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
Commentaires bibliques
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
Sources et licences
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.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
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.
- Avancement de la traduction
- 19,831 / 19,831
- Langue source
- en
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
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.
- Avancement de la traduction
- 22,781 / 22,781
- Langue source
- en
Adam Clarke's Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
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.
- Avancement de la traduction
- 21,603 / 22,101
- Langue source
- en
John Gill's Exposition of the Bible
John Gill · 1763
John Gill(1697-1771), Exposition of the Old and New Testament(1746-1763). Public domain. Retrieval mirror: biblehub.com/commentaries/gill.
- Avancement de la traduction
- 12,528 / 30,759
- Langue source
- en
Calvin's Commentaries
John Calvin · 1850
종교개혁 신학 원천 (영역본 PD, 대부분 — 전권 아님)
- Avancement de la traduction
- 144 / 7,385
- Langue source
- en
Matthew Poole's Annotations upon the Holy Bible
Matthew Poole · 1685
간결 절별 전권 개혁주의 주석
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 31,092
- Langue source
- en
The Pulpit Commentary
ed. H.D.M. Spence & Joseph S. Exell · 1890
전권 강해·설교·예화 풍부 (항목 대량)
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 25,592
- Langue source
- en
Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
Carl F. Keil, Franz Delitzsch · 1866
구약 학술 표준 — 히브리어·문헌비평·고대근동 배경
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 2,044
- Langue source
- en
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
ed. Charles J. Ellicott · 1878
학술+가독 균형 전권 주석
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 23,497
- Langue source
- en
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Cambridge (다저자) · 1900
준전권 준학술 (권별 저자·연도 확인)
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 27,176
- Langue source
- en
Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament
Marvin R. Vincent · 1887
신약 헬라어 단어 연구
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 5,763
- Langue source
- en
Word Pictures in the New Testament
A.T. Robertson · 1933
헬라어 시제·문법 해설 결정판 (KR PD / US 1931+ 권별)
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 6,935
- Langue source
- en
The Expositor's Greek Testament
ed. W. Robertson Nicoll (다저자) · 1910
헬라어 신약 학술 (권별 저자 PD 확인 필요)
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 7,010
- Langue source
- en
Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
Heinrich A.W. Meyer · 1880
신약 학술 정밀주해 (독일 — K&D 대응)
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 5,340
- Langue source
- en
Wesley's Explanatory Notes
John Wesley · 1755
간결 실용 전권(NT 1755 / OT 1765) 웨슬리안
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 5,643
- Langue source
- en
Benson's Commentary of the Old and New Testaments
Joseph Benson · 1815
웨슬리안 전권 주석
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 14,675
- Langue source
- en
The Treasury of David
Charles H. Spurgeon · 1885
시편 주석 고전 (설교 자료 풍부)
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 2,290
- Langue source
- en
MacLaren's Expositions of Holy Scripture
Alexander Maclaren · 1910
설교형 강해 명저 (전권, 절별 가공 필요)
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 1,144
- Langue source
- en
The People's New Testament
B.W. Johnson · 1891
평이 절별 신약 해설 (일반신자·모바일)
- Avancement de la traduction
- 7 / 3,477
- Langue source
- en
Coke's Commentary on the Holy Bible
Thomas Coke · 1803
감리교 전권 주석
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 10,808
- Langue source
- en
Trapp's Complete Commentary
John Trapp · 1660
청교도 전권 주석 — Henry/Gill 보완
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 26,397
- Langue source
- en
Hodge's Commentary on the New Testament
Charles Hodge · 1860
프린스턴 조직신학 관점 신약 정밀 주석 (롬·고전후·엡)
- Avancement de la traduction
- 0 / 1,011
- Langue source
- en
Tempting
See on Matthew 6:13.
For every cause
The temptation turned upon the dispute dividing the two great Rabbinical schools, the one of which (that of Hillel) held that a man might divorce his wife for any reason which rendered her distasteful to him; and the other (that of Shammai) that divorce was allowable only in case of unchastity. The querists would be anxious to know which side Jesus espoused.
Pharisees tempting him (Φαρισαιο πειραζοντες αυτον). They "could not ask a question of Jesus without sinister motives" (Bruce). See Matthew 4:1 for the word (πειραζω). For every cause (κατα πασαν αιτιαν). This clause is an allusion to the dispute between the two theological schools over the meaning of Deuteronomy 24:1. The school of Shammai took the strict and unpopular view of divorce for unchastity alone while the school of Hillel took the liberal and popular view of easy divorce for any passing whim if the husband saw a prettier woman (modern enough surely) or burnt his biscuits for breakfast. It was a pretty dilemma and meant to do Jesus harm with the people. There is no real trouble about the use of κατα here in the sense of προπτερ or because of (Robertson, Grammar, p. 509).
return to '
Matthew 19:3-9. The marriage question (Mark 10:2-9).
Matthew 19:3. φ. πειράζοντες: Pharisees again, tempting of course; could not ask a question at Jesus without sinister motives.—εἰ ἔξεστιν: direct question in indirect form, vide on Matthew 12:10.—ἀπολῦσαι … κατὰ πᾶσαν αἰτίαν: the question is differently formulated in the two accounts, and the answer differently arranged. In Mk. the question is absolute = may a man put away his wife at all? in Mt. relative = may, etc.… for every reason? Under the latter form the question was an attempt to draw Jesus into an internal controversy of the Jewish schools as to the meaning of Deuteronomy 24:1, and put Him in the dilemma of either having to choose the unpopular side of the school of Shummai, who interpreted עֶרְוַת דָּבָר strictly, or exposing Himself to a charge of laxity by siding with the school of Hillel. It was a petty scheme, but characteristic. Whether the interrogants knew what Jesus had taught on the subject of marriage and divorce in the Sermon on the Mount is uncertain, but in any case all scribes and Pharisees knew by this time what to expect from Him. For κατὰ in the sense of propter, vide instances in Hermann’s Viger, 632, and Kypke.
Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
Matthew 19:3
Matthew 19:3. Πειράζοντες] The question was of an ensnaring nature, owing to the rivalry that existed between the school of Hillel and that of the more rigorous Sammai. See note on Matthew 5:31. There is not the slightest foundation in the text for the idea that the questioners had in view the matrimonial relations of Antipas (Paulus, Kuinoel, de Wette, Ewald), as though they wanted to involve Jesus, while yet in Peraea, within that prince’s domains, in a fate similar to that of the Baptist. Moreover, the adoption of this view is altogether unnecessary, since the whole school of Sammai had already condemned that most unlawful state of matters just referred to, and therefore there was on this score nothing of a specially tempting character about the question. But they expected that Jesus in His reply would declare in favour of one of the rival schools (and that it would doubtless be that of Sammai; for with κ. πᾶσαν αἰτίαν they suggested the answer, No), so that they might be able to stir up party feeling against Him. Falling back, however, upon the divine idea on which the institution of marriage is founded, He took higher ground than either of the schools in question, inasmuch as from this divine idea He deduces that marriage is a union which no human authority has a right to dissolve; but as for Himself, He avoids prescribing any law of His own with reference to this matter; comp. Harless, Ehescheidungsfr. p. 34 ff.
εἰ] See note on Matthew 12:10.
τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ] Assuming ἀνθρώπῳ to be spurious, the αὐτοῦ can only refer to something in the context, and that doubtless to the logical subject, to the τίς implied in the ἔξεστι. For a similar classical usage, comp. Stallbaum, ad Plat. Rep. p. 503 D.
κατὰ πᾶσαν αἰτίαν] for every cause, which he has to allege against her,—the view maintained by the school of Hillel, and which was precisely that which gave to this question its tempting character, though it is not so represented in Mark. As given by the latter evangelist the question is not presented in its original form; as it now stands it would have been too general, and so not calculated to tempt, for it would certainly have been foolish to expect from Jesus any answer contrary to the law (in answer to Weiss, Keim); but, according to Matthew’s version, the persons who were tempting Jesus appear to have framed their question with a view to His splitting on the casuistical rock implied in κ. πᾶσαν αἰτίαν. After having laid down as a principle the indissoluble nature of the marriage tie, Jesus, in the course of the conversation, replies to this captious point in their query in the very decided terms of Matthew 19:9, where He says, μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ.
Pas encore de traduction.
Matthew 19:3. The Pharisees also — Who always had a watchful eye on his motions, and attended him with the most malignant designs, being now more especially irritated by the fame of his late miracles, which they had in vain endeavoured to suppress; came unto him, tempting him — With what they thought a very artful and insnaring question; and — That they might, if possible, find some reason to accuse him, or to discredit him, at least, among the people; they asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? — That is, for any thing which he dislikes in her. “The school of Hillel taught, that a man might put away his wife for any cause. The son of Sirach saith, ‘If she go not as thou wouldest have her, cut her off from thy flesh, give her a bill of divorce, and let her go.’ Sir 25:26. Josephus saith, The law runs thus: ‘He that would be disjoined from his wife, for any cause whatsoever, let him give her a bill of divorce.’ And he confesseth, that he himself put away his wife, after she had borne him three children, ‘because he was not pleased with her behaviour.’ But the school of Shammah determined, on the contrary that the wife was only to be put away for adultery.” — Whitby. (Christ, it must be observed, “had delivered his sentiments on this subject twice; once in Galilee, Matthew 5:31; and again in Perea, Luke 16:18. It is probable, therefore, that they knew his opinion, and solicited him to declare it, hoping it would incense the people, who reckoned the liberty which the law gave them of divorcing their wives, one of their chief privileges. Or if, standing in awe of the people, he should deliver a doctrine different from what he had taught on former occasions, they thought it would be a fit ground for accusing him of dissimulation. But they missed their aim entirely; for Jesus, always consistent with himself, boldly declared the third time against arbitrary divorces, not fearing the popular resentment in the least.” — Macknight.
Pas encore de traduction.
3–12. The Question of Marriage and Divorce
Mark 10:2-9Matthew 19:10-12 are peculiar to Matthew. St Mark mentions the part of the conversation contained in Matthew 19:9 as having taken place “in the house,” Matthew 19:10-12.