Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary
Matthew Henry · 1714
Matthew Henry 사후(1714) 공개 도메인. 디지털판 CC0-1.0.
- 翻訳進捗
- 4,537 / 4,537
- 原文言語
- en
学習資料
複数のパブリックドメイン注解書と scripture.how の韓国語訳を、書巻と章ごとに閲覧できます。注解書を切り替えながら、訳文だけでなく原文と訳文を並べて読むこともできます。
現在の注解書
すべての注解書
23件の注解書
全項目
307,288
翻訳 81,431 件
ライセンス
出典ごとに表示
注解書ごとに原資料、著者、翻訳進捗、ライセンス情報を分けて表示します。scripture.how の韓国語訳・編集物は原文資料とは別に管理されます。
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)
この章、すなわちコリント第二 3章は、その意図において前の章と密接に結び付いている。パウロは前の章(コリント第二 2:14)で、自分が得た成功の中にあって常に凱旋する理由があり、神が常に自分の労苦を祝福してくださったと述べており、特に前の章の終わり(コリント第二 2:17)では、神の言葉を混ぜ物するある人々の行いと対照して、自分の真摯さについて語っていた。これは一部の人々には、彼が自分を彼らに推薦しようとするかのように、また彼らの好意を得るためにこう語ったかのように見えたかもしれない。また、コリントにいた偽教師たちは、おそらくユダヤからの推薦状によってそこに紹介されたものであろう。これに答えてパウロは、これが自分の意図ではなかったとほのめかし(コリント第二 3:1)、彼らに宛てた推薦状は必要ないと述べる(コリント第二 3:2)。なぜなら(コリント第二 3:2-3)、彼ら自身が彼の推薦状だったからである。彼ら自身が、彼の熱心、忠実さ、労苦の成功の最良の証拠であった。彼は、自分が使徒の職にふさわしいことの最良の証明として、彼らに訴えることができたのである。彼は(コリント第二 3:4)、彼らの間での自分の成功は、神に信頼する根拠、すなわち自分が受け入れられていることの証拠であったと言う。しかし、自分の力に頼り、自分のしたことを誇っているように見えるおそれがあるので、彼は(コリント第二 3:5)、自分の成功は自分の持っていたどんな力や自分の技量によるものでもなく、全く神から受けた助けによるものであったと言う。彼を説教する資格のある者とし、新しい契約の有能な奉仕者となるような恵みを与えてくださったのは神である、と彼は言うのである(コリント第二 3:6)。
コリントにいた偽教師たちはユダヤ的な出身者であったため、モーセの律法と制度を、より優れた明瞭さを持つものとして、さらにはキリストの福音に勝るものとして推賞していた可能性がなくはない。そこでパウロは(コリント第二 3:7-11)、モーセの律法と制度がこの点において福音にはるかに劣ることを示す機会を得る。モーセのものは死の務めであり(コリント第二 3:7)、栄光あるものではあったが廃されるべきものであり(コリント第二 3:7)、それゆえ御霊の務めは、はるかに栄光あるものとみなされるべきであり(コリント第二 3:8)、一方は罪に定める務め、他方は義の務めであり(コリント第二 3:9)、一方は他方にあまりに勝られており、比較の上では栄光を持たず(コリント第二 3:10)、前者は廃されるが後者は存続するのであるから、後者ははるかに栄光あるものであった(コリント第二 3:11)。
モーセの律法と福音との間のこの重要な相違についてのこの述懐は、モーセの制度がユダヤ人自身に及ぼした効果を示すことによって、さらに説明される(コリント第二 3:12-15)。その効果は、彼らを盲目にすることであった。モーセはその顔にベールを掛け(コリント第二 3:13)、その結果、国民は旧約聖書を読むときに盲目とされ、自分たちの聖書の真の意味について正しい見解を持たなかったのである(コリント第二 3:14-15)。
しかしパウロは、そのベールは取り除かれるべきものであったと言う(コリント第二 3:16-18)。それが取り除かれることは神の御旨であった。その民が再び主に立ち返るとき、それは取り除かれる(コリント第二 3:16)。それは主の御霊のあるところでなされる(コリント第二 3:17)。それは実際、すべての真のキリスト者に関してなされたのである(コリント第二 3:18)。彼らは、鏡にあるように主の栄光を見ることを許され、同じ姿に変えられた。同じ主題はコリント第二 4章で続けられ、そこでパウロは、モーセの制度と比較した福音のこの明確な啓示の、キリスト者の務めに対する効果を説明する。
The apostle shows, in opposition to his detractors, that the faith and salvation of the Corinthians were sufficient testimony of his Divine mission; that he needed no letters of recommendation, the Christian converts at Corinth being a manifest proof that he was an apostle of Christ, 2 Corinthians 3:1-3. He extols the Christian ministry, as being infinitely more excellent than that of Moses, 2 Corinthians 3:4-12. Compares the different modes of announcing the truth under the law and under the Gospel: in the former it was obscurely delivered; and the veil of darkness, typified by the veil which Moses wore, is still on the hearts of the Jews; but when they turn to Christ this veil shall be taken away, 2 Corinthians 3:13-16. On the contrary, the Gospel dispensation is spiritual; leads to the nearest views of heavenly things; and those who receive it are changed into the glorious likeness of God by the agency of his Spirit, 2 Corinthians 3:17, 2 Corinthians 3:18.
INTRODUCTION TO 2 Corinthians 3
In this chapter the apostle clears himself from the charge of arrogance and self-commendation, and ascribes both the virtue and efficacy of his ministry, and his qualifications for it, to the Lord; and forms a comparison between the ministration of the Gospel, and the ministration of the law, showing the preferableness of the one to the other; and consequently how much more happy and comfortable the state and condition of the saints under the Gospel dispensation is, than under the legal one: on account of what the apostle had said in the latter part of the preceding chapter, concerning the excellency, usefulness, and success of the Gospel ministry, he foresaw an objection would arise; that he and his fellow ministers were proud and arrogant, and commended themselves, which was unseemly, and not agreeably to the character they bore; which objection he obviates, 2 Corinthians 3:1, by putting some questions, signifying that they were not guilty of vain boasting; nor did they need any commendations of their own, or others, nor any letters to recommend them, either from Corinth to other places, or thither: a practice which, he suggests, the false teachers made use of; and in 2 Corinthians 3:2 he gives the reason why they did not stand in need of such letters, because the members of the church at Corinth were their epistle or letter, declaring to all men the efficacy and success of their ministry among men; but lest he should be charged with arrogating to himself and others, he declares, 2 Corinthians 3:3 that though the Corinthians were their epistle, yet not so much theirs as Christ's; Christ was the author and subject, they only were instruments; the writing was not human, but the writing of the Spirit of God; and that not upon outward tables, such as the law was written upon, but upon the tables of men's hearts, which only God can reach; however, that they had been useful, successful, and instrumental in the conversion of souls, through the ministry of the word, that he was confident of, 2 Corinthians 3:4 though the sufficiency and ability to think, study, and preach, were not of themselves, and still less to make the word effectual for conversion and comfort, but of God, 2 Corinthians 3:5 wherefore he ascribes all fitness, worthiness, and ability to preach the Gospel, to the grace and power of God, by which they were made ministers of it; and hence he takes occasion to commend the excellency of the Gospel ministry above that of the law, which he does by observing their different names and effects; the Gospel is the New Testament or covenant, or an exhibition of the covenant of grace in a new form; the law is the Old Testament, or covenant, which is vanished away; which, though not expressed here, is in 2 Corinthians 3:14 the Gospel is spirit, the law the letter; the one gives life, and the other kills, 2 Corinthians 3:6 wherefore the apostle argues from the one to the other, that if there was a glory in the one which was only a ministration of death, as the law was, 2 Corinthians 3:7 then the Gospel, which was a ministration of spiritual things, and of the Spirit of God himself, must be more glorious, 2 Corinthians 3:8 and if that was glorious which was a ministration of condemnation, as the law was to guilty sinners; much more glorious must be the Gospel, which is a ministration of the righteousness of Christ, for the justification of them, 2 Corinthians 3:9 yea, such is the surpassing glory of the Gospel to the law, that even the glory of the law is quite lost in that of the Gospel, and appears to have none in comparison of that, 2 Corinthians 3:10 to which he adds another argument, taken from the abolition of the one, and the continuance of the other; that if there was a glory in that which is abolished, there must be a greater in that which continues, 2 Corinthians 3:11 and from hence the apostle proceeds to take notice of another difference between the law and the Gospel, the clearness of the one, and the obscurity of the other; the former is signified by the plainness of speech used by the preachers of it, 2 Corinthians 3:12 and the latter by the veil which was over Moses's face, when he delivered the law to the children of Israel; the end of which they could not look to, and which is a further proof of the obscurity of it, 2 Corinthians 3:13 as well as of the darkness of their minds; which still continues with the Jews in reading the law, and will do until it is taken away by Christ, 2 Corinthians 3:14 and that there is such a veil of darkness upon the hearts of the Jews, when reading the law of Moses; and that this continues to this day, is again asserted, 2 Corinthians 3:15 and an intimation given that there will be a conversion of them to the Lord, and then it will be removed from them, 2 Corinthians 3:16 and who that Lord is to whom they shall be turned, and by whom they shall have freedom from darkness and bondage, is declared, 2 Corinthians 3:17 and the happy condition of the saints under the Gospel dispensation, through the bright and clear light of it, is observed, 2 Corinthians 3:18 in which the Gospel is compared to a glass; the saints are represented as without a veil looking into it; through which an object is beheld, the glory of the Lord; the effect of which is a transformation of them into the same image by degrees; the author of which grace is the Spirit of the Lord.
Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
CHAPTER 3
2 Corinthians 3:1. ἢ μή] So also Griesb. Lachm. Scholz, Rück. Tisch., following B C D E F G א, min. Vulg. It. Syr. Arr. Copt. Slav. Theodoret, and Latin Fathers. But εἰ μή (Elz. Reiche) has also considerable attestation (A K L, min. Chrys. Damasc. al.), and since after the interrogation the ἤ continuing it occurred to the copyists more readily than the conditional εἰ, the latter, whose explanation is also more difficult, is to be preferred.
The second συστατικῶν (after ὑμῶν) is wanting in A B C א, min. Copt. Arm. Vulg. Chrys. Theodoret, and several Fathers. Deleted by Lachm. and Rück. An addition by way of gloss, which in F G is further increased by ἐπιστολῶν.—2 Corinthians 3:3. καρδίας] So Iren. Orig. Vulg. But A B C D E G L א and many min. have καρδίαις. So Lachm. An error of the copyist after 2 Corinthians 3:2.—2 Corinthians 3:5. ἀφʼ ἑαυτῶν] has its correct position after λογίσ. τι, as is abundantly attested by A D E F G, It. Vulg. Goth. and Latin Fathers (so also Lachm. Tisch. and Rück.). The Recepta after ἰκανοί ἐσμεν, and the position before ἰκανοί in B C א, min. Copt. Arm. Bas. Antioch. are to be regarded as superfluous transpositions to connect the ἀφʼ ἑαυτῶν With ἱκανοί ἐσμεν.—2 Corinthians 3:7. ἐν γράμμασιν] Lachm.: ἐν γράμματι, following B D * F G. A mechanical repetition of the singular from 2 Corinthians 3:6.
Before λίθοις, Elz. Scholz have ἐν. An explanatory addition against decisive evidence.—2 Corinthians 3:9. ἡ διακονία] A C D* F G א, min. Syr. utr. Clar. Germ. Or. Cyr. Ruf.: τῇ διακονίᾳ. So Lachm. and Rück. An interpretation instead of which Sedul. and Ambrosiast. have ex or in ministerio, while others applied the interpreting at δόξα, as still Vulg. Sixtin. Pel. read ἐν δόξῃ.
ἐν δόξῃ] ἐν is wanting in A B C א* (δόξα), 17, 39, 80, Tol. Vulg. ms. Deleted by Lachm., bracketed by Rück. The ἐν slipped in easily from 2 Corinthians 3:8; comp. 2 Corinthians 3:11.—2 Corinthians 3:10. οὐ] Elz.: οὐδέ, against decisive evidence. Originated by the first syllable of the δεδοξ. that follows.—2 Corinthians 3:13. Instead of ἑαυτοῦ, αὐτοῦ is, according to decisive testimony, to be read with Lachm. and Tisch.—2 Corinthians 3:14. ἡμέρας] is wanting in Elz., but has decisive attestation, and was passed over as superfluous (comp. 2 Corinthians 3:15).—2 Corinthians 3:15. ἀναγινώσκεται] Lachm. and Rück.: ἂν ἀναγινώσκηται, in accordance with A B C א, while D E have the subjunctive, but not ἄν. Since the ἄν before ἀναγ. might be introduced through a mistake of the copyist just as easily as it might be left out, we have merely to decide according to the preponderance of the evidence, which proves to be all the more in favour of Lachmann’s reading, because this is supported also by D E with their retention of the subjunctive (without ἄν), while they betray the copyist’s omission of the ἄν.—2 Corinthians 3:17. ἐκεῖ] is wanting in A B C D א* 17, Copt. Syr. Cyr. Nyss. Suspected by Griesb., deleted by Lachm. Tisch. and Rück. An addition of the copyists, who had in mind the current use elsewhere of ἐκεῖ after οὗ (Matthew 18:20; Matthew 18:24; Matthew 18:28; Jam 3:16, al.), an usage not found in Paul. See Romans 4:15; Romans 5:20.
CONTENTS.[154]
This, again, is no recommendation of self; for we need no letters of recommendation, since you yourselves are our letter of recommendation in the higher sense (2 Corinthians 3:1-3). But with this confidence we wish to ascribe our ability not to ourselves, but to God, who has made us able as servants of the new covenant, far exalted over the old covenant (2 Corinthians 3:4-6). How glorious is this service compared with the service of Moses (2 Corinthians 3:7-11)! Hence we discharge it boldly, not like Moses with his veil over his face (2 Corinthians 3:12-13). By this veil the Jews were hardened; for up to the present time they do not discern that the old covenant has ceased (2 Corinthians 3:14-15). But when they are converted to Christ, they will come to unhindered discernment; we Christians, in fact, all behold without hindrance the glory of Christ, and become ourselves partakers of it (2 Corinthians 3:16-18).
[154] See on chap. 3, Krummel in the Stud. und Krit. 1859, p. 39 ff.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
IIコリ3:1-18。
彼の務めに対する神の承認を証明するために必要な唯一の推薦は、コリントの回信者たちそのものである。彼の務めは、いのちと自由の福音が、罪を定める律法にまさるように、モーセの務めにまさる。
1. 私たちが再び自分自身を推薦し始めているのだろうか
(IIコリ5:12)
(コリント人の一部が、彼が第一の手紙でそうしたと言ったであろうか。あるいは、そうし始めた「ある人々」への非難であろうか)。
推薦——推薦状のこと。(参照
IIコリ10:18)。
「ある人々」は、彼に対抗した「多くの」
(IIコリ2:17)
教師たちのうちの特定の人々を指す。彼らは他の教会からの推薦状を持ってコリントに来た。そしてその都市を去る際、コリント人から他の教会への同様の推薦状を得ていた。カルケドン公会議(紀元451年)の第十三教規は、「知られざる都市に来た聖職者は、自分の主教からの推薦状なしには職務を行ってはならない」と定めた。歴史
(徒18:27)
は、本書簡で言及されている慣習の存在を裏付ける。「アポロがアカヤ[コリント]に渡ろうとしたとき、兄弟たち[エペソの]が書き送り、弟子たちに彼を受け入れるよう勧めた」。これは本書簡の約二年前のことであり、コリントの多くがアポロに従う者であると誇っていた
(Iコリ1:12)
ことから考えて、おそらくパウロが言及する事例の一つであろう。
「私たちはまた……」――これは明らかに、一つの反論に応えるためのものである。彼は務めにおける自分の凱旋について(コリント第二 2:14)、また、神の言葉を混ぜ物する多くの者たちの行いと対照しての自分の真摯さと正直さについて(コリント第二 2:17)語ってきた。これらの述懐において自分を誇大に示し、このような仕方でコリント人たちに自分を推薦しようとしているのではないか、と反論されるおそれがあった。これに答えるのが次の諸節である。
「自分を推薦するのですか」――自分自身を推薦する、すなわちあなたがたの好意を得るために自分自身の称賛を語る、ということである。
「あるいは、他のある人々のように……」――おそらく、ユダヤから彼らに推薦状を携えて来た人々のことであろう。コリントの偽教師たちは、もともと国外からの推薦状によってそこに紹介されたのであった。これらは紹介の書簡であり、今日あるのと同様、ギリシヤ人、ローマ人、ユダヤ人の間で一般的であった。宿屋がなく、旅行者が旅先の人々の好意に頼らざるを得なかったため、これらの書簡は通常、旅行しようとする人々に与えられたのである。
「あなたがたからの推薦状」――他の会衆への。ここでパウロによって含意されているのは、自分はそのような書簡を求めなかったこと、それなしに旅をしたこと、そして、自分の熱心と自己否定と成功とに依拠して自分を知らしめ、自分が仕える人々の愛情を得た、ということである。これは単なる紹介状よりもはるかに優れた推薦である。とはいえ、そのような書簡はキリスト者によって与えられることもあり、決して不適切なものではない(使徒の働き 18:27)。しかし、使徒たちが一般的にそれを求め、あるいは用いた様子はない。彼らは、自分たちの奇跡的な賜物と、伴う神の恵みとに依拠して、自分たちを知らしめたのである。
使徒は、自分を称賛しているように見えることについて釈明し、自分自身にあまり多くを帰さず、すべての誉れを神に帰すよう心を配っている(2Co 3:1-5)。次いで彼は旧約と新約を比較し、後者が前者にまさる卓越性を示し(2Co 3:6-11)、そこから福音の奉仕者の務め、および律法の下に生きた者たちよりも福音の下に生きる者たちの優位性を引き出している(2Co 3:12-17)。