Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary
Matthew Henry · 1714
Matthew Henry 사후(1714) 공개 도메인. 디지털판 CC0-1.0.
- 번역 진행
- 4,537 / 4,537
- 원문 언어
- en
학습 자료
여러 공개 도메인 주석서와 성서하우 한글 번역을 책과 장별로 탐색합니다. 주석서를 전환하며 번역만 읽거나 원문과 번역을 나란히 볼 수 있습니다.
현재 주석서
전체 주석서
23개 주석서
전체 항목
307,288
번역 81,431건
라이선스
출처별 표시
주석서 원문, 저자, 번역 진행률, 라이선스 정보를 출처별로 구분해 표시합니다. 성서하우의 한글 번역·편집물은 원문 자료와 별도로 관리됩니다.
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)
예수께서 빌라도 앞에 끌려가 심문과 고발을 받으시나 아무 대답도 하지 않으신다, 막 15:1-5. 무리가 바라바를 놓아 주고 그리스도를 십자가에 못 박으라고 소리친다, 막 15:6-14. 빌라도가 동의하고, 예수께서 끌려가 조롱과 모욕을 당하시며 십자가에 못 박히신다, 막 15:15-26. 두 강도가 예수와 함께 십자가에 못 박힌다, 막 15:27, 막 15:28. 예수께서 십자가에 달려 계시는 동안 조롱과 모욕을 당하신다, 막 15:29-32. 기적적인 어둠과 우리 주의 죽음, 막 15:33-37. 휘장이 찢어지고 백부장이 고백한다, 막 15:38, 막 15:39. 여러 여자가 예수의 죽음을 지켜본다, 막 15:40, 막 15:41. 아리마대 사람 요셉이 빌라도에게 예수의 시체를 달라고 청하여 장사한다, 막 15:42-46. 막달라 마리아와 요세의 어머니 마리아가 예수께서 묻히신 곳을 본다, 막 15:47.
CHAPTER 15.
THE PASSION HISTORY CONTINUED.
CHAPTER 15
Mark 15:1. ἐπὶ τὸ πρωΐ] B C D L א 46, Or. Lachm. Tisch. have merely πρωΐ. But why should ἐπὶ τό have been added? The omission is easily explained from the fact that the transcribers had the simple conception mane (Vulg.; comp. Matthew 27:1).
Instead of ποιήσ. Tisch. has ἑτοιμάσ., following only C L א, without min. vss. and Fathers. But it is worthy of consideration, as ποιήσ. might easily come from Mark 3:6.
Mark 15:4. καταμαρτ.] B C D א, Copt. Aeth. It. Vulg. have κατηγοροῦσιν. So Lachm. and Tisch.; the Recepta is from Matthew 27:13.
Mark 15:7. συοτασιαστῶν] Fritzsche, Lachm. Tisch. have στασιαστῶν, following B C D K א, min. Sahid. But how easily the syllable ΣΥ dropped away before ΣΤ, even although no scruple might be felt at the unusual συστασ.! ΣΥ has scarcely been added to make it undoubted that Barabbas was himself an insurgent with the others (Fritzsche), which assuredly apart from this every transcriber found in the words.
Mark 15:8. ἀναβοήσας] Lachm. Tisch. have ἀναβάς, following B D א* Copt. Sahid. Goth. Vulg. It. Approved also by Schulz and Rinck. The ἀναβάς was not understood, and, in accordance with what follows (Mark 15:13-14), it was awkwardly changed into the ἀναβοήσας, which was as yet in this place premature.
Mark 15:12. ὃν λέγετε] Lachm. has deleted this, on too slight evidence. If it had been added, it would have taken the form τὸν λεγόμενον from Matthew 27:22. But τόν is to be adopted before βασιλ. (with Fritzsche, Lachm. Tisch.), according to A B C Δ א, min., to which also D may be added as reading τῷ βασιλ. Out of the swerving from ὅν to τόν is explained the omission of ὃν λέγετε, which happened the more easily after Mark 15:9.
Mark 15:14. The reading περισσῶς (Lachm.), instead of the Recepta περισσοτέρως, is so decisively attested that it may not be derived from Matthew 27:23. Somewhat more weakly, but still so considerably, is ἔκρο ζον (Lachm.) in the sequel attested (A D G K M, min.; Δ: ἔκραζαν), that this also is to be adopted, and ἔκραζαν is to be regarded as a repetition from Mark 15:13.
Mark 15:17. ἐνδύουσιν] Fritzsche, Lachm. Tisch. have ἐνδιδύσκουσιν, which Griesb. also recommended, and Schulz approved, following B C D F Δ א, min. Rightly; the familiar verb supplanted the unusual one.
Mark 15:18. The Recepta βασιλεῦ is to be maintained; ὁ βασιλεύς (Griesb. Scholz) is from Matthew and John. The evidence is divided.
Mark 15:20. σταυρώσιν] Lachm. and Tisch. have σταυρώσουσιν, following A C D L P Δ, min. (B has not got ἵνα σταυρ. αὐτ. at all). With this preponderant attestation, and as the subjunctive so easily intruded itself, the future is to be adopted.
Mark 15:22. Before Γολγ. Fritzsche and Tisch. have τόν, following B C** F L Δ א, min. Rightly; the article, superfluous in itself, was left out in accordance with Matthew.
Mark 15:23. πιεῖν] is with Tisch., following B C* L Δ א, Copt. Arm., to be struck out as being an addition from Matthew 27:34.
Mark 15:24. Instead of διαμερίζονται Elz. has διεμέριζον, in opposition to all the uncials.
Mark 15:28. The whole of this verse is wanting in A B C D X א, min. Cant. Sahid. Condemned by Griesb., Schulz, and Fritzsche, deleted by Tisch. It is an ancient, but in the case of Mark a foreign, interpolation from a recollection of Luke 22:37 (comp. John 19:24).
Mark 15:29. ἐν τρισὶν ἡμ. οἰκοδ.] Lachm. and Tisch. have οἰκ. τρ. ἡμ. As well the omission of ἐν as the putting of οἰκ, first, is sufficiently well attested to make the Recepta appear as an alteration in accordance with Matthew 27:40.
Mark 15:30. καὶ κατάβα] Lachm. Tisch. have καταβάς, following B D L Δ א, Copt. Vulg. codd. It. The Recepta is a resolution of the participle; comp. P, min.: καὶ κατάβηθι (in accordance with Matthew).
Mark 15:33. καὶ γενομ. (Lachm. and Tisch.) is to be adopted instead of γενομ. δέ on preponderating evidence; but in Mark 15:34 the Recepta τῇ ὥρᾳ τῇ ἐνάτῃ is, following A C E G, etc., to be maintained.
Lachm. Tisch. read τῇ ἐνάτῃ ὥρᾳ, which suggested itself in accordance with Matthew 27:46.
Mark 15:34. The words ἐλωΐ κ.τ.λ. are very variously written in codd. and vss. The Recepta λαμμᾶ is in any case rejected by the evidence; between the forms λιμά (Lachm.), λαμά (Tisch.), and λεμά, (Fritzsche), in the equal division of the evidence, there is no coming to a decision.
Mark 15:36. τε] has important but not preponderating evidence against it; it is deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. But if it had been added, καὶ περιθ. would have been written (Matthew 27:48), which, however, is only found in a few cursives. On the other hand, previously instead of εἷς, τις is to be read with Tisch., and the following καί to be deleted with Lachm. The Recepta is moulded after Matthew.
Mark 15:39. κράξας] is wanting only in B L א Copt. Ar. (deleted by Tisch.), and easily became objectionable.
The arrangement οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπ. in Lachm. and Tisch. is attested by B D L Δ א, min. The Recepta is from Luke 23:47.
Mark 15:41. αἳ καί] Lachm. and Tisch. have merely αἵ. So also Rinck. But the collocation of the two almost similar syllables was the occasion of the dropping away partly of αἵ (A C L Δ, min. vss.), partly of καί (B א, min. vss.).
Mark 15:42. The reading πρὸς σάββατον in Lachm. (instead of προσάββατον) is nothing but a clerical error.
Mark 15:43. ἦλθεν] Decisive evidence gives ἐλθών. So Matthaei, Fritzsche, Lachm. Tisch., approved also by Griesb. ἐλθὼν … τολμ. εἰσῆλθε was resolved into ἦλθεν … καὶ τ. ἐ. This καί before τολμ. occurs still in min. Syr. utr. Vulg. Euthym.
Mark 15:44. πάλαι] Lachm. has ἤδη, in accordance with B D, Syr. hier. Arm. Copt. Goth. Vulg. It. Theophyl. A repetition of the previous ἤδη.
Mark 15:45. σῶμα] B D L א: πτῶμα. So Lachm. and Tisch. Rightly; σῶμα appeared more worthy.
Mark 15:46. καί before καθελ. is wanting in B D L א, Copt. Lachm. Tisch. A connective addition.
κατέθηκεν] B C** D L א, min. have ἔθηκεν. So Fritzsche, Lachm. But how easily the syllable κατ dropped out after καί, especially since Matthew and Luke also only have the simple form!
Mark 15:47. τίθεται] In accordance with decisive evidence read, with Lachm. and Tisch., τέθειται.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
마가복음 15:1-20. 예수께서 빌라도 앞에 끌려가심. 두 번째 심문에서 빌라도가 그를 놓아주려 하다가 마침내 넘겨줌. 예수께서 잔혹한 대우를 받으신 뒤 십자가에 못 박히기 위해 끌려가심(마 26:1, 2, 11-31; 눅 23:1-6, 13-25; 요 18:28-19:16). 요한복음 18:28-19:16 해설을 보라.
이 장의 주요 사건들은 마 27 주석에서 설명되어 있으니 보라.
새벽에 - 마 27:1 이하를 보라.
앞 장에서 우리가 읽은 그리스도의 고난은 그저 서막(序幕) 곧 도입부에 지나지 않았다. 여기서 우리는 그 고난이 완결되는 것을 본다. 우리는 그분이 대제사장들에게 정죄당하신 데서 이야기를 멈추었거니와, 그들은 다만 이를 드러내며 으르렁댈 수 있었을 뿐 물어뜯지는 못하였다. 여기서 우리는 그분께서 다음과 같이 되시는 것을 본다. I. 로마 총독 빌라도 앞에 끌려가 고발당하심(막 15:1-5). II. 제사장들의 선동을 받은 무리에게 규탄을 받으심(막 15:6-14). III. 즉시 십자가에 못 박히도록 정죄받으심(막 15:15). IV. 로마 군병들에게 거짓 왕으로 조롱당하고 모욕당하심(막 15:16-19). V. 온갖 치욕과 수치 가운데 처형 장소로 끌려 나가심(막 15:20-24). VI. 두 강도 사이에서 십자가에 못 박히심(막 15:25-28). VII. 지나가는 모든 자에게 비방과 모욕을 당하심(막 15:29-32). VIII. 한동안 아버지께 버림받으심(막 15:33-36). IX. 죽으시며 휘장을 찢으심(막 15:37,38). X. 백부장과 다른 이들에게 증언되고 입증되심(막 15:39-41). XI. 아리마대 요셉의 무덤에 묻히심(막 15:42-47).