Chú giải Kinh Thánh

Matthew 27:44 : the co-crucified brigands join with the mob and the priests in ribaldry.—τὸ αὐτὸ: Fritzsche supplies ἐποίουν after this phrase and renders: the same thing did the robbers, or they too reproached Him (“idem vero etiam latrones fecerunt, nempe ei conviciati sunt”). It seems simpler to take αὐτὸ as one of two accusatives, depending on ὠνείδιζον, αὐτόν following (the true reading) being the other. Vide Winer, § 32, 4.

Matthew 27:45-49. Darkness without and within (Mark 15:33-36, Luke 23:44-46).

Matthew 27:45. ἀπὸ δὲ ἕκτης ὥρας: three hours, according to Mark (Matthew 27:25, cf. Matthew 27:33), after the crucifixion the darkness came on. This is the first reference in Matthew to a time of day. The definiteness of the statement in this respect seems to vouch for the historicity of the fact stated. Those who find in it legend or myth point to the Egyptian darkness, and prophetic texts such as Amos 8:9, Joel 2:31, etc. (none of which, however, are cited by the evangelist), as explaining the rise of the story. The cause of this darkness is unknown (vide notes on Mark). It could not, of course, be an eclipse of the sun at full moon. Origen saw this and explained the phenomenon by the hypothesis of dense masses of cloud hiding the sun. Others (Paulus, De Wette, etc.) have suggested a darkening such as is wont to precede an earthquake. To the evangelist the event probably appeared supernatural.—ἐπὶ π. τ. γῆν, Origen and many after him restrict the reference to Palestine. The fragment of the Gospel of Peter limits it to Judaea (πᾶσαν τ. Ἰουδαίαν). In the thought of the evangelist the expression had probably a wider though indefinite range of meaning, the whole earth (Weiss) or the whole Roman world (Grotius).—ἕως ὥ. ἐννάτης: the end as exactly indicated as the beginning, another sign of historicity. The fact stated probably interested the evangelist as an emblem of the spiritual eclipse next to be related.

Matthew 27:46. ἠλί, ἠλί, etc.: the opening words of Psalms 22, but partly at least in Aramaic not in Hebrew, wholly so as they stand in Codex [155] (W.H[156]), ἐλωί, ἐλωί, etc., corresponding exactly to the version in Mark.—ἠλί, ἠλί, if the true reading in Matthew, seems to be an alteration made to suit what follows, whereby the utterance of Jesus becomes a mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic. It is not likely that Jesus would so express Himself. He would speak wholly either in Hebrew or in Aramaic, saying in the one case: “eli eli lamah asavtani”; in the other: “eloi eloi lema savachtani”. The form the utterance assumed in the earliest evangelic report might be an important clue. This Resch finds in the reading of Codex [157], which gives the words in Hebrew. Resch holds that [158] often preserves the readings of the Urevangelium, which, contrary to Weiss, he believes to have contained a Passion history in brief outline (Agrapha, p. 53). Brandt expresses a similar view (E. G., pp. 228–232). The probability is that Jesus spoke in Hebrew. It is no argument against this that the spectators might not understand what He said, for the utterance was not meant for the ears of men. The historicity of the occurrence has been called in question on the ground that one in a state of dire distress would not express his feelings in borrowed phrases. The alternative is that the words were put into the mouth of Jesus by persons desirous that in this as in all other respects His experience should correspond to prophetic anticipations. But who would have the boldness to impute to Him a sentiment which seemed to justify the taunt: “Let Him deliver Him if He love Him”? Brandt’s reply to this is: Jewish Christians who had not a high idea of Christ’s Person (E. G., p. 245). That in some Christian circles the cry of desertion was an offence appears from the rendering of “eli eli” in Evang. Petri—ἡ δύναμίς μου ἡ δ. μ. = my strength, my strength. Its omission by Luke proves the same thing.

[155] Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

[156] Westcott and Hort.

[157] Codex Bezae

[158] Codex Bezae

Matthew 27:47. τινὲς δὲ: not Roman soldiers, for they knew nothing about Elias; might be Hellenistic Jews who did not understand Hebrew or Aramaean (Grotius); more probably heartless persons who only affected to misunderstand. It was poor wit, and showed small capacity for turning to advantage the words spoken. How much more to the purpose to have said: Hear Him! He actually confesses that His God in whom He trusted has forsaken Him.

Matthew 27:48. εἷς ἐξ αὐτῶν, one of the bystanders, not one of the τινὲς, with some human pity, acting under the impression, how got not indicated, that the sufferer was afflicted with thirst.—ὄξους, sour wine, posca, the drink of Roman soldiers, with sponge and reed at hand, for use on such occasions.

Matthew 27:49. ἄφες: either redundant coalescing with ἴδωμεν = let us see (cf. chap. Matthew 7:4), age videamus, Grotius (vide also Burton, M. T., § 161), or meaning: hold, stop, don’t give Him the drink, let us see whether Elias will come (ἔρχεται, comes without fail) to help Him. The latter is the more probable. The λοιποὶ belong to the scoffing crew. The remainder of this verse about the spear thrust—another, final, act of mercy, though attested by important MSS., seems to be imported from John 19:34. It is omitted in R. V[159]

[159] Revised Version.

Matthew 27:50-56. Death and its accompaniments (Mark 15:37-41, Luke 23:46-49).

Matthew 27:50. πάλιν, pointing back to the cry in Matthew 27:46.—φωνῇ μεγάλῃ. The Fathers found in the loud cry a proof that Jesus died voluntarily, not from physical exhaustion. Some modern writers, on the contrary, regard the cry as the utterance of one dying of a ruptured heart (Dr. Stroud on The Physical Cause of Christ’s Death; Hanna, The Last Day of Our Lord’s Passion). Mt.’s narrative, like Mk.’s, gives the impression that the cry was inarticulate. Brandt recognises this cry as historical.

Matthew 27:51. καὶ ἰδοὺ, introducing solemnly a series of preternatural accompaniments, all but the first peculiar to Mt.—τὸ καταπέτασμα, the veil between the holy place and the most holy.—ἐσχίσθη: this fact, the rending of the veil, is mentioned by all the Synoptists, though Lk. introduces it at an early point in the narrative. It might have happened, as a natural event, an accidental coincidence, though it is not so viewed by the evangelist. A symbolic fiction, according to Brandt. The legendary spirit took hold of this event, magnifying the miracle. In the Hebrew Gospel the rending of the veil is transformed into the fracture of the lintel of the temple: “Superliminare templi in finitae magnitudinis fractum esse atque divisum” (Jerome, Com.).—καὶ ἡ γῆ, etc.: an earthquake, preceding and conditioning the greatest marvel of all, the opening of the graves and the resurrection of many saints (Matthew 27:52-53). We seem here to be in the region of Christian legend. Certainly the legendary spirit laid hold of this feature with great eagerness, expanding and going into details, giving, e.g., the names of those who rose: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc. (vide Evang. Nicod., c. 17, and The Acts of Pilate in Thilo’s Codex Apocryphus, N. T., p. 810).