Commentari biblici

Matthew 4:12. Fritzsche gives the sense and connection of Matthew 4:12-16 thus: “Post conditi in carcerem Johannis famam discessit Jesus in Galilaeam, et relicta Nazaretha Capharnaumi quidem consedit, ut, quemadmodum apud prophetam est, magnis, amisso Johanne, tenebris oppressi Galilaei splendida Messiae luce fruerentur.” But it appears, from the words in Matthew 4:12, that Jesus, upon learning that the Baptist had been delivered over to Herod, deemed it dangerous to appear in the same district where the latter had baptized and excited so much attention, and that therefore He withdrew into the more remote Galilee (comp. Matthew 12:15, Matthew 14:13). This belonged, indeed, to the dominion of Herod Antipas, who had caused the Baptist to be apprehended (Matthew 14:3); but it removed Jesus more from his attention and that of the hierarchical party, and gave Him the natural retirement of home. According to John 3:24, John had not yet been apprehended, and the journey to Galilee was occasioned by the marriage at Cana (Matthew 2:1). In Luke 4:14 no external reason is stated for the journey, which is a later avoidance of the inaccurajcy of the earlier tradition (retained in Mark and Matthew) (in answer to Schneckenburger). The contradiction, however, between Matthew and John is to be recognised, and to the latter is to be assigned the preference in point of accuracy.[392] Comp. on John 3:24. A longer intervening period between the temptation and the return to Galilee is not hinted at by Matthew (nor even by Mark), and is excluded by Luke.

[392] We cannot say that it is the journey to Galilee, John 6:1, which is intended in our passage (Wieseler, chronol. Synopse, p. 161 f., and Beitr. z. Würdig. d. Eu. p. 174 ff.), for that Matthew conceived the journey recorded by him as the first after the sojourn in the wilderness, is shown not only by the whole context, but also by ver. 13 ff., where the settling down at Capernaum is related, and the reason assigned for it; and by ver. 17, where Jesus first actually begins His office as teacher. This holds good against the frequent assumption that the journey to Galilee, Matthew 4:12, coincides with John 4:3; John 4:43-45 (Kuhn, Ebrard, Lange, Märcker, Uebereinst. d. Matth. u. Joh., 1868, p. 9). Exegetically, the discrepancy must remain a blank, which is also recognised by Bleek and Keim; by the latter, however, in such a way that he denies to John’s account a strictly historical character.

Matthew 4:13-14. Καφαρναούμ] so, with Lachmann, Tischendorf, we must write כְּפַר נַחוּם, vicus Nachumi, not χωρίον παρακλήσεως (Origen), or villa pulcherrima (Jerome). It was a prosperous manufacturing town on the north-west shore of the Lake of Tiberias. Not mentioned in the Old Test.; in Josephus, Vit. lxxii., κώμη Κεφαρνώμη. It has now disappeared, and not even can its site be determined with certainty (Tell Hûm? so also Wilson’s Lands of the Bible, II. p. 137 ff., and Furer in Schenkel’s Bibellex. III. p. 494 f., likewise Ritter, Ewald, and several others; Robinson,[393] III. p. 543 ff., and Later Researches, p. 457 ff.; Saulcy, II. p. 491 ff.; Ritter, Erdk. XV. 1, p. 338 ff.). The designation of the situation by τ. παραθαλ. and ἘΝ ὉΡΊΟΙς etc. (where the boundaries of both tribes touch each other), is given with reference to the following prophecy, for which even the position of these boundaries was not a matter of indifference (in answer to Hengstenberg, Christol. II. p. 93), as, in consequence of it, the settlement in Capernaum had reference to the districts of both the tribes.

καταλιπ. τ. Ναζαρ] why, Matthew does not say, but see Luke 4:16 ff. Misconceived in Nazareth, Jesus preferred as a place of settlement the more populous, and, through intercourse with strangers, the more liberally-minded Capernaum, Considering His migratory life and work, neither Matthew 8:5 f. nor Matthew 8:20 can be regarded as not agreeing with the statement in our passage (in answer to Hilgenfeld).

[393] According to Robinson, it is the present Khân Minieh, farther south than Tell Hûm; so also Sepp, Keim.

Matthew 4:15-16. As the evangelist, Matthew 2:23, found a prophecy in support of the settlement at Nazareth, so also now for the removal to Capernaum, viz. Isaiah 8:22; Isaiah 9:1 (quoted from memory, but adhering to the LXX.): The land of Zdbulon and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles, the people which sat in darkness, and so on.

γῆ is not the vocative, but the nominative, corresponding to ὁ λαός, etc., Matthew 4:16. The article was not required; see Winer, p. 114 f. [E. T. 22]. As, by the ὁδὸν θαλάσσης, the τὴν παραθαλασσίαν expressed of Capernaum in Matthew 4:13 is prophetically established, so must θαλάσσης, in the sense of the evangelist, refer to the Sea of Galilee, the Lake of Gennesareth. These words, namely, determine the situation of γῆ Ζαβ. and γῆ Νεφθ., and are to be translated seawards. The absolute accusat. ὁδόν is quite Hebraistic, like רֶּרֶךְ in the sense of versus (Ezekiel 8:5; Ezekiel 40:20; Ezekiel 41:11 f., Ezekiel 42:1 ff.; 1 Kings 8:48; 2 Chronicles 6:38; Deuteronomy 1:2; Deuteronomy 1:19),—a usage which is partly retained in the LXX. 1 Kings 8:48, ὁδὸν γῆς αὐτων, in the direction of their land; exactly so in 2 Chronicles 6:38, and most probably also in Deuteronomy 1:19. In this sense has the evangelist also understood רֶּרֶךְ הַיָם in the original text of the passage before us; so also Aquila and Theodotion, not the LXX., according to B (in A, by an interpolation). No completely corresponding and purely Greek usage is found, as the accusatives of direction, in Bernhardy, p. 144 f., comp. Kühner, II. 1, p. 268 f., do not stand independent of a verb. πέραν τοῦ Ἰορδ. is not, like ὁδὸν θαλ, a determination of the position of γῆ Ζαβ. and γῆ Νεφθ., as these tribes were situated on this side the Jordan, while πέραν (in answer to Bengel, Kuinoel, Linder in the Stud. u. Krit. 1862, p. 553) can never signify on this side (Crome, Beitr. p. 83 ff.); but it designates, after these two lands, a new land as the theatre of the working of Jesus, viz. Peraea (comp. on Matthew 4:25), whose customary designation was עבר הירדן, πέραν τοῦ Ἰορδάνου—that is, the land east of Jordan. The evangelist includes this land as well as Γαλιλ. τ. ἐθνῶν, because it stands in the prophetic passage along with the others (not with reference to the Peraean ministry of Jesus, de Wette, Bleek, which has no place here), leaving it, besides, to the reader to decide that it was only in γῆ Ζαβουλὼν … θαλάσσης that the specific element of locality which was to be demonstrated from the prophecies was contained. The citation, moreover, which specially sets forth that Jesus; after He had quitted Nazareth, settled at Capernaum, on the borders of Zebulon and Naphtali, in their telic connection with a divine prediction (ἵνα of the divine determination), shows in this very circumstance the Messianic fulfilment of the historical relation of the prophetic declaration, according to which there was announced to northern Galilee safety and salvation from the oppression of the Assyrians, and consequently theocratical, political salvation.

Γαλ. τ. ἐθνῶν] נְּלִיל הַנּוֹיִם (district of the heathen), that is, in keeping with the originally appellative term גליל, which had become a proper name, Upper Galilee, in the neighbourhood of Phoenicia, inhabited by a mixed population of heathens (Strabo, xvi. p. 760) and Jews. 1Ma 5:15 : Γαλιλ. ἀλλοφύλων. Its geographical limits are defined by Joseph. Bell. iii. 3. 1.

Matthew 4:16. Ὁ λαὸς ὁ καθήμενος, κ.τ.λ.] In opposition to Γαλιλαία τῶν ἐθνῶν, whose inhabitants are characterized as darkened, that is, devoid of divine truth, and sunk in ignorance and sin. The great light, however, which these darkened ones saw is Jesus.

καὶ τοῖς καθημένοις, κ.τ.λ.] repeats the same thought, with the climactic designation of darkness: ἐν χώρᾳ κ. σκιᾷ θανάτου, in the land and darkness, which belong to death. Death, that is, spiritual death (Matthew 8:22, see on Luke 15:24), the negation of that living activity which recognises the truth and is morally determined, is personified; the land, whose inhabitants are spiritually dead, belongs to it as the realm of its government, and darkness surrounds it. The common interpretation of it as ἓν διὰ δυοῖν: “in regione et in spissis quidem tenebris = in regione spissis tenebris obducta” (Fritzsche), is, indeed, admissible (see Fritzsche, Exc. IV. p. 856; Nägelsbach on Hom. Il. iii. 100), but unnecessary, and takes away from the poetic description, which is certainly stronger and more vivid if θανάτου is connected not merely with σκιᾷ (צַלְמָוֶת, infernalis obscuritas, i.e. crassissima), but also with χώρᾳ. On the significant καθήμενος, comp. Lam. l.c. Pind. Ol. i. 133: ἐν σκότῳ καθήμενος. “Sedendi verbum aptum notandae solitudini inerti” (Bengel). Comp. especially, Jacobs, ad Anthol. VI. p. 397; Bremi, ad Dem. Phil. I. p. 119. Nägelsbach on Hom. Il. i. 134.

αὐτοῖς] see Winer, p. 139 f. [E. T. 265]; Buttmann, p. 125 [E. T. 381].

Matthew 4:17. Ἀμὸ τότε] from that time onwards—that is, after this return to Nazareth and Capernaum. It determines the commencement of the preaching not merely from Capernaum onwards. In the N. T. ἀπὸ τότε stands only here, Matthew 16:21, Matthew 26:16; Luke 16:16. More frequently in the writers of the κοινή, LXX. Psalm 93:2; Wetstein in loc. Not in classical writers. Phrynichus, ed. Lobeck, p. 461.

βας. τῶν οὐρανῶν] See on Matthew 3:2. Jesus in the presence of the people does not yet designate Himself as the Messiah, but announces in quite a general way the nearness of the Messianic kingdom, the divinely-ordained bearer of which He knew Himself to be; this is quite in keeping with the humility and wisdom of His first appearance, when He resumed the preaching of John. The view, that at the beginning He did not regard Himself as the Messiah, but only as a forerunner like John, and only at a later time appropriated to Himself the Messianic idea (Strauss, Schenkel), is in contradiction to all the four Gospels. But in His self-attestation as the Messiah He proceeded to work, according to the Synoptics, in a more gradual manner than He did according to John. Comp. Gess, Christi Person u. Werk, I. p. 247 ff.

Matthew 4:18. Comp. Luke 5:1 ff.

θάλασς. τῆς Γαλιλ.] Lake of Gennesareth or Tiberias (see on John 6:1) is 140 stadia long and 40 broad, with romantic environs, and abounding in fish (Josephus, Bell. iii. 10. 7), about 500 feet below the level of the Mediterranean. See Robinson, Pal. III. pp. 499, 509; Ritter, Erdk. XV. 1, p. 284 ff.; Rüetschi in Herzog’s Encykl. V.; Keim, Gesch. J. I. p. 599 ff.

τὸν λεγόμ. Πέτρον] not a ὕστεριν πρότερον, but see on Matthew 16:18. That the evangelists always have (with the exception of the diplomatic passage, John 1:43) the name Peter, which in Paul is certainly found only in Galatians 2:7 f., not Cephas, is explained in the case of Matthew by the circumstance that his Gospel is only a translation, and that at the time of its composition the Greek name had become the common one.

Matthew 4:19-20. Δεῦτε ὀπίσω μου] come here after me! לְכוּ אַחֲרַי (2 Kings 6:19; 1 Kings 11:5), be my pupils. The disciples were in constant attendance on their teacher; Schoettgen, Hor. in loc.

ποιήσω … ἀνθρώπων] I will put you in a position to gain men, that they may become members of the kingdom of the Messiah. Words borrowed from the domain of hunting and fishing (Jeremiah 16:16) often denote the winning over of souls for themselves or others. Wetstein and Loesner, Hemsterhusius, ad Lucian. Dial. Mort. viii.; Burmann, ad Phaedr. iv. 4. Comp. on 2 Corinthians 11:20. Here the typical phraseology suggested itself from the circumstances.

εὐθέως] belongs to ἀφέντες, not to ἠκολ.

ἠκολ.] as disciples.

καταρτίζ., either arranging (Bengel) or repairing (Vulgate and most commentators). We cannot determine which; Luke has ἀπέπλυναν.

REMARK.

The want of harmony between Matthew 4:18 ff. and John 1:35 ff. is to be recognised, and is not (as the Fathers of the church, Kuinoel, Gratz, Olshausen, Hoffmann, Krabbe, Neander, Ebrard, Arnoldi, Luthardt, Bleek, Riggenbach, Lange, Ewald, Hausrath, Märcker, have attempted) to be removed by supposing that in Matthew it is a second calling of the apostles in question that is recorded, viz. that they had already been at an earlier date (John 1:35 ff.) disciples of Jesus in the wider sense of the word, but that now for the first time they had become so in the narrower sense—that is, had become apostles. Comp. on John, remark after ch. 1. Matthew does not even agree with Luke 5:4 ff. See remarks on the passage, and Keim, Gesch. J. II. p. 215. We must in any case (in answer to Baur, Hilgenfeld) seek the true history of the occurrence in John, in whose account a merely preliminary adherence to Jesus is the less to be thought of, that immediately afterwards οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ go with Him to Cana (ii. 2), to Capernaum (ii. 12), and to Jerusalem (ii. 17, 22). This also in, answer to Liicke on John, I. p. 466 f., and to Wieseler, who distinguishes a threefold act in the selection of the disciples: the preliminary calling in John 1:35 ff.; the setting apart to be constant attendants, Matthew 4:18 ff; Matthew 9:9 ff.; and the selection of the Twelve to be apostles, Matthew 10:2-4. Wieseler (chronol. Synopse, p. 278) lays especial weight on the circumstance that John names τοὺς δώδεκα for the first time in John 6:67. But John in general, with the exception of this passage (and the John 6:70 and John 6:71 belonging to it), only once again expressly mentions the τοὺς δώδεκα (viz. in John 20:21), which is determined by the antithetic interest in the context. Especially in John 6:67 are the Twelve opposed to those others, many of whom had deserted Him. Previously, however, John had no opportunity, where this or any other antithetical relation might give him occasion, to give prominence to the number of the Twelve.

Besides, the history of the calling in Matthew, if it were not in contradiction to John, would by no means bear in itself a mythical character (Strauss finds in it a copy of the call of Elisha by Elijah, 1 Kings 19:19 ff.), but is to be explained from the great, directly overwhelming impression made by the appearance of Jesus on minds prepared for it, which Matthew himself experienced (Matthew 9:9); and this also is to be applied to the Johannine account. This narrative, which Schenkel and Keim relegate to the sphere of free invention, does not exclude the profound and certainly original words, “fishers of men,” which may have proceeded from the mouth of Jesus to His first called disciples on that day, John 1:40; and upon the basis of these words the narrative of the call, as it is preserved in Matthew and Mark, might easily be formed.

Matthew 4:23-24 serve by way of introduction to the Sermon on the Mount, where the description is manifestly exaggerated as regards the time of the first ministry of Jesus, and betray the work of a later hand in the redaction of our Gospel. Comp. Matthew 9:35.

The synagogues were places of assembly for public worship, where on Sabbaths and feast days (at a later period, also on the second and fifth days of the week, Jerusalem Megillah, f. 75. 1; Babylonian Bava Cama, f. 82. 1) the people met together for prayer, and to listen to the reading of portions of the Old Testament, which were translated and explained in the vernacular dialect. With the permission of the president, any one who was fitted might deliver addresses. Vitringa, de synagoga veterum, Franecker 1696; Keil, Archäol. § 30; Leyrer in Herzog’s Encykl. XV. p. 299 ff.; Keim, Gesch. J. I. p. 432 ff.

αὐτῶν] of the Galileans.

πᾶσαν] every kind of sickness which was brought to Him. See Hermann, ad Viger. p. 728, μαλακία, weakness, deprivation of strength through sickness. Herod. Vit. Hom. 36, and often in the LXX. Comp. μαλακίζομαι and μαλακιῶ, Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 389. In the N. T. only in Matthew (Matthew 10:35, Matthew 10:1).

ἐν τῷ λαῷ] belongs to θεραπ. Comp. Acts 5:12; Acts 6:8.

Observe that such summary accumulations of the activity of Jesus in healing as Matthew 5:23 f. (Matthew 8:16, Matthew 12:15) are not mentioned in John’s Gospel. They are, moreover, especially at so early a date, not in keeping with the gradual progress of the history, although explicable enough in the case of a simple historian, who, easily anticipating the representation which he had formed from the whole history, gives a summary statement in the account of a single portion of the narrative.