Lectionary Calendar
Thursday, July 17th, 2025
the Week of Proper 10 / Ordinary 15
the Week of Proper 10 / Ordinary 15
video advertismenet
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
Attention!
Tired of seeing ads while studying? Now you can enjoy an "Ads Free" version of the site for as little as 10¢ a day and support a great cause!
Click here to learn more!
Click here to learn more!
Bible Commentaries
Alford's Greek Testament Critical Exegetical Commentary Alford's Greek Testament Commentary
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Alford, Henry. "Commentary on Matthew 12". Alford's Greek Testament Critical Exegetical Commentary. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/hac/matthew-12.html. 1863-1878.
Alford, Henry. "Commentary on Matthew 12". Alford's Greek Testament Critical Exegetical Commentary. https://www.studylight.org/
Whole Bible (49)New Testament (18)Gospels Only (6)Individual Books (11)
Verses 1-8
1 8. ] THE DISCIPLES PLUCK EARS OF CORN ON THE SABBATH. OUR LORD’S ANSWER TO THE PHARISEES THEREON. Mark 2:23-28 . Luke 6:1-5 . In Mark and Luke this incident occurs after the discourse on fasting related Mat 9:14 sq.; but in the former without any definite mark of time: St. Mark has á¼Î³ÎνεÏο ÏαÏαÏοÏεÏεÏθαι αá½Ïὸν á¼Î½ Ïοá¿Ï ÏάββαÏιν κ . Ï . λ .: St. Luke á¼Î³Îν . δὲ á¼Î½ ÏαββάÏῳ [ Î´ÎµÏ ÏεÏοÏÏÏÏῳ ] κ . Ï . λ ., on which see note there. The expression á¼Î½ á¼ÎºÎµÎ¯Î½á¿³ Ïá¿· καιÏá¿· is, I conceive, a more definite mark of connexion than we find in the other Gospels, but cannot here be fixed to the meaning which it clearly has in ch. Matthew 11:25 , where the context determines it. We can merely say that it seems to have occurred about the same time as the last thing mentioned in the same journey or season.
The plucking the ears was allowed Deuteronomy 23:25 , but in the Talmud expressly forbidden on the Sabbath. (Lightfoot in loc.) It was also (Leviticus 23:14 , apparently, but this is by no means certain: see note on Luke) forbidden until the sheaf of first-fruits had been presented to God, which was done on the second day of the feast of unleavened bread at the Passover. This incident, on that supposition, must have occurred between that day and the harvest. It is generally supposed to have been on the first Sabbath after the Passover. For a fuller discussion of the time and place, see note on Luke as before.
Verse 3
3. ] It appears from 1 Samuel 21:6 , that hot bread had been put in on the day of David’s arrival; which therefore, Leviticus 24:8 , was a sabbath. The example was thus doubly appropriate. Bengel maintains, on the commonly received interpretation of Ïάβ . Î´ÎµÏ ÏεÏÏÏÏÏÏον Luke 6:1 , that 1Sa 21:1-15 was the lesson for the day. But the Jewish calendar of lessons cannot be shewn to have existed in the form which we now have, in the time of the Gospel history.
Verse 4
4. ] εἰ μή , in the construction, is not for á¼Î»Î»Î¬ , but belongs to οá½Îº á¼Î¾á½¸Î½ ἦν , and retains its proper meaning of except.
Verse 5
5. ] The priests were ordered to offer double offerings on the Sabbath ( Num 28:9-10 ), and to place fresh ( hot , and therefore baked that day) shewbread. In performing these commands they must commit many of what the Pharisees would call profanations of the Sabbath. So that, as Stier ( Mat 2:4 ), not only does the sacred history furnish examples of exception to the law of the Sabbath from necessity , but the Law itself ordains work to be done on the Sabbath as a duty .
Verse 6
6. ] μεá¿Î¶Î¿Î½ seems the better supported reading, and sustains the parallel better: a greater thing than the temple is here. See John 2:19 . The inference is, ‘If the priests in the temple and for the temple’s sake, for its service and ritual, profane the Sabbath, as ye account profanation, and are blameless, how much more these disciples who have grown hungry in their appointed following of Him who is greater than the temple, the true Temple of God on earth , the Son of Man!’ I cannot agree with Stier that the neuter would represent only “something greater, more weighty than the temple, namely, merciful consideration of the hungry, or the like:” it seems to me, as above, to bear a more general and sublime sense than the masculine; see Matthew 12:41 , &c.
Verse 7
7. ] The law of this new Temple-service is the law of charity and love: mercy and not sacrifice, see ch. Matthew 9:13 : all for man’s sake and man’s good; and if their hearts had been ready to receive our Lord, and to take on them this service, they would not have condemned the guiltless.
Verse 8
8. ] On the important verse preceding this in Mark 2:27 , see note there. The sense of it must here be supplied to complete the inference. Since the Sabbath was an ordinance instituted for the use and benefit of man, the Son of Man, who has taken upon Him full and complete Manhood, the great representative and Head of humanity, has this institution under his own power. See this teaching of the Lord illustrated and expanded in apostolic practice and injunctions, Romans 14:4-5 ; Romans 14:17 ; Colossians 2:16-17 .
Verse 9
9. μεÏÎ±Î²á½°Ï á¼ÎºÎµá¿Î¸ÎµÎ½ ] This change of place is believed by Greswell to have been a journey back to Galilee after the Passover. (Diss. viii. vol. ii.) It is true that no such change is implied in Mark and Luke; but the words here point to a journey undertaken, as in ch. Matthew 11:1 ; Matthew 15:29 , the only other places in this Gospel where the expression occurs. In John 7:3 , the cognate expression μεÏάβηθι á¼Î½Ïεῦθεν is used of a journey from Galilee to Judæa. So that certainly it is not implied here (as Meyer, a [120] ., suppose) that the incident took place on the same day as the previous one. We know from Luk 6:1-49 that it was on another (the next?) sabbath.
[120] alii = some cursive mss.
αá½Ïῶν , not, of the Pharisees; but of the Jews generally, of the people of the place.
Verses 9-14
9 14. ] HEALING OF THE WITHERED HAND. Mark 3:1-6 . Luke 6:6-11 .
Verse 10
10. ] This narrative is found in Mark and Luke with considerable variation in details from our text, those two Evangelists agreeing however with one another. In both these accounts, they ( the Scribes and Pharisees , Luke) were watching our Lord to see whether He would heal on the Sabbath: and He ( knowing their thoughts , Luke) ordered the man to stand forth in the midst, and asked them the question here given. The question about the animal does not occur in either of them, but in Luke 14:5 , on a similar occasion. The additional particulars given are very interesting. By Luke, it was the right hand; by Mark, our Lord looked round on them Î¼ÎµÏ Ê¼ á½Ïγá¿Ï , ÏÏ Î½Î»Ï ÏοÏÎ¼ÎµÎ½Î¿Ï á¼Ïá½¶ Ïá¿ ÏÏÏÏÏει Ïá¿Ï καÏÎ´Î¯Î±Ï Î±á½Ïῶν : and the Herodians were joined with the Pharisees in their counsel against Him. See notes on Luke.
ξηÏάν = á¼Î¾Î·ÏαμμÎνην Mark, of which the use had been lost and the vital powers withered.
Verse 11
11. ] The construction of this verse is involved: there is a double question, as in ch. Matthew 7:9 .
Our Lord evidently asks this as being a thing allowed and done at the time when He spoke: but subsequently (perhaps, suggests Stier, on account of these words of Christ), it was forbidden in the Gemara; and it was only permitted to lay planks for the beast to come out .
Verse 13
13. ] Our Lord does no outward act: the healing is performed without even a word of command. The stretching forth the hand was to prove its soundness, which the divine power wrought in the act of stretching it forth. Thus his enemies were disappointed, having no legal ground against Him.
Verse 14
14. ] This is the first mention of counsel being taken by the Pharisees ( and Herodians , Mark, as above) to put our Lord to death.
Verse 15
15. ] αá½ÏÎ¿á½ºÏ ÏάνÏÎ±Ï : see similar expressions, ch. Matthew 19:2 : Luke 6:19 ; i.e. ‘ all who wanted healing .’
Verses 15-21
15 21. ] Peculiar in this form to Matthew . See Mark 3:7-12 .Luke 6:17-19; Luke 6:17-19 .
Verse 16
16. á¼ÏεÏίμηÏεν ] see ch. Matthew 8:4 , and note.
Verse 17
17. ] On ἵνα ÏληÏÏθῠ, see note on ch. Matthew 1:22 . Neither it nor á½ ÏÏÏ Ïλ . must be understood ‘ and thus was fulfilled ,’ as Webster and Wilkinson: both are used only of the purpose, not of the result, here or any where. It is strange that any should be found, at this period of the progress of exegesis, to go back to a view which is both superficial and ungrammatical. The prophecy is partly from the LXX, partly an original translation. The LXX have Ἰακὼβ á½ Ïαá¿Ï Î¼Î¿Ï â¦ á¼¸ÏÏαὴλ á½ á¼ÎºÎ»ÎµÎºÏÏÏ Î¼Î¿Ï â¦, but the Rabbis generally understood it of the Messiah.
Verse 18
18. κÏίÏιν Ï . á¼Î¸Î½ . á¼Ï . ] He shall announce judgment to the Gentiles, viz. in his office as Messiah and Judge. In these words the majesty of his future glory is contrasted with the meekness about to be spoken of: q. d. ‘And yet He shall not,’ &c.
Verse 20
20. κάλαμ . ÏÏ Î½Ï . κ . Ï . λ .] A proverbial expression for, ‘He will not crush the contrite heart, nor extinguish the slightest spark of repentant feeling in the sinner.’ The form καÏÎµÎ¬Î¾Ï for the future seems to have crept in from the aor., as a convenient distinction from καÏÎ¬Î¾Ï from καÏÎ¬Î³Ï . See Winer, § 12. 2. [Moulton, p. 82, note 6, cites καÏÎµÎ¬Î¾Ï from Psa 47:8 Symm.] In ref. Hab. the regular future καÏÎ¬Î¾Ï is used.
á¼ÏÏ á¼Î½ á¼ÎºÎ² . ] Until He shall have brought out the conflict, the cause, the judgment, unto victory, caused it, i.e., to issue in victory: á¼ÎºÎ²Î¬Î»á¿ , exire jusserit , see reff.: i.e. such shall be his behaviour and such his gracious tenderness, during the day of grace: while the conflict is yet going on, the judgment not yet decided.
Verses 22-45
22 45. ] ACCUSATION OF CASTING OUT DEVILS BY BEELZEBUB, AND OUR LORD’S DISCOURSE THEREON. DEMAND OF A SIGN FROM HIM: HIS FURTHER DISCOURSE. Mark 3:20-30 . Luke 11:14-36 , where also see notes. This account is given by Luke later in our Lord’s ministry, but without any fixed situation or time, and with less copiousness of detail. See also ch. Matthew 9:32 , and notes there. St. Mark ( Mar 3:23-29 ) gives part of the discourse which follows, but without any determinate sequence, and omitting the miracle which led to it.
Verse 23
23. ÎήÏι ] This form of question is properly a doubtful denial, involving in fact a surmise in the affirmative. ‘Surely this is not â¦?’
á½ Ï á¼±á½¸Ï Î . ] see ch. Matthew 9:27 , and note.
Verse 24
24. οἱ δὲ Φ . á¼ÎºÎ¿ÏÏ . ] St. Mark states ( Mar 3:22 ) that this accusation was brought by the γÏαμμαÏεá¿Ï οἱ á¼Ïὸ ἹεÏοÏολÏμÏν καÏαβάνÏÎµÏ . Luke ( Luk 11:15 ), by ÏÎ¹Î½á½²Ï á¼Î¾ αá½Ïῶν , i.e. Ïῶν á½ÏλÏν . On the charge itself, Trench remarks, ‘A rigid monotheistic religion like the Jewish, left but one way of escape from the authority of miracles, which once were acknowledged to be indeed such, and not mere collusions and sleights of hand. There remained nothing to say but that which we find in the N.T. the adversaries of our Lord continually did say, namely, that these works were works of hell.’
Verse 25
25. ] The Pharisees said this covertly to some among the multitude; see Luke 15:1-32 ; Luke 17:1-37 . “There is at first sight a difficulty in the argument which our Saviour draws from the oneness of the kingdom of Satan: viz. that it seems the very idea of this kingdom, that it should be this anarchy; blind rage and hate not only against God, but each part of it warring against every other part. And this is most deeply true, that hell is as much in arms against itself as against Heaven: neither does our Lord deny that in respect of itself that kingdom is infinite contradiction and division: only He asserts that in relation to the kingdom of goodness it is at one: there is one life in it and one soul in relation to that. Just as a nation or kingdom may embrace within itself infinite parties, divisions, discords, jealousies, and heart-burnings: yet, if it is to subsist as a nation at all, it must not, as regards other nations , have lost its sense of unity; when it does so, of necessity it falls to pieces and perishes.” Trench, Miracles, p. 58. We may observe (1) that our Lord here in the most solemn manner re-asserts and confirms the truths respecting the kingdom of evil which the Jews also held. The βαÏιλεá¿Î±Î¹ are so set parallel with one another, that the denial of the reality of the one with its á¼ÏÏÏν , or the supposing it founded merely in assent on the part of our Lord to Jewish notions, inevitably brings with it the same conclusions with regard to the other. They are both real , and so is the conflict between them. (2) That our Lord here appeals not to an insulated case of casting out of devils, in which answer might have been made, that the craft of Satan might sometimes put on the garb and arts of an adversary to himself, for his own purposes, but to the general and uniform tenor of all such acts on his part, in which He was found as the continual Adversary of the kingdom of Satan. (3) That our Lord proceeds to shew that the axiom is true of all human societies, even to a family, the smallest of such. (4) That He does not state the same of an individual man, ‘ Every man divided against himself falleth ,’ rests upon deeper grounds, which will be entered on in the notes on Matthew 12:30-31 .
Verse 27
27. ] The interpretation of this verse has been much disputed; viz. as to whether the casting out by the Ï á¼±Î¿á½¶ ΦαÏιÏαίÏν ( scholars, disciples; see 2Ki 2:3 and passim) were real or pretended exorcisms. The occurrence mentioned Luk 9:49 does not seem to apply; for there John says, á¼ÏιÏÏάÏα , εἴδομÎν Ïινα á¼Ïá½¶ Ïá¿· á½Î½ÏμαÏί ÏÎ¿Ï á¼ÎºÎ²Î¬Î»Î»Î¿Î½Ïα δ ., which hardly could have been the case with those here referred to. Nor again can the ÏεÏιεÏÏÏμενοι á¼¸Î¿Ï Î´Î±á¿Î¿Î¹ á¼Î¾Î¿ÏκιÏÏαί of Act 19:13 be the same as these, inasmuch as they also named over the possessed the name of the Lord Jesus: or at all events it can be no such invocation which is here referred to. In Josephus (Antt. viii. 2. 5) we read that Solomon ÏÏÏÏÎ¿Ï Ï á¼Î¾Î¿ÏκÏÏεÏν καÏÎλειÏεν , Î¿á¼·Ï á¼Î½Î´Ïμενα Ïá½° δαιμÏνια á½¡Ï Î¼Î·ÎºÎÏ Ê¼ á¼Ïανελθεá¿Î½ á¼ÎºÎ´Î¹ÏÎºÎ¿Ï Ïι . καὶ αá½Ïη μÎÏÏι νῦν ÏÎ±Ï Ê¼ ἡμá¿Î½ ἡ θεÏαÏεία Ïλεá¿ÏÏον á¼°ÏÏÏει . It is highly necessary to institute this enquiry as to the reality of their exorcisms: for it would leave an unworthy impression on the reader, and one very open to the cavils of unbelief, were we to sanction the idea that our Lord would have solemnly compared with his own miracles, and drawn inferences from, a system of imposture, which on that supposition, these Pharisees must have known to be such. I infer then that the Ï á¼±Î¿á½¶ Î¦Î±Ï . did really cast out devils; and I think this view is confirmed by what the multitudes said in ch. Matthew 9:33 , where upon the dumb speaking after the devil was cast out they exclaimed οá½Î´ÎÏοÏε á¼Ïάνη οá½ÏÏÏ á¼Î½ Ïá¿· ἸÏÏαήλ : meaning that this was a more complete healing than they had ever seen before. The difficulty has arisen mainly from forgetting that miracles, as such , are no test of truth , but have been permitted to, and prophesied of, false religions and teachers. See Exodus 7:22 ; Exodus 8:7 ; ch. Matthew 24:24 , &c.: Deuteronomy 13:1-5 . There is an important passage in Justin Martyr, Dial. with Trypho, § 85, p. 182, as follows: καÏá½° Î³á½°Ï Ïοῦ á½Î½ÏμαÏÎ¿Ï Î±á½Ïοῦ ÏοÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïοῦ Ï á¼±Î¿á¿¦ Ïοῦ θεοῦ ⦠Ïᾶν δαιμÏνιον á¼Î¾Î¿ÏκιζÏμενον νικᾶÏαι καὶ á½ÏοÏάÏÏεÏαι . á¼á½°Î½ δὲ καÏá½° ÏανÏá½¸Ï á½Î½ÏμαÏÎ¿Ï Ïῶν ÏÎ±Ï Ê¼ á½Î¼á¿Î½ γεγενημÎνÏν á¼¢ βαÏιλÎÏν , á¼¢ δικαίÏν , á¼¢ ÏÏοÏηÏῶν , á¼¢ ÏαÏÏιαÏÏῶν á¼Î¾Î¿ÏκίζηÏε á½Î¼Îµá¿Ï , οá½Ï á½ÏοÏαγήÏεÏαι οá½Î´á½²Î½ Ïῶν δαιμονίÏν . á¼Î»Î» ʼ εἰ á¼Ïα á¼Î¾Î¿Ïκίζοι ÏÎ¹Ï á½Î¼á¿¶Î½ καÏá½° Ïοῦ θεοῦ á¼Î²Ïαὰμ καὶ θεοῦ ἸÏαὰκ καὶ θεοῦ ἸακÏβ , á¼´ÏÏÏ á½ÏοÏαγήÏεÏαι . Irenæus (cited by Grotius) says that “hujus invocatione etiam ante adventum Domini nostri salvabantur homines a spiritibus nequissimis, et a dæmoniis universis,” and adds, “Judæi usque nunc hac ipsa invocatione dæmonas fugant.” Jer [121] , Chrys., Hil [122] , understand Ï á¼±Î¿á½¶ á½Î¼á¿¶Î½ to mean the Apostles: á½ Ïα κá¼Î½Ïαῦθα Ïὴν á¼Ïιείκειαν · Î¿á½ Î³á½°Ï Îµá¼¶Ïεν Îá¼± μαθηÏαί Î¼Î¿Ï , οá½Î´á½² Îá¼± á¼ÏÏÏÏολοι , á¼Î»Î» ʼ Îá¼± Ï á¼±Î¿á½¶ á½Î¼á¿¶Î½ ⦠ὠδὲ λÎγει ÏοιοῦÏÏν á¼ÏÏιν · Îá¼± á¼ÏÏÏÏολοι á¼Î½ Ïίνι á¼ÎºÎ²Î¬Î»Î»Î¿Ï Ïι ; ⦠θÎλÏν δεá¿Î¾Î±Î¹ á½ Ïι ÏθÏÎ½Î¿Ï á¼¦Î½ Ïοῦ ÏÏá½¸Ï Î±á½Ïὸν Ïá½° εἰÏημÎνα μÏνον .⦠Îá¼° Î³á½°Ï á¼Î³á½¼ οá½ÏÏÏ á¼ÎºÎ²Î¬Î»Î»Ï , Ïολλῷ μᾶλλον á¼ÎºÎµá¿Î½Î¿Î¹ οἱ ÏÎ±Ï Ê¼ á¼Î¼Î¿á¿¦ Ïὴν á¼Î¾Î¿Ï Ïίαν λαβÏνÏÎµÏ . á¼Î»Î» ʼ ὠμÏÏ Î¿á½Î´á½²Î½ ÏοιοῦÏον εἰÏήκαÏε αá½Ïοá¿Ï . Chrys. Hom. xli. 2, p. 446.
[121] Jerome , fl. 378 420
[122] Hilary, Bp. of Poictiers , 354
κÏιÏαὶ á½Î¼á¿¶Î½ ] your judges, in the sense of convicting you of partiality .
Verse 28
28. ] á¼Î½ ÏνεÏμαÏι θ . = á¼Î½ δακÏÏλῳ θ ., Luke; see Exodus 8:19 .
á¼ÏθαÏεν ] emphatic in position: but merely, has come upon you: not in the more proper sense of ÏÎ¸Î¬Î½Ï , ‘is already upon you,’ i.e. ‘before you looked for it,’ as Stier and Wesley. It does not seem to occur in this latter sense in the N.T. But Fritzsche’s dictum, ad Rom. 2:356, “Alexandrinis scriptoribus Ïθάνειν nihil nisi venire, pervenire, pertinere valet,” certainly is not right; for we have it indisputably in the sense of to anticipate, prevent , 1 Thessalonians 4:15 .
Verse 29
29. ] Luke has the word á¼°ÏÏÏ ÏÏÏεÏÎ¿Ï applied to the spoiler in this verse; a title given to our Lord by the Baptist, ch. Matthew 3:11 [123] , and also in prophecy, Isaiah 40:10 ( μεÏá½° á¼°ÏÏÏÎ¿Ï , LXX). See also Isaiah 53:12 (LXX); Isaiah 49:24-25 . See note on Luke 11:21 f., which is the fuller report of this parabolic saying.
[123] When, in the Gospels, and in the Evangelic statement, 1 Corinthians 11:23-25 , the sign (â) occurs in a reference, it is signified that the word occurs in the parallel place in the other Gospels, which will always be found indicated at the head of the note on the paragraph. When the sign (â) is qualified , thus, ‘â Mk.,’ or ‘â Mt. Mk.,’ &c., it is signified that the word occurs in the parallel place in that Gospel or Gospels, but not in the other or others .
Verse 30
30. ] These words have been variously understood. Chrysostom and Euthymius understand them to refer to the devil: Bengel, Schleiermacher, and Neander, to the Jewish exorcists named above. Grotius and others understand it as merely a general proverb, and the á¼Î¼Î¿á¿¦ to mean ‘ any one ,’ and here to apply to Satan, the sense being, ‘ If I do not promote Satan’s kingdom, which I have proved that I do not, then I must be his adversary .’ But this is on all accounts improbable: see below on ÏÏ Î½Î¬Î³Ïν and ÏκοÏÏίζει . I believe Stier is right in regarding it as a saying setting forth to us generally the entire and complete disjunction of the two kingdoms, of Satan and God. There is and can be in the world no middle party: they who are not with Christ, who do not gather with Him, are against Him and his work, and as far as in them lies are undoing it. See Romans 8:7 . And thus the saying connects itself with the following verse: this being the case, διὰ ÏοῦÏο λÎÎ³Ï á½Î¼á¿Î½ , the sin of an open belying of the present power of the Holy Spirit of God working in and for His Kingdom, assumes a character surpassingly awful. This saying is no way inconsistent with that in Mark 9:40 ; Luke 9:50 . That is not a conversion of this, for the terms of the respective propositions are not the same. See note on Mark 9:40 .
As usual, this saying of our Lord reached further than the mere occasion to which it referred, and spoke forcibly to those many half-persuaded hesitating persons who flattered themselves that they could strike out a line avoiding equally the persecution of men and the rejection of Christ. He informed them (and informs us also) of the impossibility of such an endeavour.
In the ÏÏ Î½Î¬Î³Ïν there is an allusion to the idea of gathering the harvest: see ch. Matthew 13:30 : John 11:52 , and for ÏκοÏÏίζει , John 10:12 , in all which places the words exactly bear out their sense here.
Verses 31-32
31, 32. ] διὰ ÏοῦÏο , because this is the case: see last note. Notice again the λÎÎ³Ï á½Î¼á¿Î½ , used by our Lord when He makes some revelation of things hidden from the sons of men: see ch. Matthew 6:29 ; Matthew 18:10 ; Matthew 18:19 : and Mat 12:36 below. The distinction in these much-controverted verses seems to be, between (1) the sin and blasphemy which arises from culpable ignorance and sensual blindness, as that of the fool who said in his heart ‘There is no God,’ of those who, e.g. Saul of Tarsus, opposed Jesus as not being the Christ; which persons, to whatever degree their sin may unhappily advance, are capable of enlightenment, repentance, and pardon: and (2) the blasphemy of those who, acknowledging God, and seeing his present power working by His Holy Spirit, openly oppose themselves to it, as did, or as were very near doing (for our Lord does not actually imply that they had incurred this dreadful charge), these Pharisees. They may as yet have been under the veil of ignorance; but this their last proceeding, in the sight of Him who knows the hearts, approximated very near to, or perhaps reached, this awful degree of guilt. The principal misunderstanding of this passage has arisen from the prejudice which possesses men’s minds owing to the use of the words, ‘the sin against the Holy Ghost.’ It is not a particular species of sin which is here condemned, but a definite act shewing a state of sin, and that state a wilful determined opposition to the present power of the Holy Spirit; and this as shewn by its fruit, βλαÏÏημία . The declaration, in substance, often occurs in the N.T. See 1 John 5:16 , and note on á¼Î¼Î±ÏÏία there: 2 Timothy 3:8 ; Jude 1:4 ; Jude 1:12-13 ; Hebrews 10:26-31 ; Hebrews 6:4-8 . Euthymius expands the sense well and clearly: á½Ï μὲν á¼Î½ á¼Î¼Î¬ÏÏῠκαÏá½° Ïá¿Ï á¼Î½Î¸ÏÏÏÏÏηÏÏÏ Î¼Î¿Ï , ÏηÏί , ÏÎ¿Ï ÏÎÏÏιν , á½ ÏÏÎ¹Ï á¼Î½ εἴÏῠβλάÏÏημον λÏγον ÎºÎ±Ï Ê¼ αá½Ïá¿Ï , ⦠ὠÏοιοῦÏÎ¿Ï ÏÏ Î³Î³Î½ÏÏθήÏεÏαι ÏάνÏÏÏ á½¡Ï Î¿á½Îº á¼Î¸ÎµÎ»Î¿ÎºÎ±ÎºÎ®ÏÎ±Ï , á¼Î»Î» ʼ á¼Î½ á¼Î³Î½Î¿Î¯á¾³ Ïá¿Ï á¼Î»Î·Î¸ÎµÎ¯Î±Ï βλαÏÏημήÏÎ±Ï Â· ὠδὲ βλÎÏÏν Ïá½°Ï Î¸ÎµÎ¿ÏÏεÏεá¿Ï Î¼Î¿Ï á¼Î½ÎµÏÎ³ÎµÎ¯Î±Ï , á¼Ï μÏÎ½Î¿Ï Î´ÏναÏαι Ïοιεá¿Î½ ὠθεÏÏ , καὶ Ïá¿· Îεελζεβοὺλ ÏαÏÏÎ±Ï á¼ÏιγÏαÏÏÎ¼ÎµÎ½Î¿Ï , á½¡Ï ÎºÎ±á½¶ á½Î¼Îµá¿Ï νῦν , καὶ οá½ÏÏ Î²Î»Î±ÏÏημῶν καÏá½° Ïοῦ ÏνεÏμαÏÎ¿Ï Ïοῦ á¼Î³Î¯Î¿Ï , ἤÏοι καÏá½° Ïá¿Ï θεÏÏηÏÎ¿Ï ( ÏαÏÏην Î³á½°Ï Î½á¿¦Î½ καλεῠÏνεῦμα ἠγιον (?)) οá½ÏÎ¿Ï á½¡Ï á¼Î¸ÎµÎ»Î¿ÎºÎ±ÎºÎ®ÏÎ±Ï ÏÏοδήλÏÏ ÎºÎ±á½¶ á¼Î½ γνÏÏει ÎºÎ±Î¸Ï Î²ÏίÏÎ±Ï Ïὸν θεὸν καὶ á¼Î½Î±ÏολÏγηÏα ÏλημμελήÏÎ±Ï Î¿á½ ÏÏ Î³ÏÏÏηθήÏεÏαι .
No sure inference can be drawn from the words οá½Ïε á¼Î½ Ïá¿· μÎλλονÏι with regard to forgiveness of sins in a future state. Olshausen remarks that a parallel on the other side is found in ch. Matthew 10:41-42 , where the recognition of divine power in those sent from God is accompanied with promise of eternal reward. He himself however understands the passage (as many others have done) to imply forgiveness on repentance in the imperfect state of the dead before the judgment, and considers it to be cognate with 1 Peter 3:18 ff. Augustine speaks very strongly, de Civ. Dei xxi. 24, vol. vii.: ‘Neque enim de quibusdam veraciter diceretur, quod non eis remittatur neque in hoc sæculo neque in futuro, nisi essent quibus, etsi non in isto, tamen remittatur in futuro.’ See, on the whole subject, note on 1 Peter 3:18 ff. In the almost entire silence of Scripture on any such doctrine, every principle of sound interpretation requires that we should hesitate to support it by two difficult passages, in neither of which does the plain construction of the words absolutely require it.
The expressions αἰὼν οá½ÏÎ¿Ï (= ὠνῦν αἰÏν , Titus 2:12 ; 2 Timothy 4:10 ; καιÏá½¸Ï Î¿á½ÏÎ¿Ï , Mark 10:30 ; αἰὼν Ïοῦ κÏÏÎ¼Î¿Ï ÏοÏÏÎ¿Ï , Ephesians 2:2 ; αἰὼν á¼Î½ÎµÏÏá½¼Ï ÏονηÏÏÏ , Gal 1:4 ) and αἰὼν μÎλλÏν (= αἰὼν á½ á¼ÏÏÏÎ¼ÎµÎ½Î¿Ï , Mark 10:30 ; αἰὼν á¼ÎºÎµá¿Î½Î¿Ï , Luke 20:35 ; Î±á¼°á¿¶Î½ÎµÏ á¼ÏεÏÏÏμενοι , Eph 2:7 ) were common among the Jews, and generally signified respectively the time before and after the coming of the Messiah. In the N.T. these significations give place to the present life , and that to come: the present mixed state of wheat and tares, and the future completion of Messiah’s Kingdom after the great harvest. The expression κÏÏÎ¼Î¿Ï Î¼ÎλλÏν is not found. αἰὼν μÎλλÏν , &c., seem to differ from βαÏιλ . Ï . οá½Ïανῶν or Ï . θεοῦ , in never being spoken of, or as in, individuals, but as an age of time belonging to the universal Church.
Verses 33-34
33, 34. ] ÏοιήÏαÏε , not, as generally understood, = ‘ponite,’ ‘ represent ⦠as: ’ for then the clause á¼Îº Î³á½°Ï Îº . Ï . λ . loses its meaning: but literally, make. The verse is a parable, not merely a similitude. ‘There are but two ways open: either make the tree and its fruit both good , or both bad: for by the fruit the tree is known.’ How make , the parable does not say: but let us remember, the Creator speaks, and sets forth a law of his own creation, with which our judgments must be in accord. This verse resumes again the leading argument, and sets forth the inconsistency of the Pharisees in representing Him as in league with evil, whose works were uniformly good. But the words have a double reference: to our Lord Himself, who could not be evil, seeing that His works were good; and (which leads on to the next verse) to the Pharisees, who could not speak good things, because their works were evil.
Verses 35-37
35 37. ] The treasure spoken of is that inner storehouse of good and evil only seen by God and (partially) by ourselves. And on that account because words, so lightly thought of by the world and the careless, spring from the inner fountains of good and ill, therefore they will form subjects of the judgment of the great day, when the whole life shall be unfolded and pronounced upon. See James 3:2-12 .
Verse 36
36. ] á¿¥á¿Î¼Î± á¼ÏγÏν is nom. pendens, as ch. Matthew 10:14 ; Matthew 10:32 . αἱÏεÏÏÏεÏÏν Ïοι á¼ÏÏÏ Î»Î¯Î¸Î¿Î½ εἰκῠβάλλειν , á¼¢ λÏγον á¼ÏγÏν , Pythag. in Stobæus, xxxiv. 11. Wets [124] .
[124] Wetstein.
á¼ÏγÏÏ = á¼ÎµÏγÏÏ , and is perhaps best taken here in its milder and negative sense, as not yet determined on till the judgment: so that our Lord’s saying is a deduction “a minori,” and if of every á¿¥á¿Î¼Î± á¼ÏγÏν , then how much more of every á¿¥á¿Î¼Î± ÏονηÏÏν !
Verse 37
37. ] The λÏÎ³Î¿Ï being the ÏεÏίÏÏÎµÏ Î¼Î± Ïá¿Ï καÏÎ´Î¯Î±Ï , is a specimen of what is within; is the outward utterance of the man , and on this ground will form a subject of strict enquiry in the great day, being a considerable and weighty part of our works.
Verse 38
38. ] St. Luke ( Luk 11:15-16 ) places the accusation of casting out devils by Beelzebub and this request together, and then the discourse follows. It seems that the first part of the discourse gave rise, as here related, to the request for a sign (from Heaven); but, as we might naturally expect, and as we learn from St. Luke, on the part of different persons from those who made the accusation . In consequence of our Lord declaring that his miracles were wrought by the Holy Ghost, they wish to see some decisive proof of this by a sign, not from Himself, but from Heaven .
The account in ch. Mat 16:1-4 manifestly relates to a different occurrence: see notes there. Cf. John 6:30-31 ; John 12:28 .
Verse 39
39. ] μοιÏÎ±Î»Î¯Ï (see reff.), because they had been the peculiar people of the Lord, and so in departing from Him had broken the covenant of marriage , according to the similitude so common in the Prophets.
The expression Ïημεá¿Î¿Î½ οὠδοθ . αá½Ïá¿ does not, as De Wette maintains, exclude our Lord’s miracles from being Ïημεá¿Î± : but is the direct answer to their request in the sense in which we know they used Ïημεá¿Î¿Î½ , ‘a sign, not wrought by Him, and so able to be suspected of magic art , but one from Heaven .’ Besides, even if this were not so, how can the refusing to work a miracle to satisfy them , affect the nature or signification of those wrought on different occasions, and with a totally different view? And yet on ground like this it is (De Wette, vol. i. p. 147) that rationalistic systems are built. Ïί οá½Î½ ; οá½Îº á¼ÏοίηÏεν á¼ÎºÏοÏε Ïημεá¿Î¿Î½ ; á¼ÏοίηÏεν , á¼Î»Î» ʼ οὠδι ʼ αá½ÏοÏÏ , ÏεÏÏÏÏμÎνοι Î³á½°Ï á¼¦Ïαν , á¼Î»Î»á½° διὰ Ïὴν Ïῶν á¼Î»Î»Ïν á½ ÏÎλειαν . Euthym [125] in loc. Notice á¼ÏιζηÏεῠ; not merely quærit, but requirit; misses, and demands as a sine quâ non. See Palm and Rost’s Lex. sub voce.
[125] Euthymius Zigabenus, 1116
The sign of Jonas is the most remarkable foreshadowing in the O.T. of the resurrection of our Lord. It was of course impossible that His resurrection should be represented by an actual resurrection, as his birth was by births (Isaac, Samson, Samuel, Mahershalalhashbaz), and His death by deaths (Abel; the substitute for Isaac; Zechariah the prophet; the daily and occasional sacrifices); so that we find the events symbolic of his resurrection (Joseph’s history; Isaac’s sacrifice; Daniel’s and Jonah’s deliverance), representing it in a figure (Hebrews 11:19 , á¼Î½ ÏαÏαβολῠ). In the case before us the figure was very remarkable, and easily to be recognized in the O.T. narrative. For Jonah himself calls the belly of the sea monster ×Ö¼Ö¶×Ö¶× ×©×Ö°××Ö¹× ( Jon 2:2 ), ‘the belly of Hades,’ = καÏδίᾳ Ïá¿Ï γá¿Ï here. And observe, that the type is not of our Lord’s body being deposited in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, for neither could that be called ‘the heart of the earth,’ nor could it be said that ‘the Son of Man’ was there during the time; but of our Lord’s personal descent into the place of departed souls: see Ephesians 4:9 ; 1 Peter 3:19 , and note on Luke 23:43 .
Verse 40
40. ] If it be necessary to make good the three days and nights during which our Lord was in the heart of the earth, it must be done by having recourse to the Jewish method of computing time. In the Jerusalem Talmud (cited by Lightfoot) it is said “that a day and night together make up a ×¢×Ö¹× Ö¸× (a Î½Ï ÏθήμεÏον ), and that any part of such a period is counted as the whole.” See Genesis 40:13 ; Genesis 40:20 ; 1 Samuel 30:12-13 ; 2 Chronicles 10:5 ; 2 Chronicles 10:12 ; Hosea 6:2 .
Verse 41
41. ] In this verse there is no reference to the sign of Jonas spoken of above , but to a different matter, another way in which he should be a sign to this generation. See Luke 11:29 f., and note. (But the preaching of Jonas to the Ninevites was a sign after his resurrection: so shall the preaching of the Son of Man by His Spirit in His Apostles be after His resurrection. Stier.)
Verses 41-42
41, 42. Ïλεá¿Î¿Î½ ἸÏνᾶ ὧδε ⦠Ïλεá¿Î¿Î½ Σολ . ὧδε ] On the neuter, see above, Matthew 12:6 , note. There is more than Jonas here. No matter so worthy of arousing repentance had ever been revealed or preached as the Gospel: no matter so worthy of exciting the earnest attention of all. And the Lord Himself , the Announcer of this Gospel, is greater than all the sons of men: his preaching , greater than that of Jonah: his wisdom , than that of Solomon.
Verse 42
42. βαÏίλιÏÏα νÏÏÎ¿Ï ] Josephus, Antt. viii. 6. 5, calls her Ïὴν Ïá¿Ï ÎἰγÏÏÏÎ¿Ï ÎºÎ±á½¶ Ïá¿Ï ÎἰθιοÏÎ¯Î±Ï ÏÏÏε βαÏιλεÏÎ¿Ï Ïαν Î³Ï Î½Î±á¿ÎºÎ± , i.e. of Meroe (whose queens were usually called Candace. Plin. Hist. vi. 29). Abyssinian tradition agrees with this account, calls her Maqueda, and supposes her to have embraced the Jewish religion in Jerusalem. The Arabians on the other hand also claim her, calling her Balkis (Koran, c. xxvii., cited by Winer), which latter view is probably nearer the truth, Sheba being a tract in Arabia Felix, near the shores of the Red Sea, near the present Aden (see Plin. vi. 23), abounding in spice and gold and precious stones.
Verse 43
43. ] á½ Ïαν , not ‘ whenever; ’ the indefinite conj. does not assert universality, but is hypothetical; δΠconnects strictly with what has preceded. This important parable, in the similitude itself, sets forth to us an evil spirit driven out from a man, wandering in his misery and restlessness through desert places, the abodes and haunts of evil spirits (see Isaiah 13:21-22 ; Isa 34:14 ), and at last determining on a return to his former victim, whom he finds so prepared for his purposes, that he associates with himself seven other fiends, by whom the wretched man being possessed, ends miserably. In its interpretation we may trace three distinct references, each full of weighty instruction. (1) The direct application of the parable is to the Jewish people , and the parallel runs thus: The old dæmon of idolatry brought down on the Jews the Babylonish captivity, and was cast out by it. They did not after their return fall into it again, but rather endured persecution, as under Antiochus Epiphanes. The emptying, sweeping, and garnishing may be traced in the growth of Pharisaic hypocrisy and the Rabbinical schools between the return and the coming of our Lord. The re-possession by the one, and accession of seven other spirits more malicious ( ÏονηÏÏÏεÏα ) than the first, hardly needs explanation. The desperate infatuation of the Jews after our Lord’s ascension, their bitter hostility to His Church, their miserable end as a people, are known to all. Chrysostom, who gives in the main this interpretation, notices their continued infatuation in his own day: and instances their joining in the impieties of Julian. (2) Strikingly parallel with this runs the history of the Christian Church. Not long after the Apostolic times, the golden calves of idolatry were set up by the Church of Rome. What the effect of the captivity was to the Jews, that of the Reformation has been to Christendom. The first evil spirit has been cast out. But by the growth of hypocrisy, secularity, and rationalism, the house has become empty, swept, and garnished: swept and garnished by the decencies of civilization and discoveries of secular knowledge, but empty of living and earnest faith. And he must read prophecy but ill, who does not see under all these seeming improvements the preparation for the final development of the man of sin, the great re-possession, when idolatry and the seven ÏνεÏμαÏα ÏονηÏÏÏεÏα shall bring the outward frame of so-called Christendom to a fearful end. (3) Another important fulfilment of the prophetic parable may be found in the histories of individuals. By religious education or impressions, the devil has been cast out of a man; but how often do the religious lives of men spend themselves in the sweeping and garnishing (see Luk 11:39-40 ), in formality and hypocrisy, till utter emptiness of real faith and spirituality has prepared them for that second fearful invasion of the Evil One, which is indeed worse than the first! (See Hebrews 6:4 ; Hebrews 6:6 ; 2 Peter 2:20-22 .)
Verse 46
46. ] In Mar 3:21 we are told that his relations went out to lay hold on Him, for they said, He is beside Himself: and that the reason of this was his continuous labour in teaching, which had not left time so much as to eat . There is nothing in this care for his bodily health (from whatever source the act may have arisen on the part of his brethren , see Joh 7:5 ) inconsistent with the known state of his mother’s mind (see Luke 2:19 ; Luk 2:51 ).
They stood á¼Î¾Ï , i.e. outside the throng of hearers around our Lord; or, perhaps, outside the house. He meets their message with a reproof, which at the same time conveys assurance to His humble hearers. He came for all men , and though He was born of a woman, He who is the second Adam, taking our entire humanity on Him, is not on that account more nearly united to her, than to all those who are united to Him by the Spirit; nor bound to regard the call of earthly relations so much as the welfare of those whom He came to teach and to save.
It is to be noticed that our Lord, though He introduces the additional term á¼Î´ÎµÎ»Ïή into his answer, does not (and indeed could not) introduce ÏαÏÎ®Ï , inasmuch as He never speaks of an earthly Father. See Luke 2:49 .
All these characteristics of the mother of our Lord are deeply interesting, both in themselves, and as building up, when put together, the most decisive testimony against the fearful superstition which has assigned to her the place of a goddess in the Romish mythology. Great and inconceivable as the honour of that meek and holy woman was, we find her repeatedly (see Joh 2:4 ) the object of rebuke from her divine Son, and hear Him here declaring, that the honour is one which the humblest believer in Him has in common with her.
Stier remarks (Reden Jesu, ii. 57 note), that the juxtaposition of sister and mother in the mouth of our Lord makes it probable that the brethren also were his actual brothers according to the flesh: see note on ch. Matthew 13:55 .
Verses 46-50
46 50. ] HIS MOTHER AND BRETHREN SEEK TO SPEAK WITH HIM. Mark 3:31-35 .Luke 8:19-21; Luke 8:19-21 . In Mark the incident is placed as here: in Luke, after the parable of the sower.