聖書注解書

この章には次のことが記されている。一、ユダヤの教師たちが提起した迷信的な観念から安息日に関する第四戒をきよめ、それを弁護すること。必要とあわれみのわざはその日になされるべきことを示される（マタイ12:1-13）。二、奇跡を行う際の私たちの主イエスの慎重さ、へりくだり、自己否認（マタイ12:14-21）。三、悪霊追い出しを悪魔との契約に帰した、律法学者とパリサイ人の冒涜的な難癖と中傷に対するキリストの答え（マタイ12:22-37）。四、天からのしるしを示すようキリストに挑んだ、律法学者とパリサイ人の誘惑的な要求に対するキリストの答え（マタイ12:38-45）。五、キリストの親族と縁者に関するキリストの判断（マタイ12:46-50）。

Jesus and his disciples go through the cornfields on the Sabbath, and the latter pluck and eat some of the ears, at which the Pharisees take offense, Matthew 12:1, Matthew 12:2. Our Lord vindicates them, Matthew 12:3-8. The man with the withered hand cured, Matthew 12:9-13. The Pharisees seek his destruction, Matthew 12:14. He heals the multitudes, and fulfils certain prophecies, Matthew 12:15-21. Heals the blind and dumb demoniac, Matthew 12:22, Matthew 12:23. The malice of the Pharisees reproved by our Lord, Matthew 12:24-30. The sin against the Holy Ghost, Matthew 12:31, Matthew 12:32. Good and bad trees known by their fruits-evil and good men by their conduct, Matthew 12:33-37. Jonah, a sign of Christ's death and resurrection, Matthew 12:38-40. The men of Nineveh and the queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment against the Jews, Matthew 12:41, Matthew 12:42. Of the unclean spirit, Matthew 12:43-45. Christ's mother and brethren seek him, Matthew 12:46-50.

CHAPTER 12.

CONFLICTS WITH THE PHARISEES.

This chapter delineates the growing alienation between Jesus and the Pharisees and scribes. The note of time (ἐν ἐκείνῷ τῷ καιρῷ, Matthew 12:1) points back to the situation in which the prayer Matthew 11:25-30 was uttered (vide Matthew 12:25, where the same expression is used). All the incidents recorded reveal the captious mood of Israel’s “saints and sages”. They have now formed a thoroughly bad opinion of Jesus and His company. They regard Him as immoral in life (Matthew 11:19); irreligious, capable even of blasphemy (assuming the divine prerogative of forgiving sin, Matthew 9:3); an ally of Satan even in His beneficence (Matthew 12:24). He can do nothing right. The smallest, most innocent action is an offence.

CHAPTER 12

Matthew 12:3. ἐπείνασε] Elz. and Fritzsche insert αὐτός, against decisive testimony. From Mark 2:25; Luke 6:3.

Matthew 12:4. ἔφαγεν] Tisch. 8 : ἔφαγον, only according to B א. Altered to suit what follows.

οὕς] Lach. Tisch.: ὅ, after B D 13, 124, Cant. 12 :Harl.* Correctly; the Received text is a correction in accordance with Mark and Luke.

Matthew 12:6.

μείζων] B D E G K M S U V Γ Π, Curss. and Fathers: μεῖζον. So Fritzsche, Scholz, Lachm. Tisch. Authority and exegesis favour the neuter, by way of explaining which the masculine would readily suggest itself.

Matthew 12:8. Before τοῦ σαββάτου Elz. inserts καί, which has been deleted in accordance with decisive testimony. From Mark and Luke.

Matthew 12:10. ἦν τήν] is certainly wanting in B C א, while Vulg. and Codd. of the It. Copt. leave it doubtful whether they did not read simple ἦν. Ἦν τήν is deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. Correctly. The brevity of Matthew’s statement was supplemented from Mark 3:1, and hence ἐκεῖ came to be inserted between ἦν and τήν (by others at a different place).

Matthew 12:11. Lachm., following inadequate testimony, reads ἐγείρει instead of ἐγερεῖ. An error on the part of the transcriber.

Matthew 12:14. The following arrangement, ἐξελθόντες δὲ οἱ Φαρ. συμβ. ἔλ. κατ. αὐτοῦ (B C D A א, Curss. Syr. Copt. It. Vulg. Eus. Chrys. Fritzsche, Gersd. Lachm. Tisch.), is to be preferred to that of the Received text (οἱ δ. Φ. ς. ἔλ. κ. ἀ. ἐξ.), as being simpler and more in keeping with Matthew’s style.

Matthew 12:15. ὄχλοι] omitted in B א, Vulg. It. Eus., deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. Homoeoteleuton.

Matthew 12:17. With Lachm. and Tisch. we ought to adopt ἵνα instead of ὅπως, in accordance with B C D א, 1, 33, Or. Eus.; ὅπως was introduced for sake of variety.

Matthew 12:18. εἰς ὅν] Lachm. and Tisch. 8 (see note of the latter): ὅν, after B א* and several Curss. On inadequate testimony, for εἰς would be readily dropped out, from a mechanical effort to conform the construction to ὃν ᾑρέτισα; ἐν ᾧ in D is a gloss.

Matthew 12:21. τῷ ὀνόματι] Elz. Fritzsche: ἐν τῷ ὀνόμ., against decisive testimony. ἐν is an interpolation, as is also ἐπί in Eus. and several Curss.

Matthew 12:22. τὸν τυφλὸν καὶ κωφόν] Lachm. and Tisch. have merely τὸν κωφόν (B D א, Copt. Syrcur Cant. Corb. 1, Germ. 1). But λαλεῖν coming first in what follows gave rise partly to the omission of τυφλόν, partly to the inverted arrangement: κωφὸν καὶ τυφλόν (L X Δ, Curss. Syr. Arm.).

Matthew 12:28. The order ἐν πνεύμ. θεοῦ ἐγώ, as against that of the Received text, ἐγὼ ἐν πνεύμ., is supported by decisive testimony (less adequately the arrangement of Lachm. and Tisch.: κριταὶ ἔσονται ὑμῶν, in Matthew 12:27).

Matthew 12:29. In accordance with B C* X, Curss., Lachm. and Tisch. have ἁρπάσαι instead of διαρπάσει. The reading of the Received text is adopted from Mark. In what follows Lachm. has ἁρπάσει instead of διαρπάσει; so also Tisch. 7; but according to testimony that is far too inadequate. Tisch. 8, following D G K Π א, Curss., reads διαρπάσῃ. But still the evidence in favour of διαρπάσει remains so strong, that there is but the more reason to look upon διαρπάσῃ as a supposed grammatical correction.

Matthew 12:31. Tisch. 8, following Lachm., has indeed also deleted the second τοῖς ἀνθρώποις (after B א, Curss. Verss. and a few Fathers); it is, however, to be preserved as a solemn yet superfluous repetition.

Matthew 12:35. Elz., against decisive testimony, inserts τῆς καρδίας after the first θησαυροῦ. A gloss. But with Tisch. 8, and on the strength of sufficient testimony, τά before ἀγαθά is to be maintained, in opposition to Griesb. Lachm. Tisch. 7. The article came to be omitted from a desire to conform to the second clause.

Matthew 12:36. The reading λαλήσουσιν, adopted by Tisch. (B C א), is to be traced to the futures which follow.

Matthew 12:38. With Lachm. and Tisch. αὐτῷ should be inserted after ἀπεκρίθ., in accordance with B C D L M א, Curss. and most Verss. and Chrys. Perhaps it was omitted from being considered unnecessary.

καὶ Φαρις.] is deleted by Lachm. on too inadequate testimony.

Matthew 12:44. The arrangement: εἰς τ. οἶκ. μ. ἐπιστρ. (Lachm. Tisch.), as opposed to that of the Received text (ἐπιστρ. ἐ. τ. ὀ. μ.), finds testimony sufficiently strong in B D Z א. Comp. Luke.

ἐλθόν] D F G X Γ, Curss.: ἐλθών. So Fritzsche and Tisch. Correctly; the reading of the Received text is here and in Luke 11:25 a grammatical correction.

Matthew 12:46. δέ] omitted in B א, Curss. Vulg. It. Deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. 8. But how easily may it have been omitted at the beginning of the new section (one reading even begins with αὐτοῦ)!

Matthew 12:48. εἰπόντι] Fritzsche, Lachm. Tisch.: λέγοντι, after B D Z Π א, Curss. Correctly. The former has crept in mechanically, in conformity with Matthew 12:47.

Mt 12:1-8.

安息日に 麦穂を 摘む。 ( =

Mr 2:23-28; Lu 6:1-5)。

これが起こった時期は、出来事自体によって決定される。熟した麦穂は収穫の直前にのみ畑に見出される。ここでは大麦の収穫、すなわち私たちの三月の終わりと四月の初めが明らかに意図されている。それは過越の季節と一致した。小麦の収穫が五旬節と一致したように。しかしルカにおいて

(Lu 6:1)

は、彼が用いている特殊な言葉の意味を確信できるなら、さらに明確な時のしるしを持つ。「そして（彼は言う）安息日に、第一・第二のことが起こった」—というのがその言葉の正当な訳であり、私たちの訳のように「最初の安息日の後の第二の安息日」ではない。これが何を意味するかについてのさまざまな推測のうち、SCALIGERのものが最も承認されており、私たちが考えるにも最も困難がない。すなわち、過越の第二の日以降の最初の安息日。言い換えれば、過越の第二の日—それ自体が安息日であった—から次の祭り、五旬節の祭りまで数えるべき七つの安息日

(Le 23:15, 16; De 16:9, 10)

の最初のものである。この場合、伝道者の意味する日は過越と五旬節の間に介在する七つの安息日の最初のものである。そして私たちが

Joh 5:1

で言及される「祭り」を過越とみなし、したがって主の公の奉仕の間の第二のものとみなすのが正しいなら（

Joh 5:1

参照）、この麦穂を摘むことは、疑いなく主がエルサレムでパリサイ人の怒りを煽った

Joh 5:19-47

に記録される場面と説教の直後に起こったに違いない。それは主に、彼らの怒りを避けて北へ出発することを促したであろう。ここに、したがって、私たちは主が畑におられるのを見出す—おそらくガリラヤへの道中に。

1. そのとき、イエスは安息日に麦畑を通られた—「麦畑を」

(Mr 2:23; Lu 6:1)。

弟子たちは空腹になった—正規の食事の前に空腹になるというのではなく。明らかに食糧不足からであった。というのも、イエスは彼らが麦穂を摘んで食べることを必要の訴えに基づいて擁護されたからである。

そして麦穂を摘んで食べ始めた—「手で揉りながら」

(Lu 6:1)。

Matthew 12:1-8。これらの節に含まれる記事は、Mark 2:23-28 と Luke 6:1-5 にも記録されている。

そのころ――ルカ（Luk 6:1）は、その時をより具体的に定めている。彼は、それが「初めの安息日後の第二の安息日」であったと言う。これを理解するためには、「過越の祭」が「アビブ」の月、すなわちニサンの月に守られたことを述べておくのが適切である。これは三月の後半と四月の初めに当たる。この祭は、その月の十四日に始まって七日間行われた、Exodus 12:1-28、Exodus 23:15。過越の週の「第二」の日に、律法は、収穫の初穂として「大麦」の一束をささげることを要求していた、Leviticus 23:10-11。この日から「五旬節（ペンテコステ）」の祭まで七週間が数えられた、Leviticus 23:15-16。これは七七節とも呼ばれ、Deuteronomy 16:10、また収穫の祭とも呼ばれた、Exodus 23:16。それゆえ、過越の祭、すなわち種入れぬパンの祭のこの第二の日は、彼らが五旬節に向かって数え始める起点であった。その翌週の安息日は、この数え方における最初の安息日の後の「第二の安息日」となる。キリストが麦畑の間を通られたと記されているのは、疑いなくこの時のことである。さらに述べておくべきことは、ユダヤでは大麦の収穫は五月の初めごろに始まり、大麦と小麦の収穫はともに二十日ごろまでに終わることである。大麦は四月の初めには十分に穂が出ている。それゆえ、この記事には、一年の季節の点で不自然なところはない。この祭は常にエルサレムで行われた。

麦畑の間を通って――「大麦」あるいは「小麦」の間を、ということである。私たちの聖書翻訳において用いられている「corn（穀物）」という語は、私たちの用法での「トウモロコシ（maize、Indian corn）」を指してはいない。トウモロコシはアメリカ大陸の発見まで知られておらず、翻訳者たちがそれについて何かを知っていた可能性はほとんどない。「corn」という語は、今日のイングランドでもそうであるように、小麦、ライ麦、カラスムギ、大麦に適用された。これは、彼らが穀粒をもみがらから分けるために「手でこすって」食べたという事情を説明する、Luke 6:1。

At that time Jesus went on the Sabbath-day through the corn - "The time is determined by Luke in these words, εν σαββατω δευτεροπρωτω, that is, on the Sabbath from the second-first.

"Provision was made by the Divine law that the sheaf of first-fruits should be offered on the second day of the pass-over week, Leviticus 23:10, Leviticus 23:11. On the morrow after the Sabbath, the priest shall shake (or wave) it. Not on the morrow after the ordinary Sabbath of the week, but the morrow after the first of the pass-over week, which was a Sabbatic day, Exodus 12:16; Leviticus 23:7. Hence the seventy, επαυριον της πρωτης, the morrow of the first day; the Chaldee, the morrow after the holy day. The rabbins, Solomon and Menachen, have it, On the morrow after the first day of the pass-over feast; of which mention had been made in the verses foregoing.

"But now, from the second day of the pass-over solemnity, wherein the sheaf was offered, were numbered seven weeks to pentecost: for the day of the sheaf, and the day of pentecost did mutually respect each other; for on this second day of the pass-over, the offering of the sheaf was supplicatory, and by way of prayer, beseeching a blessing upon the new corn, and leave to eat it, and to pot in the sickle into the standing corn. Now, the offering of the first-fruit loaves on the day of pentecost, (Leviticus 23:15-17), did respect the giving of thanks for the finishing and housing of the barley-harvest. Therefore, in regard of this relation, these two solemnities were linked together, that both might respect the harvest; that, the harvest beginning; this, the harvest ended: this depended on that, and was numbered seven weeks after it. Therefore, the computation of the time coming between could not but carry with it the memory of that second day of the pass-over week; and hence pentecost is called the feast of weeks, Deuteronomy 16:10. The true calculation of the time between could not otherwise be retained, as to Sabbaths, but by numbering thus: this is σαββατον δευτεροπρωτον, the first Sabbath after the second day of the pass-over. This is δευτεροδευρερον, the second Sabbath after that second day. And so of the rest. In the Jerusalem Talmud, the word שבת פרוטוגמייא shebeth protogamiya, the Sabbath, πρωτογαμιας, of the first marriage, is a composition not very unlike." Lightfoot.

His disciples were an hungered - Were hungry. The former is a mode of expression totally obsolete. How near does the translation of this verse come to our ancient mother-tongue, the Anglo-Saxon! - The Healer went on rest-day over acres: truly his learning knights hungred, and they began to pluck the ear and eaten - We may well wonder at the extreme poverty of Christ and his disciples. He was himself present with them, and yet permitted them to lack bread! A man, therefore, is not forsaken of God because he is in want. It is more honorable to suffer the want of all temporal things in fellowship with Christ and his followers, than to have all things in abundance in connection with the world.