Lectionary Calendar
Thursday, July 25th, 2024
the Week of Proper 11 / Ordinary 16
We are taking food to Ukrainians still living near the front lines. You can help by getting your church involved.
Click to donate today!

Bible Commentaries
Matthew 6

Watson's Exposition on Matthew, Mark, Luke & RomansWatson's Expositions

Search for…
Enter query below:
Additional Authors


Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

1 Christ continueth his sermon in the mount, speaking of alms,

5 prayer,

14 forgiving our brethren,

16 fasting,

19 where our treasure is to be laid up,

24 of serving God, and mammon:

25 exhorteth not to be careful for worldly things:

33 but to seek God’s kingdom.

Verse 1

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

Take heed that ye do not your alms before men.

— Many MSS. instead of ελεημοσυνη , alms, read δικαιοσυνη , righteousness; and those who admit this to be the true reading, take the sense to be, a general caution against ostentation in the performance of all acts which constitute the “righteousness” of men; almsgiving, being immediately after specified. But eminent critics have successfully defended the received text. And were the reading more doubtful, and δικαιοσυνη established, it would not necessarily alter the sense, as the Hellenists frequently employ δικαιοσυνη , righteousness, for almsgiving. The Hebrew צדקה , has also occasionally the same signification. — Almsgiving is here recognized as a duty, and so is made by Christ one of the laws of his religion. It is to be distinguished from the “giving” enjoined in verse 42 of the preceding chapter, as that might, or might not, be performed for the benefit of the dependent poor; and it comprehends every kind of munificence. Alms, properly, are gratuities to the afflicted and destitute of the lowest degree; and as such persons will always be found in every place and state of society, so the duty is universal. It follows, also, from the words of our Lord, that almsgiving, when done without ostentation, from a principle of obligation, as matter of duty and kindness to the object, shall not fail to be rewarded. — Often is this realized in the present life, and though such acts of mercy are not meritorious, as some have fatally dreamed, they will not be forgotten in the apportionment of the final rewards of eternity. Our Lord here again calls off the attention of his hearers from those merely external acts which with the Jews were considered to constitute acceptable piety, to the study of their hearts, and the cultivation of those inward principles from which alone a true obedience can flow. Alms-giving is wholly vitiated, as a religious act, when done to be seen of men, θεαθηναι to be gazed at and applauded as on a theatre.

Verse 2

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

Do not sound a trumpet before thee. — Trumpets were used by the Jews to proclaim their new moons, and to collect the people together on various public occasions. A trumpet also belonged to every synagogue.

But that this instrument was used to collect people together to receive alms from ostentatious persons, does not appear. Harmer, indeed, quotes from Chardin, that it was the practice of the Persian dervises to sound horns or trumpets in honour of those who bestowed alms upon them; but, in illustrating Scripture by the manners and customs of “the east,” we are to recollect that “the east” is a wide term; and, though oriental manners have great similarity in all ages, and have been less subject to fluctuate than those of the west, yet great diversities have obtained there at different times, and in regions far remote from each other. Lightfoot, who is a great authority on all subjects connected with Jewish antiquities, says that he finds no trace of the custom in the writings of the rabbins. The expression used by our Lord may therefore be considered proverbial, as a similar one is with us; and it strikingly marks the ostentatious publicity with which the “hypocrites” whom Christ reproves performed their eleemosynary acts.

Hypocrites. — The Greek word signifies an actor, a stage-player, one who in a mask personated a character which he was not: hence, in religion, it is a man of pretended sanctity.

Verily, I say unto you, They have their reward. — Those who would take απεχουσι in the classical sense, to fall short of their reward, lose the double antithesis intended by our Lord:

1. Between present and future reward; and,

2. Between the kind of reward which they receive from the applause of men, and that which consists in the approbation of God. The obvious meaning is, they have now all the reward they shall ever receive: and this, at the best, is but the empty expression of human praise.

Verse 3

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

Thy left hand know. — A proverbial expression for the closest secrecy. Yet not an affected secrecy, which but tells the tale in another manner.

Verse 4

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

Thy Father which seeth in secret, &c. — Εν τω κρυπτω , place, is here to be understood, and so εν τω φανερω . Otherwise they may be taken adverbially, secretly and openly. All things are to be done as under the eye of God, which is in every place, and penetrates every heart. Nor shall the modest, retiring manner in which any good is done deprive the disciple of his reward. It is noticed by HIM that seeth in secret; by Him who, thus discerning both the act and the motive, himself shall reward thee openly. Here also the antitheses are to be remarked; HIMSELF shall reward thee: not a mortal who has nothing to bestow but vain applause; and OPENLY, in opposition to the SECRECY of the giving. This often takes place in the present life, where a favouring providence does, as it were, openly mark out the conscientious and humble giver, as a special object of blessing; so that he enjoys through life a sanctified prosperity, according to his rank, and is sometimes raised above it. But the final rewards, to be openly administered at the last day, are ultimately, and in the highest sense, intended, according to our Lord’s own declaration in his description of the general judgment, Matthew 25:31, &c. If it be asked whether our Lord proposes a mercenary motive, it may be denied. The alms are not to be given FOR THE SAKE of the promised reward, a motive which would vitiate the act, as being only selfishness directed to another object, The true motives are a sense of duty, and the impulse of those kind feelings toward others which it is an essential branch of our religion to cultivate. In entire consistency with this, however, may the promise of our Lord be brought to bear upon our cheerful readiness to such duties; inasmuch as they assure us that in every act of duty, when accompanied by sacrifice, we are authorized to trust in the care of our heavenly Father; and also as they put us to the test, whether we will prefer the spiritual rewards of another life, which God, as an act of pure grace, attaches to the performance of acts of charity, to that dross of earth which we might withhold from the poor, and those carnal gratifications to which we might apply these unhallowed savings.

Verse 5

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

And when thou prayest, &c. — What is usually called private prayer is here intended; a duty recognized as of serious obligation from the most ancient times, and practised with exactness by all good men. It is founded upon the necessity of a personal communion with God, and upon that great privilege which is conferred by religion upon man, that he shall be entitled “to make his requests known unto God” in every thing however small it may appear to others, which can affect his present interests, and the religious state of his soul. For these exercises, as being of a personal nature, and relating chiefly to personal or family concerns, the privacy of the closet is only fitting; and therefore to offer this species of prayer in the synagogues, which were for public worship, by frequenting them at unusual times for this purpose, and in the corners of streets, could only result from the hypocritical design of being esteemed eminent for sanctity, which in that age of formal religion appears to have been the high road to vulgar popularity. The practice of the Pharisees, in praying in corners of the streets, squares, &c., may be seen among Hindoos and Mohammedans to this day. They offer their devotions in the most public places, the landing places of rivers, and in the public streets, without any concealment.

They love to pray standing in the synagogues, &c. — Standing was the usual posture of the Jews in prayer, except on particular occasions of calamity and deep humiliation, when they prostrated themselves before the Divine Majesty. In Acts 9:40, we find Peter kneeling down in prayer; in Acts 20:36, St. Paul prays in the same attitude; and both he himself, and all present with him, in Acts 21:5. This, therefore, appears to have been the constant attitude of the first Christians in their acts of devotion; but very quickly after the death of the apostles, the notion came in of giving dramatic effect to religious exercises, innocent in intention perhaps at first, but always culpable in fact, and the fruitful source of future corruptions of the simplicity of primitive worship. Hence at a very early period the Christians uniformly stood at prayer on Sundays; for, according to Tertullian, it was as unlawful to kneel as to fast on that day. The reason is given by Justin: “That on the Lord’s day we do not bow the knee, symbolically represents our resurrection in Christ.” The practice of standing at prayer was also extended from Easter to pentecost, in testimony of their joy at the resurrection of Christ; and these circumstances came at length to be ranked among the essentials of piety! Many critics, however, take the word εστωτες in the text, simply in the sense of being; as the Latin sto, and existo, are frequently used.

In the synagogues. — Because συναγωγη means a collecting together, whether of things or persons, some here understand εν ταις συναγωγαις , in circulis, “in any public concourse,” and not in the synagogues, properly so called, the places in which the Jews used to assemble for instruction and prayer; but this would induce a tautology, as “the corners of streets” were selected as being places of public resort. The popular sense of the term is therefore to be preferred.

Verse 6

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

But thou when thou prayest, &c. — The utmost secrecy is here enjoined; the place for private prayer is to be ταμιειον , the closet, and the door of the closet is to be shut. The closet signifies a chamber, or indeed any place of privacy or retirement. It may be the same as the υπερωον , the upper room, which, in many of the Jewish houses, was set apart for retirement, or some still more retired place. The encouragements to this important duty are here most impressively stated. God is in our retirement; he is there to meet us, and receive our prayers; there to bless us, and cause his face to shine upon us: he seeth in secret; he enters into our case, and penetrates the meaning of silent desires and sighs, as well as words, which have no need to be vociferously pronounced to enter into his ears; and he rewards those openly who practise this secret duty in a right spirit. Their strength to do the will of God in the public walks of life, and their power to suffer it amidst all its afflictions; the temper of mind they are enabled to maintain, and the exemplifications of a holy religion, which they are empowered to exhibit, together with a manifest resting of the Divine blessing upon them; are the OPEN rewards which the mercy of God confers upon those who most regard this injunction: an injunction which ought to be regarded more in the light of a privilege, than as a mere duty.

Verse 7

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

Use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do. — The verb Βαττολογεω is said to be formed from one Battus, who made long hymns to the gods, full of tautologies, which thus became proverbial to express whatever in spirit or writing was prolix, verbose, and had the same thought repeated in the same or in equivalent words. It is more probably from the Hebrew בשׂ?א , to prate, to babble, It has been much disputed whether our Lord here reproves repetitions in prayer, or long prayers. The fact is, that, simply considered, he forbids neither. All repetitions of the same prayer cannot be reproved, for he himself prayed “thrice in the same words;” and many instances of repetition are found in the Psalms and other parts of the Old Testament, It would also be an evident restraint upon the strong emotions of the soul in prayer, were the repetition of the same words or sentiments absolutely prohibited. St. Paul, through his earnestness, for instance, was led to pray thrice, that his thorn in the flesh might “depart from him;” and if he used not exactly the same words, the import of his prayer must have been each time the same. Nor are long prayers forbidden, as some have supposed, who think their notion fortified by our Lord teaching his disciples, immediately after this, a short form of prayer: but that this was not designed to regulate the length of our prayers, is evident from longer prayers being used by the apostles themselves, who surely knew the mind of their Master; to say nothing of the extended prayers used by Solomon, at the dedication of the temple; by Daniel in confessing the sins of his people, and praying for their restoration; and by Nehemiah chap. 9.

Simply then, in themselves, neither repetitions in prayer, nor length of prayer is forbidden. Our Lord is his own interpreter; and we have only to take the latter part of the verse to explain the former: “for they think, that they shall be heard for their MUCH SPEAKING.” The fatal error which crept into all corrupted religions was, and continues to be, that God is pleased with mere service, of which he requires a certain quantum, usually onerous and wearisome to him that offers it, which renders him more meritorious, and God more propitious. Hence the length of the prayers of heathens may be accounted for: and long prayers are forbidden when they are made so under this intention. As for their repetitions, these partly arose from the necessity they thought themselves under of filling up the appointed time, and making up the required amount of service; and still more directly did they proceed from those low views of their deities which prevailed among them. These were local gods, and might be at a distance; their worshippers must therefore continue calling until they returned: hence Elijah mocks the worshippers of Baal, “Cry aloud; for, peradventure, he may be asleep, or on a journey.” They also ascribed human affections to their gods, and entertained notions of overcoming their reluctance by dint of clamorous importunity; or of wearying them into compliance, by reiterations of the same requests; or of making them understand their case by urging it repeatedly under different forms, For this they were often satirized by their own writers. Hence the husband is introduced in Terence, “Cease, wife, to tease and stun the gods with thanks for the welfare of your child. Cannot they understand except you mention it a hundred times?” “Ohe! jam desine Deos, uxor,” &c. Heaut. v, 50. 6.

The priests of Baal called, “O Baal, hear us,” from morning until noon; and in one place in Æschylus near one hundred verses are filled with tautologies, ιω , ιω , φευ , φευ , ε , ε , as invocations of the gods. Now, both the length and the repetitions of such services proceeded upon unworthy notions both of religious service, and the beings to whom it was addressed: they thought they should be heard for their “much speaking,” and had reference to that, not to any wisdom or goodness in the deities addressed. All such repetitions of prayer, when addressed to the true God, as implied that he could be pleased with mere service and forms, or that he needed to be informed of the case by putting it in various modes before him, or that he could be urged by a clamorous importunity to do what he was reluctant to do, or that he was absent, and needed to be called upon by vociferation implied an affront to him, a bringing him down to the level of heathen deities, and thus proved great ignorance and want of true devotion in his worship. He, therefore says, Be ye not like unto them; for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of before ye ask him. As your Father, he is always inclined to hear your prayers; and from his infinite knowledge needs no information. Such views of God ought to regulate the MANNER of our praying: it is to be full and comprehensive, earnest and devotional; it may be lengthened or shortened according to circumstances; it may have such repetition as a sincere and enlightened ardour will often dictate; but there must be nothing in it which springs from the notion that we shall be heard for our much speaking, or which looks at the service itself as having any value: the eye of faith and hope must alone be fixed upon the mercy and wisdom and power of God; and having RATIONALLY made our requests known unto God, we must, with cheerful confidence, wait and look for the answer.

The reason why our Lord referred to these vain and clamorous services of “the heathen,” appears to have been, that he might thereby the more severely reprove the Jews, who had fallen into the same delusion as to the efficacy of mere service with God; and they also made long prayers, and used repetitions, under much the same views as the heathens. Hence the rabbinical maxims given by Buxtorf: “Every one that multiplies prayer shall be heard:” and, “The prayer which is long shall not return empty.”

As our Lord’s words, For your Father knoweth what things ye have need of before you ask him, are not given as a reason against much speaking in prayer, but against thinking we shall be heard for our much speaking, they afford no countenance to the argument which is sometimes urged against prayer, from the previous knowledge which God has of our wants. This, indeed, when rightly considered, affords the highest reason, and the best encouragement, to this great duty; and the beautiful light in which the sentiment is here put presents to us another of those instances in which our Lord, in few words, suggests, as the ground of our confidence, the loftiest views of the Divine nature, in opposition to those low and defective conceptions which a religion of mere ceremonies, whether Jewish or pagan, tends always to induce. Every thing is known to God; all the minutest circumstances which can affect an individual; all that that individual, in the infinite variety of relations in which he may and must be placed, can want; all that he really needs, although he may greatly mistake on this matter himself; all that can be truly good to him in its beneficial results, as well as its present influence.

He accurately knows all these things before we ask; and it is also as certainly implied that he is disposed to give what, upon this infallible knowledge of our characters and the influence which things have upon us, we really need. This, then, is one of the reasons and grounds of prayer. God knows what we want before we ask; he is disposed, by the benevolence of his nature, by his parental feeling as our Father, to give; and waits only for the simple expression of our desires in prayer, accompanied by that trust which we ought to exercise in his mercy, in order to bestow upon us the best blessings at the best time. The infidel argument against prayer is, therefore, our Lord’s argument to enforce the duty; and it is enough for those who receive the revelation of the Bible, that to ask them of God is the instituted means of obtaining our blessings, although the reasons of the appointment should not be fully manifest. He who gives to them that deserve not has the right to appoint his own conditions; and since in this case they are made so easily practicable, nothing can more impressively illustrate his goodness. Those as greatly err, on the other hand, who explain prayer as not influencing God, but ourselves, and thus affect to give a philosophic reason for the duty. Prayer, however, is not in itself the means of producing moral changes in us, but the appointed means of obtaining from God that grace by which such changes are wrought; it does not put us into a moral state of fitness to receive his favour, but, as it necessarily implies penitence and faith, it places us in that relation of humble and dependent creatures, that he can meet with us and graciously bless us.

Verse 9

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

After this manner, therefore, pray ye. — On the obligation of Christians to use this form of prayer there has been much diversity of judgment; some regarding it as intended merely to be a guide to our own prayers; others, as enjoined upon us to use as a standing form; and a third, as designed only for the use of the disciples until the full revelation of the Christian dispensation, by the resurrection and ascension of Christ, and the gift of his Spirit, to lead them into all truth. Those who hold the first opinion take the words ουτως ουν , thus, therefore, pray ye; or, as they were understood by our translators, “After this manner pray ye;” to signify, Pray ye in similar words, or like mode. But ουτω , in various places, signifies a direct form, as in the frequent phrase, introductory to the delivery of a message or prediction: “Thus saith the Lord” is, in the LXX., ουτω λεγει ο Κυριος ; which can only mean, THESE VERY WORDS saith the Lord. But the matter is more decisively settled by the parallel place Luke 11:2, “When ye pray say, Our Father;” and especially when we also consider that this prayer in Luke was prescribed in consequence of a request from the disciples of Christ, that he would teach them to pray, as John taught his disciples. For as it is certain that it was the practice of the Jewish teachers to give to their disciples a short form of prayer, it is probable that this had been done by John the Baptist, in order to give the desires and hopes of his followers a direction suited to that intermediate dispensation which was designed to usher in the perfect religion of Messiah. The second opinion appears, therefore, to be the best founded;

but still, though the use of this form is prescribed to Christians, the practice of the apostles, and the reason of the case, show that other prayers, both of a more extended kind, and comprehending a greater number of particulars arising out of the various wants which we may feel, and the aids we may require, are at once lawful and necessary. Still its important use as a general guide to the structure and spirit of our prayers is to be maintained. “It is the fountain of prayer,” says an ancient, “from which we may draw praying thoughts.” in this view, the benefit which the Church of Christ has derived from it is incalculable. It teaches us to approach God with filial confidence as our FATHER, but with reverential awe of his sacred NAME; to extend our desires beyond ourselves, and the prosperity of the particular society to which we may belong, to the coming of Christ’s universal KINGDOM; it connects absolute submission to the practical will of God respecting us, with our earnestness to obtain the benefits he has to bestow; it teaches our dependence upon his providence for the supply of our DAILY BREAD, and therefore excludes an infidel confidence in mere second causes, and brings devotion into the daily business and enjoyments of life; it calls for confession of sin, and authorizes us to ask FORGIVENESS; and it reminds us that when we pray we are also to FORGIVE; it teaches us that without the aid of God we shall fall into TEMPTATION, and leads us to him as our refuge against the danger of EVIL and the evil one; and, finally, it turns prayer into praise, and calls up the grateful homage and ardent affections of the whole soul toward God, in ascribing to him the glory due unto his name for ever. Into this Divinely prepared mould must all acceptable prayer” be cast, and he who regards these as general rules can never, as to the manner of “ordering his cause before God,” pray amiss.

With respect to the third opinion, it seems chiefly to rest upon the silence of the New Testament as to the use of the Lord’s prayer by the apostles or others, and upon the assumption that it is not a prayer offered in the name of Jesus Christ, in which the disciples were instructed to present all their petitions after his resurrection: “Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name.” On which we may observe, that the argument from the silence of the New Testament as to the practice of the apostles proves nothing, since we have no particular account of their modes of worship, and no occasion occurs in the history which could lead to any inference as to the use of this form or otherwise, in their private or social devotions. With respect to the absence of all direct reference to the “name” of Christ, which, in fact, signifies his mediation and merit, rather than the express form of concluding our prayers in his name, however important that maybe, and by no means to be disused, it may be observed, that we have an instance of a prayer offered even after the ascension, by all the assembled apostles and the Church at Jerusalem, which has no express reference to the mediation and merit of Christ; and we have instances of prayers in the epistles of both kinds, that is to say, of many consecutive petitions sometimes offered without express reference to the offices of Christ, as Mediator and Intercessor, and sometimes with such a reference emphatically declared. — Now it clearly follows, from the latter class of prayers, that “the name” of Christ, in the sense of his merit, was regarded by the apostles as the ground of all acceptable worship, or, as St. Paul says with respect to thanksgiving, “Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;” yet from the others it is evident that, though this was always IMPLIED as a first and fundamental principle, it was not always expressed. The absence of direct reference to the mediation of Christ therefore could be no objection to the use of the Lord’s prayer by the disciples, after the full developement of the Christian doctrine of Christ’s sacrifice and intercession; and by them, as by us, it would be used with constant reference in their minds to the sole ground of their hope.

This doctrine, therefore, being understood, it is farther to be remarked, that there is nothing temporary in the character of the petitions which this Divine prayer contains; it is as adapted to convey our general wishes, supplications, and thanksgivings, “to the throne of the heavenly grace,” now, as when first enjoined, and will be so to the end of time; nor is it a slight recommendation to its constant use, both in families and public worship, that in it we address God in the very words which were taught us by his beloved Son.

The notion that the several parts of the Lord’s prayer were collected out of the Jewish forms of prayer used in the synagogue does not stand on good proof, although great pains have been taken to collect from them similar sentences. The fact is, that there is no satisfactory evidence that the Jewish prayers now extant are as ancient as the time of Christ. If any have this claim, they are what they call “the eighteen prayers,” which are undoubtedly very ancient, and are considered as their most solemn form of worship; but in vain will these prayers be searched for petitions at all similar to those of the Lord’s prayer. Not a phrase occurs in them which could suggest a single petition of the Lord’s prayer. Others adduced in proof are from liturgies and talmudists of still later times; and it is to be remarked, that with all their enmity to Christ, the Jewish writers have often very freely borrowed moral sentiments, devotional expressions, and even the leading idea of several of the parables found in their writings, from the New Testament. They have thus often confessed its wisdom while they have denied its authority. The strong probability therefore is, that where such coincidences occur as have been pointed out by Lightfoot and others, the rabbins borrowed from our Lord, and not he from them. That our Saviour used in this prayer the devotional language familiar to the Jews, which was drawn from the Holy Scriptures, is certain; as that God is our Father, that he is in heaven, that his name may be sanctified, and his will done; and that the kingdom, power, and glory are his; for all these may be paralleled by passages from the Old Testament, which he always took occasion to honour; and with such parallels before the critics referred to, it was little better than solemn trifling to ransack the rabbins, who wrote long after Christ, to find the scattered models of the different parts of this Divine composition. We may therefore conclude, that this form is, as it has been generally acknowledged in the Church to be, an original composition by Christ, into which the sentiments and devotional expressions of the Old Testament are in some parts interwoven, but wholly adapted to his dispensation. The chief use to be made of the later Jewish writers is to explain by them such modes of speaking and such customs, as have been all along peculiar to their nation. That they afford models of sentiment to inspired men is a dream.

Our Father. — The plural form here prescribed indicates that this was a prayer to be used in social rather than in solitary worship. It is a rule with the later Jews, that a man ought always to join himself in prayer with the assembly, not in the singular but in the plural number. As all men are authorized to address God as their Father, not only does this Divine prayer tacitly enjoin upon us a universal philanthropy, but assures us that “God is loving to every man, and that his tender mercies are over all his works.”

No one, therefore, of the whole human race can “seek his face in vain.” This confidence is farther heightened when, through a true faith in Christ, we receive “the adoption of sons;” and, in that special sense spoken of by St. Paul, are entitled to say to God, “Abba, Father.” Yet this Father is in heaven, εν τοις ουρανοις , to remind us of his glorious majesty, and to impress us with the deepest reverence. He is in heaven; and yet, such is his infinite perfection, “the heaven of heavens cannot contain him.”

Hallowed be thy name. — The name of God is here, as in the Old Testament, put for God himself, as declared by his revealed attributes; and to hallow his name, is with reverence and joy to acknowledge all his perfections, and to celebrate his praises; for to hallow is equivalent to “glorify.” There is an evident allusion to Leviticus 10:3, “I will be sanctified in them that come nigh me, and before all the people I will be glorified;” and to 2 Samuel 7:26, “And let thy name be magnified for ever.”

Verse 10

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

Thy kingdom come. — The kingdom of Messiah, the reign of grace among all nations. That kingdom of which the prophets speak in such lofty strains; the near approach of which John the Baptist announced, and the foundations of which our Lord was then placing in the hearts of his disciples, by teaching that doctrine, and going through those humiliations and sufferings, which were necessary to bring men under its influence; that is, to reconcile them to God, and renew them in righteousness. For the complete establishment of this dominion of God in our own hearts, this prayer may be properly used, although it principally respects the extension of Christ’s spiritual reign over the whole earth, when “the kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ;” that is, when all the people which compose them, and all their institutions, civil and ecclesiastical, shall be subject to the laws and spirit of his religion. See note on Matthew 3:2.

Thy will, &c. — We do not here pray that God may do his will, nor merely express our acquiescence in what he wills; but that what God wills ourselves and all men to do may be done by us on earth as it is done in heaven by the angels; that is, vigorously and with delight, perfectly and with constancy. The model of our obedience is thus the elevated one of the unfallen and unsinning angels, all whose principles of obedience ought to exist in us, and be continually carrying up our services to a nearer practical resemblance to theirs. There is here probably an allusion to Psalms 103:20-21: “Bless the Lord, ye his angels, that excel in strength, that do his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of his word. Bless ye the Lord, all ye his hosts, ye ministers of his, that do his pleasure.”

Verse 11

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

Give us this day our daily bread. — Τον αρτον ημον τον επιουσιον . As the word επιουσιος is found in no Greek writer, nor in the New Testament, except here and the parallel place in St. Luke, there has been great diversity of opinion as to its meaning. It has been derived either from επι and ουσια , substance or being; or from επειμι , whence comes επιουσα , following, subsequent, next, spoken of a day or night; or from επειμι in the sense of to be at hand. But, as Mede says, “the import of the prayer in general is indifferently well agreed upon; but much ado there is what this επιουσιος should signify.” Thus we have “bread for to morrow,” that is, a supply day after day; “bread till to-morrow,” which also implies daily dependence; and “the bread we have need of to-day,” “sufficient bread.” The Vulgate has “super-substantial or spiritual bread,” which is an unwarranted refinement. “Bread for to-morrow” has an apparent inconsistency with St. Luke’s καθ’ ημεραν , “day by day,” and St. Matthew’s σημερον : for to ask that the bread of to-morrow may be given us to-day, or day by day, is not only harsh, but somewhat inconsistent with our Lord’s own exhortation: “Take no thought for the morrow, what ye shall eat.” The derivation from επι and ουσια appears therefore the most satisfactory; for as ουσια signifies substance, being, επιουσιος may well have the sense of that which will support existence, that which is sufficient and necessary. The petition will then be, “Give us this day the bread necessary for our subsistence;” as Suidas: το επι τη ουσια ημων αρμοζον , “fit for our support.” Bread, with the Hebrews, included all the necessaries of life, and with respect to these we are instructed to ask, not what is superfluous, but what is sufficient; a prayer admirably adapted to a religion which inculcates spiritual-mindedness, and teaches us to disregard all earthly things, in comparison of heaven. More than sufficient bread is indeed often given; but then, let it be remembered, it is given as a TRUST. Our Lord appears to have referred to the supply of the Israelites day by day with “bread from heaven,” that is, with manna. It is here well remarked by Archbishop Wake, that “we present this petition to God; not to exclude our own reasonable care for our support, much less to exclude our labouring for it; but to show that we depend altogether upon the providence of God, and owe our lives, and all our support of them, not to our own cunning and industry, but to his blessing, thereby to engage us both to rely on him with the greater confidence, and to make suitable returns of love, praise, and gratitude.”

Verse 13

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

And lead us not into temptation. — To lead is a Hebraism for to permit, or suffer; suffer us not to be led into temptation; that is, to be OVERCOME by it. Hence Tertullian renders the clause, Ne nos patiaris induci. So Augustine explains it: ‘Quid dicimus nisi, Ne inferri sinas? And Gregory: Induci minime permittas. By temptation is here meant any great and overwhelming trial, whether of our virtue by solicitations and promptings to sin, or of our patience by extreme sufferings. It is such temptation as would produce “evil,” the evil of sin, according to the next clause, “but deliver us from EVIL.” To deliver here signifies, not to rescue out of evil, but wholly to preserve us from it. Temptations are necessary to a state of discipline, or, as we often express it, a state of probation. We are daily tried, and put to the proof, whether we will obey God, or the suggestions of Satan, the world, and our own evil hearts; but we have here the right granted to us to pray that we may not be permitted to fall into, or by such temptations as shall be “hurtful to the soul.” Yet without the special care of God, who could prevent this? Who can so control his circumstances, that they shall never press too hard upon his resolution by presenting motives to some relaxation of duty, or to some positive offence! And what is there in man to withstand the power and subtlety of “the archangel fallen,” that malignant spirit, so long practised in every moral wile and subtlety to entangle, pervert, and destroy? How important, then, is this petition, and how great is the encouragement arising from the assurance implied in it, that our heavenly Father will not suffer us to be tempted “above what we are able to bear!” The very prayer implies a promise, since we are authorized by Christ himself to use it.

For thine is the k ingdom, &c. — This sublime conclusion is not in St. Luke, which makes it probable that the Lord’s prayer as recorded by him, was delivered on another occasion, and in a shorter and somewhat varied form. Here it is a part of a set and solemn discourse, and is therefore given at full length. By some critics the doxology is rejected from the text; but it appears in most of the Greek MSS., the Syriac, and other ancient versions, and was certainly read in the copies used by the Greek fathers; and on such evidence must be retained. It is obviously taken, not as Lightfoot suggests, from the Jews, who at the end of their prayers repeated, “Blessed be the name of the glory of his kingdom for ever and ever;” but manifestly from the inspired words of Solomon: “Thine, O Lord, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty; for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O Lord, and thou art exalted as head above all,” &c, 1 Chronicles 29:11.

Verse 16

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

Be not as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance. — The word σκυθρωπος signifies one of a gloomy and dejected countenance. Lucien, in one of his dialogues, censures those who affected to be philosophers, and without any qualification assumed their garb, and imitated their gravity, calling them apes and stage players, υποκριτες , hypocrites, and ridicules their grave faces, σκυθρωποι , the word here translated, of a sad countenance.

Disfigure their faces. — Αφανιζω signifies to cause to disappear, and figuratively, to deform or disfigure, as hiding or defacing whatever is beautiful or graceful. These hypocrites “disfigured their faces” by letting their hair and beard remain untrimmed, by not practising the usual ablutions and anointings, and perhaps also by sprinkling ashes upon their heads. Hence, on the contrary, our Lord exhorts his disciples, when they fast, to anoint their head and wash their face, that they might not appear to men to fast, that there should be among them no unnecessary exhibition, no vain show of religion. Anointing the body with fragrant oil after washing was a common practice with the ancients, and especially on great and joyous occasions. Examples appear in Homer and other ancient writers. The Jewish canons forbid washing and anointing on fast days. The anointing of the head is mentioned, either because on ordinary occasions they anointed the head only, or because when they anointed the whole body, the rule was to anoint the head first, as being “THE KING over all its members.” Which mode of speaking probably gave rise to St. Paul’s comparison of believers to the members of the body, and Christ to its HEAD, as being THE LORD of his Church.

Verse 19

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, &c. — The treasures laid up by the easterns were not only gold, silver, and precious stones, but corn, wine, and oil; and garments also, frequent changes of which they thought a point of dignity. Many of these garments were costly, from their curious texture, workmanship, and the embroidery with which they were adorned. In Homer, such vestments make a conspicuous figure in the treasury of Ulysses.

Where moth and rust doth corrupt, &c. — The moth eats into the garments; the rust, βρωσις , is a name which comprehends the different kinds of insects which devour grain and fruits. The word is from βροωσκω , to eat, and signifies whatever consumes by corrosion, or devouring, whether the mildew, which destroys corn, or the rust, which corrodes metals, or locusts, ants, weevils, and other insects, by which various substances are devoured. Finally, thieves break through and steal the gold and silver, as being easily carried away. Thus the perishableness and uncertainty of all earthly property is metaphorically but strikingly set forth; and, as Bishop Hopkins well observes, “the moth and rust may denote the insensible wasting of the good things of this life, as the moth does not make a sudden rent; and the thieves may intimate some sudden blast of providence upon worldly possessions.” The accumulation of property is not here absolutely forbidden. In most cases the business of life cannot be carried on without it, in some degree; and large commercial and manufacturing concerns can only be conducted by a large capital, and if successfully managed must rapidly increase wealth. But the precept forbids,

1. The hoarding up of useless wealth which is not made beneficial to society.

2. All anxiety to acquire wealth, so that we may be cheerfully content with the portion which Providence assigns us.

3. All greediness of gain, whether to keep or to spend, whether to gratify the mean passion of avarice, or to be used for vain ostentation or personal indulgence.

Verse 20

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, &c. — Secure imperishable treasures there, “an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and which fadeth not away.” It is only by a true faith in Christ that we become “heirs” of this heavenly inheritance; but every act of pious charity lays up treasure in it, and will render it the more rich and felicitous. (See 1

Timothy 6:17, 18; Luke 18:22.) The antitheses contained in these verses will not pass unnoticed by the attentive reader. Treasures on earth, and treasures in heaven; the latter, therefore, are all spiritual, suited to the enjoyment and capacity of a perfectly purified and glorified nature; they are also inalienable and imperishable, in contrast with the corruptible and uncertain enjoyments of time, and so it is a joyful consideration that in proportion to the VALUE of the treasures of heaven is their SECURITY; we can never outlive them, never forfeit them, they shall never be taken away from us.

Verse 21

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. — If we esteem earthly things to be our treasure, then will our AFFECTIONS be set upon them, and become alienated from God, the result of which must be the utter loss of the heavenly inheritance; “for to be carnally minded is death.” But if, on the contrary, we have our treasure in heaven, if we gain a true title to it, and esteem the attaining of it the great end of life; if we are intent upon exalting our felicity there, by “works of faith and labours of love,” by a vigorous zeal and a liberal charity, our hearts will be kept there, and our “AFFECTIONS set on things above.” Thus shall we acquire that heavenly mindedness, without which all pretensions to piety are vain and fatally delusive.

Verses 22-23

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

The light of the body is the eye, &c. — “The light,” ο λυχνος , the lamp of the body is the eye, its steps and motions being directed by it, as in the night we use a lamp for the same purposes. If therefore thine eye be single, that is, SOUND, in a healthy state, if vision be perfect; (for, as Campbell well remarks, that “there can be no reference to the primitive meaning of απλους , simple or single, is evident from its being contrasted with πονηρος , evil or distempered, and not to διπλους ;”) thy whole body shall be full of light; the images of things without being transmitted by a sound eye to the sensorium, all things appear enlightened, and we are able correctly to perceive and judge of them, and to conduct ourselves accordingly. But if thine eye be evil πονηρος , diseased, so that the function of vision cannot be performed, thy whole body shall be full of darkness; all notices of external things designed to be transmitted by the eye being shut out, and all the beautiful scenes of nature excluded. If therefore the light that is in thee become darkness; if the power of seeing be lost to any one, how great is that darkness, how pitiable and wretched is that man’s condition!

But how are these words connected with our Lord’s argument against worldly mindedness? By the single eye, the liberal person, say some, is intended; by the evil eye, the covetous, urging, as Lightfoot, Whitby, and others, the Jewish phrases, “giving with a good eye,” that is, freely; and having “an evil eye,” that is, being churlish and covetous. But no good sense can be made of the whole passage in this view. How is it that if the eye be sound or good, in the sense of being liberal, the whole man is full of light? or if it be evil, greedy, and covetous, that he should be full of darkness? The attempts to explain this, by the commentators who take the terms in this sense, are too forced and awkward to be admitted; whereas, if we interpret the eye, as an easy and indeed common metaphor to indicate the understanding or practical judgment, a natural and most important sense unfolds itself, which by none has been better expressed than by Baxter: “If therefore thy judgment be sound, and thou knowest the difference between laying up a treasure in heaven and on earth, it will rightly guide the actions of thy heart and life; but if thy judgment be blinded in this great affair, it will misguide thy affections, thy choice, and the whole tenor of thy life. If that judgment then be blind, which in this affair of everlasting moment ought to guide thee aright, what a miserable wretch wilt thou be, and how fatal will that error prove!”

Verse 24

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

No man can serve two masters, &c. — Decision, strong and constant, is here enforced by Christ upon his disciples, by an illustration, the energy of which all must feel. It is taken from the state of absolute servitude; but the masters or lords who claim our subjection are of entirely opposite characters, and require an entirely opposite service, and that at the same time, and through the whole course of our life. To obey two lords under such circumstances is manifestly impossible. Ye cannot serve God and mammon; yet you must serve one or the other, so that there is no middle path; therefore, take your choice. Mammon is not here used, as some have supposed, for a Syrian idol, like the Plutus of the Greeks, the god of riches; but simply means riches, which our Lord personifies. The word for riches in the Syriac, according to Jerome, was mammon; and so had been introduced into the language of Palestine, which was a mixed dialect. — Thus our Lord again uses it for riches, Luke 16:9-13. The meaning is obvious. He who serves riches, that is to say, gives himself up to the sordid love of them, and surrenders himself to be mastered by this passion, cannot serve God. For to serve God acceptably is to serve him absolutely, to confide in him alone, to love him supremely, and to submit to all those laws of generous liberality in the use of money which necessarily imply that we make riches our SERVANTS, not our MASTERS; and are to be ready to sacrifice wealth and all the distinctions and pleasures which it can purchase, when called to it for Christ’s sake, and the preservation of a good conscience. Even heathen writers had often just views on this subject. Thus, Plato, in his Republic, says, that in proportion to the degree in which riches are honoured and admired, virtue will be slighted and disregarded; and compares them to the light and heavy weight in a balance always going in an opposite direction.

Verse 25

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought, &c. — The beautiful discourse on God’s providential care which is thus introduced was evidently designed to anticipate an objection to the doctrine just taught.

The hearers of our Lord would naturally ask, If we are to become so dead to the pursuit of wealth, how are our wants in life to be provided for? To which his reply, in sum, is, Not by surrendering yourselves to an excessive anxiety about the affairs of this present life, but by trusting in the care of your heavenly Father. The word μεριμνατε is somewhat unhappily rendered, take no thought; for simple thoughtfulness, and a moderated care, are both necessary to that prudent and industrious conduct by which, under God’s blessing, our daily wants are appointed to be supplied. “Be not anxiously solicitous,” better expresses the idea; hence the Vulgate, Ne soliciti sitis. Care becomes a dangerous and sinful anxiety when it goes beyond the necessity of the case; when it is disproportionate to the temporary interests of the present life; when it leads to distrust in God; when it arises from want of submission to the lot he may be pleased to assign us; when it stretches too far into the future; when it disturbs and chafes our own minds, unfitting us for devotional exercises, and reducing the neglect of our spiritual concerns.

Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? — Is not the life more, (πλειον is here taken in the sense of worth and dignity,) of more value than meat; and it follows, therefore, that God, who has given life, the nobler gift, will take care to sustain it with food; and he who has so curiously formed the body, so that it is a wonderful monument of his power and skill, will not deny to it the raiment which it needs to cherish and defend it. This fine argument proceeds upon the principle that “all the works of God are perfect;” that in them every thing answers to each other, so that nothing is left unprovided for. The wisdom of God which had an end in giving life to every one, which yet is a dependent life, not to be sustained but by external supplies, will so order it that such supplies shall not be wanting; and he who gave to the body no natural clothing, and yet places it in circumstances which render clothing necessary for decency and comfort, will take care that we are supplied with raiment. When our first parents, from the sad changes which had been induced by sin in their persons and the climate of the world, needed raiment, the Lord God himself made coats of skins and clothed them; an affecting proof of his compassion. In illustration of this sentiment, that he who made the creatures cannot be inattentive to the supply of their wants, Christ refers to the fowls of the air, and the flowers of the field.

Verse 26

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

Behold the fowls of the air, &c. — Εμβλεψατε , Attentively consider the fowls of the air; not those, says one, of the barn door, of which man takes care for his own profit, but those of the air. Yet even these, for whom none cares but God, find their food provided by a hand they cannot recognize; so that he who hath given them life, and assigned them their place in the rank of created beings, and appointed their uses, fails not to supply them with subsistence. The fowls here are only considered as the representatives of all the inferior creatures, of the different orders of which the psalmist says, “All these wait upon thee, and thou givest them their meat in due season;” and so accurately is this furnished, that none of their species perish for want of sustenance, but continue, from age to age, a standing monument of the care of God: Are ye not much better than they? as being spiritual, rational, immortal, and redeemed creatures.

Verse 27

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

Which of you by taking thought, &c. — As though he had said, Let the regular feeding of the inferior creatures, who are without care themselves, reprove your over-carefulness, the total inefficacy of which, independent of the gracious interposition of God, may be confirmed to you by this, — that no man by taking thought, by becoming ever so anxious, can add one cubit to his stature, so limited is the power of man. Ηλικια may either be taken in the sense of STATURE or AGE. The latter, to many, seems preferable, as best agreeing with the argument. In the sense of life, the connection, they think, is much more apparent. Out Lord warns his hearers, against being solicitous concerning their LIFE, how it was to be sustained; and urges that by taking thought they could not prolong it. To add a cubit to life, it is true, is a singular phrase; but they think it only parallel to those passages in the Old Testament where the life of man is frequently compared to measures of length, as “a hand-breadth, or span.” Farther, they argue that this interpretation of ηλικια is confirmed by St. Luke; for in the parallel passage he adds, “If ye then be not able to do that thing WHICH IS LEAST, why take ye thought for the rest?” And they argue that making a small addition, to the length of human life may well be said to be one of the least things; whereas, applied to a man’s stature, the addition of a cubit is a VERY GREAT matter. This view, though supported by very great names, is far from being satisfactory; for the argument from these words of St. Luke appears strongly to bear the contrary way. The adding of “a cubit,” not merely “a hand-breadth” or “a span,” and therefore not an inconsiderable space, to human life, is not one of “THE LEAST” things; great, and even eternal consequences might depend upon adding even the shortest space to the duration of man’s state of trial; but though a whole cubit were added to his stature, it would be a thing of inconsiderable value, or of no value at all, and may therefore be justly called “that which is least.” I take the expression to be proverbial, and that the argument against anxiety is thus founded upon man’s imbecility: if, by the most careful solicitude, he cannot add a cubit, or any other measure to his stature, God himself giving to every man his bodily form as it pleases him; if he cannot accomplish that which in its import is of as little consequence as whether a man be a cubit higher or lower, much less can he by taking thought so control the arrangements of Providence, vast and intricate as they are, as to command the supply of his wants, and the gratification of his wishes. To which may be added that ηλικια occurs several times in the New Testament, in the sense of stature; and is so used by Aristotle, Plutarch, Lucian, and other Greek writers.

Verse 28

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, &c. — This noble flower, which with us is found only in gardens, grows in the fields of Palestine, and especially in the valleys. The white lily, however, is not meant. This is not known in Palestine; but the country, in autumn, is covered with the amaryllis lutea, or autumnal narcissus. On this passage that distinguished botanist, Sir J. E. Smith, observes, “It is natural to presume that the Divine Teacher, according to his usual custom, called the attention of his hearers to some object at hand; and as the fields of the Levant are overrun with the amaryllis lutea, whose golden lilaceous flowers afford one of the most brilliant and gorgeous objects in nature, the expression of ‘Solomon in all his glory not being arrayed like one of these,’ is peculiarly appropriate.”

How they grow. — Palairet places a full stop after αγρου , and reads what follows interrogatively. Regard the lilies of the field. How do they grow? That is, how do they grow up into grace and beauty? They toil not, to cultivate the earth which nourishes them; neither do they spin, to array themselves with their splendid vestments; but they are arrayed in their beauty by the hand of God.

Solomon in all his glory, &c. — In his royal robes, richly embroidered and adorned. So inferior is every work of art to the beauty, delicacy, and splendour, which are exhibited by the various flowers of the field!

Verse 30

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

The grass of the field. — Χορτος , by us rendered “grass,” includes every species of plant which has not a perennial stalk like trees and shrubs.

Into the oven. — The scarcity of fuel in most parts of Palestine obliged the inhabitants to use every kind of combustible matter to heat the ovens which were attached to every family, and used daily for the baking of their bread. The withered stalks of every species of herbage, and the tendrils of vines, were collected for this purpose, and in a climate so hot might be cut down one day and be sufficiently dried by the sun to be used for fuel the next.

The argument here is the same as before; but the illustration is beautifully varied. If God so clothe the plants of the field, invest them with a dress, of so much richness and beauty, although they may only exist to-day, and to- morrow be used as fuel, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?

Verse 32

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

After these things do the Gentiles seek. — Heathens who have no knowledge of the true God and providence, seek, επιζητει , these things SOLELY and ANXIOUSLY, for επι is here intensive. Beware, therefore, as though our Lord had said, of the Gentile spirit: such earthly mindedness as theirs becomes not the followers of a religion which discloses all spiritual blessings, and the lofty hopes of eternity itself, to the view of faith; and those cares which distract heathens are most unworthy of men to whom God is revealed as a “Father,” and who have his own warrant to trust with entire confidence in his unbounded goodness. It was a severe reproof to the worldliness of the Jews thus to parallel them with the very Gentiles they despised as having no knowledge of God; and the reproach is more poignant in the case of those Christians who, with their still superior light, and in possession of the perfected dispensation of mercy, suffer themselves to doubt the love of God, so gloriously attested by the gift of his Son, and sink into a vortex of earthly anxieties. When we are absorbed in the inquiries, What shall we eat, and what shall we drink, and wherewithal shall we be clothed? we divest ourselves of the Christian, and put on the Gentile character.

Your heavenly Father knoweth, &c. — See note on Matthew 6:8.

Verse 33

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness. — The kingdom of God is the same as the kingdom of heaven, that kingdom which Christ establishes in the hearts of men by his Spirit; and his righteousness is the forgiveness of sin, and the sanctification of the heart and life, in which true righteousness, relative and personal, consists. This is here called the righteousness of God, that which he bestows upon and works in them that truly believe the Gospel, in opposition to “the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees,” which stood only in forms. To seek this first, that is, first IN ORDER, to give it the foremost place in our desires and pursuits, and first IN DEGREE, to prefer it to all other things, is the condition on which these promises of the SPECIAL care of our heavenly Father is suspended; for though there is a general care in God for man, as his offspring, and the subjects of his redeeming mercy, yet that particular and more tender and watchful care here spoken of is restrained to those who receive his kingdom, and seek his righteousness. To them all these things shall be added, meat, drink, clothing, and whatever is necessary, according to their rank in life; and often so as to raise them above that meaner state in which the grace of God finds them. The promises of God never fail when the conditions on which they are made to depend are perseveringly performed. Seasons of suffering, arising out of persecution “for righteousness sake, are from their nature exempt cases.

Verse 34

Watson - Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark

For the morrow. — A Hebraism for THE FUTURE.

For the morrow shall, take thought, &c. — “The morrow” is here, by a fine prosopopœia, considered as a PERSON sufficiently thoughtful and careful for his own affairs, and needing no obtrusive offer, of aid from another. Let every day bear its own cares, and discharge its own duties. Sufficient for the day, each day, is the evil, the trouble and vexation, thereof.

Who after reading this part of our Lord’s sermon can doubt whether the Scripture teaches the doctrine of a PARTICULAR providence? That which the philosophy of the world so often stumbles at, God’s attention to minute and individual things and persons, is here most fully declared. He provides for the fowls of the heaven, that is, for every one of them; he paints every flower of the field; he regards each individual of his human family in particular; marks who among them “seeks first the kingdom of God and his righteousness,” and deals with HIM accordingly. The government of God over individuals, as such, cannot be more strongly marked.

Bibliographical Information
"Commentary on Matthew 6". "Watson's Exposition on Matthew, Mark, Luke & Romans". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/rwc/matthew-6.html.
Ads FreeProfile