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
Our Lord's countrymen are astonished at his wisdom and mighty works, and are offended at him, Mark 6:1-4. He works few miracles there, because of their unbelief, Mark 6:5, Mark 6:6. He sends forth his disciples by two and two to preach, etc., Mark 6:7-11. They depart, preach, and work miracles, Mark 6:12, Mark 6:13. Different opinions of Christ, Mark 6:14-16. Account of the beheading of John Baptist, Mark 6:17-29. The disciples return, and give an account of their mission, Mark 6:30. He departs with them to a place of privacy, but the people follow him, Mark 6:31-33. He has compassion on them, and miraculously feeds five thousand with five loaves and two fishes, Mark 6:34-44. He sends the disciples by sea to Bethsaida, and himself goes into a mountain to pray, Mark 6:45, Mark 6:46. The disciples meet with a storm, and he comes to them walking upon the water, and appeases the winds and the sea, Mark 6:47-52. They come into the land of Gennesaret, and he works many miracles, Mark 6:53-56.
CHAPTER 6.
AT NAZARETH. MISSION OF THE TWELVE. HEROD AND JOHN. FEEDING OF THE THOUSANDS. SEA INCIDENT.
The first two of the miscellaneous group of narratives contained in this chapter (Mark 6:1-13) are regarded by some (Weiss, Schanz, etc.) as forming the conclusion of a division of the Gospel beginning at Mark 3:7, having for its general heading: The disciplecircle versus the unreceptive multitude. Such analysis of the Gospels into distinct masses is useful provided it be not overdone.
Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
CHAPTER 6
Mark 6:1. Instead of ἧλθεν, we must read with Tisch., following B C L Δ א, ἔρχεται. ἦλθεν was introduced in accordance with the preceding ἐξῆλθεν.
Mark 6:2. After αὐτῷ (instead of which B C L Δ א, as before, read τούτῳ; so Tisch.) Elz. has ὅτι, which Fritzsche defends. But the evidence on the other side so preponderates, that ὅτι must be regarded as an inserted connective addition, instead of which C* D K, min. give ἵνα (and then γίνωνται), while B L Δ א have changed γίνονται into γινόμεναι, which is only another attempt to help the construction, although it is adopted (with αἱ before διά upon too weak evidence) by Tisch.
Mark 6:3. ὁ τέκτων] The reading ὁ τοῦ τέκτονος υἱός (and then merely καὶ Μαρίας), although adopted by Fritzsche, is much too weakly attested, and is from Matthew 13:35.
Ἰωσῆ] The form Ἰωσῆτος (Lachm. Tisch.) has in its favour B D L Δ, min. vss. Ἰωσήφ (א, 121, Aeth. Vulg. codd. of the It.) is here too weakly attested, and is from Matthew 13:55.
Mark 6:9. The Recepta, defended by Rinck, Fritzsche, is ἐνδύσασθαι. But ἐνδύσησθε (so Griesb. Scholz, Lachm. Tisch.) has decisive attestation; it was altered on account of the construction.
Mark 6:11. ὅσοι ἄν] Tisch. has ὃς ἂν τόπος (and afterwards δέξηται), following B L Δ א, min. Copt. Syr. p. (in the margin). A peculiar and original reading, which became altered partly by the omission of τόπος (C*? min.), partly by ὅσοι, in accordance with the parallels.
After αὐτοῖς Elz. Matth. Fritzsche, Scholz, have: ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀνεκτότερον ἔσται Σοδόμοις ἢ Γομόῤῥοις ἐν ἡμέρᾳ κρίσεως, ἢ τῇ πόλει ἐκείνῃ, which is not found in B C D L Δ א, min. vss. An addition in accordance with Matthew 10:15.
Mark 6:12. ἐκήρυξαν (Tisch.), instead of the Recepta ἐκήρυσσον, is still more strongly attested than μετανοῶσιν (Lachm. Tisch.). The former is to be adopted from B C D L Δ א; the latter has in its favour B D L, but easily originated as the shorter form from the Recepta μετανοήσωσι.
Mark 6:14. ἔλεγεν] Fritzsche, Lachm. have ἔλεγον only, following B D, 6, 271, Cant. 6 :Verc. Mart. Corb. Aug. Beda (D has ἐλέγοσαν). An alteration in accordance with Mark 6:15; comp. Mark 6:16.
ἐκ νεκρ. ἠγέρθη] Lachm. Tisch. have ἐγήγερται ἐκ νεκρ., following B D L Δ א, min.; but A K, min. Theophyl. have ἐκ νεκρ. ἀνέστη. The latter is right; ἀνέστη became supplanted by means of the parallel passages and Mark 6:16.
Mark 6:15. δέ after the first ἄλλοι is wanting in Elz. Fritzsche, but is guaranteed by decisive evidence. Decisive evidence condemns the ἤ read before ὡς in Elz. and Fritzsche.
Mark 6:16. οὗτός ἐστιν, αὐτὸς ἠγ.] B D L Δ, min. Vulg. Cant. Colb. Corb. Germ. 1, 2, Mm. Or. have merely οὗτος ἠγ. So Griesb. Fritzsche, Scholz, Tisch. (Lachm. has bracketed ἐστ. αὐτ.). Certainly the Recepta might have arisen out of Matthew 14:2. But, if merely οὗτος ἠγ. were original, it would not be at all easy to see why it should have been altered and added to. On the other hand, the transcribers might easily pass over from ουΤΟΣ at once to αυΤΟΣ. Therefore the Recepta is to be maintained, and to be regarded as made use of by Matthew.
ἐκ νεκρῶν] is, in accordance with Tisch., to be deleted as an addition, since in B L Δ א, vss. it is altogether wanting; in D it stands before ἠγ.; and in C, Or. it is exchanged for ἀπὸ τ. νεκρ.
Mark 6:17. The article before φυλακῇ is deleted, in accordance with decisive evidence.
Mark 6:19. ἤθελεν] Lachm. has ἐζήτει, although only following C* Cant. 6 :Verc. Vind. Colb. An interpretation.
Mark 6:21. ἐποίει] B C D L Δ א, min. have ἐποίησεν. So Lachm. But the reading of Tisch. is to be preferred: ἠπόρει; see the exegetical remarks.
Mark 6:22. αὐτῆς] B D L Δ א, min. have αὐτοῦ. A wrong emendation.
καὶ ἀρεσάσ.] B C* L Δ א have ἤρεσεν. So Lachm. and Tisch., the latter then, upon like attestation, having ὁ δὲ βασ. εἶπεν (Lachm., following A, has εἶπε δὲ ὁ βασ.). Rightly; the Recepta is a mechanical continuation of the participles, which was then followed by the omission of δέ (Elz. has: εἶπεν ὁ βασ.).
Mark 6:24. αἰτήσομαι] αἰτήσωμαι is decisively attested; commended by Griesb., and adopted by Fritzsche, Lachm. and Tisch.
Mark 6:30. πάντα καί] This καί has evidence so considerable against it that it is condemned by Griesb. and deleted by Fritzsche, Lachm. and Tisch. But how easily might the quite superfluous and even disturbing word come to be passed over!
Mark 6:33. After ὑπάγοντας Elz. has οἱ ὄχλοι, in opposition to decisive evidence; taken from Matt. and Luke.
After ἐπέγνωσαν (for which Lachm., following B* D, reads ἔγνωσαν) Elz. Scholz have αὐτόν, which is not found in B D, min. Arm. Perss. Vulg. It., while A K L M U Δ א, min., vss. have αὐτούς. So Tisch. But αὐτόν and αὐτούς are additions by way of gloss.
ἐκεῖ] Elz. Scholz have: ἐκεῖ, καὶ προῆλθον αὐτοὺς καὶ συνῆλθον πρὸς αὐτόν. Griesb.: καὶ ἦλθον ἐκεῖ. Fritzsche: ἐκεῖ καὶ ἦλθον πρὸς αὐτόν. Lachm. Tisch.: ἐκεῖ καὶ προῆλθον αὐτούς. So, too, Rinck, Lucubr. crit. p. 298. The latter reading (B L א) is to be regarded as the original one, and the variations are to be derived from the fact that προσῆλθον was written instead of προῆλθον. Thus arose the corruption καὶ προσῆλθον αὐτούς (so still L, min.). This corruption was then subjected to very various glosses, namely, καὶ προσῆλθον πρὸς αὐτούς (220, 225, Arr.), καὶ προσῆλθον αὐτοῖς (Δ), καὶ συνῆλθον αὐτοῦ (D, Ver.), καὶ συνέδραμον πρὸς αὐτόν (A), καὶ συνῆλθον πρὸς αὐτόν (Elz.), al.; which glosses partly supplanted the original καὶ προῆλθον αὐτούς (D, min. vss.), partly appeared by its side with or without restoration of the genuine προῆλθον. The reading of Griesb. has far too little attestation, and leaves the origin of the variations inexplicable. For the reading of Fritzsche there is no attestation; it is to be put on the footing of a conjecture.
Mark 6:34. After εἶδεν Elz. and Scholz have ὁ Ἰησοῦς, which in witnesses deserving of consideration is either wanting or differently placed. An addition.
ἐπʼ αὐτοῖς] Lachm. and Tisch. have ἐπʼ αὐτούς, following important witnesses; the Recepta is from Matthew 14:14 (where it is the original reading).
Mark 6:36. ἄρτους· τί γὰρ φάγωσιν οὐκ ἔχουσιν] B L Δ, min. Copt. Cant. Verc. Corb. Vind. have merely τί φάγωσιν, which Griesb. approves and Tisch. reads. D has merely τι φαγεῖν, which Fritzsche reads, adding, however, without any evidence: οὐ γὰρ ἔχουσιν. Lachm. has [ἄρτους·] τί [γὰρ] φάγωσιν [οὐκ ἔχουσιν]. The reading of Griesb. is to be preferred; ἄρτους was written in the margin as a gloss, and adopted into the text. Thus arose ἄρτους, τι φάγωσιν (comp. א: βρώματα τι φάγωσιν, Vulg.: “cibos, quos manducent”). This was then filled up from Mark 8:2, Matthew 15:32, in the way in which the Recepta has it. The reading of D (merely τι φαγεῖν) would be preferable, if it were better attested.
Mark 6:37. δῶμεν] Lachm. has δώσομεν, following A B (?) L Δ 65, It. Vulg. Comp. D א, min., which have δώσωμεν. The future is original; not being understood, it was changed into δῶμεν, and mechanically into δώσωμεν (Tisch.).
Mark 6:38. καί before ἴδετε is wanting in B D L א, min. vss., and is an addition which Griesb. has condemned, Lachm. has bracketed, and Tisch. has deleted.
Mark 6:39. ἀνακλῖναι] Lachm. has ἀνακλιθῆναι, not sufficiently attested from Matthew 14:19.
Mark 6:40. Instead of ἀνά, Lachm. and Tisch. have κατά both times, in accordance with B D א, Copt. Rightly; ἀνά is from Luke 9:14.
Mark 6:44. Elz. has after ἄρτους: ὡσεί, in opposition to decisive evidence.
Mark 6:45. ἀπολύσῃ] Lachm. and Tisch. have ἀπολύει, following B D L Δ א 1. The Recepta is from Matthew 14:22.
Mark 6:48. εἶδεν] B D L Δ א, min. Vulg. It. Copt. have ἰδών. So Lachm. and Tisch., omitting the subsequent καί before περί. Rightly; the participle was changed into εἶδεν, because the parenthetic nature of the following ἦν γὰρ … αὐτοῖς was not observed.
Mark 6:51. καὶ ἐθαύμαζον] is wanting, it is true, in B L Δ א, min. Copt. Vulg. Vind. Colb. Rd., and is condemned by Griesb., bracketed by Lachm., cancelled by Tisch.; but after ἐξίσταντο it was, as the weaker expression, more easily passed over than added.
Mark 6:52. The order αὐτῶν ἡ καρδ. is, with Scholz, Lachm. Tisch., to be preferred on far preponderating evidence.
Mark 6:54. After αὐτόν Lachm. has bracketed οἱ ἄνδρες τοῦ τόπου ἐκείνου, which A G Δ, min. vss. read; from Matthew 14:35.
Mark 6:55. ἐκεῖ] is not found in B L Δ א, 102, Copt. Vulg. Vind. Brix. Colb. Deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. Passed over as superfluous.
Mark 6:56. ἥπτοντο] Lachm. reads ἥψαντο, following B D L Δ א, min. Matthew 14:36.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Mr 6:1-6.
CHRIST REJECTED AT NAZARETH. ( =
Mt 13:54-58; Lu 4:16-30).
See on
Lu 4:16-30.
See this passage explained in the notes at Matthew 13:54-58.
And he went out from thence - That is, from Capernaum. See on Matthew 13:54 (note).
A great variety of observable passages we have, in this chapter, concerning our Lord Jesus, the substance of all which we had before in Matthew, but divers circumstances we have, which we did not there meet with. Here is, I. Christ contemned by his countrymen, because he was one of them, and they knew, or thought they knew, his original, Mk 6:1-6. II. The just power he gave his apostles over unclean spirits, and an account given of their negotiation, Mk 6:7-13. III. A strange notion which Herod and others had of Christ, upon which occasion we have the story of the martyrdom of John Baptist, Mk 6:14-29. IV. Christ's retirement into a desert place with his disciples; the crowds that followed him thither to receive instruction from him; and his feeding five thousand of them with five loaves and two fishes, Mk 6:30-44. V. Christ's walking upon the sea to his disciples, and the abundance of cures he wrought on the other side of the water, Mk 6:45-56.