Comentários bíblicos

Matthew 10:1. And when he had called unto him— The distinction of the sacred writings into chapters and verses, which is a modern invention to facilitate references, has with that advantage many inconveniencies, because it often breaks that thread of discourse, which is the proper clue to lead us into the meaning of what follows. It will be seen how reasonable this reflection is, if we look back to the 36th verse, &c. of the preceding chapter, where we read that Jesus, beholding the multitudes (in their spiritual capacities, which were ever the principal object of his regard), had compassion on them, because they were tired and lay down, as sheep that had no shepherd; Then saith he, &c. After this, as he himself was ever foremost, on all proper occasions, to do what he commanded others, he passed the following night in prayer; see Luke 6:12-13.: and the next morning chose twelve from among his disciples, whom he constituted apostles; persons sent, that is to say, especial messengers, and sent them forth with a peculiar commission, as shepherds, to raise and guide those dejected forlorn sheep, who had moved his compassion; and as labourers, to be employed in the harvest which was now mature, and fit for the threshing-floor. The language is figurative, and there is an absolute necessity that it should be so; because the mental dispositions here spoken of have no proper names in human language, which consists only of terms, that in their first signification all belong to the objects of sense. The language is therefore figurative; andeven different figures are here made use of to express the same object; which also cannot sometimes be avoided: for every similitude is defective, and can shew but a part. Therefore, where one similitude falls short, another may aptly supply its deficiency, and represent, by new images, the whole of what was intended. Thus, in the passage now under consideration, the same mental disposition is expressed by two metaphors, both highly instructive, yet in different respects, for each gives a different lesson. The first shews what kind of persons are rightly disposed to be admitted into that last and peculiar dispensation, which is called the kingdom of heaven; and the second intimates to those who are to be admitted, what kind of treatment they are to expect there. See Heylin, the note on Matthew 10:6., and on ch. Matthew 3:7. It appears from the present verse, that Jesus had already chosen from among his disciples those whom he afterwards honoured with the name of Apostles. Compare Mark 3:14.Luke 6:13; Luke 6:13. It is probable that he chose twelve, in reference to the twelve tribes of Israel (see ch. Matthew 19:28. Luke 22:30. Revelation 21:12; Rev 21:14 and compare Exodus 24:4.Deuteronomy 1:23; Deuteronomy 1:23.Joshua 4:2-3; Joshua 4:2-3.); and therefore care was taken, on the death of Judas, to choose another to make up the number; which seems to have been a mark of respect paid to the Jews, previous to the grand offer of the Gospel to them: whereas, when they had generally rejected it, Paul was added to the Apostles, without any regard to the particular number of twelve.

return to '

Matthew 10:2. Now the names, &c.— In the catalogue of the apostles, Simon and Andrew, the sons of Jonah, are named first; not because they were greater in dignity than their brethren of the apostolical college, but because they had become Christ's disciples before them. With respect to Andrew, this is plain from John 1:40-41.; and as for Peter, he may have been the second disciple, not withstanding it was another person who accompanied Andrew when he first conversed with Jesus. That person is supposed to have been John, the son of Zebedee; and the author of the Gospel, because he is spoken of in the manner in which John usually speaks of himself. But whoever he was, Peter may have been a disciple before him, because it by no means follows from Andrew's being convinced, that his companion was convinced also. The foundation of his faith may have been laid at that meeting, though he did not acknowledge Christ's mission till afterwards. Now, as some one of his disciples was to have the first place in the catalogue, the earliness of Peter's faith might be a reason for conferring that honour on him. But he takes place even of his brother Andrew, who was converted before him, perhaps because propriety called for it, he being, as is generally believed, his elder brother. In like manner, James the son of Zebedee, being elder than John his brother, is mentioned before him, though it is probable he was the younger disciple. In the catalogue of apostles, Simon, the brother of Andrew, is distinguished from the other Simon by the surname of Peter, which had been conferred on him when he first became acquainted with Jesus at Jordan. The reason of the name, however, was not assigned till long after that, viz. when Simon declared his faith inJesus as the Messiah, Mat 16:17-18 for it was then that Jesus told him he was called Cephas, and Peter (which by interpretation is a rock), on account of the fortitude wherewith he was to preach the gospel. Simon and Andrew were originally fishermen, and inhabitants of Bethsaida, a town situated on the north shore of the lake of Gennesareth; but after Peter was married, he and his brother settled in Capernaum, perhaps because his wife lived there. Before they became acquainted with Christ, they were disciples of the Baptist, who pointed him out to them as the Messiah. Andrew has left no writings, for which reason we are at a loss to judge of his literary endowments; but Peter was the author of the two epistles which bear his name.

James and John, the sons of Zebedee, were also fishermen; they dwelt in Capernaum, and seem to have been in rather better circumstances than Peter and Andrew; for the Gospel speaks of their having hired servants to assist them in their business. John is thought to have been the youngest of all the apostles; yet he was old enough to have been a follower of John the Baptist before he came to Christ. On this, or on some other occasion, James and John, the sons of Zebedee, obtained the surname of Boanerges, that is to say, the sons of thunder; perhaps because of the natural vehemency and impetuosity of their tempers. Accordingly their spirit shewed itself in the desire they expressed to have the Samaritans destroyed by fire from heaven, because they refused to lodge Jesus in his way to Jerusalem. It appeared also in their ambition to become the great officers of state in their Master's kingdom, which they supposed would be a secular one. Besides, John's writings shew that he was a man of a very affectionate turn of mind. This affectionate turn of his mind gave him a singular fitness for friendship, in which he was not only peculiarly amiable, but peculiarly privileged, as it rendered him the object of Christ's peculiar love; a love which will do him honour to the end of the world. As for James, his being put to death by Herod is a proof that his zeal was uncommon, and that it moved him to be eminently active andbold in the work of the Gospel. Had it been otherwise, he would not have become the object either of Herod's jealousy or of his resentment. Some indeed are of opinion, that the epithet sons of thunder was not expressive of the dispositions of the two brothers, but of the force and success with which they should preach the Gospel: yet if that had been the reason of the surname, it was equally applicable to all the apostles. Philip is said to have been a native of Bethsaida, the town of Peter and Andrew. He was originally a disciple of theBaptist, but he left him, to follow Jesus, as soon as he became acquainted with him at Jordan. John 1:44. Bartholomew is supposed to have been the disciple called Nathanael, whose conversion is related, John 1:45; John 1:51. The Ancients tell us he was a native of Cana, and was skilled in the law. Matthew was a rich publican of Capernaum: he was otherwise named Levi, and left his gainful employment for the sake of Christ. He wrote the Gospel to which his name is prefixed, and was the son of one Alpheus, of whom we know nothing but the name. There is nothing said of Thomas before his conversion: however, it is conjectured that, like the rest, he was of mean extraction; and because he is mentioned among those who went a fishing, Joh 21:2-3 it is supposed that he was a fisherman by occupation. He obtained the surname of Didymus, probably because he was a twin, and made himself remarkable by continuing longer than his brethren to doubt of Christ's resurrection. In the college of Apostles, besides James the son of Zebedee and brother of John, Judas Iscariot who betrayed his master, and Simon surnamed Peter, we find James surnamed the Less, or Younger (see Mark 15:40.), to distinguish him from the other James, the son of Zebedee, who was elder than he: also Judas surnamed Thaddeus (Mark, iii 18.) and Lebbeus, the brother of James the Less, and Simon surnamed Zelotes. James the Less, Judas Thaddeus, and Simon Zelotes, were brothers, and sons of one Alpheus or Cleophas, who was likewise a disciple, being one of the two to whom our Lord appeared on the road to Emmaus after his resurrection. They were called Christ's brethren (Matthew 13:55.), that is, his cousins; in which sense the word is used, Leviticus 10:4. It seems their mother Mary was sister to Mary our Lord's mother; for it was no unusual thing among the Jews to have more children than one of a family called by the same name. The three apostles, therefore, who go by the name of our Lord's brethren, were really his cousins-german: James the Less and Judas Thaddeus wrote the epistles which bear their names. This James was a person of great authority among the apostles; for in the council which met at Jerusalem to decide the dispute about the necessityof circumcision, we find him, as president of the meeting, summing up the debate, and wording the decree. Simon, the cousin of our Lord, is called by Matthew and Mark the Canaanite; but from the above account of his relations it is plain, that the epithet does not express his descent, otherwise his brothers James and Judas ought to have been termed Canaanites likewise. Luke calls him Simon Zelotes, which seems to be the Greek translation of the Hebrew appellation given him by Matthew and Mark. From קנא [kena] zelotyphus fuit,—he was jealous,—comes the Chaldaic word קנן [kenen] zelotes,—a zealot. See Buxtorff on the word. Put the Greek termination to this Chaldaic word, and it becomes κανανιτης, the Canaanite: wherefore the appellation of Canaanite, given to Simon here and in Mark, and the epithet Zelotes which he bears in Luke, are as perfectly the same as Cephas and Petros, Tabitha and Dorcas. The Zealots were a particular sect or section among the Jews, who in later times, under colour of zeal for God, committed all the disorders imaginable. They pretended to imitate the zeal which Phinehas, Elijah, and the Maccabees expressed, in their manner of punishing offenders; but they acted from blind fury, or from worse principles, without regard either to the laws of God, or to the dictates of reason. Some are ofopinion, that Simon the Apostle had formerly been one of this pestilent faction; but, as there is no mention made of it till a little before the destruction of Jerusalem (Joseph. Bell. lib. iv. c. 3), we may rather suppose that the surname of Zelotes was given him on account of his uncommon zeal in matters of true piety and religion. Judas the traitor was the son of one Simon: he had the surname of Iscariot given him, to distinguish him from Judas Thaddeus, our Lord's cousin. The literal meaning of Iscariot is, a man of Cariot or Kerioth, which was a town in the tribe of Judah. Joshua 15:25. In all probability, therefore, this surname denotes the place of the traitor's nativity. Some pretend, that among the Jews no person was surnamed by theplace of his birth, but such as were illustrious on account of their station; and so would have us believe, that Judas was a person of some distinction. They think his being entrusted with the bag, or common stock purse, preferablyto all the rest, is a confirmation of this; but as the other apostles were men of mean condition, these arguments are too trivial to prove that Judas was distinguished from them in that particular.

Thus were thefoundations of the church laid in twelve illiterate Galileans, who, being at first utterly ignorant of the nature and end of their office, and destitute of the qualifications necessary to discharge the duties of it, integrity excepted, were the most unlikelypersons in the world to confound the wisdomof the wise, to baffle the power of the mighty, to overturn the many false religions which then flourished everywhere under the protection of civil government, and, in a word, to reform the universally-corrupted manners of mankind. Had human prudence been to make choice of instruments for so grand an undertaking, doubtless such as were remarkable for deep science, strong reasoning, and prevailing eloquence, would have been pitched upon; and these endowments probably would have been set off with the external advantages of wealth and power. But, lo! the wisdom of God, infinitely superior to that of men, acted quite differently in this matter: for the treasure of the Gospel was committed to earthen vessels, that the excellency of its power might in all countries be seen to be of God. Accordingly, the religion which these Galileans taught through the world, without having at all applied themselves to letters, exhibited a far juster notion of things than the Grecian or Roman philosophers were able to attain, though their lives were spent in contemplation and study. Hence, by its own intrinsic splendour, as well as by the external glory of the miracles which accompanied it, this religion shewed itself to be altogether of divine original. Besides, it was attended with a success answerable to its dignity and truth. It was received everywherewiththehighestapplause,as something which mankind had hitherto been seeking in vain; while the maxims and precepts of the philosophers never spread themselvesmuch farther than their particular schools. It was therefore with the highest wisdom that the foundations of the churchwere thus laid in the labours of a few weak illiterate fishermen: for with irresistible evidence it demonstrated that the immense fabric was at first raised, and is still sustained, not by the arm of flesh, but purely by the hand of Almighty God. See Macknight.

return to '

Matthew 10:5. Go not into the way, &c.— It may seem strange that our Lord neither preached himself to the Gentiles in general, nor allowed his disciples to preach among them, during his own lifetime; especially when it is evident that he came into the world on purpose to destroy the polytheism of the heathens, their idol mediators, and their idolatrous worship, and to establish the knowledge of the true and triune God, and of the only Mediator between God and man, and of the right method of attaining his favour: but our wonder will cease, when the reason of his conduct is understood. As the Jews were the only people in the world who believed in the one true God, before his messengers attempted to preach him to the heathens, it was fit that they should prove their mission, to the conviction of the Jews; instruct them more fully in the fundamental doctrines of religion, and correct what errors had crept into their faith. Besides, Christianity was to be propagated through the world, not only by the force of its own intrinsic excellence, and by the miracles wherewith it was accomplished, but it was to make its way also by the evidence which it derived from the Jewish prophecies, and by the light thrown upon it, considered as the perfection of that grand scheme which was begun in the first ages, and carried on under various dispensations from time to time, till it obtained a more complete and lasting form under the Jewish economy. It was highly expedient, therefore, that a competent numberof Jews should be converted to Christianity, who might publish it to the rest of the world, with all the evidence which was proper to be offered: but if, on account of the former revelation made to the Jews, it was absolutely fit that the new revelation should be preached by them to the rest of the world, it was necessary that the Gospel, at the first, should be confined to them; because, had it been preached to the Gentiles, that circumstance alone would have made the Jews reject it universally. It is well known how high the prejudices of the Apostles themselves ran on this head, even after they had received the gifts of the Spirit; being excessively offended with Peter, one of their number, who, by a vision from heaven, had with difficulty been prevailed upon to preach to Cornelius the centurion. Nay, they were hardly brought to believe that God intended to bestow the Gospel on the Gentiles, when they saw them receive the greatest of its privileges themselves, even the gifts of the Spirit; and though after this they preached to the Gentiles, yet, wherever they came, their custom was to begin at the Jews, if there were any in the place, that all offence might be prevented; and, on the Jews rejecting the Gospel, they turned to the Gentiles. Acts 13:46. Thus, as the Apostle tells us, Romans 15:8. Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promise made unto the fathers, namely, concerning the conversion of the Gentiles, and that the Gentiles might glorify God on account of his mercy; the mercy of the Gospel Dispensation, which they enjoyed by their conversion to Christianity. Had Jesus Christ been a minister of the uncircumcision, that is to say, had he preached the Gospel to all the Gentiles, the Jews would have rejected it; so that the proselytes, and such as held the faith of the proselytes, which many of the best sort of Gentiles seem to have done, would not have become Christ's disciples with such ease and readiness. The reason was, the evidence of the Gospel being greatly weakened by the universal unbelief of the Jews, the converts among the Gentiles would have been few in comparison, and, by that means, the promises made to the fathers, that in Christ all nations should be blessed, would not have been confirmed, or at least not so fully accomplished as it is by the scheme which Providence has actually chosen. See Macknight. When our Saviour says, Enter not into any city of the Samaritans, he means, "Enter not with a design to preach." It is true, in the beginning of his ministry, our Lord himself preached to the Samaritans with great success, Joh 4:41-42 and therefore, had he sent his apostles among them, numbers in all probability would have become members of the Christian dispensation; but the inveterate enmity which the Jews bore to the Samaritans, made the conversion of the latter to Christianity improper at this time, for the reasons mentioned above.

return to '

Matthew 10:6. But go rather to the lost sheep, &c.— See what has been said concerning the metaphors of sheep and harvest, in the note on Matthew 10:1. With respect to the first, it should be remembered, that in the note on ch. Mat 3:7 it was observed, that men, as animals, have each of them a peculiar resemblance to some particular species of other animals; which we exemplified in the term lamb, sheep, wolves, dogs, &c. We now farther add, that those appellations are upon no account to be taken for indelible characters; but those to whom they are applicable at any given time, may in the future course of life, through the converting and sanctifying grace of God, be enabled so far to control their wrong propensities by a steady practice of the contrary graces and virtues, as to afford to the church and to the world a quite opposite character. To effect this is the proper work of grace, producing repentance in the soul, and then genuine conversion, including a change of mental disposition, whereby the crafty, rapacious, mischievous, stubborn, or other savage temper, may be transmuted into that simplicity, meekness, harmlessness, and ductility, which constitute the character of sheep, or, what is an infinitely more honourable title, members of Christ's mystical body. When our Lord is said to behold the multitudes, tired, lying down, and without a shepherd;—when, in consequence of this view, he directs his apostles to go in quest of them, he calls them the lost sheep; not that they had gone astray from their shepherd, for they wanted one; but lost here imports, that they were quite at a loss how to proceed, and actually perishing for want of a guide. Such were the persons who had moved the compassion of our Lord, and for whose sake he had sent forth his apostles to publish the glad tidings of his kingdom, with assurances that divine power was at hand to take them under his immediate regency. And as that kingdom was mental, and therefore not obvious to sense, the apostles were at the same time sent to give visible proofs of its reality, by healing the sick, cleansing the lepers, raising the dead, and casting out demons. These miraculous testimonies were to those who were, by the grace of repentance, rightly disposed, a sure ground of faith in Christ; and, when concurring with the attractions of still superior degrees of grace, would induce them in simple faith to resign themselves, with an implicit submission, to the conduct of his Spirit, the fulness of which dwelt without measure in the incarnate Jesus, and was communicated in the power of converting grace to those whose repentant hearts were prepared to receive it.

return to '

Matthew 10:7. Preach, saying, &c.— The original word is Κηρυσσετε, which is derived from κηρυξ a herald, and signifies "proclaim, with that ardour and zeal which becomes my heralds." Probably they were to make this proclamation with a loud voice, as they passed through the streets of the towns which they visited, as Jonah declared his message to Nineveh. See Jon 3:4 and Doddridge.

return to '

Matthew 10:8. Raise the dead— In several copies this clause is wanting; for which reason, and because the disciples did not raise any person from the dead whom we read of, till after Christ's ascension, Dr. Mill takes it for an interpolation. But his opinion is ill-founded; as it is certain that this, with several other articles in the apostles' first commission, have a direct relation to the period comprehended under that more extensive commission which they received after their Master's resurrection. See Matthew 10:18; Matthew 10:21; Matthew 10:23. Whitby and Wetstein. That the direction at the end of this verse, Freely, or gratis ye have received, freely give, relates to the miraculous cures which the apostles were empowered to perform, and not to the stated offices of the apostolical function, is evident from Luk 10:7 where our Lord, in giving a like commission to the Seventy, bids them eat and drink what was set before them, because the labourer was worthy of his hire; nay, in this very charge, no sooner did he order the apostles to give freely, than he forbade them to provide gold, &c. because the workman is worthy of his meat; [deserves his maintenance; Heylin;] plainly intimating, that while they were preaching, they had a right to maintenance from those who enjoyed the benefit of their labours, and should, in the course of divine providence, be supplied with all things necessary. Accordingly, we find the apostles receiving such maintenance, and insisting upon it as their due, 1 Corinthians 9:4-5; 1 Corinthians 9:14.Galatians 6:6; Galatians 6:6. See Macknight.

return to '

Matthew 10:9. Brass in your purses— The Greek word κτησησθε, which signifies to possess, signifies also to get, to furnish oneself with; which is the meaning of it here. The stress seems to lie on this word: they might use what they had already, but they might not delay at all to provide any thing more, nor take any thought about it. Nor indeed were they to take any thing with them, more than was strictly necessary; lest it should retard them, and because they were to learn hereby to trust God in all future exigencies. In your purses, in the Greek is ζωνας , girdles. The Eastern girdles being doubled, and sewed along the edges, were more convenient for carrying a quantity of money than purses, because money, being distributed round the body in the fobs of the girdle, the weight of it was not so much felt. By money, therefore, in their girdles, is to be understood a considerable sum. See Calmet, Beausobre and Lenfant, and Shaw's Travels, p. 227.

return to '

Matthew 10:10. Nor scrip for your journey— The scrip, Πηρα, was a sort of large bag, in which shepherds, and those who journeyed, carried their provisions. See on Luke 10:34. Thus the bag into which David put the smooth stones, wherewith he smote Goliah, is called both a scrip and a shepherd's bag, In the account in which St. Mark gives the repetition of these instructions, immediatelybefore the disciples took their journey, he says, they were permitted to be shod with sandals, ch. Matthew 6:9. The sandal was a piece of strong leather, or wood, fastened to the sole of the foot with strings, which they tied round the foot and ancle; but the shoe was a kind of short boot, that covered the foot and a part of the leg, and was a more delicate piece of dress than the sandals. See Calmet on the word sandals, and Lightfoot. St. Mark says, Mar 6:8 that they were allowed to take a staff; which Calmet observes may be reconciled with St. Matthew, by attending to the ambiguity of the Hebrew word שׁבח shabet, answering to the Greek word ραβδος : for, as the Hebrew signifies any sort of rod, whether club, staff, sceptre, or pole, he thinks the staff, which, according to St. Matthew, the disciples were prohibited to use, may have been a pole for carrying a burden on; an accoutrement which was useless, as they were not allowed to carry any provisions with them, nor any spare clothes; whereas the staff, which by St. Mark's account he permitted them to take, was a walking-staff, very proper for those who were to perform a journey with expedition. Heinsius labours to prove, that ει μη, the exceptive particle in Mark, may signify no not; and so would have the clause ει μη ραβδον μονον, translated no, not a single staff. But the more probable solution of the difficulty seems to be, that such of the apostles as had staffs in their hands might take them: as for those who were walking without them, they were not to provide them; for as the providence of God was to supply them with all necessaries, to have made the least preparation for their journey would have implied a disbelief of their Master's promise.

return to '