성경 주석서

CHAPTER 10

Matthew 10:2. Tisch. 8 has καί before Ἰάκωβος, only according to B א* Syr.

Matthew 10:3. Λεββ. ὁ ἐπικλ. Θαδδ.] Fritzsche: Θαδδ. ὁ ἐπικλ. Λεββ., only according to 13, 346. Changed because Θαδδ. is really the proper noun.[439]

Matthew 10:4. ΚΑΝΑΝΊΤΗς] the form ΚΑΝΑΝΑῖΟς (Lachm. Tisch.) is decisively attested.

Matthew 10:8. ΚΑΘΑΡΊΖΕΤΕ] Elz. inserts ΝΕΚΡΟῪς ἘΓΕΊΡΕΤΕ, which words Griesb. Lachm. and Tisch. 8 (so B C* D א) place after ΘΕΡΑΠΕΎΕΤΕ, while Fritzsche puts them after ἘΚΒΆΛΛΕΤΕ. Correctly struck out by Scholz and Tisch. 7. For besides being suspicious, owing to their omission in C*** E F G K L M S U V X Γ Π and very many Curss., also several versions and Fathers,—a suspicion that is heightened by their diversity of position in the unquestionably important authorities which witness in their favour,—they have the appearance of being an interpolation, which, in accordance with the apostolic narrative (Acts 9:20 ff.), seemed necessary by way of completing the list of miraculous powers that had been conferred. Had the words been original, their contents would in any case have contributed much more to preserve them than to cause their omission.

Matthew 10:10. ῬΆΒΔΟΝ] C E F G K L M P S U V X Δ Π Curss. Copt. Arm. Syr. p. Theoph. have ῬΆΒΔΟΥς. Adopted by Scholz and Tisch. Altered because of the preceding plurals, and because what is spoken applies at the same time to a plurality of persons.

ἘΣΤΙ] should be deleted, see on Luke 10:7.

Matthew 10:19. The reading fluctuates between ΠΑΡΑΔΊΔΩΣΙΝ (Elz. Tisch. 7), ΠΑΡΑΔΏΣΟΥΣΙΝ, and ΠΑΡΑΔῶΣΙΝ (Tisch. 8, after B E* א and Lachm.). The future is adopted from Matthew 10:17; while the present, which is best authenticated, and most in accordance with the sense, would be easily transformed into the aorist by the omission, on the part of the transcribers, of the middle syllable.

ΔΟΘΉΣΕΤΑΙ to ΛΑΛΉΣΕΤΕ] is not found in D L, Curss. Arm. Codd. of It. Or. Cypr. and a few Verss. Bracketed by Lachm. Ancient omission occasioned by the homoioteleuton.

Matthew 10:23. ΦΕΎΓΕΤΕ ΕἸς ΤῊΝ ἌΛΛΗΝ] Griesb.: (ΦΕΎΓΕΤΕ ΕἸς ΤῊΝ ἙΤΈΡΑΝ, ΚἊΝ ἘΚ ΤΑΎΤΗς ΔΙΏΚΩΣΙΝ ὙΜᾶς, ΦΕΎΓΕΤΕ ΕἸς ΤῊΝ ἌΛΛΗΝ,[440] after D L, Curss. and some Fathers and Verss., however, with differences in detail. A continuous extension of the sentence.

Matthew 10:25. ἘΠΕΚΆΛΕΣΑΝ] Elz.: ἘΚΆΛΕΣΑΝ, against decisive testimony. Lachm. again (defended by Rettig in Stud. u. Krit. 1838, p. 477 ff.; Buttmann, ibid. 1860, p. 342 f.) has, instead of the accusative, the dative Τῷ ΟἸΚΟΔΕΣΠΌΤῌ) and ΟἸΚΙΑΚΟῖς, only after B*, which is to be ascribed to a grammarian who took ἘΠΙΚΑΛΕῖΝ as meaning to reproach.

Matthew 10:28. φοβεῖσθε] Elz., Fritzsche: φοβηθῆτε, against decisive testimony. Adopted from Matthew 10:26. Likewise in Matthew 10:31 we ought, with Lachm. and Tisch., to restore φοβεῖσθε in accordance with B D L א, Curss. Or. Cyr.

ἀποκτενόντων] so also Scholz. The ἀποκτεινόντων (B, Or.) of the Received text is condemned by counter testimony as a grammatical correction. But although the form ἀποκτενόντων is supported by important testimony, yet we ought, with Lachm. and Tisch., to follow C D U Γ Δ Π א and Curss. and adopt the Aeolic-Alexandrine form ἀποκτεννόντον (see Sturz, Dial. Al. p. 128), because ἈΠΟΚΤΕΝΌΝΤΩΝ as a present is nowhere found, while an aorist, if the verb had had that form, would have been in this instance without meaning.

Matthew 10:33. The position ΚἈΓῺ ΑὐΤΌΝ (Beng. Lachm. Tisch. 8) is a mechanical alteration on account of Matthew 10:32.

[439] D, 122, Codd. quoted in Augustine, Hesychius, Rufinus, have merely Λεββαῖος. B א, 17, 124, and several versions have only Θαδδαῖος. So Lachm. I regard the simple Λεββαῑος (with Tisch. and also Ewald) as the original reading. The other readings are derived from Mark 3:18, because of the identity of Lebbaeus and Thaddaeus. Comp. Bengel, Appar. crit. Had the simple Θαδδαῖος been the true one, it would have been impossible to see how Λεββαῖος should have been inserted, seeing it does not occur anywhere else in the New Testament. No doubt D and Codd. of It., also Mark 3:18, have Λεββαῖον, but against testimony so decisive that it appears to have come there from our present passage.

[440] Instead of the ἄλλην of the Received text, Lachm. and Tisch. 8, following B א 33, 265, Or. Petr. Ath. have ἑτέραν, which, however, is undoubtedly connected with the above interpolation.

Matthew 10:1. Not the choosing, but merely the mission of the Twelve, is here related; Mark 6:7; Luke 9:1. The choosing (Mark 3:14; Luke 6:13; comp. also John 6:70), which had taken place some time before,—although a still earlier one, viz. that of the five (Matthew 4:18 ff., Matthew 9:9), is recorded,—is assumed, as far as the complete circle of the Twelve, to be generally known, which is certainly an omission on the part of the narrator.

ἐξουσίαν] Authority over unclean spirits. The following ὥστε is epexegetical: so that they would cast them out. But καὶ θεραπεύειν, etc., is not dependent on ὥστε also, but on ἐξουσίαν (1 Corinthians 9:5). Power was given to them both to cure demoniacs and to heal those who suffered from natural disease as well; comp. Matthew 10:8. The manner of imparting this power, whether through a laying on of hands, or breathing on them (John 20:22) through a symbolic act (de Wette), or by communicating to them certain sacred words or signs, or by certain movements of the hands (Ewald), or even by magnetic influences (Weisse), or by the mere effectual word of the Lord (which is more likely, since nothing is specified), is not stated.

On the genitive, comp. Mark 6:7; John 18:2; Sir 10:4.

Matthew 10:2. Δώδεκα] Theophylact: κατὰ τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν δώδεκα φυλῶν; comp. Matthew 19:28. On this occasion, when the mission is understood to take place, it is precisely the designation ἀποστόλων (not occurring elsewhere in Matthew, while in Mark it is found only in Matthew 6:30) that is made choice of, though doubtless also used by Jesus Himself (John 13:16; Luke 6:13), and from that circumstance it gradually came to be employed as the distinguishing official title.

πρῶτος Σίμων] The first is Simon. The further numbering of them ceases, for Matthew mentions them in pairs. The placing of Peter first in all the catalogues of the apostles (Mark 3:16 ff.; Luke 6:14 ff.; Acts 1:13) is not accidental (Fritzsche), but is due to the fact that he and his brother were looked upon as the πρωτόκλητοι (see, however, John 1:41). This accords with the pre-eminence which he had among the apostles as primus inter pares (Matthew 16:16 ff., Matthew 17:1. Matthew 24:19, Matthew 27:26; Matthew 27:37; Matthew 27:40; Luke 8:45; Luke 9:32; Luke 22:31 f.; John 21:15; Acts 1:15; Acts 2:14; Acts 5:3 f., Matthew 8:14, Matthew 10:5, Matthew 15:7; Galatians 1:18; Galatians 2:7), and which was recognised by Jesus Himself. For that they were arranged in the order of their rank is perfectly obvious, not only from the betrayer being uniformly put last, but also from the fact that in all the catalogues James and John, who along with Peter were the Lord’s most intimate friends, are mentioned immediately after that apostle (and Andrew). Moreover, a conjoint view of the four catalogues of the apostles (Ewald, Gesch. Chr. p. 395 ff., Bleek, Keim) will confirm Bengel’s observation, that “universi ordines habent tres quaterniones, quorum nullus cum alio quicquam permutat; turn in primo semper primus est Petrus, in secundo Philippus … in tertio Jacobus Alphaei; in singulis ceteri apostoli loca permutant; proditor semper extremus.”

ὁ λεγόμ. Πέτρος] who is called Peter (Schaeffer, Melet. p. 14); that was his usual apostolic name.

Ἀνδρέας] Greek name (found even in Herod. vi. 126), like Philippus below. Doubtless both originally had Hebrew names which are not recorded.

Matthew 10:3. Βαρθολομαῖος] בַּר תָּלְמַי, son of Tolmai, LXX. 2 Samuel 13:37, patronymic. His proper name was Nathanael; see note on John 1:46, and Keim, II. p. 311.

Θωμᾶς] תְּאֹם, Δίδυμος, twin (John 11:16; John 20:24; John 21:2), perhaps so called from the nature of his birth. In Eusebius and the Acts of Thomas he is called (see Thilo, p. 94 ff.) Ἰούδας Θωμᾶς ὁ καὶ Δίδυμος.

ὁ τελώνης] In reference to Matthew 9:9 without any special object.

ὁ τοῦ Ἀλφαίου] Matthew’s father was likewise called Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but this is a different person; see Introduction, sec. 1.

Λεββαῖος] who must be identical with Judas Jacobi,[441] Luke 6:16 (comp. John 14:22), Acts 1:13; who, however, is not the author of the New Testament epistle bearing that name. Lebbaeus (the courageous one, from לֵב), according to our passsage, had become his regular apostolic name. According to Mark 3:18, he had the apostolic name of ΘΑΔΔΑῖΟς (which must not be taken as the correct reading of the present passage; see the critical notes), and it is in vain to inquire how this twofold appellation has arisen. The name Thaddaeus, however, is not “deflexio nominis Judae, ut rectius hic distingueretur ab Iscariota” (Lightfoot, Wetstein), but the independent name חדאי, which is also currently used in the Talmud (Lightfoot, Schoettgen, Wetstein). There is the less reason to seek for an etymology of ΘΑΔΔ. such as will make the name almost synonymous with ΛΕΒΒ., as if from תַּר (which, however, signifies mamma), or even from שַׁרַּי, one of the names of God, and meaning potens (Ebrard). For the apocryphal but ancient Acts of Lebbaeus, see Tischendorf, Acta ap. apocr. p. 261 ff. According to these, he received the name Θαδδαῖος when John the Baptist baptized him, and was previously known by the name of Lebbaeus. This is in accordance with the reading of the Received text in the case of the present passage, and with the designation in the Constit. apost., Λεββαῖος ὁ ἐπικληθεὶς Θαδδαῖος, 6. 14. 1, 8. 25,—a circumstance which, at the same time, goes to show that the name of the apostle as given in Mark is to be preferred to that found in Matthew

[441] On the relation of the genitive in Judas Jacobi (not brother, but son), see note on Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13. Comp. Nonnus, John 14:22 : Ἰούδας υἱὸς Ἰακώβοιο. The view that this Judas is a different person from Lebbaeus, and that he had succeeded to the place rendered vacant, probably by the death of Lebbaeus (Schleiermacher, Ewald), cannot possibly be entertained, for this reason, that in that case the statement in Luke 6:13 (ἐκλεξάμενος, etc.) would be simply incorrect, which is not to be supposed in connection with a matter so important and generally known (Rufinus, in Praef. ad Origen in ep. ad Rom.). According to Strauss, only the most prominent of the Twelve were known, while the others had places assigned them in conformity with the various traditions that prevailed.

Matthew 10:4. Ὁ καναναῖος] see the critical remarks. Luke calls him ζηλώτης, the (quondam) zealot. Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13; Chald. קַנְאַנִי; Hebr. קַנא; Exodus 20:5; Exodus 34:14; Deuteronomy 4:24. Zealots were a class of men who, like Phinehas (Numbers 25:9), were fanatical defenders of the theocracy; and who, while taking vengeance on those who wronged it, were themselves frequently guilty of great excesses; Ewald, Gesch. Chr. p. 67 f. But the ὁ Καναναῖος (or Κανανίτης, according to the Received text) is not to be explained in this way, inasmuch as this form of the epithet is derived from the name of some place or other: the Canaanite, or Cananaean; comp. Κανανίτης in Strabo, xiv. 5, p. 674 (ἀπὸ κώμης τινος). It cannot be derived from the town of Cana in Galilee (Luther, Calovius); in that case it would require to have taken the form Καναῖος, just as the inhabitants of Κάναι in Aeolis (Strabo, xiii. 1, p. 581) were called Καναῖοι (Parmenides in Athen. 3, p. 76 A). This enigmatical name is to be explained from the fact that, in accordance with his previous character, Simon bore the surname קַנְאָנִי, ζηλώτης, a name which was correctly interpreted by Luke; but, according to another tradition, was erroneously derived from the name of a place, and accordingly came to be rendered ὁ Καναναῖος.

Ἰσκαριώτης] אִישׁ קְרִיּוֹת, a native of Karioth, in the tribe of Judah. Joshua 15:25; Joseph. Antt. vii. 6. 1 : Ἴστοβος (אִישׁ טוֹב). There is no evidence that he was the only one that did not belong to Galilee (which has induced Ewald to think that the place in question is the town of קַרְתָּה (Joshua 21:34) in the tribe of Zebulon. The proposal of Lightfoot, to derive either from אסקורטיא, leather apron, or from אסכרא, strangulation, is indeed recommended by de Wette; but like the interpretation איש שקרים, man of lies (Paulus, Hengstenberg), it is not suited to the Greek form of the word; nor are de Wette’s or Hengstenberg’s objections to the ordinary explanation of the name to be regarded as unanswerable.

ὁ καὶ παραδοὺς αὐτόν] who also delivered him over (not betrayed, in which case we should have had προδούς). A tragic reminiscence, and ever present to the mind! Καί has the force of qui idem; Klotz, ad Devar. p. 636.

Matthew 10:5 ff. From this on to Matthew 10:42 we have the instructions to the Twelve; comp. Mark 6:8 ff., and especially Luke 9:3 ff. As in the case of the Sermon on the Mount, so on this occasion also, Luke’s parallels are irregular in their connection (in ch. 9 connected with the mission of the Twelve, in ch. 10 with the mission of the Seventy). But this is only an additional reason (in answer to Sieffart, Holtzmann) why the preference as respects essential originality—a preference, however, which in no way excludes the idea of the proleptical interweaving of a few later pieces—should also in this instance be given to Matthew, inasmuch as the contents of the passage now before us are undoubtedly taken from his collection of our Lord’s sayings.

The mission itself, to which Luke 20:35 points back, and which for this very reason we should be the less inclined to regard as having taken place repeatedly (Weisse, Ewald), was intended as a preliminary experiment in the independent exercise of their calling. For how long? does not appear. Certainly not merely for one day (Wieseler), although not exactly for several months (Krafft). According to Mark 6:7, they were sent out by twos, which, judging from Luke 10:1, Matthew 21:1, is to be regarded as what originally took place. As to the result, Matthew gives nothing in the shape of an historical account.

Matthew 10:5. With the Gentiles (ὁδὸν ἐθνῶν, way leading to the Gentiles, Acts 2:28; Acts 16:17; Kühner, II. 1, p. 286) Jesus associates the Samaritans, on account of the hostility which prevailed between the Jews and the Samaritans. The latter had become intermixed during the exile with Gentile colonists, whom Shalmaneser had sent into the country (2 Kings 17:24), which caused the Jews who returned from the captivity to exclude them from any participation in their religious services. For this reason the Samaritans tried to prevent the rebuilding of the temple by bringing accusations against them before Cyrus. Upon this and upon disputed questions of a doctrinal and liturgical nature, the hatred referred to was founded. Sir 1:25 ff.; Lightfoot, p. 327 f. In accordance with the divine plan of salvation (Matthew 15:24), Jesus endeavours, above all, to secure that the gospel shall be preached, in the first instance, to the Jews (John 4:22); so, with a view to the energies of the disciples being steadily directed to the foremost matter which would devolve upon them, He in the meantime debars them from entering the field of the Gentiles and Samaritans. This arrangement (if we except hints such as Matthew 8:11, Matthew 21:43, Matthew 22:9, Matthew 24:14) He allows to subsist till after His resurrection; then, and not till then, does He give to the ministry of the apostles that lofty character of a ministry for all men (Matthew 28:19 f.; Acts 1:8), such as, from the first, He must have regarded His own to have been (Matthew 5:13). The fact that Jesus Himself taught in travelling through Samaria (John 4), appears to be at variance with the injunction in our passage (Strauss); but this is one of those paradoxes in the Master’s proceedings about which the disciples were not to be enlightened till some time afterwards. And what He could do, the disciples were not yet equal to, so that, in the first place, they were called upon only to undertake the lighter task.

Matthew 10:6-7. Τὰ πρόβατα … Ἰσραήλ] the members of Israel, the family of Israel (Leviticus 10:6; Exodus 19:3), the theocratic nation, who were alienated from the divine truth and the divine life, and so were found wandering in error, like sheep without a shepherd. Comp. Matthew 15:24. And such sheep (Matthew 9:36) were they all, seeing that they were without faith in Him, the heaven-sent Shepherd. For the figure generally, comp. Isaiah 53:6; Jeremiah 50:8; Ezekiel 34:5.

Matthew 10:7. ἤγγικεν, κ.τ.λ.] being precisely the same terms as those in which Jesus Himself (Matthew 4:17), and the Baptist before Him, had commenced their preaching (Matthew 3:2).

Matthew 10:8-9. Δωρεὰν … δότε] with reference to the miraculous gifts just mentioned, not to the teaching, for which, as a matter of course, nothing was to be asked in return except the bare necessaries of life, Matthew 10:10 (1 Corinthians 9:4 ff.).

ἐλάβετε] refers back to Matthew 10:1.

μὴ κτήσησθε] you must not provide for yourselves.

The girdle, which holds together the loose upper robe, served the double purpose of keeping money as well, the different kinds of which are, in the order of their value, denoted by χρυσόν, ἄργυρον, χαλκόν. Rosenmüller, Morgenl. V. p. 53 f. Therefore εἰς τ. ζ. ὑ.: in your girdles, is depending on κτής.