Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary
Matthew Henry · 1714
Matthew Henry 사후(1714) 공개 도메인. 디지털판 CC0-1.0.
- Avancement de la traduction
- 4,537 / 4,537
- Langue source
- en
Ressources d'étude
Parcours plusieurs commentaires du domaine public et leurs traductions coréennes scripture.how par livre et chapitre. Bascule entre sources, lis la traduction seule ou compare-la au texte source.
Commentaire actif
Tous les commentaires
23 sources
Total des entrées
307,288
81,431 traduits
Licence
Affiché par source
Chaque source conserve séparément texte original, auteur, avancement de la traduction et licence. Les traductions et travaux éditoriaux coréens de scripture.how sont gérés à part du texte source.
Matthew Henry · 1714
Matthew Henry 사후(1714) 공개 도메인. 디지털판 CC0-1.0.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, David Brown · 1871
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871). CCEL expanded electronic edition states it is in the public domain.
Albert Barnes · 1834
Albert Barnes' Notes on Revelation Of St. John The Divine (New Testament, English original, public domain). Sourced from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL). Public domain. Retrieval mirror: biblehub.com/commentaries/barnes.
Adam Clarke · 1831
Public domain English commentary by Adam Clarke, normalized from Wikisource book pages for scripture.how. Public domain. Retrieval mirror: biblehub.com/commentaries/clarke.
John Gill · 1763
John Gill(1697-1771), Exposition of the Old and New Testament(1746-1763). Public domain. Retrieval mirror: biblehub.com/commentaries/gill.
John Calvin · 1850
종교개혁 신학 원천 (영역본 PD, 대부분 — 전권 아님)
Matthew Poole · 1685
간결 절별 전권 개혁주의 주석
ed. H.D.M. Spence & Joseph S. Exell · 1890
전권 강해·설교·예화 풍부 (항목 대량)
Carl F. Keil, Franz Delitzsch · 1866
구약 학술 표준 — 히브리어·문헌비평·고대근동 배경
ed. Charles J. Ellicott · 1878
학술+가독 균형 전권 주석
Cambridge (다저자) · 1900
준전권 준학술 (권별 저자·연도 확인)
Marvin R. Vincent · 1887
신약 헬라어 단어 연구
A.T. Robertson · 1933
헬라어 시제·문법 해설 결정판 (KR PD / US 1931+ 권별)
ed. W. Robertson Nicoll (다저자) · 1910
헬라어 신약 학술 (권별 저자 PD 확인 필요)
Heinrich A.W. Meyer · 1880
신약 학술 정밀주해 (독일 — K&D 대응)
John Wesley · 1755
간결 실용 전권(NT 1755 / OT 1765) 웨슬리안
Joseph Benson · 1815
웨슬리안 전권 주석
Charles H. Spurgeon · 1885
시편 주석 고전 (설교 자료 풍부)
Alexander Maclaren · 1910
설교형 강해 명저 (전권, 절별 가공 필요)
B.W. Johnson · 1891
평이 절별 신약 해설 (일반신자·모바일)
Thomas Coke · 1803
감리교 전권 주석
John Trapp · 1660
청교도 전권 주석 — Henry/Gill 보완
Charles Hodge · 1860
프린스턴 조직신학 관점 신약 정밀 주석 (롬·고전후·엡)
Adam Clarke's Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The disciples inquiring who should be greatest in Christ's kingdom, Matthew 18:1. He takes occasion to recommend humility, simplicity, and disinterestedness, Matthew 18:2-6. Warns them against offenses, Matthew 18:7. Recommends mortification and self-denial. Matthew 18:8, Matthew 18:9. Charges them to avoid giving offense. Matthew 18:10, Matthew 18:11. Parable of him who had lost one sheep out of his flock consisting of one hundred, Matthew 18:12-14. How to deal with an offending brother, Matthew 18:15-18. A gracious promise to social prayer, Matthew 18:19, Matthew 18:20. How often an offending brother who expresses sorrow, and promises amendment, is to be forgiven, Matthew 18:21, Matthew 18:22. The parable of the king, who calls his servants to account, and finds one who owed him ten thousand talents, who, being unable to pay, and imploring mercy, is forgiven, Matthew 18:23-27. Of the same person, who treated his fellow-servant unmercifully, who owed him but a small sum, Matthew 18:28-30. Of the punishment inflicted on this unmerciful servant, Matthew 18:31-35.
CHAPTER 18.
MORAL TRAINING OF THE DISCIPLES.
In this and the next two chapters the centre of interest is the spiritual condition of the Twelve, and the necessity thereby imposed on their Master to subject them to a stern moral discipline. The day of Caesarea had inaugurated a spiritual crisis in the disciple-circle, which searched them through and through, and revealed in them all in one form or another, and in a greater or less degree, moral weakness: disloyalty to the Master (Matthew 17:22), vain ambition, jealousy, party spirit. The disloyal disciple seems to have taken to heart more than the others the gloomy side of the Master’s predictions, the announcement of the Passion; his more honest-hearted companions let their minds rest on the more pleasing side of the prophetic picture, the near approach of the kingdom in power and glory, so that while remaining true to the Master their hearts became fired with ambitious passions.
Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
CHAPTER 18
Matthew 18:1. ὥρᾳ] Lachm.: ἡμέρᾳ, which Fritzsche has adopted, against decisive evidence; although ancient, since both readings are found as early as the time of Origen, ἡμέρᾳ is a gloss instead of ὥρᾳ, as there appeared to be nothing in the context to which the latter might be supposed to refer.
Matthew 18:4. ταπεινώσῃ] The future ταπεινώσει is, with Lachm. and Tisch., to be adopted on decisive evidence.
Matthew 18:6. εἰς τὸν τρ.] for εἰς Elz. has ἐπί, while Lachm. and Tisch. 8 read περί. Only εἰς and περί have anything like important testimony in their favour. But περί is taken from Mark 9:42; Luke 17:2.
Matthew 18:7. On weighty evidence we should follow Lachm. in deleting ἐστιν after γάρ, and ἐχείνῳ in the next clause, as words that might naturally have been inserted; Tisch. 8 has deleted ἐστιν only.
Matthew 18:8. αὐτά] B D L א, min. vss. and Fathers: αὐτόν. So Lachm. and Tisch. correctly; αὐτά is an emendation to include both.
Further on Lachm. and Tisch. 8 have κυλλὸν ἢ χωλόν, following B א, Vulg. It.; a transposition to suit χείρ and ποῦς.
Matthew 18:10. The evidence is too weak to warrant us in substituting ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ (so Lachm. in brackets) for the first ἐν οὐρανοῖς; still weaker is the evidence in favour of omitting the words, although they are omitted at an early period (as early as the time of Clem. Or. Syr.?).
Matthew 18:11. This verse does not occur in B L* א, 1*, 13, 33, Copt. Sahid. Syrjer. Aeth. (cod. 1), Eus. Or. Hil. Jer. Juv. Deleted by Lachm. and Tisch.; condemned also by Rinck. Already suspected by Griesb. to have been an interpolation from Luke 19:10, which in fact it is, considering how much evidence there is against it, and considering, on the other hand, that, if it had been genuine, there was no obvious motive on exegetical grounds for the omission.
Matthew 18:12. ἀφεὶς … πορευθείς] Lachm.: ἀφήσει … καὶ πορευθείς, following B D L, min. Vulg. It. (of which, however, D, Vulg. have ἀφίησιν, and D, πορευόμενος). Exegetical analysis, in order to remove ambiguity as to the connection.
Matthew 18:14. εἷς] Lachm. and Tisch.: ἕν, following B D L M* א, min. Altered to εἷς in accordance with Matthew 18:10; while πατρός μου, which Lachm. substitutes for πατρ. ὑμῶν (following B F H J, min. vss. Or.), is to be regarded in the same light.
Matthew 18:15. εἰς σέ] deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. 8, after B א, I, 22, 234*, Sahid. Or. Cyr. Bas. This evidence is too weak, especially as the omission of ΕΙΣΣΕ might easily enough have happened from its following ΗΣΗ (ἁμαρτήσῃ), while it is further to be borne in mind that, in what goes before, it was sin in general, not merely an offence, that was in question. The εἰς σέ, which is here genuine, was inserted from our passage into Luke 17:3, Elz.
ἔλεγξον] Elz., Scholz: καὶ ἔλ., against B C א and many min. vss. and Fathers. The καί was inserted as a connective particle.
Matthew 18:19. πάλιν ἀμήν] Elz. (so also Griesb. Scholz, Fritzsche, Rinck, Tisch. 8) has merely πάλιν, and Lachm., following min. only (B being erroneously quoted), has merely ἀμήν. But the attestation for πάλιν ἀμήν (Tisch. 7) is about equal in weight (incl. B) to that in favour of the simple πάλιν (incl. א), and one of the words might easily enough have been omitted from the combination not occurring anywhere else.
συμφωνήσωσιν] Seeing that the future συμφωνήσουσιν is supported by the preponderating evidence of B D E H I L V Δ א, min., and seeing, on the other hand, that it might very readily have been supplanted by the subjunctive as being the mood most in accordance with the usual construction, it is, with Tisch., to be adopted as the correct reading.
Matthew 18:24. προσηνέχθη] Lachm. and Tisch. 7 : προσήχθη, following B D Or. Correctly; this and Luke 9:41 are the only instances in which προσάγειν occurs in the Gospels, προσφέρειν being the form most familiar to the copyists.
Matthew 18:25. εἶχε] Lachm. and Tisch. 7 : ἔχει, following only B, min. Or.; but it is to be preferred, since to the mechanical transcribers the present would doubtless seem to be improper.
Matthew 18:26.] κύριε before μαχρ. is to be regarded as interpolated, being omitted by B D, min. Vulg. codd. of It. Syrcur Or. Chrys. Lucif., and deleted by Lachm. and Tisch.
Matthew 18:27. ἐκείνου] omitted by Lachm., only after B, min., as is also ἐκεῖνος, Matthew 18:28, only after B.
Matthew 18:28. μοι] not found in the more weighty witnesses; deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. An interpolation.
εἴ τι] Elz.: ὅ, τι, against decisive evidence. Erroneous emendation.
Matthew 18:29. αὐτοῦ] Elz. Fritzsche, Schulz, Scholz, Tisch. 7, insert εἰς τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ, which, however, is omitted by B C* D G L Δ א, min. Copt. Sahid. Aeth. Syrcur It. (Brix. excepted) Vulg. Or. Lucif. Gloss on the simple πεσών. In regard to εἰς, comp. John 9:32, al.
πάντα] Deleted by Matth., Scholz, Tisch., on preponderating evidence; bracketed by Lachm. It is a mechanical interpolation from Matthew 18:26.
Matthew 18:31. For the first γενόμενα Fritzsche and Tisch. substitute γινόμενα, following only D L א**, min. Vulg. It. Chrys. Lucif., but correctly. The transcribers failed to notice the difference of meaning.
For αὐτῶν or αὑτῶν we should, with Lachm. and Tisch., read ἑαυτῶν, upon decisive evidence; the reflexive reference of the pronoun was overlooked, as was often the case.
Matthew 18:34. αὐτῷ] not found in B D א**, min. vss. Lachm.; but it may easily enough have been left out in conformity with Matthew 18:30.
Matthew 18:35. ὑμῶν] Elz. Fritzsche, Schulz, Scholz insert τὰ παραπτώματα αὐτῶν, which is not found in B D L א, min. and several vss. and Fathers. Gloss from Matthew 6:14-15; Mark 11:25-26.
But ἐπουράνιος, for which Fritzsche, Lachm. Tisch. 8 substitute οὐράνιος (B C** D K L Π א, min. Or. Damasc.), is to be retained, all the more that the expression ὁ πατὴρ ὁ ἐπουρ. occurs nowhere else, though we frequently find ὁ π. ὁ οὐράνιος.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Mt 18:1-9.
STRIFE AMONG THE TWELVE WHO SHOULD BE GREATEST IN THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, WITH RELATIVE TEACHING. ( =
Mr 9:33-50; Lu 9:46-50).
For the exposition, see on
Mr 9:33-50.
See also Mark 9:33-41; Luke 9:46-50.
Who is the greatest in the kingdom, of heaven? - By the kingdom of heaven they meant the kingdom which they supposed he was about to set up - his kingdom as the Messiah. They asked the question because they supposed, in accordance with the common expectation of the Jews, that he was about to set up a temporal kingdom of great splendor, and they wished to know who should have the principal offices, and posts of honor and profit. This was among them a frequent subject of inquiry and controversy. Mark Mar 9:34 informs us that they had had a dispute on this subject in the way. Jesus, he says, inquired of them what they had been disputing about. Luke Luk 9:47 says that Jesus perceived the thought of their heart an act implying omniscience, for none can search the heart but God, Jeremiah 17:10. The disciples, conscious that the subject of their dispute was known, requested Jesus to decide it, Matthew 18:1. They were at first silent through shame (Mark), but, perceiving that the subject of their dispute was known, they came, as Matthew states, and referred the master to him for his opinion.
At the same time - Or hour; but ωρα is frequently used to signify some particular time: however, instead of ωρα, three MSS., all the Itala but four, and Origen, read ημερα, day. Origen says both readings were extant in MSS. in his time.
Who is the greatest - Could these disciples have viewed the kingdom of Christ in any other light than that of a temporal one? Hence they wished to know whom he would make his prime minister - whom his general - whom his chief chancellor - whom supreme judge, etc., etc. Is it he who first became thy disciple, or he who is thy nearest relative, or he who has most frequently entertained thee, or he who is the oldest, merely as to years? Could this inquiry have proceeded from any but the nine disciples who had not witnessed our Lord's transfiguration? Peter, James, and John, were surely more spiritual in their views! And yet how soon did even these forget that his kingdom was not of this world! See Mark 10:35, etc.; John 18:10, etc. The disciples having lately seen the keys delivered to Peter, and found that he, with James and John, had been privileged with being present at the transfiguration, it is no wonder if a measure of jealousy and suspicion began to work in their minds. From this inquiry we may also learn, that the disciples had no notion of Peter's supremacy; nor did they understand, as the Roman Catholics will have it, that Christ had constituted him their head, either by the conversation mentioned Matthew 16:18, Matthew 16:19, or by the act mentioned in the conclusion of the preceding chapter. Had they thought that any such superiority had been designed, their present question must have been extremely impertinent. Let this be observed.
The gospels are, in short, a record of what Jesus began both to do and to teach. In the foregoing chapter, we had an account of his doings, in this, of his teachings; probably, not all at the same time, in a continued discourse, but at several times, upon divers occasions, here put together, as near akin. We have here, I. Instructions concerning humility, Mt 18:1-6. II. Concerning offences in general (Mt 18:7), particularly offences given, 1. By us to ourselves, Mt 18:8,9. 2. By us to others, Mt 18:10-14. 3. By others to us; which are of two sorts, (1.) Scandalous sins, which are to be reproved, Mt 18:15-20. (2.) Personal wrongs, which are to be forgiven, Mt 18:21-35. See how practical Christ's preaching was; he could have revealed mysteries, but he pressed plain duties, especially those that are most displeasing to flesh and blood.