70 A. Oepke, TDNT , III, p. 209.
59 ἀφίημι is used by Matthew more than by any other New Testament writer (47 times; next is Mark with 34). It has a wide range of meaning including “let go,” “pardon,” “permit,” etc., but here leaving the nets is in view.
60 The word this time is δίχτυον; it is a general word for “net” and not the specific hand net of verse 18. The plural covers all the nets they would have used in their profession as fishermen. They now left them all.
61 ἀχολουθέω is another favorite word of our Evangelist. Matthew has it 25 times, which is more than in any other book (next is John with 19).
62 The word son is not included (the Greek means literally “the of Zebedee”), but in this expression it is readily understood. Interestingly, when Zebedee is mentioned with one of his sons his name always has the article as here, τὸν τοῦ Ζεβεδαίου, but the article is lacking in the plural “sons of Zebedee” except in John 21:2.
63 χαταρτίζω means “make ἄρτιος,” that is, “fit, complete”; they were making their nets ready for a further fishing expedition. This would involve any necessary repairs, and cleaning and folding the nets. NEB has “overhauling.”
64 Glover comments, “We read of no one being called to the apostleship while ‘standing idle in the markets.’ No indolent man will make either an apostle or a teacher.”
65 Luke 6:17–19 is usually seen as parallel to this passage, but it is a very rough parallel at best; coincidences of language are few.
66 For differences between the syngagogue and the church see chapter II of my The New Testament and the Jewish Lectionaries (London, 1964).
67 εὐαγγέλιον is found 4 times in this Gospel and 8 times in Mark; in the New Testament it is basically not a Gospel word but Pauline (Paul has it in 60 of its 76 New Testament occurrences). It is a compound of εὐ and ἀγγελία, “good” and “message.” It meant originally the reward given to the messenger, but came to be used for the good news he brought.
68 He has the verb θεραπεύω 16 times out of 43 in the New Testament, which is more than anyone else. The word actually means “to do service” (as in Acts 17:25), but in the New Testament the particular service is mostly the service of the sick, healing. Here it is used with the accusative of the disease, in verse 24 with the accusative of the person healed.
69 Disease is νόσος, which Matthew has 5 times, and illness is μαλαχία, which he alone uses in the New Testament (3 times), The repeated πᾶσαν emphasizes Jesus’ complete mastery over all forms of illness, and that whether we take it to mean “every kind of” or “every case of.”
70 A. Oepke, TDNT, III, p. 209.
71 Davies and Allison comment on the passage 4:23–5:2: “Before the crowds hear the Messiah’s word they are the object of his compassion and healing. Having done nothing, nothing at all, they are benefited. So grace comes before ask, succour before demand, healing before imperative” (I, p. 427) We should not miss the note of grace that runs through Matthew’s Gospel.
72 ἀχοή means “the sense of hearing” or “the organ of hearing,” the ear, but it comes also to have the meaning “what is heard,” whether this be a message or, as here, a report.
73 The verb προσφέρω is often used in the sense “offer” (as in 2:11), but here it is used in its literal sense “bring to.”
74 The expression is χαχῶς ἔχοντας, which Matthew has 5 times in this sense.
75 Matthew has the verb συνέχω only here; it means “hold together” and then “hold fast” (of a prisoner, Luke 22:63). It may be used of constraining someone to do something, and in the passive, as here, it is used of people held fast by ills of one sort or another (and unable to break free from them). The noun βάσανος also occurs only here in this Gospel. It is a word of Oriental origin that meant properly “a touchstone,” a stone used in the testing of metals. It evidently was regarded as a very stringent test, for it came to be used of examination of people by torture and then of the torture itself (AS). It thus seems to denote painful diseases.
76 The word is σεληνιάζω (again in 17:15 and nowhere else in the New Testament), which in the passive means “to be moonstruck.” AS says that epilepsy was supposed to be influenced by the moon, which is the reason for the widespread understanding of the term as “epileptic.” Phillips has “the insane” (so also LB), Filson and Knox “lunatics.”
77 More literally “many crowds,” ὄχλοι πολλοί, which Matthew employs often for “a great crowd” (8:1, 12 v.l.; 13:2; 15:30; 19:2); despite the plural we are not to think of several crowds.
1 Ridderbos has a wise comment: “In many respects His words have the character of a (Heb.) māšāl (mashal) or proverb, that is, an unexpected, paradoxical, and absolute manner of speaking that sharply accentuates a particular side of the truth without considering the possible exceptions to the rule (cf. 5:16 to 6:1). The hearer then has to ponder the matter himself” (Ridderbos, p. 112, n. 12).
2 “No man can live the Sermon on the Mount in and of himself, and unaided”; “There is nothing that so leads to the gospel and its grace as the Sermon on the Mount” (Lloyd-Jones, I, pp. 14, 18).
3 JBL, 106 (1987), p. 441.
4 Cf. Johnson, “Jesus would not have given all this teaching on a single occasion. The sermon is made up of aphorisms, maxims, and illustrations which were remembered and treasured out of many discourses.”
5 For a helpful introduction to the Sermon see Carson, SM, pp. 122–28. The number of Interpretation for April 1987 (vol. 41, no. 2) is given over to the Sermon on the Mount and has a useful discussion of a wide range of views.
6 He actually says “the” mountain, but it is not easy to understand the significance of the article. Matthew has a similar article in 8:1; 14:23; 15:29; 17:9; was there a particular mountain that the disciples knew as “the” mountain? (Plummer thinks this possible). This may be so, but the article need mean no more than the mountain that was nearby, or the mountainous area as opposed to the plain. Matthew uses ὄρος 16 times, which is more than in any other New Testament book. Perhaps we should notice Kingsbury’s view: “can we assume that Matthew, at 5:1 and 15:29, is likewise employing the mountain to point to Jesus as the Son of God? All indications are that this is indeed the case” (Structure, p. 57; so also p. 58). But this is unreasonable. Being on a mountain does not carry such a far-reaching implication.
Diétrich S. de Diétrich, Saint Matthew (London, 1962)
7 Davies, who has examined the concepts of the new Exodus and the new Moses, allows that such motifs may be discernible in some places, but he concludes that they are not dominant (SM, pp. 25–108). He says that “the context of the Sermon in the totality of the Gospel’s thought on the nature of the Christian life forbids any exclusive or even predominant ‘Mosaic’ approach to it” (SM, p. 99). Davies and Allison, however, “are moved” to accept a Mosaic motif in verses 1–2.
8 The posture, the verb, and the reference to disciples combine to show that Matthew is referring to teaching rather than proclamation. Davies holds that Matthew “has, with unmistakable deliberateness and with massive and majestic impressiveness, placed the teaching of Jesus in the forefront of his Gospel” (SM, p. 107),
9 This is Matthew’s first use of μαθητής, a term he will use 73 times (John has it 78 times). Its 262 New Testament uses are confined to the Gospels and Acts. For discipleship in this Gospel see my New Testament Theology (Grand Rapids, 1986), pp. 136–40.
10 Barclay takes the imperfect ἐδίδασχεν in the sense “This is what He used to teach” and sees evidence that this is not one sermon but a summary of what Jesus habitually taught.
11 According to AB, the two accounts “may well represent two versions uttered by Jesus on two different occasions.”
AB The Anchor Bible: W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, Matthew (New York, 1971)
12 μαχάριος means “blessed, fortunate, happy” but “usu. in the sense privileged recipient of divine favor” (BAGD), “O, the happiness of, or hail to those … may be exactly right for the Aramaic original (= Hebr. אַשֲׁרֵי), but it scarcely exhausts the content that μαχάριος had in the mouths of Gk.-speaking Christians” (BAGD, 1.b). Curiously Morgan regards “happy” as more accurate than “blessed.” F. Hauck in a felicitous expression says that the beatitudes “are not just intimations of the future or consolations in relation to it. They see the present in the light of the future” (TDNT, IV, p. 369).
13 The word πτωχός means a person so poor that he “lives not by his own labour or industry, but on other men’s alms… being one therefore whom Plato would not endure in his ideal State”; it contrasts with πένης (which also means “poor”): “The πένης has nothing superfluous, the πτωχός nothing at all” (Trench, p. 129).
14 We find “the poor in spirit” also in later Jewish writings such as the Qumran scrolls (see Vermes, p. 142).
15 Cf. Lloyd-Jones, “I would say that there is no more perfect statement of the doctrine of justification by faith only than this Beatitude: ‘Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs (and theirs only) is the kingdom of heaven.’ Very well then, this is the foundation of everything else” (I, p. 42).
16 Davies comments, “The repeated αὐτοί in the second clause in each part of the Beatitudes in vv. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10 has an antithetical effect. It is not reading too much into these verses to find that it is ‘these’ people rather than ‘those’ who are blessed” (SM, p. 289).
17 The verb παραχαλέω can have the meaning “encourage” (cf. Heb. 3:13), and that may possibly be in mind here. Many interpreters find here the “divine passive,” that is, the passive used when the real doer of the action is God. Thus GNB has “God will comfort them” (and so in vv. 6, 7, 9, etc.). E. M. Sidebottom has shown that the construction is perhaps not as widely used as some suggest (ET, LXXXVII [1975–76], pp. 200–203), but we can scarcely doubt that this is the way the present verse is to be understood.
18 “It is not the sorrow of bereavement to which Christ refers, but the sorrow of repentance” (Stott, pp. 40–41).
19 αὐτοί resumes the subject and puts some emphasis on it: they and not others are the ones who will be comforted.
20 This verse precedes verse 4 in D 33 itmss syrC etc. But it follows so naturally on verse 3 that it is hard to see why any scribe should have interposed verse 4 if this had been the original order. It is much more likely that scribes altered the original sequence to bring verses 3 and 5 together.
21 “Others claim their rights, but the meek are concerned about their duties” (Buttrick).
22 “These are not the weak in character, the meekly submissive or the fearful compromisers. Christianity is not a crutch for the sick or a parapet for the dizzy, a substitute for those who have missed something else. Therefore the gospel is not a hymn in praise of people without stuffing or strength” (Gutzwiller).
23 χληρονομέω, which means “receive by lot” (χλῆρος) and then “inherit,” and thus “possess.”
24 “To believe oneself to be in possession of righteousness, like the Pharisee in the parable, is fatal. To know oneself to be in want of it is not enough. One must feel the want of it, and have a passionate and persistent longing for it …” (Plummer, p. 65).
25 Cf. G. Schrenk, “in opposition to the Jewish thought of merit, διχαιοσύνη is plainly regarded as a gift which God gives to those who ask for it” (TDNT, II, p. 198). Johnson denies that the saying can be “reconciled with rabbinical Judaism” and understands the meaning to be “they depend, not upon their own power to achieve righteousness, but upon God.” R. Bultmann says that this verse “obviously does not mean those who ‘ever striving, endeavor’ to attain ethical perfection, but those who long to have God pronounce the verdict ‘righteous’ as His decision over them in the judgment” (Theology of the New Testament, I [London, 1952], p. 273).
26 The verb χορτάζω is used of animals in the sense “feed, fatten,” so that when it comes to be used of persons it means “fill,” “satisfy fully.”
AS G. Abbott-Smith, A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament (Edinburgh, 1954)
27 According to BAGD, χαρδία is used “as center and source of the whole inner life, w. its thinking, feeling, and volition … in the case of the natural man as well as the redeemed man.” They note its use of thought, of the will, of moral decisions (“pure in heart”), of the emotions (esp. love; 22:37), and of the disposition.
28 “All agree that purity of heart is the mother of all virtues, but there is scarcely a man in a hundred who does not put smart dealing in the place of the highest virtue” (Calvin, I, p. 171).
29 Billy Graham brings out the fact that this world sorely needs peacemakers by citing the numbers of wars fought by various nations from 1480 to 1941: Great Britain 78 wars, France 71, Spain 64, Russia 61, Austria 52, Germany 23, China 11, Japan 9, U.S.A. 13 plus 110 against the Indians within U.S.A. He adds, “Someone has pointed out that in the past four thousand years there has been less than three hundred years of peace” (The Secret of Happiness [New York, 1955], p. 85). In a race like ours peacemakers have plenty of scope for action.
30 The Jews lauded peacemaking, and Hillel, for example, said, “Be of the disciples of Aaron, loving peace and pursuing peace” (’Abot 1:12). But he adds, “loving mankind and bringing them nigh to the Law.” The reverence for peace and the love of mankind are noteworthy, but the emphasis on the law strikes a different note.
31 “Sons of God, then, are those who manifest the God-life, do as God does, perform God’s task in the world” (Robinson).
32 διώχω. The perfect tense points to a persecution in the past that endures into the present.
33 Lenski points out that this “means more than that they suffered innocently. … They suffered because of what they were in their character and their lives, for the divine approval that rested upon them.”
34 Filson comments, “God will preserve and welcome into the Kingdom those who in the conflict of life pay the cost of discipleship.”
35 ὅταν, which is used “of an action that is conditional, possible, and, in many instances, repeated” (BAGD, which goes on to point out that when the aorist subjunctive is used the action of the subordinate clause precedes that of the main clause, here “when they have reviled”). Matthew has it 19 times.
36 ψευδόνεμοι is read by many important MSS (א B C mss of OL syrC sah Boh etc.) but omitted by a significant group (D mss of OL syrs). It is a nice point whether the word was original but omitted by some scribes who thought it scarcely necessary (it could be assumed that if the followers of Jesus were accused it would be falsely) or whether it was absent from the original text but was supplied by scribes to make sure there was no doubt about the point. On the whole I think it should be read. But if it is not read it is implied, for what the enemy say would not really be evil if it were true.
37 ἀγαλλιᾶσθε is a strong term, “exult.” The verb is found only here in Matthew; it is “a new formation in H. Gk., found only in Bibl. and ecc. wr. for ἀγάλλω” (BAGD). Cf. KJV, “be exceeding glad.”
38 μισθός is used 10 times by Matthew, the most in any New Testament book.
39 Cf. Allen, “Here the thought is not that of reward for piety, but of future recompense for a present condition of persecution and reproach.”
40 There is a similar saying about salt in Mark 9:50 but with considerable differences (of Mark’s 21 words only 6 are in Matthew), so that dependence is not easy to demonstrate. Luke also has a saying about salt (Luke 14:34–35), but adds only μωρανθῇ to the words common to Mark. Luke has words about throwing out worthless salt, but they are different from those here, and he adds, “he who has ears to hear, let him hear.” Mark and Luke also have a saying about a covered light (Mark 4:21; Luke 8:16).
41 BDF sees the article here as “inserted if the predicate noun is presented as something well known or as that which alone merits the designation” (273[1]). On salt Stendahl comments, “The connotation of ‘salt’ in rabbinic metaphorical language is mainly ‘wisdom.’ ” Such a reference may be favored by the use of the verb μωραίνω (see n. 39† above).
42 “While Christians are not challenged to become salty—their saltiness is a gift of Jesus’ Word—they are obliged to stay salty, that is, they are challenged to be real Christians” (Bruner, p. 160).
43 The verb so translated, μωραίνω, means “to be foolish” (cf. Rom. 1:22) and comes to have a causal sense “to make foolish.” It is not what we expect with salt, but foolishness easily leads to insipidity and this results from the lack of salt. Carson comments, “It is hard not to conclude that disciples who lose their savor are in fact making fools of themselves.”
44 L. G. Herr says that the Dead Sea was the main source of salt for Palestine, but “the salt from the Dead Sea region was generally contaminated with other minerals; thus the salt could be dissolved out of this mixture, leaving a tasteless substance” (ISBE, IV, p. 287; so also TDNT, I, p. 229).
45 ἰσχύω has the meaning “be strong”; in passages like this it signifies “avail,” “be serviceable” (cf. Gal. 5:6; Heb. 9:17).
46 The Qumran scrolls refer to members of the community as “the sons of light” and say things like “All the children of righteousness are ruled by the Prince of Light and walk in the ways of light” (Vermes, p. 75).
47 ἐπάνω signifies that the city is on top of the hill.
48 Cf. Tasker, “The most obvious general characteristic of salt is that it is essentially different from the medium into which it is put. Its power lies precisely in this difference. So is it, says Jesus, with His disciples. Their power in the world lies in their difference from it.”
49 χαίω means “light,” “kindle,” and “in contrast to ἅπτω, χ. lays the emphasis less upon the act of lighting than on keeping a thing burning” (BAGD, 1.a).
50 AS understands λύχνος as “a lamp (portable, and usually set on a stand, λυχνία).”
51 The μόδιος, Latin modius, was a measure of grain comprising 16 sextarii = “about 8.75 liters, almost exactly one peck” (BAGD). The article here points to the measure in the house.
52 χαί here is consecutive, “and so”: χαὶ λάμπει = ὥστε λάμπειν (BDF 442[2]).
53 οἰχία strictly means “the house” as opposed to οἶχος, the whole estate (see on 2:11). This obviously fits the present passage. A typical house of the poor would have only one room, so that one lamp would lighten the whole house.
54 Good is χαλός; over against ἀγαθός and δίχαιος, it signifies the goodness that is attractive. Some “good” people are very unattractive. That is not the goodness of which Jesus is speaking.
55 The adjective οὐράνιος qualifies Father in verse 48; 6:14, 26, 32; 15:13; 18:35; 23:9, a construction found in Matthew only. He also has some references to the Father as “in secret” (6:4, 6, 18). For οὐρανός see on 3:2.
56 There is a play on words. The verb νομίζω is related to νόμος and in fact is derived from it. AS gives its meaning as “1. to practise, hold by custom … 2. to deem, consider, suppose.” Turner regards the command as categorical: “Do not think for one moment that …” (Grammatical Insights, p. 32).
Tasker R. V. G. Tasker, The Gospel according to St. Matthew (London, 1961)
57 χαταλύω = “loose down”; it is used of demolishing the temple, for example (24:2; 26:61; 27:40).
58 The two are linked with ἤ, a disjunctive. Conceivably a different attitude might be taken to one than to the other. Jesus fulfils both.
59 The infinitive expresses the purpose of Jesus’ coming (Burton, MT, 366).
60 The meaning of fulfil has aroused a great deal of discussion (see Carson for a useful summary). That Jesus did not insist on the whole ceremonial law is evident, but he makes no distinction between the ceremonial and the moral law here. Cf. Carson, “The best interpretation of these difficult verses says that Jesus fulfills the Law and the Prophets in that they point to him, and he is their fulfillment. The antithesis is not between ‘abolish’ and ‘keep’ but between ‘abolish’ and ‘fulfill.’ ” According to Davies, the verb is best taken as “to bring to its destined end” (SM, p. 100). JB has a note: “Jesus is speaking not of carrying into effect each single injunction of the old Law but of bestowing on that Law a new and definitive form by raising it to a higher place through the spirit of the gospel.” Calvin argues with regard to the ceremonies laid down in the law that “it is only their practice that was abrogated: their significance was actually given more confirmation” (I, p. 180). McNeile holds that the reference is to Jesus’ teaching: “He came to fill the Law, to reveal the full depth of meaning that it was intended to hold.” This is true but inadequate.
61 JBL, 93 (1974), p. 231.
62 Stonehouse points out that in this Gospel Jesus is recorded as using the expression “I say” 55 times, whereas in Mark this happens 18 times, in Luke 43 times, and in John 34 times (Witness, p. 210). Clearly Matthew is more than a little interested in the solemn pronouncements Jesus makes.
63 Cf. H. Schlier, “The point of the Amen before Jesus’ own sayings is rather to show that as such they are reliable and true, and that they are so as and because Jesus Himself in His Amen acknowledges them to be His own sayings and thus makes them valid. … Thus in the ἀμήν preceding the λέγω ὑμῖν of Jesus we have the whole of Christology in nuce” (TDNT, I, p. 338).
64 For ἕως see the note on 1:25.
65 Matthew usually has οὐρανός in the plural, but in the expression “heaven and earth” he prefers the singular (see v. 34; 6:10; 11:25; 24:35; 28:18).
66 The double negative οὐ μή is emphatic. Moulton points out that the words of Jesus and quotations from LXX account for nearly 90 percent of the New Testament examples of the construction; he detects “a feeling that inspired language was fitly rendered by words of a decisive tone not needed generally elsewhere” (M, I, p. 192). The aorist subjunctive is used here in the sense of the future indicative (Burton, MT, 172). Matthew has it about 20 times, almost all in words of Jesus.
67 Bengel says that there are 66,420 yodhs in the Hebrew Scriptures. Just one of such a number would not seem to be important, but even that will not pass away, Jesus says.
68 The word is χεραία, found again in the New Testament only in Luke 16:17. It derives from χέρας, “a horn,” and means “a little horn.” Precisely what the “little horn” meant in New Testament days is not certain, but it may well have been used “of the point or extremity which distinguishes some Heb. letters from others” (AS).
69 γίνομαι may be used in the sense “be,” “become,” but here it has the meaning “happen, take place” (BAGD, I.3.a); “until all has taken place” signifies “until all is past.”
70 Lloyd-Jones sees this as “the central claim which is made by our Lord. It is, in other words, that all the law and all the prophets point to Him and will be fulfilled in Him down to the smallest detail. Everything that is in the law and the prophets culminates in Christ, and He is the fulfilment of them. It is the most stupendous claim that He ever made” (I, p. 187). France remarks, “The law is unalterable, but that does not justify its application beyond the purpose for which it is intended.”
71 “Relative clauses which can be converted into conditional clauses usually make no assertions about concrete realities, but rather general assertions or suppositions, so that ὃς... ἄν, corresponding to the ἐάν of the conditional clause proper, appears as a rule” (BDF 380[1]).
72 λύω means “loose” in a variety of senses; of such things as commandments or laws it means “repeal, annul, abolish” (BAGD, 4).
’Abot ’Abot
73 There is notice of an opinion that the “least” commandment was that about taking the mother bird and its young (Deut. 22:6–7) in SBk, I, p. 249.
74 Of this use of χαλέω BAGD notes, “Very oft. the emphasis is to be placed less on the fact that the name is such and such, than on the fact that the bearer of the name actually is what the name says about him” (1.a.d).
75 Barclay quotes some scribal interpretations of the law that show plainly the way they understood “righteousness” and its distance from the teaching of Jesus.
76 “This verse challenges us to be good if we will be God’s. There is no cheap grace in Matthew” (Bruner, p. 172).
77 “There has been much talk since Freud of a ‘depth-psychology’; the concern of Jesus was for a ‘depth-morality’. Pharisees were content with an external and formal obedience, a rigid conformity to the letter of the law; Jesus teaches us that God’s demands are far more radical than this” (Stott, p. 75).
78 D. B. Wallace has pointed out that, while Granville Sharp’s Rule applies when one article governs two singular nouns, that is, that the same person is meant by both, this does not follow with plurals. Then there is a variety of possibilities; he sees τῶν γραμματέων χαὶ Φαρισαίων here as signifying “the scribes and other Pharisees” (GTJ, 4 [1983], p. 73).
79 For the double negative οὐ μή see on verse 18. The Evangelists often use it in reporting the words of Jesus as though they felt it appropriate to the solemn words of a great person. Here, however, there is real emphasis. There is no question of entrance into the kingdom for the person of whom Jesus speaks.
80 Daube, pp. 55–62.
81 This could be translated “It was said by the men of old,” as does KJV. Ridderbos, Hendriksen, and others accept this rendering, reasoning that Jesus is not citing Scripture but scribal tradition.
82 The form used is ἐρρέθη, whereas Jesus’ own formula of quotation is γέγραπται (4:4, 6, 7, etc.). Matthew also uses the participle ῥηθέν in such quotations (1:22; 2:17, etc.).
JB The Jerusalem Bible (London, 1966)
REB The Revised English Bible (Oxford and Cambridge, 1989)
83 The future indicative renders “the categorical injunctions and prohibitions (negative οὐ) in the legal language of the OT … but the future is nowhere used in this chapter in independent injunctions of Jesus” (BDF 362). An apparent exception is in verse 48, but it takes this as going back to such passages as Deuteronomy 18:13 and Leviticus 19:2.
M, J. H. Moulton, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, vol. 1, Prolegomena (Edinburgh, 1906)
84 “Moses said it truly; the interpreters of Moses said it with altered meaning: the hearers did not distinguish the meaning of Moses from that of his interpreters” (Bengel). Perhaps we should notice that Gundry does not see any reference to Jewish tradition, but holds that Matthew is giving his “own summary of the OT penalty for murder.”
85 ἔνοχος (5 times in Matthew out of 10 in the New Testament) is a legal term meaning “liable to,” “answerable to” with a dative of the court. χρίσις (which Matthew also has more than anyone else, 12 times; John with 11 is next) is obviously a legal term as well. Strictly it denotes the process of judging, but it may also be used of a court.
GNB Good News Bible (London and New York, 1976)
86 He uses the emphatic ἐγώ. France comments, “This is not a new contribution to exegetical debate, but a definitive declaration of the will of God. It demands (and receives, 7:28–29) the response, ‘Who is this?’ Thus this passage contributes another aspect to the presentation of Jesus as the Messiah which is Matthew’s overriding purpose.”
87 KJV adds “without a cause,” a reading supported by אG D K L etc. but not found in p67vid א* etc. Most interpreters agree that it should not be accepted. But it does give a correct understanding of Jesus’ words, for there are situations in which anger is quite proper (cf. Mark 3:5).
88 To Jewish ears “brother” meant “fellow Jew.” Recent commentators often draw attention to the Qumran sect with its gradations of punishment for offenses against fellow members and suggest that the passage refers to discipline practiced among Christians (cf. Davies, for whom brother means “a Christian”; SM, p. 98; so Gundry and others). But to limit its meaning in this way is surely to fall into the same error as that of the Pharisees; it would allow anger against all non-Christians. Is this really Jesus’ meaning?
89 It is usually held to be derived from the Aramaic רֵיקָא, “a shortened form of רֵיקָז, ‘empty,’ as vocalized in the Galilaean dialect” (AS). But BAGD notes its use “as an uncomplimentary, perh. foul epithet in a Zenon pap. of 257 B.C.” when it is unlikely to be Aramaic. It also finds it in the Talmud. It notes that Jerome and others take it as equivalent to χενός, “empty-head, numbskull, fool.” Compare Chrysostom, who said, “this word ‘Raca,’ is not an expression of great insolence, but rather of some contempt and slight on the part of the speaker.” It is like talking to servants or “any very inferior person” (p. 110).
90 If we are to distinguish between the two words it will probably be as Bruce puts it: “Raca expresses contempt for a man’s head = you stupid! Mōre expresses contempt for his heart and character = you scoundrel.” But Ridderbos regards the three sins of murder here “as virtually equivalent.” It is difficult to think that Jesus would engage in a hair-splitting distinction between “Raka” and “you fool.”
91 μωρός occurs 6 times in Matthew out of a New Testament total of 12; it is not found in any other Gospel or in Acts. It is normally an adjective, but here it seems to be a noun. It is possible that it is a transliteration of the Hebrew מוֹרֶה, “rebel” or “apostate” (cf. Deut. 21:18). Then we might see a gradation of offense, from being angry, to calling the brother stupid, to calling him a rebel, coupled with a gradation of punishment, first that of the local council, then the Sanhedrin, and finally the judgment of God. This distinction has its attractions, but it falls short of being demonstrated. Albright and Mann, by contrast, detect “a descending scale of offences” (AB).
BAGD Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, rev. and aug. by William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, and Frederick W. Danker from the 5th edn. (Chicago, 1979)
92 Sub ἔνοχος 2.a. γέεννα occurs 7 times in Matthew out of a New Testament total of 12 (Mark with 3 is the only other book to have it more than once). It refers to the valley of Hinnom, a ravine to the south of Jerusalem. During the monarchy it was the center of an idolatrous cult that involved passing children through the fire (2 Kings 23:10, etc.). There are prophecies of judgment on this dreadful place (Jer. 7:32; 19:6), and it came to be linked with the final place of torment. There is some evidence that the place was used as a rubbish dump where fires burned continually. Among the Jews there was the idea that the Last Judgment would take place there, and before New Testament times the name was used for the place of fiery torment that awaits the wicked (cf. TDNT, I, pp. 657–58).
93 πρῶτον is to be taken with what precedes (as in 6:33; 7:5; so NIV, REB, “First go”) rather than with what follows (as NRSV, “first be reconciled).”
94 διαλλάσσομαι occurs here only in the New Testament; it has the meaning “become reconciled to.” Lightfoot sees it as denoting “mutual concession after mutual hostility” (Notes on Epistles of St Paul [London, 1904], p. 288); this may be the case, or it may be reading a little too much into the word. The emphasis is on the offender putting things right with the offended brother. Turner comments on the tenses: “First be reconciled once and for all (aorist) to your brother, and then come and offer as many gifts as you like (present)” (Grammatical Insights, p. 30).
95 For τότε see on 2:7. This is another example of its use in the nonclassical sense of what follows in time rather than “at that time” (so also in 7:5; 12:29, etc.).
96 The “seemingly periphrastic” tense (BDF 353[1]), ἴσθι εὐνοῶν, is unexpected. It perhaps indicates the continuing state (“be habitually well disposed,” Chamberlain, p. 72); Jesus is speaking of something more than a momentary impulse. εὐνοέω occurs only here in the New Testament.
97 ἀντίδιχος. MM calls it “this common legal word” and cites examples from the papyri of its use in lawsuits. Its only New Testament occurrences are twice each in Matthew and Luke, and once in 1 Peter.
98 The combination ἕως ὄτου is found only here in Matthew; it is not common. The meaning is generally “until,” but here it is clearly “while.” BAGD classes this use of μετά as signifying “accompaniment for a short time” (A.II.1.c.α).
99 ὑπηρέτης may denote a helper or servant in any one of a variety of ways; here it is the servant of the court who looks after imprisonment.
100 From there renders ἐχεῖθεν, a favorite expression of Matthew’s (he has it 12 times; nobody else has it more than Mark’s 5).
101 ἕως “w. the aor. subj. and, as the rule requires … ἄν … to denote that the commencement of an event is dependent on circumstances” (BAGD, I.1.b).
102 ἀποδίδωμι is found 18 times in Matthew (out of a New Testament total of 47). It basically means “give away” and is often used in the sense “give back,” “recompense,” which may be in a good sense or a bad one. It may also mean “sell.” Here, of course, the meaning is “repay.”
103 χοδράντης is found again in the New Testament only in Mark 12:42. It is a loanword from the Latin quadrans, which was the Roman copper coin with the smallest value (BAGD speaks of a quarter of a cent).
104 O. J. Baab puts the accepted view in these terms: “Because of the nature of marriage, adultery was not so much evidence of moral depravity as the violation of a husband’s right to have sole sexual possession of his wife and to have the assurance that his children were his own” (IDB, I, p. 51). It was not seen as adultery, for example, for an Israelite to have intercourse with a female slave or with a Gentile woman. Adultery for him involved infringing the rights of another Israelite male.
105 There is a complaint about men who “gratified their eyes with lewdness,” for “Whoever looks upon a woman’s little finger is as though he gazed upon the pudenda” (Shab. 64b). Elsewhere the leg, the voice, and the hair of a woman are added to the little finger as objects that may be sexual incitements (Ber. 24a). The Book of Jubilees urges “that we should keep ourselves from all fornication and pollution … let them not fornicate with her after their eyes and hearts” (Jub. 20:3–4).
106 BAGD interpreters πρός as used here “of the result that follows a set of circumstances (so that)”; it translates, “the one who looks at a woman in such a way that desire for her is aroused in him” (III.3.b; cf. BDF 402[5], “with respect to”). Chamberlain also considers result as possible (p. 192). Turner finds “hardly any telic force, but simple accompaniment (and)” (M, III, p. 144). ἐπιθυμέω may be used of a good desire (Luke 22:15), but mostly it means evil desires, as here.
107 Josephus speaks of a king who put out the right eyes of subjugated warriors; “since the left eye was covered by the shield” this rendered them “utterly unserviceable” (Ant. 6.69–70).
108 σχανδαλίζω is from σχάνδαλον, the bait stick of a trap, and properly denotes the putting of a trap or snare in the way. In the New Testament it is always used metaphorically and may mean anything that leads people away from right conduct into sin. Matthew has almost half the total New Testament occurrences of the verb (14 out of 29; he also has most occurrences of σχάνδαλον). AS notes that the word occurs in LXX, other Greek translations of the Old Testament, once in the Psalms of Solomon, and “not elsewhere except NT and eccl.” MM favors the view that the emphasis is “on the idea of ‘snare’ rather than of ‘stumbling-block.’ ”
109 Bengel remarks, “Not the organ itself, but the concupiscence which animates the eye or hand is meant. … a man might pluck out his material eye, and yet cherish concupiscence within.” Cf. Bruce, “Mutilation will not serve the purpose; it may prevent the outward act, but it will not extinguish desire.”
110 Cf. Bruner, “in sexual purity decisiveness is everything”; “Better to go limping into heaven than leaping into hell” (p. 186).
111 Derrett points out that among many Eastern peoples “the left hand is used for lavatory and inauspicious purposes (the left index finger is used in cursing), the right exclusively for blessing” (Law, p. xlv). He holds that the right hand here refers to actions like taking (stealing, etc.) and giving (bribes).
112 ἐχχόπτω (4 times in Matthew, the most in one book) means “cut off or down.” It is used of cutting down trees (3:10) or metaphorically of removing the pretext of Paul’s opponents (2 Cor. 11:12). Josephus uses it of putting out eyes (Ant. 10.140).
113 Thus Matthew specifies the right hand as Mark does not, while Mark has the article with γέενναν, which Matthew lacks. But both have σχανδαλίζω (Matthew has εἰ with the present indicative and Mark ἐάν with the present subjunctive), a compound of χόπτω (Matthew uses ἐχ, Mark ἀπό), and the verb ἀπέρχομαι (Matthew aorist subjunctive, Mark aorist infinitive). Clearly the two are related, but it is not easy to derive the one from the other.
Mounce R. H. Mounce, Matthew (San Francisco, 1985)
114 It is expedient etc. is identical with the wording in verse 29 except that ἀπέλθῃ replaces βληθῇ and εἰς γέενναν precedes the verb here, whereas it followed it in verse 29.
115 “Whatever grounds for divorce the Mosaic enactment may have had in view, the thrust of the passage in its original setting is not to establish grounds for divorce, but, presupposing the practice of divorce on various grounds, to provide some protection for the woman from the harshness of her husband. The aim of the legislation is not to condone divorce as such, but to mitigate its evil consequences” (Stonehouse, Witness, p. 204).
116 This is surely an incorrect understanding of Scripture, for the punishment for adultery was death (Deut. 22:22); in Deuteronomy there is no question of divorce on the ground of adultery.
Giṭ. Giṭṭin
117 Cf. Josephus, “He who desires to be divorced from the wife who is living with him for whatsoever cause—and with mortals many such may arise—must certify in writing …” (Ant. 4.253).
118 The Mishnah devotes a whole tractate to the bills of divorce. Clearly the precise requirements meant a great deal to the Jews in the early centuries, and there was a good deal of discussion. But as to the central point, that it was a man’s right to divorce his wife, there was no dispute.
119 ἀπολύω occurs 19 times in Matthew, which is nearly a third of its 65 New Testament occurrences. It is used of releasing a prisoner (27:15) or a debtor (18:27), and of forgiveness (Luke 6:37). It comes to mean “let go, dismiss,” and it is in this sense that it is used of divorce. Moulton says that the aorist tense here, “denotes not so much the carrying into effect as the determination” (M, I, p. 186).
120 ἀποστάσιον occurs again only in 19:7; Mark 10:4 in the New Testament. MM notes its use in the papyri for documents of relinquishing rights to property after sale and the like.
121 λόγου πορνείας. λόγος among other things may be used of “the subject under discussion, matter, thing” and may have meanings like “reckoning, account” or “reason, motive” (BAGD). I have taken the meaning here as “matter,” but “motive” is a possibility.
122 “The penalty for proven adultery, when the capital punishment was abolished, was mitigated into the divorce of the woman (the husband having no option)” (Israel Abrahams, Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels, 1st ser. [rpt. New York, 1967], p. 74). So also Moore, Judaism, II [Cambridge, 1958], p. 125). The Mishnah provides that if a woman “was found unchaste … he may not continue [his union] with her” (Ketub. 3.5). Markus Bockmuehl cites Qumran and other evidence that “adultery (and rape) requires divorce” (NTS, 35 [1989], p. 295). See also Mishnah, Soṭa 5:1.
123 πορνεία properly means the use of a harlot (πόρνη) and is sometimes distinguished from adultery (15:19). But it is also used of sexual sin in general (1 Cor. 5:1; Col. 3:5), and that seems to be its meaning here. Bonnard argues that it signifies marriage within the prohibited degrees (Lev. 18:6–18), but there is no good reason for understanding the term in this way.
124 The word is used of an adulterous wife (Sir. 23:23).
125 NIV translates “except for marital unfaithfulness,” which, of course, clearly includes adultery. But it is a wider term and perhaps captures for us a little more of Jesus’ meaning. It is perhaps relevant that Paul cites Jesus’ teaching (1 Cor. 7:10), but goes on to deal with other situations (vv. 12–15) and claims to have “the Spirit of God” in this discussion (v. 40). Clearly he did not understand the words of Jesus to exclude the possibility of divorce on other grounds than literal adultery.
126 The two passives are to be noted: the man who puts away his wife wrongfully makes her commit adultery, as most translations note. They do not note that he also makes her future husband commit adultery. Lenski puts emphasis on these two passives and translates, he “brings about that she is stigmatized as adulterous” and the new husband “is stigmatized as adulterous.” Again, “Neither ‘commits’ anything, both have had something committed upon them.” The guilt attaches to the one who broke the marriage.
Shebu. Shebu‘ot
Ned. Nedarim
127 Or not to commit perjury; ἐπιορχέω can mean either.
128 ἀποδίδωμι (see on v. 26) is a favorite Matthean word. It has about it the idea of paying what is due. Here it means that whatever is sworn must be performed. Davies thinks that the passage refers to vows rather than oaths (SM, p. 240); if this were so, the verb would be very appropriate.
129 Matthew has ὅρχος, “oath,” 4 times, Hebrews twice, and no other writing more than once. This Evangelist is interested in oaths.
LB The Living Bible
130 ὀμνύω (a variant form of ὄμνυμι) is found in Matthew in 13 of its 26 occurrences. It is followed by the accusative of the person or thing by whom one swears or by ἐν with the dative, εἰς with the accusative, or χατά with the genitive. The repeated μήτε divides the preceding negative into its component parts (BAGD).
TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, trans. G. W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, 1964-76)
131 The swearing of oaths is forbidden in the Damascus Document of the Qumran sect (Vermes, p. 108). But those who joined the community must first swear “a binding oath to return with all his heart and soul to every commandment of the Law of Moses in accordance with all that has been revealed of it to the sons of Zadok …” (Vermes, p. 79). Josephus says of the Essenes, “Any word of theirs has more force than an oath; swearing they avoid, regarding it as worse than perjury, for they say that one who is not believed without an appeal to God stands condemned already” (War 2.135). But to join the sect they had to swear “tremendous oaths” (139).
132 ὅλως has a meaning like “altogether,” and with a negative, “not at all.”
133 By here is εἰς, which is unusual in such a context. Ἱεροσόλυμα is Matthew’s usual form of the name. A vow that included the words “as Jerusalem” was binding, but if “as” was lacking it was not binding (Ned. 1:3). A number of commentators refer to the rabbinic view that an oath “by Jerusalem” is nothing, but an oath “to Jerusalem” is binding (Tos. Ned. 1).
134 For examples of oaths sworn in all these ways see SBk, I, pp. 332–36. Philo advises swearing by one’s father or mother, but permits swearing by “earth, sun, stars, heaven, the whole universe” (De Spec. Leg. 2.2, 5). Such oaths avoid the use of the divine name and therefore taking God’s name in vain.
135 ἐν is a reversion to the previous construction after just one εἰς. Matthew uses χεφαλή more often than does any other book except Revelation (12 times; Revelation has 19). Matthew means the literal head, apart from one reference in a quotation to “the head of the corner” (21:42). The rabbis regarded a vow “by the life of thy head” as binding, though a dissentient opinion says that it is not (Sanh. 3:2).
Ridderbos H. N. Ridderbos, Matthew (Grand Rapids, 1987)
136 For δύναμαι see on 3:9. The use of dyes, of course, changes only the appearance of the hair, not its real color.
137 ὁ λόγος ὑμῶν. This noun may be used in any one of a variety of ways, but here it signifies “what you say,” “any statement you make.”
138 Both times we have accented οὔ. Matthew has this term 4 times, the most in any New Testament book.
139 The rabbis regarded the doubled word as more significant than the single use. Thus a bath qol might be recognized “only if it says, yes, yes, or no, no” (Meg. 32a). R. Eleazar held that “no” or “yes” was an oath, but it was countered that either word must be doubled if it was to be an oath (Shebu. 36a).
140 περισσός = “exceeding the usual number or size,” here in the comparative sense (BAGD). BDF sees this with the following τούτων as “the so-called abbreviated comparison” and with περισσός finds it equivalent to πλείων (185[1]).
141 ἐχ τοῦ πονηροῦ.
142 ἀντί is the preposition of substitution: it means “in place of,” “in the stead of.” It shows that the punishment is an exact requital.
143 As in verse 34 we have the infinitive, but the meaning is plainly imperative. ἀνθίστημι, here only in Matthew, has the meaning of setting oneself against someone; “it has the notion of hostility” (Chamberlain, p. 133). τῷ πονηρῷ could mean “the evil one” or “evil,” but in this context it is much more likely to refer to an evil person (“those who wrong you,” REB). Knox understands it of “the evil thing” and renders “you should not offer resistance to injury.”
144 ἀλλʼ.
145 ὅστις (see on 2:6) is the relative of quality, but it often has a meaning like “whoever, everyone who,” and that will be its significance here. Most translations have “if anyone,” and this certainly gives the general sense; this is a “conditional relative clause” (BDF 380; it also cites this as an example of Matthew’s correct use “in sentences of general reference” (293[1]). But the word draws attention to the kind of person, “one who slaps,” rather than to a conditional possibility.
146 ῥαπίζω (ῥαπίς, “a rod”) in secular writers seems to mean “hit with a rod or a club”; in the New Testament, however, it seems always to mean “hit with the open hand,” “slap” (though some think a rod is in mind in 26:67). If a right-handed person hits another on the right cheek it is probably with the back of the hand, which was regarded by the Jews as more serious than a slap with the open hand; it carried double the fine (B. Qam. 8:6).
147 σιαγών (again in the New Testament only in Luke 6:29), which AS defines as “the jawbone, jaw, cheek.” MM notes its use in the papyri and remarks that it “is not of learned origin.”
B. Baba Qamma
148 τῷ θέλοντι is a casus pendens, resumed by the pronoun αὐτῷ (cf. M, II, p. 424).
149 See S. Daniel-Rops, Daily Life In Palestine at the Time of Christ (London, 1962), pp. 211–18.
150 “Here the order is χιτ.-ἱ; the situation is that of a lawsuit, in which the defendant is advised to give up not only the indispensable χιτών demanded by his opponent, but the ἱ. as well.” In Luke 6:29, however, “the order is ἱ.-χ., a sequence that suggests highway robbery, in which the robber first deprives his victim of his outer garment” (BAGD, sub ἱμάτιον 2).
151 ἀγγαρεύω. MM cites its use from 252 B.C. The word is discussed by Deissmann, BS, pp. 86–87.
152 Matthew is fond of μετά, which he uses 70 times, the most in any one book. Overall it is used with the genitive about 3½ times as often as the accusative (364 to 103), but Matthew has it 6 times as often (60 to 10).
153 Turner comments on the aorist: δός “of a definite occasion and person, where Lk 6:30 δίδου to anyone who asks” (M, III, p. 76).
154 ἀποστρέφω may be transitive or intransitive; it can mean “repudiate,” “reject” (2 Tim. 1:15; Heb. 12:25), which is the meaning here. AB understands the text to mean “do not refuse one who is unable to pay interest,” emphasizing that δανίζω means “lend at interest.” But in the middle this verb means “borrow”; AB’s interpretation seems unduly limiting.
155 Buttrick comments on the injunctions in this section: “A literal obedience raises problems in our ambiguous world, but is better far than the evasion which says, ‘This is figurative language.’ ” Calvin reminds us that “Christ’s purpose was to make His disciples generous, not prodigal. There is stupid prodigality, which pours away the Lord’s gifts recklessly. …”
156 Luke 6:27–28, 32–36 are similar to this passage, but there are not unimportant differences. Schweizer indeed finds “only three points of agreement” (p. 113). The introductory formula is different in Luke 6:27–28, and “pray” is the only word in common after “love your enemies.” It is not much better with Luke 6:32–36. “Those who love you” is the same in both accounts, but Matthew has ἐάν, the aorist, and τίνα μισθὸν ἔχετε where Luke has εἰ, the present, and ποία ὑμῖν χάρις ἐστίν. In verse 46 Matthew has a question introduced by οὐχί concerning οἱ τελῶναι and referring generally to τὸ αὐτὸ ποιοῦσιν where Luke has a statement that sinners love those who love them. Matthew’s statement about a greeting in verse 47 is paralleled by one about doing good, though we are a trifle closer with οἱ ἐθνιχοί (Matthew) and οἱ ἁμαρτωλοί (Luke), both followed by τὸ αὐτὸ ποιοῦσιν. At the end Matthew refers to being perfect as (ὡς) the heavenly Father is perfect, and Luke to being compassionate as (χαθώς) your Father is compassionate. Many interpreters regard these as variants of the same set of sayings, but it is better to see them as going back to the variants normal for an itinerant preacher.
157 ἐχθρός means “hated, hateful” and thus in an active sense, “hating, hostile” and as subst. “enemy” (LSJ). Matthew has it 7 times and Luke 8 times, but nobody else in the New Testament has it more than 3 times. It is the ordinary word for “enemy,” but on occasion it is opposed to ἀγαπητός.
158 The Qumran sect’s Community Rule enjoined members “that they may love all that He has chosen and hate all that He has rejected” (Vermes, p. 72); they are to “hate all the sons of darkness, each according to his guilt in God’s vengeance” (ibid.). There are other such passages in the scrolls. This “eschatology of vengeance” (Davies, SM, p. 248) is in marked contrast to Jesus’ teaching. But there were other views. Thus we read in 2 Enoch, “if you are able to take vengeance with a hundredfold revenge, do not take vengeance, neither on one who is close to you nor on one who is distant from you” (2 Enoch 50:4).
159 ἀγαπάω is used 8 times in Matthew out of 141 times in the New Testament. It is the usual verb for “to love” in these writings (φιλέω occurs only 25 times, 5 in Matthew). It is used of a variety of loves, here of the love of one person for another, but it is used also of love for God, for Jesus, and for things. It is used of God’s love for Jesus and Jesus’ love for God, and of the divine love for people. Cf. 6:24; 19:19; 22:37–39, and for the idea in other language, 7:12.
160 πλησίον is the neuter of the adjective πλησίος. It was used as an adverb meaning “near,” and with the article to mean “the one who is near,” “the neighbor,” and thus one’s fellow, often in the sense fellow countryman. In the New Testament it is often used, as here, in the quotation from Leviticus 19:18.
161 μισέω is found only 5 times in Matthew (39 times in the New Testament); it may be used of hating people or things. The word for “enemy,” ἐχθρός, appears 7 times in Matthew out of 32 in the New Testament. It is really an adjective meaning “hostile,” but it is used as a substantive with the meaning “enemy.” This may mean the enemies of God or of people; it may refer to the devil (13:39) or to death (1 Cor. 15:26). Here it is used with the genitive of the person who is the object of the enmity.
162 The verb προσεύχομαι is frequent in the New Testament (Matthew has it 15 times). It is always used of prayer to God (or the gods). The construction with ὑπέρ is not common (again in Col. 1:9; BAGD cites it in a number of nonbiblical passages). This is Matthew’s one use of the preposition with the genitive (it occurs 130 times in the New Testament).
Nixon R. E. Nixon, Matthew, in D. Guthrie, J. A. Motyer, A. M. Stibbs, and D. J. Wiseman, eds., The New Bible Commentary Revised (London, 1970)
163 Cf. Barclay, “We cannot go on hating another man in the presence of God. The surest way of killing bitterness is to pray for the man we are tempted to hate.”
164 γένησθε might be understood as “become” (so GNB); disciples are not to be content with what they are but to “become” increasingly God’s children. It is not only that they act in love to show what they are now (Zahn); that is true, but they also go on to become what they are not yet. This does not mean that they qualify for membership in the family by their deeds, but rather that they continually progress in the service of God. Cf. Bruner, “that we might really be in act what we have been made in fact—sons and daughters of the Father” (p. 221).
165 ἀγαθός occurs 18 times in Matthew (only Romans with 21 has it more often). It is used in both physical and moral senses and may refer to persons, things, or deeds. AS thinks it refers to “inner excellence” as against χαλός, which signifies “goodliness as manifested in form.” AS also differentiates it from δίχαιος in that it “implies a kindliness and attractiveness not necessarily possessed by the δίχαιος, who merely measures up to a high standard of rectitude.”
166 Both NEB and JB make the distinction here between the “honest” and the “dishonest.”
167 τελώνης occurs 8 times in Matthew out of a New Testament total of 21 (Luke has it 10 times). The Roman system was to invite bids for the taxing rights of a given area. The successful bidder would then employ people to do the actual work of collecting the taxes. Strictly speaking the τελώνης was the man who had the tax-farming contract (Lat. publicanus), but the term came to be used also for his underlings. A certain amount over and above the tax was legitimate, since the people who did the collecting were entitled to their wages and salaries. But human nature being what it is, there was a great temptation to collect more than was justified and a vicious circle developed. The more the tax collectors collected the more they were hated, and the more they were hated the more they collected. Among the Jews a further count was ceremonial uncleanness. The contacts the tax men had with Gentiles made it almost inevitable that they would be unclean. In the Mishnah we find that if tax gatherers enter a house, everything in it becomes unclean (Ṭohar. 7:6). This will mean those who did the actual collecting of taxes; those who held the taxing rights were further removed from contact with uncleanness and were not regarded as unclean (J. Jeremias, New Testament Theology, I [London, 1971], p. 111). They are linked with “sinners” (9:10–11), Gentiles (18:17), and harlots (21:31), and in the Mishnah with murderers and robbers (Ned. 3:4).
168 Introduced by the emphatic οὐχί. The ascensive χαί has a meaning like “even”; since one would expect this of anyone, if the tax collectors, the worst possible people in the view of most people of the day, do this, then anyone might be expected to respond in the same way.
169 ἀσπάζομαι in the New Testament is mostly a Pauline word (40 times out of 59); Matthew has it twice only.
170 The expression here, οἱ ἐθνιχοί, is the masculine plural of the adjective meaning “Gentile”; Matthew has it in 3 of its 4 New Testament occurrences, and each time he uses it as a noun with an implied contrast to “the Jews” (6:7; 18:17; so also in 3 John 7).
171 Cf. Schweizer, “Of course, the formulation, both in Greek and in Hebrew, includes the promise ‘You will be’ as well as the summons ‘You must be’ ” (p. 135).
172 τέλειος has the meaning “having attained the end (τέλος) or aim”; if anything has fully attained that for which it is designed it is perfect. It can refer to the maturity of an adult man—the end or aim of that to which the boy points. Jesus is calling on his followers to be mature people, attaining the end for which God has made them. God has set before us the highest of standards; it is expected that we will press on to attain them. We find the expression τέλειος ἔσῃ in Deuteronomy 18:13 (LXX).
173 The Jews, too, could take notice of the divine example. Abba Saul said: “Be thou like Him: just as He is gracious and compassionate, so be thou gracious and compassionate” (Shab. 133b). But Jesus is saying something more than this; “perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect” sets the highest possible standard. Who would ever claim to have reached it?
1 The Jews took giving to the poor very seriously, and in each community there were officials who made weekly collections of goods or money for the poor (Moore, II, pp. 174–79). Gifts were obligatory; a man residing in a town for thirty days became “liable for contributing to the soup kitchen, three months for the charity box …” (B. Bat. 8a). But more than this compulsory levy was needed, and almsgiving over and above the charity box was commended.
2 For διχαιοσύνη see on 3:15. ἐλεημοσύνην is read by L W Z Θ etc., but this can scarcely be original. It seems to be an explanation made by a scribe who thought the verse was concerned only with almsgiving instead of being the introduction to the succeeding sections as well.
3 γέ is an enclitic particle “appended to the word it refers to; it serves to emphasize this word”; the expression εἰ δὲ μή γε signifies “otherwise” (BAGD).
4 ὅταν is employed “Usually of an iterative action, indefinite, in the past or future” (M, III, p. 112).
5 ἐλεημοσύνη is connected with the idea of mercy (ἔλεος) and points to any deed of compassion. In LXX and other Jewish writings it came to be used specifically of the gift of money for the poor (the English “alms” goes back to a corruption of this Greek word; see OED). This usage was apparently not common among the Greeks, and only one example is cited (TDNT, II, p. 486, n. 4). Davies and Allison remark, “The Greeks had no word for alms” (ICC, I, p. 578, n. 12). Lightfoot cites examples of Jewish approval of the practice (II, pp. 136–38).
6 Turner understands this imperative to mean “On no account sound a trumpet …” (Grammatical Insights, p. 32).
7 Those who think there was a literal blowing of trumpets vary in their understanding. Hill sees a reference to the blowing of trumpets when alms were collected in the temple and cites Bonnard as his authority. But while Bonnard does say that trumpets were blown to announce the time of collection of money for the poor, he also raises a question about the attestation of the blowing of the trumpet and suggests that the expression may be a piece of imagery. The fact is that no evidence seems to be cited for blowing a trumpet when alms were given. Others are reminded of the trumpet-shaped receptacles into which money was put when given at the temple, but these were not trumpets at all and could not be “blown.” Carson accepts A. Büchler’s suggestion that it refers to the blowing of trumpets when fasts were proclaimed, and it was widely held that almsgiving was a suitable accompaniment of fasts and prayers. But Lenski points out that trumpets would not have been blown in synagogues. The language is figurative.
8 ὑποχριτής occurs 13 times in this Gospel, but elsewhere in the New Testament only 3 times in Luke and once in Mark. AS derives it from ὑποχρίνομαι, a variant of ἀποχρίνομαι = “answer (on the stage), play a part.” The word was used mostly for the actors in a play, from which it is an easy step to those who speak words for effect and without regard to what is true. Bruce remarks sardonically, “There are religious actors still, and they draw good houses.” Albright and Mann argue for the meaning “overscrupulous” (AB, pp. CXV–CXXIII), but they do not deny that the word was used of one who was “an actor or was consciously playing a part” (p. CXVII). In any case, it is the hypocritical rather than the overscrupulous who blow a trumpet to draw attention to their deeds. It is surely the one who is playing a part who is in mind here. A. W. Argyle argues that there can scarcely have been an Aramaic word for “actor” since “theatre was forbidden among the Jews”; he finds in the use of this word evidence that Jesus sometimes spoke Greek (ET, LXXV [1963–64], pp. 113–14).
9 ῥύμη denotes a narrow street or lane. In such a street a person would be very close to others; he could not make a gift without it being noticed.
10 ὅπως introduces the real purpose of the hypocrites. Chamberlain says that it is used to introduce purpose about 50 times in the New Testament, of which 17 are in Matthew (Chamberlain, p. 186).
11 The verb ἀπέχω (5 times in Matthew) is used as a technical term in commerce with the meaning “receive a sum in full and give a receipt for it” (BAGD).
12 The Jews at their best surpassed the Pharisees. The Mishnah speaks of a “Chamber of Secrets” in the temple (Sheqal. 5:6) where the devout could leave gifts in privacy and go away; the poor of good family would later come and receive help without knowing who their benefactor was. In the Talmud we read, “A man who gives charity in secret is greater than Moses our Teacher” (B. Bat. 9b).
Stott J. R. W. Stott, The Message of the Sermon on the Mount (Leicester, 1978)
13 Cf. Lenski, “The whole matter is in the heart, it is not a mechanical rule about hiding our gifts. For one might hide all his giving in the secret hope of eventually being discovered and then being praised for the saintly secrecy of his gifts” (on v. 4).
14 χρυπτός occurs 5 times in Matthew, more than in any other book; it may point to what is hidden or, as here, what is secret. ἐν τῷ χρυπτῷ is applied to the Father again in verses 4 and 6 (twice) only in the New Testament.
15 For ἀποδίδωμι see on 5:26; it means “recompense” and is used both in the good sense of rewarding (as here) and the bad sense of punishing.
16 Cf. Barclay, “To banish all rewards and punishments from the idea of religion is in effect to say that injustice has the last word. It cannot reasonably be held that the end of the good man and the end of the bad man are one and the same” (I, p. 180); “the person who looks for reward, and who calculates that it is due to him, does not receive it; the person whose only motive is love, and who never thinks that he has deserved any reward, does, in fact, receive it” (I, p. 182).
Plummer A. Plummer, An Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to S. Matthew (London, 1910)
Gutzwiller R. Gutzwiller, Day by Day with Saint Matthew’s Gospel (London, 1964)
17 ὅτι here “hardly states why we are not to be ‘as the hypocrites’ … but in what respect we are not to be like them” (Lenski).
18 The perfect ἑστῶτες may possibly point to lengthy prayers, though the emphasis here is on publicity rather than length.
19 The word is not ῥύμη, as in verse 2, but πλατεῖα (the feminine of πλατύς, “broad”), which means a wide road or street. Ta‘an. 2:1–2 refers to prayer in “the open space in the town” on certain fast days.
20 The Mishnah tractate Berakot goes into detail. For example, the Shema' is to be recited in the morning “So soon as one can distinguish between blue and white” (another opinion is “between blue and green,” Ber. 1:2). Directions are given as to what is to be done if a man were on top of a tree or a heap of stones when the hour of prayer arrived (Ber. 2:4) or if he were riding an ass or journeying on a ship or raft (Ber. 4:5, 6). Even if the king greeted a man while he was saying his prayer, he must not interrupt it (Ber. 5:1). It is clear that the saying of prayers at the prescribed times was taken seriously.
21 “Prayer does not exist where man’s aim is self-promotion; such parade is not prayer to God but self-worship” (Filson).
22 ταμεῖον means a storeroom and thus a room in the inner part of a house. With houses made of mud brick it was possible for thieves to “dig through” an outer wall (cf. v. 19); thus anything valuable was stored in an inner room. In many houses this was the only room that could be locked. In the present context the emphasis is on a room that cannot be observed. Cf. 24:26. The threefold your (your room, your door, your Father) emphasizes the personal character of it all.
23 Lloyd-Jones points out that “it is possible for a man to pray in secret in such a way that everybody knows he is praying in secret, because he gives the impression that by spending so much time there he is a great man of prayer” (II, p. 26). There are many ways of being ostentatious about our praying.
McNeile A. H. McNeile: The Gospel according to St. Matthew (London, 1915)
24 A. Oepke remarks, “Jesus restores lost modesty to piety by directing it to the place of concealment” (TDNT, III, p. 974). Carr comments, “Christ was the first to enjoin clearly secret and silent prayer,” and he points to praying aloud as the practice in a number of religions.
25 βατταλογέω is found only here in the New Testament, and BAGD finds it in writers dependent on this passage and in only two other places in all the rest of Greek literature (it lacks attestation in one of these). They think that it is a hybrid form possibly deriving from Aramaic words meaning “talk idly”; they give the meaning as “babble, speak without thinking.” AS thinks that it may be onomatopoeic, meaning “stammer, repeat idly.” MM points out that in D the word is βλαττολογέω, “the form of which suggests an approximation towards the Latin blatero [query—cf. provincial English blether, with the same meaning…].” The word is discussed in M, II, p. 272. A Jewish injunction reads, “Do not prattle in the assembly of the elders, nor repeat yourself in your prayer” (Sir. 7:14).
Ber. Berakot
26 BDF sees ἐν here as probably used to give the reason (BDF 219[2]). Moule thinks that its significance is “by means of” (IBNTG, p. 77).
27 There is some textual variation. Your Father is read by most MSS (א* D K L W etc., “our Father” by f1 1253 1546, “God your Father” by אa B sah Origen, and “your heavenly Father” by 28 892mg 1195 etc. Metzger regards the use of “our” in place of “your” as due to “scribal inadvertence,” “God our Father” as “a scribal intrusion reflecting a characteristically Pauline collocation of θεός and πατήρ,” and “your heavenly Father” as assimilation to the text of verse 9. UBS3 gives an A rating to “Your Father.”
28 Calvin remarks that Christians pray “to alert themselves to seek Him, to exercise their faith by meditating upon His promises, unburdening their cares by lifting themselves into His bosom, and finally to testify that from Him alone, all good for themselves and for others is hoped and asked.” Plummer quotes Augustine, “Prayer calms and purifies the heart, and makes it more capacious for receiving the Divine gifts. God is always ready to give us His light, but we are not always ready to receive.” He proceeds, “By prayer we open channels through which blessings, which are always ready, may flow” (p. 94).
29 This does not exclude the possibility that the prayer “is to be seen in the light of the expectation of the new world where all evil will be destroyed” (Hamann, p. 76; he has just rejected the limiting of “lead us not into temptation” “to the great trial at the end of this age”).
Filson F. V. Filson, A Commentary on the Gospel according to St. Matthew (London, 1960)
30 For that reason I have not discussed it. There is a useful summary in Carson, pp. 166–68. Stendahl sees the difference as “one between two different ‘theologies’: In Mt. the setting is thoroughly eschatological; in Lk. there is more concern for the daily life, the End is not in the process of breaking in, the eschatological tension is relatively low.” J. Jeremias agrees that it is possible that Jesus “spoke the ‘Our Father’ on different occasions in a slightly differing form,” though he prefers the view that the Lucan form is the older one and that in Matthew we have a form used liturgically (ET, LXXI [1959–60], p. 143).
31 “It may well have been taught by Jesus more than once and in more than one form” (Tasker, p. 72).
32 οὕτως is common in Matthew. It means “thus, in this way” and may refer to what precedes (5:19), or, as here, to what follows.
Zahn T. Zahn, Das Evangelium des Matthäus (Leipzig, 1922)
33 The vocative Πάτερ is found 4 times only in Matthew (out of 64 occurrences), all being in prayers of Jesus. The nominative, of course, may be used in the vocative sense (e.g., 11:26). We are often reminded that this is equivalent to the Aramaic Abba (Mark 14:36; Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6), the language of the little child to its Father, but Gundry points out that Abba was also used when adults addressed their male parent. On the use of our, G. Bornkamm points to the fact that Jesus frequently uses “my Father” and “your Father” but never joins the disciples with “our Father” and goes on, “The consistency with which the tradition has retained this particular feature is at least an unmistakable proof that the believing community looked upon the secret of the fatherhood of God and the secret of our being the children of this father as a miracle, not as a natural fact” (Jesus of Nazareth [London, 1960], p. 129).
34 In the 4th and the 6th of the Eighteen Benedictions God is addressed simply as “our Father,” but in all of them we find “O Lord.” See Moore, II, pp. 201–11 for a discussion of the use of “Father” with regard to God. But he concludes that all this “does not indicate that the age had a new conception of God”; the expressions he cites simply express “a characteristic attitude of piety” (p. 211).
35 Cf. Diétrich, “The whole miracle of divine grace is contained in this single word.” Barclay comments that the heathen “lives in a world crowded with gods … all these gods are jealous, and grudging, and hostile. They must all be placated, and a man can never be sure that he has not omitted the honour due to some of these gods.” To find that there is but one God and that he is to be called “Father” is a liberating discovery: “We need no longer shiver before a horde of jealous gods; we can rest in a father’s love” (pp. 200–201).
36 ὄνομα is found 22 times in Matthew (and as many as 60 times in Acts and 34 in Luke). The use of the name was important in Jewish prayer: “any benediction in which the Divine Name is not mentioned is no benediction.” In view of a later petition in this prayer we may notice also, “Any benediction in which (God’s) Kingship is not mentioned is no benediction” (Ber. 40b).
37 In the New Testament period people generally saw in the name “someth. real, a piece of the very nature of the personality whom it designates, that partakes in his qualities and his powers” (BAGD, 4).
38 ἁγιάζω “belongs almost exclusively to biblical Greek or Greek influenced by the Bible” (O. Procksch, TDNT, I, p. 111). It occurs 3 times in Matthew out of a New Testament total of 27 (6 times in Hebrews is the most in any one book). It is used of “sanctifying” objects set apart for use in worship in the temple and the like, and when used of people signifies that they have been consecrated in some way to the service of God. Further, “the logical subject of sanctifying is God alone and not man. … God’s name is as little hallowed by man as His kingdom comes or His will is done. … When God’s deity is revealed to man in the mystery of worship (cf. Is. 6:3), then God is sanctified to him” (ibid.).
39 Unless with Turner we take ἐλθάτω to mean “continue to come … (the Kingdom being present already as a grain of seed)” (M, III, p. 75).
Stendahl K. Stendahl, in Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, ed. M. Black and H. H. Rowley (London, 1962)
40 Cf. Calvin, “So the sum of this supplication is that God will illuminate the heart by the light of His Word, bring our hearts to obey His righteousness by the breathing of His Spirit, and restore to order at His will, all that is lying waste upon the face of the earth.”
41 Bonnard holds that the aorist γενηθήτω more naturally refers to a decisive action; the reference will then be to the final decisive act. But France points out that “To view these three petitions as purely eschatological is to defuse one of the most demanding prayers disciples can be called on to offer, with far-reaching consequences for the daily conduct of our lives”; but he also adds, “to view them as purely ethical is to ignore the ‘blessed hope’ which is the mainspring of New Testament discipleship.” Both thoughts are surely there.
42 ἄρτος is a Gospel word, being found 21 times in Matthew and Mark, 15 times in Luke, and 24 times in John, a total of 81 times out of its 97 New Testament occurrences. It may denote bread in the literal and specific sense or it may be used (as here) for food generally. It may also be used figuratively—for example, “the living bread” (John 6:51).
Augustine Augustine, Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount (NPNF, 1st ser., vol. VI)
43 ἐπιούσιος, an extremely rare word found again in the New Testament only in Luke 11:3, and with no undisputed example of its use in early documents outside these two passages (B. M. Metzger examines the evidence that it occurs in two secular documents and shows that there is no good reason for holding that the word occurs in either, ET, LXIX [1957–58], pp. 52–54). Origen may well be right in saying that the word was “coined by the evangelists” (BAGD). The meaning is thus sought from its derivation, and a number of possibilities have been suggested. (1) ἐπί + οὐσία, “necessary for existence”; cf. GNB, “the food we need”; Patte, “essential”; so W. Foerster, TDNT, II, p. 599. Against this view MM objects that in the papyri οὐσία generally means “property.” (2) ἐπὶ τὴν οὖσα, sc. ἡμέραν, “for this day,” “today”; cf. NRSV, “daily” (“conceptually and grammatically the most plausible explanation,” BDF 123[1]). (3) ἡ ἐπιοῦσα, sc. ἡμέρα, “for the following day”; cf. Moffatt, “for the morrow” (Howard accepts this view, M, II, pp. 313–14). (4) Deriving from ἐπιέναι, which may yield “bread for the future,” “bread that comes to it, i.e., that belongs to it,” “next,” or “bread of the coming kingdom” (BAGD). MM considers it probable that the word is connected with ἐπιέναι and that it denotes “the immediately following day.” Chrysostom asks, “What is daily bread?” and answers, “That for one day.” He also says that this prayer is “so that we may not, beyond this, wear ourselves out with the care of the following day.”
44 In Luke we have the present δίδου, “keep on giving” (with τὸ χαθʼ ἡμέραν, “day by day”), where Matthew has the aorist δός, “give” (with σήμερον, “today”).
45 M. Black points out that the word is the equivalent of an Aramaic term that may mean “debt” or “sin”; “ ‘Sin’ was conceived of in terms of a debt; we may compare the parable of the Unforgiving Debtor. Examples of the words in these senses are common” (Black, p. 102).
Buttrick The Interpreter’s Bible, VII: G. A. Buttrick, The Gospel according to St. Matthew, Exposition (Nashville, 1951)
46 Jewish writings sometimes come close to this; Sirach 28:2–4, for example, puts it this way: “Forgive your neighbor the wrong he has done, and then your sins will be pardoned when you pray. Does a man harbor anger against another, and yet seek for healing from the Lord?”
47 Reading the aorist ἀφήχαμεν. Some MSS have the present, but most of Metzger’s committee favored the aorist. Luke has χαὶ γὰρ αὐτοὶ ἀφίομεν, which is a different way of emphasizing the subject; he goes on to use the continuous tense, “as we keep forgiving.” After the verb Luke puts the emphasis on the offender rather than the offense, παντὶ ὀφείλοντι ἡμῖν, “everyone indebted to us.”
Schweizer E. Schweizer, The Good News according to Matthew (London, 1976)
KJV The King James Version
NIV The Holy Bible, New International Version (Grand Rapids, 1978)
48 Carson suggests that the petition may be an example of litotes (expressing a positive by negating the opposite; e.g., “not a few” means “many”). The meaning will then be “Lead us, not into temptation, but away from it, into righteousness …” (SM, p. 70).
49 C. F. D. Moule asks, “Is it, then, true humility not to intellectualize, not to be over-logical, but, realizing one’s own weakness, to pray for escape even from what seems inevitable … while, at the same time, offering one’s obedience: ‘thy will be done’?” He goes on to suggest “that nearly all who pray the Lord’s Prayer probably interpret it, often unconsciously, to mean ‘Let us not succumb to temptation when we are tested’ ” (RThR, XXXIII [1974], p. 75). This may possibly be so, but there are certainly some who pray from a sense of their own weakness and simply express a firm desire not to undergo temptation. “We ask our Father … to keep us out of some situations because our faith could not endure them (example, Peter)” (Lenski). “Whoever prays the Lord’s Prayer is not outstandingly pious, not a religious superstar; he does not ask God for opportunity to prove his faith, but asks not to be put to the test” (Schweizer).
50 ἀλλά. The words “but deliver us from evil” are absent from Luke.
Knox R. Knox, The Holy Bible: A Translation from the Latin Vulgate (London, 1955)
Glover R. Glover, A Teacher’s Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew (London, 1956)
51 It is absent from א B D etc., but it is found with variations in K L W Δ Θ etc., it has strong support in the versions, and it is attested in writings such as the Didache and the Apostolic Constitutions.
52 Davies has a useful discussion of the doxology (SM, pp. 451–53). J. Jeremias says, “according to contemporary analogies Jesus must have intended that the Our Father should conclude with a doxology, but would have left the user to fill it in for himself” (Unknown Sayings of Jesus [London, 1958], p. 28, n. 1).
53 In verse 12 our sins were called “debts”; now they are offenses. παράπτωμα (“a falling beside”) is used of a false step, and thus a transgression. It is mostly used of offenses against God, but here of those against people.
54 ὅταν; see the note on verse 2. δέ is used “in lists of similar things, to bring about a clearer separation betw. the things listed” (BAGD, 1.c). For νηστεύω see on 4:2.
55 σχυθρωπός combines σχυθρός, “sullen,” and ὤψ, “face”; clearly some who fasted were determined to let everyone know about it.
56 ἀφανίζω can mean “render invisible,” which might point to any one of a number of ways of doing away with one’s normal appearance. Those who think that this is meant literally hold that it means covering the head or using so much ashes or dirt that the person is unrecognizable. But that would defeat the hypocrite’s purpose; he had to be known or his ostentatious show of humility would be wasted.
57 BAGD gives one use of φαίνω as, with the participle, “to denote the role that one plays before men” (2.c).
58 σὺ δέ.
59 The rabbis forbade washing on the Day of Atonement (and other fasts?) unless one is soiled “with mud or excrement.” They similarly forbade anointing (Yoma 77b). Washing and anointing were, however, permitted at some times of fasting (Ta‘an. 1:4–5).
60 In the earlier passages we have χρυπτός, here χρυφαῖος (the only place in the New Testament where this word occurs). There appears to be no significant difference in meaning.
61 How easy it is for a wrong attitude to fasting to invade Christianity is to be seen in the Didache (which may be as early as the first century); it instructs believers: “Let not your fasts be with the hypocrites, for they fast on Mondays and Thursdays, but do your fast on Wednesdays and Fridays” (8:1).
62 There is a partial parallel in Luke 12:33–34, but it is not easy to derive either saying from the other and it looks as though Jesus gave similar teaching on more than one occasion.
63 Matthew has quite an interest in treasure; he has the noun θησαυρός 9 times out of 17 in the New Testament and the verb θησαυρίζω twice out of 8 (the only book to have it more than once). The noun can denote a treasure box (2:11) or a storehouse (13:52), and it may be used figuratively of the heart as the treasury where heavenly possessions are stored up (12:35). Or it may refer to what is stored, treasure itself, either earthly or heavenly (19:21). The imperative here may signify “Quit laying up treasures” (Chamberlain, p. 86).
64 Lloyd-Jones points to the insidious nature of treasure on earth by saying, “Many a preacher has been ruined by his congregation.” The congregation’s praise leads him “almost unconsciously to be controlled by the desire to have his people’s good opinion and praise, and the moment that happens a man is laying up treasures on earth” (II, p. 82).
65 σής is found in this passage and Luke 12:33 only in the New Testament. It denotes a moth whose larvae will eat clothing. βρῶσις is a little more common (11 times, 2 in Matthew). It means “eating” and can mean “what is eaten” (“food,” as in John 6:27), but here it is “the act of eating” that is meant, which may be the eating away of metals, corrosion or rust (cf. Jas. 5:2–3; a different word is used), or the action of vermin of some kind eating crops, timber, or, indeed, any form of wealth.
RSV The Revised Standard Version
66 χλέπτης means a thief “who steals in secret, by fraud and cunning,” as against λῃστής, “a brigand who plunders, openly, with violence” (AS). διορύσσω has the idea of “dig through” and refers to digging through the mud brick wall of a building to get at what is inside.
67 The adversative δέ.
68 Plummer points out that the treasure and the heart “act and react upon one another; where our treasure is, there will our hearts be; and where our hearts are, there is our treasure” (p. 106). Robinson says of the miser, “Instead of lifting his heart to heaven, he has buried it with his savings.”
69 ἁπλοῦς occurs in the New Testament again only in Luke 11:34 (and only once in LXX). It means “single, simple”; cognate words have the idea of generosity about them, which may mean that the word should be understood here in the sense “generous.” Here it is opposed to πονηρός (cf. 20:15, “is your eye evil because I am good?”).
70 In the Old Testament an evil eye points to a miserly person (e.g., Deut. 15:9; Prov. 23:6; 28:22; see KJV — modern translations generally paraphrase). Lightfoot says that among the Jews “a good eye” means “a bountiful mind” and “an evil eye” likewise “a covetous mind”; he cites the Mishnah, Terumot 4:3, which says of the offering made to the priests: “A good eye yieldeth one out of forty [i.e., the fortieth part]. … A middling eye, one out of fifty. … And an evil eye, one out of sixty.”
71 λύχνος, which properly denotes a lamp. Turner points out that the predicate is usually anarthrous but the article “may be inserted if the predicate noun is supposed to be a unique or notable instance”; he cites this passage to illustrate his point: “the eye alone is the light of the body” (M, III, p. 183). Davies and Allison argue that in antiquity it was held that the eye contains a fire or light, not that it receives light. This would make sense in the present passage, but it raises the question why people could not see in the dark (which these commentators do not face).
72 ἐάν introduces a clause in which there is no implication as to the fulfilment or otherwise of the condition. ἁπλοῦς (see on v. 22) means “single,” “simple,” and thus as applied to the eye “sound” or “healthy.”
73 πονηρός is used in Matthew twice as often as in any other New Testament book (26 times; next is Luke with 13). It is usually employed in the ethical sense, “evil,” but it may be used in the physical sense with the meaning “in poor condition, sick” (BAGD, 1.a). JB has “diseased”; Hill thinks that it “probably denotes the eye that is ‘focussed on evil’ and draws a man into evil ways.” As we saw in the previous verse, there may be the thought of “ungenerous,” “miserly.”
74 εἰ with the indicative assumes the fulfilment of the condition and tells us what follows in that case. οὖν introduces the result of the previous chain of reasoning.
75 Cf. BAGD, “light that illuminates the spirit and soul of man, is gener. the element in which the redeemed person lives, rich in blessings without and within” (φῶς 3.a; they place the use here, however, under “the eye as an organ of light,” 1.b.α). Philo says, “what the intellect is in the soul, this the eye is in the body” (On the Creation, 53).
76 This verse is almost word for word the same as Luke 16:13, but Luke has οἰχέτης after οὐδείς. A household slave is especially close to the master and cannot share this close servitude with slavery to anyone else.
77 K. H. Rengstorf points to the practice; one master might free the slave, who would then be half slave and half free (TDNT, II, p. 270). Pes. 8:1 provides that a slave owned by two masters must not eat the Passover meal of both.
78 Chamberlain sees the meaning of ἀντέχομαι as “I hold myself over against another,” “I hold to” (p. 134).
79 Matthew has the verbal form δουλεύειν, “serve as a slave.”
80 The term is μαμωνᾶς, elsewhere in the New Testament only 3 times in Luke. It transliterates an Aramaic term whose derivation is uncertain but which probably comes from a root meaning “that in which one trusts” (F. Hauck, TDNT, IV, p. 388), and which comes to signify “wealth, property.” It is used in ’Abot 2:12, “Let the property of thy fellow be dear to thee as thine own.” Black notes a number of its occurrences (Black, p. 102). Some translations read “money” (REB, GNB, NIV, etc.). Cf. Melinsky, “Certainly to be devoted to the increase of wealth … rules out that devotion to God which alone is the ground of human integrity or wholeness.”
81 Cf. Calvin, “it is not impossible for men who are rich to serve God, but whoever hands himself over as a slave to riches must leave the service of God, since greed always engages us in bondage to the devil” (p. 219). Carson quotes from the diary of Matthew Henry (1662–1714) a prayer written after that pious man had been robbed: “Lord, I thank you that I have never been robbed before; that although they took my money, they spared my life; that although they took everything, it wasn’t very much; that it was I who was robbed, not I who robbed” (Carson, SM, The Sermon on the Mount [Grand Rapids, 1982], p. 81). This is the kind of attitude Jesus is urging his followers to take up.
82 There is a parallel passage in Luke 12:22–32. The sense is the same as in this passage, though there are continuous minor variations. Matthew has 183 words, of which 106 are in Luke. The resemblances may be close (v. 29 is almost exactly the same as in Luke), or there may be considerable differences (as in v. 34). For the thought cf. Philippians 4:6; Hebrews 13:5; 1 Peter 5:7.
Bruce The Expositor’s Greek Testament: A. B. Bruce, The Synoptic Gospels (Grand Rapids, 1979 rpt.)
83 Matthew uses μεριμνάω 7 times, which is more than in any other book in the New Testament. It conveys the thought of anxious care, or worry, here used with the dative of that which occasions the worry. Six of Matthew’s 7 uses of the verb occur in verses 25–34; there is strong emphasis on anxiety in this passage.
84 ἢ τί πιήτε is read by B W f13 33 etc., but the words are not found in א f1 892 some OL etc. They form a natural correlative to the preceding and may well have been added by scribes who wanted to complete the thought or to assimilate the passage to verse 31, but it is hard to suggest a reason for their omission if original (though, of course, it may have been accidental). Matthew has πίνω 15 times (a total exceeded only by Luke with 17), so it is a verb he may well have used.
85 It is generally agreed that ψυχή here means life as a whole, and not “soul” as it sometimes does.
86 οὐχί is used “to emphasize the expectation of an affirmative answer” (Chamberlain, p. 207).
87 The neuter πλεῖον in the predicate arises because the subject, ψυχή, refers to a whole class and not one individual life (cf. BDF 131).
88 τροφή is a general term for food or nourishment.
89 ἐμβλέπω (in the New Testament 11 times, twice in Matthew) is used in the sense “look at, fix the gaze on” but also in the sense “consider.” The latter meaning suits the context here, but it is not unlikely that an open air preacher pointed to birds flying (GNB translates, “Look at the birds flying around”).
90 It is not clear whether ὅτι is to be taken as meaning “for” (KJV) or “that” (NASB); either is possible, but most recent translations simply omit it. For the thought cf. R. Simeon b. Eleazar: “Hast thou ever seen a wild animal or a bird practising a craft?—yet they have their sustenance without care” (Qidd. 4:14).
91 χαί here is used to emphasize “a fact as surprising or unexpected or noteworthy: and yet, and in spite of that, nevertheless” (BAGD, 1.2.g).
92 τρέφω means “provide with food (τροφή)” and is used of food for people or animals or even plants.
93 διαφέρω means literally “carry through”; it is used intransitively in the sense “differ.” Where things differ one may well be better than the other, and the meaning “excel” is common (it is not unlike our use of “different”). Morgan comments, “The Lord’s argument here is not that we are to cease our sowing and reaping and gathering, but that if He takes care of those who cannot do such things, much more will He take care of those who can” (p. 68).
LSJ A Greek-English Lexicon, comp. by H. G. Liddell and R. Scott, rev. by H. S. Jones and R. McKenzie, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1940)
NRSV The Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version (Nashville, 1990)
94 Stott reminds us that “God does it to all of us between our childhood and adult life” (Stott, p. 163).
95 NEB has “who by anxious thought can add a foot to his height?”; in one way or another this view is found in the Vulgate, and in the translations of Knox and Phillips. McNeile supports this understanding of the text. It is perhaps significant that this is the way Chrysostom in antiquity took it.
96 χαταμανθάνω, found here only in the New Testament, may refer to “a fully learnt lesson, and not the process of study,” though it is also possible to see the meaning as “understand, take in this fact about” (M, I, pp. 117–18). Turner thinks that the aorist imperative is “a command now, once and for all, to look at the lilies …” (M, III, p. 76).
97 χρίνον clearly denotes a flower, but it is not clear which one. BAGD mentions the autumn crocus, the Turk’s cap lily, the anemone, and the gladiolus, and in the end suggests that Jesus perhaps “had no definite flower in mind, but was thinking of all the wonderful blooms that adorn the fields of Galilee.” Modern translations mostly retain the traditional “lilies” or go for the general term “flowers” (GNB, “wild flowers”).
98 χοπιάω means “become weary” (11:28) and thus “work hard.” Flowers perform no hard labor. It is possible that we should take “toil” as referring to work normally done by men in the fields and “spin” as referring to women’s work. The birds do neither. A further possibility arises from the reading of א: οὐ ξαίνουσιν οὐδὲ νήθουσιν οὐδὲ χοπιῶσιν. Peter Katz argued that there was a primitive corruption and that we should read οὐ ξαίνουσιν οὐδὲ νήθουσιν: “they do not card [i.e., wool] nor do they spin” (JTS, n.s. V [1954], pp. 207–9). But not many have been persuaded.
99 δόξα is used for “glory” of any sort; here the thought is of kingly splendor, and specifically the glorious clothing that the great king wore.
Burton, E. de W. Burton: Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek (Edinburgh, 1955)
100 χλίβανος may be defined as “covered earthen vessel, wider at bottom than at top, wherein bread was baked by putting hot embers round it” (LSJ); others say that the fire was kindled in the oven and when it was heated the coals were scraped out. MM notes the use of the word for “furnace.”
101 ὀλιγόπιστος is not attested in the classics or LXX, or indeed in any pre-Christian writing. It seems to have been coined by the early Christians. In the New Testament it occurs 4 times in Matthew and once in Luke (cf. 17:20).
102 The same verb was used in verse 25, but there in the present; here we have the aorist. If there is a difference, Jesus is now telling them not to begin to be anxious about anything, whereas in the earlier verse he spoke of the continuing attitude. In the corresponding passage Luke has μὴ ζητεῖτε (Luke 12:29); Matthew concentrates on the attitude, whereas Luke is concerned with the deed.
103 ἐπιζητέω is sometimes said to be intensive, but J. Armitage Robinson comments on the preposition ἐπί in compounds: “It seems to fix the verb upon a definite object. … The preposition is not intensive, but directive. … It prepares us to expect the limitation of the verb to a particular object” (St Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians [London, 1907], p. 249).
104 The first all represents πᾶς, a word Matthew uses 128 times; Luke has it 152 times and Acts 170 times, but no other book exceeds Matthew’s total. Clearly he is fond of the word. The second all is ἅπας (3 times in Matthew and 32 times in the whole New Testament). “The Att. distinction that πᾶς follows vowels and ἅπας consonants … cannot be applied consistently even to Lk … although ἅπας is found prevailingly after a consonant” (BDF 275).
105 The verb ζητέω basically means “to look for” something, to try to find it. This usage is somewhat different; the meaning is “somewhat removed fr. the basic mng. of seeking—a. try to obtain, desire to possess” (BAGD, 2). JB has, “Set your hearts on his kingdom first.” The present imperative conveys the idea “Keep seeking.” Lloyd-Jones says that Jesus “is not telling His hearers how to make themselves Christian; but He is telling them how to behave because they are Christian” (II, p. 143).
Bengel J. A. Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament, I (Edinburgh, 1866)
106 Cf. Bruner, “at this point Matthew and Paul agree. The righteousness we are taught to seek here is an alien righteousness, the Father’s righteousness, and not first of all our own” (p. 269). Filson asks, “is righteousness used here, as in Second Isaiah, of the vindicating salvation by which God saves those who seek him?” Hendriksen sees both imputed and imparted righteousness.
107 Turner thinks that the meaning is “never be anxious” in contrast to “cease being anxious” in verse 25 (M, III, p. 76).
108 This is Matthew’s one use of χαχία (11 times in the New Testament). The word means “badness” and thus “wickedness”; it comes to mean “evil” or “trouble.” The neuter ἀρχετόν is perhaps used because no one day is in mind; it is a general reference.
109 The rabbis could advise one not to fret about tomorrow, for “peradventure tomorrow he is no more: thus he shall be found grieving over a world that is not his” (Sanh. 100b).
110 Barclay remarks, “There may be greater sins than worry, but very certainly there is no more disabling sin” (I, p. 261).
1 Luke 6:37–42 is similar, but the degree of resemblance varies.
2 Augustine comments that here “we are taught nothing else, but that in the case of those actions respecting which it is doubtful with what intention they are done, we are to put the better construction on them” (p. 154).
3 “The present tense of μὴ χρίνετε does not merely prohibit habitual judging, as though occasional judging meets no disapproval, but carries the force ‘Stop judging’ or ‘Don’t ever judge’ ” (Gundry). Contrast the aorist imperatives in verse 6.
4 ἵνα indicates purpose.
5 Cf. Lenski, “The punctiliar aorist χριθῆτε refers to God’s final judgment; if the judgment of men were referred to, the durative present subjunctive would have been used.” GNB paraphrases with “so that God will not judge you” to make this meaning clear.
6 “This verse does not forbid all judging of any kind, for moral distinctions drawn in the Sermon on the Mount require that decisive judgments be made” (Carson, SM).
7 For γάρ see on 1:20.
8 χρίμα may mean a lawsuit, a decision, or a judicial judgment, especially a negative verdict. Strictly it points to the sentence of judgment as against χρίσις, the process of judging. χρίνω is used 6 times in this Gospel, not a large proportion of its 114 New Testament occurrences. ἐν is used of means or instrument in Greek generally, but its frequency in the New Testament is generally ascribed to LXX, reflecting a Hebrew construction. In this passage there is an abbreviated construction with a single use of the preposition instead of repeating it: ἐν ᾧ χρίματι χρίνετε = ἐν τῷ χρίματι ἐν ᾧ χρίνετε. The sentiment is found in the Old Testament (Ps. 18:25–26) and in Judaism, for example, “With what measure a man metes it shall be measured to him again” (Soṭa 1:7). Hillel said, “judge not thy fellow until thou art come to his place” (’Abot 2:5).
Chrysostom John Chrysostom, Homilies on St. Matthew (NPNF, 1st ser., vol. X)