. ii. 5. Ephes. ii. 7.) which relates to the Messiah's
kingdom upon earth, as predicted in Isaiah ix. 6. LXX, where
he is called irari)p rov piXXovrog alwvog. At the same time the
promise may fairly be extended, as that in v. 23., to the general
resurrection, so as to include both interpretations. And this
conclusion seems to be warranted by the following verse, where
our Lord's declaration relates to all his faithful followers in all
times and ages of the world, and the blessing announced is both
temporal and eternal. It is no objection that Judas was one o£
the twelve to whom the promise was made. Our Lord knew
that he would fall from his office and dignity, but as Matthias
filled his place, and so stood entitled to the promise, it was evi
dently unnecessary to make any particular distinction. Ham
mond, Lightfoot, Grotius, Campbell. — [Whitby, Le Clerc,
Doddridge.]
Ver. 29. EKarovTa7rXa<riova Xr)ipErat. Mark x. 30. Iv rtj> Katptj!
roiirw, pErd Siwypwv, i. e. they shall receive more than they
part with ; in the inward satisfaction and divine consolations at
tending real religion, in the delights of a good conscience, and
the affectionate communion of all good Christians, which shall
support them under the persecutions to which they will neces
sarily be exposed. Of this St. Paul was an illustrious example.
See 2 Cor. vi. 8. sqq. which may be considered not only as an

240 MATTHEW XIX. 30. XX. 1.
admirable comment upon our Lord's declaration, but as an exact
fulfilment of the prediction contained in it. Doddridge, Por
teus. Ver. 30. ttoXXoi Se laovrai k. t. X. The Jews, who had been
the chosen people of God, and who will be first invited to the
reception of the Gospel by the preaching of the Apostles, will be
the last to partake of it, and to obtain its promises ; and the
Gentiles, who have had none of the privileges of a covenant with
God, and to whom the offer of the Gospel will not be made till
the Jews have rejected it, will be the first in the kingdom of
grace and of glory. To illustrate this position our Lord deli
vered the parable in the opening of the next chapter, in which,
however, the application is not only particular but general, and
intended for the instruction of all Christians whatsoever. See
Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 406. Whitby, Doddridge.

CHAPTER XX.
Contents : — The parable of the labourers in the vineyard, vv.
1 — 16. Christ again predicts his death 'and passion, vv.
17 — 19. [Mark x. 32. Luke xviii. 31.] Ambition of the sons
of Zebedee, vv. 20 — 28. [Mark x. 35.] Two blind men healed
at Jericho, vv. 29 — 34. [Mark x. 46. Luke xviii. 35.]
Verse 1. dvQpwirw diKoSEawory. This pleonasm is very com
mon. Compare Matt. xi. 19. xiii. 45. xviii. 23. and elsewhere.
Of the custom alluded to in this parable, see Home's Introd.
Vol. III. p. 432. The scope and design of its principal parts
have been variously explained by different commentators. Some
imagine that it was intended to teach us that God converts
some in childhood, some in youth, some in their riper years,
some in the decline of life, and others in old age. But this is
altogether at variance with the declaration with which the parable
concludes, since all who are called in this acceptation must be
chosen also. It would also follow as a necessary inference that
the rewards of the righteous are all equal, and that this equality
was the cause of murmuring and discontent among the saints in
heaven ; an inference which is directly opposed to other passages
of Scripture, as well as to reason and common sense. Others
explain the first call of the preaching of the Baptist, and the
earlier days of Christ's ministry, that at the third hour, as re
lating to the first mission of the Apostles to preach among the
Jews ; those of the sixth and ninth hours of the Apostolic exer-

MATTHEW XX. 2. 241
tions among the Jews in Judea and elsewhere, subsequently to
the descent of the Holy Ghost ; and that at the eleventh hour of
the call of the Gentiles : but the nicety of these distinctions is
too laboured and minute. It should rather seem that the parable
is entirely prophetical of the extent to which the Jews would
carry their prejudices, and the difficulty with which they would
be led to admit that Gentile converts were to partake of the same
privileges with themselves. See on v. 11. They prided them
selves in their adherence for so many ages to the worship of the
true God, and in the great extremities to which they had been
sometimes reduced on account of it: and it seems natural to
interpret the burning and heat of the day in reference to these,
rather than any other hardships which the Jewish converts en
dured, since it does not appear that believing Gentiles met with
less ill treatment than the Jews. Macknight, Doddridge. —
[Whitby.] Ibid, dpa irpto't. This is an elliptical form for dpa aiiv rip
irpw'i. Compare Ecclus. xi. 6. Jerem. xx. 16. LXX. So dpa
ry ripipq, Xen. Hellen. I. 6. 10. 1 Mace. iv. 6. djua 'iw, Thucyd.
IV. 32. The phrase here used is found also in Thucyd. IV. 1.
dpa Si irptot iapaXovrsg. A similar Latin idiom occurs in Plaut.
Mercat. II. 1. 31. Mane cumluci simul. So Cistell. II. 1. 53.
cum prima luci, where the dative form is used for the ablative.
Albert, Kypke.
Ver. 2. Ik Sjjvapt'ov rrjv ripipav. A denarius was the usual
price of a day's labour among the Romans, as well as among the
Jews. Tacit. Annal. I. 17. Denis indiem assibus animam et
corpus cestimari, hinc vestem, arma, tentoria, hinc scevitiam cen-
turionum, et vacationes munerum redimi. Compare also Tobit
v. 14. It is, therefore, justly mentioned in Rev. vi. 6. as a
proof of the great scarcity of provision, that a chcenix of wheat,
(about an English quart,) which was the usual allowance of one
man for a day, was sold at that price. The preposition Ik is
generally omitted before the genitive of the price, as in v. 13.
See Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 342. Before i)pipav some supply Kard,
but Ete is more correct, as denoting only a single day. Polyb.
VI. 37. ste rbv priva. So in Latin, in. Ovid. Met. II. 47.
Inque diem alipedum jus et moderamen equorum. We have the
same ellipsis in Numb, xxviii. 3. LXX. The verb avpipwvslv
is properly a musical term, expressive of harmony : hence it
denotes generally to consent ; and so to bargain : as here, and
in Acts v. 9. So Diod. Sic. Exc. Val- p. 313. 6 Se rwv TaXa-
rwv riyovpEvog avp(pwvi)aag piaObv ijrEi roiirov. Doddridge,
Kuinoel, Kypke. Various rules and regulations with respect
to hired labourers, and the proportion of wages for a day or
parts of a day, are laid down with great exactness in the tract of
Maimonides, entitled " Hiring," and in Bava Metzia, §. 7.
VOL. I. R

242 MATTHEW XX. 4. 8. 11.
There are many similitudes also in the Talmud, closely parallel
to this parable of our Lord, and in which the principal part even
of the phraseology may be found. The following is from Bera-
choth, p. 5, 3. To what was R. Bon Bar Chaija like ? To a
king who hired many labourers ; among which there was one
hired, who performed his work extraordinarily well. What did
the king ? He took him aside, and walked with him to and fro :
and when even was come, the labourers came that they might
receive their hire, and he gave him a complete hire with the
rest. And the labourers murmured, saying ; We have laboured
hard all the day, and this man only two hours, yet he has re
ceived as much wages as we. The king saith unto them ; He
hath laboured more in those two hours, than you in the whole
day. So R. Bon plied the law more in eight and twenty years
than another in a hundred years. Some have thought the same
turn which is given by the Talmudists, should also be given to
the parable of our Lord ; but of this it is clear that the scope and
design thereof will not admit. It has also been thought, that
this and other of the Gospel parables, have been borrowed by
the Jewish writers, who came after the time of Christ. But it
seems more probable, that our Lord modelled to his own use the
maxims and proverbs then in use, since it is scarcely to be ima
gined that the hatred which they bore to Christ and his religion
would have allowed them to imitate his sayings. Lightfoot,
Whitby. — [Le Clerc]
Ver. 4. o Idv y Sikoiov. Whatever is reasonable. Compare
Phil. i. 7. Col. iv. 1. 2 Pet. i. 13. The same words in v. 7.
are omitted in several MSS. versions and Fathers ; and for
XJ7t//£<r0E, some read SaJerw vplv, probably from this place. Kui
noel,. Doddridge.
Ver. 8. rt£ EVtrpoVtf). Of the duties of this servant, see
Home's Introd. vol. III. p. 435. He seems to have been
nearly the same with our bailiff. Hesych. !7rirp6Voe' 6 7rpo<r-
rarwv xwp'iWV K(" bXrig rfjc ovaiag. By the Romans he was
called procurator. Cic. pro Ccecin. §. 20. Procurator dicitur
omnium rerum ejus — quasi quidam pcene dominus, hoc est, alieni
juris vicarius. In vv. 9, 10. the preposition dvd is used adver
bially, singulatim. So in Rev. xxi. 21. dvd Eig EKaarog. Kui
noel.
Ver. 11. !yoyyv£ov. That this was the case of the Jews,
upon a general notion of the Gentiles being admitted into the
same Church privileges with themselves, is evident from a variety
of Scriptures. See Acts xi. 2, 3. xiii. 45. sqq. xvii. 5. 13.
xviii. 6. 13. xxii. 21, 22. xxviii. 29. Rom. xi. 28. 1 Thess.
ii. 16. Doddridge.

MATTHEW XX. 13. 16. 243
Ver. 12. piav tlipav iiroirjaav. These words are sometimes
rendered have spent one hour ; as if those who had been first en
gaged, intended to speak slightingly of those who had come last
into the vineyard. That the verb Trotstv will admit of this sense,
is evident from Tobit x. 7. LXX. Actsxv. 33. xviii. 23. 2 Cor.
xi. 25. James iv. 13. So also Eurip. Hippol. 37. iviavrbv
TrotEtv e%w rrig irarpiSog. Lucilius in Anthol. II. 1. 8. vvktu
piaw iiroiriaE. Facio is employed in the same sense by Seneca ;
Epist. 66. Quamvis autem paucissimos una fecerimus dies,
tamen multi nobis sermones fuerunt. In this case, however,
the adverb coSe, or the words Iv t<£ dpirEXwvi, would, in all
probability, have been added; so that it is better to understand
spyov. Of ttoieIv in the sense of Ipyd^EtrfJae, there are ex
amples in Ruth ii. 19. LXX. Matt. xxi. 28. So Columell. de Re
Rust. II. 2.facere agrum. Kuinoel, Whitby. — [Wetstein,
Palairet.] Ver. 13. IrcupE, ovk dStKiu cte. The salvation of the Gentiles
is no impediment to that of the Jews ; but eternal life is offered
to both on the .same terms. The gift is God's, who has therefore
a right to bestow it upon whom he pleases, and upon what con
ditions he may choose to appoint. — The word IraTpE is an affable
form of address from a superior to one in a lower rank of
life ; sometimes indicative of a gentle reproof. Compare Matt.
xxii. 12. xxvi. 50. The expression brpOaXpbg irovripog, denoting
envy or covetousness, is explained on Matt. vi. 22. On the
other hand, dyafloe frequently signifies bountiful or liberal : as
Matt. xii. 12. Acts ix. 36. James iii. 17. and elsewhere. See
also Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 298. Kuinoel, Grotius, Le
Clerc.
Ver. 16. 7roXXot ydp Etert KXrjrot, k. t. X. In some places of
the N. T. as, for instance, Rev. xvii. 14. the terms kX^toi and
IkXektoi, seem to be nearly synonymous, as applied to those who,
being called, obeyed the invitation, and therefore are become the
elect, or chosen, of God. The former appellation also, is sometimes
used of those who are not only called, but who received the call,
and are therefore essentially Christians : as Rom. i. 6. 1 Cor. i.
1, 2. 24. and elsewhere^ But the words are properly distinct ; re
ferring to two different stages in the Gospel dispensation. In
fact, the terms were originally Jewish forms of expression, and
thence applied by Christ and his Apostles to similar distinctions
in his own Church. The Jews, had been selected from all
other nations, and called to peculiar privileges, as the chosen
people of God; whence they were denominated KXrjrot and
IkXektoi indifferently. Thus the whole nation are called Ik
Xektoi, Psalm cv. 6. but such as were set apart to any distin
guished office, were more properly so denominated ; as Moses,
r2

244 MATTHEW XX. 18. 20.
Psalm cvi. 23. David, Psalm lxxxix. 3. Saul, 2 Sam. xxi. 6.
Hence, in this parable, the KXrjrot, or called, are those of the
Jews who were invited to the marriage-supper of the Gospel, but
slighted and rejected it, (Luke xiv. 18.): the IkXektoi, on the
other hand, are those who embraced the call, and are therefore
denominated by St. Paul, the iKXoyi), and the remnant kot
iviXoyriv, Rom. xi. 6, 7. Some would extend the import of the
maxim to Christians in all ages ; so that the kXjjtoi would be
those who are mere professors of the religion of Jesus, and the
IkXektoi those who have so received the Gospel, as to be ap
proved and chosen of God. But, in this place at least, the scope
of the parable will not admit of such an interpretation. Of the
custom to which our Lord alludes, see Home's Introd. Vol. III.
p. 200. Whitby, Grotius. — [Kuinoel.]
Ver. 18. KOTaKptvovertv aiirbv Oavdrw. That is, KaraKptvov-
crtv aiirbv iivat ivoxov Oavdrov, as stated by Mark xiv. 64. The
Jews had now no judicial power of life and death. By rote
iOvEai the Romans are intended, and crucifixion was a Roman
punishment. Grotius. This prediction is a remarkable proof
of the prophetic powers of Christ ; for, humanly speaking, it was
much more probable that he should have been privately assassi
nated, or stoned, in some zealous transport of popular fury, than
solemnly condemned before a Roman tribunal. Indeed, when
the Jews condemned him for blasphemy, which was legally
punishable by stoning ; and when Pilate at last gave them per
mission to judge him according to their own law, (Matt. xxvi. 65,
66. John xviii. 31. xix. 7.) it is wonderful that this death was not
decreed against him. But all this was done that the Scripture
might be fulfilled. Doddridge.
Ver. 20. i) pr)rrip twv vlwv Z. Her name was Salome. Com
pare Mark xv. 40. with Matt, xxvii. 56. The request which
she now made to Christ, probably originated in the promise just
given to the Apostles, of sitting on twelve thrones, judging the
twelve tribes of Israel. She seems to have alluded to a custom
of the Sanhedrim,' in which the two principal officers, called Ab
Beth Diu, the father of the council, and Chacham, the sage,
sate on the right and left hand respectively of the Nasi, or Pre
sident. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 115. At all events, to
sit on the right hand and left hand was always a mark of the
most exalted dignity. Compare 1 Sam. xx. 25. 1 Kings ii. 19.
Psalm xiv. 9. ex. i. 1. Esdr. iii. 7. iv. 42. 1 Mace. x. 63. •
Ecclus. xii. 12. Joseph. Ant. XI. 4. According to Mark x. 35.
James and John presented the request for themselves : i. e. they
presented it through the medium of their mother. See on Matt.
viii. 5. They may probably have been induced to make it, in
consideration of their near relationship with Christ, and the

MATTHEW XX. 22, 23. 245
peculiar favour and attachment with which he regarded them.
Whitby, Doddridge, Grotius.
Ver. 22. ovk oi'SarE, ri alrElaOs. That is, you do not justly
comprehend the nature of my kingdom, which will rather call
you to suffer after my example, than to temporal advantage and
aggrandizement. Of the metaphorical signification of the word
cup, as denoting the portion of good or evil which is assigned
to men in this life, see my note on Hom. II. 12. 527. The meta
phor of baptism also is familiar in Scripture, to signify a person
overwhelmed with calamities, as it were with a flood of waters.
Compare Psalm xiii. 7. lxix. 2. lxxxviii. 7. Cant. viii. 7. Jerem.
xlvii. 2. Ezek. xxvi. 19. Dan, ix. 26. Jon. ii. 3. Christ also
speaks of his death, as of a baptism to be baptized with, Luke
xii. 50. and the same figure is employed by profane writers.
Achill. Tat. III. p. 179. ed. Salm. ri rriXiKoiirov rjStKrjcraiiEv, wg
ev bXiyaig i)pipaig roaovrw irXriOsi KaraflairriaOrivai kokcuv.
Somewhat similar is the expression kokwv iriXayog, illustrated
in my note on Msch. Theb. 755. Pent. Gr. p. 457. So Virg.
iEn. VI. 512. His mersere malis. It is supposed by some,
that our Lord alludes to the cruelty of baptism, as practised by
the Jews ; the whole body being immersed in water even in the
coldest seasons ; in consequence of which, as the Talmudists
relate in Berachoth, p. 6, 3. the women of Galilee were fre
quently barren. But this is somewhat strained and unnatural.
According to the prediction here delivered, James and John
were baptized with Christ's baptism. The former was put to
death by Herod, (Acts xii. 2.) : and the latter was banished to
the isle of Patmos, (Rev. i. 9.) There is also a tradition that
John was cast into a cauldron of boiling oil at Rome, which is
received by Chrysostom, but rejected by Tertullian. It is not to
be doubted, however, that he had his share of the persecutions
from which none of Christ's Apostles were exempted. Whitby,
Doddridge, Macknight, Kuinoel. — [Lightfoot.] It should
be observed, that the whole clause rj to fidirrtapa, k. t. X. and that
corresponding to it in the subsequent verse, are in this Gospel
wanting in several MSS. and some versions and Fathers. But
they are found in the greater number of copies, and perfectly
coincide with the scope of the passage, nor is there any sufficient
authority, as some have thought, to justify their omission. Wet
stein, Campbell. — [Griesbach, Mill, Grotius.]
Ver. 23. ovk 'iartv ipbv k. t. X. According to the E. T. and
some other versions, there is here an ellipsis of the verb So#?j-
aErai, and the sense thus supplied affords some colour to the
Arian and Socinian heresies. By disclaiming all discretionary
power in the distribution of future rewards, our Lord is thus
made to acknowledge his inferiority to the Father, there being

246 MATTHEW XX. 25.
some power which the Father has reserved to himself, and not
committed to the Son. But the fact is, that there is no ellipsis
whatever in the passage ; for the conjunction dXXd, when, as in
this place, it is not followed by a verb, but by a noun or pronoun,
is equivalent with ei pi), except. Compare Matt. xvii. 8. with
Mark ix. 8. Hence the expression here employed argues no
defect in the power of Christ, but merely a perfect conformity to
his Father's will ; in accordance with which he can assign the
chief places in the kingdom of heaven to those only, whose
pre-eminent faith and fortitude deserve them. The Socinian
tenets, supported by the received translation of this verse, are in
direct opposition to Luke xxii. 29. 1 Cor. xii. 5. Rev. iii. 21.
Whitby, Macknight, Campbell.
Ver. 25. oISute, on ol dpxovrsg k. t. X. It cannot be inferred
from this passage, as some have contended, that the exercise of
all dominion is forbidden in a Christian community. The autho
rity of parents over their children, of masters over their servants,
of magistrates, kings, and ecclesiastical rulers, is enforced in
such clear and positive terms in other parts of the N. T. as to
set aside any such conclusion. Compare Rom. xiii. 6. 1 Cor.
v. 5. xii. 28. 2 Cor. iv. 21. x. 6. 8. xiii. 10. Ephes. vi. 1. 5.
Coloss. iii. 22. 1 Thess. v. 12. 1 Tim. vi. 1. 2 Tim. i. 20. Heb.
xiii. 7. 17. It has also been supposed that our Lord employed
the compound verbs KaraKvptEvav and KarE^ovaid^Eiv, in order
to express an indirect reprehension of tyrannical and arbitrary
power, in which sense they are used in Nehem. v. 14, 15. ix. 37.
Ezra vii. 24. Psalm x. 5. 10. Ecclus. xx. 8. But in Luke
xxii. 25. the simple verbs only are used ; not to mention that
kings and governors among the Gentiles cannot be supposed to
have been always guilty of mal-administration. It was simply
our Lord's intention to check the ambitious pride of his disciples,
by assuring them that his kingdom was not, as they imagined, of
the same nature with the kingdoms of the world ; but that the
true dignity of the Christian will arise more from the service
which he does to others, than the power he possesses over them.
In this they were to follow the example of their Master, whose
greatness consisted not in being ministered to by men, but in
ministering to them, by healing their sick, feeding the hungry,
instructing the ignorant, and giving his life as a ransom for the
sins of the world. The request of the two brethren plainly
shews that they did not understand our Lord's declaration to
Peter in Matt. xvi. 18. as designed to invest him with any autho
rity over the rest of the Apostles ; and the reply which Christ
here gives, is decisive on that head. Doddridge, Whitby,
Macknight. Some have supposed that the pronoun aiirwv re
lates to the Gentiles only in the first clause of the verse, and that
it is repeated in reference lo «'pxovtec, which is understood to

MATTHEW XX. 28. 217
denote the governors of provinces, and therefore holding domi
nion under the'Roman emperors, who are termed pEydXot. But
this is less natural ; and the repetition of the same sentiment in
different words in this, and again in v. 27. is merely for the sake
of emphasis. Kuinoel. — [Grotius.]
Ver. 28. Xirrpov dvrt 7roXXwv. The word Xvrpov signifies a
ransom, ox price of redemption, whether from death, captivity,
or any other state of misery whatsoever. In Exod. xxi. 30.
LXX. it is used for the Hebrew pH3, pedion, the ransom for a
man's life. But it more generally corresponds in the LXX with
the Hebrew 133, copher, which signifies a piacular sacrifice;
as in Numb. xxxv. 31. Prov. vi. 35.: in which latter place
several other versions use i^iXaapa, and the LXX themselves
also translate the verb 133, by i^iXdaOai, in Levit. iv. 20. x. 17.
Psalm cvi. 30. In this sense also the Greek word is employed in
Lucian. D. D. p. 125. Kpibv TEQvasaOai Xxirpa virip ipoii. He
sych. l^tXacTjUa* dvrtXvrpov. With respect to the efficacy of
vicarious sacrifices, the whole Gentile world, as well as the Jews,
were very generally persuaded that piacular victims were accepted
as an atonement for the life of an offender ; and that the life of
one person was, in some cases, given for the life of another.
These persons were called dvrnpvxol, and there is an oracular
response in Aristid. Sacr. V. founded upon this notion, wherein
ipvxi) dvrt \pvxvg is required. So Virg. JEn. V. 85. Unum pro
multis dabitur caput. Compare also Josh. ii. 14. LXX. Joseph.
de Maccab. p. 1090. C. Porphyr. de Abstin. IV. 15. Eurip.
Phoen. 1011. Alcest. 293. See also Home's Introd. Vol. III.
p. 157. Our Lord, therefore, clearly meant, and was under
stood by the Apostles to mean, that he gave his life instead of
the life of others. Some, indeed, have supposed, that the words
Xvrpov dvrt 7roXXct>v mean, one ransom instead of many ransoms ;
i. e. the many prescribed by the Jewish law ; and the Socinians
affirm, that the death of Christ was not intended as a substitute
for that of men, but as the seal and ratification of the New Cove
nant. The criticism, upon which this depends, is supported by
Deut. vii. 8. LXX, where the verb iXvrpwaaro signifies simply,
delivered from captivity. But there no ransom is mentioned ;
whereas the death of Christ is here expressly stated as the
Xvrpov, and the sense of the passage is confirmed beyond all
doubt by the use of the preposition dvrt in its strong and original
sense of instead, in the place of. The word 7roXXtt>v has also
been a stumbling-block, as seeming to imply, that redemption is
not universcd. Some have argued, therefore, that iroXXol is used
of believers only ; but it is far more satisfactory to understand
7roXXot in the sense of 7rdvr£e, which it clearly bears in a variety
of passages. Compare especially Dan. xii. 2. with John v.
28, 29. and Rom. v. 15. 19. with 1 Cor. xv. 12. 22. Again, a
10

248 MATTHEW XX. 29.
question has arisen, whether the prevalent opinion respecting the
Messiah, that he would not be subject to death, (John xii. 34.)
would have allowed the Apostles to understand Jesus as speaking
to the effect which his words imply. It is certain, indeed, that
they did not altogether comprehend the nature and intent of
Christ's sufferings, even after his repeated declarations on that
subject ; still it is equally true that many of the more enlightened
Jews expected that their Messiah would make some sort of expi
ation for the sins of their nation. He is spoken of, for instance,
as 133 ItPN, aish copher, which is equivalent with dv^p Xvrpov,
an appellation which probably originated in Dan. ix. 24. where
it is predicted that he should make reconciliation for iniquity.
Compare Matt. xxvi. 28. John xi. 51, 52. Ephes. v. 2. 1 Tim.
ii. 6. Heb. ix. 14. 28. Whitby, Le Clerc, Kypke, Kuinoel.
— [Grotius, Calvin, Wakefield.] There is a remarkable
addition to this passage in the Codex Bezce, and some MSS.
and Versions ; but it is evidently an interpolation from some
Apocryphal Gospel.
Ver. 29. lK7ropEvojulvaJV aiirwv dirb lEpixw, k. t. X. The
event here related is generally admitted by the commentators to
be the same with that recorded in Mark x. 46. Luke xviii. 35.
At the same time there are several apparent discrepancies in the
three accounts respectively, which have given rise to various
methods of reconciling the Evangelists with each other, and
have induced some to suppose that two at least, if not three dis
tinct occurrences, are intended. That the cures are the same
will scarcely be doubted by any who attentively observe the
sameness of the incidents in the three several narratives. Two
facts only, of apparently great importance it must be owned, con
stitute the difficulty : 1 . Matthew and Mark state the cure to
have been effected as Jesus departed from Jericho, whereas
Luke relates it as he drew near to that city ; 2. Two blind men
were cured according to Matthew, while Mark and Luke men
tion only one, whose name, according to the former, was Bar-
timceus. In order to account for the first of these discrepancies
some suppose that one blind man was cured as Jesus entered,
and the other as he left the city ; that Luke speaks of the first,
Mark of the other, and that Matthew includes both in one nar
ration. But it is scarcely probable that the people would have
reproved Bartimaeus for his importunity, if a cure of the same re
markable character had been wrought but a short time before,
at the entrance into the town. The same objection applies to
the supposition, that there were two towns of the same name, but
distinguished as Old and New Jericho, and that the cures were
performed at the entrance of Christ into one, and his departure
from the other, respectively. Others again conjecture that Jesus
passed the man as he entered the city without healing him, in

MATTHEW XX. 81. 34. 249
order to try his faith, but cured him on his return, and another
who had joined him. This evidently does not remove the diffi
culty, the whole of which in fact resides in the incorrect ren
dering of St. Luke's expression Iv ry iyyi&tv. Not only the
E. T., but other versions also have understood this to mean as
he drew near, whereas it should unquestionably be translated in
definitely while he was near. It is thus left undetermined at
which extremity of the city the miracle was wrought ; and that
the words will bear this construction is amply confirmed by
Isaiah i. 8. Jerem. xxiii. 23. LXX. Luke x. 9. xv. 1. xviii. 40.
xix. 29. Rom. xiii. 12. With respect to the number of the per
sons to whom sight was restored, the opinion of Augustine, (de
Cons. Evang. II. 124.) is very probable, that one of the beggars
was more remarkable than the other, being the son of Timceus,
who had formerly perhaps been a person of some distinction,
and that having fallen into poverty and blindness he was forced
to beg for his bread : he may also have made himself remarkable
by the extraordinary earnestness of his application. An instance
of similar discrepancy occurs in Matt. viii. 28. Vide locum.
Doddridge, Grotius, Newcome. — [Lightfoot, Macknight,
Calvin, &c]
Ver. 31. iirEripriaEv. E. T. rebuked; but Campbell prefers
charged, observing that the historian did not mean to blame the
poor men for their importunity, since our Lord both by word
and deed was accustomed to commend such application. Now
the Evangelist merely records the transaction, stating that the
rebuke came from the multitude ; and it does not appear how the
conduct of the mob is to be charged upon the historian. It is
true, indeed, that iiriripav is sometimes simply to charge, but it
much more frequently means to rebuke in the N. T., as Matt.
xvi. 22. Mark ix. 25. and elsewhere ; and certainly something
stronger than a simple admonition might naturally be expected
from a collected multitude. They may have deemed it expedient
to impose silence upon Bartimaeus and his companion from fear
of the powerful men of the city, in regard to the safety of Jesus,
or from a wish to prevent any interruption to his passage, or
from impatience at the disturbance by which his discourse may
have been rendered inaudible. Of the ellipsis of "iva in the fol
lowing verse see my note on Eurip. Phoen. 734. Pent. Gr. p.
347. Ver. 34. r)KoXovOriaav airy. The allegorical reflection which
Erasmus makes on this circumstance is beautiful : — Ita sanat
animum cupiditatibus mundanis exccecatum suo contactu Jesus,
et in hoc datur lumen, ut illius sequamur vestigia. Macknight.

250 MATTHEW XXI. 1.

CHAPTER XXI.
Contents : — Christ' s public entry into Jerusalem, and expulsion
of the money-changers, fyc. vv. 1 — 13. [Markxi. 1. Luke xix.
29. John xii. 12.] He heals the sick in the Temple, reproves
the chief priests, and goes to Bethany, vv. 14 — 17. The
barren fig-tree blasted, vv. 18 — 22. [Mark xi. 12.] The au
thority qf Christ questioned, and his reply to the chief priests,
vv. 23—27. [Mark xi. 27. Luke xx. 1.] The parable of the
two sons, vv. 28 — 32. Parable of the vineyard, its applica
tion to the Pharisees, and their consequent indignation, vv.
33—46. [Mark xii. 1. Luke xx. 9.]
Verse 1. ote rjyyetrav k. t. X. Several particulars not re
corded by St. Matthew occurred between the miracle related in
the last chapter and Christ's public entry into Jerusalem ; and
among others the raising of Lazarus from the dead, which is de
tailed in John xi. 17. sqq. This display of omnipotence had
attracted an amazing multitude around him, and opened the way
for the completion of one of the most remarkable prophecies in
Holy Writ. It will be necessary to make a few observations
[on Christ's triumphant entry into Jerusalem.
The time was now fast approaching when Christ was to com
plete the office for which he came into the world, by dying upon
the cross : previous to this, however, it was necessary that the
people should honour him with the title of Messiah publicly,
and give him the opportunity of accepting that august name in
the most avowed manner before he ascended into heaven. The
priests, who had issued out a proclamation against him, (John
xi. 57.) were to be restrained for a while by the popular emotion
from offering him violence, as he had doctrines to teach, rebukes
to give, and predictions to deliver, which would otherwise in
evitably have ended in a death at once premature, and of a dif
ferent nature to that which he was ordained to suffer. With respect
to the manner of his entry into Jerusalem, it was precisely that
which indicated the strongest and most unequivocal persuasion of
the attendant crowds that he was their Messiah and^heir King.
The spreading of the garment before him, the carrying of palm
and other branches, and the acclamations with which they wel
comed him, are precisely the tokens by which they acknowledged
the presence of their princes, and which they expected their
Messiah to receive. Compare 2 Kings ix. 13. 1 Mace. xiii. 51.
2 Mace. x. 7. Jos. Ant. II." 83. Phil, de Legg. I. ^Esch.
Ag. 918. Herod. VII. 54. Plutarch, Cat. Min. 12.. and see

MATTHEW XXI. 1. 251
Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 87. 318. It has been ob
jected, indeed, that there is something mean and ridiculous in
the idea of the Saviour riding upon an ass ; but it should be
remembered, that the unmerited insignificance of this animal in
modern times did not attach to it among the early oriental na
tions. The Eastern asses are much larger and more beautiful
than ours, and kings and patriarchs did not disdain to ride upon
them. Compare Gen. xxii. 3. Exod. iv. 20. Numb. xxii. 21.
Judg. v. 10. x. 4. 2 Sam. xvi. 2. xvii. 23. xix. 26. and see my
note on Hom. II. A. 557. The circumstance was an exact ful
filment of the prophecy in Zech. ix. 9. and indicative of the
meekness and humility of Christ, and the gentleness of his ad
ministration, at the same time that it exemplified, in the most
expressive manner, his strict observance of the divine law. God,
that he might keep the people of Israel in a more sensible de
pendence on himself, forbade the use of horses, as also of cha
riots, in their armies, see Deut. xvii. 16. Josh. xi. 6. Judg. v. 15.
David therefore rode on a mule, and ordered Solomon to do so,
on his coronation day, (1 Kings i. 33, 34.) burnt the chariots he
took from the enemy, and ham-strung their horses, (2 Sam. viii.
4.) to make them unfit for war. Afterwards also, when Solomon
(1 Kings iv. 26.) and succeeding princes multiplied horses, they
were rebuked by the prophets and chastised by God for it. See
Isaiah ii. 6, 7. xxxi. 1 . Hos. xiv. 3. Compare also Hos. i. 7.
Micah v. 10, 11. Zech. ix. 10. Of the completion of the pro
phecy of Zechariah in Jesus Christ there can be no doubt, not
only from the declarations of the Evangelists, but from its exact
application to him, and to no other person whatsoever ; for
though historians speak of -the entrances of several princes and
conquerors into Jerusalem, to none of them will it apply in all its
minute particulars. It has been supposed, for instance, that it
may have referred to Zorobabel, but the prophecy was written sub
sequent to his residence in the city, after the return from the cap
tivity. In its reference to their expected Messiah the Rabbins are
almost universally agreed. Thus Midrach Koheleth, p. 61, 2.
Such as our first Redeemer (Moses) was, such also shall be the
last, (the Messiah) ; they first set his wife and children upon an
ass, (Exod. iv. 20.) and so shall it be with the last, of whom it is
said, He is poor, and sitting upon an ass. In Sanhedrim, §. II.
p. 98. it is said, Sapores, King of Persia, said to R. Samuel,
You say your Messiah will come upon an ass, I will send him a
noble horse. To which R. Samuel replied, You have not a
horse with a hundred spots like his ass. A variety of citations to
the same effect abound in the Talmud ; and in the Seder Ha-
gada, ox Book of Paschal rites, it is related, that during the
Paschal feast it was usual for a man, personating the Messiah,
to ride into the room upon an ass, in allusion to the manner in
which he was expected to enter Jerusalem. There is a story

252 MATTHEW XXI. 2.
also in Diod. Sic. Excerp. XXXIV. invented probably by the
Greeks in derision of this expectation, that Antiochus Epiphanes,
entering the holy place in the Temple, found there the image of
a man with a long beard riding on an ass. There is no doubt,
therefore, that the Jews, at our Lord's public entry into Jeru
salem, were fully impressed with his exact resemblance to Ze-
chariah's description, and hailed him accordingly, upon the faith
of this prediction, as their expected king. Whitby, Doddridge,
Lightfoot, Schoettgen. — [Grotius.]
In undertaking this journey to Jerusalem our Lord has been
accused of attempting to feel how far the populace were disposed
to favour his pretensions in establishing himself as a king in the
land, or, at least, of giving occasion to popular tumult and sedi
tion. The cavil is completely refuted by every circumstance
connected with the transaction : he had previously predicted
that he was going up to Jerusalem in order that all things which
had been spoken by the prophets concerning him might be ac
complished ; and it was only five days after his arrival that he
was condemned and crucified by that very multitude which had
so lately hailed him as the Christ. During this five days, which
he employed as he was ever wont, in teaching, he uttered no
maxim dissimilar to his former precepts, nor said a word which
was calculated to produce any feeling in the minds of the people
than that of piety towards God. It is true that with the cha
racter of the Messiah the Jews had always connected that of
secular royalty ; and if Jesus had meditated any ambitious pur
pose he had now the fairest opportunity of accomplishing his
design. He received, indeed, for reasons already assigned, the
public acknowledgment of his Messiahship, but instead of at
tempting to advance any secular view, he retired, after the labours
of the day, to the private seclusion of Mount Olivet, and pre
pared himself by secret prayer and meditation for the awful
scene which he knew to be approaching. Rosenmuller, A.
Clarke.] Ver. 2. WtoXov pET avrrig. Mark xi. 2. irf ov ovSEte dvOpdi-
irwv KEKaOiKE. It was usual with the ancients to use for any
sacred purpose animals which had not been employed in any
ordinary work. See Deut. xxi. 3. 1 Sam. vi. 7. Horat. Epod. 9.
22. Ovid. Met. III. 12. Virg. Georg. IV. 540. 551. There are
some trifling difficulties connected with our Lord's command to
his disciples. Mark and Luke, who do not cite the prophecy of
Zecharias, represent our Lord as sending for the colt only ; but
this very naturally arose from the circumstance that he rode only
upon the colt, and though both were brought, in strict accordance
with the prophecy, that only may have been mentioned which
was the principal feature in the affair. In saying that our Lord

MATTHEW XXI. 3. 5. 9. 253
sent for the one, the Evangelists do not say that he did not send
for the other. By the use of the plural, however, in v. 7. it has
been inferred that both were used by Christ at different stages of
the journey : but this is highly improbable, and it is by no means
unusual with the sacred writers, when either the nature of the
thing spoken of or the attendant circumstances are sufficient for
precluding mistakes, to employ the plural number for the sin
gular. The difficulty may also be removed, and perhaps more
correctly, by rendering lirdvcu avrwv upon one of them. See on
Matt. iv. 3. It would be a ready solution of the matter, if it
were not for the express distinction, to render the conjunction
Kat in vv. 5. 7. merely as an explicative particle ; and so it is in
fact rendered by some, an ass, even a colt. Others again, with
Euthymius, refer the latter aiirwv to Ipdrta. But this method is
extremely harsh and unsatisfactory, and, at the same time, it ap
pears unnecessary. Kuinoel, Le Clerc, Campbell. In the
whole of this transaction we cannot but observe a wonderful in
stance of Christ's prescience in the minutest matters: — 1. You
shall find a colt : 2. On which never man sat : 3. Bound with its
mother : 4. In bivio : 5. At the entrance of the village : 6. The
owners shall at first hesitate : but, 7. Eventually consent to send
them. Whitby.
Ver. 3. 6 Kvpcoe. Some understand the Lord the Messiah ;
and others, that Christ claims to himself the title Kar i%,oxnv, as
Lord of all things ; but it is better to take it simply in the sense
of the Hebrew 31, with the article prefixed as a possessive pro
noun. See on Matt. vii. 21. There is no appearance of Christ's
intending to shew his sovereignty in transferring the property of
these creatures, nor is such a supposition consistent with the
general tenor of his proceedings. The owners, who were near
them, were in all probability acquainted with Christ and his dis
ciples ; and doubtless, though the Evangelists do not descend to
these minute particulars, the asses were properly cared for, and
duly returned to their possessors. Doddridge, Kuinoel.
Ver. 5. E'iirarE ry Ovyarpl 2to>v. That is, Jerusalem; so
named from Mount Zion, which was in the city, and on which
was erected a fortress for its defence. See Joseph. B. J. V. 4. 1.
This poetical manner of personifying cities and countries to
which they address themselves was familiar to the prophets.
Compare Psalm xiv. 13. cxxxvii. 8. Jerem. xlvi. 24. Lam. i. 6.
ii. 1 . Amos v. 1 . This opening to the prophecy seems to have
been transferred from Isaiah lxii. 11. Campbell, Glasse.
Ver. 9. EvXoyripivog. Scil. iarw. Acclamations of this kind
are always of the nature of prayers, or ardent wishes. Thus the
preceding words 'Qcrawd rt$ vl$ Aavl'S are equivalent to God

251 MATTHEW XXI. 12, 13.
preserve the son of David! for the Hebrew verb VW, yashang, — ¦
of which 'ilcrawd, Hebrew KJ }WlJ"|, hoshiang na, i. e. save
now, is a derivative, — sometimes governs a dative. Compare Josh.
x. 6. Judg. vii. 2. x. 14. 1 Sam. xxv. 26. Job xl. 14. Psalm
xliv. 4. The phrase rd viptara denotes the heavens, so that
'Qiaavvd iv rolg iiipiaroig is an address to God, 6 Iv rote inpiaroig,
in favour of the Messiah. Of the peculiar import of these ac
clamations, as connected with the Feast of Tabernacles, see
Home. The titles vlbg Aavt'S and 6 ipxbpEvog were well-known
appellations of the Messiah. See on Matt. i. 1. xi. 3. Kuinoel,
Campbell. Ver. 12. £te rb hpov. This word comprehends the whole
building of the Temple, with all its courts, as distinguished from
the vaoe, or Temple strictly so called, including only the vesti
bule, the sanctuary, and the holy of holies. In illustration of
the passage, and the terms employed, see Home's Introd. Vol.
III. pp. 185. 239. sqq. It has appeared strange to some that
the money-changers and sellers of doves, — for the offerings,, it
should seem, of the poor, Luke ii. 24. — should make no resist
ance. They were probably struck by the secret energy of
Christ's omnipotence ; and Jerome even supposes that igneum
quiddam atque sidereum radiebat ex oculis ejus, et divinitatis
majestas lucebat in facie. But without having recourse to any
thing supernatural the sellers and buyers may have been inti
midated by our Lord's numerous train of attendants, who be
lieved him to be the Messiah, and were ready to support any
reformation which he should think proper to make. It was ge
nerally believed among the Rabbins that the Messiah would be
invested with the power of reforming abuses, and that he would
enact divers new laws. Hence, in Midrasch Schir Haschirim,
II. 13. R. Chiyah said, Tliis must be referred to the days of
the Messiah. A great event will happen in the world: the
Law. will be changed, and Israel reformed. So Jalkut Shemuni
on Isaiah, p. 46. 1. The holy blessed One shall sit and proclaim
a new law, which he is about to deliver through the Messiah.
Kuinoel, Macknight.
Ver. 13. yiypairrar k. t. X. The former part of this Scrip
ture is from Isaiah lvi. 7. and the latter from Jerem. vii. 11.
The word Xjjerrat signifies not only robbers, but generally men
of infamous character, and especially such as lived by extortion
and unjust gain. So Jerome in loc. Latro est, et Templum Dei
in latronum convertit specum, qui lucra de Religione sectatur, et
quibus cultus ejus non tam cultus Dei quam negotiations occasio
est. In John ii. 16. the expression is otKoe ipiropiov. Our
Lord's assertion is fully confirmed by Josephus, B.- J. V. 9. 4.
ov rd -Kpv7rrd piv rwv apaprripdrwu r)So%r)Kars, KXoirdg Xiyw Kal

MATTHEW XXI. 16. 255
IvlSpae Kat potXEiag, dpirayatg S' ipi^ETE Kat rpovoig, Kal %,ivag
Katvo7rot£iTE KaKtae bSovg' IkSoxeiov Se irdvrtov to hpbv ylyovs.
In the expression aTr^Xaiov Xjjcstwv there seems to be an allu
sion to the custom which robbers in those parts had of shelter
ing themselves in dens and caves in the wilderness, where great
multitudes often joined in sharing their plunder. See Joseph.
Ant. XIV. 15. 5. The practice, however, was not confined to
Judea ; a similar account is given of Cacus, in Virg. /En. VIII.
193. sqq. who stole the oxen of Hercules,* and is called by Pro-
pertius metuendo Raptor ab antro, Eleg. IV. 10. Hence also
airr/Xaiov XrjerrtKov in Heliod. ^Ethiop. V. 2. The allusion is
more apparent by comparing John ii. 1 4. where it is said that
Christ found in the Temple those who sold oxen and sheep.
Doddridge, Hammond, Wetstein, Bowyer.
Ver. 16. KaTjjprtcrco alvov. Thou hast perfected praise. He
sych. Karrjprtcrtt)' l7TOtr)trae, irEXEitoaag. The citation is from
Psalm viii. 3. where the original is rightly rendered thou hast or
dained strength : implying that the divine perfections are manifest
in the providence which God exercises towards even the weakest
of his creatures, and consequently that the divine praise is per
fected even by the silent eloquence of the suckling, and the artless
cry of the babe. Hence the sense of the Psalm, and of the
LXX translation, from which the Evangelist quotes, are pre
cisely equivalent, though the words are somewhat different.
Some have supposed that our Lord merely accommodates the
passage to the passing circumstance ; but that the whole Psalm
has a prophetic reference to the Messiah is sufficiently proved
by three other places in the N. T. in which it is applied to him.
See 1 Cor. xv. 27. Ephes. i. 22. Heb. ii. 6. It maybe remarked
also, that the babes and sucklings will readily admit of a more
extensive meaning, as predicting the triumph of the Apostles,
weak as in many respects they were, over all the opposition of
the Jews and Gentiles. With respect to the offence taken by
the Pharisees, there was nothing uncommon in the children's
joining in public acclamation ; and it was thus they were accus
tomed to salute their Rabbins. In addition to the natural ten
dency in children to imitate the actions of others, they were
taught from their earliest infancy to take a part in the Hosannas
at their solemn festivals. Succah, §. 3. in fine : — A child, as
soon as he knows how to wave the bundle, is bound to carry a
bundle; i. e. a bundle of palm-boughs, which was called Ho-
sanna, from the acclamation of those who carried it. Hence
their disregard of the prophecy, and their indignation at the
shouts of the children, were the sole effect of their rooted hatred
against Christ. Doddridge, Lightfoot, A. Clarke. — [Whit
by.] The verb avXiUaQai, in the next verse, generally signifies
to abide in any place, as the Latin manere. So 3 Esdr. ix. 2.

256 MATTHEW XXL 18.
Ecclus. xxiv. 7. Hesych. avXiZopai' pivw, IvSiarpi^io. Xen.
Anab. IV. 3. 1. ravrrjv r?5v ripipav tivXiaOnaai. Hence it also
denotes to lodge, to pass the night : Lat. pernoctare ; and in
this sense vvKroe is sometimes added, as in Diod. Sic. p. 333. C.
avXt£oju!vove Iv ry ttoXei vvKrog. In this sense it is here used :
and it seems that our Lord lodged in the house of Lazarus,
whom he had raised from the dead. Compare John xii. 1 .-
Kuinoel.
Ver. 18. irpwiag Se Iffavdyeuv k. r. X. According to Mark
xi. 12. Christ cursed the barren fig-tree on the same day that he
drove the buyers and sellers from the Temple, but the Apostles
did not observe that it had withered till the following morning.
The two accounts are easily reconciled by supposing that Matthew
relates the occurrence briefly, without distinctly stating all the
particulars, whereas Mark has told it precisely as it happened,
pointing out the relation which it' bore throughout to other
events. Some indeed suppose, with great probability, that the
buyers and sellers were ejected twice ; and that Mark has re
corded a distinct action from that in Matthew and Luke. This
is greatly confirmed by several considerations. Both Matthew
and Mark distinctly mention that our Lord went into the Temple
on the day of his public entry into Jerusalem. Now the latter
merely states that he looked round about upon all things on that
day, connecting the ejection of the money-changers with the oc
currences of the following day. But Matthew so expressly joins
this act with the transactions of the first day, that although it is
certain that the Evangelists are not always exact in observing the
order of time, it is highly reasonable to suppose that the Temple
was purged on this day. In fact, from St. Mark's expression
that he observed what was passing, we may fairly conclude to the
same effect, as it is scarcely probable that he would do this
without reforming the abuses which presented themselves. At
the same time Mark positively asserts that the traders were
driven out on the next day after the cursing of the fig-tree ; nor
is it altogether likely that a single expulsion would be sufficient
to abolish their unholy traffic. It should seem also that the
second purification of the Temple was more complete than the
former, as he then prohibited even the carrying of a vessel
through it, (Mark xi. 16.) which is a circumstance unnoticed
both by Matthew and Luke in their account of the transactions
of the preceding day. Hence the order of events will be, 1. The
public entry into Jerusalem, and the first ejection of the traders
on the Sunday, with other events related in John xii. and
Christ's retirement to Bethany in the evening ; 2. The fig-tree
cursed in the morning of Monday; 3. The buyers and sellers
again ejected ; 4. Christ retires again in the evening, Mark xi.
19. ; 5, The fig-tree is noticed to have withered away. Don-

MATTHEW XXI. 21. 23. 257
dridge, Lightfoot. — [Mann.] Of our Lord's design in
cursing the barren tree, and the weakness of the objections
raised against the miracle, see Home's Introd. Vol. I. p. 247.
See also Vol. III. p. 66. and on Mark ix. 13. We may refer
also to Heb. vi. 8. as a practical illustration of the miracle. The
expression iirl rrje oSov, by the way-side, proves that Christ was
not guilty of private injustice, with which infidels have charged
him. The tree belonged to no one; and being barren, was
absolutely valueless, except for the purpose to which our Lord so
aptly applied it. Euthym. pi) aKptj3oXoyov, Start TETiptopnrai
rb rpvrbv, dvainov ov' dXXd povov 6'pa to Qaiipa, Kat tov Oav-
parovpyov. Ver. 21. The negative expression pi) SiaKpiOriTE, is precisely
the same with the positive condition idv exwte iriartv, and the
two are united, more Hebraico, for the sake of emphasis. Some
would render StaKptOijvat, to discriminate ; i. e. to put a differ
ence between what is, and is not possible : but the opposition
clearly shews that it is the same with Sicrrd£av. Of the elliptical
form rb Trig <rvKrje, which is equivalent to to Trspt Trig ervK»je
yEyovoe, see Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 284. 1. So rd rwv SatpovtZopi-
viov, Matt. viii. 33. Of the proverbial expression, removing
mountains, see on Matt. xvii. 20. In Luke xvii. 6. instead of
mountain, we have sycamore-tree; which evidently does not
alter the import of the proverb.- The assurance added in v. 22.
respecting prayer, was intended to enforce it as a fit means of
increasing the faith of which he was speaking. See on Matt.
xvii. 21. xviii. 18. With respect to this faith, it is impossible
for any to know the exact impression which it made upon the
minds of the Apostles, or for any words to have described it ;
and it is, therefore, an instance of their wisdom, that they never
attempted to do so. It is certain, however, that the attempt to
perform miracles was a remarkable instance of faith in the divine
power and fidelity ; and the solemnity with which the Apostolic
miracles were attended, clearly evinced their persuasion that the
attempt would be attended with immediate success. Compare
Acts iii. 6. ix. 34. 40. In pronouncing the healing words, the
speaker pawned his credit as a messenger from God ; and a
single failure would have been decisive against the Apostle and
the Gospel together. Kuinoel, Doddridge.
Ver. 23. Iv iroiq iliovaiq k. t. X. The Sanhedrim, of whom
these priests and elders formed a part, were invested with the
prerogative of enquiring into the pretensions of a prophet, and
the truth of his mission. Thus the tract, Sanhedrim, §. 4. p. 213.
A tribe, a false prophet, or a high-priest, are only amenable to
the council of seventy-one judges. Since, therefore, the present
aspect of popular feeling would not admit of violent measures,
vol, i. s

258 MATTHEW XXI. 28.
the members of this council, fixed in their determination to
destroy Jesus, sought to do it under pretext of law, and enquired
respecting the authority by which he had lately acted. They
doubtless expected that he would assert his claims to the Mes
siahship, thereby furnishing them with the means of charging
him with blasphemy. It has been urged, that Christ evaded the
inquiry from fear ; but this is a cavil so entirely at variance with
the parables which immediately follow, that it requires no farther
refutation. His reply evinced the most consummate wisdom ;
and the confusion of the Pharisees was a tacit admission of our
Lord's pretensions. The people believed John to be a prophet;
(see on Matt. iii. 4.) and they dared not deny it, at the same time
that the admisssion of his claims would, upon their own princi
ples, have established those of Jesus also. For John had re
peatedly borne the most express testimony to the divine mission
of Christ ; and, according to a Jewish maxim, the testimony of
one prophet was sufficient to confirm the authority of another.
Their silence, therefore, was a tacit confession that they were
incapable of judging in the matter, and perfectly justified our
Lord's refusal to reply to their enquiry ; especially as their uni
form perverseness, and their inveterate hatred, had ever been,
and still would have been, insurmountable, had he even condes
cended to explain and prove his commission. Grottos, Mac
knight, Lightfoot, Doddridge. In v. 25. the word fidirrtapa
includes, by synecdoche, the whole ministry of John, of which
his baptism was the most prominent feature. The substitution
of ovpavoe for Gsoe, in the same verse, though somewhat unusual,
(see on Matt. iii. 2.) is not without example. Compare 1 Mace.
iii. 18. iv. 19. ix. 46. Luke xv. 18. 21. Kuinoel, Whitby.
Ver. 28. rUva Svo. It is evident from vv. 31, 32. that this
parable is directed against the Pharisaical members of the San
hedrim, in consequence of their perverse disbelief in John the
Baptist ; and that the conduct of the two sons represents that of
the Publicans and Pharisees respectively. The publicans and
harlots characterized by the first son, and comprehending the
profane and wicked generally, did not profess to do the will of
God ; but they were brought by the preaching of John to think
seriously, to submit themselves to Christ, and embrace the
Gospel, so as eventually to attain to the kingdom of heaven.
The second son, on the other hand, was an exact picture of the
Pharisees ; for in their devotions they gave God the most
honourable titles, and professed the utmost zeal to serve him ;
but as their religion was merely formal, they refused to hearken
to the Baptist's exhortations, and though they could not disprove
his divine mission, disregarded the testimony which he bore to
the Messiah. Even the reformation which he effected, v. 32.
in the most abandoned characters, which clearly proved that he

MATTHEW XXI. 30. 33. 259
was sent from God, had no effect in gaining their attention to
his instructions. It has been supposed, that the two sons are
intended to represent the Gentiles and the Jews ; but, though
the parable may admit of such an interpretation, it is clear that
it was not so given by our Lord on this occasion. Macknight.
— [Whitby.] Ver. 30. iyd>, KvpiE. The pronoun iyw is supposed by some
to correspond with the Hebrew word 'Oil, hannani, denoting
assent to a proposition, and rendered iSoii iyw, in Numb. xiv. 40.
1 Sam. iii. 4. LXX. At all events, the expression seems to be
an ellipsis, which may in general be supplied by the verb OiXw,
or, in the present instance, by d7rlpxojuae. Kuinoel, Grotius.
We may fairly infer from this, that the reception or rejection of
the Gospel is not the effect of any invisible operation of divine
grace ; since it appears that the conduct of the two sons was
entirely free, and that no compulsion was employed with either
of them. Whitby.
Ver. 33. dXXjjv irapafioXr)v. After shewing the rulers the
sin of rejecting the Baptist in particular, our Lord proceeds to
represent the public crime of the nation in rejecting all the mes
sengers of God generally from first to last, and to warn them of
the punishment which was shortly about to visit them. The
parable, in which he thought fit to convey these disagreeable
truths, was formed upon one which Isaiah had long before made
use of, and with which they were well acquainted. In Isaiah
v. 1. the vineyard represents the Jews in their national, here
they are represented in their spiritual capacity, as living under
the Mosaical dispensation, attended, as it was, with great present
privileges, and the promise of many future blessings. The
householder and his son, are evidently the Lord Jehovah, and
the Messiah ; the husbandmen, to whom the vineyard was let
out, are the Scribes and Elders, who were to make the vineyard
fruitful, and prepare it for the reception of the servants and the
son, when they appeared for the returns due to the householder.
The servants were the prophets sent from time to time to warn
them of the punishments which awaited their sins, and to urge
them to repentance ; of whom they beat Jeremiah, killed Isaiah,
stoned Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada, and persecuted all. See
2 Kings xxi. 10. 16. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 16. Neh. ix. 26. Jerem.
xliv. 4. Acts vii. 52. Heb. xi. 37. Of the Jewish vineyards,
with their various appurtenances, &c. see Home's Introd. Vol.
III. p. 465. sqq. See also p. 459. A particular application has
been adapted by some paraphrasts to every circumstance in the
parable ; but it is probable that the hedge, the wine-press, &c.
are merely ornamental appendages, and that in this, as in other
cases,- minute points are not to be pressed too far. It is plain,

260 MATTHEW XXI. 35. 41.
for instance, from numberless predictions, both in the O. and
N. T. that God foresaw the certainty of Christ's death ; and,
consequently, the implied probability, that the husbandman
would reverence his son, cannot without absurdity be applied to
the interpretation of the parable. Instead of Xtivov, the wine
press, it is inroXr)viov, the wine-fat, i. e. cavity in which the
vessel was placed to receive the liquor pressed from the grapes ;
but one of these naturally implies the other, and our Lord might
possibly have mentioned both. Hesych. Xrjvoe" 6Vov araipvXr)
irarElrai, Macknight, Whitby, Grotius, Doddridge.
Ver. 35. 'iSsipav. The verb Slpstv signifies properly to flay,
to tear off the skin : as in Hom. II. A. 459. whence it is also
sometimes put as the cause for the effect, denoting to scourge
severely : as in this place, Mark xii. 3. Luke xxii. 64. Acts
xvi. 37. So in Aristoph. Vesp. 483. where the Scholiast notes :
SipiaOai Se koi SlpEtv iirl tov rvirrEaOat. There is no necessity,
therefore, to read, with some MSS. E'S^pav, from Satpcu; as some
have wished. Kuinoel, Kypke. — [Beza, Mill.] Of the divi
sions, ov piv — ov Se, see Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 288. f ; of 7rX£tovae,
v. 36. on Matt. vi. 25. and of the verb ivrpiirsaOai, v. 37. Lex.
Pent. Gr. in voce.
Ver. 41 . KaKove KaKiog diroXiaEi. This kind of paronomasia is
very frequent in the best writers. Soph. Aj. 1409. KaKove KaKwg
^>cmpEtav. Philoct. 1364. £a KaKtoe avroiig dwoXXvaOat KaKOvg.
Eurip. Med. 805. KaKwg KaKrjv Qavslv aip' dvdyKrj. Aristoph.
Plut. 418. lyev ydp vjtiae l^oXco KaKove Kastoe. Add Eurip. Med.
1386. Troad. 1055. Cyclop. 267. Arist. Plut. 880. Herod. VI. 9.
Hom. II. 4>. 459. Od. I. 534. Joseph. Ant. II. 14. 2. VII. 11. 8.
XI. 5. 4. Lucian. D. M. V. 2. D. D. I. 1. Wetstein, Ra-
phelius. ' The condemnatory inference which our Lord is repre
sented by Matthew and Mark to have elicited from the Scribes
themselves, is attributed in Luke xx. 16. to our Lord himself, and
the Scribes reply pi) yivoiro, God forbid! In order to reconcile
this apparent discrepancy, some suppose that after the words pi)
yivoiro in Luke, the Jews repeated the words of Christ ironi
cally; others contend that the words in Luke, as well as in
Matthew, are the reply of the Scribes in answer to Christ, al
though the former does not expressly say so ; and that the words
pi) yivoiro, also the words of the Scribes, were said in an under
tone, as deprecating the evil from themselves : and others, again,
adopt a solution directly opposite, that the words in both cases
are those of Christ. In support of this last opinion it is urged
that in one MS. the words Xlyovertv ovrog are omitted, and as
this authority is clearly of little weight, the word in the Hebrew
Gospel is conjectured to have been 1DN1, and he said, instead
pf YIDWlj they said. The fallacy of all these suppositions is

MATTHEW XXI. 42. 261
easily discernible, and the last especially, which at first sight
may appear plausible, is altogether irreconcileable with the an
swer of Jesus in the following verse. There is little real diffi
culty however in the matter : Christ, in the first instance, may
have drawn their self-condemnation from the Sanhedrim, as St.
Matthew states; he then, in all probability, repeated their
words in confirmation of their decision ; whereupon the Sanhe
drim, or perhaps some of its less hardened members, seem to have
uttered almost involuntarily the exclamation God forbid ! Dod
dridge, Kuinoel. — [Macknight, Le Clerc, Michaelis.]
Ver. 42. Iv ralg ypaipalg. The quotation is from Psalm cxviii.
22. It seems to have been originally spoken of David, who, though
at first rejected and despised by Saul and the rulers of the Jews,
was afterwards chosen by God to ascend the throne of Israel.
In a higher and spiritual sense, however, our Lord applies it to
himself, and his rejection by the Scribes and Elders of the peo
ple ; and that the Jewish Rabbins understood this stone of their
Messiah is admitted by R. Solom. Jarchi on Micah v. 1. and
Abarbanel on Zach. iv. 13. The Jewish dispensation in the
O. T. and the Christian church in the N. T. are continually re
presented under the figure of a building, and, in reference to
this, Jesus Christ is represented as the head stone, or support of
the fabric, 1 Cor. iii. 11. Ephes. ii. 21, 22. Some have supposed
that there is an allusion to the union of Jews and Gentiles in the
Christian church, as a head corner stone unites the two sides
of a building, but probably nothing more is intended than the
support which this stone affords to the building. Somewhat in '
this sense the chiefs of the people are called ywviai in 1 Sam.
xiv. 38. LXX. It is not very clear, however, what this head
stone was. From this place it should seem that it might be added
when the building was otherwise complete, that it was so situated
that the passenger might fall against it, and also that it might
fall upon him, v. 44. so as to answer most exactly to an upright
stone or buttress, added for the purpose of strengthening and
protecting the corner of the building, where it is most exposed to
external violence. The Greek expression is equivalent to the
Hebrew 133 33N, or 133 li'MI; but every rectangular build
ing would have necessarily four such columns, as expressly
mentioned in Job i. 19. whereas Christ is the sole bulwark of
the Christian church. Besides, the KEipaXr) ywviag is allowed
to be the same with XiOog aKpoywvialog, Ephes. ii. 20. which
can only be understood of something single and pre-eminent ;
and, indeed, we find 133 33tt spoken of as single in a building,
Job xxxviii. 6. although nothing can thence be inferred as to its
position, form, or height. The common interpretations certainly
do not answer the requisite conditions, and so far they are un
founded. Nothing can be drawn from the absence of the article

262 MATTHEW XXI. 43, 44.
to prove that there was more than one KEipdXr) ywviag in an edi
fice. See on Matt. i. 1. (Greek Art. omission 7. p. 10. and in
fine, p. 11.) Hammond, Grotius, Middleton. — [Mack
night.] The accusative XiOov, instead of the nominative, is a
species of anacoluthon, of which see Matt! Gr. Gr. §. 474. c.
With respect to the pronoun otirij, and the adjective Qavpaarr),
it is evident from the sense that they cannot be referred either to
KEipaXi) or ywviag, and therefore the feminine must be put He-
braice for the neuter. This change is common in the original
language, and it is imitated by the LXX. in Psalm cxviii. 22.
here cited, and also in Gen. xxiv. 14. Judg. xix. 30. 1 Sam. iv.
7. xi. 2. Psalm xxvii. 4. The form iysvriuri slg is also Hebrew.
See on Matt. xix. 5. Kuinoel, Hammond.
Ver. 43. Sid tovto. The reference is to the last verse, com
pared with v. 39. The word eOvei should not be rendered to the
Gentiles, although there can be no doubt that the Gentiles, in
conjunction at least with the believing Jews, are intended. Had
it been our Lord's intention to say this distinctly he would have
used rote Wveoi in the plural. We may remark that this is one
of the clearest predictions of the rejection of the Jews and the
call of the Gentiles which we have in this history. Campbell.
Ver. 44. ko.1 6 7rE<rwv k. r. X. Many of the commentators on
this verse understand an allusion to the two different ways of
stoning among the Jews ; the former by throwing the criminal
down headlong upon a great stone, and the other by letting a
stone fall upon him : but, in point of fact, there does not seem to
be any material difference between the two methods, whereas a
climax is evidently intended in our Lord's denunciation. In the
first clause he seems to describe the sin of those who are misled
by their teachers to oppose Christ ; and in the latter the heavier
sin and severer condemnation of the Scribes and Pharisees, who
obstinately persevere in their disbelief and persecution of the Gos
pel.' There is an evident allusion to Isaiah viii. 14, 15. and pro
bably also to the vision of the image in Dan. ii. 34. The verbs
avvOXdaOat and Xxpqv are figurative terms, of which the former
denotes simply to beat or bruise, indicating a milder punishment ;
and the latter implies a more fearful fate, signifying properly
to disperse as chaff, and thence, generally, to destroy utterly,
(E. T. to grind to powder.) Hesych. XiKpqV rd dxvpa dirb
rov ertVov Siaxtopl^Eiv. In the same sense the word occurs in
Dan. ii. 44. LXX. It is not unlikely that our Lord intended
to represent not only the dreadful crushing of the Jewish state
by the Romans, but the general dispersion of the Jews through
out all the nations of the world, which continues to the present
day. Doddridge, Macknight, Whitby, Lightfoot. This
verse should properly follow v. 42. as the connection plainly in-

MATTHEW XXII. 2. 263
chcates. It is altogether wanting in the Codex Bezce, and some
other MSS ; and Origen has passed it over in his commentary.
It is found, however, in the parallel place, Luke xx. 18. from
whence it was probably added in this place also. Kuinoel, A.
Clarke.

CHAPTER XXII.
Contents: — Parable of the marriage feast, vv. 1 — 14. Christ's
reply to the Herodians respecting the tribute-money, vv. 15 —
22. and to the Sadducees respecting the resurrection, vv. 23 —
33. [Mark xii. 13. Luke xx. 20.] His reply to the Pharisees
respecting the great commandment in the laiv, vv. 34 — 40. -
[Mark xii. 28.] His enquiry into the opinion of the Pharisees
respecting the Messiah, vv. 41 — 46. [Mark xii. 35. Luke
xx. 41.]
Verse 2. The primary object of the parable of the marriage
feast is to represent the invitation given to the Jews to embrace
the Gospel, their rejection of that gracious offer, the severe pu
nishment inflicted upon them for their obstinacy, and the admis
sion of the Gentiles to the privileges of Christianity in their
room. At the same time the rewards of the Gospel are not con
ferred upon mere professors, but upon those only who comply
with its ordinances, and cultivate those habits and dispositions
which its precepts enjoin. In the comparison itself there is a
peculiar propriety, since both the Jewish and Christian cove
nants are frequently represented in Scripture under the simili
tude of a marriage contract between God and his people. See
Isaiah liv. 5. Jerem. iii. 8. Matt. xxv. 5. 2 Cor. xi. 2. It is
observable that Luke does not relate this parable here because
he had given us one very like it before, which was spoken upon
another occasion, Luke xiv. 16. For the same reason he omits
the question of the lawyer, infra v. 35. most of the discourse
against the Pharisees, Matt, xxxii. and the parable of the ta
lents, Matt. xxv. 14. There is a parable very similar to this in
Bereshith Rabba, §. 62. p. 60. and another still more so in
Sohar. Levit. p. 40. Porteus, Doddridge, A. Clarke. The
word ydpog is here correctly rendered by the generality of com
mentators a marriage feast. In this sense it is frequently used,
in the plural especially, by classical writers, in reference proba
bly to the duration of these festivals, which lasted several days.
Compare Hom. II. S. 491. Od. A. 226. B. 196. A. 415.
Theoph. Char. XII. 1..XXII. 1. Arrian, Exp. Alex. VII. 4.6.

264 MATTHEW XXII. 3,4.
It has been urged, however, that the Hebrew word nnttfD, which
is rendered ydpog in Gen. xxix. 22. Esth. ii. 18. ix. 22. signifies
generally m feast ; and that nothing more than a feast is here
intended, as in Luke xiv. 8, Others understand an inaugu
ration feast, comparing 1 Kings i. 5. 9, 10. 19. Out of forty-
eight times, however, which the Hebrew word occurs in the
O. T., in the above three instances only it is rendered by ydpog
in the LXX : in the two first a marriage feast is particularly de
scribed, and in the last a feast which was held in consequence of
a marriage. Wetstein, Kypke, Whitby, Mant. — [Michaelis,
Kuinoel.] Ver. 3. roiig SovXovg avroii. The early fathers generally in
terpret the servants first sent of the prophets of the O. T., but
the parable evidently refers to the time of Christ's advent. It
should seem, therefore, that the first mission was that of the
Baptist, and the Apostles and seventy disciples, (Matt. x. 5, 6.
Luke ix. 2. x. 1 .) and the second that of the same Apostles sent
with a new commission after the resurrection, Acts i. 8. It was
probably usual in early times, though the fact is not absolutely
ascertained, to issue two different invitations to a feast, one at a
given time previous to the entertainment, and a second shortly
before the time appointed for the assembling of the guests. In
the old Greek colloquies, edited by Vulcanius, is the following
dialogue : — "2ir)pEpov irap' ipol dpiarriaov xpvaiptog. Ovrev y£-
viaOto. 'Ev iopq ovv iXOi irpbg ripag. "Ote QiXsig iripipov irpbg
r)pdg, iv ry otKta Etjut. See also Joseph. Ant. XI. Suet. Claud.
39. and Oudendorp ad loc. So also in Echa R. IV. 2. What
was the pride of the inhabitants of Jerusalem ? That none went
to a feast until twice invited. Whitby, Grotius, Wetstein,
Prioeus. The verb koXeTv, signifying to invite, occurs in 1 Sam.
ix. 22. Prov. ix. 3. LXX. Hesiod. Op. D. 342. Theogn. 563.
Theophr. Char. 12. 17. 21. So in Latin, Plaut. Menaech. III.
1. 11. Qui esum neque vocantur, neque vocant. Hence the ser
vants who carried the invitation were called KXijropEe, Athen.
Deipn. II. 8. p. 47. and in Latin vocatores, Plin. XXXV. 36.
Senec. de Ira. III. 37. Kuinoel.
Ver.<b. rd ainard. E, T. Fallings. The word is 'derived
from airiZto, to feed or fatten, thus including rams or wethers,
(2 Sam. vi. 13. 1 Chron. xv. 26.) calves, (Luke xv. 23.) &c.
Bochart supposes that ot ravpot koi rd airtard is an hendiadys
for ravpoi atnarol, as we have ravpot irioveg, Psalm xxii. 12.
LXX. But this is unnecessary. To mention oxen and failings
as the chief , part of a royal entertainment is perfectly agreeable
to the simplicity of the ancient ages. Thus Homer's princes are
repeatedly described as feasting each other upon nothing else
than the flesh of oxen, sheep, or swine. Compare Isaiah xxv. 6.

MATTHEW XXII. 5. 7. 9, 10. 265.
Kuinoel, Doddridge. The verb Oveiv was originally confined
to the offerings of flowers, incense, &c. which were customary
among the early Greeks ; and so the compound iiriQvEiv is used
in Aristoph. Ran. 915. Hence the word was gradually applied
to sacrificed victims, and came at length to signify generally to
kill. Compare Deut. xii. 15. with John x. 10. Acts x. 13.
Grotius. Ver. 5. dpEXr)aavTEg. It was considered by the Mahometans,
and probably by all the Oriental nations, a peculiar affront to
refuse an invitation to a marriage-feast, and even a breach of the
law of God. See Hedayah, Vol. IV. p. 91. The wickedness of
the guests in the parable is thus placed in a more conspicuous
point of view. A. Clarke. The adjective t'Stov is equivalent to
the possessive pronoun avrov : and so the Hebrew affix 1 is ren
dered in Job vii. 10. Prov . xxvii. 8. LXX. Kuinoel.
Ver. 7. arparEvpara avrov. Some here understand the angels,
who are the delegated ministers of God's vengeance, (1 Kings
xxii. 10. Luke ii. 13.) and by whom his judgments of war, pes
tilence, and famine were let loose upon the Jews at the siege of
Jerusalem. But the Roman army is certainly intended, which
may properly be called the army of God, as executing his will ;
whence the Median army is likewise so called, Isaiah xiii. 4, 5.
Whitby, Le Clerc. — [Grotius.] This clause must be sup
posed to come in by way of prolepsis or anticipation, for it is
plain that there could not be time before the feast already pre
pared was served up to attempt an enterprise of this nature.
And this precisely corresponds with historical fact, for the call of
the Gentiles took place some time prior to the fall of Jerusalem.
Doddridge. Of the adjective d^iog, (v. 8.) used absolutely, see
on Matt. x. 11.
Ver. 9. SiE%6Sovg rwv oSOiv. Some understand country lanes
or bye paths, but Sii^oSog signifies exitus, and the Stl^oSot rwv
bSwv axe, therefore, places where two or more roads terminate in
one, called in Latin compita viarum ; so that, leading into the
city from various parts of the country, they are consequently
more frequented. Doddridge supposes that our Lord intended
to intimate that the Gentiles had as little reason to expect the
call of the Gospel, as common- passengers or travellers to expect
an invitation to a royal banquet. It appears, however, from the
Talmud, in Beracoth, p. 43. that it was not unusual with the rich
to invite travellers to their feasts. Kypke, Lightfoot.
Ver. 10. 7rovjjpove rE Kat dyaOovg. This is not the only place
in which our Lord has declared that the bad as well as the good
would compose the visible church ; he intimates the same in the

266 MATTHEW XXII. 12.
parable of the tares and of the net, Matt. xiii. 26. 48. The
privileges of the Gospel, however, belong to the latter only,
while the severest punishment is threatened against the wicked :
Matt. vii. 21, 22. xiii. 24. Le Clerc, Kuinoel.
Ver. 12. ivSvpaydpov. It was usual at public festivals, and more
especially at marriage feasts, to appear in an appropriate dress,
and those who attended in their ordinary apparel were looked
upon as highly culpable and deserving of punishment. This dress
was usually a white robe, and as it could not be expected that ac
cidental guests should be provided with a marriage garment, it
was usual for the donor of the feast to provide them with. one.
Compare Gen. xiv. 22. 2 Kings v. 22. x. 22. Esth. vi. 8. viii.
15. This custom also prevailed among the Greeks and Romans,
as it appears from Hom. Od. A. 48. sqq. Diod. Sic. XIII. p.
375. Steph. Hence Eustath. on Od. Z. 28. rj6V>e ydp, (paaiv,
^v rde vvprpag rolg tov vvpipiov iaOr/rag iv ri£ tov ydpov Katpcj?
XapiZsaOai. Spartianus in Vit. Sev. — Habuit etiam aliud omen
imperii. Cum rogatus ad ccenam imperitoriam palliatus venis-
set, qui togatus venire debuerat, togam prcesidiariam ipsius im-
peratoris accepit. In this, therefore, consisted the offence of the
guest who had entered improperly clothed, that he had neglected
to apply for a marriage garment, or had perhaps refused the offer
of one. It is still a mark of honour in the East to be presented
with a garment, called caftan; and a refusal to accept or wear it
is considered a peculiar insult to the donor. Our Lord seems
to allude in the parable to Zeph. i. 7, 8. Doddridge, A.
Clarke. It is well observed that Faith alone cannot be repre
sented by the wedding garment, for faith is implied in the simple
act of coming to the supper. The intruder, therefore, has been
supposed to designate those false brethren among the Jews who
upheld the necessity of retaining circumcision and the ritual
ordinances in the Gospel covenant. But it should seem rather
that the walking worthy of our vocation, (Ephes. iv. 1 . 2 Pet.
i. 10.) is denoted by the marriage garment. In Rev. xix. 7, sqq.
where there is a plain allusion to this parable, the fine linen in
which the guests at the marriage supper of the Lamb are clothed, is
expressly declared to be the righteousness of the saints. Nothing
is more common in Scripture, and indeed in other ancient writ
ings, than to represent the habits and disposition of the mind
under the figure of bodily garments. Compare Job xxix. 14.
Isaiah lxi. 10. and see my note on Hom. II. A. 149. That the
ejection into outer darkness is emblematic of the punishment of
the wicked at the last day there can be no doubt, since it is then
only that God will separate the bad from the good. Here then
is a conclusive argument against salvation by faith only, and also
against the Calvinistic doctrines of election and reprobation. It
was in the man's power to have obtained this garment, and his

MATTHEW XXII. 14—16. 20. 267
own neglect was the cause of his exclusion from the feast. Gro
tius. The verb (ptpow signifies properly to muzzle, to gag, as
in 1 Cor. ix. 9. and thence to make speechless, to silence. Jo
seph. B. J. I. 20. rdxa Kal roiig dirayyiXXEtv irpoatpopivovg ol
avypripiviov SaipovEg dSsXiptov irpipow. The word is "used by
Christ in stilling the sea, Mark i. 25. Luke iv. 35. Kypke. Of
the sentence in v. 13. see on Matt. viii. 11.
Ver. 14. TroXXot ydp k. t. X. See note on Chap. XX. 16.
There are some who would confine the observation, as in that
passage, to the Jews only ; but it seems here to admit of a wider
signification, as including professing Christians in general. Le
Clerc, Whitby, Grotius.
Ver. 15. The verb 7raytS£v£tv is properly used of snaring
birds, Sec. and thence signifies generally to ensnare, to entrap,
i. e. to plot one's destruction, as the Latin phrase, laqueos
alicui tendere. See Eccles. ix. 12. Prov. vi. 2. LXX. The ad
dition of iv Xoyto, in conversation, explains the mode of attack
about to be adopted. The verb employed in Mark xii. 12. is
dypEVEtv. Kuinoel.
Ver. 16. The expressions ov piXsi aoi irspl ovSfvoe, and ov
j3XiirEig slg irpoawirov dvOpwirwv, amount to the same thing, so
that the repetition of the same sentiment encreases the flattery,
and, at the same time, the baseness of the flatterers. It is for these
false and hypocritical compliments that our Lord rebukes them
as v7roKpirat, v. 18. Instead of the latter phrase we have Xap-
/3dv£tv 7rpotrtiJ7rov in Lukexx. 21. Kuinoel. Of the Herodians,
and the insidious nature of the question proposed to Christ, see
Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 83. 184. 380.
Ver. 20. rivog r) eikwv aiirrj Kat r) hriyparpri ; The mode of
proceeding which Christ adopted upon this and similar occasions
is a most striking instance of his consummate wisdom and pru
dence. He thus compelled the tempters to answer the question,
removing from himself the odium attending the determina
tion of it, and unmasking the impious motives for which it was
proposed. By admitting that the coin was impressed with
Caesar's image and superscription, and by consenting to receive
it as current in Judea, they in fact acknowledged their subjec
tion to his dominion; for it was a tradition of their own Rabbins,
that wherever the money of any king is current, the inhabitants
acknowledge that king for their Lord: Maimon. in Gezel. 5.
Hence the reply of Abigail to the reproaches of David, recorded
in the Talmud, Sanhedrim, p. 20. 2. Art thou then a king? the
coinage of our Lord Saul is yet current. In the present in
stance this acknowledgment of subjection, which Christ drew

268 MATTHEW XXII. 23.
from them, was particularly in point, as the particular coin in
which this tribute was paid is known to have borne this remark
able inscription : KaTerap Avyovcrr. 'IovSatae iaXwKvtae. It is
probable, also, that in asking whose image and superscription
the tribute money bore, our Lord intended to distinguish between
the half shekel, dedicated to God, as part of the Temple service,
and the Roman denarius which was paid in the form of tribute to
the Romans. See on Malt. xvii. 24. Lightfoot, Hammond,
Rosenmuller. It is urged by some that Christ after all left
the matter undecided, and that his answer does not intimate the
right of Caesar to demand tribute from the Jews. But though
he does not directly reply to the question put to him, yet the
precept in v. 22. is plainly decisive on the point. Connected by
the illative particle ovv with the preceding verses, it plainly incul
cates the duty of submission to established governments, and is
a leading feature of the Christian religion. In perfect conformity
with this precept are those of the Apostles, Rom. xiii. 5. 7. Tit.
iii. 1. 1 Pet. ii. 13, 14. The right of Caesar to impose tribute
upon the Jews had its rise in their own act of submission to the
Roman government, as formerly to the Assyrian, and it had now
existed about one hundred years. Upon this ground King
Agrippa, and the historian Josephus, insist upon the necessity of
a patient subjection to the Roman yoke : Joseph. B. J. II. 28.
VI. 26. Whitby. — [Grotius, Le Clerc] The latter part of
Christ's injunction has been interpreted as a caution against
omitting the sacred tribute, on pretence of answering the de
mands of Caesar. But he rather cautions the Pharisees against
using religion as a pretence to justify sedition, and the Hero-
dians against complimenting the Romans at the expense of their
religion : he makes a clear distinction between the duties we owe
to God and to our earthly rulers, and shews that they do not in
the slightest degree interfere or clash with each other. Dod
dridge, Porteus. — [Diodati, Raphelius.J
Ver. 23. pi) Eivai dvdaraaiv. Of the opinions of the Sad
ducees see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 372. sqq. Their lead
ing tenet was, that the soul had no separate existence, but was
annihilated immediately upon its disunion from the body. Hence
a saying of the sect in Tanchun, p. 3. 1. The cloud sails and
goes away ; so he that descends into the grave returns not from
it. The story which they mention here seems to have been a
kind of common place objection, since it is to be met with in
the Jewish writings ; and as it had probably puzzled some of the
Scribes, they hoped that Jesus would have been unable to an
swer it. It was not to be wondered at that they could not satis
factorily solve the difficulty, since their own notions of a future
state were little better than those of the Heathen philosophers.
Josephus, (B. J. II. 12.) compares their idea of the happiness

MATTHEW XXII. 24. 29, 30. 269
of the life to come to that of the Fortunate Isles, as described in
Hom. Od. A. 561. Compare Hor. Epod. XVI. 42. 53. With
respect to the question proposed to our Lord, they held that if a
woman had two husbands in this world, the first only would be
restored to her in the world to come : Sohar. Genes, p. 24. Our
Lord, therefore, not only refuted the Sadducaical doctrine, but
set the Pharisees right in their misconception on the subject :
he tells them that the difficulty arose entirely from their inatten
tion to the Scriptures, from their ignorance of the power of God,
and of the state of human beings in Heaven. The argument
drawn from the Scriptures is contained in v. 32., of which see
Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 560. By telling them .that they
knew not the power of God, our Lord intimates that he could
effect, with the utmost ease, what they deemed to be impossible;
and that they either did not allow, or could not comprehend his
omnipotence in this respect is evident from St. Paul's question,
Acts xxvi. 7. Whitby, Lightfoot, Doddridge, Grotius.
Ver. 24. Mcoerfje eTttev' idv ng k. t. X. Deut. xxv. 5, 6. The
words of the Law are not quoted verbatim, but according to
their sense. It was the intention of this injunction that the chil
dren produced by the second marriage should be reckoned in the
genealogy of the deceased brother, and inherit his property. A
similar law prevailed among the Athenians in respect to heiresses,
who were not allowed to marry out of their kindred, in order
that their estates might be preserved to their families ; and by
the same law, their nearest relations were obliged to marry them.
Traces of the same custom are still found in the East, as modern
travellers inform us. The verb E7rtyait/3p£v£tv is properly used
of the intermarriage of relations, from yaitj3p<je. Kuinoel, A.
Clarke.
Ver. 29. rde yparpdg. It has been supposed that the Penta
teuch only is here intended, but there is no ground for the opi
nion maintained by some commentators, that the Sadducees did
not receive the whole of the Scriptures of the O. T. See Home.
The question proposed to Jesus depended upon the injunctions
of the Mosaic law, and consequently he chose to reply to it from
the same quarter, (Exod. iii. 6.) not, however, because the other
books would have had less weight with them. Kuinoel.
Ver. 30. ovte yapovai k. t. X. There was considerable dif
ference of opinion among the Rabbins on this point, some main
taining that there was eating and drinking and marrying in
heaven, and others agreeing in the statement of Christ. The de
claration that the saints in heaven shall be el»e dyysXot, or, ac
cording to Luke, terdyysXot, does not imply that there will be an
equality between them and the angels generally, but that merely,

270 MATTHEW XXII. 86.
like them, they shall not be subject to bodily appetites, but be
come pure and immortal spirits, so that matrimony will be no
longer necessary as the means of repairing the wastes of mortality
by the production of new generations. > With the argument of
our Lord in the next verse, that of Manasse Ben Israel, (de
Resur. Mort. I. 10. 6.) is strikingly parallel: When the Lord
first appeared to Moses we read that he said, I am the God of
thy fathers, the God of Abraham, &c. But God is not a God of
the dead, who are not, but of the living, who are : hence we
justly infer, that the souls of the Patriarchs are still in exist
ence. Similar modes of reasoning are frequent in the Talmud;
and the Jews had a maxim that there was no place for them in
the world to come who say that the resurrection cannot be proved
out of^the law: Avoda Sara, p. 18, 1. Sanhedrim, p. 90, 1.
Kuinoel, Wetstein, Schoettgen.
Ver. 36. 7rota ivroXi) pEydXr\ iv ti$ vopw ; Upon this the
Jewish doctors were greatly divided, some contending for the
law of circumcision, others for that of sacrifices, and others for
that of the phylacteries : and though they were for the most part
agreed that the law of the Sabbath was to give place to that of
circumcision, they were still undecided as to which of the rest
the preference should be given, except that they considered the
ceremonial observances of the greatest importance. The ques
tion proposed, therefore, is not unlike that of the young ruler,
(Matt. xix. 16.) and it may possibly have been dictated by the
same motive. The words 7rstpd£evv, v. 35. and etti to aiirb, v.
34. seem indeed to intimate that the Pharisees now assembled,
with the lawyer in their company, were following up the insi
dious design of entangling Jesus in his talk. At the same
time the verb wEipdZw does not necessarily require to be taken
in a bad sense, as is evident from 1 Kings x. 1. and with abrb
some commentators supply x<^Plov> so that no evil intention may
have existed at all. It is certain, at all events, from the conclud
ing part of the transaction, as related in Mark xii. 32 — 34. that
if it did exist, it was eventually relinquished; and this is perhaps
the more probable supposition. Our Lord in his reply decided
in favour of the moral law ; and the Lawyer was so fully per
suaded of the truth of his decision as to admit that an adherence
to its precepts was more than whole burnt-offerings and sa
crifices. At the same time, with his usual prudence, he did not
neglect the ceremonial law, for this very, commandment of the
love of God was written upon their phylacteries. See Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 403. In calling it the first and great com
mandment, he intimated that the object of it was the first and
greatest of all beings, so that its duties must have the precedence
over every other : it was so called, moreover, because the love
of God is the source of every other Christian grace, and the only

MATTHEW XXII. 39, 40. 271
motive sufficiently powerful to subdue our passions, to carry us
through the trials, and to support us under the temptations by
which we are on all sides surrounded. Lightfoot, Whitby,
Porteus, Kuinoel. The citation is from Deut. vi. 5., of the
variation from which in the Evangelists and the LXX see
Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 211. Of the vopiKol also, (E. T.
Lawyers,) see the same work, Vol. III.' p. 376. Observe also
that 7rota is for rig, as in Matt. xix. 18., and pEydXr) for pEyiarri,
as in Matt. v. 10.
Ver. 39. bpoia aiiry. Is like unto it; i. e. springs out of it, is
closely connected with it, and equally obligatory upon the Chris
tian : and by quoting it with the former our Lord refuted a notion
to which the Pharisees were fondly attached, that the observance
of one excellent precept of the law would excuse the transgression
of the rest. The term neighbour, as employed in the Scriptures,
is of very extensive import, including not only kindred, friends,
and countrymen, but even our enemies, as appears from the pa
rable of the good Samaritan. It has been objected, that in this
view of the case the precept is impossible, and contrary to that
principle of self-love which God himself has implanted in our
breast. Be it observed, that we are not told to love our neigh
bours as much as, but simply as ourselves ; the particle dig im
plying not equality in degree, but similarity in kind. The pre
cept, therefore, merely enjoins that we treat all men at all times
as we would wish under similar circumstances to be treated our
selves ; thus exactly corresponding with the divine rule which
Christ had before delivered in Matt. vii. 12. Doddridge,
Whitby, Porteus.
Ver. 40. Kpipavrai. Some have supposed that this verb has
a metaphorical allusion either to the custom of suspending their
laws in a public place, or generally, to hanging any thing to a
large nail or wooden pin, such as were usually built up at the
same time with the wall, in Jewish houses. See Isaiah xxii. 23.
Ezra ix. 8. But the expression is common in all languages in
relation to things closely connected with each other, or originat
ing in another as a first principle. Compare Gen. xliv. 30.
Judith viii. 24. So Philo, T. I. p. 420. ttiv al rov Wvovg iKpl-
pavro. Cic. in Pison. 41. In sententiis omnium civiumfamam
nostrum fortunamque pendere. Kuinoel, Grotius, Elsner,
Wetstein. — [Le Clerc, Whitby.] It must not be inferred
from this declaration of our Lord that these two precepts, great
and important as they are, constitute the whole of the Christian
system. In that we find many essential improvements of the
moral law, as may be seen at once in the Sermon on the Mount.
We find also many distinguishing doctrines of Christianity, par
ticularly those of a resurrection, of a day of judgment, of the

272 MATTHEW XXII. 42;
atonement made for sin by the sacrifice of Christ, of sanctifica-
tion by the Holy Spirit, and of justification by faith in the merits
of a Redeemer. We must not, therefore, content ourselves with
observing the two leading commandments, of love to God, and
love to man, but we must look to the whole of our religion, at
tend to every branch of our duty to God, our neighbour, and
ourselves, and finally repose all our hopes of salvation on the
merits of Jesus Christ. Porteus.
Ver. 42. rov Aav't'S. This was a thing well known among the
Jews. See on Matt. i. 1. They expected also that as a temporal
prince he would be a much greater man than David, but still that
he would be a mere man, possessed of no higher nature than that
which he derived from his earthly progenitors. It was the inten
tion of our Lord, in proposing this question to them, to intimate
that there was in his character, as pourtrayed by David and the
prophets, something more exalted than they were aware of; and
though he does not expressly assert his divinity, there can be no
doubt as to the inference which must necessarily follow from his
reasoning. He may also have intended to put an end to the
captious questions of his opponents by exposing their own igno
rance of the Scriptures, and especially of the prophecies relating
to the Messiah. Their acknowledged belief that he was to be
the descendant of David is a remarkable proof against them that
the Messiah is come. Their families are now so perfectly con
fused that they cannot trace back a single genealogy with any
degree of certainty, nor have they been capable of ascertaining
the different families of their tribes for more than 1,600 years.
Why then should prophecy be so clear and distinct on this head,
if the Messiah was not to appear till the public registers were all
demolished, so as to render it impossible to ascertain the fact ?
Is it not evident that God had fixed his advent at a time when
his descent could be ascertained ; and that the Evangelists Mat
thew and Luke were directed by inspiration to furnish this proof
from the public registers, which were in existence at the time
when their Gospels were published ? No Jewish writer has
ever attempted to invalidate this argument, and for this plain
reason — because it was impossible. It has been attempted, in
deed, to evade the passage which our Saviour here cites from
Psalm ex. 1. by referring it to David himself, to Abraham, or to
Ezekiel ; but it is clear that the Jews in our Lord's time ascribed it
to the Messiah, or he would not have alleged it to this end, much
less would he have silenced his opponents by so doing. The
LXX, it is true, inscribe the Psalm rt# AajStS, but other inter
preters, and the Jews themselves, translate Tilb in the genitive ;
and without this rendering no Psalms whatever can be attributed
to David. Campbell, A. Clarke, Whitby, Grotius.

MATTHEW XXII. 43. 273
Ver. 43. Kvpiov. This word, corresponding with the He
brew PIX, adon, signifying Lord or Master, was a term imply
ing an acknowledgment of superiority in the person to whom it
was addressed, and therefore never given to inferiors, though
sometimes perhaps, out of courtesy, to equals. Upon this then
the argument of our Saviour depends. An independent mo
narch, such as David, acknowledged no Lord or Master but
God ; far less would he bestow that title upon a son or descen
dant : and consequently the Messiah, being so called by him
under the influence of the Spirit, and therefore acknowledged as
his superior, must be divine. In the next verse the same word,
Kvptoe (in the nominative) is used by the Evangelists to express
the Hebrew IViiV, Jehovah. Though this is a proper name, and
not an appellative, the LXX, from a superstitious notion which
the Jews entertained, that it was dangerous to pronounce it, have
thought fit always so to render it, and the Jews to this day always
read adon where they find Jehovah. Hence the writers of the
N. T., in quoting from the O. T., have generally adopted the
method of the LXX in this respect, frequently using their very
words: nor can any objection be raised against them on this
ground. It seemed good to infinite wisdom under the old dis
pensation to distinguish himself as the God of his chosen people
by an appropriate name, in opposition to the gods of the sur
rounding nations, all of whom were called indifferently gods and
lords ; but under the Gospel, wherein all such distinctions were
to be abolished, it was proper that there should remain nothing
which might appear to represent God as a national or local
deity. It has been proposed, by an alteration of the points, to
render 01N7 also, to which tc£> Kvptto pov answers in the Gospel,
to the Lord, instead of to my Lord, as in the E. T. This, how
ever, would clearly destroy the force of our Saviour's argument.
Campbell, Grotius, Kuinoel. Of the import of the phrase
KaOriaOai Ik SeS,iwv see on Matt. xx. 20.

VOL. I.

274 MATTHEW XXIII. 2. 4.

CHAPTER XXIII.
Contents : — The disciples warned against the example of the
Scribes and Pharisees, and exhorted to humility, vv. 1 — 12.
[Mark xii. 38. Luke xx. 45.] Christ severely reproaches the
Scribes and Pharisees for their intolerance, v. 13. rapacity,
v. 14. false zeal, v. 15. superstition in oaths and tithes, vv.
16 — 23. hypocrisy, vv. 24—28. cruelty, vv. 29 — 33. Their
destruction foretold, vv. 34 — 36. Christ's lamentation over
Jerusalem, vv. 37 — 39.
Verse 2. Mwaitog KaOlSpag. The Jewish doctors always
taught sitting. Some understand the chair of Moses of legis
lative authority, but without any sufficient reason. It was pro
bably so called because it was that from which the books of
Moses were read and explained, so that he seemed to dictate
from thence. There may possibly be an allusion to the pulpits
which Ezra made for the expounders of the law, (Neh. viii. 4.)
and which were afterwards retained in the Synagogue. It is
evident that the injunction given in the next verse must be un
derstood with certain limitations. Our Lord certainly did not
mean that the traditions of the Scribes, which they considered
superior to the law, were binding upon the people, but simply
that they should observe all those things which they read from
the Law and the Prophets, and whatever they taught con
sistently with them. Compare infra w. 16. 18. 23. Matt. xv. 4.
sqq. xvi. 6. 12. Had he meant, as the Romanists contend, to
assert their infallibility, and to require an absolute submission to
their dictates, he must have condemned himself, as it was known
he was rejected by them. Doddridge, Kuinoel, Whitby. —
[Lightfoot.] The name Pharisees being the appellation of a
sect, it cannot be supposed that all the party sat in Moses' chair,
but merely the Doctors of the sect. Hence the phrase Scribes
and Pharisees must be a Hebraism for Pharisean Scribes.
Macknight. Much information on the subject of this chapter
will be found in the account of the Jewish Sects, Home's Introd.
Vol. III. pp. 367. sqq. See also pp. 253. 403. 482.
Ver. 4. <popria fiapia. See on Matt. xi. 29. These burdens
axe also mentioned in the Jewish writers under the name of
strokes or severities. In the Talmudic tract Sotah, III. 4.
R. Joshua reckons among the things that destroy the world the
strokes (J"03D) of the Pharisees, and a crafty wicked man; in
illustration of which the Gemara observes, By the strokes of the
Pharisees he means superfluous worship and troublesome rites,
introduced by them underhand into the Jewish religion, and by

MATTHEW XXIII. 5. 7. 275
the crafty wicked man some understand one that prescribes light
things to himself and heavy to others. So Maimonides : They
call the additaments by which they made the law heavy strokes
or severities. Hammond, Lightfoot. The verb SsapEiiEiv sig
nifies to tie up a bundle, and it is here used in allusion to those
who lade and drive beasts of burden : they first make or bind up
their loads and then lay them on their backs. Theophrastus
(Char act. II.) mentions among the characteristics of a wicked
man, to Tty aKoXovOw iiriOslvai pElX,ov (popriov i) Svvarai <pipsiv.
Macknight, Alberti. The phrase tc[> SaKrvXeo Ktvrjcrai is pro
verbial, and of the same import with aKpeo rtji SaKrvXeji a\paaOai,
which is frequently used by Greek writers of those who are un
willing to exert themselves in any undertaking. Compare Aris
toph. Lysist. 365. yElian V. H. XII. 1. Philo. I. p. 297, 33.
So in Latin, digito attingere. Some have understood our Lord
to allude not to the neglect of the Pharisees themselves in ob
serving these minute precepts, but to their tenaciously exacting
them of others : but this is not the force of the proverb, the real
import of which is fully explained by the assertion in v. 3. XI-
yovtrt ydp, Kat ov TTOtovcrt. WETSTEIN, ELSNER, KuiNOEL. —
[Whitby.] Ver. 5. KpdairESa. We are not to understand our Lord as
condemning the use of these fringes, but merely the spiritual
pride of those who wore them of an immoderate size for the pur
pose of ostentation. Moses had positively commanded the Jews
to wear them, and Christ himself did not hesitate to comply with
the law in this respect. See on Matt. ix. 9. Neither are the
phylacteries themselves condemned, although it is not so evident
that they originated in any divine institution. In Deut. vi. 8.
indeed, and Exod. xiii. 9. 16. God commands the Israelites to
bind the words of the Law as a sign upon their hands, and as
frontlets between their eyes. But although the later Jews, and
among them Josephus, understood this precept literally, it was
perhaps only a strong metaphor, and so it is explained by Je
rome. Compare Prov. iii. 3. vi. 21. Isaiah xlix. 16. The pre
cept, indeed, by a comparison with Deut. xi. 18. seems to have
reference to the whole law, in which case it can only be taken
figuratively. Whitby, Grotius.
Ver. 7. pafifii. This was a title which none of the prophets
had ever received, nor any of the Jewish doctors, till the time of
Hillel and Schammai, but during our Lord's ministry it was
greatly affected by the Pharisees, who wished to be regarded as
infallible oracles in matters of religion. See on Matt. xix. 17.
Sometimes, also, they were saluted by the disciples with the ap
pellation of father and guide, to which our Lord alludes in vv.
9, 10., and some were even addressed by all the three names
T 2

276 MATTHEW XXIII. 11. 13.
together, as appears from the fiction in Maccoth, p. 44. that
when King Jehoshaphat saw the disciple of a ivise man he rose
from his throne, and embraced him, arid said, Abbi, Abbi! Rabbi,
Rabbi ! Mori, Mori ! i. e. Father, Father ! Rabbi, Rabbi !
Guide, Guide ! To these rabbis they ascribed the highest and
most incontestible authority, (Rom. ii. sqq.) so high, indeed, as
to prevail against that of the king or the high-priest. See Joseph.
Ant. XIII. 23. XVIII. 2. In v. 9. there may possibly be an
allusion to the father of the Sanhedrim. Whitby, Hammond,
Lightfoot. The old reading in this verse is KaOriyrirrig, as in
v. 10., but a great number of MSS. and Fathers have SiSdaKaXog,
which is incomparably the best reading, although Griesbach
considers it a marginal gloss. It not only removes an evident
tautology, but it is the word by which the Hebrew ^31 was
always translated by the Hellenists. Compare Matt. viii. 19.
xiii. 38. Something more is clearly meant by KaOriyr)rrig, guide,
than by StSderKaXoe, teacher. The sentiments, indeed, are nearly
allied, but, unless there had been some difference, it would have
been no occasion for recurring to a different and even unusual
term. In order to enforce the warning against an unlimited ve
neration for the decisions of men, such as the Rabbins expected
from their disciples, Christ puts it in a variety of lights, and prohi
bits an implicit reliance upon any human teacher, and the admission
of any doctrine which does not emanate from him or from God.
The very uncommonness of the word KaOriyrirrig, which oecurs
in no other place in the N. T., shews an effort to say something
more than is contained in the preceding words. In some MSS,
also, 6 Xptcrroe is omitted, and in others the clause 7rdvr£e Se
vtiEte dSEXrpoi Ictte is found at the end of the next verse, by which
transposition the connection of the sentiment is certainly more
natural than in the common arrangement. Campbell, Grotius.
—[Griesbach, Loesner.]
Ver. 11. 6 Se juei£wv k. t. X. Compare Matt. xx. 25, 26. The
sentiment in the next verse was a maxim not only among the
Jews, in whose writings it frequently occurs, but also with other
nations. Compare Prov. xv. 33. xvi. 18. xxix. 23. So Polyb. V.
26. /3pax£te ydp Si) irdvv Kaipol, irdvrag piv dvOpwirovg wg iiri-
irav infjoiiat, Kal irdXtv rairEtvovai' pdXiara Si roiig iv rolg fiaai-
XElotg. By Christ, however, it is applied in a spiritual sense,
and there is no one sentiment which is so frequently repeated by
him, and enforced with such earnestness, not only upon his
Apostles, but upon Christians in general. See Mark ix. 35. x.
43,44. Luke xiv. 11. xviii. 14. xxii. 26. John xiii. 14. and
compare 1 Pet. v. 6. Grotius^ Raphelius, Doddridge.
v
Ver. 13. Oval Si iiplv k. t. X. In this and the following de
nunciations our Lord apostrophises the Scribes and Pharisees as

MATTHEW XXIII. 14. 277
if they were present, though it should seem from v. 1 . that they
had departed, unable to solve the question proposed to. them at
the end of the last chapter. At all events, he was now no longer
under any restraint from fear of personal violence, as the close of
his ministry was approaching ; and he did not therefore hesitate,
in the most plain and solemn manner, to reprove their excessive
wickedness, their gross hypocrisy, and their shameless perver
sion of the law of God to the most abandoned purposes. In the
E. T., and in some MSS, this verse is transposed with the fol
lowing, and in others it is omitted altogether. From the change
in the construction, which should have been Kat irpoaEvxiaOs, it
may probably be an interpolation from Mark and Luke ; but
Griesbach, though he omitted it in his first edition, has been in
duced, by the preponderance of MS. authority, to restore it in his
second. In order to give the sense intended by our Lord, the
conjunction Kat must bear the sense of idque : — Ye devour wi
dows' houses, and this too under the mask of superior sanctity.
Kuinoel, Macknight, Grotius.
Ibid, on KarEaO'iETE k. t. X. This sect, says Josephus, (Ant.
XVII. 3.) prided themselves in a more exact knowledge of the
law, on which account the women were subject to them, cue rb
QeIov irpoairoiovpivwv, as pretending to enjoy the peculiar fa
vour of God. The same historian relates (B. J. I. 5.) that they
employed the same means to insinuate themselves into the favour
of Queen Alexandra. With respect to their long prayers, there
is a passage in Beracoth, p. 32, 2. wherein R. Joshua Ben Levi
directs the truly religious to pray nine hours a day. See also on
Matt. vi. 7. Whitby, Lightfoot. The word o'iKia does not
here signify merely a house, but generally an estate, property,
in which sense oikoc is used in Hom. Od. A. 248. 251. (compare
v. 375.) B. 64. iElian. H. V. X. 17. Joseph. B. J. VII. 11. In
Gen. xiv. 18. LXX, the Hebrew JT3 is rendered by rd iiirdp-
Xovra, and in Esth. viii. 1. by ocra v7rr)px£. Homer uses pre
cisely the very metaphor employed by our Lord in Od. B. 237.
KariSovai (3iaiwg OIkov 'OSvaariog. Kypke, Kuinoel.
Ver. 14. on kXe'iete k. t. X. In the parallel passage, Luke
xi. 52. the expression is ypars rr)v kXeiSo rrig yvdiaeiog, in allu
sion to the custom of the Rabbins, who carried a key as the em
blem of knowledge and instruction. Hence it is related in Se-
machoth, §. 8. that when R. Samuel the Little died, his key and
his tablets were hung on his tomb, because he died childless.
The Pharisees prevented the reception of the Gospel — for such
is the intention of the metaphor — by their misinterpretation of
the ancient prophecies respecting the Messiah, and their conse
quent rejection of his claims, (John ix. 16.) by their example,,
(John vii. 48.) by their authority, (John ix. 22.) and in short, by
using their utmost endeavours to hinder the people from repent-

278 MATTHEW XXIII. 15. 23.
ing of their sins, and believing the Gospel. Schoettgen,
Whitby, Macknight.
Ver. 15. 7T£ptdy£r£ T17V OdXaaaav and rr)v £»jpdv. This ex
pression is proverbial, indicative of the most unremitting and in
defatigable exertions. So Philetas ap. Stob. Tit. 250. r<$ alii
ttoXew yair)g virip r)Si OaXdaang. Lucan Pharsal. V. 262. quceris
terraque marique His ferrum jugulis. Somewhat similar is the
Latin proverb, Omnem Lapidem movere : Anglice, To leave no
stone unturned. With the adjective £rjpd, in the feminine, yjj
must be supplied, as irlSov with the more usual ellipsis of Sjjpdv
in the neuter. So Herod. II. 68. MMan. Hist. An. V. 33.
Precisely similar is the omission of OdXaaaa with the adjective
vypd in Hom. II. K. 27. See my note in loc. So we find sic-
cum, subaud. solum, in Virg. Georg. I. 363. and liquidum,
subaud. mare, in Horat. Sat. I. 1. 54. The zeal of the Jews in
making proselytes was so remarkable that it passed into a pro
verb among the Heathen. Hor. Sat. I. 4. Ac veluti te Judcei
cogemus in hanc concedere turbam. Of the different kinds of
proselytes see Home. Munthe, Palairet, Kuinoel, Mack
night. Ibid, vlov yEEvvrje. A child of Hell; i. e. in the Hebrew
idiom one deserving of, or doomed to, Hell. So in 1 Sam. xx.
31. 2 Sam. xii. 5. LXX. vlbg Oavdrov, morti debitus. It has
been proposed to render SiirXorEpov in this passage deceitful,
rather than two-fold, as in the E. T. and other versions : but
although it is true that a7rXove sometimes signifies sincere, and
that St7rXove, on the contrary, occasionally iraxAies fraudulent,
crafty, as the Latin duplex in Horat. Od. I. 6., still it cannot be
so rendered in the present instances. The notion of guilt is
sufficiently implied in the expression vlbg yflvvrje, in which ve6e>
supplying the place of the adjective d%iog, plainly indicates the
adverbial usage of SiirXorEpov. In confirmation of this point it
is sufficient to refer to the passage quoted from Justin. M. in
Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 370.,- where the original Greek is
SnrXorEpov vpwv j3Xaaipripovaiv Eig rb bvopa avrov. Grotius,
Kuinoel. — [Kypke.] Of the Jewish opinions respecting oaths,
which our Saviour reprobates in the seven following verses, see
on Matt. v. 33. sq. By the gold, v. 16. we are not to under
stand the ornamental decorations of the temple, but the money
set apart for sacred purposes, called by the Greeks dvaOf)para,
and by the Latins donaria. Lightfoot, Grottos.
Ver. 23. bri diroSEKaroiirE k. t. X. The Jewish law set apart
for the priests a tenth of all fruits, and of such produce of the
ground as could be comprehended under the name of revenue.
See Levit. xxvii. 40. Numb, xviii. 21. Deut. xiv. 22. In their
observance of this law the Pharisees affected the most scru-

MATTHEW XXIII. 24. 279
pulous exactness, paying tithe even of the most insignificant
herbs, such as our Lord here specifies, and which seem to have
been usually passed over as of little or no value. It is to be.
observed, however, that Christ does not discommend this exact
ness, but complains, that while they were so precise in these
matters, which were comparatively unimportant, they neglected
the more essential commandments of the law, and substituted
frivolous and insignificant observances in the place of a moral
and religious life : and this remark will also apply to the other
woes denounced in the chapter. The first of the herbs here
mentioned, r)Svoapov, is the well known garden mint, so called
from its fragrant smell : by dvr/Oov the dill is meant, and not the
anise, as it is rendered by our translators, who were probably
misled by the similarity of sound ; anise in Greek is dveerov.
Cummin, Ki/pivov, is a disagreeably pungent plant, and so little
regarded by the ancients as to be used by them to express what
ever was worthless and insignificant. Hesych. Kiipivov' tovto
iirl piKpoXoyov irarrov. Hence a miser was sometimes called
Kvpivoirpiarr)g. See Hemsterhuis on Arist. Plut. p. 193. That
these herbs are not particularized, except for the purpose of il
lustration, is clear from Lukexi. 42., where they are varied, and
irav Xdxavov is added. The verb d7roSEKar£V£tv is an Hel
lenistic word, which is not to be found in any classical author,
but was formed to represent the Hebrew 1W, osher, which sig
nifies both to take tithe and to pay tithe. In the former sense it
occurs in 1 Sam. viii. 15. 17. Neh. x. 35. Heb. vii. 5. viii. 2.
and in the latter, which it bears also in this passage, in Gen.
xxviii. 22. Deut. xiv. 22. Luke xi. 42. xviii. 12. Kuinoel,
Campbell, Schleusner.
Ibid. Kpiatv, e'Xeov, irianv. E. T. judgment, mercy, and
faith. Luke xi. 42. ri)v Kpiatv koI rrjv dyaTrrjv rov Qeov, judg
ment and the love of God. Hence it appears that our Lord in
tended to reprove the Pharisees for their neglect both of their
social and religious duties. By the word Kpiaig, therefore, must
be understood^s&'ct?, i. e. the giving to all their due ; by tXaog,
charity, i. e. a feeling for the wants and calamities of others, and
a readiness to relieve them ; and by iriang, not as some would
render it, fidelity or probity, but trust in God, and confidence in
his mercy. Perhaps, indeed, iriang, as it admits of both these
senses, may include both in this passage. Compare Rom. iii. 3.
Gal. v. 22. Col. i. 4. Tit. ii. 10. 1 Pet. i. 21. There is most
probably an allusion to Micah vi. 8. Compare also Hos. ii. 19.
The expression is not unlike Hor. Od. I. 24. 6. cui Pudor, et
Justitice soror Incorrupta Fides, nudaque Veritas. Grotius,
Hammond.
Ver. 24. of StvXiZ,ovTEg k. t.X. E. T. Ye strain at a gnat
and swallow a camel. The word strain has here been under-

280 MATTHEW XXIII. 25.
stood by many as denoting to make an attempt to swallow, whereas
the verb SivXt^Etv means to filter, or percolate. It appears, in
deed, that by a typographical error at was substituted for out in
the edition of 161 1, and the blunder has been regularly continued
in the authorised version down to the present time. The expres
sion is proverbial, alluding to a custom which the Jews had of
filtering their wine, that they might not inadvertently swallow
any insect forbidden by the law as unclean ; of which descrip
tion was the Ktovw^/, which seems to have been a small insect
bred in the lees of wine, and thence called the culex vinarius.
See Aristot. Hist. Anim. V. 19. The Talmudists also speak of
jabhkuskin, or wine gnats ; and Maimonides, (de cib. vetit. I.
20.) has a remarkable illustration of this passage : He who
strains wine or vinegar or strong drink, and eats the wine gnats
which he has strained off, deserves whipping. That the Jews
used to filter their wine appears also from Amos vi. 6. LXX,
where we read of StvXto-julvov dlvov, in a passage of which the
scope is not very different from the present. Our Lord applies
the expression to those who are superstitiously anxious in avoid
ing small faults, yet did not scruple to commit the greatest sins.
There is a proverb somewhat similar in Beracoth; He omits
years, but computes months with exactness. Some would trans
late KapriXov a cable here also, as well as in Matt. xix. 24. ; and
others incline to the version of 1727, which renders it a beetle :
but there is no authority for any such variation, not to mention
that the Jews had a proverb of swallowing an elephant, the ana
logy of which is ample authority for retaining the usual sense of
the word. A. Clarke, Kuinoel, Wetstein, Schoettgen. —
[Doddridge.] In calling the Pharisees blind guides, bSriyol
rvrpXol, Christ in all probability alludes to some of the more os
tentatious of the sect, who were wont to appear in public with
bandages on their eyes, under the canting pretence of not even
looking upon iniquity, lest they should be defiled. Hence they
frequently met with severe contusions from striking against walls,
and sometimes were seen in the streets covered with blood.
This practice, however, was reprobated by the sect in general ;
and the Talmudist, who describes it, censures it as hypocritical,
and intended not to glorify God, but to deceive men. See
Anich, p. 127. 4. Schoettgen.
Ver. 25. on KafapiZ^TE k. r. X. Of the frequent purifications
of cups and vessels used at meals among the Jews, see Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 337. There are several instances of their
exactness in this point in the Talmud: Schabbath, p. 118. 1.
The metaphor here employed is sufficiently obvious. In their
external deportment these hypocrites took especial pains to ap
pear strict and virtuous, while they neglected to purify the inward
man from the moral stains of extortion and injustice. Before

MATTHEW XXIII. 27. 29. 281
yipovai the words irorripiov Kal irapoxfJlg are omitted with a view to
conciseness, and for the same reason the metaphor is preserved
through the next verse, instead of being explained by a direct
declaration of the lesson intended by it. The reading dStKtae,
which Griesbach has adopted in the place of aKpaertae, upon the
authority of a multitude of the best MSS. and versions, and se
veral of the Fathers, is unquestionably correct. It suits much
better with the character of the Pharisees, who are never accused
of intemperance, though often of injustice ; and indeed the
former vice is rarely found with those who make great preten
sions to religion. Joseph. Ant. XVIII. 1. 3. o'Ite ydp Qapiaaloi
ri)v Siairav i^EvrsXiZovatv, ovSiv £te rb paXaKWTEpov ivSiSovrEg.
Lightfoot, Grotius, Campbell, Kuinoel.
Ver. 27. 6'n 7rapojuotd?£TE k. r. X. By the law of Moses,
(Numb. xix. 16.) if any one touched a sepulchre he was thereby
rendered unclean : hence their tombs were always whitewashed,
and the fifteenth of the month Adar was annually set apart,
among other things, for rewashing those which had become in
discernible. So the Talmud, in Schekalim I. 1. The generality
were merely marked with the likeness of bones, (Ezek. xxxix.
15.) but those of the more opulent, to which our Saviour here
alludes, were doubtless ornamented with considerable splendour.
See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 528. In this woe, therefore,
the Pharisees are represented as polluted with the grossest vices,
however holy they might appear by their exactness in the exter
nals of religion, insomuch that by the contagion of their ex
ample they defiled all who had any intercourse with them. But
the denunciation in Luke xi. 44. where they are likened to the
pvi)pEia dSriXa, (of which see Home, ubi supra,) refers to the
contamination which they spread around, infecting those who un
warily approached them. Some, indeed, suppose that the appli
cation in this passage is the same as in St. Luke, and that the
tombs are here called d>pa<oe for the same reason that they are
called dSrjXa there, the herbs and grass which conceal them con
tributing at the same time to render them apparently beautiful.
But this interpretation is exceedingly far fetched and unsatis
factory. Lightfoot, Macknight. — [Whitby, Hammond.]
Ver. 29. on oIkoSojueite k. t. X. Not only the Jews, but the
ancients generally, were wont to testify their respect for the me
mory of the illustrious dead by repairing and beautifying their
tombs. What Vitringa (de Synag. p. 221.) tells us of the ex
traordinary honours paid to the sepulchre of Mordecai ; and the
account in Josephus, (Ant. XVI. 7. 1.) of the splendid manner
in which Herod repaired that of David, mentioned in Acts ii. 29.,
are pleasing illustrations of this custom. St. Jerome also, (Epist.
de Mort. Paul.) speaks of several tombs of the holy men of the

282 MATTHEW XXIII. 32.
O. T. as still in existence in his time, which must undoubtedly
have been erected or rebuilt long after their death. That the prac^
tice also prevailed among other nations, see Diod. Sic. XI. 83.
.Elian. V. H. XII. 7. Thucyd. III. 59. Arrian, Exped. VII. 29.
Xenoph. Mem. II. p. 587. Hellen. VI. p. 465. It cannot be
supposed, therefore, that our Lord intended to discountenance
the practice, but to reprove the hypocrisy of the Pharisees in
pretending a veneration for their ancient prophets, which they
really did not feel. Neither is it probable that our Lord in
tended to insinuate that they rebuilt the sepulchres of the pro
phets not from any regard to the glory of God, or with the view
of honouring the prophets themselves, but to do honour to their
murderers, and to perpetuate the memory of their deeds, of which
they secretly approved, to future generations. The connection
of the passage is indeed somewhat intricate, but the following
paraphrase is probably correct : " Ye pretend indeed to vene
rate the memory of the prophets, whom your fathers destroyed ;
and ye affirm that ye would not, had ye then lived, have con
sented to their murderous proceedings. Ye thus acknowledge
that ye are by nature the children of their murderers, and I say
that ye are also their children by disposition, as your conduct to
me and my Apostles will prove, v. 34. Fill ye up then," &c.
The inference which our Lord intended to draw is not absolutely
expressed, but it is evidently implied in the word vlbg, which
not only signifies a son or descendant, but one of like manners
or disposition with another. Compare Matt. v. 45. John viii. 44.
In the parallel place of Luke there can be little doubt that the
argument is the same, nor will any difficulty there present itself,
according to the following translation : And truly ye attest and
approve of the deeds of your fathers, even though they killed
them, and you rebuild their sepulchres. Should this rendering,
however, be deemed inadmissible, the words koI awSoKElrE rolg
ipyotg rwv iraripiov vpwv may be included in a parenthesis,
which, though somewhat abrupt perhaps, will be amply justified
by a variety of examples. Compare Gen. xiii. 10. Exod. xii. 15.
Cant. I. 5. Mark xii. 12. xiv. 23, 24. xvi. 3, 4. Luke v. 15, 16,
17. Rom. iii. 5. 8. Rev. xx. 12, 13. Le Clerc, "Doddridge,
Whitby, Grotius, Kuinoel, Elsner, &c. — [Macknight.]
Ver. 32. Kat vpslg 7rX?7puicrar£ k. t. X. This imperative is un
derstood by some commentators in the sense of the future ; but
the expression is rather to be considered as an ironical permis
sion, accompanied with a feeling of indignation, and leaving the
persons to whom it is addressed, to experience the consequence
of their own perverseness. A similar concession, indicative at
the same time of severe reproof, is implied in the words If you
will, you must ; which convey an unwilling assent to one obsti
nately determined to pursue his own wilful indiscretions. This

MATTHEW XXIII. 33, 34. 283
species of irony is met with several times in Scripture, as
1 Kings xxii. 22. 2 Kings ii. 17. Prov. vi. 32. and we have at
least one other instance (Mark vii. 9.) of its having been used by
our Saviour. Compare also Matt. xxvi. 45. John xiii. 27;
Somewhat similar is Virg. iEn. IV. 381. I, sequere Italiam
ventis. So Tacit. Hist. I. 41. Sil. Ital. II. 256. Terent. Adelph.
V. 3. 27. Campbell, Wetstein, Rosenmuller, Kuinoel. —
[Whitby, Glass, &c] The expression here employed seems
to imply that there is a certain height to which the iniquity of a
nation is allowed to rise, encreasing with each succeeding gene
ration till the measure is full, and punishment is inflicted. The
justice of such a procedure is evident from the circumstance that
the sins of a body politic can only be punished in this life, the
proper punishment of national sins being national judgments,
not only dissolving the transgressing state, but warning the na
tions of the world to submit with pious awe to the government of
God. It may be remarked, also, that the anger of the Almighty,
though slow, is always sure, and that he compensates for venge
ance delayed by the severity of the stroke. Macknight, Gro
tius. Ver. 33. irwg rpvyrirE k. t. X. The phrase airorpvyEtv Kplpa or
Kpiatv signifies to escape conviction in a court of judicature. Our
Lord therefore would intimate that the obduracy of the Pharisees
was so inveterate as to bring upon them not only the impending
national calamity, but to give them little hope of acquittal at the
day of judgment. Of the word yizwa see on Matt. v. 22. and
of the expression yEwripara ixiSvwv on Matt. iii. 7. Raphe-
lius, Doddridge, Grotius. An argument has sometimes been
drawn from our Lord's expressions addressed to the Pharisees,
and his denouncing woes against them, in justification of those
censorious judgments and harsh appellations which men are too
apt to apply to each other. But Christ was fully acquainted
both with the dispositions and motives of these hypocrites ; he
knew their hearts, and the judgment which he passed upon them
was that which his prophetical office required. In this know
ledge and capacity an ordinary man cannot imitate him, and
therefore can derive from him no sanction in ordinary cases for
any neglect of the precepts against rash judging, so distinctly
stated in Matt. vii. 1 . sqq. Macknight.
Ver. 34. Std tovto. The import and reference of this formula
has been much disputed : some would render in the mean time,
but without any sufficient authority ; others connect it with the
words immediately preceding, for this cause, namely, that ye
are serpents, &c. ; others, again, refer it to v. 32. ; and so Eu-
thymius : Siori juIXXete 7rXjjpwcrai rb pirpov rrig KaKiag rwv irari-
pwv iipwv. The most probable opinion, however, is, that it

284 MATTHEW XXIII. 35.
merely denotes transition, as in Matt. xiii. 52. xxii. 29. Mark
xii. 24. At all events the meaning cannot be that he would
send them prophets to be killed, that they might not escape the
damnation of Hell, but on the contrary, that every possible
means might be tried for their conversion. At the same time he
knew that they would make light of their warnings, and draw
down upon them such terrible vengeance as would be a lasting
monument of the divine displeasure to the end of time. In
stating, however, that all the righteous blood which had been
shed in former ages would be laid to their charge, he did not
mean that every individual act of their ancestors would be visited
upon them, but that of every species of cruelty, oppression, and
murder which had been exemplified in times past, they of that
generation would be no less guilty, inasmuch as they had care
fully imitated, and even exceeded, all the most atrocious deeds
of their forefathers from the beginning of the world. Nor is
there any hyperbole in this representation, as the account given
by Josepbus of their extreme national depravity will abundantly
testify. See Home's Introd. Vol. Ill, p. 382. sqq. Kuinoel,
Macknight, Campbell.
Ibid. irpo(pr)rag, Kal aoipoiig, Kat ypapparElg. These and similar
appellations were given by the Jews to their Doctors and Rab
bins, from whom they are transferred by Christ to his Apostles
and their successors, partly in reference to the irpo<pr)rag ko!
StKatovg in v. 32. and partly to insinuate that his messengers
would be no less inspired, wise, and acquainted with the Scrip
tures than those whom they themselves honoured with these
titles. Compare Luke xi. 49. In proof of the completion of our
Lord's prediction we may instance the stoning of Stephen, Acts
vii. 59. the cutting off James with the sword, Acts xii. 2. the
scourging of Peter and other Apostles, Acts v. and the persecu
tion of Paul and Barnabas from city to city. It has been ob
served, indeed, that there is no positive record of the crucifixion
of any Christian teacher before the destruction of Jerusalem.
Probably Christ may have included himself in the prophecy, not
to mention that the history which we now possess of those early
times is far from complete, so that the names of many who suf
fered, in various ways, have not been transmitted to posterity.
Kuinoel, Grotius. Before i% aiirwv must be supplied nvdg,
as in Luke xi. 49. xxi. 16. John xvi. 17. See Matt. Gr. Gr.
§. 352. Ver. 35. Zaxaplov, vlov Bapaxiov. Considerable doubts have
been agitated as to the individual of whom Christ speaks ; and
four persons bearing the name Zacharias have been severally
considered by different commentators as particularly alluded to
in this passage. Some contend that Zachariah, one of the minor
prophets, is, meant ; but although he states himself to have been

MATTHEW XXIII. 37. 285
the son of Barachiah, (Zech. i. 1.) and however probable it may
be that he was murdered by the Jews, (see Home, Vol. IV. p.
239.) there is no evidence, historical or traditional, of the fact.
Yet more unsatisfactory is the conclusion in favour of the father
of the Baptist, of whom indeed there was a tradition mentioned
by some of the early Fathers, but rejected by Jerome, that he
was killed in the temple ; but he was neither the son of Bara-
chias nor a prophet. Others, therefore, suppose that the Za-
charias in question was a rich Jew, who was slain by the Jewish
zealots in the temple a short time before the destruction of Jeru
salem : Joseph. B. J. IV. 6. 4. In this case, however, the verb
irpovEvaarE must be taken in a future acceptation, not to mention
that this person was the son not of Barachias, but of Baruch,
Bapovxov ; and that these names were perfectly distinct is clear
from Neh. iii. 4. 20. LXX. In all probability, therefore, our
Lord refers to the murder of another Zachariah, who was slain
by the order of Joash, in the courts of the house of the Lord,
2 Chron. xxiv. 21. This supposition is strongly confirmed by
the consideration that as Abel was the first, so this Zacharias
was the last prophet and preacher of righteousness mentioned
in the O. T. It is true that this Zacharias is said to have
been the son of Jehoiada ; but it was not unfrequent with the
Jews to have two names, especially when the name of Jehovah
entered into the composition of one of them : thus Jehoiakim is
also called Eliakim, (2 Kings xxiii. 34.) and in the present in
stance the same meaning, viz. the praise of God, is conveyed
under both appellations. Possibly, indeed, the words vlov B,
may be nothing more than the marginal gloss of some copyist,
who took it for granted that the minor prophet was intended,
whence they at length found their way into the text. Jerome ac
quaints us that the Nazarene Gospel had Jehoiada instead of
Barachias. Grotius, Le Clerc, Whitby, Lightfoot. —
[Hammond, Krebs, &c] By Ovaiaarr)ptov the altar of burnt
sacrifice must certainly be intended, since the altar of incense
was within the vabg, or temple, properly so called. See Home,
and compare Jos. Ant. VIII. 4. 1. XV. 14. 5. The phrase
IXHeTv iirl rivd, or tjkecv iirl nvd, as employed in this and the
next verse, signifies to call for vengeance against one, for blood
shed. 'Compare Acts v. 28. Hence, in the next verse, ravra
irdvra refers to the persecution of the Apostles mentioned in this,
with a view of limiting the predicted punishment to the genera
tion then in existence. It is well known that the total destruction
of Jerusalem took place about forty years after. Of the use of
the word yEVEa, as denoting a period of about thirty years, see
my note on Hom. II. A. 250. Hammond, Grotius.
Ver. 37. 'UpovaaXrip ! 'UpovaaXvp ! k. t. X. With this apos
trophe our blessed Lord concludes the most spirited and solemn

286 MATTHEW XXIII. 38.
of all his discourses, and having deemed it necessary to de
nounce in the most explicit terms the destruction which
threatened the guilty city, his breast heaved with compassion at
the prospect, and he lamented in the most moving manner the
consequences of their guilt. The depth of this feeling is forcibly
expressed in the repetition of the word Jerusalem, and the beau
tiful metaphor which is employed to represent the Saviour's love
for his chosen though rebellious people, and the earnestness with
which he had used every means consistent with his own perfec
tions and the freedom of man, to effect their salvation. A similar
emphasis is marked by the repetition of the word Ariel in Isaiah
xxix. 1. Compare Aristoph. Acharn. 27. Pac. 245. Terent.
Eunuch. I. 2. 11. With respect to the metaphor borrowed from
the hen's affection for her brood, we may compare Deut. xxxii.
11. Isaiah xxxi. 5. Psalm xvii. 8. So also Eurip. Here. F. 71.
o'i 0' 'HpaKXstot 7ratS£e, ovg iiirb irrspolg Sw^&t VEoererove, bpvig
uig, bipEipivri. There are like expressions in^Esch. Eum. 1004.
Eurip. Andr. 440. Herac. 10. Anthol. I. 87. 1. and in the
Talmud, Vajikra R. §. 28. p. 168, 4. Of the figurative use of
the noun rlKva in reference to cities and their inhabitants, we
have examples in 2 Sam. xx. 19. Jerem. ii. 16. So also Arist.
Ran. 1356. w KptjrEe, "iSae tekvo. The frequent calls to re
pentance which the Jews had received under the O. T. and their
perverse neglect of them, will be recognised among many other
instances in Deut. xxiv. 13. xxxii. 29, 30. Prov. i. 24<. Isaiah
lxv. 12. Jer. vii. 13. On points of construction we may notice
the ellipsis of Kara before ov rpoVov, which is supplied in
Acts xv. 11. and the plural iiOEXr)aarE in reference to 'lEpovcra-
Xr/p in the singular. With respect to the latter it is not unusual
to connect the names of countries, in a collective sense, with
verbs plural. So Aul. Gel. III. 7. Propter ejus virtutes omnis
Graecia gloriam atque gratiam prcecipuam claritudinis inclytis-
simce decoravere monumentis, signis, statuis. Elsner, Grotius,
Kuinoel, Wetstein, Palairet.
Ver. 38. By otKoe in this verse some understand the temple,
others the whole Jewish nation. That the Jews called their
temple the house, Kar !!;ox»7v, and the house of the sanctuary,
and the everlasting house, is abundantly evident from their
writings ; but, with the exception of Luke xi. 51. wherever the
temple is meant in the N. T. the word Geov, or the like, is always
joined with olKog to mark its signification. It is therefore better,.
in this place, to take it in the latter acceptation, as it is avowedly
so used in a very similar prophecy of Jerem. xxii. 5. XlyEt 6
Kiipiog, on Eig ipripwaiv 'iarai b diKog ovrog. So Chrysostom.
7rdcrav aiirwv ri)v dvaTpowrjv Trig iroXtTEiag iSr)Xov. The Greeks
also used the word otKoe, and the Latins domus, in the sense of
patria. Compare Dionys. Perieg. v. 354. Catull. Attid. v. 29.
10

MATTHEW XXIII. 39. XXIV. 1. 287
Cic. Attic. Epist. VII. 2. Sail. Cat. 44. Grotius, Palairet,
Elsner, Campbell. — [Doddridge, Kuinoel, Rosenmuller.]
Ver. 39. ov pi) p£ iSrjrE k. r. X. The interpretations which
have been given of this passage are many and various. Some
suppose that our Lord intended to predict his removal from them
until the destruction of their city, which is repeatedly called his
coming in the next chapter. In order to meet this exposition
they would render 'iwg dv e'itthite, until ye would gladly say, i. e.
until your calamities shall have convinced you of my Messiahship,
and ye will wish that ye had joined in those acclamations which
ye lately rebuked. Compare Matt. xxi. 9. 16. In confirmation
of this opinion it is urged, that when their destruction drew nigh
they earnestly expected their Messiah, and readily followed
those false teachers who promised them deliverance. See Joseph.
B. J. VII. 30. But to this it is an insuperable objection that
the Jews do not yet acknowledge that their Messiah has arrived,
the title 6 ipxbpEvog being still prospective. Others, therefore,
refer the prediction of Christ to the time of the conversion and
restoration of the Jews, of which St. Paul speaks in Rom. xi.
26. But as this will take place before the last coming of Christ,
it is perhaps more probable that our Lord alludes to his second
advent in triumph at the end of the world. So Chrysostom : rr)v
ydp piXXovaav ripipav rrig SEvripag aiiroii irapovaiag 'ivravOa
XiyEt. Some time previous to this period his fostering care will
be restored to them ; they will receive him as their Messiah, and
be ready to greet him with joyful acclamations at his glorious ap
pearing. The word dirapri should not be rendered henceforth,
but after a while, i. e. after his ascension, as in Matt. xxvi. 64.
and elsewhere. Grotius, Doddridge. — [Whitby, Mack
night, &c]

CHAPTER XXIV.
Contents : — Our Lord foretells the destruction of Jerusalem,
vv. 1, 2. Tlie signs preceding, and the circumstances at
tending that event, w. 3 — 31. [Mark xiii. 1. Luke xxi. 5.]
The time indicated, and illustrated by the parable of the fig-
tree, vv. 32 — 36. The uncertainty and suddenness of Christ's
appearance a cause for watchfulness, vv. 37- — 44. The pa
rable of the faithful and wicked servants, vv. 45 — 51. [Mark
' xiii. 32. Luke xxi. 34.]
Verse 1. rag oiKoSopdg rov hpov. Of the temple and its
various buildings and appurtenances see Home, to whose ad-

288 MATTHEW XXIV. 1.
mirable Introduction, Vol. III. pp. 24. 555. the reader is referred
for a proof of the fulfilment of our Lord's emphatic prediction in
the next verse, where he has also given (pp. 548. sqq.) a con
nected review of the whole of the prophecies contained in this
chapter, and the parallel places of Mark and Luke ; so that little
more will here be requisite than this general reference in regard
to the illustration of the prophecy and its fulfilment. The de
livery of the prediction arose naturally out of the train of passing
events. Christ had just pronounced in the temple his pathetic
lamentation over Jerusalem, in which he had adverted to its ap
proaching desolation. In allusion to this his disciples direct his
attention to its strength and magnificence, with a view, in all
probability, to draw from him a more explicit declaration on the
subject. The destruction of their temple was an event which
they could only connect in their imagination with the end of the
world, or at least, with that great and awful change which they
expected to take place in the constitution of the world at the
Messiah's advent. The Jews, in fact, applied the term awri-
Xsta roii alwvog, the end of the world, ox rather of the age, to
two distinct periods : 1 . the coming of their Messiah, in which
acceptation it is used in v. 3., and explained by the synonymous
expression rrje ar)g, (i. e. Xpiarov) irapovaiag. So also in Heb,
ix. 26. 1 Cor. x. 11. and that the coming of Christ is frequently
to be understood of his coming in judgment upon the Jews is suffi
ciently known. 2. The end of time, as in Matt. xiii. 39. 49.
xxviii. 20. and elsewhere. See also on Matt. xii. 32. There is
little doubt, indeed, that our Lord had both these significations
in view in the delivery of this prediction, for while the whole of
the chapter relates in its primary acceptation to the destruction
of Jerusalem, the forms of expression, and the images made use
of, are applicable also to the day of judgment, to which there is
unquestionably a secondary allusion. This is a very common
practice in the prophetic writings, where two subjects are fre
quently carried on together, a principal and subordinate one.
See Home. By mingling together in the present instance the
two important catastrophes of the destruction of the Jewish
polity and the end of the world, our Lord not only gives a most
interesting admonition to his immediate hearers, but extended
the benefit of his prediction to every period of time, and to the
whole Christian world. This remark will afford an easy solution
to many difficulties. We may observe, in conclusion, that the
three Gospels in which the prophecy is related were written and
published before the destruction of Jerusalem, and that the
writers were all dead before the event. There can, therefore, be
no suspicion that it was inserted after it had happened, more
especially as St. John, who alone survived the siege, does not
recite it. Newton, Rosenmuller, Whitby, Porteus, Mack
night. — [Mede, Sykes, Wolf, &c] The negative particle ov

MATTHEW XXIV. 6, 7. 289
in the beginning of v. 2. is omitted by several MSS. versions,
and Fathers, and it is very probably an interpolation.
Ver. 6. SeT ydp irdvra yEviaOai k. r. X. Some refer the verb
SeT to the counsel and determination of God ; but the expression
does nothing more than indicate the absolute certainty that the
predicted events will precede the destruction of the Jewish state
and nation. The word riXog corresponds with ervvrlXsta rov
alwvog in v. 3., so that our Lord's words were intended to con
firm his disciples to this effect : Be not alarmed at these ru
mours, for the end will not arrive till all which I declare is ac
complished. A similar mode of expression occurs in Hom. II.
B. 121. riXog S' ovirw rl iriipavrai. Manil. I. 912. Nee dum
finis erat : restabant Actia bella. Kuinoel, Wetstein, Gro
tius. Ver. 7. iyEpdriaErai ydp k. t. X. To Mr. Home's illustration
of this second sign it may be added that the Jews themselves
say, in Sohar Kadask, p. 8, 4. In the times of the Messiah
wars shall be stirred up in the world : nation shall rise against
nation, and city against city. Again in Bereshith R. §. 42. p.
41, 1. R. Eleazar, the son of Abina, said, When ye see king
dom rising against kingdom, then expect the immediate appear
ance of the Messiah. So also of the famines and pestilences in
Perikta Soharta, p. 58, 1. In the week in which the Son of
David comes there shall be a scarcity in the first year, in the
second the arrows of famine shall fly, and in the third there
shall be a grievous famine. In Perikta R. p. 28, 3. R. Levi
said, In the times of the Messiah a pestilence will visit the
world, and tlie wicked will be consumed by it. The words Xtjuot
Kat Xoipol are not unusually joined together, not only from their
similarity of sound, but because the one naturally produces the
other. So Hesiod. Op. D. 240. piy iirriyays irripa KpovtW,
Aipbv bpoii Kal Xoipov. Quint. Curt. IX. 10. Famem deinde
pestilentia insecuta est, quippe insalubrium ciborum novi succi,
ad hoc itineris labor, et cegritudines animi vulgaverant morbos.
Hence the proverb pErd Xtpbv Xotpog. Compare 2 Chron. xx. 9.
Jerem. xiv. 12. xxi. 7. Of earthquakes, as presaging times of
distress, see Joel iii. 3, 4. Amos viii. 9. Sil. Ital. V. 615. Plin.
N. H. II. 86. It is, therefore, incorrect, as well as unnecessary,
to understand aEiapol metaphorically. Grotius, Wetstein,
Kuinoel. — [Kypke, Loesner.]
Ibid. Kara roirovg. E. T. in divers places, rightly. So
Polyb. III. 53. Kardpipr) Se Kat Kara roirovg. Thucyd. III. 30.
Kar' olKtag. IV. 55. Kara x^paC Some, however, understand
in all places ; subaud. EKaarovg, which is supplied in Zach. iv.
16. So Kar hog, every year, in Luke ii. 42. But this inter
pretation can only be admitted upon the supposition that history
vol. i. u

290 MATTHEW XXIV. 8, 9. 14.
has not recorded every instance of calamities which happened,
which indeed, upon any consideration, is more than probable.
Raphelius, Wetstein, Le Clerc, Kuinoel.
Ver. 8. dpxi) wSivwv. Supply the words pbvov and 'iarai.
Eurip. Med. 60. Iv dpx^ irnpa, koi ovSiirw pEaol. The noun
eLStvEe signifies the pangs of child-birth, to which severe afflic
tions are frequently compared, not only in the Scriptures, but in
other writers. See my note on Hom. II. A. 270. Grotius, Wet
stein. Ver. 9. tote irapaSwaovai k. r. X. In Luke xxi. 12. it is said,
before these things ; but in this there is no inconsistency, for the
persecutions of the Christians commenced shortly after our
Lord's ascension, and continued to rage with increasing fury
long after the destruction of Jerusalem. Of this sign, the parti
culars of which extend through v. 13. the illustration given by
Mr. Home is confined to this single verse. With respect to the
apostacy predicted in v. 10., it is stated by Tacitus, in relation
to Nero's persecution, that at first several were seized, who con
fessed; and then, by their discovery, a great multitude of others
were convicted, and cruelly put to death with derision and insult :
Annal. XV. St. Paul mentions by name Phygellus, Hermo-
genes, and Demas, who forsook him, 2 Tim. i. 15. iv. 10.
False prophets or teachers also were to be raised up, v. 1 1 . and
accordingly we find St. Paul complaining of deceitful workers
transforming themselves into the Apostles of Christ. Examples
of such are Hymenceus and Philetus, (2 Tim. ii. 17, 18.) who
destroyed the hopes of the Christian by asserting that the resur
rection was past already ; Carpocrates, the head of the Gnostics ;
and Ebion, who taught that Christ was merely a Jewish prophet.
See also 1 Cor. viii. Gal. vi. 12. Phil. iii. 18. Col. ii. 8. 1 Tim.
i. 4. vi. 20. Tit. iii. 9. 1 John v. 21. It was the natural conse
quence of all this, that the love of many should wax cold, v. 12.,
and that their ardour in the cause of Christianity should be con
siderably abated ; and, accordingly, we meet with a great defec
tion in several Christian churches. See Gal. iii. 1 . sqq. 2 Thess.
iii. 1. sqq. 2 Tim. i. 15. Heb. x. 25. Of the assurance held out
in v. 13. see on Matt. x. 23. It is a remarkable fact, that not
a single Christian is known to have perished at the siege of Je
rusalem, in consequence of adopting the course recommended by
our Lord in vv. 16 — 18. By dvopia, in v. 12., is probably
meant illegal outrage, in allusion to the mock trials and lawless
persecutions with which the Christians were continually sub
jected. Newton, Grotius, Porteus, &c.
Ver. 14. £te paprvpiov iraat rolg 'iOvsat. Scil. that the offer
of salvation had been made to them in every part of the world

MATTHEW XXIV. 15. 291
where they were dispersed ; so that by their obstinate rejection
of it the justice of their punishment would be universally acknow
ledged. By i) o'tKovpivri most commentators understand the
Roman empire, in which sense the term is not unfrequently em
ployed. See on Luke ii. 1. At the same time it would be very
little of an hyperbole to take it in its widest acceptation. See
Home. The word riXog is used as in v. 6. A. Clarke, Kui
noel.
Ver. 15. Iv roirto dyiw. E. T. in the holy place. A great
majority of commentators prefer on holy ground; i. e. the dis
trict lying within a certain distance of the Temple, which was
regarded as sacred even by the enemies of the Jews, the Pagan
temples being possessed of similar immunities. In favour of this
interpretation it is urged, that, if by roirog dyiog we understand the
Temple itself, the event described would not be an indication of ap
proaching calamity, but the very calamity itself. But it appears
from the following verse that the admonition is not given to the
inhabitants of the city, to whom no opportunity of escape would
then be left, but to the people of Judea, ol iv ry 'lovSalq ; and
immediately afterwards we find 6 Iv ro dypt^t. It is urged, in
deed, that 'lovSaia frequently means no more than tractus Hiero-
solymitanus ; but of this no example has been adduced. Now,
excepting the present passage, the phrase roirog dyiog occurs in
the N. T. only in Acts vi. 13. xxi. 28. in neither of which can
it be otherwise understood than of some part of the Temple. In
the LXX it is very common, and there it is always meant of the
Temple, and generally of the holy place properly so called. Our
Lord is here supposed to allude to Dan. ix. 27. xi. 31. xii. 11.
and though the precise passage is not found in the prophet, the
first cited reference in the LXX is not very remote from the
words of St. Matthew. The expression there employed is oti
rb lEpbv fiSiXvypa rwv ipripwaiwv 'iarai ; and it is observable,
that although this differs from the Hebrew, still the word em
ployed is ^3, by which the Syriac translator has rendered 7tte-
pvytov in Matt. iv. 5. where some part of the Temple is un
questionably meant. Nor is history averse to this exposition, as
will be seen in Home. In the parallel place, Mark xiii. 14. we
have instead of Iv roirto dyiw the words 6Vov ov Sec. This ex
pression, it is true, is indefinite, but it seems to be an euphemism
to which no place less sacred than the Temple could have given
rise. That no objection can be formed against this interpreta
tion from the omission of the article, see Art. §. IV. p. 11.
Middleton. — [Grotius, Whitby, Campbell, &c] In the
expression (5SiXvypa Tr)g ipriptoaitag the noun /3SlXvyita is used
as an adjective, as in Luke i. 48. rairElvtoatg rr/g SouXrje for
SovXrj rairEivi). The participle srrrtiie is in the neuter gender
contracted from iaraog, as in Luke v. 2. iarwra for iaraora.
TT 9

292 MATTHEW XXIV. 17.
So Thucyd. III. 1. to piv KaOsaTwg rolg "EXXrjert vopipov.
Kuinoel, Kypke.
Ibid, b avayivwaKwv, voe'itw. These words are supposed by
some to have been spoken by our Lord himself, in order to fix
the attention of his hearers more forcibly ; and by others they
are explained as the words of the prophet himself, Dan. ix. 26 ,
answering to the Hebrew 73t£>J"n inj"ll, which the LXX render
Kal yvway ko! awr)aEtg. But they rather appear to contain a
parenthetical admonition of the Evangelist, calling the attention
of his readers to a very important warning of his master, which
he was then writing, and of which many of them would live to
witness the utility. The verb dvaytveicrKEiv, signifying to read,
is very common ; and that voeTv sometimes signifies to attend,
compare 2 Tim. ii. 7. Campbell, Kuinoel. — [Grotius, Mack
night.] Ver. 17. 6 iirl tov Stoparog, k. t. X. In this and the follow
ing verses there are allusions to Jewish customs designed to im
press upon the disciples the necessity of immediate flight. The
houses of the Jews had flat roofs forming a sort of terrace, with
stairs on the outside by which persons could descend without
entering the house. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 391.
Instead of n, which is the old reading, many of the best MSS.
read rd Ik rije otKtae, which is far preferable. In v. 18. the al
lusion is to the practice of husbandmen, not only among the
Jews, but also among the Greeks and Romans, of laying aside
their upper garments when, at work. Hesiod. Op. D. 392. yvp-
vbv aiTEipEtv, yvpvbv Se (5owte'iv, Tvixvov S' dpdaOai. Virg.
Georg. I. 299. Nudusara, sere nudus. The persons mentioned
in v. 19. are such as would not be in a condition to make their
escape, or to bear the miseries of the siege. According to Jo
seph. B. J. V. 10. the houses were full of women and children,
who perished by the famine, and mothers snatched the food even
from their children's mouths. See also Joseph. Ant. XIV. 13. 7.
and Home, ubi supra ; and of the admonition in v. 20. see Vol.
III. p. 30. R. Tanchum observes, p. 30, 2. that the favour of
God was particularly manifested in tlie destruction of the first
temple, in not obliging the Jews to go out in the winter, but in
the summer. With respect to the Sabbath, the distance allowed
by the Jews for journeying on that day was only 2000 cubits, or
about five furlongs, supposed to be the space between the camp
and the Tabernacle, Levit. xxiii. 3. See Exod. xvi. 29. Joseph.
Ant. XIII. 8. 4. This superstition was retained by the Na
zarene Christians, and in fact by all who remained in Judea in
the time of Adrian. See Sulp. Sev. II. 45. Besides, on the
Sabbath days the Jews not only kept within doors, but the gates
of all the cities and towns were closely barred, (Nehem. xiii. 19.
22.) so that they could expect no admission into any place of

MATTHEW XXIV. 21, 22. 293
security. See also on Matt. xii. 2. It is to be observed, how
ever, that our Lord does not here intend to establish the Jewish
Sabbath, but to caution his disciples against the inconvenience
which might arise to them from exciting the indignation of the
Jews by an apparent violation of it. Some by crdj3j3aTov under
stand, but without reason, the Sabbatical year. Grotius,
Lightfoot, Elsner, A. Clarke, Whitby, Wetstein. —
[Hammond.]
Ver. 21. ola ov ylyovE k. r. X. This is a proverbial expres
sion frequently employed by the sacred writers to express some
very uncommon calamity, as in Exod. v. 9. x. 14. Joel ii. 2.
Dan. xii. 1. 1 Mace. ix. 27. It is not, therefore, necessary to
take the words in their strictest sense ; at the same time, in this
instance they were almost literally fulfilled. See Home. The
triple negatives ovS' ov pi) are powerfully emphatic. Compare
Luke x. 19. Heb. xiii. 5. Rev. xviii. 14. Whitby, Kuinoel.
Ver. 22. ovk dv iauiOr) irdaa adp%. The expression ov 7rda-a
aap% is a periphrastic Hebraism for ovSEte, no one; scil. of
the inhabitants of Judaea, whether Jews or Christians. So vast
was the number of those who perished in the siege, that if it
had been protracted much longer, the whole nation must shortly
have been destroyed ; those within the walls by famine, conten
tion, and the fury of the Roman soldiery ; and the Christians,
who had taken refuge in the mountains, by the difficulties of
subsisting without houses or provisions, and by the hands of
the Sicarii and the Zealots, who slew all indiscriminately who
did not take part in the war. In the shortening of the siege the
providence of God is distinctly observable, for, to all human ap
pearance, a variety of circumstances combined to prolong it.
Vespasian's departure from Judaea to assume the imperial dig
nity, the obstinate inveteracy of the Jews against the Romans,
the extraordinary strength of Jerusalem, and its ample means
for sustaining a lengthened siege, and the advice which Titus
received from his generals to leave the work to famine : these
and other causes seemed to threaten the most protracted duration
of the Jewish miseries. In fact, the besieged themselves were
mainly instrumental in shortening those days of tribulation, by
their seditious and mutual slaughters, their madness in burning
their own provision, and, at last, by deserting their strong holds.
Titus was so sensible of this, that he himself ascribed his success
to God's driving them from their fortresses. See Joseph. B. J.
V. 12. 1. Tacit. Hist. V. 11. Whitby, Wetstein. The verb
koXo/3ovv signifies properly to amputate, or mutilate, as in
2 Sam. iv. 12. LXX. Xenoph. Cyrop. I. 4. 2. and thence, in re
ference to time, to shorten. So in Malela, p. 237. rov avrov
privbg rag r)pipag iKoXofiriaav. By the elect in this passage the

294 MATTHEW XXIV. 24.
Jewish converts to Christianity are in all probability intended.
See on Matt. xx. 16. There seems to be an allusion to an opi-
- nion prevalent in ancient times, that a national calamity was
sometimes averted, that the innocent might not be involved in
the punishment of the guilty. Kuinoel, Grotius.
Ver. 24. -^EvSoxptcTot Kat t//EvSo7rpoc/>rJTat. Some suppose
that our Lord had Barchochebas in view here, who expressly
called himself the Messiah ; but this is incorrect, as Barchochebas
did not arise till the reign of Adrian, about sixty years after the
siege of Jerusalem. But though Josephus does not mention that
any of the impostors and magicians, of which he says (Ant. XX.
6.) the country was at this time full, assumed the title of Christ :
still it is probable, from their promising to shew anpEla eXevOe-
piag, signs of liberty, which the Jews expected from their Mes
siah, that they really did so. It is remarkable that our Lord not
only predicted the appearance of these deceivers, but also the
circumstances and manner of their conduct. Some were to ap
pear in the desart ; and Josephus relates that many impostors
persuaded the people to follow them into the wilderness, promis
ing to shew them aripEla Kal ripara, signs and miracles, done ac
cording to the counsel of God: Ant. XX. 7. An Egyptian false
prophet, (Joseph, ubi supra, compared with Acts xxi. 38.) led
out into the desart four thousand men, who were murderers ,- but
they were dispersed by Felix. Another promised salvation to the
people, if they would follow him into the desart, and was de
stroyed by Festus. Also one Jonathan, a weaver, held out the
same hopes, and was destroyed by Vespasian, Joseph. B. J.
VII. 11. They were to appear also in the secret chambers :
and there was a false prophet, (Joseph. B. J. VI. 5.) who de
clared to the people that God commanded them to go up into the
Temple, when the place in which they assembled was set on fire
by the Romans, and six thousand perished in the flames. So
dexterous were these impostors in imitating miraculous works,
that there is no wonder they deceived the multitude ; and even
the Christians themselves, had they not possessed the strongest
" evidence of the divine mission of their Master, would in all proba
bility have fallen into the snare. And this is all that is meant
by the words e\ Swarbv, from which no argument can be drawn
in support of the doctrine of final perseverance. The phrase
simply denotes a great difficulty in a possible act. So Matt.
xxvi. 39. Acts xx. 16. Rom. xii. 18. That the Christians were
sometimes deceived appears from Tertull. adv. Marcion. III. at
the same time that the admonitions which Christ had given them
rendered it extremely difficult. Hence the saying of Galen:
Odrrov rig roiig dirb Xptarov pEraSiSdE,EiE. Besides, our Lord
solemnly exhorts his disciples to the greatest caution, (vv. 4, 5.
11. 13.) and he expressly declared that many would fall from

MATTHEW XXIV. 27. 295
the faith. See on Matt, xviii. 6. Whitby, Grotius, Le Clerc,
A. Clarke. There has been some difference of opinion as to
whether the signs and wonders here mentioned were really per
formed, or merely promised. That the verb Sdiaovai will bear
the latter interpretation is inferred from Deut. xiii. 2. 1 Kings
xiii. 3. 5. LXX. which is somewhat confirmed by Joseph. Ant.
XX. 8. 6. B. J. VII. 11. 1., where the history merely says
Se'i^eiv tipaaav. The more probable opinion, however, from the
ordinary usage of the expression crriiisiov StSovat, and from the
natural idea suggested by our Lord, is, that some species of mi
racles, perhaps by daemoniacal agency, were really wrought ; or,
at least, that magic sleights, like the lying wonders mentioned in
2 Thess. ii. 9. were exhibited. It is well known that the Jews
were particularly credulous, and easily deceived by tricks and
incantations of this nature ; and we are expressly told by Jerome,
that Barchochebas pretended to vomit flames. At all events, it
is certain that God would never suffer miracles to be wrought in
proof of falsehood without investing his servants with the power
of working greater miracles on the side of truth : so that the
cause of God and his religion will always have the greatest evi
dence in its favour. Doddridge, Lightfoot. — [Kypke, Gro
tius, &c.J The word rapslov, v. 26., is properly a treasury or
store-house, and hence any private chamber. Hesych. rapElov'
OdXapog. Compare Gen. xliii. 30. Exod. viii. 3. LXX. Al-
berti, Le Clerc.
Ver. 27. wcr7r£p ydp r) darpairi) k. t. X. By this simile some
understand the signal and conspicuous, others the rapid and
sudden, destruction of the Jews : probably both interpretations
may be united, intimating that the coming of the Messiah to take
vengeance on the nation will not be in a remote desart, or in a
secret chamber of the Temple, but manifested in the sudden and
rapid overthrow of his enemies. The flash of lightning is com
monly descriptive of suddenness and celerity. Compare Zach. ix.
14. Luke x. 18. Apoll. Rhod. II. 267. Virg. JEn. XI. 26. It
is remarkable that our Lord points out the direction of the
march of the Roman army, which entered Judea at the east, and
carried its conquests westward with the most devastating fury and
rapidity. There is a doubt whether the particle ydp in the next
verse refers to this or the preceding ; the latter seems more pro
bable, and that it conveys an additional reason for disregarding
the prevailing rumours of the Messiah's appearance. By the
carcase is meant the Jewish nation, who were judicially dead;
by the eagles the Roman armies, who bore the eagle on then-
standard : and our Lord would signify, that wherever these de
ceivers assembled their followers, the Romans would pursue
them to destruction. There is an evident allusion to the descrip
tion of the nature of the eagle in Job xxxix. 30. LXX. ov S' dv

296 MATTHEW XXIV. 29, 30.
tSen TEOvEwTEg, irapaxpripa evpiaKovrai. Our Lord employs the
same expression in Luke xvii. 37. So also Senec. Ep. 46. Si
vultur es, cadaver expecta. The prophecies of Moses, Deut.
xxviii. 49. and in Hos. viii. 1. are supposed by some to refer to
this destruction, and by others to the slaughter of the Jews under
Adrian and Trajan. Whitby, Lightfoot, Hammond, Kui
noel, &c.
Ver. 29. svOiwg Se k. r. X. The expressions in this and the
two following verses have been supposed by many commentators
to refer to the day of judgment; and indeed many of them are
actually applied to that great event in the very next chapter, and
in other parts of Scripture. But in the present instance the con
nection of our Lord's discourse, and the word EvOiwg in parti
cular, distinctly appropriate them to the destruction of Jerusalem.
In ancient hieroglyphic writing the sun, moon, and stars were
used to represent states and empires, kings and nobility ; their
eclipse or extinction denoting temporary disasters or entire over
throw : and thus in prophetic language great commotions upon
earth are often represented under the notion of commotions and
changes in the heavens. Thus the destruction of Babylon is
foretold in similar terms in Isaiah xiii. 9., the punishment of the
Idumaeans in Isaiah xxiv. 6., of Sennacherib, Isaiah li, 6., of
Egypt, Ezek. xxxii. 7., the slaughter of the Jews, Dan. viii. 10.,
and this very destruction of Jerusalem in Joel ii. 30. Compare
also Esther viii. 16. Jerem. xv. 9. Joel iii. 15. Amos viii. 9.
The same also appears from the Talmud ; and Maimonides ob
serves (More Nevoch. c. 29. p. 2.) that the sun and moon losing
their light is a proverbial expression importing the destruction
and utter ruin of a nation. So also Artemidor. Oneir. II. 39.
Similar notions are also observable in the classic writers. Thus
of the falling or shooting of stars, as ominous of evil times, Virg.
Georg. I. 365. Scepe etiam Stellas, vento impendente, videbis
Praecipites ccelo labi, noctisque per umbram Flammarum longos
a tergo albescere tr actus. Again, v. 462. Sol tibi signa dabit :
Solem quis dicere falsum Audeat ? Ille etiam ccecos instare tu-
multus Scepe monet, &c. Compare Ovid, Met. XV. 782. Cic.
Catil. III. 8. Tibull. II. 5. 71. Liv. XXII. 4. 5. Still it is
more than probable that there is a remote although not a direct
reference to the attendant circumstances of the day of judgment.
See above on v. 1. By the powers of Heaven, SwdpEig rwv ov-
pavwv, are generally meant the sun, moon, and stars, as in Deut.
iv. 19. Isaiah xxxiv. 4. 2 Chron. xxxiii. 5. Jerem. xxxiii. 22.
and elsewhere ; and these, having been already particularized,
are again mentioned generally to encrease the emphasis. Whitby,
Lightfoot, Doddridge, Hammond, Kuinoel.
Ver. 30. tote (pavf)aErat rb aripEiov k. t. X. Some understand

MATTHEW XXIV. 31. 297
the word anpslov to mean an ensign or banner ; others interpret
it pleonastically, and it is omitted by Mark and Luke ; but our
Lord seems rather to allude to the prophecy in Dan. vii. 13., from
which the Jews had imbibed an idea that the Messiah would ap
pear visibly in the heavens, and exert some miraculous display
of power by which they would be delivered from the Roman
yoke, and an universal empire over all nations be erected in their
behalf. But by the coming of the Son of man in the clouds
Daniel meant his appearance to take vengeance on the unbe
lieving Jews; and by the kingdom over all nations he meant a
spiritual kingdom, i. e. the dispensation of the Gospel, which
should be extended over all the nations of the world. Hence,
by adapting the words of this prophecy to his present purpose,
our Lord intimated that the true spirit of it was generally mis
taken by the Jews, and set his disciples right upon the subject.
The figurative expression, coming in the clouds, is used in other
parts of Scripture to denote the irresistible interposition of God
to execute vengeance on a guilty generation. See 2 Sam. xxii.
10. sqq. Psalm xcvii. 2. Isaiah xix. 1. Its meaning in this
place is sufficiently fixed by our Lord himself in vv. 27, 28. 37.
That it cannot refer, as some have supposed, to the comet men
tioned in Joseph. VII. 12. is evident, since that appeared some
time previous to the destruction of the city. Macknight,
Whitby, Hammond, Le Clerc. — [Doddridge, Kuinoel,
Rosenmuller.] By (pvXal rrjg yr)g are evidently meant the
inhabitants of Judea, who would have abundant occasion for
mourning. The verb KoirrEaOai signifies to beat the breast in
token of sorrow, as in Zech. xii. 12. Rev. i. 7. See on Matt.
xi. 17. Whitby, Kuinoel.
Ver. 31. airoaTEXEl rovg dyyiXovg avrov. Some commentators
understand our Lord to mean, that after the destruction of Je
rusalem he would collect together, by his angels, as with the
sound of the trumpet, his true and persevering followers from all
parts of Judea ; but he rather alludes to the rapid progress of
the Gospel, by means of his Apostles and their successors, to
which the exact fulfilment of this prediction mainly contributed.
Agreeably to this interpretation, the word dyyEXoe is frequently
applied both in the O. and N. T. to God's prophets and mi
nisters. See on Matt. xi. 10. Their preaching also is compared
to the sound of a trumpet in Isaiah lviii. 1. Jerem. vi. 17. Ezek.
xxxiii. 3 — 6. Rom. x. 18. and the Gentiles are said to be called
from all corners of the earth in Matt. viii. 11, 12. Luke xiii. 28,
29. Whitby, Macknight, Rosenmuller. — [Hammond.] The
Jews by the winds denoted the cardinal points of the heavens, as
in 1 Chron. ix. 24. Ezek. xxxvii. 9. We have examples of the
phrase a7r' aKpwv iwg aKpwv in classic writers. Themist. XIII.
p. 179. 15 ctKpae tic ciKpav. Xenoph. de vectigal. p. 727. a7r'

298 MATTHEW XXIV. 32. 36.
iaxdrwv rf/e 'EXXdSoe Itt' iaxa7a' Kuinoel, Wetstein, Ra-
PHELIUS.
Ver. 32. dirb Si rr)g avKr)g k. t. X. Our Lord in this parable
answers to the question of the disciples in v. 3. respecting the
time of this destruction, telling them that it will be as clearly in
dicated by the signs which he had mentioned, as the approach of
summer by the budding of the fig-tree. He then limits the time
more distinctly to a certain period, and declares that his predic
tion would be accomplished before the generation of men then
existing should pass away. Those, indeed, who understand this
part of the prophecy more immediately of the day of judgment, ex
plain this generation, (r) ysvsd avrri, v. 34.) of the Jewish nation
through all ages ; as if our Lord intended to say that they should
continue a distinct people till the end of the world. But this is
altogether at variance with the meaning of the word y£v£a in every
other passage of the N. T. Compare Matt. xi. 16. xii. 42. xxiii.
36. Mark viii. 12. Luke vii. 31. xi. 29. sqq. xvi. 8. Acts ii. 40.
The true sense is abundantly illustrated by Matt. xvi. 28. be
sides that the declaration was literally fulfilled. The Evangelist
John in all probability lived to see these things come to pass ;
and there were also some Rabbins alive at the time when Christ
spoke these words who witnessed the destruction of the city,
viz. R. Simeon, who perished during the siege ; R. Jochanan
Ben Zaccai, who outlived it ; R. Zadoc, R. Ishmael, and others.
The Temple was burnt and the city taken A.D. 70. Dod
dridge, Whitby, Lightfoot, &c. — [Mede, Sykes, &c] The
phrase lyyve iirl Ovpaig, v. 33., denoting the closest proximity,
occurs in Demosth. Philip. 4. V7r£p Se tov Iirl ralg Ovpaig iyyiig
ovruoal k. t. X. Philo de Agric. p. 208. D. 6 woXspog lyyve
Kat iirl Ovpaig tvv. So in limine esse, Virg. ^En. VlII. 656.
Compare Gen. iv. 7. Phil. iv. 5. James v. 9. Rev. i. 3. The
nominative to be supplied may be 6 vlbg tov dvOpdiirov, from v.
30., or 77 wapovaia tov vlov roil dvOpdiirov from v. 27. KuiNOEL,
Bos, Whitby, Grotius.
Ver. 36. irspl Si rrig iipipag k. t. X. It is strongly urged by
many that this verse at least relates solely to the day of judg
ment, which is immediately alluded to in the strong proverbial
expression in the preceding verse ; of which see on Matt. v. 18.
In support of this opinion great stress is laid upon the opposition
of iKEt'vrje here, and raiira, v. 33. If the conjecture be true the
verse should be inclosed in a parenthesis, for what follows cer
tainly relates to the destruction of Jerusalem, to which it is ex
pressly confined in Luke xvii. 26. sqq., and cannot, without vio
lence, be applied to the final advent of Christ. There is no
reason, however, for supposing that there is any closer reference
to the day of judgment than in the rest of the chapter. Having

MATTHEW XXIV. 38. 40. 299
predicted the fall of the Jewish state within certain limits, he
proceeds to affirm that the precise time thereof cannot be di
vulged, and, on that account, presses upon them the necessity of
watchfulness. The emphatic term 17 ripipa Ikeivt) refers to the
destruction of Jerusalem in Luke xix. 43. Acts ii. 20. Rom. xiii.
11. 1 Cor. i. 7, 8. iii. 13. 1 Thess. v. 2. 2 Thess. i. 10. and
elsewhere. Compare Zech. xiv. 1. Hammond, Le Clerc. —
[Whitby, Doddridge.] With respect to the silence of revela
tion on this point, Christ expressly states in Mark xiii. 32. that
he himself also knew it not : at least such is the English version.
In order to obviate the objection which has frequently been built
upon this declaration against the divinity of Christ, it is some
times urged that our Lord here speaks of himself only as to his
human nature ; but the gradation of the sentence from men to
angels, and from angels to Christ, seems to forbid this solution.
It should rather seem, therefore, that the word eISew in this place
bears the sense of the Hebrew conjugation Hiphil, and signifies
to make to know, i. e. to declare, to reveal. This is unquestion
ably the meaning of the word in 1 Cor. ii. 2. Hence the true
import of the passage, Neither man nor angel, nor even the Son
of Man himself, can reveal the day and hour of the destruction
of Jerusalem to you ; because the Father hath determined other
wise. Macknight. — [Doddridge, Whitby, Lightfoot.]
Many commentators would render wpa season, rather than hour,
observing, that if the day is unknown the hour is necessarily un
known also : this, however, is unimportant. The expression
employed by our Lord is simply intended to designate the precise
time. Le Clerc, Hammond. — [A. Clarke.]
Ver. 38. rpciyovrEe Kat 7rtvovTEe k. t. X. These words have
been thought to imply the most fatal extravagance of riot and
lust ; and the verb yapElaOai is interpreted here, as it is unques
tionably often used, in a criminal sense. But how great reason
soever there may be for believing that the antediluvian sinners
were addicted to the grossest excesses, our Lord most probably
intended nothing more than to express the security and gaiety
with which they pursued the ordinary employments and amuse
ments of life when they were on the very brink of destruction.
The verb 'iyvwaav in the next verse should be rendered they did
not consider, i. e. they did not improve their knowledge so as to
profit by it. That they had sufficient intimation of the judg
ments which awaited them, see Gen. vi. 13. Heb. xi. 7. 2 Pet.
ii. 5. Compare Luke xix. 42. Whitby, Doddridge.
Ver. 40. tote Svo k. t. X. Some have supposed that the de
sign of this and the following verse is to shew that the desolation
should be as general as unexpected ; so general, that of two
persons employed together in any occupation both should in no

300 MATTHEW XXIV. 42. 45.
wise escape. It should rather seem to assert the providence of God,
in making a distinction between the faithful and disobedient, of
whom the former would be saved and the latter destroyed, al
though they might both appear to be equally exposed to the im
pending danger. The verb wapaXapfidvErat is in the present
for the future. Whitby, Hammond. — [A. Clarke.] Of the
allusion in v. 41. see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 464.
Ver. 42. ypijyopstrE ovv, k. t. X. It is conjectured by some
that our Lord's discourse respecting the destruction of Jerusalem
concluded with the last verse ; and that what follows was spoken
at another time, and upon a different occasion. In Luke xii. 39.
the ensuing exhortations are otherwise connected, but they ac
cord here as well as there with the subject in hand, and may,
therefore, be supposed to have been accommodated by our Lord
to both places. It is certain that the remainder of the admoni
tion alludes no less to the final judgment than to the judgment
upon the Jews, not to mention that the next chapter cannot
easily be applied to any other than the former. It seems, there
fore, that the grand transition about which commentators are so
much divided is made precisely at this point. The destruction
of Jerusalem was a proper emblem of the dissolution of the world
itself, and the warnings which had just been delivered in re
ference to impending national judgments would naturally lead to
a caution against an unwelcome surprise by a call to the tribunal
of God. The application of the following parables is sufficiently
obvious ; they inculcate the necessity of perseverance and watch
fulness, more especially in Christ's appointed ministers, from the
fact that his coming to judge the world will be no less sudden than
unexpected. The metaphor of his appearance as a thief is em
ployed in 1 Thess. v. 2. 2 Pet. iii. 10. Rev. iii. 3. Of the verb
StopvrTEtv, v. 43., see on Matt. vi. 19. With the sentiment we
may compare Sail. Cat. 52. Vigilando, agendo, bene consulendo,
omnia prospere cedunt. Whitby, Doddridge, Kuinoel, Wet
stein. Ver. 45. rig dpa ian k. t. X. These parables evidently refer
most especially to the ministers of the Gospel, under the simi
litude of those servants whose business it was to distribute the
monthly allowance of provisions to the slaves. They extend,
however, to every Christian individually ; and in reference to the
early ages of Christianity, the faithful and wise servant will re
present those who remained constant in their attachment to their
Lord under all the persecutions and iniquities of those times ;
while the evil servant is the apostatizing Jew, who having de
serted the faith himself, betrayed and smote his fellow-servants,
who continued faithful to the religion of the Gospel. Compare
Matt. x. 21. xxiv. 10. Heb. x. 37. James v. 8, 9. 2 Pet. iii. 4.
9

MATTHEW XXIV. 51. 301
The Gnostics and early Heretics are also supposed by some to
be included in this declaration. Whitby, Hammond, Mack
night. The noun OEpairEiag is the abstract for the concrete,
the service for the servants, of which see Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 429. 1.
Ver. 51. SixoroiiTJcTEt. Very many of the commentators un
derstand this verb of the ancient punishment of dichotomy, of
which see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 155. and compare Judg.
xix. 29. 1 Sam. xv. 33. 2 Sam. xii. 31. Dan. iii. 29. Heb. xi.
37. Tertull. Apol. 3. Diod. Sic. I. 2. Suet. Cal. 27. Horat. Sat.
I. 1. 99. Others interpret it of the division of a debtor's pro
perty among his creditors ; and others, again, of separating the
evil servant, or confining him apart from the rest of the house
hold, in a sense somewhat similar to that of abscindere in Hor.
Od. I. 3. 21. It is quite clear from the context that the punish
ment alluded to fell short of death; and, as the two last of these in
terpretations are far-fetched and unsatisfactory, the most probable
opinion is, that although dichotomy itself is not intended, the
verb is transferred from that sense to denote a severity of punish
ment nearly allied to it. We should, therefore, probably trans
late it to scourge severely, in which sense the Greek ripvEiv, and
the Latin discindere and secare, are sometimes employed. Com
pare Hom. Od. 2. 345. Arrian. Epict. III. 22. Plaut. Mil. Gl.
V. 1. 2. Terent. Adelph. IV. 3. 6. In Luke xii. 47. the verb
is SapTjcrErat. At the same time, the punishment intended is
clearly emblematic of eternal perdition, which may also be in
ferred from its being joined with the portion of the hypocrites.
Thus in the Talmudic tract Solah : R. Eliezer said, Every hy
pocrite has his portion in Hell. Kuinoel, Doddridge, Scho
ettgen, Rosenmuller. — [Whitby, Raphelius, Munthe,
Campbell, Glasse, &c] The expression rb pipog nOivai is
probably taken from the division of booty amongst soldiers, and
hence signifies versari cum aliquo. Compare Job xx. 29. Psalm
xi. 6. 1. 18. Prov. xxix. 24. Dan. ix. 12. 20. So also Plutarch
in Mario, C. 29. slg dpErrje Kat SEevorrjroe pspiSa rb ipEvaaaOat
nOipEvog. Of the expression Ikei iarai k. t. X. see on Matt.
viii. 11. 13. Elsner, Le Clerc. With the allusion in these
parables we may compare Claudian de Bel. Getic. v. 366. Ac
veluti famuli, mendax quos mortis herilis Nuntius in luxumfalso
rumore resolvit, Dum marcent epulis, atque inter vina choros-
que Persultat vacuis effrcena licentia tectis ; Si reducem domi-
numfors improvisa revexit, Harent attoniti, libertatemque pero-
sus Conscia servilis prcecordia concutit horror. Columel. I. 1.
Servi dominorum distantia corrumpuntur. See also Plaut.
Pseud. IV. 7. 3. Wetstein, Bulkley.

302 MATTHEW XXV. 1. 9.

CHAPTER XXV.
Contents: — Parable of the ten virgins, vv. 1 — 13. Parable of
the talents, vv. 14 — 30. The proceedings of the day of judg
ment described, vv. 31 — 46.
Verse 1. tote bpoiwOf)aErai k. t. X. For an ample illustration
of this parable, the application of which is given by our Lord
himself in v. 13., see Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 400. III. pp.
399. 417. sq. A very similar one is found in the Jewish treatise
Rheschith Cochma : — Repent, whilst thou hast strength to do it;
whilst thy lamp burns, and the oil is not extinguislied ; for, if
thy lamp be gone out, thy oil will profit thee nothing. There
is another parable also, of a like description, produced by
Kimchi, on Isaiah lxv. 13. This thing is like to a king who in
vited his servants, but appointed no set time. Those that were
wise adorned themselves, and sat in the porch of the palace ; but
those that were foolish went about their own business. The king
on a sudden called for his servants ; the first went in adorned,
the second undressed ; and the king was pleased with the wise
and angry with the foolish, and said : They who are prepared
shall eat of my banquet ; they that are unprepared shall not eat
of it. Hence Origen and others of the Fathers have justly in
ferred that this parable of the virgins is designed against a late
repentance, which may be seen also in the necessity of constant
vigilance, v. 13. of assiduous prayer, Luke xxi. 34. 36. and con
tinued well doing, Matt. xxiv. 45. In v. 10. there is probably
an allusion to the Jewish phrase of shutting the gates of re
pentance. Thus Midrash. Cohel. II. 9. The holy blessed God
said to Israel : My sons, repent, while the gates of repentance
stand open. Compare Ecclus. xviii. 21. It may be inferred,
perhaps, from this parable, that ten was the usual number of
virgins who attended the bridegroom, though the number may
be used indefinitely, and is certainly not to be pressed in the
application. The same number is particularized in Kelim, II. 8.
It is the custom of the Israelites to carry the bride from the
house of her father to the house of the bridegroom, and to carry
before her about ten wooden staves, in which there is a piece of
cloth with oil and pitch ; and these, being lighted, they carry
before her for torches. Whitby, Lightfoot.
Ver. 9. pr)iroTE ovk dpKiay k. r. X. Some understand an
ellipsis of opdrE or |3Xe7T£T£ ; others of (pofiovpEOa ; and others,
again, that there is no ellipsis whatever, but that the particle Se
should be omitted in the next clause upon the authority of se
veral good MSS. It has been thought, also, that the adverb

MATTHEW XXV. 14. 303
pr'lirorE is sometimes used for i'cnoe, perhaps, as in Gen. xx. 1 1 .
LXX. 2 Tim. ii. 25. The E. T. supplies not so, i. e. we will
not give it, lest, &c. ; and this seems to be as easy a method as
any, if not preferable to them all. Grotius, Glasse, Dod
dridge, Whitby, Campbell. — [Alberti, Kypke, &c] It is
strange that Popish writers should consider this passage as
favouring their doctrine of a stock of merits in their church,
founded on works of supererogation, since, if it referred to them
at all, it would rather forbid any dependence on them. The ex
pression dyopderarE iavralg seems merely an ornamental circum
stance, having the appearance of a proverb usually applied to
those who were unreasonable in their demands. If it is to be
taken into the account, it plainly denies to every one any work
of supererogation which can be placed to the account of another.
Doddtudge, A. Clarke. In the end of the parable, v. 13. the
words Iv y 6 ve'6e rov dvOpiiiirov 'ipx^rai, which are found in the
common editions, are omitted in most MSS. and versions, and
should in all probability be expunged. The sense, however, is
the same in either case. Grotius, Mill, Griesbach, Ham
mond.
Ver. 14. ibaiTEp yap dvOpwirog k. t. X. This parable does
not appear to be the same with the very similar one in Luke xix.
12. There the gifts are equal, here they vary; there they
are pounds, here they are talents : that in St. Luke was spoken
in the house of Zacchaeus before the raising of Lazarus, this was
delivered on Mount Olivet three days before the last passover.
The scope of the two parables is also generally supposed to be
different: in the former the pounds are understood by some to
represent the ordinary operations of the Spirit equally vouchsafed
to every Christian; in the latter the talents axe the extraordinary
powers given in different degrees to the ministers of the Gospel,
as to the Apostles ten, to the seventy disciples five, and to
teachers of an inferior order one. The former also is considered
as a warning addressed immediately to the Jews, the latter as a
general intimation of the last judgment. Some, indeed, refer
this also to the destruction of Jerusalem. It is to be observed,
however, that whatever may be the opinions respecting their
primary import, both of them must be interpreted ultimately with
a view to the final judgment, and as directed indiscriminately
to every Christian. Lightfoot, Grotius, Whitby. The open
ing of this parable is evidently wanting. The E. T. supplies
the kingdom of Heaven, which is the usual form upon similar
occasions ; but it seems more likely here to have been the Son of
man, both from the bearing of the similitude and the interpolation
in the last verse, which in all probability caused the defect in
this. Campbell, Macknight. Of the custom alluded to see
Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 404.

304 MATTHEW XXV. 15. 21. 24.
Ver. 15. Kardrr)v \Siav Swaptv. Some would render Swapig,
wealth, in reference to the master ; and in this sense it is doubt
less sometimes employed : but the scope of the parable is alto
gether in favour of the general interpretation, which understands
it of the capability of the servants, to each of whom a propor
tionate sum was given, according as they had the necessary quali
fications for its management. It seems to have been a practice
with opulent traders in the East to employ a portion of their
capital in this way ; and something of a similar nature has been
observed in modern times. The adjective I'Stoe, both in this and
the preceding verse, is used for avrov, as in Matt. xxii. 5.
Whitby, Kuinoel, Rosenmuller. — [Kypke.] In the next
verse the verbs ipydX,EaOai and iroulv are mercantile terms, of
which the former signifies to embark money in trade, and the
latter to realize a profit. With ipydZeaOat in this sense the
word xpi?i"araJ °r the like, is generally supplied, as in Herod. I.
24. Arist. Equit. 835. iElian. Hist. An. X. 50. For TrotEtv the
more usual verb KEpSijtrai is substituted in the next verse, but
the former is also very commonly so employed. iElian. V. H.
XIV. 32. Evpcov TJ7V ovalav iroir)aavra r)g diriXiiTE ttXeicv.
Theoph. Char. 54. 7roti?crai SIko rdXavra. So also in L,atinfacere.
Nepos, in Cimon. 1.3. Magnas pecunias ex metallis fecerat.
Cic. Ver. II. 6. pecuniam maximum facere. With oipv^sv, v.
18., there is an ellipsis of the cognate accusative bpvypa. Some,
indeed, supply avrb, sc. dpyvptov, but of this the succeeding
clause would only be a repetition. Wetstein, Palairet, Kut-
no'el. Of the phrase ervvaipEtv Xoyov, see on Matt, xviii. 23.
Ver. 21. ev, SovXe k. t. X. There is peculiar force and energy
in the word ev, which is equivalent to Evys. It was the word
employed by spectators at any public exercise to express the
highest satisfaction and applause. Plato, Euthyd. dpa dv£c?o-
pvjiriadv te koi iyiXaaav, Kal irplv dvairvEvaai KaXuig te ko! ev.
Compare Hor. A. P. 328. 428. In order to keep the parable
and its application distinct, it is very generally agreed to render
Xapd, in this place, a banquet ox feast. In reference to the con
viviality of an entertainment the Hebrew tlTWO, which signifies
a banquet, and particularly a marriage feast, is once expressed
by xaPa m Esth. ix. 17. LXX. and Pignorius (de Servis) says
that banqueting-rooms had the word XAPA written over them.
It may be observed, that although slaves were not, freedmen
sometimes were, admitted to their master's table. Doddridge,
Wetstein, Whitby, Le Clerc.
Ver. 24. KvptE, iyvwv cte, k. t. X. This excuse of the sloth
ful servant has been thought to be merely an ornamental circum
stance to which nothing corresponds in the application of the
parable. But it should rather seem to relate to the weak and

MATTHEW XXV. 26. 31. 305
groundless reasons which those who neglect the duties of Chris
tianity are apt to allege in their defence ; representing the Gospel
as a hard task-master, who requires more of them than they
are able to perform. It is to be observed also, that in what
follows, v. 26., the Lord does not make any concession that the
matter was truly as the servant stated, but merely admits the
point by way of argument, in order to urge more forcibly upon
him the necessity of exertion in the performance of his duty.
In selecting also as the example of sloth the servant who had
been entrusted with the smallest sum, it was not Christ's in
tention to insinuate that those who have received most will
ordinarily pass their accounts best ; but to intimate that the most
humble Christian has some service to perform, for which he will
be held equally responsible with the highest. God does not re
quire much, where little has been given ; but one talent, as well
as ten, the respective trustees will be called upon to improve.
Whitby, Doddridge. — [Le Clerc] Of the construction with
the verb lyvcov see my note on C£d. T. 1271. Pent. Gr. p. 84.
and compare Exod. ii. 2. 2 Sam. xvii. 8. 1 Kings v. 17. 1 Mace.
xiii. 53. LXX. The adjective aKXripbg implies severe, harsh, i. e.
one who exacts his due to the utmost : and the agricultural terms
which follow are proverbially descriptive of such a character ; or
rather, of one who expects more than he has afforded the means
of producing. Kuinoel.
Ver. 27. Tpa7r£?trate. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 185.
They seem to have paid a certain rate of interest for money
vested in their hands. It is not to be supposed, from this de
claration, that our Lord approved of usury; he merely adapts
the parable so as to answer effectually the excuse which the ser
vant had just put in. Indeed the word roKoe signifies only pro
duct or interest, and such was originally the meaning of the
English word usury, by which our translators have rendered it.
Of the proverbial expression in v. 29. see on Matt. xiii. 11.
The words dparE ovv k. r. X. v. 28. seem to be merely added as
a finish to the picture. Whitby, Campbell, Kuinoel.
Ver. 31. Srav Se tXOy k. t. X. From the preceding parables,
intended as a warning to prepare for the last great day, our Lord
naturally turns to a description of the day itself; and it is a de
scription which for dignity and grandeur has not its equal in any
writer, sacred or profane. It opens with a declaration of the
universality of the judgment, in direct opposition to a prevailing
Jewish notion, that the Gentiles would form no part in the re
surrection, and proceeds with a detail of the method in which
sentence will be passed, in the presence of men and angels. The
metaphor employed is agreeable to the language frequently
adopted in the O. T., in which good men are compared to sheep
vol. 1. x

306 MATTHEW XXV. 34,35.
on account of their innocence, (Psalm xxxiii. 1. c. 3.) and wicked
men to goats for the obstinacy of their lusts, (Ezek. xxxiv. 17.
Zech. x. 3.) The allusion, however, is dropt almost at the
entrance of the description, the greater part of the representa
tion being expressed in terms perfectly simple, so that though
the sense is profound, it is obvious. The image is formed upon
the usual practice of shepherds in early times, who always kept
the sheep and goats in different flocks. Thus Virg. Eclog. VII.
2. Compulerantque greges Corydon et Thyrsis in unum;
Thyrsis oves, Corydon distentas lacte capellas. Compare Liv.
XXIV. 3. Of the position of the sheep on the right hand and
the goats on the left, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 118. It
may be observed, also, that the Rabbins employed the right and
the left hand respectively as the emblems of acceptance and rejec
tion. Hence in Sohah Chadash it is said : The right hand is
given, the left also is given : to the Israelites and Gentiles are
given Paradise and Hell; this world and the world to come.
The Romans and Greeks also had similar notions. Thus Virg.
.eEn. VI. 540. Hie locus est, partes ubi se viafindit in ambas;
Dexter a, quce Ditis magni sub moenia tendit, Hac iter Elysium
nobis ; at laeva malorum Exercet pocnas, et ad impia Tartara
mittit. Doddridge, Macknight, A. Clarke, Whitby, &c.
Ibid. Opovov So^ng. A Hebraism for Opovov lvSo£ov. The
epithet dyiot is omitted before dyyEXoe. in most ancient MSS., ver
sions, and Fathers : and it is probably an interpolation. Kui
noel, Griesbach.
Ver. 84. fiaaiXEvg. In v. 31. our Lord had called himself
simply the Son of Man, but he now changes the appellation, and
with great propriety assumes the title of King, as about to ex
ercise the highest act of kingly power, in passing sentence on
the whole congregated world. The blessing which he here pro
nounces has been adduced as an argument in favour of personal
election and reprobation ; but it should be observed, that the ex
pression with which it closes, and upon which the whole argu
ment rests, is a mere Hebraism. Thus there were seven things
which the Rabbins said were cxeatedfrom the foundation of the
world: 1. the Law; 2. Repentance; 3. Paradise; 4. Hell; 5.
the Throne of God ; 6. the Name of the Messiah ; 7. the Temple.
Be it observed, however, that the Temple here alluded to was a
habitation which they believed to be prepared for their nation
exclusively in Heaven ; to which opinion our Lord probably al
ludes. See Tanchuma, p. 61, 4. Macknight, Schoettgen.
Ver. 35. iirElvaaa yap, k. t. X. The particular acts of charity
here enumerated by our Lord were in very great estimation
among the Jews, though the exercise of them was confined to
those of their own nation. Thus in Vedarim R. Chama com-
8

MATTHEW XXV. 35. 307
ments thus on Deut. xiii. 4. He clothed tlie naked; (Gen. iii. 21.)
he visited the sick ; he comforted those that mourn ; (Gen. xxv.)
do thou also tliese duties. The words of the Chaldee paraphrast
in Eccles. ix. 7. bear a remarkable resemblance to those of our
Lord, if, indeed, they are not an imitation of them. In Vayikra
Rabba, §. 34. p. 178. it is said: As often as a poor man pre
sents himself at thy door, the holy blessed God stands at his
right hand; if thou give him alms, he that stands at his right
hand will give thee a reward; but if thou give him not alms, he
who stands at his right hand will punish thee. Another of their
sayings was, that He who neglects to visit the sick, is like him
who has shed blood. Of the duties of hospitality see Home's
Introd. Yol. III. p. 451. Schoettgen, A. Clarke, Rider.
Of the doctrine inculcated in this passage, it should be observed,
that we shall be examined at the last day, not merely as to our
exemption from crimes, but as to our performance of good ac
tions ; and that not only as regards charity, but every other
virtue : for although our Lord has selected charity for the purpose
of illustration, as being the most characteristic of his religion, yet
it is clear, from the whole tenor of the N. T., that nothing short
of universal holiness will entitle us to everlasting life ; (Col. iv.
12. James ii. 10. 2 Pet. i. 6.) and even after we have done all we
are still but unprofitable servants, and it is themerits of Christ alone
that can ensure our acceptance with God, Ephes. ii. 8. 1 John i. 7.
It may seem strange that the commission of sin is not expressly
insisted upon, but positive injunctions evidently include the op
posite prohibitions. We may remark also, that no intermediate
station is noticed between the rewards of the good, and the pu
nishment of the bad ; so that, although there will be unquestion
ably different degrees of happiness or misery, it is certain that
those who are not absolutely rewarded will be absolutely pu
nished, and that eternally. There are some, indeed, who would
understand the words KoXaaig altovtog, not of everlasting, but
merely of a long, but indefinite, punishment ; in defence of which
it is urged that KoXacrte properly signifies correction inflicted for
tlie benefit of the offender. It is true that Aristotle makes a
distinction between KoXacrte and ripiopia, but he afterwards uses
them together as equivalent: IkoXocte ripwpiq. So also Hesy
chius : KcfXaerte" npwpia. With respect to altovtoe, it cannot be
allowed that the word is used in two different significations
in the same sentence ; and as the eternal life of the righteous
is avowedly meant in this passage, the eternal punishment of
the wicked must also be understood. This text is fully explained
and confirmed by Markix. 44. Rev. xiv. 11. xx. 10. Porteus,
Rennell.
R>id. The verb ervvdyEiv signifies to lodge or entertain ; and
there is an ellipsis of Eig tov oikov, which is supplied in 2 Sam.
xi. 27. Judg. xix. 18. LXX. It is evidently more properly ap-
x2

308 MATTHEW XXV. 40, 41.
plied to more than one, as in Plutarch, Sympos. V. 5. rov iroX-
\oiig bpoxi avvdyEtv. In the next verse the adjective yvpvbg
does not mean naked, but simply, as frequently nudus in Latin
writers, badly clothed. Seneca de benef. V. 5. Qui male vesti-
tum et pannosum vidit, nudum se vidisse dicit. Compare 1 Sam.
xix. 24. Job xx. 6. Isaiah lviii. 7. John xxi. 7. Acts xix. 16.
The verb iiriaKiirrEaOai signifies properly to look earnestly, (Isaiah
xxvi. 16.) to observe, (Psalm xvi. 3.) and thence to visit, sc. the
sick and afflicted, for the purpose of assisting and consoling
them; as in Job ii. 11. Ecclus. vii. 35. LXX. Acts vii. 23.
Hence Phavorinus : iirtaKiirropai' irpopriSEvopat ko! KnSopai
nvog. Kuinoel.
Ver. 40. !c/>' ocrov iiroir)aarE k. t. X. So close is the union
betwixt Christ and his church, that he looks upon the favours
conferred upon its members as done to himself, and rewards
them accordingly, Matt. x. 42. So also on the other hand, with
respect to injuries, and their punishment, v. 45. Hence his ad
dress to Saul, Acts ix. 4., Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me ?
There is a similar sentiment in Cic. Epist. Fam. X. 1. Teque
hoc existimare volo, quicquid in eum judicii ojficiique contuleris,
id ita me accipere ut in me ipsum te putem contulisse. Compare
Prov. xix. 17. Whitby, Bulkley, Kuinoel.
Ver. 41. riroipaapivov rip Staj3oXej> k. t. X. There is a re
markable difference between our Lord's expression here and in
v. 34. ; there the kingdom is said to have been prepared for the
righteous from the foundation of the world, but here the everlast
ing fire is not said to have been prepared for the wicked, but for
the devil and his angels. Hence a very just inference of some
of the early Fathers, that Hell was not originally designed for
men, but that men, by giving themselves up to wickedness, and
imitating the practices of the evil one, subject themselves to the
same torments which are endured by him and his angels. Neither
is it said Go, ye cursed of my Father, as Come, ye blessed of
my Father, because God is the giver of happiness, and men
alone are the authors of their own miseries. Compare Rom. ix.
22, 23. Doddridge, Whitby, Grotius.

MATTHEW XXVI. 5, 6. 309
CHAPTER XXVI.
Contents: — Christ foretells his approaching death, vv. 1,2.
The rulers consult about taking him, vv. 3 — 5. [Mark xiv. 1.
Luke xxii. 1.] He is anointed by Mary, vv. 6 — 13. [Mark
xiv. 3. John xii. 1.] Judas agrees to betray Christ, vv.
14 — 16. [Mark xiv. 10. Luke xxii. 3.] The preparation and
celebration of the last passover, vv. 17 — 20. [Mark xiv. 17.
Luke xxii. 14. John xiii. 1.] Christ predicts the treachery
of Judas, vv. 21—25. [Mark xiv. 17. Luke xxii. 21. John
xiii. 17.] The institution of the Lord's Supper, vv. 26 — 29.
[Mark xiv. 22. Luke xxii. 19.] Christ goes to the Mount of
Olives, and again announces his approaching death, vv.
30—32. [Mark xiv. 26. Luke xxii. 39.] He foretells Peter's
denial of him, vv. 33 — 35. [Mark xiv. 27.] His agony in the
Garden of Gethsemane, vv. 36 — 46. [Mark xiv. 32. Luke
xxii. 40. John xviii. 1.] His apprehension, and Peter's re
sistance, vv. 47 — 57. [Mark xiv. 43. Luke xxii. 47. John
xviii. 3.] Peter and John follow Christ, who is examined by
Caiaplias, condemned and insulted, vv. 58 — 68. [Mark xiv. 54.
Luke xxii. 55. John xviii. 15.] Peter's denial of Christ, vv.
62—75. [Mark xiv. 66. Luke xxii. 56. John xviii. 17.]
Ver. 5. pr) iv ry iopry. That is, pr) Kparr)awpEv Kal dirOKTEl-
vtopEv. It was a tradition of the Jews, founded upon Deut xvii.
3., that criminals capitally convicted should be reserved till one
of the three great festivals, and put to death during their conti
nuance, for the sake of making a more public example. See
Sanhed. X. 4. It was the object of the Jews to anticipate the
approaching festival in the case of Jesus, that their iniquitous
proceedings might be as secret as possible, and eventually buried
in oblivion. But the providence of God ordained otherwise. It
was of the highest importance that the crucifixion of Christ, and
the events attending it, together with his resurrection from the
dead, should be exhibited before many witnesses, that infidelity
might never be enabled to object that these things were done in
a corner. Of the Passover see Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp.
307. sqq., where much interesting matter will be found in illus
tration of the events recorded in this chapter. That Caiaphas
was high-priest now, and throughout the presidentship of Pon
tius Pilate, is evident from Joseph. Ant. XVIII. 2. 2. compared
with XVII. 5. 3. Whitby, Schoettgen, Wakefield.
Ver. 6. rov Xsirpov. This seems to have been only a sirname,
as Simon the Canaanite, Matt. x. 4. originating in his having
been formerly afflicted with the leprosy, of which he was pro
bably cured by Christ. He is called the Leper, just as Matthew is

310 MATTHEW XXVI. 6.
called the Publican, because he had once been so, not because he
was still so, as in that case there could have been no intercourse
between him and Jesus. With respect to the transaction here
recorded, and in Mark xiv. 3., there is a point which has given
rise to a considerable discussion among the commentators. While
some maintain that it is identical with the anointing of our Lord,
which is described in John xiii. 14. others are of opinion that the
two actions are entirely distinct, and performed by two different
persons at two different times and in two different places. In
support of the latter opinion it is urged: 1. that the action re
corded by St. John happened six days before the Passover,
whereas this is fixed to the second day before the feast ; 2. that
the scene in St. John is the house of Lazarus, in St. Matthew of
Simon the Leper ; 3. that in the former instance Mary, the sister
of Lazarus, is the agent, in the latter a woman unnamed; 4. that
St. John mentions the feet of Jesus to have been anointed by Mary,
and wiped with her hair ; the other Evangelists confine the anoint
ing to his head ; 5. that in St. John, Judas alone murmurs ; in
St. Matthew, the disciples generally ; and 6. that our Lord's vin
dication of the woman, in the two cases respectively, does not cor
respond. It will readily appear, however, that there is but little
weight in any of these particulars. With respect to the time of
the transaction, there is little doubt that it happened, as stated by
St. John, six days before the Passover, (John xii. 1.) and that St.
Matthew deferred his account of it, in order to introduce the
treachery of Judas, with which it is immediately connected.
The reason of St. Matthew in so doing is evident from the rela
tion of St. John, who states that Judas had a fraudulent object in
view, (John xii. 6.) so that the answer of Jesus at once disap
pointing his avarice, and smiting his guilty conscience, would
naturally incite in him the idea of revenge ; and that more espe
cially as he was already an apostate, (John vi. 67. 71.) There
are some, indeed, who rather refer the time, according to St.
Matthew's order, to the second day before the Passover, and con
tend that St. John anticipates the history on mentioning the
place where it happened. But this solution is far less satis
factory, and scarcely, if at all, preferable to that which would re
concile the accounts of the Evangelists by supposing a corrup
tion to exist in the text of St. John, in the face of the concurring
testimony of all the MSS. Besides, it is well known that the
Gospels are not always written with a strict regard to the order
of time ; and the manner in which the relation is introduced by
St. Matthew indicates no particular time, and may as easily refer
to a preceding as to a present period. The scene of the anoint
ing is laid by all three Evangelists in Bethany, and by Matthew
expressly in the house of Simon the Leper. In St. John, Lazarus
is only mentioned as Eig rdiv dvaKEipipiov, but this should rather
designate a guest than the host ; and there is nothing improbable

MATTHEW XXVI. 6. 311
in the supposition that Martha prepared the feast, and Mary
anointed Jesus, in the house of Simon, who was probably a
friend, as well as in their own. Compare Luke x. 40. As to the
omission of Mary's name by St. Matthew and St. Mark, a very
likely reason may be assigned for it. They make no mention of
the raising of Lazarus from the dead, lest they might expose him
to the persecution of the Jewish Sanhedrim : and for the same
cause they naturally withheld the name of his sister; but St.
John, who wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem, could have
no cause for such concealment. Nor is it a necessary inference
that Mary left the head of Jesus unanointed, because she is
stated by St. John to have anointed his feet. The general prac
tice of the East is a sufficient warrant for admitting the former
circumstance ; and therefore the more extraordinary part of the
transaction only is related by St. John, in accordance with his
peculiar manner of relating what his predecessors had passed
over in silence. In stating that the disciples murmured, St.
Matthew does not mean they all expressed their disapprobation,
though it may be that they tacitly assented to the censure of
Judas. The plural is put by Enallage for the singular, as in
Gen. viii. 4. Judg xii. 7. Neh. vi. 7. Matt, xxvii. 44. and else
where. Lastly, our Lord's vindication, as given by St. John, has
been thus misinterpreted into a prediction of what passed at the
time : — Let her alone ; she hath spent but part of it now, that
she might reserve tlie rest for the day of my funeral. But the
words are a prediction of Christ's death, and are beautifully
taken from the occasion. If this ointment were laid out upon a
dead body you would not think it too much : and you may con
sider this anointing as an embalming of me, the day of my fu
neral being so near.
Hence it appears that there is no inconsistency in the two
accounts as given by St. Matthew and St. John; and the
points in which they agree are so numerous and particular that
they cannot easily be separated into different events: 1. Both
happened in Bethany ; 2. the anointing in both cases was by
a woman, not as was more commonly the case, by the host;
3. both happened shortly before the Passover, so shortly in
deed, that the disciples cannot be supposed to have repeated
the observation which their Master had censured in Judas,
within the period assigned ; 4. in both cases the ointment was
the same, and so expensive, that the unction was deemed waste
ful ; 5. in both cases we meet with the remarkable circumstance,
that the ointment was not purchased for the purpose to which it
was applied, but had been preserved for some time by the person
who used it ; and one might almost conjecture, it was the re
mainder of the ointment which Martha and Mary had purchased
for the funeral of Lazarus ; 6. in both cases the unction is cen
sured, and upon the same grounds ; 7. the vindication offered by

312 MATTHEW XXVI. 7, 8.
Jesus has been shewn to be the same in both cases ; in which the
prediction respecting the record of the transaction can scarcely
have been fulfilled, unless St. John's account be identical with
that of the other Evangelists. In every point of view, indeed,
the two statements have the appearance of proceeding from dif
ferent eye-witnesses of the same fact. Michaelis, Newcome,
Doddridge. — [Lightfoot, Whitby, Macknight, &c]
Ver. 7. dXd/3aerrpov. Some derive this word from a priv.
and Xafii), a handle, understanding thereby a small cruse or vase,
with no handles, and a long neck like a modern oil flask. Plin.
N. H. IX. 35. Et procerioribus margaritis sua gratia est; elen-
chos appellant fastigiata longitudine, alabastrorum figura in
pleniorem orbem desinentes. It is more probable, however, that
the name is derived from a species of onyx, called in Arabic
Batstraton, and with the article Al-batstraton, which was pecu
liarly adapted to the purposes of preserving unguents. Plin.
N. H. XXXVI. 7, 8. Onychem etiamnum in Arabice montibus,
nee usquam alicubi, nasci putavere nostri veteres ; hunc aliqui
lapidem alabastraton vocant, quern cavant ad vasa unguentaria,
quoniam optime servare incorrupta dicitur. Compare Ibid. XIII.
2. Among the presents sent by Cambyses to the King of ^Ethio-
pia, was a pvpov dXdfiaarpov, Herod. III. 20. They are men
tioned by Plutarch in Alexand. p. 676. Pollux VI. Athen. VI.
19., and from them a city in Arabia was called Alabastra, Plin.
N. H. V. 9. Hence the name was by degrees applied to unguent
vases, of whatever material they might be composed. Thus
f olden alabasters are mentioned in Theoc. Idyl. XV. 114. Svptw
e jttvpev xpucrEt' dXdf3aarpa. So also Alexis ap. Athen. XV. 13.
It has been supposed that the vessel here intended was of glass;
as the woman is said to have broken it ; Mark xiv. 3. But the
expression breaking the box implies merely breaking the cement
with which the vase was closed, to prevent the perfume from eva
porating. So Propert. El. IV. 7. 21. fracto bustafiriare cado. It
was usual in the East to stop the bottles, containing essences, with
cotton, and to seal them with wax ; and those which contain the
attar of roses are still sealed in this manner. Some would render
the verb ervvrpt/3£iv, to shake, but there are no good authorities
for its use in this sense. Le Clerc, Kuinoel. — [Hammond,
Grotius, Whitby.] Of the unguent itself see on Mark xiv. 3.
and of the custom of embalming, to which our Lord here alludes,
see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 520. as well as for an explana
tion of the verb Ivrae/itd^Etv, v. 12.
Ver. 8. dirwXEia. Profusion, waste. So rpOopog is used in
Theocr. Idyl. XV. 18. The phrase 7rap!xav KoVove, v. 10. to
molest, occurs in Arist. Prob. V. 38. So Isaiah vii. 13. dywva
irapixEiv. Ecclus, xxix. 4. 7rovov 7raplxetv. More commonly,

MATTHEW XXVI. 14, 15. 17. 313
however, we find irpdypara irapixEiv. Our Lord's vindication
of Mary's conduct proceeds upon the principle, that of two good
actions, that should always be performed, which must either be
done at the present time, or never, in preference to that for which
there may be other and frequent opportunities. It is not ne
cessary to suppose that the woman had any presentiment of
Christ's approaching death : she merely intended to testify her
veneration of our Lord according to a prevailing custom of the
Jews, from which our Lord took occasion to intimate that his
funeral was at hand. In v. 1 1 . we have an explicit refutation of
the doctrine of Transubstantiation. Kuinoel, Kypke, Albert,
Whitby, Le Clerc.
Ver. 14. tote. This adverb is of very indefinite signification,
and by no means fixes the period at which the betrayal took
place, as immediately consecutive upon the anointing of our
Lord. It is used with considerable latitude in many places both
of the N. T. and the LXX. Some would include the preceding
narrative (w. 65 — 13.) in a parenthesis, but this is unnecessary.
Kuinoel. — [Markland.]
Ver. 15. rpiaKOvra apyvpia. Some MSS. read errarf/pae.
This, however, is probably only a gloss, since, when pieces of
money are mentioned in the Scriptures, the Jewish shekel or
stater is to be understood. Thus in the Targum the ten pieces
of silver mentioned in 2 Sam. xviii. 11. are called ten shekels.
The value of the shekel or stater was equivalent to four drachmas,
or about half a crown of our money ; and thirty of these, or about
£3 15s. was the usual price of a slave. See the Tracts Erachin,
p. 40. and Shekalim, c. 1. Maimon. Mor. Nev. III. 40. and
compare Exod. xxi. 82. So true it is that our blessed Saviour
took upon him the form of a servant. Whitby, A. Clarke. The
verb 'iaravai signifies properly, as applied to money, to weigh
out, in reference to the ancient mode of paying by weight;
whence, after the introduction of coined money, it denoted gene
rally to pay. Compare Job vi. 2. xxviii. 15. xxxi. 6. Hom. II.
N. 745. T. 247. It is argued, however, from a comparison of
Mark xiv. 11. and Luke xxii. 5. that the priests only promised
the money at the time, or paid part only in earnest of the re
mainder : but the discrepancy can be of little importance. The
Evangelists in all probability speak by anticipation, the money
having been duly paid when the contract was fulfilled. Kuinoel.
— [Grotius, Michaelis.]
Ver. 17. irpdiTy rwv dX,vpwv. Reference has already been made
to Mr. Home's work, for information on the subject of the Pass
over. A question of great difficulty here presents itself ; whether
Christ partook of that feast with his disciples before his crucifixion ;

314 MATTHEW XXVI. 17.
and if so, at what time he partook thereof. It appears from John
xviii. 28. that the Jews would not go into the judgment hall on
the Friday morning, lest they should be defiled and rendered
unfit for eating the passover in the evening; and in John xix. 14.
the noon of Friday is called the preparation of the passover :
some affirm, therefore, that the expressions here employed of
making ready the passover, and of eating the passover, refer to
a commemorative supper, used by our Lord instead of the proper
paschal supper, because his crucifixion would have taken place
before the time appointed for the celebration of the passover.
On the other hand it is contended, that Matthew, Mark, and
Luke cannot be understood in reference to any other than the
passover properly so called, and consequently that the Thursday
evening on which Christ supped with his disciples was the ge
neral time of the paschal celebration that year. In order to
reconcile St. John with the other Evangelists, the advocates of
this opinion assert, that the passages above cited refer to the day
of holy convocation, or first day of the seven, during which the
feast continued. But on this supposition, Christ must have been
accused, and tried, and crucified on the day of holy convocation,
which was observed as strictly as a sabbath. Hence a third
opinion, far more probable, has arisen, that our Lord did eat the
passover this year, but not at the same time with the Jews. It
appears from the Talmud, the Mischna, and the Rabbinical
writings, that in cases of doubt respecting the time of the appear
ance of the new moon, the passover was permitted to be holden
on both of the two days between which the doubt lay ; and Epi-
phanius relates that there was a contention (Oopvfiog) about the
passover this very year. We may fairly infer, therefore, from
the three first Evangelists, that a part of the Jewish nation sa
crificed the paschal lamb on the same day with our Saviour ; and
from St. John, that many of the Scribes and Pharisees did not
sacrifice until the evening of the following day, about the time
that our Lord expired on the cross. It may be objected, that our
Lord could not in this case eat the feast according to law, as the
priests, following the order of the Sanhedrim, to observe the
passover the day following, would not have sprinkled the blood
of the lamb at the foot of the altar. But, independent of what
has been said respecting the uncertainty of the paschal full moon,
it had become necessary to employ more than one day for slaugh
tering the immense number of lambs which were required for
the feast. In one year no less than 256,000 lambs were offered,
Joseph. B. J. VII. 9. 3. It will be allowed, also, that if, as
was probably the case, our Saviour did anticipate the generality
of the Jews in celebrating the supper, the error was not on his
part Neither his character, conduct, nor sentiments, will permit
us to believe that he disobeyed in the slightest degree, the Mosaic
ordinances ; and if he refused to follow, upon this occasion, the

MATTHEW XXVI. 18. 815
practice of the high priests, his refusal must be ascribed to some
deviation in their practice from the Levitical injunctions. What
ever rules might have guided him, he doubtless eat the passover
on the day when it ought to have been killed, iv y "E AEI OvsaOat
rb irdaxa, (Luke xxii. 7.) With respect to the objection that
our Lord and his disciples seem to have reclined at table con
trary to the paschal institution, which required them to eat it
standing ; the words dvsKEtro, v. 20. and dviirEaE, Luke xxii. 14.
should probably not be confined to the sense which they usually
bear. The custom is known to have been abandoned in the
latter days of the Jewish church. Thus in Pisach: R. Levi
saith, It is the manner of slaves to eat standing ; but now let
them eat lying down, that it may be known they are gone out of
bondage to liberty. So Maimonides : We are obliged to lie
down when we eat, that we may eat after the manner of kings
and nobles. Our Lord might, therefore, and in all probability
did, attend to the Levitical injunction, though the Evangelists
have used terms in accordance with the more general practice of
the time. It should seem, then, that Christ kept the passover
at the beginning of the 14th of the month Nisan, the precise day
on which the Jews had eaten their first passover in Egypt,
(Exod. xii. 6. sqq.) and that on the same part of the day in
which they had sacrificed the first paschal lamb, i. e. between
the two evenings, Christ our psssover was sacrificed for us.
There is yet another opinion on this difficult question, which
supposes that our Lord did indeed eat a passover with his dis
ciples, but that it was one of his own institution, and very dis
tinct from that eaten by the Jews, namely, the mystical passover,
or sacrament of his body and blood. Now it was during this
last paschal supper that the Eucharist was instituted ; and it was
doubtless with a view to this institution that Christ so ardently
desired to eat this passover with his disciples ; so that, in fact,
this opinion harmonises in a great degree with the last. It may
even be that no lamb was killed upon this occasion, and that the
bread of the Eucharist was substituted in its place. On this sup
position, the preparation for the passover would merely imply the
providing of a convenient room, removing all the leaven from the
house, and such other necessary acts as would be unlawful on
the following day. Thus every thing was duly prepared, and
the sacrament ordained, and thenceforward substituted in the
place of the passover, as a memorial of the sacrifice of the true
paschal lamb, which was then about to be made for the sins of
the world. Hammond, Macknight, A. Clarke, Benson, Cud-
worth. — [Wall, Newcome, Lightfoot, Whitby, Le Clerc,
&c]
Ver. 18. tov SeTvo. The Greeks made use of this term in fa
miliar conversation, to designate a person well known to those

316 MATTHEW XXVI. 23, 24.
whom they address, but whose name they had reason for with
holding, or did not immediately recollect. Schol. Lucian. Vit.
Auct. 19. to Sslva EidiOaaiv ol iraXatol XiyEiv, oiircue dc/iEXcJe rov
Xoyov 7rpodyovr£e iirl rwv avyKpvirrEiv n fBovXopivtov ry doptcr-
Tta rov bvoparog. Tradition has variously reported that the in
dividual here intended was John the Evangelist, Nicodemus,
Joseph of Aramathea, and Simon the Leper ; and it is supposed
that our Lord concealed his name that Judas might not be
enabled, by a too early knowledge of his arrangements, to in
terrupt the celebration of the last supper. Wetstein, Kuinoel.
Ibid. 6 Kaipog pov iyyvg ian. The word Kaipbg is very ge
nerally understood of the time of Christ's apprehension, suffer^
ings, and death ; and numerous instances are produced by the
commentators in which it is used metaphorically to denote cala
mity. So also the Latin tempus in Nepos, de Vit. Miltiad. 5.
But the connecting clause, 7rpoe <te 7rotto rb irdaxa, plainly refers
it to the time of keeping the passover ; and in other places also
Christ has used the same or equivalent expressions, where there
can be no reference whatever to his passion or death. From the
ordinary acceptation of the words may be drawn an additional
inference, that the time of our Lord celebration of the passover
was different from that of the rest of the Jews. Kuinoel, Ro
senmuller. — [Kypke, Wetstein, Grotius, &c]
Ver. 23. 6 ipfidipag k. t. X. As the Jews eat the passover,
there were several little dishes, containing the juice of the bitter
herbs, on different parts of the table ; so that each dipped his
bread into that which was nearest to him. Judas, therefore, was
near our Lord at the paschal supper, since he is represented as
dipping in the same dish with him. Hence it is supposed by
some that our Lord's reply to Judas in v. 25. was only heard by
the traitor himself; that the other Apostles merely knew that one
of those who were nearest to their Master would betray him ; and
that the sop given to Judas (John xiii. 26.) indicated to John
only the precise individual. The disciples do not indeed appear
to have been immediately certified on the point ; even Judas
himself pretends not to understand the designation. , Others,
however, maintain that Christ intended to point out the traitor
to the rest of the disciples ; and such was unquestionably his ulti
mate object, though in all probability it was not recognized by
the disciples till Judas had left the apartment. Some would ren- '
der the aorist ipfidipag in the sense of to be wont ,- so that our
Lord's allusion will merely imply that the traitor was one of
those who usually ate with him : but this seems improbable. A.
Clarke, Grotius. — [Rosenmuller, Kuinoel.]
Ver. 24. virdyEi. Verbs signifying to depart are used in all
languages, by a common Euphemism, in the sense of to die.

MATTHEW XXVI. 25, 26. 317
Thus oixferflat, Eurip. Alcest. 379. Soph. Elect. 152. Aj. 1149.
Xen. Cyr. III. 1. 8. Anab. III. 1. 22. d7rlpY£<T0ac, iElian. V. H.
II. 25. dTrtlvat, Apoll. Rhod. II. 140. j3E/3?iK£vat, Soph. CEd.
C. 1673. In Latin, Stat. Theb. IX. 559. Lcetus abi. Silv. II.
218. Ibimus omnes. We have TropEvsrat in the same sense in
Luke xiii. 83. It is true that v7rdyco is not found in this accep
tation, but tig dt'Srjv v7rdyw occurs without an ellipsis in a frag
ment of Nicarchus ap. Antliol. Gr. VII. 169. Compare 1 Kings
ii. 2. Psalm xxxix. 13. Wisd. iv. 2. LXX. Elsner, Raphelius,
Kuinoel.
Ibid. koXov ijv avrc£, k. t. X. This was a Hebrew expression,
commonly applied to any flagrant transgressor, or to one whose
lot was more particularly unfortunate. Thus in Schemoth R.
§. 40. p. 135. He that knoweth the Law, and doeth it not, it
were better for him that he had not come into the world. Again
in Beracoth, p. 17, 1. It were better for him that he were not
created. Compare Jerem. xv. 10. xx. 14. Similar expressions
are sometimes found also in the classic writers, though in re
ference to temporal calamities. See Hom. II. r. 40. Plutarch,
Consol. ad Apol. p. 115. and the tragic writers, passim. Scho
ettgen, Lightfoot, Kypke. It has been inferred from this
prediction respecting the treachery of Judas, that he was from
the beginning to the end under an absolute necessity of doing as
he did. But the fore knowledge of God that he would so act,
by no means impelled him to the action : and Chrysostom justly
observes, that Judas was not a traitor because God foresaw it,
but God foresaw it because Judas would be so. The woe de
nounced against him is also decisive against the Calvinistic doc
trine, that all men, except some few elect, are excluded by an
immutable decree, from the favour of heaven. For such a deter
mination would have made this the condition of Judas, though
he had not betrayed Christ, provided he was not one of God's
elect. Whitby.
Ver. 25. aii Elirag. This was the usual form of solemn affirma
tion. Thus in Beracoth : When the Zipporenses enquired if R.
Judas was dead, the son of Zaphra answered; Ye have said.
Compare Arist. Plut. 96. Plaut. Merc. I. 2. 52. Schoettgen,
Kuinoel.
Ver. 26. iaOiovrwv avrwv. That the eating here alluded to
was that of the paschal lamb, into the place of which the Eu
charist was intended to succeed, and not an ordinary meal, has
been shewn to be the most probable opinion ; though the question
is involved in considerable difficulty. In the apostolic age, after
the abolition of the paschal feast, the disciples probably cele
brated the sacrament at or after their usual supper, (Acts ii. 46.
xx. 7. 11.) and the agapa; of the primitive Christians have also

318 MATTHEW XXVI. 26.
been supposed by some to have preceded or accompanied the
participation of the Eucharist. This, however, is a point upon
which there is a great division of sentiments ; and it is at least
certain that the two feasts were kept separately in very early
times. See Jude 12. According to Cyprian, it was received
in the third century every day, but at what time is uncertain :
the Church of Corinth seems to have solemnized it in the morning,
and that this was the general practice, at least in times of perse
cution, appears from Plin. Epist. X. 97. From the Acts of the
Apostles it appears, that it was administered in general to the dis
ciples, on the Lord's day, in their public assemblies. Grotius.
With respest to the institution itself, there are certain points
which it will be necessary to consider.
[ON THE EUCHARIST.
The circumstances attending the first appointment of this holy
rite, are related with little variation by two other Evangelists be
sides St. Matthew; and by St. Paul, who declares that he derived
his account from divine revelation. See Mark xiv. 22 — 26. Luke
xxii. 19, 20. 1 Cor. xi. 23. St. John's silence on this subject is
readily accounted for by his knowledge of what the other three
Evangelists had written; and by his conviction that their relation
was true, and amply established by their united testimony and that
of St. Paul. From their accounts of this most solemn act of reli
gious worship, we derive the following information respecting its
design, its nature, and the particulars of its institution.
I. The design for which the Lord's Supper was instituted is
stated in the Church Catechism, in accordance with our Saviour's
declaration, to be for the continual remembrance of the sacrifice
of the death of Christ, and of the benefits which we receive
thereby. In this view, the regular and frequent celebration of
it not only records the object for which he came into the world,
and suffered death upon the cross, but it is also a standing proof
of his divine mission to all ages of the world. See Home's
Introd. Vol. I. p. 147. As the sacrament of Baptism is the pre
scribed mode of admission into the blessings of Christ's covenant ;
so is that of the Lord's Supper the ordinance by which remission
of sins and sanctifying grace are conferred upon the faithful and
penitent members of the Church of Christ. Surely, therefore,
an implicit obedience to the last command of our dying Lord is
the first and most important duty of those who profess to believe
the Gospel.
II. With respect to the nature of the Eucharist, it may be ne
cessary to advert to the analogy which it bears to the Jewish sa
crifices. Some of these, it is well known, were entirely conse
crated to God, as typical of the full, perfect, and sufficient sa-

MATTHEW XXVI. 26. 319
crifice which Christ should make for the sins of the world. Of
others, as the sin-offerings, a portion was eaten by the priests,
as mediators to God in behalf of the person who offered the sa
crifice, who did not partake of it himself, as being still in a state
of guilt. In peace offerings, however, which were a token of
reconciliation between God and man, part was offered to God,
and the rest consumed by the priest and the party offering, who
were entitled thereby, if offered conscientiously, to consider
themselves reinstated in covenant with God. To this latter class
the Jewish Passover, and consequently the Lord's Supper, clearly
belong ; and thus our Lord expressly declares in John vi. 53.
Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood,
ye have no life in you. Compare 1 Cor. v. 7, 8. Hence the sa
crament of the Lord's Supper is a feast upon a sacrifice, as were
those under the Jewish law, and also those among the Heathen,
upon things offered to idols ; and a comparison is accordingly
drawn between them in 1 Cor. x. 13. sqq. Now these epulae
sacrificiales under the law were considered as federal rites be
tween God and those that offered them, in the same way as co
venants were ratified in ancient times by the contracting parties
eating and drinking together. See my notes on Hom. II. B. 124.
341. Hence, as salt was a necessary appendix to these sacrificial
feasts, it is called the salt of the covenant, 2 Chron. xiii. 5.
Compare also Levit. 13. Numb, xviii. 19. Those who partook
of these sacrifices, therefore, were God's guests, and entered
into covenant with him by eating their portion of the victim, while
his was consumed ; the divine presence being sometimes clearly
manifested by the descent of fire from heaven, thereby acknow
ledging his acceptance of the offering. In the same manner, the
Christian's participation in the Holy Communion, is a visible
pledge of Christ's love to his faithful followers, as well as a
federal rite, uniting them to God and to one another. For a fur
ther view of the typical connection between the passover and the
sacrament, see Home's Introduction.
III. We come now to the particulars of the institution, which
we shall consider in order : 1. Xafidiv rov dprov. E. T. He took
bread. It is rendered by Campbell, the loaf; upon the principle
that the article is definite, and from the inference suggested in
1 Cor. x. 17. that one loaf only, larger or smaller according to
the company, was provided on the occasion. But the article is
wanting in several important MSS. in most of the MSS. of Mark
xiv. 22. and in all of Luke xxii. 19. so that, assuming the in
tended agreement of the three historians, the text of St. Matthew
is probably unauthorised. It is to be observed also, that al
though the passage adduced from 1 Cor. x. 17. supported by the
testimony of the Fathers, fully proves the Christian practice, the
accounts which have reached us of the mode of celebrating the
passover, uniformly speak of two loaves of unleavened bread.

320 MATTHEW XXVI. 26.
Nor are we to wonder at this deviation from the usage of the
superseded institution. Of the two cakes, usually introduced at
the passover, only one is recorded to have been broken by Christ ;
and it was therefore natural that his followers should discontinue
so much of the Jewish rite as was foreign to the newly estab
lished ordinance. Thus, at no distant period, the bread employed
was not necessarily unleavened ; for though unleavened bread
was actually used by Christ, it was not studiously chosen, but was
such as the passover unavoidably presented. The Greek and
Latin churches, however, subsequently disputed this point ; the
former giving leavened bread, and the latter unleavened, or, at
present, wafers. — 2. EvXoyijcrae. The E. T. renders blessed it,
i. e. the bread: but of this see on Matt. xiv. 19. In speaking
of the cup, the corresponding word in the next verse is svxapter-
ri)aag, from which the appellation Eucharist partly took its rise,
and partly, perhaps, from the service being a sacrifice of praise
and thanksgiving. It is probable that as the Jews, at their great
feasts, extended their thanks to particularize the blessings they
commemorated, so the first Christians returned especial thanks at
the sacrament for the blessings of redemption. See Clem. Alex.
VII. 27. Iren. V. 2. Origen. c. Cels. VIII. The name Eu
charist first appears in the Epistles of Ignatius, A. D. 107., but
from the familiar use which he appears to make of it, it was in all
probability coeval with the age of the Apostles. — 3. EKXaaE. He
brake it; probably into as many pieces as the number of guests,
i. e. twelve or thirteen. There can be no doubt that the breaking
of the bread is a very essential part of the celebration of the
Lord's Supper ; for this act was especially designed by our Lord
to represent the breaking of the body of Christ upon the cross.
In this view it is mentioned by St. Paul and the Evangelists, that
our Lord said, Take, eat, this is my body broken for you ; Do
this in remembrance ofme; i. e. Eat this bread broken, in remem
brance of my body broken. When no bread is broken, there is
no memorial of his broken body. Hence it is that the sacrament
is expressly designated the breaking of bread, (Acts ii. 42. xx.
7.) and the bread itself is called tcXdapara by Augustin. The
spirit of the institution, therefore, is wholly overlooked in the
Romish Church, where no bread is broken, but the consecrated
wafer is placed upon the tongue by the priest, and swallowed
whole by the communicant. — 4. iSt'Sov Tote paOr)raig. Hence it
appears that the distribution of the bread, which is also omitted
by the Church of Rome, is equally necessary to the due solemni
zation of the Eucharist ; and it was in fact observed, as Hum-
bertus testifies, by the Romanists themselves as late as the eleventh
century. — 5. Xdf3£rE, rpdyETE' k. r. X. It is the eating of the
bread, which constitutes the feast upon the sacrifice, and ratifies
the covenant between God and the communicant ; and as the
Jews were accustomed to understand that the food of the body

MATTHEW XXVI. 26. 321
typified that of the mind, the benefits to be communicated would
be readily appreciated. These benefits are justly represented in
the Church Catechism to be tlie strengthening and refreshing of
our souls by the body and blood of Christ, as our bodies are by
the bread and wine. It is well known, that upon the solemn
declaration of our Lord, tovto lort rb awpd pov, the Romanists
ground their doctrine of Transubstantiation, which is thus stated
in the 14th article of the Creed of Pope Pius IV. In the sacra
ment of the Eucharist there is really and substantially the body
and blood, together with the soul and the divinity of our Lord
Jesus Christ ; and there is a conversion of the whole substance
of the bread into his body, and of tlie whole substance of the
wine into his blood. It should be observed, however, that the
analogy existing between the Eucharist and the Passover di
rectly opposes this doctrine : and that our Lord merely intended
that the bread signified or represented his body in the same
sense as the paschal lamb is said to be the passover. In the
Hebrew and Chaldee there is no word which expresses to mean,
signify, denote, and, therefore, the Hebrews say it is for it sig
nifies. Examples of this figure abound not only in the O. T.
but in the N. T., in which the idioms of the Hebrew language
are known to prevail. Compare Gen. xii. 26, 27. Dan. vii. 24.
Matt. xiii. 38, 39. Luke viii. 9. xv. 26. John vii. 36. x. 6. Acts
x. 17. 1 Cor. x. 4. Gal. iv. 24. Rev. i. 20. The same form of
speech is common also in our own language. Should a person^
entering a museum, enquire whose was such and such a bust or
statue, he would probably be told, this is Socrates, that Plato,
a third Homer, and so on : nor is he deceived by this informa
tion ; he knows that the busts are not the identical persons,
but merely the representations of the said philosophers, poets,
&c. sculptured on marble. So any man of plain sense must see
as great a difference between the man Christ Jesus and apiece
of bread, as between a bust of marble and the philosopher it re
presents. The bread could not be Christ's natural body, while
he was alive, and performing the act of breaking it ; nor could
the wine in the cup be the blood still flowing in his veins. In
fact/ the elements are still called bread and wine after their con
secration, (1 Cor. xi. 27.) and it is absurd to suppose that the
real body of Christ can be present to different assemblies of com
municants at the same time. Tertullian, adv. Marcion. V. 40.
Acceptum panem, et distributum discipulis, corpus ilium suum
fecit, Hoc est corpus meum dicendo ; id est, Figura corporis mei.
6. After the words this is my body, St. Luke adds, which is
given for you; and St. Paul, which is broken for you. Herein
there is an allusion to the offering of sacrifice : an innocent crea
ture was brought to the altar of God, and offered instead of, or
as an atonement for, the person who brought it. 7. Xafiwv rb
iroTi)piov, k. t. X, It is not quite decided which of the four pass-
vol, i. Y

322 MATTHEW XXVI. 26.
over cups it was that our Saviour declared to be the symbol of
his blood : it is usually understood to have been the third, or the
cup of blessing, which was regarded as the most important of
the four. Some, however, infer from the expression pErd to
SEiirvr)aai, in Luke xxii. 20., that it was the fourth, and last, but
this is by no means decisive, as the cup of blessing immediately
followed the eating of the lamb, which was the last thing eaten.
The article before irorr)piov will decide nothing, except that one
vessel only was employed at the paschal supper ; and though four
cups full of wine were to be emptied at different times during the
ceremony, a single cup four times filled was all which the occasion
required. Very few MSS. indeed want the article, and in the
parallel place of Mark so many are without it, that Griesbach
is inclined to reject it; but in Luke all the MSS. agree in giving
it ; and, therefore, as it may be presumed that uniformity was in
tended by the several Evangelists, it is surely safer to retain it.
In the celebration of the passover it was customary to dilute the
wine with water, and it should seem that the strength of the
wine and the heat of the climate required it. Hence in Beracoth,
p. 50, 2. The wise agree with R. Eleazar, that one ought not
to bless over the cup of blessing till water be mixed with it.
Our Lord, however, does not mention the water as essential to
the Eucharist, though it is manifest from the Fathers that the
early Christians continued to temper their wine, and the Ro
manists do so to the present time. These latter are far less punc
tilious in obeying an express command of Christ, in direct viola
tion of which they deny the cup to the laity. The words of
Christ, in relation to this part of the rite, seem to be, as it were,
prophetically emphatic : Drink ye all of this ; all, without ex
ception or reserve : and the notion of the Papists, that the injunc
tion was directed exclusively to the Apostles, who were then
made priests, is completely overthrown by the reason assigned
why all are to drink of the cup : For this is my blood of the
new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
All, therefore, who stand in need of forgiveness, i. e. all mankind,
are to partake thereof; and such was the invariable practice of
the church for above 1300 years. Of the import of v. 28. see
Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 192. 314. note. In the latter part
of the verse our Lord seems to turn fxoxa federal to piacular sa
crifices. It was usual in the former to receive the blood in a
vessel, which, among the more barbarous nations, was drank
by the contracting parties, as appears from Ezek. xxxix. 19.
Tacit. Annal. XII. Val. Max. IX. 11.; but the more civilized
nations substituted a libation of wine. See my note on Hom. II.
B. 341. In piacular sacrifices the life of the victim was offered
as a substitute for the life of the man, who had deserved death :
thus a daily sacrifice was offered in the temple for the sins of the
people ; and it is in evident allusion to this that our Lord de-
10

MATTHEW XXVI. 29. 323
clared his blood to be shed for the remission of sins. The verb
IkxIo* or iKxvw is frequently employed in the LXX in a sacrificial
sense, in reference to the blood poured out before the altar of the
Lord by way of atonement. See Exod. xxix. 12. Lev. iv. 7. 14.
17. 30. 34. viii. 15. ix. 9. 2 Kings xvi. 15. and elsewhere. In
this place the present participle ekxvvo/uevov is used in the sense
of the proximate future, and should be rendered now about to be
shed. Examples of similar usage occur in Matt. iii. 10. xx. 22.
Mark ix. 31. Luke xvii. 12. xxiv. 49. John iv. 21. Of. the word
StaOi'iKri, which the E. T. here incorrectly renders testament, see
Prelim. Obss. §. 1. The preposition 7TEpt is used for inrip, as in
Matt. ix. 36. Joknxvii. 9. Ephes. vii. 18. Hom. II. M. 243. and
frequently elsewhere. Of 7roXXeuv for Trdvrcov see on Matt. xx.
28. Whitby, Lightfoot, A. Clarke, Hammond, Middleton,
&c. &c.]

Ver. 29. drrdprc. Henceforth, hereafter ; as in v. 64. Rev.
xiv. 3. There is, however, great difference of opinion respecting
the import of the passage. Some suppose, with Euthymius,
that the declaration was fulfilled at the commencement of the
Messiah's kingdom after his resurrection, when he ate and drank
with his disciples, Luke xxiv. 30. 43. John xxi. 13. Acts i. 4.
x. 41. Others are of opinion that our Lord intended merely
to announce the discontinuance of the Jewish passover, and the
lasting substitution of the Eucharist in its place. But the object
of our Lord's eating and drinking after his resurrection was
simply to convince them of the reality of that important event ;
and his expression does not appear to have any particular refer
ence to the cessation of the passover. It seems more probable,
therefore, that he intended by a strong figure to prepare them
for his departure, which was now close at hand ; and would pre
vent his partaking in the commemoration of any future solemnity
till the end of time. The figure of drinking wine is frequently
employed in Scripture to indicate feasting, as in Isaiah xxii. 13.
xxiv. 9.; and thence the happiness of heaven, Matt. viii. 11.
xxii. 4. Hence the epithet koivov, which denotes wine of a dif
ferent nature from that which was then before them, and such as
the kingdom of God alone can afford. In a similar sense are to
be understood the expressions new heavens, new earth, new man,
new Jerusalem, and the like. So Virg. Eccl. V. 71. Vina novum
fundam Ariusia nectar ; i. e. according to Servius, quale nun-
quam habuerit. Compare Hor. Od. 1.31.2. It is true that the
kingdom of God, which is the term employed in Mark xiv. 25.
Luke xxii. 18. frequently signifies the Gospel state ; but this is
never called, as here, the kingdom of the Father, nor will the
kingdom be delivered up to the Father till after the final judg
ment. See 1 Cor. xv. 24. xxii. 8. Hammond, Le Clerc, Kui-
y 2

324 MATTHEW XXVI. 30, 31. 34.
noel. — [Whitby, Porteus, &c] The periphrasis yivvnpa rov
dpiriXov, and the like, denoting wine, was frequent both with
Jews and Greeks. Compare Deut. xxii. 9. Isaiah xxxii. 12.
Hab. iii. 17. So Anacr. 4. 7. ydvoe dpiriXov. Pind. Nem. IX.
123. dpiriXov iralg. Herod. I. 212. dpiriXivog Kapirog. Kui
noel, Alberti.
Ver. 30. vpvr)aavrEg. Pious hymns, such as those of Hannah,
Deborah, Mary, Zachariah, and others, were frequently recited
or chaunted by the Jews upon occasions of rejoicing; and it has,
therefore, been supposed that that which was now sung by our
Lord and his disciples was one adopted to the institution of the
Eucharist, and similar to the Christian hymn, Acts iv. 24. ; or
that Christ probably formed his discourse recorded in John xvii.
into a song of praise. But it is far more likely to have been the
usual paschal Hallel, consisting of the five Psalms cxiii. — cxviii.,
in which not only the events of the Exodus are commemorated, but
there is a direct reference to the sorrows of the Messiah and the
resurrection of the dead. Whitby, Schoettgen. — [Hammond,
Grotius.] Ver. 31. aKavSaXiaOfiaEaOE iv ipoi. E.T. Ye shall be offended
because of me; i. e. ye will be induced, by the terrors of my
situation, to forsake and deny me. That the verb is here in
tended to convey this meaning is evident from the sequel ; and,
indeed, a virtual denial of Christ or his religion are always im
plied in this verb as used in the Gospel. The citation from
Zech. xiii. 7. seems primarily to be understood of an evil shep
herd or teacher; and Christ applies the passage to himself ra
ther as an argument a fortiori than as a prediction. If this would
happen on account of the smiting of an evil shepherd, much
more will it take place at the smiting of the good shepherd of the
sheep. The expression was probably proverbial, since it is si
milarly applied in Joseph. Ant. VIII. 15. 4. Of the variation in
the Hebrew and LXX version of the quotation, see Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 212. In the following verse our Lord still
continues the allusion to shepherds, who were usually in the
East followed by their sheep, a fact to which there is a beautiful
reference in John x. 4>. For the fulfilment of the promise here
given by Christ to his disciples, see Matt, xxviii. 7. sqq. Whitby,
Grotius, Kuinoel.
Ver. 34. Trptv dXlKropa ipwvr)aai. It is Sic (pwvrjaat in Mark
xiv. 13. In this, however, there is no inconsistency, since the
Jews reckoned three, and the Heathens two, cock-crowings, of
which the second, or that about break of day, was the most re
markable. Aristoph. Eccl. 414. to StvrEpov dXsKrpvwv irpOiyyEro.
Juv. Sat. IX. 107. Quod tamen ad galli cantum facit tile se-

MATTHEW XXVI. 35, 36. 325
cundi. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 169. It appears from
the Talmud, in Bava Kama, c. 7. that cocks were not kept at
Jerusalem because of the holy things ; and on the same plea the
priests were forbidden to keep them throughout all the land of
Israel. Hence, an objection has been started that Peter could
not have heard one crow. In order to remove the difficulty,
some would interpret dXiicTopa metaphorically of a watchman, and
others urge that the canon was not strictly observed, as it is evident
from the story related in Erubbin, p. 26, 1. of a cock which killed
a child, and was stoned by order of the council, that these birds
were sometimes kept in Jerusalem. But, without resorting to
these doubtful solutions, it is very possible that the crowing of a
cock without the walls might easily, in the stillness of the night,
have been heard at the house of Caiaphas, from which the walls
were at no great distance. The noun dXiicrtop is every where
anarthrous in the N. T., unless, indeed, in Luke xxii. 60., where,
however, on the authority of a multitude of MSS. the article is
rejected by Griesbach ; and it is manifest, from this indefinite-
ness, that cocks, if at all tolerated in Jerusalem, were far less
common than with us. Whitby, Grotius, Middleton. The
words ipwvi) and c/>o>veTv are used by the Greeks not only of birds
generally, but of cocks in particular. iEneas Tact. 23. rwv ciXek-
pvdvcuv rdg (pwvag. Lucian. Somn. I. dXXd cte, Hi KaKtarE ciXek-
rpvdiv, o'vrwg b%6(pwvov ovra. So ^Esop. Fab. 36. 66. Hence
Schol. Theocr. Idyl. II. 109. (pwvEiivra' dvrl tov (pwvowra kv-
piwg iirl rwv bpviwv XiyErai. Wetstein.
Ver. 35. kSv Sir; pe ovv aoi diroOavElv. This declaration is
strongly characteristic of Peter's ardent disposition. The ex
pression made use of is proverbial, and frequently to be found in
ancient writers. Aristoph. Plut. 216. kov SeT p diroOavElv, avrbg
Stairpd^to ravra. Compare Lysist. 123. Aristsenet. Epist. II. 17.
Dio. Cass. XLV. p. 301. Joseph. Ant. VI. 6. 2. Wetstein,
Alberti. Ver. 36. TEOaripavrj. Heb. NJftttf A3, a place of oil-presses ;
probably the village in which the produce of the Mount of Olives
was prepared for use. Hither our Lord retired, as gardens, on
account of the pollution of the weeds and dung, were not allowed
in the city, and numbers were, therefore, formed near the walls in
the neighbourhood of Mount Olivet. See Bava Metzia, c. 7.
and compare John xviii. 1. The three whom he selected as his
immediate attendants are those who were also present at the
transfiguration, and on other occasions of peculiar importance.
It is remarkable that the words KaOiaarE avrov k. r. X. are
precisely those which Abraham addressed to his servants when
he went to sacrifice Isaac, Gen. xxii. 5. Lightfoot, Grotius.
— [Kuinoel, &c]

326 MATTHEW XXVI. 37.
Ver. 37. Xv7TEtcr0ai Kat dSrijuovEiv. The several terms which
are here employed by our Lord and the Evangelists indicate the
most excessive anguish and distress of mind. The verb dSripo-
veTv rises above Xv7rEte70at ; and iKOap^ElaOat, in Mark xiv. 33. is,
if possible, still more forcible, than either. Our Lord himself re
presents his soul as 7T£piXv7roe ^ti»e Oavdrov ; and it is added in
Luke xxii. 44. that his sweat was as it were great drops of
blood falling down to the ground. Of the verb Xv^ETerOat, de
noting a lively and piercing sorrow, examples abound; and dSrj-
povElv, to be utterly exhausted and maddened with grief, is not
unusual. ^Elian. Hist. An. III. 21. dSri/iovetiv Kat dXvwv virb
rov dxovg. Xenoph. Hellen. IV. 4. 3. dSri/xovijcrat rag ipvxdg.
Etym. M. dSr/juovEtv' dXvEtv, Kat dVopEtv, Kat dprixavEtv. Hesych.
dSripoviS' aKJjStco, dyeovitJ. Suid. Xiav Xvirovpai, diropii). In the
verb iKOapj^ElaOai the intensive force of the preposition is dis
tinctly observable, as also in the adjective 7r£ptXv7roe, which is
rendered yet more emphatic by the addition of I'die Oavdrov. So
Jonas iv. 9. LXX. atpoSpa XEXvirripai iyw iwg Oavdrov. Ecclus.
iv. 28. 'iwg tov Oavdrov dydiviaai irspt rr)g dXriOEiag. Anthol. II.
13. 2. piawv aavrbv iwg Oavdrov. There seems also to be an
allusion to Psalm cxiv. 3. ¦ With respect to the bloody sweat, it
has been thought that nothing more is implied than that the
drops were large and clammy, like drops of gore ; but Aristotle
(Hist. Anim. III. 19.) and Diodorus, (XVII. p. 560.) mention
similar effects as attending an extraordinary agitation of mind :
and the like is also asserted by some modern writers. Thus
Dr. Mead observes from Galen : Contingere interdum, poros
ex multo aut fervido spiritu adeo dilatari, ut etiam exeat san
guis per eos, fiatque sudor sanguineus. Doddridge, Whitby,
Wetstein, Kuinoel.
[on Christ's agony in the garden of gethsemane.
From the strong expressions employed in the description of
our blessed Saviour's agony, from the earnestness of his prayer
for deliverance, and, indeed, from all the attendant circumstances,
it is unquestionable that his distress of mind was in the highest
degree poignant and acute. Of the cause, however, to which
this extremity of pain was owing, and of the nature of the sensa
tions which he experienced, much has been written, and little
understood ; and there is certainly something deeply mysterious
in this part of his history. Some think it was occasioned by the
divine wrath pressing- in upon him ; and that God treated him,
while bearing the sins of the world, as if he were indeed a sinner.
But the ministry of the angel, (Luke xxii. 43.) who must have
been sent from God, and sent in love too, is completely at va
riance with this notion ; not to mention that no angelic strength
could have resisted the force of God's indignation. It is true,

MATTHEW XXVI. 39. 327
indeed, that the circumstances related in this and the following
verse in St. Luke are called in question, and that the verses are
omitted in the Vatican, Alexandrian, and others of the oldest
MSS. They are extant, however, in such a vast majority of
MSS, versions, and Fathers, that there can be no doubt of their
authenticity ; and, at all events, God could not regard him as a
sinner who was purity itself; but in every act Jesus was, and
knew himself to be, that beloved Son, in whom the Father was
well pleased. Neither is it credible, that his agony arose solely
from the fear of death, and of the torments and the ignominy he
was about to undergo ; for many great and good men, many of
the primitive martyrs for instance, and of our first reformers,
have met death and tortures without such expressions of ago
nizing pain. His sufferings might, indeed, be embittered by a
variety of sorrows peculiar to himself; by his foreknowledge of
all that would befal him, by the complicated miseries that his
death would bring upon his wretched countrymen, by the perse
cution to which his disciples would be exposed in propagating
his religion, by the sympathy which his mother and his beloved
apostle would experience in his fate, by the malignity of sin, and
the vicarious burden thereof with which he was then oppressed,
and by numberless considerations which could not fail to exas
perate his woes in a powerful degree. Still it is evident that the
cup of sorrow (compare Matt. xx. 23.) was not the bitterness of
death: indeed, we are assured by St. Paul, in relation to this
fact, that he was heard in that he feared, (Heb. v. 7.) i. e. that
he was delivered from the terrors that oppressed him ; and yet
we know that he was not delivered from the death of the cross,
and that he left the garden with the most dignified composure to
meet the dangers that awaited him. Upon the whole, the most
probable opinion seems to be, that our Lord upon this occasion
entered into a severe spiritual conflict with the great enemy of
mankind, who assaulted the second Adam in a garden as he had
done the first. After the temptation in the wilderness the devil
is said to have departed from Christ for a season, (Luke iv. 13.)
and it is not improbable that this might be the season at which he
thought fit to return. The angel from heaven may be supposed
to have come against the minister of hell, in order to counteract
his influence and strengthen the human nature of Christ under
the horrors to which he was exposed. In the whole transaction,
however, there are many things hard to be understood ; and we
cannot, therefore, be too careful that we presume not in our en
quiries into the hidden mysteries of God. Whitby, Lightfoot,
A. Clarke. — [Grotius, Calvin, Doddridge, &c]

Ver. 39. ei Svvarov. If it be possible ; i. e. if it be consistent
with the divine counsels, and the method therein proposed for

328 MATTHEW XXVI. 40, 41.
the redemption of the world. Many things are possible per se
which are impossible in reference to certain prescribed condi
tions ; and upon this principle the words of our Lord are easily
reconciled with the parallel passage, Mark xiv. 36. All things
are possible for thee. Our Lord's will, in effect, therefore, per
fectly coincided with his Father's ; as it was his supreme desire
that his Father should be obeyed, rather than any inclination of
his own should be gratified. His prayer was intended to express
not what was in reality as matters stood, but what would have
been his desire, on the supposition that his Father's will did not
interfere. As the Hebrew has no optative mood, the indicative,
in conformity with the Oriental idiom, is frequently used in the
, N. T. in the sense of the optative. In regard to the spirit of the
prayer, there is a similar sentiment in Arrian, Dissert. IV. 7.
KpEtTTOv r)yovpai o b Osbg OeXei, r) Iyw. Whitby, Grotius,
Campbell, Raphelius. The verb 7rapEX0Etv seems to be em
ployed in allusion to the passing of the goblet from one person to
another at an entertainment. Epictet. 21. [Iv avpiroaito] irEpi-
(pEpopsvov yiyovi rt Kara ers ; Koapiwg ju£rdXaj3£' 7raplpx£Tat ; pi)
kotexe. Wetstein. In the beginning of the verse the reading
of many MSS. is irpoaEXOwv, which some have approved; but
the violent ellipsis which is necessary to complete the sense, scil.
etc rbv rr)g irpoaEvxvs roirov, is abundantly in favour of the re
ceived text. Kuinoel, Griesbach.
Ver. 40. ovrcoe- Itane ? Siccine ? This adverb is used in in
terrogations to denote a degree of censure mingled with admira
tion, the cause of which, in this instance, will be found in v. 35.
See Mark iv. 40. 1 Cor. vi. 5. Hom. Od. E. 204. Callim. H.
Del. 240. To the reproof itself there is something similar in
Virg. iEn. IV. 560. Potes hoc sub casu ducere somnos? Com
pare also Hom. II. B. 23. Kuinoel, Wetstein.
Ver. 41. ypjjyopEtTE. From the natural our Lord evidently
passes to the metaphorical use of this verb ; i. e. to be diligent
and circumspect, as Matt. xxiv. 42. xxv. 13. It is to be re
marked, however, that our Lord does not exhort the disciples to
pray that they might not be tempted, but that they might not be
overcome by those temptations to which he knew they were about
to be exposed. The verb EtcrlpxEcrflae is- used in the sense of
immergi et succumbere, as ipiriirrEtv, 1 Tim. vi. 9. The succeed
ing clause is not only an affectionate excuse for the frailty of his
followers, but an urgent motive for future vigilance and exertion,
as if he had said : You have made a solemn promise not to for
sake me, and of your sincerity I entertain no doubt ; yet when
temptations actually arise, and fear, and shame, and persecution
are at hand, the weakness of your flesh will prevail over your re
solution unless you use the greatest vigilance, and pray with fer-

MATTHEW XXVI. 42. 45. 329
vency for the Divine assistance. With the sentiment we may
compare Lucian. Tragopod. 66. ¥vx<j piv ovv poi Kal irpoOvpia
irdpa' Aipag Se vwt?pov ovx v7n7p£T£t iroOoig. Stat. Theb. VIII.
739. Odi artus, fragilemque hunc corporis usum, Desertorem
animi. Grotius, Whitby.
Ver. 42. 7rdXtv Ik Sevte'pov. Heracl. Pont. p. 452. Ik SevtI-
pov Se TrdXiv bpoiag rapaxvg avarpOEiarig. Plutarch, in Philopcem.
7rdXtv Ik SEvrlpov irspipOEig. Similar pleonasms occur in John
iv. 54. xxi. 16. Acts x. 15. Hom. Od. T. 161. Xen. Hellen.
III. 5. 21. Eurip. Herac. 488. Arist. Plut. 860. The adverb
irdXiv, however, may possibly be referred, as in v. 44., to a7r£X-
Odiv, and Ik SEvrlpov, as ek rptrou (scil. xpdvov) to irpoariv^aro.
With fiapwopsvoi in the following verse there is an ellipsis of
iirrvw. Compare Luke ix. 32. Anthol. Gr. IV. 8. 12. Eurip.
Alcest. 395. Theocrit. Idyl. XXII. 204. Anac. Od. LII. 18.
So Ovid, Met. V. 658. Somno gravatum. Kuinoel, Kypke,
Palairet. Some have supposed that this excessive drowsiness
in the disciples can only be accounted for upon the supposition
that the evil spirit was at work with. them as well as with Christ
himself; and that it was in reference to the desire of Satan to
sift them as wheat, (Luke xxi. 31.) that their Master enforced
upon them the necessity of watchfulness. But there is no suffi
cient reason for this opinion, more especially as St. Luke (xxii.
45.) is silent on this head, and refers it expressly to sorrow.
Doddridge.
Ver. 45. KafovSETE rb Xoiirov. Some late interpreters translate
this with an interrogation, Do ye still sleep ? &c, and this ap
pears at first sight to suit better with what follows, arise, let us be
going, &c. But the phrase rb Xoiirov, and simply Xotirbv, when
ever it relates to time, seems always to denote the future. Com
pare Acts xxvii. 20. 1 Cor. i. 16. 2 Cor. xiii. 11. 2 Tim. iv. 8.
Heb. x. 13. Phavorinus : to Xoiirov dvrt tov aKoXovOog. Ste-
phanus : deinceps, postea. Hence the common version is clearly
preferable ; and, as some suppose, in this sense, sleep on still,
for you can no longer assist me by your watchfulness, as the
time of my betrayal is at hand. But the expression rather con
tains an ironical reproof ; and so Euthymius : Ittei pixp1 TOV viiv
ovk lypjjyopijcraTE, to Xoiirov koOevSete Kat dvairaiiEauE, ei Sv-
vaaOE. This interpretation is somewhat confirmed by the word
dirixti) which is added in Mark xiv. 41. It is enough, scil.
that ye have slept already. Campbell, Whitby. — [Grotius,
Schleusner, &c]
R>id. r) iopa. Scil. rrig irpoSoaiag. So Euthymius, rightly;
the particle Kal following, as frequently, in the sense of y or ote.
Compare Mark xv. 25. Luke ii. 15. 21. Acts v. 7. Heb. viii. 8.
Thucyd. I. 50. Herod. I. 61. VII. 217. See Hoogeveen. The

330 MATTHEW XXVI. 47, 48.
word dpapTwXol is to be understood of the Gentiles, who were
in general so designated by the Hebrews as being idolaters.
See Gal. ii. 15. Some, indeed, suppose, but with less proba
bility, that the Jews are intended, in the same sense as Judas is
called vlbg rr)g diroXEiag, John xvii. 12. The former interpre
tation is far more satisfactory, in reference to Pilate and the
Roman soldiers ; and for a similar reason they were called dvopoi,
lawless, as destitute of the law of God, Acts ii. 23. 1 Cor. ix. 21.
In the next verse dywpEv is explained by I^uo/iev, as in John
xiv. 31. and Euthymius supplies Etc diravrr/aiv rolg irspl rov irpo-
Sorijv. Etym. M. dyw aripaivEt to iropsvopai. Grotius. — [Kui
noel.] Ver. 47. pavcupiHv Kal £vXcJv. Swords and clubs. Joseph.
B. J. V. 3. 1. tiiiXotg te civeStjv iraiopsvoi Kal <rtSr|ptj». These
tumultuary weapons do not certainly give the idea of regular
soldiers, nor is it probable that such would be employed without
the previous consent of the Roman governor. It is true, indeed,
that the word airElpa, in John xviii. 3. usually denotes a Roman
cohort, as in Acts x. 1.; and x'Xtapxoe (John xviii. 12.) also
seems to lead to the conclusion that the Roman soldiery is in
tended. Compare Acts xxi. 31. sq. Hence, some have supposed
that Judas was entrusted with the command of the cohort sta
tioned in the Castle of Antonia, or at least with a part of it ; or
with the guard which attended near the Temple at the time of
the great feasts, in order to prevent any insurrection of the Jews.
See Joseph. Ant. XVIII. 6. 3. B. J. V. 3. 8. But the terms
may possibly be applied in a more general sense, especially if a
portion of the garrison formed part of the company. The LXX
employ xl^'laPX0C to denote a Jewish leader of 1,000 men, in
Numb. xxxi. 14. 1 Sam. xviii. 13. 1 Chron. xii. 20. With re
spect to the arparriyol rov Upov mentioned in Luke xxii. 52.
they were unquestionably Jewish officers, as one of the Jewish
priests is so called in Joseph. Ant. XX. 6. 2. ; 9. 3. B. J. II.
17. 2. Kuinoel, Whitby. — [Grotius.]
Ver. 48. ov dv (piXr)aw. A kiss was a customary mode of
Jewish salutation, which prevailed also among the early Chris
tians; whence the ipiXripa dyarrije of St. Paul. In this sense the
verb (piXEtv continually occurs in Greek writers ; the word aro-
pari being sometimes supplied. Compare Xen. I. 3. 8. ; 4. 27.
VII. 3. 3. Sympos. 9. 5. It should seem that there is properly
a difference between the simple verb and the compound Kararpi-
XeIv, the preposition in the latter being emphatic. Xen. Mem.
II. 6. 3. rove piv KaXoiig <ptXr]aovr6g pov, roiig S' dyaBovg Kara-
(piXf)aovrog. The distinction may be well exemplified by Massen-
ger's New Way to pay Old Debts, Act III. Sc. 2. And when he
kisses you, kiss close. In the LXX, however, the same verb is ren-

MATTHEW XXVI. 50, 51. 331
deredby <PiXeIv in Exod. xviii. 7., and by Karac/>tXEiv in Exod. iv.
27. Grotius, Kuinoel. On other occasions Jesus had conveyed
himself away from the multitude when they attempted to destroy
him, (Luke iv. 30. John viii. 59. x. 39.) and it has been urged,
in extenuation of the guilt of Judas, that he hoped he would
have done so now ; and that when he was disappointed in this
expectation he hanged himself. Jesus, however, had expressly
declared to the contrary, v. 34. supra ; and at all events such a
possibility would be no excuse for so base an experiment.
Ver. 50. !c/>' cj5 7rdp£t; Scil. SEvpo. Arist. Lysist. 1104. l7rt n
?rdp£cn-E Sfvpo ; Several MSS. read !e/>' o in the accusative, which
is preferred by some of the commentators : but the dative is equally
correct, and thus explained by Hesychius : iirl iroito aKoirto irdpEi
Kal irapayiyovag ivravOa ; Examples of both constructions
abound. Eurip. Orest. 130. i<f on xp!°e I/uoXete ; Bacch. 484.
It/)' o7T£p Eig Gijj3ae irdpEi; Thucyd. I. 134. ec/>' tj5 ixwpsi. Of the
word IratpE see on Matt. xx. 13. By this simple question our
Lord clearly indicated to Judas that he was fully aware of his
treachery, and the meaning of his salutation. See Luke xxii. 48.
Kuinoel, Elsner, Palairet.
Ver. 51. eIc tcov pErd 'Iriaov. We learn from John xviii. 10.
that this was Peter ; and the same Evangelist records the name
of the high-priest's servant, which was Malchus. It should seem
that the name of Peter was cautiously omitted in the three first
Gospels, lest it should expose him to any persecution ; but St.
John, writing long after his death, needed no such precaution.
The action was exceedingly injudicious, though highly charac
teristic of Peter's disposition ; and had not Christ, by some se
cret influence, overawed the multitude, it must have been pro
ductive of serious consequences. In healing the servant's ear,
therefore, our Lord not only performed a deed of great compas
sion, but prevented those censures which his disciple's rashness
would otherwise have occasioned. Doddridge.
Ibid. dcpEtXEv avrov wriov. Some understand diriov, as the
Latin auricula, of the lower part of the ear ; but ove is the word
employed in Luke xxii. 51. and the LXX use ove and elirtov in
differently to designate the ear. Compare Deut. xv. 17. 2 Sam.
xxii. 45. Amos iii. 12. So Hesychius : ove' wriov. Mceris
also: ove 'ArrtKcJe, wriov 'EXXijvtKcJe- Wetstein. — [Grotius.]
The verb dc/>atp£iv has the sense of diroripvEiv, or d7roK07rr£tv, as
in John xviii. 10. So Judith xiii. 8. dipElXs ri)v KE<paXi)v avrov.
1 Mace. vii. 47. ri)v KE(paXi)v dipElXE. Polysen. VII. 6 Se enraerd-
psvog rr)v irapaZ,t<piSa, dipElXsv aiirov plva ko! wra. In the same
sense also the Latins use auferre. Cic. ad Q. Frat. II. 14.
Auriculam fortasse mordicus abstulisset. Virg. JEn. X. 394.
Caput Evandrius abstulit ensis. The sword, (fidxaipa,) which

332 MATTHEW XXVI. 52, 53. 56.
Peter used upon this occasion was a short knife or dagger, such
as the Jews, especially on a journey, were used to conceal under
their cloaks, as a protection from the banditti with which the
country was infested. Kuinoel, Palairet, Michaelis.
Ver. 52. irdvrEe ydp oi Xaj3ovr£e k. t. X. From this reproof
we are not to infer that the use of the sword in self-defence is un
lawful, but that the use of it against the magistrate, which was
the case in the present instance, is unlawful. It was meant also
to restrain private persons from avenging private injuries, which
they should rather leave to the magistrate or to God, Rom. xii.
19. The expression seems to have been proverbial; intimating
the probable consequence of having recourse to the sword upon
every occasion. In addition, however, to the indirect lessons
inculcated by our Lord, he had clearly a further and more im
mediate object in view, in reference to the Jews, who now sur
rounded him, against whom it was unnecessary for his disciples
to draw the sword, since God himself would shortly cut them off
by the sword of the Romans. See Rev. xiii. 10., where the same
expression is used in predicting the destruction of the persecutors
of true Christians. To add to his rebuke, our Lord proceeds to
tell Peter, v. ,53., that the deed which he had performed implied
a distrust of the divine Providence; and, v. 54., a gross igno
rance of the Scriptures. Grotius, Whitby, Macknight, Por
teus. Ver. 53. ScoSeko XEyEcovae. The Roman legion at this time
contained about 6,000 men ; and twelve legions were more than
were commonly entrusted to their greatest generals. How dread
fully effective such an host of angels would have been, where one
alone could destroy 185,000 Assyrians at a stroke, it is above the
comprehension of man to conceive. Of the infinite multitude of
the heavenly host we may compare 2 Kings vi. 17. Dan. vii. 10.
Doddridge, Grotius. For a list of Latinisms in the N. T.
of which XEyEcuv is an example, see Home's Introd. Vol. II.
p. 28. Ver. 56. al yparpal rwv irpofriTtov. Some attribute this ob
servation to the Evangelist; but that it was spoken by Christ
himself is clear from Mark xiv. 49. Our Lord seems here to
allude more immediately to the particular prophecy of Isaiah liii.
12. in reference to his question, Are ye come out as against a
thief? In v. 54. the expression is more general, and will in
clude the predictions contained in the whole chapter of Isaiah
above cited, as well as Psalm xvii. lxix. and Dan. ix. 24. sqq.
Kuinoel, Le Clerc. In the last clause of this verse we have
an exact completion of the prophecy which our Lord had just
before delivered in v. 31., and therein an instance of the strictest

MATTHEW XXVI. 57, 58. 333
veracity on the part of the Evangelists, who did not hesitate to
relate occurrences, which for their own credit they would gladly
have suppressed, had not the sacred cause of truth required other
wise. Porteus.
Ver. 57. irpoe Katdipav. To Annas first, according to John
xviii. 13. It should seem that this circumstance is omitted by
the three first Evangelists, as nothing of any importance trans
pired there. Jesus may have been conducted thither in compli
ment to Annas, whose late deposition from the priesthood by the
Roman power had increased his popularity with the Jews ; so much
so, indeed, that no less than five of his sons successively enjoyed
the dignity of high-priest, and his son-in-law was at this time in
possession of the office. It is likely, also, that Annas was president
of the Sanhedrim, and that Christ was brought to him in this
office, while the council was assembled at the house of Caiaphas.
For 7rpoe Kaide/>av Luke (xxii. 54.) has Eig rov oIkov tov 'Apx'£-
plcue. Thus Trpoe is frequently used to denote motion to a place
in which the person is, whose name is governed by the preposi
tion in the accusative. Compare Gen. xix. 3. 6. LXX. So Acts
xxi. 18. 7rpoe 'IaKw/3ov. iElian. V. H. I. 21. 7rpoe fiaaiXia dc/»t-
keto. Terent. Eun. III. 5. 64. Eamus ad me. Whitby, A.
Clarke, Kuinoel.
Ver. 58. 6 Si Illrpoe k. t. X. From this circumstance some
commentators would render 7rdvr£e, v. 56., by plerique ; but, it
should seem, unnecessarily. Peter, in all probability, had at
first fled with the rest, but ashamed of his cowardice, and really
attached to his Master, he summoned up resolution to return, and
follow him at a distance. It is added in John xviii. 15. that ano
ther disciple followed with Peter, who is generally supposed to
have been John the Evangelist himself; and when we consider
that he was destined to write a history of Christ's life, it will ap
pear very proper that an opportunity should have been provi
dentially afforded him of witnessing his trial before the council.
An objection has indeed been urged against this opinion, that the
twelve being GaJilaeans, and men of mean station, would scarcely
have had interest to procure admission into the palace upon an
occasion of such importance ; and, consequently, that an inha
bitant of Jerusalem, the person perhaps at whose house Jesus
had eaten the passover, would be more likely to gain an entrance
for Peter and himself into the hall. For similar reasons others
have supposed Judas to be intended. But there is no impro
bability in the notion, that John, though a poor Galilaean, may
have had some acquaintance among the high-priest's household,
who would have given him admittance to the proceedings. It is
expressly stated in John xviii. 16. that he was known to the
high-priest, probably from his connexion with some of the do-

334 MATTHEW XXVI. 60, 61.
mestics. Macknight. — [Grotius, Lampe, Whitby, &c] See
further on John, in loc; and of the form dirb paKpoOsv, see my
note on Hom. II. A. 500.
Ver. 60. ko! ovx Evpov. That is, they found none whose evi
dence came up to the point they aimed at, and proved against
Jesus a capital offence. Not that they did not charge him with
crimes that would have subjected him to death, as some have
supposed, but because their testimony was contradictory, Mark
xiv. 56. To condemn any one to death the law required the
concurring testimony of two or, three witnesses, each of whom
was examined apart. See Numb. xxxv. 30. Deut. xvii. 6. Matt.
xviii. 16. 1 Tim. v. 19. It was also necessary to produce evi
dence sufficient to induce the Roman governor to ratify the sen
tence, in whose hands the power of life and death was now vested.
The words ovx ivpov are wanting after Trpoo-EX^ovrevv in some
MSS., most probably from the error of some copyist, who was
offended at their repetition. There seems to be a gradation in the
two clauses, intimating that when there was the testimony of one
witness there was no difficulty in suborning a succession of others,
though their depositions were equally unavailable. The readiness
with which false witnesses were procured was probably owing in
some degree to the nature of the accusations with which Christ
was charged. In the prosecution of false prophets no man was
allowed to speak in their defence. See Maimonides in Hilcoth
Sanhedr. c. 2. and the notes of Fagius on the Chaldee Para
phrase of Deut. xiii. 8. ; and compare Acts vi. 11. 13. There is
a great similarity between the treatment which Christ now expe
rienced and the conduct of the Jews towards Jeremiah ; the latter,
indeed, may be looked upon as typical of the former. Kuinoel,
Whitby, Hammond.
Ver. 61. ovrog i<pri' k. t. X. From Mark xiv. 59. it appears,
that neither on this point did their witnesses agree together. The
intention of this accusation was evidently to convict our Lord of
having spoken disrespectfully, and prophesied against the Temple,
which was considered by the Jews as blasphemy, and of course
a capital offence. But the truth is, that he had said no such
thing as that which they had falsely laid to his charge : the ex
pressions alluded to are those which he spake after casting the
buyers and sellers from the Temple, when the Jews asked him
what sign he could give them of his authority to do these things.
In answer to their enquiries he referred them to the miracle of
his resurrection, destroy this temple, and in three days I will
raise it up, John ii. 19. where we are expressly told that by this
temple he meant his own body, to which he probably pointed at
the time. According to Mark xiv. 58. the witnesses alleged that
Christ had said this temple made with hands, which more grossly

MATTHEW XXVI. 63. 335
exaggerates the calumny, as entirely restraining the words of
Christ to the Temple of Jerusalem. It is observable that the
words thus grossly misrepresented were spoken by Christ three
years before the charge was brought against him ; a circumstance
which affords the most striking attestation of the unimpeachable
integrity of his life. The expression Std rpiwv i)pEpwv is equi
valent to Iv rpiry i)pipq, Matt. xvi. 21. So Std £7rrd Irtuv,
Deut. xvi. 1. Acts xxiv. 17. Similar forms are frequent in the
Greek writers : Isocr. Archid. ravrr/g Se Std rptcov IrtJv KarotKt-
Zovaa. Grotius, Kuinoel, Wetstein, Doddridge.
Ver. 63. i^opKiZw as Kara tov Oeov. This seems' to have been
the usual mode of administering an oath. See Home's Introd.
Vol. III. p. 193. sq. Both the simple and compound verbs 6p-
ki£ci> and itiopKlZw axe used in the LXX. for the Hebrew verb
y3t£?n, hisbiang, which is commonly rendered in the E. T. to
make to swear. Compare Gen. xxiv. 3. 1 Kings ii. 42. 2 Chron.
xxxvi. 13. Neh. xiii. 25. Jerem. xlix. 13. in some of which places
the genitive of the Deity sworn by follows with the preposition
Kara, though the more usual construction is with the double ac
cusative, as in Mark v. 7. 1 Thess. v. 27. The form is some
times used by private persons, as in Judg. xvii. 2. 1 Kings viii.
31., but more generally by magistrates, either to the witness,
(Lev. v. 1.) or to the person accused, in which case it was called
the oath of adjuration. See Numb. v. 19. 21. Josh. vii. 19.
1 Kings xxii. 16. After such an adjuration by a magistrate or
superior, the answer returned was an answer upon oath ; a false
answer was perjury, and even the silence of the person adjured
was not deemed innocent. Hence it was that the high-priest had
recourse to this measure upon our Lord's disdaining to answer
the unfounded accusations which were brought against him, from
the conviction that his judges were predetermined, and that every
thing he could say would be of no avail. From the question pro
posed by the high-priest, and from our Lord's observation in
Luke xxii. 67, 68. it is evident that he and his council hoped to
place him in a dilemma : if he confessed, to condemn him on that
confession ; and if he denied, to expose him on that denial, as
unable to maintain the pretensions he had formerly made. Camp
bell, Kuinoel, Hammond, Doddridge.
Ibid. 6 Xptcrroe, 6 vlbg rov Qeov. It is clear from this pas
sage, and others in which these terms are used synonymously, as
Matt. xvi. 16. and elsewhere, that the Jews expected their Mes
siah to be the Son of God. See on Matt. xiv. 33. The expecta
tion was founded on the second Psalm, which the Jews in our
Saviour's time agreed in referring to their Messiah, and which
is so referred by St. Paul and the Apostles in a body, Acts iv.
25. xiii. 33. It is also certain that they understood the title
Son of God in a sense implying divinity. Hence it is that the

336 MATTHEW XXVI. 64, 65.
high-priest declared the assumption of this title to he blasphemy,
v. 65., for in no other sense than as implying divinity could it
be so construed, and deemed worthy of death. The appellation
was sometimes given to men of eminent piety ; and the whole
Jewish people styled themselves the sons of God; so that in this
figurative sense Jesus might have claimed it without incurring
the charge of blasphemy. Compare also John v. 17, 18. x. 31.
sqq. Grotius, Whitby.
Ver. 64. ab Elirag. See above on v. 25. In what follows our
Lord again alludes to the passage of Daniel referred to in Matt.
xxiv. 30. See the note there ; and of the expression Ik Se^iwv
Ka0r)a0ai on Matt. xx. 20. The adverb irXjjv is moreover, as in
2 Chron. xxxiii. 17. and dirdpri is synonymous with dirb tov vw
in Luke xxii. 69. and, therefore, equivalent with pErd piKpbv ; so
that the time of the appearance must refer, primarily at least, to.
the destruction of the Jewish nation. As the Hebrews employ
the word iTTQjn, hageburah, which signifies power, in the ab
stract, as a common appellation for God, so Svvapig exactly cor
responds with our usage of the word Almighty. Compare Heb.
i. 3. viii. 1. 1 Pet. iv. 14. In the Rabbinical writings also the
same mode of expression repeatedly occurs. Thus Jarchi on
Numb. vii. 10. observes : Moses received not the offering of the
princes till commanded by the mouth of power. See also Kimchi
on Josh. vii. Kuinoel, Whitby, Hammond, Grotius.
Ver. 65. Stippn^s rd Ipdna. See Home's Introd. Vol. III.
pp. 282. 410. It should be observed, however, that the precepts
in Levit. x. 6. xxi. 10. forbidding the high-priests to rend their
clothes, relate only to the pontifical garments, and to private
mourning. That Caiaphas was clothed in ordinary apparel upon
this occasion appears from Exod. xxix. 29, 30. where the pontifical
garments were ordered to descend from father to son ; and, there
fore, could only be worn at their consecration, and when they
ministered. In seasons of great distress it was not unusual with
the high-priests to rend their clothes, instances of which may be
found in 1 Mace. xi. 71. Joseph. B. J. II. 15. 2, 4. It should
seem also that a similar practice prevailed in sitting in judgment
respecting blasphemy. We read in the Talmud, Sanhedr. VII.
10. They who judge a blasphemer, first bid the witness to speak
out plainly what he hath heard : and when he speaks it, the
judges, standing on their feet, rend their garments, and do not
sew them up again. So also Maimonides in Avod. Zara, c. 2.
When witnesses declare aloud the blasphemy which they have
heard, then all hearing the blasphemy are bound to rend their
clothes. Macknight, Grotius, Lightfoot. In the end of the
verse the word ISe is put for ISete, as in Matt, xxviii. 6. Mark
xvi. 6. Kuinoel.

MATTHEW XXVI. 66—69. 337
Ver. 66. svoxog Oavdrov iari. Of the extent of the power
which the Jews now possessed in matters of life and death, see
Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 110. The word Zvoxog is properly
constructed with the dative, as in Matt. v. 21, 22. Sometimes,
however, it is found with the genitive, and so Mark iii. 29. xiv.
64. Heb. ii. 15. So also Demosth. p. 1229, 11. tvoxot SEapov.
In this latter construction there seems to be an ellipsis of k-pt'-
pan. See Bos Ellips. Gr. p. 146. Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 347. Obs. 4.
Ver. 67. iviirrvaav. Spitting in the face was a mark of the
most profound contempt and abhorrence, both with the Jews and
other nations. See Numb. xii. 14. Job xvi. 10. xxx. 10. Micah
v. 1. Plutarch. Apophthegm, p. 189. A. re,t Qwidwvt atwirij /3aSt-
Z,ovn Tujv ixOpiov rig zviirrvaEv diravriiaag tig rb irpoatoirov.
Lucian. D. M. XX. 2. —poairrvaopai ys iravroog dvSpoywoi ovrt.
Seneca, de Consol. 18. Inventus est lamen, qui in faciem ejus
(Aristidis, scil. ad supplicium ducti) inspueret. So also Senec.
de Ira, III. 38. Kuinoel, Wetstein. Between the verbs ko-
Xa<piZ,Eiv and pairiZ,Eiv there is this difference, that the former
denotes to strike with the clenched fist, the latter with the palm
of the hand. Theophylact : ^-oXctc/>t?Etv• Sid rwv xilpdiv irXf)T-
teiv, avyKapirropivtov rwv SaKTvXwv. Suidas : pairiaai' irard^at
ri)v yvaObv dirXy ry XaP'' °* Ka' Xlyovert ira'iEiv iirl rqg kopprje.
Hence Juvencus : Tunc sanctum Christi faciem sputa undique
complent, Et palmae in malis, colaphique in verlice crebri Insul-
tant. Sedul. Op. Pasch. IV. Nam que per hos colaphos caput est
sanabile nostrum ; His alapis nobis libertas maxima plausit. So
Juv. Sat. XIII. 127. Nee pugnis ccedere pectus Te veto, nee
plana faciem contundere palma. Hammond.
Ver. 68. irpoipr/TEvaov i)plv, k. t. X. In this insulting taunt
there seems to be an indirect sneer at the popular belief in our
Lord's Messiahship ; which is rendered yet more apparent by
the sarcastic use of the word irpo<pi]TEvEiv. This verb, as also
pavrEvEaOai, is sometimes used generally in relation to things
unknown, so as to correspond with the English guess. Aristot.
Rhet. III. 17. 10. IkeTvoc ydp (Epimenides) ivEpl rwv iaopivwv
ovk !/iavr£VETO, dXXd 7T£pt rwv yEyovorwv, doi'iXtov SI. It should
be remembered that Christ was now blindfolded, as appears from
Mark xiv. 65. Luke xxii. 64. The treatment which he received
from the Jews upon this occasion is expressly predicted in Isaiah
1. 6. liii. 3. 7. Kuinoel, Grotius, Markland.
Ver. 69. e^io. That is, without ; or according to Mark xiv.
66. beneath, (Karw) the room in which Jesus was examined ; not
without the palace. See v. 58. The file at which Peter and the
servants were warming themselves was probably contained in a
chafing-dish, and placed in the outer court of the palace ; but
VOL. I. Z

338 MATTHEW XXVI. 69.
Jesus was examined in the vestibule, called by Matthew irvXwv,
and by Mark irEptavXtov. The persons in the court, therefore,'
might be said to have been without, in respect of the covered
part of the building ; or below, in respect to the vestibule, which
was raised above the level of the court. Some suppose that Peter
was, throughout the whole proceeding, in the same room with
his Master, but separated from him by a bar or rail, so as to be
without the bar, and below the raised platform on which the exa
mination took place : but this is less probable. Grotius, Lamy.
— [Macknight.] With respect to Peter's three denials there
are some apparent inconsistencies in the narratives of the several
Evangelists, which it will be necessary to reconcile. The first
denial, made while he sat at the fire, was elicited, according to the
three first Evangelists, by a direct charge, but according to John
xviii. 17. in answer to a question by the damsel who kept the
door. Hence, some have supposed that a note of interrogation
should be added in every instance ; but this is perfectly unneces
sary, since the Hebrew frequently puts a strong affirmation in
an interrogatory form. Grotius. — [Michaelis.] According to
Matt. v. 71. and Mark xiv. 69. the second charge was made
against Peter by another damsel ; according to Luke xxii. 58.
by a man. In order to remove this difficulty, it is proved by
some that the Greek word dvOptoirog, like the Latin homo, sig
nifies both man and woman ; and others contend that he was
accosted both by a woman and a man ; the former mentioned by
Matthew and Mark, the latter by Luke. But the better solution
is, that the maid spoke to the by-standers (rolg IkeT ;) upon which
one of them accosted Peter himself, and received the denial. It
is true that some MSS. for rote IkeT read avrolg' IkeT k. t. X.,
but that this is incorrect is evident from the mention of no place
to which IkeT can refer ; in which case also the position of
the words would have been Kat ovroe <5v IkeT. There is also
another difficulty respecting the place where this second denial
occurred. According to John xviii. 25. Peter was still at the
fire, whereas the words of St. Matthew seem to indicate that he
had gone into the vestibule. But the participle i^EXOovra merely
indicates the intention of going out, without necessarily implying
that he fulfilled it. Compare John x, 32, 33. with xi. 8. Whitby,
Kuinoel. — [Grotius, Macknight, Campbell.] The third
charge is attributed by Matt. v. 73. and Mark xiv. 70. to the by
standers, by Luke xxii. 59. to one person in particular, and by
John xviii. 26. to a relation of Malchus, whose ear Peter had cut
off in the garden. But Luke, no doubt, specifies one of the by
standers mentioned generally by Matthew and Mark, who dis
tinguished himself by the vehemence of his affirmation, in which
he was supported by the relation of Malchus, if indeed it was not
himself that (Stterxvp^Ero) confidently affirmed the Apostle's con
nection with Jesus. It is possible that numbers might interro-

MATTHEW XXVI. 70. 74. 339
gate him, though he denied but thrice. Wall, A. Clarke. We
may observe, in conclusion, that our Lord's trial and Peter's de
nial being contemporary events, might be related the one before
the other, according to the historian's pleasure. Matthew and
Mark describe the trial first, because it is the principal fact ; St.
Luke brings it in after the denials. John has preserved the
exact order of the proceedings, beginning with the first denial,
which happened immediately after Peter entered the palace ;
then giving the history of the trial, as the principal fact ; and
concluding with the subsequent denials. Macknight.
Ibid. iratSiaKr). John xviii. 17. i) iraiSiaKri i) Ovpwpog. The
porters employed by the Romans and Greeks were always men;
but it was not unusual with the Jews to assign the office to fe
males. See 2 Sam. iv. 6. Acts xii. 13. The accusation, aii r/aOa
pErd 'Irjcrov, is explained in John as implying one of his disciples ;
and Etvat psrd nvog is a common formula, denoting to take side
with one, to assist, to befriend, as in Matt. xii. 30. Thucyd. VI.
44. VII. 57. Kuinoel, Wetstein.
Ver. 70. ovk otSa, ri XiyEig. A common formula of denial.
So Soph. Aj. 270. 7reoe rovr iXi%ag ; ov KaroTS' 6Vwe Xlyste.
Inv. 72. the adverb 6'rt is used, like the Hebrew particles *3 and
?3N, after verbs of adjuring, in the sense of profecto. Compare
Gen. xxii. 17. xxviii. 16. xiii. 16. xliv. 28. 1 Kings i. 30. Wet
stein, Kuinoel. Of the Galilaean dialect, v. 73., see Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 14.
Ver. 74. KaraOEpariZEiv. This is the reading of a great va
riety of MSS. upon the authority of which it is admitted by
Griesbach into the text. But analogy will give no other mean
ing to this verb than that of deponere ; and it is therefore highly
probable that the copyists have dropped a syllable from the verb
KaravaOEpariZ,Eiv, which exactly suits the sense, and is also con
firmed by Mark xiv. 71. The meaning, however, is not male-
dicere Christo, as expressed in Plin. Epist. 97., but there is
an ellipsis of lavrove, which is supplied in Acts xxiii. 12.
Peter, in all probability, used a form of imprecation, which is
common in the O. T., God do so to me, and more also ! Gro
tius, Kuinoel. — [A. Clarke.] There is no doubt that fear
was in a great measure the cause of Peter's denial of his Master.
He had been witness to the insults heaped upon Jesus, and he
was sensible of the hopeless situation in which he was placed ;
he saw himself surrounded by enemies, and above all, in the
presence of, and probably recognized by, one whose relation he
had wounded. Still his sin was more than a sin of infirmity.
He had been forewarned against it, and his conscience must have
smitten him severely as he fell, step by step, from a lie to per
jury, and from perjury to the most profligate oaths and curses.
z 2

340 MATTHEW XXVII. 1, 2.
His. fall may well teach us to distrust our own unassisted nature
in time of temptation, and his contrition and speedy repentance
when the look of his Master (Luke xxii. 61.) forced him to re
flect upon the heinousness of. his offence, will assure us that no
sinner need despair of mercy who truly repents. It is remark
able that all the Gospels record the fall of Peter, but none with
circumstances of greater exaggeration than Mark, whose Gospel
is said to have been revised by Peter himself. A most convinc
ing proof this of the veracity of the narrative. Whitby, Por
teus, Doddridge.

CHAPTER XXVII.
Contents: — The condemnation of Christ by the Sanhedrim,
vv. 1,2. [Mark xv. 1. Luke xxii. 66.] The repentance of
Judas, and the purchase of the potter s field, vv. 3 — 10.
Christ before Pilate, w. 11 — 25. [Mark xv. 2. Luke xxiii. 1.
John xviii. 28.] Barabbas released; and Jesus scourged,
insulted, and led away to be crucified, vv. 26 — 29. [Mark xv.
15. Luke xxiii. 24. John xix. 1.] The crucifixion, and at
tendant circumstances, vv. 30 — 45. [Mark xv. 20. Luke xxiii.
26. John xix. 16.] The death of Christ, and the prodigies
which accompanied and followed it, vv. 46 — 56. [Mark xv. 33.
Luke xxiii. 44. John xix. 28.] The burial of Christ, vv.
57—61. [Mark xv. 42. Luke xxiii. 50. John xix. 38.] The
sepulchre sealed and guarded, vv. 62—66.
Verse 1. irpw'iag. It was contrary to the Jewish canons to
proceed against a person's life by night ; as it appears from the
Talmud, in Sanhedr. IV. 1. Cases of money are heard in the
day, and may be determined in the night ; but capital causes are
tried in the day, and finished in the day. As the proceedings
at the house of Caiaphas were totally at variance with this regu
lation, they seem to have separated till break of day, under pre
tence of conducting the business according to form, but with the
real intention of consulting by what means they might obtain the
sanction of Pilate to the sentence which they had already passed
upon Jesus. Lightfoot, Grotius.
Ver. 2. Sf)aavTEg. It appears from John xviii. 12. that Jesus
was bound immediately upon his apprehension, so that the aorist
in the nominative is employed for the perfect SeSe^Ivov in the
accusative ; or probably his bands were loosed during the exa
mination. Of the phrase avpfiovXiov Xapfidvsiv see on Matt.
xii. 14. The title riyspiov, which properly belongs to the pro
consular ox proprtttorian governors of the Roman provinces, is

MATTHEW XXVII. 3. 5. 341
here given to Pilate, who was only procurator of Judaea. Joseph.
B. J. II. 9. 2. TTEpcpOElg Eig 'lovSaiav iir'irpoirog virb Tij^Epiov
YliXdrog. Tac. Ann. XV. 44. Auctor nominis ejus (Christiano-
rum) Christus, qui Tiberio imperitante per Procuratorem Pon-
tium Pilatum supplicio affectus erat. In consequence, however,
of the rebellious disposition of the Jews, it was deemed necessary
to invest the procurator of Judea with the proconsular power of
life and death, being still in subjection to the President of Syria.
See Joseph. B. J. II. 8. 1. Antiq. XVIII. 1. 1. Hence the
title of i)yEptov is also given to Pilate in Joseph. Ant. XVIII.
3. 1. Kuinoel, Grotius, Krebs.
Ver. 4. alpadOwov. Innocent blood ; i. e. an innocent man.
Not only the phrase adp% kal alpa, (Matt. xvi. 17.) but simply
dipa, is employed to designate man ; and we have the expression
here employed in Deut. xxvi. 25. 1 Sam. xix. 5. Psalm xciii. 21.
So Philo de victimis, p. 839. ovr' a'tparog dOwov irpoar)ipavro.
The adjective dOioog signifies properly unpunished, from Owi), a
fine, of which see my note on Hom. II. N. 668. and thence un
deserving of punishment, i. e. innocent. Themist. Orat. 23. p.
287. vopoig dOwov eIvui. Some consider aii bipzi as a Hebraism,
but it should rather seem to be an adaptation of the Latin formula
Tu videbis ; for which the Greeks employ crot peXetw. Kypke,
Alberti. — [Kuinoel.] The opinion of some of the early Fa
thers, as well as some modem commentators, that Judas was in
some measure induced to betray Jesus by the expectation that he
would deliver himself out of their hands, which has been already
noticed, is supposed to derive some support from his subsequent
repentance. But, from our Lord's declaration in Matt. xxvi. 24.
Johnxvii. 12., and from St. Peter's in Actsi. 25. it cannot be be
lieved that his repentance was sincere. The tortures of conscience
racked him with remorse, but as all he thought of in the betrayal
was gain, so all that now instigated him to suicide was confusion
and despair. In the answer of the chief priests there was a won
derful instance of the most flagrant inconsistency ; they did not
scruple to murder an innocent person, yet were mightily consci
entious about putting into the treasury the price which they
themselves had paid for his blood. Porteus, Whitby.
Ver. 5. dirEXOwv diri)y%aro. E. T. Went and hanged him
self; and that this is correct is evident from Arrian, Epict. I. 2.
to Si dirdyi,aaOai ovk ianv dxoprrrov' brav yovv pdOy rig on
EvXoyov, dircXOtov airi'iy^aro. Hanging, indeed, seems to have
been a frequent mode of self-destruction. So Ahitophel, 2 Sam.
xvii. 23. airnXOcv Kal airr)yS,a-o. Compare Job vii. 16. Tobit
iii. 10. It has been thought, however, that the account given by
St. Peter of the death of Judas in Acts i. 25. that he fell head
long, and his bowels burst out, contradicts the fact of his hanging

342 MATTHEW XXVII. 6, 7.
himself. Hence some have contended that dirdyx^Oai may sig
nify merely to suffocate, and that Judas choaked himself, even to
bursting, with rage and remorse. In support of this interpreta
tion they adduce the wish of the poet: Virg. Eccl. VII. 27.
Invidia rumpantur ut ilia Codro. In Josephus also, Ant. XV.
13. one Zenodorus is mentioned, who is supposed to have died
in this manner. But the more probable opinion is, that the traitor
had actually suspended himself, and that the cord breaking, or the
noose slipping, he had fallen with such violence as to cause his
bowels to protrude. This interpretation is strongly confirmed by
the expression iXdKrjcrE piaog, employed by St. Peter, as the verb
XjjkeTv signifies lacerare cum strepitu, in allusion perhaps to the
noise occasioned by his fall. It should seem, therefore, that in
the Gospel the intent and perpetration, and in the Acts the event
of the deed is recorded, in which there was possibly a more than
ordinary providence exhibited to mark the end of so notable a
sinner. There is a singular tradition, that the devil caught Judas
up into the air, strangled him, and dashed out his bowels against
the ground; and even this solution has found an advocate in
modern times. Whitby, Kuinoel, Macknight, Le Clerc,
Alberti. — [Grotius, Wakefield, Lightfoot.]
Ver. 6. Kop/3avdv. The treasury ; or that part of the woman's
court where the chests were placed for receiving the offerings of
the worshippers. See on Matt. xv. 5. The Rabbins inferred
from Deut. xxiii. 18. where the hire of a harlot is specified as
an abomination to the Lord, that it was unlawful to place the pro
duce of any unjust or iniquitous traffic, and consequently the price
of blood, into the treasury. Compare Sanhedr. p. 112. Hence,
also, the first Christians deemed it unlawful for an executioner to
make any offerings or alms. Kuinoel, Hammond, Macknight.
Ver. 7 . iiyopaaav tov dypbv rov KEpapiwg. Thirty pieces of
silver may seem a very inconsiderable price for a field so near
Jerusalem ; but, in all probability, it had been rendered unfit for
pasture or tillage by the potters, in digging out the earth for their
wares. It should seem that it was not unusual to convert pieces
of ground, which had thus been rendered useless for other pur
poses, to that of sepulture. There was a place at Athens called
Ceramicus, which had doubtless, from its name, been formerly
attached to a pottery, and was used as a burying-place for those
who fell in the service of their country. With respect to the
strangers, (Uvoi,) for the interment of whom the field of blood
was provided, the priests would have little cared for Heathen
burials ; and it has therefore been thought they must be foreign
Jews, who died during a temporary residence at Jerusalem : at
all events, the point is not very material. The historians men
tioning the purchase of the potter's field, with the money for

MATTHEW XXVII. 9. 343
which Judas betrayed his Master, from which circumstance it
received the appellation of the field of blood, (Hebraice, aKEXSapd,
Acts i. 19.) and was still so called in the time of Jerome, is a
public appeal to a very public transaction, and puts this part of
the history beyond the reach of exception. As to the date of the
transaction, it may be observed, that the purchase of the field
does not seem to have been effected immediately upon the money
being cast down in the temple. But because the deliberation of
the priests concerning this matter had a close connexion with the
treachery of Judas, St. Matthew very fairly relates it here, though
it may not have taken place for some days, perhaps weeks or
months, after Judas had hanged himself. Macknight, Dod
dridge, Kuinoel.
Ver. 9. 'lEpEpiov. A purchase somewhat similar to that here
recorded is mentioned in Jerem. xxxii., but the prophecy to
which the Evangelist here unquestionably refers, occurs in Zech.
xi. 13. and not in Jeremiah at all. For a solution of the diffi
culty, see Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 212. note. The citation
itself corresponds neither with the Hebrew nor the LXX, in both
of which the clause ri)v rtpi)v  'lapai)X is wanting ; and seems
to be supplied by the Evangelist himself from the ironical ob
servation of the Prophet: A goodly price that I was priced at
of them ; i. e. of the children of Israel. In this case, therefore,
the words a7r6 vtctiv 'lapai)X will necessarily be the nominative,
subaud. rtvEe, to the verb inpi)aavro, according to the common
interpretation ; and cannot be referred to E'Xaj3ov, so as to in
dicate Judas, as some have supposed. See farther in Home, ubi
supra. As to the application of the prophecy, or rather vision,
Zechariah therein represents the person of Messiah, who de
mands of his people the value which they set upon his services,
when he undertook the office of a shepherd in guiding and go
verning them : and upon their giving him thirty pieces of silver, the
price of a slave, he indignantly casts it to a potter, who happened
to be working at the Temple-gate, as a fitter price for his paltry
ware than for the benefits which they had experienced at the
hands of Christ. The whole transaction was clearly intended to
presignify the train of events here related by the Evangelists. It
is one of those prophecies which can relate, except in a very re
mote sense, to our Saviour alone : and the Jews themselves refer
it to their Messiah. So Bereshith R. on Gen. xlix. Kimchi, in
deed, would render the Hebrew ~W,jotzer, by r6v yaZ,o<p\>XaKa,
the treasurer, as if it were "lUIN, the quiescent letters being often
interchanged : and to this interpretation some commentators are
inclined to assent. In support of this opinion, they argue that
the prophet neither mentions the field nor the purchase, and that
the grammatical sense, to which the Talmudical writers fre
quently accommodate the literal, almost necessarily points to a

344 MATTHEW XXVII. 11. 15.
treasurer, as it relates to the payment of money in the Temple.
But the word in every instance signifies a potter ; and though
the LXX have here used xwv!lvrhpl0v carelessly for KEpdpEiov,
they employ KEpapsvg in Isaiah xii. 25. Lam. iv. 2. It might
even be, indeed, were so minute a correspondence necessary,
that the poller is used in Zechariah by Synecdoche for the
poller's field, as Ucalegon in Virg. JEn. II. 312. for the house
of Ucalegon. Kuinoel, Doddridge, Grotius. — [Campbell,
Le Clerc]
Ver. 11. erv si 6 fiaaiXEvg rwv 'IovSateov ; It appears from the
parallel place, Luke xxiii. 2., that the Jews in their application
to Pilate, had changed their accusation against Jesus from blas
phemy to treason. They accused him of forbidding to give
tribute to Ceesar, and of making himself a king : — a charge which,
however false, was extremely dangerous before a Roman go
vernor, acting under the authority of the jealous Tiberius. The
dignity with which Christ acknowledged what was really true,
but preserved the most profound silence against their false and
unjust affirmation, might well have astonished Pilate. It seems
that this and the three following verses relate to the first exami
nation of Jesus before the governor, after which he was sent to
Herod ; but St. Matthew, omitting what passed before Herod,
continues his account of Pilate's examination in one uninter
rupted narrative. Compare Luke xxiii. 6. sqq. We may remark,
that the silence of Jesus is expressly predicted in Isaiah liii. 7.
Le Clerc, Grotius, A. Clarke.
Ver. 15. Kctc5' ioprryv. Scil. iv rej> irdaxa, John xviii. 39. At
the other festivals it was rather the custom to punish criminals,
and indeed, at the passover also, with the exception of the indi
vidual, who was released to the people. Nor was this custom of
Jewish institution, as some suppose, but contrary, in fact, to the
spirit of their law, which was altogether xwP'C o'iKrippwv, (Heb.
x. 28.) and recognized no such power of remission either in king,
sanhedrim, or people. David dared not forgive Absalom ; Zede-
kiah could not oppose the sanhedrim ; and Sameas prophesied
destruction against the sanhedrim itself for unjustly acquitting
Herod. There is liltle doubt, therefore, that the practice was
comparatively of recent origin, if not introduced by the Romans;
among whom there was a custom somewhat similar at their
Lectisternia. Liv. V. 13. Lectislernii indicli diebus vinctis demta
sunt vincula. The Athenians, likewise, had the same usage at
the Thesmophorise and other festivals. See also Home's Introd.
Vol. III. p. 308. Grotius. — [Whitby, Lightfoot.] In the
two following verses many MSS. read 'Itjerovv Bapaj3j3dv. But
although it is possible that the name Jesus, or Joshua, as being
very common among the Jews, may have belonged to Barabbas ;

MATTHEW XXVII. 18, 19. 345
it is highly probable that it is inserted by the mistake of some
copyist. Griesbach.
Ver. 18. rjStt. It is not necessary to suppose that Pilate had
received any information to this effect: he was himself aware
that no sedition had been raised by Jesus, and he could not but
discover the frivolous and empty nature of the charges brought
against him. It was, in fact, the fear of sedition on the part of
the, multitude, v. 24., and his dread of the jealousy of Tiberius,
which prevailed with him, against his conscience, to deliver
Christ to be crucified. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 131.,
where there is also a description of Pilate's judgment-seat,
(firjpa,) mentioned in the next verse. The Roman tribunals, it
may be added, were always in the open air. Le Clerc, Grotius,
Kuinoel. Ver. 19. Kar' bvap. Perhaps the word afipspov may imply
that she had dreamt these things in the morning since Pilate
rose ; and as the Heathens attached great importance to dreams
which came about break of day, she might, on that account, be
more disturbed by them. A precisely similar occurrence is re
lated in Appian. B. C. II. p. 814. and the celebrated dream of
Calphurnia may also be aptly compared, as related in Val. Max.
I. 7. 2. and imitated by our immortal Shakspeare in his Julius
Ccesar, Act II. Sc. 2. Considerable difference of opinion exists
as to the nature of the dream which caused so great alarm to the
wife of Pilate. Some of the later commentators have been in
clined to attribute it to natural causes ; they imagine that she
may have been informed of the doctrines and the miracles of
Christ, that she may have had some belief in the truth of his
mission, and have desired to counteract the dark designs of the
sanhedrim ; so that the anxiety excited in her mind by the pass
ing events did not forsake her sleep, but produced those dreams
which so greatly disturbed her. Others unaccountably suppose
that the devil might be the author of them, in order to prevent
the death of Christ according to the prophecies. Upon the
whole, perhaps, it may seem that the dream was supernatural,
though it may be difficult to give any stronger reason for the
opinion than that an impression to that effect almost involuntarily
arises on the perusal of the narrative. There certainly can be
no ground for the notion that she was distracted with a repre
sentation of those calamities which afterwards befel Pilate and
his family. Doddridge, Grotius. — [Kuinoel, Fleming.] The
name of Pilate's wife was Claudia Procula. This incidental
notice of her being now at Jerusalem is a strong proof of the
Evangelist's veracity, as the governors of provinces had only
been recently permitted to take their wives with them. See
Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 109.

346 MATTHEW XXVII. 24, 25.
Ver. 24. dirsvlipaTo rag x*"lPac' This was tne usua" mo&e
with the Jews of declaring their innocence. In a case of undis
covered murder, the elders of the nearest city were required to
wash their hands, in token of their innocence, over the victim
which was sacrificed to expiate the crime. See Deut. xxi. 6.
Hence, in Sota VIII. 6., the elders of the city washed their
hands in water, where the victim was slain, and declared : Our
hands have not shed this blood. Compare Psalm xxvi. 6. The
practice seems to have been adopted by Pilate, who had lived
long enough in Judea to have become familiar with their cus
toms, in order to signify to those who could not hear for the
tumult, that he would not be partaker in the death of Christ. It
has been thought, indeed, that the custom was equally in use
among the Heathens, and that as such Pilate adopted it. But
the Pagan and Jewish practices, though similar, were distinct ;
the former being only employed in cases of crime actually com
mitted, and especially of bloodshed. Schol. Soph. Aj. 663. 'iOog
r)v iraXatolg, ote i) (povov dvOpwirov r) dXXag atyaydg Ittoiovv,
vSan diroviiTTEiv rag xE'PaC Etc KaOapatv rov piaaparog. See
Eurip. Orest. 429. Here. F. 1415. Apoll. Rhod. IV. 543. 693.
Herod. I. 35. .Elian. V. H. III. 1. VIII. 5. Virg. Mn. II.
715. It is clearly a distinct action, which judges, in passing
sentence, were accustomed to perform, raising their hands to
heaven, and declaring themselves guiltless (dOwot) of the blood
of the person condemned. Kuinoel, Buxtorf, Wetstein. —
[Grotius, Whitby, Doddridge.] Of the adjective dOibog,
see above, on v. 4. The correct expression would have been
dOwog rov aiparog, without the preposition, which is added
Hebraice. Ver. 25. to alpa avrov k, t. X. See Home's Introd. Vol. III.
p. 122. It was also a custom among the Greeks, for those per
sons upon whose evidence others were put to death, to devote
themselves, by a solemn execration, to the divine vengeance, if
their testimony was untrue. Thus Demosthenes observes, in
relation to a case of murder, (adv. Aristocr. p. 438.) ScE^ojtuTrai
Kar' ISoXeioc avrov, Kat ylvove Kat o'tKlag, 6 nvd alndipEvog
ElpydaOal ti toiovto. Compare Aristoph. Ran. 594. .Elian.
V. H. III. 43. Horn. II.. A. 162. A similar form was also em
ployed in the Roman courts of justice : Sit sanguis istius super
nos ! With respect to this imprecation of the Jews in regard to
our Saviour, the exact fulfilment of it at the siege of Jerusalem,
and the striking correspondence between their crime and their
punishment, exhibit the clearest proofs of the finger of God.
The passover happened at the time both of our Lord's crucifixion
and of the siege ; — the rejection of the true Messiah was their
crime, and the following of false Messiahs led to their destruc
tion; — they bought Jesus as a slave, and they themselves were

MATTHEW XXVII. 26. 28. 317
afterwards sold and bought at the lowest prices ; — they destroyed
Jesus lest the Romans should take away their place and nation ;
and the Romans did take them away : — and what is still more
striking, they were punished with the same death which they in
flicted on the Saviour of mankind, and that in such prodigious
numbers, that, according to Joseph. B. J. VII. 1. Std to irXijOog
X<ipa te IveXeitteto rote crravpoTe, Kat erravpot roTe auipaai. Ju-
vencus has thus translated the imprecation in his Hist. Evang.
IV. 623. Nos, nos cruor iste sequatur ; Et genus in nostrum
scelus hoc et culpa redundet. Elsner, Grotius, Newton, Wet
stein, Kuinoel.
Ver. 26. tppayyEXXdiaag. This verb, which is equivalent to
paanyoiiv in John xix. 1., as also 7rpatrwptov in the next verse,
is of Latin origin. Hor. Sat. I. 2. 41. Ille flagellis ad mortem
ccesus. 3. 119. horribili sectere flagello. The prcetorium does
not here refer to the part of the Roman camp which was so de
nominated, but the noble edifice which had formerly been He
rod's palace, and was subsequently the residence of the Roman
procurators when they came from Csesarea to Jerusalem. Kui
noel. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 22. A variety of in
formation, illustrative of the remainder of this chapter, will be
found in the same volume, p. 157. sqq.
Ver. 28. x^11!1^0- kokkivjjv. The chlamys, called also saga
and paludamentum, was a robe worn by the Roman soldiers over
their other garments, covering the left side only, and fastened on
the right shoulder by a knot or button. Hence they are called
chlamydati in Plaut. Rud. II. 2. 9. The chlamys of a general
was of finer texture and deeper colour than that of the common
soldier, differing however from the imperial saga, which was of
purple. Compare Hist. B. Afr. c. 37. Sil. Ital. IX. 420. What
is here called xXa^tve kokkivt) is described as iropipvpa in Mark
xv. 17. 20., and Ipdnov iropipvpovv in John xix. 2., which is pre
cisely the difference between the robe of a general and an em
peror. The two adjectives, however, are sometimes interchanged.
Plin. N. H. XXII. 5. Coccumimperatoriis dicatumpaludamentis.
The robe in which our Lord was insultingly clothed was, in all
probability, a worn- out saga of one of the officers of the praetorian
guard. It is supposed by some that the insult was offered by
the soldiers, at the instigation of the Jews, in reference to his
claims as their expected Messiah, a tradition existing among
them that their Messiah would be clothed in fine purple. See
Bereschith, R. LXIX. 11. But they seem rather to have ar
rayed him in this mock majesty in derision of his title to be the
King of the Jews ; as if the robe had been one of the pictce vestes
usually sent by the Roman senate : in fact, this is evident from
the next verse. Kuinoel, Hammond, Whitby.
10

348 MATTHEW XXVII. 29. 32.
Ver. 29. arifavov i% ukuvOwv. A difference of opinion exists
among the commentators respecting the nature of this crown,
which is grounded entirely upon the object for which it was
placed upon the head of our Lord. It is contended, on the one
hand, that the soldiers could have had no interest in adding to
our Lord's sufferings, and that the crown of thorns, like the reed
put into his hand, and the scarlet robe on his back, was meant
only as a mark of mockery and contempt. Now the word ctKav-
Owv may be the genitive plural of aKavOog, as well as of aKavOri ;
and in that case it would signify what we call bears-foot, which
is not a thorny, but a soft and smooth plant. It is called mollis
acanthus in Virg. Eccl. III. 45. Georg. IV. 137., and levis in
Plin. N. H. XXII. 22., and the soldiers would rather have
chosen to plat a plant of this nature than one which was covered
with prickles. But, on the other hand, it is argued in support
of the common version, that the adjective aKavOivog, which is
used in Mark xv. 17. John xix. 1. invariably denotes thorny, as
in Isaiah xxxiv. 13. LXX. — that aKavOri, both in the nominative
and other cases, frequently occurs in the LXX and N. T. but
aKavOog never ; — and that all the versions, without any excep
tion, render the word thorns. The silence of the early Fathers
is of little weight against this testimony, especially as Tertullian,
(de Coron. Milit. §. 14.) who lived A. D. 160. mentions the
crown as being of thorns in such a manner as clearly shews that
he had never heard of any different opinion. So also Clem. Alex.
Paed. II. 8. Here is, therefore, the highest probability opposed
to mere conjecture ; and that it was intended to add cruelty to
scorn, is abundantly evident from the other particulars of their
conduct. See also Home, ubi supra. Campbell, Doddridge. —
[Pearce, Michaelis, A. Clarke.]
Ibid. xa'PE> ° fiaaiXEiig. It was thus that the Romans were
used to salute their emperors. Hence Mart. Epig. XIV. 71.
Hoc didici per me dicere, Cassar ave ! Compare Macrob. Saturn.
II. 4. A piece of mockery similar to that passed upon Christ is
related in Lev. xxxvi. 14., as used by Philip to his conquered
namesake of Megalopolis. The nominative j3aaiXEiig is put for
the vocative, which, though a common Hebrew idiom, is also
met with in Greek writers. See my note on Eur. Phoen. 769.
Pent. Gr. p. 350. In v. 31. the verb d7rdyav is a usual term
for leading a criminal to execution. Hesych. d7rdy£e70ar Etc
Odvarov 'iXKEaOai. Galen: ekeXevev aiirbv diraxOrivai TEOvrfeopE-
vov. So in Latin, ducere. Sueton. Calig. 27. Ad supplicium
duel Compare Tiber. 57. Cic. Cat. I. Plin. Epist. X. 97.
Kuinoel, Grotius, Wetstein.
Ver. 32. i^EpxdpEvov. Scil. extra urbem. See Home, ubi
supra. According to John xix. 16. Christ bore his own cross,
in conformity with the usual custom, which is also illustrated by

MATTHEW XXVII. 33, 34. 349
Home ; and it was not, therefore, till he sunk under the weight,
that he was relieved by Simon. Of the verb dyyapsvEtv, see on
Matt. v. 41.
Ver. 33. ToXyofld. This is the Hebrew TOiD^, golgoleth, or
rather the Chaldee N/TO^J, golgoltha, with the "p omitted eu-
phonice causa. It is rendered vpavtov, 2 Kings ix. 35. and
KEipaXii, 1 Chron. xxiii. 3. and is of the same import with the
word Calvaria, which has been explained to mean calvi capitis
area. Of the origin of the name, see Home's Introd. Vol. III.
p. 19. According to an ancient tradition, mentioned by Theo-
phylact, and others of the Fathers, but rejected by Jerome, Adam
was buried near this spot, and therefore Christ, who was to
heal the fall and death of Adam,, was here crucified ; that ivhere
the beginning of death was, there might be the dissolution of it.
It has also been supposed, from the resemblance which the
name bears to Gilgal, that some typical relation may be con
tained in it. As that place was so named by Joshua, the tem
poral redeemer, and type of Christ, in remembrance of the deli
verance of the Israelites from the reproach of Egypt (Josh. v. 9.),
so may this be intended to denote the spiritual redemption of the
world from the bondage of sin and death. Kuinoel, Whitby,
Grotius. The MSS. vary between o and bg, and between XEyo-
psvog, KaXovpEvog, and pEOEppr/vEvopEvog, some also omitting the
participle altogether. Hence, some have thought the clause a
marginal gloss.
Ver. 34. b^og psra x°X»JC pspiypivov. According to Mark
xv. 23. the potion administered to Christ was wine mingled with
myrrh, (iapvpvtapivov olvov,) and various methods of removing
the apparent discrepancy between the two Evangelists have been
proposed. Some suppose that the same ingredients are repre
sented under different names ; and it is true that the ancients ap
plied the term o%,og or olvoe indifferently to fermented liquors in
general. Thus we have b%og iiprirbv, palm wine, in Xenophon ;
and divog KpiOtvog, or malt wine, in Herodotus. As to the other
ingredient, the word x0^ Is use<l with great latitude in the
LXX. In Prov. v. 4. Lam. iii. 18. it signifies wormwood ; and
at other times it seems to be employed as a general name for any
bitter herb. Compare Jerem. viii. 14. ix. 14. xxiii. 15. Hence
also x°X>7 iriKpiag is used metaphorically in Acts viii. 23., so
that there can be no great objection against understanding the
expressions of St. Matthew and St. Mark as synonymous,
even without adopting the reading of Beza, who gives otvov in
stead of b%og. Others, however, in solving the difficulty, have
recourse to the Hebrew Gospel of St. Matthew, and suggest that
the historian employed words in the Hebrew or Chaldee denoting
wine and myrrh, which his translator mistook for others, nearly

350 MATTHEW XXVII. 35.
resembling them, but denoting vinegar and gall. This, how
ever, is mere conjecture, and founded upon an uncertainty ; for
it is by no means ascertained that St. Matthew wrote- his Gospel
originally in Hebrew. Upon the whole, therefore, the preferable
opinion seems to be, that the potions mentioned by the two Evan
gelists respectively were distinct mixtures ; the vinegar mixed
ivith gall being probably offered in malice and derision, and the
myrrhedwine being the medicated cup usually offered to criminals,
and thence denominated dtvog Karavii^Ewg, the wine of stupefac
tion, from its intoxicating qualities. See Psalm lx. 5. lxxxv. 9.
Isaiah li. 17. 22. Jer. xxv. 15. 17. 28. and the Chaldee Paraph.
in loc. Our Lord properly refused to partake of either ; the first
he rejected with indignation, and the second in attestation of his
willingness to endure the full and unmitigated penalty of the sins
of mankind. It may be proper to add an opinion nearly allied
to the last, that our Lord's friends presented him with a cup of
myrrhed wine, which the soldiers, in contempt, mingled with gall.
The Talmudists (Sanhedr. p. 43. 1.) relate that the Jewish women
of rank were accustomed to prepare an infusion of wine and
frankincense for criminals condemned by the Sanhedrim. A
third potion, of vinegar only, or the usual Roman posca, was
offered to Christ just before he died upon the cross. Doddridge,
Jones. — [Whitby, Macknight, Michaelis, Marsh, &c]
Ver. 35. trravpweravrEe Se k. t. X. It appears from John xix.
23. that four soldiers of the praetorian guard performed the office
of executioners, superintended by a Centurion: and such appears
to have been the uniform practice in the Roman provinces.
Sueton. Calig. 32. Miles decollandi artifex quibuscunque e cus-
todia caput amputabat. See also Joseph. Ant. XIX. 1.6. It
seems to have been also customary for the executioners to divide
the spoils of the criminals, as in the case of our Lord ; the seam
less coat being excepted, for which they cast lots. Compare
Senec. de Tranquil, c. 1. After the suspension of the body on
the cross a guard was left to watch that no person removed it
for sepulture, at least without permission of the governor ; for it
appears that in some cases the friends were allowed to perform
the rites of burial for the deceased. See Home, ubi supra.
Petron. Arb. p. 389. Miles, qui cruces servabat, ne quis ad se-
pulturam corpora detraheret. Plut. Clem. p. 823. ol rb awpa
rov RXsopivovg dvEaravpwpivov irpoarpvXaTTOVTEg. KuiNOEL,
Wetstein. The citation from Psalm xxii. 18. is wanting in a
very great number of the most valuable MSS., and in several
early versions and editions. As it was a practice with many
transcribers to correct, and as they imagined, improve one
Gospel by another, it is extremely probable that the clause was
copied from St. John, to whose Gospel it properly belongs.
Campbell, Grotius.

MATTHEW XXVII. 37, 38. 43. 351
Ver. 37. alriav. Mark xv. iirtypa<pi)v rije alriag ; which it
was usual to write in black characters on a white board. See
Home, ubi supra; and of Middleton's objection regarding the va
riations in the title, as given by the four Evangelists respectively,
see Vol. II. p. 545. It was written in Latin for the majesty of
the Roman empire; in Greek for the information of the vast
number of Hellenistic Jews who would be present in Jerusalem,
and because Greek was now in fact almost universally spoken in
Palestine and Syria ; and Hebrew, or rather Hebraeo-Chaldee,
as it was the national language of the place. Thus the inscrip
tion which excluded Gentiles from the inner courts of the Temple
was written in all these three languages. See Joseph. B. J. Vi.
2. 4. Doddridge, Grotius.
Ver. 38. Svo Xyarai. Various reasons may be assigned for
the vast hordes of assassins and banditti with which Judea was
at this time infested. The frequency of divorce, which neces
sarily gave occasion to a number of illegitimate children, born to
ignorance, beggary, and rapine ; the sinful indulgences extended
to offending Israelites ; the impatience of the Jews under the
Roman yoke on the one hand, which made them averse to bring
their criminals before the governor's tribunal, and the policy
of the governors in encouraging such offenders, on the other ;
(Joseph. B. J. II. 24.) these, among other causes, naturally
tended to this end. Those few, however, who were occasionally
brought to justice, were generally reserved for execution at one
of the great festivals, and were usually crucified together, as
appears from Joseph. B. J. VI. 12. They placed Jesus in the
midst, by way of mock honour, as they had previously crowned
him with thorns, given him a reed for a sceptre, and clothed him
with a scarlet robe ; little dreaming of the remarkable fulfilment
which they thereby afforded to a most remarkable prophecy,
Mark xv. 28. The mark of contempt exhibited in v. 39. was
usual with the Jews, as well as with other nations. See 2 Kings
xix. 21. Job xvi. 5. Isaiah xxxvii. 22. Lam. ii. 15. Ecclus. xii.
18. as well as the prediction here fulfilled from Psalm xxi. 7.
Compare also Hom. II. P. 442. Eurip. Med. 1188. Virg. ^En.
XII. 894. Of the taUnt in v. 40. see on Matt. xxvi. 61. and
Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 244. We may compare also Ovid.
Fast. II. 399. At si quis vestrce deus est originis auctor, In tam
prcecipiti tempore ferret opem. In the similar taunt of the
Scribes, in v. 42. some commentators would read the words
iavrbv ov Svvarai awaat interrogatively, as adding to the bitter
ness of the sarcasm. The sense is the same either as an affirma
tion or a question. Lightfoot, Grotius, Wetstein.
Ver. 43. iriirotOsv iirl tov Qeov. It is difficult to tell what it
was the rulers here alluded to : it may be that they meant to in-

352 MATTHEW XXVII. 45.
sinuate that Jesus could not be a true worshipper of God, since
in that case he would undoubtedly have delivered himi Compare
Wisd. ii. 18. v. 16. Ecclus. xxxii. 14. xxxiii. 1. But perhaps
they alluded to the declaration of Jesus at the time of his appre
hension, that he could pray to his Father, and he would give
him more than twelve legions of angels, Matt. xxv. 53. But
whether in derision of this particular instance of his confidence,
or with whatever other view it was spoken, it is certain that the
taunt fulfilled a remarkable prophecy respecting the Messiah's
sufferings, that his enemies would use these very words in de
rision of his pretensions, Psalm xxii. 8. With the verb OeXeiv
some understand ixuv' ^n the Hebrew, however, of the pro
phecy alluded to, the verb employed is ysn, chophetz, which
signifies both to will, and to delight in, and is translated by Oe
Xeiv in the LXX. So Tobit. XIII. 6. rig ytvcverKtc, ei 0eXi7cte£
r)pdg. Compare also 2 Sam. xv. 26. and 1 Cor. vii. 36. Col. ii.
18. Heb. x. 5, 6. Hence Hesych. OiXw' evSokw. The verb,
however, is used in the same or a similar sense in pure Greek.
Aristaenet. I. 24. OiXw Si Avaiav. Chariton V. p. 93. 'i^Etg
dvSpa ov OiXEig. Alciphr. II. 11. ov 0!Xcu Soc Ti/xapxov. Mack
night, Palairet, Kuinoel. In order to remove the apparent
discrepancy between the statement in the next verse and Luke
xxiii. 39., where only one of the thieves are said to revile Jesus,
some have supposed, with Euthymius, that both reviled him at
first. But the more probable solution is, that the plural is used
for the singular, as in the instances cited in Matt. iv. 3. and
elsewhere. With aiirb there is an ellipsis of Kara. Euthym. to
S' aiirb dvrt tov waavrwg. Macknight, Grotius, &c. — [Ham
mond, &c]
Ver. 45. irdaav ri)v yfjv. For oX?jv, as in Luke iv. 25. Com
mentators are undecided whether yfj is here to be understood
simply of the land of Judcea, in which sense it is frequently em
ployed, or whether it signifies the earth generally. The majority,
however, are of the latter opinion ; and if Phlegon, as cited by
Origen, c. Cels. p. 83. is speaking, as Christians generally sup
pose, of the darkness here mentioned as accompanying our
Lord's crucifixion, little room is left for doubt upon the subject.
This author, in speaking of the fourth year of the two hundred
and second olympiad, answering to the nineteenth of Tiberius,
observes, lylvEro EKXEVpig 17X10V pEyiarri nov iyvwapivwv, oictte
Kat dartpag iv ovpavw e/>avrjvae. It is to be observed, however,
that the darkness in question could not be an ordinary eclipse of
the sun, for that can only happen at the change of the moon,
whereas it was now at the full. It has been doubted, indeed,
whether the Jewish months, according to the Mosaic institution,
began with a new moon ; and consequently, whether the pass-
over, which was kept on the 14th, must necessarily happen at

MATTHEW XXVII. 46. 353
full moon. There can be no question, however, respecting the
fact in our Saviour's time ; as the day of expiation, and conse
quently their other feasts, were then always adjusted by the age
of the moon. See Joseph. Ant. III. 10. 3. A total eclipse
never continues above twelve or fifteen minutes. Some suppose
that it may have been a dense mist arising from sulphureous va
pours, such as naturalists have described to be frequent pre
cursors or concomitants of earthquakes. At all events, it was
preternatural ; and the early Fathers relate that it was taken no
tice of as a prodigy by the heathens themselves. Thus Tertullian
appeals in Apol. c. 21. to the record of it in the Roman archives;
and Eusebius also, in his Chronicon, quotes Phlegon, as above.
To the same purpose Thallus is cited by Africanus in Chronogr.
3. and Dionysius the Areopagite is supposed to have remarked
concerning it to his friend Apollophanes, either that the God
of nature suffered, or ivas sympathising with another sufferer.
Phlegon also mentions an earthquake which occurred at the same
time in Bithynia, and overthrew several houses in the city of
Nice. Josephus, it is true, takes no notice of this wonderful
phenomenon ; but he was probably unwilling to mention any cir
cumstance favourable to Christianity, of which he was no friend.
Grotius, Whitby, Macknight, &c. — [Campbell, Kuinoel,
Rosenmuller.]
Ver. 46. 'HXt, 'HXl, Xajttd aafiaxOavi; This ejaculation, with the
exception of the last verb, which is Syro-Chaldaic, is a citation
from the Hebrew of Psalm xxii. 1. The verb there employed is
3U?, ozeb. According to Mark xv. 34. our Lord employed the
Syro-Chaldaic entirely, which was then very commonly spoken
in Judea; 'EXcih, 'EXtt/t, Xappn aafiaxOavi; In order to reconcile
this apparent discrepancy, some suppose that our Lord uttered
the words twice, varying the dialect in the second instance : but
the citation itself being to all intents the same, the Evangelists
themselves may have been guided by circumstances, arising out
of the especial purposes for which they wrote, to make what they
considered an immaterial change in the language. Grotius. — [Ed
wards.] With respect to the signification of these words the
commentators are greatly at issue ; and they have even been con
sidered as expressive of a degree of impatience, imbecility, and
despair, unworthy of the character of our blessed Lord. Some
suppose that the divinity had now departed from Christ, and that
his human nature was left unsupported to bear the punishment
due to men for their sins. But this can never be admitted, as it
would deprive the atonement of infinite merit, and leave it to a
certain extent imperfect. Others imagine that he spoke the
words to the Jews standing round the cross, to prove to them
that he was the Christ, since the Jews themselves applied the
Psalm from which they are taken to their expected Messiah.
vol. i. a a

354 MATTHEW XXVII. 46.
They had just reviled him in the words of the eighth verse, and
he might, therefore, recite the opening verse, — or as it has been
thought, the whole Psalm, though the Evangelists have not re
corded it,— in order to direct their attention to it as containing the
most remarkable particulars of his passion and crucifixion. But
the words are too remarkable, and too expressive of extreme
mental suffering in the speaker, to allow of so limited and calcu
lating an exposition ; and that it was an ejaculation of extreme bit
terness and distress appears from the Talmudists. See Megillah,
p. 15. 2. However, some think that the words are capable. of a
translation which obviates every difficulty. The particle HD7,
lamah, may be translated to what, to whom, to what kind, (sc. of
persons) ; and such a version is considerably supported by the
interpretation of St. Mark, Eig ri ps iyKariXtirEg ; Compare Gen.
xxv. 32. xxxii. 29. xxxiii. 15. Job ix. 29. Jerem. vi. 20. xx. 18.
Amos v. 18. Also the verb 3W, ozeb, signifies to leave, to com
mit to the care of, in Gen. xxxix. 6. Job xxxix. 11. Psalm x.
14. Jerem. xlix. 11. Hence, the passage may be thus translated :
My God, my God, to what sort of persons hast thou left me ?
i. e. in other words, How astonishing is the wickedness of those
persons into whose hands I am fallen ! A literal translation of
the Syriac version gives a similar sense : Ad quid dereliquisti
me ? It may be objected that this can never agree with the ivarl,
why, of St. Matthew. But Ivan must necessarily have the same
meaning with Etc ri, as the translation of T\u> ; and we should
therefore follow that which gives the most literal meaning of the
original. At all events, it cannot be supposed that Jesus meant
to express any distrust in God's favour, or any apprehension that
he had deserted him. He well knew that in voluntarily suffering
for the salvation of mankind, he was doing the will of him that
sent him. In the ordinary acceptation of the words, therefore,
they can only be regarded as the natural and almost unavoidable
effusions of a mind tortured with the acutest pain, and hardly
conscious of the complaints it uttered ; of which many similar
examples occur in the Psalms. This very Psalm, indeed, al
though in the outset it breathes an air of dejection and com
plaint, yet ends in expressing the firmest confidence in the divine
mercy ; and our Lord himself, at the moment of death, committed
himself with boundless confidence to the care of the Almighty.
Luke xxiii. 46. Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.
Neither does he doubt but that his soul should be that day in
Paradise : Luke xxiii. 43. In the Hebrew also God is said to
forsake a person when he suffers him to be- under any great
affliction or calamity, as in Isaiah xlix. 14. Psalm x. 11. xiii. 10.
xliii. 2. and the Deity might so far restrain his consolatory sup
port, as to leave the human nature fully sensible of its sufferings.
Thus much indeed seems to have been necessary to render them
meritorious. Still there may be, as in the case of the agony in
10

MATTHEW XXVII. 47, 48. 355
the garden, a degree of mystery attached to the nature of the
ejaculation, into which we should carefully avoid a too inquisitive
investigation. A. Clarke, Lightfoot, Whitby, Porteus. —
[Kuinoel.] Hall (W. J.), who has nearly exhausted the sub
ject of the Crucifixion, observes that the expression can contain
nothing derogatory to the character of our Lord. It may indeed
indicate such a fear of death as is natural to man, without which
the manhood in Christ would scarcely have been perfect ; but
it must be remembered that fear is twofold, sinful and sinless.
The fear which induced Peter to deny his Master was sinful ;
not so the fear with which Christ offered his supplications
with strong crying and tears to God, and was heard in that
he feared. Ver. 47. 'HXt'av ipwvEt. This observation has been attributed
to the Hellenistic Jews, or to the Roman soldiers, or to some of
the bystanders, who did not hear the remark distinctly. It
should rather seem that there was no mistake in the case, as our
Lord is expressly stated to have spoken with a loud voice ; but
that the malice of the bystanders led them to misrepresent his
words, in order, perhaps, to prevent any serious reflection on the
Psalm from which they were taken, and to expose him to further
contempt. In this misrepresentation they would be apparently
borne out by the current expectation of the Jews that Elias
would appear as the Messiah's forerunner. See on Matt. xi. 14.
Kuinoel, Doddridge, Rosenmuller. — [Campbell, Grotius,
Macknight.] Ver. 48. koI EvOiwg k.t.X. It appears from John xix. 28. that
Jesus had said, / thirst ; and that it was this which led the by
standers to dip the sponge into a vessel of posca, or water mixed
with vinegar, which was the ordinary drink of the Roman sol
diery. Some have thought that this was presented to him in
compassion ; but it rather seems to have been in derision, as the
speech with which the bearer accompanied it, and in which,
according to Mark, he was joined by his companions, was in all
probability a sneer at the prayer which they pretended he had
offered for the assistance of Elias. Kuinoel, Doddridge.
There is another seeming discrepancy in this passage with re
spect to the means by which the vinegar was raised to the mouth
of Jesus : Matthew and Mark say that it was put upon a reed
(KaXdpw), John upon hyssop (iiaawirw). Hence some suppose
that as the vinegar upon a former occasion was mixed with gall,
v. 34-., so it was now embittered by the hyssop, though the cir
cumstance is omitted by the two former Evangelists ; the placing
it on the reed being on the other hand passed over by St. John.
This was certainly the idea of Nonnus : wpEysv iiaawirw KEKEpaa-
pivov o£oe bXiOpov : and we have the sponge, the vinegar, and
the hyssop brought together in a medicinal preparation in Plin.
N. H. XXIII. 1. Calidum acetum, in spongio appositum, ad-
vol. i. a a 2 _,

356 MATTHEW XXVII. 50.
jecto hyssopi fasciculo, medetur sedis vitiis. This, however, is in no
wise a case in point ; and the more probable opinion is, that there
was some plant in judea, of the lowest class of trees or shrubs,
which was either a species of hyssop, or greatly resembling that
plant, and with a stalk of which it would be easy to reach a per
son on a cross, which was not so lofty as some erroneously
suppose. In 1 Kings iv. 33. Solomon is said to have spoken of
trees from the cedar-tree that is in Lebanon even unto the hyssop
that springeth out of the wall; and there is mention of this
botanical work in the Mischna : Pesachim, c. 4. Now they did
not reckon among trees any shrubs or plants but such as had
durable and woody stalks ; and that their hyssop was of this kind
is evident from the many cases of sprinkling to which it was
appointed by the law to be applied. Hence there is no necessity
for reading vcrcrw, instead of vaadnrw, in John xix. 29. as some
have proposed. Campbell, Whitby, Macknight. In the next
verse there is a common ellipsis of 'iva before the subjunctive.
Ver. 50. 7rdXtv Kpd£ae <pwvy pEydXy. A loud hysterical cry or
scream is stated by some learned physicians immediately to pre
cede the death of persons dying under circumstances of extreme
anxiety and anguish of mind. But this second cry of our Lord's was,
like the first, v. 46., unquestionably articulate; and the words which
he employed, though omitted by Matthew, are recorded partly in
John xix. 30., and partly in Luke xxiii. 46. The loud voice, with
which the completion of the covenant of grace was announced,
may have been designed to indicate the voluntary sacrifice of the
Son of God. It is supposed, indeed, by some commentators that
there was something miraculous in our Lord's death, and that the
terms employed by the Evangelists, and especially by St. Mat
thew, are peculiarly descriptive of it, as the immediate effect of
his own volition. But though our Lord was in every respect a
voluntary sacrifice (John x. 17, 18.), and though the verb iicipv-
X£tv, Kara7rav£tv, and IkXeiVeiv are used in other places of ordinary
deaths ; yet there is no support for the hypothesis in question in
the words here employed by the Evangelists. The verb dipiivai
is used elliptically in the sense of expiring in Judg. ii. 21. LXX.
and the complete phrase dipiivai rr)v ^vx»?v in Gen. xxxv. 18.
So also Eurip. Hec. 575. Ittei S' de/>fjKE -mvEvpa. ^Elian. H. A.
II. 1. 7TErrd)V dtpiriai rrjv ipvX*>v' VII. 29. ri)v 4>vxr)v dtpr)KE.
Herod. IV. 190. e/>vXd<T<TovTEe iirsdv diriy ri)v \pvxvv. Joseph.
Ant. I. 13. we pr) irapoiarig ri)v ipvxvv dipy. Virg. Mn. XI. 883.
Expirant animas. Campbell, Kypke, Wetstein, Doddridge,
A. Clarke, W.'J. Hall. From the shortness of time which
Christ hung upon the cross, compared with the lingering exist
ence of crucified persons in general, and other minor points,
some German critics have ventured to question the reality of his
death. An ample reply to these mischievous speculations will be
found in the opposite arguments of Mr. Home, in his Introd.
Vol. II. p. 266. and Vol. III. ubi supra.

MATTHEW XXVII. 51, 52. 357
Ver. 51. Karairiraapa rov vaov. In Solomon's Temple the
sanctuary was divided from the holy of holies by a wall, beyond
which the veil fell ; but in Herod's Temple, as Maimonides re
lates, a second veil, at the distance of a cubit from the first, sup
plied the place of the wall. Compare Joseph. B. J. V. 5. 4.
That it was the interior veil, belonging to the holy of holies,
which was rent at the crucifixion, is clearly intimated by St. Paul
in Heb. ix. 8. x. 19. as well as by the term which the Evangelist
has employed to designate it. Thus Philo de Vit. Mos. p. 150.
7rpovaov Eipyojuevov Svcrtv bipdapaaiv, rb piv evSov ov icaXEtrai
Karairiraapa, rb S' Iktoc TrpoerayopEVETat icdXvppa. From this
veil of separation the Jews seem to have regarded the holy of
holies as a type of heaven. Joseph. Ant. III. 5: to piv ydp
Tpirov avXi)g pipog, b rolg hpEiiatv i}v dfdarov, dig ovpavog dv
e'ii} riji Qsqi. Compare Psalm xv. 1. Wisd. ix. 8. The veil was
probably rent in the presence of the priest who burnt the incense
in the holy place at the evening sacrifice : for it was at the hour
of this sacrifice that our Lord expired on the cross. Perhaps, as
it was a high day, even Caiaphas himself may have witnessed the
miracle ; and there is no "doubt but that many of the other
priests, who had been partakers in Christ's death, were in the
Temple at the time. Whitby, Grotius, Macknight, Dod
dridge. With Etc Sio there is an ellipsis of pipn, as in 1 Kings
iii. 25. Jerem. xxiv. 18. LXX. So Joseph. Ant. VIII. 2. SieXwv
Si rbv vabv £te Svo. Kuinoel, Kypke. The earthquake men
tioned in connection with the rending of the veil is supposed by
some to have been confined to the land of Judea, where the
most remarkable vestiges of it still remain. But it was probably
much more extensively felt ; and may have been identical with
that which is recorded by several Heathen authors to have hap
pened in the reign of Tiberius, and to have destroyed twelve
cities of Asia. See Tacit. Annal. II. 47. Sueton. in Tib. 48.
Plin. N. H. II. 84. This supposition is also strongly confirmed
by the connexion of the earthquake with the darkness in the
passage cited Phlegon at v. 45. supra, Doddridge, Grotius.—
[Hammond, Le Clerc]
Ver. 52. rd pvripEla dvEi^x^iaav. The same effects are at
tributed to earthquakes by other writers. So Xiphil. in Nerv.
p. 185. aEiapbg ic,aiatog lyivEro, warE Kat Sokjjctiv irapa<TX£tv, on
i) te yrj irdaa Siappriyvvrat, Kat al rttiv TTEipovEvpivtoV iiir' avrov
i/*vxat dpa iir aiirbv dvaOoppvovat. Aristid. in Rhod. p. 544.
dvEpptwrovvro Si ohdai, koI pvi)para dvEppr)yvwro, irvpyoi Si
irvpyotg iviirnrrov. Ovid. Met. VII. 204. Jubesque tremes-
cere montes, Et mugire solum, manesque exire sepulcris. Wet
stein, Kuinoel, Rosenmuller. Some questions of consider
able difficulty are involved in the transactions mentioned in this
and the following verse : and some have been led to suppose that

358 MATTHEW XXVII. 54.
the two verses have been introduced into St. Matthew's text from
the Apocryphal Gospel of the Nazarenes. But they are found
in all the MSS. and versions, and the earliest fathers allude to
them ; so that they cannot now be regarded as an interpolation.
In the first place, then, who were the saints here alluded to ?
Ignatius (Epist, ad Magnes.) supposes that they were some of the
ancient prophets ; but it should rather seem that they were dis
ciples, or righteous Jews, such as old Simeon, who had died but
lately. For when they went into the city, they were known to
those who saw them, which could not well have been the case un
less they had been their contemporaries. Again, as to the purpose
for which they arose : as the rending of the veil of the temple
intimated that the entrance into the holy place, the type of hea
ven, was now laid open to. all nations : so the resurrection of a
number of saints from the dead demonstrated that the power of
death and the grave was vanquished, and an earnest was given
of a general resurrection. The Jews, indeed, had a tradition
that the kingdom of the Messiah would begin with a resurrection
of the dead ; in accordance with which there is the following
curious conceit in the Talmud, Chetubboth, p. 35, 1. R. Jere
miah commanded : When you bury me put shoes on my feet, and
give me a staff in my hand, and lay me on one side ; that when
the Messiah comes I may be ready. Another point of enquiry
respects the time of this important occurrence. That the graves
were opened by the earthquake, which happened at the moment
of our Lord's expiring on the cross, is clear from the tenor of
the narrative, as well as from the above accounts of similar con
vulsions ; and from the construction of the sentence, as it is usu
ally taken, it would appear that they were simultaneously quitted
by their tenants. But Jesus himself was the first-born from the
dead, (Col. i. 18.) and the first fruits of them that slept, (1 Cor.
xv. 20.) ; so that the saints did not rise to life till after his resur
rection. The passage is unquestionably obscure ; but it is idle
to suppose that nothing more is meant than that several bodies,
being disinterred by- the earthquake, were seen above ground by
passers by till after s^jjrjst's'resurrection ; and to treat the whole
as a mere fable, as>s£me of the German critics have done, is little
short of blasphtepryt Their resurrection may possibly not have
been instantaneous, but accomplished by such slow degrees as
that represented in Ezekiel's vision, (Ezek. xxxvii.) It is un
profitable, however, if not presumptuous, to indulge in conjectures
on those circumstances which the Scriptures have not revealed.
Macknight, Grotius, Whitby, Lightfoot, Doddridge.
Ver. 54. EKarovrapxoe. Senec. de Ira, I. 17. Centurio sup
plicio propositus. From this declaration of the Centurion it
has been supposed that he was a Jewish proselyte. This, how
ever, is not a necessary inference, and, with respect to those who

MATTHEW -XXVII. 55. 57. 359
would translate the words 0eov ve6e a Son of God, or a son of a
God, the same remarks will apply here which were made at
Matt. iv. 3. xiv. 33. The Centurion could not fail to know the
alleged blasphemy for which Christ suffered ; and it was doubt
less in reference to this that the confession extorted from him
was made. The expression in Luke xxiii. 47. is not to be con
sidered as equivalent to this. Both were used ; the one in re
ference to the imputed blasphemy, the other most probably to
the message of Pilate's wife, (supra v. 19.) which was delivered
_in presence of the Praetorian guard. Middleton. — [Campbell,
Grotius, Kuinoel, &c]
Ver. 55. dirb paKpoOsv OEwpovaai. So Mark and Luke ; nor
are they inconsistent with John xix. 25. where our Lord's mo
ther and the two other women are said to have stood beside the
cross. They kept at a distance for a while ; and afterwards, as
the darkness came over, gathered courage, and came so near
that Jesus had an opportunity to speak to them before he expired.
Macknight. Of the women themselves see Home's Historical
Index. Ver. 57. cnro ' ApipaOaiag. Subaud. tov. So John iv. 7. ywr)
Ik rrig 'S.apapEiag. Compare Luke iv. 20. 2 Pet. iii. 6, 7. Of
the use of the preposition dirb see on Matt. ii. 1. xv. 1. There
were several towns named Arimathcea in Palestine. Some sup
pose that the one to which Joseph belonged was that which is
called 'AppaOalp in 1 Sam. i. 1. LXX. situated in the tribe of
Ephraim, and the birth-place of Samuel : but, being described as
iroXigrwv 'IovSatcov in Luke xxiii. 51. it is more likely to have
been that in the tribe of Benjamin, mentioned in Josh, xviii. 25.
Joseph is here said to be a rich man, in reference to what follows
in v. 59. as well as to indicate the fulfilment of the remarkable
prophecy respecting the burial of Christ in liii. 9. In Mark xv.
43. and Luke xxiii. 50. he is called /3ovX£vrrje, and it is stated
by the latter Evangelist that he did not consent to the counsel
(fiovXy) of them, sc. who condemned Jesus. It has been sup
posed that the council of which he was a member was not the
Jewish Sanhedrim, as in that case he would have been called
dpxtov, as Nicodemus in John iii. 1. But he could not have been
one of Pilate's council ; for though governors were always assisted
in managing the affairs of their province, and in judging criminal
cases, by a council, called erv^/3ovXtov in Acts xxv. 10. it was
always composed of Romans only. Probably the name /3ov-
XEvrrje was also applied to the Sanhedrim, and is used in re
ference in the fiovXi) mentioned by Luke. Kuinoel. — [Gro
tius.] The verb paOrrrevEiv is more commonly used transitively,
to make a disciple, as in Matt. xiii. 22. xxviii. 19. John iv. 1.
Acts xiv. 21. Hence some understand iavrov. Examples, how-

360 MATTHEW XXVII. 59, 60.
ever, of its passive construction with a dative are found in Greek
writers. Plutarch, X. Orat. p. 832. B.'Avrtciwv paOrirsvaag rid
warpi. De Isocrat. p. 837. C. ipaOi'irEvaE Si aiin^ Kat QEoiropirog
6 Xlog. Jamblichus de Pyihag. c. 23. paOnrEvaavrEg ri^ TlvOa-

Ver. 59. IvetvXiSev aivSovi KaOapd. John xix. 40. As the
manner of the Jews is to bury : of which see Home's Introd.
Vol. III. pp. 520. 528. The envStvv was a large square wrapper,
in which the body was swathed, and which was then confined by
linen bandages, called in John xi. 44. KEipiai, and in Luke xxiv.
12. bdovia. There is some difference of opinion in regard to the
derivation of the name. It has been thought to have originated
in the place of its manufacture. So Etym. M. crtvSwv" dirb StSev-
vog Trig irbXEwg' ol ydp SiSovec iipEiipov wpwrov KapvEiv aivSo-
vag. Others consider it as the Hebrew THD, which denotes
linen cloth generally, formed into a Greek appellative : but it
seems rather of ^Egyptian origin. J. Pollux VII. 172. atv-
Sibv' 'ianv Alyvirria piv, 7TEptj3oXatov S' dv £tr|, r6 vvv St-
k-poercrov KaXovttEvov. For the verb ivrvXiZitv Mark has em
ployed 7r£ptj3dXXecr0at, which is equivalent to the Latin amicire.
Kuinoel.
Ver. 60. Katvcj! avrov pvripEiw. Luke xxv. 53. ov ovk %v
ovSiirw ovSeIc ke//xevoc. This plainly proves that it could be no
other than Jesus who arose; and cuts off all suspicion that he
was raised by touching the bones* of some prophet, as in the case
of the corpse which touched the bones of Elijah, 2 Kings xiii. 20.
Be it remembered, also, that the sepulchre was near to Jeru
salem, so that all the cavils are prevented which might have
arisen had the body been removed to a greater distance. The
sepulchre too was hewn out of a rock, and there was no passage,
therefore, by which the disciples could get into it but the one at
which the guards were placed, v. 62., and consequently they
could not possibly have stolen away the body while the guards
were on duty. Macknight, Whitby. For a complete summary
of the evidence of our Lord's resurrection, see Home's Introd.
Vol. I. p. 262. sqq. Of the rocky nature of the ground near
Jerusalem we have the testimony of Strabo and Josephus. The
verb Xaroi-iEtv signifies to excavate, as a well, Deut. vi. 11.
LXX ; and a sepulchre, Isaiah xxii. 16. In respect to the
rolling of the stone to the mouth of the tomb, it may be observed
that such was the usual custom with the Jews to preserve the
bodies of the dead from the attacks of wild beasts. A similar
mode of securing not only tombs, but caves in general, was prac
tised ih other countries. Heliod. I. 2. rov XiOov rov airriXaiov
rb KaXvpna. Compare Horn. Od. I. 240. Arist. Vesp. 199.
Schol. Soph. Ant. 1216. Grotius, Wetstein, Kuinoel.

MATTHEW XXVII. 62, 63. 361
Ver. 62. t^ Se liravptov k. t. X. Subaud, fipipq. On the next day
that followed the day of the preparation ; i. e. after sun-set, at
which time the Jewish day commenced. They took this measure,
therefore, not on the morrow in our sense of the word, but in the
evening on which the Sabbath begun; and when they understood
the body was buried. Had they waited till sun-rise, the disciples
might have stolen the body during the night. The irapaej-KEvrj
was the day preceding a sabbath or festival, on which they made
the necessary preparations for the due celebration of the so
lemnity : it is called in Mark xv. 42. 17 r)pipa irpb cra]3j3dTov.
Macknight. It has been observed that this conference between
the Pharisees and Pilate, who was a Heathen, was a manifest
profanation of the Sabbath; but probably the deputation did not
enter the governor's house, and it was not forbidden by the law
to make an application to a magistrate on that day. The watch
ing of the sepulchre, however, was a servile work, and therefore
illegal ; so that this at least, it might be thought, they would not
have asked to be done on the Sabbath. But it seems that the
guard employed was a band of Roman soldiers, and they did not
hesitate, any more than the Jews of the present day, to avail
themselves of work done by those who are not under their law.
Some, indeed, have thought that the watch was kept by the Levites,
who had the care of the temple ; but their service did not extend
beyond the walls of the temple, neither would it have been ne
cessary to recur to Pilate for obtaining their assistance. From
the promise also of mediation with Pilate, with which the bribe
was forced to be accompanied, before they could be induced to
pretend that the body was stolen by the disciples while they
slept, it is clear that they dreaded the punishment which so gross
a dereliction of duty would inevitably entail upon a Roman sol
dier. In short, the name KovcrrtoSta is a Latin word, and it is
used in the sense which it here bears in Virg. iEn. VI. 574. Cernis
custodia qualis Vestibulo sedeat. Kuinoel, Campbell, Gro
tius. Ver. 63. psrd rpac i)pipag. After three days ; i. e. on the
third day. See on Matt. xvi. 21. xxvi. 61. That the Jews
themselves understood the expression in this sense is evident
from the next verse. Christ had predicted his resurrection on
the third day in those memorable words which had so lately
been perverted into an accusation against him, (Mall. xxvi. 61.)
and also when the Pharisees demanded a sign from him, (Matt,
xii. 40.) To whichever of these prophecies the chief priest al
luded, it is clear that our Lord's declaration on the subject was
universally known. Surely it would have been the height of
absurdity in an impostor to court this publicity, the natural effect
of which was to put his enemies on their guard, to prevent any
deceit on the part of the disciples. It is remarkable that the

362 MATTHEW XXVII. 64,65.
trick of stealing the body, with which they were charged, had
been actually committed about seventeen years before by a
Roman slave, who stole away the bones of his murdered master,
and endeavoured to personate him. See Tacit. Ann. II. 39.
. Kuinoel, Grotius, Macknight. The verb iyEipopai is in the
present for the future.
Ver. 64. Kat tarai r) iaxdrri irXdvri k. r. X. This seems to be
proverbial. Compare Matt. xii. 45. Luke xi. 26. 2 Pet. ii. 10.
In this place it is thus explained by Euthymius : iaxdrnv piv
ovv irXdvriv Xiyovai irEpl rov on riyipOri dirb rwv VEKpiHv' irpwrrrv
Si irEpl rov on vlbg Qeov ilpi. The word 7rXdvrj may have some
reference to 7rXdvoe in the preceding verse, and signify a fraud
or imposition, as 7rXdvoe implies a deceiver or cheat. In the
same sense 6 irXavtSv is used in Isaiah iii. 12. Mic. iii. 5. LXX.
The word is also employed by Latin writers. Cic. Cluent. 26.
Hie ille planus improbissimus, qucestu judiciario pastus, et qui
esset totus exfraude et mendacio f actus. Hor. Epod. I. 17.
Nee semel irrisus triviis attollere curat Fracto crure planum. In
the beginning of the verse the verb daipaXiZEaOat signifies munire ;
as also in v. 66., where it is followed by a genitive with the pre
position pErd. Its more usual construction, however, is with
the dative. Polyb. II. 65. rag piv dXXag rag slg rr)v x<*ipav
slafioXag i)a<paXiaaro (pvXaKalg, Kat rdippoig, Kat SfvSpeJv !k-
KOiralg. Joseph. Ant. XIII. 1. t?jv 'lovSaiav airdaav Qpovpalg
daipaXiadpEvog. At the same time it is not unusual to denote
the instrument by the preposition ixeto with a genitive. Demosth.
adv. Leptin. ri)v AaKsSaipovitov (ppovpdv jue0' birXivv lKj3aXovr£e.
Raphelius, Kypke. The word vvktoc is wanting in several of
the best MSS.
Ver. 65." e'x£T£ KovcrrcoStav. Ye have a guard : viz. that
which was usually stationed in the castle of Antonia, but which
was removed during the festivals to the outer court of the temple,
to quell any tumult that might arise in the city. Some incor
rectly take the verb in the imperative, whereas the tenor of Pi
late's answer clearly indicates the indicative. The expression dig
o'iSarE is here properly rendered quantum possetis. Kuinoel,
Grotius. The sealing of the stone, /mentioned in the next
verse, was probably performed with Pilate's signet; and with the
view of preventing the guards from combining with the disciples
in carrying on any fraud. A similar precaution was taken by
Darius, in the case of Daniel shut up in the lion's den. See
Dan. vi. 17. It was usual to affix the seal to the extremities of
a cord, or leathern band, passing over the stone. Macknight,
Rosenmuller.

MATTHEW XXVIII. 1. 363

CHAPTER XXVIII.
Contents: — The resurrection announced to Mary Magdalene
and the other Mary, who are commanded to acquaint the dis
ciples with the fact, w. 1 — 7. [Mark xvi. 1. John xx. 1.]
Christ appears to the women, and promises to meet the dis
ciples in Galilee, vv. 8 — 10. [Mark xvi. 8. John xx. 18.]
The soldiers report the resurrection to the high priests, vv.
11 — 15. Christ meets the disciples in Galilee, vv. 16,17.
His commission to the Apostles, vv. 18 — 20. [Mark xvi. 15.
Luke xxiv. 50.]
Verse 1. 6i/<l Se craj3j3dreov. Some would understand d^l to
include the whole of the night subsequent to the sabbath : and
others, interpreting it strictly of the evening, suppose that the
women, after leaving home, remained in the suburbs, and did not
reach the tomb till break of day. But this adverb, with a ge
nitive, refers to any past time generally ; and that it has this
latitude of signification here is clear from the parallel expression of
Mark xvi. 1. Scaysvojitlvov Se axtj3j3drov. So Thucyd. IV. 93.
Xen. Hellen. II. 1. 14. rije npipag bipi Tiv. Philostr. Vit. Apoll.
IV. 18. bipi pvarripitov. Lucian. Toxar. p. 49. bipi rov psra-
irdipov. In the following clause the entire phrase would be dpa
rr) r)pipa hrupwaKOvay. Herod. III. 86. dp vpipy SiaipavaKOvay.
VII. 217. 77toe StlciatvE. Dion. Hal. Ant. IX. p. 620. i)pipa Si
TjSrj StEiriipwaKE. The corresponding term in Mark is Xiav irpwl,
and in Luke op0pov BaOiog. Of the expression pia craj3j3drci>v
see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 171. By way of illustration
we may refer to Exod. xl. 2. Lev. xxiii. 24. Numb. i. 1. 18.
xxix. 1. xxxiii. 38. Deut. i. 3. Ezra iii. 6. x. 17. Ezek. xxvi. 1.
xxxii. 1. xiv. 18. Hag. i. 1. ii. 1. LXX. 1 Cor. xvi. 2. Rev. ix.
12. Joseph. Ant. I. 1. 1. avrri piv dv Etrj r) irpdirri ripipa'
Mwvcrjje S' avri)v piav elite. This mode of speaking probably
originated in the Hebrew word TTW, which is both a cardinal
and ordinal number. It is not unfrequent, however, in other lan
guages. Dion. H. Ant. III. tttde 6Xv/x7rtdSoe. Compare Herod.
IV. 161. Thucyd. IV. 115. So Cic. de Senect. 5. uno et octo-
gesimo anno. Raphelius, Palairet, Krebs, Kypke, Kuinoel.
[on the evangelical narratives of the resurrection.
For a comprehensive summary of the evidence of our Lord's
resurrection the student has already been referred to Mr. Home;
but there are still some difficulties arising out of the apparent dis
crepancies in the accounts which the Evangelists have respectively
given of this important event, which require an attentive examina-

364 MATTHEW XXVIII. 1.
tion. Various schemes have been proposed for harmonizing the
Gospel narratives; and the succession of incidents is so arranged
in all of them as to afford abundant proof that there is no real
inconsistency in any of the facts related. It would be impossible,
and indeed unnecessary, — for any one of them is sufficient, more
or less satisfactorily, to prove the point, — to investigate at length
the merits of each of these several schemes ; and, therefore, as the
plan of Mr. West has long been looked upon as possessing very
considerable advantages, and is the ground-work upon which
later writers have generally conducted their investigations, a
brief outline thereof shall be given, followed by a Table of Mr.
Townsend's arrangement, as being the last, and upon the whole
the best, which has been executed.
During the time of our blessed Saviour's lying in the grave,
several of the pious women who attended him from Galilee
agreed to meet at the sepulchre early on the morning of the third
day, for the purpose of embalming the body. Mary Magdalene,
the other Mary, Salome, and Joanna, were principal persons in
this appointment ; the chief care of preparing the spices was left
to Joanna and her company, who were to be there about sun
rise ; whereas the two Maries and Salome, (of whom Matthew
and Mark chiefly write,) knowing nothing of the guard that had
been set, came thither before day-break, in order (OEwpriaai) to
view the sepulchre, that they might ascertain whether they should
or should not require assistance to move the stone. While these
three women were on their way, the angel had opened the se
pulchre, the guards had fled in consternation, and Jesus had
arisen. In the event, some of the guards joined in contriving
and propagating the senseless falsehood of the body being stolen;
and the rest, turning into other parts of the city, told the matter
as it really was. The angel having disappeared after rolling
away the stone, Mary, concluding from thence that the body was
removed, left the other Mary and Salome to wait for Joanna,
while she herself went to acquaint Peter and John with what she
had discovered. During her absence, the other Mary and Sa
lome, entering the sepulchre, were assured by an angel of the
resurrection of Jesus, and were given in charge to inform the dis
ciples that he would give, them a meeting in Galilee. As they
were returning slowly, lost in wonder and consternation, Peter
and John, followed by Mary Magdalene, passed them unob
served. John at his first arrival only looked into the sepulchre";
but when Peter came and entered it, John went in too, and, from
the state in which he saw things, believed that Jesus was risen ;
though the angel did not render himself visible to either. They
returned to the city, and Mary Magdalene, who was now alone,
stooping down to look into the city, saw two angels, but, per
haps imagining they were young men, whom curiosity or acci
dent might have brought thither, stood weeping in deep distress

MATTHEW XXVIII. 1. 365
till Jesus appeared, and made himself known to her in those very
remarkable words, John-xx. 17. .(Vide locum.) Leaving her very
suddenly, our Lord appeared to the other Mary and Salome,
whom he permitted to embrace his feet, comforted them under
their fear, and renewed the promise of the angel, that he would
meet his disciples in Galilee. While these things were passing
at some distance, Joanna and her companions, of whom Luke
only writes, approached the sepulchre ; and, entering with the
spices, at first saw no one in it, till the two angels, who had just
before appeared to the other women, made themselves visible to
them also, and assured them of the resurrection of Jesus, in
accordance with his own predictions, but without any directions
to convey the information to the brethren. Some of the party,
however, very naturally ran with the tidings into the city ; and,
by whatever accident it happened, reached the eleven and some
other disciples before the arrival of the two Maries and Salome,
and told them (which was all they could tell them) that they had
seen a vision of angels, who asserted that Jesus was alive. Upon
this Peter ran a second time to the sepulchre (Luke xxiv. 12.),
and not entering as before, but only stooping down and looking
into it, he saw no angels, nor any thing else, but only the linen
clothes lying : he therefore immediately returned, and just on
his making his report, the two disciples who went that day
to Emmaus, or some from whom they received their information
(Luke xxiv. 22 — 24.), left the place before the arrival of the two
Maries and Salome, whom fear or some unknown accident had
detained behind. These however at last arrived, with the intel
ligence not only that they had seen an angel, who had informed
them of their Lord's resurrection, but that Jesus himself had
appeared to them, and had even permitted himself to be touched
by two of them.
The above is an abstract of Mr. West's scheme of this important
story, as given by Doddridge in a postscript to the third volume
of his Expositor ; and that of Doddridge himself, which was
published shortly before, only differs from it in two circumstances
of any consideration. In the first place, he supposes the women
to have met at the sepulchre, and consequently to make only one
report ; and secondly, he imagines that Peter ran to it only once,
thus incorporating Luke's account-with that of John's relating to
his running thither with John, on Mary Magdalene's first report.
After perusing Mr. West's plan, however, he readily allowed the
advantages which it possessed over his own. Since that time
Dr. Townson has published a more elaborate and systematic
arrangement of the transaction, upon the basis of Mr. West's
account ; Mr. Cranfield has examined some minute points in
which he differs from Dr. Townson; and from a careful investi
gation of the united labours of these and the earlier commen
tators, Mr. Townsend's scheme was formed, as exhibited in the
following Table. See also Greswell's Dissertations.

366

MATTHEW XXVIII. 1.

EVENTS.

MATT.

MARK.

LUKE.

JOHN.

1. Joseph and Nicode-

mus bury the body of
Christ 
xxvii. 57 — 60.
xv. 42—46.
xxiii. 50 — 54.
xix. 38. to the
2. The two Maries, and
[end.
the other women, ob
serve where the body
47-
55.
3. The women return
home, before the Sab
bath begins, to prepare
56.
4. The two Maries con
tinue before the sepul
chre till after the com
mencement of the Sab-
61.
5. At the close of the
Sabbath the guard is
62 to the
6. The two Maries and
[end.
Salome purchase their
xvi. 1.
7. (Easter morning.)The
two Maries and Sa
lome leave their homes
very early to go to the
xxviii. 1.
part of 2.
xx. part of 1.
8. Before their arrival
Christ rises from the
2-4.
9. Many bodies arise, and
go to Jerusalem ....
xxvii. 52, 53.
10. The two Maries and
Salome arrive at the
sepulchre, and find the
stone rolled away ....
2—4.
part of 1.
1 1 . Mary M agdalene
leaves the other Mary
and Salome to tell
2.
12. Salome and the other
Mary enter the porch
of the sepulchre, and
see one angel, who
tells -them to inform
the disciples of the re-
.
xxviii. 5 — 7-
5—7.
13. Salome and the other
Mary leave the se-
8.
8.
14. Peter and John, upon
the tidings brought by
Mary Magdalene, run
to the sepulchre,which
they inspect, and de-
3 — 10.
15. Mary Magdalene,
having followed Peter
and John, remains at
the sepulchre after
their departure ....
part of 11.
16. She looks into the
tomb, and sees two
part of 1 1 —
[part of 14.
MATTHEW XXVIII. 1.

367

EVENTS.

MATT.

MARK.

LUKE.

JOHN.

17- Christ first appears

to Mary Magdalene,
and tells her to inform
the disciples of his re-
xvi. 9.
xx. 14—17.
18. Mary Magdalene, on
her way to the disci
ples, meets again with
Salome and the other
Mary ; aud Christ ap
pears to the three wo-
xxviii- 9, 10.
18.
19. The soldiers report
to the high-priest the
resurrection of Christ.
11—15.
20. The second party of
women arrive at the
sepulchre, and find the
stone rolled away
xxiv. 1 — 3.
21. The angels appear to
them also ; and they
return and tell the
4—9.
22. Mary Magdalene
adds her testimony - *
10.
10.
23. The Apostles still
11.
11.
24. Peter goes again to
part of 12.
25. Christappearstohim.
part of 12.
26. Christ appears to two
disciples on their way
12.
13—32.
27. The two disciples re
turn to Jerusalem, and
assure tlie Apostles of
the resurrection.
13.
33—35.
28. Christ appears to all
^
the Apostles except
36—43.
19—23.
29. The disbelief of Tho
mas
24, 25.
30. Christ appears to all
the disciples, and con-
14.
26—29.
31. Christ appears to the
16 — part
brethren in Galilee. . .
[of 18.
32. Christ's appearance
at the Sea of Tiberias,
and his conversation
xxi. 1—24.
33. Christappears to his
Apostles at Jerusalem,
and commissions them
to convert the world.
— (Acts i. 4, 5.) • • • ¦
44-49.
34. Christ leads his Apos
tles to Bethany, with
in sight of Jerusalem,
gives them their fi
-
nal commission, blesses
them, and ascends vi
sibly into heaven. —
[end.
[end.
(Acts i. 6—12.) 
18—20
xvi. 15. to the
50. to the
368 MATTHEW XXVIII. 1.
There are some little difficulties attending this arrangement,
and some few points which -may require explanation, and will
be noticed as they occur. At present it need only be observed,
that nothing material seems to be gained by the transposition of
Matt, xxvii. 52, 53. after the fourth verse of the present chapter.]
[ON THE CHANGE OF THE SABBATH.
The first day of the week, being the day on which our Lord
arose from the dead, has, from that time, been set apart by his
followers for the purpose of religious worship, and called, in re
lation to that event, i) tcvpiaKi), the Lord's clay. Thus Ignatius
(Epist. ad Magnent.) desires his Christian brethren not to sab-
butize with the Jews, but to live icard Kvpiaici)v, according to the
Lord's day; on which our life arose with him. In a fragment
of Irenseus also it is said, that rb iv ry KvpuiKy pi] icXivsiv ybvv
was a symbol of the resurrection. To the early institution of the
Christian sabbath we have likewise the testimony of Pliny in his
celebrated letter to Trajan : AJfirmabanl autem (Christiani,) hanc
fuisse summam vel culpce vel erroris sui, quod essent soliti stato
die ante lucem convenire, carmenque Chrislo, quasi Deo, dicere
secum invicem. In the Talmud- also, (Avoda Zara, p. 6, 1.) the
Christian sabbath is distinguished from that of the Jews, with
the following gloss on the place : A Nazarene or Christian
is he who followeth the error of that man who commanded
them to make the first day of the week a festival unto him. The
change of the sabbath, however, from the first day of the week,
is a point on which we are at issue both with Romanists and
Sectarians. The former adduce it as an argument in favour of
the Popish doctrine of independent tradition, upon which alone
they assert that the change in question rests : and the latter have
gone so far as to deny any Scriptural authority for a sabbatical
observance whatsoever. These last may fairly be left to reflect
upon the positive injunction of the fourth commandment, which,
as to the keeping of a day of rest, is equally as binding now as
it was at the time of its delivery on Mount Sinai ; since the aboli
tion of any one of the precepts of the decalogue would go a
great way towards invalidating tlie obligation of the whole.
With respect to the Romanists, if it can be proved that the
change of the day is sanctioned by the Scriptures, as well in the
types of the Old, as in the spirit of the New Testament, their
position is obviously unfounded. The argument on , this im
portant subject has lately been fully stated in an able pamphlet
by Dr. Miller, of Armagh, of which it may not be improper to
subjoin an analysis.
In the Old Testament we find two distinct commemorations of
the deliverance of the Israelites from the captivity of Egypt ; one
in the annual celebration of the passover, Exod. xii. 26, 27. ;

MATTHEW XXVIII. 1. 369
and the other in the weekly observance of the Sabbath, Deut. v.
15. Now, as this temporal deliverance of the Jews was a type
of the spiritual deliverance of Christians, effected by the death of
Christ, so were the sacrifice of the Paschal lamb, and the Sab
batical rest, respectively typical of the atonement made by Christ
upon the cross, and the eternal rest of heaven, assured to us by
his resurrection. From a comparison of Numb, xxviii. 16. with
Levit. xxiii. 5. it appears that the Israelites left Egypt on the
15th day of the first month, having celebrated the first passover
on the day preceding ; so that, by dying on the day following the
passover, our Lord precisely accomplished the type presented by
that deliverance. With respect to the day of the resurrection,
we find a remarkable circumstance in the original institution of
the passover. It was ordained that the sheaf of the first-fruits of
the harvest should be offered on the morrow after the Sabbath in the
Paschal week, Levit. xxiii. 11., thereby presignifying that Christ
should rise from the dead on the first day of the week, to be
come the first-fruits of them that slept, 1 Cor. xv. 20. That the
day of Pentecost should likewise have been originally determined
by a computation, which should bring it to a Christian Sabbath,
must not be overlooked as one of those typical predispositions by
which a change in the institution was signified. This feast was
calculated from the day of the wave-offering, so as to fall on the
fiftieth day, or on the morrow after the seventh Sabbath from
that event; and as on the one occasion there was an offering of
the first-fruits of the barley harvest, emblematic of the resurrec
tion, so on the other there was an offering of the first-fruits of
the wheat harvest, presignifying the first-fruits of the Christian
Church, produced by the effusion of the Holy Ghost. Surely if
the prospective reference in these institutions had extended
simply to the fulfilment of the type, unconnected with circum
stances respecting the day of the solemnity, the Jewish Sabbath,
rather than the morrow after the Sabbath, would have been the
more natural time for the celebration of each respectively. The
connection, indeed, between the resurrection of Christ, and a new
appointment of the Sabbath, is clearly intimated in Heb. iv. 1.
where the Sabbath is represented as an emblem of that rest into
which the people of God are to enter. As the Sabbath had been
to the Jews a symbol of their deliverance from Egyptian bondage,
it had been observed on one day of the week ; so, to Christians,
it became a symbol of the eternal rest of heaven, assured to them
by the resurrection of Christ, and is therefore celebrated on the
day of the resurrection. There is also a passage in the Psalms
applied expressly to Christ, both by himself and St. Peter, in
connection with which the Psalmist speaks of a day which the
Lord had made, sanctified by a great deliverance, and set apart
for entering into the gates of righteousness, in order to rejoice
and be glad in it : Psalm cxviii. 14. 99.
vol. i. b b

370 MATTHEW XXVIII. 1.
But not only was the change of the Sabbath essential to the
due accomplishment of the types of the Old Testament, but the
types themselves seem to have been ordained with a prophetic
reference to a combination of events, with which the death of
Christ would necessarily be attended. The relation of time be
tween the Paschal Sabbath and the passover would vary in each
successive year ; but from the connection which subsisted between
them as commemorative of the same event, it was fit that they
should be as nearly coincident as the circumstances of the case
would allow. Before Christ offered himself as the great sacrifice
for the sins of the world, it was expedient that he should change
the Paschal celebration, which typified his death, into another
which should be better accommodated to the spiritual nature of
the Christian covenant. It was in reference to this intended in
stitution of the Eucharist, that he so ardently expressed his de
sire to eat his last passover with his disciples ; after which no
thing remained but the completion of the work of redemption
upon the cross, which the fulfilment of the type, already noticed,
required to take place on the following day. This day, however,
could not be a Sabbath, for that Sabbath day was a high day ;
and, consequently, the crucifixion intervened between the pass-
over and the Sabbath. During the Sabbath our Lord lay in the
grave : the rest of which corresponded to the outward rest of the
Jewish Sabbath, as the rest of heaven, which the latter had typi
fied, agreed best to the spiritual Sabbath begun at the resurrec
tion. Christ then rested from the humiliation and suffering, by
which he wrought the redemption of the world ; and the silent
repose of the tomb attested that the deliverance prefigured by
that of Egypt was accomplished, as the weekly Sabbath had
served to retain it in remembrance. By postponing the resurrec
tion no longer than the day following the Sabbath, the body was
subjected to no perceptible decomposition, which, if it had not
taken place during a more protracted period, might have induced
a doubt as to the humanity of Christ. An inference, indeed,
may be drawn from Psalm xvi. 10. which is applied to Christ by
Peter and Paul, Acts ii. 24. xiii. 35., that the body would not be
left in hell a sufficient time to see corruption ; at the same time
it was necessary that he should lie in the grave a sufficient time
to place beyond doubt the reality of his death, which was fully
effected by the detention of the body in the guarded tomb during
the one entire day, which intervened between the crucifixion and
resurrection. Still it may be urged that the want of Scripture authority for
the change of the Sabbath, in the shape of an apostolic injunc
tion, renders the application of these types uncertain and unsatis
factory. Now it is manifest that while the Jewish state existed,
any formal abrogation of their Sabbath was politically impossible,
as far, at least, as Judea was concerned. We know, however,

MATTHEW XXVIII. 2. 371
that from the day of the resurrection the disciples met together
for prayer and religious exercise, on the first day of each week ;
and though, in respect to the laws, they did not neglect the
Jewish Sabbath, yet, as Christians, they kept the Lord's day, as
it is expressly called in Rev. i. 10. In confirmation of this prac
tice, Jesus, who had appeared to his disciples on the day of his
resurrection, seems to have reserved his second appearance till
the recurrence of that day in the ensuing week ; and the descent
of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost sanctified the newly
appointed Sabbath for perpetual observance. It is to be re
marked, also, that although there is no positive injunction of our
Lord or his Apostles on the subject, there is, nevertheless, a dis
tinct declaration of St. Paul to the Church at Colosse, which was
without the precinct of Judea, wherein the observance of the
Jewish Sabbath is particularised, among other ceremonial ordi
nances, as no longer obligatory upon Christians, (Col. ii. 16.)
Such is the warrant which the Scriptures afford for the change
of the Sabbath, in contradistinction to the Romish doctrine of
independent tradition, which, however valuable as a proof of the
original and uninterrupted practice of the church, can never be
admitted as exclusive authority for its adoption. The force with
which the evidence deduced from the Old Testament bears upon
the Jewish observance of the seventh day, is sufficiently perspi
cuous. It is more than probable, that the patriarchal Sabbath
corresponded to our Sunday, and that it was thrown back to Sa
turday, in order to commemorate the departure of the Jews ; so
that the return to the original day of rest is no more unreason
able than its change in the first instance. Into the proofs of this
position there is no need to enter ; the reader, who may choose
to pursue the subject, will find them discussed at length in Bed-.
ford's Scripture Chronology, and Hamilton's Tract on the Sab
bath.]

Ver. 2. Kal iSoii, asiapbg k. t. X. The incidents related in this
verse had taken place before the arrival of the women ; and the
Evangelist was informed of them either by a special revelation or
by some of the soldiers, who were probably thereby induced to
embrace the GospeL It is clear, therefore, that the verb eXOeIv,
in the preceding verse, does not signify to arrive, but simply to
go to, as in Mark vii. 31. Luke ii. 44., and must be understood
in reference to the time at which they left their homes. Some
commentators render astapbg not an earthquake, as in the E. T.,
but merely a tempest, or whirlwind; in which the angel might
probably descend. The word properly signifies any shaking,
whether in the earth, air, or sea. Thus Matt. viii. 24. aEtapbg
iv ry OaXdaay. Ezek. iii. 12. LXX. iiKovaa <pwvi)v aEiapov p.E-
ydXov, I heard the voice of a great wind. In 2 Kings ii. 1. ava-
b b2

372 MATTHEW XXVIII. 3. 6. 8.
aEiapbg is the word employed to denote the whirlwind in which
Elijah was caught up. It is certain that the word does not, as
others have thought from the use of the verb iaEiaOriaav in v. 4.,
imply terror, scil. among the guards. If the Evangelist in
tended, by the use of the verb, to fix the sense of the substan
tive, he has not been lucky in the choice of an expedient, as aEia
pbg, till of late, has been understood by all interpreters to sig
nify an earthquake. Hammond, Macknight, Le Clerc, Camp
bell. — [Markland, A. Clarke.]
Ver. 3. r) iSia avroii. His form, or appearance. Hesych.
XSia' poprpi), slSog. Arist. Plut. 558. irapixto fiEXriovag dvSpag
Kal ri)v yvdipriv kuI rrjv iSiav. Philo de Abrah. p. 366. E. slg
iSiav dvOpwirwv pErapopipdiaOai. The supposition that the word
is used merely of an imaginary and not a personal appearance,
and that the angel, is merely a personification of the earthquake,
is at variance with the description given of him by the Evan
gelist. Coruscations of heavenly splendor (darpairtj) beamed
around him, and he was clothed in a robe of dazzling whiteness,
which was the symbol not only of joy but of purity. Compare Dan.
vii. 9. Rev. iii. 4. 18. et passim. See also Matt. xvii. 2. In
Luke xxiv. 4. the angels are clothed iv iaOiiaEaiv darpairrovaaig ;
and such were those which Herod presumptuously assumed as an
emblem of divinity, Acts xii. 22. The simile here employed is
one of frequent occurrence in the classic writers. Hom. II. K.
437. Xevkotepoi x<-bvog. Virg. ^En. XII. 84. Qui candore nives
anteirent. Mart. Epigr. II. 25. Et toga non tactas vincere jussa
nives. Grotius, Wetstein. — [Rosenmuller, Kuinoel.] In
the next verse the genitive avroii denotes the author of the fear ;
as we have metus hostium in Latin. So Plaut. Amphict. V. 1. 14.
Terrore meo occidistis. See Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 375. 3. and
§. 466. 2. The expression iyivovro wasl vEKpol is a common
form of hyperbole. Lucian. Necyom. 10. rov piv 'VaSdpavOov
EvpopEv TEOvswra, piKpov SeIv, virb tov Siovg. Dial. D. II. 1.
rsOvdvai inrb rov Siovg. Demosth. Phil. I. ol Si avppaxoi
TEOvaai Tto Seei. Wetstein.
Ver. 6. ekeIto. Lay. Thucyd. II. 43. rbvrdipov, iv $ keIvtui.
See my note on Hom. II. 2. 20. In the next verse for eIttov
some would read eittev, as in Mark xvi. 7., in reference to the
promise which Christ had given his disciples in Matt. xxvi. 32.
But there is no authority for any such change in the MSS. Kui
noel. — [Michaelis.]
Ver. 8. ipofiov Kal xaPac- These sensations, of which the
former was induced by the appearance of the angel, and the
latter by the unexpected tidings which he delivered, are not un
frequently intermingled. Achil. Tat. II. rpipwv rpopov SnrXow

MATTHEW XXVIII. 12. 15, 16. 373
Xapdg dpa ko! ipoBov. Joseph. Ant. XIX. 3. 1. avE/Saora^E Se
aiirbv, ov irdvv paivsiv rolg iroal SvvdpEvov, iiirb te <po(5ov Kal
Xapparog rwv Elpripivtov. Virg. iEn. I. 514. Percussus Achates
Lcetitiaque metuque. Terent. Andr. V. 4. 34. Vix sum apud
me ; ita animus commotus et metu, Spe, gaudio, mirando hoc
tanto, tam repentino bono. Wetstein. The first clause of the
next verse, which is nothing more than a repetition of the last
words of this, and forms an anacoluthon in the construction, is
omitted in «everal MSS. and is very probably an interpolation.
Mill, Kuinoel. Of the verb irpoaKwriaai, see on Matt. ii. 2. ;
and of the Jewish custom of falling at the feet of a superior, see
Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 436.
Ver. 12. iKavd. This adjective is here used in the sense of
iroXXd. Compare Luke viii. 32. with Matt. viii. 30. Plato, in
Crit. p. 33. E. keko/uikev dpyiipiov tKavov. Diogen. Arcesil. IV.
41. {icava dpyvpta iiriarEiXEV b 'Avriyovog. Athen. I. p. 7. A.
'tKavdg pvplaSag. The Hebrew 2.1 is used in the same sense in
Ezek. i. 14. Of the word dpyvpta see on Matt. xxvi. 15. In
the next verse the preposition E7ri is used for virb, as in Diod.
Sic. p. 26. B. iip1 5iv aprporipwv iXiyx^rai (pavEpwg rb ipEvSog
rov avyypaipiwg. The verb we'iOeiv is used, as it sometimes is,
absolutely, in the sense of to appease, to conciliate. Thucyd.
II. 63. ot TOtovrot iripovg te irsiaavrEg. 67. 7ropEi>ojtt£vot wg rov
paaiXia, E'iirwg irsiaEiav aiirbv xpr)flaTa irapixEiv. There is an
ellipsis however of the word xpvaaai, which is supplied in
2 Mace. x. 20. LXX. Compare Ibid. IV. 45. So Diod. Sic.
p. 380. D. xpri/xao-i iTEtaOivTEg. Joseph. Ant. XIV. 11. 4.
iTEiaag apyvpito tov 'YpKavoii otvo^oov. That Pilate was noto
riously open to this species of persuasion we have the testimony
of Philo. An expression similar to dpiptpvov ttoieIv occurs in
Xen. Cyrop. VIII. 4. 28. rolg dinovai SwpiqadpEvog iroXXd, Kal
dpipirrovg iroiriadpEvog. KuiNOEL, MuNTHE, WETSTEIN, Kypke.
Ver. 15. 6 Xoyoe ovrog. That is, the lie which the Sanhedrim
had put into the mouths of the soldiers. Some, indeed, under
stand the remark not of the lie published by the Jews, but of the
general report that the soldiers had been bribed to circulate such
a falsehood. The addition, however, of the words 7rapa'IowSatotc
are almost decisive in favour of the former interpretation ; and the
industry with which the fabrication was propagated by the Jews,
not only in Judea, but in distant countries, is attested by Justin
Mart, in his dialogue with Trypho, p. 335. In the Talmudical
writings also the story is related. The expression pixpL T»ie aripE-
pov, subaud. i)pipag, refers to the period at which St. Matthew
wrote his Gospel. Kuinoel, Doddridge.
Ver. 16. opog ov ird^aro. Neither by himself in his pro-

374 MATTHEW XXVIII. 16.
phetic declaration, Matt. xxvi. 32. or in his promise, supra, v. 10.
nor by the angel, supra, v. 4, is any mountain specified as the
place of meeting between Christ and his disciples. The words ov
ird^aro do not therefore refer to the mountain, but to Galilee ;
but the eleven assembled on a mountain, probably Mount Tabor,
as being a spot much frequented by him, and on which he had
been before transfigured. Whether there were more than the
eleven at this meeting the Evangelist does not say : but the cir
cumstances of the case seem to indicate many witnesses. Their
appearance was known beforehand ; the place where it was to hap
pen was pointed out by Jesus himself. It is also observable that
it did not take place till above eight days after the resurrection,
(John xx. 19.) so that doubtless the disciples did not go alone
from Jerusalem to Galilee, but those who were with them at Je
rusalem, and had heard of their Master's previous appearance,
would be induced by curiosity to accompany them. This suppo
sition is greatly confirmed by the declaration of St. Paul in 1 Cor.
xv. 6., that Jesus, after his resurrection, was seen by above five
hundred brethren at once. Now at Jerusalem our Lord had but
few disciples, for it appears that the number assembled on the
day of Pentecost were only one hundred and twenty, Acts i. 15.
Galilee, therefore, being the principal scene of his ministry, and
the residence of the greater part of his followers, was far betfer
suited for the most solemn and important appearance before his
ascension. It should seem, also, that Matthew, who passes over
the several other appearances of Christ, selects this in particular
as being still attested by several surviving witnesses. Mack
night, Whitby, Grotius. In the next verse the relative ot is
put for nvig, as in Xen. Anab. I. 513. ware iKEivovg EKirEirXrix-
Oai Kal aiirbv Msvwva, Kal rpE^Etv iirl rd birXa' ot Si Kal 'iaraaav
diropovvTEg. ^Elian. V. H. XII. 35. ot Si ipaai Kal iripag
e£, djg Eivai irdaag SiKa. Lucian. Timon. p. 63. ol Si Kal aiiTtijj
aoi rag x&pag 'OXvpiridaiv iirij3EJ3Xr)Kaat. Schol. bpoia r) avv-
raliig avrri ry iv tt; hpq rov siiayyEXiov MarOaiov avyypdipy, ry
Ol Si iSiaraaav' dvrl yap tov Ttvig to Ol Si KElrat. Hesych. 6
Si' b SeIvo. Those who doubted were probably some who had
not yet received the proofs of his real appearance and corporeal
existence : or it may be that Jesus first appeared at a distance,
and that it was not until his nearer approach that all were fully
persuaded of his personal identity. This may perhaps be in
ferred from the words ko! irpoaEXOdiv in the next verse. Some,
but less probably, attribute the doubt to the same cause as in
Luke xxix. 41. ; and others would translate the words ol Si iSia
raaav, even those who had doubted, of which the words will not
easily admit. Beza's conjecture, oiiSi iSiaraaav, is wholly un
supported by MS. authority, nor is its reception necessary.
Kuinoel, Townson, Raphelius, Palairet. — [Le Clerc,
Macknight, Beausobre, Doddridge.]

MATTHEW XXVIII. 18, 19. 375
Ver. 18. iSoOr) pot irdaa i^ovaia. These words, to the end of
the chapter, which contain the great commission and charter
granted by our Saviour to his Apostles and their successors, are
supposed by the generality of harmonists to have been spoken
immediately before our Lord's ascension into heaven. They are
incorporated by St. Matthew, who has made no mention of the
ascension, into his account of the meeting on the mountain of
Galilee ; but as we learn from St. Mark that our Lord did not
commission his disciples till he was about to be finally removed
from them, it is possible that St. Matthew may have been more
careful to give the words of Christ than denote the particular oc
casion on which they were spoken. With respect to his making
no mention of the ascension, it is not easy, nor is it necessary, to
assign a reason for the omission. We know that in several in
stances circumstances are omitted by one Evangelist which are
supplied by another ; and this is a convincing proof that they
did not write in concert with each other, but that each related
his own story, and selected such facts and events as were best
adapted to the particular object for which he wrote. It may be
that St. Matthew, who wrote in Palestine, was satisfied that the
circumstances attending the ascension were sufficiently known to
all the Christians there ; and the fact itself is clearly implied in
the concluding words of the Gospel. The presence of the Deity
is promised in like terms in Judg. vi. 12, 13. Jerem. i. 8. Acts
vii. 9. Mark and Luke, writing for those who lived out of the
limits of Judea, properly add the history of the ascension ; and
John omits it, as his principal object was to supply the defi
ciencies of the other Evangelists. The expression here made
use of by our Lord, All power is given to me, has been urged as
an objection to his divinity. In his divine nature, however, he
doubtless had this power from all eternity, and therefore, if the
declaration was made with respect to his divine nature, it must
be understood of him as being God of God. See on Matt. xi. 27.
But he was also perfect man, as well as perfect God, and he
may therefore have spoken in reference to his state of humiliation
thus ending, and his elevation, at that instant about to take place,
to the most exalted power and dignity at the right hand of God.
Porteus, Whitby, Grotius, Macknight.
Ver. 19. iropEvOivTEg paOiiTEvaarE k. r. X. In this commission
there are manifestly three distinct things which our Lord enjoins
his Apostles to execute with regard to all nations, viz. paOrirEVEiv,
to make them disciples; ftairriZ.Eiv, to initiate them into his church
by baptism; SiSdaKEtv, to instruct them, when baptized, in all
the duties of Christianity. Our translators, after the whole cur
rent of Latin interpreters, have confounded the first and last,
rendering both verbs by the English word teach. From the order
in which these injunctions are delivered, it seems that conversion

376 MATTHEW XXVIII. 19.
to the faith precedes the initiatory rite. In the case of adults,
which formed of course the bulk of the first converts, this was
necessarily the case, as it is still with those who are brought
over from Judaism to the reception of the Gospel. No argu
ment, however, can be drawn from this against the baptism of
children, of whom it cannot be expected that they should believe
in order to be baptized. Campbell, A. Clarke, Whitby.
[on christian baptism.
The necessity of baptism, as the means of admission into the
church of Christ, is sufficiently clear from the words of the insti
tution, especially in Mark xvi. 16., where it is added, He that
believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth
not shall be damned. Neither is there any restriction or excep
tion as to the persons who are to be baptized. Nations .consist
of persons of all ages, and therefore infants, as well as adults
must be included in the command : and this inference would ne
cessarily be drawn by the Jews, who were accustomed to see
infants baptized, and would of course consider themselves au
thorized to receive converts to Christianity upon the same prin
ciples as they received converts to Judaism. See on Matt. iii. 1.
Had our Lord intended otherwise, he would not have failed to
specify the alteration, more especially as the intent and spirit of
the Jewish rite is in other respects closely allied to the Christian
institution, as will be seen by the following parallel, founded
upon the authority of the Rabbins and early Christian writers :
1. The Jews required of the pro- 1. The Christians required a re-
selytes a renunciation of idol- nunciation of the devil and all
atry, and a belief in Jehovah. his works, and a belief in the
Trinity.
2. The Jews interrogated the 2. The Christians interrogated
proselytes while standing in the the Catechumens as they en-
water, tered the water, and also pre
viously in the congregation.
3. The Jews baptized the infant 3. The Christians baptized in-
children of proselytes. fants.
4. The Jews required that either 4. The Christians observed a si-
his father, or the church of the milar custom.
place, or three grave persons
should answer for the child of
a proselyte.
5. A baptized proselyte was said 5. Our Saviour and his Apostles
to be born again. call baptism regeneration, or
being born again.
6. The Jews told the proselyte 6. The same term is used in the
that he was now clean and N. T. Baptized Christians are
holy. said to be sanctified with the
washing of water.

MATTHEW XXVIII. 19. 377
7. The Jews declared the bap- 7. Among Christians this was
tized to be under the wings of shewn by the gifts of the Holy
the Shechinah. Ghost. To this end the laying
on of hands was used ; a cus
tom probably borrowed from
the Jewish church.
8. At the paschal season the Jews 8. Easter was a stated time at
baptized proselytes that they which Christians were baptized
might eat the passover. with great solemnity.
9. The Jews had their proselytes 9. The Christians had their cate-
of the gate. chumens or competentes.
The propriety of infant baptism may also be inferred from the
analogy which the rite bears to circumcision, as the ceremony by
which the Christian is admitted into covenant with God. It was
expressly commanded in the law of Moses that the children of
the Jews should receive the mark of circumcision at eight days
old ; and there is the same reason why our children should be
admitted from the beginning into the Christian, as why the infants
of the Jews should be admitted into the legal covenants. Infants
with us are as capable of covenanting as they were with them,
and if God did not consider their age a bar against circumcision,
we ought not to urge it as an objection against baptism. So
close did this analogy between the two rites appear to the early
Christians that a question was proposed to St. Cyprian, respect
ing the propriety of baptizing only on the eighth day ; and from
the earliest days to the present infants have always been bap
tized in the Christian church.
The outward visible sign of baptism, as a Christian sacrament,
is water, by the use of which is represented the spiritual cleans
ing of the soul ; or, in other words, its death unto sin, and new
birth unto righteousness. In this phrase there is a reference
to the. primitive custom of baptizing by immersion ; and it must
be allowed, that by plunging the body under water, and raising it
again, the ends and effects of baptism are more significantly re
presented than by aspersion. For St. Paul speaks of baptism
as emblematic of the death and burial and resurrection of Christ,
and in conformity thereto of our dying unto sin, and rising unto
righteousness, Rom. vi. 3, 4. Col. ii. 12. Still affusion or as
persion will sufficiently express the same intention, that we are
by this ordinance purified from the guilt of sin, and bound and
qualified to keep ourselves pure from the defilement of it. Be
sides, it very naturally represents that sprinkling of the blood of
Christ, 1 Pet. i. 2., to which our salvation is owing. The usage,
indeed, seems to be foretold in Isaiah Iii. 15. Ezek. xxxvi. 25.
and St. Paul probably alludes to it in Heb. x. 22. It was cer
tainly employed less frequently in the apostolic age ; but at the
same time it must of necessity have been sometimes used, as, for
instance, when baptism was administered to several thousands at

378 MATTHEW XXVIII. 19.
once, (Acts ii. 4.1.) or when it was administered on a sudden in
private houses, as upon the gaoler and his family on the night of
their conversion, (Acts xvi. 33.) or in cases of sickness, when
immersion would have been attended with danger. In these
cold climates it would seldom be safe to immerse an infant in
water ; and therefore, our church, without forbidding immersion
if the strength of the child will bear it, admits aspersion only,
rather than occasion injury to a baby ; wisely remembering, that
in the sight of God mercy is better than sacrifice, Hos. vi. 6.
Matt. ix. 13. xii. 7.
It is further an essential requisite to Christian baptism that it
be administered in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and
of the Holy Ghost. Some have supposed, that to be baptized
in the name of these three is to be baptized by virtue of their
authority : but the proper translation of the words fiairriZovrEg
Eig to ovopa, is baptizing into the name ; and this expression is
probably a Hebraism for baptizing into the person named, the
word ovopa being frequently redundant. Thus Johni. 12. irta-
teveiv Eig rb ovopa rov Xpiarov for Etc tov Xptorov. Compare
1 Cor. i. 13. Hence the import of the form will be, that by this
solemn act we are devoted to the faith and worship and obedience
of these three — our Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier. In this
profession the whole of Christianity is briefly comprehended, and
on this foundation all the Christian creeds are built. There are
some passages in the Acts and Epistles which have been sup
posed to authorize the administration of baptism in the name of
Jesus only ; for instance, Acts ii. 38. x. 48. xix. 5. Rom. vi. 3.
Gal. iii. 27. It may be, that in baptizing Jews, who were al
ready in covenant with God, it was considered a virtual com
pliance with the form of the institution to employ the name of
Jesus only in order more especially to settle the evidence of his
being the true Messiah ; this being the point of controversy be
tween the believing and unbelieving part of the nation. With
respect to the Gentiles the case was different, and the prescribed
form was therefore invariably used. It appears, however, from
Acts xix. 3. that the name of the Holy Ghost was used ; and pro
bably, therefore, that of the Father also : and, in fact, baptizing
in the name of the Lord Jesus may fairly be understood to imply
baptizing according to the form which he had ordained. The
early Fathers are unanimous in declaring that it was the un-
deviating custom of the primitive church to baptize in the name
of the Holy Trinity, which custom, it is reasonable to suppose,
was derived from the Apostolic practice.
In the form of administering baptism, the fundamental doctrine
of the Gospel, that of the holy Trinity, is unequivocally asserted,
and the equality of the three Persons in the Godhead most clearly
maintained. No superiority or difference is mentioned as apper
taining to either of them ; but all are spoken of in precisely the

MAT.THEW XXVIII. 20. 879
same terms. It is impossible, therefore, to suppose that while
the Father is self-existent, eternal, and omnipotent, the Son
should be a mere man, born of a woman, and subject to all the
frailties of humanity ; or that the Holy Ghost should be a mere
energy or operation, without any personal existence. The very
form, indeed, running in the name, not names, of the three, may
insinuate that the authority of all the three is the same, their
power equal, their persons undivided, and their glory one. This
consideration at once overthrows the objection that being bap
tized into Christ no more implies the divinity of Christ than
being baptized into Moses (1 Cor. x. 2.) implies the divinity of
Moses. The name of Moses is not here coupled with the name
of God ; and in point of fact, the baptism here mentioned is only
typical of the baptism of Christ : it was no covenanting rite, and
carried with it no obligation to, or initiation into, the service of
Moses. It is true that this important doctrine is deeply mysterious,
beyond the power of human ingenuity to unravel, or human
reason to explain : but though it is far above human reason, it does
not contradict human reason ; and if we are unable to compre
hend the nature of the union subsisting between the three per
sons in the Godhead, we are equally unable to form any other
idea of the Deity, which is so exquisitely adapted to the spiritual
necessities of man. The corruption of our nature, which renders
us wholly incapable of giving that perfect love and obedience
which is evidently due from a creature to his Creator, naturally
calls for some satisfaction. This satisfaction is offered in the
atonement of the only begotten Son of God, the second person in
the Trinity ; and it seems almost impossible that another should
have been a sufficient sacrifice. It would be clearly preposterous
for any one human being to look up to any other mere human
being, who by his own merits should have acquired such in
fluence with the Almighty as to atone to him for the transgres
sions of his fellow-creatures. But that strict harmony which
exists between the atonement and the divinity of Christ renders
the case plain and consistent. There are also certain conditions
to be performed by every member of the Christian covenant, for
which he is wholly incompetent, and in which the assistance of
any being like himself would be equally unavailable. But this
difficulty again is removed by the assurance of the co-operation
of God's holy spirit in his endeavours after righteousness. Wall,
Whitby, Lightfoot, Secker, Beveridge, Holden, &c]

Ver. 20. rijc awrEXsiag tov alwvog. Of the two periods de
noted by this phrase see on Matt. xii. 32. xiii. 39. xxiv. 1. In
this place it distinctly means the end of the world, and the words
contain a promise of Christ's presence with his ministers through
out all ages. Had the promise been confined to the Apostles

380 MATTHEW XXVIII. 20.
only, and during the continuance of the Jewish state, he would
have said irdaag rag r)pipag vpwv, all your days ; and in this
case no person, not even the Evangelist St. John, would have
had any commission to preach the Gospel after the destruction
of Jerusalem, when the churches of the Gentiles were chiefly to
be established. There are some, however, who maintain that
the words should be rendered the end of the age. At all events,
no support can arise from them to the Unitarian hypothesis : for
if Christ was every where present from his ascension to the final
salvation of the Jews, he must be omnipresent in all ages.
There can be no intermission of an infinite attribute. Whitby,
Hammond. — [Campbell.] The phrase Eivai pErd nvog, adesse
alicui, here implies to render assistance ox support. So Gen.
xxxix. 2. LXX. riv Kvpiog psrd 'Iwaritp. Josh. i. 19. psrd aov
Kvpiog. In Matt. xxvi. 69. the import of the expression, though
analogous, is somewhat different. Kuinoel. The final 'Api)v is
wanting in some MSS.

ST. MARKS GOSPEL.

CHAPTER I.
Contents: — The ministry of the Baptist, and the baptism of
Christ, vv. 1—11. [Matt. iii. 1. Luke iii. 1. 21.] The
temptation in the ivilderness, vv. 12, 13. [Matt. iv. 1. Luke
iv. 1.] The commencement of Christ's ministry, and four
disciples called, vv. 14 — 20. [Matt. iv. 18. Luke v. 1.] A
dcemoniac dispossessed at Capernaum, w. 21 — 28. [Luke iv.
31.] Peter's wife's mother and others cured, vv. 29 — 34.
[Matt. viii. 14. Luke iv. 38.] Jesus preaches throughout
Galilee, vv. 35 — 39. [Luke iv. 42.] ; and cleanses a leper,
vv. 40—45. [Matt. viii. 2. Luke v. 12.]
Note. — It is well known that nearly every fact related by St.
Mark is also related either by St. Matthew or St. Luke. With
the exception, in short, of twenty-four verses, the whole of St.
Mark's Gospel is contained in the other two. In addition, there
fore, to the parallel references in the synopsis of each chapter, it
has been thought convenient to subjoin the following table from
Griesbach, (Comment. Theol. p. 374.) exhibiting the comparative
contents of each Gospel respectively. The middle column con
tains the whole of St. Mark's Gospel : those to the right and left
contain the portions of St. Matthew's and St. Luke's which cor
respond to the stated portions of St. Mark's. Such remarks,
therefore, as are omitted under St. Mark for the sake of avoiding
repetition, the reader will readily find in the parallel places of the
other Evangelists.
MATTHEW. MARK. LUKE.
iii. 1—4. 22.. . i. 1—20.
21—39  iv. 31—44.
40— iii. 6. . . . v. 12— vi. 11.
xii. 15, 16. ... iii. 7—12.
13—19  vi. 12—16.
22, 23. ... 20, 21.

382

MARK I. 1.

MATTHEW.
xii. 24—32. 46-50.
xiii. 1—23.
24—30. 31, 32.
34, 35. .

53—58. .

xiv. 1,2....
3—12. . .
13—21. . .
22— xvi. 12.
xvi. 13 — xviii. 9
xix. 1—12. . .
13 — xxiii. 1
xxiv. 1 — 36. . .
xxvi. 1 — xxviii. '•

xxviii. 18—20. . .

m.

iv.

Vlll.

Xll
xiii,

xiv,xvi

MARK.
22—30. 31—35. 1—20.
21—25  viii.
26—29. 30—32. 33, 34.
35—41 
1—43 
1—6.
7—13  ix.
14—16 
17—29.
30, 31 
32—44 
45 — viii. 21.
22—26. 27— ix. 50. . . .
1—12.
13— xii. 38. . .xviii.
38—44  xx.
1  0/C» • a • • XXli
33—36. 1— xvi. 8.
9.
10—13  xxiv.
14. 
15—18.
19 
20.

LUKE.

16—18.

22—25. 26—56. 1—6.
7—9.
10.
11—17.

18—51.
15 — xx. 45.
45— xxi. 4.
. 5. sqq.

10—35.
36—43. 50, 51.

Verse 1. dpxi) roil EvayysXiov. Some consider dpxr) as the
nominative case to the verb iyivsro, v. 4., and include the inter
vening verses in a parenthesis ; but although the preaching of
John may justly be looked upon as the commencement of the
Gospel dispensation, so long a suspension of the sense in the
very first sentence is extremely awkward, and the construction
proposed entirely unsuited to the style of the sacred writers. On
the other hand, iyivEro 'Iwavvrig jdairriZtov, John was baptizing,
is quite in their idiom. Compare Mark ix. 7. Luke ix. 35. The
first verse, therefore, ought to be considered as a sentence by
itself; and dig, sicut, refers to v. 4. as the completion of the pro-
10

MARK I. 13. 15. 383
phecies with which the Gospel opens. It was not unusual with
authors to prefix a short sentence to their works to serve as a title
to the book, and to signify that the beginning immediately fol
lows. See Hos. i. 1. In the same sense Herod. I. 1. 'HpoSorov
' AXiKapvaaar)og laropirig diroSEi^ig r\Ss. The commencement of
Thucydides also, and other writers might also be adduced ; and
thence probably arose the custom frequently adopted by tran
scribers, of putting at the head of their transcript incipit, fol
lowed by the name of the subject; and at the end explicit, with
the name repeated, to shew that the work is entire. The usage
so far still exists that we prefix a short title at the head of our
books, and subjoin Tlie end at the completion. Campbell, Le
Clerc. — [Whitby, Grotius, Markland.] In the next verse
the MSS., versions, and Fathers vary between the common read
ing iv rolg irporpriraig and iv 'Haaiq rip irpo(pr)ry. Many com
mentators support the latter, which was certainly very early re
cognized, and gave rise to the objection of Porphyry, that Mark
attributes to Isaiah what is found in Malachi. Hence it has also
been thought that the true reading is simply ev t<£ irpo(pi)ry, the
name 'Haaiif. having been added from a gloss. But as the com
mon reading has an immense majority of copies in its favour, and
some noted versions ; as the quotation is from two different pro
phecies, Mai. iii. 1. Isaiah xl. 2, 3., of which the nearest is not
from Isaiah, but from Malachi ; and as the Jews often say, As it
is written in the Prophets, jet it is never said in the N. T.
written in a prophet, but by him ; there seems to be no just
ground for departing from the received text. Campbell, Whitby,
Lightfoot. — [Grotius, Michaelis, Mill.]
Ver. 13. jUETa rwv O-qpitov. This circumstance is omitted by
the other Evangelists. It seems to intimate that he was in the
most remote, unfrequented, and savage part of the desert, and
was probably introduced for the sake of the Romans, who might
not be acquainted with the wildness of the eastern deserts. Some
have supposed that the description seems rather to point to the
great desert of Horeb, but that of Judea was also in some parts
infested with wild beasts. See 1 Sam. xvii. 28. 34. 2 Sam. xxiii.
20. Jerem. xlix. 19. It has been conjectured, but without any
reason, that the expression is merely poetical, as in Virg. iEn.
III. 64. Cum vitam in silvis inter deserta ferarum Lustra do-
mosque traho. Lightfoot, A. Clarke. — [Markland, Wet
stein.] In the preceding verse the verb ekj3oXXeiv is used in
the milder sense of to lead out, as infra, v. 43. John x. 4.
See also Matt. ix. 24., where it is employed somewhat similarly.
The word in Matt. iv. 1. is dvr)xOri. Whitby, Grotius.
Ver. 15. irEirXripwrai 6 Katpog. The time here spoken of is
that which, according to the predictions of the prophets, was to

384 MARK I. 19. 22. "
happen between any period assigned by them and the appearance
of the Messiah. It was, for instance, the completion of the se
venty weeks of Daniel ; that is, each week being seven years,
four hundred and ninety years from the order issued to rebuild
the temple. However much the Jews misunderstood many of
the other prophecies relating to the reign of this extraordinary
personage, what concerned both the time and the place of his
first appearance seems to have been pretty well apprehended by
the bulk of the nation. From the N. T. as well as other and
independent histories of that period, it is evident that there was
then a prevailing expectation among them of this great deliverer;
and it is in reference to this expectation that the Evangelist has
inserted the article before icatpoe. It is a point of some conse
quence to the cause of Christianity, that both the time and the
place of our Lord's birth coincided with the interpretations then
commonly given of the prophecies" by the Jews themselves, his
contemporaries. Campbell, Middleton. The expressions 7rto--
teveiv iv rt£ EvayysXiw and irtarEVEiv TtjJ EvayyEXito are somewhat
different : the latter merely implies an assent to the truth of the
Gospel narrative, but the former includes a disposition of heart
in conformity with its precepts, and a firm reliance on the pro
mises held out in it. The preposition corresponds with the He
brew 2, in Psalm cxix. 66. Grotius.
Ver. 19. KarapriZovrag rd S'tKrva. The verb Karaprt^Etv not
only signifies to mend or refit, but also to prepare, to make. In
terpreters are generally agreed in preferring the former significa
tion ; and the Jewish fishing-boats, as described in Joseph. B. J.
II. 43., though commodious enough for repairing nets, would be
ill adapted for making them. Campbell.
Ver. 22. i^ovaiav e'xwv. See on Matt. vii. 29. The de
moniac in the next verse is mentioned only by Mark and in Luke
ix. 31. We may compare, however, Matt. viii. 29. xvii. 15. It
appears that the man had lucid intervals, or he could not have
been admitted into the synagogue ; and from his convulsions
(v. 26.) it is more than probable that epilepsy was the complaint
with which he had been afflicted by daemoniacal agency. With
respect to the construction of the passage, the preposition iv is
used in the sense of with, like the Hebrew 2. in Exod. xv. 19.
In v. 24. la is not a verb, as some have supposed, by an interjec
tion answering to the Latin eheu. The verb dwoXiaat corres
ponds to fiaaaviaat in Matt. viii. 29, and airapdaaEtv, (v. 26.)
which signifies properly to tear, is here used of those spasms or
convulsions which are usually attendant upon epilepsy; and
which are called in the medical writers airaapol or airapaypoi.
See Aratseus, de Curat. Epileps. 5. de morb. 5. Galen, ad
Glauc. I. In the expression of surprise, v. 27., which the mi-

MARK I. 38. II. 1. 385
racle elicited, the words tear' i^ovaiav are applied to Christ, as
acting by his own power, in opposition to that of the Jewish
exorcists, who invoked the aid of heaven in order to dispossess
daemons. Grotius, Wetstein, Rosenmuller. There seems
to have been a tradition among the Jews that the Messiah would
destroy Galilee, and disperse the Galilaeans. Hence Lightfoot
supposes, in opposition to the received opinion, that the ejacula
tion in v. 24. was spoken by the man, who was a Galilaean, and
not by the daemon. Campbell.
Ver. 38. rag ixopivag KWpoiroXEig. One MS. has iyyiig iro
XEig koI Etc Tag KiLpag ; in conformity with the Vulgate, which
translates Proximos vicoset civitates: but the variation doubtless
originated in the uncommonness of the word Kw/i07roXtc, which is
found nowhere else in the LXX or the N. T. It occurs, how
ever, in Strabo, XIII. p. 887. B. rb "IXtov, o vw iarl, KwpoiroXig
rig r)v. Some suppose that it is intended to denote towns where
there was no synagogue ; and it is certain that something inter
mediate is meant, greater than a village, and less than a city ;
either similar to those which are mentioned in Joseph. B. J.
III. 2., or unwalled towns, as in Thucyd. I. 5. 7roX£o-tv drEi-
Xiaroig, koI Kara Kwpag oiKOvpivatg. The participle ixdpEvog,
in the sense of propinquus, occurs in Luke xiii. 33. Acts xx. 15.
xxi. 26. and in Gen. xii. 23. Numb. ii. 17. 2 Sam. xxi. 1. Psalm
lxviii. 25. xciv. 15. LXX. It is also frequent in the best writers.
Herod. IV. 176. tovtwv ixopsvoi TivSdvEg slai. Joseph. VI. 1. 1.
7rpoc rag ixopivag airoXvovai ttoXeic. See also Aristot. Pol. VI.
5. 8. Arrian, Exped. II. 8. Diod. Sic. I. p. 32. XVII. p. 142.
Herod. 1.93. IV. 178. Schol. Thucyd. I. 11. Joseph. Ant. XI.
8. Campbell, Lightfoot, Wetstein, Elsner, Kypke. Of
the verb ipfipipdaOat, v. 43., see on Matt. ix. 30.

CHAPTER II.
Contents: — The cure of the paralytic, vv. 1 — 12. [Matt. ix. 2.
Luke v. 17.] The call of Matthew, and the dinner at his
house, vv. 13 — 22. [Matt. ix. 9. Luke v. 27.] Christ vin
dicates his disciples from an alleged profanation of the Sab
bath, vv. 23—28. [Matt. xii. 1. Lukevi. 1.]
Verse 1. Si -npEpwv. Scil. nvwv. Theophylact. Si iipEpwv
dvrl rwv SitXOovawv i)pEpwv nvwv. So Gen. iv. 3. LXX. See
also on Matt. xxvi. 61. Whitby, Grotius. In Luke xi. 7. we
have sic rr)v koItw, as here Eig oikov for iv o"ikw. So also Xen.
Cyrop. VIL 5. 41. irapriv Eig to avrb x<»piov. Raphelius.
vol. i. c c

386 MARK II. 2. 19. 26.
Ver. 2. rd irpbg rr)v Obpav. That is, rb irpoOvpov, the vesti
bule. In the end of the verse Xoyog with the article is used Kar'
i^oxvv, of the word of God, i. e. the doctrine of the Gospel. Of
the miracle recorded in the subsequent verses see the parallel
place in Matthew and Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 291. 297.
note. Some suppose that the words toJ irvsvpan avroii in v. 8.
are redundant : but it should rather seem that irvEvpa is used in
the second acceptation mentioned under Matt. i. 18. Applied to
an ordinary man in this sense it would here denote the percep
tion of what was passing in his own mind, and would be properly
rendered in himself, as it may also be in reference to Christ, pro
vided it be understood to include those faculties of his divine
nature, by which he ascertained what was passing in the minds of
others. Campbell. — [Rosenmuller, Kuinoel.]
Ver. 19. pi) Svvarai vriarEvEiv. In a subject such as this,
relating to the ordinary manners or customs which obtained in
a country, it is usual to speak of a thing which is never done as of
what cannot be done. The verb Svvarai therefore is, in fact, re
dundant, as in the examples adduced in Matt. ix. 15., and there
are several cases in which the same periphrasis indicates some
thing far short of an impossibility. 1. If their actions be con
trary to the rules of decency or propriety, as in Exod. viii. 26.
Mark vi. 42. Luke xi. 7. 2. If it be illegal or unjust, as in
Deut. xii. 13. Acts x. 47. 1 Cor. x. 21. 2 Cor. xiii. 8. 3. If it
be not agreeable to the divine counsels, as in Gen. xix. 22. Matt.
xxvi. 42. Johnv. 19. 30. 4. If it be inconvenient, as in Gen.
xliv. 22. Mark i. 45. iii. 20. vi. 19, 20. Luke xiv. 20. 5. If the
agent is prevented by some fault in the patient, as in Mark iv.
33. vi. 5'.' Luke xvi. 2. John v. 44. 6. If there be any aversion
to doing it, as Gen. xxxvii. 4. Jerem. vi. 16. Matt. vii. 16. xii.
34. John vii. 7. viii. 43. xii. 39. xiv. 17. Acts iv. 20. Rom. viii. 8.
1 John iii. 9. Rev. ii. 2. Campbell, Whitby.
Ver. 26. iirl 'AfiidOap roii 'ApxtEpstoc. E. T. In the days of
Abiathar, the high priest. Now it appears from 1 Sam. xxi. 1.
which is the place here referred to, that Abimelech was then
high-priest at Nob; and from 1 Sam. xxii. 20. xxiii. 6. 1 Chron.
xviii. 16. that Abiathar was the son of Abimelech. In order to
reconcile this historical discrepancy, some have supposed, with
Theophylact, that Abiathar was the priest and Abimelech the
high-priest ; or that varspov is understood before dpxupiwg, as
in Matt. i. 6. David the king, i. e. afterwards king ; or that
Abimelech, now advanced in years, employed his son as his
sagan, or deputy; and he, being then present, and a more con
spicuous character than his father in the days of David, and suc
ceeding his father very shortly in the high-priesthood, is men
tioned by anticipation as already in the office : or that Abiathar

MARK III. 1. 387
and Abimelech, the father and the son, were called by either name
indiscriminately. Others assign a variety of significations to
the preposition iiri; such as in the presence of, about or a little
before the time that, at the suggestion of, &c. &c. All this,
however, has arisen from imagining that the words of St. Mark,
explained in the obvious way, would mean in the priesthood of
Abiathar; a sense which they will not bear. Without the article,
indeed, which is omitted in some few MSS., such must have been
the meaning, as in 1 Mace. xiii. 42. LXX. iirl ~2,ipwvog dpxu-
piwg. Luke iii. 2. £7r' dpx^piwv "Avva Kal Katdipa. Demosth.
Vol. I. p. 250. ed. Reiske. £7ri NtKoicXEOuc dpxovrog. In these
examples the insertion of the article would imply, as in the
case of Abiathar, that these persons were subsequently dis
tinguished by their respective offices from others of the same
name. The name of Abiathar was certainly not uncommon
among the Jews ; it should seem therefore that the Evangelist has
merely followed the Rabbinical mode of citation frequently
adopted by the writers of the N. T. in their quotations from the
O. T., which in this instance has been completely overlooked.
They select some principal word out of each section, and apply
the name to the section itself, saying, in Eli, in Solomon, &c.
when they wish to distinguish the sections in which these names
occur. Thus Rashi, on Hos. ix. 9. has in the concubine ; i. e.
Judg. xix. Aben Ezra on Hos. iv. 8. As is said near Eli. So
Mark xii. 26. £7ri rrjg j3aroti, in the section which treats of the
burning bush. Rom. xi. 2. r) ovk o'iSarE iv 'HXta ri XiyEi r)
yparpi) ; Hence the expression etti 'AfitdOap may be explained
in the chapter of Abiathar, i. e. in that part of the book of
Samuel where the history of Abiathar is related. It is objected
to this interpretation that the word yiypairrat is omitted ; but
dviyvwTE, which is found in the place of Mark cited above, occurs
here also, though at some little distance from iirl 'AfiidOap.
Michaelis, Middleton. — [Grotius, Whitby, Hammond, Le
Clerc, &c]

CHAPTER III.
Contents : — The withered hand healed, vv. 1 — 6. [Matt. xii. 9.
Luke vi. 6.] Divers cures, and the call of the twelve Apostles,
vv. 7 — 18. [Matt. xii. 15. Luke vi. 12] A daemoniac cured,
and the conduct of the Scribes and Pharisees thereupon, vv.
19—30. [Matt. xii. 22. Luke xi. 14.] Christ's kindred, vv.
31—35. [Matt. xii. 46. Luke viii. 19.]
Verse 4. ayaOoiroiriaai, r) KaKOiroir)aai ; k. t. X. A mere nega
tion is frequently expressed in Scripture by an affirmation of the
c c 2

388 MARK III. 9. 14. 17,
contrary, as in Matt. xi. 25., not to reveal is to hide. See also
Luke xiv. 26. and elsewhere. Hence the pertinency of our
Lord's argument, as the question about preference was here
solely between doing and not doing. In the latter part of the
question there is probably an allusion to the maxim of the Jews,
that it was lawful to defend themselves on the Sabbath, and even
to kill an enemy in self-defence. See 1 Mace. ii. 41. Joseph.
Ant. XIV. 8. From this, however, and many other passages, it
may be justly deduced as a Christian principle, that not to do the
good which we have the opportunity and power to do, is, in a
certain degree, to do the contrary evil ; and not to prevent mis
chief when we can is to commit it. From the next verse we
learn that anger is not always sinful, as it is found in him in
whom was no sin : but it must never be accompanied with a
desire of revenge, in which case it coincides with the bpE^tg dv-
riXvirr)aEtog., as it is defined by the philosophers, and is entirely
inconsistent with the Christian character. The clause avXXv-
vovpEvog k. r. X. is not found in the other Evangelists. For
irwpwaEi the Codex Bezce reads vEKpdiaEt ; and the Vulgate trans
lation is ccecitate. Campbell, Whitby, Le Clerc, A. Clarke.
Ver. 9. irpoaKaprEpy airy. E. T. should wait on him; i. e. should
be always in readiness to receive him. The verb is more usually
applied to persons, as in Acts viii. 13. So Polyb. Leg. 47. irpoa-
KaprEpEi r$ Tirw. It has been thought that the verb iirtiriirrEiv,
in the next verse, has the sense of 7rpoo-7rt7rr£tv in v. 11 ., and
should be rendered to fall down at his feet ; scil. in order to
touch him, as in Mark vi. 56. But the pressing on him, which
is the proper sense of the word, is more agreeable to the reason
why he desired a ship ; scil. that they might not throng him. The
use of the noun paarVc, is very similar to that in which it is im
plied in Hom. II. M.37. See my note there, and Home's Introd.
Vol. III. p. 510. Grotius, Whitby, Wetstein. — [Ham
mond.]
Ver. 14. E7rotrjo-£. He chose, or appointed. So 1 Sam. xii. 6.
LXX. 6 iroir)aag Moj<rfjv Kat 'Aapwv. Herodian. IV. 4. iry£"
povag r) dpxovrag itoieiv. Philostr. Apoll. V. 28. iroiriaov pt,
t'^rj, fiaatXia. Of the phrase pErd nvog Eivai see on Matt. xxvi.
69. In v. 17. the relative, which is supplied in Luke xii. 14. is
omitted ; and the verb to be understood in the following verses
is iiroiriaE. The import of the name Peter is explained in Malt.
xvi. 18. Grotius, Elsner, Kuinoel.
Ver. 17. Boarspylc. This word is neither Hebrew nor Syriac ;
and it has been thought that the Greek transcribers have not
copied it exactly, but that DJH 02, beni roam, i. e. sons of
thunder, which the ancient Greeks would pronounce Benereem,

MARK III. 21. 389,
was probably the appellative used by our Lord. Jerome, on
Dan. i. is in favour of this supposition ; and various methods are
given by which the name, which he writes B£v£p££;u, may have
been altered into BoavEpyEe. Others, however, derive the word
from t£>jn, roesh, which signifies an earthquake, or any great
commotion, as in Hagg. ii. 7., and thence, probably, thunder.
Between these derivations it is difficult to decide : the former is
nearer the interpretation given by the Evangelist, and, at all
events, preferable to that from IM"1, reges, which signifies merely
an assembly. A. Clarke, Grotius, Hammond, Lightfoot,
Beza. Of the reason for which this name was given to the sons
of Zebedee, see Home's Introd. Vol. IV. p. 312.
Ver. 21. e£eot-?j. E. T. He is beside himself. It shocks many
persons to think that so harsh an expression concerning our
Lord should have been pronounced by his relations, and various
methods have been suggested to get rid of the difficulty. Some
contend that the verb ifyaravat here signifies to faint, scil. from
exhaustion and want of food ; and in support of this interpreta
tion they adduce Gen. xiii. 28. xiv. 26, 27. Josh. ii. 11. Isaiah
vii. 2. xxxiii. 3. Jerem. xlix. 23. LXX. But these instances are
not exactly in point ; not to mention that fainting or swooning
denotes a visible event, or one that had been related to his
friends rather than by them. Others are for rendering the
word to wonder, to be amazed, as in Mark ii. 12., but there an
evident subject of wonder or amazement is first mentioned, and
then the passion as the natural effect. Admitting, therefore, that
the word is here employed in its ordinary acceptation, another
class of interpreters refer the relative avrbv not to 'lriaoiig but to
oyXov, v. 20., but the same pronoun occurs again in the same
clause, where it is admitted on all hands to refer to Jesus, and
not to the multitude. Others, again, have supposed that the
phrase ol irap avroii does not here denote his friends or rela
tions, but merely those who were with him ; i.e. some of his
disciples. - But this is altogether impossible ; for it is said not of
Jesus alone, but of his disciples also, that they were oppressed
by the crowd ; and consequently they could not be said to have
heard of the distress which they had seen and felt. Unless,
therefore, EXsyov be translated indefinitely it was said, of which
the syntax will scarcely admit, the version of the E. T. is cor
rect ; and it is easy to suppose that the expression might be eli
cited from our Lord's relations by the fear that his fervency of
spirit might be injurious to his health ; not to mention that they
were apt at times to encourage a disposition not altogether fa
vourable to his claims. See John vii. 5. with the context. Camp
bell, Doddridge, Hammond, Kuinoel.— [Whitby, Le Clerc,
Grotius, Schoettgen.] With i^iarri there is an ellipsis of ek
4>pEvwi> or ek yvwpng. So Aristaen. I. 5. i^iarriv, bpoXoyw.

390 MARK III. 31. IV. 2. 10, 11. 15.
Alciphron. III. 2. pipyvag, Kat aXnOwg i%iarng. Compare Mark
v. 42. vi. 51. Luke viii. 56. Acts ii. 7. 12. xii. 16. The omission
is supplied in Eurip. Orest. 1019. i^iarnv (ppsvwv. Iph. A. 136.
yvwpag i^iarav. Bacch. 840. 805. So Cic. deDiv. II. excidere
mente. Phavorinus : e^eotjike' paivsrai. The phrase Kparrjo-at
aiirbv does not necessarily imply violence, as appears from
2 Kings iv. 8. LXX. Mark ix. 27. Wetstein, Munthe.

Ver. 31. rj ju/jrrjp aiiroii. Hence Theophylact accuses her
KEvoSo^lag, of vain glory; TertuWian of incredulity ; and Chry
sostom of infirmity and madness. Whitby. It is not necessary
to admit the charge in order to shew that the superstitious errors
of Romanism are wholly at variance with the opinions of the
early Fathers.

CHAPTER IV.
Contents: — The parable of the sower, vv. 1 — 20. [Matt. xiii.
1. Luke viii. 4.] The proper end of hearing, vv. 21 — 25.
The parable of the progressively growing seed, w. 26 — 29.
The parable of the mustard-seed, vv. 30—34. [Matt. xiii. 31.
Luke xiii. 19.] Tlie tempest stilled, vv. 35 — 41. [Matt. viii.
18. Luke viii. 22.]
Verse 2. iv ry StSaxp- In his doctrine ; i. e. while he was
teaching. The phrase occurs again in Mark xii. 38. and is pe
culiar to this Evangelist. Grotius.
Ver. 10. ol 7T£pt avrov. None of the other Evangelists in
timate that there were any besides the twelve with him : but it
seems that there were others, probably some of the seventy dis
ciples, who were constant attendants upon his public instructions.
A. Clarke.
Ver. 11. rolg'i%w. It was customary with the Jews to give
this title to the Heathens. Thus in Aruch : Books that are
without; i. e. Heathen books. Our Saviour, therefore, by ap
plying it to the Jews, seems to hint to them that in a short time
the kingdom of God would be taken from them, and they them
selves be ot 'i\to, those that are without. Whitby, Lightfoot.
Ver. 15. Kat7rwc; How then? The conjunction Kat is not
only copulative but illative, as in Gen. xiii. 16. xxiv. 41. xxviii.
21. xxxi. 8. xiii. 34. 38. Exod. vi. 1. vii. 9. 11. Levit. iv. 3. 14.
23. 28. v. 5. vi. 4. Numb. v. 15. 21 .' Deut. vi. 21. viii. 10. Josh.

MARK IV. 21. 26. 391
i. 15. xxiv. 20. 1 Sam. i. 11. vi. 9. Psalm ii. 16. vii. 7. xlviii. 42,
Joel ii. 18. Mic. vii. 9. Mai. ii. 2. LXX, Markx. 26. £«£<? ii.
15. xii. 29. 1 Cor. v. 13. Whitby.
Fer. 21. This and the four following verses occur in different
connexions in Matt. v. 15. x. 26. xi. 15. xii. 2. xiii. 12. Here
and in Luke viii. 16. they are subjoined to the explanation of the
parable of the sower, in a private conference with the disciples,
and seem to be intended as a direction to them in regard to their
future ministry. " I give you," says Christ, " a clear light by
which you may understand this and all other parables ; not that
you should keep it to yourselves, and hide it as a candle under a
bushel, (v. 21.); for though I instruct you privately in the doc
trines of the Gospel, I do not intend that you should keep them
secret, for there is nothing hid which shall not be made manifest,
(v. 22.) Listen, therefore, to my instructions (v. 23.) ; and take
heed how ye listen, that nothing be forgotten, for according to
the measure of your attention and diligence greater proficiency
shall be imparted to you (v. 24.) ; according to the proverb, He
that hath, J-e. (v. 25.)." So Theophylact. Whitby, Le Clerc,
Macknight. The word KXivn, v. 21., does not signify a bed,
but a couch, on which they reclined at meals, and which seems
to have been frequently used as a hiding-place. Lucian Toxar.
28. rd fpwpia i%i<pEpov iiirb KXivy nvl iv aKOTEivty KEipEva. Liban.
Epict. 608. rovg piv ek twv bptov Kariiyaysg, rovg Si iiirb KXivag
Kpvirropivovg iirslaag, k. t. X. Sueton. Calig. 51. Sub ledum
condere solebat. Plaut. Cas. III. 5. 31. Sub lectis latentes metu
mussitant. Wetstein. In v. 24. rt is equivalent to irwg in
Luke viii. 18. So also 1 Cor. vii. 16. The verb aKoiiEiv, in the
end of the verse, implies to hear with attention, as in Matt, xviii.
15, 16. and elsewhere. It has a signification nearly similar infra
v. 33. Whitby, Campbell.
Ver. 26. ovrwg iarlv r) fiaatXEia k. t. X. This parable is re
corded only by St.' Mark. Some refer it to the seed which fell
upon good ground in the foregoing parable of the sower, which
springs and grows and daily increaseth, though the husbandman
knows not how. So the doctrine of the Gospel received into a
honest heart ripens and brings forth fruit, though we know not
how the word and spirit work the increase. In this case, how
ever, Christ being the husbandman, the sleeping and waking can
form no part of the comparison, nor can it be said with propriety
that he knoweth not how the seed comes to perfection. It
seems more probable, that the parable should be understood
in connexion with the preceding verses, and intended to prevent
the Apostles from being dispirited when they did not see their
labours attended with immediate success. As the husbandman
does not by any efficacy of his own cause the seed to grow, but

392 MARK IV. 27. 29. 35.
leaves it to the natural and imperceptible nourishment of the soil
and sun ; so Christ, having taught men his religion, no longer
interposes visibly in the furtherance thereof, but suffers it to
spread by the secret influence of his spirit, till it shall at length
attain its full effect. But as the reapers in the harvest collect the
ripened corn into the granary, so also Christ will then visibly re
appear, to take to himself and reward those who have received
his doctrine and brought forth the fruits of it. Of course the
ornamental circumstances of the parable are not to be taken into
the account. S. Clarke, Macknight. — [Whitby.]
Ver. 27. KaOsvSy, Kal iyEtptirai k. r. X. The order is clearly
this : KaOsiSy vvKra Kal iyEipyrai ripipav. In the next verse the
adjective avropdrri signifies by its own energy ; i. e. without the
industry of man. Apoll. Rhod. I. 1143. avropdrri <pve yala
TEpEivrig avOsa iroirig. Hesiod. Op. D. I. 117. Kapirbv S' eiptpe
feiSwpog dpovpa Avropdrrj ttoXXov te Kat d<pOovov. Arrian.
Exped. Alex. VII. 4. 8. ot XsipuivEg, ot vdpSov avroparoi ek^e-
povai. Virg. iEn. II. 10. Nullis hominum cogentibus ipsce
Sponte sua veniunt. With the expression irXr)pri alrov we may
compare Lucian. Diss. Hesiod. p. 663. ojjSe dpqv \Xwp6v 'in
rov araxvv, i) kevov EvpE0i)aEa0at rov Kapirov. The whole ex
pression is similar to Simplic. in Epict. p. 224. to yap airippa
tpvrwv, Kara(5aXX6pEvov iirl yr)v, TEyyoptvov vSari, pit,ag drpitjat
Kal fiXaaroiig, Etra KaXajuiiv Kat kXooouc rpiipEi, Kal rd E^ijc ^XP1
rr/g airoSoaEwg tov Kap7rov Kat 7r£iravt7£a)e. Again, p. 231. koi
dirb 7rvpov KaXdpii, Kat daraxvg, Kal irdXiv irvpog. Compare
also Cic. de Senect. 15. Wetstein, Kypke, A. Clarke.
Ver. 29. irapaSi^. Supply iavrov. Shall deliver itself; scil. to
the gatherer ; i. e. shall be ripe. There is a similar ellipsis in
Eurip. Phoen. 21. See my note; Pent. Gr. p. 305. So in Latin,
dare for dare se : Terent. Heaut. V. 1 . 43. The omission is
supplied in Virg. Georg. I. 287. Multee adeo gelidce melius se
node dederunt. In the same way the Hebrew C3"W is used in
Isaiah xxxviii. 13., where the LXX employ 7rapa8tSo)^t. Luke
has rEXE<r^>opETv. By a common metonymy, SpfVavov, the sickle,
is put for the reapers, who used it. The verb a7ro<rr£XXEtv is pro
perly used only of persons. Bos, Hammond. Our Lord has been
supposed to intimate here, that as soon as a man has reached the
highest degree of holiness of which his nature is capable, he is
taken into the kingdom of God. But such is evidently not the
scope of the parable ; and though in many cases it would be
gain to die and be with Christ, yet to live may be better for the
church. See Philip, i. 21. 24. The time of harvest here, as
in Matt. xiii. 38. 43. is the day of judgment. A. Clarke.
Ver. 35. iv tKEivy ry i)pipa. Hence it appears at first sight

MARK V. 3. 393
that the following events of the storm and the Gadarene dae
moniac are immediately connected with the delivery of the pa
rable of the sower, whereas, according to Matthew, they took
place at a different time. But it should be remembered that the
Jews used the word days for time generally, so that the expres
sion here employed is equivalent to iv iKEivw t$ Kaip$, Matt.
xii. 1., where a similar transition occurs. It is true that in this
case the plural r)pipai is usually employed, as in 1 Sam. iii. 1.
LXX. Compare also Nehem. xiii. 1. with ch. xii. 37. But
there may be an enallage of the singular for the plural, as in
John xviii. 20. In Luke viii. 22. the words employed are iv
piq rwv r)pEpibv. The Evangelist's meaning is, therefore, that on
one of those days, after our Lord had taught the people, he de
sired his disciples to go with him to the other side of the lake.
There is another difficulty, however, arising from the words dig
r)v iv rij> irXoiw in the following verse, which seem to connect the
transaction with v. 1. supra : but this may mean nothing more
than that he had been preaching from a vessel to the multitude
on the shore, as his custom was on other occasions, and that
they carried him away just as he sat in the vessel. Or it may be
that dig r)v, like dig ei^e, will denote quam celerrime. Xen.
Cyrop. IV. 1. 19. Evuvg wairEp ei^ev 6 Ssvo^tlJv iXOwv irpbg tov
XEiplaoipov. So in Latin ut implies swiftness, as in Virg. Eclog.
VIII. 41. Ut vidi, utperii, ut me malus abstulit error ! In this
case ev nji irXoiw must be put for Etc rb irXolov ; and the inter
change of these prepositions is sufficiently common. Compare
Matt. xiv. 3. Mark i. 16. 1 Cor. xv. 19. Esdr. vii. 10. Ecclus.
xiii. 12. LXX. Of the verb irapaXapfidvEiv, see on Matt. iv. 5.
Other solutions also have been given, but they are so extremely
far fetched as to be altogether unworthy of attention. Macknight,
Grotius, Kuinoel, Schleusner. — [Elsner, Kypke, Raphe
lius, &c]

CHAPTER V.
Contents: — Tlie Gadarene dcemoniac, vv. 1 — 20. [Matt. viii.
28. Luke viii. 26.] The daughter of Jairus raised, and the
issue of blood cured, vv. 21 — 43. [Matt. ix. 1. Luke viii. 40.]
Verse 3. ovte dXvaEaiv ovSug k. t. X. Instances of great
strength in maniacs, during their paroxysms, are very usual : in
this instance, however, it was clearly the effect of dcemoniacal
agency. It is also very common with them to tear and maim
themselves with their hands or sharp stones, or whatever may fall

394 MARK V. 7.
in their way. Pausan. in Laconicis : iirirpiuaKE aiiTog avrov, Kal
StEc,yEt to awpadirav,K6irTwv te Kal XvpatvopEvog. Justin. XIII.
6. 17. Macedonia exemplo furentium manus et membra sua ipsa
ccesura. The use of sharp stones for cutting is noticed in Arrian,
Indie. XXIV. 9. rd Si dXXa rolg XiOoiatv b£,iaiv ekotttov' aiSri-
pog yap avrolg ovk i,v. Wetstein, Raphelius.
Ver. 7. roii Qeov tov vxpiarov. The name of the Most High is
given to God in the O. T. to distinguish him from all others who
are called gods, as in Gen. xiv. 18. Deut. xxxii. 8. Heb. vii. 1.
Hence it seems to have been adopted as a general name of the
Deity by the Canaanites and Phoenicians ; for we find the invo
cation Ythalonim Vualonuth, i. e. Super os super asque, being the
masculine and feminine plural of the Hebrew. ]r>y, Halion, cor
rupted into Alon, in Plaut. Pcenul. V. 1.1. Philo also relates
that Augustus had sacrifices offered in Jerusalem to the most high
God. It is not surprising, therefore, that the daemoniac, though
an Heathen, should make use of the appellation in addressing
Christ. Of the formula 6pKt?w ai, see on Matt. xxvi. 63. Here,
however, it does not amount to the exaction of an oath, but is
merely an expression of earnest supplication, equivalent to Sio-
pai aov in Luke viii. 28. Some have supposed that the request
here made corresponds with the first petition in Luke, and there
fore, that fidaaviZEiv denotes a milder punishment than Etc ri)v
afivaaov air eXOeIv, Luke viii. 31. But it seems more probable
that this latter is only a repetition of the former entreaty in a
different form. The word dfivaaog signifies bottomless, and is
applied by the Greeks to their Tartarus, as in Eurip. Phoen.
1620. Taprapov a/3u<rcra xdapara. Hence the Jews and early
Christians, in writing Greek, transferred it to the abode of evil
spirits ; or, as it is called, the bottomless pit, Rev. ix. 1, 2. xi. 7.
xvii. 8. xx. 1. 3. Compare also 2 Pet. ii. 4. It appears also
from v. 10. infra, that the devils begged that Jesus would not
send them out of the country. To explain this circumstance
some pretend that particular genii preside over particular regions,
founding their opinions on Dan. x. 13. 20. ; and because the pro
phet speaks of angels contending with each other, and Michael's
assisting one of the parties, they think the war was waged between
good and bad genii, respectively appointed to protect and injure
mankind. Hence they conjecture that the daemons who tormented
these miserable men were stationed in this country to oppose
Christ ; and here they begged to remain, thinking that they can
do more mischief than elsewhere. Be this as it may, they bore
the most unequivocal testimony to the Omnipotence and the di
vinity of Christ ; and it may be questioned if the person speaking,
or any of the hearers, except Christ himself, fully understood the
nature or the propriety of the petition which they put up to him.
Macknight, Grotius, Hammond, Doddridge. — [Whitby.]

MARK V. 9. 18. 23. 395
Ver. 9. ri aoi ovopa ; Spirits are continually represented in
Scripture as having names, for instance, Gabriel, Michael,
Beelzebub, &c. Le Clerc supposes that these names were either
of human invention, or assumed by the spirits to accommodate
themselves to human capacities. That the latter was the case, in
some instances at least, appears from this passage, as well as
from Luke i. 19. and elsewhere. Christ did not ask the daemon's
name from ignoranee, but in order that the surrounding multitude
might be convinced by the answer of the dreadful affliction to
which the possessed was exposed, of the stupendous power by
which the miracle was effected, and of the benevolence which re
leased the sufferer from a tyranny so oppressive. The term
legion, borrowed from the Romans, was constantly employed by
the Jews to denote a great multitude. In Bereshith Rabba, §.
20. R. Eliezer Ben Simeon saith, It is easier for a man to
nourish a legion of olives in Galilee, than to bring up one child
in the land of Israel. It has been supposed that the legion is
here put for the chief of the legion, but the tenor of the narrative
is decisive in favour of the literal meaning of the word. What
the Romans thought of their legions may be readily conceived
from the boast of Caesar, de Bell. Hisp. §. 42. An, me deleto,
non animum advertebatis, decern habere legiones populum Ro-
manum, quce non solum vobis obsistere, sed etiam caelum diruere
possent? Lightfoot, Kuinoel.
Ver. 18. 'iva y juet' avroii. See on Matt. xxvi. 69. The man
may have been induced to make this request lest he should again
become subject to the daemon's power as soon as Christ had de
parted. But our Lord was willing to shew that his presence was
not necessary in order to protect those who put their trust in
him. So Theophylact. It may be also that he wished to have
a living record of his miracles among the Gentiles, for the purpose
of preparing their minds for the reception of the Gospel, when it
should be preached to them after his resurrection. In the next
verse the Camb. MS. followed by the Syriac version, inserts on
before iXiriaE, but the received reading presents a very easy con
struction. Grotius, Kuinoel.
Ver. 23. to Ovydrpiov. It appears from v. 42. that she was
about twelve years old, and from Luke that she was his only
child. Hence the term Ovydrpiov, and Kopctcriov, v. 41. Mai
monides in Ashuth, c. 2. A daughter from her birth-day, until
she is twelve years old complete is called a little maid, but when
she is full twelve years old, and one day over, she is called a
young woman. Of the phrase iaxdrwg ex£(v we have frequent
examples in the best writers. Lucian. Abdic. 14. iv iaxdrotg
ovaav rriv yvvalKa. Diod. Sic. XVIII. 48. 6 8' 'Avrt7raT-poe
iaxdrtog rjSr| SiaKElpEvog. XXI. 12. rov fiaaiXia SiaKEipsvov ia-

396 MARK V. 26. 30. 38.
Xdrwg r)Sn. Joseph. Ant. IX. 9. KaraXa/3wv S' avrov ev £<rxa"
roig bvra, kXoieiv r)p%aro. Artemid. Oneirocr. III. 61. rolg ia-
Xarotg e'yoikti awrripiav irpoayopEVEi. So in ultimis esse, Petron.
Arb. 101. Before 'iva there is an ellipsis of Siopat ; and it often
happens that some verb or sentence is omitted before this par
ticle, as in Mark xiv. 49. Ephes. v. 33. 1 John ii. 19. In peti
tions however, more especially, the verb is omitted. See my note
on Hom. II. B. 413. The imperative iiriOig is used in Matt. ix.
18. Lightfoot, Wetstein, Elsner, Whitby.
Ver. 26. iroXXd iraOovaa k. t. X. That the sufferings as well
as the expences of the woman must have been excessive, we may
readily conceive from the nostrums which the Jewish physicians
were accustomed to apply to the disease under which she la
boured. In Schabbath, p. 110., we find the following: R. Jo-
chanan saith : Take of gum of Alexandria the weight of a
zuzee ; of alum, the weight of a zuzee ; and of crocus hortensis,
the weight of a zuzee : let these be bruised together, and be
given in wine to the woman who hath an issue of blood. If this
does not benefit, take of Persian onions three logs, boil them
in wine, give it to her to drink, and say, Arise from thy flux. If
this does not prevail, set her in a place where two ways nieet,
and let her hold a cup of wine in her hand, and let somebody
come behind her, and affright her, and say, Arise from thy flux.
If these do no good other doses and remedies are prescribed, and
among them the following : Let them dig seven ditches, in which
let them burn so'me cuttings of such vines as are yet uncircum-
cised, i. e. under four years growth, and let her take in her hand
a cup of wine. Lead her away from this ditch, and let her sit
down over that, and so of the rest ; and at every removal you
must say unto her, Arise from thy flux. Lightfoot. There is
a story related in Euseb. Eccl. Hist. VII. 18. that this woman,
who by the way had spent all that she had, afterwards erected a
statue commemorative of her cure ; and that near it an unknown
plant miraculously sprung up, which was a sovereign remedy
against all diseases. Credat Judceus. Whitby.
Ver. 30. rj)v e? avroii Swapiv l^EXOovaav. So Luke vi. 19.
Hence it appears that the power of performing miracles was not
adventitious, but inherent in Jesus. The miraculous cures per
formed by the Prophets and Apostles are always attributed to a
superior agency; but those of Christ sometimes to a divine
virtue residing in him, and sometimes to the Father, as in John
xiv. 10. Their being therefore equally ascribed to the Father
and himself proves that they are one in mysterious union. Whit
by, Holden.
Ver. 38. dXaXa£ovrac. From dXaXi), of which see Pent.

MARK V. 43. VI. 5. 13. 397
Gr. Lex. in voce. In v. 41. some Latin copies have Tabitka, as
in Acts ix. 40. ; but the common reading is correct. The word
NJTvtD, Talyitha, occurs in the Chaldee paraphrase on Prov. ix.,
and in Bava Bathra, p. 91, 2. we have the words NJTvtOI WvD,
which the Gloss explains a boy and a girl. Somewhat similar
both in sound and signification is the iEolic word rdXig, of
which see Lex. Pent. Gr. in voce. The verb Kovpi is the im
perative of Dip, surgere. In the interpretation the Evangelist
has inserted <rot Xiyw, as indicative of the self-derived authority
by which our Lord performed this miracle. Lightfoot, Gro
tius. Ver. 43. "iva pmSElg yvi^ tovto. One reason of this might be,
lest he should receive too frequent applications to raise the dead.
The miracles of Christ were designed as proofs of his mission,
and not to alter the course of nature upon every request that
might be made to him. Hence, after restoring the damsel to
life, he left her, for the preservation of her existence, to the use of
ordinary means, and commanded that something should be given
her to eat. Le Clerc, A. Clarke.

CHAPTER VI.
Contents: — III treatment of Christ at Nazareth, vv. 1 — 6.
[Matt. xiii. 54.] His commission to the twelve, vv. 7 — 13.
[Matt. x. 1. Luke ix. 1.] Various opinions of Christ, vv. 14,
15. [Matt. xvi. 14.] Death of John the Baptist, vv. 16—29.
[Matt. xiv. 2.] The twelve return, vv. 30—34. [Matt. xiv. 13.
Luke ix. 10. John vi. 1.] Five thousand fed miraculously,
vv. 35—44. [Matt. xiv. 16. Luke ix. 12. John vi. 3.] Christ
prays in private, vv. 45, 46. [Matt. xiv. 22. John vi. 15.] He
walks on the sea, and quells a storm, vv. 47 — 52. [Matt. xiv.
24. John vi. 16.] Divers cures, vv. 53 — 56. [Matt. xiv. 34.]
Verse 5. ovk iiSvvaro. See on Mark ii. 19. Christ required
faith in the patient in order to his cure ; and, therefore, where
this was wanting, he could do no mighty work ; not that he
wanted power, but that they wanted the condition upon which
alone it was fit that he should heal them. Whitby.
Ver. 13. i,XEifov iXaii^. Of the use of oil in cases of sickness
and disease, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 510. To this
there is an allusion in James v. 14. and in the Talmud. See
Berach, p. 3, 1. Schabbath, p. 14, 3. It is also mentioned as a

398 MARK VI. 15. 19. 21.
medicinal application in Celsus, Galen, and Hippocrates. It is a
question however, whether, in the case of the Apostles, it was
used as symbolical of that oil of gladness which they imparted to
the patient, or as a remedy, which though uncertain in human
hands, could not be otherwise than effectual in the hands of God.
The former is, perhaps, the more probable opinion, not only be
cause it was not pointed out to them as a remedy by Christ, but
because it was frequently used as a religious emblem both by
Jews and Christians. Thus we are told of the unction of faith,
and of the spirit, 2 Cor. i. 21. 1 John ii. 20. 27. Wihtby, Light
foot, Grotius, Rosenmuller. — [Michaelis, Kuinoel.]
Ver. 15. on irporpr)rrig iarlv, i) dig k. t. X. According to Eu
thymius some copies hado irpocprirrig, so that the sense would be
He is the prophet predicted of old. But the almost general
consent of the best MSS. in omitting the particle r) forbids us to
admit the article or the interpretation founded upon it. The
meaning is, He is a prophet resembling one of the prophets of
ancient times. Middleton, Campbell, Grotius.
Ver. 19. Evst^Ev airy. Was greatly enraged at him.
Hesych. evei^ov- EyoXow, topyiZovro. Compare Luke xi. 53.
There is probably an ellipsis of ydXov, which is supplied in
Herod. I. 118. VIII. 27. Nearly in the same sense is used the
Hebrew Dt2t#, which the LXX render by iyKOTElv in Gen. xxvii.
41. Psalm liv. 3. by pvriaiKaKElv in Gen. 1. 15., and by Evsyav
in Gen. xlix. 23. Hammond, Grotius, Wetstein. In the next
verse there is some difference of opinion as to the meaning of the
verb <rvv£TJ7p£i : the E. T. renders it observed, and some commen
tators understand it of the attention which Herod, in common
with others, had occasionally paid to John's advice. See Joseph.
Ant. XVIII. 7. But this is rather implied in the ensuing clause.
The Vulgate has custodiebat; i. e. from the effects of Herodias'
resentment: and this seems to be the true version. Compare
Matt. ix. 17. Luke ii. 19. v. 38. There seems to be a needless
repetition of the verb dKovEtv in the next clause ; but in the first
instance it is merely an explanation of etto'iei. The sense is, He
heard him with pleasure, and frequently put what he heard in
practice. Campbell, Kuinoel, Le Clerc. — [Whitby.]
Ver. 21. ripipag svKaipov. E. T. a convenient day. It rather
means a day of leisure ; i. e. a holy day. In v. 31. infra, the
verb EVKatpEtv signifies to be at leisure. Hammond. — [Grotius.]
The word pEyiaravsg is of Persic origin, and thence adopted
both by the Greeks and Latins to designate nobles generally,
but more especially the immediate friends or ministers of the
king. Suidas : psyiaravEg' ol rov fiaaiXiwg irEpip^XEirroi, vwe%-
ovaioi. Compare Joseph. Ant. IX. 3. 2. XX. 2. 3. Siieton.
10

MARK VI. 23. 31. 33. 399
Calig. 5. Senec. Epist. 21. Tacit. Anal. XV. 27. It occurs in
2 Chron. xxxvi. 8. Prov. viii. 16. Jerem. xiv. 3. Jonas iii. 7.
Nah. iii. 10. Dan. iii. 34. v. 1, 2. 3. 9. 23. Zach. xi. 2. Rev. vi.
15. viii. 23. LXX. By 7rpwrot we are probably to understand
the chief magistrates of the city or province. Schleusner.
Ver. 23. 'iwg ripiaovg k. r. X. There is a similar promise in
Esth. v. 3. LXX. So Hom. II. I. 612. laov ipol (ZaalXEvs, koI
r)ptav pslpEo npr)g. Wetstein. The verb dOsrElv in v. 26. sig
nifies to deny, to refuse, in which sense it is used in Joseph.
Ant. XV. 2. 6. ovSEvbg dOErr)aEiv wv d£,iol. Plut. Coriolan. p.
252. C. priSiv aOErslv jttrjr' avaivsaOai rwv rotoiirtov Svvapivov.
Its primary meaning is to displace ; and thence to abrogate,
Gal. iii. 15. to frustrate, Luke vii. 30. 1 Cor. i. 19. to reject,
Luke x. 16. with some other cognate significations. Schleus
ner. The word (T7rEKoi)Xar<i>p, v. 27., signifies a soldier of the
guard. It is the Latin speculator, which occurs in Tac. Hist. I.
24. It is found also in Hebrew characters in the Talmud.
Hammond, Lightfoot. See Home's Introd. Vol. I. p. 100.
Ver. 31. vpElg avroi. You yourselves ; i. e. by yourselves, or
alone. So aiirbg is sometimes used, as in Theogn. v. 373. av
yap irdvTEaatv dvdaaEig Ti.pi)v aiirbg £XWV- PALAIRET.
Ibid, ol ipxbpevoi koI ol virdyovTsg. Coming ; that is, to be
-instructed, or to be healed of their infirmities ; and departing,
when they had received the benefits for which they petitioned.
Ver. 33. There is, perhaps, no verse in the N. T. which has
suffered more from transcribers than this. In the first clause ol
bx^oi, and in the next avrov are omitted by a variety of the best
MSS., and Griesbach has properly ejected them from the text.
Christ would scarcely embark in sight of the multitude since his
intention was to be private, though many might discover it ; nor
would the historian be likely to say that many knew him, after
he had been occupied so long in teaching them that his person
could not be otherwise than familiar to them. It may be said,
indeed, that when avrov is excluded there seems to be some de
fect, as it is not expressly said what they knew ; but this is so
fully supplied by the following words, which acquaint us that the
people went thither, as to put it beyond a doubt that what they
knew was the place to which our Lord intended to sail. Indeed,
many of those who retain the common reading refer avrov not to
Jesus, but to roVov in the preceding verse : but there is sufficient
reason for supposing that the words in question are intruders.
Upon the authority also of several MSS. and versions Griesbach
rejects the last clause of the verse altogether, and emends the
preceding sentence as follows, Kat irEZy dirb iraaibv raiv ttoXewv
awiSpapov, koI rjXOov ekeI. Campbell, Griesbach. Of v. 34.

400 MARK VI. 37. 39.46,
see on Matt. ix. 36. The expression ibpa 7roXX?j, (v. 35.) sig
nifying late in the day, is of frequent occurrence both in Greek
and Latin writers. Dion. Hal. II. 54. StipEvov axpt iroXXr)g
wpag. Cass. B. G. I. 22. Multo die. Cic. Epist. Attic. XIII. 9.
Multus sermo ad multum diem. Wetstein.
Ver. 37. StaKoaiwv Snvapiwv. This would amount to about
6£ 5s. sterling. Some suppose that the disciples made an offer
of laying out their whole stock in hand to supply provisions for
the multitude ; but the question seems rather to indicate an ex
pression of admiration: and this opinion is confirmed by the im
port of Philip's answer in John vi. 7. It appears also from the
Talmud that two hundred denarii was the sum fixed as a fine for
various offences, as the dowry of a virgin, as the portion to be
paid by a husband to his divorced wife, &c. &c. whence, it be
came at length a general phrase for any round sum. Lightfoot,
Gill, Whitby. — [Grotius, Doddridge.] The preposition
dvrt must be supplied with Snvapiwv.
Ver. 39. avpiroaia, avpiroaia. The word avpiroaiov signifies
properly compotatio ; and thence generally an entertainment, and,
by an easy transition, the company assembled at an entertainment.
Cic. Epist. Fam. IX. 24. Sapientius nostri quam Grceci. Illi
avpiroaia, aut avvSstirva, i. e. compotationes, aut conccenationes,-
nos convivia, quod turn maxime simul vivitur. See also de
Sened. c. 1 3. The word is here doubled after the idiom of the
Hebrew language, which is deficient in phrases of distribution.
In the same manner we have Svo Svo, infra v. 7. and irpaatal
irpaaial in the next verse. So Exod. viii. 10. LXX. a-wijYayov
aiirovg Oripwviag Oripwviag. The word irpaaid denotes a small
plot, such as a flower-bed in a garden. Theophylact : 7rpatrtai
Xiyovrat rd iv rolg Kr)irotg Sidipopa Koppara, iv dig ipvrEvovTai
Sidipopa iroXXaKig Xdxava. It is found in this sense in some of
the later Greek writers ; as also in Ecclus. xxiv. 31. but not
elsewhere in the LXX or in the N. T. Some have supposed
that the whole multitude sat down in one body, one hundred in
front, and fifty deep, because 50 x 100 = 5000. But such a
disposition would have rendered the distribution of the bread
extremely inconvenient : and the use of the plural both by Mark
and Luke plainly indicates several detached companies. These
companies formed themselves into oblong squares, like beds in a
garden, the persons in each company sitting face to face. The
word KXto-tat, employed by St. Luke, refers to the manner of re
clining at meals. Kuinoel, Campbell, Wetstein. In v. 44. the
adverb iiaEi is omitted by many of the best MSS.
Ver. 46. avrolg. That is, t$ bxXw, the multitude, Matt. xiv.
23. Compare Mark viii. 1. With iXawEiv in v. 48. there is an

MARK VI. 52. VII. 2. 401
ellipsis of ri)v vaiiv, as in John vi. 1 9. The omission is supplied
in Arist. Equit. 1179. Grotius.
Ver. 52. £7rt role aprotc- That is, IVi nig Oaiipan rolg dp-
roig yEvopivto. Some understand s7rt to mean after, as in Jo
seph. Ant. V. 1. 26., iroir)aETE aw(ppovr)aavrEg koI iirl vsapolg
pETariOipEvot upaprripaai. It should seem rather to signify by
means of, as in Matt. iv. 4. and elsewhere. The verb trvvtlvat
denotes to gain wisdom, to grow wiser : and so in Josh. i. 7.
1 Sam. xviii. 4. LXX, Matt. xvi. 8. Mark viii. 17. The verb
irwpoiiaOai is here metaphorically applied, as again in Mark viii.
17. John xii. 40. Rom. xi. 7. 2 Cor. xiii. 14. It signifies pro
perly to be hardened; and thence, to be mentally dull, or stupid.
Schleusner. — [Krebs.] Of the verb bppiZw, v. 53., see my
note on Hom. II. S. 75.

CHAPTER VII.
Contents : — The conversation of our Lord with the Scribes and
Pharisees on the subject of traditions, vv. 1 — 23. [Matt. xv.
1.] Tlie cure of the Syro-Phcenician ivoman's daughter, vv.
24 — 30. [Matt. xv. 21.] ; and of the man with an impediment
in his speech, vv. 31 — 37.
Verse 2. Koivalg xEPff'- With common, i. e. defiled hands.
See on Matt. xv. 11. It was quite in the Jewish idiom to
oppose common and holy ; the most usual signification of the
latter word in the O. T. being separated from common, and de
voted to sacred uses. The superficial Pharisee, however, uni
formly attending to the letter and neglecting the spirit of reli
gion, here used the word in the sense of unclean or unwashen,
not understanding that their meals were sanctified by the ivord
of God and by prayer, (1 Tim. iv. 5.) rather than by ceremonial
ablutions. This sense of the word Kotvoc seems to be recognized
in the Latin derivative ccenum, and in the old verb quino ; whence
inquino, to pollute. Some suppose that the explanation, roiir
'ianv, aviirroig, is added from a gloss ; but as Mark wrote for
Gentile as well as Jewish readers, he added it no doubt for the
information of the former. Campbell, Hammond. The word
ipipxpavro is wanting in several MSS., and Griesbach has re
jected it from the text. But the authorities in favour of the
common reading are abundantly sufficient, and though vv. 3, 4.
are parenthetical, the word 'iirtira, at the beginning of v. 5., in
dicates the commencement of another sentence, and not the con
tinuation of v. 2.
vol. i. d d

402 MARK VII. 3, 4.
Ver. 3. idv pi) irvypy vixpwvrai. Except they wash their
hands oft. For this signification of the word irvypy there is no
authority whatever ; and though in the modern Lexicons crebro
is admitted as one meaning, it is only because the Latin Vulgate
so translates the word in this passage. Erasmus would therefore
read irvKvy, which Beza suspects that the old translator found in
his copy ; but irvKvy, as an adverb, is as little known as irvypy,
though irvKvd frequently occurs, as in Luke v. 33. : and even
71-vKvd would be ambiguous, as it may imply that they washed often
before every meal. Theophylact explains the word axp< dyKw-
vog, up to the elbow; and that such was the Jewish manner of
washing is evident from a variety of passages in their writings.
Thus in Jadaim, II. 3. The hands are polluted and made clean
unto the joining of the arm. The same custom, borrowed in all
probability from the Jews, is recognized in the Koran, Sur. V. 7.
O believers, when ye wish to pray, wash your faces, and your
hands up to the elbows, and your feet up to the ancles. But
this idea would scarcely have been conveyed by the dative ; nor
does irvypi) even signify the elbow, but the fist, or the hand con-
traded for grasping. It is more natural, therefore, to consider
the word as representing the manner of washing ; and hence it is
rendered by some with the fist, i. e. with one hand closed, and
passing over the other. But it should rather seem that the
word is here used, by metonomy, to signify a handful, as we say
a foot for the length of afoot ; and as the sense immediately
supplies the word water, the sense will be with a small quantity
of water. This is confirmed by the circumstance that the verbs
rendered wash, both in this and the next verse of the E. T.
are different in the original ; the former of which, vlirrEaOat,
signifies to wash simply, and is distinguished from fiairriZEaOat,
which signifies to immerse, to dip, (whence fiairrtapbg, immersion,
in the same verse,) by the addition of irvypy. Both these modes
of washing of hands appear to have been in use; the baptism or
immersion of the whole body was, for the most part, a religious
ceremony. Campbell, Wetstein. — [Hammond, Lightfoot,
Le Clerc, Whitby.]
Ver. 4. a7ro dyopdg. Scil. iXOovTEg, or perhaps yEvojtiEvot
or bvTEg, the former of which is supplied in Herod. II. 78. iirsdv
dirb Se'iitvov yivuivrai, and the latter in Herod. I. 126. dwb
Se/7tvov fjo-av. The ellipsis occurs in Theophr. Char. 24. dirb
Se'iitvov ivrEv%saOai ipdaKEiv. Compare Ecclus. xxxiv. 27. LXX.
There is no occasion therefore to insert brav iXOwai, which has
found its way into some MSS. from a marginal gloss. Elsner.
The word %,f.arwv may either be the genitive plural of i^arijc, the
name of a liquid measure, corresponding with the Latin sextarius,
or of %Eard, polished vessels, subaud. irorf)pia. Perhaps the
former derivation is preferable. The word Isorijc occurs fre-

MARK VII. 9. 13. 21. 403
quently in Galen, and in Arrian, Dissert. II. 16. Epict. I. 9.
Joseph. Ant. VIII. 2. 9. Vit. 15. Grotius, Wetstein. —
[Lightfoot.] The cleansing of brazen drinking vessels, (%aX-
k'iwv,) only is mentioned ; as earthen-ware, if it became polluted,
was broken. A similar custom is attributed to the Egyptians in
Herod. II. 37. ek yoXkewv iroTxjpiwv irivovat, SiaapiiovrEg dvd
irriaav ripipav' k. r. X. Couches, kXivoI, upon which they re
clined at meals, were supposed to incur impurity if any person
legally unclean made use of them: Celim, p. 66, 1. Rosenmul
ler, Kuinoel.
Ver. 9. KaXiog uOeteIte. Some commentators disjoin the ad
verb KaXwg from oOeteIte, and prefix it to 'iXEyEv : but the struc
ture of the sentence will scarcely admit of this ; nor is it at all
suited to the manner of the Evangelists, who tell the world simply
what Christ said and did, leaving the judgment which ought to
be formed about both to the discernment of their readers. Others
take the words interrogatively ; but the expression is evidently
ironical. See on Matt, xxiii. 32. Campbell. — [Pearce, Ham
mond.] Ver. 13. irapopoia roiavra. Namely, such things as make
the word of God. of none effect by your traditions.. Accordingly
Dr. Pocock, (Miscel. p. 415.) cites from them an ancient canon,
that vows take place even in things commanded by the law, as
well as in things indifferent ; and that any one is so bound by
them that he cannot without great sin do that which is com
manded; i. e. a vow which cannot be legally ratified, must be
ratified even in violation of the law. Whitby.
Ver. 21. 'iawOsv yap k. t. X. The defilements here mentioned
are, in the first place, sins committed against the second table of
the Law, as murder and an evil eye against the sixth command
ment ; fornication, adultery, lasciviousness, against the seventh ;
theft, deceit, against the eighth ; false witness and blasphemy,
against the ninth; and covetousness against the tenth. See Rom.
xiii. 9. They include also the evil dispositions which incline us
to these vices: as, 1. dtppoawri. 2. irovripia. 3. iiirEpri<pavia.
4. SiaXoytapol kuko'i. Of these last dtppoavvn is variously in
terpreted: some render it foolishness; others boasting, from
2 Ccr. xi. 1. 19. xii. 6. 11.; and it is supposed to include not
only a carelessness about religion but a want of reverence for
the Divine Majesty. It is evidently the reverse in signification
of awrppoavvri, which usually denotes temperance, and therefore
most probably implies a want of command over the passions.
By irovr/pia, which is a general name for vice, is here more par
ticularly meant malice, as in Rom. i. 29. Of the terms b<pOaX-
pbg irovripog and fiXaarpripia, see on Matt. vi. 22. ix. 3. respec-
d d 2

404 MARK VII. 34, 35.
tively. In this place the former rather denotes envy than covet-
ousness; but the two vices are nearly related, and the expression
is used of envy in Deut. xv. 9. and in Prov. xxiii. 6. where the
LXX has dvr)p fidaKavog, and the Vulgate homo invidus. The
word 7rX£ovE£tai denotes covetousness ; or perhaps rather, as the
plural is used, inordinate desires generally : and so 2 Pet. ii. 14.
Whitby, Grotius, Campbell, &c.
Ver. 34. Kw<pbv poyiXdXov. E. T. One that was deaf, and
had an impediment in his speech. Some, however, maintain that
the adjective poyiXdXog should be rendered dumb, in which sense
it occurs in Exod. iv. 11. Isaiah xxxv. 6. LXX, for that the
man was dumb as well as deaf appears from v. 37. and from Matt.
ix. 33. Luke xi. 14. But the miracle here related is different
from that referred to in Matthew and Luke ; and the word dXd-
Xovc, in v. 37., is rather a general expression than employed in
reference to this particular case. After the cure also the man is
represented as speaking plain, (iXdXEi bpOwg. v. 35.) which
clearly characterises the cure of an impediment, and not of a com
plete deprivation of speech ; and that he was only tongue-tied, as
it is called, is evident from the expression 6 Ssapbg rr)g yXwaarig,
in the same verse. Artemid. I. 32. rb Si pi) SvvaaOai (puiyyEaOai
i) rr)v yXtoaariv SsSspivrfv exeiv. Justin. XIII. 7. Battus, linguae
nodis solutis, loqui primum ccepit. Grotius, Le Clerc, Wet
stein.— [Whitby, Hammond.] It has been asked why Christ
in this, and two other of his miracles, made use of external signs,
which could have nothing to do with the cure. This was no doubt
intended to intimate that the power which he was about to exert
resided in himself. By putting his finger on the man's ear, he
intimated, that as he appeared to have his ears closed he would
exert his power to open them ; and his tongue, cleaving, as it
were, through drought, to the palate, he moistened it with spittle,
to signify that he would loose it. Whitby.
Ver. 35. iipipaOd. This word is explained by some as the
imperative Hithpahel, and by others as the imp. Niphal of the
Hebrew verb TWiB, aperuit. But it is rather Syro-Chaldaic than
pure Hebrew. As our Lord pronounced the word Ephphthathach,
for such is its proper sound, with a solemn and authoritative em
phasis, the Evangelist thought proper to retain it, though the last
letter could not be properly expressed by any in the Greek al
phabet. The verb XvEaOai would have been more properly ap
plied to the loosing of the tongue, but StavoiyEaOat comes nearer
to the signification of the word of which it is here given as the
interpretation, and it signifies to open the mouth in Psalm
xxxviii. 14. xxxix. 9. Prov. xxxi. 8. LXX. Luke i. 64. and
elsewhere. Schleusner, Grotius, A. Clarke.

MARK VIII. 11, 12. 15. 22. 405

CHAPTER VIII.
Contents : — The feeding of the five thousand, vv. 1 — 9. [Matt.
xv. 32.] Hypocrisy of the Pharisees, vv. 10 — 21. [Matt.
xvi. 1.] A blind man restored, vv. 22 — 26. Jewish opinions
respecting Christ, vv. 27 — 30. [Matt. xvi. 13. Luke ix. 18.]
Our Lord 's prediction of his death and resurrection, vv. 31 —
38. [.Matt. xvi. 21. Luke ix. 22.]
Verse 11. avZr\TElv avrt£. E. T. To question with him, i. e.
to dispute with him : the ancient mode of disputation being by
question and answer. Hence Aristotle enumerates among the
sophisms, 7rXEtw ipwrripara. Compare Luke ii. 46. Grotius,
Kuinoel.
Ver. 12. nip irvEvpan. This is strongly expressive of the vio
lence of his emotion, and the sorrow which he felt at their ob
duracy and hardness of heart. Compare Acts xvii. 16. In the
end of the verse a SoOiiaErat is an elliptical form of adjuration,
very common in the O. T., in which the words Let me not live,
or the like, are omitted at the beginning. So in Deut. i. 35.
1 Sam. iii. 14. Psalm lxxxix. 3, 4. xcv. 11. cxxxii. 2, 3. The
sense is complete in Ezek. xiv. 16. LXX. Z<T> iydi, eI viol r) Ovya-
ripEg atoOriaovrat. By degrees, however, the conditional particle
came to be considered merely as a negative, and hence it is ex
pressed in Matt. xii. 39. xvi. 4. Luke xi. 29. by ov. Whitby,
Campbell, Macknight.
Ver. 15. 'HpdiSov. Matthew couples the Sadducees with the
Pharisees, and omits the mention of Herod. But Herod and the
Herodians, whom Jesus in all probability meant to include with
their head, seem to have belonged to the sect of the Sadducees,
and that they were infected with the leaven of hypocrisy, is evi
dent from Luke xiii. 31. Rosenmuller.
Ver. 22. rpipovaiv avr^ rvipXbv, k. t. X. This miracle is re
corded only by St. Mark, and it contains three particulars worthy
of notice: — 1. Jesus led him out of the town, thereby declaring,
that after so many mighty works had been wrought in Bethsaida
without leading the people to repentance, it was undeserving of
beholding any further display of the power of Christ. 2. The
man upon whom the miracle was performed does not appear, as
in other similar cases, to have been born blind ; this is evident
from his looking up, for the purpose of ascertaining the recovery
of his sight, and from his reply to our Lord's inquiry, that his
vision was indistinct and imperfect : he saw men, as trees, walk-

406 MARK VIII. 26. 31.
ing ; i. e. he could distinguish men from trees only by their
walking : from which it is plain that the idea of a tree had been
previously impressed upon his mind when in possession of his
sight. A confusion of objects is mentioned by Plato as the first
signs of returning vision ; which, he observes, rr)g alaOr)a£tog
aripsla irapaXXdrrEi. The verb dva/3X£7TEtv, it is true, frequently
signifies in the N. T. to recover sight, and in this sense many of
the commentators understand it ; but in all such cases it denotes
a complete recovery, as in Matt. xi. 5. xx. 34. Mark x. 51. Luke
vii. 22. xviii. 41. John ix. 11. 15. 18. and elsewhere, which does
not hold here, as in the very next verse it is used again, the cure
being not yet complete ; and the perfection of the cure is after
wards declared in the words airoKarEardOri, Kal eve/DXe^e rijXav-
ywg diravra. In this passage, therefore, it signifies simply to
look up ; and so it is used in Matt. xiv. 19. Mark vi. 41. vii. 34.
Luke ix. 16. xix. 5. Occasionally it denotes nothing more than
to behold, as in Mark xii. 41. Luke xxi. 1. 3. Lastly, in giving
sight to this man, Jesus did not, as on other occasions of a like
nature, perform the cure instantaneously, but by degrees. It
was probably his intention to make it evident that he was not
confined to one method of operation, but could dispense his
mercies in whatever manner he chose. Of the use of external
signs in this and other of Christ's miracles, see on Mark vii. 34.
and Home's Introd. Vol. I. p. 238. Grotius, Campbell,
Macknight, Hammond.
Ver. 26. priSi Eig ri)v Kwpnv k. t. X. Some have thought that
there is an impropriety in this reading, as it seems to suppose
that the man could relate the miracle to the people in the village
though he did not enter it. But the words rtvt iv ry Kwpy are
merely a periphrasis for any of the villagers ; and some of these
might frequently pass his house, which, though not in Beth
saida, seems to have been at no great distance. The Vulgate,
indeed, renders the passage et si in vicum introieris ; but this
version seems to have arisen from a different reading, for which,
however, there is no authority. Campbell, Whitby, Rosen
muller. — [Mill.]
Ver. 31. diroSoKipaaOryvai. - To be rejected. There is an
allusion to Psalm cxviii. 22. In other places of the LXX the
Hebrew word there employed is rendered by e^ovSeveiv. The
word irappriaia, in the next verse, signifies plainly, i. e. without
any figure of speech or parable : and so it is also used by the
classic writers. Of vv. 34. sqq. see on Matt. x. 33. 38. xvi. 24.
and of the word poixaXlg, in v. 38., on Matt. xii. 39. Grotius.

MARK IX. 8. 12. 407

CHAPTER IX.
Contents: — The transfiguration, vv. 1 — -13. [Matt. xvii. 1.
Luke ix. 28.] A deaf and dumb spirit dispossessed, vv. 14 —
29. [Matt. xvii. 14. Luke ix. 37.] Christ again foretells his
death and resurrection, vv. 30 — 32. [Matt. xvii. 22. Luke ix.
43.] Contention among the disciples, and the admonition of
Christ consequent thereupon, w. 33 — 50. [Matt, xviii. 1.
Luke ix. 47.]
Verse 8. i%diriva. This word is found occasionally in the
LXX: and so Jamblich. in Protrept. 20. p. 125. pi) ipipofiovg
i^diriva KaOiaraaOai. The pure Greek writers, however, always
write iZ,ai(pvrig or Viairivrig. Thom. M. ot jorjroptKOt i^airivrig' rb
Si i%diriva ovx EXXjjvikov bXwg. Hom. II. O. 325. iXOovr
i%,airivrig. In v. 11. on is for Sion, quare. Compare Matt.
xvii. 10. Some consider this an Hebraism, but on is sometimes
found in the same sense in Greek writers. Hom. II. A. 64. bg k
Eiwy, on roaaov ixdiaaro $ot]3oc 'AiroXXtov. So also v. 28.
infra. Arist. Plut. 19. Kypke, Wetstein, Palairet.
Ver. 12. Kat irwg yiypairrai k. r. X. This passage has been
a source of considerable difficulty to the commentators. Accord
ing to the rules of construction, no proper meaning can be ad
duced from the words as they now stand. Instead of Kat irwg
several good MSS. read KaOwg, which Michaelis supposes is the
gloss of some transcriber, who placed it in the margin as the in
terpretation of Mark's indifferent Greek. Bishop Marsh, how
ever, observes that irwg occurs fourteen times in the Gospel, and
always in its proper sense ; and accordingly, he would receive
KaOwg as the true reading. But even upon this supposition the
sense of the passage does not seem to be elicited ; nor does the
explanation of Grotius appear more satisfactory : And how then,
if this be true, can Christ suffer according to the Scriptures ?
Perhaps some light may be thrown upon the question by a re
ference to the parallel place in St. Matthew. It thence appears
that the fate of John the Baptist and of Christ are contrasted with
each other ; and the substance of this clause and of the following
verse are transposed. By a similar transposition in this place,
and by reading Kat ovrwg, as in Matthew, instead of Kat irwg, the
two Evangelists would precisely coincide, and the connection and
drift of the argument would be plain and intelligible. In v. 13.
the clause KaOwg yiypairrai eV aiirbv must be understood of the
coming not the sufferings of the Baptist, as these latter are no
where predicted in the O. T. Instances of similar transposition
are not unfrequent. Compare Gen. xiii. 10. Exod. xii. 15.

408 MARK IX. 16. 18. 22.
Cant. I. 5. Mark xxi. 12. xvi. 3, 4. Acts viiL 7. Rom. i. 13.
Whitby.
Ver. 16. ri avZwuTE. From the reply of the man in the fol
lowing verses it appears that the Scribes were disputing with the
disciples respecting the cure of the youth, which they had unsuc
cessfully attempted. See on the parallel place in Matthew.
Macknight.
Ver. 18. pf)aaEi aiirbv. E. T. teareth him. But the verb
pf)aaEiv has two significations ; 1 . To break or rend, as in Matt.
vii. 6. ix. 17. Mark ii. 22. Luke v. 37. : and 2. To throw down,
as in Luke vi. 49. Compare Matt. vii. 25. 27. Wisd. iv. 19.
LXX. pr)%Ei avrovg irprivElg. Artemid. Oneir. I. 62. pr)^at rbv
dvriiraXov. Horapoll. II. 57. pr)aan iavrbv iirl ri)v yijv. So in
this passage it is rightly interpreted by Euthymius, KarafidXXEt
e?c y*iv. Hesych. prfcaf SieXeIv, KarafiaXElv. The Hebrew Din,
rendered in other places oriyviivai, is expressed by Karaj3dXX£tv
in Job xii. 14. Ezek. xxvi. 4. 12. LXX. At v. 20. Beza ex
plains iairdpa^Ev by pJj^Ev, but see on Mark i. 22. The verb
%ripaivEaOai signifies not only to be dried up, and thence to pine
away, as in Zech. xi. 17. LXX, but also to swoon ox faint. So
Isaiah xxxvii. 27. Zech. x. 2. Whitby, Wetstein, Grotius.
Ver. 22. dXX' ei n Svvaaat. Some imagine that this expres
sion does not imply doubt, but denotes simply Kara Svvapiv, in
which sense it occurs in Hom. II. A. 393. Thucyd. VI. 25.
Herod. VIII. 57. Soph. Aj. 329. and elsewhere in classical
Greek. But the whole tenor of the narrative is at variance with
such an interpretation, and it is very probable that the failure of
the disciples in working the cure, and the encreasing violence
of his paroxysms as the daemoniac approached Christ, contri
buted to produce that weakness of faith which dictated the words
in question. The particle dXXd is frequently, as here, redun
dant in petitions. So Arist. Pac. 266. Acharn. 578. 582. Vesp.
459. Lysist. 747. Plut. 1203. And so tamen in Latin. Terent.
And. V. 3. 23. Tamen, Simo, audi. In the following verse the
insertion of the article rb has greatly perplexed the commentators;
some maintain that it is redundant, and others that it is an inters
polation : but though it is wanting in some MSS., and is not
translated in the Vulgate and other versions, the variations and
omissions seem to have arisen from the grammatical obscurity of
the passage. Others, again, suppose that rt should be substi
tuted either with or without an interrogation ; and Markland yet
farther, that Svvaaat should be repeated, thus : ri, el Swaaai ;
Svvaaai iriarEvaat ; k. t. X. It has been conjectured also that
the sentence is elliptical, and may be thus supplied : rb, ei Svva
aai, iriarEvaat j3oi)6V|cm aoi. But whatever ingenuity there may

MARK IX. 24. 35. 409
be in these several opinions, they are for the most part equally
unauthorized and unsatisfactory. Our Lord evidently alludes to
the wavering faith exhibited in the words Et ri Svvatrat, with
which the father had qualified his entreaty. In reference to this
the article to is put absolutely, with the preposition Kara under
stood ; and thus runs the sense of the passage : As to this matter,
i. e. my ability to perform the cure, if you are able to believe, all
things are in my power, for the good of him that believeth. Of
the dativus commodi see Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 387. Kuinoel, Ro
senmuller. — [Wetstein, Palairet, Grotius, Knatchbull,
&c]
Ver. 24. diriaria. E. T. unbelief. It is evident, however,
from the preceding clause, that a total want of faith is not in
tended, but merely a deficient or wavering faith. In the next
verse, and no less than eight times out of nine in this Gospel,
the verb iwEripriaE is rendered in the Vulgate comminatus est ;
but in all the other Gospels it is rendered in conformity with the
E. T., which has rebuked. That the verb will not admit this
sense, viz. to threaten, is evident from its being sometimes
adopted to the wind, the sea, &c. to which, as including the idea
of punishment, it cannot be so applied even in a prosopopoeia.
Sometimes too, as in this very place, the very words of the iirtri-
pr/aig axe given, and never do they contain any thing of the
nature of a menace. The verb is even used to express St. Peter's
rebuke of his Master in Matt. xvi. 22. ; and Euthymius, on
Matt. xii. 16., explains it by 7rapayy£XX£tv. In short, the only
terms for threat in the Gospels is d-KEiXi) and its derivatives.
Campbell. In v. 25. also the pronoun iyw is emphatic, as
marking the superior and self-exerted power of Christ above that
of his disciples, who had failed in their attempt to eject the
daemons. The paroxysm which succeeded the command of Christ
is recorded as a proof that the cure had not been previously
effected ; and our Lord added the prohibition that he should
enter no more into him, lest an impression should remain that
the fit had naturally subsided, and would return again at the end
of the month. Wetstein, A. Clarke.
Ver. 35. Ang OiXst k. t. X. See on Matt. xx. 26. and of vv.
37. 41. on Matt. x. 40. 42. Between these last verses the ob
servation of John seems to have been inserted out of its proper
connection. It has been supposed that the man who is repre
sented by him as ejecting devils in the name of Christ was one of
the seventy disciples, who had given up his commission after their
return, and retired from the company of the other disciples, though
he still held fast his faith in Christ. Others suppose that he
was only partially converted, but that an efficacy was allowed to
his adjurations, which was withdrawn after the descent of the

410 MARK IX. 41. 44.
Holy Ghost. It seems more likely that he was one of the Bap
tist's disciples, who had been led by his master to believe in
Jesus : and it would be no small proof of the truth of Chris
tianity, both to himself and to others, that the name of Christ
was thus powerful even among those who did not follow him,
and therefore could do nothing in compact with him. For that
the miracle was actually performed is evident from the whole
tenor of the narrative. If he stedfastly believed, however, that
Jesus was the Christ, it is difficult to give a reason for his keeping
aloof from his disciples. At all events it cannot be supposed that
a man who knew nothing of Christ, or one so abandoned as the
Jewish exorcists, could have been allowed to work a miracle in
his name. The proverb in v. 40. is the reverse of that in Matt.
xii. 80., but that it is equally true, see the note there. He
that does not oppose our endeavours to subvert the kingdom of
Satan, but rather pursues the same end with us, cannot be
against us, but is rather for us ; and he that so sensibly feels the
power of my name canndt speak evil of me. Whitby, A.
Clarke. — [Grotius, Doddridge.]
Ver. 41. on Xpiaroii eote. Scil. paOtirai. From the note on
Matt. i. 18. it should seem that Xpiaroii in this place, without
the article, is a proper name. The more general use of the word in
the N. T., and especially in the Gospels, is unquestionably as an
appellative descriptive of office or dignity, and some have thought
that it is never employed otherwise, except when the Evangelists
themselves adopt the practice of their time. Michaelis, indeed,
asserts that in the time of the Apostles the word was never us,ed
except as an epithet expressive of the ministry of Jesus. But,
on this supposition, how are we to explain among other instances,
Rom. v. 6. 1 Cor. i. 12. 23. 2 Cor. iii. 3. Gal. ii. 17. Col. iii.
24. 1 Pet. i. 11., in all of which the article is omitted, and to
say the anointed is more than any of the passages will bear ?
Upon the whole it can scarcely be doubted, that even during our
Saviour's life Xpiarbg had become a proper name, though its ap
pellative use was more frequent. Compare especially Matt, xxvii.
17. 22. with Matt. x. 2. An expression similar to that of this
passage occurs in 1 Cor. iii. 23. vpElg Se Xptorov, Xpioroe Se
Geov : where Xpioroe is clearly a proper name. Middleton. —
[Campbell, Michaelis.]
Ver. 44. 6Vov 6 <tkwXj}£ k. r. X. This expression is taken
from Isaiah lxvi. 24. where the prophet is describing the mi
serable end of hardened and impenitent sinners. From Isaiah
the allusion has been borrowed in Ecclus. vii. 17. Judith xvi. 17.
As our Lord is here speaking of Gehenna, which was looked
upon by the Jews as an emblem of the place of torment, it may
be that the metaphor here employed is connected throughout with

MARK IX. 49. 411
this idea. In detestation of the odious sacrifices which the idol
atrous Jews had there offered to Moloch, Josiah had caused the
Valley of Hinnom to be desecrated by dead carcases ; and the al
lusion has been supposed to refer to the fire which consumed
the victims, and to the worms which preyed upon the carcases.
But the reign of Josiah was prior to the age of Isaiah, and it is
therefore more probable that the prophet alludes to the two dif
ferent modes in use among the Jews of disposing of their dead ;
by one of which the body is consumed by worms in the grave,
and by the other burnt with fire. From these sensible images
our Lord describes Hell, as from those of resting in Abraham's
bosom, &c. he described Heaven. There has been much con
tention also among the learned respecting the nature of this fire
and worm, whether they be real and material, or whether they
denote the worm of conscience and the fire of sharp burning
pain. The Fathers are greatly divided on this point, and the
same Father often differs from himself, particularly St. Jerome
and St. Austin. It has even been affirmed, that though the worm
is metaphorical the fire is unquestionably material. This confu
sion, however, of trope and letter can scarcely be admitted; and
as the constant phraseology of Scripture plainly declares that the
bodies of the wicked shall be tormented in everlasting fire, as in
Matt, iii, 10. 12. x. 28. xxv. 45. Johnxv. 6. 2 Thess. i. 8. 2 Pet.
iii. 10. Jude 7., the probability is in favour of the literal sense.
In this sense the Jews would certainly have understood our Lord,
for the Targum, on Gen. xv. 17. represents Gehenna as a fur
nace sparkling and flaming with fire, into which the wicked fall :
and on Ecclus. viii. 10. ix. 15. x. 11. it speaks of the fire of
Hell, and of the wicked who shall go to be burned in Hell. At
all events the punishment will be eternal. On this our Lord,
both here and every where, is remarkably explicit ; nor could he
be otherwise understood by the Jews, who had always held that
the punishment of the wicked in Hell would be eternal. Accord
ing to Joseph. B. J. II. 12. Ant. XVIII. 2. the Pharisees main
tained that the wicked would be tormented aiSiq npwpia, and
that an eternal prison, (slpypbg diSiog,) was prepared for them.
Philo also (de prcem et poen. p. 713, 6.) observes that their fate is
Zyv diroOavovrag a£t, to live for ever dying ; and SiauoviZEtv iv
dXyriSoai, Kal aviatg, koI avptpopalg dSiaardroig. MACKNIGHT,
Le Clerc, Doddridge, — [Whitby, Lowth, Grotius.]
Ver. 49. 7raeydp 7rvpi k. t. X. This is confessedly one of the
most difficult passages in the N. T. ; and it is scarcely possible
to satisfy oneself, much less to direct others, in selecting that in
terpretation which is liable to the least objection. The Codex
Bezce is without the first clause of the verse, and some other
MSS. omit the second; but the authorities in favour of entire
genuineness are indisputable. Kuinoel supposes that the con-
10

412 MARK IX. 49.
elusion of the chapter has been inserted from some other place in
the Gospel, to which it properly belongs ; but for this supposition
again there is no authority, nor has any more appropriate context
been pointed out. Besides, various interpretations have been
given by the commentators, which, however uncertain, are not
improbable ; and the main difficulty lies in determining to which
of the two preceding verses our Lord's declaration refers. If it
refers to v. 47. irag must be understood generally of every Chris
tian, i. e. every one who plucks out the offending eye, and mor
tifies the evil inclinations of his heart ; and those who advocate
this side of the question have proposed one or other of the fol
lowing explanations : 1. Every Christian is salted or purified
with fire, i. e. by the fiery trials and sorrows of life ; in the same
manner as every sacrifice is salted with salt. See Levit. ii. 13.
The particle Kat in the sense of uig is not unfrequent, as in Mark
x. 12. John xiv. 20. and elsewhere. Salt was used in sacrifices
on account of its seasoning and preserving qualities, as an emblem
of that purity and persevering fidelity which are necessary in the
worshippers of God. 2. Every Christian shall be salted with
fire, i. e. shall be purified by the Holy Ghost, as every sacrifice,
&c. Compare Matt. iii. 11. Acts iii. 3. 3. Every Christian
shall be salted for the fire, scil. of God's altar, i. e. shall be pre
pared by the Apostles' doctrine to be offered a holy and lively
sacrifice unto God. So 2 Pet. iii. 7. 77-vpt rrypov/zEvot, reserved
for the fire. On the other hand there are those who understand
irag of every wicked man, i. e. of those whose worm dieth not,
&c. This connection seems to be pointed out by the particle
ydp : and here also there are various interpretations, of which it
will be sufficient to notice one or two of the most remarkable.
1 . Every wicked man shall be consumed by fire, as every sa
crifice is salted with salt. In defence of this rendering it is
urged that the Hebrew Tr?ffl, which signifies properly to salt,
denotes also to consume, as in Isaiah li. 6. ; and that in this
ambiguity of signification the emphasis of the comparison lies.
2. Every sinner shall be salted with fire, but every sacrifice,
(i. e. every true Christian, Rom. xii. 1 .) shall be seasoned with
the salt of grace to the incorruption of glory. 3. Every sinner
shall be salted with fire, so as to become imperishable, as every
sacrifice, &c. This, after all, is perhaps the best explanation,
which depends upon the property of salt to preserve things from
corruption. Hence our Lord may be supposed to mean, that as
salt preserves the flesh with which it is connected from corrup
tion, so this everlasting fire will make those cast into it as incon
sumable as itself. There seems to be a transition from the men
tion of unquenchable fire to the fire on the altar, which was never
extinguished ; then to the sacrifices on the altar ; from these to
the salt, and thence to the peace and friendship (v. 50.) of which,
as well as of purity, of incorruption, and of wisdom it is some-

MARK X. 6. 12. 413
times the emblem. Hence, to have eaten a man's salt is consi
dered in the East to this day a bond of indissoluble attachment.
See Harmer's Obss. Vol. IV. p. 458. Of the precept in the next
verse see on Matt. v. 13. It has been proposed for irdg irvpl
to read 7ra<ra 7rvpta, every wheaten sacrifice ; but there is no such
word as 7rvptain Greek, and if there was nothing is gained by the
alteration. Whitby, A. Clarke, Grotius, Le Clerc, Light
foot. — [Gilpin, Rosenmuller, Macknight, &c]

CHAPTER X.
Contents : — The question of divorce, vv. 1 — 12. [Matt. xix. 3.]
Christ blesses little children, vv. 13 — 16. [Matt. xix. 13. Luke
xviii. 15.] The young ruler, and the dangers of wealth, vv.
17 — 31. [Matt. xix. 16. Luke xviii. 18.] Christ again pre
dicts his death and passion, vv. 32 — 34. [Matt. xx. 17. Luke
xviii. 31.] Ambition of the sons of Zebedee, vv. 35 — 45.
[Matt. xx. 20.] Blind Bartimaeus, vv. 46—52. [Matt. xx. 29.
Luke xviii. 35.]
Verse 6. Kriasiiig. This word is found in all the MSS. except
the Alexandrian, and almost all the versions. It cannot there
fore be suspected from not appearing in Matt. xix. 4. as a7r'
dpx»ic conveys the same sense, and Matthew is more likely to
have omitted, than Mark to have added, a word in our Lord's
discourse. Whitby.
Ver. 12. Kat idv ywi) k- t. X. The practice of divorcing the
husband, unwarranted by the law, had been, according to Joseph.
Ant. XV. 7. 10., introduced by Salome, sister of Herod the
Great, who sent a bill of divorce to her husband, Costobarus :
which bad example was afterwards followed by Herodias and
others. In this they were probably instructed by the Roman
women, who, in this age, carried the practice to a most scandalous
extent. See Juv. Sat. VI. 222. and compare 1 Sam. xxv. 44.
1 Cor. vii. 13. By law, it was the husband's prerogative to di
vorce the wife ; and the bill, which she received, was an evidence
that she had not deserted her husband, but that he had parted
from her, and left her free. Christ, however, puts both parties
on the same level, and makes adultery in one as great an offence
as in the other. It is clear also from this text that polygamy is
unlawful, for adultery does not consist in the repudiation of the
first wife, however unjust and cruel such repudiation may be,
but in entering into a second marriage during the legal existence
of the first. Campbell, Doddridge, Whitby, Paley.

414 MARK X. 19. 21.
Ver. 19. pi) diroarepfiayg. The tenth commandment, as ren
dered by the LXX, and cited by St. Paul in Rom. vii. 7., is pi)
iiriOvpiiaEig ; and as cited in Matt. xix. 19., thou shalt love thy
neighbour as thyself. With Matthew also agree Joseph. Mace.
3. and R. Tranchuma, p. 167, 2. ; and it seems to have been a
scruple with the Jews to quote the Decalogue either in the exact
words or the exact order. Joseph. Ant. III. 5. 4. Xiywv, ove
Miovarig iv ralg Siio irXd^iv yEypappivovg KariXiiTEv' ovg oil Oe-
pirov ianv i)plv XiyEiv ipavspwg irpbg Xi%tv, rde Si SwdpEig aii
rwv SriXwaopEv. Compare Rom. xiii. 9. Under d7roarEpEtv St.
Mark includes all those secret acts of fraud or injustice which are
not included in the foregoing prohibitions, and with which the
law cannot interfere. The verb itself is used with considerable
latitude in the Scriptures, as implying any act of injustice gene
rally. Hence it is nearly synonymous with dStKEtv in 1 Cor. vi.
8. andproperly employed by the LXX. to render the Hebrew
PW, in Lev. vi. 2. It imports also the detention of any thing
when it is due, the injustice of which is expressed in the forensic
maxim, Minus solvit qui tempore minus solvit. From the dif
ferent forms in which the commandment is given by the Evan
gelists and St. Paul it is fair to conclude that it contains the
importance of them all ; obliging us to rest satisfied with our own
condition, and to think others as worthy of enjoying what belongs
to them as we are of enjoying what belongs to us. Wetstein,
Hammond, Whitby, Grotius.
Ver. 21. r)ydiniaEv avrov. There is considerable diversity of
opinion respecting the meaning of the verb dyairq.v in this place.
Some suppose that it is employed to indicate some outward ges
ture by which Christ manifested his approbation both of the
question and the reply of the young man. The Rabbins fre
quently employed some token of this sort, as a kiss, an inclina
tion of the head, or the like, to signify their admiration of a
disciple's conduct. But in these cases the Talmudic verb specifies
the particular action. Thus in Horaioth, p. 48, 3. R. Abba Bar
Catina heard R. Levi disputing profoundly, and when he had
made an end R. Abba rose up, and kissed his head. In Psalm
lxxviii. 36. the expression dyairi^v iv aropari signifies to flatter,
whence it has been thought that the verb here has a similar
sense, and that Christ praised the youth ironically, knowing
him to be a covetous and worldly-minded man. This interpreta
tion, however, proceeds upon the supposition that the young
ruler was insincere, which is highly improbable : not to mention
that irony would scarcely have been used by our Lord in a ques
tion of such serious importance. Besides, in the passage cited,
the meaning of the verb is settled by the addition of ev aropari,
which alone could authorize its usage in so uncommon an ac
ceptation. There are yet other senses more or less unsatisfac-

MARK X. 26. 30. 415
tory, which have been affixed to the verb in this instance ; and
after all, the E. T. seems to be not only the least objectionable,
but the most natural and appropriate. He loved him, i. e. he
was well pleased with him, scil. because of his youth, his earnest
ness, and his sincerity. He was unwilling, it is true, to give the
test which our Lord subsequently required of him ; but hitherto
his life had been passed in strict obedience to the law, and so far
he was praiseworthy, though he afterwards manifested too strong
an attachment to the world. The citations from Psalm cxvi. 1.
Isaiah lx. 10. LXX, which are adduced in support of the inter
pretation first stated, are more applicable to this last ; and to
these we may add, with all reverence, the heavenly voice in Matt.
iii. 17. ovrog eotiv 6 vlog pov b ayairrirbg, iv dj EvSoKriaa. Whit
by, A. Clarke, Macknight. — [Lightfoot, Elsner, &c]
The import of the verb arvyvdZEiv, in the next verse, as applied
to a sorrowful and dejected countenance, will be abundantly illus
trated by the following examples. Eustath. Ismen. IV. p. 98.
avvixEi ri)v brppvv, arvyvdZsi to irpoawirov. Eurip. Hipp. 290.
arvyvi)v bippvv Xvaaaa. Alcest. 782. arvyvi^ irpoawirto Kal aw-
wrppvwpivw. Diog. Laert. VII. 1. 18. orvyvbv Kat rb irpoaw
irov awEairaapivov. See also my note on Soph. Ant. 528. Pent.
Gr. p. 246. Wetstein, Kypke.
Ver. 26. Kal rig Siivarat awOrivai ; Matt. xix. 25. rig dpa ;
But Kat rig, which is by some taken for a Hebraism, occurs in the
same sense in the best writers. Herod. III. 140. Kat rig ian
'FiXXr)vwv EvEpyirrig ; Arist. Pac. 123. Kat rig iropog aoi Trig bSov
ysviiaETai ; So v. 834. Acharn. 86. ^Elian. II. 31. VIII. 16.
Arrian, Alex. V. 2. 4. Epict. IV. 4. et alibi. Wetstein, Els
ner, Bos. — [Grotius.]
Ver. 30. oWiag, Kat aSEXipoiig, k. t. X. Two difficulties have
been pointed out in this passage : the first in the promise itself,
the second in the limitation, pErd Siwypwv. With respect to the
first, the declaration that the sincere Christian shall receive a
hundredfold houses, and brothers, &c. seems to imply that the
compensation shall be in kind. Hence the impious sneer of
Julian, who asked whether the Christian was to get a hundred
wives. But, not to mention that the word ywatKac does not ap
pear in this to correspond with yvvdiKa in the preceding verse, it
is clear that the promise is not to be taken literally : \t plainly
implies, that those who forsake all for the sake of Christ shall
find among genuine Christians spiritual relatives, who shall be
as dear to them as fathers, mothers, &c. ; and in this sense, es
pecially in the Apostolic age, the promise of receiving a hundred
fold may have been even literally fulfilled. For the disciples, as
they travelled from place to place, were admitted by the brethren
to the shelter of their houses and the product of their lands, and

416 MARK X. 32. 42. 46. 50.
welcomed with every token of friendship and filial affection. As
to the qualifying words, ptrd Stwypwv, a promise regarding
things merely temporal, accompanied with persecutions, has been
considered as illusory, and compared to the feast which was given
by Dionysius to Damocles, at the same time that a sword was
suspended by a hair over his head. Hence, some have suggested
that juErd should be rendered after ; but as this sense is ex
tremely rare with a genitive, others would read Siwypbv, with
Theophylact. But the idea of temporal blessings, during the
time of persecution, is by no means inconsistent with the state of
the church militant, wherein the godly are always, in some shape
or other, exposed to persecution : hence there is no authority for
rejecting the passage altogether, as some have wished ; or to alter
it, as others. See the parallel place in Matt. xix. 29. and com
pare 2 Cor. vii. 4. James i. 2. Le Clerc, Doddridge, A.
Clarke. — [Wetstein, Campbell, Pearce, Kuinoel, Rosen
muller.]
Ver. 32. iOapjiowro, k. t. X. This wonder and fear is
ascribed by some to the prediction which Christ now delivers of
his death and passion ; the words koi 7rapaXa/3wv being rendered
for he took. Examples of Kat in this sense are found in Luke i.
22. John xii. 35. and elsewhere. But it should seem that his
going to Jerusalem was the cause of their terror, where the San
hedrim had already endeavoured to apprehend him, John xi. 53.
57. Whitby, Grotius. — [A. Clarke.]
Ver. 42. ot Sokovvte? apxEtv. The participle is here redun
dant. Matt. xx. 25. ol dpxovTEg. Luke xxii. 25. ol fiaaiXslg.
Compare also 1 Cor. vii. 40. xl. 16. xii. 23. xiv. 37. Phil. iii. 4.
Epict. Ench. XXX. 11. rwv iv inrEpoxy Sokovvtwv. Polyb. I. 5.
rovg SoKoiivrag dSiKElv. vElian. V. H. X. 15. SoKOvvrEg Statpi-
pEiv. See also on Matt. iii. 9. Doddridge, Whitby, Pa
lairet. Ver. 46. vlbg Ttpaiov Baprlpaiog. Some suppose that the
Evangelist is here guilty of tautology; but probably an interpre
tation of the name Bartimceus is intended, the words rovr ian
being understood, as in Abba, Father, which occurs oftener than
once. Lightfoot, Campbell. With 7rporjatrt5v there is an
ellipsis of /3tov, as in Jobxx. 14. LXX. So Arist. Acharn. 429.
ywXbc 7rpotTatTwv. The omission is supplied in Eurip. Helen.
512. 792. Kypke.
Ver. 50. dirofiaXwv to Ipdnov. Scil. that he might run the
faster. Horn. II. B. 183. /3ij Si Ohiv, dirb Si xXaTvav jidXE.
Eustath. in loc. 'iva iv ny Oisiv pqov rpixoi. Wetstein. Of the
title Rabboni, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 482.

MARK XI. 4. 10. 13. 411

CHAPTER XI.
Contents: — Christ's entry into Jerusalem, vv. 1 — 11. [Matt.
xxi. 1. Luke xix. 29. John xii. 12.] The barren fig-tree
cursed, vv. 12 — 14. [Matt. xxi. 18.] The Temple purged,
vv. 15—18. [Matt. xxi. 12. Luke xix. 45.] The fig-tree
withered, vv. 19—26. [Matt. xxi. 29.] Christ refuses to tell
the Chief Priest by what authority he acted, vv. 27 — 33.
[Matt. xxi. 23. Luke xx. 1.]
Verse 4. iirl rov dpipoSov. In bivio ; or perhaps merely near
the street. The word does not occur again in the N. T., but so
it is used in Prov. i. 20. Jerem. xi. 13. Amos v. 16. LXX.
Hesych. dpipoSa' al piipai, dyvial, SidSoi. Suid. dpipoSov' Sio-
Sov, pvpriv. The noun aroifidg, in v. 8., or as it is more generally
written, arifidg, signifies more properly a bed of leaves. See my
note on Hom. II. ii. 670. Hesych. anfidg' dirb pdj3Swv i) xXw-
pwv xoprtov arpwatg koI (piiXXwv. Hence the verb <7rtj3aSoKOtK£tv
in Polyb. II. 17. Here, however, it denotes simply leaves, though
with a reference to their being strawed on the ground. Compare
Matt. xxi. 8. Schleusner, Wetstein.
Ver. 10. i) ipxopivri ^aaiXsia k. t. X. The kingdom of David
is the kingdom which God was now about to erect according to
his promise made to David. In several of the principal MSS.
and versions the words iv bvopan Kiiptov are wanting, and their
insertion between fiaatXEia and its regimen rov irarpbg r)pwv
gives them very much the appearance of an interpolation. Be
sides, the phrase ipxbpEvog iv bvopan Kvpiov, in the preceding
verse, may very easily have given rise to an inadvertent repeti
tion of it in this. There is, therefore, some reason for rejecting
these words, but none for rejecting the whole clause. Whitby,
Grotius, Mill, Griesbach.
Ver. 13. oil ydp i)v Kaipbg aiiKiov. E. T. For the time of figs
was not yet. Did Christ then curse the tree because it had not
figs before the time of figs ? To solve the difficulty it has been
proposed to read ov instead of ov : but the translation thus affixed
to the passage, where he was it was the season of figs, is ex
tremely harsh and intricate, and irreconcilable with the general
simplicity of the N. T. writers ; not to mention that the sentence
thus rendered would affix to the words, without any assignable
reason, a sense precisely contrary to that which they now bear.
Neither is there any authority for translating Kaipbg aiiKwv, a
good year for figs, or a good country for figs ; and if it could be
proved that Kaipbg was ever so used, it cannot be supposed that
the Evangelist would have applied it in a sense so artificial and
vol. i. e e

418 MARK XI. 16.
extraordinary. The fact is, that the expression Katpbe ovkwv
denotes the season for gathering figs. So Matt. xxi. 34. 6
Kaipbg raiv Kap7rwv. Compare Job v. 26. Psalm i. 3. LXX.
Mark xii. 2. Luke xx. 10. And this, indeed, coincides with the
interpretation which a reader would naturally give it. The declara
tion however, that the season of figs was not yet come, cannot be,
as the order of the words would lead one at first to imagine, the
reason why there was nothing but leaves on the tree ; for the fig-
tree has the property of forming its fruit before the leaves ap
pear. Hence the words Kat iXOwv k. t. X. must be read in a pa
renthesis ; and thus the appearance of the tree in full foliage,
together with the fact that fig harvest had not yet arrived, would
justify the expectation of finding fruit on the tree ; and the dis
appointment of this expectation could only have proceeded from
the barrenness of the tree. Parentheses of this kind are not
without example, and there is one precisely similar in Mark xvi.
3, 4. Compare Gen. xiii. 10. Numb. xiii. 20. 23. Luke xx. 19.
John i. 14. It has been objected, indeed, that, at all events, the
figs at this time of the year, in the beginning of the month Nisan,
(March or April,) must have been so unripe as to be totally unfit
to eat. But it frequently happens in Barbary, and of course in
the hotter climate of Judea, that some of the more forward and
vigorous trees will occasionally yield a few ripe figs six weeks or
more before the full season, which are esteemed a great dainty.
Something like this may be alluded to in Hos. ix. 10. See
Shaw's Travels, p. 342. Compare also Isaiah xxviii. 4. Camp
bell, Macknight, Kuinoel, Wetstein, Rosenmuller. —
[Heinsius, Hammond, Michaelis, &c]
Ver. 16. 'iva rig StEviyKy aKEvog, The Hebrew word vD,
keli, which properly signifies a vessel, is employed with consi
derable latitude in the O. T. : it denotes arms in Jer. xxi. 4.
Ezek. ix. 1., clothes, Deut. xxii. 5., and musical instruments,
Psalm lxxi. 22. Hence, it is likely that the meaning of the
word aKEvog is equally comprehensive, and intended to include
any article of traffic whatsoever. In this prohibition, however,
our Lord merely enforced the received doctrine of the Jews ; for
to this effect they interpreted Levit. xix. 30. Deut. xii. 5. as it
appears from Josephus, adv. Apion. p. 1066. The Talmud
also, in Jevamoth, p. 6, 2. explains the reverence of the Temple
to mean that none go into it with his staff, and his shoes, and his
purse, and dust upon his feet ; and that none make it a common
thoroughfare, or a place of spitting. It may be that the abuses,
which had now risen to a great height, were in some measure in
creased by the proximity of the Castle of Antonia, as the markets
held in the Temple would be very convenient for the garrison,
which was there stationed. Lightfoot, Wetstein, Kuinoel,
Rosenmuller.

MARK XI. 17. 21, 22. 419
Ver. 17. irdai rolg WvEai. The E. T. has given this passage
as if the words had been iiirb iravrwv rwv 'iOvwv ; and this is
more remarkable, as in the translation of Isaiah lvi. 7. it is cor
rectly renderedybr all people. As the court of the Gentiles,
which was the part of the Temple more generally profaned, was
designed for the devout of all nations, the Temple itself was
justly styled a house of prayer for all nations ; and upon this
principle our Lord commanded that no part of it was to be dese
crated. Campbell, Hammond.
Ver. 21. Karijpdtj-o). The use of this verb, which the E. T.
renders to curse, has afforded occasion for cavil, as conveying an
idea very unsuited to the character of our Lord. But the expres
sion which our Lord made use of on the occasion, supra, v. 14.,
was in every respect becoming, and St. Peter merely follows the
Jewish mode of speaking in reference to things which have be
come worthless and unprofitable. Compare Heb. vi. 8. Mack
night.
Ver. 22. irianv Qeov. That is, faith in God; the genitive
Geov being put for ei? rbv Qeov. The noun iriang is frequently
used with the genitive of the object precisely in this manner.
Compare Acts iii. 16. Rom. iii. 22. 26. Gal. ii. 16. 20. iii. 22.
Phil. iii. 9. So also eX^ic, 1 Thess. i. 3. Some, however, un
derstand the expression as a mere Hebraism, denoting a strong
faith ; and it is common in the Jewish idiom to use the name of
God with a substantive to denote great, mighty, excellent ; or
with an adjective as the sign of the superlative. See 1 Sam. xiv.
15. Isaiah xxix. 1. Exod. iii. 1. and elsewhere. But the sub
stantives so employed, with which alone we are concerned, are
always names either of real substances, as mountain, cedar, lion,
city ; ox of visible effects, as wrestling, trembling, and the like ;
never of any abstract quality, as faith, hope, justice, &c. The
received translation, therefore, is unquestionably correct. Camp
bell, Grotius, Kuinoel. — [Pearce, A. Clarke.] Of the
phrase iarai iiplv, in v. 24., see on Matt, xviii. 19. and of the
two following verses on Matt. vi. 5. 12. vii. 7. xviii. 21. sqq.
Some MSS. and versions omit v. 26., and in others two verses
are added from Matt. vii. 7, 8. The origin of these variations is
easily perceptible.

e e 2

420 MARK XII. 4. 12. 26.

CHAPTER XII.
Contents: — Parable of the vineyard, w. 1 — 12. [Matt. xxi.
S3. Luke xx. 9.] The tribute-money , vv. 13 — 17. [Matt. xxii.
15. Luke xx. 20.] Christ's reply to the Sadducees respecting
the resurrection, vv. 18 — 27. [Matt xxii. 23. Luke xx. 27.J
His answer to the Pharisees, vv. 28 — 34. [Matt. xxii. 34.]
and his enquiry respecting the Messiah, vv. 35 — 37. [Matt.
xxii. 41. Luke xx. 41.] His caution against the Scribes, w.
38 — 40. [Matt, xxiii. 1. Luke xx. 45.] The widow's mite,
vv. 41 — 44. [Luke xxi. 1.]
Verse 4. Xi0of3oXr)aavrEg iKEipaXaiwaav. E. T. At him they
cast stones, and wounded him in the head ; i. e. they wounded
him in the head with stones. This is no doubt the sense of the
passage, although the commentators are greatly divided in the
meaning of the verb KE<paXaioiiv. In Rom. xiii. 9. the compound
dvaKEtpaXaioiiv signifies to sum up, to comprise; and so it has
been proposed to render it here, to this effect, they threw stone
after stone at him. But the parallel word in Luke is Tpavpari-
Zuv, which favours the received translation. Others would trans
late it to load with insult. So Theophylact : trvvErlXEcrav Kat
iKopvcpwaav rrjv v/3ptv. This meaning, however, is totally un
supported and unsatisfactory. The interpretations to shave the
head, scil. in derision, to beset with sticks, &c. need only be no
ticed in order to their refutation ; and to despatch is contrary to
the tenor of the narrative. It is true that there is no positive
classical authority for the sense above assigned- to it, but analogy
is altogether in its favour. Thus we have yaorpt^Etv, to strike in
tlie belly, and jur/pt^Etv, to strike on the thigh. Diog. Laert. VII.
p. 544. £t 6 Etc rrjv yaaripa 'tvtttwv yaarpiZsi, Kal 6 Etc rovg pri-
povg tvtttwv pripiZEi. Compare Arist. Equit. 273. 454. Vesp.
1529. Hence KE^aXatovv, to strike on the head, and this signi
fication is confirmed by Arist. Ran. 854. KEipaXaiiv tov Kporaipov
pi)pan Oivwv. Whitby, Campbell, Kuinoel, Schleusner. —
[Lightfoot, Wakefield, Alberti, &c]
Ver. 12. irpbg avrovg. Against them. So Luke xx. 19., but
Matt. xxi. 45. 7T£pi avrOiv. The preposition 7rp6e has the same
import in Judg. xii. 3. Isaiah xxxii. 6. Ezek. xiii. 9. LXX.
Acts xxiii. 30. xxvi. 14. Ephes. vi. 11. Heb. xii. 4. Whitby.
Ver. 26. iirl rf)e fidrov. See on Mark ii. 26. In the next
verse there is a great variety in the reading, arising probably
from an apparent difficulty in the construction of the article.
The words 6 0eoc vekpwv could not be tolerated in regimen ;

MARK XII. 29. 41. 421
but there is evidently an ellipsis of another Oe6c before vekowv,
which is supplied in Matt. xxii. 32. Instead, therefore, of
omitting the article with some MSS., and making the proposi
tion exclusive, There is no God, &c. it seems more accurate with
others to omit QEog before Zwvrwv, which seems to have crept in
from the margin. Middleton, Griesbach.
Ver. 29. Kvptoe 6 Qsbg k. t. X. Some would render this
clause as two sentences : the Lord is our God; the Lord is one.
It is true that the verb substantive is wholly omitted in the He
brew of Deut. vi. 4., but the construction in the Greek, with
Etrrtv in the last member, does not favour this construction; and
in the original the idiom of the language will not permit the se
paration of the words "DTl^N miT. Rennell. — [Campbell.]
Mark, as writing more especially for the Gentiles, has quoted
the precept more at large than St. Matthew. The answer of the
Scribe also, and our Lord's reply in v. 32. sqq., are only recorded
by this Evangelist. With the former we may compare the Tal-
mudic Tract Succa, p. 49, 2. R. Eliezer said: It is far better
to give alms than to offer all oblations. By the declaration
these are not far, &c. v. 34., our Lord intimated that the lawyer
had expressed sentiments which became a Christian, and such as
might eventually dispose him to embrace Christianity, and make
him a partaker in the privileges and promises of the Gospel.
Wetstein, Macknight. The vv. 38 — 40. correspond with
Matt, xxiii. 5, 6, 7. 13.
Ver. 41. ya£oc£vXaKiov. This word, which is of rare oc
currence, seems to denote the chests into which the money de
signed for the Temple and the sacred service was put. The first
mention we have of such a repository is in 2 Kings xii. 9., where
it is called Kifiwrov. These chests were thirteen in number, set
apart for different purposes, and inscribed accordingly. See
Maimonides in Shekalim, c. 2. Joseph. B. J. V. 14. Antiq. XIX.
5. and Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 183. 241. From signifying
the chest that contained the treasure the name was at length ap
plied to that part of the Temple where the chest was deposited,
as here, and in John viii. 20. It appears from the Mischna, in
Shekal. p. 8, 4. that according to his pleasure any one might
cast into the chests how little soever he would ; i. e. any thing
not less than two prutahs. Now the prutah was the small He
brew coin equal to the eighth part "of an Italian as, the as being
the twenty-fourth part of a silver denarius : Bava Metzia, p. 44,
2. Kiddush, p. 58, 4. Hence it is called Xetttov in Greek, and
mite in English, which is an old word for crumb. The brass
money (xaXK.bg) here mentioned was probably of this species ;
of which the rich cast in 7roXXd, scil. XE7rrd. Campbell, Gro
tius, Lightfoot.

422 ' MARK XIII. 11. 19.
Ver. 44. varEprjaEiog. Of her want, or poverty. So vari-
pvpa, which is opposed to irEpiaaEvpa, abundance, in 2 Cor. viii.
14. The word j3toc is used for the support of life in the best
authors; and so Luke viii. 43. xv. 12. 30. Here it rather im
plies what is necessary to support life during the day. Grotius,
Whitby.

CHAPTER XIII.
Contents: — The destruction of Jerusalem foretold, the signs
which should precede and accompany it described, and the
necessity of watchfulness and prayer inculcated, vv. 1 — 37.
[Matt. xxiv. 1. Luke xxi. 5.]
Verse 11. jUEXsrdrE. This word is frequently used by the
rhetoricians of an elaborate disquisition or discourse. Isocr. de
Pace : koi yap avrol irEiroiriKarE roiig pr)ropag jueXet^v Kat ipiXo-
aorpEiv. Lucian. de Merc. cond. 35. pryropa psXErriaavra. Hence
the phrase pEXirri pr)ropog, a declamation. Wetstein. Of the
Quakers' misinterpretation of this passage see on Matt. x. 20.
It is clear from this place, compared with Luke xxi. 14, 15. that
the promise is peculiar to the Apostles and to the times of per
secution. Whitby.
Ver. 19. at i)pipai EKEtvat OX'npig. An emphatic abstractum
pro concreto not unusual in the best writers. Herod. I. 16. irag
iartv dvOpwirog avptpopi). Achil. Tat. IV. p. 267. Kat fjv dirag
b irorapbg ioprr). Kypke. Of the ekXektoi, v. 20., see on Matt.
xx. 16. A similar phraseology occurs continually in the Fa
thers. Thus Clemens speaks of sedition, as dXXorpta Kat %,ivr\
rolg EKXEKrolg roii Qeov, Epist. ad Corinth. § I . and again, i)pdg
EKXoyijg pipog iirolrfaEv iavrt^. Whitby.

MARK XIV. 3. 423

CHAPTER XIV.
Contents : — The rulers conspire against Christ, vv. 1, 2.
[Matt. xxvi. 1. Luke xxii. 1.] He is anointed in the house
of Simon, vv. 3 — 9. [Matt. xxvi. 6. John xii.- 1.] Tlie cove
nant of Judas with the chief priests, vv. 10, 11. [Matt. xxvi.
14. Luke xxii. 3.] The last supper, and the institution of
the Eucharist, vv. 12 — 31. [Matt. xxvi. 17. Luke xxii. 7.
John xiii. 17.] The agony in the garden, vv. 32 — 42. [Matt.
xxvi. 36. Luke xxii. 40. John xviii. 1.] Tlie betrayal, vv.
43 — 50. [Matt. xxvi. 47. Luke xxii. 47. John xviii. 3.] The
seizure and escape of a young man in the train, vv. 51, 52.
The examination of Christ, and Peter s denial, vv. 53 — 72.
[Matt. xxvi. 57. Luke xxii. 54. John xviii. 12.]
Verse 3. vdpSov irtariKrig. The nard is a highly aromatic
plant, two species of which are mentioned by Dioscorides, the
nardus Syriaca and Indica. The latter terminates, like wheat
or lavender, in ears or spikes, from which a rich unguent is ex
tracted, and thence denominated unguentum nardinum, or un-
guentum nardi spicatce ; Anglice, spikenard. See Dioscor. I. 6.
8. 75. Plin. N. H. XII. 12. XIII. 2. Sometimes, however, the
unguent, as well as the herb itself, was called simply nard. It
was so extremely prized, and so valuable, that a small box of it
furnished at an entertainment was considered equivalent to a
large vessel of wine. Hor. Od. IV. 12. 16. Nardo vinum mere-
bere : Nardi parvus onyx eliciet cadum. With respect to the
epithet iriartKi), which is here applied to it by St. Mark, there is
a considerable diversity of interpretation ; but the opinions of
some of the commentators are so improbable, that it will be suf
ficient merely to mention them, and to examine those only which
seem to be worthy of notice. Passing by, therefore, the con
jectures of 7rrtejTtKf/e from irriaaEiv, contundere, and '07rt<rrtKr/e
from Opis, a town near Babylon ; and the derivations from 7rtE-
Zeiv, premere, from the Syriac Np^lD^S, an acorn, and from Ilto-rd,
a city of Persia, supposed to be mentioned in iEsch. Pers. 2. —
the first hypothesis which deserves attention is that which sup
poses the word to be of Latin origin, and substituted for spicata.
It is clear, however, that in this case it should have been applied
to the herb rather than to the unguent. Those, again, who
would render the word liquid, as if from tt'iveiv, to drink, evi
dently confound it with iriarbg in ^Esch. Prom. 489., which they
cite in their defence. Upon the whole the most probable opinion
seems to be that the epithet denotes pure, unadulterated, and is
derived from iriang. Thus the sacramental wine is called in
Euseb. Dem. Ev. VIII. Kpdpa irtariKOv rrig Kaiviig SiaOi)Krig.
10

424 MARK XIV. 13, 14.
Kuinoel, Kypke, Le Clerc. — [Grotius, Lightfoot, Wet
stein, Schleusner, &c]
Ver. 13. KEpdpiov. Scil. dyyElov or ctkevoc, an earthen vessel.
Polyb. IV. 56. r)roipaaav o'ivov KEpdpta pvpia. Joseph. Ant.
VIII. 13. 2. eXoi'ov rb KEpdpiov. Diog. Laert. VI. 2. 6 Se ke-
pdpiov bXov 'iwEpipEv aiiriij. So in Juv. Sat. X. 25. fictilia,
subaud. vasa. Pollux VII. 162. dyysla KspdpEta Kal yr)'iva, koI
rd EtSr; KEpdpEia. Raphelius, Wetstein. It has been thought
that the person whom the disciples were to meet with this vessel
of water was a servant of the house in which our Lord intended
to eat the Passover. Fetching water seems to have been a servile
occupation among the ancients generally. We have a striking
instance of it in the Electra of Euripides.
Ver. 14. KardXvpa. E. T. the guest chamber. The same
word occurs in Luke ii. 7., where, in the E. T. it is rendered inn.
In Judea there seem to have been two sorts of public-house for
the reception of strangers, of neither of which we have any precise
counterpart among ourselves. Of these the KaraXv/mrawere the
most commodious, being divided into separate apartments for the
accommodation of different parties, who brought their provisions
with them. It was necessary that there should be at Jerusalem
a great number of these houses for the reception of the vast con
course of people who came thither at the Passover ; and rooms
also in private houses, which at the time were set apart for a
similar purpose, and to one of which our Lord seems here to
allude, were called by the same name. This apartment is called
in the next verse dvwyEov Erjrptu/iEvov, an upper room, furnished,
or more properly carpeted. The term, however, as used of a
dining-room, does not refer simply to the floor, but to the couches
also, on which they reclined at meals, and over which was spread
a coverlet or carpet. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 393. 397.
The other word translated inn in the E. T. is iravSox^iov, Luke
x. 34. This was far less comfortable than the KardXvpa, as all
the travellers and their cattle also were under the same roof, se
parated only by a low partition-wall from each other. Hence the
derivation of the name is evident. It is distinguished in the
Vulgate from KardXvpa, where the one is rendered by diverso-
rium, and the other by stabulum. Campbell. Some have
thought that chambers, (KaraXvpara,) were let out during the
feast, and that the disciples were simply directed to engage this
particular one, wherein to prepare the Passover. But it is
well ascertained that it was the custom of the Jews to give to
strangers the use of their rooms and furniture for this purpose,
without any pay except the skins of the lambs sacrificed. See
the Talmud, in Joma, p. 12, 1. Lightfoot, Le Clerc. — [Ro
senmuller.]

MARK XIV. 19. 36. 41. 47. 425
Ver. 19. sig KaO' iig. Some take Kara for Kat slra, and render
the expression one and then another : so unus is sometimes re
peated instead of alter in Latin. Mart. Epigr. I. 20. 2. Expuit
una duos tussis, et una duos. But it should rather seem to be a
Hebrew idiom for KaO' 'iva, and not altogether dissimilar from the
form noticed at Mark vi. 39. Compare John viii. 9. Rom. xii. 5.
Ephes. v. 33. Grotius. — [Wetstein.]
Ver. 36. 'A/3/3a, 6 irariip. There has been much discussion
respecting these words. Some are of opinion that 6 irarr)p is
merely added to 'Aj3j3a as being . equivalent in meaning, in the
same manner as we frequently find in the early Jewish writings a
word of the same signification in Greek added to their own term,
by way of explanation. But in all these cases, such as ''"Vp HD,
Mori KvptE, v^S "1JHP, shangnar iriiXri, &c. the article is never
prefixed to the Greek word. Others, therefore, would read o
7rarrjp, i. e. o ian pEOspprivEvopsvov irariip ? for which, however,
there is no authority either here or in the other two places, Rom.
viii. 15. Gal. iv. 6. where the expression recurs. Now in these
places the Syriac version renders my Father, or our Father, re
spectively, as the circumstances of the case require, thereby
plainly indicating that the article here, as elsewhere, has the
force of a possessive pronoun, and that 6 irari)p must be taken
for the vocative case, as 6 fiaaiXEvg, Matt, xxvii. 29. 6 vlbg,
Mark x. 47. 6 0£oe, Rev. xv. 3. The addition is expressive of
the most impassioned feeling. Among the Hebrew the words
OK, Abbi, and N2N, Abba, have a distinct signification, the
former being a term of merely civil respect, and the latter of
filial affection. Compare the Targum on Gen. xxii. 7. xxvii.
34. xlviii. 18. and on Gen. iv. 20. 1 Sam. x. 12. 2 Kings ii. 12.
et passim. Middleton. — [Schoettgen, Lightfoot, &c]
Ver. 41. dirixEi. Considerable doubts exist with respect to
the meaning of this word, and the proper mode of supplying the
ellipsis occasioned by the abrupt manner in which our Lord's
agitation led him to express himself. Most of the commentators
would understand Kaipbg or wpa in reference either to the time
when the Apostles could assist their Master, or to the agony of
Christ. But the verb itself is unquestionably impersonal, and
so it is explained by all the Fathers and Lexicographers, sup
ported by the authority of classical examples. Hesych. dirixEi'
diroxpVi E^apKEt. Anacr. Od. 28. dirixEi, [SXiirw yap avrov.
Perhaps the true interpretation is that which is noticed in the
parallel passage, Matt. xxvi. 45. Wetstein, Whitby. —
[Hammond, Kypke, Kuinoel, &c]
Ver. 47. sic ne. So again v. 51. The pleonasm is of fre
quent occurrence. Thucyd. VI. 61. rtva piav viiKra. Aristoph.

426 MARK XIV. 51. 54.
Equit. 1297. piav nva. Plutarch, de Adulat. p. 63. E. slg rig
iwpaKwg rb yEvopEVOv. WETSTEIN.
Ver. 51. vsavto-Koe. Many idle conjectures have been formed
respecting this youth. Epiphanius and Jerome suppose him to
have been James the Less ; Chrysostom and others have a tra
dition that he was John : but all the disciples had forsaken him
and fled. It has also been conjectured that he was some young
man whose house lay near the garden, and who, being rouzed
by the tumult, was excited by curiosity to see what was going
forward. The most probable conjecture seems to be that he was
a Roman soldier not on duty, for vEavto-Koe, as juventus and ju-
venes in Latin, is frequently employed as a denomination for sol
diers. Thus again in this very verse, where the article points to
a particular part of the company, which could be no other than
the soldiery. Compare Josh. ii. 1. vi. 22. Isaiah xiii. 18. LXX.
and in the Hebrew, 2 Chron. xiii. 3. where the LXX have 7toXe-
piarr)g. Of the word aivSwv see on Matt, xxvii. 59. Some
suppose that it here signifies the taliih, or upper cloak, which
the Jews generally wore, since the word yvpvbg does not neces
sarily mean naked. See on Matt. xxv. 35. In this case, however,
the words iirl yvpvoii would be superfluous ; nor does their use
agree better with the notion that the under linen tunic is intended,
which was always close to the skin. Besides, a man's appearing
only in his tunic would not have excited surprise, as the common
people, when at work, seldom appeared otherwise. See on Matt.
xxiv. 17. It should rather seem, therefore, to have been the
linen cloth or sheet in which he had been sleeping. So Kimchi :
Sindon est vestis nocturna, quam induunt super carnem,f actus ex
lino. Galen, pi) yvpvbg KopiZiaOw, dXXa irspifisPXripEvog atv-
Sova. Herod. II. 95. r)v juev ev Iparito ivEXt%apEvog EvSrj i) atv-
Sovi. Dion. H. ap. Euseb. Eccl. Hist. VI. 40. r/jttr/v yvpvbg iv
t$ Xivw iaOr)pan. Compare Thucyd. II. 49. Liban. Or. XI.
p. 377. D. Wetstein, Grotius, Schleusner, Whitby. —
[Pearce.] This incident ¦ is related only by St. Mark ; but
though of much less importance than the cure of Malchus, it
adds greatly to the credibility of the history. It is an occurrence
which is very likely to have happened, but very unlikely to have
been invented. Campbell.
Ver. 54. 7rpoe rb <pwg. E. T. At the fire. In pure Greek
the word <pwg almost always, if not invariably, denotes light. Its
usage, therefore, in this place foxfire may fairly be considered as
a Hebraism, the word "VJ<, which signifies light, being frequently
used in this acceptation. By a comparison with this place the
same metonomy seems to be indicated in Luke xxii. 56., though
it has there been ingeniously proposed to render it the light or
blaze of the fire. Grotius, Hammond. — [Palairet, Wetstein.]

MARK XIV. 56. 69. 72. 427
Ver. 56. laai al paprvpiai. It has been said that it does not
appear by the Evangelist that there was any disagreement in the
testimony of the witnesses against our Lord, and a reason is thence
deduced for rendering ttroe here and at v. 59. sufficient. That
the testimony adduced was not sufficient to condemn him is
certain, but it does not appear that it was not at the same time
contradictory, though the Gospels do not record the precise
points of contradiction. There may possibly be a reference both
to the inconsistent and the insufficient nature of the evidence,
though the Sanhedrim seem rather to have studied a show of
justice than to have regarded the magnitude of the alleged
offence ; and there is no good authority for the use of this adjec
tive in the sense proposed. The traditional canons divided tes
timonies into three kinds: — 1. a vain, or discordant testimony;
2. a standing, or presumptive testimony ; and 3. an even testi
mony, lari paprvpia. It was not agreeable to the Jewish canon
to seek for witness at all in capital cases, as it appears from the
Talmud in Sanhedrim, c. 4. Ltghtfoot, Wetstein, Wolf. —
[Hammond, Grotius, Whitby.] In v. 61. the name Qeov is
prefixed to roii EvXoyjjrov in some MSS. and versions, but it is
entirely suitable to the Hebrew idiom to employ the adjective
without the substantive-as a distinguishing appellation of God.
Campbell.
Ver. 69. r) iraiSiaKri. The article seems here to indicate the
maid recently mentioned, v. 66., whereas Matthew puts this se
cond charge into the mouth of another. This discrepancy is
unnoticed in Matt. xxvi. 69., but will be easily solved to the
satisfaction of every candid enquirer, and that too without reject
ing the article, or making it equivalent to rig, for which there is
no reason or authority. The maid who first recognized Peter
may have joined in the second accusation, which seems to have
been made by several persons together ; and it is natural, from
her reiterated attack, that she should make the deepest impression
upon his mind. Hence, in relating the circumstance to Mark,
he might have said, the maid. Michaelis, Middleton. — [Gro
tius, Rosenmuller.]
Ver. 72. E7nj3aXa>v EKXats. E. T. When he thought thereon
he wept : and much as the import of the participle iirifiaXwv has
been canvassed, this seems to be the true interpretation of the
passage. Any change, such as £7rtXaj3o>v, which has been pro
posed, is altogether without authority ; and the other meanings
which have been attached to E-n-tj3dXX£iv, are either inadmissible
or unsuited to its present use. The examples produced by some
in favour of its signifying to rush out, conclude nothing, for in
these it implies to rush in rather than to rush out; and the pre
position, if used, is ste or etti, never e| or dirb. Others, therefore,
prefer one of two other explanations, upon the authority of Theo-

428 MARK XV. 3.
phylact, who observes : £7rtj3aXu>v £KXat£, rovriartv, iiriKaXvipa-
pEvog Tr)v KEipaXrjv, i) dvrt tov, ap%dpEvog jitErd aipoSporrirog.
With respect to the former of these interpretations, it was a well-
known, and indeed a natural custom with the Greeks and Ro
mans, and also with the Jews, to cover the head when they wept.
Compare 2 Sam. xv. 30. xix. 4. Esth. vii. 8. Jerem. xiv. 3, 4.
Joseph. Ant. VII. 10. 5. Hom. Od. A. 114. ^Esch. Choeph. 75.
Eurip. Orest. 274. Suppl. 110. 295. Arist. Ran. 942. Platon.
Pheed. p. 97. Wytt. Isocr. Trapez. p. 714. Anthol. V. 33.
Herod. VI. 67. Plin. Epist. xxxv. 10. But, not to mention
that such an expression of grief would have published the emo
tion of Peter to all present, such an ellipsis can scarcely be al
lowed as that suggested by Eurip. Elect. 1232. iiri(3aXdiv (pdpri
Kopaig ipalai. Compare Levit. xix. 19. LXX. The other inter
pretation of Theophylact would require iirifiaXEv kXoieiv rather
than £7rtj3aXwv EKXatE, even if the word would admit of this mean
ing ; for which there is no more authority than for rendering it,
according to another supposition, to look upon, scil. Jesus. It is
true that the expression is elliptical, and that by supplying this
or that particular word a given sense may be elicited ; but an
ellipse cannot be fairly established unless where an instance si
milar to the case in point can be exhibited. Now in the sense
of the E. T- there are abundant examples of E7rt/3dXX£tv, scil.
rr/v Siavoiav, both with and without the ellipsis. Polyb. Leg. 37.
iirifdaXtov 6 irpEaf3Evri)g iroXXovg nvag Siet'iOeto Xoyovg. M.
Anton. X. 80. rovrw ydp iiripaXwv, rayiwg iiriXr)ari rrig opyrig.
Hierocl. Carm. Pythag. p. 14. dXXwg Si Kat aXXaie iinfidXXEi.
Diod. Sic. XX. 44. 7rpoe ovSev £7r£|3aX£ rrjv Siavoiav rwv irapd
rolg iroXspioig avvrsXovpivtov. Hence Suid. iirifioXr)' 'ivvoia.
Diog. L. Epicur. X. 31. rag ipavraartKag iirifioXdg rr)g Siavoiag.
If these authorities do not put the matter beyond doubt, they at
least give it a greater probability than has been yet given to any
other hypothesis ; and the incident is certainly such as would na
turally produce reflection in the mind of the Apostle. Campbell,
Wetstein, Kypke. — [Rosenmuller, Schleusner, Elsner,
Beausobre, Bos, Grotius, Le Clerc, &c]

CHAPTER XV.
Contents:— The accusation, crucifixion, death, and burial of
Christ, with the attendant circumstances, vv. 1 — 47. [Matt.
xxvii. 1. Luke xxiii. 1. John xviii. 28.]
Verse 3. At the end of this verse the clause aiirbg Si ovSiv
dirEKpivaro are added in a few MSS. and retained by the E. T.

MARK XV. 6. 8. 11. 15. 21. 429
and some other versions. Hence, perhaps, the error in the trans
lation of v. 5., yet answered nothing, whereas the adverb ovketi
should have been rendered no longer. The clause was probably
inserted from Matt, xxvii. 12. Grotius, Campbell.
Ver. 6. diriXvEv. Matt, xxvii. 15. eIiIjOei diroXiiEiv. Of the
use of the aorist simply in this sense see Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 503. 3.
The same sense, however, will result by rendering Kara ioprrjv,
ad moremfesti, or after the manner of the feast ; and this is the
import of the preposition Kara in Rom. iii. 5. 1 Cor. iii. 3. xv. 32.
Gal. iii. 15. So also in Attic Greek, Kara rd avrd, i. e. Kara
rov avrbv rpoirov. It cannot be now ascertained, either from
Josephus or elsewhere, to what sedition the Evangelist alludes in
the next verse. The phrase tpovov ttoieIv, to commit murder,
occurs in Deut. xxii. 8. LXX. So Polybius : 7rot£tv dlpa Kal
ipovovg. Whitby, Kuinoel, Raphelius.
Ver. 8. ava/3o/)<rae- Several MSS. read here avaj3de or dva-
fii)aag, and thence the Vulgate cum ascendisset turba ; unless
the MSS. in question were made conformable to the Vulgate,
whose translators had probably mistaken avaj3oi7<rae f°r ava/3»j-
aag. That the received reading is correct is evident from the
words 7rdXtv EKpa^av in v. 13. Whitby, Grotius.
Ver. 11. dviaEiaav. Stirred up, incited. Some copies have
EirEtaav, evidently from a marginal gloss. Dion. Hal. Ant. R.
VIII. p. 748. ovk imrpiipovTEg rolg dvaaEiovai rb irXijOog. Pa-
lairet. The adverb paXXov is here used in a negative rather
than a comparative sense : and so Matt. x. 6. Mark ix. 43. and
elsewhere. Whitby.
Ver. 15. to 'iKavbv irotriaai. To content, to satisfy. The
phrase seems to be of Latin origin, derived from the forensic ex
pression satis fucere. Hence it is found in those Greek writers
who lived after the subjugation of Greece to the Romans. Diog.
Laer. in Bion. IV. 50. rb 'iKavbv aoi iroir)ato, idv irapaKXr)rovg
iripipyg. Appian. Punic, p. 68. a to 'iKavbv iroiriaETE Vwpaioig.
Grotius, Wetstein.
Ver. 21. 'AXE^dvSpov koi 'Pov^ov. The latter of these is
supposed to have been the person saluted by St. Paul in Rom.
xvi. 3., and if so, he and his brother were probably at Rome
when St. Mark published his Gospel. Hence he very naturally
inserts their names together with that of their father, appealing
thereby to their testimony in support of the truth of his history.
Lucius, another brother, is said to have preached the Gospel in
Germany. Grotius. Of the statement in v. 25. compared with
that in John xix. 14. See Home's Introd. Vol. II. pp. 505. 510.

430 MARK XV. 27. 42. XVI. 1.
Ver. 27. Svo Xyardg. A copy of the Italic version tells their
names, Zoathan and Chammatha. A. Clarke. The prophecy
cited in the next verse is Isaiah liii. 12. Abarbanel, on the pas
sage, testifies that the Rabbins unanimously refer the whole
chapter to their Messiah. Whitby, Grotius.
Ver. 42. 6 ion 7rpotrd|3j3arov. This explanation is added by
Mark for the information of the Gentiles, for whom he principally
wrote. Grotius. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 308.

CHAPTER XVI.
Contents: — Tlie two Maries and Salome see an angel in the
sepulchre, vv. 1—8. [Matt, xxviii. 1. John xx. 1.] Christ
appears to Mary Magdalene, and sends her to the disciples,
vv. 9 — 11. [Luke xxiv. 10. John xx. 14.] His appearance
on the road to Emmaus, vv. 12, 13. [Luke xxiv. 13.] His
final commission and ascension into Heaven, vv. 14 — 20.
[Matt, xxviii. 18. Luke xxiv. 50. Acts i. 6.]
Verse 1. SiayEvopivov. Being past, or ended. So Acts xxv.
13. xxvi. 9. Polyb. II. 19. StayEvopiviiiv irdXtv irwv SiKa.
Herodian. I. p. 475. xpdvov Si ov 7roXXov StayEvojulvov. Polyaen.
Strat. VII. 31. xP°vov SiayEvopivov. Raphelius, Grotius.
The verb rVyopatrav is rendered in the E. T. they had bought ;
and in this acceptation the aorist is sometimes used. It is most
probable, however, that this translation originated in Luke xxiii.
56., where it is stated that the spices were prepared before the
evening of the Sabbath. The two Evangelists, however, refer
to different parties of women respectively ; and though the one
party had procured their spices on the evening before, there is no
reason to suppose that the other did not purchase an additional
supply after the Sabbath. The Vulgate correctly has emerunt.
From this notion also, that only one party of women visited the
sepulchre on the morning of the resurrection, as well as from con
founding the times of their setting out and their arrival, has arisen
the difficulty of reconciling the words dvarEtXavroe rov r)Xiov,
v. 2., with the statement of the other Evangelists, and especially
the expression irpwl aKoriag 'in ovtrrje, in John xx. 1. Some
contend, therefore, that the aorist does not here denote times
past, but passing, or about to pass, and that the phrase means '
simply about sun-rise : while others would adapt the various ex
pressions of the Evangelists to the different distinctions of twi
light among the Rabbins. But the difficulty is much more na-

MARK XVI. 4. 7. 9. 12. 431
turally removed by harmonizing the incidents so as to suit the
times severally described by the Evangelists. Townsend. —
[Whitby, Lightfoot, &c]
Ver. 4. f)v ydp piyag aipoSpa. This is referred by some to an
elliptical sentence, to be thus supplied : And they were anxious,
because the stone, &c. But the clause should rather be con
nected with the preceding verse, the intervening sentence being
parenthetical. See on Mark xi. 13. Kuinoel. — [Grotius,
Whitby, Rosenmuller.]
Ver. 7. Kat ti£ Tlirpw. Peter is here named, not as prince of
the Apostles, but for his consolation, and the assurance that his
repentance after the threefold denial of his Master was accepted.
Theophylact: iirEiSri r)pvr)aaro 6 IlErpoe. So Chrysostom, Je
rome, and others. The conjunction Kat is elliptical for Kat pd-
Xiara, especially. ThusHomer,^r«**M«.- Tpwae Kat "EKropa. Virg.
iEn. I. Danaum atque immitis Achillis. Whitby, Grotius.
In the next verse the words ovSevi ovSev Et7rov are to be limited
to those whom the women might meet on their return, as they
doubtless published the occurrence afterwards. So Euthymius.
Compare Luke xxiv. 22, 23. Hammond, Grotius.
Ver. 9. iirrd Saipovia. Some understand this merely of so
many epileptic fits ; others explain seven as a certain for an un
certain number, and the German theorists even go so far as to
maintain an opinion that the expulsion of these daemons was no
thing more than a delusion of Mary's mind. The intent and
origin of such . opinions are too obvious to require refutation.
Kuinoel, Paulus, &c. Of the genuineness of the concluding-
verses of this Gospel see Home's Introd. Vol. IV. p. 235.
Ver. 12. iv iripq pop<py. Commentators are not agreed whe
ther this change was in the dress of Jesus, or in his visage.
Possibly popipi) may include both ; and, at all events, it is a point
of no material importance. The alteration in his appearance,
whatever it might be, was doubtless the cause which prevented
his immediate recognition by the two disciples, who were going
Ete dypov, into the country, i. e. to Emmaus. See Luke xxiv. 18.,
where the particulars are more fully related. The incredulity of
the Apostles, mentioned in the next verse, has been thought in
consistent with Luke xxiv. 34., and it has been proposed to re
move the discrepancy by reading that passage interrogatively,
Has the Lord risen, &c. But, though many of the assembled
disciples yielded their assent to the testimony of Simon, there
were still some who would probably entertain doubts respecting
the resurrection. Some, we know, were scarcely led to believe by
the evidence of their own eyes, Matt, xxviii. 17. Luke xxiv. 41.

432 MARK XVI. 15.
We may therefore fairly conclude that St. Luke means only some,
probably the majority, of the eleven ; and by a figure of common
occurrence in the best writers, puts the whole for the part.
Some, indeed, suppose that evSeko, in v. 14., is used in the same
way, and that only ten is meant, Thomas being absent. But the
appearance of Christ there recorded is not parallel with that in
Luke xxiv. 86. John xx. 19., but with that in John xx. 26.,
which took place a week after the resurrection. In his previous
meetings there was nothing like reproof; and it was the stub
bornness of his unbelieving Apostles, and especially of Thomas^
which called forth the rebuke here mentioned, and the other cir
cumstances related at large by St. John. Grotius, Macknight,
Kuinoel. — [Markland.]
Ver. 15. irday rd Kriasi. So Col. i. 23. In Matt, xxviii. 18.
the expression is irdvra rd Wvri : which has been supposed to
mean more particularly the Gentiles. The phrase also employed
by Mark was very common in this limited sense among the Jews.
Thus in Bereshith R. §. 13. The speech of all the creatures,
i. e. the Heathen, is only of earthly things : bid all the prayers
of Israelites are for the holy place. But that it is here to be
understood of the whole creation, Jews as well as Gentiles, is
manifest from Luke' xxiv. 47., where the words beginning at Je
rusalem are added ; and in this extended sense it is also some
times found in the Rabbinical writings. Whitby. — [Lightfoot,
Hammond.] Of the objection which has been raised against
Christianity on the ground of its non-universality, see Home's
Introd. Vol. I. p. 340. sqq. The damnatory sentence in the
ensuing verse has not only been a fruitful source of cavil to the
unbeliever, but a stumbling-block to many sincere Christians.
Not only has it been said to make human salvation depend upon
a mere speculative belief, and to involve the greater part of man
kind, to whom the Gospel has not reached, in ruin ; but it has
been endeavoured to bring the declaration within limits by which
it does not appear to be confined. But by comparing the words
of the Apostolic commission as dictated here, in Matt, xxviii. 20.
and Luke xxiv. 47. it will appear that not only faith but obe
dience and repentance were to be preached in the name of Christ ;
and that consequently belief, as apart of the Christian system, is
here put for the whole. With respect to the necessity of bap
tism, as a condition of salvation, i. e. of being placed in a state
of salvation, our Church does not undertake to say that it is im
possible to be saved without it. The words of Scripture, how
ever, seem to urge its absolute necessity ; and the early Fathers,
too strongly indeed, insist upon the danger even of infants dying
unbaptized ; nor is it for us, who need salvation, to sound and
examine the means by which salvation is offered, but seriously
to do what is required, and religiously to fear the danger which

MARK XVI. 17. 433
may be incurred by neglecting it. There are some, it is true,
who limit the damnatory declaration before us to the age of the
Apostles, when the spiritual gifts, promised in the very next sen
tence, could not fail of producing conviction in any unprejudiced
mind. But there are other passages, which, without any such
qualifying appendix, represent the terrible doom of the unbeliev
ing, as Luke xii. 46. Rev. xxi. 8., and it is enough for us to infer
from the command to preach the Gospel to all nations, that there
is a broad distinction between unavoidable ignorance and the vo
luntary rejection of the Gospel. See Rom. x. 14. Opportunity
and capacity of believing are supposed both in this and other texts
to the same effect, which cannot possibly be applied to any case,
where these, from whatever causes, are wanting. Nor can we
hence conclude that infants are incapable of baptism because
they are incapable of faith, for the same reasoning would render
them incapable of salvation. In the second clause, however,
baptism is omitted ; so that it is not simply the want of baptism,
but the contemptuous neglect of it, which constitutes the sin ; as
infants might otherwise be punished for the mistake or profane-
ness of their parents. The extent of the declaration, therefore,
amounts to this, that by virtue of faith and baptism we are placed
in a state of salvation ; if we continue in faith, and do not wilfully
recede from the duties of the baptismal covenant, we shall ac
tually be saved ; if otherwise, Scripture warrants but one alter
native. Whitby, Lonsdale, Doddridge, &c. Many render
the verb KaraKpivEaOat to be condemned, as less strong in expres
sion than the E. T., and doubtless the verb may be so translated.
But this makes little difference as to the sense of the passage.
The two clauses are evidently antithetical ; and upon the lowest
interpretation of awOi)aErai, as signifying a mere solvable state
in the admission to Gospel privileges, the reverse of it must imply
a state, which, if persevered in, must end in everlasting perdition.
At the same time, the solemnity of the declaration, as well as of
the occasion on which it was delivered, may reasonably be con
sidered as pointing at the final condition of the believer and the
infidel. Grotius, Rosenmuller, Hammond, Doddridge.
Ver. 17. aripEla Si k. t. X. For the first promulgation of the
Gospel the extraordinary display of the spirit was necessary, to
draw the attention of mankind more forcibly to a consideration of
its merits, and the admission of its truth. Hence our Lord, in
giving his final injunction to his Apostles, promises them the
sensible co-operation of his grace, and certain supernatural en
dowments to those who, by their means, were introduced into
the kingdom of God. Of the nature and extent of these spi
ritual gifts we shall have to speak in the note on 1 Cor. xii. 28.
At present, therefore, it will be sufficient to attend to the fulfil
ment of our Lord's promise in regard to those which are here
VOL. i. f f

434 MARK XVI. 17.
enumerated by St. Mark. — 1. Casting out devils. Of the expul
sion of the most inveterate dasmons, not only from men, but from
temples, altars, &c. by the name of Christ, we have the most
convincing testimony of the early Fathers, who do not hesitate to
appeal to the very infidels in support of their veracity ; and offer,
upon pain of death, to make the experiment in the presence of
an inquisitorial tribunal. Clem. Recogn. IV. 33. Fidelis quis-
que dcemonibus imperat. Justin. M. Dial. p. 302. A. rd Saipo-
via irdvra Kal irvsvpara irovr/pd it,opKiZovrEg viroraaaopEva r)plv
e'xojuev. Origen (cont. Cels. I. p. 7.) speaks of the name of Jesus
as iiirb ipavXwv bvopaZbpEvov dvvEiv ; and St. Austin affirms,
T. IX. p. 63. Illi ipsi qui seducunt per ligaturas, per prcecan-
tationes, per machinamenta inimici, miscent prcecantationibus
suis nomen Christi. Compare Matt. vii. 22. Mark ix. 38. Acts
xix. 4. — Minut. F. p. 31. Hcec omnia sciunt plerique vestrtim,
ipsos dcemonas de semetipsis confiteri, quoties a nobis et tormentis
verborum, et orationis incendiis, e corporibus exiguntur. Tertull.
Apol. 23. Edatur hie aliquis sub tribunalibus vestris, quern dce-
mone agi constat. Jussus a quolibet Christiano loqui, spiritus
ille tam se dcemonem confitebitur de vero, quam alibi Deum de
falso. Et nisi sic dcemones corf essi fuerint, Cliristiano mentiri
non audentes, ibidem illius Christiani procacissimi sanguinem
fundite. See also Origen c. Cels. I. p. 20. III. p. 133. VII.
pp. 334. 376. ed. Spenc. Just. M. Apol. I. p. 45. Dial. c. Tryph.
p. 311. 341. Lactan. IV. 27. V. 27. Iren. II. 56, 57. Julian.
ap. Cyril, p. 198. Porphyr. ap. Euseb. Prcep. Ev. V. 1.
Clem. Alex, ad Grcec. p. 9. A. Cyprian de Idol. pp. 4. 14.
Tertull. Apol. 37. — 2. Speaking with new tongues. This was a
gift highly requisite for the speedy propagation of the Gospel ;
and there is frequent mention of its exercise in the N. T. Com
pare Acts x. 46. xix. 6. 1 Cor. xii. 9. 30. xiv. 26. sqq. 2 Cor. i.
5. and elsewhere. Irenaeus also (Lib. V. 6.) speaks of the Chris
tians as 7ravroSaTrate XaXoiivrtov Std irvEvparog yXwaaaig. It is
somewhat strange that this miraculous faculty should have been
represented, as it has been by some of the German commentators,
as the result of previous study ; while others have proposed to
limit its extent to the promise made by Christ to his Apostles in
Matt. x. 19, 20. of supernatural assistance when they were
brought before the courts of judicature. — 3. Taking up serpents.
Of this we find only one instance in the N. T. viz. that of St.
Paul in Acts xxviii. 3. ; and there are but few of any credit in the
Ecclesiastical writers. Tertullian, however, observes, Scorp. c. 1.
Hoc denique modo etiam Ethnicis scepe subvenimus, donati a
Deo ea potestate quam Apostolus dedicavit, cum morsum viperce
sprevit. Jamblicus, in Vit. Pyth. 28., says that Pythagoras had
this gift ; and many impostors have also pretended to possess it.
Julius Paulus (Lib. I. 15.) speaks of circulatores, qui serpentes
circumferunt. So Plato in Euthydem. p. 201. E. i) piv rwv

MARK XVI. 19. 435
iiriiiStov rixvr) I'xewv r£ Kai (paXayyiwv Kal aKOpiriwv Kat rwv uX-
Xtov Oripiiov te Kat voawv Kr)Xriaig ian. Virg. Eclog. VIII. 71.
Frigidus in pratis cantando rumpitur anguis. Ovid. Met. VII.
203. Vipereas rumpo verbis et carmine fauces. It has also been
asserted by very credible writers, that in the East there is an art
of charming serpents by music, so as for a short time to suspend
their disposition to hurt. From the possibility, therefore, of de
ception in this respect, it is probable that this miracle was less
frequently exercised ; but there can be no reason to render the
verb atpEtv to kill, as some have proposed. The sense of the
passage is clear from Luke x. 19. Isaiah xliii. 2. ; and the power
undoubtedly included the ability to heal the most dangerous
wounds inflicted by the bites of venomous animals. To complete
the sense the words Kat ov pi) avrovg (3Xdipovai must be supplied
from the next clause. — 4. Drinking poison without injury. Con
sidering the refinement to which the art of poisoning was by this
time brought, and that it was even applied as a capital punish
ment, such a promise as this will appear highly important. Four
instances are recorded of the exercise of the gift : that of Bar-
sabas, by Papias, ap. Euseb. Ecc. H. III. 39.; of the Caecilian
soldiers, by Ado, in his Martyrology ; of Sabinus, Bishop of Ca-
noso, by Gregory of Tours ; and of Joshua Ben Levi, in the
Talmud, who was cured by pronouncing the name of Jesus. It
is worthy of remark, that Mohammed, who styled himself the
Apostle of God, lost his life by poison; a circumstance which,
compared with our Lord's promise, at once exhibits his impos
ture. With Oavdatpov n we must understand (pdppaKov. The
same ellipsis occurs in Plutarch in Ccesare : dig inrvwariKov ov
Oavdaipov irEirwKora. It is supplied in Eurip. Ion. 616. ocrae
aipaydg Si) (pappaKwv Oavaaipwv VvvalKEg Eiipov. — 5. Healing
the sick. To this salutary influence we find ample testimonies
during the first three centuries. See 1 Cor. xii. 19. 30. James
v. 14, 15. Epiphanius relates, de Mensuris, §. 15. that soon
after the destruction of Jerusalem the Christians returned from
Pella, arjpEla piyaXa ipyaZbpEvoi idaswv. Among the operations
of the Holy Spirit at baptism, Justin M. enumerates rb rrje IdaEiog,
Dial. Tryp. p. 258. Tertullian thus appeals to Scapula, a
judge at Carthage, Apol. c. 4. Et quanti honesti viri, de vulga-
ribus enim non dicimus, aut a dcemoniis aut valetudinibus reme-
diati sunt ? He then particularizes one Proculus, who so in
gratiated himself with Severus by the cure of Euodus, that he
was retained in the palace till his death. Compare also Iren. II.
56, 57. Origen c. Cels. I. p. 34. II. p. 80. Arnob. adv. Gent. I.
p. 35. VIII. p. 418. Whitby, Grotius, Doddridge, A.
Clarke, Kuinoel.
Ver. 19. dvEXiicpOii Eig rov oiipavov. Of our Lord's ascension
into heaven see Home's Introd. Vol. I. p. 522. for a sufficient
f f 2

436 MARK XVI. 20.
reply to the leading objections which have been raised against it.
Upon the assumption that the last twelve verses in this Gospel
are spurious, it has been insinuated that Luke's is the only
narrative which has been given of the event. To this we may
reply that our Lord himself predicted the event, and that the ful
filment of it was repeatedly asserted by St. Peter and St. Paul.
Compare Acts ii. 32. sqq. Ephes. iv. 10. vi. 9. Col. iv. 1. 1 Tim.
iii. 16. Heb. vi. 19. viii. 1. ix. 12. 21. The phrase dvaipipEaOai
Eig ovpavbv is used also of the translation of Elijah in 2 Kings
ii. 10. Compare also Ecclus. xlviii. 9. xlix. 16. 1 Mace. ii. 58.
LXX. Of the phrase KaOiaai ek Se^'iwv see on Matt. xx. 20.
It is here quoted from Psalm ex. 1., which is therefore to be un
derstood as prophetic of the ascension. Grotius, Kuinoel.
Ver. 20. rov Kvptov trvvEpyovvroe. In accordance with his
promise given in Matt, xxviii. 20. Compare 1 Cor. iii. 9. xv. 10.
and elsewhere in the Epistles. The signs following are those
mentioned supra, vv. 17, 18. Grotius.

ST. LUKES GOSPEL.

CHAPTER I.
Contents: — The Preface, vv. 1 — 4. The birth of John the
Baptist foretold, vv. 5 — 25. The annunciation, vv. 26 — 38.
Interview between Mary and Elizabeth, w. 39 — 45. Marys
song of praise, vv. 46 — 56. Birth of John, vv. 57 — 66. The
prophetic song of Zacharias, vv. 67 — 79. Education of the
Baptist, v. 80.
Verse 1. E7r£iSrj7TEp iroXXol k. r. X. On this Preface see
Home's Introd. Vol. IV. pp. 304. 515.; and of the Apocryphal
Gospels, to some of which the Evangelist has been supposed to
allude, see Appendix I. of the same work, Vol. I. p. 499. Many,
however, if not all of these spurious productions, were of a later
date than the Gospel of St. Luke ; nor does it by any means follow
that the narratives to which he refers were intentionally false or
heretical, though we may fairly, perhaps, infer, that they were de
fective and erroneous. Such, at least, is the impression which this
introductory statement of his object in writing naturally makes
upon the mind : although the verb E7rtxEtp£tv by no means neces
sarily implies failure, as it sometimes signifies not merely to at
tempt, but to accomplish. iEschin. Dial. Soc. II. 12. dXXd ri ovx
avrbg, iirEiirsp Ettrr/yEt tov Xoyov, £7r£T£Etpr/(7ae XsyEtv, k. r. X. Ulpian
had evidently his eye upon this place in Demosth. p. 159. iirEt-
Srj7TEp 7T£pt rovrov 7roXXot E7rE^£tpr)(7av airoXoyr)aaaOai. With
respect to the word dvard^aaOai, which has been understood as
signifying to re-arrange a history already written, it is certain
that the preposition does not always in composition retain its
proper force. The word itself is not repeated in the N. T., and
is generally of very rare occurrence : but dvaypd^Etv is frequently
no more than ypdipEtv, as in Dion. Hal. Vol. I. p. 182. ed.
Reiske : KaXXtae Si 6 rde 'AyoOoKXiovg wpd^Ete dvaypdipag.
That avard^aaOat Sii)yriaiv is here simply to write a narrative,
seems probable from what follows : e'So|e Kapol ypdipai. In the
N. T. the verb TrXrjpo^opEtv, applied to things, signifies to per-

438 LUKE I. 2.
form, fulfil, accomplish, as in 2 Tim. iv. 5. or applied to persons,
to persuade, convince, embolden, as in Rom. iv. 21. The de
rivative 7rXr)po0opta occurs also in the Epistles. In this passage,
though applied to persons, most of the commentators coincide
with the E. T. in adopting the latter signification of the word ;
and similar catachreses are frequent in the best writers. The
sense is the same as if the construction were ruiv irpaypdrwv d
iv i)plv ysviaOai irXripocpopoiipEOa : and this, in fact, seems to be
the sense best suited to the tenor of the passage. The different
derivations which have been assigned to the verb are of minor
importance : it is found in the sense here affixed to it in Ctesias,
Pers. 38. 7roXXo7e Xoyote Kat bpKiotg irXr/porpopriaavTEg Msyd-
|3v£ov. Isocr. Or. Trap, e^e E^apvov irXripoipopriOElg yEysvrja-
Oat. Kuinoel, Schleusner, Wetstein, Palairet, Grotius.
— [Hammond, Campbell, &c]
Ver. 2. air dpx>?e- So Acts XV. 7. dip' rjpEpwv dpxaitov. The
expression is sometimes supposed, as dvwOEv in the next verse,
to refer to the period at which Luke begins his narrative ; but it
should rather seem to indicate the commencement of Christ's
ministry : and so Mnason is called dpxalog paOrirrig, Acts xxi. 16.
Neither is it probable that Xoyoe is here to be understood of
Christ personally, in which acceptation it seems peculiar to St.
John. The word of God, or simply the word, was a common
expression with the Jews for whatever God communicated to men
for their instruction. See Luke viii. 11. and compare Mark iv.
14. Hence it came to denote the Gospel; and the idiom, even
in the abridged form, occurs in Luke viii. 12, 13. 15. Actsiv. 4.
vi. 4. viii. 4. x. 44. xi. 19. xiv. 25. xvi. 6. xvii. 1 1. Hence it ap
pears that it is very familiar with this Evangelist ; nor is there
any reason for a different interpretation in this place. Some,
indeed, would render tov Xbyou the thing, not the word, sup
posing it to mean the same with irpaypdroiv in the preceding
verse, and understanding by virripirai those connected in the
events, as the relations and immediate connections of Jesus. But
in this case the plural would rather have been used as in v. 4.
and virripirrig always denotes a servant or agent employed by
another in the performance of some work, as were the Apostles
by Christ in the ministry of the Gospel. In the N. T. it is
synonymous with StaKovoe : and in Acts vi. 4. we have i) SiaKo-
via tov Xoyov opposed to StaKOvia TpairsZtov, an inferior mi
nistry, which was soon to be committed to a set of stewards
elected for the purpose. Luke, therefore, doubtless received his
information from those who had attended Jesus during his public
ministry, and who, after his ascension, were entrusted with the
propagation of his doctrine through the world. See also
Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 293. note. Campbell, Lightfoot.
—[Hammond, Beza, Grotius, Kuinoel.]

LUKE I. 8, 4. 439
Ver. 3. 7raprjKoXov0j}Kort :rd<Ttv aKpifiwg. E. T. Having had
perfect understanding of all things. But the verb 7rapaKoXov-
OeIv signifies to follow up, to examine, to investigate. See 1 Tim.
iv. 6. 2 Tim. iii. 10. So Demosth. p. 1178. rote slSoaiv aKpifiibg
airavra raxira rd irpdypara dig e'xei Kat 7rapr/KoXov0r)KO(7iv aV
apxvg. 1463. baa rvyxdvw Si' ipirEtpiav Kal rb irapriKoXovOriKi-
vat rolg irpdypaaiv Etoaie. Plin. Epist. VII. 16. Unum adjiciam,
omnia me, quibus interfueram, quceque statim, cum maxime vera
audiantur, audieram, vere persecutum. The historian intended
to assert his diligence in procuring exact information rather than
the possession of that information ; thus contrasting himself with
the avroirrat Kal inrripirai, from whom he .derived his knowledge.
Campbell, Grotius, Wetstein, Kypke. Some would render
dvwOsv from above, i. e. by inspiration, comparing John iii. 3. 31.
xix. 11. James i. 17. iii. 15. 17. But it frequently denotes
sinrplj from the top ox beginning, as in Matt, xxvii. 51. Mark
xv. 38. John xix. 23. Acts xxvi. 5., and such is unquestionably
its import here, in reference to the early period at which this
Gospel commences above that of St. Matthew and St. Mark. So
Demosth. c. Nearch. p. 1870. j3oiiXopai S' iiplv aKptjiiarEpov
irEpl avribv dvwOEv Siriyi)aaaOat KaO' EKaarov. Virg. Georg. IV.
575. Prima repetens ab origine famam. Whitby, Wetstein,
Lightfoot. The word KaOEt,rig does not necessarily refer to time,
so that we cannot conclude from it, as some have hastily done,
that St. Luke has strictly observed the true chronological order
of events. It means distinctly, particularly, as opposed to con
fusedly, generally ; and relates to the orderly classification of the
several transactions recorded. Compare Acts xviii. 23. and see
Home's Introd. Vol. IV. p. 306. Campbell, Grotius, Whitby.
¦ — [Beza, Le Clerc] Of the individuality of Theophilus see
also Home. We may add that, on the other supposition, it
would be the only instance of a feigned name in the N. T.
Moreover, in the composition of an epithet, analogy requires that
rp'iXog should be placed in the beginning of the word ; and we
actually have the word <ptX60Eog in 2 Tim. iii. 4. Of the epithet
KpdrtoTE, it has been observed that it may be nothing more than
an affectionate designation, as in Hor. Ep. I. 16. Optime Quincti.
But in this sense tpiXrarE would rather have been employed ; and
in the N. T. it is always used as a title of excellency to men of
rank, as in Acts xxiii. 26. xxiv. 3. xxvi. 25. So Hor. Sat. I.
10. 82. Odavius optimus. There was certainly a person of
this name resident at Jerusalem at the time when Luke wrote
his Gospel. He is thus mentioned in Joseph. Ant. XX. 8. King
Agrippa, removing Jesus the son of Gamaliel from the high-
priesthood, eoWev avri)v MarOta rig QeotpiXov. Campbell,
Wetstein, Lightfoot. — [Hammond.]
Ver. 4. Karrjxrj0i7e- There is some doubt whether this verb
is to be understood in the sense of catechetical ox viva voce in-

440 LUKE 1. 5.
struction, or in that of information simply. It is derived from
r)xn, vox; and thence signifies, in the active voice demittere vo-
cemper aures, and in the passive, to hear, as in Acts xxi. 21. 24.
in Plutarch, de flumin. pp. 1152. 1160, 1161, 1162. and so in
Philo, Leg. ad Caium, p. 1020. Karrjx»JTtu Se on Kat irdvrwv
lEpwv tiov iravraxoii KaXXiarov iariv. Instruction, however, is
evidently intended in Ads xviii. 25. Rom. ii. 18. 1 Cor. xiv. 19.
and this seems to be the sense best suited to the present passage,
from which two arguments are deducible against the Romanists : —
1. against the sufficiency of oral tradition ; and 2. against with
holding the Scriptures from the laity. Whitby. — [Kypke.]
Ver. 5. 'HpwSov. This was Herod, surnamed the Great, an
Idumean by birth, and the first king of Judah who was not of
Jewish extraction. Hence the prophecy of Jacob in Gen. xlix.
10. was now fulfilled ; for the sceptre had departed from Judah,
and now was the time to look for the appearance of the Messiah.
For an account of the family of the Herods, and also of the
courses of priests, see Home's Introduction. The word iipripEpia
properly denotes a daily service, as that of the Prytanes at
Athens ; and thence, by metonymy, the tribe itself, which offi
ciated. Hesych. itpripspia' r) rf/e ripipag XEtrovpyia. Hence, be
cause the Jewish courses of priests resembled, in several respects,
the Athenian Prytanes, the name was transferred to them, though
with some impropriety, as theirs was a weekly service. It has
been supposed that Zacharias was either the high-priest or his
deputy, and was now performing his grand office on the day of
expiation. But he is called merely tspEve rig, not dpx'EpEve, as
Luke iii. 2. ix. 22. and elsewhere: and Josephus states that
Simon, son of Boethus, was high-priest that year ; not to mention
that the high-priest was of no course at all. The name of the Bap
tist's mother, which was that of the wife of Aaron, (Exod. vi. 23.)
is mentioned to shew that he was of the sacerdotal line both on
his father's and mother's side ; for though a priest might marry
a Levitess, or indeed any daughter of Israel, (Ezra ii. 61.
2 Chron. xxii. 11.) it was more honourable to take a wife of
priestly descent. See Joseph. Vit. init. c. Apion. 1. 7. Hence also
Elizabeth and Mary might be relations, as stated in v. 36. though
one was of the tribe of Levi, and the other of Judah. Elizabeth,
who was of the family of Aaron, and therefore also of Moses and
Miriam, was descended from the most illustrious characters
in the whole Jewish history. Lightfoot, Whitby, Grotius,
Macknight, A. Clarke, Kuinoel, &c.
[on the circumstances connected with the births of JOHN
THE BAPTIST AND OF CHRIST.
It will readily be granted, that if the account of the conception
and birth of John the Baptist, as contained in this first chapter

LUKE I. 5. 441
of St. Luke's Gospel, is true, his mission is necessarily divine.
The whole train of events which are here affirmed to have taken
place, are of a nature so clearly beyond the power of human
means to produce, that if they really happened as they are said
to have happened, the authority of any fact founded upon them
becomes unquestionable. Now it is certain, admitting the ge
nuineness of this part of the history, (of which see Home, ubi
supra,) that these extraordinary facts have been on record from
the time of the publication of St. Luke's Gospel to the present
day ; and, therefore, if they were invented at all, they must have
been invented either by Luke himself, in conjunction with the
Apostles, and after the death of John, for the purpose of assisting
the propagation of Christianity ; or by John himself, and his dis
ciples, during his life, in order to support a pretended claim to
inspiration ; or, lastly, by Zacharias, with a view to some future
and distant advantage to be derived from their fabrication. As
to the first of these alternatives, it is utterly impossible that
events of this nature could have been suppressed for so long a
period, and given to the world nearly a century after they are
said to have taken place. Had such miraculous occurrences,
which had never before been heard of, appeared in a work pur
porting to be written by a professed advocate of a new religion,
which was making its way in face of the most determined oppo
sition, they must have been enquired into, detected, and exposed.
The Apostles themselves must have known that there were ready
means, and those who were ready and willing to employ those
means, of sifting the matter to the bottom ; and that the slightest
deviation from veracity would have involved in certain ruin the
cause in which they were engaged. Nor is it less improbable
that the events in question should have been the invention of the
Baptist himself. From their very nature, the knowledge of their
existence, or of their supposed existence, must have been public
during the infancy, and indeed before the birth of John. At the
time when the angel appeared to Zacharias in the Temple, the
whole multitude of the people were praying without. Now on
the ordinary days of the week twenty-four men only, who from
the nature of their office were called stationary men, attended
the Temple service as representatives of the people. The day,
therefore, on which Zacharias saw the vision, must either have
been the Sabbath or some public festival, on which, exclusive of
the whole course of priests in attendance, there was a more than
ordinary concourse of worshippers in the Temple : and even of
the priests alone, according to Josephus, there were thousands in
each course of the twenty-four. Compare 2 Kings xi. 5. It
must be allowed, then, that circumstances far less extraordinary
than those recorded by St. Luke must have been remembered by
some of the numerous assembly who witnessed them ; and con
sequently, that they could not afterwards have been set on foot,

442 LUKE I. 5.
and declared to have happened at such a time, in the face of so
many who would have been able to contradict the assertion. The
circumstances, in fact, whether real or pretended, can have hap
pened at no other time than that to which they are assigned by
the Evangelist. In the first place Zacharias must have been
prevented by his blindness, which his incredulity had brought
upon him, from pronouncing the benediction after the burning of
the incense : and this omission of what the Israelites regarded as
the most essential and solemn part of the service, and received
with the profoundest veneration, and which had probably never
occurred before, would render the time of its occurrence particu
larly remarkable. It was also the lot of Zacharias to burn in
cense when he went into the Temple of the Lord ; which was the
most honourable part of the whole sacerdotal office, and no priest
could perform it more than once. Sigon. Rep. Heb. I. 13. Novi
semper accedebant sacerdotes, ut sortiantur ad suflfiendum, et
nullus bis sujfitum adolebat. There was yet another circum
stance, which, from its public nature, would prevent any subse
quent invention of the miraculous birth of John the Baptist, and
fix the precise date of its occurrence. At the circumcision of a
child the relatives and friends of the family, to the number often
at least, were invited to celebrate the event in a social entertain
ment. In the presence of these assembled guests, at the admi
nistration of the rite to John, Zacharias suddenly recovered his
speech, according to the promise of the angel, and uttered a re
markable prophecy respecting his son. Independently, there
fore, of the miracle, the expectation of the fulfilment of the pre
diction would not allow them to forget the occasion and the time
of its delivery : the terror which they felt, and the conjectures
which they formed, could not soon have been obliterated from
their minds. John could never, therefore, have ventured to
attract the attention of the Jews by a relation of facts which he
stated to have happened at a certain time and place, and by ap
pealing to multitudes as witnesses of those facts, when there was
not a being in existence who had so much as heard of them. The
imposture must have been immediately detected and exposed,
and even if it did not at once confound the Christian cause, Luke
could never have hazarded a repetition of it. Waiving the im
possibility, however, is it probable that John would have been
the person to set the contrivance on foot ? Human impostures
are invariably conducted on calculating principles : they are never
undertaken without a view to present, or a prospect of future ad
vantage. But the severe austerities of the Baptist can never be
reconciled with worldly considerations : while his steady oppo
sition to prevailing vices, and the undaunted firmness with which
he rebuked sin, even in Herod himself, are a convincing proof
that he had no ambitious views to promote, and that he must
needs have been prepared for that death which was the conse-

LUKE I. 5. 443
quence of his perseverance. Had John been so inclined, the
most favourable opportunities offered of gratifying the most as
piring wish; at one time in particular the Jews seem to have re
quired but his own sanction to receive him as their expected
Messiah. But he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I
am not the Christ : John i. 23. With every unbiassed enquirer
this candid declaration alone would be sufficient to establish
his mission, and confirm his pretensions as a messenger from
Heaven. The only remaining supposition of imposture abounds with
such extravagant absurdities that it cannot stand for an instant.
If any part of the miraculous events in question were the inven
tion of Zacharias, they must all have been so ; and among the
rest the prediction of the angel concerning the future destination
of John. Now it has been already proved that this prediction,
whether truly delivered by the angel, or pretended to have been
so delivered, must have been public at that very period to which
it is assigned, i. e. nine months previous to the Baptist's birth.
In the case of fraud then the supposed promise of a son, was
given to Zacharias at a period when Elizabeth was not only
unlikely, but from her peculiar situation, independently of her
advanced age, unable to bear a child at all. Admitting, however,
that contrary to all expectation and probability she had actually
conceived, and that upon this foundation Zacharias had hazarded
the prediction, could he possibly have ventured to declare that
her delivery, especially in her particular case, would be unat
tended with danger either to herself or her child ? And even
should the hope of success have induced him to prosecute a
scheme so absurd, could he have presumed still further that the
infant should assuredly be a male, and that he should live, par
ticularly under the disadvantages which attended the birth of
John, to the age of manhood ? Still further, could he promise
himself that the child, should he live, would turn out so utterly
depraved as to engage in an imposture so iniquitous, and that he
should have strength and abilities to support the character as
signed him ? These multiplied absurdities evince, beyond the
slightest possibility of doubt, that the prediction could not, in
the case of forgery, have been delivered before the birth of the
Baptist, nor indeed till he had attained a vigour of constitution
far beyond the promise which his early years would naturally ex
hibit. The same observations will apply to the prophecy of Za
charias himself at the time of his son's circumcision. But it has
already appeared, from a consideration of the events which at
tended these prophecies, that they must have been public at a
much earlier period, and that they could not have been brought
into subsequent notice. It appears, therefore, with the strictly
logical force of a mathematical reductio ad absurdum, that an
imposture in the case supposed is not only morally improbable,
but physically impossible.

444 LUKE I. 5.
Nor does the matter end here. — The whole train of events re
corded in this chapter are so inseparably connected, that the au
thenticity of each and all must be at once admitted, or rejected.
If Zacharias was concerned in their fabrication, he could not have
been the only person in the plot ; Elizabeth, and Mary, and the
rest, must each have had their share in it, and their particular
parts to act. Now it is certain that the character for virtue and
piety attributed to all of these persons in the Gospel, must have
been in accordance with the general opinion of the times. Would
Zacharias then, or whichever of them was the first contriver of
the supposed imposture, have hazarded his reputed character,
which was indispensable to the prosecution of his design, by
trusting his secret to any person, whosoever he might be ? From
the very nature of the undertaking, the incitements to treachery
were infinitely more powerful than those to concealment ; not to
mention the extreme improbability of success. The benefits
which they could expect from the enterprise were at all events
uncertain, and could not be looked to for the next thirty years at
least; whereas the reward of exposure would be instant and
sure ; and, if at all corresponding with the well-known aversion
of the Jews from the whole Christian scheme, considerable.
Again, success would appear still less likely from the fears and
doubts and incapacities naturally attendant upon old age on the
one hand, and from the inconstancy and inexperience of youth on
the other. For Joseph and Mary, on the supposition that the
former had not been previously married, which is the opinion
most strongly supported, must have been very young at this time.
Wedlock was reckoned by the Jews among the affirmative pre
cepts, and from the strong desire of issue the espousals fre
quently took place at ten years of age, and few men were un
married at eighteen. In short, whether the character, circum
stances, and condition of the persons concerned, or the nature of
the plot itself, or the probable chance of success, are jointly or
separately considered, the whole affair is so completely immersed
in absurdity, and so totally inconsistent with the ordinary views
of human prudence and foresight, that infidelity itself must surely
pause before it trust to its boasted reason, in denouncing such
manifest truths as mere fabrication and falsehood.
With respect to the miraculous conception of our blessed
Lord, however extraordinary in itself, and above the reach of
human reason to comprehend, it is not on that account to be
rejected as incredible. Not only is the evidence upon which it
rests of that irrefragable nature, that it cannot, without sophistry,
be impeached, but no other mode of generation could have con
sisted with the Gospel scheme of redemption. It was necessary
that Christ should in no degree partake of the natural pollution
of the human race, as in that case he would have himself been
included in the general condemnation of Adam's progeny. In

LUKE I. 6. 9. 445
Adam all die : and as the sentence upon universal guilt was also
universal, a Redeemer was to be found pure of every stain of
innate and contracted guilt. Since, therefore, every person
produced in the natural way could not but be contaminated by
original corruption, the purity requisite to the efficacy of the Re
deemer's atonement, made it necessary that the manner of his
conception should be supernatural. Had the office of Christ
been merely that of a teacher or prophet, a mere man might have
done the whole business ; but to this higher office such an one
would have been unequal. So close is the connection of this ex
traordinary fact with the cardinal doctrines of the Gospel. See
on Matt, xxviii. 19. Bell, Lightfoot, Whitby, Allix, Hors-
ley, Macknight, &c.

Ver. 6. ivwirtov roll Qeov. In the sight of God ; i. e. truly
and sincerely pious ; an Hebraism of which there is a similar
example in Gen. vii. 1. To the same effect we have in Plut.
Probl. Rom. p. 274. A. koi to iv viraiOpw pdXtara iribg Eivai SokeT
roii Aibg iviinrtov. See on v. 15. infra. The word dpEpirrol more
immediately regards their irreproachable conduct in the eyes of
men. In the explanatory sentence which succeeds svroXat and
SiKaitopara axe referred by the generality of commentators, either
to the moral and ceremonial, or to the Levitical and natural law,
respectively ; but perhaps the terms are nearly synonymous, as
in Gen. xxvi. 5. LXX. Suidas : SiKaidipara' vopog, ivroXai.
We may compare Ovid. Met. I. 328. Innocuos ambos, cultores
numinis ambos. In the phrase 7rpo/36/3rjKo>e ev rate i)pipaig, (v. 7.)
the preposition answers to the Hebrew 2. and i)pipai is also
used according to the Hebrew idiom. The classical expression
is 7rpoj3atv£tv ry rjXtKta or Kara rrjv TjXtKtav ; and in Latin cetate
provecti. We have 7rpoj3Ej3*)Kaie Ta'C ripipaig in Josh. i. 23. and
7rpo/3£/3r|KorEe -npEpiov in Gen. xviii. 11. LXX. The time of
life here denoted could not be more than fifty ; after which a
priest was forbidden to officiate : Numb. viii. 25. A more ad
vanced age is expressed by 7rpo/3£/3r?Kvta ev r)pipaig iroXXalg in
Luke ii. 36. Kuinoel, Wetstein, Macknight, Munthe. —
[Lightfoot, Grotius.]
Ver. 9. 'iXaxE roii Ovpidaat. Scil. KXrjpov, or pipog. The
former is supplied in Acts i. 17. By vaov is here meant the
sanctuary, in which was the altar of incense, as distinguished
from the whole Temple, rb Upbv, in one of the courts of which,
viz. that of the Israelites, the people were praying, v. 10. The
form r)v 7rpo(T£vxO|U£vov for irpoamvx^ro is frequent in this Evan
gelist. Compare infra, v. 21, 22. ii. 8. 51. iii. 23. iv.44. v. 9. 17.
Acts x. 30. and elsewhere. So Eur. Hec. 669. ovkeV ii fiXEirovaa

446 LUKE I. 11. 13.
<pwg. 122. i,v Si to piv abv airEvSwv. See also my note on Hom.
II. E. 873. Bos, Campbell.
Ver. 11. SifyOri Si avrtp dyysXog k. r. X. Some imagine that
this took place at the morning, others at the evening sacrifice ;
but neither opinion is properly supported, nor is the question of
any moment. It has been attempted also to point out other in
stances parallel with the appearance of the angel ; but although
it should seem from v. 32. that similar visions had been known,
the stories of Hyrcanus and Simon the Just, related by Josephus,
which have been usually cited, are not, perhaps, to be relied on.
We may compare, however, Judg. xiii. 2. sqq. Dan. x. 7. With
respect to the angel's appearing on the right side of the altar of
incense, it may be observed, that an omen on the right side was
usually considered fortunate by the ancients. See Homer, passim,
and my note on II. B. 353. The phrase iwiiriirrEiv iir avrov is
generally regarded as an Hebraism. Compare Exod. xv. 16.
Judith xv. 2. Acts x. 10. xix. 17. and v. 65. infra. The classi
cal construction is with a dative, as in Thucyd. III. 87. r) voaog
rb Ssvrspov iiriiTEaE rolg 'A0r)vatote. Macknight, Whitby,
Grotius, Wetstein.
Ver. 13. i) Siriaig aov. There are different opinions respect
ing the purport of this prayer. Some suppose that Zacharias
had been offering up a private petition for a son, or that the
angel perhaps referred to the supplications which in early life,
conformably with the desire of issue so prevalent among the Jews,
he had made for the removal of Elizabeth's sterility, which he
could not but regard as a severe calamity, though in the counsels
of Providence it proved an inestimable blessing. The birth of
John, the fore-runner, as that of Isaac, the type of Christ, was
for the wisest reasons to be miraculous ; and the old age and
barrenness of Elizabeth, as of Sarah, combined to render it, hu
manly speaking, impossible. Compare Gen. xi. 30. xvii. 17.
xviii. 11. This apparent impossibility, however, would naturally
have suggested to Zacharias the propriety of resignation to the
divine will, and prayers for a son must at length have appeared
vain, at the same time that he would scarcely have intermingled
private concerns with public devotions ; and the angel's declara
tion obviously refers to the prayers which he was at that time
putting up. It is more reasonable, therefore, to suppose that he
was making intercession for the coming of the Messiah, in whom
all the nations of the earth were to be blessed. Nor is there any
force in the objection that the angel merely announced the birth
of John ; for the appearance of the forerunner necessarily im
plied the subsequent appearance of the Messiah also. Before
Etrrat, in the next verse, 'Itodwrie should probably be supplied,
in allusion to the Hebrew derivation of the name, which signifies

LUKE I. 15. 447
the grace, or mercy of God, and is also used to exxixessjoy and
rejoicing. Compare Matt. i. 21. xvi. 18. Hence it was justly
given to the Messiah's harbinger, who was sent to proclaim the
approaching embassy of Grace, and to introduce the glad tidings
of the Gospel. The word ayaXXiaatg is more emphatic than
Xapd, denoting properly a joyous excitement, accompanied by
some gesture, as dancing, leaping, ox the like. See vv. 44. 47.
By the many, (iroXXol,) are intended the pious Jews who were
anxiously looking for the consolation of Israel ; and those whom
the preaching of the Baptist would induce to repent, and prepare
for admission into the Messiah's kingdom. Grotius, Lightfoot,
Macknight, Kuinoel. — [Rosenmuller.]
Ver. 15. ivdiwiov Kvpiov. Some understand Kvptoe of the
Lord Christ, whom John was to precede ; but when the article
is omitted, the Lord Jehovah is generally, though not universally,
intended. It is true that rov is inserted in the old editions, and
recognized by several MSS., but Griesbach has produced suffi
cient authority for its rejection. Of the use of the article before
Gsoe and Kvptoe see on Matt. iv. 3. To the remarks there
offered it may be added, that while 0£oe, which occurs more than
thirteen hundred times in the N. T., invariably conforms to the
law of Regimen, and other rules of common appellatives, Kvptoe
approaches more nearly to a proper name, and by it the LXX
have frequently expressed the Hebrew tVttV. Generally, there
fore, in the N. T., where there is no reason for omitting the
article, 6 0Eoe denotes the one true God, as distinguished from
other Oeo'i : and Kvptoe, without the article, without the addition of
the name of Christ, and so circumstanced that no rule for appella
tives will account for the omission of the article, almost always
signifies God the Father, though a few instances occur in which
it is so used of God the Son, as 2 Cor. iii. 17, 18. 1 Thess. v. 2.
2 Pet. iii. 10. In the LXX also the false Gods of Egypt and
Canaan are called OeoI, but never Kiiptoi, which is the more re
markable when we consider the etymology and meaning of
O^JQ. This, however, they have never rendered by Kvptot,
but have commonly left untranslated by giving the word BaaXE^t..
To return to the passage before us : those who by Kvptoe under
stand God, either interpret the expression as in Acts vii. 46., or
explain it of the unerring judgment of God, in opposition to the
fallibility of man, or regard it as another instance of the Hebrew
idiom noticed in v. 6. supra. So also Acts vii. 20. darsiog nd
Qei£. This last seems to be the true interpretation : and the im
port is that John would be exceedingly great, viz. in respect of
his character, his office, his inspiration, and the success of his
ministry, as it is explained by the angel himself. Middleton,
Macknight. — [Grotius, Whitby.]
Ibid, ohov koI aiKEpa oil pi) iriy. This is a Nazaritic injunc-
10

448 LUKE I. 17.
tion, of which see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 329. The Tar-
gumist explains oTvov Kai crtKEpa of old and new wine ; but the
latter is an Hebrew word denoting any fermented liquor, from
"Oty, to inebriate. It is retained by the LXX in those passages
where the law of the Nazarite is laid down ; but in 1 Sam. i. 15.
they translate it piOvapa. Hesych. trtKEpa' otvoe avppiyi)g
riSiiapaaiv, r) irdv iropa ipiroiow piOw, pi) e£ dpiriXov Si aKEvaa-
rov. Campbell, Lightfoot, Grotius. The words in ek koi-
Xiag p. a. cannot be referred, as some suppose, to John's dedica
tion as a Nazarite ; but, as the construction plainly indicates, to
his early inspiration. In Scripture, to be filled with the Holy
Ghost commonly signifies that divine afflatus by which the pro
phets usually spoke ; and so in this chapter it is applied to Za
charias, Mary, and Elizabeth. That the expression from his
mother's womb means simply very early, is manifest from a va
riety of passages ; and it may be illustrated by the remark that
our Lord exercised his prophetical gifts at the age of twelve
years among the doctors in the Temple : Luke ii. 49. Compare
Job xxxi. 18. Psalm lviii. 3. Isaiah xlviii. 8. Jerem. i. 5. Gal.
i. 15. It has been suggested, indeed, that even before his birth
the spirit was communicated to John, when he leaped in his
mother's womb at the salutation of Mary: and in one MS. the
reading is iv ry KOiXia. But the emotion in question was doubt
less imperceptible to the child itself. Macknight, Hammond,
Whitby. — [Grotius, A. Clarke.]
Ver. 17. ivdnriov avroii. The commentators are not agreed
with respect to the reference of the relative avrov. Some sup
pose that it is put emphatically for Christ, and compare Luke v.
17. 1 John ii. 6. 12. But in these passages the reference is
clear and unquestionable ; whereas here, in strictness of con
struction, the relative is immediately connected with Kvptov r6v
Qeov, (v. 16.) answering precisely to the Jehovah Elohim of the
Hebrew Scriptures. This construction is moreover confirmed by
v. 76.. infra, and by Luke iii. 4. compared with Mai. iii. 1., in
all which places Christ is evidently the subject of discourse.
Christ, therefore, according to this construction, which is un
doubtedly correct, is here called the Lord God; and conse
quently, equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead. Hol-
den. — [Kuinoel.] The phrase 7rpoE'pxE<70at Eva>7nov nvog im
plies to precede a prince in his journey, in allusion to an Eastern
custom, of which see Home, as cited on Matt. iii. 3. Of John,
as typified by Elias, see on Matt. xi. 14. The word Siivapig
does not here imply miraculous power, as usually in the N. T.
Ibid, iiriarptyai KapSiag k. t. X. Here is an evident allusion
to Mai. iv. 6., but there is some difference of opinion with re
spect to the precise import of the expression employed by the
angel and the prophet. Some suppose that the fathers are the

LUKE I. 18. 449
Patriarchs, and the children the Jews, who would be brought
back by the preaching of the Baptist to the innocency of life, and
purity of religion, which characterized the Patriarchal times.
Others understand the words as prophetic of a reconcilia
tion of the discordant sects of Jews, and the consequent differ
ences of families, and Christ, as the Father, or Head, to whom
they should be turned by repentance ; while others, again, by
the fathers and children explain Jew and Gentile respectively,
who would be alike admitted to the privileges of the Gospel.
Probably nothing more is meant than a prediction of the general
philanthropy and good-will which it was the object of Christianity
to introduce among mankind. The translation ivith the children
is forced and unsatisfactory. In the ensuing clause the adjective
dirEiOElg is not governed by iiriarpiipai, as in the E. T., but by
iroipdaai ; for although the preposition iv is sometimes used for
ste or iirl, it is scarcely probable, even if any examples could be
adduced in which the verb iiriarpi\pai is joined with iv, that St.
Luke would have altered the construction of the preceding
clause, in which, as well as in the last verse, it is joined with E7rt :
not to mention that the copula Kat would thus be requisite before
iroipdaai. The words iv tppovi)aEi SiKaiwv express the manner
in which the Baptist was to effect these changes, viz. by incul
cating that disposition of mind which righteous men regard as
the only genuine wisdom. By airsiOElg may be intended either
the disobedient or unbelieving ; but, as opposed to SiKaltov, the
former meaning is probably correct. It has been proposed to
render the participle KarEaKEvaapivov collected, gathered toge
ther, to avoid a tautology between its received interpretation and
that of iroipdaai. But there is no reason to depart from its or
dinary signification, prepared, equipped for service; i. e. fur
nished with those virtues and graces which the service of Christ
required. Xenophon : arpdrog KarEaKivaapivog. Demosthenes :
vavg KarEaKEvaapivri. There is a reference to Isaiah xl. 3.
Campbell, Gilpin, Elsner, Macknight. — [Whitby, Light
foot.] Ver. 18. Kara ri; Scil. aripElov. The same question, and with
the same ellipsis, is asked by Abraham in Gen. xv. 8. LXX.
Compare Judg. vi. 15. 1 Sam. xxix. 4. Lucian. Scyth. 594.
- The cases of Abraham and Zacharias, however, are very different.
Abraham did not distrust the promise of God, but merely desired
a sign in confirmation of his faith ; whereas Zacharias did not
believe at all. See v. 20. and compare Gen. xv. 6. xvii. 16.
Rom. iv. 18. Hence, though a sign was given to him, it was at
the same time a punishment also, the continuance and public re
mission of which was admirably calculated to fix the attention of
the Jews to the divine character of the promised child. A similar
question was far more pardonable in Mary, (v. 34.) whose youth
VOL. i. g g

450 LUKE I. 20, 21.
and inexperience might excuse a degree of hesitation which
would be far less pardonable in an aged priest. Besides, the
case of Mary was entirely without example, whereas Zacharias
was well acquainted with the instances of Sarah, and of the wives
of Manoah and Elcana, who, after long barrenness, conceived by
the promise of angels. It should seem too that Mary's enquiry
proceeded from weakness of apprehension rather than want of
faith ; for in her reply to the angel in v. 38. she expresses the
firmest reliance on the promised goodness of God. See also
v. 45. Many of the commentators have ascribed the unbelief of
Zacharias to a suspicion that the angel was an evil spirit who de
signed to delude him. This, however, is altogether inconsistent
with the sanctity of the holy place, the important office in which
he was engaged, and the exalted purpose for which the child
was designed. By declaring himself to be Gabriel, the angel
would naturally direct the attention of Zacharias to the important
message respecting the Messiah, which he had been formerly
employed to convey to the prophet Daniel, and which was now
on the very eve of its accomplishment. See Dan. viii. 16. ix. 21.
The import of the name Gabriel, ;W12J, is Swapig Qeov, the
poiver of God. Grotius. — [Macknight, Whitby, Light
foot, &c]
Ver. 20. aiwrruiv, Kal pi) Swdpsvog XaXijaai. An affirmation,
joined with a denial of its contrary, is expressive of peculiar em
phasis. St. John is particularly partial to this idiom. Compare
also Acts xiii. 11. xviii. 9., and see my note on Hom. II. A. 4l6.
Soph. 02d. T. 58. Pent. Gr. p. 11. As Kwfbg signifies either
deaf, as in Matt. xi. 5. Mark vii. 32. 37. ix. 23. Luke vii. 22.
or dumb, as in Matt. ix. 33. xii. 22. xv. 31. Luke xi. 14. it has
been thought that atwirwv, in order to avoid the pleonasm, should
here be rendered deaf, instead of silent. So Theophylact, Eu
thymius, and others. And that Zacharias lost both speech and
hearing is sufficiently clear from v. 62. It is probable, therefore,
that Kwtpbg, in v. 22., like the Hebrew t£Hn, signifies both deaf
and dumb ; but there is no authority for extending the ordinary
meaning of atwiryv. Macknight, Rosenmuller, Kuinoel. —
[Grotius, Hammond, Doddridge.] Of the form dv0' wv, be
cause, see Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 480. So Luke xix. 44. Acts xii. 23.
2 Tliess. ii. 10. Soph. Ant. 1068. It is sometimes merely illa
tive, as in Luke xii. 3. In the end of the verse we have £te rov
Katpbv for ev rid Kaipid. Compare Matt. ii. 23. So Aristaen. Ep.
I. 5. tj yE'tTwv £te Katpov iipdvri. Grotius.
Ver. 21. iOavpaZov iv no XP- aiirbv. It appears from the
Talmud, in Joma, p. 43, 2. that the priest never made any long
stay in the sanctuary ; and a story is there related of Simon the
Just, that upon one occasion he remained so long that the people

LUKE I. 23, 24. 451
were preparing to enter in upon him. He excused himself by
saying that he had been praying for the preservation of the
Temple ; and, as all that is here recorded of Zacharias and the
angel might have passed in a few minutes, it is probable that he
spent some time in private devotion, during which the time passed
faster than he was aware. Lightfoot, Doddridge.
Ver. 23. XEtrovpytae. Hence the English word Liturgy. It
denotes primarily any public service, whether civil or religious ;
from the obsolete adjective Xrj't'roe, publicus. Lysias uses the
verb XstrovpyEtv, publico munere fungi. So Aristot. Polit. II.
fcotvde Xsirovpyiag. Both with Jews and Gentiles, however, it
was more especially applied to sacred offices ; and in this sense
it is synonymous with lEparsia, v. 9. supra. Thus Hesych. Xel-
rovpyiKag' hpariKag. Compare Phil. ii. 17. Heb. viii. 6. ix. 21.
x. 11. Hence it was applied to the solemnization of the rites of
the Christian Church, as in Acts xiii. 2. Rom. xv. 16. and thence
to set forms appointed for such solemnization. It is applied to
almsgiving, as a Christian service, in Rom. xv. 27. 2 Cor. ix.
12, 13. Phil. ii. 25. 30. The service in which Zacharias was
now employed consisted, during the remainder of the week, in
manual duties chiefly, with which his dumbness did not interfere.
He remained, therefore, at Jerusalem till the end of his course,
during which time he was not permitted to leave the precincts of
the Temple, or to have any intercourse with his wife. Hammond,
Campbell, Grotius.
Ver. 24. <rvvEXaj3Ev. Scil. vlbv, as in v. 36. Different exposi
tions have been given by the commentators of the words 7T£pt£-
Kpvj3sv iavri)v, she concealed herself. Some suppose them to
mean that Elizabeth concealed her situation for a while, lest she
should expose herself to ridicule, by speaking of it before she was
fully assured of its reality ; and it has been disputed whether the
five months of this concealment were the first or the last of her
pregnancy. This enquiry is at once set at rest by the fact that
in the sixth month she visited her cousin Mary, in reference to
which alone the five months are mentioned ; nor is it clear that
the words will admit of this interpretation, even if any conceal
ment were necessary in the early stage of conception. It is more
probable, therefore, that she kept herself private for the purposes
of devotion and silent meditation on the goodness of God, as
well as to avoid any defilement or uncleanness, which she might
impart to the Nazarite in her womb. See Judg. xiii. 4. That
this is the true sense of the passage is plainly intimated in the
next verse, wherein she expresses her gratitude to God for re
moving her reproach. In this light barrenness was always re
garded by the Jews, from the promises which God had repeatedly
made, to multiply the offspring of his obedient people, and more
g g2

452 LUKE I. 28.
particularly from the desire of giving birth to the Messiah.
Hence the similar ejaculation of Rachel in Gen. xxx. 23. LXX,
dipEiXsv 6 Qsbg rb ovstooe pov. Compare Exod. xxxii. 13. Levit.
xxvi. 9. Deut. vii. 13. 1 Sam. i. 11. Psalm cxxvii. 3, 4, 5. Isaiah
iv. 1. liv. 1. 4. Lightfoot, Whitby, Doddridge, Kuinoel. —
[Grotius.] The verbs ttoieIv and etteiSeTv are both used in a
good sense, to do good, to shew favour. So E7rtj3X£7r£tv, v. 48.
Respicere, occurs frequently in the same sense in Latin. Terent.
Adelph. V. 8. 9. Nee qui earn respiciat quisquam est. Wet
stein. Ver. 28. xa"lP£> KExapirwpivri. The participle is rendered in
the Vulgate gratia plena ; and some of the commentators have
explained it in an active sense, so that the salutation should mean
Hail, gracious person ! In defence of this interpretation Psalm
xviii. 26. is adduced, according to the version of Symmachus :
pErd rov KExaptrwpivov xaPlT<x>0r)ay. So Ecclus. ix. 8. xviii. 17.
LXX. Suidas also explains the adjective x«p«pyoe by rd ke-
Xaptrwpiva ipyaZbpEvog. The word, however, is found in no
classical writer, nor elsewhere in the N. T. except in Ephes. i. 6.
which is decidedly in favour of the common version. Phavorinus :
KExapnwpivri' irEtpiXripivri. Besides, the import of the salutation
is clearly marked by the explanatory clause in v. 80. Evpsg X"ptv
7rapd ri£ Oei£. The same words are also used of Noah, Gen. vi.
8. of Joseph, Gen. xxxix. 4. and of David, Acts vii. 16. so that
here is nothing in them to authorize the Romish adoration of the
Virgin. With the formula Kvptoe pird aov the E. T. supplies iarl,
but Earui is preferable, as being in accordance with the usual mode
of salutation among the Jews. Compare Judg. vi. 12. Ruth ii. 4.
The phrase EvXoyripivri iv yvvat^tv, blessed among woinen, is a
Hebrew form of the superlative, denoting happiest of women. So
Psalm xciv. 8. LXX. dippovEg iv Xaw. Cant. I. 8. KaXr) iv yv-
vaiKt. Somewhat similar is Callim. Frag. CXXXI. 1. irpriEla yv-
vaiKwv. In Latin also we meet with the same idiom, as in Liv.
XXIII. 44. Magna memorabilisque fuisset inter paucas. Com
pare also Judg. v. 24. LXX. Mary's astonishment respecting
the nature of the salutation arose perhaps, independently of her
terror at the sight of an angel, from the infrequency of offering
any salutation whatever to a woman, and more especially of that
exalted kind with which Gabriel addressed her. See the Talmud,
in Kiddushim, p. 70, 1. It should have been remarked that the
words !? oikov Aa/3tS, in v. 27. refer to irapOivov, the intervening
sentence being parenthetical. St. Luke intended more particu
larly to state that the Virgin was of the family of David. Whit
by, Grotius, Lightfoot, Wakefield, Kuinoel. — [Ham
mond.] Of the next verse, which relates the exact accomplish
ment of Isaiah, vii. 14. see on Matt. xvi. 22, 23.

LUKE I. 32. 34. 453
Ver. 32. ovrog 'iarai piyag, k. t. X. In this and the following
verse the angel seems to allude to the prophecies in Isaiah ix.
6, 7. Dan. vii. 14. which speak of the glory, extent, and per
petuity of the Messiah's kingdom. With respect to the extent of
Christ's dominion, the prophecy does not mean to confine it to
the house of Jacob, i. e. to the Jews only; but these are men
tioned as being first called to embrace the Gospel, before it was
extended to the reception of the Gentile world. See Isaiah xiv.
1. xliv. 5. The predicted perpetuity of Christ's government has
been supposed to contradict the Apostle's declaration in 1 Cor.
xv. 28. that, after the final judgment, the Son shall deliver up
the kingdom to God, even the Father. In order to account for
this apparent discrepancy, a distinction has been drawn between
the spiritual and mediatorial kingdoms of the Messiah, . the
former of which will endure for ever over his saints and angels in
Heaven, but the latter will cease with the existence of the Gospel
dispensation at the end of the world. But the phrase Ete rove
alibvag should rather be understood comparatively, in reference
to the limited duration of earthly kingdoms. Whitby, Grotius.
— [Macknight.]
Ibid, vlbg iixplarov. The Unitarians translate A Son of the
most high God; and in v. 35. A Son of God. To be consistent
they should write A most high God. But, if the phrases are to
be taken in an inferior sense, the prophecy of the angel will
simply mean that our Lord would be a righteous person, and the
inference implied in Sib will amount to nothing more. It is also
observable that Zacharias does not prophecy in v. 75. that John
would be called vt6e vxpiarov, or vlbg Qeov, which in this case he
well might have done ; but he says irpoiprirrig vxpiarov KXriOi)ay,
which is not more appropriately applied to the Baptist than vlbg
xnplarou is to Christ. The article is omitted because 6 vtoe after
KXriOfiaETat would not be Greek : and Regimen may exclude the
article before ii^iarov. Middleton. — [Wakefield.]
Ver. 34. irwg iarai tovto ; See above, on v. 18. The inference
which the Papists adduce from this question, that Mary was
under a vow of perpetual virginity, is at once set aside by the
consideration that virginity was a reproach among the Jews, that
marriage was mentioned among the positive precepts of the law,
and that she was actually espoused to Joseph at the time of the
annunciation. Whitby. In the next verse irvEv^ta aytov is com
monly taken in the personal sense ; and the verb E7rtirKtd^£tv is
supposed to have a reference to the motion of the Spirit at the
creation. See Gen. i. 2. But a divine influence suits the occasion
equally well, and conforms better with the general usage ; and,
indeed, Siivapig vipiarov, in the succeeding clause, seems to be
added in explanation of irvEvpa dyiov in the present. Compare
1 Cor. vi. 14. with Rom. viii. 11. and see also Luke xxiv. 49.

454 LUKE I. 36. 39. 41.
Adsi. 8. 1 Tim. iii. 16. 1 Pet. iii. 18. The phrases iiripx^Oai
iiri nvog and iiriaKidZEiv axe metaphorical, signifying to exert an
influence over one ; and, in reference to the Holy Ghost, they
here denote that supernatural energy by which the miraculous
conception was effected. Of the expression to yivvwpEvov dyiov
see on Matt. i. 20. Middleton, Wetstein, Kuinoel.
Ver. 36. pi)v sWoe avry k. r. X. So Herod. III. 56. dig aipl
riaaspsg iyEyovEaav iipipai iroXiopKEOvai "SLdpov. Polyaen. Strat.
IV. 6. 18. oeko pnvwv xpdvog y ry iroXiopKia. Arrian. Exped.
Alex. VII. 14. 2. i[3S6pr) te ripipa rjos f)v avrtjj rrig voaov. With
the next verse, which seems to have been a proverb, we may
compare Gen. xviii. 14. LXX. pi) dcvvdrrjo-Et 7rapd n^ 0£ij>. In
both instances pripa is used for irpdypa, as infra v. 65. ii. 15. 19.
and frequently in the best writers. See also on Matt. xiv. 25.
and with the construction compare Matt. xxiv. 22. Rom. iii. 20.
The ejaculation in v. 38. is a customary phrase, expressive of pa
tient resignation and prompt obedience. So 1 Sam, iii. 9, 10.
Acts ix. 10. Heb. x. 7. 9. Wetstein, Whitby, Grotius.
Ver. 39. iv ralg ripipaig ravraig. Scil. iv Tig privl ri~j ektw,
v. 26. The phrase here employed is much more definite than Jv
ripipaig iKEivaig, which frequently refers, as in Luke ii. 1. and
elsewhere, to a period at some distance. Compare infra, v. 24.
Luke vi. 12. xxiii. 7. xxiv. 18. Acts i. 5. xi. 27. xxi. 15. The
observation that Mary rose up jusrd <T7rovSije, with haste, fixes
the time in the present instance. For this haste many important
reasons concurred. Independently of her wish to congratulate
Elizabeth, she would naturally avail herself of the first opportu
nity of confirming her faith by the sign which the angel had pro
posed to her, of acquainting her cousin and Zacharias with the
promise which had been made to her, and of obtaining their tes
timony in favour of her own reputation, and in support of the
wonderful revelation which had been made to her. It may be
right to add, that the city here spoken of is generally supposed
to have been Hebron, as being not only one of the cities of the
priests, and given to the posterity of Aaron for an inheritance,
(Josh. xxi. 11.) but situated in the mountains of Judah, (Josh.
xi. 21.) which, running from North to South, gave the name of
the Hill Country to that part of Judea. See Home's Geogra
phical Index. It has been supposed, however, but without any
authority, that for 'Iovoa we should read 'Iovra, Jutta, which
was also a city belonging to the priests. Compare Josh. xv. 55.
xxi. 16. With the adjective bpEivi)v the substantive x^pav must
be supplied. Le Clerc, Grotius, Doddridge, Macknight. —
[Michaelis.] Ver. 41 . E<TKtprr/<TE to fipiipog. The verb aKiprqv is properly

LUKE I. 43. 455
applied to the bounding ox frisking of young cattle. Psalm cxiv.
4. LXX. rd oprj £<TKtprrj<rav wasl Kpiol, Kat ol j3ovvot toe dpvta
Trpopdrwv. Mai. iv, 2. aKiprfiaETE dig poaxdpia ek SEapwv avEi-
piva. Eur. Phcen. 1141.7rt5Xot SpopdSsg iaKiprwv tpofiw. Hence
it is sometimes transferred to the motion of a child in the womb,
as in Gen. xxv. 22. LXX. EtrKtprwv Se rd iraiSia iv avry. Non-
nus in Dionys. VIII. 224, irdig S' dXoxivrog ixi<pptov 'AXpdaiv
ivSopi>xotai (TvvE<7Ktprr)<TE rEKovtrp. So the Latin satire in Juv.
Sat. VI. 598. Vexare uterum pueris salientibus. It does not
necessarily follow, though the impression upon reading the pas
sage somewhat favours the supposition, that the emotion expe
rienced by Elizabeth upon this occasion was supernatural. In
the latter stage of pregnancy the child at times has a very sen
sible motion, especially when the mother is affected by any
sudden agitation or surprise. There is a tradition in the Talmud,
that when the Israelites arrived in sight of the Red Sea, the
babes in the womb glorified God. So at the prospect of that
spiritual deliverance, of which the freedom from Egyptian bond
age was a type, a similar effect was produced upon the mother of
the Messiah's forerunner. In v. 44. the words ev dyaXXidaEt,
which are added in explanation, refer to Elizabeth herself, not
to the child, which was manifestly incapable of any sensation
whatsoever. Wetstein, Kuinoel, Schoettgen, Whitby, Ham
mond.
Ver. 43. itoOev pot tovto. Scil. yiyovEv. Aristasn. Epist. I.
43. itoOev dv ejuoi, ipr/al, yivoiro xatpav. This, and other like
expressions, seem to be expressive of admiration, more especially
at any unexpected mark of honour or respect. Compare 2 Sam.
xxiv. 21. Matt. iii. 14. Arist. Plut. 264. Epict. Ench. XXIX.
44. Virg. Eccl. IX. 27. The knowledge that Mary was to be
the mother of the Messiah, as well as of her immediate belief in
the promise of the angel, (v. 45.) seems to have been conveyed
to Elizabeth by immediate revelation; and her declaration of this
knowledge, introduced by the very words of the angel's annun
ciation, (v. 28.) together with her delicate allusion to the unbelief
of her husband in respect to her own pregnancy, which had
been referred to as the pledge of Mary's conception, would be a
mutual confirmation of the faith of them both. Some, indeed,
have supposed that the words paKapia i) irtarEvaaaa have only a
general reference, as in Luke xi. 28. John xx. 29. without any
relation to the unbelief of Zacharias. But the natural drift of the
narrative plainly leads to the opposite conclusion. Neither is the
adverb on to be rendered for, as in the E. T. being invariably
used, when subjoined to iriarEVEiv, to introduce a clause repre
senting the thing believed. Compare Matt. iv. 24. Mark xi. 23,
24. John xi.27. 42. xiii. 19. xiv. 10, 11. xvi. 27. 30. xvii. 8. 21.
xx. 31. The Vulgate renders the expression by the second
10

456 LUKE I. 46.
person instead of the third, translating aiiry by tibi. By this
version, though it does not affect the sense, the delicacy of the
allusion is greatly impaired. Some of the commentators join
irapd Kvptov with rEXEttutrte, and others rolg XaXripivoig k. t. X.
with irtarEvaaaa, inclosing the intervening words respectively in
parentheses. But it is always preferable to adopt the construc
tion which suits the order of the words, where there is no special
reason for deserting that order ; and though a transposition is
sometimes necessary, the presumption is always against it, when
the words, as they lie, yield as good and as pertinent a meaning.
Wetstein, Rosenmuller, Doddridge, Campbell. — [Kui
noel.]
Ver. 46. Kat £t7rs Mapidp. It is observable that most of the
expressions in this Hymn are borrowed from the Scriptures of
the O. T. with which the pious virgin seems to have been very
conversant, especially from the Song of Hannah, in which there
were so many passages remarkably suitable to her own case.
Compare 1 Sam. ii. 1—10. Gen. xxx. 13. Psalm lxxxix. 10.
xcviii. l.'ciii. 17. cvii. 9. Mic. vii. 20. The Hymn itself is re
markable for the beauty of its style, the sublimity of its senti
ments, and the spirit of piety which runs through the whole of
it. It is formed upon the model of those irregular songs of praise
or prayer so common in the O. T., of the nature and construction
of which see Home's Introd. Vol. II. pp. 423. sqq. The pro
phetic hymn of Zacharias, in vv. 67. sqq. is of a somewhat si
milar description. Mary expresses her grateful joy that she is
raised from her low estate through the omnipotence of God,
which she illustrates by several examples, to the dignity of giving
birth to the Messiah ; the benefits of whose advent, by divine
mercy, and in accordance with God's promises, were to extend
to the whole house of Israel, and eventually to all mankind.
Doddridge, Macknight, Grotius, Rosenmuller.
Ibid. psyaXiivEi i) ipvxh pov k. t. X. When a person, speaking
of himself, mentions his soul or spirit as doing a thing, the ex
pression is strongly emphatic, implying that he exerts the utmost
energy of all his faculties. Mary, therefore, intended to represent
the intensity of her devotion in celebrating the Almighty power
of God, and her extatic joy in the contemplation of his goodness
towards her. The verb pEyaXvvsiv signifies to magnify, not in
the sense of to enlarge, but to extol, as in Diod. Sic. p. 12. pE-
yaXvvEtv rr/v Geov Siivapiv. So Acts xix. 17. ipsyaAvvETO rb
ovopa roii Kvptov 'Irjtrov. In the next verse ra7r£iva>(ne does not
signify humility, as some have supposed, but humiliation, low
estate, as in the E. T. Had humbleness of mind heen intended
the word rairEtvoippoavvri would have been employed : nor does
Mary celebrate her own humility, but God's mercy. A low or
abject condition is expressed by rairEivwaig, -Gen. xxix. 32.

LUKE I. 49. 51, 52. 457
2 Kings xiv. 26. Psalm xxv. 18. LXX. Phil. iii. 21. Of the
construction see on Matt. xxiv. 15. The declaration of the
virgin that she should be esteemed blessed by all succeeding ge
nerations can afford no sanction to the blasphemous appellations
by which she is invoked in the Romish Church, such as Queen
of Heaven, Mother of God, and the like. Macknight, Gro
tius, Whitby, A. Clarke. — [Lightfoot, &c]
Ver. 49. pEyaXEta. Miracles ; subaud. ipya. Compare Deut.
x. 21. xi. 2. xxxiv. 12. Psalm lxxxi. 19. cxxvi. 2. Ecclus. xvii.
8. LXX. Acts ii. 11. A substantive is supplied in Xen. Mem.
IV. 5. 2. KaX6v Kat jusyaXaov vopiZEig Krfjixa iXsvOEpiav. The
expression 6 Swarbg, answering to the Hebrew "112.3, is used Kar'
iZoxnv, of the Almighty, as in Psalm xxiv. 8. LXX. Mary had
now in her eye the miraculous conception of the Messiah ; and
she adds what follows to the end of the next verse, as expressive
of her sure confidence in the goodness and mercy of God. Com
pare Psalm ciii. 17. For Ete yEvfde ysvEwv several MSS. read
sie yEvsdv Kat yEVEav, as in Psalm lxxxviii. 1. ci. 12. LXX. But
the received text is equally correct. Instead of rolg tpofiovpivotg
in the dative, the more regular construction would have been in
the accusative, with 7rpoe. We have the same syntax in Exod.
xx. 6. Psalm lxxxix. 2. LXX. Macknight, Whitby, Grotius,
Kuinoel.
Ver. 51. ev ]3paxiovt avroii. It is worthy of observation that
the great power of God is represented by his finger, his greater
by his hand, and his greatest by his arm. Compare Exod. iii.
20. vii. 18. xv. 16. In this dispensation of the Almighty, there
fore, he is represented as mightily exerting his sovereign power.
So John xii. 38. from Isaiah liii. 1. 6 j3paxiwv Kvptov rtvt a7TE-
KaXvipOri ; Such expressions as ttoieIv Kpdrog, tXEog, and the like,
are Hebraisms, as in Psalm cxvii. 5. LXX. As^ta Kvptov iiroiriaE
Siivaptv. The second clause in this verse should not be rendered
as in the E. T., but rather He scatter eth the proud, as to the
imaginations of their hearts ; i.e. he frustrates their schemes,
and overthrows their counsels. In Psalm lxxxix. 10. LXX. the
verb Sta<7Kop7ri?Eiv is used in its primary signification, of putting
an enemy to the rout ; from which its metaphorical application
in this passage is readily deduced. With the sentiment we may
compare that of Seneca : Sequitur superbos ultor a tergo Deus.
The aorist is used in this and the following verses in the sense of
to be wont, as the Hebrews employed the Hiphil voice to express
general truths and observations, which have no reference to any
particular time. See Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 503. Grotius, Macknight,
Doddridge, Campbell.
Ver. 52. kuOeiXe Svvdarag. Ecclus. x. 14. LXX. Opovovg

458 LUKE I. 54.
dpxovrwv KaOslXsv <t Kvpiog, Kat EKaOtai irpqElg dvr avrwv.
Compare 1 Sam. ii. 7. 1 Kings i. 1 . 2 Chron. xxv. 8. Psalm
lxxv. 7. cxiii. 6. To the same effect was the reply of ^Esop
respecting Jupiter : rd piv inpriXd rairstvol, rd Si rairsivd inpol.
So Hom. Od. n. Hesiod. Op. D. 5. Eur. Tro. 614. Herac.
613. Xen. Hell. VI. 4. 23. Hor. Od. I. 34. 12. Of the verb
Kaflatpstv see my note on Hom. II. Q. 268. The kings who
sprung from David had, no doubt, one after another, expected to
be the parents of the Messiah, instead of whom the honour was
reserved for one of that line in a humble station. The text will
certainly bear this interpretation, though it is, perhaps, as well
as those with which it is joined, only a general declaration of
God's power; the particular application being reserved for the
conclusion of the hymn, in v. 34. Of the, adjective KEvoe, in the
sense in which it is employed in the next verse, a variety of in
stances occur ; and the phrase dTrotrrlXXEtv KEvove recurs in Luke
xx. 10. and in 1 Sam. ii. 5. 2 Kings x. 4. Judith x. 11. Job xxii.
9. LXX. Macknight, Grotius.
Ver. 54. dvrEXd]3£ro 'IuparjX. The verb dvnXapfidvEiv sig
nifies properly to support a thing that is falling, by taking hold
of it on the falling side. Compare Isaiah xii. 9. Jerem. xxxi.
32. Ecclus. iii. 11. LXX. Acts xx. 39. xxiii. 19. Heb. viii. 9.
So Diod. Sic. XI. 13. to OeIov avriXaj^Ero rwv 'EXXrjvwv.
God supported the Jewish nation, or rather the whole spiritual
Israel, by raising up the Messiah among them. Before pvriaOr)-
vai there is an ellipsis of the adverb wars, as in v. 72. and else
where ; and the words rip 'Aj3pad/x, k. r. X. with which the
hymn concludes, depend upon iXiovg, the intervening clause
being parenthetical. This construction is supported by Psalm
xcvii. 3. LXX ; and that the E. T. is incorrect is manifest from
its placing rip 'Afipaup in the dative, in opposition with 7rp6e
rove 7rar£pae in the accusative. The addition of the words ste
r6v atwva shews the same thing ; and some editors, sensible
that these words could not refer to iXaXrias, but still missing the
true connection, have, therefore, included all between iXiovg and
alibva in a parenthesis. Others, after Jerome, have supposed
Ete r&v alwva to correspond with the Hebrew Selah; for which
no reason can be assigned, even if there was not an evident re
ference to the promise of God in Gen. xvii. 7. 19. Compare
Isaiah lv. 3. Rom. xi. 29. With respect to the phrase pvriaOi)-
vat iXiovg God is said to remember his attributes when he exerts
them in a signal manner ; as in the present instance he made an
especial display of his mercy in fulfilling the promises which he
had made to the patriarchs. Compare infra, v. 72. 2 Chron. vi.
42. Psalm cxxxvi. 23. The verb XoXeTv recurs in the sense of
this passage infra, v. 70. Acts iii. 21. and elsewhere. Mack
night, Grotius, Whitby, Wetstein, Kuinoel.

LUKE I. 56. 59. 60. 63. 459
Ver. 56. diasl pi\vag rpElg. There has been some needless
dispute respecting the time of Mary's departure from Hebron.
The whole tenor of the narrative plainly shews that it must have
been only a few days before the birth of John ; and the only
reason for which it has been proposed to strain the words to a
different import, seems to consist in the supposed improbability
that Mary would leave her cousin in so critical a situation. But
the bustle and publicity which would necessarily attend so re
markable a birth would be cause sufficient for her taking such a
step. The congratulations which were usual upon ordinary oc
casions of child-birth, appear, in this instance, to have been pro
portionate to the peculiar circumstances of the case; See v. 58.
and compare Plaut. True. II. 6. 35. Tu cum rede provenisti,
cumque es aucta liberis, Gratulor. Grotius, Wetstein.
Ver. 59. iirl n^ bvopan roii irarpog. From the genealogies
in the O. T. it appears to have been very unusual to name the
child after the father ; but, as in this case the father, who ought
to dictate the name, was unable to do so, the respect of his
friends, and their unwillingness to choose for him, carried them
to his name. Of the ceremony of circumcision, and the naming
of children, see Home's Introd. Vol. II. pp. 270. sqq. 422., and
compare my notes on Eur. Phoen. 56. Pent, Gr. p. 307. Hom.
II. Z. 403. The children of the Greeks were generally named
on the tenth day from their birth, and the ceremony was accom
panied by the purification of the women. Arist. Av. 925. Ovk
aprt Oiito rrjv §£Karr|v ravrrje iyw, Kat rovvoju', (iiaiTEp iraiSiw,
vw Si) 'Oipriv. Compare also Eurip. Elect. 659. 1130. Among
the Romans the eighth or ninth day was appointed for this pur
pose. Macrob. Saturn. I. 16. Est autem dies lustricus, quo in
fantes lustranfur, et nomen accipiunt, sed is maribus nonus, oc-
tavus estfeminis. Kuinoel, Wetstein, Grotius, Whitby.
Ver. 60. KXi-iOr)aErai 'Iwdwrje. It has been supposed that in
this case Elizabeth acted by revelation ; but it is more probable
that Zacharias had made her acquainted in writing with the com
mand of the angel, respecting the name of the Baptist. Some
have also observed that the verb evevevov in v. 62. does not ne
cessarily prove the deafness of Zacharias, as signs axe sometimes
addressed to persons endued with the faculties both of speech
and hearing, and it is no where expressly stated that he was
deaf. But it is very uncommon to converse by signs, except
where secresy is intended, so that the old opinion may fairly be
admitted as correct. Macknight. — [Kuinoel.] In the last
clause of v. 62. the article is redundant.
Ver. 63. irivaKiSiov. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 475.
and my note on Horn. II. Z. 168. The phrase ypdipEtv Xiyiov is

460 LUKE I. 65.
a Hebraism. Compare 2 Kings x. 1. 6. LXX. Joseph. Ant.
XI. 3. XIII. 4. The Greek pleonasm i<pr) Xi^ag is somewhat
analogous. Beza, Krebs. With yXCoaaa in the next verse
some, such verb as iXvOri should be supplied, or rather the verb
dvEtjj'xoV; is to be understood as applying in an extended signifi
cation to both clauses ; and that it will admit of such application
is evident from the note on Mark vii. 35. Instances of similar
construction abound. Thus Hom. II. M. 319. I'Sovtrt te iriova
pi)Xa, Otvov r. 1 Cor. iii. 2. ydXa iipag iironaa, Kal oil jipwpa.
See also my notes on Soph. CEd. T. 270. Pent. Gr. p. 26. Hom.
II. A. 532. It has been proposed to construe yXwaaa with iXd-
Xei, which would not only require EvXoyovua to be substituted
for EvXoywv, but the copula Kat distinctly indicates a fresh mem
ber of the sentence ; and the emendation Kat ry yXuiaay avroii
iXdXst, evidently suggested by this interpretation, is equally un
supported and unnecessary. The addition of SinpOptoOri, which
is found in some old editions, is sanctioned by no MS. authority
whatsoever. Raphelius, Grotius, Lightfoot, Campbell. —
[Elsner, Pearce.] Some of the German divines have attempted
to explain both the loss and the recovery of speech to Zacharias
from natural causes, attributing the former to panic, and the
latter to nervous agitation. In support of this opinion they adduce
the well-known story of the son of Croesus, from A. Gell. V. 9.
Is it possible that any similarity can be conceived to exist between
an occurrence somewhat singular indeed, but easily accounted
for, and a judicial infliction removed in fulfilment of a remarkable
prophecy? Kuinoel.
Ver. 65. ipofiog. Religious awe, astonishment. Euthym. Ik
rov Oavparog. With the phrase nOivai iv KapSta, in the next
verse, compare Isaiah xii. 11. xiii. 25. Dan. i. 8. Hagg. ii. 15.
Mai. ii. 2. Luke xxi. 14. Acts v. 4. So Hom. Od. A. 361.
piiOov ivriOEaOai Ovp$. Virg. Eclog. III. 54. Sensibus hcec
imis, res est non parva, reponas. Catull. 65. Facito, ut memori
tibi condita mente Hcec vigeant mandata. Wetstein, Kuinoel.
The recollection of the series of wonders, which took place at
the birth and circumcision of John, must have contributed largely
to the efficacious discharge of his office, as the forerunner of the
Messiah. It could not have been the exertions of an ordinary
man by which an audience such as John's was collected ; but,
even admitting the possibility of assembling the hearers, his ex
hortations, considered exclusively of those extraordinary circum
stances, which were wisely designed by Providence to point him
out as a special messenger from Heaven, would have been re
garded as the ravings of an idle enthusiast, if they did not expe
rience the punishment of a suspected imposture. It is true that
when John entered upon his ministry thirty years had elapsed
since the occurrence of these events, nevertheless they were of a

LUKE I. 67, 68. 461
nature so remarkable that they could not have been forgotten.
The conjecture at his birth what manner of child this should be,
and the memory of the wonders which were noised abroad
throughout all the Hill country of Judea, could not fail to revive
at his re-appearance ; and the public curiosity being once awak
ened, the grand impediment to the exercise of his ministry would
be removed. Bell. The last clause, Kat x£'P Kvptov k. r. X. is
supposed by some to be a part of the speech, and to constitute
the ground of the conjecture. But it is somewhat harsh to render
Kat because ; and the words may very well be considered as a por
tion of the narrative, the purport of which is more fully explained
in v. 80. The expression x£'P Kvptov sometimes denotes the
spirit of prophecy, as in Ezek. i. 3. iii. 22. xxxvii. 1. xl. 1. but
here the providence of God is plainly intended. Compare Psalm
lxxx. 17. Whitby, Macknight.
Ver. 67. irpoE<pr)TEvaE. Some imagine that this verb merely
implies that Zacharias fervently praised God ; and a variety of
senses have been affixed to it, from which the notion of predict-
ing future events is wholly excluded. It is true that in the Attic
writers irpotpr)rrig sometimes denotes a speaker simply, as in
Lucian. Vit. Arist. I. p. 549. dXriOEiag koI irappriaiag irpo<pr)rrig
Etvat j3ovXopat. ^Esch. Agam. 1068. irpo<pr)rag oxinvag paarEv-
opEv. Schol. irpo<pr)rag' rovg Xk%ovrag r)plv 7T£pt aov. In the
Holy Scriptures, however, there does not appear to be any pas
sage in which the word will not admit of one of these two mean
ings : 1. to prophesy, in the strictest sense ; 2. to speak by in
spiration. The passages which are cited in defence of the inter
pretation here assigned to it are 1 Chron. x. 5. 1 Cor. xi. 15.
and especially 1 Chron. xxv. 1. where Asaph and Jeduthan are
said to prophesy with the harp and cymbal, which is explained
in v. 3. by giving praise and thanks to God. But the hymns of
praise sung on this occasion were inspired by the Holy Ghost, and
the second signification of the verb applies. In Ecclus. xlviii. 14.
where the dead body of Elisha is said to prophesy by raising the
dead men, the word does not mean to work miracles, as some
contend, but that it foretold a thing to come, viz. the fall of the
Syrians and the raising of God's people. Hence it falls under
the first acceptation of the verb. At all events, as the hymn of Za
charias is evidently prophetic, and may be said to have been filled
with the Holy Ghost, the ordinary use of the verb may certainly
be admitted here. Whitby, Macknight, &c. — [Hammond.]
Ver. 68. iirEaKE\paro. Hath visited ; scil. with mercy. There
is an evident allusion to the deliverance from Egypt, respecting
which the same verb is used in Exod. iv. 31. Compare also
supra, vv. 25. 48. Ruth i. 6. Psalm lxxx. 14. cvi. 4. Gen. xxi.
1. 1 Sam. ii. 21. There is an allusion to the custom of princes,

462 LUKE I. 69.
who commonly visit the provinces of their kingdom, in order to
redress grievances and confer benefits ; and the great benefit ac
cruing to the people of God, which is here spoken of, is their
spiritual deliverance from the bondage of sin and Satan by the
coming of the Messiah. It has been supposed, indeed, that
Zacharias had his eye more immediately on the temporal deli
verance, which the Jews expected the Messiah to accomplish for
them ; and it may be, that although he spake by inspiration, the
meaning of the Holy Ghost, as in many other prophecies, might
be far more extensive than the ideas of the prophet himself. See
1 Pet. i. 10, 11. No temporal deliverance, however, can be the
object of the prophecy : if the kingdom of Christ is spiritual his
subjects must be spiritual, as also their enemies, Sin, Death, and
Satan, from whom redemption is purchased for those who serve
God in righteousness and holiness all the days of their life. Of
this redemption the deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt, and
of David from the hands of Saul, were typical. See Psalm xviii.
18. cvi. 10. Hos. xiii. 14. 1 Cor. xv. 55. The noun Xvrpwtrte
signifies properly the ransom-price of a captive ; and the phrase
Xvrpwtnv 7toieiv is equivalent to XvrpidaaaOat in Joseph. Ant.
XIV. 14. 1. Whitby, Grotius. — [Le Clerc]
Ver. 69. KEpae awrripiag. The metaphor here employed has
been variously explained. Some imagine that there is an allusion
to the horn of steel on the top of ancient helmets, which usually
lay flat, but was erected in token that the warrior had returned
victorious from the battle. On ancient coins this horn is fre
quently discernible, sometimes^orf, sometimes erect ; and to this
lifting up of the horn the Scriptures have been thought to refer
in 1 Sam. ii. 10. Psalm cxii. 9. cxlvii. 4. Lam. ii. 17. But there
is no satisfactory proof that helmets with this appendage were in
use among the Hebrews. According to another interpretation,
the horns of the altar are the basis of the metaphor ; and as the
altar was a place of safety, and those who held by its horns were
considered under the protection of the Almighty, so Christ is a
new altar of refuge for those who embrace his Gospel. Compare
1 Kings i. 50. 1 Mace. ii. 45. 48. There is something specious
in this explanation, and it is far more satisfactory than many
others which have been proposed ; but the common opinion
seems byfar the best, which derives the image from horned animals.
Suidas : KEpae* r) laxvg irapd ry Osia ypaipy, ek jtiEra<£opae rwv
Zdiwv ratv KaPW7rXt(7/i^vtiiv rolg KEpaat, Kal roiiroig apwopivwv.
A horn in Scripture is frequently the symbol of power or prin
cipality. See Psalm xviii. 3. lxxv. 4. 10. lxxx. 18. cxlviii. 14.
Jerem. xlviii. 25. Lam. ii. 3. 17. Ezek. xxix. 21. Dan. vii. 7.
24. viii. 8. xx. 8. Ecclus. xlvii. 5. Zech. i. 18. Rev. xiii. 1. also
the Targum on 1 Sam. ii. 10. Jerem. xlviii. 2. 10. and Psalm
exxxii. 18. We have a similar allusion in Sanchoniathon, ap.

LUKE I. 70. 72. 463
Euseb. Prcep. Ev. I. 10. r) Si 'Atrrdprj) iiriQriKS rrj ISiq KE^aXrj
(iaaiXEiag irapdaripov K£tpaXi)v ravpov. The Latins also use
cornu in the same manner. Hor. Od. III. 21. Addis cornua
pauperi. Compare Epod. 6. Ovid. Met. VIII. 882. XV. 567.
Val. Max. V. 6. Hence the expression will signify a mighty
Saviour. There is probably a reference to Psalm cxxii. 16, 17.
Hammond, Grotius, Whitby, Kuinoel.
Ver. 70. a7r' alwvog. This phrase is rendered by some, in
general terms, of old, from ancient times : and so Errj atoivta is
the same as i)pipai dpxalat in Psalm Ixxvii. 5. Others by alwv
understand the Jewish dispensation, because before the giving of
the law no prophet spake of raising up a horn of salvation in the
house of David, or of his performing his covenant with Abraham.
That this interpretation is admissible see on Matt. xii. 32. But
a promise of a Redeemer was made to Adam immediately after
the fall, (Gen. iii. 15.) and it is to this promise, which was after
wards repeated in more explicit terms to Abraham and the Pa
triarchs, that Zacharias in all probability alludes. Nor will the
supposed difficulty exist if this verse be taken in connection, not
with that which precedes, but that which follows, in which the
word awrripiav is to be construed in apposition with Kipag awrri-
piag in v. 69. the words ev o'ikw AapiS being omitted for the
purpose, as it were, of pointing to the higher date of the pro
mise as originally given. Here, therefore, air aiwvoe implies
from the earliest times; and this sense is confirmed by Gen. vi.
4. Psalm xxv. 6. Ecclus. xxxvi. 15. LXX. John xix. 32. Acts
iii. 21. 24. Hesiod. Theog. 609. Diod. Sic. XI. 12. Diog. Laert.
IV. 6. The present verse is to be taken parenthetically. Mack
night, Whitby, Lightfoot, Wetstein. — [Hammond, Gro
tius, Le Clerc]
Ver. 72. irotriaai 'iXsog. Subaud. wars. The same phrase oc
curs in Exod. xx. 6. LXX. In the E. T. a supposed ellipsis is
supplied by the word promised, and some commentators infer that
the mercy promised to the fathers was fulfilled in the persons of
their descendants. Compare Matt. x. 6. Luke xiii. 16. Acts iii.
25. Rom. xi. 28. But the expression irotriaai iXsog psrd nvog
is a Hebraism, in which no idea of promise is included ; and Za
charias may have spoken in accordance with the prevailing no
tion of the Jews, that their forefathers would be partakers in the
blessings of the Messiah's advent. See Isaiah xxix. 22. The
meaning of this passage will therefore coincide with the words of
Mary, in v. 54. supra. Kuinoel. — [Grotius.] In what follows
there is some difficulty with respect to the government of pvria-
Orivat by two cases, SiaOriKrig and opKov. Theophylact reads bp-
kov, but without authority ; and, in fact, the covenant and the
oath are not identical, but the former was confirmed by the latter.

464 LUKE I. 74. 76.
Compare Gen. xvii. 7. xxii. 16, 17. Apposition, therefore, is
out of the question, and the opinion maintained by some, that
the case of opKov is regulated by that of the succeeding relative,
cannot, therefore, be admitted. The more general opinion,
therefore, is doubtless correct, that the preposition Kara, as in an
infinite variety of instances, must be supplied. With respect to
the verb bpviisiv, followed by an accusative with 7rpoe instead of
a dative, we have a similar instance in Hom. Od. I. 386. ibpvvE
Si irpbg ipavrov. Wetstein, Bos. — [Kuinoel.] The oath of
God was immutable, (Heb. vi. 17.) and therefore the coming of
the Messiah could not be prevented or retarded by the sins' of
the Jews, as some of their writers maintain. Whitby.
Ver. 74. With the words roii Soiivai iiplv the E. T. properly
begins this verse, which, together with the following, contain
the substance and purport of the oath which God sware unto
Abraham. The prophets in the O. T., in describing the times
of the Messiah, and the spiritual worship which was to succeed
the ritual observances of the law, speak precisely to the same
effect, though the Jews did not understand their predictions in
the light which the Gospel has interpreted them. Compare Isaiah
xliv. 1. sqq. Jerem. xxxi. 31. sqq. Ezek. xxxvi. 25. sqq. Of the
construction, it is observable, that before rov Soiivat there is an
ellipsis of the preposition irspi. To construct dtpofiwg with pva-
Oivrag, as some propose, is not only extremely harsh, but it will
not bear the translation affixed to it: being rescued fromlhe
fear of our enemies. Its connection with Xarpsvsiv is evident
from the nature of the Christian constitution, which delivers us
from the spirit of bondage and fear, Rom. viii. 15. in opposi
tion to the service of the Jews, whose worship is divided by the
Rabbins into that which proceeded from love and that which pro
ceeded from fear. But the perfect love with which Christians
worship God castelh out fear, i. e. slavish fear ; 1 John iv. 18.
The words ev baiorriri Kal SiKaioavvy refer to the inward purity
of heart required under the Gospel, as opposed to the external
rites and ceremonies of the Jewish dispensation ; and the distinc
tion between the two terms is clearly marked by the Scholiast on
Euripides : rb irpbg Osovg e£ dvOpwirwv ysvopEvov S'tKatov batov
KoXovyusv. Compare Jerem. xxxii. 39. LXX. John iv. 23. Ephes.
iv. 24. Whitby, Grotius, Kuinoel, Schoettgen. — [Ham
mond.]
Ver. 76. irpotprirrig vipiarov. From Josh. ii. 11. 2 Chron. ii.
12. xxxvi. 33. Ezra i. 2, 3. vi. 9. vii. 21. 23. Dan. iv. 37. it ap
pears that the God of Israel was acknowledged even by the
Heathens who had any knowledge of him, as superior to all other
Gods; and as he is called in Scripture the most high God, so is
he by Cyrus, Esdr. ii. 3. by Nebuchodonosor, Dan. iv. 34. by

LUKE I. 77, 78. 465
Darius, Esdr. vi. 31. by Artaxerxes, Esdr. viii. 19. 31. by Au
gustus, in Joseph. Ant. XVIII. 10. by Tiberius, in Philo, Leg.
p. 785. E. Compare also Ezra v. 8. Esth. xvi. 16. Whitby.
Of John, as a prophet, see on Matt. iii. 4. xi. 11. John i. 29.
The next clause of the verse is from Isaiah xl. 3. cited at large
in Luke iii. 4. and the parallel passages.
Ver. 77. yvwatv awr-ripiag. The knowledge of salvation under
the Law was by legal righteousness ; under the Gospel by re
mission of sins. John, therefore, in introducing the Gospel,
preached the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins .-
Mark i. 4. Luke iii. 3. Lightfoot, Grotius. With tov Soiivai
there is an ellipsis of Sid or evsko. So also with roii KarEvOiivai,
y. 79.
Ver. 78. mrXdyxva IXEove- An Hebrew expression ; of the
origin and purport of which see on Matt. ix. 36. and compare
Isaiah lxiii. 15. Philip, ii. 1. Col. iii. 12. It is more powerful
than 'iXEog simply, denoting the most tender mercy. By itself,
mrXdyxva sometimes signifies any strong affection whatever, as in
Philem. 7. Much discussion has arisen respecting the true ren
dering of the words dvaroXi) i% vxpovg. It has been observed
that the Hebrew nD"£, tsemach, a name by which the Messiah is
designated in Jerem. xxxiii. 5. Zech. iii. 8. vi. 12. is expressed
by avaroXr) by the LXX ; and the same translation is also given
to the word in Ezek. xvi. 7. xvii. 10. It would be very un
natural, however, to speak of sending a branch to give light to
those who sit in darkness, <yc. The word sometimes also de
notes the rising sun or day-spring, as in Nehem. viii. 3. LXX.
but to this sense it is objected that e£ vipovg would not be pro
perly applied, as the sun at rising is always in the horizon. Al
lowing its full weight to this objection, it may still be assumed,
that as dvaroXi) trEXrjvrje signifies the moon herself in Isaiah lx.
19. LXX. so dvaroXi), scil. rjXtov, may here mean the sun. Za
charias is evidently alluding to those passages in the prophetic
writings which describe the Messiah by the metaphors of the
light and the sun, and especially to Mai. iv. 2., where he is called
the Sun of Righteousness, both on account of the light of his
doctrine and the joy produced by his appearance. Compare also
Isaiah ix. 2. Matt. iv. 16. (where see the note,) Luke ii. 32.
John i. 5. Most aptly indeed is Jesus compared to the rising
sun, his doctrine being to our souls what light is to our bodies,
and equally necessary to direct our steps in the way of that
Wisdom whose ways are ways of pleasantness, and all whose
paths are peace. ' There are some, indeed, who understand the
Baptist to be represented under the figure in question ; and
adapt the construction to their opinion by pointing at i)pag, and
taking avaroXr) in apposition with irpo(pr)rrig in v. 76. The
vol. i. h h

466 LUKE I. 80.
harshness of this syntax carries its refutation with it. In regard
to the objection noticed above, it may be observed further, that
I? vxfiovg is not necessarily referred to dvaroXi), but may be joined
with iirEaKEiparo, by which means the difficulty, trivial as it is, is
entirely removed. Virg. Eclog. VI. 7. Jam nova progenies coelo
demittitur alto. Macknight, Whitby, Grotius, Le Clerc,
Kuinoel. — [Wetstein, Wakefield, A. Clarke, &c]
Ver. 80. EKparatovro irvEvpan. The same phrase, and in the
same sense of irvEvpa, occurs in Luke ii. 40. The sense is plainly
in mind, i. e. mentally, as opposed to corporeally. When the
word is so used, no general rule can be laid down with respect to
the article, which is sometimes omitted and sometimes inserted.
Compare Rom. viii. 13. Gal. v. 16. 18. 25. with John xi. 33.
xiii. 21. 1 Cor. xiv. 15. et alibi. Middleton.
Ibid, iv ralg ipi)potg. Sortie have supposed that the desert
here mentioned was identical with the Hill country where John
was born, and that he remained there from the time of his birth
to the commencement of his ministry. It seems more probable,
however, that he withdrew from his father's house at an early
age, to meditate in solitude, after the example of Elias, upon the
Jewish Scriptures, in which he had been well grounded by his
parents. This may be inferred from Matt. xi. 7., and that it
was not unusual so to retire appears from the austerity which
Josephus, in his Autobiography, relates that he himself practised
for three years in the wilderness. By means of this seclusion
the Baptist would prosecute his studies, under the sole guidance
of the Holy Spirit, and untainted by the perverse traditions and
unscriptural interpretations with which the Scribes had corrupted
the divine law. Grotius, Calmet, Kuinoel. — [Hammond,
Macknight.] The word dvaSsi^tg signifies the entering upon
an office to which one has been previously appointed. It recurs
in Luke x. 1. Acts i. 24.; and the Roman historians, who wrote
in Greek, apply it to the assumption of office by the consuls
elect. Compare also Diod. Sic. I. 66. Polyb. XIII. 4. Juvenc.
I. 130. Exin secretis in vallibus abdita semper Vitafuitpuero,
donee, poscentibus annis, Vatis ad qfificium pleno pubesceret cevo.
Elsner, Wakefield.

LUKE II. 1. 467

CHAPTER II.
Contents: — Tlie birth of Christ in Bethlehem, vv . 1 — 7. The
appearance of the angels to the shepherds, vv. 8 — 20. The
circumcision, purification, and presentation in the Temple,
vv. 21 — 40. The history of Jesus at twelve years old, vv.
41—52. Verse 1. 7rd<rav ri)v otKovi/Evrjv. It is agreed on all hands
that this cannot mean the whole world, which is the primary
meaning of the term, and which it bears in Acts xvii. 31. Rom.
x. 18. Heb. i. 6. In addition to this signification, however,
there are two others of which it is capable ; and the question is
to which of these the preference is to be given in this place.
The Romans at this time had extended their dominion over a
great part of the then known world ; whence historians applied
the expression orbis terrarum, and its equivalent 7rd<ra rj oikov-
pivri, to the Roman empire. Polyb. VI. 48. 'Pwpaloi iv oXtyto
Xpovw tracrav v<p' iavrovg hroiriaav ri)v o'lKOvpivw. In this sense
the phrase occurs in Acts xxiv. 5. Rev. iii. 10. xvi. 14. ; and
some commentators are of opinion that here also it is to be so
taken. But it is scarcely probable that a census of the whole
Roman empire would be spoken of with reference to the governor
of Syria alone ; and it should rather seem, therefore, that Judea
only is intended, which, as separated into different divisions, is
denominated i) oiKovpivri in Luke xxi. 20. Acts xi. 28. Compare
also Luke iv. 5. with Deut. xxxiv. sqq. Lardner, Beausobre,
Doddridge, Kuinoel, Wetstein. — [Grotius, Elsner.] It
should be remarked that the opening words ev ralg i)pipaig ekei-
vaig do not refer to the last verse, but to vv. 36. sqq. of the
preceding chapter.
[on the date of the nativity, as connected with the
taxing mentioned by st. luke.
The calculations at Matt. ii. 1. have fixed the period of the
birth of Christ to some day on or before Jan. 3. J. P. 4710 ; i. e.
to some day in the year comprehended between Jan. 8. J. P.
4710. and Jan. 3. J. P. 4709. Now from the taxing, which is
here said by St. Luke to have been making at the time of the
nativity, it should seem that event took place during the govern
ment of Cyrenius in Syria. But Cyrenius, or Sulpicius Quirinius,
of whom see Tacit. Ann. III. 22. 48., was not sent into Syria
until J. P. 4720, seven years at least after the commencement of
the vulgar aera in J. P. 4713, and no less than ten after J. P.
4710. In order to reconcile this contradiction in chronology,
h h 2

468 LUKE II. 1.
various expedients have been devised. That a census did take
place under Cyrenius is well known, but that St. Luke, unless
by mistake, could not have stated this to have been the one dur
ing which our Lord was born, their difference of date sufficiently
indicates. It is highly improbable, however, not to say impos
sible, that a confusion of dates of this nature should have been
ignorantly made by such an historian as St. Luke, who tells us,
in the preface to his Gospel, that he enquired minutely into the
entire subject of his history ; and a supposition of wilful error,
which is the only alternative, is totally irreconcileable with that
minute precision of dates which he has employed in the beginning
of his third chapter, so entirely at variance with the caution and
wariness of an impostor. Hence some have supposed the verse,
which is only parenthetically historical, which might be removed
without interfering with the sense, and which has very much the
air of a later insertion, to be spurious ; and in confirmation of
this opinion they appeal to Greg. Naz. IX. p. 136. where the
first and fourth verses are quoted without the second. But the
fact is, that Gregory only quotes what is necessary for his own
purpose, and the external testimony is entirely against the re
jection of the verse. Others, therefore, have thought it necessary
to affix to the word rjyEjuovEvovroe a different translation from
that which it bears in the common versions. Beza and Casau-
bon, in direct violation of the uniform sense of this verb in the
N. T., and even in a precisely similar form in the first verse of
the very next chapter, would refer it to an extraordinary com
mission with which .Cyrenius was invested for the purpose of
making the assessment ; while Lardner and others understand it
prospectively, and take it as an official designation in the same
manner as we might speak of the Protector Cromwell, although
speaking of a period previous to his attainment of that situation.
As the former of these senses is inconsistent with the universal
application of the word itself, so the latter fails from the omission
of the article before it. See on Mark ii. 26. Possibly then a
corruption may have found its way into the text ; and upon this
supposition various conjectural emendations have been proposed.
Among these the substitution of Sarvpvtvov or KoivrtXtov for
Kvprivtov, is to cut the knot, and that very rudely, instead of
untying it :— the alteration of irpdiTri into 7rp6 rije is extremely
awkward ; and the insertion of irpb rrig after 7rpairrj is bad Greek.
Indeed, the only conjecture -which has any great claim to atten
tion is that the adverb i) has been inadvertently omitted after
sylvEro. The restitution of this particle, by supplying an el
lipsis, would give to the passage a sense altogether unembar
rassed : avrrj r) diroypaipi) 7rpa>rrj iyivsro i) (diroypaipi) rj iyivEro)
¦nyEpovEvovTog k. r. X. And that this construction is admissible
is inferred from 2 Sam. xix. 43. LXX. 7rpwrdroKoe iydi i) ab.
But, as an objection to this emendation, it is enough to say that

LUKE II. 1. 469
it is unnecessary ; for 7rpwroe by itself, without the addition of i),
is capable of denoting priority of time ; and to render it in this
acceptation is, perhaps, the best solution of the difficulty. So
2 Mace. vii. 41. LXX. iaxdrr/ rwv vlwv r) jUtjrr/p ErEXEvrrjrjE.
Dion. Hal. IV. 3. 7rpwroe EtrrE^avovro rwv dXXwv. John i. 30.
6e S|U7rporj0£v uov yiyovEv, on irpwrog pov f)v. XV. 18. ipi irpw-
tov iipwv pEpiariKE. In the two former of these examples, indeed,
¦n-ptoroe denotes a priority over many, according to the rule of
Ammonius, 7rpa>roe iirl iroXXwv, irpoTEpog Si iirl Siio ; but those
from St. John are more, if not exactly, in point, although it is
true that they are capable of other interpretations. The passage,
therefore, will admit of this translation : This taxing was made
before Cyrenius was Governor of Syria ; and so Theophylact :
rovrian irpoTEpa r)yEpovEvovrog, rjyovv 7rpdr£pov i) rjyE/xdvEVE
rfje 2vptae Kvprjvtoe. Tertullian also, (adv. Marc. IV. 19.)
asserts, that the assessment was made per Sextium Saturninum,
so that he could not have understood the words of Luke as im
plying that it was made by Cyrenius, as that which was levied on
the banishment of Archilaus confessedly was. It is uncertain,
and at the same time immaterial to the point in question, whether
Saturninus was or was not the agent in this matter : Cyrenius
certainly was not ; and his name seems to have been inserted in
order to direct attention to an assessment prior to that which
took place under his government, the memory of which, from
the several calamities connected with it, must have been indelibly
impressed upon the mind of every Jew. But, although it is
more than probable that Varus had succeeded Saturninus in the
government, Tertullian may still be right in saying that the
census was conducted by Saturninus, who might perhaps have
been sent to Judea for that purpose, under an idea that his
knowledge of the province would enable him to perform the task
more readily than a perfect stranger.
Having proceeded thus far in relation to the taxing to which
St. Luke does not allude in this passage, it remains, to point out
that to which he probably does allude. From this enquiry all
those assessments are of course excluded, which, like those which
Augustus is known to have completed in the years B. C. 28. and
8. and A. C. 14. were levied upon Roman citizens alone ; and
those only will come into the account which comprehended the
inhabitants of Judea. Now there is a passage in Joseph. Ant.
XVII. 3. detailing a transaction in which the marks of corres
pondence with the taxing in question are so striking as to create
a strong argument in favour of their identity. The passage is to
the following effect : When the whole Jewish nation took an oath
to be faithful to Ccesar and the interests of the king, the Pha
risees, to the number of above six thousand, refused to swear.
The king having laid a fine upon them, the wife of Pheroras
paid the money for them. Between this oath of Josephus and

470 LUKE II. 1.
the taxing of St. Luke the following points of resemblance,
with some of less importance, and others that are wholly fan
ciful, are readily discernible. 1. The Ccesar mentioned by Jo
sephus is known to have been Augustus, and the king Herod.
2. The oath, as well as taxing, occurred in the latter > part of
Herod's reign. 3. Both included the whole of Judea. 4. The
oath must necessarily have involved an universal diroypatpi), or
enrolment of names ; without which it could not be ascertained
whether the whole nation had or had not taken it. Suid. awo-
ypaipi) rj dirapiOpriaig. 5. In order to prevent deception and
error in this part of the proceeding, the usual custom of the Jews
would probably have been adopted, that each individual should
appear in the city or village where his birth and pedigree were
registered. 6. There is nothing in Josephus to contradict the
supposition, in itself highly probable, that the edict may have
been issued for a taxing, and the oath required at the same time.
7. The edict must have proceeded from Augustus himself, for
Herod would scarcely have risqued the little hold he had upon
the affection of his subjects by so unpopular an act as an oath of
allegiance to the Roman government ; not to mention that the
punishment of the defaulters would have been much severer had
they refused submission to himself. 8. Herod did actually
punish with death certain of these Pharisees who would not take
the oath, and, enraged at the fine, had pretended to prophesy
the destruction of Herod and his kingdom. Now it seems more
than probable that this prophecy may have been suggested by
those of Symeon and Anna, which Herod interpreted to the same
effect : and if so, the oath, as well as the taxing, preceded the
presentation in the Temple and the massacre at Bethlehem by a
very short period of time. Lastly, there is not a single circum
stance in which the two events can be said to be absolutely and
irreconcileably dissimilar ; and it may therefore be fairly inferred
that they are identical. How far then does the date of this oath
correspond with that which has already been determined upon as
the approximate date of the nativity ? About a month before the
memorable epoch of Mar. 13. J. P. 4710, the second set of deputies
were sent to Rome relative to the case of Antipater, which brings
us back to Feb. 13. J. P. 4710. Between the taking of the oath
and this latter period a series of events are related by Josephus,
for the passing of which a period of about ten months, more or
less, may reasonably be allowed. Now Feb. 13. J. P. 4710. 
ten months =" April 3. J. P. 4709. Hence we may fairly fix the
asra of the nativity to the early part, probably April, of the year
of J. P. 4709, which is a nearer approximation within the limits
already assigned.
Still it must be owned that the sense above assigned to irpwrr)
is not free from objection. To say that one person was before
another is unexceptionable, but to say that a taxation was before

LUKE II. 1. 471
Quirinius is harsh in the extreme ; and if the meaning be before
the presidency of Quirinius, rrig i)yEpovlag should have been in
serted. If this difficulty be considered fatal to the hypothesis,
the best solution seems to rest upon the meaning of iyivsro,
which sometimes signifies not merely to be, but to take effect, as
in Matt. vi. 10. xxvi. 42. Luke xi. 2. xxii. 42. xxiii. 34. Com
pare also Msch. Socr. Dial. p. 70. iElian. V. H. IX. 25. In
the latter part of Herod's reign we learn from Josephus, Ant.
XVI. 15. that Augustus became offended with Herod, and
threatened to reduce Judea to the state of a Roman province, and
it is not unreasonable to suppose, though the threat was not exe
cuted till some years after, that some steps might have been taken,
such as the decree in question, to make him believe the emperor
was in earnest. This supposition is greatly strengthened by the
omission of the article before 7rpwrr|. Before the discovery of
the difficulty, which had escaped the notice of those acute ad
versaries of Christianity, Celsus and Julian, the words were uni
versally rendered This first taxing, &c. But if the words rj
diroypaipi) irpwrri were in immediate concord, the article must
have been repeated, or irpwrri have been inserted between the
article and airoypatpi). Compare Exod. xii. 15, 16. 1 Kings xiv.
14. Dan. viii. 21. Joel ii. 20. Zach. xiv. 10. Rev. iv. 1. 7. xx. 5.
xxi. 19. Hence it is more than probable that Trpdirri must be
understood in the adverbial sense, in which it is taken in the
E. T. The meaning, therefore, will be, This enrolment first
took effect, eye. So 7rptoroe is used in John i. 42. v. 4. viii. 7.
xx. 4. Acts xxvi. 23. xxvii. 43. Rom. x. 19. 1 Tim. ii. 13.
1 John iv. 19.
Two other methods for ascertaining the season of the year in
which Christ was born have been adopted by chronologers,
which, though manifestly uncertain in their application, it may be
expedient to explain. In the first place it appears from Luke i.
36. that the annunciation of the Virgin Mary took place in the
sixth month after the conception of Elizabeth ; so that, if both
were born after the usual period of gestation, Jesus must have
come into the world between five and six months after John the
Baptist, and between fourteen and fifteen months after the ap
pearance of the angel to Zachariah in the Temple. Now it may be
collected from various passages in Josephus, that no inducement
however strong, not even the peril of death itself, could prevail with
any of the twenty-four courses of priests, (of which see Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 277.) partly from motives of religion, and
partly of gain, to forego its respective turn of ministering in the
Temple. If, therefore, we can find at what period of any given
year any one of these courses was in its turn of ministration,
provided the due order of succession was never disturbed by any
unavoidable accident, we can discover by a mere arithmetical cal
culation at what period the same or any other given course, as

472 LUKE II. 1.
the eighth, or the course of Abiah, to which Zachariah belonged,
would enter upon its service in that or any preceding or suc
ceeding year. It so happens, however, that the regular succes
sion was repeatedly disturbed ; but then it is recorded that after
the three years profanation of the Temple by Antiochus Epi-
phanes, the sanctuary was cleared, and the daily sacrifice re
stored on the five- and-twentieth day of the ninth month in the
hundred forty and eighth year, i. e. on Nov. 22. J. P. 4549.,
from which time the order of the courses was carefully maintained
till the destruction of Jerusalem. Assuming then that the first
of the priestly families, that of Joarib, in consequence of its pre
cedence, and for the sake of order and regularity, to have entered
upon the service thus renewed, the course in office at any given
time is easily determined. For the whole number of courses
multiplied into the number of days each course officiated = 24
X 7 = 168 = complete cycle of days in the weekly ministra
tions. By ascertaining, therefore, how many revolutions of 168
days are contained between Nov. 22. J. P. 4549 and any sub
sequent date, the remainder, if any, .will point out the course re
quired. If the remainder be equal to one, two, three, &c. mul
tiples of seven, the second, third, fourth, &c. courses, — and if there
be no remainder the course of Joarib — will then be entering upon
their duties. Since, therefore, the birth of Jesus has been fixed to
some part of the year between Jan. 3, J. P. 4709 and Jan. 3, J. P.
4710, the ministration of the course of Abiah, during which the
angel appeared to Zacharias, must be sought for between fourteen
and fifteen months earlier, i. e. between Nov. 3. J. P. 4707 and
Nov. 3. J. P. 4708. By the above process this course is found
to have entered upon its office first on April 3, and again on
Sept. 18. J. P. 4708 ; and, therefore, reckoning fourteen months
complete from each of these ministrations, the nativity took
place either in the months of June or November, J. P. 4709.
Independently, however, of the ambiguity in all calculations of
this kind, arising from the circumstance that each course was in
office twice and sometimes three times in the same year, which
will always lead to a double, and consequently a dubious result ;
an objection is naturally suggested to the above method in par
ticular, that so tenacious of their rights as these courses avowedly
were, they would scarcely have consented to the preference as
sumed to have been shewn to the family of Joarib. It is more
consistent to suppose that they either resumed their services at
the link in the chain in which it had been broken off by Antio
chus, or else that they proceeded in the same manner as if their
regularity had never been interrupted. Upon each of these alter
natives a calculation has been made, founded upon a passage in
the Talmud and the Seder Olam respectively, the former of
which places the destruction of the Temple by the Romans, which
took place on Aug. 4. J. P. 4783. to the beginning, and the

LUKE II. 1. 473
latter to the conclusion of the ministration of the course of Joarib.
Now by a retrograde calculation the course of Abiah is found to
have commenced its week of service in the year of J. P. 4708,
a fortnight later upon one of these authorities, and a week later
upon the other, than it has been shewn to have happened upon
the original assumption. These variations must render the ac
curacy of any of these hypotheses uncertain, and all of them sus
picious ; not to mention that they all set out with the idea that
Christ was bom after the ordinary period of gestation, which
may possibly not have been the fact, and against which there is a
tradition preserved by Epiphanius (Hcer. LI. 29. p. 451. A.) that
he was born in the seventh or tenth month after his conception.
That such might very probably have been the case, the expe
rience of the most eminent physicians has testified.
The other method which has been adopted for determining
the season of the year at which Christ was born, depends upon
a comparison of the events which accompanied his nativity. It
seems scarcely possible that the nightly watch of the shepherds,
the census in Judea, and the flight into Egypt should have taken
place in the depth of winter. At the same time the inference
deduced from these circumstances is far less conclusive in relation
to the mild and salubrious climate of Judea than it would be in
relation to another of severer temperature : and if it should be
opposed to any argument derived from a less uncertain source, it
must of course be given up as invalid. Now the 25th of De
cember has been universally observed throughout Christendom
as the anniversary of the nativity from the fourth century down
wards; and this does not materially differ, in respect of the
season of the year, from the ancient tradition of the Eastern
Church, which fixed it to the 6th of January. But there were
also in early times other opinions upon the subject ; and Clemens
Alex, in his Stromata, after stating his own opinion, that Jesus
was born one hundred and ninety-four years one month and
thirteen days before the death of Commodus, i. e. in the month
of Nov. J. P. 4711, proceeds to mention the opinions of others,
to whom the months of April or May appeared more probable.
Clemens is certainly incorrect in the year, and probably in the
month, which he has assigned to the event in question : and
although there is great uncertainty in the application of the above
hypothesis, the result of the latter at least may be considered as
adding some support to the accuracy of the preceding investiga
tions, which fixed the spring of the year J. P. 4709 as the aera
of the nativity. In other words, he may have been born about
two years before the death of Herod in the beginning of J. P.
4711, and in confirmation of this conclusion Epiphanius relates
it, apparently as the general opinion of the primitive Christians,
that Joseph and Mary remained in Egypt somewhat less than
two years, Hcer. LI. 9. T. 1. p. 431. Benson, Middleton,

474 LUKE II. 4. 7.
Campbell, Macknight, Wetstein. — [Scaliger, Allix, Ca-
saubon, Whitby, Michaelis, &c. &c]

Ver. 4. i% oikov Kat irarpidg Aaj3t8. The 7rarptd was a part
of the otKoe, the latter including the servants and collateral
branches, and the former being confined to the direct line of
descent, according to the division of the tribes into families and
households. See Numb. i. 18. sqq. Josh. vii. 17, 18. and Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 79. Somewhat analogous is the Roman dis
tinction of gentes and familice. See also my note on Hom. II.
B. 362. The mode of enrolment, according to the cities to
which each person respectively belonged, prevailed not only in
Judea, but in Rome. Compare Liv. XXXVIII. 28. 36. XLII. 10.
Cic. de Legg. II. 2. It does not appear, however, that there
was any necessity for Mary's appearance, unless she was a
heiress ; and it has, therefore, been supposed that such was the
case, as she would otherwise scarcely have undertaken so long
a journey in her present condition. Possibly she might accom
pany her husband in order to remain under his protection, and
secure herself from the taunts of her unbelieving neighbours ; or
she might judge it proper, on this occasion, to claim her descent
from David, as she knew herself to be miraculously with child of
the Messiah. At all events it was so ordained by the Almighty,
in order to the fulfilment of the prophecy in Mic. v. 2. which the
Jews themselves applied to their Messiah. See the Targum in
loc. and the Talmud, in Joma, p. 10. 1. According to Justin,
Tertullian, and Chrysostum, Jesus also was enrolled. Grotius,
Wetstein, Doddridge, Schoettgen. In the next verse the
participle pEpvriarEvpivy is used, although Mary was now not
only espoused but married, in reference to the conduct of Jo
seph, as related in Matt. i. 25. Macknight.
Ver. 7. iv ry ipdrvy. The meaning of this word has been
greatly canvassed. Many of the commentators, with the E. T.
render it a manger, which is unquestionably its more general
signification ; and, under the circumstances of the case, a manger
would not appear an unlikely receptacle for the new-born child.
At the present day, however, horses do not eat out of mangers in
the East, but from bags of hair-cloth, which are hung about their
necks for that purpose. Hence some have imagined that a bag
of this kind is here intended; but, admitting that the modern is a
continuation of the ancient usage in this respect, which is ren
dered somewhat improbable from Herod. IX. 70., both one and
the other of these interpretations are equally inadmissible upon
other grounds. It is clear from the context that the rpdrvri was
not merely the place in which the babe was laid, but the place
also in which he was born and swaddled. For if the words iv

LUKE II. 7. 475
rrj ipdrvy do not belong as much to eVekev as to ovekXivev, where,
it may be asked, did Mary's delivery happen? Certainly not in
the KardXvjua, for there we are immediately told that there was
no room, not merely for the child, but avrolg, i. e. for Mary and
Joseph. By rpdrvri, therefore, we must understand some place
in which they might find a lodging, though less convenient than
the KardXvpa : and we have two meanings of which ipdrvri is ca
pable, from which to make choice. Some understand an enclosed
area for cattle, like our farm-yard, which is commonly adjoined
to the house ; but an unsheltered enclosure seems little adapted
for the accommodation of a person in Mary's situation. It is far
more likely, therefore, that a stall or stable is intended, and in this
sense the word is frequently employed by the best writers. Eurip.
Ion. KaO si p^ar avrov liririKalg iriXag iparvaiaiv. So a\so prcesepe
in Virg. ^En. I. 425. VII. 275. et scepius. This interpretation is
considerably supported by the article, which clearly indicates
that the ipdrvri in question is monadic, and belonged to the Kard
Xvpa mentioned in the same verse. Now of mangers there would
probably be several, and though the stable and the inn might
very well be thus contradistinguished, yet not so well the inn
and the manger. It is true the article is wanting in some good
MSS., and Griesbach has affixed to it the mark of possible spu-
riousness. But the various reading in all probability arose from
v. 12. where the best MSS. want the article, and where it should
certainly be expunged. The interpretation is also further con
firmed by the authority of Justin Martyr, and other of the fa
thers, by whom the place of the nativity is denominated airrfXaiov
or dvrpov. Closely allied to this is the tradition still prevalent
in the East, that the place of the nativity was a grotto, and that
the stable might be really such is highly probable from the rocky
nature of the country about Jerusalem. Justin Martyr, it is true,
expressly distinguishes between the cave and the ipdrvri in which
they laid the child. His words in Dial. c. Tryph. are these :
eVeioov 'ltiiadtp ovk £?xev ev rrj Kwpy EKEtvrj irov KardXvaat, iv airrj-
Xaito nvl avvsyyvg rr)g Kiiiprig KariXvaE, Kat tote avrwv bvrwv
ekeT, 'etetokei r) Mapta rov Xpiarbv, Kat ev ipdrvy aiirbv 'eteOe'ikei.
So also Origen c. Cels. Ss'iKwrai rb iv BttiOXeep airr)Xaiov ivOa
iyEvvr)Ori, Kal r) iv rtj) airriXaiw ipdrvri, iv t{> iairapyavdiOri. May
not the distinction, however, be considered as referring to the
entire cave, and the portion of it on which the bed was strawed 1
It is further observable that Justin places the cave near and not
in Bethlehem. But though the inn were without the village,
still, inasmuch as it belonged to Bethlehem, whatever happened
there may fairly be said to have happened at Bethlehem. It may
be added that, according to Volney, the houses of public recep
tion in the East are always built without the precincts of towns.
Middleton, Wetstein, Rosenmuller, Kuinoel. — [Beau-
sobre, Campbell, Michaelis, Schleusner, &c] Of the Jewish

476 LUKE II. 8, 9.
KardXvjuara see on Mark xiv. 14. From Mary's swaddling the
child herself it has been thought that she was delivered without
the usual pains of child-birth. Whitby. The airdpyava, swad
dling-clothes, were very generally used among the ancients, and
indeed till lately, in modern times, as a preventive against dis
tortion. Photius : airapyavwpara' ai irpwrat ipaaKiai, Kal ol
Ssapol rwv dpriroKwv tekvwv. Senec. de Benef. VII. 24. Ne
membra libertas immatura detorqueat, in rectum exitura con-
stringunt. ^Esch. Agam. 1596. rvr06v ovr iv airapydvotg.
Choeph. 753. 7rate et' w ev rj7rapydvote. Wetstein.
Ver. 8. dypavXovvrEe. Hesych. ol iv dypolg StavvKTEpEvovrEg.
But the word signifies generally to abide in the fields, whether
by day or night, and is more appropriately explained by Etym.
M. ol iv dyptji avXiZbpEvoi. Hence it was necessary to subjoin
rrig vvKrog. The argument deduced from this event, in reference
to the season of the year in which our Lord was born, has been
already noticed as not quite conclusive. It is certain, from the
testimony of several travellers, that some of the wandering Ara
bian tribes dwell in tents in the open plains both in winter and
summer ; and the word dypavXtr; is used of a military encamp
ment by Diodorus. St. Luke, however, does not seem to allude
to any pastoral tribes, but merely to the shepherds of Bethlehem ;
and it appears from the Talmud that it was customary in the
mountainous parts of Judea to keep their flocks at pasture from
the Passover till the first rain, i. e. from March till November.
See Bezah, p. 40,- 1. Schab. p. 45, 2. Lightfoot, Benson,
Wetstein. Of the watches of the night see Home's Introd.
Vol. III. p. 169. The words should be rendered keeping the
watches, <yc.
Ver. 9. hriarri. The verb itpiartipi is generally applied to
sudden appearances and heavenly visions. Compare Luke xxi.
34. xxiv. 4. Acts xii. 7. xxiii. 27. Hom. II. ¥. 201. Arist. Pac.
427. Anacr. III. 6. Herod. II. 141. V. 56. Dion. Hal. VII. 67.
So Virg. ./En. IV. 702. Devolat, et supra caput adstitit. Wet
stein, Kuinoel. By some commentators to%,a Kvptov is ren
dered a bright light, in reference to the Hebrew idiom noticed on
Mark xi. 22. But the term should rather seem to correspond
with the Hebrew miT "T)2D, by which the Shechinah, or symbol
of the Divine presence is expressed in the O. T. So Exod. xxiv.
16. Psalm lxxv. 10. This appearance was frequently attended,
as in this instance, (v. 13.) by a company of angels, who, as they
-sung at the creation, so did they also at the redemption, of the
world. See Job xxxviii. 7. and compare 1 Kings xxii. 19.
Neh. ix. 6. Psalm ciii. 20. Whitby, Schoettgen. — [Gro
tius.] The form tpopElaOai ipofiov is similar to xaP*>val XaPav
in Matt. ii. 10.

LUKE II. 11. 14. 477
Ver. 1 1 . Xpiarbg Kvpiog. Christ the Lord, i. e. the Lord
Messiah ; Kvptoe corresponding with the Hebrew Jehovah.
Compare Hos. i. 7. Holden.
Ver. 14. ev bipiarotg. Scil. ovpavolg. So Matt. xxi. 9.
The Jews reckoned three heavens, of which the highest was con
sidered as the place of the throne of God; and in this sense the
plural is used, according to the Hebrew idiom. The phrase Iv
vipiaroig is used by the LXX only in Job xvi. 19. where it evi
dently corresponds in sense with this passage. We have a si
milar contrast between heaven and earth in Matt. vi. 10. Luke
xi. 2. 1 Cor. viii. 5. Eph. i. 10. iii. 15. Col. i. 16. 20. Rev. v. 3.
13. except that the highest heavens axe not the object of compa
rison. The import of these words has greatly perplexed the
commentators. Some understand Ei/SoKta ev dvOpdnroig as the
prcedicate, and the rest of the words as the subject of the sen
tence. But thus to change the doxology into a kind of proverb
or aphorism, miserably detracts from its beauty, and converts a
joyous acclamation into a cold and languid declaration of facts.
Others adopt the reading of the Alexandrian MSS. which, to
gether with one other, gives EvoWtae. Now to join Etprjvr) evSo-
Kiag is exceedingly harsh and unnatural ; and to unite dvOpwiroig
EvSoKiag is directly at variance with the sense of the context.
The Vulgate however favours the latter method : In terra pax
hominibus bonce voluntatis. But the angelic proclamation of
peace on earth to the men whom God favoureth, which seems to
be the meaning of this translation, suits ill with their previous
tidings of great joy to ALL people. Others again would read
EvSoKta in the dative, et aliter alii ; but the whole difficulty
seems to have arisen from dividing the verse into three clauses.
That it consists of two only is evident to demonstration from the
apposition of ev inpiaroig and Qei£ in the one, to iirl yf/e and ev
dvOpwiroig in the other. Hence also the following order : Qei£
iv vipiaroig S6%a (ian,) Kal iv dvOpwiroig Iirl yfje Etprjvr), EvooKta.
Acclamations and shouts of triumph are usually broken into short
elliptic sentences, which will account • for the want of the copula
between Elpi)vt) and EvcWa, though scarcely for its omission in
the last of three clauses, in the second of which it is inserted.
Thus the blessing proclaimed to mankind is twofold : 1 . Etprjvr/,
Peace with God and our own consciences, whence Christ is called
the Prince of Peace. Compare Isaiah ix. 6. 1 Cor. i. 30. Ephes.
ii. 14. Col. i. 20. 2. Good-will, or affection one with another,
Rom. x. 1. Phil. i. 15. ii. 13. It should be remarked, in con
clusion, that there is some difference of opinion respecting the
manner of supplying the ellipsis. Some prefer 'iarw, as in Matt.
ix. 21. but ian is perhaps more suitable to a doxology, and is
abundantly sanctioned by 1 Pet. iv. 11. Doddridge, Campbell,
Parkhurst,Kuinoel. — [Pearce, Wakefield, Lightfoot, &c]

478 LUKE II. 15. 22.
Ver. 15. Kat ol dvOpwirot, ol iroipivsg, k. t. X. The conjunc
tion is redundant; and so again v. 21. It has been usual to ex
plain dvOpwirot irotpivEg as a pleonastic Hebraism; of which there
are examples in Gen. xlvi. 32. and elsewhere ; at the same
time that the idiom is no less frequent in Greek writers. Thus
Herod. VI. 83. dvOpwirog pdvrtg. The use of dvrjp in this
manner is unlimited. But in these cases the article, which is
here indicative of the renewed mention, is seldom, if ever, in
serted. It is, therefore, preferable to understand ol irotpivEg in
explanatory apposition with ol dvOpwiroi, so that the sense will
be, the men, i. e. the shepherds ; those mentioned, namely, in v. 8.
So Thucyd. VIII. 77. ol Si irspipOivTEg ig Sd/uov, ol SiKa irpEa-
fiEvrai. ValcknjER. — [Grotius, Kuinoel.] Here, and at v. 19.
pr)pa is to be taken in the sense of irpdypa, ut scepius. In this
latter verse there is considerable difference of opinion in regard
to the meaning of the verb o-v/xj3dXXEtv. Some would render it to
understand, to comprehend, to unravel the meaning of; and in
support of this sense they refer to a variety of passages relating
to dreams and oracles, concerning which the Heathens themselves
did not pretend to any certain knowledge. Others translate to
revolve, to consider, as in Hom. II. H. 297. Theocr. Idyl. XXV.
168. Soph. CEd. C. 1151. But the meaning which suits best with
the passage is to form conjectures respecting, viz. by comparing
past and present events. Compare Herod. L 91. Dion Hal. I.
24. Arrian, II. 3. Of this sense also the passages first referred
to are more capable than of that which they are cited to defend ;
not to mention that throughout the N. T. crvjttj3dXX£iv is used
only by St. Luke, and that of five places besides this, in which
he has employed it, none will admit of the sense in question.
Alberti, Raphelius, Campbell, &c. — [Elsner, Wetstein,
Doddridge.
Ver. 22. ote hrXr)aOriaav al -npipat k. t. X. In illustration of
this and the preceding verse see Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp.
270. sqq. 422. sqq. The period of a woman's uncleanness after
giving birth to a male child was seven days ; in addition to which,
for thirty-three days more, she was still thought in an inferior
degree unclean, being debarred from touching any hallowed
thing, and from going into the sanctuary. For a daughter the
time of separation was double, the first term being fourteen days,
and the second sixty- six, in all eighty, before she could partake
in the solemnities of public worship. At the conclusion of this
period the purification of the mother, and the presentation of the
child, if a first-born son, took place. The presentation indeed
might take place when the child was a month old, but as the time
was not, like that of circumcision, fixed to a particular day, it is
not unlikely that it may have been customary, because convenient,
to perform the ceremony at the same time with the purification.
10

LUKE II. 25. 479
With respect to the purification, there is a various reading of
some importance. The MSS. read KaOapiapoii avrwv with very
few exceptions, of which some give avrov, and one, the Com-
plutensian, avrfje. Of these the former requires no notice, but
the latter is adopted by the E. T. and some other versions, partly
it should seem because the law in Lev. xii. 1. speaks of the mo
ther only, and partly from the fear of imputing uncleanness to
Christ. But the spirit of the law extended the impurity of the
mother to the child suckled by her ; and as Christ was circum
cised that he might fulfil all righteousness, so he submitted, with
the Virgin, to the ceremony of purification, though he was free
from every moral stain, and she from the pollution of ordinary
childbirth. Campbell, Doddridge, Whitby. After 7rapa<rrrj-
rjai we must supply Ovaiav. Rom. xii. 1. irapaariiaai rd awpara
vpwv Ovaiav ri£ 0£tt). So ^Elian. V. H. VII. 41. Lucian. D. C.
T. I. p. 958. In the same manner the Latins use, sistere, as in
Stat. Theb. IV. Velleris obscuri pecudes, armentaque sisti Atra
jubet. With roii Soiivai, in v. 24. there is an ellipsis of eveko,
as in v. 77. of the preceding chapter. Of ^Evyoe, as applied to
birds, we have examples in Herod. III. 76. iipdvri lpr)Kiov iirrd
Zsvysa, Siio alyviriitiv ^svyEa StwKOvra. Athen. IX. p. 397. rauiv
^Evyoe. Wetstein, Elsner, Alberti.
Ver. 25. S'tKaiog koI EvXafiiig. The former of these adjectives
implies a strict observance of the outward ceremonies of the law,
as in Matt. i. 19. and the latter an inward devotion of the heart.
In its primary signification it denotes one who handles a thing
carefully, or, in a passive sense, a thing carefully handled, as
opposed to ov<rXr]7rroe. Compare ^Elian. Hist. An. III. 83.
Lucian. Timon. T. I. p. 114. Grcev. Hence it signifies gene
rally cautious, as in Arrian, Diss. Ep. II. 1. 17. and as applied
to religion, devout. Of this sense we have examples in Deut. ii.
5. 1 Sam. xviii. 29. Prov. xxx. 5. Micah vii. 2. LXX. Acts ii. 5.
viii. 2. Xen. Mem. III. 6. 8. Plat. Phaad. §. 39. The character
here intended is described somewhat differently, but to the same
effect, in Acts x. 22. dvrjp S'tKaiog koI <poj3oiipEvog rov Qeov. So
Ovid. Met. V. 100. JEqui cultor, timidusque Deorum. The
primitive title of bishops was EiiXafiiaraTog. Grotius, Wetstein.
Inquiries have been instituted in order to identify the Symeon or
Simon here mentioned, with some known personage in the Jewish
history. Of the celebrated Simon, surnamed the Just, Josephus
observes, Ant. XII. 2. S'tKaiog hriKXriOElg Sid te to irpbg Qeov
EvaEp^ig, Kal rb irpbg roiig bporpvXovg evvovv. But he had been
long dead ; and it is by no means certain that he deserved the
character attributed to Symeon by St. Luke. It appears, however,
from the Talmud, in Juchas. p. 66, 2. that Rabban Simeon, the
son of Hillel, whom he had succeeded as father of the Sanhedrim,
was still alive, and lived a great while after the birth of Christ.

480 LUKE II. 29.
But this circumstance is evidently against the supposition that he
was the Symeon mentioned by the Evangelist, which rests upon
the simple fact, that he had a son named Gamaliel, who was
possibly the celebrated teacher mentioned in Acts v. 34. Indeed,
the whole matter is mere conjecture, and St. Luke's silence upon
the subject renders the conjecture very improbable. Doddridge.
— [Lightfoot, Wetstein.] The consolation of Israel is a
phrase by which the Jews frequently designated the Messiah, in
reference to the manner in which his coming is sometimes fore
told by the prophets. See Isaiah xlix. 13. hi. 9. lxvi. 13. Jerem.
xxxi. 13. Zech. i. 17. In the Talmud also he is spoken of as the
Manaliem, or comforter ; nor was it unusual for them to swear by
their desire of seeing this consolation. Thus Chagigah, p. 16, 2.
R. Judah Ben Tabbai said: So let me see the consolation if I
have put to death a false witness. Chetubb. p. 67, 1. R.
Eliezer Ben Zadok said : So let me see the consolation, if I did
not see her gleaning barley under the horse's heels. Similar
examples abound. This consolation, again alluded to in v. 38.,
was now generally expected, not only in Judea, but throughout
the whole East. See Tacit. Hist. V. 13. Sueton. Vesp. §. 4.
Joseph. B. J. VI. 31. The sceptre was now departing from
Judah, the seventy weeks of Daniel nearly accomplished, and the
spirit of prophecy had revived in Zacharias, Symeon and Anna: —
circumstances, which could not fail to encourage and quicken the
expectation. Some, indeed, do not understand the word 7rpo-
^fjrte as applied to Anna in v. 36. in the sense of a prophetess
strictly so called, but merely of a woman devoted to a religious
life, or, perhaps, a prophet's wife. But it was clearly under the
influence of divine inspiration that Anna spoke of the infant
Jesus as the Messiah ; and nothing less than this is ever implied
by the word in Holy Writ. See the note on Luke i. 67. and
compare Judg. iv. 4. 2 Kings xxii. 14. 2 Chron. xxxiv. 22.
LXX. Rev. ii. 20. St. Paul indeed calls a Heathen poet 7rpo-
<pr)rrig in Tit. i. 12. but it is well known that the Heathen poets
generally laid claim to a divine afflatus, and the Apostle evidently
spoke in reference to the opinion of the people of whom he was
writing. The noun 7rapdKXrjo-te is, of course, to be understood in
the abstract for the concrete ; and so again awrr)ptov, v. 30.
Whitby, Lightfoot, Grotius, Parkhurst. — [A. Clarke,
Kypke, &c] By irvEvpa dyiov we must understand a divine in
fluence ; and rov irvsvparog tov dyiov, in the following verse,
may be intended of the same divine influence, the article denot
ing the renewed mention ; though the act there inferred points
rather at the personal acceptation of 7rv£vjua. See on Matt. i. 18.
Middleton. Of the verb xpvpariZEtv see on Matt. ii. 12. and
of the phrase ISeIv Odvarov on Matt. xvi. 28.
Ver. 29. vvv diroXbtig k. r. X. Symeon's hymn of praise

LUKE II. 32. 34. 481
hinges upon the fulfilment of those prophecies which speak of the
Messiah as the peculiar glory of the Jews, from whom he was to
spring, and of the final admission of the Gentiles to be partakers
in the light of the Gospel. See Isaiah xlvi. 13. xlix. 6. Iii. 7. 10.
When the clearness of these predictions is considered, it is won
derful that the Jews were so unwilling to consider the Gentiles
as capable of the favour of God. See Acts x. 45. xi. 18. Even
those who were at all inclined to admit the idea, conceived that
the privilege could only be obtained by a conversion to Judaism.
In reference to these prejudices, therefore, upon the first appear
ance of Christ, the glory of the second temple, in his own house,
Simeon seems to have been directed by the Spirit to announce
that salvation which was prepared for all people. The verb
dTroXvav signifies properly to loose, and thence to release, as
from a disease, Luke xiii. 12. from imprisonment, Matt. xxvi. 15.
from punishment, Matt, xviii. 27. from the bond of marriage,
i. e. to divorce, Matt. i. 19. also to suffer, to depart, to dismiss,
Matt. xiv. 15. Hence it is applied, by a euphemism, to the dis
missal of the soul from the body, as in this passage. Compare
Gen. xv. 2. Numb. xx. 29. Job iii. 6. Tob. iii. 13. LXX. The
ellipsis to be supplied, as some suppose, is dirb roii Znv or roii
/3tov, but dirb roii awparog is more probable. Plat. Phasd. ap.
Plutarch, p. 108. C. dXXd KaOapsvwpEv air avroii (rov aiiiparog,)
Etog dv b QEog avrbg diroXvay r)pdg. ^Elian. V. H. V. 6. a7ro-
Xveiv ek riiiv roii awparog SEapwv. We meet, however, with
diroXuo-te rov |3tov in Diod. Sic. p. 653. In the next verse the
addition of ot btpOaXpol'is probably emphatic. Similar instances
occur in Gen. xiv. 12. Job xix, 27. xiii. 5. 1 Johni. 1. Whitby,
Grotius, Parkhurst, Wetstein.
Ver. 32. ipiog Eig airoKaXviptv k. t. X. These words are in
apposition with crtiirrjpiov in v. 30. The E. T. renders a light
to lighten the Gentiles, which is scarcely correct. If the passage
be compared with Isaiah xlix. 6. LXX. ( I have given thee ste <piog
idvwv.) and with Psalm xcviii. 2. (Before the Gentiles dirEKa-
XvxpE ri)v StKaioaiivriv avroii.) it seems that the words of the Evan
gelist are transposed for ipwg iOvwv Eig diroKaXvipiv. Hence the
sense will be a light of the Gentiles, for revelation ; viz. of the
righteousness of God. See Rom. i. 17. Grotius. In the next
verse the verb jjv is syncopated for fjtrav.

Ver. 34. iSov, oiirog keitoi k. r. X. In this prediction Simeon
has been supposed to adopt a metaphor, corresponding to that
found in Isaiah viii. 14. xxviii. 16. which are united in one
citation, and applied to the Messiah in Rom. ix. 33. Under the
image of a stone lying in the path, Christ is represented as a
rock of stumbling to those who reject him, and of support to
those, who, by leaning upon it, raise themselves from the state of
vol. i. i i

482 LUKE II. 35.
ignorance and prejudice into which they had fallen, to a belief in
the Gospel. But the phrase KElaOai s'ig n signifies to be ordained
or appointed for any purpose, as in Phil. i. 17. 1 Thess. iii. 3.
and in this sense it here refers to aripElov as well as irrwaiv koI
dvdaraaiv. At the same time, no fatality is implied, the import
of the expression amounting merely to this : that such would be
the effect arising from the different dispositions with which the
Jews and mankind in general would receive the dispensation of
the Gospel. The continuation of the sense, after the parenthesis
in v. 35. does not indicate the appointed intention of Christ's ill-
treatment ; but the thoughts of men's hearts — whether good or
bad, for SiaXoyiapol includes both, — are declared to be the cause
of his reception on the one hand, and his rejection on the other.
Grotius, Wetstein. — [Macknight, Le Clerc] Of the word
artpElov different interpretations have been assigned by the com
mentators. Some understand it to signify a remarkable per
sonage ; and others explain it as a metaphor from a mark, which
is shot at. See Gen. xlix. 23. Psalm xi. 2. xxxvii. 14. lxiv. 3, 4.
Job xvi. 12. But the metaphor fails in the participle dvrtXEyo-
pEvov ; so that it is better to explain the expression from Isaiah
viii. 18., which is applied to Christ and his followers in Heb. ii.
13. Compare Acts xxviii. 22. Deeds as well as words, how
ever, seem to be included in this participle, as they are in the
word fiXaaiptipia in Psalm xviii. 43. 1 Mace. ii. 6. LXX. The
present also, be it observed, is put for the future. So Wisd. xi.
16. 2 Mace. vi. 14. LXX. Acts xxi. 3. 2 Cor. iii. 7. 2 Pet. ii. 9.
iii. 11. Thucyd. II. 87. Xen. Mem. III. 13. 4. Herodian. III.
11. Diod. Sic. IV. 31. Parkhurst, Grottus. — [Doddridge,
Schleusner.] Ver. 35. popipaia. Psalm xxxvi. 15. LXX. 17 popipaia avrwv
EtaiXOoi Eig rrjv KapStav avrwv. Val. Flac. Arg. VI. JEquaque,
necferro brevior nee romphea ligno. The word signifies pro
perly an oblong javelin, much in use among the Thracians, and
not unlike the German framea ; hence any weapon, as a sword,
in Rev. i. 16. Compare Exod. v. 3. Levit. xxvi. 6. Deut. xxxii.
41. Judg. vii. 20. Isaiah i. 20. LXX. where it always answers
to the Hebrew 2TF, a sword. The prediction of Simeon re
specting the Virgin is taken by some in a literal sense, as fore
telling that she should suffer martyrdom ; and so Epiphanius,
Haeres. III. 78. 23. But this is uncertain. Others therefore
interpret popipaia metaphorically of the cruel calumnies which
were industriously circulated against her character. But it
should rather be understood of the sorrow which she experienced
in witnessing the injuries and insults to which Jesus was ex
posed : and thus the prophecy was most signally fulfilled when
she saw him expiring on the cross, amid the scoffs and cruelties
of the multitude. See John xix. 25. The representation of mental
10

LUKE II. 37, 38. 188
anguish, under the image of a wound, is very frequent in the
classical writers. Hom. II. I. 3. irivOu §' drXiirw /3s/3oX}jaro
irdvrsg dptarot. Soph. Aj. 938. Xwp£i7rp6e rj7rap, otSa, yEvvata
Svri. Virg. JEn. XII. 168. tristi turbatam vulnere mentis.
Compare Psalmxhii. 10. Iv. 21. lvii. 4. Joseph. Ant. VIII. 8. 3.
Stat. Theb. X. 613. Senec. de Ira, III. 14. By a common
figure also, popipaia, the weapon, is substituted for the wound,
which it inflicts. So fiiXog in II. 0. 513. A. 268. and elsewhere
frequently. Doddridge, Grotius, Le Clerc, Wetstein. —
[Whitby, Hammond, Lightfoot.]
Ver. 37. koI avrrj x^Pa- Scil. »)v. So Luke vii. 12., where,
however, some would understand avry x*JPa m the dative : but
the more usual rendering is sufficiently established by a parallel
example in Herod. IV. 109. BovStvot - Se ov ry avry yXdiaay
Xpitovrat Kal ol TEXtovot" dXX' ovSi Siatra r) aiirr). With X'iPa
also, the feminine of x*Jpocj there is an ellipsis of ywr), which is
supplied in Luke iv. 26. So Hom. II. B. 289. x^Pal TS ywaiKEg.
Compare II. Z. 472. 2 Sam. xiv. 5. 1 Kings vii. 14. LXX.
Blackwall, Parkhurst. The widowhood of Anna is espe
cially mentioned, that state being held in great honour among
the Jews. In the case of Anna, whose husband appears to have
died when she was yet young, and had been married only seven
years, it would have been regarded as a particular instance of re
ligious mortification. Hence Cyril, of Jerusalem, speaks of her
as iyKpardg, continent, £vXaj3Eardrrj, devout, and drjKrjrpta, as
cetic, or strict in her religious exercises. There is a similar
example in Joseph. Ant. XVIII. 6. 6. via ydp ^rjpEvEtv 7rap£-
pEivE, ydpto te dirElirE r<j> 7rpoe £T£pov, KaurEp rov 2t/3ao-rov ke-
XEvcravroe rivi yapElaOat, Kat Xotoopttliv aVr/XAay pivov SiEadiaaro
avrfje r6v j3iov. So Val. Max. II. 1. 3. Quce uno contentce ma-
trimonio fuerant, corona pudicitice honorabantur. Wetstein,
Kuinoel, Hammond. In stating that Anna departed not from
the Temple night or day, the Evangelist does not mean that she
abode there continually ; for none lived there except the priests
and Levites. The expression is hyperbolical, and denotes that
she spent the greater part of her time in the Temple, being con
stant in her attendance at the morning and evening sacrifice,
often engaging in the exercise of private prayer and fasting, and
joining perhaps in those anthems which the priests occasionally
sung during the night watches, to which David alludes in Psalm
cxix. 62. cxxxiv. 1, 2. The attendance of the Apostles upon
the daily service is mentioned in the same manner in Luke xxiv.
33. Acts i. 13, 14. ii. 46. Macknight, Doddridge.
Ver. 38. 7TEpi avrov. The antecedent to which the relative
refers is Kvpttji, by which, therefore, we must necessarily under
stand Jesus. Doddridge. Commentators differ respecting the
i i 2

484 LUKE II. 40. 42.
signification of the verb dvOopoXoyElaOai. Some render it to
praise, some to return thanks, and some again to confess or ac
knowledge ; which last is perhaps correct. Compare Psalm
lxxviii. 13. LXX. In Ezra iii. 11. LXX. the substantives
alvoe and dvflojUoXoyrjo-te are united, so as to indicate that they
are not precisely synonymous ; and it may be objected to the
second meaning, that an infant would scarcely have been sensible
to an expression of gratitude. At all events, there is an ellipsis
in the construction. Plutarch, iEmil. p. 260. B. dvOopoXoyEla
Oai riva xdpiv. Diod. Sic. p. 45. dvOopoXoyElaOai o" fjv dvay-
Kalov Kal rag Kara pipog dp-Erdg avroii. Parkhurst. — [Wet-
stein, Schleusner.] In the end of the verse the construction is
transposed, and should properly run thus : rolg iv 'lEpovaaXr)p
7rpoaSExopivoig Xvrpwaiv. Some few MSS. read rov 'lapai)X,
and ev rid 'Io-parjX, by which the sense is not altered, but the
authorities for the received text are unquestionable. Grotius,
Campbell. Ver. 40. x™P'c Qiov. Many commentators understand by
these words, after the Hebrew idiom noticed on Mark xi. 22., an
extraordinary comeliness ; and that the historian points to that
graceful dignity in our Lord's manner which at once engaged
the love and commanded the respect of all who heard him. That
Xapte will admit of this sense, particularly in regard to elegance
of speech, is clear from Luke iv. 22. Ephes. iv. 29. Col. iv. 6.
and there are several allusions in the Gospels to an extraordinary
authority in our Lord's address, blended with the most conde
scending sweetness. Compare Matt. vii. 28, 29. Mark \. 22.
Luke iv. 22, 32. John vii. 46. But gracefulness of speech can
scarcely be intended here in relation to a new-born babe ; and it
is further observable, that the grace of God, xdpte Qeov, when
not used for the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost, always means
in the N. T. his favour or affection to men, as in Acts iv. 33.
2 Cor. vi. 1. ix. 14. and elsewhere. Besides, in v. 52. infra, the
Evangelist, speaking of Christ at twelve years old, relates, that
as he grew in years he increased in favour (xdpiri) with God,
which can mean nothing more than that the affection of his Fa
ther, which was manifest from his childhood, encreased with his
ripening age. Whitby, Parkhurst, Doddridge. — [Wet
stein, Campbell, Macknight, Raphelius.]
Ver. 42. irwv SdiSEKa. By the Jewish canons parents were
required to instruct their children, at the age of twelve years, in
the trade for which they were intended. Chetubb. p. 50. Let a
man deal gently with his son till he come to be twelve years old;
but from that time let him descend with him into his way of
living. There is a tradition also that Moses was taken from his
father's house at twelve years old ; and Ignatius observes, in

LUKE II. 46. 49. 485
Epist. ad Magnes. 'SoXopwv SwSEKaErijg Kplaiv iirl ralg yv-
vaiS,tv iirotriaaro. So also Joseph. Ant. V. 10. 4. 'S.apovtiXog
Si irEirXripiOKwg 'irog rjSrj SwSiKarov irpoEtprirEVE. The Rabbins
also state, that under this age they were called D\DZ2p, ketanim,
i. e. little ones ; and afterwards D'HnJ, necharim, or children.
We may observe by the way, however, that the word "irO, ne-
char, is sometimes used for those under this age, as in Judg. xiii.1
24. 1 Sam. i. 24. Hos. xi. 1.3. At the same time it is certain that
children then became amenable to the law ; and that they were
inured to fasting, in order to prepare them for the exercise on the
great day of atonement. See the Talmud, in Joma, p. 82, 1.
and Abenezra on Gen. xvi. 14. It is more than probable, there
fore, that after this age they were looked upon as bound to ap
pear, with all the men of Israel, at the celebration of the three
great annual festivals in Jerusalem ; of which, and of their mode of
travelling on these occasions, in. companies, (iv awbSlaig,v. 44.)
see Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 306. 450. The attendance of
women upon these solemnities was not perhaps indispensable ;
but the more pious seem to have made it a duty to be present at
least at the passover. Thus Hannah, in 1 Sam. i. 7. Grotius,
Lightfoot, Wetstein, Doddridge.
Ver. 46. iv piaw ribv SiSaaKaXwv. Besides the chambers in
which the Sanhedrim and the other courts of judicature were held,
there was a hall in the Temple, in which it was customary for the
disciples, or any person present, to enquire of the doctors re
specting any doubtful matter in the law. There is a Talmudic
story, in Taanith, p. 67. 4. of a disciple who interrogated R.
Gamaliel, Of what kind is the Evening Prayer ? To whom he
said : To-morrow, when I come into the Consistory, do thou
come forth, and question me about this matter. Upon extraor
dinary occasions the same custom prevailed even in the Sanhe
drim, and the members of the council sometimes admitted the en
quirer to a seat upon the same bench with themselves. The
admiration excited by the conversation of Jesus may readily be
supposed to have procured him this honour ; nor is it reasonable
to infer that he would have so far violated the rules of modesty
and decorum as to seat himself there uninvited, for the purpose of
joining in their debates. Lightfoot, Doddridge. Of the ex
pression peO' i)pipag rpiig see on Matt, xxvii. 63. and of the verb
i&arripi, in the next verse, on Matt. xii. 23.
Ver. 49. . iv rolg tov irarpog pov, There is some ambiguity in
this expression. The E. T. renders about my Father' s business.
To this effect many- of the commentators supply the ellipsis by
irpdypaat, and a variety of examples might be adduced in which
stvat ev rivt signifies to be engaged in any occupation. Prov.
xxiii. 17. LXX. iv <pb(5to Kvptov tcr^i oXrjv rrjv ripipav. 1 Tim.

486 LUKE II. 51. III. 1.
iv. 15. ravra pEXira' iv rovroig 'iaOi. Horat. Epist. I. 1. 11.
Quid verum atque decens euro, et rogo, et omnis in hoc sum.
Compare John ix. 4. But the knowledge that Jesus would be
well employed could not, as the connection in this instance seems
to imply, have directed his parents where to find him. It is,
therefore, preferable to supply olKnpaai, .which is no less fre
quently omitted than irpdypaai; as, for instance, in Esth. v. 10.
vi. 12. vii. 9. Ecclus. xiii. 10. LXX. John xix. 27. So Theocr.
Idyl. II. 76. rd AiiKiiivog. Joseph, c. Apion. I. 18. iv rolg tov
Aiog. Theophylact explains ev rt£ vat$ avroii ; and so Origen,
Euthymius, and others of the Fathers. There may possibly be
an allusion to the prophecy in Mai. iii. 1 . the nature of which his
mother did not comprehend. Whitby, Hammond, Kuinoel,
Wetstein, Elsner, &c- — [Rosenmuller, Valckmsr, &c]
Ver. 51. r)v inroraaaopEvog avrolg. See on Matt. xiii. 55,
In this subjection to his parents our Lord has left us an encou
raging example of filial duty, and of useful industry. Mack
night. Of the word rjXtKta see on Matt. vi. 26. In the next verse
it clearly denotes stature, since it would be unnecessary to relate
that he advanced in years. The phrase 7rpoKoVr£tv ev nvt is a
metaphor borrowed from the felling of trees, in order to clear a
passage. Hence it denotes to advance, whether in age, ac
quirements, or otherwise. Diod. Sic. XI. 87. 7rpoK6Vrav ev Trai
ls t'a.

CHAPTER III.
Contents: — Commencement of the Baptist's ministry, vv. 1 —
18. [Matt. iii. 1. Mark i. 2.] The cause of his subsequent
imprisonment, vv. 19, 20. [Matt. xiv. 3. Mark vj. 17.] The
baptism of Christ, vv. 21, 22. [Matt. iii. 13. Mark i. 9.] The
genealogy of Christ by his mother, vv. 23 — 38.
Verse 1. ev Era Si k. r. X. Of the argument arising from the
connecting particle Si, and of the general evidence that this Gos
pel did not originally begin with this third chapter, as the So-
cinians contend, see Home's Introd. Vol. IV. pp. 272. sqq. 300.
[on the fifteenth year of tiberius, and the date of our
lord's baptism.
The fifteenth year of Tiberius, as corresponding with the com
mencement of John the Baptist's ministry, has given rise to con-

LUKE III. 1. 487
siderable difficulty in settling the chronology of the nativity of
Christ. It appears from Luke iii. 23. that Jesus, when baptized
by John in Jordan, was about thirty years of age. Now Justin
Martyr has observed that the expression uktei irwv rptaKovra is
somewhat indeterminate, implying not exactly thirty years, but
rptaKovra srrj TrXftova rj Kat EXdtrtrova, thirty years more or less.
The later fathers have generally assumed that Christ was less
than thirty years of age when baptized, lest the assertion of the
Evangelist should militate with their erroneous opinion, that he
was only thirty when crucified ; and modern writers, taking the
full liberty which the ambiguity allows, have varied from twenty-
five to thirty-five, as the limits of which the phrase is capable.
Hence, by reckoning backwards from the baptism to the birth of
Christ, and taking it for granted that he was baptized in the
same year of the reign of Tiberius in which John commenced his
ministry, a variety of dates have been assigned to the nativity,
all of them more or less falsified by their disagreement with one
or other of the chronological data, which the Evangelists have
given for approximating to the true period of this event. In
order to avoid the difficulties thus arising, various expedients
were resorted to ; and some have imagined that the baptism of
Christ took place only a few months, some a year and upwards,
and some even three years and a half subsequent to the call of
John in the wilderness. Still a great uncertainty existed, till
at length the period of Herod's death, as deducible from the
history of Josephus, was made subservient to the purpose of as
certaining the chronology of our Saviour's life. Since that time
the age of Christ at his baptism has been considered only as a
subordinate instrument in the settlement of the dispute ; by which
the date of Christ's birth, already established, may be confirmed,
and the acknowledged ambiguity of which will admit of a little
liberty in bending it to a correspondence with our previous
conclusions. At the same time, the expression must not be over
strained ; and it is scarcely probable that St. Luke would have
used the word thirty, when he might, with equal ease, have said
that he was about twenty-nine or thirty-one years of age, or
otherwise, as the case might be, unless he had meant that he had
lived more than twenty-nine and less than thirty-one years. Now
the construction (see the note on v. 23.) seems to indicate that
Jesus was just above thirty when baptized, and we have already
seen that he was born in April J. P. 4709. But 4709 + 30 =
4739 ; hence we must date his baptism between the month of
April J. P. 4739 and the month of April J. P. 4740. We have
to turn to the Gospels, therefore, in search of such information
as may lead to the point within these limits, on which to fix the
event in question.
It appears from John ii. that Jesus, in conformity with the
law, was at Jerusalem on the first Passover after his baptism.

488 LUKE III. 1.
In the interval there occurred his Temptation, which lasted forty
days ; John's testimony to Jesus on two successive days ; the call
of Philip and Nathaniel ; the marriage in Cana ; and the return of
Jesus to Capernaum, not many days after which he went up to
Jerusalem. Of the precise time occupied by these transactions
it is impossible to speak with certainty, but sixty or seventy days
at least are thus clearly accounted for ; so that Jesus must have
been baptized at least two months before the Passover of J. P.
4740, i. e. he was baptized before the month of February in that
year. Now Epiphanius has preserved a tradition (Haer. LI. 16.)
which fixes our Saviour's baptism to the month ' of November ;
and this date is not only uncontradicted, but has a positive re
commendation in its favour. The improbability of John's bap
tizing in the middle of winter is a strong objection to the month
of January, but none whatever, in the climate of Judea, to the
month of November. It should seem also, from the Gospel nar
rative of our Lord's temptation, which followed immediately after
his baptism, that the cravings of hunger which he was then ex
periencing gave rise to the deceiver's attempt to induce him to
turn the stones into bread ; and that he still continued an hun
gered at the close of his conflict with the adversary. If the
temptation had commenced in January, forty days would have in
troduced the Spring, and the herbs would have furnished suste
nance to our Lord, without the necessity of a miraculous supply.
This would have been far otherwise had he entered the wilder
ness in November, and to this month therefore of the year J. P.
4739, we may fairly assign the event in question.
Here we fall in with the difficulty arising from the chronology
of the fifteenth year of Tiberius, which, reckoning from the death
of Augustus, on the 19th of August J. P. 4727, did not com
mence until the 19th of August J. P. 4741, nearly two years after
November J. P. 4739, some time before which the word of the
Lord came to John in the wilderness. It appears, however, that
Tiberius was admitted into a participation of the empire during
the life-time of Augustus ; a similar decree having been passed in
favour of Titus also in the reign of Vespasian, and of Trajan in
that of Nerva. See Plin. Paneg. §. 8. Sueton. Tib. §. 20. Paterc.
II. 121. Tacit. Ann. I. 3. Dio. Cass. LVII. p. 802. There is
some difficulty in settling the precise date of this joint reign of
Tiberius ; but from a fair computation of the time, which may
fairly be allotted to the transactions which occurred between his
inauguration and the death of Augustus, it seems most likely to
have commenced between two and three years before this latter
event, about the conclusion of the year J. P. 4724. Taking it for
granted, therefore, that the years of Tiberius in St. Luke are the
years of his proconsular empire, the fifteenth year of this empire
Avill.be included between the conclusion of J. P. 4738 and the
conclusion of J. P. 4739 ; and, as Jesus was baptized in No-

LUKE III. 1. 489
vember J. P. 4739, if the word of the Lord did not come to
John more than ten months before the baptism of Jesus, it did
come to him in the fifteenth year of Tiberius. We may fairly
infer from the Gospels that no interval, or at least a very short
one, elapsed between the time when the word of God came unto
John and the commencement of his ministry. From the immense
numbers which flocked to him it may also be fairly conjectured,
that his preaching about Jordan occupied some months ; and it
appears that in those days, i. e. while he was baptizing, Jesus
came from Galilee, and was baptized of him. Now winter does
not seem a very fit or natural season for beginning to baptize,
and entirely immerse in water, so great a multitude of converts,
as appear to have flocked to John ; so that it is much more rea
sonable to suppose that the revelation was communicated to John
in the summer or spring, or about six months before the baptism
of Jesus, in November. This inference is considerably strength
ened by other circumstances. On the day after the celebrated
message of the Baptist, in bearing witness to Jesus, he alluded
to his baptism as already past, (John i. 32.) and consequently his
temptation in the wilderness,' which immediately followed that
event, must have preceded the mission of the Levites. Our
Lord's baptism, therefore, must have happened very early in the
ministry of his forerunner ; for it is natural to suppose that the
general expectation of the Messiah then entertained would make
the Jews anxious to ascertain who the Baptist was ; and had he
been baptizing ten or twelve months before Jesus appeared at the
Jordan, it amounts almost to a certainty, that an official enquiry
would have been made into his pretensions long before, instead
of forty days after the event in question. Fixing, then, the com
mencement of John's ministry about six months earlier than the
baptism of Christ, we have Nov. J. P. 4739 — six months = May
J. P. 4739, for the date of the former. On the supposition,
therefore, that St. Luke computed the years of Tiberius from the
beginning of his proconsular government, the word of God came
to John in the fifteenth year thereof, as stated by the Evangelist.
It is an important objection, however, to this conclusion, that
no Latin historian has given the slightest hint of any other com
mencement of the reign of Tiberius than that which is dated
from the death of Augustus ; and that the title of Imperator was
never conferred upon him, as it was upon Titus, by Pliny, Jo
sephus, and Philostratus, before the death of Vespasian. To this
it is replied, that Titus had an equal share in the entire govern
ment of his father, whereas that of Tiberius extended only to the
provinces and armies. It is no wonder, therefore, that the Ro
man historians, who were accustomed only to the computation
which was acknowledged at Rome, should have invariably calcu-.
lated from the epoch of the death of Augustus, whereas St. Luke,
who was a native of Antioch, where the authority of Tiberius was

490 LUKE III. I.
equal to that of Augustus, would naturally date from the moment
in which the decree of the senate sanctioned that equality. But
here again another difficulty presents itself. There are two An
tiochian medals, which were respectively struck in the first and
third years of this reign, dating from the commencement of the
sole empire, after the death of Augustus. These medals, how
ever, do not necessarily exhibit the opinion of the Antiochian
people, but only of the Antiochian mint. Now it appears from
Tacit. Ann. I. 8. Dio Cass. LVII. p. 603. that Tiberius took
great pains to obliterate the date of his proconsular empire, inas
much as he was unwilling to have it thought that he owed his
greatness to the adoption of Augustus, and the intrigues of his
mother, rather than the choice of the people. If this was the
case, the wish of the emperor would necessarily be a law to the
public mint, while St. Luke might be careless, or entirely ig
norant of the circumstance. Had the Evangelist fixed the date
positively to the fifteenth year of the sole empire of Tiberius,
there would have been no room for doubt or disputation ; but
not only has he omitted this limitation, but he has employed a
word which does not signify reign or empire at all. The word
is not dpxrj or fiaaiXEia, but r)yEpovia, and though it does not
itself recur in the N. T. the cognate words r)yEpovEvw and rjys-
pwv are frequently to be met with, and always in the sense of a
subordinate authority. See Matt. x. 8. Mark xiii. 9. John xix.
15. Acts xxvi. 30. 1 Pet. ii. 13. The same distinction is observ
able in Josephus, passim. Upon the Antiochian coins also we
read 2EBAST0Y Katrjapoe ; and though the omission of this
title by St. Luke is not decisive of the question, it should rather
seem to point to a period at which it had not yet been assumed.
Be it observed, moreover, that the Christian Fathers, almost with
one consent, fix the crucifixion of our Lord to the fifteenth year
of the sole empire of Tiberius, at the same time that they allow
more than a single year for the duration of his ministry. It is
clear, therefore, that they could not think that the fifteenth year
of the government of Tiberius, mentioned by St. Luke, referred
to his reign as sole and supreme emperor.
There is yet another difficulty connected with this hypothesis.
It appears from Joseph. Ant. XVIII. 6. that Pontius Pilate was
dismissed from his government by Vitellius, at the suit of the Sa
maritans, after passing ten years in Judea, and sent to Rome to
answer the charges brought against him ; but that Tiberius died
before he arrived thither. Hence it is inferred, with consider
able plausibility, that Pilate had not been removed above two
months before the death of Tiberius, which took place in March
J. P. 4750. But Jan. J. P. 4750— ten years = Jan. J. P. 4740.
Therefore Pilate entered upon the government of Judea about
January J. P. 4740, which does not correspond with the fifteenth
year of Tiberius. After the deposition of Pilate, however, Vi-

LUKE III. 2. 491
tellius proceeded to Jerusalem, where he arrived at the time of
the celebration of the feast of the Passover. This Passover was
doubtless that which succeeded the removal of Pilate ; but it was
not, as the objectors suppose, that which succeeded the death of
Tiberius. The train of events which are recorded by Josephus
between these two occurrences can scarcely have occupied less
than a year in passing, so that the feast during which the
tidings of the death of Tiberius arrived at Jerusalem, must have
been the second Passover or Pentecost after the removal of
Pilate. It will be easy to account for Pilate's not reaching home
until more than a year after his deposition, by taking into consi
deration the dilatory character of the emperor, and the natural
repugnance of the offending procurator to appear before him.
The Passover, therefore, immediately succeeding Pilate's re
moval was that of J. P. 4749, and J. P. 4749—10 = J. P.
4739. Hence Pilate was appointed Procurator of Judea before
the Passover of J. P. 4739 ; and therefore before the commence
ment of John's ministry in the fifteenth year of the government
of Tiberius. Benson, Lardner, Le Clerc, Macknight. Of
the other governments mentioned in this verse see Home.]

Ver. 2. lir 'Apx'EpEwe "Awa Kat Kaldipa. There is an ap
parent indeterminateness, and some difficulty, in the use of the
title of high-priest, both in Josephus and the Gospels. See Jo
seph. Ant. II. 21. IV. 16. 18. V. 33. XX. 6. in all which places
either the plural dp^ttpEte is employed, or two persons are jointly
mentioned as bearing the office. Properly there could be only
one high-priest at a time, and the dignity was enjoyed for life ;
but, after the subjugation of Judea by the Romans, great liberties
were taken with the original institution, and the new rulers ap
pointed whom they chose. Some suppose that the election had
been made annual, and that Annas and Caiaphas enjoyed the
office by turns. See John xi. 49. xviii. 13. 24. It appears, how
ever, from Joseph. Ant. XVIII. 2. 2. that Annas had been de
posed in the twelfth year of Tiberius, and was succeeded by
Ismael, Eleazer, and then Simon, after whom Caiaphas entered
upon office in the fifteenth year of the same reign. This succes
sion not only proves that Annas did not share the honour with
Caiaphas, but also that the high-priests of former years did not
retain the title after laying down the office, as some have sup
posed, in order to account for the difficulty in St. Luke. Others
again consider Annas as the sagan or deputy of Caiaphas, and
the title is applied to this officer in Joseph. Ant. XVtI. 6. 4.
But the most probable solution seems to be, that Annas was the
chief of Aaron's family then alive, and regarded as the rightful
high-priest by the Jews, although Caiaphas held the office at the
pleasure of the procurator. See on Matt. xxvi. 57. whence it ap-

492 LUKE III. 5. 11.
pears that he was still in the priesthood at the time of the cru
cifixion. The election, therefore, could not have been strictly
annual, though there were no less than twenty-eight appoint
ments from the time of Herod to the destruction of Jerusalem.
It is almost needless to notice the opinion of Eusebius, in Hist.
Eccl. I. 10., that the expression eV dpx'EpEtov 'A. Kat K. which
seems to be the true reading, includes the whole space of time
between their respective priesthoods, i. e. the period between
the appearance of the Baptist and the crucifixion. Such an in
terpretation could only- have arisen in a preconceived notion, that
the duration of our Lord's ministry did not extend to quite four
years. Hammond, Schoettgen, Paley. — [Whitby, Light
foot, Grotius, Kuinoel.]
Ver. 5. irdaa ipdpayE, k. t. X. Ovid. Amor. II. 16. At vos,
qua veniet, tumidi subsidite montes, Etfaciles curvis vallibus este
vice. St. Luke quotes this passage from Isaiah more at length
than the other Evangelists. In writing for the Gentile converts
it was necessary to include that part of the prophecy which ex
tended the salvation of God and the privileges of the Gospel to
all mankind.
Ver. 11. 6 e'xwv k. r. X. It appears from Matt. iii. 7. that
the Pharisees are here more particularly addressed ; and the ex
hortation is clearly directed against their known uncharitableness,
and their dependence on the ritual observances of the law, in
stead of on the practice of holiness. Under the head of charity,
however, all virtues are included. The various exhortations
which follow do not appear to have been all delivered at the same
time, but rather to have composed the general substance of his
preaching. Of the rEXwvat, and the import of the Baptist's ad
dress to them in v. 13., see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 185.
The verb irpdaaEiv, as applied to the collection or exaction of
money, is very frequent in the best writers. Pind. Olymp. III.
12. irpdaaovri pE tovto OEoSparov XP'°C- Thucyd. VIII. 57.
tpopovg irpdaaEaOai. Xen. Hellen. 1. 3. 7. xpvpara irpd£,wv.
Hence the noun irpaKrwp, Luke xii. 58. Compare also Luke
xix. 23. In the" same way the Latins use perflcere. Plaut.
Asinar. I. 1. Perficito argentum. Somewhat similar is the Eng
lish phrase to make money. The verb SiardaaEiv also is pro
perly used of taxes or tribute appointed by law, as in Thucyd.
III. 70. and elsewhere. With the expression 7rapd rb StarEray-
pivov compare Heb. i. 4. iii. 3. xii. 24. So Thucyd. IV. 6.
XEipwv pEiZwv irapd rrjv KaoWrrjKvtav wpav. It is observable
that the Baptist does not condemn the profession of the publicans,
as the Jews did, in toto, but distinguished between the abuse and
the legal exercise of their calling. Whitby, Lightfoot, Wet
stein, Kypke, Rosenmuller, Grotius, &c.

LUKE III. 14. 493
Ver. 14. arparEvopEvoi. These soldiers were certainly not
Heathens, otherwise the Baptist would have enjoined them to
relinquish idolatry. It has been supposed that Herod had al
ready commenced the war with Aretas, and that the participle
arparEvo/xEvoi is used with particular reference^ to the soldiers at
that time engaged in the service. See Home's Introd. Vol. I.
p. 51. But the Jews attributed Herod's defeat on this occasion
to his cruelty in murdering the Baptist ; so that in this case the
preaching, imprisonment, and death of the Baptist must have fol
lowed each other in much more rapid succession than chrono-
logists, calculating from the marks of time exhibited in the Gos
pels, have been generally led to imagine. The use of the participle
for a noun may not only be explained as a common Hebraism,
but we have aparEvopEvoi for aTpanwrai in classical Greek.
Thucyd. VIII. 65. dig ovte piaOotpopririov arj dXXovg, i) roiig
arparEvopivovg. Herodian. VIII. 7. 20. ovv rolg iiirb BaXj3tvtj»
trrparEvo/iEvoie. Hence the conjecture, however ingenious, and
even possible, is more probably incorrect. Wetstein, Mack
night, Lightfoot. — [Michaelis.] The verb SiaaE'atv is ren
dered in the E. T. to do violence, and some explain it by the
English bully. Others with more probability explain it as sy
nonymous with the Latin concutere, as employed by the Roman
lawyers, in the sense of extorting money, whether by threats or
violence. Thus concussio is said to be si aliquid terror e potes-
tatis illicitce extorquetur et aufertur. Thus 3 Mace. vii. 20.
LXX. SiaaEiaOivrEg rdiv v7rapxovrwv. In a similar sense the
LXX use d7roj3td££tv in Prov. xxii. 22. and EK7rt££siv in 1 Sam.
xii. 3, 4. Tacitus observes that it is the custom of the soldiery,
omnia, tanquam urbes hostium, urere, vastare, rapere : and
hence Herodian. XI. 14. 2. roiig te arpanwrag ekeXevue (IlEp-
nvd%) iraiiaaaOai rr)g irpbg rovg Siiporag vppiwg, kcu urjrE ira'iEiv
nva rwv irapiovrwv. Compare Arist. Equit. 836. and Schol. ad
loc. Grotius, Le Clerc, Wetstein. — [Doddridge, Kui
noel.] In early times, -before the cultivation of figs had been
carried to any extent, the Athenians enacted a law to prevent
their exportation. This law being yet unrepealed, although ren
dered useless by the increased supply of the fruit, gave rise to
various malicious informations against persons who transgressed
it ; and from this circumstance any busy informer was popularly
called avKotpdvrrtg, from <tvkov and ipaivEiv. Hence the verb
avKoipavrqv came by degrees to denote to injure or oppress, whe
ther by calumny , false witness , fraud, or violence. In the LXX
it represents the Hebrew pttty in Gen. xliii. 18. Job xxxv. 9.
Psalm lxxii. -4. cxix. 121. 134. Prov. xiv. 31. xxviii. 3. 16.
Ecclus. iv. 1. And it signifies to wrong, to injure, in Luke xix.
8. Whitby, Hammond, Grotius.
Ibid. dpKElaOE rolg bipwvlotg iipwv. In ancient times a sol
dier's pay consisted in their food only ; and that of the Roman

494 LUKE III. 23.
soldiers, besides an allowance of money, included victuals also.
Compare Caesar. B. G. I. 23. 1. Hence the term btpwviov de
noted military pay or wages generally. With the Baptist's ex
hortation we may compare that of Josephus, de Vita sua, §. 47.
avpfioiiXEvov (rolg arpanwraig) irpbg jurj^Eva ju/jte ttoXeiieiv, i^rjrE
dp7rayrj XapfidvEtv rag x<*JpaC> aXXd o-kjjvovv Kara to iriSlov
dpKOvpivovg rolg iavriov itpoSioig. We find also among the ex
communicate in the Constit. Apost. IV. 6. arpanwrrig avKOtpdv-
rrje, pr) dpKOvpEvog rolg bipwvioig, dXXd roiig Trivrrrag Staasitov.
Ver. 23. kui aiirbg rjv 6 'Irjrj-ove k. r. X. There has been much
discussion in respect both to the meaning and the construction
of this passage. Some connect the participle div with dpxopai,
and render the passage beginning to be as it were thirty, i. e.
just past his twenty-ninth year. The harshness and inelegance
of this syntax is an obvious impediment to its reception ; and in
deed there can be no doubt that r)v is properly referred to dpxb-
psvog, as most of the older commentators have supposed. At the
same time the meaning cannot be that Jesus was entering upon
his thirtieth year, for in this case the Evangelist would unques
tionably have written Erove rpiaKoarov. Neither can it be ad
mitted that dpxbpEvog is redundant. It appears rather to in
dicate the commencement of some period, whatever that period
may be. Now it may be inferred, though not positively proved,
from Numb. iv. 3. 47. 1 Chron. xxiii. 3. that thirty was the age
of admission to the Jewish priesthood, and the inference is con
firmed by the Rabbinical writers. It seems highly probable,
therefore, that Christ was just entering upon the completion of
thirty years ; and the construction, when properly filled up,
strongly favours the supposition : Kat avrbg b 'Irjtrove rjv dp^o-
juEvoe (Eivai) airjEt (airb) irOiv rpiaKovra, £iv, dig ivopiZETO, k. t. X.
The word evo/xi^eto has been thought to mark the custom above
referred to ; but the arrangement of the words will not bear this
connexion, not to mention that vEvoptarai would rather have been
used. There is evidently a tacit allusion to the divinity of Christ,
who was only the reputed son of Joseph, being indeed the
Son of God. With respect to the use of the preposition as
supplied to complete the ellipsis, it can scarcely mean any thing
else than that Jesus was beginning to he from or above or more
than thirty years of age ; and in this sense it is frequently used
in reference to time. Thus we meet with dirb Se'iitvov, after
supper, and still more analogously, dirb iraiSiov, from childhood.
It only remains to be observed, that some commentators refer
dpxojusvoe to rfje SiaKoviag understood — Jesus when he began
his ministry was about thirty years of age. But the text affords
no ground for such a substitution ; and in Acts i. 22., which is
adduced in support of it, the words to be supplied are evidently
EtrxEX0Etv Kat 'e%eX0eIv from the preceding verse. Epiphanius

LUKE IV. 11, 495
gives the passage thus : Haer. XXX. 29. rjv Si 'Uaoiig dpxbpE-
vog Elvai dig iribv rpiaKOvra, d>v vlbg, dig ivopiZEro, 'ltoai)ip. To
give dpxouEvoe the sense of vTroratro-ottEvoe in Luke ii. 51. is
scarcely reconcileable with that simplicity of style for which
St. Luke is so eminently remarkable. Benson, Bos, Grotius,
Lightfoot. — [Whitby, Campbell, &c. &c] Of the genealogy
of Christ see on Matt. i. 1. With- respect to that which follows,
the insertion of the word Ka't'vdv in v. 36. has occasioned much
difficulty, as Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, and father of Sola, is
not found in any Scripture genealogy. The best solution, be
cause it does not violate the text, is, that Cainan was a surname
of Sala, and that the names should be read together thus : — the
son of Heber, the son of Sala Cainan, the son of Arphaxad.
A. Clarke.

CHAPTER IV.
Contents: — Tlie temptation, vv. 1 — 13. [Matt. iv. 1. Mark i.
12.] Christ's return to Galilee, and his preaching in the
Synagogue of Nazareth, vv. 14 — 30. The dcemoniac healed
at Capernaum, vv. 31 — 37. [Mark i. 21.] The cure of
Peter's wife's mother, and other miracles, vv. 88 — 44. [Matt.
viii. 14. Mark i. 29.]
Verse 14. slg rrjv TaXtXalav. This visit to Galilee was sub
sequent to the death of the Baptist. In the interim, since the
temptation, a series of transactions are omitted by St. Luke,
which are recorded in the four first chapters of St. John's Gos
pel. Some have supposed that the precise time which elapsed
between the baptism and the preaching of Christ in the synagogue
of Nazareth (v. 16.) may be readily ascertained, on the supposi
tion that the passage from Isaiah lxi. 1., which he read and ap
plied to himself, was the section of the prophets appointed for the
day. It appears that the section in which this passage occurs,
falls to be read on the same day with the fiftieth section of the
law. Now the first section of the law was read on the first Sab
bath of the month Tisri, or September, (Neh. viii. 2.) so that
the fiftieth section would be read about the last Sabbath in
August. Hence, the event in question took place about nine
months after our Lord's baptism. Of the synagogue, its service,
&c. see Home's Introduction, and more particularly in reference
to this passage, Vol. III. p. 458. It is by no means certain,
however, that the prophecy in question was the proper lesson of
the day; for, in reading the prophets, the reader frequently

496 LUKE IV. 18. 22.
turned from passage to passage for the better illustration of his
subject. In all probability, however, Christ had been appointed
by the minister of the congregation to read the Prophets, as being
a member of the synagogue of Nazareth ; or it may be, that his
celebrity as a prophet may have obtained for him permission to
address the people. Macknight, Lightfoot, &c.
Ver. 18. E'xpt<7£' ije EvayyEXiaaaOai. In these words there is
an evident allusion to the reason for which our Lord was called
Christ, and his religion denominated the Gospel. The prophecy
is from Isaiah lxi. 1 . and its application to the Messiah is ac
knowledged by Kimchi, and the generality of the Jewish writers.
Jesus appealed to its fulfilment in himself, as a sufficient reply to
the Baptist's disciples in Matt. xi. 5. where see the note ; and of
the difference between the Hebrew and the LXX version, from
which the citation is made by St. Luke, see Home's Introd. Vol.
II. p. 214. note. The clause d7ro<TTstXat TEOpavapivovg iv atpi-
<TEt, which is found neither in the Hebrew or the LXX, is sup
posed by some to be a marginal explanation of the preceding ;
but it seems rather to have been inserted by our Lord himself
from Isaiah lviii. 6., the custom of the synagogue allowing the
teacher to illustrate one passage by another of the same prophet.
In order to reconcile the LXX, which gives recovery of sight to
the blind, with the Hebrew, which has freedom to the imprisoned,
it may be remarked, that it was a custom in the East to put out
the eyes of their prisoners, as in the instances of Samson, Judg.
xvi. 21. and Zedekiah, 2 Kings xxv. 7. Besides the literal, the
prophecy throughout is capable of a spiritual interpretation,
which extends to all nations and ages of the world ; but the ana
logy is too obvious to need illustration. It is highly probable
that the custom of preaching from a text of Scripture, which
now universally prevails, derived its origin from the authority of
this example. Whitby, Lightfoot, Grotius, Macknight, &c.
— [Michaelis.]
Ibid. awTErpippivovg ri)v KapSiav. The broken-hearted, or
contrite. See Psalm li. 17. Diod. Sic. XI. 59. <rvvrptj3£vrEe
rolg ippovripaai Std rb piyEOog rr/g avpipopdg. In the next verse
there is an allusion to the year of Jubilee, of which see Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 325. The verbal SsKrbg is found in no pro
fane writer, but it recurs in v. 24. Acts x. 35. 2 Cor. vi. 2. Phil.
iv. 18. Hesych. SsKrog' dpEarog. Wetstein, Grotius.
Ver. 22. ipapriipow avre^j. The verb paprvpslv frequently
signifies to give testimony of admiration, to extol, as in Luke xi.
48. John iii. 26._Acts vi. 3. x. 22. So .Elian. V. H. I. 30. iroX-
XaKte yoliv avnd Kal 6 nroXf/uatoe ipaprvpEt, k. t. X. Here also
some commentators would so render it ; but the wonder of our
Lord's countrymen seems to have been the effect of doubt rather

LUKE IV. 23. 25. 497
than approbation ; and the testimony which they could not re
fuse to the wisdom and benevolence of his doctrine, was vitiated
by the prejudices with which they regarded his low condition
and humble parentage. These prejudices, our Lord tells them,
would not only prevent their reception of his doctrine, but would
shut their eyes against the clearest evidence, should he conde
scend to repeat among them the miracles which he had lately
performed in Capernaum ; and, in order to shew that those who
are nearest to the means of grace are often least inclined to profit
by them, and therefore undeserving of them, he adduces the ex
amples of the widow of Sarepta, (1 Kings xvii. 9.) and Naaman,
(2 Kings v. 14.) to whom Elijah and Elisha were sent in pre
ference to the Israelites, whose wickedness rendered them less
worthy of their services. Our Lord instances these two Hea
thens in his first sermon at the opening of his ministry, thereby
indirectly announcing the admission of Gentiles as well as Jews
to the privileges of the Gospeli Hence their indignation against
him, which rendered it necessary for him to effect his escape
from the midst of them ; perhaps by making himself invisible.
The words of the Evangelist seem to imply some supernatural
exertion of his power, though its precise nature is not recorded.
See also on Matt. xiii. 56, 57. Whitby, Lightfoot, Pearce,
Rosenmuller. — [Campbell, Wakefield.]
Ver. 23. larpi, OEpdirEvaov asavrov. This proverb is of fre
quent occurrence in the Jewish and other oriental writers. It
occurs in Bereschith R. §. 23. Tanchuma, p. 4, 2. and in its
obvious sense applies to those who pretend to instruct others in
matters with which they are themselves unacquainted. We meet
with it in this application also in /Esch. Prom. 482. KaKoe S'
larpbg wv rig, Eig voaov YIeowv dOvpElg, Kal aEavrbv ovk £X£tC
Evpstv biroioig ipappaKOig tdaipog. Eurip. Fragm. ctXXwv larpbg,
avrbg 'iXKEai j3pva>v. Hence Sulpic. ad Cic. Epist. Div. IV. 5.
Neque imitare malos medicos, qui in alienis morbis profitentur se
tenere medicince scientiam, ipsi se curare non possunt. Compare
Ovid. Met. VII. 561. The meaning of the saying in this pas
sage is somewhat different, and refers to those who shew more
favour to strangers than to their own kindred. So Virgil : Hanc
primum tutare domum. Grotius, Wetstein. Our Lord's mi
racles in Capernaum, to which St. Luke alludes, are related by
St. Matthew and St. Mark.
Ver. 25. Errj rpia koI pi)vag 'e%. According to the history in
1 Kings xviii. 1. the rain fell again in the third year. St. Luke's
account, however, is supported by James v. 17. and it may be re
conciled with the O. T. In Palestine it rains only twice a year,
in April and October ; so that by adding the preceding six months
to the three years during which there was neither the first nor
vol. i. k k

498 LUKE IV. 29. V. 2.
the latter rain, the difficulty is at once removed. Our Lord
spoke, in all probability, in accordance with a tradition current at
the time. The particle we, rendered by the E. T. when, is equi
valent to liiarE, so that ; the drought being the cause of the famine.
Lightfoot, Wetstein, Grotius.
Ver. 29. KaraKpnpvtaai avrov. Of precipitation, as a punish
ment, see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 155. Here, however, the
attempt was only the effect of tumultuary excitement. Of the
word oippvg, denoting the brow of a hill, see my note on Hom.
II. Y. 151. and of Hovaia, in v. 32. on Matt. vii. 29.

CHAPTER V.
Contents : — The miraculous draught of fishes, and the call of
Andrew, Peter, James, and John, vv. 1 — 11. [Matt. iv. 18.
Mark i. 16.] A leper cleansed, vv. 12 — 15. [Matt. viii. 2.
Mark i. 40.] The cure of the Paralytic, vv. 16—26. [Matt.
ix. 2. Markii. 1.] The calling of Matthew, vv. 27 — 39.
[Matt. ix. 9. Mark ii. 13.]
Verse 2. Kal eISe Svo irXola k. t. X. From the circumstance
that St. Luke has related this occurrence after the miracles re
corded in Malt. iv. 23. sqq. and that some additional particulars
are inserted, some commentators have considered it as distinct from
the parallel passages in Matthew and Mark. But it is not un
usual with the Evangelists to anticipate events, and to give them
with greater or less fulness, as their respective purposes may seem
to require. Similar histories should therefore be multiplied with
caution, and in the present instance the points of resemblance
are so numerous and striking as almost to prove identity. The
place is the same, the persons concerned in a very similar trans
action are the same, the speech of our Lord is also the same, and
so is the result of the incident. In stating that the fishers had
been washing their nets, (diriirXvvav rd StKrva) St. Luke merely
expresses the purpose for which they cast them into the sea, as
mentioned by the other Evangelists. The MSS. vary between
i7r£VXwav, eVXvvov, and etteVXvvov. Whitby, Hammond, Gro
tius, Lightfoot, Le Clerc, Wetstein, &c. — [Macknight,
Whiston, &c]
Ibid, iarwra. Hom. II. Q. 43. vijEe Se rot ayx1 OaXdaang
"Earaa1. Caesar, B. C. III. 28. Nostrce naves in anchoris con-
stiterunt. Campbell improperly translates aground. The verb
In-avdyEtv, vv. 3, 4., and Kardyav, v. 11., are nautical terms, sig-
10 6

LUKE V. 5, 6. 8. 499
nifying to put out to sea, and to make the land, respectively ; the
word vaiiv being sometimes omitted, and at others supplied.
Herod. VII. 100. avayayovrse riaaEpa irXiOpa dirb tov aiyiaXoii.
Xen. Hell. VI. 2. 16. iiravr)yayEv to KEpae dirb rrig yrje. Com
pare 2 Mace. xii. 4. LXX. The verb x«Xdv occurs in the sense
of demittere, in Acts ix. 25. 2 Cor. xi. 33. Palairet, Grotius,
Schleusner. Ver. 5. s7rt<rrdra. This word occurs in none of the other
Gospels: St. Matthew, for the most part, has KvptE, and St.
Mark StSdo-KaXE. It properly signifies an overseer, or superin
tendent, and so it is explained by Thom. Mag. StSdo-KaXoe, Xo-
ywv Kat dpErrje' £7rtirrdrr)e Si, 'ipywv. In this sense it is fre
quently used by the LXX ; such also may be its import here,
though elsewhere it is convertible with StSdo-KaXoe. Compare
Mark ix. 5. with Luke ix. 33. and see Luke viii. 24. 45. ix. 49.
Grotius. Ver. 6. StEppriywro. E. T. brake. It should rather be ren
dered began to break, as in the next verse fivOiZEaOat, began to
sink ; for without an extension of the miracle a broken net could
not inclose the fishes which they had taken. Gloss, Kuinoel.
Ver. 8. e£eX0£ dV ipov. The phrases eIoeXOeIv s't'e rtva and
HZeXOeIv dirb nvog axe generally employed to denote an entrance
into, and departure from the house of a person, respectively.
Luke i. 28. ElaEXOwv 7rpoe avrrjv. Acts xvi. 40. Eta-rjXflov Eig rr)v
AvStav. So in Latin: Terent. Phorm. V. 1.5. Namque hcec
anus est exanimata, a fratre quce egressa est floras. Hence
there is probably an ellipsis of viwg in this passage. Valcken^er.
Peter's address to our Lord is expressive of a deep sense of his
own unworthiness ; and the terror which he felt arose from the
display of Christ's supernatural power, which indicated his di
vinity. A superstition prevailed among the Jews that the pre
sence of angels, or the manifestation of the divine majesty, fore
boded death, or some approaching calamity. See Gen. xxxii. 30.
Exod. xxiv. 10, 11. xxxiii. 20. Deut. iv. 33. v. 26. Judg. vi. 22.
xiii. 22. Isaiah vi. 5. That Peter should be more sensibly im
pressed with the miracle of the fishes than with those which
Christ had previously performed in Capernaum, may have been
owing to a prevailing idea that the prayers of holy men might
have power to heal the sick, and eject evil spirits, but not to pro
duce an effect so extraordinary as that to which they had now
been witnesses. Whitby, Lightfoot, Le Clerc The verb
7T£pt£XEtv is used, as in the next verse, in 2 Sam. xxii. 5. Psalm
xviii. 5. cxvi. 3. LXX. So Hom. II. A. 79. Odpfiog 8' e'X£v
£t<7opoa>vrae. Virg. ^En. II. 559. At me tumprimum scevus cir-
cumstetit horror. Grotius.
k k2

500 LUKE V. 12. 17. 26. 29. 36. 39.
Ver. 12. Iv piq rwv ttoXewv. Scil. of Galilee: according to
some Bethsaida, ox Chorazin, but more probably it should seem
from Mark ii. 1. Capernaum. To account for the appearance of
a leper in a city, it has been supposed that the lawDnly excluded
them from walled cities : but the expression may perhaps be un
derstood with some latitude, the cure being performed in a field
near the city. Compare Josh. v. 13. x. 10. Whitby. — -[LrGHT-
foot.] The change of construction in v. 14. is similar to that in
Hom. II. O. 346. cited by Longinus, de Sublim. 6. 27. Compare
also II. A. 301. Virg. Mn. IX. 635. Hor. Epist. I. 7. 52. Liv.
I. 13. Quintil. Inst. Orat. IX. 3. Kypke.
Ver. 17. IdaOai avrovg. Not the Pharisees, but the sick.
The pronoun refers to the remoter noun, as in Matt. xi. 1.
Whitby, Grotius.
Ver. 26. irapdSo^a. Plin. Epist. IX. 26. Sunt maxime mira-
bilia, utque Grceci magis exprimunt irapdSo%a. The word is
among the dira% XsyopEva of the N. T. In the former part of
the verse there is no tautology, as some suppose ; but EKaraaig
denotes astonishment at the miracle itself, and tpofiog, reverential
awe at the power which performed it. Compare Mark xvi. 8.
Acts iii. 10.
Ver. 29. Soxvv. A feast : dirb roii Six^aOai, from receiving
the guests. It recurs in Luke xiv. 3. and in Gen. xxi. 8. xxvi.
30. 3 Esdr. iii. 1. Ecclus. xiv. 13. LXX. Diod. Sic. XVII. 106.
v7roSoxrjv iroislaOat. Hesych. Soxv' SeIttvov. Grotius.
Ver. 36. iirifiXripa rb dirb tov Kaivov. In very many MSS.
iirifiXripa is wanting ; and not only is it unnecessary, but it would
scarcely have been written without the article. Either dvOpwirog
must be supplied before, or to 7raXai6v Ipariov after, axiZ^i. The
latter is greatly preferable. Markland.
Ver. 39. Kat ov^Ete iruov k. r. X. Compare Ecclus. ix. 10.
This short parable, which is confined to St. Luke, is sometimes
interpreted as illustrating the difference between the austerities of
the Pharisees and the quietude of the Christians ; or the anti
quity of the law, and the novelty of the law. But it seems to be
nothing more than a continuation of the doctrine held out in the
preceding similitudes, that men cannot be suddenly inured to
fasting and religious austerity. With this sentiment we may com
pare a variety of passages in the classical writers. Hammond. —
[Le Clerc, A. Clarke.] The construction is similar to Soph.
CEd. T. 241 . where <see my note in Pent. Gr. p. 24.

LUKE VI. 1. 501

CHAPTER VI.
Contents: — The disciples pluck the ears of corn on the Sab
bath, vv. 1—5. [Matt. xii. 1. Mark ii. 23.] The withered
hand healed, vv. 6 — 11. [Matt. xii. 9. Mark iii. 1.] The
election of the twelve Apostles, vv. 12 — 19. [Mark iii. 13.]
Our Lord's address to them, vv. 20 — 49. [Matt, v, 1.]
Verse 1. aafifidrw SEvrEpoTrpturtji. The precise meaning of
this term has given rise to considerable disquisition. Some adopt
the opinion of Epiphanius, who supposes that the last day of the
passover 'feast is intended ; the first and last days of all the great
feasts being holy convocations, and subject for the most part to the
sabbatical observances. The sabbatical rest, however, was not
strictly observed on those- days ; and it appears from Exod. xxxv.
2, 3. that food might be dressed on them, though not on common
Sabbaths, from which our Lord would not have failed to deduce
an obvious reason in defence of his disciples. Others, there
fore, have resorted to the day of Pentecost, falling on a Sabbath,
for an explanation of the term. The supporters of this opinion
maintain from John xix. 31. that the r)pipat pEydXat of the great
feasts, (Levit. xxiii. 7. 21. &c.) if they coincided with a Sabbath,
were called irpwra crdj3j3ara, prime Sabbaths. Thus when the
passover so occurred, it would be called 7rptoro7rpwrov, the first
prime Sabbath ; the day of Pentecost SEvrEpoVpotrov ; and the
great day of the feast of Tabernacles rpiToVpwrov. But the har
vest in Judea was gathered in before the feast of Pentecost, so
that at that period of the year they could have met with no corn
in the fields ; a fact which has been attested by travellers and na
turalists both in ancient and modern times. This objection ap
plies yet stronger to the modification of this opinion, that the
Jews had three prime Sabbaths every year, the first after the
feasts of the Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles ; as we have
the first after Epiphany, Easter, and Trinity. After all, nothing
but conjecture can be offered ; but it seems most probable that
the Sabbath intended is the first after the second day of unlea
vened bread; irpwrov dirb rr)g Stvripag, scil. r)pipag rov irdaxa.
This second day of unleavened bread, was that on which the
wave-sheaf was offered, and from it, not from the first day of the
feast, the fifty days were reckoned to the Pentecost. It is very
possible, therefore, that the Sabbaths intervening between this
second day and the Pentecost were called SEvrEpoVpwrov, SsvrE-
poSEVTEpov, SEVTEporpirov, &c. ; and that the day on which the
disciples plucked the ears of corn was the first of these Sabbaths.
Had the incident occurred before the Passover they would have
transgressed two laws instead of one; for until the first sheaf had

502 LUKE VI. 12.
been offered to God it was unlawful to pluck corn at all, (Levit.
xxiii. 14.) and consequently, the censure passed upon them would
not have been confined to the simple violation of the Sabbath.
That it did not- occur after Pentecost has been already shewn,
and the particular Sabbath may have been marked in order to
shew the mitigated nature of the offence committed. The grain
which they plucked was perhaps barley, as the barley harvest
began at the Passover ; but the wheat was at the same time ripen
ing fast, and was generally all reaped by the 20th of May.
Whitby, Doddridge, Scaliger, Macknight, Lightfoot, &c.
— [Beza, Grotius, Hammond, Pearce, &c] The verb tpwx^v
is of extremely rare occurrence. Nicander uses awxuv m Theriac.
590. which the Scholiast explains by rptj3siv. Compare Herod.
IV. 75. In the Codex Beza, v. 5. is placed after v. 10., with the
following extraordinary addition : Trj avry ripipa, OsaadpEvog nva
ipyaZbpEvov r<£ <raj3j3drtj>, eittev aiiTt^' "AvOptoirs, Et juev olSag ri
iroiElg, paKapiog Et- a Se pr) olSag, iirtKaTaparog Kal 7rapaj3drrje
El TOV ,VOjttOV.
1.
Ver. 12. iv ry irpoaEvxv tov 0eov. There exists a difference
of opinion whether this means in prayer to God, as in the E. T.,
or in the proseuche or oratory of God. That 7rpoa-£vx»? will ad
mit of the latter signification may be proved from a variety of
passages in Josephus and other writers, and Juvenal has Latinized
the word in Sat. III. 296. Ede, ubi consistas ; in qua te qucero
proseucha? In Acts xvi. 13. 16., however, where the same
meaning has been assigned to the word, the common version is
decidedly preferable, as it is most probably also in the present
passage. The principal reasons adduced by those who advocate
the other opinion is the use of the genitive roii Qeov for 7rpoe r6v
6e6v, of the verb StavvKTEpEvtv, and of the article before TrpocrEvxrj.
But the genitive, in the first place, is by no means unusual in this
construction. Lys. Orat. 31. 'tKETEiag Qewv. Joseph. Ant. IX.
9. 'liodZag iirl Sir/atv Kal IketeIov tov Qeov Karitpvys. Sail. Cat.
supplicia Deorum. Compare also Soph. CEd. T. 239. Troad.
889. Ion. 638. and see my note on Soph. Ant. 1185. Pent. Gr.
p. 287. Neither is StawKrspEvEtv less applicable to an occupa
tion than to place. Diod. Sic. XIII. 62. StEWKrlpEvov iv rolg
birXotg. Phalar. Epist. ry Xwfiy SievvkHpeve. With respect to
the article, it is not unusual with 7rpotTEvxr) in the sense of
prayer. See Matt. xxi. 22. Acts i. 14. 1 Cor. vii. 5. It is well
known also that the 7rpotTEvxat of the Jews, of which see Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 249. were not situated among mountains, to
which Christ is here said to have retired, but near some river, or the
sea ; and if one of those had been meant, it is not likely that roii
Qeov would have been added, for all oratories were rov 0eov.
Moreover, to pass the night in prayer, without going to an ora
tory, seems to have been a common act of devotion. Thus in

LUKE VI. 20. 22. 503
Berachoth, p. 14, 1. R. Chija affirmed after R. Jochanan:
Whosoever states himself with the words of the Law, and then
passes the night inprayer, shallreceive no ill tidings. Kuinoel,
Schleusner, Kypke, Middleton, Schoettgen. — [Hammond,
Whitby, Campbell, Doddridge, Wetstein, &c] Of the
Apostles see on Matt. x. 2.
Ver. 20. EXsyE- MaKaptot k. t. X. For a reference to the pas
sages in the Sermon on the Mount, as recorded by St. Matthew,
which correspond with those which St. Luke has selected from
it, see the Table at p. 96. supra.
Ver. 22. dtpopiawai. E. T. Separate you from their com
pany. This was the first degree of excommunication among the
Jews; of which see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 149. The ex
pression EKJ3aXEtv we irovrjpov signifies to hold up to ignominy;
and that the name of Christian was covered with the grossest
obloquy and malediction in the early days of the Gospel, we have
the testimony both of Christian and Heathen writers. See Acts
xxiv. 5. xxviii. 22. 1 Pet. iv. 14. 16. James ii. 7. Athenag.
Legat. p. 5. r)plv Si rtj> bvopan diTExOdvEaOE. Just. Mart. Apol.
I. 3. r)plv to ovopa, dig sXsyxov, XapfidvETE. Tertull- Apol. §. 2.
Christianis solis nihil permittitur loqui, quod causam purget,
quod veritatem defendat, quod judicem nonfaciat injustum : sed
illud solum expectatur, quod odio publico necessarium est, con-
fessio nominis, non examinatio criminis. Plin. Epist. XCVII.
Nee mediocriter dubitavi an nomen ipsum, etiamsi flagitiis ca-
reat, an flagitia coharentia nomini puniantur. Wakefield.
Instances of maltreatment received from the Jews by the ancient
prophets, (v. 23.) will be seen in 1 Kings xviii. 4. 2 Chron. xxiv.
21. xxxvi. 16. Neh. ix. 26. and elsewhere in the O. T. He
that would be pleasing to all, flatters their various propensities ;
and thus the false prophets, whom the Jews commended, (v. 26.)
spake to them smooth things, Isaiah xxx. 10. prophesied lies,
because the people loved to have it so, Jer. vi. 14. viii. 11. xiv.
13. Ezek. xiii. 10. 16. Zech. x. 2. and strengthened the hand of
the evil doers, Jer. xxiii. 14. It is a true proverb : Obsequium
amicos, Veritas odium, parit. Hence Senec. Epist. 29. Si te
video celebrem secundis vocibus vulgi, — si, intrante te, clamor,
plausus, et pantomimica ornamenta obstrepuerint, — si tota civi-
tate femince te puerique laudaverint, — quidni ergo tui miserear,
cum sciem, qua: via ad istum favoremferat ? The woes de
nounced in vv. 24. sqq. are not to be found in Matthew : they
are directly opposed to the preceding blessings, and require no
further illustration. It should be remarked, however, that the
interjection oval, as opposed to paKaptoi, is not imprecative, but
affirmative. Of the verb ctTTE'xEtv see on Matt. vi. 2. Whitby,
Campbell, Wetstein.

504 LUKE VI. 30. 35.
Ver. 30. rd ad. Scil. xpvpara. The passage is differently in
terpreted. Some would render the verbs ai'pstv and dirairEiv re
spectively to borrow, and to exact usury, citing Neh. v. 7. LXX.
in support of the sense attached to the latter verb. But usury is
not necessarily implied in this example, but merely the payment
of debts after the year of release, as in Exod. xxi. 2. Deut. xv. 1.
Jer. xxxiv. 14. Ecclus. xx. 14. Others properly render dirat-
teIv to require restitution, still explaining dipovrog of one who
borrows, and is unable to pay. This signification, however, is
wholly unsupported. The verb usually denotes to take by vio
lence, and in this very sense it occurs in the verse next preceding.
That it is not to be otherwise interpreted in the present instance
may be fairly inferred from the connection of the two clauses of
which the verse is composed: — To him who asks, give; and
from him who takes, (i. e. without asking,) do not demand resti
tution. The precept is not to be overpressed. Our Lord would
merely discourage a revengeful and persecuting spirit in regain
ing possessions, of which we are unjustly deprived. Cic. Off. II.
18. Conveniet esse vicinitatibus ei conflniis cequum et facilem :
multa multis de jure suo cedentem, a litibus vero quantum liceat,
et nescio anpauloplus quam liceat, abhorrentem. With respect
to borrowing and lending the Christian's duty is specified in v.
34. Kuinoel, Whitby.— [Le Clerc, Hammond.] For x«P(e>
in v. 32. we have ptaObg in Matt. v. 46., and that the words are
synonymous is evident from v. 35. infra. Compare 1 Pet. ii. 19.
Hom. II. I. 316. Theogn. 305. Dion. Hal. VI. 86. Joseph.
Ant. VI. 14. 4. In the same way the Latins use gratia. Plaut.
Aul. II. 5. 11. stultum et sine gratia est Ibi redefacere, quando
quod facias perit. Hesych. X"P'C dpotfir) Kara EiiEpyEaiav.
Wakefield, Wetstein, Elsner.
Ver. 35. pr)Siv dirsXiriZovTEg. The meaning of this expres
sion is plainly pointed out by its opposite in the preceding verse :
7rap' wv eXtt'iZete diroXafiElv. It is true that aV£X7Tt^Etv com
monly signifies to despair, as in Isaiah xxix. 19. Esth. xiv. 19.
Judith ix, 11. Ecclus. xxii. 22. 2 Mace. ix. 18. LXX. and
hence many would here translate nowise despairing, i. e. of re-
compence from God. But the import of the passage clearly
establishes the correctness of the E. T. hoping for nothing again.
As aVoXafSay is put for XafBslv dirb nvog, so direXirlZEiv may be
for iXTrt^Etv dwo nvog. We have frequent instances of this sepa
ration of the ^ preposition; and so Athen. XV. p. 649. xP&vrai
rip dirEaO'iEiv dvrt tov diro nvog iaO'tEtv. Some would translate
causing despair to no one, i. e. by refusing to lend. But this
sense is unknown to dirEXirtZEtv, and would require priSiva in
stead of pr,Siv. With the sentiment we may compare Senec. de
Benef. I. 1. Est virtus dare beneflcia non utique reditura. III.
14. Qui dat beneficia, Deos imitatur ; qui repetit, fceneratores.

LUKE VI. 38, 39. 505
Whitby, Grotius, Kuinoel, Schleusner, Krebs. — [Camp
bell, Wetstein, Hammond, Pearce.] That Sav£t?Etv does
not here denote, as it sometimes does, to lend upon interest, is
plain from the addition of rd laa in the preceding verse. Our
Lord does not allude to commercial transactions, but to the kindly
and disinterested assistance which we are bound to afford to our
neighbour in distress, from a principle of love to God, and Chris
tian charity one toward another. With v. 35. compare Matt. v.
45. The adjectives d^dptcrroe and irovrjpoe are frequently found
in conjunction. Demosth. de Cor. ovrwg a'xdptcrroe a Kat 7rovrjpoe
ipiiaEt. Lucian. Timon. 48 7rdvr£e dxdpiaroi Kat Trovrjpot. Camp
bell, Wetstein.
Ver. 38. pirpov koXov, irEiriEapivov k. r. X. The phrases here
employed express the different kinds of good measure, according to
the different nature of the thing measured. Some must be pressed
and trodden down ; some shaken together, as the several kinds of
grain ; and some must be running over, as all sorts of liquors.
The expression is proverbial, and of frequent occurrence in the
Rabbinical writings. We find also in Sota, p. 52. the maxim,
with which the verse concludes : With whatever measure a man
metes, men measure to him again. Thus also Hesiod. Op. D.
348. ev piv pETpslaOai irapa ysirovog, ev S a7roSovvat Aiirw rid
pirpto, Kat Xdilov, o'ike Suvrjat. Of the import of the term StSovat
Ete KoX7rovsee Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 402. So Herod. VI.
125. tov koXitov 7rdvra TrXija-d/xEvoe XPvaov' Hor. Sat. II. 3.
71. te talos, Aule, nucesque Ferre sinu laxo, donor e, et ludere
vidi. Macknight, Wetstein, Schoettgen.
Ver. 39. irapa(5oXf)v. This parable does not occur in St.
Matthew's report of the sermon on the mount, but it is found in
Matt. xv. 14., where it is applied to the Pharisees, who are there
denominated blind guides. Its connection in this place is not very
obvious, and some have supposed that it is an interpolation from
some other place. The proverb also in v. 40. is met with in
Matt. x. 25. and in John xiii. 16., but in a sense totally different
from that in which it is here applied. It should seem that the
reasoning of our Lord is to the following effect. " If you follow
the instruction of blind guides, such as the Scribes and Pharisees,
instead of the precepts which I have just given you, you will na
turally fall into their errors, for the disciple cannot hope to excel
his master in wisdom ; though the perfect scholar may attain to
the full extent of his master's Jcnowledge. Nor can you justly
complain of the defects in the (moral) eye of a brother, &c." The
verb Karaprt^av, signifying primarily to amend, to repair, meta
phorically denotes to instruct, to perfect. Compare Matt. xxi. 16.
2 Cor. xiii. 9. 11. Heb. xiii. 21. 2 Tim. iii. 17. 1 Pet. v. 10.
Kuinoel, Whitby, Grotius.

506 LUKE VI. 45. VII. 2. 5.
Ver. 45. 6 dyaObg dvOpwirog k. r. X. See on Matt. xii. 35.
In v. 48. eaKaipE koi ifidOwE is a hendiadys for iaicaxpE (5a0itiig.
So Judg. xiii. 10. LXX. ertt^uvE Kat I'Spa/M for raxitog 'iSpape.
See my note on Hom. II. 0. 240. With the simile we may
compare Ovid. Met. IX. 39. Hand secus ac moles, quam magna
murmur e fluctus Oppugnant ; manet ilia, suoque est pondere
tuta. For iirEai, v. 49., some good MSS. read ctweVeo-e. So
Ovid, de Pont. I. 9. 13. Turn domus ingenti subito mea lapsa
ruina Concidit. Grotius, Valckn^er, Kuinoel.

CHAPTER VII.
Contents: — The Centurion's servant healed, vv. 1 — 10. [Matt.
viii. 5.] The raising of the widow's son, w. 11 — 17. John's
message to Jesus, and Christ's testimony concerning John, vv.
18 — 35. [Matt. xi. 2.] The female penitent forgiven, vv.
36—50.
Verse 2. ivnpog. E. T. dear. Rather esteemed, respected.
So 1 Sam. xxvi. 21. LXX. Phil. ii. 29. Artemid. II. 8. rove iv
ripa irapd rolg SEairoraig. Compare iEsch. Dial. Socr. II. 8.
In v. 4. some read 7rap££;Ete, others 7rap£?rj : but irapt%u is un
doubtedly correct, being the Attic form of the second person sing.
pres. indie, mid., and used instead of the subjunctive. See Matt.
Gr. Gr. §§. 197. 496. There is no occasion to take irapi^Ei for
the third person singular. The particle Srt frequently introduces
the exact words of the speaker ; and the active and middle voices
of irapixtiv are used in the same sense. Markland. — [Gro
tius.] Ver. 5. rrjv <rvvayu>yr)v k. t. X. It was not unusual for an
individual to build a synagogue at his own cost ; nor was there
any objection to a Gentile's building it, since the holiness of the
place did not so much consist in the building as in the act of de
dication. This appears from the repairs which Herod made in
the Temple. See also the Talmud in Megillah, §. 41. The
Centurion, however, was in all probability a Proselyte, and as
Augustus had published a decree, in which the teaching of the
synagogues was strongly recommended, it is not strange that a
Roman should engage in erecting one. Lightfoot, Grotius.
The insertion of the article shews that there was at that time
only one synagogue in Capernaum. It is probable that the per
sons who solicited Christ for the Centurion were the elders of this
synagogue. Middleton, Campbell, A. Clarke.

LUKE VII. 12. 21. 25. 507
Ver. 12. E^EKOjut^Ero. This word, as well as EK^IpEtv, and the
Latin efferre, is a funereal term ; and with the Greeks and Ro
mans, as well as among the Jews, the dead were earned out of
their cities, the laws forbidding their interment within the walls.
Lucian. Contemp. T. I. p. 340. rov yEirova Se t6v EKKO/ut£ovra
rb iraiSiov ovx °P?# Compare iEsch. Theb. 1026. iElian. V. H.
VIII. 4. Herodian. II. 1. 5. Virg. Georg. IV. 255. Many of
the commentators notice the impropriety of the practice of bury
ing in churches and cemeteries adjoining, so common in modern
times. The custom, it seems, was introduced in honour of the
early martyrs ; and thence its general adoption, even in populous
towns, where, without the greatest caution, infectious diseases
would be the unavoidable consequence. Elsner, Wetstein,
Parkhurst, Grotius, Rosenmuller, Schoettgen. Of the
miracle here recorded, and the circumstances attending it, see
Home's Introd. Vol. I. pp. 246. 259. III. p. 523. Of the ad
jective tKavoe see on Matt, xxviii. 12. See also on Luke ii. 37.
and of the verb imaKiirTEiv, v. 16. on Luke i. 68.
Ver. 21. ixapiaaro. This verb signifies to bestow freely in
Eslh. viii. 7. Ecclus. xii. 3. 2 Mace. iii. 33. iv. 32. 1 Cor. ii. 12.
Gal. iii. 18. Phil. i. 29. ii. 9. Herodian. I. 17. 3. rwv irXovaiwv
rag ovaiag xap'iaaa^al ej3ovXeto, Kat pEpiaat Eig roiig arpariixirag.
Xen. Cyrop. VIII. 6. 28. 7rae Se tStwrrje irXoiiaiog dv i$eto ye-
viaOat, Etrt Kvpw xap'iaalT0, In -^Elian- V. H. IX. 1. xaP'-Zia-
Oai is opposed to Xajuj3dvEtv. The verb seems here to be ex
pressive of the kindness and benevolence with which our Lord
performed these cures. Kuinoel, Doddridge.
Ver. 25. rpvtpy. This word properly signifies luxury ; and in
this sense some understand it here as opposed to the rigid absti
nence of the Baptist's life. In the parallel place of Matthew
however, clothing only is specified; and as rpvtpi) is sometimes
applied to costliness of dress, St. Luke may possibly have em
ployed it in this meaning. Eurip. Phcen. 1505. aroXiSa KpoKOEa-
aav dvEtaa rpvipdg. Isocr. Paneg. 41. rd uev awpara rpvipdivrag.
Kuinoel, Wetstein. In v. 28. 6 piKponpog has been generally
supposed to be put by an enallage for the superlative ; but it
seems rather to refer to 'Iwdwov understood, though not as de
signating Christ, from his being junior in ministry, and indeed in
age, to John. In this decision, maintained by some of the Fa
thers, it is probable that the force of the article has been mistaken.
That Christ should say of himself that he was greater than the
person whom he had just described as having been sent to pre
pare his way, amounts to nothing : and still less would he call
him 6 piKpoTEpog iv ry fiaaiXsiq rov Qeov, i. e. under the Gospel
dispensation, or among the body of Christians. Middleton. See
on the parallel place in Matthew.

508 LUKE VII. 29, 30.
Ver. 29. iSiKaiwaav rov Qeov. E. T. justified God. A variety
of opinions have been offered on the true import of the passage.
Some would render StKatovv to praise; some to honour; some to
thank; and some to obey: but the verb seems rather to retain
its ordinary acceptation. The people acknowledged the justice
of God, i. e. of the counsel or purpose of God, in calling them by
the Baptist to repentance ; and were baptized accordingly. See
on Matt. xi. 19. and compare Rom. iii. 4. 1 Tim. iii. 16. That
this is the true interpretation is further confirmed by a contrary de
claration respecting the Pharisees, that they rejected the counsel
of God; rrjv /SovXrjv roll Qeov r)Oirriaav. It is to be observed
that j3ovXrj is not here the mere command, but the decree or pur
pose of God, as always in the N, T. So Acts ii. ^3. iv. 28. xiii.
36. xx. 27. Ephes. i. 11. Heb. vi. 17. Whitby, Macknight,
Kuinoel, Doddridge. — [Wakefield, Hammond, Schleus
ner.] Some of. the commentators have improperly considered
this and the following verse as spoken by the Evangelist,
acquainting us that the people hearing what Jesus said at this
time concerning him, immediately resorted to his baptism. The
main support of this opinion is in the words eitte Si 6 Kvptoe,
with which v. 31. commences in the common editions, and which
are retained in the E. T. But nearly all the best MSS. and
versions omit them ; the critics reject them ; and as the Evan-
gelistaria begin with this verse, they were probably first used by
them to introduce the following parable. At all events these two
verses cannot bear the sense affixed to them above. It appears
from Matt. xi. 2. that John was then in prison, where he re
mained till his death, and was not, therefore, able any longer to
baptize. Besides, it was John's office to bring disciples to Jesus,
and not of Jesus to bring disciples to John. Campbell, Gro
tius, A. Clarke.
Ver. 30. Ete iavrovg. It has been questioned whether these
words are to be construed in connexion with /3ovXrjv Qeov or
¦nOirriaav. Of those who adopt the latter opinion, some with the
E.T. translate against themselves, i.e. to their own prejudice. That
the preposition will admit of this interpretation is evident from
Luke xii. 10. xv. 18. Acts vi. 11.1 Cor. viii. 12., but it does not
naturally arise out of the context. Our translators have given in
the margin another version, within themselves, which is preferred
by several, though it seems not very apposite to what follows in
the sentence, which shews that the rejection was open and no
torious. Upon the whole, therefore, the opinion is preferable
which refers Ete iavroi/g to rrjv /3ovXrjv rov Qeov. The use of Ete,
in the sense of in regard to, is very common. See Matt. xxvi.
10. Acts xxiv. 17. Rom. v. 8. xii. 10. 2 Cor. ii. 4. 1 Pet. iv. 8, 9.
Campbell, Whitby, Hammond, Rosenmuller, Doddridge, —
[Kuinoel, Schleusner, Glass, Erasmus, &c]

LUKE VII. 37, 38. 45. 509
Ver. 37. Kat ISov, ywr) k. r. X. The commentators are at va
riance respecting the identity of this anointing with that recorded
in Matt. xxvi. 6. Maxk xiv. 3. John xii. 3. Now the only points
of similarity are the unction itself, which was very usual at en
tertainments ; the common name of the alabastron, and the Pha
risee's name Simon, which was one of the most prevalent among
the Jews. In all other points the transactions are totally dis
tinct ; and there is little, if any, doubt that St. Luke's narrative
relates to a much earlier period in the ministry of Christ than
that of the other Evangelists. The incident here recorde4 took
place in Galilee, the other at Bethany ; the former by Mary, the
sister of Lazarus, the latter by a woman unnamed, who lived in
the city, i. e. either in Nain or Capernaum : our Lord's dis
courses upon each occasion respectively are entirely different;
and the relations are introduced in connexion with subjects
which in no way resemble each other. That the woman here
mentioned could not be Mary, the sister of Lazarus, may be
fairly inferred from St. Luke's observation, that she was a sin
ner, in whatever sense the word dpaprwXbg is understood. Some
translate the word an adulteress, which corresponds with the
sense in which dpaprdvEtv is sometimes used. Thus Eurip. Hipp.
507. st rot SokeI aoi, xp^v P*v °v a' dpaprdvEtv. iElian. V. H.
IV. 1. rrjv dpaprdvovaav slg srEpov avyyvwprig tvxeiv dSvvarov.
The word more probably denotes a Gentile, as in Matt. xxvi.
45. Compare also Matt. ix. 10, 11. xi. 19. Mark ii. 15,16.
xiv. 41. Luke xv. 1. 7. 10. xix. 7. John ix. 31. At all events it
is not very likely that Mary was either the one or the other.
Many suppose Mary Magdalene to be intended ; but of this there
is not only no proof, and the distinction given to her shews that
she was of Magdala, not of Nain. Kuinoel, Hammond, Ro
senmuller, Michaelis, Whitby. — [Grotius.] Of the cus
toms alluded to in the following verses see Home's Introd. Vol.
III. pp. 397. 440. See also Vol. II. p. 488. Of the word dXd-
fiaarpov see on Matt. xxvi. 7.
Ver. 38. KarsipiXEi. See on Matt. xxvi. 48. Kissing the feet
was a token of the deepest reverence and humiliation ; and as it
was a Heathen no less than a Jewish practice, coincides very well
with the interpretation of dpaprtoXbg given in the preceding note.
Xen. Cyrop. VII. 5. 11. Kvpov kote^iiXovv Kat x£'P«e Ka' irbhag,
7roXXd SaKpvovrEe dpa xaP£ Ka' Evippaiv6p.Evoi. Arist. Vesp. 608.
Kat irpwra piv r) Ovydrrip pE 'AiroviZy, koI tw irbS' dXst^rj, Kat
irpovKvipaaa tpiXr)ay. Polyb. XV. 1. 7TErjovrEe £7rt rrjv yfjv rovg
iroSag KarEipiXovv r$ avvESpiw. Senec. de Benef. II. 12. Agenti
gratias (Pompeio C. Caesar) porrexit osculandum sinistrum pe-
dem. A. Clarke, Wetstein, Raphelius.
Ver. 45. dip' i)g stcnjXv'ov. A very few MSS., and those of no

510 LUKE VII. 47. 49.
great consideration, read eIotiXOev, which is adopted, however, by
the Vulgate, and other Versions. This reading is certainly best
suited to the context, which represents the woman as coming to
Simon's house, after she had learnt that Jesus was there, v. 37.
Now if Jesus was there before her, the action could be dated
only from her entering, not from his. So slight a circumstance
as this might easily be overlooked in the hurry of transcribing ;
and the difference in writing is so inconsiderable that an over
sight might readily occur. Campbell. The verb StaXstirEtv with
a participle expresses the intermission of the action expressed by
the participle ; — a phraseology purely Greek, and common in the
best writers. Compare 1 Sam. x. 8. Jerem. x. 5. LXX. Xen.
Apol. Socr. §. 16. yElian. V. H. XV. 27. Lucian. Prom. 17.
Parkhurst, Wetstein.
Ver. 47. on riydirnaE iroXv. Many of the best commentators
consider the particle on in this place, not as causal but illative, in
the sense of therefore, and produce a variety of texts from the
LXX. and N. T. to confirm this interpretation. But it is by no
means clear that this meaning of on will hold in any of the pas
sages cited, or in any Greek writer whatsoever ; and although
the parable of the debtors represents the gratuitous forgiveness
as the cause of the love, not the love as the cause of the forgive
ness, it should seem that the love of the woman is adduced as the
sign not the cause of her pardon. Hence, the particle denotes
an inference of the antecedent from the consequent ; wherefore,
since she has shewn so great a regard for me, / say unto you, it
is plain that her many sins are forgiven ; for or because she
loved much. Having obtained from Christ the remission of her
sins, of the enormity of which she was conscious, as well as of
the divine mercy in forgiving them, she cherished a proportionate
love to Christ, which she manifested in the manner recorded by
St. Luke. In v. 50. her pardon is attributed to hex faith. Gro
tius, Parkhurst. — [Campbell, Hammond, Whitby, Kui
noel, &c]
Ver. 49. dtpiwvrai aov al dpapriai. This is doubtless a
repetition of the consolatory assurance which Christ had, on
some previous occasion, given to the woman; and plainly de
notes the spiritual remission of sin, consequent upon her faith
and repentance. There is no authority for supposing, with some
commentators, that he had cured her of a baneful disease, which
she had brought upon herself by her irregularities. See on Matt.
ix. 2. The observation of the guests does not appear to have
originated upon this occasion, as it did upon some others, in any
unfriendly disposition towards our Lord. Le Clerc, Grotius. — ¦
[Kuinoel.] In the next verse the expression iropsvov Eig slpr)-
vnv is a Jewish formula of valediction or farewell. So it is used

LUKE VIII. 2. 511
in Judg. xviii. 6. 1 Sam. i. 17. xx. 42. xxix. 7. 2 Sam. xv. 9.
James ii. 16. A. Clarke.

CHAPTER VIII.
Contents: — Jesus preaches throughout Galilee, vv. 1 — 3.
Parable of the sower, w. 4—18. [Matt. xiii. 1. Mark iv. 1.]
Christ's kindred, w. 19—21. [Matt. xii. 46. Mark iii. 31.]
The tempest quelled, vv. 22—25. [Matt. viii. 1 8. Mark iv. 35.1
The Gadarene dcemoniac, vv. 26 — 39. [Matt. viii. 28. Mark
v. 1.] The raising of Jairus's daughter, and the issue of
blood stanched, vv. 40—56. [Matt. ix. 18. Mark v. 22.]
Verse 2. r) KaXovpivri MaySaXrjvrj. Of the town Magdala,
whence MaySaXrjvrj, as Na£aprjvoe from Nazareth, see Home's
Geographical Index. From a notion, however, for which there
is no authority in the N. T., that this Mary had been a prosti
tute, some have supposed that the adjective is derived from the
Hebrew JO"UD, and signifies one who plaits her hair, as was the
custom with women of this description ; or that the town where
she resided was not Magdala, in Galilee, but near Jerusalem,
and of ill repute for the adulteries there committed. This town,
it is also supposed, might be the same with Bethany, and thus
Mary Magdalene might be identified with the sister of Lazarus ;
and possibly she might have received her designation from her ad
diction to the evil practices of that place. But we have already
seen that these Maries were two distinct individuals ; and it is
not improbable that Mary Magdalene was a person of some con
sequence, as she is almost always mentioned first by the Evan
gelists, and in this place before the wife of Chuza, Herod's
steward. This Chuza is imagined by some to be the nobleman
mentioned in John iv. 46., but this is only conjecture. Mack
night. — [Lightfoot.] Of the £7rrd Saipovia see on Mark xvi. 9.
The word E7rtrpo7roe is used here in a more exalted sense than in
Matt. xx. 8. Some would render it guardian or tutor, as syno
nymous with 7ratSaytoyoe ; and so it occurs in Gal. iv. 2. Com
pare Gal. iii. 24. and see Joseph. B. J. I. 30. 5. Ant. XVII.
4. 2. Xen. Mem. I. 2. 40. Plut. Lye. p. 40. But it should
seem rather to denote a superintendent, or lord of the house
hold, as in Herod. 1. 108. irdvrwv iirirpoirov. Compare 2 Mace.
xi. 1. xiii. 2. Parkhurst, Raphelius. Of the verb StaKovav
see on Matt. iv. 11. From the sense in which it is there used it
is easily transferred to any service whatever, as in Matt. xx. 28.

512 LUKE VIII. 12. 15.22.
Rom. xv. 26. 2 Tim. i. 18. and elsewhere; and thence also the
peculiar ecclesiastical sense of StaKovog, of which see on Acts
vi. 3.
Ver. 12. ol irapd rrjv 6Sov. Scil. oTrapEVTEe. See on Matt.
xiii. 19. In v. 14. the participle 7rop£v6)uEvot seems to denote
the gradual progress of the action denoted by the verb, with
which it is joined ; in the sense of the Hebrew \?T1, in 1 Sam. ii.
26. 2 Sam. iii. 1. Some, however, consider it pleonastic, and
compare Matt. ix. 15. 1 Pet. iii. 19. Wetstein.— [Schleus
ner.] The verb rEXsrj^opav is applied to ripe fruit in Arrian.
Epictet. IV. 8. Compare also Strabo V. p. 381. Joseph. Ant.
I. 6. 3. Hesych. rEXEo-^opwv* 6 KaO' ibpav roiig Kapirovg, ri b te-
Xtiovg aiiroiig tpipiov. There are very few instances in which the
accusative is omitted. Raphelius, Elsner, Kypke. At the be
ginning of the verse there is an ellipsis of the preposition Kara.
Ver. 15. iv inropovy. E. T. with patience ; and so this noun
is generally translated, though it signifies an active more fre
quently than a passive virtue, answering to what is with us called
perseverance. The word in Scripture, which strictly answers to
the English term patience, is paKpoOvpia, commonly rendered
long-suffering ; though viro/iovi) may also be so translated in se
veral passages : as, for instance, in Rom. xv. 4. 2 Cor. i. 6.
1 Thess. i. 3. 2 Thess. iii. 5. and elsewhere. For the sense of
perseverance compare Luke xxi. 19. Rom. ii. 7. viii. 25. Heb.
x. 36. xii. 3. Campbell, Parkhurst. By a comparison of
this verse with Matt. xiii. 23. the character here described will
appear to be possessed of all those good qualities which were
wanting in the others. Receiving the words ev KapSiq. KaXr} Kat
dyaOy, he is awtdiv, understanding and meditating upon it, in
opposition to that by the way side ; — he long retains it, KarsxEt,
as distinguished from that on the rocky ground; — and he brings
forth fruit, Kapiro^opEt, unchoked by temporal cares, as in the
case of that which fell among thorns. The phrase KaXbg Kal dya
Obg, as expressive of entire goodness, is applied E7rt rwv rsXiwg
awovSaiwv, dig r ayaOd irdvra, ovra ayaOd, ian, in Arist.
Magn- Moral. II. 9. Whitby, Grotius. Of the three follow
ing verses see on Matt. v. 14. Mark iv. 21.
Ver. 22. dvjjx&Vrav. They set sail. Compare Acts xiii. 13.
xviii. 21. xxvii. 2. 12. Aristoph. Lysist. 608. Herod. III. 109.
IV. 141. See also on Luke v. 2. In the next verse the use of
the verb aipvirvwaE is somewhat singular, for the signification of
dtpvirviZuv is directly opposite, and denotes to awake, not to fall
asleep. Some have supposed that St. Luke has here adopted a
provincialism, but we may remark, that the expression jutKpov
dtpvirvwaavng, having slept a little, occurs in Ignat. Mart. §. 7.

LUKE VIII. 27. 40. 55. 513
The verb has the same meaning also in Judg. v. 27. LXX. (Ed.
Aid.) and so also the adjective £^v7rvoe in 3 Esdr. iii. 3. Park
hurst, Valckn^er, Markland. A catachresis is observable in
the reference of the verb <Tvv£7rXrjpovvro to the crew, instead of
to the ship. Similar instances abound. Demosth. c. Leptin. p.
466. irpwrovg yEpiZsaOat rovg dig r)pug irXiovrag. Thucyd. I. 93.
'A0rjvatot juev ovv ovruie iTEi\iaOriaav. Virg. JEn. II. 314. Jam
proximus ardet Ucalegon. Kuinoel, Kypke.
Ver. 27. ek xpdvwv 'iKavwv. For several years : and so also
in v. 29., though some understand 7roXXo7e XP°V0L% f°r ToXXd-
Kig, as in Mark v. 4. But xpdvog is frequently used in the
sense of annus, as, for instance, in Deut. xii. 19. Josh. iv. 14.
LXX. Luke xx. 9. Acts viii. 11. Rom. xvi. 25. and elsewhere.
So Diod. Sic. p. 44. rj 'OXvpiriag wXripoiirai Kara rirrapag XP°~
vovg. Plutarch, de Educat. p. 11. A. ev SEo-jttwrrjpttjr 7roXXove
Karso-d7rrj ^povove. Eustath. on Hom. II. H. 250. psrd rovg
iwia xpbvovg. Of tKavoe, in the sense of many, see on Matt.
xxviii. 12. and to the instances cited add Arist. Pac. 353. ikovov
Xpovov diroXXvpsOa. Wetstein, Kuinoel. — [Grotius, Rosen
muller.] In the next verse the words 'Irjtrov and rov Qeov are
omitted in several MSS. and in v. 34. a few MSS. have d7T£X0ov-
r£e before dirf)yyEiXav, which is very properly rejected by Gries
bach and the best critics. The incident related in vv. 39, 40. is
omitted by Matthew and Mark. Of our Lord's injunction to the
daemoniac, compared with his conduct upon other occasions, see
Home's Introd. Vol. I. p. 236.
Ver. 40. aTTES^oro. Received joyfully. The preposition is
intensive ; and so in 2 Mace. iii. 9. iv. 22. LXX. Acts xv. 4.
xviii. 27. Similar examples are also common in the classical
writers. Schleusner, Raphelius.
Ver. 55. iiriarpsxpE rb irvEvpa aiirrig. Hence it is argued that
the soul does not perish with the body, but exists in a separate
state after death. This may indeed be collected from the death
of the damsel, as also in the case of the child restored to life by
Elijah, where the same expression is employed, 1 Kings xvii. 21.
But in other places it is used of a mere restoration of strength
and vigour, as in the instance of Sampson, Judg. xv. 19. and in
Psalm iii. 23. Lam. i. 11. 16. 19. LXX. Whitby, Grotius.
Of the use of the nominative r) iralg instead of the vocative, in
the preceding verse, see my note on Eur. Phcen. 796. Pent. Gr.
p. 350.

VOL. I. L 1

il4 LUKE IX. 1. 3.

CHAPTER IX.

Contents: — Christ's commission to the Apostles, vv. 1 — 6.
[Matt. x. 1. Mark vi. 7.] Herod's perplexity, vv. 7 — 9.
[Matt. xiv. 1. Mark vi. 14.] The return of the Apostles, and
the feeding of the five thousand, vv. 10 — 17. [Matt. xiv. 13.
Mark vi. 30. John vi. 1.] Peter's confession, vv. 18 — 21.
Matt. xvi. 13. Mark viii. 27.] Christ predicts his passion,
death, and resurrection, vv. 21 — 27. [Matt. xvi. 21. Mark viii.
31.] The transfiguration, vv. 28— -36. [Matt. xvii. 1. Mark
ix. 2.] A deaf and dumb spirit ejected, vv. 37 — 43. [Matt.
xvii. 14. Mark ix. 14.] Christ again foretels his death and
resurrection, vv. 44, 45. [Matt. xvii. 22. Mark ix. 30.] The
disciples contend for superiority, vv. 46 — 50. [Matt, xviii. 1.
Mark ix. 84.] The Samaritans refuse to receive Jesus, vv.
51 — 56. The answers of Christ to three new disciples, vv.
57—62. [Matt. viii. 19.]
Verse 1. The words paOryrdg aiiroii, which are found in the
common copies, are omitted in several of the best MSS. and in
others diroaroXovg is substituted. Hence the critics are very
generally agreed in rejecting them from the text. We have ot
SwSEKa simply infra v. 12. and in Luke viii. 1. xviii. 31. and else
where. Grotius, Griesbach.
Ver. 3. Svo x^vag. Compare Luke iii. 11. The Jews usu
ally wore two garments, of which the upper was called the talith,
and the under the chalyk. By the poorer classes the chalyk
seems to have been worn alone. Some have supposed that these
two garments are here intended ; and that the Apostles are en
joined to undertake their journey with the under garment only,
which was all to which their situation in life entitled them. In
the same manner the Baptist is believed to have directed those who
had both a talith and a chalyk to give one or the other in cha
rity. But it should be observed that these two garments are repre
sented in Greek by x'twv and Ipariov respectively, so that two
of the same kind are here evidently meant, and the precept forbids
the incumbrance of a supernumerary coat, which might impede
them in their progress. With the equipment of the Apostles we
may compare that of the philosopher : — Ilrjpri, Kat j3aKrpov, Kat
SiirXovv Etpa aoipolo Aioyivovg, fiiorov ipoprog b KoviporaTog.
Wakefield. — [Lightfoot.] The preposition dvd is here used
adverbially, as in Matt. xx. 9, 10. It may be well rendered
apiece. Of the change from the imperative mood to the infi
nitive see my note on Hom. II. A. 20.

LUKE IX. 7. 12. 14. 515
Ver. 7. StrjTropEt. Was greatly perplexed. The preposition is
intensive ; and the verb is intended to express a mixture of doubt
and fear. Compare Luke xxiv. 4. Acts ii. 12. v. 24. x. 17. In
the next verse the verb tpaivEaOat is used in the sense of eXOeIv.
So in 2 Mace. vii. 22. LXX. Ete rrjv ipr)v itpavrirs KoiXlav. Plat.
Protag. subinit. ttoOev, w SwKparEe, ipaivy; See also my note on
Hom. II. K. 236. Doddridge, Wetstein, Hammond.
Ver. 12. r\pipa rjp^aro kXiveiv. Scil. Ete ia"?r£pav. The same
ellipsis occurs in Judg. xix. 11. LXX. Herod. IV. 181. It is
supplied in Judg. xix. 9. kekXikev rj ripipa Eig iairipav. Arrian.
Exp. Alex. III. 4. lyKXtvavroe Se tov rjXtov Ete iairipav. In the
same manner inclinare is used in Latin. Plin. Epist. VII. 27.
Inclinato die spatiabatur in porticu. Q. Curt. Vi. 11. 9. In
vesperam inclinabat dies. Compare Luke xxiv. 29. With rag
KVKXtjj Kwpag also there is an ellipsis of the participle KEipivag ;
and so in Xen. Anab. III. 5. 9. rrjv kvkXw irdaav x^pav. Hell.
IV. 6. 3. rd kvkXw irEpiixovra oprj. Again in the next verse,
some suppose that ov Swarov Erjrt, or ov SwdpsOa, is omitted
before the particles ei pr) ti, and that this elliptic phrase is em
ployed to introduce a manifest absurdity. But it does not appear
that any sarcasm is intended ; and the passage may possibly be
rendered with an interrogation : — Shall we then buy, <ye. ? In
this sense ei pi) n is again used in 2 Cor. xiii. 5. So Joseph.
Ant. XVII. 11. Et pr) n toiovtov vlov ivoEt KaKwg svpiaKoiro;
Compare also Eurip. Alcest. 824. where, however, Monk reads
the line without a question, and Elmsley conjectures e'i pi) ys aog
ps k. r. X. Wetstein, Kuinoel, Kypke. — [Grotius, Bos.]
Ver. 14. KXtcrtae- In companies; subaud. Kara. See Matt.
Gr. Gr. §. 425. and compare Mark vi. 39. The word is used in
the sense which it here bears in Joseph. Ant. XII. 2. 11. In
v. 18. the adverb Karapovag should be rendered in private. It
frequently occurs in the LXX. as two words, Kara juovae, scil.
Xwpag, and so in the best writers. See Psalm iv. 8. Jer. xv. 17.
Mic. vii. 14. Thucyd. I. 32. 37. Joseph. Vit. §. 63. It should
be observed that neither in this place nor in Mark iv. 10. are we
to understand the disciples as excluded, but simply the multitude.
Parkhurst, Wetstein, Grotius. There is considerable varia
tion in the MSS. respecting the admission or rejection of the
words KaO' ripipav in v. 23. All the versions, however, with one
exception, sanction their presence ; and though they are not
found in the parallel places of the other Gospels, still there is no
thing there to contradict them. To follow Christ is the daily
business of his disciples, and, therefore, it is more than probable
that St. Luke has stated as much ; nor is there any sufficient
grounds for rejecting the statement. Campbell, Griesbach,
l 1 2

516 LUKE IX. 28. 31.
Ver. 28. waEl iipipai oktw. With these words some under
stand an ellipsis of the. verb r)aav, and compare Luke vi. 13.
Others take lyEvsro for the verb, and produce a variety of in
stances in which a 'masculine or feminine plural is followed by a
verb in the singular; thus, for example, Herod. I. 26. Ecrrt Se
pETa^ii rfje woXtoe Kat rov vrjov E7rrd ardSioi. But it is preferable
to read the words in a parenthesis, and take sylvEro Se ko! 7rapa-
Xaj3wv in connection, which is a mode of construction not un
usual with this Evangelist. The Kat is redundant, as in Luke viii.
1. x. 38. xxiii. 44. or it may be rendered into English by the
conjunction that. Campbell, Elsner. — [Blackwall, Bos.]
Ver. 31. e^oSov. This word is often used of military expedi
tions, as in 2 Sam. xi. 1. LXX. Thucyd. II. 10. V. 14. Mhan.
V. H. I. 7. II. 11. XIII. 12. Dion. Hal. A. R. VIII. pp. 303.
531. and God's punishment is frequently represented under the
figure of going out to war, as in Isaiah xiii. 13. Hence it has
been supposed that the conversation here mentioned alluded to
the battle which our Lord was about to wage against the rebel
lious Jews at the destruction of Jerusalem. This, however,
would require Ete 'iEpovtraXrj/j rather than ev 'iEpovrjaXr'ju ; not to
mention that whenever iE,oSog is so used, the sense is always de
termined by the addition of some such word as army, king, or
the like. But independently of the construction, there can be
little doubt that 'iE,oSog is here used to signify death, as in a va
riety of passages, both in the sacred and profane writers. Com
pare Wisd. iii. 2. vii. 6. Ecclus. xxxviii. 23. LXX. 2 Pet. i. 15.
In Joseph. Ant. IV. 8. 2. rov £rjvis added. In the same manner
excessus and exitus axe used in Latin. Cic. de Legg. I. 1. Certe
non longe a tuis cedibus inambulans post excessum suum Romu
lus, 8fc. Again, de Fin. III. 18. In his excessum e vita, et in
vita mansionem. . See also Juv. Sat. X. 127. Plin. Epist. VI. 16.
Corn. Nep. IX. 4. 3. The word is also used of the departure of
the Israelites out of Egypt both in Heb. xi. 22. and in the title
to the second book of the Pentateuch ; and in reference to this
event it is evidently used in this place, the deliverance from
Egyptian bondage being typical of the spiritual deliverance from
the bondage of sin effected by the death of Christ. Hence it will
also include the triumph of our Lord's ascension, to which there
seems to be an allusion in v. 51. Some few MSS. read Sd£av
instead of i£oSov, and others include both. Grotius, Wetstein,
Whitby, Kypke, Kuinoel, Lightfoot. — [Hammond, Le
Clerc] The verb XE'yEtv signifies to converse about a thing in
Mark x. 32. Johnvi'. 7. viii. 27. 54. ix. 19. 1 Cor. i. 12. 2 Tim.
ii. 7. So Herod. VII. 144. rov irbXEpov tov irpbg Alyivrirag
Xiytov. In Latin also, Ovid. Met. I. 1. In nova fert animus
mutatas dicere formas. Compare Cic. de Fin. V. 3. ./Elian.
V, H. III. 36. Some, less properly, render it to foretell.

LUKE IX. 45, 46. 51. 517
Pearce, Parkhurst. — [Schleusner.] Of the phrase j3£j3aprj-
juevoi iiirvw, in the next verse, see on Matt. xxvi. 42. In v. 34.
some understand the pronouns avrovg and iKsivovg of the same
persons ; but the former is more properly referred to the Apos
tles and the latter to Moses and Elias. Campbell. — [Le Clerc]
Of the expression Etvai 7rpoe nva, v. 41. see on Matt. xiii. 56.
Ver. 45. 'iva. To the end that. Sometimes i'va implies merely
so that, but it seems here to express something intentional, a
passive participle being employed rather than an adjective. There
is evidently a difference between saying that an expression is
dark and that it is darkened or made dark ; nor is there any im
propriety in supposing that predictions were intentionally ex
pressed so as to be imperfectly understood at the time. The
Apostles had not yet thrown off the prejudices which they long
entertained in common with their countrymen, that their Messiah
should live for ever, and which gave rise to the distinction in after
ages between Messiah ben Joseph, who was to die, and Messiah
ben David, who was to be for ever triumphant. The sense of
'iva in this place is confirmed by John v. 20. vi. 7. Rom. iii. 19.
1 Cor. xiv. 13. 2 Cor. vii. 9. Campbell, Whitby, Schleusner.
Ver. 46. rb, rig k. t. X. The neuter article to occurs in re
ference not to a noun but to a sentence in Luke i. 62. xxii. 2. 4.
23. 24. 27. Compare also Matt. xix. 18. and Mark ix. 23. In
v. 48. by a very common Hebraism the positive piyag is put for
the superlative, as in Matt. xxii. 36. and elsewhere. Campbell.
Ver. 51. rag r)pipag rr)g dvaXr)ipEwg. The noun dvaX-qipig
does not occur in any other place of the N. T., nor is it found in
the LXX, but the verb dvaXa/ijSdvEtv is frequently used in both.
It is applied to our Saviour's ascension into heaven in Mark xvi.
19. Acts i. 2. 11. 22. 1 Tim. iii. 16. to the translation of Eli
jah in 2 Kings ii. 11. LXX; and hence the title 'AvdXrj^te
Mwaiwg to a Jewish treatise respecting the body of Moses. The
verb, however, is used in other significations ; and .therefore
some commentators, interpreting avpirXripovaOai in its strict
sense, would render dvdXrj^te a retiring, i. e. from Jerusalem
and the parts adjacent, which Jesus rarely frequented in the
early part of his ministry, because the Jews sought to kill him,
John vii. 1. Others understand a lifting up, i. e. on the cross,
but this would rather have been vxfiwaig, as in John xii. 22.
Others, again, suppose that a second seizure is intended, in re
ference to the attempt which had formerly been made upon the
person of Christ, Luke iv. 29., but in this case the proper word
would have been avXXapj3dvEtv. Compare Luke xxii. 54. Acts
i. 16. There can be little doubt that our Lord's ascension is
meant, nor is there any real objection to this in the verb avp-

518 LUKE IX. 54.
irXripoiiaOai, which may fairly be interpreted with some latitude.
In popular language a time is frequently said to be come which
is very near. With respect to the objection that the Evangelist
would scarcely speak of the ascension of Christ as being at
hand some time before his resurrection, and even his trial and
death ; the circumstances closely connected with an event may
well be understood as comprehended in it, and this is strongly
indicated here by the indefinite turn of the expression rag r)pipag
rr)g dvaXrfipiwg. GROTIUS, KuiNOEL, WhITBY, DODDRIDGE, —
[Pearce, Hammond, Michaelis, Parkhurst.] Some think-
that another journey into Galilee intervened between this time
and the crucifixion. But the sense which dvaXriipig almost un
questionably bears, and the strong expression employed by the
Evangelist, plainly indicate that this was the last time that Christ
went to Jerusalem before his i%oSog alluded to during the trans
figuration. The phrase arript^av r6 irpoawrov is a Hebraism,
denoting a fixed and settled resolution, as in 2 Kings ii. 9, 10.
xii. 18. Jerem. iii. 12. xxi. 10. Ezek. iv. 3. vi. 2. xiii. 17. xiv. 8.
xvii. 7. xxi. 10. Dan. xi. 16, 17. and frequently in the Rabbi
nical writings. In v. 42. the expression is less powerful, and
merely denotes that his face was turned in. the direction of Jeru
salem, thereby indicating that he was going to that city. Com
pare 2 Chron. xxxii. 2. Jerem. xiii. 15. Whitby, Wetstein.
Of the enmity between the Jews and Samaritans, see Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 376. On many occasions, however, as may
be collected from the parable of the good Samaritan, and from
our Lord's interview with the woman of Samaria, this nation did
not always abstain from acts of kindness towards the Jews. It
should seem, therefore, that the tacit preference which our Lord
gave to the worship of the Jewish temple, by going up to Jeru
salem at the celebration of the Passover, induced them to reject
him in this instance. There is an account in Joseph. Ant. XX.
25. of the murder of certain Galilasans by the inhabitants of Gi-
naea, a Samaritan village, as they were passing to Jerusalem at
one of the feasts. Whitby, Paley. With iroipdaai, in the
next verse, Bos supplies S,Eviav. Compare Acts x. 10. Philem. 22.
Ver. 54. dig koI 'HXt'ae iiroitias. See 2 Kings i. 10. It is ob
servable that there is no analogy between the case cited by the
Apostles and their own. The servants of Ahab meditated an in
sult against Elijah, as the prophet of the Most High ; whereas the
Samaritans, deluded by their prejudices, and not fully acquainted
perhaps with the nature of our Lord's pretensions, were objects
of pity rather than punishment. Besides, the religion of Jesus
was of a milder nature than that of Moses, and was only to be
promoted by meek and merciful means. Religious persecutions
can find no warrant in the Gospel, and our Lord's reply in the
next verse is decisive against them. We may observe, by the

LUKE IX. 61, 62. 519
way, that some of the later commentators read this reply inter
rogatively, but the common translation is at least equally expres
sive. Whitby, Grotius. — [Schleusner, Kuinoel.] The
noun iriip, signifying lightning, occurs again in Luke xvii. 29.
Rev. xiii. 13. xx. 9. So also in Soph. Ant. 131. Eurip. Phoen.
1191. and ignis, in the same sense, in Hor. Od. I. 34. 5. and
elsewhere. Of dvaXiaKEiv, denoting to destroy, we have ex
amples in Gal. v. 15. 2 Tliess. ii. 8. and so Xen. Cyrop. I. 4, 5.
rd Oripia dvrjXt^Ka SttuKoiv. It is applied to the action of fire, as
in this place, in Gen. xii. 30. Numb. ix. 33. Jerem. 1. 7. Ezek.
v. 12. LXX. Wetstein, Parkhurst.
Ver. 61. dirord^aaOat rolg Eig rov oIkov pov. This disciple
seems to have had in view the case of Elisha, who made a si
milar request to the prophet Elijah, 1 Kings xix. 19. though it
is probable that our Lord discerned a less firm resolution in the
one than in the other. The incident is related only by St. Luke.
With respect to the verb dirord^aaOat a difference of opinion
prevails among the commentators. Some would refer the verb to
the disciple's possessions, understanding Krr)paat with the dative
following, and rendering to set in order my affairs. But the
dative of the person seems infinitely preferable, with which the
verb signifies to take leave, to bid adieu, in Plutarch, Josephus,
Philo, and other writers. Of Elisha having parted with his pa
rents, it is said in Joseph. Ant. VIII. 13. 7. dirora^dpEvog av
rolg e'itteto. Compare also Acts xviii. 18. 21. 2 Cor. ii. 13.
With a dative of the thing it signifies to renounce, as in Luke
xiv. 33. Grotius, Wetstein, Kypke, Parkhurst. — [Hein-
sius, Doddridge, A. Clarke.]
Ver. 62. ovSEte £7rtj3aXo)v k. r. X. The first member of this
sentence is a proverbial expression, descriptive of those who, en
gaged in any important concerns, allow their attention to be ab
stracted by things foreign ; and the application to religious duties is
blended with the diroSoatg, without forming a distinct member of
the comparison. The similitude is derived from the ploughman,
who keeps his eyes stedfastly before him that the furrow may be
perfectly straight. Hence Hesiod. Op. D. II. 60. lOeiriv avXaK
iXaiivot, MrjKETt 7ra7rratvtiiv jUE0' bpf)XtKag, dXX' £7rt 'ipyw Qvpbv
e'xwv. To this custom is to be referred the derivation of the
Latin verb delirare ; the old word lira signifying a furrow. With
the sentiment we may compare Phil. iii. 14. and to the same
effect Seneca: Si enim ambitio non respicit, major a semper con-
sequendi studio flagrans ; quanto id cequius est eosfacere, quibus
immortalis gloria proposita est. The Pythagoreans had a si
milar maxim, cited by Simplicius, in Epidet. 332. sie rb hpbv
iirEpxbpivog pr) iiriarpiipov. Grotius, Whitby, Wetstein.

520 LUKE X. 1. 18.

CHAPTER X.
Contents: — The mission of the seventy disciples, vv. 1 — 16.
Their return, vv. 17 — 24. A lawyer directed in the way to
obtain everlasting life, vv. 25 — 29. The parable of the good
Samaritan, vv. 30 — 37. Martha and Mary, vv. 38 — 42.
Verse 1. Kat iripovg ifiSopriKOvra. E. T. Other seventy also ;
which seems to imply that seventy had been sent before. The
words should rather be rendered seventy others also, the con
junction Kat referring to the previous mission of the twelve, in
Luke ix. 1. Some MSS. read i(5Sopr)Kovra Svo, of which see
Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 195. But, without advocating a
change in the Text, some commentators maintain that seventy is
placed in a round number for seventy-two, that being also the
number of the Jewish Sanhedrim, as well as of the elders, whom
Moses associated with himself in the government of the people,
and in reference to whom Christ acted upon this occasion. But
seventy is the number of elders chosen by Moses, (Exod. xviii.
21. xxiv. 9. Numb. xi. 16. 24.) and there is no proof that seventy-
two was the number of the Sanhedrim. It appears, indeed, from
Joseph. Ant. XII. 2. that of the translators of the Septuagint,
six were chosen from each tribe ; though in the same passage he
speaks of them as seventy persons. Still this can only be applied
by analogy to the Sanhedrim; and the writers on Jewish anti
quities are almost unanimous in making them seventy, the pre
sident making seventy-one. See Selden de Synod. V. 4. 8.
Whitby. — [Lightfoot, Grotius.] Of the verb dvaSsl^at see
on Luke i. 80. of the phrase dvd Siio on Luke ix. 14. and with
the following verses compare Matt. ix. 37. x. 1.8. sqq. xi. 21.
sqq. See also on Matt, xxiii. 15. and my note on Hom. II. X.
263. Ver. 18. iOEtiipow tov Saravdv k. r. X. Some understand
these words as referring to Satan's fall from heaven on his first
transgression, (2 Pet. ii. 4.) which was typical of the destruction of
his power over mankind by the progress of the Gospel. But in the
same manner as being exalted to heaven sometimes figuratively
implies the extension of sovereignty and dominion, so may falling
from heaven he understood, without any particular reference, of
the diminution or loss of power. Compare Matt. xi. 23. Hence,
by an enallage of tense, our Lord may be understood as saying,
/ shall see the destruction of Satan's kingdom in the world, by
the success of your ministry. We have a similar expression re
lative to the King of Babylon in Isaiah xiv. 12. See also John
xii. 31.2 Cor. iv. 4. Ephes. vi. 12. Col. i. 13. Rev. xii. 7. sqq,

LUKE X. 20. 25. 521
Cicero, in Epist. Att. II. represents the overthrow of Pompey by
the phrase ex astris decidisse ; and in Orat. Philip. II. 42. ex
presses degradation by de coelo detrahere. Whitby, Grotius. —
[Doddridge.] Of v. 19. see on Mark xvi. 17. Some suppose
that by serpents and scorpions our Lord means men of like dis
positions with these animals, as he calls the Scribes and Pha
risees a generation of vipers in Matt. iii. 7. and that he declares
the inability of their enemies to hurt them beyond what Provi
dence shall think fit. A. Clarke. See Home's Introd. Vol.
III. p. 499. note.
Ver. 20. bvoparavpwv iypdipri. So Heb. xii. 23. Many are
of opinion that this is an allusion to the enrolment of citizens'
names in a register, whereby their right to the privileges of citi
zenship is ratified and acknowledged. There are references to
the same custom in a variety of passages in Scripture, in which
a book is attributed to God, wherein he writes the names of
those who are heirs of everlasting life, and blots out those who
are unworthy of being registered as citizens of heaven. See
Exod. xxxii. 32. Deut. ix. 14. xxv. 19. xxix. 20. 2 Kings xix.
27. Psalm Ixix. 28. cix. 13. cxxxix. 16. Isaiah iv. 3. Ezek. xiii. 9.
Dan. xii. 4. Phil. iv. 3. Rev. Hi. 5. xiii. 8. xvii. 8. xx. 12. 15. xxi. 27.
xxii. 19. Among the Heathens also a book is assigned to Ju
piter, in Eurip. ap. Stob. Grot. p. 121. to Philo in yEsch. Eum.
273., to the Fates in Lucian. Catapl. §. 5., and to Nemesis in
Callim. H. Cer. 57. Others, however, suppose less properly,
that, as to be written in the dust, (Jer. xvii. 13.) implies to
perish; so to be written in the book of life is a Jewish phrase
denoting worldly prosperity. See the Targums on Isaiah iv. 3.
Jerem. xiii. 9. cited above. Hammond, Kuinoel. — [Grotius.]
We are by no means to infer that being thus written implies an
absolute and irreversible decree of eternal salvation. St. Paul
himself, on more than one occasion, speaks hesitatingly upon the
subject of his own perseverance unto the end ; and as one among
the twelve failed of making his election sure, it cannot be ima
gined that our Lord intended to assure the seventy of an uncon
ditional inheritance in heaven. In Rev. xxii. l9. also Christ
threatens some to blot out their names, although once written in
the book of life ; and to a like effect the declaration of Moses is
explained by the Targum on Exod. xxxii. 32. Whitby, Gro
tius. Of the following verses see on Matt. xi. 25. sqq. xiii. 16.
Ver. 25. Kal iSov, voptKog k. t. X. An incident very similar
to this is related in Matt. xxii. 36. See the notes in loco; and
of the parable by which the import of the second great com
mandment is illustrated, v. 30. see Home's Introd. Vol. II. pp.
404. 482. It was our Lord's object in this parable to convince
the lawyer that his duty to his neighbour embraced a much wider

522 LUKE X. SO.
signification of the term than the Jews were inclined to affix to
it, and to teach mankind in general the nature and extent of
Christian benevolence. Under the idea of neighbour the Pha
risees and Scribes included none but those of their own commu
nity. Many precepts are found in their writings which inculcate
a spirit of benevolence among themselves ; but they cherished, as
Tacitus truly observes, adversus omnes alios hostile odium: Hist.
V. 5. So also Juv. Sat. XIV. 103. non monstrare viam, eadem
nisi sacra colenti. With respect to the Gentiles, and the Sama
ritans were held in the same estimation, Maimonides has the fol
lowing in Rutzah, §. 4. We must not contrive their death; but
if they be in danger of death we are not bound to deliver them.
For it is said, Thou shalt not rise up against the blood of thy
neighbour : but such a one is not thy neighbour. It often hap
pens that persons who have the best opportunities to understand
true religion are very deficient in making use of them, and flatter
themselves that a zeal for externals will make up for a want of
vital holiness. This was notoriously the case with the Jews, and
therefore our Lord sends them to learn their duty from a schis
matic and heterodox Samaritan, who practised it much better than
they. It is admirably well judged to represent the distress on
the side of the Jew, and the mercy on that of the Samaritan.
Had the points been put the other way the inference would have
operated less forcibly on the mind of the lawyer ; for though he
might have replied that the Jewish law required no act of charity
to a Samaritan, he could not deny that the same feeling of bene
volence which actuated the Samaritan toward the Jew ought
equally to operate with the Jew toward the Samaritan. We may
observe, also, that the conduct of the priest and Levite is yet
more inexcusable from the circumstance that if a man saw his
enemy's ox or ass going astray or sinking under a burden, the
Mosaic law (Exod. xxiii. 4, 5.) commanded him to help them.
Grotius, Jortin, Doddridge. The lawyer's reply in the next
verse refers to Deut. vi. 5. Levit. xix. 18. which were repeated
together every day in the synagogue, as containing a summary
of the whole law. The former part, containing the duty of God,
was also written upon their phylacteries. Some suppose that
irwg and rt are equivalent, but the first part of the question seems
to be general, the latter more particularly directed to the lawyer
himself. Heinsius. — [Kuinoel.]
Ver. 30. v7roXaj3o>v eIttev. So Herod. VII. 213. v7roXa/3wv
Ur,. Compare Thucyd. V. 49. Xen. Cyr. II. 2. 2. Anab. III. 1.
31. iEhan. V. H. II. 1. XIV. 8. Job ii. 4. iv. 1. Dan. iii. 9.
LXX. There is an ellipsis of Xoyov, which is supplied in
Herod. III. 146. MatdvSptoe S' iiiriXafJE tov Xoyov k. t. X. In
this manner the Latin suscipere is used in Virg. /En. VI. 723.
Suscipit Anchises. So also excipere in Virg. Ma. IX. 258.,

LUKE X. 30. 34. 523
which answers to Plato's use of iKSixEaOai in the Euthydemus.
Some incorrectly supply avrov. In the opening of the parable
some interpreters connect dv#paj7roe dirb 'UpovaaXrip, as in Matt.
xv. 1. xxvii. 57. Johnxi. 1. Acts xvii. 13. Heb. xiii. 24. observing
that the whole energy of the story depends on the opposition be
tween the Jew and the Samaritan. To account for the trans
position of the verb Kar£j3aivsv, a similar instance is cited from
Luke xi. 27. £7rapacrd rig ywr) tpiovr)v ek tov oxXov. But in
neither case is the transposition necessary, and the opposition
seems to be equally marked either way. Beza, Wetstein,
Kypke. — [Campbell, Wakefield.]
Ibid. Xyaralg irepiiirEaEv. So Diog. Laert. IV. 50. The
verb irEpiiriirrEtv signifies to fall in with, and is applied either to
persons or things, chiefly of an evil character. Compare 2 Mace.
ix. 21. x. 4. LXX. James i. 2. Thucyd. II. 54. Polyb. I. 76. 8.
Artemid. III. 5. In v. 36. the expression is varied into ipirlir-
teiv Ete rove Xrjcrrde, for which we have classical authority in
Arrian. Epict. III. 13. So Hor. Sat. 1.2. 4:2.fugienshic decidit
acrem Prcedonum in turbam. The phrase 7rXrjyde iirtOElvai is
found in 2 Mace, iii- 26. LXX. Acts xvi. 23. but rarely, if ever,
in classical Greek. It seems to be a Latinism. Thus Val. Max.
IX. 10. Permisit ut denas plagas singulis imponeret. Instead
of r)piOavr)g the more usual classical form is r)ptOvi)g, as in Aris
toph. Nub. 504. Thucyd. II. 52. Lycoph. Cass. 511. The pre
sent form, however, is found in Diod. Sic. XII. 62. Herodian.
IV. 9. 15. We have r)piOvr,rog in Wisd. xviii. 18. LXX. The
corresponding Latin word seminex occurs in Virg. ^En. V. 275.
Wetstein, Schleusner. In the next verse Kara trvyKvptav de
notes by a coincidence, scil. of time and place ; i. e. by chance.
Hesych. Kara cvvrvxtrjv. The noun is very rarely met with,
but it denotes an accident or coincidence in Herod. IX. 89.
Polyb. V. 18. 6. In 1 Sam. xx. 26. the Hebrew mpD, which
the LXX. translate aiipirTixipa, is rendered avyKiipripa by Sym-
machus. Hippocrates uses crvyKvpta to denote an occasion of
doing a thing. Hammond, Parkhurst, A. Clarke.
Ver. 34. KarESrja-E rd rpavpara. Xen. Cyr. V. 2. 32. rpaiipara
iiriSESEpivovg. Of the use of a mixture of oil and wine as a lini
ment see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 510. Cels. Med. V. 36.
In rulnerum curatione lance succidce vicem implent, nunc ex vino
et oleo, nunc ex posca. Compare Theophr. H. V. IX. 12. Plin.
N. H. XXXI. 47. The mixture was called oinelccum. We
may readily account for the Samaritan's having these ingredients
at hand, as the frequent unction of the limbs with oil is pecu
liarly refreshing in the hqt countries of the East, and travellers
were accustomed to provide themselves with wine and provisions
for their journey, which were not furnished at the inns. Of the
word iravSoxEtov see on Mark xiv. 14. The compound verb

524 LUKE X. 38. 40.
irpoaSairavdv in the next verse is of very rare occurrence. It
occurs, however, in Lucian. Ep. Saturn. §. 39. Themist. Or. 23.
The two denarii which the good Samaritan proffered to defray
any additional expences for food or attendance were equivalent
to the price of two days' labour, (Matt. xx. 9.) and would doubt
less go further than a much larger sum among ourselves. Wet
stein, Schoettgen, Gilpin.
Ver. 38. Ktiurjv nvd. Bethany. See John xi. I. The verb
inroSixtaOai signifies not only to receive, but to receive with hos
pitality, or under one's roof. Hom. Od. II. 70. viroSiKopai o'ikw.
Compare Job. vii. 8. 1 Mace. xvi. 15. LXX. Luke xix. 6. Acts
xvii. 7. James ii. 25. Hom. II. II. 476. Xen. Mem. II. 3. 13.
Lucian. D. D. Tom. I. p. 178. .Elian. V. H. IV. 9. XVI. 26.
In Luke viii. 40. diroSixEaOai is used in nearly the same sense.
Some of the commentators are of opinion that Martha was a
widow, and that Lazarus and Mary were living in her house ;
but as she was the individual whose conduct gave rise to the ad
mirable lesson inculcated by our Lord, the house may have been
called hers, though she only had it in joint possession with her
brother and sister. We may observe that Martha was a common
name among the Orientals. It is mentioned as a Syriac appella
tion in Plut. Mar. p. 414. E. Svpav yvvatKa, MdpOav bvopan,
pavTEmaOai Xsyopivriv. In the next verse the particle Kat is not
redundant, but has a reference to the disciples as well as to Mary.
Sitting at the feet of their instructors was an usual posture not
only with the Jews but other early nations also. See Home's
Introd. Vol. III. p. 483. and compare Arist. Vesp. 618. Isidor.
Orig. XX. 11. Suet. Claud. 32. Aug. 64. Val. Max. II. 1.
Wetstein, Kuinoel, Parkhurst. — [Grotius.]
Ver. 40. 7r£pt£a7rdro. This verb denotes to tear asunder, to
draw different ways ; and thence, metaphorically applied to the
mind, to distract, to confuse; as nearly equivalent to pEpipvyv
and rvp/3d£av in the next verse. Ecclus. xii. 2. LXX. 7T£pto--
irwpivw irspl irdvrwv. Diod. Sic. I. 74. 7T£pt 7roXXd 7r£pt<T7ra<r-
pivovg. Compare also Ecclus. i. 13. ii. 23. 26. iii. 10. LXX.
Polyb. IV. 10. 3. We have exactly to the point Hor. Sat. II.
8. 67. Tene, ut excipiar laute, torquerier omni Sollicitudine dis-
trictum. Of pEpipvqv see on Matt. vi. 25. The verb rvp/3d£av
(from rvpjBi), Xen. Cyr. I. 2. 3., whence the Latin turba,) sig
nifies properly to raise the mud, as in Arist. Vesp. 257. Pac.
1007. See the Scholiast on Equit. 311. Hence the passive
rvpfidZEaOat, to be disturbed in mind, to be bewildered. Of the
verb avvavnXapfidvEaOai see on Luke i. 54'. The repetition of
the name Martha is expressive of affection, attended in this in
stance with gentle reproof. Compare Matt. vii. 41. Mark xiv.
36. 45. Rom. viii. 15. Gal. iv. 6. It seems to convey the idea

LUKE X. 42. XI. 1. 525
of the restless situation of a person in a crowd, or of water in a
state of agitation. Some MSS. read OopvfidZy. Wetstein, Ro
senmuller, Valcken^er, Parkhurst, Doddridge, Grotius.
Ver. 42. ivog. Euthymius : rrje aKpodo-Ettie rwv ipwv Xoywv.
Many, however, after Theophylact and Basil, supply fipwparog,
and with TroXXd, in the preceding verse, fipwpara. The same
commentators understand uEptSa in reference to the custom of
sending the choicest portion of the feast to the most honourable
among the guests. See my note on Hom. II. H. 321. But al
though the zeal of Mary in preparing an entertainment for her
Master was undoubtedly the basis of our Lord's remark, the
common interpretation seems infinitely preferable. By supply
ing the general term irpdypara we have one of the gravest and
most important apophthegms that ever were uttered ; and of uEpie,
in the sense of business or occupation, we have examples in Xen.
Cyr. III. 3. 5. Anab. VII. 6. 25. and elsewhere. So also^?ar*
in Latin. The opinion of Basil seems to have originated in the
reading of some MSS. adopted by the Coptic and ^Ethiopic ver
sions : — oXiytirv Si Icrri XP£'a V ivog. DODDRIDGE, ELSNER, Kypke,
Kuinoel. — [Rosenmuller, Wetstein, A. Clarke.] From the
praise here bestowed upon Mary, the Papists have inferred that
a contemplative is more acceptable in the sight of God than an
active life. It is not two courses of life, however, but two par
ticular actions that are here compared ; and attention to the word
of God, with a view to profit by it, is recommended as a more
beneficial exercise than any occupation connected with temporal
concerns. Our Lord did not mean to signify any displeasure at
Martha's hospitality, but to testify his greater satisfaction in the
earnestness with which Mary listened to his instructions. Mack
night, Grotius.

CHAPTER XI.
Contents: — The Lord's prayer, vv. 1 — 4. Earnestness in
prayer recommended, vv. 5 — 13. A dcemoniac cured, and the
conduct of the Scribes and Pharisees thereupon, vv. 14 — 36.
[Matt. xii. 22. Mark iii. 19.] Denunciation of woes against
the Pharisees and lawyers, vv. 37 — 54.
Verse 1. St'Sa^ov r)pdg irpoaEvx^aOat. It is probable that this
disciple was anxious to obtain from our Lord a longer, and, as he
hoped, more comprehensive form of prayer than that which had
already been given ; unless, perhaps, not being present at its

526 LUKE XI. 4. 6, 7.
delivery, he was unacquainted with its existence. In either case
it was sufficient to repeat it, as the most perfect and sufficient
epitome of human wants, both spiritual and temporal. Of its se
veral petitions see on Matt. vi. 9. sqq. As given by St. Luke,
however, not only is the doxology omitted, but in some MSS.
and versions the words r)pwv b iv rolg ovpavolg, together with
the third and the latter part of the sixth petition, are wanting.
Several of the Fathers contain no notice of these clauses, and
Origen distinctly states that they were not recorded by St. Luke.
This would lead us to think that he had not found them in any
copy of the Gospel which came under his notice ; and hence the
best critics have considered them as the interpolation of some
later transcriber, who thought it necessary to supply what he
thought deficient in one Gospel out of another. At the same
time by far the greater number of MSS. possess them ; and they
are noticed by Cyprian, Cyril, Chrysostom, Euthymius, Theo
phylact, and others of the Fathers, and it is difficult to suppose
that all the copyists would regularly insert them from St. Mat
thew. Lightfoot, Whitby. — [Mill, Grotius, Griesbach.]
Ver. 4. btpEiXovn. One who sins or offends against God or
man, is in the Syriac called 2TT, a debtor ; and a sin, in like
manner, is X2TT, a debt. See Dan. i. 10. and compare the
Targums on Exod. xxxii. 30. Lev. iv. 3. Psalm xxv. 18. Ezek.
xviii. 7. Hence o^eiXeiv and its derivatives are frequently used
in this sense in the N. T., as in this place and Matt. vi. 12. 22.
Luke xiii. 4. Hence dipiivai, to release, is here of the same im
port as toforgive or absolve. Hammond, Whitby.
Ver. 6. iE, bSoii. Some connect this expression with 7rapEy£V£ro,
and translate is come out of his road, comparing Apul. IX. p.
200. Node quadam paterfamilias, de pago proximo tenebris
illunce caliginis impeditus, et imbre nimio madescens, atque ob
id ab itinere directo cohibitus, ad hortum nostrum divertit. The
instances, however, are not necessarily similar; and it is prefer
able to join tplXog i% bSoii, a friend on a journey, for which the
authorities are more pertinent and express. Lysias, p. 34. ed.
Taylor. KaraXa/3ovr£e rb pEipaKtov ek rjje bSoii. ibid. p. 36.
/3ta ek rrje bSov avvapirdZovrEg. WAKEFIELD. — {VaLCKEN^R.]
Ver. 7. rj Oiipa KEKXEtarat. It was now midnight, (v. 5.) or that
part of the evening which by the Greeks was named KXavtrtflvpov.
Compare Josh. ii. 5. LXX. See also Home's Introd. Vol. III.
p. 450. We are not necessarily to infer that the children were
in the same bed with their parent, as the E. T. seems to imply.
According to the custom among the lower classes of the East
the whole family were asleep in the same room, upon separate
mattresses laid upon the ground. That psr ipoii will bear this

LUKE XI. 8. 527
signification is clear from v. 31. infra, Matt. ii. 3. Acts xxi. 5.
1 Cor. xvi. 1. Indeed Koirrj may be put as a part for the whole,
and signify the bed-chamber. Some would render 7ratSta ser
vants, of which sense of the word see on Matt. viii. 5. But it
here plainly signifies children, as in Heb. ii. 13, 14. and else
where. Hammond, Grotius, Campbell. — [Macknight, Le
Clerc] Of the phrase KoVove irapixEiv see on Matt. xxvi. 10.
The interchange of the prepositions Ete and iv has been repeat
edly noticed.
Ver. 8. dvatSEtav. Importunity. The Homeric use of dvat-
Si)g is very similar. See my notes on II. A. 521. N. 139. So
Petronius : Nihil est quod non improbitas extorqueat. Schleus
ner, Grotius. The design of this parable, and of the very si
milar one in Luke xviii. 1. is to enforce the necessity of frequent
and earnest prayer ; and the direct inference to be drawn from
them is, that as importunate entreaties will frequently prevail
with men, and even with those who are actuated by no religious
principles, to alleviate the wants of their fellow-creatures, so in a
greater degree will the Almighty attend to the persevering peti
tions of those who diligently seek him. It is true, indeed, that
the reasons for the prevalence of importunity with men, have no
place when applied to God. Men may not attend to first appli
cations from doubt as to the necessity of them, from inability to
render assistance, from pride, and a variety of other causes ; but
God knows our necessities before we ask, is infinitely able to
grant all that we can desire, can receive no accession of glory
from our dependance, and is incapable of being softened by the
repetition, or wearied by the importunity, of our addresses. But
although perseverance in prayer can have no efficacy in inclining
God to be more merciful, it may yet be effectnal in making us
fitter objects of mercy ; not to mention that the nature of our
prayers, and the proper season for granting them, are better
known to him that they can possibly be to us. Where an imme
diate compliance with our requests is most conducive to our final
happiness, he is as ready to give as we to ask ; where to refuse
our petitions will contribute more to this end, whilst he appears
to deny a blessing he grants one in the refusal ; and where sus
pending his blessings for a time will be for our advantage, they
are put off to a more convenient season. Rosenmuller, Kui
noel. Of the following verses see on Matt. vii. 7. sqq. The
similitude in v. 12. is well preserved, the body of the scorpion
being very like an egg, and the head being scarcely discernable,
especially in those of the white kind mentioned by .Elian and
others. Bochart has produced testimonies to prove that the
scorpions of Judea were about the size of an egg. See also Plin.
N. H. xi. 25. Macknight.

528 LUKE XI. 13. 17. 27. 33.
Ver. 13. b i% o'vpavov. This is not to be construed with Sii-
<ra, as some suppose, but is clearly equivalent to ovpdviog, as in
Matt. vii. 1 1 . Compare 1 Cor. xv. 47—49. 2 Cor. v. 42. By
irvEvpd dyiov is here meant the ordinary aids of the Holy Spirit,
as parallel with the good gifts in Matt. vii. 9. Accordingly the
Greek Scholiasts have x«Ptv irvEvpariKr)v. Whitby, Grotius,
Middleton. — [Campbell.]
Ver. 17. Kat otKoe iirl oikov iriirrEt. The Vulgate translates
Et domus supra domum cadit, which probably gave rise to the
opinion that olKog was a subdivision of fiaaiXEia in the pre
ceding clause, and that the sense of the passage should be thus
rendered : By intestine broils any kingdom may be desolate, one
family falling after another. But surely the original would
hardly admit of such a translation, did not the parallel place in
St. Matthew sufficiently prove that the generally received version
is correct. The phrase o»coe eVi oTkov for e<jV iavrbv is a He
braism of frequent occurrence. Grotius, Kuinoel. — [Camp
bell.] Ver. 27. paKapia i) KotXia k. t. X. This was an exclamation
extremely natural, more particularly so if the woman was a mo
ther ; and a variety of passages illustrating the sentiment are
found in the Rabbinical and profane writers. From the latter
we may select Musaeus de Her. et Leand. 138. "OXj3toe bg as
ipiiTEvaE, Kal bXpiog r) teke jttrjrrjp, ITWrrjp 0' rj a' iXbx^vaE paKap-
Tarri. Callim. H. Cer. 95. KXatE piv a jttdrrjp, j3apv S' EtrrEvov at
Sil' dSsXipal, Xdi paarbg rov 'iirivE. Ovid. Met. IV. 320. Qui te
genuere beati, Et frater felix, et fortunata profecto, Siqua tibi
soror est, et quce dedit ubera nutrix. Claud. Pan. Prob. 203.
O duplici fcecundam Consule matrem, Felicemque uterum, qui
nomina parturit annis. Petron. Arb. 94. O felicem, inquiunt,
matrem tuam, quce te talem peperit. The verb flrjXd^Etv has an
active signification in Luke xxiii. 29. As authorities for either
acceptation we may compare Gen. xxi. 7. Job iii. 12. Psalm viii.
3. Lam. ii. 20. LXX. Matt. xxi. 16. xxiv. 19. Mark xiii. 17.
/Elian. V. H. XIII. 1. Hist. An. X. 8. Plut. Rom. p. 20. D.
. Elsner, Wetstein, Palairet, Raphelius, Schoettgen. By
the emphatic declaration in the next verse our Lord by no means
intended to detract from the blessedness ascribed to the Virgin in
Luke i. 28. 48. but merely to intimate that the essential blessed-"
ness of eternal happiness was not restricted to her alone in con
sequence of her relationship to him, but was equally extended to
all who fulfilled the condition of the Gospel covenant. Whitby,
Grotius. Ver. 33. Kpv7rrrjv. Scil. x^Pav- Hence the Latin crypta, and
the English crypt. Of the parable see on Matt. v. 14. Our

LUKE XI. 38. 529
Lord intimates that the exercise of his miraculous powers among
those, who were blinded by their prejudices against the evidence
which they afforded of his Messiahship, would be the same in
effect as to place a lighted candle under a bushel. Hence he
takes occasion in the three following verses, of which see on
Matt. vi. 22., to exhort them to remove the darkness which ob
scured their mental vision, in order that the whole understanding
might be illuminated by the light of the Gospel. The com
mentators complain of indistinctness and tautology in v. 36.,
which some would remove by inserting the article before the
second bXov, and understanding it of the whole man, both body
and soul. Others would reject the verse altogether, upon the
authority of some few MSS. in which it is omitted with v. 35.
But there is no tautology in the case, the latter clause being
more fully explained by a reference to the bright shining of the
candle, supra v. 33. Neither would to bXov imply both body
and soul, nothing more than the body having been previously
mentioned, though the soul be the object which our Lord had,
by a tacit inference, more especially in view. In v. 35. the ana
logy between external and internal light had been established ;
in the present the complete illumination described in the con
cluding clause, though intended of the mind, is affirmed only of
the body ; the application, after what had been said, being sup
posed to be obvious. A Clarke, Middleton, Kuinoel. — [Mi
chaelis, Markland.] The noun darpairi) generally signifies
lightning, as in Matt. xxiv. 27., but the corresponding Hebrew
•word is used to denote a bright flame in Deut. xxxii. 41. Nahum.
iii. 3. Schleusner.
Ver. 38. E/3a7rrt<r0rj. See on Matt. xv. 2. Mark vii. 2. sqq.
In the next verse, for iipwv some of the commentators suggest
iiplv, as the most elegant and appropriate reading ; but the con
jecture is wholly unsupported, and the intermixture of the com
parison with its application is not unusual in our Lord's parables.
See the last note. In this instance, more especially, the two parts
are almost necessarily blended, inasmuch as the outside of the
cup, in point of fact, could scarcely be cleansed without cleansing
the inside also ; so that the application ad hominem runs thus : —
" You, while you are so scrupulous in regard to external wash
ings, do nothing more than if you washed the outside of the cup
or platter, while there was nothing but filth within. Ye fools !
did not God, who made the outward man, make the inward man
also ? and does he not require inward as well as outward purity?"
According to some, however, the verb 7rotav, v. 40., signifies to
make a thing as it ought to be, and thence to cleanse. It is true,
indeed, that some shew of authority may be produced for such a
meaning, as, for instance, 2 Sam. xix. 25. LXX. ttoieIv tov piia-
raKa. But St. Luke would scarcely have used the verb in so rare
vol. i. Mm

530 LUKE XI. 41. 49.
a sense ; and the received interpretation is much more simple,
and at least equally intelligible. The word dtppovEg corresponds
with the Hebrew D^EIty, which frequently occurs in the Rabbi
nical writings. Thus in Menacoth, p. 66. 1. R. JochananBen
Zacchai said : Ye fools, how prove ye this ? Lightfoot, Ro
senmuller. — [Elsner, Kuinoel.]
Ver. 41. rd Ivovra. Some commentators understand Kara
and xpilj"OTa, and render the formula thus supplied, according to
your substance. Now in Demosth. de Cor. p. 312. ivovra de
notes property ; and the ellipsis may probably be justified by the
somewhat similar one in Arist. Eccles. 856. rd Sward ydp Sa ry
ttoXei £vXXa/uj3dv£tv. But the proper phrase in this case would
be ek rwv ivovrwv ; and though rd ivovra might possibly bear
the same signification, no example to that effect has been pro
duced ; at all events, we should rather have expected v7rdpxovra,
as in Luke viii. 3. xii. 33. Compare Tob. iv. 7, 8. It seems
better, therefore, to understand riji irornpito ; and, indeed, that rd
ivovra will mean that which is within the cup, may be. fairly in
ferred from the parallel place in Matt, xxiii. 26., where the words
corresponding with rd ivovra Sots JXErj/^ocrvvrjv are KaOdpiaov
rb ivrbg roii irorripiov. Compare Xen. Hell. II. 3. 6. Ages. II.
19. Hence the sense will be — Care not for the exterior part of
the cup, but give in alms the food which it contains ; and thus
all things shall be clean to you : i. e. you shall not require the
Levitical purification. See Tit. i. 15. Raphelius, Kypke, Wet
stein, Parkhurst. — [Grotius, Rosenmuller, Schleusner,
Campbell.] It has been supposed that our Lord's words are
ironical, and spoken in derision of the high importance attached
to alms-giving by the Pharisees, of which there are sufficient
proofs in the Rabbinical writings. Thus in Bava Bathra, p. 9, 1.
R. Asai saith, Alms are equivalent to all the other command
ments. Again, p. 10, 1., R. Judah said, Giving of alms hastens
our redemption ; it delivers from death. But such an interpreta
tion is more ingenious than solid ; for, although our Lord did
sometimes, though rarely, employ irony, the present occasion
was not one in which he would have departed from his usual
solemnity of discourse. We are not to infer, however, that alms
giving is the only virtue required by God, but that it was se
lected by Christ, not only as inclusive of every other Christian
grace, but as being the one in which the Pharisees, like Nebu-
chodonozar, were peculiarly deficient. Compare Dan. iv. 27. Pos
sibly, also, it may have been chosen with an indirect reference to
the subject in hand, as the Arabic word zachat signifying alms,
carries the double sense of increase and cleansing. Schleusner,
WhiTby, Le Clerc. — [Lightfoot, Kuinoel.]
Ver. 49. tj aoipia roii Qeov. Some understand by this a peri-

LUKE XI. 53. XII. 1. 531
phrasis for Christ, as in Matt, xxiii. 34. our Lord speaks in his
own person. But it is agreeable to the Hebrew idiom to say
the wisdom of God and the power of God for the wise God and
the mighty God; and such is, in all probability, the case in this
passage. Compare Acts viii. 10. 1 Cor. i. 24. 30. and elsewhere.
A similar form of speaking is not unusual in the Jewish writings ;
as, for instance, in the Targum on Lament, ii. 2. is it fitting
that the daughters of Israel should eat the fruit qf their own
womb? The rule of judgment, i. e. retributive justice, answered
and said, Was it also fitting to kill a priest and a prophet in the
sanctuary of the Lord, as ye killed Zacliarias ? Kuinoel,
Lightfoot.
Ver. 53. diroaropariZEtv aiirbv. E. T. to provoke him to
speak. The primary import of this verb is to recite from me
mory, dirb aroparog XiyEiv ; of which there are abundant in
stances in Plutarch, Athenasus, and other writers. Hence also
to command another to speak, to question magisterially, as a
teacher does his disciples. Hesych. diroaropariZEiv' dirb juvrjurje
d^iovv Xiystv. Suidas : airoaropaTiZEiv <paal rbv SiSdaKaXov,
brav KsXfvrj rbv iralSa XiyEiv drra dirb aroparog. Jul. Pol. II.
202. diroaTopariZEaOai Se roiig iralSag IlXdrwv 7rov Xlya, rjyovv
a7r6 rdiv StSaaKaXtov ipwraaOat rd paOr)para. The passage here
referred to is in Plat. Euthyd. p. 14. rt Si, w KXavta, 'iipri, ottote
diroaropariZoi iiplv 6 ypappariari)g, irorEpot ipdvOavov riov
iraiStov rd airoaropanZbpEva ; ol ao^ol, i) ol dpaOslg ; So also
Aristot. Soph. Elench. 3. rd ydp airoaropanZbpEva pavOdvovaiv
ol ypapparslg. The sense in which St. Luke has employed it is
marked in the desire of the Pharisees 0rjp£vo-at n ek tov aroparog
avroii ; and it is one of the many proofs of his perfect familiarity
with the genius of the Greek language. Grotius, Hammond,
Wetstein, Kypke. Of the phrase Ssivwg ivixEiv see on Mark
vi. 19.

CHAPTER XII.
Contents : — Christ exhorts his disciples against hypocrisy,
and recommends confidence in the divine Providence, vv.
1 — 12. He refuses to act as judge, vv. 13, 14. Caution
against worldly cares and anxieties, vv. 1 5 — 84. Exhorta
tion to watchfulness, vv. 35 — 59.
Verse 1. rwv pvpidSwv roii oxXov. That is, an indefinitely
great multitude. So uvptae is used for the Hebrew D22") in
m m 2

532 LUKE XII. 13, 15.
Gen. xxiv. 60. Deut. xxxiii. 2. Psalm iii. 6. Dan.xi. 12. Ecclus.
xlvii. 6. Compare also Acts xxi. 20. xxvi. 26. Heb. xii. 22.
Jude 14. Rev. v. 11. Lightfoot, Grotius.
Ibid, rjrte £<rrtv v7roKpt<ne. These words are supposed by
some to be an interpolation, because in a parallel admonition in
Matt. xvi. 6. our Lord expressly refers to the doctrines of the
Pharisees under the image of leaven. But it should rather seem,
from the connection of the sense in the two following verses, that
the allusion is here to another symbolic application of the term ;
and it is well known that it was usual with him to give a different
turn to the same idea upon different occasions. See on Matt.
xvi. 1 1 . The precept coincides with that which in the charge to
the twelve runs thus: Be wise as serpents, %c. (Matt. x. 16.)
for though the disciples were to be prudent and circumspect in
their behaviour, their prudence was to be wholly unmixed with
hypocrisy. Of this the Pharisees had as large a proportion as of
false doctrine ; and our Lord assures his followers, that although
their artful expedient might serve a turn for the present, it would
eventually be discovered and exposed. Macknight, A. Clarke.
— [Pearce.] Of the following verses see on Matt. x. 26. sqq.
and xii. 31, 32. and of the import ofavO'div, v. 3. on Luke i. 20.
Ver. 13. pspiaaaOat psr ipoii rrjv KXripovopiav. Among the
Jews children had the inheritance of their fathers divided equally
among them, except that the eldest had a double portion. It is
likely, though by no means certain, that the complainant in the
text was a younger brother, from whom the elder had detained
his share of the property bequeathed to him. Some have sup
posed that he appealed to our Lord in his prophetic capacity, but
his reply, which is founded on Exod. ii. l4. plainly indicates that
he was requested to act merely as an arbitrator ; nor is it impro
bable that disciples, in order to avoid the delay of judicial pro
ceedings, were sometimes accustomed in such cases to abide by
the decisions of their masters. Christ, no doubt, declined to in
terfere lest he should excite the jealousy of the Jewish council,
probably that of the three judges, who were the appointed arbi
trators of property. In after times, when the Christian converts
abstained to bring their differences before a Heathen tribunal,
the bishops usually decided controversies of this nature, in con
formity with the advice of St. Paul in 1 Cor. vi. 1 . sqq. Whitby,
Grotius, Lightfoot. — [Le Clerc]
Ver. 15. ipvXdaaEaOE dirb rrje irXEOvE^iag. From the connexion
between this precept and the incident which gave rise to it, 7tXeo-
vsgta evidently denotes an over anxiety in acquiring wealth,
the inefficiency of which in securing either the happiness or
duration of life, is illustrated in the following parable. Of Zwr)
in the sense of felicity we have examples in Prov . iv. 22. xii.

LUKE XII. 16. 20. 533
28. LXX. Rom. viii. 6. 1 Pet. iii. 10. So Ovid. Pont. IV. 6. 3.
The reason assigned for this admonition of our Lord may be il
lustrated by a variety of passages in the classical writers. Aristot.
Nicom. X. 9. ov ydp iv ry v7T£pj3oXrj rb avrapKig. Hor. Od. IV.
9. 45. Non possidentem multa vocaveris Rede beatum, <ye. Sat.
I. 1. 49. Die, quid refer at intra Naturce fines viventi, jugera
centum, an Mille aret? Epist. I. 2. 47. Non ceris acervus et
auri AEgroto domini deduxit corpore febres, Non animo cur as.
Manil. IV. 89. Et neque paupertas breviores excipit annos , Nee
sunt immensis opibus venalia fata. Apparent, however, as is the
sense of the passage, not so the construction. Some of the com
mentators would join ek rwv iiirapxbvrwv with £ti>rj, others with
ev rip irEpiaaEiiEiv. But although Z>iv ek nvog is a frequent
phrase, as in 1 Cor. ix. 14., ek rov EvayysXtov Znv, nothing
seems to be gained by such an expression as Znv ek rttiv iiirap-
Xovrwv ; and a genitive after irEpiaaEvsiv, as in Luke xv. 17., is
always without a preposition. Possibly the latter words are a
marginal interpretation, which have improperly found their way
into the text. Whitby, Schleusner, Grotius, Wetstein,
Kuinoel. — [Campbell.]
Ver. 16. EiitpopriaEv. This verb is somewhat rare ; it is used,
however, in Joseph. B. J. I. 2. 43. as Ev^opoe and Evtpopia are
in .Elian. V. H. II. 17. Phil. Vit. Mos. T. II. p. 162. The
noun xd>Pa is here synonymous with dypoe, a field. Compare
Matt. xxiv. 18. with Luke xxi. 21. and see Ecclus. xliii. 3.
LXX. John iv. 35. James v. 4. So Joseph. Ant. VII. 8. 5. rrjv
X^pav £7rvp7roXrj(T£. From this signification of xd>Pa; as opposed
to cities and towns, is derived the word xwP^7riaKoirog, who was
an officer appointed to assist the bishop in country districts. Of
yEvvrj/uara, produce, v. 18., we have another example in Luke
xxii. 18. So Polyb. I. 71. rwv ek rrje xwPa£ ywvyp-drwv. Diod.
Sic. V. 17. rwv Si irpbg ri)v rpoipriv yEvvrjudrtuv olvov piv bXoa-
X^pdig ovk ixovai. With v. 19. compare Ecclus. xi. 18, 19.
Hence Senec. Epist. 99. Nos corpus putre sortiti nihilominus
ceterna proponimus, et, in quantum potest cetas humana pro-
tendi, tantum spe occupamus. Wetstein, Grotius, Kypke,
Schleusner, Rosenmuller.
Ver. 20. rrjv ipvxvv aov airatroiiaiv. Wisd. XV. 8. rb rrig
ipvxoc dirairriOEig xp^°e- Commentators differ respecting the
nominative to be supplied before d7rairov<xtv. Some understand
God in the plural, with reference to the Trinity, and others sup
pose an allusion to the Jewish opinion, that the angel of death,
by means of good or bad angels respectively, required back the
debt of life. See on Luke xvi. 22. But it is enough perhaps to
explain the expression as an impersonal form, of which there
are many similar instances in this Gospel. Compare ver. 48. vi.

534 LUKE XII. 21. 24. 29.
38. 44. xiii. 19. xiv. 35. xvi. 4. 9. and elsewhere. So Catull. III.
9. Qui nunc it per iter tenebricosum Illic, unde negant redire
quenquam. With the sentiment in the next verse the following
are parallel. Anthol. II. 50. 12. IlXovrov piv irXovroiivrog e'x"?*
ipvxrjv Si irivrirog, '£1 rote KXrjpovo/iote 7rXov<rtE, trot Se irivrig.
Propert. Eleg. III. 5. 13. Hand ullas portabis opes Acherontis
ad undas ; Nudus ab inferna, stulte, vehere rate. Mart. Epig.
VIII. 44. 9. Rape, conger e, aufer, posside : relinquendum est.
Phaed. Fab. IV. 19. 18. Tibi dico, Avare, gaudium hceredis tui.
Sil. Ital. V. 265. Modo quern Fortuna fovendo Congestis opibus
donisque refersit opimis Nudum Tartarea portabit navita
cymba. Grotius, Kuinoel, Rosenmuller. — [Schoettgen,
Elsner.] Ver. 21. Ete Qeov ttXovtwv. The verb :tXovte7v is here evi
dently to be taken in a spiritual sense ; but there is some dif
ference of opinion as to the import of the expression 7rXovrEtv Ete
0eov. Some make it synonymous with OriaavpiZEiv iv oiipavq,
as in Matt. vi. 20. Others understand it as signifying to use
one's riches as God wishes. But perhaps the true meaning is,
to be rich for God's glory ; i. e. by employing one's wealth in
works of charity and benevolence. Compare v. 33. So Lucian.
Epist. Saturn. 24. Ee rb koivov itXovteIv, to be rich for the benefit
of the community. Philo Byzant. 7rXovr£tv Ete Qewv Koapov.
Kypke, Parkhurst. — [Kuinoel, Schleusner, Markland,
&c] Of the following verses see on Matt. vi. 25. sqq.
Ver. 24. KopaKae. Matt. vi. 26. 7TET£tvd. The commentators
remark a more beautiful allusion in St. Luke, from the pecu
liarities of the raven tribe. Naturalists relate that they fre
quently desert their young, either from forgetfulness or aversion ;
and Philo relates that they are preserved from perishing by worms
and insects, which the materials of which their nests are made
are calculated to produce. See Philo X. 12. Arist. Hist. An. IX.
31. /Elian. II. 49. and compare Job xxxviii. 41. Psalm cxlvii. 9.
Grotius, Wetstein.
Ver. 29. pETEiopiZEaOE. This verb signifies properly to lift up
on high ; and, as well as the adjective pEriiiipog, is applied to the
flight of birds, and to ships at sea, which appear elevated in re
spect of the land. Compare Ezek. x. 16. sqq. Obad. iv. LXX.
/Elian. H. A. III. 20. VII. 30. XI. 33. Thucyd. VII. 16.
Hence, from the agitation to which birds and ships are subject
from the winds, arises the metaphorical signification of being
restless and unsettled in mind. Cic. Epist. Att. XV. 14. Ita sum
pEiiwpog, et magnis cogitationibus impeditus. Virg. ^En. VIII.
19. Qui magno curarum a?stuat cestu. In this sense we have
Lucian. Jup. Trag. T. II. p. 191. pEriwpoi iravrEg irpbg rr)v

LUKE XII. 30. 32. 35. 535
aKpoaatv. Thucyd. II. 7. ?j 'EXXde irdtra pEritopog i)v. See also
Joseph. B.J. T. 27. 3. II. 21. 1. IV. 9. 2. Ant. VIII. 8. 2. The
same metaphor is retained by the Latins as in Cic. Tusc. I. 40.
Expedando et desiderando pendemus animis, cruciamur, an-
gimur. Compare Soph. CEd. T. 914. Parkhurst, Whitby,
Grotius, Alberti, Doddridge, Wetstein, Schleusner.
Ver. 30. £0vrj koctjuov. The words Koapog and atwv have a
peculiar meaning in the sacred which they have not in. profane
writers, the latter referring to the Jewish ages, and the former
to the Gentile. Compare Matt. xxiv. 3. Tit. i. 2. and elsewhere.
Lightfoot. Ver. 32. to ptKpbv iroipvtov. Double diminutives of this na
ture have a peculiar emphasis. Among a variety of instances the
following have been selected : Aristoph. Plut. 147. 240. ptKpbv
dpyvptStov. Isocr. piKpd iroXixvia. Athen. XV. p. 666. piKpbv
irivaKtaKiov. Xen. Cyrop. VIII. pdXa ptKpbv yrjStov. Cic. Acad.
IV. 38. minuta opuscula. Paradox. Prooem. minutas interrogatiun-
culas. The form is here expressive of the utmost tenderness,
which is rendered yet more emphatic by the insertion of the article,
somewhat unusual with the vocative, in the sense of the pos
sessive pronoun. Wetstein, Campbell. On the two following
verses see on Matt. xix. 21. vi. 19. The adjective dvEKXEnrroe,
though of rare occurrence, is found in Diod. Sic. IV. 84. dv£K-
XEi7rrove E'xovTEe Tag rrje rpoiprig SaiptXEtag. In the same sense
dv£KXt7rrje is used in Wisd. vii. 14. viii. 18. LXX. With the
sentiment in v. 34. we may compare Plaut. Aul. II. 2. 4. Nam
Ego sum hie: animus domi est. Kuinoel, Pearce.
Ver. 35. al batpiiEg irEpiEZtoapivat. See Home's Introd. Vol.
III. p. 402. The custom alluded to prevailed among the ancients
generally, with those engaged in any active employments, as sol
diers, servants, and others. With respect to the Jews we may
compare Exod. xxxix. 5. Lev. xvi. 4. 1 Kings xx. 11.2 Kings
iii. 21. Luke xvii. 8. John xiii. 4. Ephes. vi. 14. Rev. i. 13. To
the same effect Hom. Od. S. 72. ^worrjpt Oowg avvispyE x^Td>va.
(Eustath. rr7rovSrje SrjXwrtKov.) Hence the adjective EvZwvog,
active. Horat. Sat. II. 8. 10. puer alte cinctus. 70. Prcecindi
rede pueri comptique ministrant. On the contrary, discinctus
implies idle, dissolute, as in Hor. Epod. I. 34. We may gather
from v. 37. that it was the custom of those days, as it was in
older times among ourselves, for the host, on certain occasions,
to wait upon the company. The same also appears from Hor.
Sat. II. 6. 107. veluti succinctus cursitat hospes, Continuatque
dapes, necnon verniliter ipsis Fungitur ojficiis. It was not cus
tomary, indeed, that the servants sat at table while the master
waited ; though something similar took place at the Roman Sa-
10

536 LUKE XII. 47. 49.
turnalia, the Cretan Hermcea, and some other ancient festivals.
Our Lord merely meant to affirm that the master would treat
such servants with every mark of honour and respect, Hammond,
Grotius, Whitby, Le Clerc, Kuinoel. Of the following
verses see on Matt. xxiv. 43. sqq. xxv. 1. sqq. and of the word
ydpog, v. 36. on Matt. xxii. 1. In v. 37. the participle is re
dundant, as in Luke xvii. 8. 7rap£X0d>v dvairiaat. See also
Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 308.
Ver. 47. SaprjcrErat 7roXXde. That is, Kara 7roXXde 7rXrjyde ;
and so Kara bXiyag irXnydg, in the next verse. The same el
lipsis is frequent in the best writers. Arist. Vesp. 1277. Kai pE
KaKiaratg ekvicte, scil. irXriyalg. Nub. 472. rvirropEvog iroXXdg.
Xen. Anab. V. 6Xtyae ira'iEiv. So in Latin, Terent. Heaut. II.
4. 22. diu etiam duras dabit ; scil. plagas. Bos. Of the verb
SspEtv see on Matt. xxi. 35. ; and of the punishment of scourg
ing among the Jews see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 141. It
appears that although forty stripes was the limit allowed by the
law, a man was sometimes adjudged to receive twice the number,
if he were guilty of a double offence ; and a master might inflict
any number on his slave. For petty offences as few as six, five, .
and even four stripes were sometimes given. Thus in Pesachim,
p. 94. 2. He that eateth the potithd, let him be beaten with four
stripes; he that eateth a pismire, let him be beaten with five ; he
that eateth a hornet, let him have six. Hence, in the adminis
tration of God's retributive justice, reward or punishment will be
administered according to the use or abuse which men make of
the opportunities vouchsafed to them. Lightfoot, A. Clarke.
Ver. 49. iriip r)XQov k. t. X. From the necessity of watchful
ness our Lord is led to consider the times of persecution, when it
would be more especially called for ; and the fire of which would
be kindled immediately after his death and passion, which are here
represented under the image of baptism. See on Matt. x. 34.
xx. 22. Ovid affords a good illustration of fire, as the emblem
of persecution : Scilicet ut fulvum spectatur in ignibus aurum ;
Tempore sic duro est experienda fides. Grotius.
Ibid, ri OiXw, a jjSrj dvijipOri ; The commentators have expe
rienced no little difficulty in interpreting these words. Some
would make ti how much, as in Cant. VII. 6. LXX. and ei
that, as the Hebrew DN, in 1 Sam. xxiv. 7. Compare Acts viii.
22. Others would render it nisi, with the Vulgate, as if the ori
ginal were ei pi). But that a wish is intended to be expressed is
sufficiently evident from the corresponding clause in the very
next verse ; and it is therefore preferable to render the particle by
utinam. Of its use in this signification see my note on Soph.
CEd. T. 863. Pent. Gr. p. 61. and the somewhat obscure con
struction may fairly be attributed to the degree of energy, not

LUKE XII. 54. 56. 537
unmixed with agitation, with which the words were delivered.
Hence there is no necessity for placing a note of interrogation at
OiXw, as some have supposed. The import of the passage is
this : — " Since the advancement of true religion must be at
tended by such unhappy divisions and persecutions, I cannot but
wish that they, together with my passion which must precede
them, had already taken place." The particle ei is also used in
this sense in Luke xix. 1 2. xxii. 42. and in Josh. vii. 7. Job vi.
2. LXX. In the schools of the Rabbins an affirmation is some
times expressed in the form of a question ; so that what will I,
<ye. may be equivalent to / will, fyc. Grotius, Whitby, Light
foot, Parkhurst. — [Campbell, Kuinoel.] The verb <twe'-
XtaOat, to be distressed, occurs in Luke viii. 37. Phil. i. 23. So
Menander : awix^rai Xviralg cut. In Acts xviii. 5. r<^> irvEvpan
is added. The whole clause is a curious instance of the laxity
with which the early Fathers sometimes cited the Scriptures.
Irenaeus, quoting from memory, reads it Kat 7rdvv iirEiyopat iig
avro ; and Epiphanius Kai ri OiXw, Et rjSrj Ef3airria0riv ; in both
instances the sense is preserved, without the slightest resemblance
to the words of the passage. Grotius, Mill, Schleusner.
The verb %xeiv *s here used in the sense of uIXXeiv, as in 2 Esdr.
iv. 45. LXX. Lactantius uses habere in the same way ; and so
also the translators of the Athanasian Creed, habent resurgere.
Hammond.
Ver. 54. rrjv ve^eXjjv. Some MSS. omit the article, but it is
unquestionably definite, the appearance here mentioned being a
well known phcenomenon. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 33.
From niceties of this sort, in which a local custom or popular
opinion of the time is alluded to, and which could not easily be
fabricated, we obtain a strong evidence of the authenticity of the
Scriptures, and consequently of the credibility of our religion.
It may be observed, also, that the heat which accompanies the
southerly winds, which blow during the month of March in Syria
and Palestine, is excessively oppressive. Different illustrations
to the same effect are given in Matt. xvi. 2., where our Lord ad
dresses the Pharisees. Middleton, Grotius, Parkhurst.
Ver. 56. rbv Katpbv tovtov. Namely, that it is the time in
which, according to the prophets, the Messiah was to appear.
Our Lord proceeds in the next verse to intimate, that even with
out the express declaration of the prophets they had sufficient
evidence in what they heard and saw, that God had visited his
people in a most extraordinary manner, from which they might
reasonably infer that his mission was divine. The adjective St-
Katog here denotes fitting, reasonable, as in Phil. i. 7. and else
where. Grotius, A. Clarke.

538 LUKE XII. 58. XIII. 1.
Ver. 58. tl>e ydp v7rdy£te k. t. X. This and the next verse
occur in Matt. v. 25., forming part of our Lord's Sermon on the
Mount ; and it is supposed by some that St. Luke has recorded
them here as a detached precept in the same sense which they
bear in St. Matthew, without any reference to the preceding con
text. This notion, however, is hardly consistent with the use of
the connecting particle ydp ; and the precept may well be consi
dered as a parable, in which the Jews are warned to make their
peace with God by repentance, before the time of predicted ven
geance arrived. Our Lord seems to have left his hearers to make
the application for themselves, as in Luke xiii. 16., and upon
other occasions, that he might not provoke the anger of the mul
titude. Hammond, Le Clerc — [Grotius, Whitby.]
Ibid. Sbg ipyaaiav. There is some difference of opinion re
specting the import of this phrase : some commentators, after
Theophylact, supposing it to mean to pay the interest as well as
the principal of the debt. But this is extremely harsh ; not to
mention that roKoe is the word employed to denote interest or
usury in Luke xix. 23. The phrase is evidently a Latinism,
dare operam ; and it is used of a laboured composition by Her-
mogenes, de Invent. III. 5. 17. Of the noun irpaKruip see on
Luke iii. 11. and of Xetttov, in the next verse, on Mark xii. 41.
The verb KaracrvpEtv is used as the Latin detrahere, in Cic. Milon.
14. Cum in judicium detrahi non posset. Philo frequently em
ploys the word in the same sense. Wetstein, Grotius, Kypke.
— [Le Clerc]

CHAPTER XIII.

Contents : — Pilate's massacre of certain Galilceans, and the
fall of the Tower in Siloam, vv. 1 — 5. The parable of the
barren fig-tree, vv. 6 — 9. An infirm woman cured, vv. 10 — 17.
The parable of the grain of mustard-seed and the leaven, vv.
18—22. [Matt. xiii. 31.] The question Are they few saved?
answered,^ vv. 23 — 30. Herod's design to kill Christ, v. 31.
He predicts his death and resurrection, and mourns over Je
rusalem, vv. 31 — 35.
Verse 1. 7TEpt rwv TaXiXaitov, div k. r. X. The incident to
which the Evangelist here alludes is not determined. It has
been supposed, in opposition to the plain statement that the
people concerned in it were Galilceans, that it was the sedition
raised by the Samaritans on Mount Gerizim, and suppressed by

LUKE XIII. 3. 539
Pilate, as related in Joseph. Ant. XVIII. 5. Some of the Greek
Fathers contend that the tumult is intended, which was set on
foot by the followers of Judas of Galilee, (Acts v. 37.) who ap
peared about A.D. 14. and resisted the payment of tribute to
Caesar. The tenor of the context, however, seems to point to a
more recent event, and Christ, who disapproved of the leading
principle of this sect, would scarcely have placed them on a level
with those who were innocently slain by the fall of a tower. In
fact, nothing certain can be decided on the subject. There is no
particular mention of the affair in Josephus, though his declara
tion that the Galilaeans were the most seditious people in the
land, renders it highly credible that some sudden tumult in the
temple may have given Pilate a pretext for putting a party of
them to the sword. It is related in Joseph. B. J. II. 1. 3. that
Archelaus did not hesitate to slay three thousand while they were
offering sacrifices ; and in some insurrection of the Galilaeans
Pilate may have followed his example. Indeed, though Judas
himself was not personally concerned, the factious tenet of his party
may have been the origin of the tumult upon this as well as upon
other occasions. See Joseph. II. 1. 12. 23. Ant. XX. 5. A pe
culiar atrocity was supposed to attach to a murder committed be
fore an altar. Liv. X. 39. Nefando sacro mixta hominum pe-
cudumque cccde respersus. Whitby, Grotius, Lightfoot,
Wetstein.
Ibid. Tiov Ovaiwv. For roii a'iparog rwv Ovaiwv. There is a
similar ellipsis in Hor. Od. I. 1. 23. Lituo tubce Permixtus so-
nitus. The sense is complete in Phil. Jud. T. II. p. 315. a'ipan
ydp avSpotpovwv dtpa Ovaiwv dvEKtpaOi)aErai. In the next verse
the preposition 7rapd signifies above or beyond, as in Luke iii. 13.
Rom. i. 9. ii. 7. 9. ix. 23. So prceter in Latin. Plaut. Amphit.
II. 1, Quern ego amo prceter omnes. Wetstein.
Ver. 3. diaainwg. In like manner; as bpoiiog in v. 5. This
declaration partakes not only of an admonition, but of a pro
phecy, which was literally fulfilled about forty years afterwards in
the destruction of Jerusalem. During the siege the Temple was
frequently the seat of war, and multitudes of the priests who were
offering the sacrifices were slain, and their blood mingled with
that of the victims. Multitudes also were buried under the ruins
of the Temple. See Joseph. B. J. V. VI. et passim. Upon other
occasions also the Temple had been defiled with various slaugh
ters. Under Florus a massacre took place, and Manahem was
slain as he worshipped there. The zealots also, and the Idu-
maaans who assisted them, met with a similar fate, (B. J. II. 32.
IV. 14. sqq.) Whitby, Grotius, A. Clarke. A notion pre
vailed among the Jews that any sudden calamity was sent by
God as a judicial visitation upon the sins of the sufferers ; and it
is not improbable that the circumstances here related were re-

540 LUKE XIII. 6,7.
garded in this light. The evident drift of our Lord's observation
upon them is to set aside this error in judgment, though it has
been produced in support of the very doctrine which it was in
tended to refute. Christ does not indeed deny that these Ga
lilaeans were sinners, and that their sufferings were justly due to
their sins ; but he reprobated the uncharitable judgment of those
who look upon such accidental occurrences as particular provi
dences, and condemn particular sufferers as the victims of God's
merited vengeance, while they regard themselves as comparatively
righteous, only because no such calamity has yet befallen them.
Rosenmuller, Waterland. Of the Pool of Siloam see
Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 23. 43. The tower was probably
built on the city walls, near which the stream flowed. Of the
word btpEiXErrjg see on Luke xi. 4.
Ver. 6. o-vKrjv ev rip dpirEXwvt. This circumstance has been
supposed to militate with Deut. xxii. 9. ; but the precept there
delivered seems rather to forbid the sowing of a variety of seeds
in the same field, and the planting of trees is not noticed. Vines
and fig-trees were frequently planted together, and hence they
are frequently mentioned in conjunction in the O. T. Pliny also
observes in N. H. XVII. 18. Ficorum levis (umbra est,) quamvis
sparsa; ideoque inter vineas seri non vetantur. An opposite opi
nion, however, is adopted in Theophrast. Plant. III. 15. xa^£"
TTtoTara Si Kal apiriXw Kal rolg aXXoig aVKr) Kal iXaia' Kal yap
rpo(pr)v 7roXXrjv dpiporEpa XappdvEi, koI aKtdv irapix^t 7rX£t<xrrjv.
Kuinoel, Wetstein. Of the scope of this parable see Home's
Introd. Vol. II. p. 402. and compare Isaiah v. 1. sqq. There is
a somewhat similar comparison in Arrian. Epictet. I. 15. tTVKfje
jiiEV Kap7roe atpvio Kal pia atpiy ov TEXaovrat" yvwpijg S' dvOpwirov
Kapirov OiXsig ovno S' bXiyov Kal EVKoXwg Krr)aaaOat ; Grotius.
Ver. 7. rpta Errj. In Judea fig-trees usually bore fruit after
they had been planted three years, Maimon. Mor. Nev. III. 37.
Theophr. Plant. III. 17. Columel. de Arb. 21. In the applica
tion of the parable, however, the three years must be understood
of an indefinite period, and not after some commentators, as in
dicating the three years' duration of our Saviour's ministry. In
this case the fourth year, during which the tree was allowed to
remain, could not be extended to represent the forty years which
intervened between the death of Christ and the fall of Jerusalem
without destroying the unity of the image. The four years to
gether embrace the whole period of the Jewish commonwealth,
and the time of Christ's ministry is well denoted by the close of
the third year, the maturity of the tree corresponding with the
completion of the Mosaic dispensation. Whitby, Grotius. —
[Pearce.] The verb KarapyEtv, from dpyoe, inactive, signifies to
render useless, properly cessarefacere, and in this sense it occurs

LUKE XIII. 9. 11. 15. 23. 541
in Ezra iv. 21. 23. v. 5. vi. 8. LXX. So also Dioscorides, and
Eur. Phoen. 765. birwg dv pr) Karapywpsv X*Pa- As applied to
land, we meet with Arist. CEcon. 2. x^Pac dpyov yEvo/usvrje.
Compare Diod. Sic. XIX. 42. The verb, however, is used no
where in the sense of this passage, nor is it to be found in the
classical writers, except in the passages above cited. It is used,
however, by St. Paul in a variety of derived senses, so as almost
to be reckoned among the words peculiar to this Apostle. In
1 Cor. vi. 13. xiii. 8. and elsewhere it signifies to abolish; 2 Tim.
i. 10. to destroy ; 1 Cor. xiii. 11. to put away ; Gal. iii. 17. to
abrogate ; and Rom. vii. 2. to emancipate. Grotius, Wet
stein, Kypke.
Ver. 9. kSv piv irotriay Kapirov. The sense must be supplied
by KaXiog f'xEt, of which ellipsis see my note on Hom. II. A. 135.
We may observe that it was a principle with the Jews, founded
on the precept in Deut. xx. 19. not to cut down any tree till its
barrenness was clearly ascertained. Hence Bava Kama, p. 1.
Cut not down a palm that bears a cab of dates. Lightfoot.
Ver. 11. irvEvpa daOEvElag. Not simply a periphrasis for dcr-
OsvEiav, as some maintain, but to be understood in reference to
the Jewish opinion, that diseases were frequently inflicted by evil
spirits. Hence v. 16. rjv E'SrjrrEv 6 Saravae- See Joseph. Ant.
VI. 9. the Targums on Psalm xci. 6. and Maimon. Mor. Nev.
III. 22. on Job ii. 7. The infirmity under which this woman la
boured was called Kvipwaig, as plainly appears from the use of the
appropriate terms avyKvirrEtv and dvaKv7rrav. We have Ete rb
iravrEXig for TravrsXaie, as in Heb. vii. 25. Whitby, Light
foot, Wetstein, Kypke. — [Rosenmuller.]
Ver. 15. Xvst rov /3ovv, k. r. X. It appears from Sciiabb. II.
I. Erubbim, p. 20, 2. and a variety of other passages in the Rab
binical writings, that it was permitted to attend to the feeding of
their cattle on the Sabbath, and even to draw water for them,
and pour it into troughs. The Heathens also allowed the per
formance of a variety of agricultural employments on their most
solemn festivals. See Virg. Georg. I. 268. sqq. Compare the
note on Matt. xii. 11. Lightfoot, Schoettgen, Doddridge,
Wetstein. Of the importance which the Jews attached to their
descent from Abraham, whence they called themselves his sons
and daughters, see on Matt. iii. 9., and of the two following pa
rables on Matt. xiii. 31. 33.
Ver. 23. e'i bXlyot ol awZbpEvot ; The precise import of this
question, as well as the spirit in which it was put, is not fully
agreed upon by the commentators. Some understand adiZEaOat
of temporal deliverance only, in which sense it is applied in the

542 LUKE XIII. 32.
LXX with reference to the remnant, KardXEtppa, which the pro
phets declared would be rescuedfrom the general destruction of the
Jews, which was now approaching. See Jerem. xlix. 17. LXX,
and elsewhere. Julian has a parallel expression in Or. I. p. 6.
Xstt/zavov iTEpiaixiZopEvov. Others understand the expression of
those who shall be saved from the general disbelief, i. e. of those,
among the Jews more especially, who should believe in Christ and
embrace his religion. So the remnant mentioned in Isaiah x. 22.
is applied by St. Paul in Rom. ix. 27. Compare Luke xix. 9.
Acts xi. 17. Rom. xi. 14. 1 Cor. vii. 16. and particularly Acts ii.
40. and 47. Ignatius also, in his Epistle to Polycarp, has em
ployed the term in the same acceptation. Hence it will signify
to put in the way of salvation. Compare Jos. B. J. V. 13. 5.
It seems more probable, however, that eternal salvation was in
the mind of the enquirer, and that the question was not a captious
one, as some suppose, but proposed with a view to an authori
tative answer. Though it was the general opinion of the Jews
that all Israel should have their part in the world to come, still
the point appears to have been disputed continually in the schools,
(Sanhedr. p. 3. 1.); and our Lord's judgment may have been
sought as decisive on the subject. Hence the use of the participle
in the present instead of the future, as indicating a firm reliance
upon the certainty of his decision, the present time being fre
quently employed when the event, though future, is clearly ascer
tainable. Our Lord's reply, moreover, is not easily reconcile-
able with the idea of a temporal deliverance, though in this, as in
other cases of merely speculative importance, he has not given a
direct answer. Compare John xii. 34. xxi. 21. Acts i. 7. It
was of more concern to know what sort of persons than how many
will be saved ; and accordingly we are told that those only will
enter into the gate of life who strive (dytoviZovrai) to do so. This
striving, therefore, is totally distinct from any absolute decree,
and it depends upon ourselves whether we will or will not use
the necessary exertions to make our calling and election sure.
Whitby, Grotius, Lightfoot, Schoettgen. — [Hammond,
Rosenmuller.] Of the following verses see on Matt. vii. 13.
22. viii. 11. xix. 30. In v. 25. iyipOrj is looked upon by some
as redundant ; but the verb may signify to rise from one's seat.
The phrase tpayslv koI ttieIv ivtoiriov nvog, v. 26. is expressive
of intimate acquaintance and familiarity. Compare Psalm xii. 9.
Kuinoel.
Ver. 32. ry aXdiirEKt ravry. Persons are frequently compared
in the Scriptures to those animals which they appear to resemble
in temper and disposition. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 499.
note. The fox seems to have been selected in all ages and
countries as the emblem of artifice and cunning, instances of
which might be produced in abundance from writers of all deno-

LUKE XIII. 33. 543
minations. It is probable from our Lord's thus designating He
rod, that these Pharisees had been sent to intimate a pretended
design of the Tetrarch to kill him, with a view to rid himself of
his presence in his dominions. The repeated testimonies of
Christ to the innocence of John the Baptist, and the influence
which he was daily acquiring with the multitude, would naturally
create suspicion and alarm in the mind of the prince. Some, in
deed, have thought that the Pharisees themselves invented the
report in order to check the censures which our Lord never hesi
tated to pass upon their conduct. Had this been the case he
would scarcely have sent them with a message to Herod, instead
of reproving, as upon other occasions, their own hypocrisy and
deceit. With respect to the appellation itself, we may observe
that it contains no violation of the precept in Exod. xxii. 28.
The prophets in the O. T. did not scruple to reprove the vices of
kings and rulers ; and in calling Herod a fox Christ intended no
thing vituperative, but merely to intimate a perfect knowledge of
his secret intentions. Grotius, Kuinoel. — [Wetstein.] The
expression trrjuEpov Kat avptov is a proverbial phrase, denoting
any short interval of time. Compare Hos. vi. 2. So Arrian.
Epict. IV. 10. ovk eixe irpb btpOaXpwv, on avptov i) Ete rrjv rptrrjv
Sei aiirbv diroOavElv. On the other hand, yesterday and the third
day signifies lately in Gen. xxxi. 2. Exod. iv. 10. Deut. xix. 6.
Josh. iii. 4. 1 Sam. xix. 7. 1 Chron. xi. 3. Grotius, Doddridge.
A difference of opinion exists as to the meaning of the verb teXeiov-
juat. Some, deriving it from rArj, render it / shall be sacrificed,
viz. on the cross ; and others, I shall complete, i. e. my ministry:
but the more received interpretation is that of the E. T. / shall
be perfected, in a passive sense, i. e. / shall die. Compare Acts
xx. 24. Phil. iii. 12. Schleusner, Wetstein. — [Kuinoel,
Kypke, Doddridge]
Ver. 33. ovk ivSix^rat. It is not possible. Hesych. dSvvarov
ian. This was a severe reproof against the Jewish sanhedrim,
of which some of those present may perhaps have been members.
It lay with this council, which sate at Jerusalem, to decide upon
the pretensions of prophets, and punish impostors ; and it now
remained for them to complete the series of murders of which
they had already been guilty by condemning and crucifying the
Messiah. The expression, however, is to be understood with
certain limitations, as John the Baptist and some other prophets,
though comparatively few, had perished out of Jerusalem. Els
ner, Wetstein, Lightfoot, Doddridge, Kuinoel. In the
beginning of the verse the verb iropEiiEaOai refers to the advice of
the Pharisees in v. 31., and there seems to be an ellipsis to the
following effect: — Nevertheless, after working my miracles to-day
and to-morrow, or the day after I must depart, as you recommend,
for Jerusalem, for, &c. Hammond. Of Christ's lamentation over
Jerusalem see on Matt, xxiii. 37.

544 LUKE XIV. 1. 7.

CHAPTER XIV.
Contents : — Christ dines with a Pharisee, and heals a dropsy
on the Sabbath-day, vv. 1 — 6. He recommends humility, vv.
7 — 15. The parable of the great supper, vv. 16 — 24. Worldly -
mindedness incompatible with Christianity, vv. 25 — 35.
Verse 1. aafifidrto tyayslv aprov. It was a religious obligation
with the Jews, which our Lord encouraged by his presence on
this occasion, to have their tables better spread on the Sabbath-
day. See Nehem. viii. 10. Tobit ii. 1. Phil. Jud. II. 166.. In
Schabb. p. 119, 1. a Rabbi who had been well entertained en
quires — How did you know of my coming ? and is thus answered
— Is there any thing more valuable to us than the Sabbath ? i. e.
the day induced us to make good cheer, though we knew not of
your coming. Hence Plutarch, speaking of the Jews, observes
in Sympos. p. 672. A. at/rot Se rt^j Xoyto paprvpovatv, on <rdj3j3a-
rov Tipuiai, pdXtara piv irivstv Kat olvoiiaOai 7rapaKaXovvrEe dXXrj-
Xovg. The phrase ipayslv dprov is not uncommonly applied to a
meal of more than ordinary preparation, as in 2 Sam. ix. 7. xii.
21. Prov. ix. 5. Lightfoot, Schoettgen, Wetstein, Kui
noel. The ctpxovrEe rwv <Paptaaiwv axe not, as the E. T. have
it, chief Pharisees, but rulers of the sect of the Pharisees, i. e.
members of the Sanhedrim, or rulers of the synagogue. See
Matt. ix. 18. Otherwise they would have been termed 7rp<t>rot
Qapiaaiwv. Grotius, Hammond. Of the formula d7roKpi0£te
Et7rEv, v. 5. see on Matt. xi. 25. and of the following verses on
Matt. xii. 2. 10, 11.
Ver. 7. iirixtov. Some understand rovg btpOaXpovg, both here
and in Acts iii. 5. alleging Lucian's expression iirixEiv rovg btp-
OaXpoiig nvi. No instance, however, is produced where the el
lipsis is necessarily so supplied. It should seem, therefore, that
rbv voiiv or rrjv Siavoiav should rather be added. This is clearly
the case in 1 Tim. iv. 16. eVexe asavn^, Kat ry StSacrKaXfa.
Plato, de Legg. II. p. 926. B. iirl pdZoat ydpotg rrjv Siavoiav
iirixtov. Compare Herod. I. 80. VI. 96. Lucian, T. II. p. 212.
In the same manner the Latins use attendere with or without
animumin the accusative. Wetstein. — [Bos.]
Ibid, rag irpwroKXiaiag. The manner in which the Jews and
the ancients reclined at their meals has been noticed more than
once already. The most honourable place was beside the host
on the middle couch which lay along the upper end of the table.
See Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 397. 420. and compare Virg.
.En. I. 698. Hor. Sat. II. 8. 20. Plaut. Pers. V. 1. 15. Of this
post of honour the Rabbies were remarkably ambitious, claiming

LUKE XIV. 9. 12. 545
it as due to their superior wisdom. Thus the Talmud, in Bera
coth, p. 11, 2. King Janneus invited R. Simeon to a banquet,
where he placed himself between tlie king and tlie queen, and
being asked the reason, he replied .- In tlie book of Ben Israel it
is written, " Exalt Wisdom, and she shall exalt thee, and make
thee to sit among princes." The quotation, however, is from
Prov. iv. 8. A similar pride seems also to have prevailed among
the Greeks and Romans. Theoph. Char. 21. 6 Se ittKpodnXortuoe,
etti CEiirvov KArjt/ste, irap avrov rov KaAEaavra KaraKZipsvog OEiir-
vr)aai (^tXst.) Val. Max. II. 1. Invitati ad ccenam diligenter
qucerebant, quinam ei convivio essent interfuturi ; ne senior es ad-
ventu discubitum prcecurrerent. Our Lord's precept may be
compared with Prov. xxv. 7., and lessons of a similar character
are to be met with in the Rabbinical writings. Of the E. T. we
may remark that in our earlier writers the word room was syno
nymous with place. Lightfoot, Schoettgen, Wetstein. Of
the word ydpog, in the next verse, see on Matt. xxii. 1.
Ver. 9. Sbg roirto roirov. This form, as well as KarlxEtv ro-
trov and irpoaavafiriOi dvtorspov, were the usual expressions of
etiquette at the Jewish entertainments, instances of which abound
in the Rabbinical writers. Parallel phrases are also to be found
in the classics. Plut. in C. Gracch. p. 840. Sote roirov ayaOolg,
kokoi iroXlrai. Arrian. Epict. III. 26. 'e£,eX0e, Sbg dXXoig roirov.
Ovid. Pont. I. 1. locum date sacra ferenti. Fast. II. 668.
Cuncta Jovi cessit turba, locumque dedit. Cic. Epist. Fam. XI.
1. Dandus est locus Fortunce. Senec. Epist. 74. Demus rap-
toribus locum. Plautus : Abi tu sane superior. Wetstein,
Kypke. Of v. 11. see on Matt, xxiii. 11.
Ver. 12. jttrj tpdivsi roiig ipiXovg, k. t. X. Supply pbvo v. The
precept is not to be taken in an unlimited sense, as excluding all
interchange of hospitality among the rich, but as recommending
that more acceptable benevolence in the sight of God, which ex
tends itself to those from whom no reward can be expected. In
this restricted sense the particle pi), like the Hebrew DtbX, is fre
quently employed. See on Matt. ix. 18. Our Lord may possibly
allude to an Eastern custom which prevails in Arabia to this
day, where the rich frequently dine in the open air and invite
the passers by, even of the poorest orders, to partake of the
meal, that nothing may be left. See also Home's Introd. Vol.
III. p. 204. Sentiments analogous to the precept are found in
other writers. Cic. Off. I. In collocando beneficio hoc maxime
officii est, ut quisque maxime opis indigeat, ita ei maxime opi-
tulari : quod contra fit a plerisque ; a quo enim plurimum spe-
rant, etiamsi Me his non eget, tamen ei potissimum inserviunt.
Plin. Epist. IX. 30. Volo eum, qui sit vere liberalis, tribuere
amicis, sed amicis dico pauperibus ; non ut isti, qui Us potissi-
vol. i. N n

516 LUKE XIV. 14. 18.
mum donant, qui donare maxime possunt. Compare also Hom.
Od. P. 382. Xen. Sympos. I. 15. Arist. Nicom. VIII. 15. Am-
mian. Marcel. XIV. 6. The verb tpwvElv is here, as elsewhere,
used in the sense of koXeiv, but a peculiar emphasis has been at
tached to it in this place, inasmuch as those who give invitations
merely from ostentatious motives are wont to speak in a loud
voice. Some have regarded dvrtKaXstv, which is opposed to it,
as a Latinism ; and so we have in Mart. Epig. III. 27. 1. Nunquam
me revocas, venias cum scepe vocatus. But Xenophon, as cited
above, fully establishes the Greek idiom : ovte pr)v dig dvrtKXrj-
OriaopEvog koXeI pi rig. WETSTEIN, HaRMER. — [GrROTIUS.] Of
koXeiv see on Matt. xxii. 3.
Ver. 14. avaardaEi twv SiKaiwv. So avdaraaig rrje £tvrje, as
opposed to dvdaraatg Kpiaitiig, John v. 25. The Pharisees only
acknowledged the resurrection of the just, and our Lord here
speaks in accordance with their sentiments, though it is clear
from Matt. xxv. 32. and elsewhere, that there will be a general
resurrection. They also supposed, as we have elsewhere already
remarked, that there would be two resurrections, the first of
which would take place at the Messiah's appearance. Hence in
the reply of the guest, the kingdom of God is evidently to be un
derstood of the Messiah's earthly kingdom. Grotius, Pearce.
Of the following parable see on Matt. xxii. 1. sqq. where it is
given more at large.
Ver. 18. dirb pidg. There is here a manifest ellipsis, which
has been supplied in various ways. Some, comparing Adsiv. 32.
Phil. i. 27. understand KapStae or '/'vxrje : others suggest 0wvfje,
as in Diod. Sic. p. 515. D.: and others, again, oipae, alriag,
ipi)ipov, &c. But the word omitted is rather yvdipng or /3ovXrje.
Compare Hom. II. B. 379. and my note in loc. The omission
is supplied in Demosth. Philip. IV. p. 147. idv piv iipslg bpo-
OvpaSbv ek jutde yvdiprig <3?iXnrirov dpi/vr/ads. Grotius, Wet
stein, Bos.— [Hammond, Lightfoot, Doddridge,] &c. The
verb irapatTElaOai does not signify, as it sometimes does, to re
fuse, but to excuse oneself, as in Joseph. Ant. VIII. 8. 2. In
deed, the expression e'xe /je TraprjrrjjtiEvov is a Latinism, corres
ponding exactly with_ Mart. Epigr. II. 80. Excusatum habeas
me, rogo .•_ cceno domi. The phrases dvayKrjv e'xw, opus habeo,
and ipwrw <te, rogo te, are also regarded as Latinisms by the
generality of commentators ; though the former, which recurs in
Luke xxiii. 17. 1 Cor. vii. 37. Heb. vii. 27. Jude 3. is used by
some of the later Greek authors. In the next verse also Soki-
pdaai is the Roman forensic term probare, which signifies to
examine a thing in order to ascertain its quality. Cic. in Verr.
III. 31. Ut probetur frumentum. Wetstein, Grotius, Mi
chaelis. It is worthy of remark that there is nothing sinful in
10

LUKE XIV. 23. 26. 547
the various excuses which the guests offered for non-attendance
at the feast. The engagements which they alleged were in them
selves unobjectionable ; but their offence consisted in allowing
any occupation whatever to interfere with the more urgent and
important ceremony to which they had been invited. We may,
and we ought to attend to the duties and concerns of the present
life, but we must never allow them to interfere with the great
work of our salvation.
Ver. 23. dvdyKao-ov eIcteXSeTv. St. Augustin was induced, by
the obstinacy of the Donatists in the latter part of his life, to in
terpret this text in favour of the compulsion of heretics, though
he had strenuously maintained in his early works, as Justin,
Athenagoras, Tertullian, Arnobius, and the rest of the Fathers
had done before him, that none ought to be compelled to a pro
fession of their faith. The passage, however, has no relation to
heretics, but to the unconverted Gentiles ; nor is any other than
moral compulsion or persuasion intended, which is all that a ser
vant could exert. In this sense the verb dvayKa£av occurs in
Matt. xiv. 22. See the note there; and to the examples cited add
Prov. vii. 21. LXX. Mark vi. 4.5. Luke xxiv. 29. Acts xvi. 15.
Gal. ii. 14. 1 Thess. ii. 10. 2 Tim. iv. 2. Cic. de Orat. I. 9. de
Amic. 8. So also Plutarch, in Brut. p. 993. Xt7rap£tv Kat /3td-
ZtaOat iirl SeIttvov. Hor. Epist. I. 9. 3. prece cogit. The ex
pression, therefore, intimates the affectionate earnestness with
which Christ invites us to embrace the Gospel, but without any
sanction, which some would derive from it, to the1 doctrine of ir
resistible grace. Doddridge, Whitby, Macknight.
Ver. 26. ptaEl tov iraripa. Taken literally, the import of this
declaration would be not only impious, but impossible : but the
verb ptaEtv is frequently to be understood in a limited sense, and
the precept merely intimates that every tie is to be sacrificed, and
every attachment forsaken which comes into competition with
Christ and his religion. See on Matt, vi- 24. and on x. 37. where
the meaning is more clearly expressed. The comparison is to be
taken in the same light with that of Epictetus, wherein he likens
mankind to men preparing for a voyage : They may collect shells
on the shore provided they be ready to go on board at the signal
for sailing. Compare 1 Cor. vii. 29, 30. Hence, as a man na
turally calculates the expense of any undertaking before he em
barks in it, or as a king considers his resources before he engages
in war, so is it necessary for the Christian to prepare his soul for
temptation in the service of God and Christ : Ecclus. ii. 1. It
has been suggested, but with little probability, that our Lord
may here allude to the renunciation which the Jewish proselytes
made of their Gentile relations. Whitby, Grotius, Gilpin.
n n 2

548 LUKE XIV. 28. 31. 34. XV. 2.
Ver. 28. n-vpyov otKoSo/urjffat. So in Matt. xxi. 33. and hence
some have imagined that a tower similar to that which is there
intended, and which were common in the vineyards of the east,
is here also meant. But from the cost of its erection being the
subject of especial calculation, it should seem rather to have been
a turreted mansion ; and in nearly the same sense 7rvpyoe is used
in Luke xiii. 4. So Hor. Od. I. 4. 13. pauperum tabernas, re-
gumque turres. Liv. XXXIII. 48. Annibal ad suum turrim^er-
venit. The verb ipritpiZEtv signifies to calculate, from ifiijipog, a
pebble, which was used by the ancients in computation. So Rev.
xiii. 18. ipritpiadrw rbv dpiOpov. Herod. II. 36. XoyiZovrai i^rj-
ipoiai. Schleusner, Wetstein. — [Doddridge.]
Ver. 31. KaOiaag j3ovXEv£rat. So Virg. JEn. X. 159. Hie
magnus sedet JEneas, secumque volutat Eventus belli varios.
With this illustration we may also compare the following. Thu
cydides : roll 7ToXeuov to irapdXoyov baov ian irplv iv aiiri^ ys-
viaOatirpoSidyvwOE. SoLivy: Cum tuas vires, turn vim fortunes
martemque belli communem propone animo. Quinctilian : Prius
est par are bellum quam exercere. Sallust : Priusquam incipias,
consulto ; et postquam consulueris, mature facto opus est. P.
Mimus : Diu apparandum est bellum, ut vincas celerius. To
these may be added Xen. Mem. IV. Paed. II. Ammian. Marcel.
XXV. 3. Joseph. B. J. II. 16. 4. Phil. Jud. II. 16. 40. Gro
tius, Wetstein.
Ver. 34. koXov to dXag' k. t. X. From a false notion that
this mineral cannot lose its flavour, some have supposed that
pure salt is not here intended, but some mixture in which salt
abounds. But see note on Matt. v. 13. The connexion in this
place runs thus : " Ye see the necessity of counting the cost and
hazard of becoming my disciple ; for if ye proceed rashly ye may
apostatise, and become as unsavoury salt." In being trodden
underfoot there may be an allusion to excommunicated penitents
in the primitive Church, who cast themselves on the ground to
be trampled upon by those who passed them. Lightfoot, Whit
by. — [Hammond, Le Clerc]

CHAPTER XV.
Contents:— Parables of the lost sheep, vv. 1 — 7.,- of the lost
piece of money, vv. 8—10. ,• and of the prodigal son, vv.
11—32. Verse 2. dpaprwXoiig irpoaSixlrai. Associates with sinners.
So Arist. Equit. 735. roiig piv KaXovg te KayaOoiig oil irpoaSixu.

LUKE XV. 4. 549
There is some difference of opinion as to the application of the
three parables which compose this chapter. Some by SiKaiotg
in v. 7. understand the Jewish nation, who trusted in themselves
that they were righteous ; and by dpaprwXid the Gentile world,
in which sense the word is not unfrequently used in the N. T.
So also in v. 10. : and under the figure of the prodigal son the
Gentiles are again supposed to be represented, who vierefar off
from God, (Ephes. ii. 13.) until admitted to the privileges of the
Christian covenant, to the great dissatisfaction of the Jews, who
are represented by the elder brother. A much more natural ap
plication arises out of the murmurs of the Pharisees against our
Lord for holding communication with persons whom they re
garded as sinners, and with whom, even though they repented,
they would not associate. See Tanchuma, p. 3, 2. But as our
Lord upon another occasion had told them that the whole need
not a physician, but those that are sick, so he here teaches them
that there is joy in heaven at the repentance of a sinner, and the
return of a prodigal ; and consequently it is more pleasing in the
sight of God to attempt their conversion than to forsake their
company, and thus harden them in their sins. It may be, indeed,
that our Lord may have had in view the more extended sense of
which the parables would afterwards admit, with reference to the
call of the Gentiles ; and the ancient Fathers have not improperly
applied them to both cases. At the same time the righteous who
need no repentance cannot be taken in an ironical acceptation, since
there would be no less joy at the conversion of one of these than
at that of sinners of any other description. The pEravoia, trans
lated repentance, does not here imply that sorrow for sin, which
is daily required of the most godly men, but a thorough change
of mind and conduct, which is necessary to the conversion of an
habitual sinner. Grotius, Hammond, Doddridge, Schoett
gen. — [Whitby.] Of the particulars of the parable see on
Matt, xviii. 12. and compare the notes on Matt. ix. 10. 13. It
seems to have been a custom with the Jews to carry their sheep
on their shoulders. See Isaiah xl. 11. and compare Tibull. Eleg.
I. 1. 31. Non agnamve sinu pigeat fcetumve capellce Desertum,
oblita matre, referre domum. The scope of the parable may
also be illustrated by Eurip. Fragm. CEd. 14. 'Ek riov diXirrwv
r) X"P'£ pEtZtov (3porote QavEiaa, paXXov rj to irpoaSoKwpEVOv,
TipirEi. Kuinoel, Wetstein.
Ver. 4. iirl to diroXtoXog. The preposition here properly de
notes in search of. Diog. Laert. I. 10. irEpipOslg irapa tov irarpbg
Ete dypov E7rt 7rpo/3arov. Kypke. Of the ellipsis of pdXXov in
v. 7. see my note on Hom. II. A. 116. The parable of the lost
piece of money has the following parallel in the Jewish writings.
As a man who has lost any thing lights a candle, and searches
till he find it, so should we be diligent in seeking for the things

550 LUKE XV. 12, 13. 15.
of the world to come. So Theoph. Char. 10. rrig yvvatKog airo-
jiaXovarig rpixaXKOv, dtog pEraipipEiv rd ffKEvrj, Kat rag KXivag,
Kat rag Ktj3a>rove, Kat Sapdv rd KaXvppara. WETSTEIN.
Ver. 12. rb iirifidXXov pipog. The portion which falls to my
share. So Job vi. 11. LXX. on aoi intfidXXEi ?j KXrjpovojttfa
avrije. Compare 1 Mace. x. 30. 2 Mace. iii. 3. ix. 16. In the
same sense the word also occurs in other writers. Herod. IV.
115. tOv Krripdnov rb iwiBdXXov. VII. 23. diroXaxbvrEg ydp
jttoptov octov avrotcrtv E7T£paX£. Demosth. de Cor. p. 212. rrjg
rdiv aXXwv rvx*ie rb iirijddXXov iip' r)pag pETEiXritpivai rrjv 7roXtv.
Neither the Jewish or Roman law allowed to a father the volun
tary distribution of his whole estate. Among the Jews a double
portion was allotted to the first born, and the remainder was di
vided equally among the rest of the children, (Deut. xxi. 17.)
nor was it unusual to settle his patrimony upon a son during the
father's life-time, the latter reserving to himself, as in the present
instance, so much of the estate as was sufficient for the support
of the rest of his family. Parkhurst, Wetstein, Kypke, Kui
noel.
Ver. 13. trvvayaywv dtravra. Scil. Ete apyvptov. Turning it
all into money. Plutarch. Op. p. 772. C. KXrjpovo/utav Ete apyv
ptov trvvayayaiv. Quinctil. Dial. 5. Cundas facultates in pretia
collegi. The verb Sta<7Kop7rt£av signifies to squander ; in Latin
dilapidare. Thus Terence : Priusquam dilapidet nostras vi-
ginti minus. With respect to the adjective dawrog there can be
no doubt of its derivation, though all are not agreed respecting
its precise import. Some understand it actively, of one who can
save nothing ; but it is certainly preferable to explain it after
Aristotle, in a passive acceptation, rbv Si aiirbv diroXXiipEvov.
He adds, Ethic. IV. 1. SokeT Se dirwXad rig aiiroii Eivai koI r) rr)g
oiiaiag tpOopa, dig roii £fjv Std tovtwv ovrog. Soph. Aj. 190.
dawTOV yEVEtte- Schol. rrje i^toXovg Kal awZEaOai pr) Swapivrfg.
The E. T. riotous living fully expresses the meaning of the ori
ginal. Cic. de Fin. 11. 8. Nolim enim mihi fingere asotos, ut
soletis, qui in mensam vomant, et qui de conviviis auferantur,
crudique postridie se rursus ingurgitent ; qui solem, ut aiunt,
nee occidentem unquam viderint nee orientem : qui consumpiis
patrimoniis egeant ; nemo nostrum istius generis asotos jucunde
putatvivere, &c. &c. &c. Aul. Gell. VII. 11. Nequam hominem
nihili neque rei neque frugis bonce, quod genus Grcecifere daw-
rov, i) aKoXaarov, rj dxpslov, rj KaKorpoirov, r) piapbv vacant.
Wetstein, Grotius.
Ver. 15. |3o(7keiv xotpove. As the Jews were forbidden to eat
swine, so the care of these animals was considered an employment
at variance with their religion, so that the occupation in which he

LUKE XV. 16. 551
was engaged is a moving circumstance in the picture of the pro
digal's distress. Thus in Sola, p. 49, 2. Cursed is he that
feedeth swine. A similar antipathy prevailed among the Egyp
tians, as related in Herod. II. 27. ; and the office of a swineherd,
though no religious scruples intervened, was looked upon with
the greatest contempt among Heathen nations. Mart. Epigr.
X. 11. Dispeream, ni tu Pyladi prcebere matellam Dignus es,
aut porcos pascere. Pearce, Wetstein. Of the verb KoXXdtr-
Oai, which here signifies to attach oneself to another, scil. as a
servant, see on Matt. xix. 5.
Ver. 16. koI iirEOiipEi yspiaai k. t. X. The interpreters for the
most part have been used to understand this passage as if the
desire was not gratified ; but as the prodigal had the care of the
swine he could have had no difficulty, except on the score of con
science, to supply himself with a portion of their food ; and as
he had made no scruple of violating his religion in undertaking
the charge, he would scarcely have been deterred from purloining
his necessary subsistence, the wages allowed by his master being
insufficient to supply his wants. Hence it seems that iiriOvpslv
should be rendered to be fain, to be content, of which sense several
instances may be adduced from the classics ; and so it should also
be taken in Luke xvi. 21. and in Isaiah i. 29. lviii. 2. LXX.
Thus Lys. Orat. 24. iirtOvpElv rwv irapovrwv vvvt 7rpay/ttdrwv,
to be content with the present position of affairs. In the ensuing
member of the sentence there is an ellipsis of ipayElv. The sense
runs thus : And yet, though he was reduced to this extremity,
no one gave him aught to eat. Campbell, Grotius, Macknight.
— [Kuinoel.]
Ibid. KEpariwv. E. T. husks: by which have been understood
the pods of peas or beans, or some other leguminous vegetable.
The commentators, however, are now pretty generally agreed
that the fruit of the carob tree (ceratonia siliquosa, Linn.) is in
tended, of which the fruit is still used in the East for feeding
swine. It is also called St. John's bread, from a popular notion
that it formed part of the Baptist's food in the wilderness. In
Plin. N. H. XV. 28. it is called the Egyptian fig ; and so
Hesych. KEpartwia" crvKrj Atyv7rrov. The rind, which is some
times eaten by the poorer classes, is sweet, but mealy, and some
what indigestible. Hence Vajikra Rabba : R Acha said, A Jew
must eat carobs in order to repentance. Again in Tanchuma, p.
258, 1. I should prefer the land of Israel, were the wildest ca
robs my only food. Compare Hor. Epist. II. 1. 123. Vivit sili-
quis et pane secundo. Pers. Sat. III. 55. Siliquis et grandi
pasta polenta. See also Galen, de Med. Situp. I. Theoph. Hist.
Plant. I. 18. IV. 1. Some have incorrectly imagined that the
fruit intended was a kind of wild chesnut. Campbell, Grotius,
Wetstein, Schoettgen. — [Doddridge.]

552 LUKE XV. 17. 20. 22. 24.
Ver. 17. tig iavrbv iXOwv. Coming to himself. The formula
is used of a recovery from insanity, delirium, or any mental de
lusion whatsoever. Diod. Sic. XIII. 95. rote Xoyurpolg eig
iavroiig ipxbptvot. Arrian. Epict. 31. brav iig aEavrbv iXOyg.
Hor. Epist. 1 1. 2. 137. Expulit elleboro morbum, bilemque me-
raco, Et redit ad sese. Lucret. IV. 994. Donee discussis redeant
erroribus ad se. 1016. Exterrentur, et ex somno quasi mentibu'
capti Vix ad seredeunt. In Acts xii 11. the phrase ysviaOai iv
iavnd, which is found also in Xen. Anab. I. 5. 15. has precisely
the same meaning. Wetstein, Kypke. In the next verse ov-
pavbg is substituted for ©soe, as in Matt. xxi. 25. Compare Dan.
iv. 23. 1 Mace. iii. 18. LXX, where the Hebrew is miT "OB1?.
Grotius. Ver. 20. eVeVeo'ev iirl rbv rpdxnXov. In token of affection
and reconciliation. Compare Gen. xxxiii. 4. xiv. 14. Tobit xi. 8.
Acts xx. 37. So Hom. Od. ¥. 207. AaKptW™ S' iirEtr lObg
Spdpsv, dpipl Se yEtpae Asipy |3dXX' 'OSvo-rji. Ter. And. I. 1. 110.
Rejecit se in ilium flens quam familiar iter. Wetstein, Wake
field. Of the verb airXayxviZ^aOat see on Matt. ix. 36. The
idea in which the word originated prevailed generally among the
ancients. Eur. Orest. 1200. Kat vtv Sokw, to irpwrov rjv ttoXvc
irapy, Xpovt^i paXd^Etv airXdyxvov. Ovid. Epist. I. 90. Viscera
nostra luce dilaniantur opes. Compare also yEsch. Prom. 729.
Eur. Med. 220. Juv. Sat. XIII. 14.
Ver. 22. rrjv trroXijv rrjv irpwrriv. The first, i. e. the best robe :
as in Rom. iii. 2. x. 19. 1 Tim. i. 15. So Ezra xxvii. 22. LXX.
psrd irpwrwv r)Svapdrwv. Athen. V. p. 197. B. raiiratg S' dptpi-
rairot dXovpyEig viriarpwvro rrje irpwrrig ipiag. Joseph. Ant.
XIII. 5. 4. rd 7rpt5ra piipa xPl°fl£v01- IQ fhe same manner
primus is used in Ter. Adelph. V. 2. 4. Justin. II. 9. The robe,
the ring, and the shoes were marks of distinction in the East.
See Gen. xii. 43. 1 Mace. vi. 16. James ii. 2. and Home's In
trod. Vol. III. p. 406. So Plaut. Casin. Si effixis hoc, soleas
tibi dabo, et annulum in digito Aureum, et bona plurima. With
the killing of the fatted calf we may compare Hom. Od. S. 414.
"A?£0' iiwv rbv dpiarov, 'iva ^,e'ivw ispEvaw TrjXESa7rt£). Hor. Epist.
I. 3. 36. Pascitur in vestrum reditum votiva juvenca. Grotius,
Wetstein, Bulkley. Of the verb Oiieiv see on Matt. xxii. 4.
Ver. 24. vEKpoe r)v, ko.1 dviZnaE. Some understand the father
as speaking of his son in relation to himself, or to his own igno
rance whether he was alive or dead. But the expression is rather
to be understood of a spiritual death and resuscitation. Theo
phylact : VEKpwatv piv Kat a7rorX£tav iprial rrjv dirb rrjg dpapriag'
dvaZtotoatv Si Kat EvpECTtv, rrjv a7ro rije psravoiag. Compare Rom.
iv. 19. Ephes. ii. 1. v. 14. 1 Tim. v. 6. 1 John iii. 14. Rev. iii. 1.

LUKE XV. 29, 30. 553
and see the note on Matt. viii. 22. The Jews have a proverb,
Illmen, while they live, are dead; and the Arabs, The living
dead man is truly dead. Pythagoras also, in order to intimate
that one who had deserted his school of philosophy was morally
dead, set up a coffin in his room. We have a similar metaphor in
a fragment of Menander, preserved by Eustathius : "AvOpwirE,
iripvat irrojxbg r)aOa Kal vEKpbg, Nvvt Se 7rXovr£te. So Cic. post
redit. in Senat. 9. Qui me a morte ad vitam, a desperatione ad
spem, ab exitio ad salutem revocavit. So in v. 27. iiyiaivovra
is to be understood of moral sanity ; or, at least, as including
this as well as bodily health. Hammond, Kypke, Wetstein. —
[Rosenmuller, Kuinoel.]
Ver. 29. iSov, roaaiira irri k. t. X. This point in the parable
is not to be overpressed in favour of the Pharisees or of the
Jewish nation ; but, allowing them to be as righteous as they
pretended, it was no reason for their rejecting a penitent sinner.
Tertullian observes : Posuit Christus ergo illos in parabola, esse,
non quales erant, sed quotes esse debuerant. The father inti
mates in his reply that there is no just cause of complaint to the
righteous, because the penitent are received into favour. As the
joyful welcome given to the younger son did not lead to the dis
inheritance of the elder, so neither will God, out of partial fond
ness for a repentant sinner, raise him to a higher state of glory
than those who have made greater progress in holiness, and done
him more constant and faithful service. Grotius, Le Clerc,
Doddridge.
Ver. 30. 6 Karaipaywv aov rbv j3t'ov. We have the same me
taphor in Hom. Od. 0. 10. jttrj rot Kara irdvra (pdywat, Krr)para
SaaadpEvot. ^Eschin. c. Timarch. ei oiirog TTEiropvEVKi te, Kal rd
irarpi^a KarESr)SoKE, Kal ov pbvov KaritpayEV, dXX', £t otov r
eItteIv, KariirtEv. JEsoxi. Fr. vfoe dawrog Karaipaywv rd irarpi^a.
Ter. Eun. II. 2. 4. Patria qui abligurierat bona. Hor. Sat. II.
3. 122. Filius ut ebibat hceres. We read of a maxim of Solon in
D. Laert. I. 55. idv rig pr) rpiipy roiig yoviag dripog iarw, dXXd
Kal b rd irarpya KarESriSoKwg ; and, accordingly, a law is cited in
iEschin. c. Timarch. §. 30. to the effect that no person of this
character should be allowed to speak in the assembly. Wet
stein, Wolf.

554 LUKE XVI. 1. 3. 6.

CHAPTER XVI.
Contents: — The parable of the unjust steward, vv. 1 — 13.
The Pharisees reproved, vv. 14 — 18. The parable of Dives
and Lazarus, vv. 19 — 31.
Verse 1. dvOptoirbg ng k. r. X. There is a parable very like
this in D. Kimchi on Isaiah xl. 21. though our Lord has im
proved it greatly, and rendered the circumstances more striking
and impressive. The whole world is like unto a house ; heaven
is its roof, the stars its lamps, and the fruits of the earth the
table spread. The owner and builder of this house is the Holy
blessed God; and man is his steward, into whose hands the bu
siness of the house is committed. If he considers in his heart
that the master keeps his eye constantly over him, and he, there
fore, acts wisely, he shall find favour in the eyes of his master ;
but if the master find wickedness in him, he shall remove him
from his stewardship. The foolish steward does not think of
this, $c. Sj-c. 8rc. Lightfoot, A. Clarke. The verb StafidXXsiv
does not always imply calumny ; but, as here, it is used of a true
accusation in Numb. xxii. 22. 2 Mace. iii. 11. LXX. Diod. Sic.
p. 269. D. Joseph. Ant. VI. 10. 2. The phrase diroSovvat
Xoyov, to give an account, occurs in Matt. xii. 36. Acts xix. 40.
Heb. xiii. 17. 1 Pet. iv. 5. So Plat. Phaed. §. 8. vplv Si rolg
SiKaaralg jioiiXopai rbv Xoyov airoSovvai. Schleusner, Kypke,
Raphelius. Of the use of Swapai, in the next verse, see on
Mark ii. 19.
Ver. 3. aKaiTTEtv ovk laxvw, k. t. X. As the labour of digging
seems to have been regarded by the ancients as most servile
and laborious, so begging was looked upon as mean and dis
graceful. Aristoph. A v. 1432. ri ydp irdOw ; aKairrEiv ydp ovk
iiriarapat. Eurip. Rhes. 176. KaKat y£a>py£tv x£'P£C £V r£0pau-
pivat. Pausan. Arcad. p. 695. AaKESatpoviwv ol alxpdXwTOi rb
iteS'iov TEyEaratg 'iaKairrov. Quintil. Decl. 9. Quid vis porro
faciam ? Agrestia opera ? Delicatior, quod afortuna non didici.
Also Tyrtaeus : ittwxeveiv irdvrwv iar dvtrjporarov. The verb
jtyvwaKitv signifies to resolve in the next verse ; and so it occurs
in Diod. Sic. IV. 57. Plutarch. Lycurg. §. 3. Eur. Dan. fr. 43.
Alciph. Epist. I. 25. Grotius, Elsner, Wetstein, Schleus
ner. Before SiZmvrai we must supply dvOpwirot, or perhaps
XpEWtpEtXirat. Ver. 6. ekotov /3drove iXaiov. A hundred baths of oil. The
bath, T\1, was the largest measure of capacity among the He-

LUKE XVI. 8. 555
brews, except the Homer, of which it was the tenth part: Ezek.
xl. 11. 14. It was equal to the ephah, containing about seven and
a half English gallons. In the E. T. j3droe in this, and Kopoe in
the next verse, are rendered by the same general term, measure.
But the cor, ~D, was the largest Hebrew dry measure, as the
Homer was for liquids ; each containing about seventy-five gal
lons. According to Joseph. Ant. XV. 9. 2. the cor was equi
valent to ten Attic medimni, or bushels. Hence there may have
been no partiality manifested in the reduction to each of the
debtors respectively, inasmuch as twenty cors of wheat were, in
all probability, equal in value to fifty baths of oil. The word
ypdppa signifies a bond or engagement, and is properly rendered
by cautio in the Vulgate. In this sense it is also used in Joseph.
Ant. XVIII. 6. 3. It should seem to have been a custom with
tenants, who paid the rent due to the landlord in the produce of
the land, to have signed a bond for the payment, which was coun
tersigned by the steward. To prevent any appearance of forgery,
therefore, the debtors or tenants are desired by the steward to
execute their bonds afresh. Some, indeed, have supposed that
no injustice was meditated in these latter proceedings, the steward
intending to make up from his own resources the balance which
he deducted from the accounts of the debtors. But, not to men
tion that in such a case he would have let the accounts remain
unaltered, the drift of the parable does not seem to admit of such
an interpretation. By changing the bills he cunningly made the
debtors his accomplices in the fraud, providing at the same time
against his detection, and for ensuring his favour with those whom
he fraudulently benefitted. That his master appears, from v. 8.,
to have discovered his guilt is no argument for his not wishing to
deceive him. Doddridge, A. Clarke. — [Macknight.]
Ver. 8. 6 Kvpiog. Scil. rov oikovo/xov. Of the scope of this
passage see Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 404. 534. The chil
dren of this world are those who mind worldly things, and the
children of light are those who are enlightened by religious wis
dom, and regard worldly things so far only as they may subserve
the great purpose of salvation, and become the instruments of
good to others. Hence, the application of the parable is clearly
deducible from our Lord's injunction in the following verse.
Those who desire the rewards of heaven should be as assiduous
in securing them by a proper application of their worldly advan
tages, as the steward was in making friends by improper means ;
and as studious in laying up for themselves treasures in heaven,
as the worldly-minded usually are in encreasing their earthly
stores. A. Clarke, Le Clerc, Whitby, &c. The word yEvfd
in this passage has been variously interpreted ; some understand
ing it in its literal and others in a metaphorical acceptation.
Among the latter, condition, conduct, disposition, &c. have been

556 LUKE XVI. 9.
assigned to it, but without any valid confirmation from similar
usage. The safest way, therefore, seems to be to understand it
literally, so that the import of Ete Trjv ysvaxv will be as respects
their generation, i. e. the age in which they live. Compare Matt.
xi. 16. xxiii. 36. Luke i. 48. ix. 41. xi. 29. Acts viii. 33. and
elsewhere. Parkhurst, Rosenmuller, Kuinoel. — [Grotius,
Campbell, &c]
Ver. 9. ek rov papwva rrig dSiKiag. For papwvd dSiKOv. So
in v. 8. oikovouov rrje dStKtae. Compare also Luke xviii. 6. The
epithet unrighteous, as applied to riches, does not seem to imply
acquired by injustice, though some commentators understand it
in this sense. It is true, indeed, that the corresponding expres
sion "IptiH T1DD is used by the Targumist on 1 Sam. viii. 3. xii.
3. 2 Sam. xiv. 14. Prov. xv. 27. Isaiah v. 23. and elsewhere, to
signify unjust gain. The Rabbins held also, that those who
were unable to make restitution, from ignorance of the persons
they had wronged, should appease the justice of God by paying
the amount into the synagogue for the service of the poor. It
cannot for a moment be imagined, however, that our Lord's ad
vice will admit of this interpretation ; so that those who think
that the texture of the parable sanctions the meaning, apprehend
it to be spoken in a general sense in relation to the means by
which wealth is too frequently acquired in the world. But it is
clearly better, in this instance, to render dStKoe, deceitful, not to
be relied on, for in v. 11. rig dSUw papwvq. is contrasted, not with
to S'lKaiov, but with to dXriOivbv, the former relating to earthly
treasure, the latter to heavenly. We have a similar opposition
in Rom. ii. 8. 1 Cor. xiii. 6. ; and dStKoe and dStKta are used for
false aadfalsehood in Deut. xix. 18. Job xxvii. 24. Psalm xxvi.
6. Jerem. v. 31. Ezek. xxiii. 7. Hos. xii. 7. Amos viii. 5. LXX.
John vii. 18. viii. 46. 2 Thess. x. 12. So also Eurip. Elect. 948.
'H ydp ipvatg SlKaiog, oil rd xprjjuara" 'H piv ydp aul irapapivova
dipst KaKa' 'O S' bXfdog dStKog, Kat UErd aKatuiv %vvwv, 'E^E7rrar'
o'Ikwv, apiKpbv dvOhaag xpbvov. Virg. Georg. II. 460. Fundit
humofacilem vidum justissima tellus. The opposite of this last
citation is lellus nunquam mentita colono, Sil. Ital. VII. 60.
Hammond, Le Clerc, Campbell, Wetstein, Kuinoel,
Pearce, Wakefield. — [Lightfoot, Whitby.] With kXt-
7rrjT£ there is an ellipsis of rbv j3tov or rb Zvv. The former is
supplied, Lys. Orat. VIII. 4. Alciph. Ep. III. 28. Dion. Hal.
A. R. I. 54., and the latter in 3 Mace. ii. 23. Polyb. II. 41. Of
the verb used in this sense absolutely, we have examples in Gen.
xxv. 8. xxxv. 29. xlix. 33. Psalm civ. 29. Job xiii. 19. xiv. 11.
Jerem. xiii. 17. 22. Lam. i. 20. Wisd. v. 13. Judith vii. 22.
LXX. So Apoll. Bibl. III. 4. 2. ^EpiXrig Si Std rbv fojBov iK-
Xtiroiiarig. Joseph. B. J. IV. 1. 9. Xdprje KaraKEipEvog Kat vo-
trrjXEvo/UEVoe EKXaVEt. Eur. Hipp. 860. £'Xt7r£c, 'iXiirEg, w tpiXa

LUKE XVI. 10. 557
yvvatKwv. Schol. r6 £'Xt7rEe dvrt rov diriOavEg" £'Xi7rse rb Zvv.
In the same way the Latins use deficere, as in Justin. XII. 15.
8. Cum deficere eum amici viderent. In this passage the word
was probably selected by our Lord to preserve the analogy be
tween death and the steward's discharge from office. Some
would supply rov papwva, but the ellipsis is unauthorised, and
does not suit well with the context. Whitby, Wetstein, Camp
bell, Wakefield. — [Grotius, Kypke.]
Ibid. Si^wvrai. The nominative to be supplied before this
verb is matter of contention among the critics. Some understand
the poor, of whom the relief afforded by the unrighteous mammon
had made friends ; and in support of this opinion they cite a
dogma of the Rabbins : The rich assist the poor in this world
by their wealth, and the poor assist the rich in the world to
come with their souls and bodies. So Jerome : Non memini me
legere mala morte mortuum, qui libenter opera charitatis exer-
cuit : habet enim multos intercessores, et impossibile est multorum
preces non exaudiri. In a sense nearly similar honouring fa
ther and mother is said to be the cause of long life, Exod. xx.
12. Others imagine that the angels are intended, in reference
to our Lord's declaration in Matt. xxiv. 31.: and others, again,
that tpiXoi should be supplied from the preceding member of the
sentence, where iplXovg, in the plural, is supposed to refer to
God. A great objection to all these hypotheses is their uncer
tainty, and it is, therefore, better to consider SiZwvrat as used im
personally. See on Matt. i. 23. Luke xii. 20. Hammond,
Whitby, Rosenmuller. — [Grotius, Mede, Schoettgen,
Blackwall, Kuinoel, &c] An objection has been raised to
the use of the word o-Krjvat in this verse, as it properly implies a
tent or tabernacle raised for temporary purposes ; it signifies,
however, a building generally, not only in Acts xv. 16. but in
Polyb. XII. 9. 4. XXXI. 22. 2. So the Vulgate in Esdr. ii. 11.
dabo eis tabernacula ceterna. Compare also Rev. xii. 12. xiii. 6.
S chleusner, Raphelius. — [Markland. ]
Ver. 10. 6 7rt<7roe ev iXax'iarw, k. r. X. This is a proverbial
saying, to which there are many parallel in the Rabbinical writ
ings. The application follows in the next verse : " As he who
is unfaithful in small matters is not worthy to have the charge of
a more important trust, so those who have misapplied their earthly
riches, which are merely committed to them by God as stewards,
and for which they must give an account, will be considered as unfit
for the riches of heaven, which, if bestowed, would be perpetually
their own, and which no one could take from them." Thus in Sche-
moth R. §. 2. God never bestows largely upon men until he has
proved them in smaller concerns ; after which he raises them to
higher stations. In v. 12. dXXorpiw is rendered by the E. T. ano
ther man's, whereas God, not man, is intended, to whom the riches

558 LUKE XVI. 14, 15.
and other advantages in our possession properly belong. In the
same sense rd dXXorpia is used in Phil. Jud. II. 77. 38. Hence
Clem. Rom. II. 5. rd KoapiKa raiira dig dXXorpia riyuaOat, Kal
pi) iiriOvpslv aiirwv. Compare Eur. Phcen. 558. Arrian. Epict.
I. 1. II. 16. III. 24. IV. 5. To these rd -npirEpa are opposed,
as belonging to the inheritance which shall last for ever, eternal
in the heavens. Thus propria and aliena are contrasted by the
Latins. Phaed. Fab. I. 4. Amiitit meriio propria, qui aliena
appcfit. Compare also Hor. Sat. II. 2. 129. Nam propriae tel-
luris hcmm nalura neaue ilium, Nee me, nee quemquam statuit.
Nunc ager Umbreni sub nomine, nuper Ofelli Dicius, erit nulli
proprius ; sed cedet in usum Nunc mihi, nunc alii. Epist. II.
2. 270. Tanqvam sit proprium, puncto quod mobilis horce, Nunc
prece, nunc pre tio, nnnc vi, nunc sorte suprema Permutat do
minos, el cedit in altera jura. P. Syrus : Nil proprium dvcas,
quod amilti potest. Hence Donatus on Ter. Andr. IV. 3. Bona
ceierna vocantur propria ; bona vero hujus vilce aliena. Whitby,
Grotius, Schoettgen, Wetstein. Of v. 13. see on Matt. vi.
24. The connexion in this place is readily discernible.
Ver. 14. i%EpvKTr)piZov. They sneered; or rather, according
to an expression of our own, turned up their noses at him. The
derivation is from pvKrr)p, nasus. The Latins also had a similar
expression. Thus Hor. Sat. I. 6. 5. Naso suspendere adunco.
Pers. Sat. I. 40. Rides : — et nimis uncis Naribus indulges. We
meet with the verb again in Luke xxiii. 35. and in Psalm ii. 4.
xxii. 7. Prov. xv. 20. LXX, but very rarely in the classic writers.
It is found, however, in Stobasus, and in a fragment of Menander,
cited by Plutarch; and Lysias is cited in J. Pollux, II. 78. as
likewise employing it. Kypke, Wetstein, Kuinoel.
Ver. 15. StKatovvrse iavroiig. This phrase clearly denotes
those who arrogate to themselves a superiority of virtue which
they do not possess. Compare Luke x. 29. The arts by which
the Pharisees gained a reputation of exalted piety among their
countrymen are sufficiently exposed by our Lord in Matt, xxiii.
Of the three following verses see on Matt. xi. 13. v. 18. 32. re
spectively. Their connexion in this place is not so apparent,
and some have supposed that they were spoken upon another oc
casion, and inserted here as detached observations ; upon closer
examination, however, they appear to have arisen out of the te-
nour of our Lord's discourse. " Your reputed sanctity among
men is an abomination to God, who knows the heart, and reads
therein hypocrisy and covetousness. The dispensation of the
Gospel, which opened with the preaching of John, will place the
precepts and ceremonies of the law, which your traditions have
perverted and misapplied, in their true and proper light ; and
teach mankind that not one tittle shall fail. Take, for instance,

LUKE XVI. 19. 21. 559
the commandment respecting adultery, which you have contrived
to evade, and your evasion of which, though it may not affect
your character in the sight of the world, is abomination in the
sight of God." Having thus unmasked their hypocrisy, our Lord
returns to his subject, and dissuades his hearers from the abuse
of riches, and indulgence in worldly pleasures, by the parable of
the rich man and Lazarus. Grotius, Whitby, Doddridge. —
[Hammond, Kuinoel.]
Ver. 19. dvOpwirog Se rig k. t. X. Some of the ancient Fa
thers, and among them Irenaeus (III. 62.) and Tertullian (De
Anim. §§. 7. 9.) have looked upon this narration as a real history,
while others have considered it as founded upon fact. The rich
man has been identified with Herod and with Caiaphas, but upon
no other grounds for the supposition than the sumptuous fare and
purple dress. See on Matt, xxvii. 28. The description, how
ever, has all the appearance of a parable, and as such it was
esteemed by Theophilus, and the moderns generally have con
curred in his opinion. Lazarus too, though a name of some fre
quency among the Jews, is here most probably fictitious, and de
scriptive of the destitute condition in which the poor man is re
presented to have been. It may either be the Hebrew Eleazer,
which signifies God my helper, or rather, perhaps, Tjy *0, lo
azer, a helpless person. Be it further remarked, that a parable
in many respects similar is to be found in the Talmud. Whitby,
Lightfoot, Doddridge, Kuinoel. Of the verb £j3£/3Xrjro, in
the next verse, see on Matt. viii. 6.
Ver. 21. iiriOvpwv xopraaOr)vat. Content to be fed. See on
Luke xv. 16. It does not appear that he was refused the crumbs,
and, indeed, had this been the case it would scarcely have been
omitted in the rebuke of Abraham. The rich man's sins were
carelessness and negligence rather than meditated inhumanity.
By the law he was bound to have provided for the care and
maintenance of so wretched an outcast, instead of indulging in
luxury and sensuality while the duties of humanity were unre
garded. See Deut. xv. 7. and compare Prov. iii. 27. Isaiah lviii.
3. Campbell, Kuinoel.
Ibid. dXXd Kal ot Kvvse k. r. X. This circumstance has been
regarded by some as an alleviation rather than an addition to his
calamity. The tongue of the dog is, indeed, sometimes looked
upon as endued with healing properties, and the animal has been
said to be moved with pity at distress. Justin. I. 4. 11. Motus
et ipse misericordia, qua motum etiam canem viderat. But,
from the general tenor of the parable, the incident is clearly re
corded to shew that his ulcers lay bare, and were neither closed,
or bound up, or mollified with ointment, (Isaiah i. 6.) Besides,
the connecting particles dXXd koI, which are correctly rendered

560 LUKE XVI. 22, 23.
in the E. T. moreover, clearly imply an increase of suffering.
Compare Luke xii. 7. xxiv. 22. Doddridge. — [Wetstein.]
Ver. 22. d7T£V£X0»ivat avrov iiirb riov dyyiXwv k. r. X. This
may possibly be only an ornamental circumstance in the parable,
in accordance with the popular opinion of the Jews, who assigned
this office to good angels ; and it is an office well suited to their
benevolent natures and the condition of a departed spirit. Thus
in Kalaim, p. 32. 3. Holy men would fain have R. Judah still
in the land of the living, but the angels took him away. Hence
the Targum on Cant. IV. 12. None but the just can enter Pa
radise, whither their souls are carried by angels. A somewhat
similar notion prevailed among the Heathen, who invested Mer
cury with the office. Soph. Aj. 843. KaXoi S' dpa Ilopiralov
'Ep/xrjv x^dviov ev pi Kopiaai. Hor. Od. I. 10. 17. Tu pias
Icetis animas reponis Sedibus. By Abraham's bosom the Jews
understood Paradise. Kiddushim, p. 72. 1. This day Ada Bar
Ahava sits in Abraham's bosom. So Joseph, de Maccab. §. 13.
ovrw ydp Oavovrag r)pdg 'Ajipadp, Kal 'ItraaK, Kat 'IaKtL/S V7T0-
Si%ovrat Eig roiig KoXirovg aiirwv. Of the import of the expres
sion see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 398. and compare Matt.
viii. 11. Lightfoot, Wetstein, Doddridge, Whitby.
Ver. 23. iv aSy. See on Matt. xi. 23. From this passage,
however, it has been argued that Hades here at least denotes the
place of torment. The Jews, however, as well as the Greeks,
represent the receptacle of departed souls as divided into two
parts, the abodes of the blessed lying contiguous to those of the
damned, and separated only by an impassable river or gulf, in
such sort that the ghosts could converse with one another from its
opposite banks. One of the Rabbins thought that a wall se
parated them; and it is said in Midras Choheleth, p. 103. on
Ecclus. vii. 14. God hath set one against the other at the dis
tance of a hand-breath. In Midras Ruth, p. 44. 2. is the fol
lowing parable : There are wicked men, who are united in this
world; but one of them repents, the other doth not : so the one is
found standing in the assembly of the just, the other in the as
sembly of the wicked. The one seeth the other, and saith, Woe
and alas! %c. $c. Sfc. So in the parable of our Lord, souls
whose bodies were buried know each other, and converse toge
ther, as if they had been embodied ; and the Pagans in like
manner introduce departed souls, as if in possession of their
bodily functions, conversing, and following pursuits, and sensible
to pains and pleasures analogous to those of life. The parable
represents the wicked as tormented in flames ; and the Grecian
mythologists fix them in Periphlegethon, a river of fire. Compare
Hesiod. Theog. 720. sqq. Hom. II. 0. 13. Virg. JEn. VI. 577.
VIII. 243. Diod. Sic. I. 96. Plat. Phjed. T. I. p. 253. Lucian.

LUKE XVI. 24. 81. 561
de Luct. §. 2. Plutarch, de Sera Num. Vind. p. 565. E. de Gen.
Sac. p. 590. Joseph. B. J. II. 8. 14. Ant. XVIII. 13. Hence
the rich man and Lazarus may have been equally in Hades,
though in different departments of it. If, as some have thought
from these coincidences, the parable is formed upon these popular
prejudices, it does not, therefore, follow that our Lord approved
of them. In parabolical discourses, provided the doctrines incul
cated are strictly true, the terms in which they are inculcated may
be adapted to the prevailing ideas of those to whom they are ad
dressed. Among the doctrines here enforced we may safely rely
on these : — that the soul is immortal, and exists in a separate and
conscious state after its dissolution from the body; — that future
rewards and punishments will be apportioned not only with re
ference to sins committed, but duties omitted ; — that future mi
sery, of whatever nature it may be, will be eternal and irrevo
cable ; that a sufficiency of light is afforded by the Gospel, and
that, if men are not enlightened thereby, they would not be
persuaded by any extraordinary illumination, which could be
afforded consistently with the freedom of the human will. On
other points, therefore, which it has pleased God for the wisest
reasons to veil in mystery, St. Augustin has well observed:
Melius est dubitare de occultis, quam litigare de incertis. Mack
night, Grotius, Le Clerc, Doddridge, Wetstein.
Ver. 24. irdrEp 'Aj3pad/u. This appellation is in strict keeping
with the Jewish prejudices respecting their descent from Abra
ham. See on Matt. iii. 9. By the Patriarch's reply in the next
verse we are by no means to infer that the mere possession of
this world's goods was the cause of the rich man's torments. It
was his abuse of his possessions, and his applying the good
things which he received to his own exclusive gratification, for
which he was thus severely visited. The expression a7roXa/3£tv
rd ayaOd aov is a Rabbinism. He who shall pass, says the
Talmud, through forty days ivithout chastisement, hath received
this world ; a full and abundant reward for all the good that he
hath done here. Whitby, Hammond.
Ver. 31. a Mwaiwg k. t. X. Though Moses does not per
haps expressly assert a future state of rewards and punishments,
yet the facts recorded by him contain unanswerable arguments in
proof of it, and the prophets speak plainly of it in many places.
See Psalm xvi. 9. sqq. xvii. 15. xxiii. 6. xlix. 14. Ixxiii. 17. sqq.
Prov. xiv. 32. Eccles. iii. 17. 21. xi. 9. xii. 7. 13. Ezek. xviii.
19. sqq. Our Lord here asserts that it was not the want of evi
dence, but their sinful addiction to worldly pleasures, which
darkened the understandings, and biassed the minds of the Jews
against the reception of the Gospel ; and we have two striking
instances of the truth of his declaration. In the raising of ano-
VOL. i. oo

562 LUKE XVII. 1. 5.
ther Lazarus from the dead, (John xi. 46.) and in the circum
stances attending his own resurrection, to which he seems more
especially to allude, he afforded a far more convincing proof of
his divine mission than any such apparition as is here referred
to could have been. We may observe that Moses and the pro
phets was an usual designation for the body of the Jewish Scrip
tures, as read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day. (See Home.)
Lightfoot, Doddridge, Grotius.

CHAPTER XVII.
Contents :^On forgiveness of injuries, and man's unprofitable
service, vv. 1 — 10. The ten lepers, vv. 11 — 19. The sudden
approach of Christ's kingdom, vv. 20 — 37.
Verse 1. ovevSektov itrrt. It is impossible. So Luke xiii. 33.
ovk EvSsxETat. The adjective is found in no other author. With
XvotteXsT, in the next verse, there is an ellipsis of judXXov, which
is supplied in Lys. Orat. XII. -nynadpEvoi raiira paXXov Xvai-
teXeIv, i) iroXirwv k. r. X. Of the precepts with which the
chapter commences see on Matt, xviii. 6. 21. There is an illus
tration of the proverb in v. 2. in Kiddushim, p. 29. 2. Samuel
saith, A man may marry and after that devote himself to the
study of the law. R. Joehanan saith, No : shull he devote him
self to the study of the luw with a mill-stone about his neck.
Compare also Arist. Equit. 1360. "Apae jUETs'tvpov, ig to fidpaOpov
ipfiaXw, 'Ek tov Xdpvyyog iKKpspdaat viripjBoXov. GROTIUS,
Wetstein, Lightfoot, A. Clarke.
Ver. 5. irpoaOsg r)plv irianv. Unless there is no connexion
between the several precepts here delivered, the increase of faith
seems to have been solicited by the Apostles with a view to be ena
bled to comprehend the nature and extent of the forgiveness re
commended in the last verse. But those commentators are pro
bably correct, who maintained that our Lord's discourse is here
composed of detached precepts, in which no connexion is in
tended or required. Hammond, Grotius. — [Wetstein, Whit
by.] Of the next verse see on Matt. xvii. 20. xxi. 21. Some
suppose that trvKautvoe, the sycamine, is the same tree with av-
Kopopia, the sycamore, which is mentioned in Luke xix. 4. ; and
so Galen (de Aliment. II.) and Athenasus. Others, however,
distinguish between them, and contend that the former has no
connexion with <tvke'»j, the fig-tree, but is purely Syrian TDpti\
Dioscorides and Celsus call it the mulberry-tree ; and it is ren-

LUKE XVII. 7. 11. 563
dered morus in the Latin Vulgate. So also the Arabic, Syriac,
and the older English versions. The sycamore is so called as
resembling the mulberry-tree in its leaf, and the fig in its fruit,
and seems to have been very common all over the East. It was, in
all probability, the same as Pharaoh' s fig-tree of the Egyptians ;
and being a tall and spreading tree it was well suited to the pur
pose for which Zacchaeus employed it. Its name is sometimes
transposed into morosycon, as in Cels. Hierobot. III. 18. Arboris
in ^Egypto nascentis, quam ibi morosycon appellant. See Plin.
N. H. XIII. 7. Theoph. Hist. Plant. IV. 2. We may observe
that the tree so called in this country is a totally different tree,
the larger maple. Grotius, Wetstein, Harmer. — [Park
hurst, A. Clarke, &c]
Ver. 7. rig Si k. t. X. Here again the connexion is not very
discernible, though the particle Si, unless a mere expletive, seems
to have a reference to the preceding verses. Having given di
rections on certain points of Christian conduct, our Lord follows
them up with the assurance that, however punctually attended to,
no merit can attach to the observance of them. In the same
manner as a servant places his master under no obligation by
performing the duties of his station, so is Christ in no ways in
debted to his disciples and followers for discharging the service
which the Gospel requires from them. Not only does idleness
and the neglect of the talents committed to our care render us un
profitable, as in Matt. xxv. 30., but the mere performance of
what is commanded comes within the compass of our Saviour's
meaning. Senec. Controv. II. 13. Non est beneficium, sed ojfi-
cium, facere quod debeas. So Hor. A. P. 267. Vitavi denique
culpam, non laudem merui. The rewards, therefore, which are
promised to obedience are not of debt or merit, but of grace; and
though they are great incitements to virtue, and will be distributed
to all according to their works, we can have no claim to them on
the score of our own deservings. Hammond, Whitby, Grotius.
' — [Macknight, Kuinoel.] The verbs ipayiaai and irdaai, in
v. '8., are the second pers. 2. fut. med. for ipdyy and Trtrj, accord
ing to the old dialect, which substituted fdyopat and iriopat for
ipayoiipai and irtoiipai. Compare Isaiah ix. 16. LXX. Matt. xx.
23. Luke xiv. 15. James v. 3. Rev. xvii. 16. Phrynichus: 7rtov-
pai aiiv rty Y Xiywv ovk bpOwg ipElg' iriopat ydp ian rb dpxalov,
Kal iribpEvog av£v rov Y. So Arist. Equit. 1286. ov 7ror' ek raii-
roii peO' r)pibv ir'iETat irorripiov. Wetstein, Parkhurst. Of
irspiZtoadpEvog see on Luke xii. 35.
Ver. 11. Std piaov SauapEtae Kat C There is some doubt as
to the meaning of the term Sid piaov in this place. Had Christ
proceeded from Capernaum, in the neighbourhood of which he
usually resided, direct to Jerusalem, his nearest road would doubt-
o o 2

564 LUKE XVII. 14. 18.
less have been through the midst of Samaria ; but in this case
the Evangelist had no occasion to mention Galilee, or, at least, it
would properly have been named before Samaria. The historian
may have spoken, indeed, of his route generally, without allud
ing to the geographical positions of Galilee and Samaria ; but it
should rather seem that the confines of the two countries are
meant, so as to render it immaterial which was mentioned first.
In the Arabic and Syriac versions the passage is rendered be
tween Samaria and Galilee. Our Lord, therefore, may have
crossed the Jordan at the bridge of Scythopolis, and proceeding
along the banks of the river through Peraea, passed it again into
Jericho. He possibly avoided Samaria in order to escape the
impediments which the jealousy of the Samaritans might have
thrown in his way. Campbell, Grotius, Wetstein, Whitby.
— [Macknight, Le Clerc] On some points of the following
miracle see Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 339. 514.
Ver. 14. rote UpEvai. The use of the plural in this passage,
as well as in Matt. viii. 4., has supplied the commentators with
matter of discussion. Some maintain that the priests of the Jews
and Samaritans are both intended, and that the latter, who re
ceived the law of Moses, are directed, no less than the former, to
abide by the precept respecting lepers in Levit. xiv. 2. Our
Lord, it is true, withheld his sanction from the tenets and the
worship of the Samaritans, (John iv. 22.) but in a question in
which no controversial doctrine occurred, he would probably have
referred each party respectively to his own priest. Others, how
ever, are of opinion, and perhaps rightly, that tEpEvtrt is here used
in a collective sense ; and an argument is thence deduced, that
by sending the Samaritan to a Jewish priest he gave an indirect
decision in favour of the superior sanctity of the Temple of Je
rusalem above that on Mount Gerizim. Whitby, Grotius. —
[Wetstein.] Ver. 18. dXXoyEvrje- So Josephus calls the Samaritans dX-
XosSvEte. Many of the Rabbies, indeed, looked upon them in
the same light as the Gentiles ; and it was matter of dispute how
far they were" to be esteemed otherwise. It appears from 2 Kings
xvii. 24. that they were formed from a colony of Cuthceans, and
they are still denominated Cuthites by way of reproach. At the
same time they were not Heathens, but worshipped the one true
God ; and by some the legitimacy of their priesthood was ad
mitted. See Kiddushim, p. 75. 2. Our Lord should here be un
derstood as applying to them a term of national prejudice, in order
to place the ingratitude of the nine Jews in a more conspicuous
light. Grotius, Wetstein. Of the verb siipiaKEaOai, in the
sense of ei vat, see on Matt. i. 18.

LUKE XVII. 20. 22. 565
Ver. 20. /turd 7raparrjprjo-E&)e. E. T. with observation : and in
the margin, with outward shew. So Euthym. pErd 7roXXije <pav-
raaiag. The word does not occur elsewhere in the N. T., and
but seldom in profane writers. Its ordinary meaning is looking
out, or being on the watch, of which examples occur in Polyb.
XVI. 22. 8. Plutarch. Quaest. R. p. 266. Arrian. Exped. III.
16. 15. Joseph. B. J. I. 29. The marginal note, therefore, must
rather be looked upon as a gloss than a translation, and it re
mains to decide between one of the two interpretations which are
more generally adopted by the commentators. Some understand
by the expression that the Messiah's kingdom comes not in such
a manner as to require that notice and observation with which the
Scribes and Pharisees awaited it. They expected that his advent
would be marked by famine, pestilence, earthquakes, and revolu
tions : and under this idea, the unmeaning expressions of an
idiot, a sudden tempest, or any unusual appearance in the hea
vens, was frequently sufficient to excite their expectation. There
should rather seem, however, to be an allusion to that regal pomp
and splendour so calculated to elicit observation, in which the
Messiah was expected to appear. Upon this view of the ques
tion our Lord's reply is natural and easy; he tells them that their
preconceived notions of the grandeur of his coming had so blinded
their understandings that they did not know him, although he
was actually among them. The words svroe iipwv do not imply,
as some suppose, the spiritual principle, as opposed to the out
ward parade, by which secular kingdoms are commonly intro
duced. Our Lord is not here speaking of his dominion over the
hearts of men, but of the establishment of his kingdom in the
world, respecting which the Pharisees had been enquiring. Be
sides, he would scarcely have represented the Pharisees as being
in that spiritual condition which the words, thus interpreted, im
ply. They are, therefore, equivalent to ev vplv, among you, as
in John i. 14. Compare Luke i. 1. vii. 16. John xi. 54. and else
where. That Ivroe will bear this signification is evident from
Xen. Anab. I. 10. 2. ravrrjv iawaav, Kat rdXXa baa ivrbg avrwv,
Kal xPr)flaTa> Kal dvOpwirot, iyivovro. Compare iElian. V. H.
IX. 3. Grotius, Whitby, Macknight, Kypke. — [Campbell,
Markland, &c]
Ver. 22. iXEvaovrai npipai, k. t. X. Our Lord here alludes
to the calamities which their sins, and especially that of rejecting
the Messiah, would shortly bring upon them. In those days, he
tells them, they would in vain wish for his presence among them,
and seek for the opportunity of mercy, which they now rejected.
So Dion. Hal. VI. 71. Et Se irapi)aETE rbv Kaipbv roiirov, Eii^aiaOE
dv iroXXaKtg bpoiov svpEtv srspov. Hammond, Wetstein. Upon
the remainder of the chapter see, for the most part, on Matt.
xxiv. 17. 27. 38. 40.

566 LUKE XVII. 24. 32. XVIII. 1.
Ver. 24. Tijg inr oiipavbv, k. t. X. Supply x^9ac ana X^Pav'
The same ellipsis is found in Job xviii. 4. Prov. viii. 28. LXX.
The phrase iiir ovpavbv, as employed in this passage, occurs also
in Plat. Ep. VII. p. 527. D. rwv iiirb rbv ovpavbv avOpwwwv.
Bos, Wetstein. Of the verb dn-oSoKiudSstv in the next verse,
see on Mark viii. 31. In v. 29. 0s6e is the nominative to be
supplied with E/3pt?E from Gen. xix. 24.
Ver. 32. juvijjuovevete rrje ywatKoe Adit. Having illustrated
the sudden destruction of Jerusalem by that of Sodom and Go
morrah, our Lord naturally adduces the example of Lot's wife as
a warning against similar conduct in those, who might otherwise
escape the impending calamity. If any, after the signs of the
times, and the means of safety had been clearly pointed out to
them, hesitated, from a love of the world, or want of faith, to
adopt the measures which circumstances required, they might see
in Lot's wife a picture both of their sin and its punishment. Of
the next verse see on Matt. x. 39. It seems here to be applied
in a literal acceptation, with reference to the context: — Whoso
ever shall expect to save himself by taking refuge in Jerusalem,
shall lose it ; and whosoever shall risque the loss of it, by fleeing
to places of less apparent security, shall save it. In profane
writers the verb ?tooyovEtv signifies to procreate, as in Diod. Sic.
I. 88., but in the LXX. and the N. T. to preserve life. So Gen.
vi. 19. Exod. i. 17, 18. 22. Judg. viii. 19. 1 Kings xx. 31.
1 Sam. xi. 6. LXX. Ads vii. 19. The corresponding word in
Mark viii. 35. is owZeiv. Macknight, Grotius, Wetstein.
In the next verse vii% is used metaphorically of the gloomy hor
rors which would attend the destruction of Jerusalem. Kuinoel.
Many of the best MSS. do not contain v. 36., and in the opinion
of the best critics it is an interpolation from Matt. xxiv. 40.

CHAPTER XVIII.
Contents : — The parables of the importunate widow and of the
Pharisee and publican, vv. 1 — 14. The young ruler's ques
tion, and our Lord's discourse thereon, vv. 15 — 30. [Matt.
xix. 16. Mark x. 17.] Christ again foretells his death and
passion, vv. 31—34. [Matt. xx. 17. Mark x. 32.] A blind
man healed at Jericho, vv. 35 — 43. [Matt. xx. 29. Mark x.
46.] Verse 1. pr) EKKaKEtv. E. T. Not to faint ; Vulg. Non deficere ;
i. e. not to tire, or flag. In this sense the verb recurs in 2 Cor.

LUKE XVIII. 2, 3. 567
iv. 1. Gal. vi. 9. 2 Thess. ih\ 13. So also Polyb. IV. 19. ; and
hence Hesych. ekkokovuev* o/xeXov/uev, dKrjSswusv. In a sense
closely analogous it also signifies to despond, as in 2 Cor. iv. 16.
Ephes. iii. 13., but though some would adopt this meaning here
also, the former is most suitable with the context. It is not un
usual with men, if their prayers are not immediately answered, to
desist from a repetition of them, more particularly in times of per
secution, to which our Lord now alludes. The particle Se plainly
implies that the parable has a relation to the preceding discourse,
and that it was delivered at the same time. We are not, how
ever, to understand that the parable recommends incessant prayer
in the strictest sense of the word, but a frequent and earnest per
severance in the duty. The adverbs 7rdvrorE, dStaXEnrrwe, and
the like, are frequently employed in this limited signification.
See Levit. vi. 20. Numb, xxviii. 24. 3. Dan. viii. 11. 1 Mace. xii.
11. LXX. John xviii. 20. 1 Tim. v. 5. and compare 1 Thess. v.
17. with Ephes. vi. 18. Hammond, Lightfoot, Whitby, Mack
night, Wetstein.
Ver. 2. rbv Qeov pi) tpofiovpsvog, k. r. X. Similar expressions,
which seem to be proverbial of the most obstinate wickedness,
are frequently met with. Hom. Od. X. 39. Ovte Osoiig SsiaavrEg,
di ovpavbv Evpvv ixovaiii, Ovte tiv dvOpwirwv vipEaiv Karbirta-
Oev iOEaOs. Eur. Cyc. 601. <|S Oewv ovSev i) j3porwv /jeXei. Herod.
II. 133. roiv Oewv oil pspvripivoi, dXXd koI rovg avOpwrrovg <pOe'i-
povTEg. Liv. III. 37. Deorum hominumque contemptor. Sallust.
Hist. I. 15. Hostis omnium bonorum, utte neque hominum neque
deorum pudet. Wetstein, Elsner.
Ver. 3. EKStKrjo-ov ue. E. T. Avenge me ; and in this sense the
verb elsewhere occurs in the N. T. In this place, however,
there is no idea of vengeance : the woman merely requests that
her right should be adjudged to her. The words should, there
fore, be translated Do me justice upon mine adversary. Whitby,
Doddridge. Of the phrase iirl xpbvov, v. 4., which recurs in
Acts xv. 33. xix. 22. see my note on Hom. II. B- 299. and of
the word virwiriov, from which iiirtoiridZEtv in v. 5. is derived, on
II. M. 463. The verb signifies properly to strike under the eye,
and corresponds with the Latin suggillare. Both the Greek
inrdnriov, however, and the Latin suggillatio, axe used meta
phorically in the sense of insult ox contumely. Thus Cicero :
Consulatus Auli non tam consulatus, sed Mugni nostri (Pompeii)
virdnriov. Liv. XIII. 14. Id prcetoribus, non sine suggillatione
consulum, mandatum. Some would, therefore, render it in this
place, to rail at; but the commentators, for the most part, prefer
translating it to weary. From striking on the face it may signify
to strike generally, thence to give pain, from which the sense
proposed is easily deduced. It is true that only one instance of

568 LUKE XVIII. 7.
this usage, and that somewhat an equivocal one, has been ad
duced from Diog. Laert. II. 136. but the Latin obtundere, which
is nearly synonymous with inrwiridZEiv, is frequently so employed.
Liv. II. 15. Quando id cerium est, neque ego obtundam, scepius
eadem nequicquam agendo. Terent. And. II. 2. 11. Obtundis,
tametsi intelligo. Adelph. I. 2. 33. Ausculta, ne me obtundas
de hac re scepius. Auctor ad Heren. IV. 42. Eandem rem dice-
mus non eodem modo, nam id quidem obtundere auditorem est.
Grotius, Macknight, Le Clerc, Wetstein. — [Hammond.]
Some critics would refer Ete riXog to inrwiridZy, lest she weary
me at last ; but its position in the context is in favour of the old
interpretations, which construe it with ipxopivr\. It is the phrase
by which the Hebrew Ttyfr, perpetually, is rendered in Job xiv.
20. Psalm xiii. 1. xlix. 19. lxxiv. 1. 10. 19. Compare John xiii. 1.
1 Thess. ii. 16. Grotius, Lightfoot. — [Wakefield.] Of the
expression 6 Kptrrje rfje dSiKiag, v. 6., see on Luke xvi. 8.
Ver. 7. Kat paKpoOvpwv iir aiiroig. E. T. Tliough he bear
with them. There is considerable difference of opinion, however,
both as to the rendering and the application of the passage. The
more usual sense of the verb paKpoQvpElv in the N. T. is to be
long-suffering ; and, therefore, as sinners are generally regarded
as the objects of God's forbearance, (Rom. ii. 4. ix. 22. 2 Pet.
iii. 9.) the words iir aiiroig axe referred by some commentators to
those who afflict and persecute the elect. But no such reference
is implied in the context, where EKXEKrwv.is the only antecedent
to which aiiroig can properly belong ; neither does the purport
of the parable accord with the interpretation. Now the verb pa-
KpoOvpElv signifies also to delay, or linger; others, therefore, un
derstand paKpoOvpwv as here put, by a common Oriental idiom,
for paKpoOvpwv iarai ox paKpoOvpi)aEi, and to be taken in con
junction with TrotrjCTEt rrjv EKSfcrjcriv. But though several MSS.
read paKpoOvpsi, and the omission of the substantive verb con
nected with a participle is not unusual, it would scarcely be
dropped when a personal verb precedes. Others, again, by
making a small alteration in the accent, convert the participle into
the genitive plural of the adjective paKpoOvpog, and couple it with
fiowvrwv. The words, however, will not easily bear this con
struction, and the examples in support of it are far from satis
factory. Against the E. T., which suits exactly with the plain
intention of the parable, the main objection is the use of Kat in
the sense of KatVsp, although. But in this sense it occurs in
John iii. 32. xiv. 30. xvii. 25. xxi. 23. Acts vii. 5. Rom. i. 13.
Heb. iii. 9. and elsewhere ; and, in other respects the version is
sanctioned by an exactly parallel expression in Ecclus. xxxv. 18.
LXX. Kat 6 Kvptoe, ov pr) fipaSiivy, ovSi pr) paKpoOvpriast iir'
avrolg. Some, indeed, have fancied an inconsistency between
vv. 7, and 8. It is plain, however, that God may not answer the

LUKE XVIII. 8, 9. 11. 569
prayers of his servants immediately, and may yet, when he does
answer them, give them a speedy and sudden fulfilment. Be it
observed, also, that though the parable admits of a general ap
plication, it was here particularly addressed to the disciples, who
were suffering under the persecution of the Jews ; and the ven
geance here intended is the approaching destruction of Jeru
salem, which, though at some distance, our Lord constantly pre
dicted as coming suddenly upon them. Macknight, Beza. —
[Whitby, Grotius, Campbell, Elsner, &c] Of the ekXektoi
see on Matt. xx. 16.
Ver. 8. 7rXrjv 6 vlbg k. t. X. This question implies that at the
coming of Christ to avenge his elect, the faith of his coming
should in a great measure be lost. Accordingly, it appears from
2 Pet. iii. 4. that many infidels and apostates scoffed at the ex
pectation of Christ's coming, which the godly in those days che
rished ; and from Heb. x. 25. that many of them began to waver
and faint under persecution, insomuch that all the epistles ad
dressed to them are manifestly designed to keep them stedfast in
the faith. Compare Heb. iii. 12—14. x. 23—39. xii. 1—4.
James i. 1—4. ii. 6. v. 10. 1 Pet. ii. 20—25. iii. 14—17. iv. 1,
2. 12 — 19. v. 9, 10. We must, therefore, understand iirl rrig
yr)g of the land of Judea, as elsewhere frequently. Macknight,
Whitby, Doddridge.
Ver. 9. 7rpoe rtvae rovg irEirotOorag k. t. X. From the neces
sity of instant and earnest prayer our Lord naturally turns to the
duty of thinking humbly of our own merits, and praying to God
for mercy and forgiveness. In illustration of the_ parable of the
Pharisee and publican the reader will find ample matter in
Home's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 186. 335. 367. sqq. It should be
observed that the preposition 7rpoe, both here and in v. 1 . supra,
signifies concerning, as in Luke xii. 41. xix. 9. and elsewhere.
So Plutarch. Op. p. 394. 7rp6e ov Se IlivSapoe EtprjKEv. Wet
stein, Kypke.
Ver. 11. irpoe iavTov. Some commentators connect these
words with ara0£ie, and render them by himself, i. e. apart ;
while others join them with Trpoo-rjvxEro, and follow the E. T.
with himself, i. e. inwardly, mentally. Now there is no passage
either in sacred or profane writers in which 7rpbe savrov is used
in the former of these acceptations, the phrase so employed being
always KaO' iavrov. Neither is there any truth in the supposi
tion that the Pharisee kept himself aloof in order to avoid pollu
tion by too near contact with the publican, since they must have
been occupied in two distinct courts of the Temple, the Pharisee
in that of the Israelites, and the publican (paKpbOsv iardig, v. 13.)
in that of the Gentiles. It is clear, therefore, that the latter in-

570 LUKE XVIII. 13.
terpretation is correct, which is confirmed by Mark ix. 10. 33.
x. 26. xi. 31. xii. 7. xiv. 4. xvi. 3. Luke iii. 15. xxiv. 12. 1 Cor.
xi. 3. So Achil. Tat. I. ravra 7rp6e ipavrov k'Xsyov. Aristaen. Ep.
I. 6. irpbg ipavrov iipriv. A man would scarcely have uttered
aloud such a prayer as the Pharisee's, in which every word was
a Galumny upon all around him. By some critics <rra0£te is said
to be redundant, as in Luke xix. 8. and elsewhere ; but it pro
bably refers to the more usual attitude of praying among the
Jews. Grotius, Le Clerc, Wetstein, Kuinoel. — [Beza,
Whitby, Doddridge, Campbell.] Of the Jewish fasts and
tithes, mentioned in v. 12. see on Matt. vi. 16. xxiii. 23. As a
specimen of Pharisaic pride we may subjoin the following from
Bereshith Rabba, §. 35. p. 44. Rabbi Simeon, the son qfJochai,
said : The world is not worth thirty righteous persons such as
our father Abraham. If there were only thirty righteous per
sons in the world, land my son should make two of them; and if
there were but twenty, I and my son would be of the number ;
and if there were but ten, I and my son would be of the number ;
and if there were but five, I and my son would be of the five ;
and if there were but two, I and my son would be those two ; and
if there were but one, myself should be that one. A. Clarke.
Ver. 13. ovSe roiig bipOaXpoiig k. r. X. A variety of passages
have been adduced by the commentators, both from Jewish and
Heathen writers, in proof that it was the general custom of the
ancients to raise their eyes and hands to heaven in prayer. It
appears, however, to have been a frequent maxim with the
Rabbis, that he who prays should cast down his eyes, but raise
his heart to Gojd; and there are passages in their writings which
recommend praying with their eyes downward. Thus Maimon.
in Tephillah : Let him that prayeth cover his head and look
downward. No specific direction, however, but a deep sense of
humiliation and consciousness of guilt, together with heartfelt
contrition and desire of forgiveness, produced the humble posture
of the publican. So Tacit. Hist. IV. 72. Stabant conscientia
flagitii mcestce, flxis in terram oculis. That beating the heart
was also a sign of excessive grief see Hom. II. 2. 50. Virg. IEn.
I. 485. and compare Matt. xi. 17. xxiv. 30. Lightfoot, Wet
stein, Grotius.
Ibid, ipol rtji dpaprwXq. It has been thought that the article
is here emphatic, and denotes the sinner Kar i^oxnv. But the
force thus ascribed to the article is here unfounded ; for it may
be laid down as a general rule, that whenever an attributive noun
(see above, p. 10.) is placed in opposition with a personal pro
noun, such attributive has the article prefixed. Thus in Luke
vi. 24. iiplv rolg irXovaioig. xi. 46. iiplv rolg vopiKolg. In
neither of these instances can emphasis be intended. We have
the same form of speech also in Herod. IX. p. 342. pi rbv Ike-

LUKE XVIII. 14. 34. XIX. 2. 571
ttv. Plut. Conv. VII. Sap. p. 95. ipi rbv Svorrjvov. See also
Soph. Elect. 282. Eurip. Ion. 348. Arist. Av. 5. Acharn. 1154.
Eccles. 619. Of the usage in question the ground is sufficiently
obvious. The article here, as elsewhere, marks the assumption
of its predicate ; and the strict meaning of the publican's prayer
is : Have mercy on me, who am confessedly a sinner ; ox, seeing
that I am a sinner, have mercy on me. Middleton. — [Wet
stein, Rosenmuller.]
Ver. 14. SsSiKaiwpivog, rj EKEtvoe. There is an ellipsis of the
adverb paXXov, of which see my note on Hom. II. A. 117. The
verb SiKatoiiv here signifies to acquit, to accept as just; as in
Rom. iii. 20. and generally in the Epistles. The expression
seems to have been in common use among the Jews. Thus in
Schemoth R. p. 133, 3. IVliosoever enters the temple covered
with sins, and offers a sin-offering, his sins ure remitted, and he
rejoices in being accounted just. Schoettgen, Grotius. Of
the maxim which closes the parable see on Matt, xxiii. 11.
Ver. 34. ovSev toiitiov o-vvrjKav' k. r. X, Some critics suppose
that they regarded our Lord's predictions of his death in the light
of an allegory. It is sufficient to understand that they could not
reconcile them with their own traditions and limited interpreta
tions of the Scriptures. See on Luke ix. 45. Whitby. — [Gro
tius.]

CHAPTER XIX.
Contents: — The conversion of Zacchceus, vv. 1 — 10. Tlie
parable of the pounds, vv. 11 — 28. Christ' s triumphant entry
into Jerusalem ; his lamentation over the city, and purging of
the Temple, vv. 29—48. [Matt. xxi. 1. Mark xi. 1. John
xii. 12.]
Verse 2. dpxirEXwvrje. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 185.
There is some doubt, however, as to the rank and office of this
person. The E. T. calls him the chief among the publicans ; but to
this it is objected that it seems to imply the chief of the whole order
in Palestine, in which case the article would most probably have
been prefixed, as it usually is to dpxt£p£ve, when the chief priest
is spoken of. Hence it is supposed that the chief publican of a
particular city or district is intended ; but this interpretation would
require the article, if the principle be correct, no less than the other.
At all events, however, the article must here be omitted, as it is also

572 LUKE XIX. 4.
with dpxtepsve whenever it follows a verb substantive. See note
on the Greek article, p. 10. Omission 1. and compare Acts xxiii.
5. There is, therefore, no reason why dpytTEXoivrie is at all
less definite in its import than would 6 dpxtrEXaJvrje be, if cir
cumstances had permitted the article to be used. The precise
nature of the office, however, it is not easy to determine. Some
understand him to have been apublicanus, or farmer of the tolls,
as distinguished from aportitor, or mere collector; and it is pro
bable from Joseph. B. J. II. 14. 9. that Jews were sometimes
admitted to this rank, though it properly belonged to Roman
knights. Such a person might, without impropriety, be called dp-
XtrEXwvrje, a head-collector, as being a publican in the strict sense,
under whom the TEXibvai acted. The publicans, indeed, formed
a society or college under the direction of a president residing at
Rome, and this president managed the concerns of the society by
means of representatives appointed in the provinces. The pre
sident himself was called magister, and each representative pro-
magister. See Grcevius on Cic. Fam. Epist. XII. 9. Zacchasus
might, therefore, be this representative, for though he was a
Jew, it might be the policy of the Romans sometimes to employ
Jews in offices of trust and emolument. Although these opi
nions amount to nothing above conjecture, the last seems to have
the preference. That ZacchaeUs was a Jew is clear from v. 9.
Tt is true, indeed, that Gentiles as well as Jews are children of
Abraham by faith : but of this idea the Jews were then ignorant.
The name of Zacchceus is purely Hebrew, (Ezra ii. 9. viii. 14.)
and his restoring fourfold proved his respect for the Law of
Moses. See on v. 8. Our Lord declares also in v. 10. that he
came to seek and to save that which was lost, viz. of the house
of Israel; {Mutt. x. 6.) and had a son by faith only been in
tended, the verb would have been lylvEro, he is become, rather
than Etrrtv, he is. Their aversion to the Roman government led
the Jews to look upon all tax-gatherers in the light of Gentiles
and sinners ; but Christ here assures them that Zacchaeus was no
less a son of Abraham than themselves, and that the exercise of
his profession, without injustice, would bring salvation through
faith to himself and his family. The word dp^trEXwvrje is diroS,
XEybpEvov in the N. T. Middleton, Grotius, Lightfoot. —
[Campbell, Beza.] Of the construction in the next verse see
Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 295, 3. and my notes on Hom. II. B. 409.
E. 85.
Ver. 4. 7rpoSpaud)v ipirpoaOEv. We meet with similar pleo
nasms frequently in the classic writers. Thus Thucyd. I. 23. rag
alriag irpoiypatpa irpwrov. Of the sycamore-tree see on Luke
xvii. 5. and Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 65. With EKa'vrje
there is an ellipsis of bSoii, and also of the preposition Sid, though
the latter is improperly inserted in some few MSS. See on Hom.

LUKE XIX. 8, 9. 573
II. A. 120. B. 415. In v. 7. the verb KaraXvaat is rendered by
some commentators to take refreshment ; but it is well rendered
to be a guest with, as in the E. T., or to lodge, as in Lukeix. 12.
So also in Gen. xix. 2. xxiv. 23. 25. Numb. xxii. 8. LXX. Xen.
Anab. I. 8. 1. ./Elian. V. H. I. 32. It properly refers to per
sons unbinding burdens from their beasts, or, as others think,
to loosening their girdles and sundals, when they baited on a
journey or reclined at meat. Wetstein, Grotius, Parkhurst.
We may observe that our Lord's knowledge of Zacchaeus, on his
first meeting with him, was supernatural and divine.
Ver. 8. airoSiStopi TETpairXow. This was the utmost which
the Jewish law required, even in cases of fraudulent concealment,
unless where an ox had been killed, and its use lost to the
owner; for the seven-fold restitution (Prov. vi. 31.) seems only
proverbial. See Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 138. Some com
mentators have remarked, that oppressive publicans were required
by the Roman law to restore four-fold; but this was only after
judgment obtained : whereas, before conviction, it was enough to
make restitution of what had been taken, or, at least, of twice as
much. As the proportion of tax to be levied on each individual
was settled by the publicans, a ready means was afforded them of
fraud and exaction ; and such oppression being under pretence
of law, it may properly be expressed by the verb avKotpavrdw, of
which see on Luke iii. 14. Doddridge, Lightfoot. It is sup
posed by some that the verbs SiSwpt and diroSiSoipt are here
used in the present tense instead of the future, and that Zacchaeus,
convinced by the instruction which Christ had that day delivered,
intended forthwith to embrace his religion, and practise its duties.
It is true that the word ar)pEpov occurs in our Lord's reply ; but
the precepts, which Zacchaeus declares his intention to observe,
are those of the Mosaic law, and the declaration seems to have
been made in order to repel the insinuation of his being a sinner.
The verbs may, therefore, be used indefinitely, to denote the
customary discharge of these duties on the part of the publican :
and trijuEpov may have nothing more than a general signification.
Macknight. — [Grotius, Whitby.]
Ver. 9. rljj otKtjj tovtw. Some understand, by synecdoche,
the master of the house ; but there seems to be no reason for not
extending it to the publican's family, who may fairly and cha
ritably be supposed to have followed his example, in embracing
the Gospel. Such was certainly the case in other conversions
recorded in the N. T. Compare John iv. 46. 53. Acts x. 2. xvi.
14, 15. 33,34. xviii. 8. Some, again, suppose that this declara
tion of Christ was made to Zacchaeus, and others concerning him.
Of irpbg in this latter signification see on Luke xviii. 9. It
should seem, however, that our Lord spoke to Zacchaeus in reply

574 LUKE XIX. 13. 20, 21.
to his declaration in the preceding verse. It is true, indeed, that
he is spoken of in the third person, but Christ possibly turned
from him in the conclusion of his speech to the surrounding mul
titude. Some copies read 7rpoe avrovg. Whitby, Hammond. —
[Grotius, Campbell, Kuinoel, &c] Of the parable of the
pounds see Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 404. Vol. III. p. 106.
and the notes on Matt. xxv. 14. sqq.
Ver. 13. SUa pvdg. E. T. Ten pounds; properly, ten mince.
The LXX use the original word pvda for the Hebrew HJD, from
which it is evidently derived,, and it appears from Ezek. xiv. 12.
to have been equal to sixty shekels. Now allowing the shekel,
with Dr. Prideaux, to be three shillings, then the mina was equal
to nine pounds English. A. Clarke. The number ten is used
merely as a round number. In the old Greek writers the verb
wpayparEvEiv generally signifies to be engaged in business,
whence it is here employed of embarking money in trade. So
trpayparEvrrig is used, as the Latin negotiator, to signify a trader.
See 1 Kings ix. 19. LXX. Xen. Cyr. II. 4. 26. The word em
ployed in Matt. xxv. 16. is ipydZopat, whence the compound
7rpo<T£pyd£oi/.at, to make money by trading, in v. 16. Wetstein.
Of the phrase "taOi e'xwv, in v. 17. see Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 559. and
my note on Soph. Ant. 1064. Pent. Gr. p. 280. The adverb £7rdvw,
denoting dignity or authority, is somewhat rare ; it occurs, how
ever, in John iii. 31. and in Arrian. Diss. I. 12. 34. Joseph.
Ant. IV. 18. 40. There seems to be an allusion to the custom
of rewarding meritorious services with the government and re
venues of a certain number of cities. So Athen. p. 29. F. 6 Si
Kvpoe b piyag Kva^apt^ ixapiaaro iirrd iroXEig, Tlr)Saaov,
'OXiipirtov, Kiipav, Ttov, SKrj7rrpa, "Aprvipiv, Tvprvprjv.
Schleusner, Wetstein.
Ver. 20. iv aovSapiw. In a napkin. The word NTTID is found
in the Syriac version of Ruth iii. 15. Hence some have thought
that it is of Chaldee derivation, but as no Oriental root occurs to
which it can be probably referred, it is most probably formed from
the Latin sudarium, which is from sudare : being used, as it should
seem, to wipe the face in perspiration. Hence it came to signify
any linen cloth generally ; and it is used in John xi. 44. for the
napkin in which the head of a corpse was wrapped. Compare
also John xx. 7. Acts xix. 12. It appears from the Rabbinical
writings, in which the word is repeatedly Hebraized, that money
was not unusually kept in a cloth. Thus in Vajikra R. VI. p.
150. He kept his denarii in a napkin (sudario.) Schoettgen,
Wetstein, Le Clerc
Ver. 21. avtrrrjpoe- This adjective properly denotes a harsh
taste or savour, as of unripe fruits, &c. and is deduced by the
10

LUKE XIX. 23. 575
etymologists from the verb avw, to dry; because things of a
rough taste make the mouth feel dry and harsh. So in Diosc.
V. 6. avarripbg divog. Hence it was applied metaphorically to
persons of a sour visage, as in Diod. Sic. III. p.. 168. irpoaoipiv
avarriporipav. Etym. Mag. 7rapd ro avw, rb £rjpatva>, 6 ueXXiov
avaw' i£, ov avarripbg aripaivEt arpvipvbv, £rjpov, avx/trjpov, otcv-
Optoirbv. Again, it is applied metaphorically as the Latin durus
and asper, to men of a severe and griping disposition. In this
sense it is used in this place, and in 2 Mucc. xiv. 30. LXX. In
Mutt. xxv. 24. the corresponding word is o-KXrjpde. Wetstein,
Kypke.
Ibid. dipEig d ovk tfflr/Kae. The expression is proverbial, and
to the same purport, though more correctly expressed, than that
in Matt. xxv. 24. crvvdyttjv oOev ov StEaKOpiriaag. It is founded
on a precept which seems to have been common to the Hebrews
with other nations, against keeping a treasure which had been
accidentally found, to which none but an avaricious temper would
be inclined. To the same effect was the law of Solon, which is
commended by Plato, (de Legg. XI.) and given in Diog. Laert.
in Vit. Solon. §. 57. d pr) iOov, pi) dviXy' a Se pi), Odvarog r)
Zvpia. So ^Elian. V. H. III. 46. "SurayEtptTwv vopog oiirog Kal
irdvrri 'EXXrjvtKoe, "O pr) KariOov, tpr]al, pi) XdpfiavE. IV. 1. ov-
Sev, wv pi) KariOETO, dvatpElrai. Joseph. C. Apion. II. 30. kSv
vrpiXriTai rig rb dXXbrptov, Kav, o pi) KariOriKEV, dviXrirat. The
latter clause is similar to Arist. Equit. 392. rdXXorptov apwv Oi-
pog. Compare also John iv. 37. Wetstein, Kypke, Le Clerc.
Ver. 23. iirl rrjv rpdirEZav. E. T. Into the bank. The word
properly denotes the table at which the money changers sate, and
from which they were denominated rpa7r£?trat. Demosth. Op.
p. 900. aTrooTEprjcrai rb iirl rrjv rpdirEZav xpa>e. Hence Plaut.
Capt. I. 2. 89. Subducam rutiunculam quantillum urgenti mihi
apud Trapezitam est. Of the same import is the Latin mensa-
rius. Liv. VII. 21. Quinqueviris creatis, quos mensarios a dis-
pensutione pecunice appellarunt, mensis cum aere in fioro positis.
Griesbach has marked the article before rpd7TE^av with the mark
of possible spuriousness. It is omitted in a great many MSS.,
nor would its absence in this instance affect the sense ; at the
same time, while iirl ri)v rpdirEZav is common in Demosthenes,
iirl rpdirEZav is not found. Kypke, Wetstein, Middleton. Of
the verb 7rpdo-o-Eiv see on Luke iii. 11. The whole of v. 25. is
omitted in the Codex Beza, and some other MSS. It seems to
be a parenthetical observation of some person, intending to cor
rect the distribution, as if he had said : Why give the mina to
him who has ten already, rather than to one of those who have
fewer? A. Clarke, Pearce. Of v. 26. see on Matt. xiii. 11.
and of the redundant pronoun avrolg on Matt. iv. 16.

576 LUKE XIX. 27, 28. 38. 40. 42.
Ver. 27. Karaatpd%aTE ipirpoaOiv pov. This custom, which
prevails in the East to this day, was universally practised among
the ancients. Plutarch, in Sylla, p. 476. D. AovKpf^rtov ev 60-
OaXpolg diroaipd^ai irpoaira^Ev. Caesar. B. C. III. 109. Quos
tile, cum in conspectum ejus venissent, corripi ac interfici jussit.
Justin. XLII. 4. 4. In conspectu suo eum interfici jussit. Com
pare 1 Sam. xi. 12. Wetstein.
Ver. 28. eVopeveto ipirpoOEv. He went forward, i. e. on his
journey ; not as some render it, preceded the multitude. Xen.
Cyr. IV. 2. 12. :rpo7ropEV£rj0E ipirpoaOEv. Kypke. — [Grotius.]
Ver. 38. Etprjvij iv olpavy, k. r. X. See on Luke ii. 14. The
first clause is not given by Matthew or Mark ; and some critics
would reject them from Luke also, as out of place. Others would
reject the whole verse, but there is no authority for either suppo
sition. The meaning seems to be this : — May the peace of man
kind be ratified in heaven by means of the Messiah ; and, in
consequence, may glory be given to God in the highest. Ro
senmuller, Newcome. — [Pearce.]
Ver. 40. ol XiOoi KEKpd?ovrat. Some by the stones understand
the Gentiles, whom the Jews were wont to despise, among other
reasons, for their reputed stupidity. See also on Matt. iii. 9. But
the expression is evidently strongly proverbial, as appears both
from Jewish and Heathen writers, and indicates a moral impos
sibility that Christ's kingdom should not be acknowledged. Thus
in Chagigah, p. 16. 1. The very stones and beams of that man's
house will testify against him. ^Esch. Agam. 37. otKoe S' avrbg,
ei ipOoyyr)v Xd/Jot, "SatpiaTar dv Xe^eiev. Eur. Hipp. 419. Ov Se
ctkotov (ppiaaovai tov SvvEpydrrjv, TIpEuvd r o'ikwv, pi) ttote
<pOoyyriv dtpy ; 1077. Si Stv/uar', e'iOe ipOiypa yripiiaaiaOi pot.
Androm. 925. we Sokov<7i pot Aopoi y' iXavvav ipOiyp ixovrEg
o'ISe ps. Cic. pro Ccel. 24. Nonne ipsum domum metuei, ne quam
vocem eliciat. Pro Marcel. 3. Parietes mediusfidius, C. Ccesar,
ut mihi videtur, hujus curice tibi gratias agere gestiunt. De Orat.
I. 57. Lapides mehercule omnes filer e ac lamenturi coegisses.
Compare also Habak. ii. 11. Virg. Eclog. V. 28. Juv. Sat. I. 13.
IX. 103. Shakspeare, also, more than once employs a similar
expression. Macbeth, II. 1. Thou sure and firm set earth, Hear
not my steps which way they walk, for fear Thy very stones
prute of my whereabout, And take the present horror from the
time, Which now suits with it. Jul. Caes. III. 2. And put a
tongue In every wound ofCcesar, that should move The stones of
Rome to rise and mutiny. Grotius, Wetstein. — [Whitby.]
Ver. 42. e\ 'iyvwg k. r. X. Some commentators would here
take a for utinam, as in Luke xii. 49. and others supply the

LUKE XIX. 43. 577
sense by an ellipsis, as in Luke xiii. 9. The particle on, by
which Christ refers to the cause of his tears, seems rather to de
cide in favour of the former method ; and this broken manner of
speaking may have been the natural effect of agitated feeling.
Grotius, Whitby, Kuinoel, Rosenmuller. — [Campbell,
Doddridge, Kypke, &c] It has been urged that our Lord's
emotion upon this occasion was unworthy of his divine character ;
and it has been endeavoured, upon the authority of Epiphanius,
to reject this and the preceding verse as an interpolation. But
the verses of which Epiphanius (Anchor. §. 41.) mentions the
omission in some MSS., are Luke xxii. 43, 44. : and though our
Lord's weeping proves his humanity, it is so far from lessening
the dignity of his character, that it exalts it exceedingly. Com
pare John xi. 35. Mill, Macknight. With rd irpbg aprjvrjv
we must supply v7rdpxovra, or the like. The expression, which
is similar to rd rrje Eiprjvrje, is equivalent to Etprjvrjv ; and there
seems to be in this place an allusion to the etymology of Jeru
salem. Indeed, the commentators remark a peculiar emphasis
throughout the whole of our Lord's apostrophe ; as in the inser
tion of Kat, even, which may probably refer to the exaggerated
guilt of this city, (Mutt, xxiii. 37.) and the words raiiry ry r)pipq,
which mark the peculiar call to repentance which at that period
had been made to them by their rejected Messiah. Wetstein,
A. Clarke. We may observe that the blindness of the Jews
was not the effect of any irresistible decree, but it arose from their
wilful neglect of those signs and warnings which God had conti
nually vouchsafed them. As it is here said vvv Se £Kpv/3rj k. r. X.
so in Luke xviii. 34. Christ's death is said to be hid from the
Apostles : but it was their prejudices which prevented them from
understanding his declarations respecting it. Whitby, Le
Clerc. Ver. 43. x«paKa. This noun signifies a rampart or mound,
in which sense it frequently occurs in the LXX ; and so also in
Arrian. Exped. II. 79. 9. Polyb. I. 29. 3. In Joseph. B. J. V.
12. 2. the corresponding word is raxoe- Of the exact fulfilment
of the prophecy, see Home's Introd. Vol. I. p. 552. Raphelius,
Campbell. It has been thought that the words Kat rd racva aov
iv aoi are to be coupled with awi'Covai cte irdvroOEv, and that
iSatptoiiai oe is to be taken parenthetically. But the verb iSatpl-
Zeiv has two distinct significations ; 1 . when spoken of a city, to
level with the ground ; 2. of men, to dash against the ground.
It is used in both these senses by the LXX ; in the former in
Amos iii. 14. and in the latter in Psalm cxxxvii. 9. Hos. x. 14.
Nahum iii. 10. Hence some annex both senses to it in this pas
sage, and others apply it in the latter only both to <te and rsKva.
The latter is perhaps the more likely method. Kuinoel, Schleus
ner. — [Grotius, Rosenmuller, Wakefield.]
VOL. I. P p

578 LUKE XIX. 48. XX. 6.
Ibid. Katpbv rrig iiriaKOirrig aov. So 1 Pet. ii. 12. r)pipa iiria-
Koirr)g, where the time of persecution is supposed to be intended ;
and the word is used in a bad sense in Isaiah x. 3. Jer. vi. 15.
x. 15. Wisd. iii. 7. Ecclus. ii. 14. LXX. But it may also signify
a merciful visitation, as in Job x. 12. xxxiv. 9. Hence the vi
sitation here intended will be the gracious offers of mercy which
God made to the Jews during the period between the Baptist's
preaching and the destruction of Jerusalem. Theophylact : hria-
K07rrje" TOVTEtrrt, rrje ipr)g irapovaiag, Srs r)X0ov iirtaKEipaaOai at
Kal awaai. See on Luke i. 68. Schleusner, A. Clarke.
Ver. 48. i^EKpiparo. Hung, i. e. upon his words ; were ear
nestly attentive to him. So Eunapius : i^EKpiparo rwv Xoywv,
Kal rrje aKpodtTEtoe ovk EVEiripirXaro. In like manner the Latins
use pendere. Virg. iEn. IV. 79. Pendetque iterum narrantis ab
ore. Ovid. Ep. Her. I. 30. Narrantis conjux pendet ab ore viri.
Sil. Ital. VI. 566. Pendent ex ore loquenlum. Plin. Epist. I. 10.
Attentus et pendens. Pope has employed the same metaphor in
his Epistle to Lord Cobham, v. 184. Though wondering senates
hung on all he spoke. In the preceding verse the phrase rb KaO\
r)pipav does not imply, as some commentators have inferred from
Christ's retiring to Bethany in the evening, (Matt. xxi. 17.) in the
day time ; but, as it is evident from Matt. xxvi. 55. Luke xi. 9.
and the general usage of the N. T. it is correctly rendered daily.
Wetstein, Parkhurst, Grotius. — [Wall, Gilpin.]

CHAPTER XX.
Contents : — The question concerning the authority of Christ,
and the baptism of John, vv. 1 — 8. [Matt. xxi. 23. Mark xi.
27.] The parable of the labourers in the vineyard, vv. 9 — 20.
[Matt. xxi. 33. Mark xii. 1.] The question respecting tribute,
vv. 21—26. [Matt. xxii. 15. Mark xii. 13.] Christ's reply
to the Sadducees, touching the resurrection ; and his question
to the Pharisees respecting the Messiah, ~w. 27 — 44. [Matt.
xxii. 23. Mark xxi. 18.] He severely reproves the Pharisees,
w. 45—47. [Matt, xxiii. 1. Mark xii. 38.]
Verse 6. KaraXtOdaEt r)pdg. It was not unusual with the
Jewish rulers, when they could not' convict their enemies, to in
cite the populace to stone them. This summary mode of pro
ceeding was caned judicium zeli ; and it was an alternative which
they had now well nigh brought upon themselves. Compare
John x. 31. Acts xiv. 19. Grotius.

LUKE XX. 11. 20, 21. 579
Ver. 11. irpoalOETo iripipai. Mark xii. 4. irdXiv iirspipE. The
expression here used is a Hebraism ; and so again in Luke xix.
11. 7rpot70ae eTtte. Compare Gen. viii. 21. xviii. 29. Job xix. 1.
LXX. In v. 13. the adverb lawg is by many commentators ren
dered surely. It occurs no where else in the N. T., and some
contend that its ordinary sense of perhaps or probably can have
no place in the Scriptures, in which uncertainty cannot belong
to the Spirit of Truth. The sense thus assigned to it is sup
ported by 1 Sam. xxv. 21. Jerem. v. 4. LXX. Xen. Cyrop. VI.
1. 4. Anab. III. 1. 26, 28. .Elian. V. H. XI. 5. Plat. Gorg.
VII. 39, 52. At the same time, the above remark may fairly be
questioned, more especially in relation to a parable ; and lawg
signifies perhaps in Gen. xxii. 21. Jerem. xxvi. 25. The event
is almost decisive in favour of the usual acceptation here. Wet
stein. — [Campbell, Pearce, Schleusner, Parkhurst.]
Ver. 20. iyKaOirovg. This is a verbal noun from iyKaOiripi,
to lie in wait; whence it is rendered in the E. T. spies. So
Hesych. iyicdOEroi' ivESpsvovrEg. Suid. EyKaforoe' SoXiog.
Hence the LXX. use the phrase EyKa0£roe yiyvEaOai for the
Hebrew 21N in Job xxxi. 9. Compare iEsch. Dial. Socr. III.
12. Polyb. XIII. 5. 1. The verb, however, sometimes signifies
to suborn, as Plutarch, in Pyrrho, p. 389. rjaav Si nvEg, ovg aii
rbg b Ilvppog iyKaOtEi. In this place, therefore, the noun should
seem to denote a person suborned for a particular purpose ; and
in this sense it is plainly used in Joseph. B. J. II. 2. 5. VI. 5. 2.
This class of persons, as described by St. Luke, will come under
the condemnation of Cicero, de Off. I. 3. Totius injustitice nulla
capitalior est, quam eorum, qui tum, cum maxime fallunt, id
agunt, ut viri boni videantur. Wetstein, Parkhurst, Kypke.
The expression iirtXafiiaOat Xoyov or pi)parog, to catch at one's
words, i. e. with a view to accusation, is employed in like manner
by the classical writers. Phavorinus explains the verb dirrEaOai
nvog dpaprdvovrog, and Suidas by pipipEaOai. Hence some would
apply the former signification to this place, and the latter to v.
26., but the phrases in both instances are unquestionably syno
nymous. Compare Xen. Mem. I. 2. 31. Hell. II. 1. 32. The
Latin arripere has the same import in Cic. N. D. II. 65. Fin.
III. 4. Elsner, Wetstein, Raphelius, Schleusner.
Ver. 21. Xapj3dvEig irpbawirov. A Hebrew phrase, denoting
purtiulity, and synonymous with OavpdZEtv to irpbawirov, in
Jude 16. See Levit. xix. 15. Deut. x. 7. 17. 2 Chron. xix. 7.
Job xxxiv. 19. Prov. viii. 5. Ecclus. xxxv. 13. xiii. 1. Lam. iv.
16. Mai. i. 8. ii. 9. LXX. and compare Matt. xx. 16. Mark xii,
14. Hence the derivatives TrpocrwTroXrjTrrav, Trpo<rto7roXrJ7rrrje,
and irpoawiroXriipia, in Acts x. 34. Rom. ii. 11. Ephes. vi. 9.
Col. iii. 25. James ii. 1. 9. Kuinoel, Parkhurst.
p p 2

580 LUKE XX. 27. 38. 46.
Ver. 27. dvTtXE'yovrEe pr) Etvat. The negative particle is fre
quently redundant after verbs of denying. So again in Luke
xxii, 34. Thucyd. III. 41. VIII. 24. and continually in the best
writers. In Acts xxiii. 8. we have Xlyovo-t pi) Etvai dvdaraaiv.
Wetstein, Kypke. Of the import of vlbg, in vv. 34. 36., see
Home's Introd. Vol. II. p. 24. and compare Luke xvi. 8.
Ver. 38. 7rdvrEe ydp aiirvji Z&aiv. There is much difference
of opinion concerning the meaning of this clause. Some under
stand from it, that all, though dead, are still living, so far as re
lates to God, who discerns equally the past and the future.
Others suppose that ydp is not here causal, but illative, and
introduces the main conclusion to be drawn from God's declara
tion to Moses, viz. that all live after death, no less than the Pa
triarchs. Others, again, would render QeiS Zyv to live to God's
honour and glory. But it should rather seem to mean that all
mankind, both the living and the dead, live to God ; and that
death does not close our connexion with him, who has the power
to recal us to an immortal existence. So Origen, on Psalm cxix.
50. 6 Kvptoe roiig TEOvswrag Qei^ £rjv Et7T£v, dig ovirw rb Zyv
k'xovrae, irXrjv otrov iv Svvdpsi Qeov tov Z<x>oiroir)aavTog. There
is a remarkable passage, which proves that the best informed
Jews believed that the souls of the righteous exist in a state of
happiness, and throws some light on this place, in Joseph, de
Maccub. c. 16. raiira slSorEg, on ol Std rbv Qeov airo0vr)aKOVTEg
Zwai riji 0£tj>, iiiairEp 'AfSpadp, 'laaaK, koI 'IaKtvj3, Kat 7rdvr£e ol
Ilarpiapxat. To the same effect is the following, from Shemoth
R. p. 159. Rabbi Abbin suith; The Lord said unto Moses,
Find me out ten righteous persons among the people, and I will
not destroy them. Then said Moses, Behold, here am I, Aaron,
Eleazar, Ithumar, Phineas, Caleb, and Joshua. But God said,
Here are but seven, where are the other three ? When Moses
knew not what to do, he said, O eternal God, do those live who
are dead ? Yes ; saith God. Then said Moses, If those which
are dead do live, remember Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. A.
Clarke, Wakefield, Kypke. — [Beza, Wetstein, Dod
dridge.]
Ver. 46. 7r£pt7rar£iv ev aroXalg. M. Anton. I. 7. iv aroXy
irEpiiraTElv. Arrian. Epic. III. 22. iv KOKKivolg irEpiirarElv. It
has been supposed that oroXrj is here adopted from the Latin
stola, which was a woman's garment, in order to mark the
length. But Greek writers used the word indiscriminately, and
particularly for the long garments of the Eastern nations.
yElian. V. H. I. 32. aroXr)v MrjStKrjv. IX. 1. IlEpawv iropfvpag
Kal jurjXtvae aroXdg. The LXX. employ it of various robes.
See Gen. xxvii. 15. 2 Sam. vi. 14. and elsewhere. In Matt.
xxi. 5. the expression is uEyaXvvovtrt rd KpdawESa rwv Ipariwv

LUKE XXI. 4. 15. 22. 581
aiirwv. Analogous to our Lord's is Cicero's description of the
Tribune Quinctius : Fucite ut non solum mores ejus et urrogan-
tiam, sed etiam vultum atque amictum, atque illam usque ad talos
demissam purpuram, recordemini. Wetstein, Parkhurst.

CHAPTER XXI.
Contents : — The widow's mites, vv. 1 — 4. [Mark xii. 41.] Our
Lord's prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem, and the
parable of the fig-tree , vv. 5—33. [Matt. xxiv. 1. Mark xiii.
1.] The necessity of watchfulness, vv. 34 — 36. [Mark xiii.
34.] Christ retires nightly to Mount Olivet, vv. 37, 38.
Verse 4. Ete rd Swpa. We have here, in the abstract for the
concrete, the gift for<the treasury which received the gift. Com
pare Mark xii. 43. Of the temple-offerings, avaOr)para, (v. 5.)
and the magnificence of the temple itself, see Home's Introd.
Vol. III. pp. 242, 243. Hence Tacit. Hist. V. 5. litis aurea
Templo reperta. 8. Hierosolyma gentis caput: illic immensce opu-
lentice Templum. In v. 6. ravra must be rendered with respect
to these things. See my note on Soph. Ant. 212. Pent. Gr. p.
228. We have similar instances in Psalm xviii. 30. civ. 17.
Hos. ii. 11. xii. 7. Nah. i. 3. LXX. Acts vii. 40. x. 36. 1 John
ii. 27. Rev. ii. 26. vi. 8. Grotius, Wetstein, Whitby.
Ver. 15. arbpa Kal aoipiav. That is, wisdom of speech. We
have a similar hendiadys, and the same consequence, in Corn.
Nep. Alcib. I. Tanta erat commendatio oris et orationis, ut
nemo ei dicendo posset resistere. Compare Acts vi. 10. Wet
stein. Of the proverb in v. 18. see on Matt. x. 29. It is not
to be understood with some as promising a compensation in eter
nity for the ills endured for the sake of the Gospel, but as pre
dicting the escape of the Christians amid the impending ruin of
the Jews. This is evident from the next verse, which should be
rendered by your perseverance preserve ye, i. e. ye shall pre
serve, your lives. Some MSS. read Krrjrj£cr0£. The words cor
respond with Matt. xxiv. 13. 6 iiiropEivag Ete riXog aiirbg awOi)-
aErat. Of KraaOai, signifying to keep in possession, topreserve,
we have an example in a similar expression of Lysias : rde ^pvxdg
dXXorpiag KEKrrjrjflat. Of the signification of iiiropovi) see on
Luke viii. 5. Whitby, Kypke. — [Grotius.]
Ver. 22. iipipat EKoiKtjo-Ewe- See Hos. ix. 8. In the next

582 LUKE XXI. 24.
verse dvdyKrj must be understood in the sense of OXtytg, with
which it corresponds in Matt. xxiv. 21. ; and it is used in the
same sense in Tobit iii. 7. 11. 2 Mace. vi. 7. 1 Sam. xxii. 2.
Job xxxvii. 9. LXX. 1 Cor. vii. 26. 2 Cor. xii. 10. 1 Thess. iii.
7. So also Xen. Mem. III. 10. 12. ae rag dvdyKag rag dXya-
vordrag ipiTEaovrsg. .Elian. V. H. XII. 24. rrjv dvdyicrjv rije
irEviag. Sueton. Caes. 68. Famem et cceterus necessitates tolera-
bant. The metaphorical expression arbpa paxaipag occurs in
Gen. xxxiv. 26. Judg. xviii. 27. Deut. xiii. 15. Hence Eur.
Orest. 1295. Siaropa ipdayava. Compare Heb. iv. 12. Soph.
Aj. 651. Lucian. Trag. 114. Wetstein, Elsner, Parkhurst.
Ver. 24. dxpi irXripwOwai Kaipol iOvwv. The interpretations
of this text have been extremely various. Some writers under
stand the time when the full number of the Gentiles, which God
will call, shall be completed. This, however, though a very an
cient interpretation, is at variance with St. Paul's declaration, that
at the conversion of the Jews there shall be a greater and more
glorious conversion of the Gentiles than that which happened at
their fall, (Rom. xi. 12. sqq.) It has been supposed that the
times of the Gentiles were fulfilled when a Christian Church
was established at Jerusalem by Hadrian, who partly rebuilt it,
and changed its name to AElia. But the edict which the em
peror issued upon that occasion, for the banishment of the Jews
from Jerusalem, included believers as well as unbelievers ; and the
new-formed Church consisted of Gentile Christians only, under
the episcopal direction of Marcus. (Euseb. Eccl. Hist. IV. 5.)
At this time, therefore, the Jews did not re-inhabit Jerusalem ;
nor were they induced, by emulation of the Gentiles, to embrace
Christianity according to the Apostle's prediction cited above.
Others refer the time to the age of Constantine the Great, who
put an end to the Gentile idolatry in Jerusalem, and established
the Christian worship there, (Euseb. Vit. Const. III. 26.) But
here again no particular conversion of the Jews is recorded.
Besides, Jerusalem is still, and always has been, trodden down
by the Gentiles, and has never been in possession of the Jews
from the delivery of the prophecy to the present time ; whereas,
when the times of the Gentiles shall be fulfilled, the expression
clearly implies that the Jews will be restored. This period,
therefore, will arrive, when the times of the four great kingdoms
predicted by Daniel shall have expired, and the fifth kingdom, or
the kingdom of Christ, shall be set up in their place ; when the
Lord shall again collect the scattered sheep of the house of
Israel, and all shall be one fold under one shepherd, and citizens
of the New Jerusalem, the city of the living God. There are
indeed others who understand by the times of the Gentiles the
times in which they shall be visited and punished, and cite in
support of their opinion Jerem. xxvii. 7. 1. 27. Ezek. xxi. 25.

LUKE XXI. 25. 30. 36. 583
29. xxii. 3, 4. xxx. 3. But this opinion does not seem entitled
to much attention. Whitby, Lightfoot, Newton, Rosen
muller. — [Hammond, Le Clerc, Doddridge, Kuinoel, &c]
By some interpreters the verb irarElaOai is here rendered to be
had in subjection ; and by others to be laid wuste, or prqfuned.
Either rendering will suit the sense. Compare 1 Mace. iii. 2.
iv. 60. Rev. xi. 2. Soph. Ant. 1275. Xa27rdrrjrov xapdv. Schol.
jue0' vj3p£tve dirwOovpivriv. So Cic. Attic. VIII. 11. Conculcari
miseram Ituliam videbis proxima (estate. Wetstein, Park
hurst.
Ver. 25. iv airopiq. With perplexity ; a well-known import
of the preposition. The noun crvvoxrj, distress, occurs in Judg.
ii. 3. Job xxx. 3. LXX. 2 Cor. ii. 4. So Artem. II. 3. irdai
rolg iv awoxy 0V<7^ By Wvri axe here meant the nations of
Palestine, called ipvXal in Matt. xxiv. 30. Wetstein. Of the
metaphorical application of adXog to civil commotions, see my
note on Soph. Ant. 212. Pent. Gr. p. 225. In the next verse
0oj3ov teat TrpotrSo/ctae is a hendiadys, denoting a fearful expecta
tion ; irpoaSoKia being a word of middle signification, and used
here, as £X7rte frequently, in a bad sense. Compare Psalm cxix.
116. 2 Mace. iii. 21. Ecclus. xl. 2. Xen. Cyr. I. 6. 16. Polyb.
I. 31. 3. Joseph. Ant. V. 10. 4. and see my note on Hom. II.
O. 110. Kypke, Elsner, Munthe. The accusative KEipaXdg,
in v. 28., is to be referred to the verb dirqparE only, a point being
placed at avaicinparE, which is intransitive. Joseph. B. J. VI. 8.
5. bXiyov EKKvi/zavrse ek roii Siovg. Compare John vii. 10. Xen.
CEcon. XI. 5. Polyb. I. 55. Theophr. Char. 11. Wetstein.
Ver. 30. 7rpo/3dXw<rt. Supply 0vXXa from Matt. xxiv. 32. Our
Lord's precept delivered in v. 84. sqq. is illustrated in the other
Gospels by the parables of the good and bad servants. The
noun Kpat7rdXrj signifies a head-ache, and is distinguished from
piOn as being the effect, not the act, of intemperance. Hesych.
KpanrdXrj" rj dirb x^LZiic piOtig KEipaXaXyia. Amnion. Kpat7rdXrj
Kat piOri SiaipipEt' KpaiirdXri piv ydp iariv rj x@£(TlvW f^^li piOii
Si ri rrje avrrje vpipag yivopivri o'ivwatg. Compare Alciph.
Epist. III. 21. Herodian. I. 17. 7. Wetstein.
Ver. 36. dig irayig. Compare Isaiah xxiv. 17. Eccles. ix.
12. Of the verb icaOriaOat see on Matt. iv. 16. In the next
verse araOi)vai denotes to be acquitted, pardon and condemna
tion being respectively expressed in Scripture by standing and
falling. See Ezra ix. 15. Psalm i. 5. Nuhum. i. 6. Rom. xiv.
4. The verb bpOpiZEiv signifies properly to rise early. Its
proper form is 5p0pEvav. Mceris : 6p0pEvav, 'ArrtKwe- bpOpi-
^Etv, 'EXXrjvtKttie. Theocr. Idyl. X. 58. Mv0i<tSev Tij, parpl Kar
Evvrjv bpOpEvoiaq. Schol. avtarapivy bpOpov. Hence it sig-

584 LUKE XXII. 3. 6.
nifies, as in this place, to come early to a place ox person. Com
pare Gen. xix. 27. xx. 8. Exod. xxxiv. 4. Josh. iii. 1. Ecclus.
xxxix. 6. LXX. Grotius, A. Clarke, Wetstein.

CHAPTER XXII.

Contents : — The rulers conspire to take Christ, vv. 1, 2. [Matt.
xxvi. 3. Mark xiv. 1.] Judas agrees to betray him, vv. 3 — 6.
[Matt. xxvi. 14. Mark xiv. 10.] The last Supper, and the
institution of the Eucharist, vv. 7 — 20. [Matt. xxvi. 17. Mark
xiv. 12.] Christ predicts the treachery of Judas, vv. 21 — 23.
[Matt. xxvi. 21. Mark xiv. 17. John xiii. 17.] He reproves
the ambition of his disciples, vv. 24 — 30. [Matt. xx. 25.
Mark x. 42. John xiii. 2.] Peter's denial fordold, vv. 31 —
39. [Matt. xxvi. 31. Mark xiv. 27. John xiii. 31.] The
agony in the garden, vv. 40 — 46. [Matt. xxvi. 36. Mark xiv.
32. John xviii. 1.] The betrayal, and Peter's resistance,
vv. 47—53. [Matt. xxvi. 47. Mark xiv. 43. John xviii. 3.]
His denial of Christ, vv. 54 — 62. [Matt. xxvi. 58. Mark xiv.
51. John xviii. 15.] Christ insulted, tried, and condemned,
vv. 63—71. [Matt, xxvii. 1. Mark xvi. 1.]
Verse 3. Et(njX0s Si Saravde k. t. X. This expression im
plies nothing more than a mental suggestion. So the Apostle
declares that Satan worketh inwardly (ivEpyEtrai) in the children
of disobedience, (Ephes. ii. 2.) and so the operations of the
Holy Ghost, which the good are said to receive, are not sensible.
Compare John xiii. 2. Acts v. 9. 2 Tim. ii. 25. Whitby, Gro
tius, Kuinoel. With o-rpaTrjyoTe, in the next verse, supply
roii Upoii, as inv. 52. and see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 245.
and the note on Matt. xxvi. 47.
Ver. 6. i^wpoXbyriaE. E. T. he promised, scil. to betray
Jesus; i. e. he agreed or assented to the terms proposed. The
compound verb is somewhat unusual in this sense ; but the simple
verb is so used in Matt. xiv. 7. So Lysias : eTttov ovv on rd-
Xavrov apyvpiov 'iroipog Etrjv Sovvat' 6 S' wpoXoyriaE raiira irocn-
a-Etv. Compare Jer. xliv. 25. LXX. 1 Tim. vi. 12, 13. Heb. iv.
11. Thucyd. III. 90. Polyb. II. 95. Xen. Anab. VII. 4. 13.
In illustration of the noun EVKatpt'a we may cite Cic. Off. I. 40.
Tempus adionis opportunum Greece EVKaipla, Latine appellatur
occasio. Fin. III. 14. Opportunitas : sic enim appellamus ev-
Kaipiav. Wetstein, Schleusner, Parkhurst. The word
SxXoe signifies both a multitude and a tumult, of which the latter

LUKE XXII. 15. 17. 24. 585
sense is best adapted to this place. So also in Acts xxiv. 18.
Hammond.
Ver. 15. EiriOvpiq lirEOvpnaa. Expressions of this nature,
according to the genius of the Jewish language, are the strongest
manner of affirmation, as in Gen. ii. 17. xxxi. 30. Numb. xi. 4.
Isaiah vi. 9. Matt. xiii. 14. Acts iv. 17. v. 28. and elsewhere.
Our Lord's anxiety to eat this passover was caused by his desire
to instruct them in the nature of his death, as a propitiatory sa
crifice ; to institute the Eucharist in memory of his dying love ;
to offer them consolation on his departure from the world ; and
to record the gracious promises which he made them in John xiv.
xv. xvi. In the next verse 'iwg orov is a Hebrew form of ex
pression, signifying that our Lord would no more eat the pass-
over for ever. The thing to be fulfilled (irXriptoOy) was the de
liverance of mankind from the bondage of sin by Christ's sacrifice
on the cross, typified by the sacrifice of the Paschal Lamb, which
was slain in commemoration of the deliverance of the Jews from
Egyptian bondage. Macknight, Grotius.
Ver. 17. irorripiov. It is probable that only one vessel was
used during the celebration of the passover. See on Matt. xxvi.
26. The MSS., however, for the most part, are against this
supposition, since a very few only have the article before irorri
piov. It has been supposed, indeed, that the cup here alluded
to was not the cup used at the institution of the Eucharist, but
earlier in the feast, perhaps the first, which was drank before the
meal. Our Saviour is here said, however, to have given thanks,
so that it seems rather to have been the cup of blessing, or the
third of the four, and in that case it was the cup used at the in
stitution of the Lord's Supper. But then, on the other hand,
how are we to understand what is said below in v. 20. ? The
perplexities attending the passage are such that it savours strongly
of interpolation. Both this and the following verse are omitted
in the Syriac version and some MSS., and may possibly have
been inserted from the parallel passage in Matthew. Mid
dleton.
Ver. 24. iyivEro Se koi ipiXovEiKia k. t. X. Two cases of dis
sension among the disciples have already been recorded, one in
Matt, xviii. 1. Markix. 33. Luke ix. 46., and the other in Matt.
xx. 20. Mark x. 35. From the difference of circumstances
which accompanied it, the former cannot be that which is men
tioned here ; and some are of opinion that the present instance
is distinct from either of them. It should seem, however, that
the latter occurrence is here intended, and that St. Luke has re
corded it out of the true order of time, for it is scarcely probable
that a contention for superiority would have arisen upon an occa-

586 LUKE XXII. 25, 26. 28.
sion so truly affecting. The verb iyivsro should, therefore, be
rendered there had been, i. e. on the way to Jericho. Grotius,
Campbell, Kuinoel, A. Clarke, Pearce. — [Whitjby.] Of
the pleonasm Soicstv slvat see on Matt. iii. 9.
Ver. 25. EVEpyirai.. Euergetes, i. e. the benefactor, was the
title assumed by one of the Ptolemies. The same was affected by
other kings among the antients : and in order to attain it they
spared no expence in acts of public munificence and regal splen
dour. See 2 Mace. iv. 2. Thucyd. I. 129. Xen. Cyr. III. 3. 4.
Apol. Socr. 26. Polyb. V. 9. IX. 30. Diod. Sic. XI. 26. .Esch.
Socr. Dial. I. 12. Plutarch. Osir. 355. Coriol. 218. Dion. Hal.
IV. 32. Athen. p. 349. Joseph. B. J. I. 16. Phil. Leg. p. 349.
There is ah inscription still in existence at Athens to the follow
ing effect: The great queen, Julia Berenice, daughter of King
Julius Agrippa, and descendant of the great kings, benefactors
(EvepyErwv) of this city. With the Romans it was a custom to
distribute part of the conquered lands among the soldiers ; these
lands were called beneficia, those who enjoyed them beneficiarii,
and the donors benefactors. With respect to the construction,
the sense seems to be somewhat inverted : And they who are
called benefactors exercise authority over them. Grotius, Le
Clerc, Schleusner, Hammond, A. Clarke.
Ver. 26. 6 pslZiov. It has been conjectured that Peter was
the eldest of all the Apostles, and that this adjective is here to be
understood in reference to age, rather than dignity, as in Rom.
ix. 12., and as the Latin major, in Virg. Eel. V. 4. But, by
comparing Matt. xx. 26. it appears that vswrEpog is rather to be
rendered as opposed to pElZwv than pEiZwv to vEwrEpoe ; and we
have authorities for vEulrEpoe, in the sense of an inferior, in clas
sical writers. Dion. Hal. II. p. 700. Xoyov diTESdiKapEv diraai
rolg fiovXopivoig, dirb rwv irpwrwv dxpi rwv VEwrdrwv. The
expressions employed throughout have an evident reference to
office or stationia the kingdom of Christ. Coxapaxe Acts v. 6. 1 Tim.
v. 1. Heb. xiii. 17. With ovrwg, in the beginning of the verse,
there is an ellipsis of the verb ttoieTte. Kypke. — [Kuinoel, Gro
tius, Lightfoot.] Our Lord's observations respecting himself,
in the next verse, may well be referred to his whole life ; but
they seem more particularly to have respect to his late condescen
sion in washing the disciples' feet, (John xiii. 14.) Macknight.
Ver. 28. irsipaapolg. E. T. Temptations; i. e. trials, afflic
tions, as in Gcd. iv. 14. Heb. ii. 18. iv. 15. James i. 12. 2 Pet.
ii. 9- Rev. iii. 10. In the first clause of the next verse some
MSS. and versions insert StaflrjKrjv, and some commentators in
close the second clause in a parenthesis, removing the comma
after pov, and connecting SiariOEpai iiplv 'iva iaOinrs k. r. X.

LUKE XXII. 31, 32. 36. 587
But the various reading is insufficiently supported ; and it is
scarcely probable that the verb SiariOEaOai would be used twice
in the same verse with a different construction. Of the kingdom
which Christ here assigns to his disciples, see on Matt. xix. 28.
Whitby. — [Campbell.]
Ver. 31. aivtdaat dig rbv alrov. To sift you as wheat; i. e. to
put to the test the sincerity of your professions and the strength of
your principles ; to toss you with temptations, as wheat is shaken
in a sieve. Compare Isaiah xxx. 38. Amos ix. 9. The noun aivtov,
a sieve, and the verb atvtdZEiv, axe found only in the later writers.
We may observe that all the Apostles are included in this warn
ing, although Simon is especially addressed, as being perhaps
more immediately concerned in the late dissension, and because
our blessed Lord foresaw that he was about to fall more deeply
than the rest. The plural pronoun vpdg, and the words orfj-
pi£ov rove aSiXtpovg aov, sufficiently prove that Peter was not
alone addressed. Some have thought that there is an allusion
to Job i. 9. 12., and that the expression both here and there is
to be understood allegorical] y. But there is no foundation for
this supposition. It is more to the purpose to remark, that the
earnest address to Simon, so strongly expressed in the repetition
of his name, instead of forming an argument in favour of his
primacy in the Church, is rather to be considered in the light of
a reproof, and prophetic of his want of faith. Wetstein, Light
foot, Grotius, Rennel. — [Kuinoel, &c] It is plain from
this passage that the power of the devil is restrained, arid that
he can exert his evil influence upon men only so far as God
allows him. The verb i^airslaOai signifies generally to demand
a person to be given up to punishment, as in Demosth. de Cor.
13. Herodian. I. 12. 12. Joseph. Ant. II. 5. 3., and in a sense
nearly similar it may be applied here. Sometimes, however, it
is used in a good sense, as in Xen. Anab. I. 1. 3. Raphelius,
Parkhurst.
Ver. 32. pr) ekXeiV^. E. T. Fail not. Rather fail not utterly.
Peter's faith did fail, but by the intercession of Christ he was
preserved from falling irrecoverably. With Eiriarpiipag must be
supplied rjEavrov. Some, indeed, take iiriarpiipag arr)pt^ov for
a Hebraism for TrdXiv crrrjpt^ov, and compare Psalm lxxxiv. 6.
LXX. But the better interpretation is, Having at length reco
vered yourself, i. e. from your fall. So Matt. xiii. 15. Acts iii.
19. ix. 35. xiv. 15. xxvi. 18. 20. Schleusner, Beza, Wolf. —
[Grotius, Kuinoel, &c]
Ver. 36. udxatpav. From a misapprehension of this admoni
tion, and inability to reconcile it with our Lord's non-resistance
at his apprehension, Bishop Pearce proposes to read irnpav. The
10

588 LUKE XXII. 37. 39. 45.
words mean nothing more than a prediction of the dangers which
now surrounded them, in opposition to the security of former
times ; and in like manner the prophets are accustomed to express
times of danger metaphorically, by recommending the precautions
which men generally take for their defence. Other symbols also of
a like nature are continually found in their writings, as in 1 Kings
xxii. 11. Isuiuh xiv. 21. xx. 2. Jerem. ix. 17. xxvii. 2. Ezek.
iv. 2. xii. 7. Hos. i. 2. and elsewhere. Hence the direction to
buy a sword will be nothing more than a proverbial expression,
denoting provision against impending danger. So far was our
Lord from authorizing a forcible resistance that he reproves Peter
for using his sword in Matt. xxvi. 52. The phrase Ikovov ian, in
v. 38., though attended with some difficulty, cannot have re
ference to the disciples' reply, inasmuch as two swords could not
have been sufficient even for a semblance of defence ; in which
sense it is sometimes understood. Neither is there any appear
ance of irony in our Lord's answer, as some have imagined. It
is plain that the disciples mistook his meaning, and the words in
all probability were merely indicative of his wishing to dismiss
the subject for the present. Similar expressions, for a similar
purpose, are not uncommon in the Rabbinical writings. Grotius,
Lightfoot, Wetstein, Schoettgen, Kuinoel. — [Pearce.]
Ver. 37. to ysypappivov. Isaiah liii. 12. Compare Mark xv.
28. With rd 7T£pt ipoii we must also supply yEypappiva. The
phrase riXog e'xeiv, which is equivalent to r£X£(T0ijvai, is classical
Greek. Dion. Hal. IX. 12. riXog eixe rote Tvpprivolg rd pav-
rEvpara. iEsch. Prom. 12. ivroXi) Atbg ex« riXog Sf). Wet
stein. Ver. 39. ol paOrirdi avrov. That is, Peter, James, and John,
as in Matthew and Mark. In v. 41. some MSS., evidently from
a gloss, read airEardOri. The verb airoairdaOat does not neces
sarily imply violence, but signifies simply to withdraw oneself, as
in this passage, and in 2 Mace. xii. 10. 17. Acts xxi. 1. So Xen.
Cyr. II. 2. 5. "iva dig irXElarov diroairaaOwpEv rov j3arjtXtKOV
arparEvparog. The phrase XiOov j3oXi) occurs in Thucyd. V. 65.
and elsewhere frequently. Compare Hom. II. r. 12. In the
next verse the particle Et is optative, as in Luke xii. 49. Ham
mond, Wetstein, Grotius, Kuinoel. — [Kypke.] Of the
genuineness of vv. 33, 34. see Home's Introd. Vol. IV. p. 302.
In the former the verb evkt^veiv is used in an active sense, as in
2 Sam. xxii. 40. Ecclus. liv. 70. LXX. but in Acts ix. 19. it
signifies to be strengthened ; and so also in Gen. xlviii. 2. Judg.
xvi. 28. xx. 22. LXX. Schleusner.
Ver. 45. KOtpwpivovg dirb rrje Xv7rrje. Hom. Od. M. 310.
KXatovrEcro-t Se rolatv £7rrjXv0£ vijSvpog virvog. Long. Past. II.

LUKE XXII. 51. 53. 66. 589
p. 67. ravra Xiyovra aiirbv ek rwv SaKpvaiv Kat rrje XvVrje virvog
fiaOiig KaraXappdvEt. Plut. de Fort. Rom. p. 323. C. aiirbv S'
Ete virvov ek SvaOvpiag Kal Xv7rrje a7roKXt0rjvat. Q. Curt. XIV.
13. Tandem gravatum animi unxietute corpus altior somnus
oppressit. In v. 49. the preposition ev is put for ovv, as else
where frequently ; and the particle ei is used in the sense of
num, as in Mark viii. 23. Luke vi. 7. xiii. 23. xxii. 67. Acts i. 6.
xxv. 20. So Thucyd. I. 118. iirriptoTtov rbv Oeov, eI iroXEpovaiv
d/UEtvov iarai ; Eur. Phcen. 736. eI vvKroe avrolg wpoafidXoi-
pEv ek Xoxov. In like manner si is used in Virg. Eclog. IX. 37.
^En. IV. 110. Wetstein, Alberti.
Ver 51. EttrE 'itog tovtov. E. T. Suffer ye thus far. This
version is obscure, and susceptible of very different interpretations.
All antiquity seems agreed in understanding our Lord's expres
sion as a check to the zeal and resistance of his disciples ; and
what is recorded in Matthew and John strongly confirms this
explanation. Another, indeed, has been suggested, viz. that the
words were spoken to the soldiers, who are supposed before now
to have seized his person ; and that our Lord requested to be
released for the purpose of healing the man, whose ear had been
cut off. But this interpretation is every way exceptionable, as
being totally destitute of evidence, and affording a solitary in
stance of our Lord's asking permission to work a miracle. The
expression 'itog roiirov means commonly hitherto; so that the
most natural import of our Lord's words are, let pass ivhat is
done — Enough of this — No more of this. Campbell, Wet
stein, Kuinoel, — [Hammond, Doddridge, Elsner.]
Ver. 53. avrv vpwv ianv r) wpa, k. r. X. Some understand
these words as referring to the dead of night as the most favour
able season for deeds of darkness; and compare Sil. Ital. XII.
193. Perge, uge ; fer gressus ; dexter deus, koraque nostra est.
Mart. Epig. X. 19. Hcec hora est tua, cumfurit Lycceus. But
it should rather seem that aKorog is here to be understood of the
prince of darkness, and that our Lord meant to say, This is the
hour destined for the completion of your wicked purpose, and for
the powers of darkness to reign undisturbed. Compare 2 Cor.
vi. 14. Col. i. 13. The words avrrj sort must be repeated before
i^ovaia. Grotius, Wetstein, Kuinoel.
Ver. 66. rb irpEafivripiov rov Xaov. In Acts xxii. 5. rb
irpEafivriptov is used without the addition of Xaov. St. Luke is
the only sacred writer who gives this appellation to the Sanhe
drim, of which he is doubtless speaking. He calls it also rj
yEpovtrta in Ads v. 21. Compare 1 Tim. iv. 13. Campbell,
Wetstein.

590 LUKE XXII. 68. XXIII. 1, 2. 4. 7.
Ver. 68. idv Se koi iptorr)aw, k. t. X. The form of argu
mentation among the Hebrews was usually interrogatory. See
oa Mark viii. 11. Our Lord meant to say, that whether he
simply declared his Messiahship, or entered into an argument to
prove it, they would equally reject his claims. That they would
have done so is evident from their conduct on other occasions.
Compare Luke xx. 7. 17. 44. Grotius, Kuinoel.

CHAPTER XXIII.
Contents: — The examination of Christ before Pilate and
Herod : his crucifixion, death, and burial, W. 1 — 56. [Matt.
xxvii. 2. Mark xv. 1. John xviii. 28.]
Verse 1. rb irXr)0og aiirwv. It is probable that the chief
priests and elders, with their servants and dependents, are the
multitude here spoken of. The common people were gene
rally favourers of Jesus, and for this reason the Jewish rulers
caused him to be apprehended in the night, and it was but now
just break of day. Compare Luke xxii. 6. 66. Pearce, A.
Clarke.
Ver. 2. EvpOpEv. The verb here denotes to convict by ju
dicial enquiry : as again in vv. 4. 14. Acts xiii. 28. xxiii. 29.
So Xen. Cyr. I. 2. 7. KoXdZovai Si Kal ove dv dStKwe dv syKa-
Aovvrae EvplaKwat. Of SiaarpitpEiv, signifying to pervert, to lead
astray, we have other examples in 1 Kings xviii. 17. LXX.
Matt. xvii. 17. Acts xiii. 8. Wetstein, Kypke, Elsner.
Ver. 4. o'vSev EvpiaKw ainov. According to John xviii. 38.
Pilate did not say this till after Christ had declared to him that
his kingdom was not of this world; and probably not till after he
had discovered, upon examination of the witnesses, that he had
raised no seditions whatsoever. Le Clerc, Pearce, A. Clarke,
The word ainov is properly an adjective, but it is used as a sub
stantive: or Oavdrov maybe supplied from v. 15. Of the reason
of Pilate's question in v. 6. see Home's Introd. Vol. III. p. 15.
Ver. 7. dviiTEpipEv aiirbv irpbg 'HptvSrjv. It was the regular
practice of the Roman prasfects to send back (remittere) the
prisoner to the governor of the province or district to which he
belonged, though they had the right of trying all offences com
mitted within their respective provinces. Thus it appears from
Joseph. B. J. III. 10. that Vespasian remitted the trial of the

LUKE XXIII. 8. 15. 28. 591
Tarichaeans to king Agrippa. Pilate seems to have acted in
this case with a view to obtaining a reconciliation with Herod,
with whom he was then at variance,, (v. 12.) The cause in which
this enmity originated has been the subject of conjecture : and is
generally supposed to have arisen from Pilate's affair with the
Galilaeans, related in Luke xiii. 1. But, be the origin of the
quarrel what it might, when the character of the parties is con
sidered, their reconciliation, as M. Saurin truly observes, is far
more wonderful than their enmity. Grotius, A. Clarke, Dod
dridge. Ver. 8. OiXwv e£ tKavov k. t. X. See Luke ix. 9. If Herod's
wish to witness a miracle was the mere effect, as some suppose,
of idle curiosity, we see at once one motive of our Lord's silence
before him, who did not choose to exercise his divine power on
so unworthy an object. In v. 11. the word arparEvpaatv signifies
merely a body-guard, as in Acts xxiii. 10. Grotius, Kuinoel.
Ver. 15. 7r£7rpay/x£vov alrid. E. T. Done unto him; which is
incorrect. The dative is here put for the genitive with iiirb,
which is evident from the repetition of the phrase Trpdcro-stv rt
dtiiov Oavdrov in other places. Compare Acts xxv. 12. 25. xxvi.
21 . Instances of the same syntax are common in the best writers.
So Arist. Eccl. 73. Kat pr)v rd y' dXX' iiplv bpw irEirpaypiva.
Xen. Hell. II. 2. 17. dvapvr)aw iiplv rd rovrw irEirpaypiva.
Campbell, Wetstein, Kypke. In vv. 16. 22. the verb irai-
Seveiv, which properly signifies to educate a child, implies, by an
easy transition, to chustise ; chastisement forming a necessary
part of education. In this sense it is frequently used in Scrip
ture, though never by profane writers. See Prov. iii. 12. xix. 18.
xxix. 17. Wisd. iii. 5. Ecclus. x. 28. LXX. 1 Cor. xi. 32. 2 Cor.
vi. 9. Heb. xii. 6, 7. 10. The particular chastisement here in
tended is scourging. Hence Theophylact: TratSEvo-ae' awtppo-
viaag Sid paariywv. SCHLEUSNER, KuiNOEL.
Ver. 28. pr) KXa'tETE iir' ipi. Soph. Phil. 339. Olpat piv dpKElv
aoi ys Kat rd a', Si rdXag, ' AXyr)paO' , warE pi) rd rwv iriXag ari-
veiv. Ovid. Met. XIII. 464. Non mea mors illi, verum sua vita
gemenda est. Cic. Cat. IV. 1. Est mihi jucunda in malis, et
grata in dolore, vestra voluntas : sed earn, per Deos immortales
quceso, deponite, atque obliti salutis mece de vobis et de liberis
vestris cogitate. Wetstein. With respect to the syntax it may
be observed, that some MSS. read ipol, which is sanctioned by
Luke xix. 41. The verb KXa'utv, however, is more usually fol
lowed in Greek writers by an accusative without a preposition,
as in Hesiod. Op. D. I. 220. KXalovaa irbXtv te ical rj^sa Xaaiv.
But the expression KXa'mv iiri nva is sufficiently confirmed by
Numb.xi. 13. Judg.x\.37. xiv. 17. LXX. and elsewhere. Of0v-

592 LUKE XXIII. 29. 31.
yaripEg, tekvo, and like terms, denoting the inhabitants of a place,
see on Matt, xxiii. 37. and compare Gen. xxxiv. 1. Psalm
cxxxvii. 8. Isaiah iii. 16. Jer. xlvi. 24. Luke xiii. 34. xix. 44.
Kuinoel.
Ver. 29. paKapiat al trrapat k. r. X. How fearfully this pre
diction was fulfilled at the destruction of Jerusalem the history
of Josephus will abundantly testify. See on Matt. xxiv. and
Home's Introd. Vol. I. p. 553. With the sentiment we may
compare Eurip. And. 395. O'ipoi kokwv rarvS'* Si raXa^ ipr)
irarpig' 'Q,g Sstvd irdaxio' ri Se jue Kat tekeiv Ixpijv, "AxOog r iir'
&xOei t^Se irpoaOiaOai SnrXovv. Cic. Ep. Fam. V. 16. Neque
hce consolutiones tantum videntur proficere debere, quantum sta
tus ipse nostrce civitatis, et hcec prolatio temporum perditorum ;
cum beatissimi sint, qui liberos non susceperunt ; minus autem
miseri, qui his temporibus amiserunt, quum si eosdem bona, aut
denique aliqua republica, perdidissent. See also Tacit. Ann.
II. 75. Sil. Ital. IV. 357. Senec. Cons. II. 5. The next verse
is descriptive of the dreadful consternation and horror into which
the inhabitants would be thrown ; and there is an allusion to the
caves and mountains of Judea, to which they fled for safety and
concealment. See Joseph. B. J. IV. 9. 4. VI. 3. 3. VII. 7. 5.
Similar expressions occur in Isaiah ii. 19. Hos. x. 8. Rev. vi.
16. ix. 6. Compare Hom. II. A. 18. P. 416. Virg. ^En. IV. 24.
XII. 892. Ovid. Epist. VI. 144. Fast. III. 609. Sil. Ital. IV.
331. Grotius, Wetstein, Kuinoel.
Ver. 31. eI iv n^ iiypiji k. r. X. This is a proverbial expres
sion. Among the Jews a green tree was looked upon as the
emblem of the righteous, and one dry and withered as the emblem
of the wicked. See Psalm i. 3. Ezek. xx. 47. xxi. 3. Ecclus. vi. 3.
It appears from the Talmud in Sanhedrim, p. 93., to have been a
Jewish maxim on the misery that attaches to the good from
their association with the wicked, who exceed them in number,
that two pieces of dry wood will burn one piece of green.
Hence our Lord's application of the parable will amount to this :
— If an innocent man be put to death in the face of justice, by a
people who professed a divine religion, what oppression and de
solation may not be expected amid the anarchy and confusion
which shall take place at the siege of Jerusalem by the Roman
armies ? Compare 1 Pet. iv. 1 8. Whitby, A. Clarke, Schoett
gen. Of £vXov, signifying a tree, we have examples not only in
Gen. i. 11. Ezek. xvii. 24. LXX. Rev. ii. 7. xxii. 2. 14. and
elsewhere; but in Eurip. Cycl. 572. Herod. VII. 65. Theoph.
Hist. Plant. V. 9. So Hor. Od. II. 13. 11. Tu triste lignum.
Hence the usage of the word is not merely Hellenistic or He-
braical, as some have imagined. Parkhurst, Wolf. — [Valck-
n^er.] In the next verse there should be a comma at srEpot Svo,

LUKE XXIII. 34. 40. 43. 593
with which KaKovpyot is not in agreement, but in apposition.
Some, indeed, suppose that Christ is here included, not as being
actually a malefactor, but as being treated like one. But the
necessity of so harsh an interpretation is avoided by correcting
the punctuation. Kypke, Kuinoel, Rosenmuller.
Ver. 34. irdrEp, dipEg aiiroig' k. r. X. If ignorance does not
excuse a crime, it at least diminishes the atrocity of it : and our
Lord's benevolent spirit suggested this excuse for his murderers
at the very moment they were nailing him to the cross, in com
plete fulfilment of the prophecy in Isuiuh liii. 12. It is true
that the Jews knew that they were crucifying an innocent person,
but, blinded by the most obstinate prejudices, they did not know
the full extent of their guilt. Some have supposed, however,
that our Lord could not here have prayed for the Jews, inasmuch
as his prayer did not succeed in averting the dreadful calamity
which hung over their nation. The Roman soldiers, who nailed
him to the cross, had greater excuse also on the score of igno
rance ; and for them, therefore, the prayer is conceived to have
been offered. But there can be little doubt that the Jews were
included in the prayer, which must be limited to the sense of in
terceding for time and opportunity of repentance, and forgiveness
to such as availed themselves of this long suffering and forbear
ance. That in this sense the prayer was fulfilled is evident from
a variety of passages in the Acts. See also 1 Cor. ii. 8. and
compare 1 Tim. i. 15. Grotius. — [Kuinoel.]
Ver. 40. Iv rt£> avr<5 Kpipan. Under the same sentence. The
charge brought against Christ in v. 2. was, that he had endea
voured to raise a sedition by opposing the payment of the tribute
due to the Roman government. It may seem, therefore, that the
two malefactors were of the same party with. Judas of Galilee,
and others, who refused to submit to the Romans, and resisted
upon principle the tax imposed by them. Pearce. See Horne.
Ver. 43. ar)pEpov pEr ipov 'iay iv ti£ irapaSsiaw. It has been
a subject of enquiry what our Lord wished the penitent thief to
understand by this promise. He certainly could not intend to
sanction the fabulous traditions of the Jews, nor the notions of
the Essenes ; neither can any argument be drawn from it in fa
vour of the Mahometan Paradise. Some have supposed, that by
Paradise we are to understand Heaven, and compare 2 Cor. xii.
4. Rev. ii. 7. But in the first of these passages it is probable
that two visions are intended, and in the latter the expression is
clearly figurative. The word has been derived from 7rapd and
SeIui, to irrigate; but is evidently of Oriental origin. The Greeks
borrowed it from the Persians, among whom it signified a gar
den, or inclosure, full of the richest produce of the earth. J. Poll.
vol. i. Q q

594 LUKE XXIII. 43.
Onom. IX. 12. ot Si TlapaSstaoi, j3ap/3aptKov slvat Sokovv tov-
vopa, rjKEt Kat Kara <rvvrj0£iav Ete XP^'Tlv EXXrjvtKrjv, dig Kal iroX
Xd dXXa rwv IlEptrtKwv. Xen. CEcon. KrJ7rot te iaovrai, ol Ilapa-
SEiaot KaXoiipEvoi, irdvrwv KaXwv te Kal dyaOiov pEarol, biroaa r)
yrj <£v£tv e0eXe. Compare Xen. Cyr. 1.3. 12. Diod. Sic. XVI.
41. The original word D*7")3, Pardes, occurs in Neh. ii. 8.
Eccles. ii. 5. Cant. IV. 13. and the LXX use 7rapdSEttxoe for the
Garden of Eden in Gen. ii. 10. and for any garden in Numb.
xxiv. 6. Isaiuh i. 30. Hence it came to signify a place of ex
quisite delight, and the Jews seem to have used it as synonymous
with the expression Abraham's bosom in Luke xvi. 22. So
Tertull. Apoll. §. 47. Paradisum nominamus, locum divince amce-
nitutis recipiendis sundorum spiritibus destinatum. So also
Origen, Chrysostom, and others of the Fathers. It was there
fore our Lord's intention to signify that the penitent sufferer
might hope for peace and happiness in that intermediate state
which awaits the good between death and the resurrection. The
phrase psrd nvog Etvat is used of those who partake of an enter
tainment, as in Judg. xiv. 11. LXX. So also Terent. Heaut. I. 1.
Hodie apud me sis volo. Plaut. Stich. Cras apud me eritis.
Wetstein, Campbell, Grotius, Horsley, Bos, &c. &c. It
has been imagined that grace was begun in the thief, and his con
version suddenly perfected, though every circumstance apparently
concurred to hinder him from believing. Yet it is far from being
certain that either his faith or repentance was the fruit of this
particular season. It is evident that he must have known some
thing about our Saviour, for otherwise he could not have said
ovSev dro7rov iirpa^s. He may have been acquainted, therefore,
with the miracles and the preaching of Christ before he was
thrown into prison, although he had not sufficient resolution to
abstain from evil courses. Nay, it is even possible that his un
timely end may have been occasioned by the single act of insub
ordination, for which he suffered ; and that he was, nevertheless,
a sincere believer, and with this exception, a practical follower
of Christ. That he was convinced of our Lord's Messiahship is
evident from his petition, pvr)aOriri pov, KiipiE, k. t. X., though it
may be doubted whether his notion of Christ's kingdom was
founded on the popular prejudices of his countrymen, or on the
declarations which our Lord himself had frequently made res
pecting it. No argument, therefore, can be drawn from his case
in favour of the validity of a death-bed repentance, since, even
upon the supposition that he had had no previous knowledge of
Christ, he could in that event have had no previous call, and
therefore he repented as soon as the means of grace were af
forded him. The fair inference from the history is, that a true
repentance is never too late. At the same time, a continuance
in sin upon the encouragement afforded by this solitary example,
will end in a repentance which has no analogy to that of the thief

LUKE XXIII. '54. XXIV. 1. 595
except in regard to the lateness of it. Macknight, Whitby,
Doddridge, Kuinoel, &c.
Ver. 54. eVs^witke. Properly, dawned, as in Matt, xxviii. 1.
Herod. III. 86. Polyb. IX. 1.; and hence, as applied to the
Jewish sabbath, which began in the evening, drew on, ap
proached. Compare John xix. 31. By the Greeks, who rec
koned the morning the first part of the day, this verb was na
turally applied to the ushering in of the day. Hence Luke, who
was a native of Syria, and, therefore, living much among Gen
tiles, would insensibly have acquired a habit of applying a term
which indicated the commencement of a day beginning in the
morning to denote the commencement of a Jewish day. In fact,
the Evangelist only adopted the common practice of his country
men. The Syriac verb, which properly denotes to shine as
the day light, is applied also to the evening light, and is the very
word used in the Syriac version of this passage. It is also used
for iirtiptoaKEiv in Matt, xxviii. 1 . ; and some have thought that
the evening is there also intended ; but the context neither re
quires nor admits any other sense than the usual one. The Jews
also, it should seem, had a similar mode of expression, which
originated in their custom of lighting lamps on the evening of
the Sabbath. Hence the Sabbath evening was called light.
Thus Maimonides : By the light, i. e. on the evening, of the
fourteenth day they search for leaven by the light of a candle.
Campbell, Lightfoot, Wetstein. — [Michaelis.]

CHAPTER XXIV.
Contents : — Tlie resurrection made known to u party of women
upon their arrival at the sepulchre, vv. 1 — 11. Peter goes
to the sepulchre, v. 12. Christ appears to two disciples on
the road to Emmaus, vv. 13 — 35. His appearance to the
Apostles, in the absence of Thomas, vv. 36 — 43. His com
mission to the disciples at Jerusalem, vv. 44 — 49. The ascen
sion, vv. 50 — 53. [Mark xvi. 19.]
Verse 1. op0pov f3a0iog. At the earliest dawn. Thom. M.
opOpog' 6 irpb roii XvKavyovg Kaipbg, ev o) in Xvxvw Svvarai rig
XpdaOat. The word occurs in Esth. v. 14. Prov. vii. 18. Dan.
vi. 19. Joel ii. 2. LXX. John viii. 2. Acts v. 21. Xen. Anab. II.
2.21. Diod. Sic. XIV. 104. Polyb. III. 73. 3. XII. 26. 1.
Plat. Crit. 1. de Legg. XII. and with the epithet fiaOvg, which
points to an earlier period, in Arist. Equit. 216. Theoc. Idyl.
XVIII. 14. Herac. All. Hom. 492. The time intended is that
Q q 2

596 LUKE XXIV. 5.
described in Ovid. Epist. Her. XIV. 22. Ultima pars noctis,
primaque lucis erat. Compare Hom. II. H. 433. Wetstein,
Kypke, Palairet. The circumstances in this chapter are either
recorded by St. Luke alone, or given more at large than by the other
Evangelists : and he may possibly have derived his information
from Joanna, with whom he seems to have been acquainted. See
Luke viii. 9. The last clause of this verse is omitted in several
MSS. and rejected by the best critics. But the evidence against
its admission is very trifling : it connects this chapter with vv. 55,
56. of the last; and the women alluded to were doubtless inha
bitants of Jerusalem, who had joined in the train of those from
Galilee. Campbell. — [Mill, Griesbach, Pearce, &c] Of
the order of events connected with the resurrection and other
points of apparent difficulty, see the notes on Matt, xxviii. 1.
sqq. and the Table.
Ver. 5. kXivovctwv to irpbawirov Eig rr)v yr)v. These words
do not imply prostration, but reverence, in accordance with the
injunction laid upon the Jews not to gaze upon an heavenly vi
sion. Compare Exod. iii. 6. xix. 27. Judg. xiii. 20. 1 Kings
xix. 13. The heathens also regarded their deities with a similar
veneration, and considered it dangerous to look steadfastly on
them, when supposed to make themselves visible. Apoll. Rhod.
IV. 1315. Avrdp by' Eig iripwaE iraXipirirEg bppar 'eveike Aat-
povag atSEaOsig. Ovid. Fast. I. 148. Sumpsi animum, gratesque
Deo non territus egi ; Verbaque sum spectans pauca locutus hu-
mum. III. 371. A media caelum regione dehiscere ccepit ; Sum-
misere oculos, cum duce, turba suos. Hence Senec. Epist. II.
Artifices scenici, qui imitantur affectus, qui metum et trepida-
tionem exprimunt, qui tristitiam reprcesentant, hoc indicio imi
tantur verecundiam : dejiciunt vultum, verbu submittunt, figunt
in terram oculos, et deprimunt. Doddridge, Elsner, Wet
stein. Ibid, ri ZyrElrE k. t. X. This was a common form of speech
among the Jews, and seems to have been applied to those who
were foolishly or unprofitably employed. As places of burial were
unclean, it was not reasonable to suppose that the living would
frequent them, or that a person who was missing was likely to be
found there. Thus in Schemoth Rabba, p. 124. 1. The foolish
servant of a priest, seeking his master among the tombs, called
out to the bystanders, Saiv ye my master here ? They say unto
him, Thou fool, who ever saw a priest among tombs ? So say
Moses and Aaron to Pharaoh, Thou fool, is it the custom to
seek the dead among the living, or the living among the dead ?
Our God is the living God; but the gods of whom thou speakest
are dead, &c. &c. Compare Vajikra R. 6. So also Plaut.
Mencech. II. 1. 15. Hominem inter vivos quceritamus mortuum :
Nam invenissemus jamdiu, si viveret. Lightfoot, A. Clarke,

LUKE XXIV. 11—13. 597
Wetstein. Of the word dpaprwXol in v. 7. see on Matt. xxvi.
47. Luke vii. 37. The prediction referred to by the angels is to
be found in Matt. xvi. 21. xvii. 23. and the parallel places.
Ver. 11. iipdvriaav tvcrst Xrjpoe. Lucian. Timon. I. ct7ravra
raiira Xrjpoe *?Srj dvairitpyvE, Kal Kairvbg irotrirtKog. Xen. Anab.
VII. 7. 24. Xrjpoe irdvra eSokei Etvat. Plaut. Pcen. I. 1. 4. Nam
tuce blanditice mihi sunt, quod did solet, Gerrce germance, atque
cedepol Xrjpot Xrjpwv. Wetstein.
Ver. 12. 6 Se nirpoe k. r. X. From a notion that St. Peter's
visit to the sepulchre, recorded by St. Luke, is identical with that
in which he was accompanied by St. John, as related in John
xx. 3., it has been supposed that this verse is out of place, and
that the Evangelist has not preserved the true order of events.
Of the genuineness of the verse there can be no doubt, as, with
three inconsiderable exceptions, it is found in all the MSS. and
versions. The fact is, there is no reason to believe the two Evan
gelists record the same visit ; for when Peter and John went to
gether, before any report of the women concerning a vision of
angels, the former went into the sepulchre, which does not ap
pear to have been the case according to St. Luke. It is obvious,
also, that the motives which induced the two visits are perfectly
distinct, and the circumstances attending them took place in dif
ferent parts of the tomb. West, Townson, Kuinoel. — [Lard
ner, A. Clarke.]
Ibid, irpbg iavrbv. The commentators differ respecting the
connexion, in which these two words are to be taken. Some
join them with d7rr}X0E, and translate, he returned home. See on
Luke v. 8. ; and to the examples there cited add Polyb. V. 93.
SiiXvaE rovg M.Ey aXairoXlrag irpbg aiiroiig. Joseph. Ant. VIII.
4. 6. 7rpoe lavrove EKaarot diryEaav. So in Latin, Phaed. Fab.
IV. 41. Sermone ab ipso cognitum cupidissime Ad se recepit.
Ter. Eun. III. 5. 64. Eamus ad me. But it may be inferred
from v. 24. infra, that Peter did not go directly home from the
sepulchre, but returned to the place where the disciples were as
sembled. Hence it is better to connect 7rpoe lavrov OavpdZtov,
wondering within himself, as in most of the ancient versions ; and
this method is abundantly confirmed by its suitableness to the
style of the Evangelist. Thus Luke xviii. 11. 7rp6e iavrbv raiira
irpoarivx^ro. xx. 14. SuXoyiZovTO rrpbg iavroiig. Doddridge,
Campbell, Wetstein. — [Kypke, Hammond, Kuinoel.]
Ver. 13. Svo e£ avrwv. This long and interesting account is
not mentioned by Matthew or John, and it is only glanced at in
Mark xvi. 12. One of the two disciples was Cleopas, (v. 18.)
and the other is supposed by many learned men, both ancient
and modern, to have been Luke himself. The Persian translation
10

598 LUKE XXIV. 16. 18.
says positively that it was so ; but the opinion is at variance with
the Evangelist's own declaration in the preface to his Gospel,
that he was not an eye-witness. Epiphanius thought it might
be Nathanael, and others have maintained that it was Peter ; but
these are mere conjectures, and the latter can scarcely be recon
ciled with v. 34., unless Xsyovrse be substituted for Xsyovrae.
It is clear that neither of them were Apostles, though they may
possibly have been of the number of the seventy disciples. Dod
dridge. — [Lightfoot, A. Clarke.] Of Cleopas, and of the
village Emmaus, see Home's Index. There seems to have been
three places of this name. To that here mentioned the same
distance of sixty stadia, or about seven English miles, is assigned
in Joseph. B. J. VII. 6. 6. Possibly the disciples resided there,
and were returning home after the celebration of the passover.
Grotius. In the next verse the verb 6/xiXeiv is used in the
somewhat rare signification of to converse. Compare Dan. i. 19.
LXX. Acts xx. 11. xxiv. 26. Joseph. Ant. X. 11. 7. IV. 2. 2.
XI. 5. 6. Elsner, Krebs.
Ver. 16. ot Se bipOaXpol k. t. X. The commentators are not
agreed whether the eyes of the disciples were holden by natural
or prasternatural causes. A different habit, their having no ex
pectation of seeing him, and the grief with which they were af
fected, might in part divert their attention, and prevent their re
cognizing him ; but the peculiarity of the expression, compared
with that in v. 31. seems to indicate some particular agency of
God, both upon their eyes and their memories. Compare Gen.
xxi. 19. Numb. xxii. 31. 2 Kings vi. 17. sqq., and see on Mark
xvi. 12. Whitby, Doddridge, Hammond, Grotius. — [Kui
noel, Campbell, Kypke, Schleusner, &c] The verb dvrt-
/3dXX£tv, in the next verse, signifies properly to toss from one to
another, as a ball, eye. and is thence applied metaphorically to
an argumentative discussion. Compare 2 Mace. xi. 3. LXX.
The disciples were possibly discussing the probability or impro
bability of Christ's Messiahship and resurrection. Wetstein, A.
Clarke.
Ver. 18. ai> povog irapoiKElg k. r. X. There are two ways in
which these words may be, understood ; either as a method of
accounting for the apparent ignorance of a traveller, or as an ex
pression of surprise, that any one who had been at Jerusalem at
the time should be as ignorant as a stranger of the late extraor
dinary events. The E. T. favours the first interpretation, but
the latter is the best, and most generally received, and the pas
sage should be thus rendered : Art thou alone such a stranger in
Jerusalem as to be ignorant of these events ? Similar expres
sions of surprise may be produced from most languages. Dip.
Or. III. p. 42. ov dpa, eItte, povog dvr)KOog e! rovrtov, a irdvrEg

LUKE XXIV. 19 21. 24. 599
laaai; M. Anton. III. £svoe Koapov b prjyvwpiZtov rd ev Kbapw
bvra. Cic. Milon. 12. An vos,judices, vero soli ignoratis, vos
hospites in hue urbe versamini; vestrce peregrinantur aures,
neque in hoc pervagato civitatis sermone versantur ? Rabir. 23.
Adeone hospes hujus urbis, adeone ignarus es disciplince consue-
tudinisque nostrce, ut hcec nescias? Ovid. Met. II. 9. An quce
per totam res est notissima Lesbon, Non audita tibi est ? Camp
bell, Wetstein, Kypke.
Ver. 19. dvrjp 7rpo^rjrrje. It is very generally thought that
dvrjp is here redundant, more Hebraico. See Exod. ii. 14.
1 Sam. xxxi. 3. Judg. vi. 8. xix. 1.16. 22. The pleonasm,
however, if it be one, is equally common in Greek writers, as in
Hom. II. T. 370. Thucyd. I. 41. Herod. I. 90. 141. Plat. Phaed.
9. 34. But it is probable that its use is here emphatic, and in
tended as a title of honour. So Lucian. Jup. Frag. 15. w dv-
Sp£e Osoi. Compare 1 Mace. ii. 23. vi. 57. Ecclus. x. 26. Acts
viii. 27. James ii. 2. A. Clarke, Schleusner. — [Kypke,
Parkhurst.] Ver. 21. rptrrjv ravrrjv r)pipav. Achil. Tat. VII. p. 442. rpt-
rrjv ravrrjv rrjv ripipav ylyovEv dipavr)g. It is a general rule that
nouns to which oiirog is prefixed always take the article ; and
this is invariably the case in the N. T. with the exception of Acts
i. 5. xxiv. 21 . and the present passage. Now in all these cases
either a numeral adjective occurs, or something analogous to it,
so that cases of this kind may possibly be regarded as occasional
exceptions to the rule. Middleton. There is a difficulty res
pecting the nominative case to be supplied before dya. Some
improperly regard ai)pEpov in the light of a nominative ; others
understand rjXioe ; and others again take dysi in a passive signi
fication, used impersonally. But the noun to be supplied is 'Irj-
aoiig ; and the phrase dyav ripipav, which is the same with the
Latin agere diem, well expresses the doubts which they enter
tained as to whether he was alive or dead. We have a some
what similar, though not the same, form in Lucian. D. M. 13. in
iv Baj3vXwvt KElpat rplrrjv ravrrjv r)pipav. Beza, Kypke, Wet-
stein. — [Grotius, Doddridge, &c] Of the verb i^iarripi, in
the next verse, see on Matt. xii. 23. Mark iii. 21. It is here
used actively, as in Acts viii. 9. The adjective bpOpiai supplies
the place of an adverb of time. So Job xxix. 7. LXX. i^Eirop-
Evo/xrjv bpOpiog. Virg. /En. VIII. 465. jEneas se matutinus
agebat. Kuinoel. See my note on Hom. II. A. 414.
Ver. 24. rtvEe. Peter and John, as related in John xx. 10.
and Peter again, v. 12. supra. With rwv aiiv r)plv there is an
ellipsis of ovrwv, as in v. 33. Mark ii. 26. So Xenoph. Rep.
Lac. 13. TpitpEt r) irbXtg fiaatXia Kal roiig avv aiirij). Bos.

600 LUKE XXIV. 25. 29-31.
Ver. 25. fipaSelg ry KapSiq. The adjective fipdSvg is not un
usually applied to the understanding, even without the addition
of ev KapSta or the like. Arist. Nub. 129. iirtXf)ap,tov koI f3paSiig.
Hence Suid. /3paSve* 6 pi) dyxtvove. So Hor. Sat. I. 3. 39.
Illi Tardo cognomen pingui damns. We have the same com
bination as in this passage in iEsop. Fab. dvaaTEvdSae dvacpayE,
*£! dvoriroi koI jipaMg. Of dvorjrot, rendered/oafo in the E. T.
the meaning is rather thoughtless, inconsiderate, being a term of
expostulation or reproof, not of anger or contempt. The phrase
TrioTEVEtv iiri nvi is a Hebraism. Wetstein, Campbell, Dod
dridge. In the clauses of the next verse aptdpEvog is applied
in two different senses. See my note on Soph. CEd. T. 270.
Pent. Gr. p. 26.
Ver. 29. 7rap£j3id<ravro. E. T. they constrained, i. e. they
persuaded. See on Matt. xiv. 22. Luke xiv. 23. It has
been objected that our Lord's making as though he would have
gone further was a species of dissimulation, and as such un
worthy of his divine character. But he doubtless would have
gone further had he not been solicited otherwise ; and though
he was aware that he should be so solicited, his omniscience must
in no ways be supposed to have influened the wish of the dis
ciples to detain him. Grotius, Whitby. In the phrase 7rpoe
io-7TEpav the preposition denotes approximation, as in Joseph.
Ant. V. 5. So Thucyd. IV. 135. 7rpoe Eap. With roii pslvat
there is an ellipsis of eveku. Wetstein, Kuinoel.
Ver. 30. Xaj3wv rbv dprov k. r. X. See on Matt. xiv. 19.
Some have thought that our Lord gave his two disciples the Holy
Sacrament on this occasion, adding it to the ordinary meal, as
at the first institution of the rite ; and that they knew him
thereby to be Jesus. But such a notion is entirely without
foundation. Among the Jews the giving of thanks and the dis
tribution of the bread was the office of the head of the family,
but in mixed companies, he, whose rank and character rendered
him most worthy of the honours of the table, obtained them.
Hence, upon this occasion it devolved upon our Lord, his dis
ciples being fully convinced from his conversation that he was a
person of no ordinary account. Macknight.
Ver. 31. dipavrog iyivsro air' aiirwv. E. T. He vanished out
of their sight : and in the margin, ceased to be seen of them.
Many of the interpreters adopt the marginal interpretation, sup
posing that Jesus merely departed unexpectedly and on a sud
den, and cite the instance of Pelops, in Pind. Olymp. I. 72.
dtpavrog iirEXEg. In this sense dipavrog is unquestionably used
in a variety of passages. See JEsch. Agam. 607. Soph. CEd. T.
560. Eur. Or. 1495. 1507. Theoc. Idyl. IV. 5. Anac. XXXIII.

LUKE XXIV. 32. 34. 36. 601
4. Apol. Rhod. IV. "1330. Arat. Dios. 899. Thuc. VIII. 58.
Xen. Anab. I. 4. 7. Diod. Sic. IV. 65. Joseph. Ant. XX. 8. 6.
So Flor. Epit. I. 1. E conspedu ablatus est. The natural im
port of the passage, however, seems to be that of a supernatural
removal. Compare John viii. 59. In v. 86. the words Etrrrj iv
piato avrwv should also be so understood. Jesus might unques
tionably have entered by the doors, as the disciples from Emmaus
had done, inasmuch as they were only closed for fear of the
Jews, and were readily opened to any of their own company. At
the same time, their mistaking him for a spirit, clearly suggests
the idea of a supernatural presence. Whitby, Gkotius. —
[Wetstein, Le Cleuc, Kuinoel.]
Ver. 32. r) KapSia Kaiopivri rjv. The expression is one of
mingled enthusiasm, affection, and joy ; and the reading is more
powerful, as well as more authentic, than that of some MbS. which
instead of Kaiopivri read KEKaXvppivri. Compare Psalm xxxix. 3.
Jer. xx. 9. So Cic. Fin. IV. 3. Incendit igitur eos, qui audi-
unt. Brut. 80. Ex omnibus oratoris laudibus longe ista sit
maxima, inflammans animos audientium. Kypke, Doddridge,
Wetstein. Ver. 34. Stjuwvt. None of the Evangelists mention any of
the circumstances of this appearance to Peter, but St. Paul
expressly refers to it in 1 Cor. xv. 5. ; and in v. 7. he also men
tions an appearance to James. Yet, as no record of his having
seen him exists in the Gospels, little credit is due to the story
which Jerome gives us from the Gospel of the Nazarenes, that
James had vowed to eat nothing after the Paschal supper till Jesus
had risen, and that, therefore, our Lord appeared first to him.
The faith of none of the Apostles was sufficiently strong for such
a vow ; and the order in which St. Paul speaks of the appearance
to James suits very ill with the story. As Mary Magdalene was
the first woman, so probably Peter was the first man, who was
favoured with the sight of his risen Saviour, who may perhaps
have appeared to him on his return from the sepulchre, v. 12.
Had Christ been seen of the other Apostles before Peter, who
had denied him, he might have deemed his repentance ineffectual,
and despaired of his restoration to the favour of heaven. Dod
dridge, Macknight.
Ver. 36. stprjvrj iiplv. Scil. iarw. This was the usual form of
salutation among the Jews. See Home's Introd. Vol. III.
p. 437., and compare the note on Matt. x. 12. The Vulgate
adds, Ego sum, nolite timere ; and several other versions have the
same addition: but only two Greek MSS. have iyw tipi pi)
#o/3£ttr0E. Grotius, Campbell.
vol. i. R r •+¦*

602 LUKE XXIV. 37, 38. 45, 46.
Ver. 37. wvEiipa OswpElv. Of the Jewish notions respecting
Spirits, see on Matt. xiv. 26. By his observation in v. 39. our
Lord by no means intended to sanction these notions, but merely
to convince them, according to their own ideas of spirits, that he
was not one. That the Jews believed in the immateriality of
spirits is evident from the definition of R. Hoshaiah in Bereshith
Rabba, p. 34, 2. that they are beings to whom souls are created,
but they have no body made for those souls. Of a similar notion
prevalent among the Heathen the classics afford a variety of
examples. Thus Max. Tyr. Diss. XV. 1. oil ydp adpKsg at
Satpovwv tpiiastg, ovSe bard, oiiSi dipa. Ovid. Met. IV. 443.
Errant exangues sine corpore et ossibus umbra. Compare
Horn. Od. A. 217. Virg. .En. VI. 700. Quintil. Decl. X. Cic.
Tus. I. 11. Christ pointed to his hands and feet, which still bore
the impression of the nails, as a yet further proof of his mate
riality, and that the same body was before them in which he had
been nailed to the cross. Hence, as we shall be like him in the
resurrection, our bodies will be united to our souls at the last day.
See Phil. iii. 21. Lightfoot, Grotius, Wetstein.
Ver. 38. dvaj3atvov<7t. In the sense in which this verb is
here used the Latins use surgere, as in Virg. .En. I. 582. Quce
nunc unimo sententia surgit. With the expression diriarElv dirb
Xapdg, v. 41., compare Matt, xxviii. 8. ; and add Liv. xxxix. 49.
Vix sibimet ipsi prce nee opinato gaudio credentes. Of the Jewish
division of the O. T., which our Lord adopts in v. 44., see Home.
Christ had spoken of the fulfilment of the predictions contained
therein, in Malt. xvi. 21. xvii. 23. xx. 19. Mark ix. 31. x. 34.
Luke ix. 44. xviii. 33. xxiv. 7. There is reason to believe that
this and the following verses were spoken after the Apostles had
returned from Galilee, from the appointed meeting with Christ ;
but the harmony of the passage is not easily settled. Grotius,
Wetstein.
Ver. 45. Strjvot^Ev avrwv rbv vow, k. r. X. It is one thing to
explain the Scriptures, and another to open man's understanding
to receive them. Christ did the latter, probably by giving them
now the first gift of prophecy or interpretation, ippnvElag i) iiri-
XvaEwg, which fell more plentifully upon them at the day of
Pentecost. Compare Acts xvi. 14. The phrase .occurs fre
quently in Justin and other Fathers. Grotius, Whitby.
Ver. 46. r»J rpiry vpipq. So John ii. 22. Acts ii. 25. xiii. 35.
1 Cor. xv. 4. It does not appear, however, in what part of the
O. T. Christ's resurrection on the third day is predicted, unless
in Hos. vi. 2., and typically in Jon. i. 17. The prophecies to
which Christ more immediately alluded in these two verses were

LUKE XXIV. 18. 50. 52, 53. 603
probably Psalm ii. 6. 8. xxii. 3. ex. 2. sqq. Isaiah ii. 3. xxviii. 16.
xl. 9. xlix. 6. liii. 12. Ix. 1. Ixi. 1. Jer. xxxi. 34. Dan. vii. 14.
Hos. ii. 23. Joel ii. 32. Mai. i. 11. Grotius. In v. 47. dpgd-
juevov is an impersonal participle, so that you begin. So Herod.
III. 91. airb Si YloaEiSri'iov wbXtog, rrjv 'AptpiXoxog 6 ' hptpiapiw
oiKtaE iir' oipoiat rolat KiXfawv te Kat Svpwv, dpSduEvov djrd
ravrrje k. t. X. Some MSS. read dpZapivwv, which would be the
genitive absolute with iipwv understood. But the received read
ing is undoubtedly correct. With KrjpvxSrjvat supply SeT, from eSei
in the preceding verse. Raphelius, Elsner. It was both
graciously and wisely appointed by our Lord that the Gospel
should begin to be preached at Jerusalem ; graciously, as an
encouragement to all penitents, who would thus see that even the
murderers of Christ were not excluded from the offers of mercy ;
and wisely, because the facts which had there happened, and
were about to happen at the day of Pentecost, afforded the most
ample testimony to the truth of Christianity. Doddridge.
Ver. 48. rovrwv. Namely, of all the events of the life and
death of Christ, but more especially of his resurrection, as the
most incontrovertible proof of his divine mission. Compare Acts
i. 21. Whitby. Of the sufficiency of the Apostolic testimony
see Home's Introd. Vol. I. The £7rayy£Xta, promise, the fulfil
ment of which our Lord forewarns them to await in Jerusalem,
was the descent of the Holy Ghost, promised in John xv. 26.
xvi. 7. See Isaiah xliv. 3. Ezek. xxxvi. 26. Joel ii. 28. Acts i. 8.
Heb. xi. 18. Of the verb ivSiiEaOai, signifying to be invested
with, we have examples in Rom. xiii. 14. 1 Cor. xv. 53. Gal.
iii. 27. Col. iii. 9, 10. So Tacit. Agric, 9. Tristitiam, et arro-
gantiam, et avaritiam exuerat. Senec. Epist. 47. Regum nobis
induimus animos. See my note on Hom. II. A. 149. Grotius,
Kypke, A. Clarke.
Ver. 50. i%r)yayE Se aiiroiig k. t. X. See on Mark xvi. 19.
It was far more proper that Christ should ascend into heaven,
than rise from the dead, in the sight of his Apostles ; for his
resurrection was proved by his appearances subsequent to his
passion, but his ascension could only be visible at the time when
it took place. Doddridge.
Ver. 52. irpoaKwr)aavTEg aiirbv. See on Matt. ii. 2. It is
manifest that the expression here indicates religious worship, as
paid to one who was no longer present with them on earth, but
ascended into heaven. Of Stairavrbg, in v. 53, see on Luke xviii.
I. The Apostles were constant attendants in the Temple at
the stated hours of prayer, and at the sacrifices offered morning
and evening, which are called bXoKavarwpara Stairavrbg in

604 LUKE XXIV. 53.
1 Chron. xvi. 40. 2 Chron. ii. 4. It is scarcely possible that
they could have taken up their abode in any of those apartments
belonging to the Temple, as some have imagined, which are
mentioned in 2 Kings xi. 2, 3. 2 Chron. xxii. 11, 12. This
the Sanhedrim and rulers would not have permitted, if we may
judge from their inveterate hatred of the cause to which they
were attached. Whitby.

the end of vol. i.

Gilbert & Rivington, Printers, St. John's Square, London.^

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08844 4592

i!i!hi|iiii;iPii^