Coke's Commentary on the Holy Bible · Matthew Capítulo 20

Matthew 20:1. For the kingdom of heaven, &c.— The true scope of this parable is, to shew that the Jewish nation, who of all people were first in external privileges, and particularlyin respect of the offer of the Gospel, wouldbe last in accepting it; and that when they did receive it, they should enjoy no higher privileges under that dispensation, than the Gentiles, who were called atthe eleventh hour. The application of the parable suggests this interpretation, Matthew 20:16. So the last shall be first, &c. The vineyard signifies the dispensations of religion in general, which God gave to mankind in the different parts of the world. The hiring of labourers early in the morning represents that interposition of Providence by which the Jews were born members of God's visible church, and laid under obligations to obey the law of Moses; "for the kingdom of heaven (the Master of the kingdom of heaven) is like unto a man, or may be fitly represented by the similitude of a man, who is an house holder, οικοδεσποτης, the master of a family." God's bestowing the Gospel dispensation upon mankind, and the preparations previous thereto, may be illustrated by a master of a family's sending labourers at different hours of the day to work in his vineyard. See Macknight, and Petavius, Dogmat. Theolog. vol. 1: p. 305.

return to '

Matthew 20:2. For a penny a-day— A denarius, or Roman penny, in value about seven-pence halfpenny of our money,—which hence it seems was the usual price of a day's service among the Jews, as Tacitus tells us it was among the Romans, Annal. Matthew 1:17. It is therefore justly mentioned, Rev 6:6 as a proof of the great scarcity of provisions, when a measure, or choenix of wheat, which was the usual allowance to one man for a day, and was about an English quart, was sold at that price. See Doddridge.

return to '

Matthew 20:11. They murmured against the good man, &c.— The οικοδεσποτης, or master of the family. That this was the case with the Jews, upon a general notion of the Gentiles being, according to the Christian scheme, intended to be partakers with them in the same church privileges, is plain from a variety of Scriptures; particularly Acts 11:2-3; Acts 13:45-50; Acts 17:5; Acts 17:13; Acts 18:6; Acts 18:13; Acts 22:21-22; Act 28:29. 1 Thessalonians 2:16. Since no murmurings can happen among the blessed, this must refer to the unbelieving Jews; but as it is certain they will have no place in the kingdom of heaven, we plainly see that it would be very absurd to pretend to draw doctrinal consequences from every incidental circumstance of the parable.

return to '

Matthew 20:16. For many are called, &c.— A proverbial expression, which, as it is here stated, imports that the Jews should all be called by the Apostles and first preachers to receive the Gospel;—"They shall have the Gospel preached to them;" but that few of them, in comparison, would obey the call or become chosen servants, the generalityof the nation wilfully remaining in infidelity and wickedness: wherefore, this branch of the parable very fitly represents the pride of the Jews in rejecting the Gospel, when they found the Gentiles admitted to its privileges without becoming subject to the institutions of Moses. In the mean time, we must not urge the circumstance of the reward so, as to fancy that either Jew or Gentile merited of the blessings of Gospel by their having laboured faithfully in the vineyard, or having behaved well under their several dispensations. The Gospel, with its blessings, was bestowed of God's free grace, and without any thing in man meriting it: besides, it was offered promiscuously to all, whether good or bad, and was embraced by persons of all characters. See Macknight, Wetstein, and the Inferences.

return to '

Matthew 20:17. And Jesus going up to Jerusalem— See Mark 10:32.

return to '

Matthew 20:18. Shall be betrayed unto the chief priests— The original word παραδοθησεται, is the same both here and in St. Mar 10:33 and plainly includes both our Saviour's being treacherously discovered by Judas, and given up into the hands of his enemies. He foretels that they should mock him, as if he was a fool, scourge him, as if he was a knave; spit on him, (Mark 10:34.) to express their abhorrence of him, as a blasphemer; and crucify him, as a criminal slave. This prediction, being built upon the ancient prophesies concerning the Messiah, certainly contained matter of great encouragement to the disciples, had they understood and applied it in a proper manner; and it is a remarkable proof of the prophetic spirit which dwelt in Christ; for, humanly speaking, it was much more probable that he would have been privately assassinated, or stoned, as was once attempted, by some zealous transport of popular fury, than that he should have been thus solemnly condemned, and delivered up to crucifixion: a Roman punishment, with which we do not that find he had ever been threatened. Indeed, when the Jews condemned him for blasphemy, for which the punishment appointed in the law was stoning, and Pilate at last gave them a general permission to take him, and judge him according to their own law, (Matthew 26:65-66. John 18:31; John 19:7.) it is wonderful that they did not choose to stone him. But all this was done, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled. Compare Mat 26:56 and John 19:36.

return to '

Matthew 20:22. Ye know not what ye ask— "You are ignorant of the nature of the honour that you are asking: however, since you desire to partake with me in my glory, I would know if you be willing to share with me in my sufferings, for the sake of the Gospel;" insinuating that the road to greatness in his kingdom lay through the depth of affliction and persecution on account of truth. It was customary among the ancients to assign to each guest at a feast a particular cup, as well as dish, and by the kind and quantity of the liquor contained in it, the respect of the entertainer was expressed. Hence cup came in general to signify a portion assigned, whether of pleasure or sorrow; and many instances occur in which it refers to the latter. See ch. Matthew 26:39; Matthew 26:42.

return to '

Matthew 20:23. And be baptized with the baptism— That is, "shall partake of my afflictions." This metaphorical sense of the word baptism, is derived from the figurativeexpressionsoftheOldTestament,inwhichafflictionsarerepresentedunder the notion of great waters passing over, and being ready to overwhelm a person. In this view of the matter James and John were baptised with Christ's baptism; for James was put to death by Herod, Act 12:2 being the first of all the Apostles who suffered martyrdom for Christ; and though the account which some gave of John's being cast into a cauldron of boiling oil at Rome has been called in question by many, it is not to be doubted that he had his share in the persecutions, from which none of Christ's Apostles were exempted. He was imprisoned and scourged by order of the council at Jerusalem, Acts 5:18; Act 5:40 and banished to the isle of Patmos for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ, Revelation 1:9. The last clause of this verse, is not mine to give, &c. should be translated, is not mine to give, unless to them for whom it is prepared, &c; 'Αλλα being put here for ει μη, as it is Mar 9:8 see also Matthew 17:8. Our Saviour meant that it was not in his power, consistently with his perfections, to give the chief places to any, but to those who were most eminent in their graces, particularly for their faith and fortitude; such only having a right to the chief places in the kingdom of heaven, according to the unalterable laws of the divine administration. "I can give the chief places of my kingdom to none, but to those, who, according to the immutable laws of my Father, are capable of enjoying them:" And in this view of the text, how poor a support does it afford to the Arian or Socinian cause!

return to '

Matthew 20:25. The princes of the Gentiles— Of the nations around. For God had prescribed to the children of Israel a just and equitable form of government. See Deuteronomy 17:14., to the end. The word rendered, have dominion over them, Κατακυριευουσιν, signifies sometimes to use an immoderate and arbitrary power. See Mark 10:42. It imports the abuse of royal authority (see 1 Samuel 8:11., &c.) which God sometimes is pleased to permit for the punishment of men's iniquities. Jesus, solicitous to cure that pride, which made some of his disciples ambitious, and others jealous, called them unto him, and told them that his kingdom was not, as they imagined, of the same nature with the kingdoms of the world; and that the greatness of his disciples was not the greatness of secular princes, which consists in reigning over others with absolute and despotic sway. See Grotius, and Beausobre and Lenfant.

return to '

Matthew 20:27. Let him be your servant— There is a gradation here not commonly observed: the original word διακονος in the former verse, which, for want of a better word, we rendered minister, is a name which might be given to any who occasionally attended others,or were statedly employed to render them any particular kind of service; but δουλος, servant, signifies one, whose whole business it is to serve, and who is indeed the property of another. Our Lord appears to mean, that he who presides over others, ought to consider his station, not so much a noble and high post, as a charge and office, which indispensably obliges him to be always ready to defend and assist his subjects. This may be an allusion to what is said, Deu 17:20 that the heart of the king of Israel ought not to be lifted up above his brethren; and generally, indeed, true greatness consists in a man's humbling himself, and condescending to the meanest and lowest offices, if hereby he can at all advance the true happiness of his fellow-creatures.

return to '

Matthew 20:28. Even as the Son of man— "The greatness of my disciples consists in doing men all the good they possibly can, by a continual course of humble laborious services, in imitation of me your master, whose greatness consists not in being ministered to by men, but in ministering to them as a servant; by healing the sick, feeding the hungry, instructing the ignorant, and laying downmy life a ransom for the sins of many." This being the highest dignity in Christ's kingdom, he might well tell the two brothers, that they did not know what they were asking, when they begged the honour of filling the highest stations in it. Instead of not to be ministered unto, but to minister, Dr. Heylin reads, not to be served, but serve; and instead of let him be your servant, Mat 20:27 let him perform the meanest offices. It does not follow, that because it is said Christ gave his life a ransom for many, that Christ died not for all. The word πολλοι being used in other places, where it most evidently signifies all. See Dan 12:2 compared with John 5:28-29. Rom 5:15 compared with 1 Corinthians 15:22.

return to '

Matthew 20:29. And as they departed, &c.— St. Luke says, that the blind man was cured as our Lord drew nigh to Jericho, Luk 18:35 and before he passed through the town, ch. Matthew 19:1. The other Evangelists say, the miracle was performed as he departed from Jericho. But their accounts may be reconciled three different ways: First, Jesus arriving about mid-day entered Jericho, and having visited his acquaintance, or done any thing else that he had to do, returned in the evening by the gate through which he had gone in. As he was coming out, he passed by the beggars, and cured them. The next day he entered into and passed through Jericho in his way to Jerusalem. There is nothing improbable in this solution; for if our Lord was a night in that part of the country, he might spend it in some of the neighbouring villages, rather than in the city, where he had many enemies.—It may be objected, that St. Luke seems to say the miracle was performed as Jesus went towards Jericho, not as he was coming away, εγενετο δε εν τω εγγιζειν αυτον εις Ιεριχω ; but if the opinion of Grotius, Le Clerc, and others, may be relied upon, the phrase εν τω εγγιζειν, stands here for εν του εγγυς ειναι, while he was near Jericho. The second solution is as follows: the blind man, of whom St. Luke speaks, may have cried for a cure as Jesus went into Jericho about noon, though he did not obtain it then. The multitude rebuked him, and Jesus passed without giving him any answer, intending to make the miracle more illustrious. Towards evening, therefore, as he was returning, the blind beggar, who had cried after him in the morning, being joined by a companion in the sameunhappy condition with himself, renewed his suit, beseeching the Son of David to have mercy on them. The multitude, as before, rebuked them for makingsuch a noise; but the season of the miracle being come, Jesus stood still, called them to him and cured them: it may be objected, that St. Luke makes no distinction between the beggar's calling to Christ in the morning, and the cure performed in the evening as he came out, but connects the two events, as if they had happened in immediate succession.—The answer is, there areseveral undeniable examples of this kind of connection to be found in the Sacred History, particularly in St. Luke's Gospel, Luke 23:25-26; Luke 24:4, &c. The third solution of the difficulty is this: Jericho, having been a flourishing city before the Israelites entered Canaan, must, in the course of so many ages, have undergone various changes from war and other accidents; we may therefore suppose that it consisted of an old and a new town, situated at a little distance from each other. On this supposition, the beggars sitting on the road between the two towns, might be said to have gained their cure either as Jesus departed from the one, or drew nigh to the other, according to the pleasure of the historians. The reader, however, must not look upon this as a mere supposition; for, on examination, he will find clear proof of it in the Sacred History. We are told (Joshua 6:24; Joshua 6:26.) that after the Israelites had burned Jericho, Joshua, their general, interdicted by a curse the rebuilding of it. His curse struck such terror into the Israelites, that for the space of five hundred years no man attempted to rebuild Jericho, till Hiel the Bethelite, in the days of Ahab, brought it upon himself, by venturing to raise the old city out of her ashes. 1 Kings 16:34. But though the old city thus continued in ruins for many ages, there was a town very soon built not far from it, to which they gave its name: for so early as Eglon's time we read of the city of Palm-trees, Judges 3:13 a name peculiar to Jericho on account of the fine palm-trees with which it was environed. Deuteronomy 34:3. 2 Chronicles 28:15. Besides, we find Jericho, some time after this, expressly mentioned by name, it being the town where David ordered his messengers to abide till their beards, which Hanun king of Moab caused to be shaved, were grown. Wherefore, as there was a Jericho before Hiel rebuilt the ancient town, which Joshua destroyed, it cannot, I think, be doubted, that from Hiel's days there were two cities of this name, at no great distance from each other; perhaps a mile or so. Besides, Josephus insinuates, that both of them subsistedinhistime;expresslydeclaring,"thatthespringwhich watered the territories of Jericho arose near the old town." See Bell. Jude 1:5:4. Thus therefore we have an easy and perfect reconciliation of the seemingly contradictory accounts which the Evangelists have given of our Lord's miracle on the blind men in this part of the country. But although there had been no hint in antiquity, directing us to believe there were two cities of the name of Jericho, not far from each other, every reader must acknowledge, that to have supposed this, would have been sufficient to our purpose of reconciling the Evangelists, because there are such towns to be met with in every country; a thing which of itself must have rendered the supposition not only possible, but probable; and I may venture to say, that had two prophane histories related any fact with the disagreeing circumstances found in the Evangelists, the critics would have thought them good reasons for such a supposition, especially if the historians were writers of character, and had been either eye-witnesses of the things which they related, or informed by the eye-witnesses of them. To conclude, this instance may teach us never to despair of finding a proper and full solution of any imagined inconsistency that is to be met with in the Sacred History. The city of Jericho, for greatness and opulence, was inferior to none in Palestine; Jerusalem excepted. It was beautified with a palace for the reception of the governor, if he chose to go thither, with an amphitheatre for public shews, and a hippodrome for horse-races. The city was pleasantly situated, at the foot of that range of hills which bounded the Campus Magnus to the west. The country round was the most fertile spot in Canaan; yielding, besides the necessaries of life in great abundance, the best palms, also excellent honey, and the famed balsam-tree, the most precious production of the earth. The fruitfulness of this region was owing to various causes, and among the rest to a fine spring with which it was watered, and which anciently was sweetened by the prophet Elisha, who blessed the land likewise, by God's command, with perpetual and extraordinary fruitfulness. 2 Kings 2:18-22. The air was exceedingly mild; for when it snowed in the other provinces of Palestine, and was so cold that they were obliged to make use of the warmest clothing, the inhabitants of this place went about clad in linen only. Hence, as Josephus tells us, the territory of Jericho was called θειον χωριου, a heavenly country, resembling paradise for beauty and prospect, fertility of soil, and felicity of climate. The fountain which enriched this delightful spot was so large, as to deserve the name of a water or river, (Joshua 16:1.) and refreshed a plain of seventy stadia long, and twenty broad; but the excellency of its quality is visible in its effects: for it gladdened the whole tract through which it glided, and made it look like a garden, affording a prospect more agreeable, as the neighbouring country was black and inhospitable. Jericho was a hundred and twenty stadia (that is, fifteen miles) from Jerusalem, almost due east, the country being mountainous; but thence to Jordan, which was at the distance of twenty stadia, or two miles and a half, and towards the Asphaltic lake, the land was flat and barren. See Macknight, and Reland's Palaest.

return to '

Matthew 20:30. And behold, two blind men— St. Mark and St. Luke speak only of one blind man who was cured near Jericho. St. Augustin is of opinion, that one of these was more remarkable than the other, being the son of Timeus, who seems to have been a person of some distinction; and that, having fallen into poverty and blindness, he was forced to beg for his bread. He thinks this a good reason for his being mentioned particularly by one of the Evangelists. It may be added, that he might himselfbe remarkable by the extraordinary earnestness with which he cried. See Aug. de Consen. Evang. lib. 2.

return to '

Matthew 20:31. Because they should hold their peace— That they might, &c.

return to '

Matthew 20:32. Jesus—said, What will ye, &c.— It is observable, that we never find Jesus bestowing an alms of money on any poor person falling in his way; yet this is no objection against his charity: for if the person who addressed him was incapable of working for his own subsistence by reason of bodily infirmity, it was much more noble, and much more becoming the dignity of the Son of God, to remove the infirmity, and put the beggar in a condition of supporting himself, than by the gift of a small sum to relieve his present want, which would soon return; such an alms being at best but a trifling and indirect method of helping him. On the other hand, if the beggars who applied to him were not in real distress through want or disease, but, under the pretence of infirmity or poverty, followed begging, as they deserved no encouragement, so they met with none from Jesus, who knew perfectly the circumstances of every particular person with whom he conversed. Besides, to have bestowed money on the poor was not only beneath Christ's dignity, but, having occasion to perform great cures on several beggars, it might have afforded his enemies a plausible pretence for affirming, that he bribed such as feigned diseases, to feign cures likewise, of which they gave him the honour. See Macknight.

return to '