Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary
Matthew Henry · 1714
Matthew Henry 사후(1714) 공개 도메인. 디지털판 CC0-1.0.
- Avanzamento della traduzione
- 4,537 / 4,537
- Lingua di fonte
- en
Risorse di studio
Sfoglia più commentari di pubblico dominio e le traduzioni coreane di scripture.how per libro e capitolo. Passa tra fonti di commentario, leggi solo la traduzione o confrontala affiancata al testo originale.
Commentario attivo
Tutti i commentari
23 fonti
Voci totali
307,288
81,431 tradotte
Licenza
Mostrata per fonte
Ciascuna fonte di commentario mantiene separati opera originale, autore, avanzamento della traduzione e informazioni di licenza. Le traduzioni coreane e il lavoro editoriale di scripture.how sono gestiti a parte rispetto al testo di fonte.
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)
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
3. And Jesus--or "He," according to another reading,--"moved with compassion," says Mark
(Mr 1:41);
a precious addition.
put forth his hand, and touched him--Such a touch occasioned ceremonial defilement
(Le 5:3);
even as the leper's coming near enough for contact was against the Levitical regulations
(Le 13:46).
But as the man's faith told him there would be no case for such regulations if the cure he hoped to experience should be accomplished, so He who had healing in His wings transcended all such statutes.
saying, I will; be thou clean--How majestic those two words! By not assuring the man of His power to heal him, He delightfully sets His seal to the man's previous confession of that power; and by assuring him of the one thing of which he had any doubt, and for which he waited--His will to do it--He makes a claim as divine as the cure which immediately followed it.
And immediately his leprosy was cleansed--Mark, more emphatic, says
(Mr 1:42),
"And as soon as He had spoken, immediately the leprosy departed from him, and he was cleansed"--as perfectly as instantaneously. What a contrast this to modern pretended cures!
And Jesus ...touched him - It was an offence to the Jews to "touch" a leprous person, and was regarded as making him who did it ceremonially impure, Leviticus 13:3. The act of putting forth his hand and "touching" him, therefore, expressed the intention of Jesus to cure him, and was a pledge that he "was," in fact, already cured.
Jesus put forth his hand - I will; be thou clean - The most sovereign authority is assumed in this speech of our blessed Lord - I:Will: there is here no supplication of any power superior to his own; and the event proved to the fullest conviction, and by the clearest demonstration, that his authority was absolute, and his power unlimited. Be thou cleansed, καθαρισθητι; a single word is enough.
And immediately his leprosy was cleansed - What an astonishing sight! A man whose whole body was covered over with the most loathsome disease, cleansed from it in a moment of time! Was it possible for any soul to resist the evidence of this fact? This action of Christ is a representation of that invisible hand which makes itself felt by the most insensible heart; of that internal word which makes itself heard by the most deaf; and of that supreme will which works every thing according to its own counsel.
And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him,.... This is a wonderful instance both of the grace, and goodness of Christ, in touching this loathsome creature; and of his unspotted purity and holiness, which could not be defiled by it; and of his mighty power in healing by a touch, and with a word of his mouth,
saying, I will, be thou clean: in which he expresses at once his willingness, "I will", of which the leper before was not certain; and his power by a word of command, "be thou clean"; and in which also is shown the readiness of Christ to do it: he did not stand parleying with the man, or making any further trial of his faith, or objecting to him his uncleanness; but at once stretches out his hand, touches his filthy flesh, and commands off the disorder. A great encouragement this, for poor sensible sinners to betake themselves to Christ, under a sense of their guilt and filth; who readily receives such, in no wise casts them out, but gives immediate discoveries of his power and grace unto them:
And immediately his leprosy was cleansed, or he was cleansed from it; he was not only pronounced clean, but was made so; he was thoroughly healed of the disease of leprosy. The Jews, themselves acknowledge this fact; for so they tell us in their wicked and blasphemous book (e), that Jesus should say,
"bring me a leper, and I will heal him; and they brought him a leper, and he healed him also by Shemhamphorash,''
i.e. by the ineffable name Jehovah. Though they greatly misrepresent the matter; for this man was not brought by others, at the request of Christ, but came of his own accord; nor was he healed by the use of any name, as if it was done by a sort of magic, but by a touch of his hand, and the word of his mouth. Whether this was the same man with Simon the leper, Matthew 26:6 as some have thought, is not certain.
(e) Toldos Jesu, p. 8.
By the law of God, Leviticus 5:3, he that touched another who was unclean (as the leper was, Leviticus 13:1-14:57) was unclean; how then doth Christ (who was subject to the law) touch the leper? Some say he did not touch the unclean leper, but him that was a leper, and by his touch made clean. But it is a better answer, that by what Christ did as he was God (such were his miraculous operations) he could not contract any ritual uncleanness; and possibly under the law the priest was exempted from that uncleanness, for he came very near the leper in his office about him, expressed Leviticus 13:1-14:57. Nor do we read of any uncleanness contracted by Aaron in his performance of his office to Miriam under her leprosy, nor by the priests, 2 Chronicles 26:20, though it be said they thrust out Uzziah. Christ, by putting forth his hand, showed his kindness to this miserable creature; by healing him with a touch, he showed his Divine power.
Saying, I will; be thou clean: he answereth him in his own term, I will, and then commands the thing. How acceptable is faith to God!
And immediately his leprosy was cleansed, that is, removed; the word immediately confirms the miracle, it was not only a thing done without ordinary means, but without the ordinary time requisite for such a cure.
Verse 3. - And Jesus put forth (and he stretched forth, Revised Version) his hand, and touched him. The careful record of the twofold action may be either a trace of the increasing astonishment of the bystanders or a means of indicating that this was no accidental touch, but the result of deliberate will (cf. Matthew 14:31). According to the Law (Leviticus 13:46 with Leviticus 11:40), our Lord by this action would become unclean until the evening. But of this there is no hint. That indeed he could not by it contract any real impurity, or even any ceremonial impurity in the eyes of God, is self-evident. But how could he himself justify his exemption from the Law? and how could the people justify it? Probably both he and they felt that as "the priests, in their contact with the leper to be adjudged, were exempted from the law of defilement," much more was the One who "cleansed" him. "He says, I will,' to meet the heresy of Photinus. He commands, because of Afius. He touches, because of Manichseus" (Ambrose, in Ford). Saying, I will (θέλω). Synchronous with the action. Be thou clean; be thou made clean (Revised Version); καθαρίσθητι. The external power which the man had himself acknowledged was now applied to him, and he was made clean by it, physically and therefore ceremonially (cf. Bishop Westcott, on 'Hebrews,' p. 346). And immediately his leprosy was cleansed. (On the parallel passage in Mark and Luke, "departed from him," see Professor Marshall, in Expositor, June, 1891, p. 464).
(3) Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him.—The act was itself a proof at once of the will and the power to heal. He did not fear becoming unclean by that contact, and was therefore not subject to the law that forbade the touch. And He met the one element of doubt in the sufferer’s mind by the words—yet more, perhaps, the tone or look that told of pity—“I will; be thou clean.” St. Mark adds, “Had compassion on him.”
Immediately his leprosy was cleansed.—We may venture to picture the process to our minds: the skin cleansed, the sores closed, the diseased whiteness giving way to the tints and tones of health.
And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.
And, behold, there came a leper — This leprosy was most rife in our Saviour’s time; God so ordering that Judea was sickest when her Physician was nearest. The Jews are still a nasty people; and this kind of leprosy seems to have been proper to them, as Plica Polonica, Morbus Gallicus, Sudor Anglicus. No stranger in England was touched with this disease, and yet the English were chased therewith, not in England only, but in other countries abroad; which made them like tyrants, both feared and avoided wherever they came. So were these Jewish lepers. Hence that fable in Tacitus, that the Israelites were driven out of Egypt for that loathsome disease. This, said one malevolent heathen, is the cause why they rest every seventh day. Bodinus observes it for a special providence of God, that in Arabia (which bordereth upon Judea) there are no swine to be found, lest that most leprous creature, saith he, should more and more infest and infect that people, who are naturally subject to the leprosy. Summa Dei bonitate id factum est, ne populos ad lepram proclives, animal leprosissimum magis, ac magis infestaret. Jo. Bodin. And another good author is of the opinion that God did therefore forbid the Jews to eat either swine’s flesh or hare’s flesh, quod ista caro facile in male affectis corporibus putrescat, because in diseased bodies it easily corrupts and turns to ill humours.
And worshipped him — Which he would hardly ever have done, haply, had he not been a leper. Morbi sunt vlrtutum officina: diseases, saith St Ambrose, are the shop of virtues. King Alfred found himself ever best when he was worst; and therefore prayed God to send him always some sickness; Gehazi’s leprosy cured him, his white forehead made him a white soul.
If thou wilt, thou canst, … — So another came with, "If thou canst do anything, help us." We never doubt of Christ’s will to do us good (saith a great divine), but, in some degree, we doubt also his power. True faith doubts neither, but believes against sense in things invisible, and against reason in things incredible. Sense corrects imagination, reason corrects sense, but faith corrects both.
return to '