圣经注释书

CHAPTER 9

Matthew 9:2. ἀφέωνται] Lachm. Tisch. 8 : ἀφίενται (also Matthew 9:5), only according to B א, Or. (once). On the other hand, σου αἱ ἁμαρτίαι (Lachm. Tisch.) for σοι αἱ ἁμ. is certainly supported by important testimony, but suspected, however, of being taken from Matthew 9:5.

Matthew 9:4. ἰδών] Lachm.: εἰδώς, according to B M E** Π* Curss. Verss. Chrys.; a gloss. Comp. Matthew 12:25; Luke 6:8.

Matthew 9:5. σου] Elz.: σοι, against decisive testimony.

ἔγειραι] There is decisive testimony for ἔγειρε. Adopted by Scholz, Lachm. Tisch. Correctly; see the exegetical notes. In all the passages in which ἔγειρε occurs, there is found, as a diff. reading, ἔγειραι.

Matthew 9:6. ἐγερθείς] Lachm.; according to B, Vulg. Codd. of the It.: ἔγειρε. Mechanical repetition from Matthew 9:5. Comp. Mark 2:11.

Matthew 9:8. ἐφοβήθησαν] so also Lachm. and Tisch., according to B D א, Curss. Verss. (also Vulg. It.) and Fathers. ἐθαύμασαν of the Received text is a gloss.

Matthew 9:9. ἠκολούθησεν] Tisch. 8 : ἠκολούθει, on the too slender authority of D א and three Curss.

Matthew 9:12. The omission of Ἰησοῦς, favoured by Lachm. and Tisch. 8, rests on too slender authority; while that of αὐτοῖς, which Lachm. and Tisch. leave out, has a preponderance of evidence in its favour.

Matthew 9:13. ἔλεον] Lachm. and Tisch.: ἔλεος; see the exegetical notes.

ἁμαρτωλούς] Elz., Fritzsche, and Scholz insert εἰς μετάνοιαν, which B D V* Γ * Δ א, Curss. Vulg. It. Syr. utr. Perss. Aeth. al. and several Fathers omit. Supplement from Luke 5:32.

Matthew 9:14. πολλά] although deleted by Tisch. 8 (only according to B א* and three Curss.), has decisive testimony.

Matthew 9:17. ἀπολοῦνται] Lachm. Tisch. 8 : ἀπόλλυνται, after B א, Curss. Verss. The present is due to the other verbs around it.

ἀμφότεροι] Elz.: ἀμφότερα, against decisive testimony. A correction.

Matthew 9:18. εἷς ἐλθών] Elz.: ἐλθών, only after Curss.; others: εἰσελθών; others: τις εἰσελθών; others: τις ἐλθών; others: τις (or εἷς) προσελθών; Lachm.: εἷς προσελθών, after B א**. In the original, stood ΕΙΣΕΛΘΩΝ.[436]

Matthew 9:19. Tisch. 8 (comp. on Matthew 9:9) has ἨΚΟΛΟΎΘΕΙ, after B C D.

Matthew 9:30. Lachm. Tisch. have the rare Alexand. form ἘΝΕΒΡΙΜΉΘΗ, which has B* א in its favour, and was replaced by the more usual ἘΝΕΒΡΙΜΉΣΑΤΟ.

Matthew 9:35. ΜΑΛΑΚΊΑΝ] Elz. inserts ἘΝ Τῷ ΛΑῷ, against B C* D S Δ א**, Curss., and several versions and Fathers. Supplement from Matthew 4:23.

Matthew 9:36. ἘΣΚΥΛΜΈΝΟΙ] Elz.: ἘΚΛΕΛΥΜΈΝΟΙ. The former, on which the latter is a gloss, rests on decisive testimony.

[436] But whether εἷς ἐλθών (Griesb. Scholz, Kuinoel, Fritzsche) or εἰσελθών (Tisch.) should be written, see the exegetical notes.

Matthew 9:1 ff. Mark 2:1 ff., Luke 5:17 ff., introduce the account somewhat earlier. Matthew reports, briefly and simply, only the essential points, following, it may be, an older form of the tradition.

Τὴν ἰδίαν πόλιν] Kapernaum; ἣ μὲν γὰρ ἤνεγκεν αὐτὸν ἡ Βηθλέεμ· ἣ δὲ ἔθρεψεν ἡ Ναζαρέτ· ἣ δὲ εἶχεν οἰκοῦντα Καπερναούμ, Chrysostom. See Matthew 4:13.

Matthew 9:2-3. Αὐτῶν] the paralytic, and those who were carrying him.

τέκνον] affectionately; Mark 2:5; Mark 10:24; Luke 16:25, and elsewhere. Comp. θύγατερ, Matthew 9:22.

ἀφέωνται] are forgiven; Doric (Suidas), not an Attic (Etym. M.) form of the perf. ind. pass.; Herod, ii. 165, ἀνέωνται,[437] with ἀνεῖνται (so Bähr), however, as a different reading; Winer, p. 77 [E. T. 96]; Buttmann, neut. Gr. p. 42 [E. T. 49]. Beza correctly observes, that in the perf. is “emphasis minime negligenda.” The view that Christ’s words imply an accommodation to the belief of the Jews, and also of the paralytic himself, that diseases are inflicted by way of punishment for sins, is all the more to be rejected that Jesus elsewhere (John 9:3; Luke 13:1) contradicts this belief. He saw into the moral condition of the sick man, precisely as afterwards, Matthew 9:4, He read the thoughts of the scribes (John 5:14; John 2:25), and knew how it came that this paralysis was really the punishment of his special sins (probably of sensuality). Accordingly, he first of all pronounces forgiveness, as being the moral condition necessary to the healing of the body (not in order to help the effect upon the physical system by the use of healing psychical agency, Krabbe), and then, having by forgiveness removed the hindrance, He proceeds to impart that healing itself by an exercise of His supernatural power.

εἶπον ἐν ἑαυτ.] as in Matthew 3:9.

ΒΛΑΣΦΗΜ.] through the assumption of divine authority (Exodus 34:7; comp. with Matthew 20:5 f.). He thereby appeared to be depriving God of the honour that belongs to Him, and to be transferring it to Himself; for they did not ascribe to Him any prophetic authority to speak in the name of God.

[437] See also Phavorinus, p. 330, 49, and Göttling, Lehre vom Accent. p. 82; Ahrens, Dial. Dor. p. 344; Giese, Dor. Dial. p. 334 f.

Matthew 9:4. The power to discern the thoughts and intentions of others (comp. on Matthew 9:3) was a characteristic mark of the expected Messiah (Wetstein), was present in Jesus in virtue of His nature as the God-man, and analogous to His miraculous power.

ἱνατί] why? that is to say, ἵνα τί γένηται; Hermann, ad Vig. p. 849; Klotz, ad Devar. p. 631 f.

πονηρά] inasmuch, that is, as you regard me as a blasphemer, and that with a malicious intention; whereas the sick man, and those who carried him, were full of faith. In contrast to them is the emphatic ὑμεῖς (you people!), which, being ignored by important authorities, is deleted by Tischendorf 8.

Matthew 9:5. Γάρ] gives a reason for the thought expressed in the preceding question,—the thought, namely, that they were not justified in thinking evil of Him.

τί ἐστιν εὐκοπώτερον] The meaning is unquestionably this; the latter is quite as easy to say as the former, and conversely; the one requires no less power than the other; the same divine ἐξουσία enables both to be done; but in order that you may know that I was entitled to say the one, I will now add the other also: Arise, and so on. The result of the latter was accordingly the actual justification of the former. For τί in the sense of πότερον, comp. Stallbaum, ad Plat. Phil. p. 168.

ἔγειρε (see the critical remarks) is not a mere interjection, like ἄγε, ἔπειγε (Fritzsche, ad Marc. p. 55 f.), seeing that it is followed by καί, and that the circumstance of the arising has an essential connection with the incident (see Matthew 9:2, ἐπὶ κλίν. βεβλημένον; comp. Matthew 20:6-7); but the transitive is used intransitively (Kühner, II. 1, p. 81 ff.), as is frequently the case, especially in verbs denoting haste (Bernhardy, p. 340). Eur. Iph. A. 624: ἔγειρʼ ἀδελφῆς ἐφʼ ὑμέναιον εὐτυχῶς.

Matthew 9:6-7. Ἐξουσίαν ἔχει] placed near the beginning of the sentence so as to be emphatic: that the Son of man is empowered upon earth (not merely to announce, but) to communicate the forgiveness of sins. ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς does not belong to ἀφ. ἁμ. (Grotius),—in which case its position would convey an awkward emphasis, and the order of the words would naturally be ἀφ. ἁμ. ἐπὶ τ. γῆς (as Marcion read them),—but it is joined to ἐξουσίαν ἔχει in the consciousness of the ἐξουσία brought with Him from heaven. “Coelestem ortum hic sermo sapit,” Bengel.

τότε λέγει τῷ παραλυτ.] is neither to be taken parenthetically, nor is τόδε to be understood (Fritzsche), in order to justify the parenthesis; but Matthew’s style is such that no formal apodosis comes after ἁμαρτίας, but rather the call to the paralytic ἐγερθείς, etc. Matthew reports this change in regard to the parties addressed with scrupulous fidelity; and so, after concluding what Jesus says to the scribes with the anacoluthon ἵνα δὲ εἰδῆτε … ἁμαρτίας, he proceeds to add, in the narrative form, “then He says to the paralytic.” This is a circumstantial simplicity of style which is not to be met with in polished Greek writers, who would have omitted the τότε λέγει τῷ παραλ. altogether as a mere encumbrance. See passages from Demosthenes in Kypke, I. p. 48 f.

καὶ ἐγερθεὶς, κ.τ.λ.] therefore an immediate and complete cure, which does not favour the far-fetched notion that the declaration of Jesus penetrated the nervous system of the paralytic as with an electric current (Schenkel).

Matthew 9:8. Ἐφοβήθησαν] not equivalent to ἐθαύμασαν (not even in Mark 4:41; Luke 8:35), but they were afraid. This was naturally the first impression produced by the extraordinary circumstance; and then they praised God, and so on.

τοῖς ἀνθρώποις] Not the plural of category (Matthew 2:20), so that only Jesus is meant (Kuinoel), but men generally,—the human race. In one individual member of the human family they saw this power actually displayed, and regarded it as a new gift of God to humanity, for which they gave God praise.

Matthew 9:9-10. Comp. Mark 2:13 ff. (whom Matthew follows) and Luke 5:27 ff.

Καὶ παράγων] not: as He went farther (as is commonly supposed), but (Matthew 20:30; Mark 1:16; Mark 15:21; John 9:1; 1 Corinthians 7:31): as He went away from where (He had cured the paralytic), and was passing by (3Ma 6:16; Polyb. v. 18. 4), the place, that is, where Matthew was. Exactly as in Mark 2:14, and in Matthew 9:27 below.

Ματθ. λεγόμ.] Named Matthew (Matthew 2:23, Matthew 26:36, Matthew 27:33), anticipation of the apostolic name.

τὸ τελώνιον] the custom-house of the place (Poll. ix. 28). On Matthew himself and his identity with Levi (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27), further confirmed in Constitt. Ap. viii. 22. 1, see introduction, § 1. Considering the locality, it may be assumed that Matthew already knew something of Jesus, the extraordinary Rabbi and worker of miracles in that district, and that he does not now for the first time and all of a sudden make up his mind to join the company of His disciples (ἀκολουθεῖν). What is here recorded is the moment of the decision (in answer to Strauss, B. Bauer). This in opposition to Paulus, who interprets thus: “Go with me into thy house!” See Strauss, II. p. 570, who, however, sweeps away everything in the shape of a historical substratum, save the fact that Jesus really had publicans among His disciples, and that probably Matthew had likewise been one of this class;—“that these men had, of course, left the seat at the custom-house to follow Jesus, yet only in the figurative sense peculiar to such modes of expression, and not literally, as the legend depicts it.”